March 15, · 1966 CO~GRESSION:AL R:ECORD -. _. HOUS_E_ 5783 There is reason :for optlmlsm in tbe new

cropland. adjustment program;· if the De­p lutment of Agriculture and the State wlld­li~e agencies ,work o~t cooperative progr_ams, I am confident that thousands of acres of privately owned land caii be· opened to pub-1~ hunting and fishing. This is another area where you can provide real leadership.

When we stop water and air pollution, we help protect fish and wildlife. When we preserve areas for public recreation rather t:Q.an for commercial or industrial sites, we help wildlife. When we manage public lands for multiple use or take private lands out of intensive agricultural production, we en­hance the opportunities for wildlife.

But we need to do more. We need to halt the drainage of wet lands of prime impor­tQ.D.ce to fish and wildlife. We have put a stop to Federal subsidies for the drainage of waterfowl wet lands, but unsubsidized drain­age goes on.

We n~ed to preserve more duck pro­duction areas. I hope that the accelerated waterfowl wetlands acquisition program can be accelerated some more. I have joined Congressmen DINGELL and SAYLOR in spon­soring new legislation which would allow U.S. duck stamp funds obtained by a volun­tary surcharge to be ~sed to set aside wet­lands in Canada ana also in the United States for propagation purposes and :for establish­ment of wintering grounds in Mexico. Under this legislation, volunteer citizens groups such as Wetlands for Wildlife and your own National Wildlife Federation affiliates wlll be able, through private funds, to acquire these areas where presently there is objection to their being acquired as public areas. A dollar spent in a Canadian marsh or in the prairie pothole country of the United States may breed a lot more ducks for our flyways. It may also be important to spend a portion of the funds for wintering grounds in Mexico.

We must set aside areas for the protection of endangered species of wildlife, not only in the United States but all over the world. I have introduced legislation looking toward an international United Nations conference in which all governments can join in a c<r operative effort to conserve wildlife. Inter­national trade in wildlife and its products must be controlled. This traffic today threat­ens many species of birds, mammals, and rep­tiles. We must demonstrate the economic and spiritual values of wildlife. We must combat fashions-such as the leopard skin coat fad, and superstitions-such as the be· lief that powdered rhinocerous horn is a sex stimulant. We must help the new coun­tries--and some of the older ones as well--de­velop their own sound conservation programs.

This has been an optimistic report. But please don't disband, on your 13th birthday, with mutual congratulations that the job ot preserving wildlife is done. On the plane to Pittsburgh, I read in Esquire of the vision of the future of Dr. William Cummins of the Navy's Taylor Model Basin. They're develop­ing a hovercraft that wlll be ready to go shortly. And here is what Dr. Cummins says:

"If I were a. duck hunter I'd cruise over swamp grass and use my boat for a blind. If I were a fisherman, I'd want an inflatable hovercraft that I could unfold from the trunk of my car, and then attach an out­board motor and hover along a rocky stream • • • at SO or 40 miles an hour."

If we can ground Dr. CUmmins for just a few years, we may be able to save our fish and wildlife yet.

The National Wildlife Federation, since the beginning, has taken the lead in coordinat­ing conservation efforts. Women's and youth organizations, civic clubs, garden groups, and even organized labor have vital interests in the things you stand for. Invite them to join you. Zero in on . broadscale

co:qseryatiop p~oble~, rather than directing your major efforts towara detailed hunting and fishing regulations.

It was my fi-iend, the. late Clem Miller Qf Califm;nia, who told you back in 196i that the word "cooper~.tion'' has a. magical effeet on Congressmen. "We are so busy being ground down by the relentless effects of political competition," he said, "that the parties who can sing in unison are greeted with open arms. To the conciliator we are frequently willing to give our devotion." ·

Nor should we automatically consider that an · industry ' is bad for conservation. The petroleum industry, I am told, has made real strides toward reducing its damage to nat­ural resources. Many timber concerns pro­vide outstanding recreational opportunities on lands managed for sustained yield,. So~e electric power interests recognize the values of preserving certain streams as wild rivers. And so it goes. I think you well can meet with many of these groups to find ways of cooperating for the benefit of conservation.

Above all, I urge you to keep your own organizations strong. Develop intelligent, responsible~ and dedicated leaders who have a recognized status in their own com­munities. Organize affiliate groups in all areas to give you broad representation. Make your voices heard in the State Capi­tols-and in Washington, D.C. As one who· know!'!--and as one who can say this sort of thing-take the information which your na­tional headquarters develops and distributes so effectively, and then act on it. Button­hole your Congressmen when they are at home. Get them committed on specific issues before the elections. Write us. Wire us. Call us. I can honestly say that most Mem­bers of Congress really want to know what you-their constituents-think about cur­rent issues. There are more conservationists in the Congress than you might think.

Conservation is an attitude, an approach, a concept which permeates our lives. As a conservationist, I wish the National Wild­life Federation well as it presses forward to bring this concept to all the people of the United States.

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES TuESDAY, MARCH 15, 1966

The House met at 1.2 o'clock noon. Most Rev. Bishop Zoltan Beky, Hun­

garian Reformed Federation of Wash­ington, D.C., offered the following prayer:

Eternal God, Father of all nations, Creator and Keeper of all people.

We stand before Thee in humble rev­erence as leaders and chosen represent- . atives of this great Nation.

We invoke Thy blessing upon this great assembly. We confess that we are un­able to carry the heavy responsibilities of our enormous tasks, without Thy help. We pray for Thy guidance and Thy wisdom.

Our entire world, divided as it is, needs Thy deliverance. Make us all the in­strument of Thy will.

We pray for our beloved country, "the land of the free and the home of the brave."

We pray for our Nation, for our dedi­cated men and women with the Armed Forces, for our sons fighting in the jun­gles of Vietnam, against the most cruel enemies of our civilization-fighting for the freedom and liberty of all mankind.

_ G,:ant them victory that their su1fer-1ngs and sacrifices will not be in vain.

On this day~ 0 God; we remember the heroic sacrifices of a small, but brave nation, the people of Hungary, who de­fended the frontiers of civilization and faith for thousands of years, and ren­dered many sacrifices for the freedom aJ;ld peace of others. .

Since it is the day of freedom in their history, we pray for Thy help that the true day of lasting freedom may come to this nation which is now subjugated by its oppressors and forces of evil.

We pray for our beloved President, our Speaker. Strengthen them in these most difficult and challenging times of our history. In Jesus' name. Amen.

THE JOURNAL The Journal of the proceedings of yes­

terday was read and approved.

MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT Sundry messages in writing from the

President of the United States were com­municated to the House by Mr. Geisler, one of his secretaries, who also informed the House that on the following dates the President approved and signed bills of the House of the following titles:

On March 14, 1966: H .R. 1484. An act for the relief of Mrs.

Loneta Hackney; and H.R. 4928. An act for the relief of Chizuyo

Hoshizaki. On Ma.rch 15, 1966:

H.R. 12889. An act to authorize appro­priations during the fiscal year 1966 for procurement of aircraft, missiles, naval ves­sels, tracked combat vehicles, research, de­velopment, test, evaluation, and military construction for the Armed Forces and for other purposes. · '

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE A message from the Senate by Mr.

Arrington, one of its clerks, announced that the Senate had passed without amendment bllls of the House of the fol­lowing titles:

H.R. 432. An act to amend the Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance Act of 1954 and the Civil Service Retirement Act with regard to filing designation of bene-ficiary, and for other purposes: .

H.R. 8584. An act to amend the Federal Coal Mine Safety Act so as to provide :further for the prevention of accidents in coal mines: and

H.R. 8030. An act to provide for the dis­continuance of the Postal Savings System, and for other purposes.

The message also announced that the Senate had passed, with amendments in which the concurrence of the House is requested, bills of the House of the fol­lowing titles:

H.R. 1647. An act to provide for the pay­ment of certain amounts and restoration of employment benefits to certain Govern­ment officers and employees improperly de­prived thereof, and for other purposes; and

H.R. 10553. An act to preserve the bene­fits of the Civil Service Retirement Act; the Federal Employees' Group Life Insurance Act of 1954, and the Federal Employees Health Benefits Act of 1959 for congres­sional employees receiving certain congres­sional staff fellowships.

5784 . i . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 The message also announced that the

Senate agrees to the amendment of the House to a bill of the Senate of the fol­lowing title:

s. 2614. An act to provide for U.S. par­ticipation in the 1967 statewide celebra­tion of the centennial of the Alaska Purchase.

The message also announced that the Senate had passed bills and a concurrent resolution of the following titles, in which the concurrence of the House is requested:

S. 2573. An act to validate the action of the Acting Superintendent, Yosemite Na­tional Park, In extending the 1955 leave year for certain Federal employees, and for other purposes;

S. 2719. An act to provide· for the striking of medals in commemoration of the lOOth anniversary of the purchase of Alaska by the United States from Russia;

S. 2831. An act to furnish to the Scranton Association, Inc., medals in commemoration of the tOOth anniversary of the founding of the city of Scranton, ~a.;

S. 2835. An act to provide for the striking of medals in commemoration of the 75th anniversary of the founding of the American Numismatic Association; and

S. Con. Res. 71. Concurrent resolution to approve selecting of the U.s. Olympic Committee and to support its recommen­dations that the State of Utah be designated as the site for the 1972 winter Olympic games.

The message also announced that the Senate insists upon its amendments to the bill CH.R. 12169) entitled "An act to amend further the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amended, and for other purposes," disagreed to by the House; agrees to the conference asked by the House on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses thereon, and appoints Mr. SPARKMAN and Mr. HICKENLOOPER to be the conferees on the part of the Senate.

HON. HENRY D. LARCADE Mr. EDWARDS of Louisiana. Mr.

Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to ad­dress the House for 1 minute and to re­vise and extend my remarks. ·

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman ·from Louisiana?

There was no objection. Mr. EDWARDS of Louisiana. Mr.

Speaker and Members of the House, as the Congressman from the Seventh Dis­trict of Louisiana, it is my solemn duty to announce the demise of one of my predecessors, the very able statesman and loyal American, Henry D. Larcade, Jr.

This gentleman distinguished himself as a Member of this Chamber represent­ing Louisiana's Seventh District from 1943 through 1953. After a long illness, Mr. Larcade, at the age of 76, passed away on March 14 in the quiet of his home in Opelousas, St. Landry Parish, La.

GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND

Mr. Speaker, I now ask unanimous consent that all Members be allowed 5 legislative days in which to prepare and insert into the RECORD remarks of sym­pathy and esteem relating to the life and service of our former colleague, the Hon­orable Henry D. Larcade, Jr.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Louisiana?

There was no objection. Mr. HEBERT. Mr. Speaker, will the

gentleman yield? Mr. EDWARDS of Louisiana. I

yield to the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. HEBERT].

Mr. HEBERT. Mr. Speaker, I want to join with my colleague from Louisi­ana in paying tribute to the memory of one of the most delightfUl people, I feel, who has served in-this body, Henry Lar­cade. Not only was he delightful as an individual, ~ a person, as a friend, but he was energetic and effective as a Mem­ber of this body in representing the Sev­enth Congressional District of the State of Louisiana.

Mr. Speaker, Henry Larcade, as it might well be said in Louisiana, was born to politics. He was reared in a political atmosphere. He served his State for many years in the State legis­lature before coming to the Congress. He retired from the Congress voluntar­ily.

Mr. Speaker, during the years 1n which he served here those who served with him will always remember this re­markable man. Few of us, however, re­member or know of his participation in politics which dates back to the inaugu­ration of Theodore Roosevelt, when he represented the State of Louisiana in Theodore Roosevelt's inaugural parade.

Mr. Speaker, from then on the name of "Larcade" was written across the po­litical history of the State of Louisiana, and in this body he exemplified the courage and independence to which few men can lay claim.

Mr. Speaker, I join in extending my deepest sympathy to his wife and to the members of his family.

Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. EDWARDS of Louisiana. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. BoGGS].

Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, I should like to concur in the statements made by my distinguished colleagues, the gentle­man from Louisiana [Mr. EDWARDS] and the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. HEBERT], in paying tribute to our former colleague, Henry Larcade.

Mr. Speaker, Mr: Larcade was beloved in our State. He had many, many friends in this body. ·He served with distinction here for a decade.

Mr. Speaker, coincidentally, I was pointing out on yesterday, as we observed the seventh anniversary of statehood for the State of Hawaii, the leading role which he played in securing the passage of that statehood resolution. Almost at the minute that I was speaking, Mr. Larcade died at his home in Opelousas.

Mr. Speaker, the work that he did for the state of Hawaii was one of his great­est achievements.

Mr. Speaker, he lived a long fruitful life. He will be missed by the people of my State. Mrs. Boggs joins me in expres­sion of sympathy to Mrs. Larcade and the members of his family.

Mr. PASSMAN. Mr .. Speaker, will the distinguished gentleman yield?

- Mr. EDWARDS of Louisiana. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana. [Mr. PASSMAN].

Mr. PASSMAN. Mr. Speaker, I join my colleagues in paying tribute to my personal friend and former colleague, Henry Larcade. He was indeed a dedi­cated American. He rendered distin­guished service as a Member of the House of Representatives.

Henry served as a Member of this House for a period of 10 years, January 3, 1943 to January 3, 1953. He was a Member when I came to the Congress in 1947. His assistance to me as a fresh­man Member, and his personal friend­ship which has lasted throughout the years, have made my life infinitely more rewarding and pleasant.

Throughout his lifetime Henry's efforts were directed toward the betterment of his fellow man and his country. As a young man just out of school, he served with the U.S. Army during World War I. Prior to his election to the U.S. Con­gress, Henry was active in educational, banking, civic, and political affairs. He served in the Louisiana State Legislature prior to and subsequent to his service in the U.S. Congress. His decision not to seek reelection in 1952 was indeed a loss to this House and. to our country.

Mr. Speaker, the people of Louisiana and the Nation as a whole can truly be grateful for the life and work of this great American. Indeed, this world is a better place in which to live for Henry Larcade's having lived in it.

I wish to extend my deep personal sympathy to his beloved and devoted wife, Virginia, and to the other members of his family. I pray that God will com­fort them in their great loss and sorrow.

Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. EDWARDS of Louisiana. I yield to the gentleman from Louisiana.

Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to concur in the remarks made by my colleagues and in express­ing our deepest sympathy to the family of Mr. Larcade of Louisiana.

Mr. Speaker, I knew the former Con­gressman quite well, because upon his retirement from this body he served 4 years in the Senate of the State of Lou­isiana, of which I was a member, and in which body I was a colleague of his. He brought much to that body during the 4 years of his service there.

Mrs. MINK. Mr. Speaker, I would like to express the deep sorrow felt by the people of Hawaii at the passing away of an outstanding former Congressman, the Honorable Henry Dominique Larcade, Jr., of Louisiana. Though Representa­tive Larcade was best known for years of dedicated service to the people of Louisi­ana, he is remembered by us for his un­flagging efforts on behalf of statehood for Hawaii during his distinguished ca­reer in the U.S. Congress.

Born in 1890, Mr. Larcade, banker by profession, entered public life early as a member of the school board in the St. Landry Parish in Louisiana from 1913 to 1928. He was a member of the Louisiana State Senate from 1928 to 1932, served that -body as assistant clerk from 1932 to 1936, and. then became a member of the

March 1·5, -1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- HOUSE 5785 State house of representatives from 19-36 to 1940.

In 1943, Mr. Larcade entered the 78th Congress and was elected to four suc­ceeding terms, for a total of 10 years of able and effective work in this body. He chose not to stand for reelection in 1952· but the call of public life was too strong, . and he became a member of his State's senate again from 1956 to 1960.

We join in the deep sadness of the people of Louisiana at the loss of this dedicated public servant, and I want to assure them that Representative Lar­cade's unrelenting efforts in attempting to procure statehood status for us will not be forgotten. His works will live after him, for he was a man whose career inspired the profound respect and ad­miration of citizens from all sections of this great land who knew of his devotion to the public good.

SUBCOMMITTEE ON PUBLIC LANDS AND SUBCOMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS OF THE COMMITTEE. ON INTERIOR AND INSULAR AFFAIRS Mr. ASPINALL. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the Subcom­mittees on Public Lands and Indian Af­fairs of the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs be permitted to sit dur­ing general debate this afternoon.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the . request of the gentleman from Colorado?

There was no objection.

REQUEST TO FILE PRIVILEGED REPORTS

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Com­mittee on Rules may have until midnight tonight to file certain privileged reports.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Virginia?

There was no objection.

HUNGARIAN INDEPENDENCE Mr. DYAL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unan­

imous consent to address the House for 1 minute.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from California?

There was no objection. Mr. DYAL. Mr. Speaker, on this date

the Hungarian independence of March 15, 1848, is commemorated as well as the magnificent courage of Louis Kossuth, the leader of that revolution. This great Hungarian patriot visited in the United States of America and was highly honored by our people for his fight against Hapsburg rule. It was just 10 years ago in 1956 that another Hungar­ian revolution took place for the purpose of -freeing these people from Communist domination. Now, 10 years later; in 1966, they are still trying. During the pa.St 3 months approximately 5,000 persons· have been arrested in Hungary on charges of conspiracy against· Russia. The Hungarian people have proven that '

their ideas of -freedom are similar to our own. .

I have risen, Mr. Speaker, to remind the House that House Joint Resolution 684, introduced last October 7 by the gentleman from New York, Congress­man HORTON, is a resolution which recog­nizes and honors the Hungarian freedom fighters. ·

As we remember today the anniver­sary of the Hungarian independence drive of 1848, it is entirely appropriate that we recall the nearer lOth anniver­sary of the revolution in our own day, which will be fast approaching this fall.

EXPORT CONTROLS OVER CATTLE HIDES AND LEATHER ARE HARM­FUL Mr. SMITH of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, I

ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Iowa?

There was rio objection. Mr. SMITH of Iowa. Mr. Speaker,

last week with the concurrence of the Department of Agriculture, the Depart­ment of Commerce imposed export quotas on hides. I asked immediately for a justification for this action and I have now received their answer. I do not think it is at all justified according to the documents that I have received. These documents and excuses ignore the fact that there are an abundance of substitutes to cover any shortages that may exist. They ignore the fact that hides went up from very low prices to the prices at which they have recently been selling. The justifications ignore the fact that foreigners were willing to pay the prices that they were paying fo~ hides and that a considerable percentage of the hides they buy are of inferior quality anyway and there is no adequate U.S. market for all those inferior hides.

This action by the Department of Commerce has reduced our ability to lower our balance of payments since the reduced prices are below what foreign customers are willing to pay and the volume will be reduced.

The cost of the green hide in a $20 pair of shoes is less than 20 cents and I do not think anybody, should get ex­cited about that. While the price of shoes was going up $10, the cost of the green hide did not increase by 10 cents.

This order by the Department of Com­merce has tumbled hide prices and re­duced the price of live cattle the equiva­lent of 25 cents per hundredweight on those cattle. The real cost of this un­justified order, I suggest Mr. Speaker, will come .out of the hides of cattle pro­ducers.

Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to join in protesting against this export quota on hides.

INCREASING IMPORTATION OF GLOVES

Mr. WHITENER.' Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House

for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from· North Carolina?

There was no objection. Mr. WHITENER. Mr. Speaker, dur-.

ing the past several weeks I have re­ceived a number of inquiries from glove manufacturers in my congressional dis­trict calling to my attention the effect that the increasing importation of gloves is having upon our domestic glove in­dustry.

My constituents are experiencing eco­nomic distress by reason of the competi­tive advantage foreign glove manufac­turers are enjoying. With lower labor and material costs, foreign glove manu­facturers can place their product on the American market at a price domestic manufacturers cannot hope to meet.

The U.S. Tariff Commission has fur­nished me with information which indi­cates that, in 1961, 4,649,111 dozen pairs of gloves with a value of $37,275,184 were imported into the United States. The average unit value per dozen pairs of these imported gloves was $8.02.

In 1965, 7,989,423 dozen pairs of gloves, valued at $61,555,189, were imported into the United States. The average unit value per dozen pairs of these gloves was $7.70.

It will be seen, therefore, that foreign gloves were sold in the United States in 1965 at a cheaper price than were for­eign-manufactured gloves in 196l. Dur­ing the same period, however, the cost· of gloves manufactured in the United States increased. In 1965, it cost the American glove manufacturer approxi­mately $13.50 per dozen pairs to place his product on the market.

I have a number of glove manufactur-· ing firms in my district. These firms are being adversely affected by the in­creasing importation of cheap foreign­made gloves.

Mr. Speaker, it is my sincere hope that the appropriate committee of the Con­gress will look into this matter in an ef­fort to secure some relief · for the Ameri­can glove manufacturing industry.

APPOINTMENT OF DR. EDWARD GARDINER LATCH AS CHAPLAIN Mr. ARENDS. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Dlinois?

There was no objection. Mr. ARENDS. Mr. Speaker, I should

like to join my distinguished colleague; the gentleman from Texas [Mr. MAHON] in expressing to you, Mr. Speaker, my appreciation of your having named Rev.' Dr. Latch to serve as our Acting Chap- · lain. He is indeed a most worthy sue .. cessor to our late beloved Dr. Braskamp and to all who have served in this ca­pacity. ·

In so honoring Dr. Latch you do honor to all of us. You have seleCted to guide and counsel us a ~an who is truly a man

• ¥ .. ~

5786 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE

of God whose entire life has been dedi­cated to the performance of God's work and the realization of God's kingdom on earth.

Dr .. Latch has been.pastor of the Met­ropolitan Methodist Church for 25 years. I have . been privileged to be one of his parishioners for many, many years. His sermons are rich in knowledge of the ways of man as well as the teachings of the ways of God. One cannot sit in his presence but recognize he is in the presence of a man of both wisdom and faith, and be inspired.

Dr. Latch is not only a theologian. He is a scholarly man of letters, knowledge­able in the vast scope of man's endeav­ors. As he has inspired and enriched the lives of his own congregation and countless others who have known him, he will inspire and enrich the Members of this House as we hear him in his daily morning prayer and have opportunity to visit with him.

It has been my very great privilege to be a personal friend of Dr. Latch. I can­not possibly tell you how delighted I am that our beloved Speaker has named him to serve us as our Acting Chaplain.

Mr. HERLONG. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ARENDS. I am ha.ppy to yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. HERLONG. I should like to asso­ciate myself with the remarks of my dis­tinguished friend from Illinois, and com­pliment the Speaker and the House of Representatives on the selection of Dr. Latch as our Chaplain.

Mr. ABERNETHY. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ARENDS. I am glad to yield to the distinguished gentleman from Mis­sissippi.

Mr. ABERNETHY. I fully subscribe to the remarks of the gentleman from Dlinois.

I have personally known Dr. Latch for many years. I worship in his church. He is a great and good man. I am sure he will be greatly loved, aqmired, and appreciated by the Members of this House, as he is by the members of Met­ropolitan Memorial Methodist Church.

Our Speaker is to be congratulated on such a fine selection.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ARENDS. I am glad to yield to the distinguished minority leader, the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. GERALD R . FORD. I share the views expressed by the gentleman from Illinois and others, and I wish to compli­ment the Speaker on his making Dr. Latch our temporary Chaplain during the remainder of the 89th Congress.

Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ARENDS. I am happy to yield to the distinguished majority leader.

Mr. ALBERT. I rise only to associate myself with the remarks of my friend from Illinois. I have had the good for­tune of hearing Dr. Latch a number of times. He is a great preacher and de­voted Christian leader. He will serve us here in the high traditions of those who

have occupied this important offi.ce in the years gone by.

Mr. WHITENER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. ARENDS . . I am happy to yield to the distinguished gentleman from North Carolina.

Mr. WHITENER. I thank the gentle­man from Illinois for yielding, as well as for the magnificent statement he made about the distinguished clergyman who has joined us.

I remember so well that shortly after my arrival in Washington I had the very kind invitation from Dr. and Mrs. Latch to visit them in their home and to visit their wonderful church. I know that all of us join with the gentleman from Illi­nois in commending the Speaker for the selection of this outstanding gentleman, outstanding theologian, and wonderful man to be ·with us here in the House of Representatives as our Chaplain.

COMMISSIONING OF OSTEOPATHS IN THE ARMY, NAVY, AND AIR FORCE Mr. CAHll.L. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Jersey?

There was no objection. Mr. CAHILL. Mr. Speaker, some of

the Members may recall that last week I brought to their attention the fact that osteopaths, who are duly licensed to practice medicine and surgery in most of the States of the Union, are not ac­ceptable for commissioning in the mili­tary forces of the United States, in spite of the acute shortage of medical doctors.

I pointed out that one married medi­cal doctor with seven children was drafted, while no osteopath is eligible for commissioning or acceptance by draft in the Medical Corps as ofilcers. ·

I wrote to the Secretary of Defense and asked for an explanation of why the law of the land, Public Law 763 of the 84th Congress, has not been imple­mented and why osteopaths are not ac­ceptable in the armed services. These are the reasons that have been given to me by Shirley C. Fisk, M.D., Deputy As­sistant SecretarY, Health and Medical. I would like to bring them to the atten­tion of the House. Dr. Fisk expresses his view that:

Both the specific language of the Public Law 763, 84th Congress, and it legislative his­tory clearly reflect its permissive nature.

He then outlines the reasons why the military Secretaries are not accepting osteopaths.

The first reason involves the possible loss of approval by the various civilian medical specialty boards of the training programs carried on in various military hospitals. The second involved the possible loss of accredi­tation by the Joint Commission on Accredi­tation of Hospitals of various m111tary hospitals.

. Now these are the two reasons that are at 'this moment advanced as to why duly licensed and properly educated and

federally assisted doctors are not accept­able in the Medical Corps of the United States. I intend to pursue this matter further and shall report at· a later date. · I am particularly interested in why the military hospitals should be threatened if they accept osteopaths. This in my judgment violates the very purpose of Public Law 763. I intend to investigate this entire matter.

EXPORTATION OF HIDES AND IM­PORTATION OF KNIT GLOVES Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Iowa?

There was no objection. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I wish to

join those colleagues who spoke earlier this afternoon in protest to the action of the executive branch of the Govern­ment in drastically reducing the export of hides and, on the other hand, tremen­dously increasing the imports into this country of knit gloves and mittens.

Some Members of the House should find a mirror and take a look at them­selves before protesting. Many Members should do this because they voted to dele­gate to the executive branch of Govern­ment the authority to take the action it did with respect to hides and, in the case of the importation of woolen gloves, voted to join the free trade movement by eliminating effective tariffs.

The next time the Trade Agreements Act is extended vote differently than you have in the past if you want to shut off these imports that are destroying Amer­ican industry.

DESIGNATING THURSDAY, APRIL 7, 1966, FOR CELEBRATION OF PAN­AMERICAN DAY Mr. SELDEN. Mr. Speaker, I call up

the House Resolution 754 and ask unan­imous consent for its immediate con­sideration.

The Clerk read the resolution, as fol-­lows:

H . RES. 754 Resolved, That the House of Representa­

tives hereby designates Thursday, April 7, 1966, for the celebration of Pan-American Day, on which day, after the reading of the Journal, remarks appropriate to such occa­sion may occur.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ala­bama?

There was no objection. The resolution was agreed to. A motion to reconsider was laid on the

table.

TRADE AGREEMENT RESULTING FROM REVISED TARIFF SCHED­ULES-MESSAGE FROM THE PRES­IDENT OF THE UNITED STATES The SPEAKER laid before the House

a message from the President of the United States.

March 15, 19"66 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 5787 CALL OF THE HOUSE

Mr. GROSS. Mr: Speaker, I make· the point of order that a quorum is not pres­ent. I think th·ere ought to be some Members here to hear the President's speech. ·

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Iowa makes the point of order that a quorum is not present. Evidently a quorum is not present.

Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I move a call of the House.

A call of the House was ordered. The Clerk called the roll, and the fol­

lowing Members failed to answer to their names:

Adair Andrews,

Glenn Ashbrook Baring Bell Bolling Brown, Calif. Clawson, Del Collier Conyers Dawson Delaney Derwinski Dowdy Everett

[Roll No. 35] Fuqua Green, Oreg. Hagen, Calif. Halleck Hanna Harvey, Ind. Holifield King, Calif. Leggett Mccarthy McVicker Martin, Ala. Mathias Matthews Michel Miller

Mosher Murray O'Hara, Mich. Pool Powell Reinecke Roncalio Roudebush Teague, Tex. Toll Waggonner Walker, Miss. White, Idaho Willis Wilson,

Charles H.

The SPEAKER. On this rollcall 383 Members have answered to their names, a quorum.

By unanimous consent, further pro­ceedings under the call were dispensed with.

TRADE AGREEMENT RESULTING FROM REVISED TARIFF SCHED­ULES-MESSAGE FROM THE PRES­IDENT OF THE UNITED STATES <H. DOC. NO. 411) The SPEAKER. The Clerk will read

the message from the President of the United States.

The following message from the Pres­ident of the United States was read and, together with the accompanying papers, referred to the Committee on Ways and Means and ordered to be printed:

To the Congress ot the United States: The Government of the United States

and the Government of Canada have concluded a trade agreement resulting from the entry into force in 1963 of the revised Tariff Schedules of the United States <TSUS). The agreement reestab­lishes, in terms of the TSUS, the conces­sions in the U.S. schedule to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade <GATT> which were negotiated by the United States with Canada in earlier GATT negotiations. It also grants, under the authority of the Trade Expansion Act of 1962, new_ concessions to be included in such schedule to offset the impairment in concessions negotiated with Canada which was incidental to bringing the TSUS into force. The agreement was signed on December 17, 1965, and the first reduction in tariffs took effect on Jan-uary 1, 1966. · · In accordance with section 226 of the

Trade Expansion Act of 1962, I herewith transmit a copy of the trade agreement,

together with a statement of the reasons for entering into the agreement.

LYNDON B. JOHNSON. THE WHITE HOUSE, March 14, 1966.

FOURTH ANNUAL REPORT OF THE PEACE CORPS-MESSAGE FROM THE PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES The SPEAKER laid before the House

the following message from the Presi­dent of the United States; which was read and, together with the accompany­ing papers, referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs:

To the Congress of the United States: . I transmit herewith from the Secre­

tary of State the fourth annual report of the Peace Corps.

This is a report of service to our neigh­bors throughout the world. It is the story of new opportunities for growth and learning among our own people.

The expansion of the Peace Corps has been as dramatic as its promise.

Five years ago today the Peace Corps was 11 days old. By midsummer 1961, 120 volunteers were serving in 3 coun­tries. At the close of fiscal year 1965 there were ·8,624 volunteers serving in 46 countries. Africa received 3,278 volun­teers-Latin America received 3,214-the Near East and South Asia, 1,285, and the Far East, 847.

There are many examples of Peace Corps impact. One is Afghanistan. Nine volunteers went there in 1962 to begin the Peace Corps work. As of June 30, 1965, there were 136 volunteers in Af­ghanistan, located in 19 different towns and villages. Peace Corps teachers reach nearly 40 percent of all Afghan students at the secondary and university levels.

There are other measures of progress. I am pleased to note that, as the number of volunteers has risen, the cost per volunteer has declined. During fiscal year 1963, for example, the annual cost per volunteer was $9,074. For 1965 the cost was reduced to $8,028. The estimate for fiscal year 196C is $7,832.

The Peace Corps is the largest pro­ducer and consumer of language mate­rials in the world. Since 1961, 20,000 trainees have received instruction in one · or more of about 60 languages in the Peace Corps training curriculums. Twen­ty additional languages are under consid­eration for inclusion in future training programs.

Since its inception, 150,000 Americans have volunteered for Peace Corps service. Some 15,000 hav0 served abroad in 49 nations.

As of June 30, 1965, 4,545 volunteers had completed service and returned to the United States. Thirty-seven percent of all returned volunteers are continuing their education. Government service is attracting 17.8 percent, while another 16.4 percent are teaching. The remain­ing 28.5 percent are engaged in private business, nonprofit organizations, and miscellaneous activities.

It is fair to say that the lives of vir­tually all volunteers have been changed

by their service in the Corps. They have become aware--in a unique and profound way--of the bond of suffering and hope that unites men and women on every continent. And they are returning home with a new understanding of their Na­tion and the world.

No more valuable experience can be gained by any man.

LYNDON B. JOHNSON. THE WHITE HousE. March 14. 1966.

LEGISLATIVE SCHEDULE AND PROPOSED EASTER RECESS

Mr. GERAlD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Michigan?

There was no objection. Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speak­

er, I ask for this time for the purpose of inquiring of the distinguished majority leader as to any information he can give us as to the schedule at Eastertime.

Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, will the distinguished minority leader yield to me?

Mr. GERAlD R. FORD. I yield to the gentleman.

Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I am happy that the gentleman has made this inquiry, because we would like to give the Members the opportunity of having as much advance information as possible. Barring some unforeseen con­tingency, which we do not expect, I ad­vise the g.entleman that it is our plan to recess at the close of business on Thurs­day, April 7, 1966, and go over until Monday, April18, 1966.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. As I under­stand it, then, we will have business on Thursday, April7.

Mr. ALBERT. The gentleman 1s cor­rect.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. And we will resume with business on Monday, April 18?

Mr. ALBERT. We will have business on Monday, April18.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I thank the distinguished majority leader. I think it is important to be sure that everyone knows we have business on Thursday, April 7, and business on Monday, April 18, which I understand is a day for sus­pension of the rules.

Mr. ALBERT. That is correct.

PRIVATE CALENDAR The SPEAKER. This is the call of

the Private Calendar.

OSMUNDO CABIGAS The Clerk called the bill <H.R. 5838)

for the relief of Osmundo Cabigas. Mr. TALCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that this bill may be pass~d over without prejudice.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Cali­fornia?

There was no objection.

5788 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966

RONALD WHELAN The Clerk called the bill <H.R. 7141)

for the relief of Ronald Whelan. There being no objection, the Clerk

read the bill, a.s follows: H.R. 7141

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America ~n Congress assembled, That, not­withstanding the limitations of paragraph ( 1) of subsection (b) of section 2733 of the United States Code or any other statute of llmitations, the Secretary of the Army is hereby authorized and directed to receive, consider, and settle the claim of Ronald Whelan, a minor, in accordance with the otherwise applicable provisions of section 2733 of title 10 of the United States Code based upon the injuries and disabilities he sutfered as the result of being struck by a United States Army vehicle in Frankfort, Germany, on or about September 26, 1960; and 1! found to be meritorious, the claim shall be paid in accordance with the proce­dures provided in that section. The claim authorized to be considered by this Act .shall be filed within one year of the date of ap­proval of this Act.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to recon­sider was laid on the table.

RONALD POffiiER, A MINOR

The Clerk called the bill <H.R. 8865) Ior the relief of Ronald Poirier, a. minor.

There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill, as follows:

H.R. 8865 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of

Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled., That the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to pay, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to the legal guardian of Ronald Poirier, a minor, the sum of $542.10 in full settlement of all claims of the said Ronald Poirier against the United States and Airman First Class Roger Blatchford, and in full and final pay­ment of the judgment and costs docketed in the United States District Court ·for the District of Massachusetts, in favor of the said Ronald Poirier, a minor, in an action brought in his behalf by his father, Roland . Poirier, as his father and next friend, against the said Airman First Class Roger Blatchford for damages for personal injuries growing out of an accident on May 31, 1957, in Spring­field, Massachusetts, while said Airman First Class Roger Blatchford was operating an Air Force vehicle and was engaged in his duties as a member of the Air Force. No part of the money appropriated in this Act in excess of 20 per centum thereof shall be paid or delivered to or received by any agent or attorney on account of services rendered in connection with this claim, and the same shall be unlawful, any contract to the con­trary notwithstanding. Any person violating the provisions of this Act shall be deemed guilty of a misdemeanor and upon conviction thereof shall be fined in any sum not ex- · ceeding $1,000.

With the following committee amend­ment:

Page 2, line S, atter ,.out" insert .. of ...

The committee amendment was agreed to.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a. motion to re­consider was laid on the table.

Mr. BOLAND. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the further call of the Private Calendar be dispensed with.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Mas­sachusetts?

There was no objection. The SPEAKER. This concludes the

call of the Private Calendar.

TAX ADJUSTMENT ACT OF 1966 Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, I call up the

conference report on the bill (H.R. 12752) to provide for graduated withholding of income tax from wages, to require dec­larations of estimated tax with respect to self-employment income, to accelerate current payments of estimated income tax by corporations, to postpone certain excise tax reductions, a.nd for other pur­poses, and ask unanimous consent that the statement of the managers on the part of the House be read in lieu of the report.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to

the request of the gentleman from Arkansas?

There was no objection. The Clerk read the statement. Mr. MILLS <interrupting the reading

of the statement). Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that it is our intention fully to discuss and explain the conference re­port, I would ask unanimous consent to dispense with further reading of the statement and ask that the statement be printed in the RECORD at this point.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Arkansas?

There was no objection. The conference report and statement

are as follows:

CONFERENCE REPORT (H. REPT. No. 1323) The committee of conference on the dis­

agreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 12752) to provide for graduated withhold­ing of income tax from wages, to require dec­larations of estimated tax with respect to self-employment income, to accelerate cur­rent payments of estimated income tax by corporations, to postpone certain excise tax rate reductions, and for other purposes, hav­ing met, after full and free conference, have agreed to recommend and do recommend to their respective Houses as follows:

That the Senate recede from its amend­ments numbered 18, 22, 23, 24, 25, and 34.

That the House recede from its disagree­ment to the amendments of the Senate num­bered 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 1~ 16, 1~ 19, 2~ 21,26,2~ 2~ 29, 3~ 3L 32, and 33; and agree to the same.

Amendment numbered 35: That the House recede from its disagreement to the amendment of the Senate numbered 35, and agree to the same with an amendment as follows: In lieu of the matter proposed to

be inserted by the Senate amendment insert the f-ollowing: ·

"SEC. 302. BENEli'ITS AT AGE 72 FOB CERTAIN UNINSURED INDIVIDUALS.

"(a) MONTHLY BENEFrrS.-Title IT of the Social Security Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new section: 11 'BENEI'ITS AT AGE 72 FOR CERTAIN UNINSURED

INDIVIDUALS II 'Eligibility

.. 'SEc. 228. (a) Every individual who­"'(1) has attained the age of 72, "'(2) (A) attained such age before 1968,

or (B) has not less than 3 quarters of cover­age, whenever acquired, for each calendar year elapsing after 1966 and before the year in which he attained such age.

"'(3) is a resident of the United States (as defined in subsection (e) ) , and is (A) a citizen of the United States or (B) an allen lawfully admitted for permanent residence who has resided in the United States (as de­fined in section 210(i)) continuously during the 5 years immediately preceding the month in which he :flies application under this sec­tion, and

"'(4) has :flied application for benefits under this section,

shall (subject to the limitations in this sec­tion) be entitled to a benefit under this sec­tion for each month beginning with the first month after September 1966 in which he be­comes so entitled to such benefits and end­ing with the month preceding the month in which he dies. No application under this section which is filed by an individual more than 3 months before the first month in which he meets the reqUirements of para­graphs ( 1) , ( 2) , and ( 3) shall be accepted as an application for purposes of this sec­tion."'

"Benefit amount ,. '(b) (1) Except as provided in paragraph

(2), the benefit amount to which an individ­ual is entitled under this section for any month shall be $35.

" '(2) If both husband and wife are en­titled (or upon application would be en­titled) to benefits under this section for any month, the amount of the husband's benefit for such month shall be $35 and the amount of the wife's benefit for such month shall be $17.50.

11 'Reduction for governmental pension system benejit8

"'(c) (1) The benefit amount ·of any in­dividual under this section for any month shall be reduced (but not below zero) by the amount of any periodic benefit under a gov­ernmental pension system for which he is eligible for such month.

"'(2) In the case of a husband and wife only one of whom is entitled to benefits un­der this section !or any month, the benefit amount, after any reduction under paragraph (1), shall be further reduced (but not below zero) by the excess (if any) of (A) the total amount of any periodic benefits under gov­ernmental pension systems for which the spouse who is not entitled to benefits under this section is eligible for such month, over (B) $17.50.

"'(3) In the case of a. husband and wife both of whom are entitled to benefits under thls section for any month-

•• '(A) the benefit amount of the wife, after any reduction under paragraph (1), shall be further reduced (but not below zero) by the excess (if any) of _(i) the total amount of any periodic benefits under governmental pension systems for which the husband 18 eligible tor such montl:l. over (11) t35, and

March 15, 1966 CONG~SSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5789 "'(B) the benefit amount of the husband,

after any reduction under paragraph (1),. shall be further reduced (but not below zero) by the excess (if any) of (i) the ' tOtal amount of any periodic benefits under gov­ernmen~ pension t;;ystems for which the wife 18 eligible for such month, over (11) .$17.50.

" ' ( 4) For purposes of this subsection, in determining whether an individual is eli­gible for periodic benefits under a govern­mental pension system-

" '(A} such individual shall be deemed to have filed application for such benefits,

"'(B) to the extent that entitlement de­pends on an application by such individual'.s .spouse, such spouse shall be deemed to have filed application, and

"'{C) to the extent that entitlement de­pends on such individual or his spouse hav­ing retired, such individual and his spouse shall be deemed to have retired before the month for which the determination of eli­gibllity is being made.

" • ( 5) For purposes of this subsection, if any periodic benefit is payable on any basis other than a calendar month, the Secretary shall allocate the amount of such benefit to the appropriate calendar months.

"'(~) If, under the foregoing provisions of this section, the amount payable for any month would be less than '$1. such amount shall be reduced to zero. In the case of a husband and wife both of whom are entitled to benefits under this section for the month,

_ the preceding sentence shall be applied with respect to the aggregate amount so payable -for such month. .

"'(7) If any benefit amount computed under the foregoing provisions of this sec­tion is not a multiple of $0.10, it shall be raised to the next higher multiple of $0.10.

•• '(8} Under -regulations prescribed by the Secretary, benefit payments under this sec­tion to an individual (or ·aggregate benefit })ayments under this section in the case of a husband and wife) of less than $5 may be accumulated until they equal or exceed $5.

" 'Suspension for months in which cash pay-ments are made under public assistance •• '(d) The benefit to which any individual

is entitled under this section for any month shall not be paid for such month if-

" '(1) such individual receives aid or as­s1stanee in the ~orm of money payments in such month under a State plan approved under title I, IV, X, XIV, or XVI, or

.ru(2) such individual's husband or wife receives .such aid or assistance in such month, and under the State plan the needs o.f such indlvidual were taken into account ·in determining ellgib.flity .for (or amount of) such aid or assistance,

unless the State a~ency adm-inistering or supervising the administration of such plan notifies the Secretary, at such time and in such manner as may be prescribed in ac­cordance with regulations of the Secre.tary, that such payments to such individual (or such individual's husband or wife) under such plan are being terminated with the payment or payments made in such month.

,~, 'Suspensi()'ft where individual is residing outside the United States

"'(e) The benefit to which any individual is entitled. under this section for any month ·shall not · be paid if, during such month, such individual Is not a resident of the United States. For purposes of this subsec­tion, the term 'United States' means the 50 States and the District of Columbia. " 'Treatment as monthly insurance benefits

"'(f) ·For p-urposes of subsections (t) and {u) of section 202, and -of sectloD 1840, a monthlY benefit under this section shall be treated as a monthly insurance benefit pay­able under section 202.

"'.Annual reimbursement of FecleraZ Old­Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund

4' • (g) There are authorized to be appro­

priated to the Federal Old-Age and Survivors Insurance Trust Fund for the fiscal year ending June 30. 1969, and for each fiscal year thereafteJ:, such sums as the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare deems neces­sary on account of-

" ' ( 1) payments made under this section during the second preceding fiscal year and all fiscal years prior thereto · to individuals who, ·as of the beginning of the calendar year in which falls the month for which payment was made, had less than 3 quarters of cover­age,

-'' • (2) the additional -administrative ex­penses resulting from the payments described in paragraph ( 1) , and

"'{3) any loss in interest to such Trust Fund resulting from such paymen1;s and expenses,

in order to place such Trust Fund in the same position at the end of such fiscal year as it would have been in if such payments had not been made.

" 'Definitions "'(h) -For purposes -of this section--· '(.1) The term "quarter.s of coverage"

includes ~ quart~r of coverage as defined in section 5(1) of the Railroad Retirement Act .of 1'9.37.

"'(2) The terp1 "governmental pension system" means the insurance system estab­lished by this title or any other system or fund established by the United States, a State, any political ·subdivision of a State, or any wholly owned instrumentality of any one or more of the foregoing which provides for payment of (A) pensions, (B) retirement or retired pay, or (C) annuities or similar amounts payable on account of personal serv- . ices performed by any individual (not in­cluding any payment under any workmen's compensation law or any payment by the Veterans' Administration as compensation for service-connected disabillty or death).

"'(3) The term "periodic benefit" includes a benefit payable in a lump sum if it 1s a commutation of, or a substitute for, periodic payments.

"'(4) The determination of whether an indi-vidual is a husband or wife for any month shall be made under subsection (h) of section 216 without regard to subsections . (b) and (f) of section 216.'

"(b) CERTAIN APPLICATIONS UNDER 1965 AMENDMENTS.-For purposes Of paragraph (4) of section 228(a) of the Social Security Act (added by subsection (a) of this sec­tion), an application filed under section 103 of the Social Security Amendments of 1965 before July 1966 shall be regarded as an application under such section 228 and shall, for purposes of such paragraph and of the last sentence of such section 228 (a) , be deemed to have been filed in July 1966, unless the person by whom or on whose behalf such application was filed notifies the Secretary that he does not want such application so regarded."

And the Senate agree to the same. Amendment numbered 86: That the House

recede from its disagreement to the amend­ment of the Senate numbered 36, and agree to the same with the following amendments:

On page 19 of the Senate engrossed amend­ments, strike out line 4 and insert: "SEC. 303. TEMPORARY DUTY-FREE ENTRY li'OR

GIFTS FROM MEMBERS OJ' ARMED FORCES IN COMBAT ZONES.

"(a) GIFTS COSTING $50 OR LESS.---8Ubpart B of part 1 of the appendix to".

On page 19 of the Senate engrossed amend­ments, in the matter following line 7, after "may prescribe" insert a. comma.

On page 19 of the Senate engrossed amend­ments, in the fourth llne from the bottom of the page, strike out "(b~" and insert:

"(b) CLERICAL AMENDMENT.-".

On page 19 of the Senate engrossed amend­ments, in the last line, strike out " {c)" and insert:

"(c) EFFECTIVE DATE.-". And the Senate agree to the same.

W. D.MILLS, CECIL R. KING, HALE BoGGS. EUGENE J. KEOGH, JOHN W. BYRNES, JAMES B. UTT.

Managers on the Part of the House. .RUSSELL B. LONG, GEORGE A. SMATHERS, CLINTON P. ANDERSON, JOHN J. Wn.LIAMS, FRANK CARLSON,

Managers on the Part of the Senate.

STATEMENT

The managers on the part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 12752) to provide for graduated withholding of income tax from wages, to require declarations of estimated tax with .respect to self-employment income, to accelerate current payments of estimated income tax by corporations, to postpone cer­tain excise tax rate reductions, and for other , purposes, submit the following statement in explanation of the effect of the action agreed upon by the conferees and recommended in the accompanying conference report:

The following Senate amendments made technical, clerical, clarifying or .conforming changes: 1, 2, S, 6, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 20, 21, 23, 24, 25, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, and 32. With respect to these amendments (1) the House recedes, or ( 2) the Senate recedes in order to conform to other action agreed upon by the committee of confe.rence. WITHHOLDING ALLOWANCES BASED ON ITEMIZED

DEDUCTIONS

Amendments Nos. 4 and 1>: The bill as passed by the House and the Senate permits employees to claim withholding allowances (which are to have the same effect as with­holding exemptions .for purposes of income tax withholding) equal to the number de­termined by dividing by $700 the excess of {1) estimated itemized deductions over (2) an amount equal to the sum ·of a specified percentage of the first $7,500 of estimated wages and 17 percent of the remainder of the estimated wages. ·under the bill as passed by the House, the percentage of the first $7,500 of estimated wages was 12 percent. Under Senate amendment No. 4, this per­c.entage is reduced to 10 percent. The.House recedes.

Under the bill as passed by the House, · any fraction resulting from the computation was to be disregarded except that, if the number determined was one-half o-r more but less than one, it was to be increased to one. Under Senate amen,dment No. 5, frac­tional numbers are not to be taken -into ac­count. The House recedes.

The conferees on the part of the House and on the part of the Senate are concerned about the extent of overwlthholdlng which prevails under existing law and which it appears will continue at a reduced level un­der the graduated withholding system pro­vided by this bill, even With the withholding allowances as provided in the agreement reached by your conferees. For that reason, it has requested the Treasury Department to continue to survey and study ways and means of reducing overwithholding, particu­larly in the case of season·al and intermittent

5790 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 employment, and has asked the Treasury De­partment, as it gains some experience under the system provided by the bill, to report back !rom time to time to the House Com­mittee on Ways and Means and the Senate Committee on Finance as to any practicable means o! reducing the remaining overwith­holding.

Amendment No. 7: Under the bill as passed by the House, an employee's estimated item­ized deductions for any estima·tion year could not be greater than the amount of the de­ductions (other than the deductions referred to in sections 141 and 151 of the Code' and other than the deductionS required to be taken into account in determining adjusted gross income under section 62 of the Code) shown on his Federal income tax· return !or the taxable year preceding his estimation year. Under Senate amendment No. 7, if the employee did not show such deductions on his return !or such preceding taxable year, the amount of his 'estimated itemized deductions is not to exceed the lesser o! $1,000 or 10 percent of the wages shown on such return.

The House recedes. OPTION OF INDIVIDUALS TO DISREGARD BALANCES

DUE AND OVERPAYMENTS OF $5 OR LESS

Amendment No. 18: This amendment added a new section 5 to the code under which individuals were given an election to disregard balances due and overpayments of $5 or less where their withholding and other tax credits and payments of estimated tax !or a year were within $5 of their tax liability for the year as shown on their returns. This election would have been effective for taxable years after 1966.

The Senate recedes. Although the House conferees did not

agree to Senate amendment No. 18, they re«­ognize the desirability of simplifying tax col­lection and refund procedures, an objective toward which this amendment was directed. For this reason, the conferees, both on the part of the House and o~ the part of the Senate, are requesting the Treasury Depart­ment to study and report back to the House Committee on Ways and Means and the Sen­ate Committee on Finance as to the prac­ticability and desirability of foregoing tax payments and refunds in cases where the amount due at the time the final return is filed is small because of substantial pay­ments through withholding or payments of estimated tax, or both. This study and re­port to the committees is to be made in con­junction with the study on ways of relieving overwithholding referred to earlier in this statement. FLOOR STOCKS TAX ON PASSENGER AUTOMOBILES,

' ETC,

Amendment No. 19: The bill as passed by the House provided for a :floor stocks tax on passenger automobiles and trailers (other than house trailers) suitable for use in con­nection with passenger automobiles which on the day after the enactment of the bill are held by dealers and have not been used and are intended for sale. Under this pro­vision the tax was 1 percent of the price for which the article was sold by the manufac­turer, producer, or importer. The tax was to be paid by the dealer and be collected from him by the manufacturer, producer, or im­porter. The tax was to be paid at such time after 60 days after the date of enactment of the bill as may be prescribed by the Sec­retary of the Treasury or his delegate.

Senate amendment No. 19 strikes . out this provision of the bill.

The House recedes. LOCAL RESIDENTIAL TELEPHONE SERVICE

Amendment No. 22: The bill as passed by the House increased the tax on communica­tion services to 10 percent (the rate in effect on December 81, 1965), for the period from

the e1fective date of this provision through March 81, 1968. Senate amendment No. 22 provided that this temporary increase was not to apply to local residential telephone service, as defined in the amendment, and that the tax rates provided by existing law (3 percent for calendar year 1966, 2 percent for calendar year 1967, and 1 percent tor calendar year 1968) were to continue to apply to this service.

The Senate recedes. EFFECTIVE DATE OF INCREASE IN COMMUNICA­

TIONS TAX

Amendment No. 26: Under the bill as passed by the Hou~e. th~ a:mendments made by section 202 of the bill (relating to com­munication services) were to take effect, un­der i;he r-qles prescribed by the bill, on the first day of the first month which begins more than 15 days after the date on which the bill is enacted. Under Senate amend­ment No. 26 the effective date is April!, 196~.

The House recedes. DISALLOWANCE OF DEDUCTION FOR CERTAIN IN­

DIRECT CONTRmUTIONS TO POLrriCAL PARTIES

Amendment No. 33: This amendment adds a new section 276 to the code providing that no deduction otherwise allowable under chapter 1 of the code shall be allowed for any amount paid or incurred for- ,

... ( 1) advertising in a convention program of a political party, or in any other publica­tion if any part of the pr~eeds of such pub­lication directly or indirectly inures (or is intended to inure) to or for the use of a political party or a political candidate,

"(2) admission to any dinner or program, if any part of the proceeds of such dinner or program directly or indirectly inures (or is intended to inure) to or for the use of a po­litical party or a political candidate, or

"(3) admission to an inaugural ball, in­augural gala, inaugural parade, or inaugural concert, or to .any similar event which is identified with a political party or a political

· candidate." The new section also defines the term

"political party" and provides that proceeds are to be treated as inuring to or for the use of · a · politic'al ' candidate only if (A) such proceeds may be used directly or indirectly for the purpose of furthering his candidacy for selection, nomination, or election to any elective public office, and (B) such proceeds are not received by such candidate in the ordinary course of a trade or business (other than the trade or business of holding elective public office) . The new section applies to taxable years beginning after December 31, 1965, but only with respect to amounts paid or incurred after the date of the enactment of the bill.

The House recedes. , INFORMATION RETURNS MADE BY DEPARTMENT

OF AGRICULTURE

Amendment No . . 34: Section 6041 (a) of the code now requires information returns to be made by persons engaged in trade or business and by officers and employees of the United States with respect to certain pay­ments of $600 or more in a taxable year. The return sets forth the amount of the payments and the name and address of the recipient. Senate amendment No. 34 added a new sub­section (e) to section 6041 providing (1) that information returns which are required under section 6041(a) with respect to payments under programs administered by the Depart­ment of Agriculture are to be rendered by the Secretary of Agriculture or by one or more officers or employees of the Department of Agriculture designated by the Secretary of Agriculture to make such returns on his behalf, and · (2) that the Secretary of Agrl­culture (or the officer or employee rendering the return) is to furnish to each' person whose name is set forth in the return a written statement showing the aggregate

amount of payments to the person as shown on the return.

The Senate recedes. Although the conferees on the part of the

House, because of problems of administering the amendment, - did not agree to Senate amendment No. 34, it was recognized that there is a problem in correlating the differ­ent payments which may be made to a farmer during a year at different times or by different offices or agencies of the Depart­ment of Agriculture. It was thought that a means should be developed administratively to report w'lth respect to any farmer a total of the payments made to him which should be reported for tax purposes. Also, a study should be made of the feasibllity of report­ing to the farmer amounts paid to him which ·are reported to the Internal Revenue Service. These studies should be made by the Depart­ment of Agriculture in cooperation with the Department of the Treasury a.nd a report made to the House Committee on Ways and Means and the Senate Committee on Finance early in the next Congress. SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS FOR CERTAIN AGED

UNINSURED INDIVIDUALS

Amendment No. 35: This amendment adds a new section to the blll to provide monthly benefit payments under section 202 of the Social Security Act to individuals who meet the requirements of the new provisions. Under the Senate amendment, an individual would be entitled to the new benefits if he has filed application for the benefits and (A) has attained age 70, (B) either (i) is not and would not (upon filing application) be en­titled to monthly benefits under existing section 202 for the month in which he at­tains age 70 or (if later) the month in which he files application for the new benefits, or (ii) is entitled to such benefits but the amount is less than the amount of the new benefits, and (C) is a resident of the United States (as defined in section 210(i) of the Social Security Act) and is a citizen of the United States or an alien laWfully admitted for P.,ermanent residence who has· resided in the United States (as so defined) continu­ously during the 5 years immediately pre­ceding the month in which he files applica-tion for the new benefits. -

Under the Senate amendment, the amount of the new monthly benefit would (in effect) be $44, except that the amount would be $22 in the case of a married woman whose hus­band is entitled to the new benefits. Under the Senate amendment the new provisions would apply for months after September 1966, and section 227 of the Social Security Act (relating to transitional insured status) would be repealed as of the close of Septem­ber 1966.

The Senate amendment authorized appro­priations to be :g1ade from time to time to the Federal old-age and survivors insurance trust fund and to the Federal hospital insur­ance trust fund to place each trust fund in the same position in which it would have been but for the Senate amendment.

Under the conference agreement, the House recedes with an amendment in the nature of a substitute for the Senate amend­ment. Subsection (a) of section 302 of the bill as agreed to in conference adds a new section 228 to the Social Security Act provid­ing for benefits at age 72 for certain unin­sured individuals.

Under subsection (a) of the new section 228 an individual is (subject to the limita­tions provided by section 228) to be enti tied to 'benefits if he-

(1) Has attained age 72, (2) Attained such age before 1968 or has

not less than 3 quarters of coverage (when­ever acquired} -for each calendar year elaps­ing after 1966 and before the year· in which he attained such age,

(3) Is a resident of the United States (as defined in the second sentence of subsection

March 15; 1966 CONGRESSIONAL Rl!CO~D - . I:JQUSE 5791 (e) of the new section 228), and is a citizen of tbe -United States or an alien _lawfully admitted for permanent residence who has resided in the United States (as _defined in section '210(1) of the Social Security· Act) continuously during the· 5 years immediately preceding the month in which he files appli­cation under new section 228, and . (4) Has filed application-for benefits under new section 228.

Entitlement is to begin with the .first month after September 1966 in which the individual becomes entitled to such benefits and is to end with the month preceding the month in which he dies.

Subsection (b) of the new section 228 pro­vides that the benefit amount for any month is to b~ $35, except that if both husband and wife are entitled (or upon application would be entitled) to benefits under new section 228 for any month, the husband's benefit for such month is to be $35 and the wife's benefit is to be $17.50.

Subsection (c) of the new section 228 pro­vides for the reduction of the benefits under this new provision on account of periodic benefits for which the individuals concerned are eligible under governmental pension sys­tems (as defined in new subsection (h) (2)).

Under paragraph ( 1) of the new subsection (c) tbe amount of the new benefit for any individual is first reduced by the periodic benefits under governmental pension systems for which such individual is eligible.

Paragraphs (2) and (3) relate to husbands ,_nd wives and in effect provide that the new benefit amount to which one spouse is en-1;1tled will be further reduced, in the manner specified, by a portion of the periodic benefits for which the -other spouse is eligible under governmental pension systems.

Paragraph (4) of the new subsection (c) provides in effect that, in determining the eligibillty of individuals for periodic benefits under governmental pension systems, appli­cations for such benefits shall be deemed to have been filed and the individuals concerned shall be deemed to have retired.

Paragraph (5) of the new subsection (c) provides that where a periodic benefit is pay­able on a basis other than a calendar month, the Secretary-of Health, Education, and Wel­fare is to allocate the amount of such benefit to the appropriate calendar months.

Paragraph (6) of the new subsection (c) provides that a monthly bent!fit amount un­der the new provision (determined before rounding under new subsection (c) (7)) of less than $1 is to be reduced to zero. Where both husband and wlfe are entitled to bene­fits under the new provision for the month, their benefit amounts are to be reduced to zero only if, .arter such amounts are com­bined (but before rounding under new sub­section (c) (7)), they aggregate less than $1.

Pargaraph (7) of the new subsection (c) provides that any benefit amount which is not a multiple of 10 cents is to be raised to the next higher multiple of 10 cents. In the case of a husband and wife, this rounding provision is to be applied separately to the benefit of each spouse.

Paragraph (8) of the new subsection (c) provides that, under regulations prescribed by the Secretary of I:;:ealth, Education, and Welfare, where the amount otherwise pay­able under the new provision to an individ­ual (or to a husband and wife) is less than $5 that amount may be accumulated. Where the amounts so p.ccumulated equa1 or exceed $5, they wlll become immediately payable.

Subsection (d) of the new section 228 pro­vides, in general, that the benefit to which any individual is entitled under section 228 !or any month is not to be pai.d if he re­ceives aid -or assi&tance in the form of money payments in such month under a State plan approved under title I, IV, X, XIV, or XVI

Qf the Social Security Act. Such benefit for any month is !llso not to be paid if such in"!'· dividual's _spriuse _receives such aid or assist~ ance in such month ·and the needs of such individual viere taken· into ·account in de­termining e!'igibility for (or the amount of) such aid or assistance.

Subsection (e) of the new section 228 pro­vides that the benefit to which any individ­ual is otherwise entitled under the new sec­tion 228 is not to be paid for any month dur­ing which the individual is not a resident of the United States. -For this purpose, the term "United States" means the 50 States and the District of Columbia.

Subsection {f) of the new section 228 pro­vides that monthly benefits under the new section are to be treated as monthly insur­ance benefits under section 202 of the Social Security Act for purposes of sections 202(t) (relating to suspension of benefits of aliens who are outside United States), 202(u) (re­lating to conviction for certain offenses), and 1840 (relating to payment of premiums for supplementary medical insurance benefits). It is to be noted that this treatment (as monthly benefits under section 202) does not apply, for example, with respect to section 226 of the Social Security Act (relating to entitlement to hospital insurance benefits) or to section 202(m) of such Act (relating to minimum benefits).

Subsection (g) authorizes to be a.ppro­priated to the Federal old-age and survivors insurance trust fund for the fiscal year end­ing June 30, 1969, and for each fiscal year thereafter, such sums as the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare deems neces­sary on account of-

" ( 1) · benefit payments made under the new section 228 during the second preceding fiscal year (and all fiseal years prior thereto which begin after June 30, 1966) to indi­viduals who had less than 3 quarters of cov­erage as of the beginning of the calendar year in which falls the month for which such benefit payments were made.

"(2) the additional administrative ex­penses resulting from such benefit payments, and

"{3) any loss in interest to such trust fund resulting from such benefit payments and administrative expenses, · in order to place such trust fund in the same post tlon at the end of such fiscal year­as it would have been in if such benefit pay­ments h-ad not been made.••

Subsection (h) provides definitions for the new section 228.

Paragraph (1) provides that the term "quarter of coverage" includes a quarter of coverage as defined in section 5(1) of the Railroad Retirement Act of 1937.

Paragraph (2) defines the term "govern­mental pension system" to mean the insur­ance system established by title II of the Socia::. Security Act or any other system or fund established by the United States, a. State, any political subdivision of a State, or any wholly owned instrumentality of any one or· more of the foregoing which provides for payment of (A) pensions, (B) retirement or retired pay, or (C) annuities or similar amounts payable on account of personal services performed by any individual (not in­cluding any payment under any workmen's compensation law or any payment by the Veterans' Administration as compehsation for service-connected disab1llty or death).

Paragraph ,(3) provides that the term "peri\)dic benefit" in-cludes a benefit payable in a lump sum if it is in commutation of, or a substitute for, periodic payments.

'Paragraph (4) provides th-at the deter­mination of whether .an individual is a hus­band or wife for any month is to be .made under the general rules of subsection (h) of section 216 without regard to the special

rules in subsections (b) and '(t) of such section~ ~ The new subsection (b) ·of section '302 of

the .b111, as agreed to in conference, provi1ies that, for purposes of paragraph (4) of the new section 228(a) :Of the Social Security Act (which -requires the filing of an applica­tion as a condition of entitlement to the new benefits), applications tiled before July of 1966 under section 103 <>f the Social Security Amendments of 1965 (which provides eligi­b111ty for hospital insurance benefits for cer­tain uninsured individuals) shall be treated also as an application for benefits under tne new section 228. DUTY FREE TREATMENT OF GIFI'S FROM SERVICE­

MEN IN COMBAT AREAS

Amendment No. 36: Under existing law (sec. 321 (a) of the Tariff Act of 1930) bona tlde gifts from abroad may be imported free of duty if the retail value in the country of shipment does not exceed $10. Senate amendment No. 36 adds a. new item to the Tariff Schedules pro-vi~ng for the temporary duty free entry of articles constituting a. bona fide gift from a member of the Armed Forces of the United States serving in a combat zone to the extent such .articles in any shipment do not exceed $50 in aggre­gate retail value in the country of shipment and with such limitations on the importation of alcoholic beverages and tobacco products as the Secretary of the Treasury may pre­scribe. The provision would apply only if the articles are purchased in or through authorized agencies of the Armed Forces of the United States or in accordance with regu­lations prescribed by the Secretary of De­fense. For purposes of this provision the term "combat zone" is any area designated by the President by an executive order under section 112(c) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 (relating to exclusion from gross income for certain combat pay of members of the Armed Forces). On April 24, 1965, the President designated Vietnam and adjacent waters as a combat zone.

The Senate amendment applies to articles entered after the date of the enactment of the b111 and on or before December 31, 1967.

The House recedes with clerical amendments.

W. D. MILLS, CECIL R. KING, HALE BoGGs, EUGENE J. KEOGH, JOHN W. BYRNES, JAMES B. UTT.

Managers on the Part of the House.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Arkansas is recognized for 1 hour.

Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, I yield my­self 10 minutes.

Mr. Speaker, the conference report which we· bring to the House pertains to the bill H.R. 12752. the Tax Adjustment Act of 1966.

GENERAL

Before discussing the conference re­port in detail, I should like to point out that it has been barely 2 months since the President sent his tax proposals to the Congress. For the second time in 2 years, the Congress has acted with dis­patch on a major tax bill. Our target was March 15. If this conference re­port is agreed to, we will hit that target. What is more, the action this time was on a bill to raise revenue and not on a bill to reduce taxes. Congress has dem­onstrated, in other words, that it can and will take action quickly •• both to lower revenues and to raise them, when­ever there is clear evidence of the need for quick action.

5792 CONG~SSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE Marek · 15, 1966

Let me turn now to the language as agreed to by the conferees. . The con­ference agreement does not depart to any significant extent from the bill passed by the House on February 23. This is indicated by the fact that the bill as passed by the House provided for an increase in administrative-budget revenues of $1.2 billion in the fiscal year 1966 and an increase of $4.8 billion in the fiscal year 1967. The bill as agreed to by the conferees provides for an in­crease in administrative-budget reve­nues of $1.1 billion in the fiscal year 1966 and $4.8 billion in the fiscal year 1967. There is virtually no difference, then, in terms of revenl,\e between .the bill that was passed by the House and the btll agreed to by the conferees. This result is significant, for the bill passed by the Senate provided for substantially less revenue than the bill passed by the House. The Senate-approved bill would have provided $1.1 billion in administra­tive-budget revenues in the fiscal year 1966 and only $3.9 billion in the fiscal year 1967.

The language agreed to by the con­ferees represents a responsible approach in helping to meet the financial demands of the Vietnam confiict. These de­mands-which are the sole reason for this bill-cannot be met out of the reve­nues generated under existing tax rates. Significant additional revenues must be provided. Without these additional rev­enues, there would be too large a deficit in the budget. Such a deficit, occurring at a time when our economy is once again operating at close to full employ­ment levels and capacity, might generate serious infiationary pressures.

All told, there were 36 numbered Sen- . ate amendments to the bill as passed by the House. Sixteen of these amend­ments, however, were technical, clerical, or conforming in nature. Of the re­maining 20 amendments, 8 were con­nected with 2 relatively minor revisions in the provisions of the House-passed bill.

Of the 12 amendments that I would classify as substantive, the conferees on the part of the Senate agreed to recede on 6. The conferees on the part of the House receded on six of these amend­ments, three of which concern matters not directly related to the provisions of the bill passed by the House.

SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS FOR CERTAIN PERSONS AGED 72 AND OVER

Perhaps the most important Senate amendment to the bill, which in a greatly modified form was agreed to by the conferees, involves a social security amendment and not an income or excise tax matter. That amendment was spon­sored by Senator PROUTY. It would have authorized a minimum social security benefit of $44 a month-$22 for a wife­to all persons not eligible for social se­curity benefits who have attained age 70 now and in the future. People who qualified for monthly social security benefits of $35 or $17.50 under the spe­cial transitional insured status provision enacted last year for people already in their seventies would have had their benefits raised to $44 and ·$22. The benefits would have been paid regardless

of the entitlement under other Govern­ment retirement systems-in other words, on top of any Federal, State, or lo­cal pension. It would have called for a first-year expenditure of $790 million from the general fund in fiscal1967, $735 million in fiscal 1968 and so forth for a considerable number of years. The amendment would have resulted in a sub­stantial drain on the railroad retirement account and would have left that system with a very large actuarial deficiency. In addition, it would have made these riew benefits available to persons receiv­ing old-age assistance, and, in most cases, their assistance payments would have been reduced by the amount of these benefits with the result that such indi­viduals would not be better off than they now are. The · effect of the amendment .would have been to shift an additional part of the burden of support of the needy aged from State funds to Federal funds. It would have covered persons aged 70 or over for _all future years in­stead of merely on a transitional basis. It would have repealed the transitional insured status provision which we en­acted just last year.

Clearly, this amendment in the form in which it came to us from the other body would have accomplished its basic purpose in a very costly and inefficient manner.

The Senate conferees agreed to exten­sive modifications to bring it more in line with the legislation which the Con­gress enacted last year authorizing bene­fits for certain aged people at age 72 who have as little as three quarters of coverage.

Benefit amount: Under the conference agreement, the benefit amount, as in last year's law, would be $35 for the hus­band and-$17.50 for the wife, instead of $44and$22.

Transitional provision: A transitional provision has been included, similar to the one we provided last year for the uninsured aged under hospital insurance, so that persons who attain age 72 in 1968, or later, will be required to have at least three quarters of coverage. Eventually, the number of quarters re­quired will merge with the regular in­sured status requirements of the law.

Number of persons covered: The pro­vision agreed to by the conferees makes an estimated 370,000 persons who are now 72 or over, or who will reach the age of 72 in either 1966 or 1967, eligible to receive social security benefits who do not now receive such benefits. About two-thirds of these beneficiaries will be women and 80 percent of the women will be widows. Thus, the typical beneficiary might be said to be a widow aged 85, whose husband had been a farmer who died in the early 1950's.

Offset provision: Another modification made by the conference committee would be the imposition of an offset for amounts received under other governmental re­tirement systems against the entitlement under the new program. The objective is to guarantee to. these aged individuals retirement payments of $35 a month for the husband, $17.50 for the wife, or a family total of _$52.50. The offset would

apply to payments made under Federal, State, or local governmental pension sys­tems, and would include payments of first, pensions; second, retirement or re­tired pay; or third, annuities or similar amounts payable on account of personal services performed, but would not include any payment under any workers' com­pensation law or any payment by the Veterans' Administration as compensa­tion for service-connected disability or death.

Of course, Mr. Speaker, I should men­tion that this offset provision will not apply to amounts payable under na­tional service life insurance, or U.S. Gov­ernment life insurance policies. . Examples of offset: Mr. Speaker, let me illustrate the manner in which this offset would work. First, take the case of a retired State employee, age 72, who is receiving a State pension of $25 and who has a wife age 72. Under this pro­vision, he would receive an additional $10, bringing his pension and benefit re­ceipts up to $35, and his wife would re­ceive a benefit of $17.50, making a total family income from these sources of $52.50.

Take another example, an aged re­tired governmental employee who re­ceives $10 a month from a local pension and whose wife receives $30 per month as a retired schoolteacher. Their total in­come from these other governmental sources is $40 per month. Under this language, an additional $12.50 would be payable to the husband, bringing their total up to $52.50. _ A third case shows how this language

excludes from the provision retired employees who are receiving substan­tial amounts from other governmen~l sources. Take the case of a retired Gov­ernment employee who is receiving $300 a month. Under this language, he would not receive additional amounts, nor would his wife. Or, take the case of a Govern­ment employee, age 69, who is still work­ing but who-if he retired-could receive a pension of $200 per month, and who has a wife age 72. Neither would re­ceive anything under this amendment. Mr. Speaker, I will insert at this point a table showing further illustrations: ILLUSTRATIONS OF SOCIAL SECURITY BENEFITS

PAYABLE UNDER · AMENDMENT FOR CASES OF ' PERSONS RECEIVING GOVERNMENTAL PENSION

SYSTEM BENEFITS

Case A-1: Government employee aged 69 working, but eligible for pension of $100; his wife is aged 72. Neither receive anything under this amendment.

Case A-2: Same as case A-1 except his po­tential pension is $40; his wife receives $12.50 under this amendment. ·

Case A-3: Same as case A-1, except his po­tential pension is $15; his wife receives $35 under this amendment.

Case B-1: Retired Government employee aged 72, with wife same age, receiving pen­sion of $80 per month; neither receive any­thing under this amendment.

Case B-2: Same as case B-1, except hus­band's pension is $40; he receives nothing, and his wife receives $12.50 under this amendment.

Oase B-3: Same as Case B-1, except hus­band's pension is $20; he receives $15, and his wife receives $17.50 under this amend­ment.

March i5, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL .RECORD-· HOUSE 5793 Case C: Husband and Wife ·both aged 72

or over and both receiving Government pen­sions, as follows: -

Government pension Social security benefit-· under this bill .

H usband Wife Husband Wife

$50 - $20 20 50 40 10 10 40 30 10

-------------- ----$2~50 ____ _ ----$2~50 ____ _

5. 00 --- - -7~50- - - -·

10 30 12. 50 --- - -- --- - ---·

FINANCING

Mr. Speaker, let me explain the ft. nancing of the conference language. Under this substitute, the financing initially will come from the social secu­rity old-age and survivors insurance trust fund, which in turn will be reimbursed from the general fund of the Treasury beginning with the fiscal year endiilg June 30, 1969, and continuing in this manner for each year. The reimburse­ments will be for benefit payments to in­dividuals who have less than three quarters of coverage, administrative ex­penses, and the loss of interest to the trust fund resulting from the benefit payments and administrative expenses. The basic concept, Mr. Speaker, is to place the trust fund in the same position at the end of each fiscal year beginning with June 30, 1969, as it would have been in if such payments had not been made.

In summary, this financing is sounder fiscally and follows more closely the benefit eligibility principles of past social security legislation. It reduces the Prouty amendment general revenue ex­penditures almost eightfold and will have no budget impact until fiscal 1969.

The first year cost under the Prouty amendment would have been around $790 million; the first year cost under this amendment will be about $95 mil­lion for fiscal year 1967, and about $115 million in fiscal year 1968. Thereafter, the cost for each fiscal year will decrease.

EFFECTIVE DATE

Mr. Speaker, the effective date for the benefits under the conference agreement will be for the month of October 1966.

SUMMARY

Mr. Speaker, your conferees believe the approach contained in this confer­ence agreement is far preferable to the language contained in the Prouty amendment.

This approach has a number of advantages--

First. It is in accord with the general approach which we took last year with_ respect to the transitional insured status provision, and with respect to coverage of the uninsured aged under the hospital insurance provision;

Second. It provides for a washout effect of transitional benefits for the aged which will not inhibit the orderly exten­sion of social security ·coverage •

'Third. It would not substitute Federal funds for State funds as the base of public assistance payments;

Fourth. It will not add to the actuarial burdens of the railroad retirement system;

Fifth. It contains an offset so that in­equitable results will not be obtained

by putting · this benefit on top of and without regard to benefits received under other governmental pension systems; and -:

Sixth. It· will provide real assistance for many of our elderly citizens who are most in need of assistance.

FLOOR STOCKS TAX ON AUTOMOBILES

A second important change in the bill passed by the House that was agreed to by the conferees concerns the :floor stocks tax ori passenger automobiles. The bill passed by the House provided that deal­ers and distributors would be assessed a tax equal to 1 percent of the manufac­turer's price of the cars they held in inventory on the day after the date of enactment of this bill. -

The conferees on the part of the House agreed to Senate amendments which delete the :floor stocks tax from the bill. On the day following the date of enact­ment of the bill, the manufacturer's ex­cise tax will rise from 6 to 7 percent with regard only to cars shipped by manu­facturers and not with regard to new cars held by dealers or distributors on that date. It is estimated that this amendment will result in the collection of $2& million less in revenue in the fiscal · year 1966 than the bill passed by the House.

WITHHOLDING ALLOWANCES

Two of the Senate amendments agreed to by the conferees on the part of the House concern the procedure for com­puting withholding allowances. Mem­bers will recall that the bil: passed by the House included provisions intended to permit persons with relatively large itemized deductions to adjust their with­holding in a manner that would prevent excessive overwithholding. The ad­justment procedure consists of a method whereby withholding allowances may be claimed. Such allowances are to be treated as additional withholding ex­emptions for withholding- purposes.

The withholding allowance procedure was developed by the Committee on Ways and Means because its members were concerned about the overwithholding which wculd otherwise be experienced. by some bxpayers as a consequence of th~ adoption of graduated withholding rates. While the procedure approved by the committee did much to solve the problem, it was felt that even more should be done, particularly for those with incomes of less than $10,000 who have heavy itemized deductions and therefore would experience significant overwithholding. That is why a com­mittee am~ndment was offered on the floor of the House when H.R. 12752 was ccnsidered. That amendment would­have pernlitted a person whose estimated itemized deductions exceeded the appll- . cable limits--12 percent of estimated wage income up to $.7,500 and 17 percent of estim!'lted wage income above $7,500-to claim a single withholding allowance if his exce[J : itemize_d deductions ex­ceeded $350 rather than a full $700.

The Senate considered the graduated withholding system further, having the benefit of the earlier deliberations of the House. As a result, the· Senate modified the provision adopted on the floor of the House. The Senate amendments re-

quire that excess · itemized deductions equal a full $700 before a withholding­allowance can be claimed but, to o1fset this, reduce the percentage upon which excess itemized- deductions are based· from 12 percent of the first $7,500 of estimated wage income to 10 percent of such income. No change was made in the 17-percent requirement which applies to estimated wage and salary income in excess of $7,500.

The conferees on the part of the House agreed to the Senate amendments just explained. It was pointed out that the procedure adopted in the amendment submitted on the :fioo·r of the House would have resulted in underwithholding for some persons who were merely trying to reduce overwithholding. The House conferees agreed that it would be unfor­tunate if a taxpayer found himself faced with an unexpected tax bill at the end of the year simply because he followed an approved procedure for reducing over­withholding. Furthermore, in the opin­ion of the House conferees the objective of the provision adopted on the floor of the House will be largely achieved by re­ducing the percentage limit for the com­putation of excess itemized deductions from 12 to 10 percent of the first $7,500 of estimated wage income. The latter change will insure that persons with in­comes of less than $10,000 and relatively large itemized deductions have ready ac­cess to the withholding allowance proce­dure. · INDIRECT CONTRIBUTIONS TO POLITICAL PARTIES

The two remaining Senate amend­ments of importance agreed to by the conferees on the part of the House involve matters not directly related to the pro­visions of the bill passed by the House. The first of these disallows deductions for indirect contributions to political parties. The amendment is intended to clear up an area of uncertainty under existing law. It does so by clearly dis­allowing any deduction for advertising in a convention program of a political party or in any other publication if any part of the net proceeds of the advertising inures to the benefit of a political party or candidate. It also disallows deduc­tions for payments made in connection with any dinner or program if any part of the proceeds inures to the use of a po­litical party or candidate. Finally, it disallows deductions for admission pay­ments to inaugural balls, galas, parades, concerts, or similar even~s. The amend­ment applieG to taxable years which ·be­gin after December 31, 1965, with respect to amounts paid or incurred after the date of enactment of this act. The con­ferees on the part of the House agreed that it was desirable to remove any uh~ certainty concerning the deductibility of such paym~nts. · DUTY-FREE GIFTS FRO~ SERVICEMEN IN COMBAT

ZONES .

The final Senate amendment of sub­stance that was agreed to by the con~. ferees on the part of the House concerns a tariti provision. It raises the value of gifts which may be sent into this coun,.. try from abroad without payment of duty from $10 to $50 when the gifts are sent by members of our Armed Forces who are serving in a combat zone as

5794 - CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, ·1966

designated by the President. In view ·of the fact that a similar regulation was in effect from December 5, 1942, until July 1, 1961, with respect to gifts from servicemen stationed abroad, the House conferees agreed that this privilege should be extended to our servicemen now in Vietnam.

The $50 limit will be computed on the basis of retail values in the country of shipment. The Secretary of the Treas­ury or his delegate is authorized to limit imports of alcoholic beverages and to­bacco products. Furthermore, to qualify for the special $50 exemption limit, the gift articles will have to be purchased in or through authorized agencies of the Armed Forces.

The Treasury Department estimates that this amendment will involve an ad­ditional out:flow of only $9 or $10 mil­lion as far as the balance of payments is concerned. The reduction in customs duties which will result from this amendment will be negligible. The new provision will apply on articles which enter the country after the date of en­actment of this bill. The provision, however, will expire on December 31, 1967.

MISCELLANEOUS CHANGES

I mentioned earlier that eight amend­ments agreed to by the conferees on the part of the House concerned minor modi­fications of the provisions in the bill passed by the House. Six of these amendments involve a change in the ef­fective date of the provisions concern­ing communications services. The bill passeq by the House provided that the 10-percent tax on local and toll telephone service and teletypewriter - exchange service was to be effective with respect to bills rendered on or after the first

day of the first month which- begins· more than 15 days after the date on which this bill is enacted. The bill as agreed to by the conferees sets April 1, 1966, as the effective date for the com­munications tax provisions. That is, the 10-percent rate will be in effect on bills for taxable communications serv-· ices rendered on or after April 1, 1966. Since Congress has acted with dispatch on this bill, the communications tax provision would, in all probability, have gone into effect on April 1 in any case. The modification merely clarifies the exact date on which the new provisions will become effective.

Two other minor technical amend­ments provide that in computing eligible withholding allowances, a taxpayer who used the standard deduction in the prior year may consider the amount of his itemized deductions for the prior year equaled 10 percent o( his wages in that year or $1,000, whichever is less. ThesP. are simply amendments to clarify the provisions of the House bill. SENATE AMENDMENTS DELETED IN CONFERENCE

OPTION OF INDIVIDUAL INCOME TAXPAYERS TO DISREGARD BALANCES DUE AND OVERPAYMENTS OF $5 OR LESS

The Senate added amendment under which individuals were given an election to disregard balances due and overpay­ments of $5 or less where their withhold­ing and other tax credits and payments of estimated income tax for a year were within $5 of their tax liability for that year as shown on their tax returns. The conferees deleted this amendment. How­ever, the conferees are requesting the Treasury Department to study and re­port back to the House Committee on Ways and Means and the Senate Com­mittee on Finance as to the practicability

and· desirability of forgoing ·tax pay­ments and r.efunds where the amount due at the time of the final return is small. This study and report is to be made in conjunction with a study on ways of relieving overwithholding which was also directed to be made. EXEMPTION OF LOCAL RESIDENTIAL TELEPHONE

SERVICE FROM RESTORATION OF TAX

The House-passed bill restored tem­porarily the 10-percent tax on local and long-distance telephone a.nd teletype­writer services. This was the rate in ef­fect prior to January 1, 1966. On Janu­ary 1, 1966, the rate had dropped from 10 percent to 3 percent. A Senate amend­ment provided that this temporary res­toration of the tax-through March 31, 1968-was not to apply to local residen­tial telephone service. The conferees agreed to delete this amendment.

INFORMATION RETURNS

Under present law persons engaged in a trade or business and officers and em­ployees of the U.S. Government who make payments of $600 or more to a per­son are required to file information re­turns with the Internal Revenue Service. This includes payments made by the De­partment of Agriculture to farmers. The Senate added an amendment requiring that copies of these information returns. in the case of farmers were also to be fur­nished to the farmers. The conferees deleted this amendment. In this con­nection, a study is to be made by the Department of Agriculture in coopera­tion with the Department of the Treas­ury and a report is to be made to the House Committee on Ways and Means and the Senate Committee on Finance early in the next Congress. This study is to also include the administrative feasibility of making such reports.

REVENUE TABLES AND CoMPARISON oF EFFECT OF BILL IN VARious STAGES

Estimated revenue increase and expenditure increase (-:-) under H.R. 12752 as reported by the Ways and Means Committee, as. passed by the House of Representatives, as reported by the Senate Finance Committee, as passed by the Senate, and as reported by the con­ference; fiscal years 1966 and 1967

[In millions of dollars]

and Means Committee, of Representatives, Senate Finance Commit- Mar. 9, 1966 terence, March 1966 As reported by the WaysiAs passed by the House As reported by the As passed by the Senate, As reported by the con-

Feb. 15, 1966 . Feb. 23, 1966 tee, Mar. 2, 1966

Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year 1966 1967 1966 1967 1966 1967 1966 1967 1966 1967

Excises: Communication taxes:

Local residential telephone _____________ ------------ 315 ------------ 315 ------------ 315 ------------ ------------ ------------ 315 Long-distance service and local business

telephone service _________ ____________ ------------ 470 ------------ 470 ------------ 470 ------------ 470 ------------ 470 Automobile tax:

Floor stocks---------------------------- 25 ------------ 25 ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------Sales on and after effective date_________ 35 420 35 420 35 420 35 420 35 420

Total excises--------------------------

g~~~~:t~edt;l:~~~J%g-for-hldl;ldu~ls~=~====== 60

1, 000 95

1, 205 3,200

275

60 1,000

95 ,

1, 205 3,200

210

35 1, 000

95

1,205 3,200

245

35 1, 000

95 Increase in declaration requirement for indi-

viduals from 70 to 80 percent_ _________________ ------------ 150 ------------ 150 ------------ 150 ------------

T~~~lft~l~~~~ ~~-~::~-~~~:~~~~~~~:- ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ (1) Reimbursement of social security trust fund by

general fund for benefits for certain aged individuals ___ _ ------------------------------- ·----------- ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------ ------------

Total, administrative budget_____________ 1, 155 4, 830 1, 155 4, 765 1, 130 4, 800 1, 130 Self-employment tax, quarterly declaration

payments_----------------------------------- ------------ 200 ------------ 200 ------------ 200 ------------Social security benefits for certain aged indi·

vi duals __ ------------------------------------- ------------ ---------- __ ------------ ------ _ ----- ------------ ------------ ------------Reimbursement of social security trust fund by

general fund for benefits for certain aged individuals----------------------------------- ------------ --------- --- ------------ ~--- -------- ------------ ------------ ------------

Total, cash budget_---------------------- 1,155 5,030 4, 965 1,130 5, ()()() ------------

890 3,200

245

35 1,000

95

1,206 3,200

:U5

150 ------------ 150

(1)

-590

3,895 1,130

200 -------------590

590 ------------

4,095 1,130 -

(2)

4,800

200

•-95

1 No revenue impact in fiscal years 1966 and 1967; estimated revenue loss for fiscal year 1968 is $10 million.

2 Reimbursement from the general fund of its share of the benefits payable in fiscal year 1967 does not occur until fiscal year 1969.

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5795 Comparison of administrative budget receipts and expenditures with and without H.R. 1~752 as reported by the Ways and Means Committee,

as passed by the House of Representatives, as reported by the Senate Finance Committee, as passed by the Senate, and as reported by the conference; fiscal years 1966 and 1967 1

[In billions of dollars]

As re~rted by the Ways As passed by the House As reported by the As passed by the Senate, As reported by the con-and eans Committee, of Representatives, Senate Finance Commit- Mar. 9, 1966 ference, Mar. 14, 1966

Feb. 15, 1966 Feb. 23, 1966 tee, Mar. 2, 1966

Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year Fiscal year 1966 1967 1966 1967 1966 1967 1966 1967 1966 1967

' Expenditures without bilL--------------------- 106.4 112.8 106.4 112.8 106.4 112.8 106.4 112.8 106.4 112.8 Receipts without bilL.------------------------ 98.8 106.2 98.8 106.2 98.8 106.2 98.8 106.2 98.8 106.2

Deficit without bilL--------------------- 7.6 6. 7 7.6 6. 7 7.6 6. 7 7.6 6. 7 7.6 6. 7

Increase in exlJenditures under bilL_----------- 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 .6 0 (2) Total expen itures (including those under

106.4 112.8 106.4 112.8 106.4 112.8 106.4 113.4 106.4 112.8 bill)-----------------------------------------·-Increase in receipts under bill ___________________ 1.2 4.8 1. 2 4.8 1.1 4.8 1.1 4. 5 1.1 4.8 Total receipts (including those under bill) ______ 100.0 111.0 100.0 111.0 100.0 111.0 100.0 110.7 110.0 111.0

Deficit after taking account of revenues and expenditures under bilL ___________ 6.4 1.8 6.4 1. 9 6.5 1.9 6.5 2.8 6. 5 1. 9

1 Figures are based on President's budget message, and therefore totals include social security trust fund by general fund for $590,000,000 of benefits. for certain aged estimated effects of proposed legislation other than H. R. 12752. Figures are rounded individuals; as reported by the conference the amount and coverage of benefits were and will not necessarily add to totals. reduced and reimbursement by the general fund of the $95,000,000 of benefits payable

2 As passed by the Senate this figure represents reimbursement iu fiscal year 1967 of in fiscal year 1967 does not occur until fisca. year 1969.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker, will the distinguished gentleman from Arkansas, the chairman of the Commit­tee on Ways and Means, yield?

Mr. MILLS. I am glad to yield to the distinguished minority leader, the gen­tleman from Michigan.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. The Secre­tary of the Treasury made a very signif­lcant speech in my State· of Michigan yesterday before the Economic Club of the City of Detroit. He talked about taxes, inflation and the problems of our economy. Prior to making that speech he ha~.. a press conference and in that press conference, he said the following, and I quote: . My whole speech implies there might be a need for further moderate tax increases de­pending on the factors I mentioned in the speech.

Has there been any indication by the Secretary to the committee or to the chairman that such a request is in pros­pect?

Mr. MILLS. Not to me-there has not been any ·such indication. We are all concerned, as I know the gentleman from Michigan is concerned, with what the future holds. But none of us, at least I am not capable of adequately predicting what we may have in the future with respect to the costs in Vietnam, for in­stance. Frankly, I do not know what the

·future holds in that respect. I think we must keep abreast of what is occurring on a day-to-day basis and do what we can to protect the value of the dollar and to protect other values here in the United States.

I am sure that my friend would say with me that if the time came where it was necessary to prevent inflation to con­sider a tax bill that we ought to give consideration to it and reach a conclu­sion based upon what the facts are at that particular time.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Do you be­lieve based on the facts as you have seen them so far. that there is such a need for the kind of Federal tax increase men­tioned by the Secretary?

Mr. MnLS. If the gentleman will re­. member, during the course of the gen-

eral debate on the bill itself, the prob­lem as I see it is primarily with respect to the enormous deficit, and I called it enormous, under the present conditions that we have in the fiscal year 1966 on the basis of projection-and that is all we have to go by. For the fiscal year 1967, we have a projected deficit of $1,800 million and certainly that kind of deficit would not exert as much in­flationary pressure as does the present deficit of some $6% billion projected for fiscal year 1966. I do not know what the final cost will be in 1967. But I say we must watch it in order to see to it that we take pains to preserve and pro­tect the value of the dollar and avoid any decrease in it and any runaway in­flation in prices.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. One of the problems in this fiscal year as has been well pointed out in the minority views of the Committee on Appropriations on the bill that we will have before us later today is the fact that the Department of Defense in the last 6 or 12 months has so grossly underestimated its anticipated expenditures. If we g.o on the basis of experience in the last 12 months and forecast what will happen in the next 12 months based on the figures of the Department of Defense, it does not look too encouraging. The Defense Depart­ment expenditure forecasts have badly missed their mark. The spending fore­casts were too low and as a result there has been serious upward pressure on our national economy. Better spending forecasts by the Defense Department might have helped the Johnson-Hum­phrey administration in its decisions in meeting the challenge of inflation. De­fense Department spending estimates were wrong. The Nation is in an infla­tionary spiral. The administration must bear the burden for the errors which have been made.

Mr. Mn.LS. I caution my friend against reaching any conclusions now about the matter, and I hope that he will not, because regardless of how far off the Dep.artment of Defense may have been at some time in the past, I point out realistically how difficult it is f.or any ad­ministration t.o project what the total

costs of Government may be some 12 months or 18 months ahead. We all re­member when President Eisenhower in his 1959 budget estimated a half-billion dollar surplus, and it turned out he was off $12.9 billion, because we had a deficit of $12.4 billion. I do think that it should be pointed out that there has been in the past 2 or 3 years, with respect to the total rate of spending, some overestimation of that rate of spending in total amount. In the 1965 budget the original estimate was $97.9. The actual figure was $96.5 billion. In 1964 the estimate w,as $98 billion. The actual figure was $97.7 billion.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I would not necessarily agree, but the record must speak for itself.

Mr. MILLS. If you go over the 2- or 3-year period, I believe you will be able to see that they have been about as accu­rate as anyone could possibly be, and they have actually overestimated, be­cause we have ended up spending less than the budget suggested we might spend in some of that period of time. Of course, we have had some increases in revenue over what was projected. So the best thing for us at the moment to do is to keep our eyes and ears open and be attuned to the developments that happen from day to day .and reach conclusions as to what we should do when we have full information with respect to the com­ing fiscal year.

Mr. BROCK. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for clarification of amendment No. 33?

Mr. MILLS. I am glad to yield to the gentleman from Tennessee.

Mr. BROCK. It is my understanding that in certain States there .are nonpar­tisan publications which are published and which receive ads in a standard bus­iness fashion. On occasion both political parties perform services for that publi­cation, and they receive .~ payment for those services. Is it the intention of the gentleman from Arkansas to eliminate that sort of activity on the part of politi­cal parties?

For example, there are the distribu­tion services and the sales of the maga­zine.

5796 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 19 G6

Mr. MILLS. If the gentleman will read the statement on page 8 of the re­port that we prepared in explanation of the .amendment, he will get a clearer un­derstanding of what was intended in the amendment.

Does my friend, the gentleman from Wisconsin, wish to respond to the ques­tion? Frankly, I do not know what the answer is. Each case depends on the facts. Did the gentleman from Wiscon­sin follow the question? We were think­ing in terms of the publications of each party. Your attention is called to para­graph ( 1) • I do not know just wb.at the situation would be if it were a nonpar­tisan publication. It depends on where the money goes, mainly.

Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MILLS. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin. I think the issue is whether ·there is a potential in revenues from the particular under­taking, be it an advertising venture, a catalog, a ball, or some other activity of that nature-if it has a potential of in­uring to the benefit of a political party.

Mr. MILLS. A banquet. Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin. Yes, a

banquet: Then the expense of that ad­vertising or the expense of the admission charge could not be deducted as a busi­ness expense.

Mr. MILLS. In the case which the gentleman mentioned, that, it seems to me, would be in the field of nonpolitical activity. But if the proceeds of that venture inured to the benefit of either or both parties in Tennessee, or to any of the political candidates in Tennessee, the expense would probably not be deductible as I read it.

Mr. BROCK. I did not have particu­lar reference to that point. I am speak­ing of nonpartisan publications for which both political parties perform services.

Mr. MILLS. You would have to give me more facts and particularly whether or not the proceeds go to the benefit of candidates or a party. If they do, the expense would appear not to be deducti­ble. I want to make it clear that there is uncertainty at the present time.

Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MILLS. I am glad to yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. PEPPER. As I understand the able chairman, if the conference report is adopted, henceforth advertisements of business groups, business corporations, and business enterprises in publications put out by political parties or their re­spective units would no longer be tax­deductible?

Mr. MILLS. I do not know whether they are now or not. I would say to my friend from Florida that we are making it clear here that they are not deductible when they inure to the benefit of a politi­cal. party or a political candidate in the future.

Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield for one further ques­tion?

Mr. MILLS. I yield to the gentleman from Florida.

Mr. PEPPER. I wonder if the commit­tee, having taken that rather salutary

approach, has in any way provided in this conference report for the removal of any exemptions that may now exist for certain radio and publication expense?

Mr .. MILLS. No, we have not done anything except what we have done in this amendment we are talking about in that direction.

Mr. PEPPER. I thought since the gen­tleman from the other body was attempt­ing to stop one source of loss of revenue which was being received for political purposes, consideration might now be given henceforth by the able Ways and Means Committee to publications that are nothing but political publications and radio programs that are nothing but po­litical, and the question as to whether they are entitled tax exemption.

Mr. MILLS. Consideration would have to be given to that in the future. We did not do so here.

Mr. Speaker, I am convinced that the conferees have done the best job that it is possible for them to do with respect to the subject matter of this conference. I would urge the Members of the House to accept the conference report. Let us get the bill signed into law within the period that the committee had as its target date on the commencement. Therefore, I urge you to vote for the con­ference report.

Mr. BURTON of California. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MILLS. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. BURTON of California. Mr. Speaker, there is a matter affecting Cali­fornia, New York, and two other States. These States have a program called dis-ability insurance. .

It is a program paid for entirely by a payroll deduction system. It is fi­nanced, as a rule, by employee contribu­tions only.

It provides weekly payments in situa­tions other than work-connected disabil­ity and injury. It is quite analogous to the workmen's compensation law, but neither the conference committee nor the gentleman's statement clarified this mat­ter.

Will I be correct in assuming that these unemployment compensation disabtlity payments will be treated just as the workmen compensation payments for purposes of the $35 payment provisions in the report?

Mr. MILLS. We specifically said, Mr. Speaker, in the conference report that, for '"purposes of any reduction in the new benefits, workmen's compensation would not be taken into account.

I do not know enough about the gen­tleman's provision, in the State of Cali­fornia, frankly, to know whether or not benefits under the provision would be taken into account for purposes of the offset. I will have to check with the gentleman later to find out more detail about his State provisions.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MILLS. I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, I did not sign the conference report, but I would like to report that as far as the tax as­pects of this bill are concerned, which was the bill that passe-d the House, I

think the conferees in conference did a good job. The one feature that was changed was where we accepted a Sen­ate amendment other than a number of technical amendments, I might say, which the Senate offered, which were very necessary to this bill. This one mat­ter of· substance that was changed has to do with the :floor stock provision for au­tomobiles owned by the dealers amount­ing to $25 million.

This is a matter that some of us on our side of the :tisle opposed in the Ways and Means Committee in the first place. I am satisfied that this is a better tax bill now, partly for the reason as the chairman explained, but also because the administration's agreement that because we have given the :floor stock exemption when the automobile excise tax was low­ered, therefore when we increase it we ought to put back the tax on :floor stock, is unsound. There are certain things that only go one way and not the other. You can either have a valve or a con­duit. This happens to be a valve. The reason for the treatment of the :floor stock when the tax went down was that automobile dealers were caught with higher priced inventory, inventory as­sessed at a higher tax rate than the new automobiles delivered after the tax went down. They could never get rid of that inventory, or at least they would have a difficult problem doing so. So we eased that off and said, "No. The :floor stock tax will be waived."

However, when you go in the other di­rection and you go up with the tax, then the dealers are left with inventory of lower taxed cars. Obviously there is no problem in their getting rid of the :floor stock at a lower price. So I was pleased about the elimination in conference of the :floor stock tax.

Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield on that P<>int?

Mr. CURTIS. Yes. I yield. Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin. I think it

should be pointed out and understood that this tax is one which is assessed against the manufacturer.

Mr. CURTIS. That is right .. Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin. You can­

not impose it on the dealer and still be consistent vrith the philosophy as to where the impact of the tax is and its nature. It is a manufacturers tax and not a delears tax to begin with.

Mr. CURTIS. The gentleman is abso­lutely right. And it became one of the issues in the Ways and Means Commit­tee as to whether we changed that manu­facturers tax to a retailers tax. But at any rate, it is an improvement and I wanted to point it out.

Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CURTIS. Yes. I will be glad to yield to the chairman of the committee.

Mr. MILLS. The gentleman made the argument in the committee that the com­mittee should not include it in the first place.

Mr. CURTIS. That is right. Now, as to why I have opposed the conference re­port. I think this 1s a very serious mat­ter that the House at some time or other is going to have to face up to. We bring these tax bUls in here under closed rules

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5797 on the floor of the House, thus denying really to every Member of the House the opportunity to amend, even under our rules of germaneness in the House, which are fairly strict rules. Then under the procedure followed the bill goes over to the Senate where they have no rules of germaneness or closed rules.

Any Senator can offer ar. amendment on a tax bill, whether it pertains to the bill or not. Then the matter comes back to the conference and your conferees, who are members of the Committee on Ways and Means, are constantly con­fronted with material that we have not had an opportunity of studying and have not had the opportunity, really, to give a good opinion on. Now, it so happens that the Constitution prohibits tax meas­ures from originating in the Senate. The Senate does have a right to amend. They have assumed that means they can amend regardless of whether it is ger­mane or not. Now, I am not asking the Senate to adopt the House rule of ger­maneness, but I am asking that there be a rule of germaneness that applies to this kind of procedure. Otherwise we are constantly confronted with situations like the one that now faces us. There are three nongermane amendments in this conference report. Not only are they not germane, but two of them do not have anything to do with the Internal Revenue Code. We are confronted with this situation.

Now let me point out the question on the benefits of people over the age of 70. That is the way the Senate· put it in. This was an amendment that was not even considered in the Senate Finance Committee. It was written on the floor of the Senate. Then it comes in to con­ference, and obviously it needed changing.

So the conferees attempt to write then and there this new language that you find in the report. The committee or the conferees had to meet yesterday to amend it even further. T)le point is this is no way to legislate. The objectives may be sound. I could not agree with the objectives on this more because Con­gressman BYRNES has primarily, and I have joined with him over a period of years in seeking to do something about these people over the age of 70. So has Congressman MILLS.

This was rejected, I might say, in the Social Security Act of 1965, although part of it was in there. However, the technical language used is very impor­tant and very serious. The House never considered it and the Ways and Means Committee never considered it and the Senate Finance Committee never con­sidered it. If we want to do proper jus­tice to people over 70 or to any group, we had better pay attention to what is the orderly way to write legislation.

The amendment in regard to the GI's overseas and what they can send back home duty free is another item. There is no question that if a bill for this pur­pose were introduced and offered before the Committee on Ways and Means, we woud get it in proper language and vote .it out _and it would pass here unani• mously.

CXII--366-Part 5

It would be considered in the other body in the same way and p~d unani­mously, and this could become law within a month, but properly drafted and fully considered. ·

Mr. Speaker, instead of that, this mat­ter is put on a tax bill where it has no business. We had not really considered it. We tried to write this language in conference. I might say that I do not believe we did a very good job.

Again, Mr. Speaker, we want to be for the Gl's. That is not the issue. The issue, however, if we really want to help them, is to vote for their interests fol­lowing an orderly procedure in writing legislation.

Mr. Speaker, finally, as far as the Wil­liams amendment is concerned, this has to do really with the Corrupt Practices Act. There is no question but that this hits at a very small part of the entire problem involved, how political parties and political candidates are financed.

Again, Mr. Speaker, this was written in a fashion where there was not proper consideration given to the entire prob­lem.

Mr. Speaker, the author of the amend­ment, Senator WILLIAMS, of the other body, admitted it. The Treasury De­partment said they had not studied it. It is obvious, based upon the few ques­tions asked today on the floor that the House of Representatives has never con­sidered it, and the Committee on Ways and Means has never considered it.

Mr. Speaker, this procedure, in my opinion, makes a shambles of the legis­lative process.

Now, Mr. Speaker, let me talk as a politician. If we in the House of Repre­sentatives want to be able to amend tax bills and have our thoughts made a part of them, we had better start paying at­tention to either knocking out the closed rule under which we have to consider tax bills, or stand firm on this constitutional right that tax measures can originate only in the House of Representatives. And, if our colleagues in the other body have some ideas as to how they would like to amend tax bills, let them come over and consult with the House Mem­bers. I am certain, Mr. Speaker, that any one of us would be happy to accom­modate them, and introduce a bill along the line that they would like so that it can be considered by the Committee on Ways and Means, so that it can be con­sidered on the floor of the House, with testimony backing it up at a public hear­ing, and with a written report upon the bill.

Mr. Speaker, as matters stand here we are considering things in this tax bill that should be properly studied and properly debated.

Finally, Mr. Speaker, I would like to refer to some remarks that the gentle­man from Michigan [Mr. GERALD R. FoRD] directed to the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means in re­gard to future tax increases, if I could have the attention of the gentleman.

The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. GERALD R. FORD] asked questions of the chairman of the Ways and Means Com­mittee, the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. MILLS] as to whether or not the ad-

ministration had approached him about tax increases. The chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means ·replied that it had not. However, it looks very apparent to me that the administration has approached some of our colleagues in the Congress along this .line.

This, I feel, is true because, beginning tomorrow, a subcommittee of the Joint Economic Committee, headed by the gentlewoman from Michigan [Mrs. GRIFFITHS] who also serves on the Com­mittee on Ways and Means, plans to hold hearings on this subject of tax increases.

Mr. Speaker, I am a little bit worried about this, because I too am a member of the Joint Economic Committee, and some of my colleagues on the Committee on Ways and Means have been looking at me as if I had something to do with. · this bypassing of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Let me assure you that I have not, and I have not been a confidant as to the scheduling of this subcommittee's hear­ings. However, it is very obvious to me that the Secretary of the Treasury and others are behind these hearings that will start tomorrow, to be conducted by the Joint Economic Committee.

Mr. Speaker, I am hopeful that the administration will be a little more forthright in what they are trying to do as far as increased taxes are concerned, even though they will not consult with the chairman of the Committee on Ways and Means.

Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CURTIS. I yield to the gentle­man from Arkansas.

Mr. Mn.LS. It might not be unusual for me not to be considered on every question involving taxes, but let me clarify the gentleman's statement. The gentlewoman from Michigan [Mrs·. GRIFFITHS] discussed this matter with me. I believe it was her idea, frankly. I do not think she had to be put up to holding her hearings. She wanted to know if I had any feelings that the hear­ings should not be held. I told her that it was perfectly all right with me, since any legislation would have to originate in the Committee on Ways and Means along this line anyway.

The SPEAKER pro tempore <Mr. ALBERT). The time of the gentleman from Missouri has expired.

Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, I yield the gentleman 2 additional minutes.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from Arkansas for clarify­ing this. I believe that is probably so, because the gentlewoman from Michigan [Mrs. GRIFFITHS] has been very inter­ested in this area, and has been quite concerned about the economic aspects of our tax laws. However, if the situation is that way, let me say this: The admin­istration certainly has seized the oppor­tunity-and it is very clear that they are more than cooperating with the gentle­woman from Michigan [Mrs. GRIFFITHS] in· bringing about these hearings. It seems quite clear that the administra­tion, at least, is sending up a trial bal­loon to see just what reaction there will be to the increased taxes.

5798 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966

I will close my remarks by simply say­ing we certainly need tightening in the fiscal area. But the other side of fiscal coin other than taxes and debt is expend­itures, and the administration still seems completely unconcerned about the neces­sary reforms in the expenditure area to avert inflation.

Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.

Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. JONES]. .

Mr. JONES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker, I hope I will not use the entire 5 minutes, but I do not wish to let this opportunity pass without making a few brief remarks about this. -

Last June when we passed the tax bill, I voted against it. I said at that time that we were not providing for the re­couping of losses in that tax bill and I predicted at that time that it would be necessary to have a tax bill to replace the losses. When this bill came up here last month, I voted against it because I felt it was a discrimination when we had eliminated the taxes on many of the luxury items, which were not being re­stored, although we did reinstate excise taxes on telephones and automobiles.

Now, when the bill comes back here, I think it is a worse bill because of what the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. CuRTIS] just said: the way we permit the other body to insert items that are not germane. I hope some time this House will have the intestinal fortitude to adopt a rule that any amendment that is not germane under the rules of the House of Representatives will not even be considered when they are placed in a bill by the other body.

Now, as to the statement about a study for increased taxes, I do not think any­body has to be smart to know that we are going to have another tax bill before this session is out. You do not have to have hearings to arrive at that conclu­sion. I think it is apparent that we are going to have it. Another thing that I think is very wrong-and someone said how can you vote against a bill that is going to give some old folks some money. If you are laboring under the delusion that you are doing something there un­der a program that has been studied and planned, you are just as wrong as you can be. Hearings were not held in either House or Senate, and the amend­ments were adopted on the floor of the Senate.

There are so many things that need to be done with reference to social se­curity that we should not try to correct them by amendments to a tax bill. It does not make sense.

For instance, some time ago I intro­duced a bill <H.R. 11327), which has been referred to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs, providing that certain social se­curity benefits may be waived and not counted as income. This became neces­sary when increases under the Social Security Act had the effect of reducing veterans' and widows' benefits by an amount in excess of those increases granted by social security. I do not think this was intentional, and I do believe that this inequity should be corrected.

If we are going to amend the social security laws, let us amend them and help everybody and remove the inequi­ties. But this bill does not remove these inequities at all. It touches on some of them.

Mr. Speaker, these are some of the reasons I am going to vote against this conference report. I hope this adminis­tration will have the wisdom to come up here and say: "We need money for Viet­nam and we are recommending and advising you to provide an adequate tax to pay for Vietnam, and after that sit­uation is over, take off the tax." That will solve this problem.

Mr. Speaker, it is my opinion that as long as we vote for these makeshift, piecemeal, patchwork type of bills that do not accomplish the announced pur­poses of the bill, in this case, namely, to raise more revenue for the conduct of the war in Vietnam, we will continue to con­fuse the taxpayer and make it more diffi­cult to solve the problem.

How much more simple it would be if we would decide just how much money is needed and then provide an increase in the form of a surtax or an "excise" tax on personal and corporation income taxes, with the understanding that after the specific need has been met the tax will be automatically eliminated.

As I have said before, I realize it is so simple it will not be considered by the bureaucrats who make the recommenda­tions to Congress, but I am willing to put my money where my mouth is that be­fore this session of Congress adjourns, the administration will be back to Con­gress requesting another increase in taxes, and Congress will go along with the request. I do not relish the idea of increasing taxes, and would welcome re­ductions in expenditures, but I do believe it is better to pay as we go, and face the issues as they arise.

Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, I yield 10 minutes to the gentleman from Wiscon­sin [Mr. BYRNES].

Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I certainly sympathize with the position taken by the gentleman who just left the floor, and the position taken by my colleague, the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. CURTIS], with respect to the amendments which were put on by the other body which would not have been germane if presented here. In fact, we prevent any Member of the House from even proposing such amendments, even if germane, by reason of the fact that we consider this type of legislation in the House under a closed rule.

Of course, this creates a situation which we all recognize is overly fair to the Senate and completely unfair so far as many Members of the House are con­cerned.

However, what we are talking about here now is a conference report. There is ·the problem of compromising between the position taken by the other body and the bill as it passed the House. There were some very adamant positions taken by the Senate.

But I would also point out that here in this tax bill we do have some prob­lems as far as timing is concerned.

Should this bill be delayed for any length of time, it could mean that badly needed revenue would be lost as the result of that delay. Frankly, Mr. Speaker, I hope this conference report will be adopted because I think it is essential in view of the current fiscal situation and the inflationary pressures that exist to­day that we provide the additional rev­enue that will be produced by this bill.

I would go one step further and say, however, that unless there are some changes made in our thinking in the area of governmental expenditures and Gov­ernment fiscal policy, we are today on a collision course toward increased taxes. The only question seems to be as to the date when those taxes will be asked for by the administration. Unless there is some retrenchment, and unless there is some recognition that we are in a war­time situation, and must accommodate to that situation and provide for those increased costs of that war, not by in­creased taxes but by a reduction in ex­penditures, then the only alternative open to us will be an increase in taxes which I am sure the administration will then recommend. I assume that it will probably try to avoid doing so before the November election. But a tax increase is in the making unless this Congress and this administration at an early date­and today is not too soon-changes some of its attitudes with reference to some of the domestic spending that is being pro­posed here at home.

For this reason, I think the adoption of this conference report is essential at this time. As I said in the debate on this bill, I do not think at this time we can enjoy the luxury of the alternative as to whether we raise taxes or cut expendi­tures, because we have already incurred a deficit for fiscal 1966 that approaches $6.5 billion at a time of unprecedented economic activity. It is too late to change the spending picture for fiscal 1966 to the degree that would obviate the need for this additional revenue.

Today we have no alternative but to provide the increased revenue that is in this bill. But, if we act properly today, we can still have an alternative for the future. We have the alternative of cut­ting back and retrenching by establish­ing some priorities for our domestic ex­penditures, and if we fail in that, the only alternative-and, make no mistake about it-will be an early and heavy in­crease in taxation to prevent economic chaos in this country.

Let me say just a few words about some of the amendments that were adopted.

Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin. I yield to the gentleman from Missouri.

Mr. CURTIS. I should like to point out, and I want to see if the gentleman agrees, if there is a heavy increase in taxes, it will have to be partly in indi­vidual income taxes. It cannot be done merely in corporate taxes.

Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin. There is no easy way to increase taxes. Let us make up our minds about that. If we have to ge·t even $500 million more in revenue, it will be painful and it will

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5799 be tough. Some of it we will, of course, hav~ to find in the individual income tax sector.

Let me briefly make a few comments about the amendments that were adopt­ed in the Senate.

I agree with my colleague from Mis­souri that the blanketing-in, that is, the coverage of our older people who, as I have pointed out, were either born too soon or Congress acted too late to pro­vide them with the basic benefits we have provided for the great majority of our people, has long presented a prob­lem that should be taken care of. Some 7 years ago I introduced the first bill to try to remedy this particular problem by a so-called blanketing-in process. What the Senate has done here is to adopt that principle. The conference re­port is in accord with the general phi­losophy and general purpose of proposals that I have been making for some 9 or 10 years.

As I have said, I do agree with my col­league from Missouri that it would be much better to do it in the normal pro­cedure. To consider the proposal and report it out by the Ways and Means Committee for passage by this House instead of on the basis of a Senate floor amendment which is then adopted in principle by the conference.

The same thing is true as far as the duty on gifts is concerned.

In both of these cases, however, I must agree fully with the results. It is a step in the right direction. I cannot argue with the merits.

Nor would I argue with the merits of another amendinent that was adopted, as far as general principle is concerned. That is the amendment related to the deductibility of an advertising expense that, in a sense, is really intended for political purposes.

Mr. BURTON of California. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. BURTON of California. I would like to state my most emphatic commen­dation to the gentleman from Wisconsin for his farsighted, initial, and continuing leadership in the effort to see to it that the older people in our country who have not had the benefit of social security cov­erage not be penalized in their waning years.

I would hope that the gentleman would pursue his efforts and see to it that the Members of this House have, before the

·end of this session, an opportunity to expand the concept contained in the con­ference committee report because, as the gentlemen well knows, this report con-· tains within it a dramatic change in the financing structure of the Social Security Act, but along sound concep­tional lines. I . am sure the gentleman from Wisconsin knows, most lamentably, it is the low-income veteran and it is the low-income person on public assistance that, as a result of the understandable compromise in the conference commit­tee, does not get any increase in weekly or monthly benefits under this bill.

I am certain that the gentleman from Wisconsin shares my concern, that in the

effort to correct this injustice that the gentleman from Wisconsin has been battling for so Iong-an injustice not remedied by this bill as to either first the lower income veteran of this Nation and second, the lower income aged who have to look to public assistance to maintain a minimal standard of living. These are among the people who should receive our primary interest, not our secondary consideration.

I am going to support the conference committee report, noting in fact that in many instances it will be the better­to-do, rather than the worst off of our older people, who are going to get the benefit. I do not quarrel with it. I would merely request that the gentleman from Wisconsin respond to my hope that he will pursue this matter.

Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman from Wisconsin yield?

Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin. I yield to my chairman.

Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, let me say in the first place that we have not ex­cluded veterans from the benefits of this program. On the contrary, we have spe­cifically provided, in the -''definition·• sub&ection that a "governmental pension system," for purposes of the offset, does not include any payment by the Veterans' Administration to disabled veterans for service-connected disability. The con­ference report, on page 4, states "not including any payment under any work­men's compensation law or any payment by the Veterans' Administration as com­pensation for service-connected disabil­ity or death."

In that instance, we have specifically excluded any such compensation that a veteran may receive in order to deter­mine whether or not he comes up to the $52.50 of the family's payment.

Then with respec~ to the people on wel­fare, the gentleman from Wisconsin rec­ognizes, I am sure, that if we provide this amount for those who are on public as­sistance, all in the world we will be doing will be, in effect, reducing the amount that the State makes available and in­creasing the amount that the Federal Government makes available. We would not increase by $1, in all probability, the total amount that is received by the aver­age recipient from both sources.

I would think that the gentleman from California would appreciate the action of the conference committee in bringing back a proposition that takes care, to the extent that we have, of the people who are without any type of retirement sys­tem. Perhaps in time the gentleman from Wisconsin and the gentleman from Arkansas--all of us--will find it possible or advisable to do more. I think that at least this is a good beginning, and the conference committee should be at least commended for making this step.

I want to pay tribute to my friend from Wisconsin for having started the idea of doing something in the later years of their life for these people who, as he said, either were born too soon or the Congress acted too late to bring them under social security.

I remind the Congress that two-thirds of the people we are talking about in total

are women, and 80 percent of that two­thirds are widows, signifying the fact that perhaps we did act too late with respect to the coverage of their spouses under social security. Here we are making up, at least, for that failure on our part.

Mr. BURTON of California. Mr. Speaker, w111 the gentleman yield?

Mr. MILLS. I yield to the gentleman from California.

Mr. BURTON of California. Mr. Speaker, I am sure the gentleman from Arkansas does not choose to leave the impression that those receiving the vet­eran's benefits, apart from the disability payment-the low-income veterans-by definition, those receiving a veteran's pension-as distinguished from disability payments-do not receive a nickel under this proposal. I am certain that the gentleman from Arkansas does not want to leave the record ambiguous in that regard.

Mr. MILLS. Of course I did not want to leave a wrong impression. That is why I read specifically what the confer­ence report states. The gentleman from California is not anymore interested in veterans than are any of the members of · this conference. And I do not want him to feel that any (}f us were deliber­·ately trying to do something tO these whom he describes as the poor veterans of the country.

We thought we were making a step in the right direction, that we would pro­vide, out of the general funds of the Treasury, this particular benefit for those people who are included here. We can look at it later on and see whether we should do more and whether it is pos­sible to do so.

Mr. BYRNES of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, we have taken a very important step by the action of the conferees to­ward the problems of these older people who have been our concern for some con­siderable period of time.

I would hope, with the gentleman, that we would continue to look at the problem that does exist in this area be­cause of factors beyond the control of these people who are today over 72 and who have been left by the side of the road while we were going ahead, making social security universal, while we were

· increasing benefits, and so on. At least we are moving in the right direction.

I am pleased that the conferees did move at least this far.

I would conclude, Mr. Speaker, by reit­erating what I said at the beginning. I would hope that this ccnfererice report would be accepted. I think it is essential that we act to pass this bill at the ear­liest possible date. In my judgment, it is the only responsible thing for this Con­gress to do.

Mr. POLANCO-ABREU. Mr. Speaker, the conference report on the Tax Adjust­ment Act of · 1966 does not include the aged of Puerto Rico as beneficiaries of the social security amendments added to the bill.

This is a tragic circumstance which must have been an oversight on the part 'of the conferees who were working under great pressure.

5800 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· ·HOUSE March 15, 1966

There has been no opportunity for me to obtain an extension· of these benefits for the people of Puerto Rico. The so-' cial security provisions of the bill were not included in the Tax Adjustment Act of 1966 when it was before the House of Representatives.

The pity of it is that the amendment does not have too much real meaning for most residents of the States or the Dis­trict of Columbia. It provides for a fill­up pension to $35 for persons having a pension below this amount from Govern­ment sources. However, it would apply to all persons now over 72 who are not now receiving a Government pension and would give them $35 per month.

In Puerto Rico we have so many elderly citizens to whom $35 a month would be a godsend in the sense of providing them with the necessaries of life.

I am taking immediate corrective ac.:. tion by the introduction of legislation to take care of this situation.

Mr. HICKS. Mr. Speaker, when this bill to reimpose some excise taxes orig­inally appeared on the floor of the House, I voted against it. Not because I ani blind to the need for increasing revenues to finance the Vietnam war and to com­bat inflation, but because I regarded this means of doing so as too little and too late. I voted in protest against a pallia­tive, a treatment of symptoms instead of the disease. Because of :-::orne vital changes in the bill by the other body and · by the conference committee, I am obliged to change Il)Y vote today to "aye."

But I still consider it a palliative. I still think it indicates an unfortunate reluctance to face the issues squarely on the part of the Congress and of the ex­ecutive branch.

Mr. Speaker, I do not like even to think of raising taxes. Apparently that attitude is not limited to myself. But I am convinced that I must think of it, that all of us must think of it very seriously. And, Mr. Speaker, I do not like to reduce spending on our worthy social program.

But the effect of inflation is both to raise taxes and reduce the effective fi­nancing of our social and all other programs. And in respect to inflation, it is later than most of us care to think.

Inflation, Mr. Speaker, to me is worse than a tax increase. At least the in­creased tax which is taken from the American taxpayer brings more money into the U.S. Treasury. Inflation is a penalty. It takes money from the tax­payer and puts it nowhere. And it takes money from the U.S. Treasury, too, in that it decreases the Government's buy­ing power just as it decreases the indi­vidual's buying power.

A tax increase, while odious to all of us, is used for Government PUrPOses. Inflation, just as ·odious, is a penalty which all of us pay and from which no­body benefits. And it is particularly hard on the .poor and the · people who must live on fixed incomes.

I am aware that there is another way to assist in curbing inflation aside from cutting spending and increasing taxes. The other way is wage and price controls.

Such controls wlll be a last desperate effort in the battle against inflation. None of us wants such controls. That . is why we should take other and less painful action while there is still time.

I wish it were not necessary to in­crease taxes. But inflationary pressure is forcing us to do so, Mr. Speaker, and the need will become intense in a ter­ribly short time. That is the way infla­tion works, something like a forest fire: it starts s~all and spreads wildly; it is much easier to put out when it starts than after it has spread.

The fire lookouts already have ob­served the smoke of the fires of _inflation in our economy. I fear the economic forest is dry as tinder, that the wind is rising, that the prospects for rain are dim.

That being the case, it is my belief that right now we should be formulating a program to combat inflation. The administration is taking some action. The Congress is making some motions in this direction. Private interests are acting. But, if I may return to the forest fire analogy once more, our com­bined actions to date have been in the nature of clearing away smoke. We must face the uncomfortable fact that more drastic action is needed.

If we do not now make ready, at a minimum, standby remedial action with full deliberation and complete attention to all ramifications, we may well find our­selves in the position of being unable to halt inflation before tremendous harm is done, and find ourselves in the equally unhappy condition of overreacting to a .situation that has gotten out of hand­and thus probably causing equal harm to the economy in another way.

I repeat, Mr. Speaker, that I am not happy about the prospect of an increase in taxes. If that is what is needed as the lesser of evils, however, then I say we had better face that issue squarely, and begin our deliberations at once.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Mr. Speaker, I shall vote against passage of the con­ference report on H.R. 12752, the Tax Adjustment Act of 1966.

When this bill was before the House last month I stated that in view of the provision it contains for reimposing ex­cise taxes on automobiles and telephone service, acknowledged by the President to be unfair and burdensome only last year, I simply could not in good con­science support it. At that time nor at this time however, would I want my ac­tions to be interpreted as suggesting in any way ah unwillingness to provide the needed funds for our fighting men in South Vietnam. I fully recognize that we are going to need more tax revenue, but I further believe that it can and should be raised on an equitable basis.

·Neither should my vote today be con­strued to indicate a lack of interest and sympathy for certain of the amendments added to this bill by the other body which I would, in fact, be inclined to support had they come to us on their own two feet and in not such objectionable com:. pany.

Mr. Speaker, since I have been in Con­gress I have protested these discrimina-

tory taxes in good times and bad-in time of budget deficits and budget sUrPluses. There is simply no right time to vote for an unfair tax. I submit that the admin­istration has not tried hard enough either . through economies here at home or through recommendations for tax equal­_lty t<;> properly provide the revenue need­ed to fulfill our most pressing commit­ments.

Mr. HORTON. Mr. Speaker, since the President's state of the Union message, which contained his request for p_ost- . poning the repeal of telephone and auto­mobile excise taxes, I have been on rec­ord as strongly opposed to reinstituting these regressive taxes as a means of procuring the . needed funds to finance the war in Vietnam.

I was most encouraged when the Sen­ate last week adopted the amendment to keep the excise on residential phone service at its present ·a-percent rate. Unfortunately, the conference commit­tee deleted the Senate amendment, with the result that the tax on local telephone service will again rise to 10 percent. Without any wavering in my strong sup­port for well-reasoned legislation to ob­tain the needed additional funds for use in Vietnam, I am reluctant to support the conference report because of the un­necessary burden it places on people in t~e lower income levels, to whom an automobile and telephone service are necessities, not luxuries, today.

With this hesitation, I have decided to vote in favor of the conference com­mittee's compromise, because of another provision it contains. I am referring to the provision that will provide social security benefits to over 300,000 Amer·­icall citizens who are reaching the . age of 72 and are not covered by social se­curity under present law. This provi­sion is an important step in broadening our social security system to cover those who had retired or were near retirement when Congress acted to cover jobs they had held.

I have been urging the passage of this amendment to the Social Security Act for over a year now. Across-the-board monthly benefits for persons reaching age 72 who do not meet normal quarter­coverage requirements was a major part of H.R. 5039, which I introduced last year-many provisions of which were later enacted into Public Law 89-97.

Under this enlightened provision, per­sons who are not now receiving any State, Federal, or local pension, in most cases persons who are most in need, will receive $35 monthly through the social security system if they reach age 72 be­fore 1968. For persons reaching age 72 after 1967, this new provision provides that fewer quarters of covered employ­ment will be required for eligibility for social security· benefits. Thus, over $120 million will be made available to persons who qualify under this section.

While I have very serious reservations about the wisdom of reimposing the same excise taxes which Congress worked so diligently to repeal just last .year, I cannot with conscience. vote down this very necessary and enlightened step in

·CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5801 the broadening of our social security laws to cover needy senior citizens. I am gratified at the inclusion in this report of a major portion of my own social security legislative program. ·

Thus, with noted reluctance, I am cast­ing my vote in favor of the conference committee's report on the Tax Adjust­ment Act.

Mr. CLEVELAND. Mr. Speaker, I rise to state that I will again vote, very re­luctantly, for this tax increase measure, called the Tax Adjustment Act of 1966. As I stated on February 23, when the bill was first approved by the Hous~ee page 3699 of the REcORD-Only the ad­ministration's refusal to cut back on itS unprecedented high level of domestic spending constrains me to vote for this bill. In this absence . of fiscal restraint on the part of the administration, which increases the dangers of inflation it be­comes necessary to provide the additional revenues in this legislation. The costs of the war in Vietnam and threat of in­flation demand it.

At the same time, I wish to add a word. of high praise for the amendment adopted in the Senate to give older per­sons at least some assistance by extend­ing a measure of social security protec­tion to many of those excluded from the

' program through no fault of their own. I am proud of the fact that my State.,s senior Senator, NORRIS COTTON, played such a prominent role in sponsoring this amendment and getting · it adopted. With all the money being poured out by the Government on various welfare pro­grams, it is good to know that at least some will now go to relieve the needs of senior citizens directly, without Federal controls or new battalions of bureau­crats. This is an antipoverty measure which I can support. It follows the precedent we estabpshed at Republican insistence, when we provided medical care for the elderly not covered by social security.

GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND

Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members desiring to do so may include their re­marks at this point in the RECORD on the conference report. Also, Mr. Speak­er, I ask unanimous consent that I, the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. CuRTIS], the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. BYRNES], and others who have spoken on this conference report may have permis­sion to revise and extend our remarks and to include certain tables and charts that refer to this conference report.

The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. AL­BERT). Is there objection to the re­quests of the gentleman from Arkansas?

There was no objection. Mr. MILLS~ Mr. Speaker, I move the

previous question on the conference re­port.

The previous question was ordered. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The

question is on the conference report. Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, on that I

demand the yeas and nays. The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken; and there were-yeas 288, nays 102, not voting 41, as follows:

[Roll No. 86]

YEAB-288 Adams Friedel Addabbo Fulton, Pa. Albert Gallagher Anderson, Ill. Garmatz Anderson, Gathings

Tenn. Giaimo Annunzio Gibbons Ashley Gilbert Aspinall Gilligan Ayres Gonzalez Ba.ndstra Goodell · Barrett Grabowski Bates Gray · Battin Green, Oreg. Beckworth Green, Pa. Belchei' Greigg Betts ·Grider Bingham Gr11fin Blatnik Griftlths Boggs Halpern Boland Hamilton Brademas Hanley Bray Hansen, Iowa. Brooks Hansen, Wash. Broomfield Hardy Broyhill, Va. Harvey, Mich. Burke Hathaway Burleson Hawkins Burton, Ca.lU'. Hays Byrne, Pa. Hebert Bymes, Wis. Hechler Cabell Helstoski Cahill Herlong CaHan Hicks C&Ilaway Holland Carey Horton Carter Hosmer Casey Howard Celler Hull Chelf Hungate Clark Huot Clausen, Irwin

Don H. Jacobs Cleveland Jarman Clevenger Jennings Cohelan Joelson Colmer Johnson, Calif. Conte Johnson, Okla. Cooley Johnson, Pa. Corbett Jones, Ala. Corman Karsten Craley Karth Culver Kastenmeier Curtin Kee Daddario Keith Dague Kelly Daniels Keogh Davis, Wis. King, Calif. Dawson King, Utah de 1a Garza Kirwan Dent Kluczyn.ski Denton Krebs Diggs Kunkel Dingell Kupferman Donohue LaUd Dorn Leggett Dow Lipscomb Duncan, Oreg. Long, La. Duncan, Tenn. Long, Md,. Dwyer Love Dyal McDade Edmondson McDoweH Edwards, Calif. McFall Edwards, La. McGrath Ellsworth Macdonald Evans, Colo. Machen

.. Evins, Tenn. Mackay Fallon Mackie Farbstein Madden Farnsley Mahon Farnum Mallllard Fascell Marsh Feighan Martin, Mass. Findley Martin, Nebr. Fino Matsunaga Flood May Flynt Meeds Fogarty Mills Foley Minish Ford, Gerald R. Mink FMd, Mize.

William D. Moeller Frelinghuysen Monagan

Moore Moorhead Morgan Morris Morrison Morse Moss Multer Murphy,Dl. Murphy, N.Y. Murray Natcher Nedzi Nix O'Brien O'Hara, Dl. O'Konski Olsen, Mont. Olson, MiDIIl.

' O'Nelll, Mass. Patman Patten Pelly Pepper Perkins Philbin Pickle Pirnie Poage Po1f Price Pucinski PurceLl Quillen Race Redlin Rees Reid, N.Y. Resnick Reuss . Rhodes, Ariz. Rhodes, Pa.. Rivers, S.C. Rivers, Alaska Roberts Rodino Rogers, Colo. Rogers, Tex. Ronan Rooney, N.Y. Rooney,Pa. Rosenthal Rostenkowski Roush Ryan StGermain St.Onge Saylor Scheuer Schisler SchmidhaUSei' Schneebeli Schweiker Senner Shipley Shriver Sickles Slack Smith, Iowa Smith, N.Y. Smith, Va. Springer Sta1ford Staggers Steed Stratton Stubblefield Sullivan Sweeney Teague, Calif. Tenzer Thompson, N.J. Thompson, Tex. Thomson, Wis. Todd . Trimble Tunney Tupper Udall Ullman VanDeerUn Vanik Vigorito

Vivian Watkins Watts Whalley White, Idaho

Abbitt Abernethy Andrews,

GeorgeW. Andrews,

Glenn Andrews,

N.Dak. Arends Ashbrook Ashmore Bennett Berry· Bolton · Bow };31"00~ Brown, Ohio Broyhill, N.C. Buchanan Burton, Utah Camet"on Cederberg Chamberlain Clancy Conable Cramer Cunlllingha.m Curtis Derwinski Devine Dickinson Dole Dulski Edwards, Ala. Erlenborn

Adair BarLng Bell Bolling Brown, Calif. Clawson, Del · Conter Conyers Davis, Ga. Delaney Dowdy Downing Everett Fraser

White, Tex. Widnall Wilson,

Charles H. Wright

NAYS-102

Yates· Young ZS.blocki

Fisher Passman Fountain Pike Fulton, Tenn. Quie Gettys Randall Gross Reid, Dl. Grover Reifel Gubser Robison Gurney Rogers, Fla.. Hagan, Ga. Roybal

· Haley Rumsteld Hall Satterfield Hansen, Idaho Scott Harsha Secrest Henderson Selden Hutchinson Sikes

· Jonas · Skubitz Jones, Mo. Smith, Calif. Jones, N .C. Stalba.um King, N.Y. Stanton Kor>negay Stephens Langen Talcott Latta Taylor Lennon Tuck McClory Tuten McCulloch Utt McEwen Walker, N.Mex. McMillan Watson MacGregor Weltner Michel Whitener Minshall Whitten Morton Williams Nelsen Wilson, Bob O'Hara, Mich. Wolff O'Neal, Ga. Wydler Ottinger Younger

NOT VOTING--41 Fuqua Hagen. Calif, Halleck Hanna Harvey, Ind. Holifield I chord Landrum McCarthy McVicker Martin, Ala. Mathias Matthews Miller

Mosh~ Pool Powell Reinecke Roncalio Roudebush Sisk Teague, Tex. Toll Waggonner Walker, Miss. Willis Wyatt

So the to.

conference report was agreed

The Clerk announced the following pairs: ·

On this vote: Mr. Teague of Texas for, with Mr~ Wag­

gonner against. Mr. Downing for, with Mr. Davis of Georgia

against. Mr. Delaney for, with Mr. Roncalio against.

Until further notice: Mr. Baring with Mr. Harvey of Indiana. Mr. Holifield with Mr. Collier. Mr. Sisk with Mr; Adair. Mr. Miller with Mr. Reinecke. Mr. Willis with Mr. Roudebush. Mr. Hagen of California with Mr. Martin of

Alabama. Mr. Brown of California with Mr. Bell. Mr. Toll with Mr. Wyatt. :Mr. Fuqua with Mr. Mosher. . Mr. Landrum with Mr. Walker of Missis-

sippi. Mr. Powell with Mr. Fraser. Mr. !chord with Mr. Dowdy. Mr. Matthews with Mr. McVicker. Mr. Conyers with Mr. McCarthy. Mr. Hanna with Mr. Pool.

Mr. RUMSFELD~ Mr. LANGEN, Mr. BROYHILL of North Carolina, Mr. FOUNTAIN, and Mr. SKUBITZ changed their votes from "yea'' to "nay."

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

5802 CONGRESSIONAL. 'RECORD.:.....:, HOUSE March ·15, 1966

·. A motion to reconsider was laid on the table;

SUPPLEMENTAL DEFENSE APPRO-PRIATION BILL, 1966 .

Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, by direc­tion of the Committee on Rules, I call up House Resolution 773, and ask for its im-

• mediate consideration. The Clerk read the resolution, as fol­

lows: H. 'RES. 773

Resolved, That during the consideration of the bill (H.R. 13546) making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1966, and for other purposes, all points of order against the bill are hereby waived.

The SPEAKER. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. YoUNG] is recognized for 1 hour.

Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 minutes to the distinguished gentleman from California [Mr. SMITH] pending which·! yield myself such time as I may require.

Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 773 pro­vides that points of order shall be waived 1n the consideration of H.R. 13546, a bill making supplemental appropriatio~ ·for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1966, and for other purposes.

Mr. Speaker, H.R. 13546 includes $13,135,719,000, the amount of the budget estimate for the military assistance and economic assistance programs of the Government directly related to opera­tions in southeast Asia. This involves an increase in the numbers of both mili­tary and civilian personnel, the increases in the operation and maintenance costs of men, machines, and structures; the production of aircraft, ordnance, ammu­nition, and other materiel; military and construction projects; selected and spe­cialized research and development pro­grams; and also economic assistance.

Mr. Speaker, in this connection I would like to address a question to the chairman of the Committee on Appro­priations. I · wonder if the chairman would advise the House as to whether or not this bill appropriates a sumcient amount of money to carry on the war in Vietnam.

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield to me?

Mr. YOUNG. I yield to t~e gentle­man.

Mr. MAHON. I believe so, at least for the time being. With the funds included 1n this bill we will have made available for the· current fiscal year a total of about $61 billion for the Department of Defense. We entered the current :fiscal year with about $30 billion in ·the hands of the Department of Defense which had not been expended. Most of those funds had been committed for such things as missiles, airi>lanes, submarines, ships, and other long lead time items. 'So I would say certainly from the financial standpoint the funds provided here are adequate for the foreseeable futilre. Of course, we' cannot tell whether peace will come or whether war will remain at the present level or whether it will escalate. So we do not know how much additional funds may be required even this year for

the further prosecution of. this war 1t it ·I must say that in another supple-continues. mental bill which will be pending before

Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, I thank the -House of· Representatives, probably the gentleman for - that answer. I before Easter, funds will be carried al­wanted to point out that all of us are most to the extent of r$1 billion because concerned over reports that we hear from of pay increases for members of the time to time of shortages over in Viet- armed· services and civilian employees nam. We realize that there are bound as a result of legislation passed last year~ to be isolated items of that nature and Mr. GROSS. That is one of the items we want these shortages to be elimi- in your hearings here,· and I am a ·little nated as soon as possible. bit surprised that that item is not cov-

Mr. Speaker, I have here a letter from ered in this bill. a constituent of mine, a responsible citi- Mr. MAHON. · If the gentleman will zen, who has a son, a lance corporal in yield further, the pending bill includes the Marine Corps in Vietnam, who is funds for the new rates of pay for the complaining of the lack of jungle boots additional men in the Armed Forces. for the Marine Con)s troops over there We have almost 400,000 more men in the while the Army has them. I want to ask Armed Forces than we previously had the chairman to have someone on his programed in the original 1966 budget. staff check on this matter, please? However, this bill -does not take care of

Mr. MAHON. I would say with re- the supplemental required, as a result of spect to equipment and clothing for the the pay increase, for the originally pro­men in Vietnam that I know of no real gramed numbers of military, which we shortage, no significant shortage. provided for at the old ra·tes in the

Of course, there may be a temporary regular 1966 appropriation. shortage at a given place at a given mo- Mr. GROSS. And yet this bill takes ment. I shall be glad to present this . into account expenditures, other than for matter to the appropriate ofilcials in the those directly related to Vietnam? Department of Defense. We conferred Mr. MAHON. To some quite limited at great length with General Greene, extent. the commandant of the Marine Corps,· Mr. GROSS. Yes, to some extent. and discussed with him some problems This is the point I am trying to make, with regard to supplies, but he did not that this supplemental is not all-inclu- , complain of any serious problem of sup- sive; that we are already looking at an­plies in Vietnam at this time. other supplem~ntal to take care of the

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the pay increase. gentleman yield? Mr. MAHON. The gentleman is cor-

Mr. YOUNG. I yield to the gentleman rect. from Iowa. Mr. GROSS. And, I cannot help but

Mr. GROSS. I believe the hearing be a little surprised that it is not con­record is already clear that the commit- tained in this bill rather than another tee does not preclude the introduction of bill yet to come to the :floor of the House. another supplemental appropriation bill Mr. MAHON. We had thought that with respect to expenditures for this pur- we should present all the ·pay increases pose. I seem to get the very definite for the whole Government in one bill. It impression that another supplemental is is anticipated that that bill may be be-not precluded at all. fore the House for action week after next.

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, if the gen- Mr. GROSS. One o·ther question: tleman will yield, I do hope to leave the Will the gentleman from Texas [Mr. very definite impression that another YoUNG] explain brie:fiy to the House why supplemental is not precluded. In my points of order are waived in this bill? opinion, and it would be my hope, tQere Mr. YOUNG. Of course, it is obvi­will be no further supplemental for ous that the points of order are waived fiscal1966 related to the war in Vietnam, because the authorization bill has no·t but there may be a supplemental for been passed or signed by the President of fiscal 1967. We do not want to give to the United States. the Department of Defense a blank Mr, GROSS. Has it passed the other check. Last year we did not want to body? give the Department of Defense billions Mr. YOUNG. Yes; it is in conference. of dollars for which it could not define a Mr. GROSS. But it has not been specific use. So we feel, as I am sure the signed by the President? gentleman from Iowa feels, when funds Mr. YOUNG. No; it is in conference. are required the ofilcials of the executive Mr. MAHON. The economic assist-branch should come to the Congress and ance portion of the bill is in conference. request the funds, and then we will pro- Mr. YOUNG. The foreign aid part vide them, as we are undertaking to do is still in conference, and the other part in this case. However, no one can pre- of the bill has gone to the President but diet the future. It has not been possible has not been signed. to· predict it in any war which we have Mr; LATTA. Mr. Speaker, will the fought. · gentleman yield?

Mr. GROSS. I understand that, but I Mr. YOUNG. I yield to the gentle• am not too well satisfied, from a reading man from Ohio, for a question. of the hearings, that you have adequately Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I did not financed the situation as it presently intend to raise this question at this time, stands. but since the chairman of the Committee-

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, if the gen;. on Appropriations has r8.ised it, I am tleman from Texas will yield further, we concerned about shortages of clothing have just done the best we could ·under that have been revealed during the hear­the circumstances. lngs which have been .held by the Com-

March 15, 1966 CON.GRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 5803 mlttee on Armed Services of th~ House of Representatives, as well as in the hear-. ings which have been held by the Armed Services Committee of the other body.

Do I understand the gentleman to say that there were no shortages of clothing in the Marine Corps, or that these short­ages were being taken care of?

Mr. Speaker, I am addressing my ques­tion to the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations.

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, if the gentleman from Texas will yield further, the Department of Defense is requesting additional funds here to meet certain requirements for additional manpower. We have increased manpower to the extent of about 400,000 men in the last year.

Mr. Speaker, insofar as I know there are no significant shortages· in South Vietnam. There are some shortages within the continental United States which are of no serious import in my judgment. And, these requirements are being met.

Mr. Speaker, there could not be a mili­tary effort of this magnitude without some shortages showing up here and there. The Department of Defense has tried to husband its funds rather well, in my opinion, in recent years. Officials have not asked for supplies to last for the next 20 or 30 years of certain items, as has been the case in some isolated

. instances heretofore. Mr. Speaker, I believe this more accu­

rate and careful budgeting procedure is in the public interest, and generally would be approved. Of course, we do not want any shortages. that would be sig­nificant, we do not want a:ny shortages at all, but these shortages ·.will 6ccur in any war. Therefore, we have to do the best we can to see that these shortages are not significant or hurtful to the fighting forces.

Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, if the gen­tleman will yield further, since the gentleman from Texas has mentioned General Green's testimony, his testimony before the Committee on Armed Services revealed that there were shortages of clothing, but that they were being taken care of through the medium of decreased clothing allowances.

Mr. MAHON. This relates to the con­tinental United States, and not to South Vietnam, I believe.

Mr. LA'ITA. There will be no de­creased allowances as far as clothing is concerned for our South Vietnam fight­ing soldiers?

Mr. MAHON. Not, I believe, for the soldiers in South Vietnam. · There is no

-clothing problem about which I know, with reference to personnel in Vietnam, except some isolated instance here or there, but some of the clothing under order for the increased strength of the Marine Corps will take a little time for delivery. But there -is no serious situa­tion here. 4nd the gentleman to whom the gentleman from Ohio referred, when testifying before the House Armed Serv­ices Committee, points out that he thinks the Marine Corps will be able to handle this matter without any seriou.s effect upon the readiness o~ the marines.

·. Mr. LATI'A. Likewise I will point out Mr. Speaker, I support the waiver of to the gentleman that General Greene the points of order and I support the in his testimony before the Committee rule and I support the bill. on Armed Services stated in their exami- Mr. Speaker, I 'have no requests for nation of the problem, meaning the time so far as I know. problem of ammunition as I recall, they Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, I move the found six different types of ammunition previous question. in which there were indications of short- The previous question was ordered. ages. This is General Greene's ·testi- The resolution was agreed to. mony. Are there sufficient funds to take Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, I move care of these shortages?

Mr. MAHON. The bill provides $2 bil- thwt . the House resolve itself into the lion for ammunition and associated Committee of the Whole House on the equipment. There ,are certain new types State of the Union for the· consideration of ammunition that are not immediately of the bill <H.R. 13546) making supple­available which ·would be desirable for mental defense appropriations for the

fiscal year ending June 30, 1966, and for use in Vietnam which are not now be- other purposes; and pending that mo-ing used. But we have sufficient fire- tion I ask unanimous consent that gen­power to mee~ th~ requir~ments. What- era! debate thereon be limited to not to eyer the d~fic~ei?-Cies. are m our prosecu- exceed 3 hours, th~ time to be divided t10n of the war m VIetnam, they are not - equally between the gentleman from brought. about by. the lack of ·money or Ohio [Mr. Bowl and myself. of supplies, in my JUdgment. Mr. Speaker, I do not think we will use

Mr. LA'ITA. I thank the gentlem,an. more than 3 hours in general debate, but Mr .. YOUNG. Mr. ~peaker, I .urge the we do not want to preclude any debate

adoption of the pendmg resolutiOn. that the House desires to have on this · The SPEAKER pro tempore. The important legislation

Ch~ir r~cognizes the gentleman from The SPEAKER pr~ tempore. Is there California [Mr. SMITH]· objection tO the request of the gentle-

Mr. SMITH of California. Mr. man from Texas? Speaker, I yield myself such time as I There was no objection. may use. . The SPEAKER pro tempore. The

Mr. f?peake~. ~ouse ResolutiOn 773 question is on the motion offered by the does ~aive all po~ts of order so far as gentleman from Texas. the bill H.R. 13546 IS conce~n~d, th~ sup- The motion was agreed to plemental defense appropnation bill for · 1966. As I understand it, the points Of IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

o;rder were requested to be waived for two Accordingly, the House resolved it-different reasons. The first is the two self into the Committee of the Whole bills that have been passed, I think $415 House' -on the S'tate of the Union for million for the foreign_ aid bill, and I be- the consideration of the bill, H.R. 13546, lieve the other one having to do with the with Mr. WRIGHT in the chair. armed services and supplies, have not The Clerk read the title of the bill. been signed by the President of the By unanimous consent, the first read-United States with the result that we ing of the bill was dispensed with. cannot appropriate unless there is first a The CHAIRMAN. Under the unani­law on the books authorizing us to do so. mous-conserrt agreement, the gentleman That is the first point. from Texas [Mr. MAHON] will be recog­. The second point, as I understand it, is nized for 1% hours and the gentleman that there is certain language in the bill from Ohio [Mr. Bowl will be recognized in the nature of legislation in an appro- for 1 ¥2 hours. priation bill which is against the rules of The Chair recognizes the gentleman the House and the Committee on Rules from Texas [Mr. MAHON]. was asked to waive that so that we could Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield proceed with thi::, legislation here today. myself 10minutes.

I think the total amount o-f the bill The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman is somewhere around $13 billion, $12.3 from Texas is recognized for 10 minutes. billion in new military spending and $415 Mr. MAHON. This is the first appro­million in connection with the foreign priation bill to be considered by the Con­aid matter that we passed here a short gress at this session. We have been re­time ago, the majority of which goes to quested by the executive branch to ap­Vietnani, some to Thailand, some to Laos, propriate for the forthcoming fiscal year and soine to the Dominican Republic. about $121 billion. The bill before us Then there is $375 million for military of course, is not applicable to the 1967 assistance projects previously authorized fiscal year but, rather, to the current and begun. · fiscal year. ·

There has been some discussion as to There has been so much said about whether or not the World War II Ian- the war in Vietnam through all media guage goes too far; whether that au- and in many public places, including thority should be given to the Depart- this body and the other body, that there ment of Defense or not. So far as I am are many who feel, perhaps, that they concerned, I feel our men are in Vietnam have heard enough. and they are fighting and I, for one, But this bill totals $13 billion. It is intend to give them all the equipment and the first opportunity of the House of ammunition and everything that we can Representatives to express its will on the tO help them to do their job. so that we urgent request of the :.?resident for all can get them back home as quickly as of the additional funds to prosecute the we possibly ~an. war in Vietnam.

5804 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966

This supplemental appropriation re- nam war since we assembled in January, quest for the Department of Defense and properly so, I would say. has occupied much of the time and ef- Last year, during the consideration of fort of many Members of the legislative the Defense Appropriation and Authori­branch in recent weeks. The President's zation bills, it became apparent that a request for the supplemental funds ar- supplemental appropriation would be rived here on Capitol Hill on the 19th needed early this year if the war should day of January. The House Appropria- continue. We were hoping and praying tions Committee began its hearings on that it would not. This view was gen­the measure on January 26 and con- erally taken by Members of the House eluded hearings on March 3. and Members of the other body who deal

Three subcommittees-the Subcom- in depth with military requirements. mittee on Defense Appropriations, the This yiew was also taken by oflicials of Subcommittee on Military Construction, the Defense Department. and the Subcommittee on Foreign Oper- We were told that additional funds ations-were all involved in the con- would probably be needed, but since they sideration of this request. could not then pinpoint the specific

The full Committee on Appropriations funds; they would not ask us for blank met last Friday and ordered the bill re- checks for financing the war. It was ported to the House, and it was sched- generally thought that early this year a u1ed for consideration today. _ request for additional funds would be

Since some of the amounts requested presented. Early this year, on January required additional authorization, several 19, the request came. So it is no sur­of the legislative committees of the Con- prise that we have been engaged in re­gress have given their attention to this cent weeks in debate and discussion of matter. The Committee on Armed this important matter. Forces of the House held hearings begin- Not only this, but during the course of ning February 3 and ending on Feb- the consideration thus far of the pend­ruary 17, having had 8 days of hearings ing $13 billion appropriation, it has been on many of the matters in the bill that apparent that most Members feel that is before us today. the additional amounts are required.

The authorization bill was reported The truth is that there has been no from the House Armed Services Commit- real question in the minds of the over­tee on February 18 and passed the House whelming majority of the Members of on March 1. this body that the funds requested are

In the other body, joint hearings were needed. I will go further, and say that held by the Armed Services Committee many feel that additional 'funds may be and the Defense Appropriations Sub- required in fiscal year 1967 for the De­committee beginning on January 20 and partment of Defense, that is funds in ending on February 3-5 days of hear- excess of the budget request. 1ngs. This certainly is my view, but no one

The bill was reported to the Senate on can tell the turn which the war will take February 10. The Senate debate began and, therefore, what the requirements on that day and continued until the may actually be. Senate passed the bill on March 1. It is true that we cannot predict, as

The conference report on that au- I say, the course of the war, the chances thorization bill was filed on March 10 for peace, or the degree of intensity of and was adopted by both the Houses the fighting. last week, as the Members know. We do not know what the Commu-

Since the pending bill provides sup- nists might do in southeast Asia or else­plemental appropriations for economic where. We have no way of knowing. assistance, the Foreign Affairs Commit- Hence, it is inevitable that some uncer­tee of the House and the Foreign Rela- tainties will confront us in the future, as tions Committee of the Senate have con- they have confronted us in the past in sidered the matter and drafted the dealing with these matters. required authorizing legislation. The When and if additional sums are re­House Foreign Affairs Committee began quired, I would make bold to say for the hearings on January 26. The committee House of Representatives that everyone held 3 days of hearings. The authoriza- can be sure that those additional funds tion bill for economic assistance was will be approved by the House of Repre­considered on the floor on February 24. · sentatives.

The Senate Foreign Relations Com- Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Chair-mittee began hearings on January 28 and man, will the gentleman yield? continued hearings until March 3, hear- Mr. MAHON. I yield to the able mi-ings being held on a total of 8 days. The nority leader. other body considered the Economic As- Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Chalr­sistance Authorization bill, as we did, on man, I am glad the chairman of the Com­March 10. mittee on Appropriations has pointed out

The conference on this economic as- that there are many, many uncertainties sistance part of the legislation has not as to the precise course of the conflict in yet been concluded, and the legislation, Vietnam. President Johnson, as the of course, has not been signed into law. elected Commander in Chief does not Neither had the military authorization himself know exactly what d~isions he portion of this legislation until today. must make in the crucial days ahead. we For that reason a rule waiving points of do not know today what the President order was requested by the Appropri- must do in the way of a commitment for ations Committee last week and granted. more strength on the ground or in the air by the Rules Committee. or on the sea.

So it is evident that Congress has been However, I gather, from what the gen-preoccupied with the issue of the Viet- tleman from Texas is saying, tha-t a

Member of the House who votes for this Defense Department appropriation is giving to the Commander in Chief the day-to-day authority to carry on the execution and implementation of our Na­tion's position of strength in South Vietnam. An "aye" vote on this bill today means that one supports adequate military strength to meet successfully the challenge of Communist aggression in South Vietnam.

Mr. MAHON. This, I believe, would be a fair interpretation of a vote in favor of the pending legislation.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. MAHON. It is true that we can­not tell the degree of the escalation, but it is my view-and I have no inside in­formation-that the probabilities are that the war will escalate, that it will grow in intensity, because I do not think our opponents are yet ready to go to the conference table.

We have given them ample opportu­nity. We have had the bombing pause, and we have been most tolerant and con­siderate in undertaking to convince our opponents, and the entire world, of our desire for peace. Our efforts have not been successful thus far. We have no other alternative than to prosecute this war to a successful conclusion.

It is in this context and under these circumstances that the Committee on Appropriations brings this request to you today for your consideration.

I would like to say that it is due to the foresight of Congress and to the fore­sight of the executive branch that we are as well prepared as we are for the conditions which confront us in the world at this time. Beginning in 1950 with the Korean war, we have kept our Military Establishment in a considerable degree of readiness. We have appro­priated large sums of money for defense. We have spent money for defense at a rather high level since the early 1950's 1n order to be ready to meet aggression if aggression came.

I should call your attention to some significant facts:

First. We have carried more than 200,000 men and the arms and equipment to support them and to support our allies' army of more than 800,000 men, by air and by sea, more than 10,000 miles from our shores.

Second. We have wisely protected the lives of our ftghtingmen by expending munitions at tremendous rates. We have the weapons and ammunition to make this possible. If we did not, more lives would be lost. We program the expendi­ture of 1 billion rounds per year of small­arms ammunition, for instance, and 1,700,000 bombs.

Third. We have been building up our conventional forces substantially since 1961. For example:

First. We have added $50 billion to the defense program since 1960 for this purpose.

Second. We had achieved a lOO-per­cent increase in airlift capability.

Third. The number of combat-ready Army divisions has been increased 45 percent.

March 15, 1986 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- HOUSE 5805 Fourth. The number of combat heli­

copters, upon which the mobility of our forces in Vietnam depends, has been in­creased 45 percent.

Fifth. The number of Air Force fighter squadrons ha~ been increased 51 percent.

If the Congress and the Defense De­partment had not had the foresight to program these increases, we would in­deed have had real supply problems and American lives would have been unneces­sarily sacrificed.

So it is as a result of this policy, that the Members have supported, that we are as well prepared as we are for the war in which we find ourselves.

I should like to say this: The United States has been better prepared for and has acted more quickly and more em­ciently to cope with the demands of this war than any other war in ow: entire history. This understanding is necessary to a proper perspective of the situation . .

We hear allegations of shortages and inefficiencies. There are some shortages and inemciences which should surprise no one in an effort this large. But the overall picture as to military strength and readiness is amazingly good. We have every reason to be proud of our men, and not only of our men but of the equipment which has been provided by the foresight of the Government in recent years.

I say that for all of the administrations involved. No shortage of equipment or supplies has adversely affected the con­duct of the war insofar as our llearings have been able to determine.

There is every indication that our forces in Vietnam are being well led. General Westmoreland seems to have the complete confidence of military and civilian leaders in the executive branch of the Government, and this, of course, includes the President.

General Westmoreland also seems to have the full confidence of the Members of Congress who have made on-the-spot checks of the situation in southeast Asia. The bravery of our troops and their morale is without question. We have every reason to be proud of the per­formance of the Nation as a whole in this time of difficulty and trial.

There seems to be little reason to argue about the amount of ·money re­quested in this bill. We are going to need all of these funds. We have spent 24 days in hearings in the Committee on Appropriations already this year explor­ing our military requirements for funds. One cannot separate this supplemental from the fiscal 1967 regular budget for defense. We have had Secretary Mc­Namara before our committee on defense requirements of the Nation a total of 5 days, and we have had many other wit­nesses, also. We have been giving con­sideration to this matter; and properly so, since the beginning of the session. We will continue to do so, and we hope that in a couple of months we can bring the new bill before you. However cer­tainly, for the moment, we should sup­port this legislation and provide the equipment, the clothing, the ammuni­tion, and the other things that are needed now.

In this bill before us we provide for 2,005 additional_ helicopters which are very much needed. in the type of war that we are fighting. We are providing for the procurement of 906 fixed-wing air­craft. We are providing the huge sum of $2,078 million for munitions, weapons of war, and associated equipment. So it is very evident to me that this is an im­portant and necessary installment for the active prosecution of the war in Vietnam.

Briefly, the bill provides-u.s. m1litary ______________ $12,345, 719,600 M1litary assistance to South

Vietnam________________ 375,000,000 Economic assistance to

South Vietnam_________ _ 415,000,000

Total---------------- 13, 135,719,000

Funds for about 113,000 more military personnel than already approved for fis­cal year 1966.

An additional $2,316,269,000 for opera­tion and maintenance to provide gener­ally for the increased tempo of operations.

For procurement: JUrcraft ____________________ $3,212,400,000 M~iles__ __________________ 181,400,000 Munitions-----------·------ 2, 078, 000, 000 Other procurement such as

electronic and communi-cations equipment________ 1, 547, 600, 000

Total ________________ 7,019,400,000

For research and development effort on weapons and equipment · directly re­quired in southeast Asia, $151,650,000.

For military construction in support of operational requirements in Vietnam, $1,238,400,000. The actual construction projects, although primarily located in Vietnam, are also located in the United States and in other countries such as the Philippines.

When we vote for this bill I think we will show to the Nation and to the en­tire world . that the elected representa­tives of the people stand firmly together in resisting any program of appeasement or of vacillation and are supporting a program of unyielding opposition to ag­gression. By our action in supporting this bill we put the country and the world on notice that we feel that we in this country have a vital stake in the outcome of the war in Vietnam. It is true that we want to be helpful to the Vietnamese, but we are not spending all of these billions of dollars and the lives of our men only to be helpful to the Vietnam­ese. We are trying to obtain peace in the world, which happens to be very im­portant to the welfare of all humanity.

Mr. BOW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from Cali­fornia, the distinguished ranking mem­ber of the Subcommitee on Defense Ap­propriations on the minority side [Mr. LIPSCOMB].

. Mr. LIPSCOMB. Mr. Chairman, the bill before the House today, H.R. 13546, provides supplemental defense funds for the fiscal year 1966 budget totaling $13,-135,719,000 in new obligational authority as requested by the President for mili­tary functions and military and eco­nomic assistance to support our opera­tions in southeast Asia.

This measure is of vit~ importance to our security and welfare for the United States must remain ready and able to act in the national interest and to sup­port such action fully.

As approved by _the Appropriations Committee, the Department of Defense portions of the bill, which total $12,345,-719,000, provide for the following:

For military personnel, the bill pro­vides $1,620 million which will support, in addition to that previously approved, a net increase of approximately 113,000 military personnel and certain additions to the Army National Guard and other Reserve components.

In the area of operation and mainte­nance, the bill proposes an appropria­tion of $2,316,269,000.

For procurement of military supplies, the bill includes $7,019,400,000. Broadly speaking, this includes funding for am­munition, various types of rotary and fixed wing aircraft, various types of ve­hicles, electronic and communication equipment, and for other items such as ships, spare parts, clothing, and other consumables. In some-cases the stocks are exhausted or are dangerously low, and these funds are needed to replenish the supply.

For research, development, test, and evaluation the supplemental request pro­vides $151,650,000, much of which will be devoted to special needs generated by the Vietnam war. This includes such programs as an increase in medical re­search to provide :r:1ew drugs to combat a severe strain of drug resistant malaria, for work in developing aircraft suppres­sive fire systems, helicopter modification developing a fast deployment logisti~ shiP--FDL--and to speed up develop­ment of advanced radar techniques for surveillance purposes, and to modify air­craft to increase their effectiveness in their close air support missions in a southeast Asia environment.

Military construction funds in the bill total $1,238,400,000. This is for con­struction projects both in the continental United States and in the southeast Asia area at bases, airfields, ports, and related facilities.

Also the bill includes $375 million re­lating to military assistance and $415 million for the Agency for International Development for economic assistance in Vietnam.

COMMITMENT IN VIETNAM

Mr. Chairman, I support H.R. 13546. There should be no question in anyone's mind about the necessity of providing completely ample funds · to support our commitment in Vietnam and related areas. Nor should there be any reserva­tion about the need to supply our Ameri­can boys fighting . over there with the necessary arms, ammunition, and other requirements. Prompt passage of this measure would also illustrate to our fighting men, our citizens, and our ene­mies that we are willing and able to take the steps that are necessary to back up our country's commitment to insure free­dom in South Vietnam and prevent the further expansion of communism.

At the same time, I believe that addi­tional comments on this measure and the defense picture generally are necessary.

5806 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966

The escalation of the conflict .in Viet­nam intensifled in February of last year. But even in view of the worsening Viet­nam situation last year the fiscal year 1966 defense budget originally submitted to Congress was "tight," as described by Department of Defense witnesses before our subcommittee. No amendment to the fiscal year 1966 original request for additional funds was made by the admin­istration to support the increased activ­ity in southeast Asia during the time the House Appropriation Subcommittee on Defense held several months of hearings and the bill was taken up and passed by the House in June. The only action taken, which amounted in large part to a token gesture as far as the amount of funds was concerned, was the supple­mental request for fiscal year 1965 for a $700 m1llion emergency fund for south­east Asia, approved by the Congress last May.

Because of this fact and our deep con­cern that there must be adequate, timely funding for the defense program, two other members of the Defense Appropria­tions Subcommittee and I felt compelled to make the following statement in addi­tional views in the committee report last June on the regular fiscal year 1966 budget as submitted to the House:

It is our firm belief that appropriations must be sutncient to carry out successfully U.S. commitments anywhere in the world.

American personnel in Vietnam must be equipped and supported in such a degree as will give maximum assurance of safety and a capability to carry out their duties. We be­lieve the President should immediately revise this fiscal year 1966 defense budget with a view toward requesting the Congress to pro­Vide for the unplanned and unprogramed expenditures which have resulted from his decision to assume a greater role in southeast Asia (H. Rept. No. 528, 89th Cong., 1st sess., p. 63).

Despite repeated urgings such as this, no change in the original fiscal year 1966 budget request was received until August of last year, almost 7 months after the increased action in Vietnam. Then, the request was made for a $1.7 billion south­east Asia emergency fund add-on which was amended into the House version of the defense bill by the Senate. Even then, this added amount covered only a fraction of the needs, to start increasing production rates and construction proj­ects, and some other items that were critically needed. It was too obvious not to be widely recognized at the time that the $1.7 billion amendment did little more than begin to provide the funds needed.

The $12.3 billion supplemental request we are considering today for Department of Defense, military functions, was pre­sented to Congress in January, only sev­eral months later. We were told by wit­nesses who appeared to testify for the $12.3 billion defense portion of the sup­plemental bill that the needs were not precisely known before this time. It is, of course, understood that our needs in situations such as this cannot be iden­tified precisely. As a matter of fact it 1s clear from the testimony that the needs are still not precisely known. But from the evidence on hand it seems clear also that had the budget request been sub-

mitted earlier, it could have prevented extensive budgetary manipulations that have been going on within the Depart­ment of Defense.

DEFICIENCIES IN BUDGETING AND PLANNING

Let me illustrate some of the results of this type of budgeting and planning in the defense program.

The Secretary of Defense has used all of the discretionary funds he had avail­able in the construction program for Vietnam. He has virtually exhausted research and development emergency funds. In addition there has been extensive use of his transfer authority and reprograming of funds to meet criti­cal needs.

As a matter of fact it was brought out in the testimony that this bill would have to be approved by approximately March 1, which of course passed 2 weeks ago, to prevent further budgetary maneuvering and the use of emergency actions.

Secretary McNamara himself stated that if the funds were not provided by March 1:

We might have to take certain emergency actions to keep on schedule and those ac­tions would not make for as orderly an opera­tion and as etncient an operation as we would have if the bill is enacted by March 1.

MILrrARY PERSONNEL

In the area of military personnel, for the first time funds for military person­nel have been requested and are in this budget covering the escalation of activi­ty. Also, for the first time the matter of combat pay for our men in southeast Asia is adequately covered since the escalation of activity. The Department of Defense up until this time has been handling the increased regular personnel and combat pay requirements by using up available personnel funds. This is just no way to budget and to handle financing for the pay of our military personnel.

This supplemental does not even in­clude funds to take care of military pay increases approved last year. The De­partment of Defense has submitted st111 another separate supplemental request for this purpose as part of a Government­wide bill. That request, for an addi­tional $863 million, was submitted to Congress March 8, 1966. Serious diffi­culties meeting personnel expenses can be expected if the supplemental pay re­quest is not approved soon.

OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE

Though the Vietnam escalation began last February, this bill provides the first appropriation for operation and mainte­nance for fiscal year 1966 funds to reflect our increased needs in southeast Asia. Operation and maintenance includes such critical items as fuel, logistical and operational support, and medical sup­port to all the services. The fiscal year 1966 budget, including the $1.7 billion add-on for southeast Asia, which was signed into law last September did not include such funds. Increased require- . ments in this area have been handled by the Department of Defense by shifting of funds to meet emergency needs.

PROCUREMENT

Procurement for vital military equip­ment such as aircraft, weapons, vehicles, and ammunition at more than $7 billion

makes up the major portion of this sup­plemental request. · Analysis of this item reveals that a portion of the request is for replenish­ment of war reserve stocks. This need, in my view, should have been recognized many months earlier, for our stock levels were and are known and it should be readily recognized that any escalation would dip further into the stockpiles.

After the various branches of service submitted their individual requests to the Department of Defense for the origi­nal fiscal year 1966 budget, numerous cuts were made by the Secretary. This action is expected and generally is neither unusual nor objectionable. How­ever, it does become a matter of concern when a budget is presented which should and could more adequately have antici­pated critical developments. This bill, and to some extent the August 1965 $1.7 billion amendment, contain some of the very items which were cut last year by the Secretary of Defense from the serv­ices' request for fiscal year 1966 in such areas as aircraft, spares, repair parts, and support material, all vital to the conduct of the war.

Now we come to a situation almost completely opposite to the examples I have been discussing. While it is neces­sary to have funds required for our de­fense program requested and approved in a timely manner, it is equally true that responsible budgeting requires that money requests be considered in orderly schedules commensurate with our needs at the time and -not swept through in supplemental bills.

Some of the items that properly should be included in the regular defense budget for fiscal year 1967 which will come up later in the session have been injected into this supplemental. Anum­ber of items amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars were deleted by the Office of the Secretary of Defense from the fiscal year 1967 regular budget re­quest by the service branches and moved into the supplemental request that we are discussing today.

Additionally when it is realized that this $12.3 billion defense supplemental request is for fiscal year 1966 which has less than 4 months to go, other questions must be raised. For example, consider­ing the long leadtime needed to start up production or to increase production rates, this, coupled with the large quan­tities involved, indicates that a portion of the procurement funds could have been included in the regular fiscal year 1967 budget request. Sufficient funds could have been included in this supple­mental request to accelerate the produc­tion rate for long lead parts and tooling and fund production items to carry through the 4-month period. Such a procedure would have had the effect of moving many millions of dollars into the fiscal year 1967 budget with no ill effects upon scheduled deliveries.

This is the type of budgeting taking place in such a crucial area as procure­ment. One could come to the conclusion that this has been done in an effort to make the regular 1967 budget look lower.

The picture is further clouded by the fact that items are to be procured to fill

March 15, 1966 (:ONGRESSIONAL· RECORD -HOUSE 5807 needed requirements as a result of attri- not in keeping with the seriousness and tion which occurred during the previous importance of the Vietnam effort. 3- to 4-year period. Congress should be concerned for the RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION available evidence SUggeStS efforts to re-

With regard to the request for supple- duce congressional control over the de­mental appropriations for research, de- fense budget. It suggests that better velopment, test, and evaluation, it has defense planning and manageme~t could been said repeatedly that our planning be done. Con~ress should be disturbed was aimed at enabling us to pursue the · .because. ~he eVIdence also suggests that type of conflict as is going on in Vietnam the deCisiOns as to ~hen budgetary re­in an expeditious manner. Yet it took quests are to be submitted an~ how much an escalated activity in Vietnam to pro- each of. these sho';lld contam are not duce a fund request to support a level n~c~ssarlly d~termmed solely by o~r of effort needed to make these new find- mih~ary req~urements.. but. that arbl­ings and :::weapons available quickly. tra~1ly shiftm.g and JUgglmg . is done Though we can hopefully say that these to ~fiuence, ~press, or <?Onvm~e the funds should provide a measure of im- pubhc, depending on w~at 1s cc;>nsidered provement, some other research and de- most needed at a~y partiCu.lar trme. velopment programs are being funded at A l~ck of effect1ve plannm~ co~d un­a level of effort lower than a realistic dermme not only ou~ effort m yietnam assessment of the overall threat would but weaken ~ur. national secu:Ity as a indicate they should be. whole. We live m dangerous times that

warrant the utmost vigilance and pre­paredness. The threat to Vietnam is not an isolated incident, and therefore we cannot blind ourselves to problem areas in the rest of the world, now or in the future.

LANGUAGE CHANGE

This supplemental package includes fiscal gimmickery in the form of a lan­guage change contained in section 101 of the bill with regard to the working capital funds, known as stock funds. The language change will eliminate the requirement to maintain cash balances equal to accounts payable. The new language provides for transfer between funds and states that balances "may be maintained in only such amounts as are necessary at any time for cash disb~se­ments to be made from such funds." If this change of language had not been proposed by the Secretary of Defense in this bill, it would have been necessary for the Secretary to ask for another $350 to $500 million.

From an accounting standpoint and based on the brief look the subcommittee had of this item, it appears to be a rea­sonable proposal. However, because there was not time to completely eval­uate it, the committee is requiring the Department of Defense to provide quar­terly reports giving the :financial status of each working capital fund, including information as to any adjustments that have been made as between the working capital funds. Congress must keep close watch on this item and take appropriate action if it is found that this procedure is not working properly.

CONCLUSIONS

Our men in Vietnam are serVing bravely and with great distinction. They are fighting to preserve and ad­vance freedom in the world against Communist aggression. Based on my observations in Vietnam last fall and from testimony in the hearing, their morale is high, their motivation strong. They are there to win.

Such practices as I have_ described here in my view are neither good man­agement nor do they reflect the maxi­mum in effective planning which is so necessary t<>. insure that the men and material will be where they are needed in a manner which will afford our serv­icemen worldwide the ability to perform their mission and receive the maximum protection for their safety.

The result has been patchwork defense budgeting in many respects, which is both unfitting of our great Nation and

I strongly urge the administration to review our overall defense posture and policies, with a broad view of our com­mitments, not just Vietnam. Because of the effect the conflict in Vietnam has had upon our defense structure there is a need for such a review immediately. I feel confident that Congress will assist in any way it can in such a review and provide the necessary authority for any legitimate increases or modifications that appear to be warranted. In this regard, Congress must receive the full benefit of military judgment without constraints. Congress must have frank discussions by both the civilian and military members of the Department of Defense in order to reach objective judgments and carry out its constitutional mandate responsi­bly.

Mr. Speaker, I support this bill to pro­vide additional funds for southeast Asia. I felt it was necessary, however, to com­ment today in some detail on the bill and I also respectfully call attention to the additional views contained in the report calling for improved fiscal pro­cedures. It is my hope that the views expressed receive full consideration by the House.

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from New York [Mr. CELLER].

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, I am very happy to note that there is genuine bi­partisan support for this appropriation measure. I, of course, support this bill.

Joining 39 Governors, I support the President on Vietnam. The $13.1 billion fund is· essential for the support of our troops and for carrying out our commit­ments in South Vietnam.

The .direction of policy in this conflict is far from easy. It bristles with serious and awesome problems.

The President must make the final de­cisions. He has his intimate advisers, yet he is like a lonely man atop a mountain.

Many are his sleepless nights, espe­cially when he reads the tragic dis­patches. At times he is veritably torn

asunder with doubts and fears. But courage and stamina are not lacking. He knows that patience is bitter but bears rich fruit.

Like all who are responsible and dedi­cated, he is not insensible to criticism. He welcomes it when it is not mordant or abusive. Some of his frenetic critics seem more interested in crushing him than in our triumph against aggression in South Vietnam.

I do not deprecate--nay, I would en­courage debate on this momentous topic of Vietnam. Only on the anvil of debate may we forge the truth.

But some of the attacks are below the belt. Some are mere billingsgate. With the monotony of a drumbeat we hear some of these armchair strategists and "pinafore" admirals saying what should be done. Ofttimes they speak in pique and spite. For them whatever the Presi-dent does is wrong. ·

Some ranted that he should have gone to the United Nations. Although he was told by his trusted advisers that such action would be futile, he nonetheless made the trek to the United Nations. When he did that the same detractors railed that such a move was ridiculous and bound to fail.

These same carping critics ridiculed his efforts at peace and said he sought peace only halfheartedly. "Let him ap­peal to the Pope at Rome." He did. When his Holiness offered all in his power and did not succeed in budging Hanoi or Peiping, these same habitual faultfinders said, "I told you so."

President Johnson made direct ap­peals te 19 nonalined nations with a view to having them persuade Hanoi and Peiping to the conference table. These nations did, but were rebu:ffed.

The President sought particularly In­dia's intercession. The rulers of Hanoi and Peiping again showed their fangs.

The President, you may remember, was savagely condemned for continued bombing of the north. He ordered the bombing stopped. The cessation yielded serious military disadvantage to us. The President received no credit for his ef­forts. The Vietcong were brought no nearer to the conference table.

The President requested Soviet Russia to arrange another Geneva-like confer­ence. Russia demurred. Ho Chi Minh and Mao Tse-tung just turn their faces away from all who bring the olive branch of peace. Only yesterday, our offer of friendship, conveyed by Vice President HuMPHREY, was branded as the "kiss of Judas."

Yet, the incessant defamers of the President continue to vent their spleen against him. Never do they utter a good word for anything he may do. They dip their pens in venom or gargle with gall, and w1ite or speak "grapes of wrath."

They refuse to realize the results of their incautious remarks, fail to under­stand that they create the false impres­sion abroad, that our Nation does not support the President. Nothing 1s fur­ther from the truth.

I raise my voice in clarion tones to defend and applaud my President, and at the same time support this appropri­ation bill.

5808 CONGRESSIONAl. RECORD- -HOUSE March 15, 1966

Mr. HAYS. Mr. Chairman, will the. gentleman yield?

Mr. CELLER. I yield .to the gentle-. man from Ohio.

Mr. HAYS. Mr. Chairman, I want to congratulate the gentleman for his state­ment. I think it is apropos, timely, forceful, and to the point. I especially lik:e' what he said about the armchair strategists and the Pinafore admirals, be­cause, as Sir Winston Churchill once said, "It is very easy indeed to make plans to win a war if you have no responsibility for carrying them out."

Mr. CELLER. I thank the gentleman. Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield

15 minutes to the gentleman from Florida, the chairman of the Subcom­mittee on Military Construction, who conducted some of the hearings on this bill.

Mr. SIKES. Mr. Chairman, let me stress the fact that the Committee on Appropriations has been ready to bring this bill to the floor for several weeks. Under the able direction of the distin­guished gentleman from Texas, hearings were initiated immediately after the re­quest for funds for the Vietnam war was received. There is no disposition to with­hold any funds which are needed to in­sure victory. And ours is a bipartisan ef­fort. This is in some measure a guess. But it is the best estimate which is avail­able. We have to trust someone. We are placing our trust in the recommenda­tions of the Nation's military leaders.

Now the gentleman from Texas has spoken at length about the state of readi­ness of our military forces when the con­frontation began and it is in fact a remarkable and commendable situation. But let us not disregard the continued efforts of district leaders in the Congress like the gentleman from Texas and many others to make this situation true.

I regret to state to the membership that those who attempt to read the hear­ings, wlll find them in considerable part useless. The testimony has been so heavily censored, much of it incompre­hensible. Some of this is ridiculous. It serves only to confuse the Congress and the American people. Some of the cen­sored material has subsequently been released in uncensored form by other committees, or even by Pentagon officials. This makes a mockery of the efforts of this committee to cooperate on security matters.

Now let us talk about the blll. I shall confine myself primarily to the con­struction problem on which separate hearings were held. As the House knows, the logistics problem in the Southeast Pacific is unbelievably large. Logistics is and has been the limiting factor. We are supplying large forces, 12,000 miles away from home, halfway around the world.

Last fall the U.S. forces were built up to more than 200,000. This was neces­sary to stem the tide of victory which was rolling for Communist forces. They nearly won the war before we realized and acted on the threat.

:But· it was . also .thought that we were putting enough forces · into -Vietnam · to . permit government forces to win. We underestimated e·nemy capabilities. · They were building up too-men and equipment. The· Ho Chi Minh trail was , improved and develop.ed into ·a road ~ys­tem capable of delivering large quantities of supplies. Food was no problem. The Communists were living off the Vietnam rice crop and they still are, because they hold most of the countryside.

To win a war you must be prepared to deny territory to the enemy. The victorious sweep of United States and Vietnamese forces !nto enemy held coun­tryside are in most instances, followed by withdrawal to secure areas, and the Communists roll right back as we leave.

To insure the defeat of expanding enemy. forces and to secure and hold ter­ritory now in Communist hands, we must have additional forces in Vietnam. We are now in the process of doubling their number.

That means doubling the logistics problem. We need port facilities, air­fields, encampments, storage facilities. In December, when I saw the area work on some of the facilities then needed for 200,000 men, had not begun. On others, the percentage of completion was ex­tremely small. The overall job is running a year behind schedule. This is not the fault of the construction team. They are doing an outstanding job. The enormity of their task is the main prob­lem and it is staggering in scope. Let us not take away credit for the work which has been done.

The construction of essential opera­tional, logistical, and support facilities are a pacing factor in the deploynient of allied forces and the conduct of mili­tary operations in southeast Asia. The nature of the terrain, the paucity of operational bases and the lack of national ports and other supply and logistical facilities in that area have resulted in a major construction effort if we are to adequately support our military require­ments. In addition, backup and train­ing requirements have generated other urgent construction needs in other areas of the Pacific and in the United States. The amount of $417,700,000 has been made available to date in support of this program. Additional funds in the total amount of $1,238,400,000 are rec­ommended in the accompanying bill. This brings the total to date to $1,656,-100,000 for construction.

This is broken down as follows: Appropriations i.n support of southeast Asia

to date [In millions]

Country Army Navy Air Force

Total

-----·---------Vietnam__ ___________ $115. 2 $78. 2 $77. 6 $271. 0 Philippines __________ -------- 21.4 7. 'l 29.1 Guam _______________ ------ - - • 5 1. 6 2.1 Wake ___ _____________ -------- ----- --- . 7 . 7 United States________ 7. 0 -------- -------- 7. o· Various______________ 40.0 17.5 50.3 107.8

TotaL_________ 162.2 117.6 137.9 -417.7

· Recommended 'i-n ·accoinpany·ing bill_; Program - ·

(In millions]

Country Army Navy Air· Total Force

-------1----1---------Vietnam-------"----- $407:5 .$207.1 - $128.0 - $7~Z. 6

.~~g~~~~~========== ======~=· -~: ~ - ~: g r~: ~ United States________ 34. 1 24.3 ---5. 0 63.4 Other---------------- 138. 3 24.4 . 174. 1 336.8 Planning_______ _____ 29.8 14. 9 (1) 44.7

TotaL _________ 609.7 304.6 324.1 1, 238.4 .

1 Distributed by country.

Appropriation [In millions]

Army ___________ .;. ___ .:, ______ . __ -----~avy _____________________________ _

Air Force--------------------------Defense emergency fund __________ _

$509 . 7 254.6 274.1 200.0

TotaL---------------·------- 1, 238. 4_ Appropriations and recommendations to

date SUM¥ARY

[In millions]

ArmY----------------------·------- $671.9 ~aVY------------------------------ 372.2 ArrForce-------------------------- 412.0 Defense emergency fund----------- 200.0

TotaL---------------·------- 1, 656. 1

In the past, there has been a serious lack of central authority and coordina­tion in the construction efforts. Effec­tive coordination between the construc­tion and operational programs has been limited. The recent establishment of a general officer position on the staff of the Military Advisory Command in Viet­nam to effectuate this coordination should assist in overcom-ing the problem. But vigorous efforts still must be made to properly coordinate the construction effort and make it fully responsive to operational requirements.

An ess-ential portion of the construc­tion problem is the lack of sufficient skilled labor forces in South Vietnam to meet the military construction effort which is needed. The present contractor effort is -requiring all of the available local labor force- plus generating a re­quirement for the use of foreign labor which naturally adds to the cost. The construction battalions of the Navy and the Army are doing heroic work in their activities there. Theirs is one of the outstanding contributions. If the es­calated construction program is to be successfully implemented, there is a need for more troop construction battalions from both the Navy and the Army. The requirement for these troops will be ac­centuated as additional facilities become operational and it becomes necessary to maintain them with troop labor. In order to meet the overall requirement for the construction and maintenance of facilities, steps now are being taken to double the troop construction .units in South Vietnam . . However, this is not enough. Through the use ,of oz:tiy a part. of the Reserve Engineer . Construction Battalions and Navy S.ea~ Battaiton~· for which equipment is .available-the number o{ these forces ·in the southeast

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5809 Pacific can be doubled again. -To do this would save lives and time ·and money. This is one of the most important steps which could be taken, but there are no indications it is going to be done.

Now, this is a costly program. This is not the end of it.

It is no time to get careless on costs, and there always is the temptation to do so when money is readily available in unlimited amounts from Congress. It is the attitude of Congress that Ameri­ca's fighting men must have whatever they need to :fight · a war. But this is not an invitation for the Pentagon to spend recklessly or wastefully. I am very

- much afraid that time wm reveal that there is waste and reckless spending in some instances. I give you one illustra­tion which applies to the bill as a whole. The Army has contracted to buy a light observation helicopter in considerable numbers for $19,000 each per airframe. But in the program before you the Army proposes to buy the same helicopter with slight changes from the same manufac­turer for $47,000 each. The Army does not even seek to take full advantage of an option to buy additional helicopter~ at the contract price of $19,000. A compet­ing firm with a helicopter which is essen­tially the same recently offered to pro­vide helicopters at $29,800 each. I am convinced that today there are a num­ber of firms which would welcome an op­portunity to provide helicopters at a :fig­ure much lower than $47,000. This is an inexcusable situation. Here is a place where heads should roll. And · there may well be other instances. The Pentagon should launch its own investi­gations to determine that the specter of waste and careless purchasing does not belie the sacrifices of those who serve on the :fighting front. I can tell you that this committee, through its chairman, has notified the Pentagon of our strong

· concern about the case in point. The Committee still is deeply con­

cerned that the programed expanded labor force and improved construction capability will be insufficient to meet the construction requirements. Continuing effort must be made to provide the con­struction capability in South Vietnam necessary to support operational and lo­gistical requirements. To do less would seriously jeopardize the efforts our mili­tary forces are making to achieve the victory and peace desired by this Nation.

There also is a tendency to utilize peacetime financial and programing procedures in the military construction program in South Vietnam. Steps have recently been taken to broaden these procedures so as to provide additional flexibility in the program. The Commit­tee is concerned that these changes might not be sufficient to meet the rll­quirements for the proper implementa­tion of the program. It will be expected that the Department of Defense will con­tinually examine this phase of the pro­gram to_ insure that the nec.essazy flexi­bility is provided within the overall con­struction program to meet chan'ging tac­tical and logistical requirements and to provide a responsive and progressive program.

There has been a tum for the better in the :fighting in Vietnam. The Saigon government shows more stability than at any time since the Diem regime. There is now recognition 'of the necessity to face up to the problem of winning over the people o:( the villages and hamlets­many of whom have been Communist­dominated for years.

These things may well give riSe to a feeling at home that the problem of Vietnam has essentially been solved­that victory is near. This would be dan­gerous thinking indeed. The biggest casualty lists of the war are coming in now. We ~ave far to go. · We must never forget we are in a war-a dirty, dangerous war which soon will involve nearly half a million American :fighting men. They must have the solid backing of the Ameiican people and the Congress.

It also is a time for soul searching efforts in the Pentagon to insure that the right decisions ate being made. There is no time to hold back the forces or the methods which can help to insure an early victory.

Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair­man, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

The CHAIRMAN. Evidently, a quo­rum is not present. The Clerk will call the roll.

The Clerk called the roll, and the fol­lowing Members failed to answer to their names:

Adair Baring Bell Bolling Brock Brown, Calif. Clawson, Del Collier Conyers Davis, Ga. Derwinski Devine Dowdy Downing

[Roll No. 37] Ellsworth Everett Fraser Fuqua Hagen, Calif. Halleck Harvey, Ind. Holifield Howard McCarthy Martin, Ala. Martin, Nebr. Mathias Matthews

Mosher Pool Powel! Reinecke Roncalio Roudebush Sisk Steed Teague, Tex. Toll Walker, Miss. Willis

Accordingly, the Committee rose; and the Speaker pro tempore, Mr. ALBERT, having assumed the Chair, Mr. WRIGHT, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, re­ported that that Committee having had under consideration the bill, H.R. 13546, and finding itself without a quorum, he had directed the roll to be called, when 391 Members responded to their names, a quorum, and he submitted herewith the names of the absentees to be spread upon the Journal.

The Committee resumed its sitting. The CHAffiMAN. The gentleman

from Texas [Mr. MAHON] has 54 minutes remaining; and the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Bow] has 1 hour and 15 minutes remaining.

Mr. BOW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15 minutes to the gentleman from Wiscon­sin [Mr. LAIRD].

Mr. LAmD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in support of the defense appropriation subcommittee . report on this supple­mental appropriation for the fiscal year 1966 in the amount of -$13.1 billion.

The support of those of us on the mi­nority side of the Committee on Appro­priations for this bill is predicated on the necessity and the awareness that these

funds must be provided in order to back up our :fighting men in Vietnam.

I would like to point out to the Mem­bers of the House, Mr. Chairman, that this is not the last supplemental appro­priation that we will be considering for the Department of Defense for the fiscal year 1966. Submitted to the Congress under a transmittal that came up here entitled District of Columbia supple­mental appropriations for 1966, just the other day, there is contained almost an­other billion dollars in appropriation requests for the Department of Defense for fiscal year 1966 to . handle military pay alone.

Those of us on the minority side of the Hoilse back when the defense appropria­tion bill for 1966 was before the Congress pointed out that no funds were included in the 1966 budget statement last Jan­uary to cover the cost of escalating the war in Vietnam.

I would like to say today that although this supplemental is before us today, this coupled with the 1967 budget for the Department of Defense will not finance current plans and contingencies for the :fighting in Vietnam through the remain­ing portion of the fiscal year 1966 and the fiscal year 1967.

As the chairman of our committee so ably said, this supplemental has to be considered along with the 1967 budget for the Department of Defense. It should be pointed out here on the floor of the House today that the 1967 budget was out of date 2 days after it was submitted to this Congress. It was out of date because the manpower ceiling so far as the Department of the Army is concerned was removed 2 days after the budget was submitted to the Congress by the President of the United States.

Those of us working with the Depart­ment of Defense budgets know full well that additional funds will be needed in 1966 as well as in 1967 in order to finance the commitment of the United States not only in Vietnam, but to maintain our present worldwide commitments sup­ported by this administration which were so ably set forth by the Secretary of State in his appearance before the For­eign Relations Committee of the U.S. Senate just 10 days ago.

Mr. Chairman, on March 4, 1966, the Department of State issued through the office of its legal adviser an important document entitled, "The Legality of U.,S. Participation in the Defense of Viet­nam."

The document was prepared to com­bat the persistent criticism from certain Democratic Members of the Congress that this Nation is acting illegally in using American military power in Viet­mtm.

With the major thesis of this docu­ment, I have no quarrel. A compelling case for the right of the United States under international law to use its mili­tary forces to assist in the defense of South Vietnam against aggression can certainly be made.

I am grieved, however, to find that the State Department chose to distort history in this publication when it came to explain the commitments which have resulted in the involvement of the United

5810 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-·~ .HOQSE March .ts; 1966

States in the war · in Vietnam. The dis­tortion is of two kin_ds. First, the docu­ment ignores completely · some highly relevant facts. Second, it misleads by failing to analyze fully the declarations which it cites, sometimes conveying thereby a false impression of their import.

In summary, this document argues that the present military involvement of the Nation in Vietnam was made necessary by pledges made by President Eisenhower and President Kennedy. It does not cite a single utterance by Presi­dent Johnson. It suggests that the pres­ent administration had nothing at all to do with any commitment to Vietnam.

This document contains a section of 6 pages headed, "The United States Has Undertaken Commitments To Assist South Vietnam in Defending Itself Against Communist Aggression from the North." The evidence which it then presents to prove the existence of the commitment of the Eisenhower admin­istration is the following: the statements of President Eisenhower at the end of the Geneva Conference of 1954, the SEATO treaty, the assistance given by the United States to South Vietnam after the Geneva Conference, and a joint com­munique issued by Eisenhower and Diem on May 11, 1957. This is followed by a citation of two statements made by President Kennedy on August 2, 1961, and December 14, 1961.

Then, abruptly, the State Depart­ment's history of the commitment of the United States to South Vietnam ends.

Equally strange is the section of this document captioned, "Actions by the United States and South Vietnam Are Justified Under the Geneva Accords of 1954." The actions of the United States which are described in this section are the supply of "considerable military equipment and supplies from the United States prior to late 1961" and the estab­lishment of an American Military Assist­ance Advisory Group of "slightly less than 900 men" in Saigon. Further the document relates:

The United States found it necessary in late 1961 to increase substantially the num­bers of our military personnel and tlie amounts and kinds of equipment intro­duced • • • int~ South Vietnam.

And there, abruptly, the State Depart­ment ends its account . of the military action of the United States in South Vietnam.

If some future catastrophe were to de­stroy every written record of the rela­tions of the United States and Vietnam during the 1950's and 1960's except the State Department's publication, "The Legality of United States Participation in the Defense of Vietnam,', the historian who tried to reconstruct the facts from this document would write something like this:

Two Presidents of the United State&­~residents Eisenhower and Kennedy-in­volved their Nation in a war to defend South Vietn.a.m against aggression from North Viet­nam. Their pledges of support to South Vietnam led to the sending of military sup­plies, to the dispatch of 900 mllitary advts-

ers, and in 1961 to the commitment of sub- action to be . taken in the event an armed stantial numbers of AIJlerican troops. · · attack occurs.

This confiict may have been going on in Vietnam as late as 1966 under another Presi- Further, Mr. DUlles said: dent of. the United States . whooe name is The treaty does not .attempt to get into not recorded. In '!!hat year the Department t~e dl.filcult question as to precisely how we of State issued a document upholding the act. · · legality of the actions of Presidents lll!sen.;; hower and Ken.tledy. · On the :floor of the· Senate 1n the de-

bate on ratification of. the SEATO agree-Mr. Chairman, this manipulation of m t F b · 1 9

history should give us all deep concern·. en ' on · e ruary · ·· ·!· ~ 55t- S~rui.tQr Smith, of New Jer~:;ey, ~learly explained When our Department of State releases the .nature of the commitment in these a report of this kind, I fear we are closer words: to 1984 than the calendar indicates. This · h k" Some of the participants came to Manila 1s t e md of propaganda that makes it with the intention of establishing an orga:.. difficult for the administration to estab- nization modeled on the lines of the North lish its credibility. This is playing poll- Atlantic Treaty arrangements. That would tics with Vietnam. have been a compulsory arrangement for our NO COMMITMENT OF COMBAT TROOPS UNDER military participation in case Of any attack.

EISENHOWER Such· an organization might have required the commitment of American ground forces

If the State Department document of to the Asian mainland. we carefully avoided March 4 were the only instance of dis- any possible implication regarding an ar­tortion of history on the part of the rangement of that kind. administration in explaining why Amer- We have no purpose of following any such lean troops are fighting in Vietnam, it policy as that of having our forces involved might be forgotten. But time after time, in a ground war. d . · t t" Under this treaty, each party recognizes a mm1s ra 10n spokesmen, including the that an armed attack on any country within President, have sought to make it appear the treaty area would endanger its own peace that the steps taken since November of and safety. Each party, therefore, agrees to 1963 were forced upon it by commitments act 'to meet the common danger in accord·­of earlier administrations. ance with its constitutional processes. That

President Johnson, for example, said means, by implication, that if any such on August 3, 1965: emergency as is contemplated by the treaty

should arise in that area it will be brought Today the most difficult problem that con- before the Congress by the President and

fronts your President is how to keep .an the administration, and will be considered agreement that I did not initiate-! inherited under our constitutional processes. we are it-but an agreement to help a small nation not committed to the pnnciple- of NATO, remain independent, free of aggression-the namely, that an attack on one is an attack nation of South Vietnam. . on all, calling for immediate military action

Earlier the President and others in his without further consideration by Congress. administration were in the habit of cit- For ourselves, the arra:l;lg~ment . means that ing a letter written by President Eisen- we will have. avoided tl;le impr~ctic~ble over-commitmen,t which. wo.ulc;i b,ave been in-bower to Diem on October 1, 1954, as "the volved if we attempted to. place .American commitment." This letter was nothing ground forces arou:qd the ·perunetei of the more than an expression of willingness area of potential Chinese ingress into south:. to discuss ways and means of aiding Viet:. east Asia. Nothing in this treaty calls· for nam if the Diem regime made certain re- the use of American ground forces in that forms. · · fashion.

More recently, the administration has The speaker, Senator H. Alexander · been using the SEA TO treaty of 1954 as Smith, was a member of the U.S. delega­the source of the commitment. tion to the Manila Conference and a

This treaty was not a commitment to signer of the SEATO agreement. send American troops to fight in south- One academic authority, W. McMahon east Asia. It carefully avoided the kind Ball, has written: of automatic response to aggression em- The treaty does not oblige the United bodied in the NATO agreement, sum- States either legally or morally to take any marized in the principle, "An attack up- course in southeast Asia than the course it on one is an attack upon all.'' might be expected to take if the treaty did

Section 1 of article IV of the SEA TO not exist. agreement reads: Article IV .of the Southeast Asia Col-

t. Each party recognizes that aggression lective Defense Treaty clearly reserves by means of armed attack in the treaty area to each signatory the right to determine against any of the parties or against any the nature of its response to armed ag­state or territory which the parties by gression and does not commit in advance unanimous agreement may hereafter desig- any signatory to use its armed forces to nate, would endanger its own peace and d safety, and agrees that it wm in that event eal with the aggressor. act to meet the common danger in accord- Recognizing this fact, the Kennedy ad-ance with its constitutional processes. Meas- ministration did not use American forces ures taken under this paragraph shall be to repel Communist aggression in Laos. immediately reported to the Security Coun- The legal commitment of the United ell of the UD:~ted Nations. States to South Vietnam is the same as

Secretary Dulles, testifying before the its commitment to Laos. Both of these Senate Foreign Relations Committee on countries of southeast Asia were brought the SEATO treaty, declared: under the protectiort ·of SEATO.

The agreement o! each of 1;he parties to Lyndon Johnson 'as · Vice President act to meet the commo~ danger in accord- made it clear in 1961' that the United ance with its constitutional processes leaves States had not up · to that time com­to the judgment o! each country the type o! mitted its.elf to an obligation that would

March· 1-5; 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE . '5811 require employment of its military force~. In a memorandum to President Kennedy dated May 23, 1961, right after his return from a tour of Asia, Johnson wrote:

The fundamental decision required of the United States--and time is of the greatest importance-is whether· we are to attempt to meet the challenge o~ Communist ex­pansion now in southeast Asia by a major e1fort in support of the forces Qf freedom. in the area or throw in the towel. This deci­sion must be made in a full realization of the very . heavy and continuing costs in­volved in terms of money, of effort, and of U.S. prestige. It must be made with the knowledge that at some point we may be faced with a further decision of whether we commit major U.S. forces to the area or cut our losses and withdraw should our efforts fail. We must remain master of this deci-sion.

Finally, Gen. Maxwell Taylor in testi­mony before 'the Senate Foreign Rela­tions Committee on February 17, 1966, demolished the argument that there was any commitment to employ American troops in combat under the Eisenhower administration in the following exchange with Senator BOURKE HICKENLOOPER of Iowa: ·

Senator HICKENLOOPER. Now, up until the end of the Eisenhower administration, we \lad only about 750 military personnel in South Vietnam, did we not?

General TAYLOR. It was very small, some­thing like that.

Senator HICKENLOOPER. I think that is . Within 25 or 30 Of the number, either way,

and they were entirely de:voted to giving tech­nical ·advice on training to the South Viet­namese troops.

General TAYLOR. That is correct. Senator HICKENLOOPER. To your knowl­

edge, did we have any commitment or agree­ment with the South Vietna:rp.ese _up ~ that. time that we would put in active field mili­tary forces to conduct a war along with them?

General TAYLOR. No, sir. Very clearly we made no such commitment. We didn't want such a commitment. This was the last thing we had in mind.

Senator HxcKENLOOPER. When was the commitment made for us to actively partici­pate in the military operations of the war as American personnel?

General TAYLOR. We, insofar as the use of our combat ground forces are concerned, that took place, of course, only in the spring of 1965. .

In the air, we had been participating more actively over 2 or 3 years.

When President Eisenhower left the White House, there were no American troops in South Vietnam. There were only approximately 700 military advisers. When President Eisenhower left the White House, there was no commitment to send American troops to South Vietnam. ·

Under President Kennedy, the first American combat casualties occurred in December 1961. Although President Kennedy increased the number of U.S. military personnel in Vietnam to 17,000, the American forces were there pri­marily to advise, not to :fight.

The New York Times. of August 19, 1965, correctly stated the case when it said: · ·

The shift from military assistance and combat advice to direct participation by American combat troops in the Vietnamese

war has • • • been a unilateral American decision * • * by President Johnson.

T~E HONOLULU COMMITMENT I find it unbelievable that a State De­

partment document dated March 4, 1966, purporting to explain the commitment of this Nation in South Vietnam could avoid mention of the Honolulu declaration of February 8, 1966. For part IV of that declaration is entitled "The Common Commitment." It reads:

The President of the United States and the Chief of State 'and Prime Minister of the Republic of Vietnam are thus pledged again to defense against aggression, to the work of &ocial revolution, to the goal of free self­government, to the attack on hunger, igno­rance, and disease, and to the unending quest for peace. ·

These are important and we~ghty com­mitments. Yet they go unreported in the State Department's survey of the commitment of the Government of the United States to South Vietnam.

Mr. Chairman, I do not mean here to be critical of the actions of the President with relation to Vietnam. I simply plead that, when the administration undertakes to defend itself against critics in the President's party, it present the facts and all the facts. Let the admin­istration acknowledge is decisions as its own and justify its actions on their merits. ·

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chah:man, I yield myself 2 minutes.

Mr. Chairman, the able gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. LAIRD] has made reference to the historical background of the war in Vietnam.

I believe that if a look backward re­veals anything it reveals our difficulties in South Vietnam have been · nonparti­san in nature. The actions which this country has taken have been actions taken in defense of the security of the United States and have not been moti­vated in my opinion by political con­siderations.

The war by the Vietnamese against the French began in 1946. In 1950 we began to give some assistance to the French in an effort to try to conclude successfully this war. The French finally capitu­lated .. We began to provide aid to the South Vietnamese against aggression in Vietnam in 1950. In 1954 or 1955 we began to provide foreign aid, direct mili­tary and economic, to the people in Viet­nam who were :fighting for freedom.

Mr. Chairman, during this time anum­ber of negotiations took place. Mr. Dul­les was very instrumental as Secretary of State in negotiating the SEATO treaty. In this treaty, to which we sub­·scribe, the United States undertook an international obligation to help defend South Vietnam against aggression.

The treaty said: Each party recognizes that aggression by

means of armed attack in the treaty area .!1-gainst any of the parties or against any state or territory which the parties by unan­imous agreement might hereafter desig­nate, would endang(lr its own peace and safety, and agrees that it will in that event act to meet the common danger in accord­ance wit~ constitutional processes--

And so forth. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the

gentleman from Texas has expired.

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield mysel{ 2 additional minutes.

'So, Mr. Chairman, we recognized early that the security aJld well-being of the United States was heavily involved in southeast Asia.

Mr. LAIRD. ~r. Chairman, will the gentleman yield on that point in the treaty?

Mr. MAHON. I yield to the gentleman from Wisconsin.

Mr. LAIRD. I would like to discuss that point.

Mr. MAHON. I do not want to dis­cuss it in detail, but I want to briefly re­fer to the history of this situation in which we found ourselves and · in which

· both our political parties and all admin­istrations have stood out against aggres­sion, and properly so, in southeast Asia.

Mr. i.AIRD. If my distinguished col­league, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. MAHON] will yield to me, I would like to state that I am sure he agrees with me that the State Department document is not correct in its interpretation of our present commitment in Vietnam.

I would like to quote from the testi­mony of Secretary of State John Foster Dulles when he discussed this particular section to which the gentleman from Texas alludes at this point.

When Secretary Dulles testified before the Senate Foreign Relations Commit­tee on this particular section he declared:

The agreement of each of the parties to act to meet the common danger in accord­ance with its constitutional processes leaves to the judgment of eac4 country the type of action to be . taken in the event an armed attack occurs.

Now, Mr. Chairman, this is quite dif­ferent from the language which is in­cluded in the NATO agreement, when the NATO agreement comes out as an attack on one is an attack on all.

Mr. Chairman, I am placing in the RECORD a discussion of the definition that Secretary Dulles made very clearly be­tween the SEATO and the NATO agree-ments. -

The point of my remarks is not to ques­tion the SEATO agreement. It is to question the interpretation used by our State Department to justify military ac­tion in Vietnam today, on the basis of that treaty, because I believe that treaty is not the basis for justifying direct mili­tary action by one country -in the treaty organization without consent of all countries.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Texas has again ex­pired. . Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 additional min~tes. · . · We, it is true, were not specifically committed by the treaty to send Ameri­can troops to war. · We all know that as a result of Communist aggression the sit­uation in Vietnam has continued to worsen. The SEATO agreement is, of course, available for all to interpret. I do not undertake at' the moment to get into the details of the treaty.

Now, in 1959 Mr. Eisenhower said-and correctly, in my judgment:

Unassisted Vietnam cannot at this time produce and support the military formations essential to it or, equally important, the morale-the hope, the confidence, the pride-

5812. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD·-- HQUS~ March. 15, 1966.

necessary to meet the dual threat o:t aggres- Congress to be reappropriated, or io·be sion !rom without and subversion wit_hin its simply transferred by the Department. borders. The point I make is that any planning

strategically, south Vietnam's capture by and any actions that may have been the Communists would bring their power several hundred miles into a hitherto :tree taken by the Department of Defense region. The remaining countries in south- have been for reasons other than that east Asia would be menaced by a great flank- funds were not available, because they ing movement. • • • The loss of South Viet- have been and are now available. nam would set in motion a crumbling process There is a substantial need for the bill that could, as 1t progressed, have grave con- that is before you, not because the money sequences for us and for freedom. is not available if handled through chan-

In the period 1953-57, during the nels, but this -represents a projection of Eisenhower administration-this Gov- the .action expected to be taken by the ernment provided $1,100 million in a1d to Defense Department in connection with Vietnam in an effort to stop aggression. Vietnam for which we are making funds But thJs was only partially successful. available in this bill.

This aid continued throughout the Again, it is not because there is no Eisenhower administration and then un- · money-it is because these projects, the der the Kennedy administration and con- acquisition of materiel and other actions, tinues under the Johnson administration. will cost money, and we are providing The problem finally culminated in this the money to do this job as we go along. war which is being fought out of neces- THERE ARE MANY cAusEs sity, growing out of the commitments I have served on this committee most and the facts of life as they existed in of the time since 1943, or at least one seg-1950 and 1954 and ever since that time ment of it, and I · think this matter of under all administrations. going into the cause, while it is academic

This is not a partisan war. It is a war in some respects, in many ways would brought about by necessity to preserve be well insofar as deciding where we go the interests of the United States in from here. It is my personal view, and southeast Asia. may I say the leaders on both sides of the

We want to help the people in South aisle differed with me then and · they Vietnam. That is true, but we also must differ with me now-but if I were to look look out after our own self-interests. for the cause, I would go back to the pe­The purpose of this bill today is to safe- riod after World War II when we went guard our own self-interests, the best in- around the world telling practically every terests of the United States. nation which would listen, "we will take

Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 minutes to care of you-we have the atomic bomb." the gentleman from Mississippi [Mr. We made those commitments in many WHITTEN]· places where, subsequently, it has become

Mr. WHITTEN. Mr. Chairman, first apparent we simply cannot carry out may I say that it has been my privilege such promises, especially since others to serve under the chairman of the full now have the atomic bomb. committee and of this subcommittee for Yes, if I were to look for the cause, I many years. It has been my privilege to would remember that we went through a serve with other members of the sub- period when the Congress and the Ameri­committee both on the minority and on can public thought all we needed was the· the majority side. It has been my ex- atomic bomb. To a great degree we quit perience that never has there been a time producing conventional weapons and we throughout all these years when this reduced our efforts for maintenance of country and this Congress could not look our defenses to the point where one of to these gentlemen to see that finances the top people in our Air Force said we are provided to enable this Nation to were giving little training to our flyers meet its national defense needs in any in dropping ordinary bombs, because we mllltary area, where we may have to had been lured into feeling we could. exercise our might. drop a big bomb and that would be it.

Certainly if we have erred through the Unfortunately, today we are in the midst years, It has been on the side of making of a war; and we are using conventional absolutely certain that adequate funds weapons. are available. May I say that our hear- If I were to look further as to there­ings have a1ways been full and in great sponsibility, I would see that the leaders detail. So that there will be no mis-understanding here, I would repeat of both parties have followed a common again that you know and I know that all foreign policy ~hrough the years right up

until this moment. of us, without exception, will be sup- If I looked at Cuba, I would realize porting and defending our men in serv-ice whatever policy our Government de- there is enough fault to be found, looking · cides upon in Vietnam. backward, to include both parties and

I might say further, as I pointed out their leaders. last year in our report, the matter of full If I looked at many other areas, I would funding of approved requests of the De- see somewhat the same situation. fense Department has many weaknesses. A sTALEMATE zs No VICTORY But it has some advantages. Last year. But what we have here, Mr. Chairman. for instance, as our committee reported, is more serious than that. The question and as it exists today substantially, we is, Where are we and what are we going have $30 bi111on in unexpended funds to to do about it? Here we are halfway the credit of the Department of Defen.Se. around the world, as my good friend, the We had some $9 billion not even obli- gentleman from Florida [Mr. SIKES] gated a year ago. All of that money said, with a 10,000-mile supply line and would be subJect to the decision of the engaged in battle in an area where hu-

man life means vei:-y little to the enemy, and where they can carry sufficient-sup­plies for guerrilla warfare on their backs. We are engaged in a deadly conflict at the end of a 10,000-mile supply line. Both parties have followed policies which have ended in this ·situation, though I am sure no one •intended it.

We :find-and the record will support this-that Haiphong Harbor in North Vietnam is an open harbor. Through Haiphong Harbor 80 percent of the sup­plies being used by our enemy in South Vietnam are passing and, with the excep­tion of several small countries, along with Communist nations our so-called friends are continuing to ship to our enemies through Haiphong Harbor.

Yes, if we carry the matter a little bit further, on the question of winning the war I agree we must win; but we must decide what it is to win. What does to win mean to us? To me it cannot be a maintenance of the status quo. Here is a little 100th-rated power, North Viet­nam, pulling the biggest power in the w'orld around by the nose day after day. It leads me, as an individual, to feel that the Vietcong may be winning as long as they can maintain the status quo and actually feel that they are. This we must stop and the first start, to me, appears to be to stop the inflow of materiel to our enemy.

We will supply this money. We argue about financial budgets. We want to keep waste down. We want to be econ­omy minded in handling appropriations. But in World War II I well remember that when war materiel was sent to for­ward theaters, it was marked off then and there. That is not the maJor problem that we have. We are reconciled to the fact that these funds will be spent.

We are in an engagement at the end of a 10,000-mile supply line, · with our troops slugging It out, fighting in swamps, attacked by mosquitoes and suf­fering from malaria; fighting under the most trying conditions where it seexns we do not know who our friends are, but where our leaders feel we must remain to show that we will be in southeast Asia.

Speaking for myself alone, if we are to keep our young men there-and our leaders .and our country feel not only a commitment but a present necessity to keep our forces there-we owe it to them to do those things that would cut off the supply line of their enemy, a supply line that to a great degree is fed by folks who are supposed to be our friends.

.-c>REIGN POLICY DETERIORATES

I repeat, the record will show that the only countriP.s which have cut o1f ship­ping to North Vietnam are a relatively few minor ones. We are not stopping that shipping because we think these other countries might not give us the sup­port we want in NATO or so I surmise. But look what has happened, already France has virtually announced her with­drawal from NATO. If you want to second-guess· our policy in the last num­ber of years, look at Africa. The men who had some know-how and brains to govern were forced out by us. It has drifted back to where the men with

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5813 strength to run these little countries, the men we shoved out, have had to be re~ turned for such order as they can effect. -

we started on our present course a ­long time ago. If we look in every direc­tion we can see the mortar cracking. · We can see the high hopes of many ot: our people running out. We can see member nations failing to put up their share in the United Nations.

But all of that is beside the point. We have young men :fighting in a war that is as much a war to them as World War II, and we are hera wondering whether we should do anything to cut off the supplies of the opposition, supplies which are being tran8ported by people supposedly on our side. To me the answer is, we must.

My friends, there is only one side to this approprtatton bill. As I have said, the Defense Department has money that could have been usedr They have money that they could now use. But we are .financing the projection of contracts to supply materiai that it is apparent they are going to need.

There are two or three other things we might say. If we need a base in southeast Asia, might not we have the courage to say so and supply a bas~ as against saying that .we are tcying to let people follow the path of their oWil de~ termination, with all the mixed-up in­formation that we can get on that subject?

I wish to say again that I am for this country. and I know the Members of the Congress are, too. ·I do feel an obliga­tion, having questioned the Secretary of Defense and various others, and I shall put those questions and answers. where · they exist, in the RECORD, to question · present actions or lack of determination to put up.

I feel we have an obligation to question a war in which we are engaged as the result of a f()reign policy participated in by both parties. ·As we do that, we do not have to be hawks or doves. We are 1n a quagmire, and we need to get out of it. It is not for me to say or for you to' say, but it is for all of us to · insist that we take appropriate actiQn, as long as we are in it, to back the men who are there, to determine what we must have for · them and take action to see that an un­tenable situation does not simply go on and on, with resulting loss of life.

If our friends 1n other parts of the world will not stand by us, it is better to :find out such fact. To support my views, I believe questions and answers of the Secretary, pages 51 through 91 of the· hearings would be of interest to you. I read them here:

ADEQUACY OF MILITARY FUNDING Mr. WHI'l"rEN. Mr. ·Secretary, we all are

interested in the overall aspects of this mat­ter, but there are t:wo or three things L think might well appear in the record.

I know last year when you were before us and afterward there was quite a. d11ference of opinion and a d11ference in statements a.s to whether the reduction in the military funds for the Defense Department would result in per~a.ps some ~jury to our defense ca.pa.b111· ties.

CXII.:....-.367-Part 5

The committee, in' view af that, provided or stated in its report and I react from last year's report on page 9:

"Appropriations to finance any such items of urgent need continue available from prior · years in staggering totals. For example, the budget in January 1965 indicated $30,529,· 379,000 total unexpended carryover into fis. cal 1966, of which a. :total of $9,624,627,000 would be :unobligated."

I a.m certain this committee wlll back your request here. I a.m not saying it critically ll: the least.

I think it is well you are here. The point I make here is that the military effort has not suffered from the lack of available :funds if you had seen fit to request the use of these funds to meet your need problem up to this point~

Secretary McNAMARA. I fully support that conclusion, Mr. Whitten. . Mr. WHITrEN. You were before us last year

in connection with the regular defense bill and again on several supplementals, and De­fense Department witnesses have been before U.S numerous times when we have approved a. reprograming request. If you had foreseen the need of the money you are asking for now, you would have asked for it, would you riot? ·

Secretary McNAMARA. Yes. I stated to the committee 1n August · that we foresaw the need for additional funds but for a. number of reasons were not requesting them: (1) we could not predict our needs with cer­tainty, (2) we knew that it would be possible to return in January with a better estimate of those needs, and (3) we felt that the funds which would be available to us in the ori_gina.l fiscal year 1966 budget and the August amendment would carry us through the early part of this calendar year.

Mr. WHITTEN. The pe>int I make is that the defense effort has not suffered from lack of funds either on your part or on the part of Congress. ·

Secretary McNAMAJtA. I fully support that conclusion. · . EI'J'Ecr8 OF BOMBING ON NORTH VIETNAM

Mr. WHrrn:N. Now carrying it one step further, General Wheeler, I a.m trying to make clear in my mind, as I understood you in enumerating the targets in North Viet­nam, that in effect you indicated that insofar as the present military effort is -concerned, where we are having this guerrilla-type wa.r::­fa.r, they were what might be termed sec­ondary targets, in that none of them are su11lciently vital as to cripple the. Vietcong. in their e1forta against south- Vietnam, is that correct?

General WHEELER. That is essentially cor­rect, Mr. WHITTEN. I pointed out the other day when I ran over the entire target sys­tem-1 believe in response to a questie>n from Mr. Sm:Es--tha.t when we talk of industrial · targets in North Vietnam, we are really talk· ing about something that essentially does not exist.

Even so at the levels of confilct in SOuth Vietnam, and with the number of Vietcong and PAVN troops that must be supported, we cannot completely cut off the introduc­tion .of supplies. We can hurt them. We can make it cost them more. We cannot cut o1f the fi«>w of supplies completely~

Mr. WHITrEN. As I understood it either you or the Secretary said, that while there are some changes as a. result of the lull in bombing, rea.Uy it was not as significant a.s we migAt think. That, notwithstanding our bombing, due to the fact it is guerrilla war­fare they could supply the troops they had even by human beings on trails. As lQng -as that was true the bo~bing was not--in line with what you just said-su11lcient to strangle their supply system. - In other words, their_

capabillty of supplying so far exceeds the actual need for the present operation that · they would ,probably have that much if we had kept up bombing. Am I recalling it ap- . proximately correct? . . General WHEELER. I think Mr. McNamara

said the greater part of the statement you ma!ie, Mr. WHITrEN.

Mr. WHITTEN. I am asking this to clarify it if my recollection is not correct.

General WHEELER. (Off the record.) Mr. WHITTEN. Is the chief value of bomb·

ing to prevent a.n enlargement «>f the Viet- · cong operation as of now?

General WHEELER. (Off the record.) Mr. WHITTEN. I a.m not trying to play on

words but if I could reduce it to this --­it is very important to keep them from sup­plying a. much larger force.

General WHEELER. That is my .judgment, Mr. Whitten.

ABILITY TO PROTECT LOCAL POPULATIONS Mr. WHITTEN. On Wednesday, I believe it

was stated that we had received some- benefit from the bombing in that the North Viet­namese had become convinced that they were not safe.

In other words, that the North Vietnamese Government could not protect them from air attacks. · At that time, I could not help but have the thought that the South Vietnamese, by this time, should be equally convinced that we cannot protect them.

Yesterday's Washington Post-and. I am quoting the testimony as I remember it over a. series of years-carried a. story by Jack . Foisie of the Los Angeles Times-and I would have to say that this story reflects the im­pression I have gotten_ from witnesses on your side of the table, and I read it here:

"SAIGON, January 26.-A tJ:.S. spokesman today described the terrorism and sabotage that goes Dn in South Vietnam every night. He emphasized the havoc the VC lnfllct on innocent villagers in the belief that they are pro-Government. But ln. most areas. the vil­lagers would stay neutral if they could. The spokesman also wanted to show what dam­age has been. done by the Vietcong to com­munlca.tions that keep the Government·held a..reas in touch with one another. ·

"The spokesman in doing this also revealed. the Vietnamese-American inability, despite the substantial U.S. buildup that beg~ 10 months ago, to improve the situatie>n i~ the countryside for the uncommitted. peasant. _ Reading from a. summary of reports by American field representatives, the spokes­man estimated that no more than 10 per­cent of the entire Vietnam railroad system is operative because of guerrilla cuts In the line. If true, this is worse than the previous low point of last July, when it was officially . reported only 30 percent was so protected."

Is that approximately correct? General WHEin.n. Mr. WHITTEN, that. arti­

cle is a. series of generalized statements drawn from (off the record).

Mr. WHrrrEN. General, that is all right. I do not mean to appear to be abrupt. We have been briefed a.t the White House. We have been on this committee listening and we have had details. I have yet to hear witnesses say that there is any place where people are perfectly safe. It ma.y be that you are willing te> so state. I am asking these questions after listening to a. lot of people and I have yet to hear anyone say that there is any place there where we are safe from the guerrilla. warfare or from bombs or anything else. Are you willlng to say it?

General WHEELER. I a.m not saying that, sir.

But what I a.m saying is that this article is an overstatement,_ a. generalization of things that can happen a.nyv;(here, tl,le same thing- that can happen 1n W~ington, D.C.

I

5814 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD _. HOUSE When you go out here at· night to get into your car, you can get mugged. But generally speaking, Washington, I believe, is a rea­sonably safe area.

Mr. WHITTEN. Lots of folks in my area kind of draw an analogy between Washing­ton and Vietnam though I · am somewhat surprised at your drawing the same one.

USE OF HUMAN TRANSPORT . There is no need of pursuing that further.

I was trying to get this quite clear. It is my understanding that this supply line which we were talking about to the north is something like a thousand miles long. ·

Of course, one man could not carry 50 pounds a thousand miles. How many points of exchange would there be if the supply lines are so much as a thousand miles long, or do we know?

General WHEELER. We · have a . feel Of it, . let me say that.

(Discussion off the record.) GOVERNMENT DESmED BY PEOPLE OF VIETNAM

Mr. WHITTEN. Carrying that one step fur­ther, now, I keep hearing that our purpose in Vietnam is to allow-and I believe · I quote correctly-allow people to seek their own destiny. The testimony uncontroverted insofar as I recall is that Vietnam has a series of villages---. We have been told that the people in a vmage do not know of any­thing, usually, except their village and the one next to them and do not care. They never have subjected themselves to a cen­tral government, do not know what it is, and do not want one.

Now, when we insist that they subject themselves to a central government, how can you say that is permitting people to seek ·their own destiny?

Secretary :McJ'iAMARA. Mr. Whitten, a very substantial percentage of the poople do not live in villages. I would guess that at least 15 percent live in large metropolitan areas, perhaps more than that.

Mr. WHITTEN. I will limit my question .to the other 85 percent.

Secretary McNAMARA. I would · say at least 15 percent. It may well be more.

Second, I do not think it accurately reflects the situation i~ Vietnam to say that the peo­ple, generally, do not know of anything other than the affairs of their own village plus the affairs of the adjacent village.

Mr. WHITTEN. I may have oversimplified my words.

Secretary McNAMARA. I am sure that is not the situation there.

Mr. WHITTEN. I do not want to change the meaning of witnesses who are supposed to be equally well informed.

secretary McNAMARA. I do not know which witnesses you are speaking of, but I would be happy to review their testimony. Based on my own knowledge of the situation that is not·an accurate assessment of the breadth of concern and awareness of the people in the countryside. I .have visited literally hun­dreds of villages there, and I can testify from

. personal experience that ·some of ·the people in the villages, at least those that I have talked to, are informed of and aware of af­fairs far beyond the limits of their villages. ·rn particular, they are aware of the kind· of an environment in which they would live were North Vietnam to come to dominate their area, and th~y do not wish to live in that kind of environment. We have other evidence to support that conclusion, not the least of which is the movement of people out of these vlllages when the Vietcong come into the area.

There are hundreds of thousands of refu­gees who have left Vietcong-controlled areas because they do not wish to live under that kind of control.

Mr. WHITTEN. I think it well to say right h.ere that the specific witness I was quoting was---. ·

I want to say again I am speaking from recollection. I would not want to tie pre­ceding witnesses to the impression or the understanding I have, but that Is where my understanding came from. I also would like to say to you, as Secretary of Defense, I doubt that you saw too many v1llages in person.

Secretary McNAMARA. On the contrary, I have seen a large number of villagers. I visit­ed Vietnam six times in the last 5 years, and I have visited the countryside widely. I do not pretend to be an expert on Vietnamese affairs, but I do say that based on my per­sonal knowledge it would not be correct to state that the typical villager's knowledge of his national government or its programs is negligible or that his knowledge is limited to the affairs of his own and nearby vmages.

ADEQUACY OF BOMB INVENTORIES Mr. WHITTEN. I probably should have pref­

aced what I said by saying that I just want to understand this.

I am trying to find out where we are and where we are going, and I think the Ameri­can people are, too. I have the utmost sym­pathy for you folks because it is your prime job. Is there any credence to the claim that we stopped this bombing because we were short of bombs?

Secretary McNAMARA. Absolutely none. I will give you the bomb inventories.

(The information request~d is classified and was furnished to the committee.)

SUPPLY SHORTAGES Mr. WHITTEN. Or other supplies? Secretary McNAMARA. Absolutely none. General WHEELER. May I add something

to that? Mr. WHITTEN. I asked the question so you

can get the answer in the record. · Secretary McNAMARA. I appreciate th&t. General WHEELER. I would like to make

a comment,· if I plight, because I think it is pertinent.

I spent 5 days during the Christmas sea­son visiting Vietnam. I visited Army, Navy, Air Faroe, and Marine units both in Vietnam and in Thailand, and I also visited one of the ca.rriers, staying overnight.

I aske<J every re&ponsibie commander thai; I &aw-and I sa.w a great many of them down to battalion level-if their operations had been hampered by shortages or defi­ciencies in consumables. I am talking about alnmunition, POL, et cetera. The answer invariably was no, that they had been able to carry out their combat opera.tions.

Secretaa-y McNAMARA. May I make a fur­ther comment, Mr. WHITTEN, in order to throw light on this subject? I issued -an order to the commanders ---. So every bomb tha.t we would have consumed had we continued to bomb North Vietnam has been ·consumed. It is our estimate or it was our plan, I should say, that during the month of January we would drop 150,000 bombs

That pla.n was nat limited in the slightest degree by bomb shortages.

. Mr. SIKES: ~y I ask one very brief ques­tion? I asked the same question Olf many field commanders and in each instance I was told that there was no essential operation that had been prevented or hindered by lack .

. Off ~pplies. It was stated, however, that the level of

supplies in some areas or in some fields was dropping significantly because of the heavy consumption of supplies and the difficulty of resupplying.

Has that situation been reversed? General WHEELER. I would not say it is

reversed yet, Mr. SIKES. I know that with the improvements that we ha.ve obtained over the last couple of months in unloo.ding and in port clearance and so on, the situa­tion is being corrected and we should get up

to a very swtisfactoiy operational level of backup in the very near future. In fact, I am thinking in terms now of March for sOme items a.nd p!'Ob8.bly June for others.

MILITARY BASE CLOSINGS Mr. WHITTEN. We have been going to great

limits to let the world know that if the Viet­cong do not make peace we are prepared to go all out for whatever is required to get them to the peace table. I listened to Secretary Rusk Sunday afternoon. I have listened here. Since it is very apparent that we are putting on a show of force and a threat of force and a willingness to use it, is there any concern that when you announced a cutback of military bases, that it had any bad effect upon our image in the world?

At that time there were many people, in­cluding me, who, whatever the merits and however it might have been done, w-ondered if to announce this curtailment to the world would indicate that we were weakening.

Did you see any sign of that result'/ Secretary MCNAMARA. Mr. WHITTEN, I have

seen no evidence of such a feeling on the part of any foreign power or in the foreign press.

Mr. WHITTEN. I do not want to cut you off but let me ask you one thing that you might reply to. Is that possibly one of the reasons that they have refused to take advantage of our lull in bombing and come to the peace table. Could that be one of the reasons?

secretary McNAMARA. No sir, it could not be one of the reasons.

Mr. WHITTEN. Why do you say it so flatly? Secretary McNAMARA. Because we do have

indications of the kinds of information get­ting through to them and the kind of infor­mation that influences their actions. I have seen no evidence that the elimination of sur­plus and obsolete military bases-at a time when we are rapidly expanding our budget by announcing a supplemental of $12.3 bil­~lon to the existing budget-has, in any way influenced them.

_Mr. WHITTEN. Couldn't they •take it that we are now waking up and rectifying a mistake? ·

secretary McNAMARA. Are you speaking about the base reduction program as rectify-ing a mistake? ·

Mr.' WHITTEN. And planes, etcetera. Secretary McNAMARA. I do not see how it

would be possible for them to interpret clos-ing obsolete bases as rectifying a mistake. In any event, I can tell you, Mr. WHITTEN, that no expert that I have talked to has ever

· even raised this point much less put any weight on it. As a matter of fact, I had one brought over here from London just last week to discuss w.tth me the reaction of the North Vietnamese.

PREVIOUS JUDGEMENTS ON VIETNAM Mr. WHITTEN. Let me ask two or three

questions and then I shall pass the witness on, Mr. Chairman. Last spring we saw no need for this supplemental. I have in front of me your prior statements, Mr. Secretary. I would not want to read them to you. I would not want mine read to me. I know they were sincere and honest and based on the best information you had. This has not worked out like you folks hoped it would and we had hoped it would. Where have we miscalculated, in your opinion?

secretary McNAMARA. There is an indirect :reference, and I know you were very gentle even in the indirect reference. With respect to my prior statementS--

Mr. WHITTEN. Let me say this, that this committee has backed your judgment so we are in it, too. I am just asking now with hindsight, where can you point your finger and figure that we miscalculated as a group, not just you?

·Secretary McNAMARA. Mr. Chairman, be­cause of the reference to prior statements a~Q in anticipation o! such a reference, I went through my prior statements a few

March 15, -_ 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5815 weeb ago, and I have extracted an the per-tinent parts relating-- .

Mr. WHITTEN. That is all right. Wp.ere would you say we miscalculated? Tha~ is my question. · Don't. get away from my ques• tion.

Secretary McNAMARA. I wlll come to the question. But the .question carries an im­plied reference to prior statements, Mr. Chairman. Therefore, I would ask the per­rilission of the committee to introduce into the record my previous statements· on the war in Vietnam. >plere are 59 of them.

Mr. WHITTEN. I have no objection to that. Mr. MAHoN. Yes. They will be included at

this point. (NoTE.-This information appears in voL

I, pp. 57 to 87 of the hearings.) Mr. WHITrEN. I am making no condemna·

tion for prior-opinion. . Secretary McNAMARA. I understand. I ap­

preciate that your reference was gentle. Mr. Chairman, . the question was, Where was it that we miscalculated?

Mr. WHITTEN. In your opinion. secretary McNAMARA. I do not know if you

should call it a miscalculation. I think it is perfectly clear that the North Vietnamese have continued to increase their support of the Vi,etcong despite the increase in our effort and that of the South Vietnamese. I say that I do not know whether or not this was a miscalculation. If you go through these statements that I have just inserted in the record, or the statements of President Ken­nedy or- those of President Johnson, you will fln,d th~t they repe~tedly .re.fer to this point, namely, that the response required from, :us will _depend to a considerable degree upon the action taken by the aggressor, in this case, the North Vietnamese. We simply cannot predict their actions accurately .. We cannot, therefore_ precUct the amount of force that we will have to bring to bear in order to achieve our political _objective. What has happened is that the North Vietnamese have continually increased the amount of re­sources, men, and material that they have been willing to devote to their objective of. subverting and destroying the political insti­tutions. of South Vietnam. Whether or not you describe the evolution of the situation in Vietnam as a miscalculation, I think is a question of semantics.

Mr. WHITTEN. It has· not turned out like we thought tt would. That is a homely way of putting it, but it has not turned out like we thought it would. Where were we wrong In our thinking? That is bringing it down to a level wher.e we all can understand it.

Secretary McNAMARA. I think i:t was hoped that the South Vietnamese by their own efforts could contain the insurgency that the North Vietnamese has initiated inside South Vietnam. Later, when it became very clear they couldn't, it became necessary for us to supply advisers and substantial amounts of equipment to improve their capability for containing the insurgency. Even with this assistance they couldn't contain the Viet­cong, because the North Vietnamese were continuing to expand their program of send­ing men and material Into the south. ·

Mr. WHITTEN. Let me ask one other ques­tion.

(Off. the record) . Secretary McNAMARA. Let me go back be­

cause I did not finish--Mr. WHITTEN. What is the plan for

winning? Secretary McNAMARA. Let me go back to

the previous question because · I did · not ft'nish my statement with respect to the · changes that have occurred during the past several years which 1n turn, a1fected· the amount of etrort that we have had to put into the struggle.

Mr. WHITTBN. Don't let us forget my ques-tion. · ·

Secretary McNAMARA. I won't. I want to answer one questioJr at a time, however . .•

I think that one event that sig~ifi~!lY. Iniluenced the col.trse of the conflict was-tll,e overthrow of Diem which . was the result of many forces, mqst of . them not within 0~ control. But the Diem overthrow, as much as anything else, affected the course _of the conflict in the following year or two.

'l'his ·factor. plus the continuing fucrease In the amount of effort that North Vietnam applied to their objective caused a continU• lng ~crease· in the amount ·of force whiqh w~ have had to apply in South Vietn~. _

Now your second question, How do we hope to win?

Mi. WHITTEN. How do we plari to win? Secretary McNAMARA. I am answeri~g .the

question as it ~ phrased. PLAN FOR WrNNING THE WAR

Mr. WHITTEN. Let me .change my question, What is our plan to win?

Secretary McNAMARA. All right, what is our plan to win? We plan with the help of the South Vietnamese to apply suftlcient force against the Vietcong and the North Vietnamese m111tary units In the south to prove to them that they cannot win in the south. While doing so, we have applied bombing to the north to increase the cost of their operations in the .south and to re­duce their capability for expanding their operations in the south.

Mr. WHITTEN. Have we not already tried that and faUed, Mr. Secretary?

Secretary McNAMARA. No. We have not faUed, we have not lost.

ECONOMIC COST OF THE WAR Mr. WHITTEN. We have not lost, but we

certainly have not won. I think you are do· 1ng as well as you can with what you have to do in the situation we are in, so I am not being critical-I have yet to find anybody who has a plan to win. We cannot do it by bombing these targets in North Vietnam. I do not know what the relative cost of the war per day in money is to us ·as compared to them. I do know their standard of liv­ing. They carry supplies on their backs. Human beings are almost unlimited in that area of the world. I know it is way around the world from us. Let me interrupt to ask, Have you any comparative dollar cost?

Secretary McNAMARA. No. Mr. WHITTEN. You do not figure war in

money, but I am talking about the d.rain on yeu.r economy. Could you give us any kind of comparison ,as to the relative per day cost to the United States as compared with them?

Secretary McNAMARA. There is no possible means of developing that financially.

Mr. WHITTEN. It would be tremendC'usly greater, would it not?

Secretary McNAMARA. The cost in economic terms 1.s far greater to them than it is to us. One simple indication is that the intelli­gence estimators conclude that they have diverted from thousand men from other pursuits to rebuild the roads and the bridges which our bombing has destroyed. And that particular ~Uversion of the work force is- but a minor part of their cost of carrying on their operations against the south. Out of a .society that has a total adult male popul;ation of perhaps 4 or 5 m1llion, that is a tremendous d.rain for just one part of their war activity. So there is no question but wb,at the rellilotive economic cost to them_ .is far greatE;!r thap. it is to :us.

PLAN FOR· WINNING THE WAR General WHEELER. May I ans:Ner your

question about what is ou.r plan? You said you do not know of a plan.

Mr. WHITTEN. I · would be glad to have you dO-SO. - . . . - . ..

. General WHEEL!lR. Before r tio, though, I would Uke to put. in· on:e ' remark that is

perhaps not completely germane to this. ( Otr the record.) . Mr~ WHITTEN. The closing of bases and

cutting back of the mtlitary. General WHEELER. No, sir. That is :tp.y point . . Now let me go to the

other one if I might. We have actually had in South VIetnam substantial numbers of. U.S. and free world combat forces for about 6 months. You should recognize that even then the weight of etrort has been available only within about the last 2 months.

The Republic of Korea division, for exam· ple, was only available to Gen,er~l Westmore­land in a combat configuration late in the month of November. General Westmoreland has achieved to date, precisely what we esti­mated he would have achieved with these accruals of force; namely, lie has reversed an adverse trend of m111tary events. While he has not yet achieved a momentum which will give him "victory," he actually has just begun his campaign. His concept, which is, I believe, a sound concept and one to which I subscribe, is this--

. Mr. MAHON. You mean the South Viet· namese?

General WHEELER. Yes, sir. (Otr the rec· ord.) It is not going to be a quick process, but it has been successful to date. ·

Mr. WHITTEN. You use the word "win" the war, and it is natural. What do you mean by "win" the war?

General WHEELER. I mean, sir, the political objective set for us by the President; namely, a free and independent Vietnam which can pursue its own destiny unhampered and un· pressured by outside force~, has been met.

EVENTS WHICH WOULD FOLLOW PEACE AGREEMENT ,

Mr. WHITTEN. This is the last question, Mr. Chairman. As you can imagine I -could go on all day and we all could. What if tomorrow Hanoi and the North Vietnamese Government would say that we will agree that the South Vietnamese may go their own way and follow their destiny, w~ether it is In a local village or .in a central government; we will agree that each village that does not want to be subjected to any central govern­ment be like it wants to . be? If they send us that message through channels and it reached you and it reached the White House, what would we do? . Secretary McNAMARA. I am not clear what you said about each v1llage.

Mr. WHITTEN. I said if they agree. Secretary McNAMARA. Pardon me? Mr. WHrrrEN. You said you did not under­

stand. I want to make it clear, Mr. Secre• tary. If they agreed that they would do what we claim we want them- to do.

Secretary McNAMARA. That is not the way it was phrased.

Mr. WHITTEN. I will change it because I am not playing on words. This situation is serious and I think the American people are like me, I do not think they believe that we have a plan to win.

Secretary McNAMARA. Let me say this: If tomorrow, North Vietnam says they will agree to do what we want--

Mr. WHITTEN, What wil~ we do? Secretary McNAMARA. Then, we would plan

to withdraw our forces from South Vietnam as soon as the· North Vietnamese demon: strated that they were sincere and had a re8.1 plan of action for the withd.rawal of their subversive forces and would allow the .Sot,J.'(;h Vietnamese Government to develop, unham• pered, stable political institutions in areas now controlled by the Vietcong. As soon as it was evident that the North Vietnamese were carrying out such a pledge, we would withdraw our fotces and allow the Govern­ment of South Vietnam to work with its people. as ~n_y _ o~~r ~ove;onp1~nt does. .

5816 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 . Mr. WHITTEN. Pending that time we would

insist keeping our people there to enforce it. Secretary McNAMARA. To enforce what? Mr. WHITTEN. To enforce the carrying out

of the agreement. Secretary McNAMARA. We would stay only

to protect the Government and the people of South Vietnam against a violation of the agreement.

Mr. WHITTEN. At this stage, and this is my last question: Haven't they convinced you that there will never be any agreement as long as a part of it is that you insist that you keep your people there to enforce such agreement?

Secretary McNAMARA. No; I do not think that this is a major element of the problem.

Mr. WHITTEN. What is your feeling based on?

Secretary McNAMARA. In the first place we do not insist that we keep our forces there, as you put it. The enforcement of an agree­ment is not part of our proposal, nor have we ever made any public statement to that effect.

Mr. WmTTEN. I thought you told me that is what you would do.

Secretary McNAMARA. No, I simply said-­Mr. WHITTEN. Mr. McNamara, what would

we do then? Secretary McNAMARA. I said that if t 'omor­

row the North Vietnamese pledge that they will do what we want them to do, we will Withdraw our forces as we see evidence in their actions that they are carrying out that pledge. The actions that we would like to see are: the Withdrawal of their military units from South Vietnam and the cessation of their direction and support of the Viet­cong and ,the guerrillas who are attempting to subvert the political institutions in the south. INDICATIONS OF NORTH VIETNAMESE STOPPING

AGGRESSION Mr. WHITTEN. At this stage, having had

your experience and having at least been thwarted in our high hopes--if you do not like the word "miscalculate"-what evidence is there in the actions of the Vietcong, Hanoi, or the North Vietnamese Government, that leads you to have any hopes that they will change their attitude?

Secretary McNAMARA. We see signs of dis­sension among- the political leaders of the north. We see signs of strain on their econ­omy. We know that they see the buildup as ­General Wheeler mentioned a moment ago, of our capability to inflict even higher levels of casualties on the Vietcong and the North Vietnamese. I think it is a reasonable co.n­clusion that at some point these rising casu­alties, and these higher costs, and these in­creasing strains are going to become so great that they Will conclude that they cannot win in the south. When they reach this con­clusion, they will be unwilling to continue to bear the costs of a program that cannot achieve their objectives.

Mr. WmTTEN. I keep wanting to end my questions because I am taking too much time. You say they cannot win and you say we can win because we have not lost.

THE BUDGET-NOT THE MAJOR CONCERN So far as arguments about budgets are

concerned, I served in my State legisla­ture when I was 21. I learned then that a budget represents the highest hopes of the administration for income from . taxes and the greatest expectation for holding down expenditures; and the other side never accepts such estimates and is usually right. I have not s~en any ditJerence here in Congress, either under the Democratic Party or the Republican Party. It works the same as State ad­ministrations.

This argument has very little to do tion, just as they were underestimated with this bill before us now, where we last year, and that there will be supple­are in trouble up to the ears and where mental requests later this year similar we are going to have to take firm steps to the one before us this afternoon. to back the men in the service. This For those of you who have not had an money will be gone when we appropriate opportunity to carefully read the addi­it, but it will be used for an absolutely tiona! views in the report, let me quote essential and necessary purpose. from the summary:

Mr. BOW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10 The growing frequency of reprograming minutes to the gentleman from Ohio actions is of particular concern because it [Mr. MINSHALL]. represents, in effect, a bypassing of Congress

Mr. MINSHALL. Mr. Chairman, I on matters that are often of critical concern. · t rt th 1 t 1 The financing of the war by supplemental

rise o suppo e supp emen a appro- demonstrates a growing ·lack of planning priation of $13.1 billion to back UP our which could, if not altered, produce serious commitment of men and material in risks for the future security of the United South Vietnam. States, and, indeed of the free world.

There is no debating the immediate The growing tendency on the part of com-necessity in approving these funds. In- mittees of Congress to consider grave mat­deed, I predicted as early as last summer ters in perpetual haste can only insure a con­that these funds would be required. I tinued and rapidly increasing loss of control strongly urge unanimous and anticipate ~~t:~:s~ongress over executive decisions and quick approval by the House. Nearly This committee has a vital role to play 300,000 of our American troops in the in insuring an adequate defense posture for Far East are looking to us for prompt the United States. That role cannot be dis­support of their etJorts to defeat Com- charged without full cooperation from the munist aggression. executive branch.

B t b f t t t Nor will it be discharged properly and u , as a mem er o he Depar men effectively until the Congress and its com-

of Defense Appropriations Subcommit- mittees reassert their traditional powers. tee which took initial action on this sup-plemental request, I would be remiss if I strongly subscribe to these senti-! did not call the attention of my col- ments. leagues to the additional views accom- Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield panying the report on the bill before us. to the gentleman from california [Mr. The debate thus far has not given these CORMAN] such time as he may consume. views the attention they deserve. Mr. CORMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise

In these additional views congress- in support of the supplemental defense men LIPscoMB and LAIRD and I point out appropriation for 1966. the diminishing effectiveness of the ap- · Last November I had an opportunity propriations system under the heavy- to visit Marine units in Vietnam. Much handed practices of the Department of of my time was spent with the 3d Marine Defense. Division, the same division I served with

Within the last few years we have in the Second World War. grown increasingly concerned as the De- Unfounded reports have been circu­fense Subcommittee and the Congress lated concerning the adequacy of sup­are relegated more and more to the role plies for our troops. I found that our of rubberstamp in approving the die- servicemen were well equipped with every tates of the Department of Defense. necessary item for the conduct of their

operations. In fact, they are better The appearances of the Secretary of equipped than we were in world war II.

Defense, the Secretaries of the Army, The fact remains that the Marines are Navy, and Air Force, the Joint Chiefs of responsible for the pacification and se­Staff and their backup witnesses, grow more perfunctory each year. The abuse curity of vast land areas in the vicinity of the "top secret" stamp to blank out of Da Nang, Chu Lai, and Hue Phu Bei. politically sensitive portions of their Their objectives cannot be achieved

without more men and support. testimony before the subcommittee is The funds we are asked to approve evermore in evidence. It has reached the point where witnesses have in etJect today will serve a vital function in sup-

plying more men, supplies, and construe­withheld their own views from the com- tion in Vietnam. In addition, this ap­mittee unless pressed, and, when pressed, argue against their own position if it is propriation will speed the activation of

the 5th Marine Division at Camp Pen­contrary to top level Department of De- dleton, Calif. This division, in turn, con-fense policy. stitutes an essential support for our .

We three minority members of the Vietnamese efforts. subcommitte.e f.eel that. a blackout on American and allied personnel in Viet­much essential mformat10n was reach~d nam deserve our strongest backing. The som~ t~e ago as far as. the Ameri~an ' supplemental defense appropriation is publ~c. lS con~erned. It IS approachmg required if the United States is to main­a cntlcal . pom.t .as far as the Defense ; tain our firm policy in resisting com­Subcommittee Is mv?lved. munist aggression. That firm policy is

I call to the attentiOn of the House that our best hope of achieving a negotiated there. were o:r;tlY 2 days of hearings on settlement. the bill we w11l pass today. The sp~ific appropriations for the

It is our strong conviction that insu:ffi- Marine corps are: $184 600 000 for per­cient attention was paid to maintaining sonnel, $102,600,000 fo~ operation and sufficient forces to meet U.S. COII\mtt- maintenance and $516,600,000 for pro­ments in portions of the world other than curement. In each instance I am glad Vietnam. We are convinced that de- to say that our Appropriations Commit­fense needs have been underestimated tee has recommended the full amount in the 1967 budget now under considera- requested by the Department of Defense.

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAi' RECORDv-~ HOUSE 5817 Mr. BOW. Mr. Chainnan, I yield. my­

self such time as I may consume. Mr. Chairman, many people ask why

we are in South Vietnam. We are there because we agreed to help the people of South Vietnam establish their new na­tion. This they were doing with remark­able progress until North Vietnam, in violation of the Geneva accords, or­ganized, armed, and directed the Na­tional Liberation Front-Vietcong-in a campaign of terror and aggression to impose communism on the people of South Vietnam. We are helping South Vietnam to resist that aggression. It is fruitless to debate now whether or not we should have undertaken this course. We did so. If we fail to honor our pres­ent commitments, we will encourage sim­ilar Communist aggression elsewhere.

Vietnam is the latest of many efforts by the Communist nations to expand their territory, and it must be viewed in its proper historical perspective.

In 1947 President Truman enunciated the Truman doctrine as follows:

I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted subjugation by armed minorities or by outside pressure.

In pursuance of that policy, massive U.S. aid to Greece and Turkey saved both nations from Communist conquest. We followed the same policy successfully in Lebanon. Soviet Russia eventually satis- . :fled itself that we would not pennit fur­ther expansion in Europe and the Near East and turned its attentions elsewhere.

The war in Korea was part of the same pattern. Our resistance halted Commu­nist expansion in that part of Asia. The Chinese have shown an appreciation of our firm intentions and our power with respect to Formosa, and have refrained from attacking in that area even though it must be the prize they desire above all others. Now we are resisting the effort to expand into southeast Asia. Many people fear that we risk war with China or that we are on a course that will lead inevitably to such a war. In my opinion, the lessons of history show that war with China would be far more likely if we permit them to succeed in their aggres­sion in Vietnam. If we stand firm in Vietnam, history leads me to believe that the Chinese in-Asia, like the Russians in Europe, may turn from unrewarding ag­gression to more peaceful endeavors.

Recent discussion has centered about two questions. The first is: Who should participate in a peace conference? The second is: What should be the govern­ment of South Vietnam during and after a conference? Related to these ques­tions are various suggestions to submit the whole problem to the U.N. or to pro­pose arbitration by the countries who participated in the Geneva conferences.

In my opinion, these are artificial and academic questions.

The United States has made clear, time after time, that we wish to go to a peace conference. ·we are ready to negotiate. We have asked the U.N. to help. We · have said that there will be no difficulty in having the views of the Vietcong z:ep-· · resented at a peace conference: This is not an insurmoimiable problem. · · ·

The insUrmountable problem is the fact that North Vietnam will not agree to a peace conference. It will not agree to arbitration. It will not agree to a U.N. settlement of the dispute. North Vietnam has said repeatedly that it will settle the whole business only if we would recognize the Vietcong as the sole representative of South Vietnam and if we will withdraw our troops. These are conditions that North Vietnam insist upon before any conference, arbitration, or other discussion can begin. In other words, North Vietnam demands the un­conditional surrender of South Vietnam and its allies including the United States. It is fruitless for us to have a domestic argument over this issue. Our Govern­ment has explored and continued to ex­plore every possible avenue for settling the conflict. North Vietnam is not will­ing.

The second question, What shall be the government of South Vietnam during and after a conference? is the central issue of the conflict. South Vietnam is a nation recognized by 70 other nations of the world. We cannot and do not wish to impose a government on this na­tion and we are fighting to prevent the Communists from doing so. We have said that we will abide by the results of a free election.

Then there is the question of the con­duct of the war. Many letters suggest a blockade, quarantine, the bombing of various targets. I am not a military strategist, but I do believe that the air and sea power of the United States could be employed more effectively than has been the case to date and that we can and should bring this conflict to a speedy conclusion. Moreover, I believe that great improvements can be made in the support of our troops. We can and must make certain that they have every­thing that is required for the success of their mission and for their personal safety and comfort insofar .as either can be provided under the conditions of war.

We have suffered many casualties in South Vietnam. This heartrending loss can be justified only if we achieve the objectives we have set. If aggression is rewarded in Vietnam the same tactic will be tried elsewhere and the cost of overcoming it may be far · greater than the price we are paying today. Nations that seek peace at any price usually find the price is a downpayment on a bigger war.

I believe it is necessary that we pass this supplemental today. I would hope that it would pass unanimously so that we can demonstrate to the world the solidarity of the representatives of the people in the conflict in which we are now engaged.

There will be other supplementals in the near future, not involving Vietnam, which I .will not support as I am support-· ing this one. And it seems to me that this is a proper time to add a word of caution as to the terrific burden we are putting on the shoulders of the tax­payers of this Nfl,tion of . ours. The in­terest on our national deb~ is costing us almost $25~000 every minute. · · ·

We cannot contuuie to build -this great . public'. debt ·and :avoid irirlatlon, · which

is not just threatening us, but which is actually here. It would seem to me that two courses lie ahead. Either we cut down this excessive spending in many of the Great Society areas or we substantially increase taxes. I shall not at this time spell out specific items which, if not entirely eliminated from future consideration, should be delayed at this period when we are engaged in a conflict such as the one in South Viet­nam. It is not difficult for my colleagues to know the areas where these cuts can be made.

It would also seem to me, Mr. Chair­man, that the time has come when a careful review should be made as to the extent of our commitments in Ew·ope and careful consideration should be given to the withdrawal from Europe of many of our troops. If President de Gaulle seems so confident that NATO is no longer necessary, then it would seem to me that it is time that we bring many of our forces and their dependents now living abroad home. This not only would reduce these great expenditures, but would also help solve our balance-of­payments problem.

We cannot and should not continue down the road we have been traveling these many months and years, but we must again embark upon a program of fiscal responsibtlity if we are not to de­stroy at home that which we are fighting to preserve in southeast Asia.

Now, Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. GERALD R. FORD], our distinguished mi­nority leader.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Chair­man, at the outset I would like to com­pliment the Committee on Appropria­tions and its various subcommittees that have had jurisdiction over the consid­eration of this bill.

Mr. Chairman, I believe that the full committee and the subcommittee have done a first-class job in responding to the request of the executive branch of the Government. Also I wish to com­pliment those three Members of the mi­nority who did write excellent minority views setting forth the minority's view­point on certain aspects of defense policy and the carrying out of the programs thereunder.

Mr. Chairman, I believe the record is clear that the Department of Defense in the past year has been uncertain .as .to what its needs were. ·This uncertainty has resulted in their underestimating the expenditures which have developed in the prosecution of the conflict in Vietnam.

This underestimating of expenditures, Mr. Chairman, has to a substantial de­gree created some of our economic prob­lems which we are facing domestically today. The uncertainty as to the course of the war and our policy and the under­estimation of · expenditures by the De­fense Department has created to a very significant degree the inflationary pres­sures which we face in the United States at the present time. ·

· i believe that the :Department of De~ fense could ha;ve done a better· job in the last ·12 months in forecasting what their expenditures would be. It is my hope

5818 CONGRESSIONAL -RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966

that their forecast of ·expenditures for the next 12 months are more accurate. If these estimates are not more accurate, we will be faced with an even more seri­ous infiationary problem than we have on our doorstep at the present time.

Mr. Chairman, this country has had during my time here in the Congress outstanding men on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. It has been my privilege over the years to know many of them intimately. I was annually privileged from 1953 through 1964 to hear the testimony of the able members of the Joint Chiefs for a period of 12 years. I think this country is blessed that men of their caliber and their experience are giving us the kind of military advice and leader­ship that is so essential in the crisis we face at the present time. It is my most sincere hope that the Commander in Chief, who was elected by the American people, will follow the wise and sound recommendations of these men who over the years have dedicated their lives to giving this country the kind of military strength and leadership that we need in this crucial nour.

At times in past months I have felt that our military leaders' advice has not been followed to the degree that it should have been. But be that as it may, with the problems getting more and more critical in Vietnam and elsewhere, it is my strong belief that the Commander in Chief should to the maximum degree fol­low the recommendations of the Joint Chiefs under the leadership of our able Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General Wheeler.

Mr. Chairtnan, it seems at the present that our Nation is following a course of action of strength against Communist aggression in southeast Asia. It appears to me our Nation is meeting the chal­lenge of communism in South Vietnam. This legislation we have before us today will give substance to the ability of our troops and our military leaders to meet this challenge. .

Mr. Chairman, the ~pproval of this legislation today will back up the policy, the posture, and the position that I think our Government is taking in Viet­nam today. It may not be enough and there may be more required in the months ahead. But this . is a tangible way for every one of us to indicate our support for what appears to be our Na­tion's policy at the moment.

It is crystal clear to me that anyone who votes for this legislation is endors­ing the policy currently being executed by the Commander in Chief.

Let me add this postscript. When the roll is called today-and I trust there will be a unanimous vote for this legis­lation-! do hope there will not be quali­fying statements made outside of the Chamber. I hope there will not be peti­tions signed which would, in effect, with­P,raw the kind of support that an "aye" vote gives to the position, the posture, and the policy that I think our Nation has and ought to have in this crisis.

I think the President, if he is to follow this course of action, must have our sup­port in its execution, in its imple­mentation, and in the funding require­ments to carry out that policy.

People cannot vote "aye" today and then issue a statement tomorrow with­drawing support. An "aye" vote means just one thing-that the elected Com­mander in Chief of our country, whether we voted for him or not, will have $13 billion to use for the purpose of support­ing a position of firmness against Com• munist aggression.

If more is needed, this House and the other Chamber will make it available.

Mr. Chairman, I trust that the vote today will be unanimous.

Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I yield to the the distinguished majority leader.

Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Chairman, of course, with most of what the distin­guished minority leader has said I am certainly in agreement, particularly with respect to the last part of his fine speech. I believe the gentleman has said that the Defense Department has been uncer­tain as to what its requirements are. I would like to comment briefly on that one statement. Of course, there has been an element of uncertainty in what the problem was going to be in Vietnam, and there is still that element of uncer­tainty. There are so many possibilities in the picture that it would be almost im­possible for anyone to prognosticate what is going to happen 6 months, a year, or 2 years from now in that part of the world. ·

I think the gentleman would agree with me that it would be the part of wisdom to base estimates of needed ex­penditures on facts that are known, or reasonably known and reasonably pro­jected, rather than simply upon un­reviewed future possible requirements that are not within the reasonable knowl­edge of those who are making the esti­mates. I am sure the gentleman does not want the Congress to make available for military spending huge and unreviewed sums of money.

The gentleman will recall that during the Korean war defense appropriations increased $35 billion in 1 year, durable goods manufacturing industries' volume of unfilled orders increased by $34 bil­lion in 1 year, and wholesale prices sky­rocketed by 11.4 percent between 1950 and 1951.

-Mr. GERALD R. FORD. In response to the observations of my good friend, the able majority leader, I do not believe that we can compare the . circumstances of June 1950 with the circumstances of the last 6 or 12 months. In 1950, as I recall, we had had submitted to us a military budget for $13 billion, and all of a sudden, in late June of 1950, we were faced with a very grave and critical mili­tary situation ·in Korea. Almost over night the Congress, as I recall, went from the budget that had been submitted by the Secretary of Defense, Mr. Johnson, of $13 billion, to a military budget of $70 to $80 billion.

Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield further?

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I yield. Mr. ALBERT. I agree with what the

gentleman is saying. The circum­stances are certainly different. But the

effects of · overfunding and overappro­priating are not different; and that is the point I am trying to make. Requests for appropriations should be based on careful consideration of needs and re­sources. Appropriations should be re­quested when needs are known and not when we do not know how much might be needed. It is not the part of wisdom to overappropriate and to permit exces­sive funding.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Let me re­spond and then I will yield to my friend from Wisconsin. It does not seem to me that the Congress, in light of the fact that we have had three supplemental bills, and in light of the probability that we are going to have another supple­mental in the next month or so, has overappropriated. It hardly seems fair to say that we have overappropriated.

Mr. ALBERT. I am not saying that y;e have overappropriated. I am merely advising that it would not be the part of wisdom to do so. I am trying to defend the position which the administration has taken. I think its course under the facts known at the time requests were ma<le has been sound.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD . . There is quite a difference, as the gentleman knows, between making obligation au­thority available and actual expendi­tures.

Mr. ALBERT. Yes, that is true. Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I do not

believe that the Defense Department has asked for an adequate amount of obliga­tion authority.

Mr. ALBERT. I think that is a ques­tion of judgment.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. And for this reason, they have had to come back peri­odically for their various supplementals.

But, leaving tha.t aside, even with the obligation authority they had available and that which they anticipated the Congress would give them, they have not accurately forecast their expendi­tures. Military expenditur~.3 which have been underestimated have created or caused the serious inflation to a sub­stantial degree in the circumstances of our economy today.

Mr. ALBERT. Of course they have not always accurately forecast what was going to happen. Had they done that, they undoubtedly would have asked for exactly what they needed, which would be ideal. Again, however, I commend the gentleman on the balance of his remarks.

Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I appreciate the kind comments made by the gentle­man from Oklahoma on other portions of my remarks. As he well knows, people probably far wiser than we and more knowledgeable than we on these intri­cate problems of the economy and in­tiation have honorably disagreed. So on this issue I do not mind disagreeing with my friend from Oklahoma. I am delighted that on the other areas there is a high degree of unanimity on the position of our country and the policy we ought to follow. · Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield

1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. GEORGE W. ANDREWS].

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 5819 Mr. GEORGE W. ANDREWS. Mr.

Chairman, as a member of this subcom­mittee, I support this bill.

There has been a lot of argument about how we got into Vietnam and whether or not we should be there, · and so on. In my opinion such .arguments are aca­demic. The fact remains that our peo­ple are committed in South Vietnam to­day, our men are being wounded and killed in South Vietnam, our tlag is being fired upon in South Vietnam. It be­hooves Americans to support those men in South Vietnam all the way, and that is all this bill does. It provides the tools of war for our men in the hope-in the prayerful hope-Mr. Chairman, that this war can soon be terminated.

I hope that there is not a single vote against this bill, on a rollcall, so that we let the world know that this Congress is supporting our fighting men in South Vietnam.

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from Michi­gan [Mr. VIVIAN].

Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman, for the past 12 years this Nation has had the opportunity to aid in establishing a pop­ular and stable government in South Vietnam. For at least 11 of those 12 years they, and we, have failed.

As a result, today our youth are slog­ging through the mud in South Vietnam, killing-and dying-in order to preserve for this Nation a longer time, the oppor­tunity, the possibility to try once again. For that is all our soldiers can accom­plish. That is all this appropriation can accomplish-to gain time and to hold open an opportunity.

We owe these brave and uncomplain­ing men and the Vietnamese people on whose land they fight-the greatest pos­sible e1Iort on our part to form, to build, to secure a government in South Viet­nam which is popular enough to quell the conflict, and to build _ an economy there which is productive enough to support its peoples.

Hundreds of American civilians have committed their energies, some even their lives, in South Vietnam in the past months, to build the base and structure of social and economic and political life needed in that land in order that a gov­ernment, in those famous words, "of the people, by the people, and for the people" can be created and then prevail.

Thousands of American troops are needed there now, to provide protection for the harassed and fearful Vietnamese villagers and farmers.

But can only a few hundred civilians complete this enormous task: the recon­struction of a society, in a reasonable time, so that the opportunity for which our 220,000 soldiers fight is not simply wasted? Are we not failing our troops tragically, by hoping that this small band of only a few hundred can untangle the inheritance of centuries of misrule?

Our record for the past 12 years is not impressive. The reasons are many. But one stands out.

In earlier years it was dimcult for us to accept the necessity for military in­tervention in South Vietnam. Today, it

remains difficult for us to accept that we must participate and intervene far more aggressively, not only in the economic, but also in the social and political fields.

If we are not prepared to do this, then we should get out of South Vietnam at once. Yet, while many of our citizens strongly support the conscription of our young men to service with gun and flame­thrower, sadly enough we find very few of those citizens willing to go to South Vietnam to serve in a civilian capacity: to rebuild and build anew. - The Agency for International Develop­ment needs men in Vietnam. The Inter­national Voluntary Services, a nongov­ernmental organization similar to the Peace Corps, needs men for Vietnam.

I ask that all of us here, and the lead­ers in our administration, urgently em­phasize the great and immediate need of this Nation for courageous men and women to serve in these absolutely essen­tial roles. I am certain that our citizens desire to live someday in peace, as brothers, with the peoples in Asia.

I will support this appropriation of money, but I ask others here to support my request to pay this money to the right men. Our current course of action will not produce the result we seek unless we rebalance our e1Iorts.

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield myself 2 minutes. ·

Mr. Chairman, there are certain lan­guage provisions in the legislation be­fore us, and I would call your attention specifically to section 102. The version of the bill before us contains the lan­guage proposed by the President in his budget estimate. However, the confer­ence version of the bill authorizing our military procurement items, and so forth, provided language somewhat di1Ierent than that which had been proposed.

I shall o1Ier an amendment to make the language in this bill comport not to the budget language, but to the language which has been agreed to and which, I understand, has become the law. I shall o1Ier an amendment which will strength­en the position of the Congress insofar as the control of these funds is con­cerned. It will be submitted, of course, during the reading of the bill.

Mr. Chairman, I now ask that the Clerk read.

Mr. SHRIVER. Mr. Chairman, I in­tend to support the Department of De­fense supplemental appropriation for fiscal year 1966 in the amount of $13,135,719,000.

My support is based upon the neces­sity and the awareness that these funds must be provided to back up our Nation's commitment of men and material in Vietnam. In recent days we have learned that another 20,000 American military men have been committed to Vietnam which will bring our total forces there to approximately 235,000 in the near future.

There is included in this supplemental appropriations bill $375 million in for­eign military assistance funds and $315 million for economic assistance to South Vietnam, Thailand, Lao.3, and the Dominican Republic. Another $100 mil­lion is allocated to the contingency fund.

The minority members of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee have ex­pressed a deep concern, which I share, about "the growing disregard evidenced on the part of the executive branch toward the appropriations process."

They cited the fact that a massive $12.3 billion supplemental request was con­sidered in the short span of 2 days by the Defense Appropriations Subcom­mittee.

It should also be pointed out that the Foreign Operations Subcommittee, on which I serve, held but 1 day of hear­ings on the economic and military assist­ance requests contained in this bill.

In the area of foreign aid, the admin­istration has promised new directions of this massive assistance program. Such redirection and reevaluation of the pro­gram should be undertaken deliberately and not through deficiency fund requests.

In this supplemental request there are certain programs which are worthy of our support.- One of these is civil police programs in Thailand and Vietnam.

A substantial amount of the supple­mental request for Thailand will go for this police program including such equip­ment as radios and transmitters. It is my understanding that approximately $27 million will be allocated for public safety and police in Vietnam.

On the recent trip which I made with the distinguished chairman of the For­eign Operations Appropriations Subcom­mittee [Mr. PASSMAN], I had the oppor­tunity of seeing firsthand the police training program in Thailand. I was impressed by the work of Mr. Jeter L. Williamson, the Chief of the Public Safe­ty Division of our U.S. Operations Mis­sion in Thailand and of other American experts assisting the Thais in this impor­tant program. This is a practical kind of program conducted by the United States to help the Government of Thai­land increase the security of its border area and rapidly develop the counter­insurgency capability of the Thai civil police. This same kind of program is being conducted in Vietnam and I was advised that it will cover 72,000 men there.

There are questions which await an­swers as we consider this further· funding to support the American commitment in Vietnam.

Why does not the administration more aggressively pursue necessary ef­forts to bring .about a halt to free world shipping to North Vietnam?

When I questioned the Administrator of the Agency for International Develop­ment last month regarding this problem, he advised me, and I quote from the hearings:

Last November, the only ships that called at North Vietnam outside of the Communist bloc countries were several flying the British flag but actually based in Hong Kong. We are not, of course, providing any U.S. assist­ance to Britain.

Mr. Chairman, the American people are disturbed, as am I, by the continuing trade by our allies with North Vietnam when American lives are being lost in far­oft Vietnam.

5820 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966

The American people are puzzled by administration policy which calls for in­stant cooperation with Great Britain in its difficulties with Rhodesia; but deals softly with the British regarding their trade with North Vietnam.

Last year I made .a motion at the time we had the conference report on .foreign aid appropriations before the House to stop aid to the countries shipping mate­rials to North Vietnam. That motion was defeated, and the President retained authority to use his discretion in giving such aid. In recent months. there has been legislation introduced to b.ar coun­tries serving North Vietnam from send­ing their ships to U.S. ports. The admin­istration has blacklisted certain ships from carrying Government-financed cargoes; but this action does not go far enough.

Another question which many Ameri­cans are asking: What is being done to secure the cooperation and participation of our allies in the Vietnam · conflict?

The American people have poured bil­lions of dollars into aiding our European allies, both militarily and economically, since World War U. Now that the United states has gone to- the aid of South Vietnam, it is obvious th.at the re­sponse for meaningful assistance from our allies has not been deafening.

We will, however, examine very care­fully and with interest the administra­tion's 1967 foreign aid budgets for respective countries around the world. We will keep in mind the 235,000 Ameri­cans who are on the frontlines :fighting communism in southeast Asia, and in the political vernacular, we will ask the administration spokesmen:

"What have these countries we are aiding done for us lately?"

Mr. EDWARDS of California. Mr. Chairman, I believe my position is clear on our commitment in soutl).east · Asia. I have been opposed to our military policy in Vietnam. I am strongly op­posed to escalation of the war, and I am distressed by the deterioration of our foreign and domestic policies which has been brought on by our Vietnam opera­tions.

I will vote for H.R. 13546, the supple­mental southeast Asia appropriation measure before this House today. I will do so because-I feel it is unwise to decide policy issues through the appropriations process. It is the job of the authorizing committees to debate policy matters. It is the job of the Appropriations Com­mittees to oversee the administration of duly authorized funds.

A year ago, I opposed the $700 million supplemental appropriation for Viet­nam. I oppose that appropriation be­cause it was used only as a ruse to obtain approval of administration policy in Vietnam. The $13.1 billion appropria­tion before us today-19 times as much money as we approved on May 5, 1965-has been duly authorized. My policy reservations have been stated earlier. Today I can but remind my colleagues of them.

My vote for this appropriation means two things. It does not alone mean that I do not believe it is proper to express my policy preferences in an appropri-

ations measure. It also means that an appropriations measure should not be used by anyone else to express their pol­icy preferences. My vote today is not an endorsement of our past policy in Vietnam. It is not an endorsement of our future policy in Vietnam. It is not an endorsement of military escalation. It is not an endorsement of the mining of Haiphong Harbor. And, it is not an endorsement of any increase in troop commitments. It is merely a certifica­tion of prior House action on authoriza­tion measures.

In supporting this measure and dis­cussing -it with my colleagues in the House today, I am compelled to make certain observations about its contents. In voting $13.1 billion today, we are doing many things, and must be aware of them.

We are appropriating $275 million for economic assistance programs within Vietnam. However, we are in this same bill appropriating $742.6 million for mil­itary construction within Vietnam alone. Thus we will spend in the com­ing :fiscal year 270 percent more money for military construction than for socio­economic reconstruction. And, we are spending $3.2 billion for aircraft pro­curement and $2.1 billion for procure­ment of munitions and associated' equip­ment. All of this money, as the report of our able Committee on Appropria­tions states, is "the amount of the budget estimates for the military, military as­sistance, and economic assistance pro­grams of the Government directly re­lated to operations in southeast Asia." Thus, in the coming :fiscal year, our country will spend $1.1 billion to build in Vietnam, and $5.3 billion for the air­craft and munitions which will destroy the resources of Vietnam. As I told this House only 13 days ago, we will continue to see destruction outpacing develop­ment. We will continue to see our mili­tary commitment make a mockery of our calls for economic development; for a policy of millions for development and billions for destruction cannot succeed.

My colleagues should also be aware that, despite the opening disclaimer of the Appropriations Committee report, not all the money in H.R. 13546 is going to programs related to southeast Asia. Twenty-five million dollars is going to the Dominican Republic in the form of economic aid.

Finally, we should be aware that the $375 million appropriated for foreign military assistance will, according to the committee report, "be recorded on the books of the military assistance program and paid to the applicable procurement appropriation accounts of the military services, to reimburse those accounts for the value of goods already delivered to military assistance recipients." A minority of the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee noted that this "was given scant attention by this committee." I would only note that in our debates over the misuse of foreign military aid, we should not allow such aid to be awarded through the military appropriation proper. Foreign military aid is a sepa­rate issue with distinct problems, and should be considered separately.

Mr. CLEVELAND. Mr. Chairman, I shall vote for this massive, supplemental defense appropriation bill. The Nation is engaged in a critical war and our mili­tary e:fforts must be fully supported.

Nevertheless, I am deeply concerned about the manner in which this legisla­tion is being handled. We are here act­ing on a bill appropriating $12,345,719,-000 for the military functions of the Department of Defense, $375 million for the President to allot in military assist­ance, and $415 million for him to allo­cate in economic assistance.

This vast total is being handled in a supplemental appropriation bill on which the Appropriation Committee held only 2 days of hearings. In that time, of course, only the most cursory considera­tion could be given. In e:ffect, Congress is unable to perform its constitutional task of carefully scrutinizing the admin­istration's requests and weighing them in detail.

In view of this haste, one must ques­tion the wisdom and foresight of a gov­ernment which, just a few months ago, did not conceive of these enormous extra expenses, reduced taxes and said we could a:fford them but now has to raise them and seek from Congress an addi­tional $13 plus billion.

Either the Government has not been honest in telling us what the war in Viet­nam was going to cost or its planning has been extremely bad.

One does not wish to think that the Government does not know what it is doing nor does one wish to think that it is deliberately concealing facts from the public. It is hard, however, to avoid reaching either one conclusion or the other or. indeed, both.

Mr. RYAN. Mr. Chairman, this is the :first supplemental defense appropriation bill in this session for the prosecution of the war in Vietnam. It embodies the $4.8 billion which the House authorized on March 1.

When the $4.8 billion authorization bill was before the House, I pointed out that a basic issue of policy was involved. It was, I said, a bill to :finance escalation, not to :finance an existing policy. I spelled out in my speech on March 1 my reasons for opposing what I called a policy of mindful escalation and my view that a policy of stabilization should be pursued. What I said then applies today.

Mr. Chairman, the .heart of this ap­propriations bill is the $4.8 billion which was authorized on March 1. In e:ffect, the appropriation contains an escalation rider. It is not simply an appropriation to support the present e:ffort in Vietnam. The funds are intended to escalate the war. As the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. MAHON], said earlier this afternoon that "the war will escalate and grow in intensity."

This is not simply an appropriation to provide supplies and equipment to the courageous American fighting men who are engaged in combat. If that were the purpose, there would be no argument. As long as ·they are committed to battle, our dedicated forces must be adequately equipped, supplied, and protected in carrying out assigned missions. The real issue is the policy question embedded in

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAl RECORD ~HOUSE 5821 the authorization and now in the appropriation.

In my speech on the supplemental de­fense authorization on March 1, I dis­cussed what I understood to be the im­plications of our vote. I said then that a debate was raging between those who believe that we should stabilize the war and those who . believe that we should escalate it mindfully. That debate still continues.

The only opportunity the House has to express its views on foreign policy is when we are asked to authorize or ap­propriate funds. If we are to participate in this debate on Vietnam policy, we must do so this afternoon. An affirmative vote, no matter how individual Members of the House may regard it, will be in­terpreted by the administration and the public as a full endorsement of adminis­tration policy. A vote for this bill is a vote for the escalation rider as well.

My vote this afternoon is not an easy one to cast. My thoughts are very much with the gallant American :fighting men in Vietnam. They should not be denied anything they need. I, too, fought in a jungle war in the Pacific some 20 years ago. However, the administration has asked us to appropriate funds to allow the President to escalate the war. Once again the crucial question is not whether we will support the men in the :field, but whether we will give the President the funds to commit hundreds of thousands of additional young. men to this war on the Asian mainland. As the Vietnam war stands today, this I am unwilling to do.

Mr. Chairman, instead of pursuing a policy of extended escalation leading to an unlimited war in an "open-ended" mllitary situation, as Senator MANs­FIELD's report described it, the admtnis­tration in a stabilized situation should explore realistic alternatives to escala­tion. As I have said so often, the con­fiict in Vietnam is not susceptible to a wholly military solution. It must be re­solved politically and diplomatically.

The cHAmMAN. The Clerk wm read the bill for amendment.

The Clerk read as foY,ows: ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE

Supporting assistance

For an additional amount for "Supporting assistance", ·$315,000,000.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, I rise at this time to ask a question or two concerning the emer­gency fund of $200 million.

Is this in the nature of a blank check to the Department of Defense or to the Executive, or what is it?

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield, is the gentleman talking about the funds for military con­struction or the contingency fund?

Mr. GROSS. I am talking about the language as shown in the report on page 12-Secretary of Defense, $200 m111ion for an emergency fund. ·

Mr. MAHON. This is military con­struction. As the gentleman knows, this bill contains $1 blllion, plus, for m111tary construction, most of which 1s in Viet-

nam. The course of the war is rather unpredictable. This 1s the sum of money made available in order to meet the situ­ations as they may arise.

Mr. GROSS. Then, this is for the spe­cifl.c purpose of construction?

Mr.MAHON. Yes. Mr. GROSS. Now, how about the $100

million for the contingency fund? This seems to be a blank check to the Presi-dent. ·

I was disappointed in reading the hear­ings of the gentleman's committee on tl)is bill in that there was no indication as to how tnis money is to be expena.ed.

Mr. MAHON. If the gentleman will yield further, it is a contingency fund. It is impossible to predict how a contin­gency fund will be used. It may all be used in Vietnam and some of it might be used in Africa. It might be used else­where. However, it 1s available to pro­tect the interest of the United States in this area of activity.

I do not believe anyone can tell us how it might be used. I wish it would not be necessary to use it at all.

Mr. GROSS. The gentleman from Texas suggested another question when he said "Africa."

Does the gentleman have any idea as to how much money has been expended from the contingency fund for the pur­pose of joining with the British in the outrageous boycott of Rhodesia-in other words, using contingency funds to pay for the airlifting of oil and gasoline into Zambia, which has been cut off from its normal supply through Rho­desia?

Can the gentleman from Texas bring us up to date on how many millions have been expended up to this point in :financ­ing the British boycott?

Mr. MAHON. If the gentleman will yield further, I am not able myself to give the gentleman the answer as to what funds may have been expended in connection with this problem.

Mr. GROSS. Does the gentleman have any part of the fear that I have that through this action in which we are presently engaged-this boycott of a friendly government-we may be com­mitting ourselves to another · war, this time on the continent of Africa?

Mr. MAHON. I do not have any fear that we are committing ourselves to an­other war. It may be that not all of us fully support the actions with respect to Rhodesia, but this is one of the facets of our foreign policy, on which people may differ. However, the purpose of this fund is certainly not primarily for use in Africa, but to be available if necessary principally for activities associated with the war in Vietnam.

Theoretically, of course, it could be used in other places.

Mr. GROSS. Well, the contingency fund voted for the President is being used for this purpose. My question went to how much has been used and how deeply are we being committed. The Queen of England served notice as late as last week that if necessary the British would send troops to invade Rhodesia,

' and already we are hearing _ talk of the

same tactics being applied to the Re­public of South Africa.

Just how deeply we are being commit­ted is a grave question that should be of concern to every American.

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, the gentle­man from Iowa is himself an important member of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of Representatives, and I assume he is familiar with this matter and could possibly give a better answer to his own question than I could.

Mr. GROSS. I will say to the gentle­man that the Foreign Affairs Committee has just started hearings on the regular authorization bill today, and it will be my purpose to try to get full information. It is not always easy to obtain informa­tion, as the gentleman from Texas well knows, from certain individuals in this Government.

I thought, perhaps, the gentleman from Texas and his committee had de­veloped information that I did not :find in the hearings.

Mr. MAHON. I know of no plan to use these funds for this ·purpose.

Mr. GROSS. I thank the gentleman. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will

read. The Clerk read as follows: SEc. 102. Appropriations available to the

Department of Defense during the fiscal years 1966 and 1967 shall be available to support Vietnamese and other Free World Forces in Vietnam and for related costs on such terms and conditions as the Secretary of Defense may determine: Provided, That unexpended balances, as determined by the Secretary of Defense, of funds heretofore allocated or transferred by the President to the Secretary of Defense for military assist­ance to support Vietnamese ·and other Free World Forces in Vietnam shall be trans­ferred to any appropriation available to the Department of Defense for military func­tions (including construction), to be merged with and to be available for the same pur­poses and for the same time period as the appropriation to which transferred.

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I have several amendments to section 102 at the desk and I ask unanimous consent that they may be considered as one amend­ment.

The CHAmMAN. Without objection, it is so ordered.

There was no objection. AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. MAHON

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. MAHON: On

page 8, line 3, insert "(a)" immediately after "Sec~ 102.".

On page 8 line 5 insert "for their stated purposes" immediately after "available".

On page 8, after line 16, insert the follow­ing:

"(b) Within thirty days after the end of each quarter, the Secretary of Defense shall render to the Committees on Armed Serv­ices and Appropriations of the House of Rep­resentatives and the Senate a report with respect to the estimated value by purpose, by country, of support furnished from such ap­propriations".

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Texas [Mr. MAHoN] is recognized.

5822 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE March· 15, 1966

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, the pur­pose of this amendment . is· to make the language of the bill compatible with the language in the authorization bill which I understand was signed into law today. It undertakes to improve in a measure the actual wording of the authorization.

It tightens up and make a little clearer the intent of the Congress with respect to this matter. The language in section 102 as reported reads:

SEC. 102. Appropriations available to the Department of Defense during the fiscal years 1966 and 1967 shall be available · to sup­port Vietnamese and other free world forces in Vietnam _and for related costs on such terms and conditions as the Sec­retary of Defense may determine: .. Provided, That unexpended balances, as determined by the Secretary of Defense, of funds here­tofore allocated or transferred by the Presi­dent to the Secretary of Defense for mili­tary assistance to support Vietnamese and other free world forces in Vietnam shall be transferred to any appropriation available to the Department of Defense for military functions (including construction), to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes and for the same time period as the appropriation to which transferred.

When the amendment is agreed to, it will read:

SEC. 102. (a) Appropriations available to the Department of Defense during the fiscal years 1966 and 1967 shall be available for their stated purposes to support Vietnamese and other free world forces in Vietnam and for related costs on such terms and conditions as the Secretary of Defense may determine: Provided, That unexpended balances, as de­termined by the Secretary of Defense, of funds heretofore allocated or transferred by the President to the Secretary of Defense for military assistance to support ·vietnamese and other free world forces in Vietnam shall be transferred to ·any appropriation available to the Department of Pefense for military functions (including construction), to be merged with and to be available for the same purposes f!,nd for the· same time period as the appropriation to which transferred.

(b) Within thirty days after the end of each quarter, the Secretary of Defense shall -render to the Committee on Armed Serv­ices and Appropriations of the Senate and House of Representatives a report with re­spect to the estimated value by purpose, by country, of support furnished from ap­propriations authorized to be made under this subsection.

The point 1s to require reports to the Congress, through the appropriate com­mittees, within 30 days after the end of each quarter, with respect to the esti­mated value by purpose and by country -of -support furnished from these appro­priations.

The basic _section 102 provides that funds which would otherwise be labeled "Mil1tary Assistance" may be spent as direct military funds. To some extent,· 1n the future, comparability of funding levels will thus be distorted for both reg­ular military function_s and military as­sistance. It is the purpose of this amend­ment to require that Congress be in­formed of the best estimates of the uti­lization of these funds.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MAHON. I yield to the gentle­man.

Mr. GROSS. The purpose of section 102, and I wonder if the gentleman agrees

to this, 1S to provide that these funds are to be expended for the purpose for which the bill and the Congress intends -that they shall be spent; is that correct?

Mr. MAHON. That is co.rrect. Mr. GROSS. The gentleman used the

words "stated purpose." Mr. MAHON. Yes, for stated purposes

such as procurement-providing certain funds for procurement-or for person­nel-and otherwise to support our allies including the Vietnamese. The Viet­namese have about 850,000 men, includ­ing local police forces, under arms. This language is designed to enable our Gov­ernment to support appropriately the efforts of those who :fight with u·s.

Mr. GROSS. And that is, in Vietnam? Mr. MAHON. In Vietnam-yes, of

course. Mr. GROSS. That is the intent.? Mr. MAHON. Yes, that is the intent. Mr. GROSS. The intent is to support

the forces--whatever they may be--there are too few there-but to support the forces in Vietnam and not somewhere else in the world?

Mr. MAHON. That is certainly the in­tent of this amendment.

Mr.- RUMSFELD. Mr. Chairman·, will the gentleman yield? .

Mr. MAHON. I yield to the gentle­man.

Mr. RUMSFELD. Did the gentleman say that the reports were to come di­rectly to the Committees on Armed Serv­ices and Appropriations 1n the House and in the Senate?

Mr. MAHON. That is with reference to the funds that are used for this pur­pose under the provisions of section 102.

Mr. RUMSFELD. I do not intend to raise the point, but I believe this would be subject to a: point of order and is a violation of rule ·40 of the House of Rep­resentatives which . requires reports to come to the' Speaker and to the House as a whole rather than to a specific com­mittee. It seems to me the reports should come to the House of Representa­tives and to the Senate, and to the ex­tent that they go directly to a committee and bypass the membership as a whole that the prerogatives of the Speaker of the House· and of the membership as a whole are set aside. I think it is an important point although, as I say to the gentleman, I am not going to raise the point of order. But I would hope that the Committee on Appropriations and the Committee on Armed Services would bring their bills in, when they call for re­ports, ·with the reports to come to 'the ' Speaker and to the President pro tem­pore of the Senate rather than going di­rectly to a committee.

Mr. MAHON. I think -the gentleman has made a good point. But, of course,

. anyth,fng that is made available to the committees is made available to the Speaker and to the Congress. What we are doing here is to tie it in with the au­thorization language which has already been included in the law and which is the basis for the language in the amendment.

Mr. RUMSFELD. I do not quarrel with the intent of the amendment.

Mr. LIPSCOMB. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MAHON. - I yield to the gentle­man from California.

Mr. LIPSCOMB. Mr. Chairman, the gentleman from Texas has talked this over at great length with the minority. We certainly agree as to the necessity for this amendment and heartily sup­port it.

The language of sect~on 102 as pres­ently contained in H.R. 13546 can readily be interpreted to give extremely wide latitude to the Secretary of Defense. The provision relates to military assist­ance type funds. But within the context of military assistance the present lan­guage could be interpreted to permit the merger of unexpended balances of fiscal year 1966 and prior year military assist­ance funds and future funds in :fiscal year 1967 for South Vietnam with the accounts for military functions to be mingled between purposes. In other words the present wording of the bill was susceptible of being interpreted as unlimited transfer authority.

This provision is required because there is now no authority to use funds appropriated to the Department of De­fense for any purpose other than support of U.S. forces. Military assistance funds are now appropriated to the President and allocated to the Department of De­fense.

The proposed amendment does not re­ject the request for authority to merge military assistance for South Vietnam with military functions but adds limiting language to that authority in two re­spects.

First. It .limits the transfer of author­ity to the extent that Department· of Defense appropriations for a particular purpose must be kept within that pur­pose. For example, personnel funds would be used for personnel, operation and maintenance for operation and maintenance, procurement for procure­ment, and so forth. This limitation is provided by the addition of the words, "for their stated purposes."

Second. The amendment adds a new subsection intended to assure that the Congress be kept informed on a timely basis of the use of these funds that may be made available for the support of the South Vietnamese and other free world forces under the authority granted in section 102. The amendment also states that the information be broken down by purpose and country in order to insure that the intent now expressed in section (a) be adhered to, and in the form that Congress will have the capability to over.- . see that it is.

There is no intent to create any con­dition that will prevent our troops and the troops of the free world that are assisting us from acquiring the neces­sary equipment and funds in a tunely manner. Tills amendment will not jeop­ardize this process in the least. Its pur­pose is to make sure that congressional control is not diluted. The conditions as propose_d in the amendment are that these fiscal transactions not violate the existing appropriations structure, it makes clear that this provision does not authorize any unlimited transfer au-

, thority, and that Congress be kept in­formed on a timely basis.

March ·15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL·-. RECORD--· HOUSE 5823 Mr; Cha.lrman, I urge support· of the

amendment. . . Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I want

to make it clear to my colleagues that the gentleman from C(l.llfornia made the suggestion with respect to this amend­ment. I think it is a good amendment and I am pleased to offer it.

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentleman from Texas [Mr. MAHON].

The amendment was agreed to. The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will· read. The Clerk concluaed the reading of

the bill. Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I move

that the Committee do now rise and re­port the bill back · to the House with an amendment and with the recommenda­tion that the amendment be agreed to and that the bill, as amended, be passed.

The motion was agreed to. Accordingly, the Committee rose; and

the Speaker pro tempore <Mr. ALBERT) having assumed the chair, Mr. WRIGHT, Chairman of the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, re­ported that .that Committee, having .had under consideration the bill <H.R. 13546) making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1966, and for other purposes, had directed him to report the bill back to the House with an amendment with the recommendation that the amendment be agreed to and that the bill, as amended, do pass.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. · Without objection, the previous question is or­dered.

There was no objection. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The

question is on the amendment. The amendment was agreed to. The SPEAKER pro tempore. The

question is on the engrossment and third reading of the bill.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time. ·

The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the passage of the bill.

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays. · The yeas and nays were ordered.

The question was taken: and there were-yeas 389, nays 3, not voting 39, as follows:

Abbitt Abernethy Adams Addabbo Albert Anderson, m. Anderson

Tenn-. Andrews.

GeorgeW. Andrews,

Glenn Andrews,

N.Dak. Annwizio Arends Ashbrook Ashley Ashmore. Aspinall Ayres Bandstra Barrett Bates · Battin· BekWorth Belcher

[Roll No. 38] YEAs-389

Bennett Berry Betts Bingham Blatnik Boggs Boland Bolton .Bow Brad~ mas Bray Brooks Broomfield Brown, Ohio Broyhlll, N:c. · Broyhill, Va. Buchanan Burke Burleson Burton, Utah Byrne, Pa. Byrnes, Wis. · ca. ben Cahill Callan Callaway Cameron

Carey Carter Casey Cederberg Celler . Chamberlain Chelf Clancy Clark Clausen, .

Don H. Cleveland Clevenger Cohelan Colmer Conable Conte · Cooley Corbett . Corman Craley ·

· Cramer .. Culver cunningham · Curtin · Curtfs. · Daddarlo

Dague. J'enmngs . Qumen Daniels Joelson Race Davis, Wis. jolinson, CaJ.if. R&ndaU. Dawson Johnson, Okla. Redldn de 1a Gal"Za Johnson, Pa. . . Rees Delaney Jonas Reid, Dl. Dent Jones, Ala. Reid, N.Y. Denton Jones, Mo. Reifel Derwinski Jones, N .C. Reuss Dikinson Karsten Rhodes, Ariz. Diggs Ka.rth Rhodes; Pa. Dingelll. Kastenmeier Rivers, S.C. Dole Kee Rivers, Alaska D:onohue Keith Roberts · Dorn Kelly Robison · Dow Keogh Rodino Dulski King, Calif. Rogers, Colo. Duncan, Oreg. King, N.Y. Rogers, Fla. Duncan, Tenn .. King, Utah Rogers, Tex. Dwyer Kirwan Ronan Dyal Kluczynskl Rooney, N.Y. Edmondson Kornegay Rooney, Pa. Edwards, Ala. Krebs Rosenthal Edwards, Calif. Kunkel Rostenkowskl Edwards, La. Kupferman Roush ErlenbOrn Laird Roybal Evans, Colo. LandrUm Rumsfeld Everett Langen Satterfield Evins, Tenn. Latta St Germain Fa.lilon Leggett St. Onge Fa.rbstein Lennon Saylor Fa.rnsley Lipscomb Scheuer Farnum Long, La.. Schisler Fascell Long, Md. · Schmidha.user Feighan Love Schneebell Findley McCarthy Schweiker-Fino McClory Scott Flood McCulloch Secrest Flynt McDade Selden Fogarty McDowell Senner Foley McEwen Shipley Foro. Ge.mld R. McFall ·Shriver Fo11d:. McGrath Sickles

William D. McMillan Sikes Fountain Macdonald Skubitz Fraser· MacGregor Slack Frellnghuysen Machen Smith, CaJ.if. Friedel Mackie Smith, Iowa FUlton, Pa. Madden Smith, N.Y. Fulton, Tenm.. Mahon Smith, Va. Garmatz Maillia.rd Springer Gathings Marsh Stafford Gettys Martin, Nebr. Staggers Giaimo Matsunaga Stalbaum Gibbons May . Stanton Gilbert Meeds Steed Gilligan Michel Stephens Gonzalez Miller Stratton Grabowski Mills Stubblefield Gray Minish Sul11van Green, Oreg. Mink Sweeney Green, Pa. Minshalil Talcott Greigg Mize Taylor Grider Moeller Teague, Calif. Griffin Monagan Tenzer Griffiths Moorhead Thompson, N.J. Gross Morgan Thompson, Tex. Grover Morris Thomson, Wis. Gubser Monison Todd Gurney Mors~ Trimble Hagan, Ga. Morton TUck Haley Moss Tunney Hall Multer Tupper Halpern Murphy, Dl. TUten Hamilton Murphy, N.Y. Udal[ Hanley Mu.ri"ay · Ullman Hanna. Natcher Utt Hansen, Idaho Nedzl. Van Deerlin Hansen, Iowa Nelsen Vanlik Hansen, Wash. Nix Vigorito Hardy O'Brien Vivian Ha.rsha .O'Hara, Dl. Waggonner Harvey, Mich. O'Hara, Mich. Walker, N.Mex. Hathaway · O 'Konski Watkins Hawkins Olsen, Mont. Watson Hays Olson, Minn. Watts Hebert O'Neal, Ga. Weltner Hechler O'Neill, Mass. Whalley Helstosld Ottinger White, Idaho Henderson Passman. White, Tex . . Herlong Patman Whitener IDcks Patten Whitten Holifield Pelly Widnall Holia.nd Pepper Williams Horton Perkins Wlson, Bob Hosmer Philbin Wilson, Howard. Pickle Charles H. Huil Pike Wolff Hungate .Pirnle Wright Huot. Poage Wyatt :Huichl~ ro~ .:WyUier Ichol.'d Pool· Yates Irwin · · ' Puclriald Young Jacobs PurceiJ. Younger Jarman Quie Zablocki

NAYS-3 B\ll'ton, Caltf. Conyers Ryan·

NOT VOTING-39 Adair Fisher Baring Fuqua Bell Gallagher Bolling Goodell · Brock' Hagen, Calif. Brown~ Calif. Halleck Clawson, Del Harvey, Ind. Collier McVicker Davis, Ga. · Mackay Devine Martin, Ala. Dowdy Martin, Mass. Downing Mathias Ellsworth Matthews

Moore Mosher Powell . Price Reinecke Resnick Roncalio Roudebush Sisk Teague, Tex. Toll Walker, Miss. WilUs

So the bill was passed. The Clerk announced the following

pairs: · Mr. Toll with Mr. Mathias.

Mr. Teague of Texas with Mr. Roudebush. Mr. Davis of Georgia with Mr. Adair. Mr. Downing with Mr. Harvey of Indiana.. Mr. Brown of California with Mr. Reinecke. Mr. Gallagher with Mr. Ellsworth. Mr. Fisher with Mr. Halleck. Mr. Fuqua with Mr. Collier. Mr. Price with Mr. Martin of Massachu­

setts. Mr. Sisk with Mr. Bell. Mr. Matthews with Mr. Walker of Missis­

sippi. · Mr. M~ckay with Mr. Moore.

Mr. Baring with Mr. Goodell. Mr. Willis with Mr. Devine. Mr. McVicker with Mr. Martin of Alabama.. Mr. Hagen of California with Mr. Brock. Mr. Resnick with Mr. Mosher. · Mr. Powell with Mr. Roncalio. Mr. Dowdy with Mr. Del Clawson.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table. · ·

PERMISSION TO REVISE AND EX­TEND REMARKS

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that Members speak­ing on the bill just passed may revise and extend their remarks and include perti­nent extraneous material.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered.

There was no objection.

GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND REMARKS

Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may have 5legislative days in which to extend their remarks on the bill just passed.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without objection, it is so ordered. ·

There was no objection.

ELECTION OF HON. CARL ALBERT, REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE STATE OF OKLAHOMA, AS SPEAK­ER PRO TEMPORE Mr. KEOGH. Mr. Speaker, I offer a

privileged resolution and ask for its im­mediate consideration.

The Clerk read the resolution, as follows:

H. REs. '779 Resolved, That Hon. CARL ALBERT, a Repre­

sentative from · the State ot: Oklahoma; be, and he is hereby, elected Speaker pro tempore during the absence of the Speaker.

Resolved, .That the :~;»resident and the.Sen­a te be notified by the Clerk of the election

5824 CONGRESSIONAL ~ECORD -_ HOU~E March 15, 1966 of the Honorable CARL .ALBE~T as Speaker pro tempore during the absence of the Speaker.

Mr. KEOGH. Mr. Speaker, I want to mention that this resolution is being offered at the request of the distinguished . Speaker of the House of Representatives.

The SPEAKER pro tempore <Mr. MILLS) . The question is on the reso- -lution. ·

The resolution was agreed to. A ·motion to reconsider was laid on the

table.

SWEARING IN OF SPEAKER PRO TEMPORE

Mr. ALBERT assumed the Chair and the oath of office was administered to him by Mr. CELLER, a Representative from the State of New York.

CONFERENCE REPORT ON SUPPLE­MENTAL FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AUTHORIZATION, FISCAL Y~R . 1966 Mr. MORGAN submitted a conference

report and statement on the bill (H.R. 12169) to amend .further the Foreign As­sistance Act of 1961, as amended, and for other purposes.

FURTHER MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE

A further message from the Senate by Mr. Arrington, one of its clerks, an­nounced that the Senate agrees to the report of the committee of conference on the disagreeing votes of tl_le two Houses on the amendments of the Sen­ate to the bill (H.R. 12752) entitled "An act to provide for graduated withhold­ing of income tax from wages, to re­quire declarations of estimated tax with respect to self-employment income, to accelerate current payments of esti­mated income tax by corporations, to postpone certain excise tax rate reduc­tions, and for other purposes."

NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE Mr. OLSEN of Montana. Mr. Speak­

er, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Montana?

There was no objection. Mr. OLSEN of Montana. Mr. Speaker,

I have introduced a bill to provide for the Surgeon General, with the approval of the Secretary of the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare, to estab­lish in the Public Health Service a Na­tional Eye Institute for the conduct and support of research and training relating to blinding eye diseases and visual dis­orders, including research and training in special health problems relating to the mechanism of sight and visual func­tion.

Surveys disclosed blindness ranks sec­ond to cancer as the affliction most feared by American people, more so than

heart disease, polio, and tuberculosis or loss of limbs.

More than 1 million Americans over 40 have glaucoma, these being prime tar­gets for eventual blindness. Most of them have never heard of the disease. More than 10 million throughout the world are totally blind.

One million Americans cannot read ordinary newspaper type with the aid of glasses, while 1 :Y2 million are blind in one eye.

Ninety million Americans suffer from ocular malfunction;

The National Health Education Com­mittee discloses that incidence of cat­aract among people aged 60 is nearly 60 percent, at age 80 almost 100 percent.

A Gallup survey disclosed that one out of five people has no idea what a cat­aract is, and even the most ·educated have only a vague conception of what is involved in this disease. Lack of public knowledge results from the fact so little has been done in the field of eye research.

More than 80 percent of all loss of vision in the United States results from diseases whose causes are unknown to science. Five percent are the result of accidents.

Visual disorders constitute one of the Nation's leading causes of disability. One-tenth of all patients seen in Ameri· can hospitals are eye patients.

In 1963 the cost of caring for the blind was more han $1 billion. Moneys in­vested in eye research by both Govern­ment and private sources amounted to $9 million that same year.

methods of the firing squad by our si­lence and our acquiesence?

I urge the President and the Vice Pres­ident to quickly intercede to prevent these extreme measures from becoming the means by which all of his social and economic problems are solved.

Lest we make a mockery of our valiant and tragic sacrifice of the lives of our American youth who need to have com­plete faith in the integrity of the South Vietnamese Government, we must force­fully insist that its leadership under­stand and apply to -its own people the same moral and ethical code of conduct that has caused our American soldiers to give their lives for the sake of the ideals of a democratic society.

This barbaric act must not be allowed to be repeated. To accept this kind of a solution to an economic phenomenon is to invite the easy road to ultimate ruin without treating the cause at all. A thousand executed profiteers will not buy a stable economy or a new social order.

THE 118TH ANNIVERSARY OF HUN­GARIAN INDEPENDENCE

Mr. PATTEN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there 9bjection to the request of the gentleman from New Jersey?

There was no objection. Mr. PATTEN. Mr. Speaker, it is with

special pride that I ' speak today on the 118th anniversary of the Hungarian up­rising for liberty against the Hapsburg dynasty.

SOUTH VIETNAMESE EXECUTION It is special for several reasons. Mrs. MINK. Mr. Speaker, I ask unan- It is special because my dear friend of

imous consent to address the House for many years, Bishop Zoltan Beky, presi-1 minute and to revise and extend my dent of the Hungarian Reformed Federa­remarks. tion of America, delivered the beautiful

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there and moving prayer heard this noon in objection to the request of the gentle- the House of Representatives. woman from Hawaii? It is special because people who love

and cherish freedom throughout the There was no objection. world have a particular respect for the Mrs. MINK. Mr. Speaker, a grave

travesty on justice has been perpetrated . Hungarian people. They have always been champions of liberty.

by the GQvernment of South Vietnam in And it is also special because one of the name of social and economic reform. the greatest fighters and leaders that The public justification for this execu- freedom ever had-Louis Kossuth-in­tion was, and I quote yesterday's Wash- spired the Hungarian revolution for free- · ington Post: "to fulfill Ky's pledge to dom we are observing today. President Johnson at the Honolulu Con- These revolutionaries for freedom were ference to put South Vietnam's social successful in their fight against tyranny and economic house in order." For all and Louis Kossuth became head of the the infiuence that we have on this re- Government. But their freedom did not gime, we did nothing to stop this sense- endure and the revolution was over­less public execution which makes a throw by th~ Hapsburg dyna.EitY. mockery of our whole system of justice. After Kossuth fied to Turkey, he later

Out of the Honolulu Conference came visited the United States, where he re­a display of unity of purpose of our two ceived many honors as a hero of free­Governments. There was renewed good dom. will · in the joint resolve and reaffirma- Judging not only from his deeds, but tion to help the people of South Vietnam from the words of praise that came from succeed in their own efforts to secure a ~me of America's greatest men, Louis better life;but this recent spectacular ex- Kossuth was indeed great. hibit of totalitarian edict to secure cer- Greeting him at Concord, Ralph Waldo tain ends points to the vastly different Emerson called Kossuth, "Freedom's worlds we truly live in. angel."

General Ky's goals and ours may be Horace Greeley, another literary im-the same, but can we, in the eyes of the mortal, said of Kossuth: Asians whom we seek to influence and to Of the many popular leaders who were up­save from communism, embrace his heaved by the great convulsions of 1848 into

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAi· RECORD_- HOUSE 5825" the full sunlight of European celebrity and American popular regard, the world has al­ready definitely assigned the first rank to Louis Kossuth, advocate, deputy, finance minister, and finally Governor of Hungary.

Whittier lauded him as "the noblest · guest."

And as we near recent history, we note that Woodrow Wilson in 1918 praised Kossuth and said:

I know the history of the gallant Magyar nation.

Tribute was not restricted to Ameri­cans of renown. The famous English economist and statesman Cobden de­clared:

Kossuth is certainly a phenomenon: he is not only the first orator of his age, but he unites the qualities of a great administrator with high morality and an indefatigable courage.

Because he loved freedom so deeply, Kossuth recognized despotism and always fought it vigorously-with sword and pen. As far back as October 27, 1851, he ob­served:

The principle of evil on the Continent is the despotic and encroaching spirit of the Russian power. Russia is the rock which breaks every sigh for freedom.

Louis Kossuth knew the threat of Russia even then but he also knew the promise of America. For about 116 years ago, he warned a gathering in Massachu­setts that, "From Russia, no sun will ever rise." ·

But he had faith in America's purpose and dream, for he also told that group:

To find the sunlight where it most spreads and lightens the path of freedom, we must come to America. ·

In 1852, Kossuth was presented to the United States Senate and also to the House of Representatives. He did not speak long, but, as always, spoke with eloquence. He said:

It is remarkable that while in the history of mankind, through all the past, honors were bestowed upon glory, and glory was at­tached only to success, the legislative au­thorities of this great Republic bestow the highest honors upon a persecuted exile, not conspicuous by glory, nor favored by success, but engaged in a just cause. There is a triumph of republican principles in this fact.

Later, Louis Kossuth, in heavy demand as a brilliant speaker, gave almost 300 public addresses, all unforgettable.

Mr. Speaker, on this day of tribute to the Hungarian people, it is hard to con­clude, because our hearts and thoughts are full of gratitude and love.

Since Louis Kossuth w111 always be the symbol of the courageous and freedom­loving Hungarian people, I would like to quote from the poem written by James Russell Lowell, named ''Kossuth."

Land of the Magyars, though it be 'fhe tyrant may relink his chain,

Already thine the victory, As just future measures gain.

Thou hast succeeded, -thou hast won The deathly travail's amplest worth,

A nation's duty thou hast done, Giving a hero to our earth.

And Daniel Webster delivered an ad­dress of welcome to Louis Kossuth on January 5, 1852. His words express the

feelings I have for the Hungarian people on this day of remembrance-and I be­lieve the feelings of many of my col-leagues. · Said Webster: ·

Hungary stands out far above her neigh_­bors in all that respects free institutions, constitutional government and a hereditary love of liberty.

How true these words are even 114 years later.

The free world will always remember and admire the courage of the Hun­garian people in 1956, when they rebelled against the tyranny of communism. Their courage was an inspiration to the entire world.

I visited Hungary last November and I observed with my own eyes that the people there have no freedom· under communism. Russian soldiers with ma­chine guns make the whole country a jail. The people seem lethargic-almost as if life is not worth living.

Mr. Speaker, on the 118th anniversary of the Hungarian uprising for liberty, let us pray to God that once again~soon­Hungary will be free.

OREGON COUNTY, MO., MOVES AHEAD WITH NEW CONSERVA­TION DISTRICT Mr. JONES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker,

I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Missouri?

There was no objection. Mr. JONES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker,

this month the Missouri State Soil and Water Conservation Districts Commis­sion authorized the people of Oregon County to move ahead in the protection and sound development of their soil and water resources by approving a soil and water conservation district for that county. This action resulted from a ref­erendum in which the people of Oregon County voted for a conservation district. Incidentally, this vote of approval was 382 to 20.

I have been extremely pleased with the stepped-up interest in soil and water conservation districts in Missouri. Thirty-one have been formed in the last 6 years, accounting for nearly half of the 68 that have been formed since 1944. I believe that this indicates recognition of the-benefits of sound conservation and development. I believe that it also in­dicates recognition of the value of the district mechanism through which the Department of Agriculture and other Federal agencies can channel help to rural individuals and communities. It is a healthy trend and I hope will continue.

Conservation districts have proved to be a sound way for communities to work together and plan for .not just the pres..: ent but for the long-term needs of the community. Their objectives to manage the land- and water resources soundly While developing them assures a commu­nity of resources that will remain ~n asset for f'!lture economic growth. The reasons f~r .supPOrting this vital con-

servation movement are valid-whether viewed from the point of the care of re­sources themselves, or whether from the point of the economic value these re­sources have in the community.

The congressional district which I represent--in which this new conserva­tion district is located-is a highly pro­ductive area and represents a large part of the agricultural income of the State. I have observed some of the conserva­tion work that local people have done to overcome water management and flood problems. Some of these problems the individual farmer can handle by him­self. Many require broader technical assistance such as is available through soil and water conservation districts. Many of the resource problems are of a community nature where a group ap­proach is required. Here again, the con­servation district provides coordinated action. Its farsighted and comprehen­sive resource inventories and programs are responsive to the needs and desires of the community because they are planned and carried out by local people.

I commend soil and water conserva­tion districts for the vital role they have taken in community development and I am gratified that Oregon County has joined their ranks, and am hopeful that­the few remaining counties in the lOth district which do not have soil conserva­tion districts will give serious considera­tion to the benefits which they might derive from the creation of such districts.

OPPORTUNITY CRUSADE Mr. GOODELL. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New York?

There was no objection. Mr. GOODELL. Mr. Speaker, hear­

ings are now underway on. the poverty program. Congressman QmE and I are pressing for consideration of our pro­posal to- substitute an opportunity cru­sade for the misfiring war on poverty.

Last week, Mr. Shriver testified rather superficially on a variety of issues. Among other things, in his prepared tes­timony, he made the incredible state­ment:

Since last summer fewer than 50 ineligibles have been discovered in the Neighborhood Youth Corps.

The very next day, Secretary Wirtz contradicted Mr. Shriver by admitting that at least 5,000 to 6,000 enrollees in the Neighborhood Youth Corps have been found ineligible and dropped since last summer; 1,700 were dropped in Chicago alone since January 1. Now they are saying that these are welfare cases, barely exceeding the strict poverty stand..: ards. Well, a quick spot check of widely dispersed records in Chicago gives quite a different picture. Although arbitrary handling of the hearings prevented me from questioning Mr. Shriver on the&e; here are some samples. - I · have removed the names of the enrollees to spare them

5826 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March -15, 19o6

embarrassment; however, they are avail­able to o:mcials who may be interested::

Male emroll'ee, 17, family of fom, father head of household~ in.come $11.000 a year.

Male enrollee,19, family of five, father head of household, income $10,200 a year.

Female enrollee. 19, family of two­housewlfe with no chlldren'-husband head of household. income $5,.000-plus a year.

Female enrollee, 18, family of three-, an only child-father and mother bath work, earn jointly $J50 per week.

Female enrollee. 20, family; of three­an only child-father head of household, income $7,59Qa year.

Male enrollee, 17, family of six .. father head of household, income $7,000-plus a year.

Male enrollee, 19, family of five, grand­father head of household, fneome$7,00:0.­plusayear.

Male enrollee, 18 .. family af six, father and mother both work., earn jointly $500. a month.

Male enrollee, 2.6, family of :flve, father head of household, income $5.,400 a year.

This fs the program supposed to help poor youngsters who are school dropouts or likely dropouts for reasons of poverty~ Obviously, a full investigation would re­veal many times more than Mr. Shrivers. 50 ineligibles in Chicago alone. And no wonder. Last November the p_ublic rela­tions representative for the Chicago poverty program stated':

We don't know what the fammes of kids make. No straight flat figure on what an applicant family should make has been set. We have no statistics on incomes of the fam­ilies of the kids in the Corps, We assume that, when we rec~ive a name from the Illinois State Employment Service, the candi­date named is qualified.

At that time, the executive director o! the Chicago program was quoted as follows:

It is absolutely correct. that, until today, no means test was given in recruiting.

Almost on~-quarter of the total en­rollees in Neighborhood Youth Corps in Chicago had to be dropped because they exceeded the income requirement. At the same time, the poverty director in Ch!cago admits that there are at least 35,000, and others estimate up to 60,000'. young people between the ages of 16 and 22 in Chicago who fully meet the poverty standards for Neighborhood Youth Corps but weren't given a chance.

Mr. Speaker, these are not isolated cases; they prevail all over the country. In addition to. the 1, 700 dropped in Chicago, Mr ~ Jack Howard, director of the Neighborhood Youth Corps, admitted that about 2,000 in New York City and at least 1,000 in Los Angeles were ineligible. That is close to 5,000 ineligibles from three cities alone.

In the next few days, I will discuss ether serious violations in the poverty program in Chicago. In the meanwhile let me emphasize-that the Quie-Goodeli opportunity crusade would couect these deficiencies and put 50,000 youngsters into productive jobs in private enter­prise through . a new Industry Youth Corps.

DEFENDING FREEDOM WITH FREEDOM

M'r. SAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remark5 at thfs point in the RECORD and lncltide extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman Pennsylvania?

There was no objection. Mr. SAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, last

month Roger M. Blough, chairman of the board, United states Steel Corv., and a native of my hometown, delivered an ad­dress at the founders day' banquet a:f Washington University in St. Louis, Mo. Since a portion of it deals with the fiscal responsibilities of Congress, I commend Mr. Blough's presentation to my col­leagues.

Without question, lack of restraint on the part of the administration in re­questing appropriations and lack of re­straint on the the part of Congress in making such funds available are the ma­jor provocations in an inflationary trend. They are the principal impediments to. holding onto the value of our money.

Providing the finest equipment and tools of war is- the topmost consideration at this time. As Mr. Blough has estab­lished, however, this eost has not reached a point where it can be tagged as the sole reason for the growing excess of Federal expenditures over Federal income. The real culprit is bureaucratic waste, and it cannot be tolerated if Congress has any intention or holding the line against the destructive forces of inflation.

Under unanimous consent, Mr. Blough's address appears herewith:

Founders day in any university provides a welcome opportunity to indulge in recollee .. tions of past achievements. It serves to re­eall the humble beginnings. of what, in this ease. has pro'llen to be a monumental educa­tional venture that was. undertaken more than a century ago. Everyone associated yvith Washing.ton University may well be proud of its history, its traditions, and of its past performance whfch weighs so heavily as a promise for the 1uture.

People have come to expect great things of this university and of its graduates; and 1f l do not dwell, tonight, upon the com­mendable degree to which these expectations have been fulfilled, it is. only because I am understandably reluctant to do anything which might contribute to inflation--even of the ego.

But founders day, as you observe it on this campus, has a cuuent purpose which trans­cends the mere recognition of a flne and noble tradition. It provides a. unique oc­~ion to contemplate contemporary issues of mounting importance. Many of you w111 recall that last year, the Chief Justice of the Untted States discussed with you the "foundations of freedom" as those founda­ttons are imbedded in the law, the Constitu­tion. and the Bill of Rights.. And in. doing so, he shed much penetrating light upon an issue of profound importance to the future of this Nation.

Tonight, I should like to consider with you another aspect of freedom which seems to me to be of imminent importance and which certainly touches the lives of all of us. It concerns the preservation ot economlc free­dom in America while we seek to defend the political freedom of other peoples through-out the world. ·

- AlS we meet her&. we are confronted by; th& fact that. despite prodigio.\1& e1Iorts. to reach a negotiated peace, Ola Nation is en­fPged 1n what. migbt-1! you wiah-lut called a negotiated war. Two hundred thousand American men are now fighting in Vietnam. Each month, some thousands of others are receiving their "greetings" from Uncle sam~ And present lndtcatio_ns a~e that before the ~ar is out the number or American troops­engaged in this conflict wnl haTe more than doubled.

So- for the fourth time fn thls century, American youth has answered the call to ~epel aggression in foreign 1~ to protect a foreign people against subjugation, inflltra.­tio:n, and subversion, and to help them 1l.nd a solution to their own problems.

In this effort our men are heavily handl­capped by a jungle-type e:Jristlence, by a. eli­mate and terrain that is allen to anything­they have known, by extended supply lines reaching halfway around the- w<>rld, by In­adequate help from most of the other f~ nations, and by extreme barriers to under­standing.

Meanwhile. among our people here. a.t. home, there are some who question vehe­mently the necessity, the Wfsdom or even the morality of our involvement in this war And this, too, is an exercise- Oi freedom that iew of us would seek to denYJ., l suppElSe, ho,w­ever deepl~ we- may disagree with such e-x­pressions.

But there is one basic point. I believe, upon which true Americans- can never dis­agree: That. everything needed to protect: the lives. of our soldiers 1n Vietnam. shall be providecl to the llmi!t of our na­tional resomces, both mat&l:ial and human .. If the sacrifice of economic freedom wW,. in fact, hasten the winning of the peace in Vietnam and reduce our casualties there there can hardly be any Ioyaf opposition t~ such a. sacrifice. But if,. on the- other hand, the economic freedoms which have- made this Nation the most productive in the world are--as I believe them to be--a unique source of our military and economic strength, then we should, and must, defend and preserve them in the national interest.

In short, the question bef:0re us is:. To what degree may we assist in the- fight for freedom by relying upon freedom-freedom in production, freedom to buy and' sen, and freedom in occupation.?' Or must we revert ~o wartime types of wage controls, or price controls, materiel controls and even controls of movement among occupations in order, as. a nation, to wage the defense of freedom?'

The question is a grave one; and it is none. too early to explore it now in the cool, un­emotional right of reason and fact; for the good sense and the patriotie endeavors of the American people will have much to do with determining. its solut.ion. What the people think, and what th.ey say to their. Rep­resentatives in Congress, is certain to in:tru­ence· the final decision since eventually­under our system of laws--Congress must make that decision.

Let us consider, then, three aspects of this question. Do the pressures generated by the war in Vietnam, plus those created by a rapidly growing economy, make controls nec­essary now or in the foreseeable future? Do the economic disruptions caused by controls themselves negate or outweigh the benefits to be expected from them? Are other, less disruptive means available for use in dealing with these pressures?

Turning :first to the question ot n~essity, we .recall that in World War II and again during the- Korean conflict controls were im­posed upon production, distribution. wages and prices in order to channel the necessary portion of our Gross National Product into the war e1fort. How then. do condlt1ona

March. 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 5827 today compare with those that existed be­fore?

Well, at the peak of World War II, defense expenditures averaged about $84 billion a year and exceeded 40 percent of the total GNP. At the height of the Korean war, they were almost $49 billion and accounted for 13lfa percent of the GNP. Last year they amounted to $50 billion; but they repre­sented only 7lf2 percent of the GNP. That is because the GNP itself has more than trebled since World War II, and has nearly doubled since the peak Korean year of 1953.

During the present year it is estimated that our total defense expenditures may rise to $60 billion which would st111 be less than 81!2 percent of the anticipated GNP; and they would have "tO mount to an astronomical $100 billion in order to reach the 131!2 percent rate that prevailed at the height of the Korean war. That is far beyond any pro­jected requirement of the action in Vietnam.

As for manpower, it must be noted here also that the national labor force has sub­stantially increased in numbers during the past 20 years.

At the end of World War II, there were 11,500,000 men in our Armed Forces-or 171!2 percent of the total labor supply. Dur­ing Korea, there were 3,500,000 men in the military, representing over 5 percent of the labor force; and about 475,000 of these were actually engaged in Korea.

Last year, some 2,800,000 men were in the armed forces and this accounted for only 3.6 percent of the labor supply. Future re­quirements, as presently projected, could call for an additional 300,000 men in the services; but even if that number were to rise to 500,-000, the military drain on the national labor force would amount to only about 4 percent as compared to more than 5 percent during the Korean conflict.

And as for Vietnam itself, the 200,000 men now stationed there constitute only one­fourth of 1 percent of our national labor sup­ply; and President Johnson reports that the total production of goods and services for the war "accounts for less than 1% percent of our gross national product."

So it is evident, I think, that Vietnam is not the primary source of the economic pres­sures we are experiencing. Vietnam may provide an excuse for the advocacy of con­trols. But it is not a reason for them; and if we seek out the major cause of these pres­sures, we must look to the unusually rapid rate of our economic growth in the non­military areas. ·

Last year, the American economy grew at a greater rate than that of any other major industrial nation in the world. After cor­recting for rising prices, the real rate of growth was 5lf2 percent; and all of this new activity increased the demand for manpower, and the upward pressure on wages and prices.

During the 1960's, the expansion of the supply of money and credit has been at twice the rate prevailing in the late 1950's. Gov­ernment expenditures at all levels-Federal, State, and local-have increased 65 percent since Korea even though there has been no appreciable rise in military outlays. Thus virtually all of this increase has occurred on the nondefense side of the ledger.

As a result, a head of economic steam is building up to a point which is beginning to cause national concern lest it break out in a burst of rising wages and prices. And this concern is understandable at a time when w~ are confronted by a stubbornly continuing imbalance of international pay­ments, a worrisome outflow of our dwindling gold supply, the need to widen the narrowing gap in our favorable balance of trade, and the necessity of preserving the integrity of the dollar as a medium. of international ex­change.

Trying to find out how long we can con­tain this mounting head of steam while con-

tinuing to heat up the boiler is something like playing Russian roulette. Certainly we cannot continue indefinitely no matter how hard we try to hold back the hand on the pressure gage. For the present we are pin­ning our faith upon the willingness and the ability of both industry and labor to comply voluntarily with the governmental guide­posts established some years ago; and while a considerable degree of price stability has been achieved during this period--especially in the more visible industries where a certain amount of "persuasion" could be applied­the boiler is clearly beginning to leak.

For the entire nongovernmental sector of the economy, employee compensation per man-hour has risen more than output per man-hour in each of the past 3 years; so unit labor costs have kept mounting. Across the economy generally, labor settlements last year exceeded the guidepost limits of 3.2 per­cent; and a recent release by the Department of Labor reports that in the construction in­dustry, for example, wages and benefits rose 4.8 percent during tl;le past fiscal year, while their study of a limited number of these labor contracts negotiated in 1965 revealed increases averaging 6.1 percent and ranging up to 8.3 percent.

Under the pressure of these rising costs and of the increased economic activity gen­erally, the Consumer Price Index has risen 11 percent since 1957-59, and the tempo has accelerated recently. In fact I might add, parenthetically, that during the 7 years since the end of 1958, the cost of living has gone up about six times as much as the price of finished steel. But I mention that only in passing.

Further energizing this trend toward higher wages and consequent rising prices is the fact that we now have practically full employment, and there is an actual shortage of skilled workers. Only about 4 percent of the labor force is presently classified as un­employed, and the Council of Economic Ad­visers reports that this figure will drop to 3% percent for the current year and will be well below that level at year's end. Among married men, unemployment is now down to 2 percent and is still declining.

Under all of these circumstances, it will clearly become increasingly difficult to main­tain an acceptable degree of wage and price stability through the publication of guide­posts and the powers of Presidential persua­sion; and the question arises: "What next?"

So the situation that confronts us today is much like that which prevailed at the end of 1950, when the United States had started down the road to wage and price controls. Then, as now, the road was paved with requests for a voluntary freeze; and standards for the freeze were being drawn up. Under the pressures of that day, the prices of many products were rising; and the prospect of price control, itself, added greatly to these pressures as producers and mer­chants sought to cover their rising costs before the freeze hit them. Production shifted from lower price lines to more ex­pensive, and more profitable goods; and re­tailers built their inventories to a record high, thus adding to demand in an already overheated economy.

But before we travel that road again, let us stop, look, and listen, for it is one thing to talk of controls and quite another thing to survive them. There is no doubt that for a limited period they can and do hold down the lid on prices. There is also no doubt, however, that they create scarcity and thus add to the economic pressures that caused their adoption in the first place. Some of us whose memory goes back to the controls of 20 years ago will recall the butter that was sold from under the counter to favored customers, and the deterioration in the quality of merchandise that occurred as producers and merchants were often forced-

at the peril of their own survival-to pay higher..:than-ceiling prices on purchases in order to get the materials to keep their busi­nesses running. · -Then, too, there is a wasteful deployment

of manpower at a time when a shortage of manpower already exists. Under the normal operation of a free market, the people them­selves--as buyers--determine what man­power will be allocated to what production. If they do not choose to buy a certain product, then that product will no longer be made and the manpower will go elsewhere to produce what is wanted and needed.

Controls not only wipe out this self­adjusting, competitive mechanism, but--by their almost unbelievable complexity-they create enormous new manpower demands in the administration and the application of the regulations.

To illustrate, let me recall that during the Korean war, United States Steel's operations were under control by eight different Federal agenc}es, the most important of which were the National Production Author­ity and the Office of Price Stabilization.

Regulations and directives of the National Production Authority aggregated about 300,-000 words and underwent approximately 400 amendments, supplements, revocations, and directions.

The Office of Price Stabilization issued 37 different regulations applying to our business. One ceiling price regulation alone consisted of almost 30,000 words and was amended 41 times with 20 supplemental regulations. So estimate if you can the number of account­ants, lawyers, engineers, and others required to keep up with these regulations; expand that to cover all the businesses in the coun-

' try, big and small; add the thousands em­ployed in the administration of these con­trols on the Government side, and you come up with some idea, at least, of the great wastage of manpower that is inherent in the mere application of controls themselves.

But, you may ask, can the Defense Depart­ment--in the absence of controls-get what it needs to carry on its military efforts? The answer is that it can and it does. We already have a system of priorities under which De­fense has first claim on essential production.

But will not the Government have to pay more than it should? And the answer to that is also simple; for the Government is the sole buyer of war material while there are many sellers competing for its business. Thus we have the opposite of a monopoly­a monopsony. And as a monopsony, the Government imposes conditions of purchase under which it exercises the right to rene­gotiate contracts and to reclaim an adjudi­cated part of the purchase price if ·the profits on the sale are deemed too large.

But then, you may ask, how about the average fellow, the pensioner, or widow liv­ing on a fixed income. Without controls, is there any better way of keeping prices from skyrocketing? And here, I can only think of the ardent young suitor whose proposal of marriage had been firmly rejected by the girl of his dreams.

"Tell me," he pleaded, "is there anyone else?"

"Oh, Elmer," she replied, "there must be." So it is with controls. There must be bet­

ter solutions; and I believe that there are. In the first place we must recognize that

our productive capacity in America is ex­panding substantially every year; so there is an ever-increasing supply of goods and services to meet our Nation's demands, both military and civ111an.

The President has called upon business to exercise restraint in its pricing policies; and has asked 1abor unions to keep their demands within certain bounds. Here it must be said that the two p~oblems are somewhat different. Among businesses there is a high degree ot competition which tends to repress

5828 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966

prices; butr among unions there 11t also a high degree. ot competition-more in the­nature- of political competition-which tends; conversely to escalate wages. · For example, transit workers in New York

r.ecently won wage and benefit increases fam 1n excess of guidepost limits; and now it is announced that the New York City Pollee: will seek pay boosts that will also shatter the guideposts concept.

It goes without saying that among labor unions you wlll find just as many patriotic­and dedicated men as in any other segment; of our society. These men, however, have a real problem. They feel compelled by force of circumstance to demand "more" 1n behalf" of the individuals they represent . . That is their function and their job; and it is asking much of them when they are called upon to exercise restraint.

Similarly it is the inescapable obligation of business managers to keep their enter­prises healthy and to generate the profit necessary to keep America's industrial facili­ties modern and competitive--not only in the interest of the owners but in the national interest as well. So there must be some wage and price flexibiUty to accommodate­the myriad changes that occur from day to day. Yet I believe that the wiser heads in the leadership of both labor and business wilF recognize that the exercise- of restraint in the highest possible degree is imperative at a time whe-n the probaJble alternatives are rising costs and runaway prices or disruptive controls.

But restraint is not a one-way street, and no matter how diligently and patriotically business and labor may try to plug the leaks In the economic boiler, they cannot succeed unless someone stops pourlng on the coal. And that, I believe, is where Congress comes in. On the monetary side, the Federal Re­serve Board is authorized and equipped to retard the expansion of currency and credit; and I would not anticipate that Congress would seek to oppose the necessary exercise of these powers.

On the fiscal side, Congress can ease the pressur.e by the judicious use of taxation; and the President has already recommended the reinstatement of certain excise taxes and a speed-up in the payments of personal and corporate in~ome taxes.

But it is in the area of restraint in appro­priations and other legislation that the hard­working men on the Hill face both their most difficult problems and their greatest opportunity to prevent a further heating up of the economy; for it is they who control the purse strings.

Today w.e dream of an Amedca where there will be no slums, no pockets of poverty, no illiterates, no unemployed, no discrimina­tion, no lack of medical facilities for all, and a minimum of crime. And .. being Americans, we are impatient to reach those shining goals-which is as it should be. But exces­sive impatience at a time of great economic pressure can be disastrous and produce the wage and price explosion which neither guideposts nor controls can permanently pre­vent. And it is up to all of us to recognize that we cannot have what I call instant amuence.

Certainly it should be possible to defer a number of programs which call for pouring of additional dollars into the economy from Government sources, however meritorious those programs might be under other. cir­cuinBtances.

Is it necessary, for exampler to. press for­ward With make-work types o:ll projects at a time when manpower is already scarce and growing scarcer?

Ia th1a a. time to undertake other large governmental expenditures which w1ll divert

manpower from more immediately neeessa.ry production? No one discounts the value of training the youth of this Nation and pro­viding jobs for them; but is it not better fol'" them to be trained on the job while­earning their own keep and doing useful work? And does not the groWing shortage of skllled workers create new opportunities for the unskilled to acquire skills?

Then, too, is this. the year to enact, for example, a law increasing the minimum wage by 40 percent, and at, the same time talk about a 3.2-percent limit on increases un­der the guideposts? Will this not tend to: elevate the entire wage structure when the increased social security and medicare taxes that went into effect last month have already added at least two-thirds. of a percent to em­ployment costs generally-an addition, in­cidentally, which the guideposts do not take into account?

Is 1966 the year in which to federalize un­employment compensation by legislation that Will add still further to the cost of em­ployment in hundreds of corporations all over the country?

In short, is this the time to enactr---in the name of social progress-far-reaching pro­grams that are costly, inadequately managed because of the lack of trained manpower, and in many instances designed to correct situations that the present economic buildup is already tending to correct Without gov­ernmental intervention?

The answer is up to the Members of Con­gress. It is their prerogativ~ to authorize expenditures. It is their obligation to view the economic picture as a; whole and act in their own best wisdom.

Summing up, then, this is- a plea for rec­ognizing where we· are as a nation--a na­tion which necessarily must meet its com­mitments abroad and maintain its economic strength at home.

It fs a plea for practical restraint by both business and labor.

It is equally a plea for restraint on the part of Congress which will finally determine. the extent of the pressures unleashed in our economic system.

It is even more a plea to recognize that the most effective way to help our Government achieve its purposes Ls not through the im­position of controls-and that even the sug­gestion of controls breeds apprehensions which induce scare buying and, in turn, in­crease the upward tendency of wages and prices.

Above all, this fs a plea to. recognize the free market economy for what it is: the most ef­ficient, productive source of our material freedom; and: to acknowledge that interfer­ence with the markets operati<Jn leads to inefficiency, inequity, and to shortageS".

In a word, it is a plea to defend freedom with freedom.

ANNOUNCEMENT Mr. FISHER. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman :from Texas?

There was no objection. Mr. FISHER. Mr. Speaker, on the.

vote which was just concluded on the appropriation biU I was unavoidably de­tained .and arrived in the Chamber im­mediately after the conclusion of the vote~ I should like to announce that had l been present, l would have voted "yea."

THE ARMY ARSENAL SYSTEM. AND THE SPRINGFIELD ARMORY­NO.II Mr. BOLAND. Mr~ Speaker~ I ask

unanimous consent to extend my remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter. · The SPEAKER pro tempore~ Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts?

There was no objection. Mr. BOLAND. Mr. Speaker, yesterday

the gentleman from Massachusetts, Con­gressman CONTE, and I addressed the House for the purpose of bringing to the. attention of Congress the extreme seri­ousness, to the security of this country., of current steps being taken by the De­partment of Defense and the Army to­ward closing out all operations and fa­cilities at the Springfield Armory.

Today, we are providing more basic in­formation in opposition to this most in­advisable and fateful decision on the part of the Secretary of Defense. It is a decision which, in our opinion, gam­bles-first in the name of disproved cost reduction and now in the name of private enterprise--with the long-range security of the Nation as well as the immediate support of our troops in Vietnam_ We say disproved cost reduction because, as will be shown in subsequent state­ments, no real saving to the taxpayer can result from this move. In this statement we want to give you some highlights of the background which led up to this fate-­ful order.

Following World War Ir and during the late 1950's, following the Korean war, the Army lived on rather short ration5 in small arms for the purpose of using up many of the stores accumulated duF­ing the Korean war and immediately ther~after. This meant relatively little new procurement for such weapons. De­fense money, for the most part, was being spent on bombers and missiles. These were lean years insofar as· procurement of small arms was concerned~ Accord­ingly, they were lean years for many of our Army arsenals involved in weapon production. However, the: arsenals were kept going, even though the unit costs were high.

This was the period for expansion of industrial type funding to many defense installations and under this type of fund­ing the arsenals were required to sup­port themselves by sales of. weapons and services. These arsenals were required to support a war production reserve, in effect, from thin current earnings. Nat­urally, under such circumstances, unit costs at the production facilities o! the. arsenals were high. Army procurement officials a:nd their customers. in the other services, under the pressure of cost re­duction, began to buy elsewhere, when­ever possible. This added to the diffi­curties of the arsenals and a vicious cycle was created.

Mr. Speaker, we have prepared and submitted to the Armed Services Com­mittee of the House a mther lengthy memorandum which provides- the back­ground for the decision to close Spring-

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 5829 field as we have been able to traee it and put it together. We submit this memo­randum here for information and con­sideration of all Members of the Con­gress: MEMORANDUM TO HON. L. MENDEL RIVERS,

CHAIRMAN, HOUSE ARMED . SERVICES CoM­MITTEE, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, WA'SH­INGTON, D.C., AND HON. EDWARD P. BOLAND

Our deep concern over the decision to close the Springfield Armory has caused us to re­view as thoroughly as possible the back­ground of this fateful decision. While our main concern in the beginning was for Springfield, in the process of our study we have also developed a great concern for the future of . all inhouse research and develop­ment and production capability in support of our Armed Forces. There has been a dras­tic change in Department of Defense policy regarding these important Inhouse opera­tions which has evolved in the past 3 years. This is a policy change which the Armed Services Committee .should be concerned about and, which we believe, should never have been undertaken without the benefit ot extensive congressional review and perhaps legislation.

Our review of this policy development has been · limited to the policy within the De­partment of the Army, as directed by the Department of Defense, but we believe that it has much broader implications than just the Army and it can seriously affect the fu­ture security of this Nation. We believe you wm agree with us once all the facts are brought into proper focus. Let us sum­marize for you what we have been able to put together .on this matter.

Prior to 1963, it had been the policy of the Department of Defense and the Army to maintain a system of arsenals to keep -alive the arts and promote the sciences which are so necessary in producing war materiel. Past experience h-ad shown that to ftll the needs for ordnance materiel, during an emergency, an adequate system must be in existence when the emergency occurred. The arsenal system was considered to be the only feasible

· repository available for the knowledge and skills necessary to accomplish Immediate and effective production of war goods in an emer­gency. On this premise, the Army had de­veloped the arsenal system beginning with tbe Springfield Armory in 1794. The pri­mal'y mission of the arsenal system was to design, develop and procure weapons and ordnance materiel. A secondary mission was to prepal'e mob111zation plans for aiding in­dustry in _ emergencies to convert from civilian to war production with a minimum of delay and confusion.

With the advent of the cold war and es­pecially during and following the Korean war it became evident that the United States would need to maintain a fairly strong peacetime mi1ltary force. With the in­creased demand for mllltary weapons, pri­vate industry found it profitable to remain in the field and compete wi:t(h the arsenals for these continuing military requirements. Durtng the 1950's, operations under indus­trial type funding was. expanded and the ar­senals were expected to compete on a cost basis. The mobilization role of the arsenals was pushed aside.

By 1960, it became evident that the arsenal system was in trouble. The then Assistant Secretary of the Army for Logistics, Mr. Courtney Johnson, personally surveyed op­erations at the various arsenals. He ex­pressed alarm at the way things were going .!or these 'faCilities, because he strongly be­lieved in the necessity o! perservJng the Army arsenal system. ·we quote from · a memoran­dum on this subject which he wrote In Sep­tember 1960.

CXII-368-Part 5

"I am convinced that the In-house capa­bilities that we have are essential to the Army's role in the defense of the country. It is historically obvious that we retain, by this method, <mpabilities during peacetime which would not and could not be main­tained in industry. Industry cannot hold its own properties in standby, producing no in­come, and cannot pay and preserve the hard core of knowledgeable engineers, . scientists, technicians, and teachers who deal specifi­cally with Inilitary problems and products in which industry is not interested unless money is continuously available .for production, thus affording the opportunity to zr.ake a profit.

"The installations are, generally speaking, operating at a low level. Overheads, which are incurred in order to preserve for future mobilization purposes, facilities, and knowl­edge, are charged against the small current production for the installation, thus raising materially the selling price of the items pro­duced. These higher selling prices are dis­couraging to Army procurement personnel and to our other customers .(Marines, etc.) with the result that the tendency is for the amount of business to decrease. This vicious circle will put us out of business."

Mr. Johnson went on to propose solutions. He suggested a study which "should result in a plan which would establish the operation of these in-house facillties on the basis that meets essential milltary requirements for spe­cial research, production engineering and methods, pilot line operations, the educa­tion and retention of scientlfi ~ personnel, mmtary production specialists, inspectors, and teachers." He went on to propose that a certain percentage of all PEMA and research and development funds be allocated for the program.

As a followup to Mr. Johnson's memoran­dum, task .groups were formed to make studies of the various arsenals. The arsenals were called upon to furnish information for these studies. The studies suggested by Mr. Johnson were sidetracked for a time by the change in administration voted into of!lce in 1960. However, Mr. McNamara's cost reduc­tion programs came ln to being and the search was on in earne.$t for facillties and opera­tions which might be closed, curtailed, or otherwise changed.

In March 1963, the f"1hief of Staff of the Army initiated what was called a compre­hensive review of the Army arsenal complex. This led to a study entitled "The Future of the AMC Arsenal System." The Chief of Staff instructed the Board, appointed to make this study, to consider the continuing require­ment for a m111tary arsenal capability to per­form the following missions:

"(a) That of conducting the research, de­velopment and engineering of new items and producing experimental models and quan­tities for engineering and troop tests with the end purpose of providing a procurement package of drawings, specifications, and tech­nical advice to assist industry in quantity production.

"(b) 'To be able to support the Army con­tract negotiators with knowledgeable tech­nical experts who can review production plans and insure that the Government re­ceives quality materiel at reasonable prices and on schedule.

"(c) That essential production skills and know-how be maintained through a limited­quantity production effort, with the full rec­ognition that quantity production of any item must not be allowed to become a func­tion of .any arsenal except where commel"cial concerns are unwilling to undertake it, when their prices are unreasonable, or where it is required for s:ecurity reasons."

The Board making this study concluded that of 10 facilities performing a substantial amount of manufacturing, 6 must be re­tained to perform required research and de-

velopment functions and because their man­ufacturing capab111t1es are unique 1n the arsenal system and not available in private industry. 0! the l"emaining five facilities, the Board recommended closing two (one of which was to be maintained in standby for mobilization purposes), two more were to be .given further study and retention of the Springfield Armory in .an active status was suspect because of the general availability of compa.Table capability on small arms in private industry. The Board recommended further study of the Springfield Armory.

In February 1964, the Army Weapons Com­mand was directed to make a study to find alternate methods for performing the .mis­sions of the Springfield Armory in effect so that the armory could be closed. The de­cision to close Springfield had, for all prac­tical purposes, been made in advance of the study. The purpose of the study was to find other means for doing the essential work of this facility. By this time, and, because of the Vietnam buildup, private industry had become heavily engaged in the production of small arms, under the guidance and with the help of the experts at Springfield. Without those experts it is doubtful if it could have been done, except at great expense and the loss of critical valuable time. 'However, since the small arms business was once again profitable, private industry was in it in a big way as they have been in previous wars. The conclusion, a very shortsighted one we might add, was that, with industry doing this work, Springfield was no longer needed and that it was pro-posed to merely transfer a small re­search contingent to another facility and close Springfield Armory. .

A very interesting aspect of this Army Weapons Command study is revealed by a brief memorandum which turned up at the Rock Island Headquarters of the Army Weapons Command. This memorandum provided certain basic guidelines for the people from this command . making this study. Two pertinent paragraphs of this highly significant memorandum are as fol­lows:

"Establish the hard core requirement for Watervliet and Rock Island Arsenals· and then establish the fact that Sprin'gfield Armory is excess to requirements. This de­termination having been made and properly supported by facts, we will move into the next section.

"Based on the foregoing alternate plans, conclusions should be drawn terminating with the conclusion that it is in the best interests of the Government to close Spring­field Armory and transfer the R. & E. func­tions to Rock Island."

We do not want ' to appear to dwell too much on the case of the Springfield Armory, because we know that your interest · is the much broader one of the entire Army Arsenal system. We must bring Springfield into it; however, because this is the case history which we have studied and it also happens to be a key factor in the develop­ment of current Department of Defense policy regarding the arsenal system.

The study of the future of the AMC arsenal system produced some recommenda­tions as "proposed augmentation of Depart­ment of the Army philosophy." Two of these recommendations pertaining to this issue were as follows:

"AMC will maintain centers with responsi­blllty for technical direction through the cradle-to-grave cycle for each commodity.

"AMC will rely almost completely on in­dustry for quantity production, but should maintain multipurpose pilot lot production capability for selected· items which could be expanded to perform limited quantity pro­duction as required in the intereat of time, cost and military exigencies."

The conclusions of the small arms study on Springfield wel"e arrived at before the

5830 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 study was made. It seems obvious to us, from the guidelines memo quoted earlier, that the purpose of the study was to sup­port those conclusions. This was also in­herent in the previously quoted instructions from the Chief of Staff which said, "That quantity production of any item must not be allowed to become a function of any arsenal." Quantity production of small arms had been a function of the Springfield Armory from the beginning along with the development of new weapons. The Spring­field Armory has served as the nucleus of small arms production in support of our troops in every war throughout our history, including the Korean and Vietnam wars, as well as during the slack times between wars.

Now, in the name of shortsighted cost re­duction, the Department of Defense is going to rely completely upon private industry for the future development and production of small arms. A small in-house research con­tingent will be maintained, but there will be no production, not even pilot production. Based on this study, in November 1964, Sec­retary McNamara ordered the Springfield Armory phased out and finally closed by April 1968.

The conclusions of this small arms study were that a savings would accrue by closing the Springfield Armory, based upon cost fig­ures complied by the group. Once these cost figures become known, people interested in keeping Springfield going found them to be fallacious. Other erroneous information and conclusions were also found in this report. These findings by our Springfield group were presented to Secretary McNamara in February 1965. After further review of the matter in the Department of Defense, Secretary McNamara directed that an inde­pendent study of the Springfield Armory problem be made by the consulting firm of Booz, Allen & Hamilton, Inc. This study was transmitted to Secretary McNamara Oc­tober 15, 1965.

The Booz, Allen & Hamilton study and report was based on a question, as follows:

"To meet DOD needs effectively and eco­nomically, should any part of the Spring­field Armory be retained in Springfield, and, if so, for how long?"

This study found that the actual costs of manufacture for the armory and for indus­trial contractors which have produced small arms are about the same for all practical purposes. It was found that as a result of DOD efforts (with the help of Springfield) to build up industry interest and capability there was no longer any significant manu­facturing capablllty at the armory that does not exist in industry and, therefore, the armory's manufacturing capacity is no longer needed. It also found that industry had also created a research and development capability equal to the armory's (at Gov­ernment expense, of course) .

The study found that the proposed move of nonmanufacturing functions is distinctly marginal from a savings-cost standpoint, and that some risk in the performance of current programs would be taken with such a transfer. Yet the report went on and rationalized the closing of Springfield and to find that DOD policies with respect to small arms weapons systems, which assign to industry the development and design of hardware, the technical data package prep­aration, and both pilot and quantity pro­duction, are completely feasible. This latter statement completely ignores experience and history. It must assume that spending for arms w111 go on at a substantial rate in­definitely and that such work will always be profitable for industry.

Based upon this study by a consulting firm which is to a large extent dependent upon the Department of Defense and De­fense contractors for its present business

volume, Secretary McNamara reaffirmed his decision to close out the Springfield Armory. His previous decision had been based on cost reduction. With the claim for cost reduc­tion refuted by our people and by the DOD oriented Booz, Allen & Hamilton study as well, a new justification for closing the Armory had been developed. This was the Booz, Allen & Hamil ton assurance that private industry could now do the complete job and, therefore, the Armory was no longer needed. With all other matters being nearly equal, one would hardly have ex­pected a different recommendation from this firm.

Now the real kicker in this business of developing a policy to fit a case is the way it was actually done in connection with the Booz, Allen & Hamilton study. To give you a feel for how this was done, we want to quote certain correspondence and supporting documents between Harry L. Vincent, Jr., vice president of Booz, Allen & Hamilton, and the Honorable Cyrus Vance, Deputy Secretary of Defense. This material speaks for itself. The significance of this exchange is that it took this private organization to develop a statement of policy for the De­partment of Defense. This stated policy changed substantially the previous evident policy laid out by the Army. And strangely enough, the newly stated policy supported the decision to close out the Springfield Armory after it had been shown that the closeout could not be supported as a cost reduction move. The letters and supporting documents showing how this firm established the guidelines which it was to follow are as follows: "Hon. CYRUS R. VANCE, "Deputy Secretary of Defense, "The Pentagon, Washington, D.C.

"DEAR MR. VANCE: Our study efforts to date in connection with the Springfield Armory situation have demonstrated the need for defining and documentl'ng current Department of Defense plans and policies regarding the manufacturing role of Army arsenals, and the research, development, and engineering role of Army arsenals.

"In addition, there is a need to clarify and, insofar as possible, quantify the probable future trends in small arms weapons devel­opments.

"Documentation of long-range plans ( 5 to 10 years) for small arms weapons develop­ment does not appear to exist at present. However, key OSD and Army officials have identified for us some elements of the cur­rent thinking concerning future small arms development and the concomitant mission for Army arsenals. Thus, up-to-date think- · ing and DOD position concerning small arms of the future is a prerequisite for sound con­clusions regarding the closing of the Spring­field Armory.

"To insure that our analysis is solidly based, we have documented the viewpoints we have received in the form of a position paper (attachment A) concerning the emerg­ing role of Army arsenals. For comparison, we have also included a current arsenal mis­sion statement (attachment B). DOD ob­servations concerning the probable trends in small arms weapons development are re­flected in attachment C.

"Summarizing the views we have received, it is clear that Army weapons materiel is becoming more sophisticated and that greater emphasis is being placed on the sys­tems approach to weapons development. Thus, there is a need for the Army to utilize its in-house technical resources in the criti­cal fields of operations analysis, program planning, program management, and system evaluation. To the extent that in-house technical resources are fully utlllzed for these functions, it is logical to expect that actual hardware design work will be conducted by contractors.

"The following exhibit displays graphically the differences between the current and pro­posed arsenal mission statements. The cur­rent mission encompasses all the functions shown (outer heavy circle) while the revised mission encompasses only the inner heavy circle.

"It is our plan to conduct our study on the basis that the thinking expressed to us by OSD and Army officials is truly guiding long­term DOD planning for the future of the arsenal system.

"We therefore desire to discuss this think­ing with you and obtain any comments you may have concerning the adequacy of our understanding.

"Very truly yours, "Booz, ALLEN & HAMn.TON, INC., "HARRY L. VINCENT, Jr.,

"Vice President."

"ATTACHMENT A "THE EMERGING ROLE OF ARMY ARSENALS

"1. Research and engineering: In general, the actual design and development (includ­ing pilot production) of weapons and weap­ons systems will be conducted by contrac­tors. Some basic and applied research may also be conducted by contractors.

"The arsenal system shall retain and/or develop in-house R. & E. capabillty to-­

"E<>tablish weapons requirements; "Direct and monitor the course of industry

efforts in weapons design, development, and technical data pa:ckage preparation;

"Evaluate the competitive development ef-forts of industry;

"Conduct technical work sufficient only to--

"Sustain the competence required to mon­itor the technical aspects of the overall pro­gram.

"Adequately support related nontechnical · management functions such as contract negotiations, contract administration, pro­posal evaluation, configuration control, cost analysis and patents control; and

"Stimulate industry activity in actual de­sign and development.

2. Manufacturing: " ( 1) In general, quantity manufacture of

operational weapons hardware will be con­ducted by industrial contractors. Excep­tions may exist in situations where--

"M111tary security requirements dictate that manufacture must be performed in­house (e.g., nuclear devices, top secret fuZ­ing devices) .

"Industry has no capabll1ty and/or in­terest in developing that capabllity (e.g., BCW agents).

"Other manufacturing activities should be performed by Army arsenals only when cost and quality for that work 1s clearly more advantageous than industry can provide.

"(2) To the extent that pilot production of weapons hardware is required, this produc­tion will normally be performed by the same contractor who is responsible for prepara-1

tion of the technical data package.

"ATTACHMENT B

"THE ARMY ARSENAL MISSiON AS PRESENTLY STATED

"As extracted from the Army study, en­titled 'The Future of the AMC Arsenal Sys­tem,' the current ,mission of an arsenal is as follows:

"There is a continuing requirement for a. military arsenal capabllity to perform the following missions:

"That of conducting the research, develop­ment, and engineering of new items and pro­ducing experimental models and quantities for engineering and troop tests with the end purpose of providing a. procurement package of drawings, specifications, and technical ad­~ice to assist industry in quantity produc• tion.

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· HOUSE 5831 "'"To be able to 'Support. the Arm.y ·coiltraet

negotiators with Jtnowledgeable technical ex­perts who can review production plans and insure that the Government receives quality material at reasonable prices and on achedule.

.. That essential pr,oduetion sJtill8 :and know­how be maintained tlulough a limited. quan­tity production. e1fort. With the full recogni­tion that quantity production of any item must not be allowed to become a fiiDction of any arsenal except where commercial con­cerns are unwUling to undertake it, when their prices are unreasonable, or where it is required for seeudty reasons."

~'ATTACHMENT C

"OBSERVATIONS MADE BT OSD AND ARMY OFFI­CIALS CONCERNING 'TRENDS AND LONG-TERM

'THINKING IN SMALL AltMS "1. Small arms technical trends: .Small

arms development efforts will be character­ized in the foreseeable future by the five fol­lowing trends:

••continued progress toward llghter, high­er-speed projectlles and higher rates of fire.

"Continued .reduction of recoil and weight with attendant increases in accuracy.

"Development of multipurpose small arms (e.g., rille, grenade launcher combinations).

"Accommodation of new types of amm.unt­t1on (e.g., fiechettes) .

"Increased emphasis on the application of small arms to aircraft and ground vehicle weapons systems.

"2. Planning guidelines: "(1) Physical collocation of the several

functions within research and engineering is desirable in two situations:

"Design and development of weapons hardware should be collocated with pilot production activities. To the extent that weapons design and development is per­formed by industry, ·so., too, industry should perform pilot production.

"Army R. & E. :functions should be collo­cated with the broad range of functions re­lated to w.ea:pons management ::!or maximum support effectiveness.

"(2) As the Army strengthens its in-house, small arms, technical capability to accommo­date the greater emphasis on operations analysis, program planning, program man­agement and system evaluation, the need "for a single, geographic :focal point for Army small arms R. & E. activities becomes more evident because--

"Physical consolidation can result in ·more efficient management by the Army; and

"Industry benefits from and can be more responsive to a single coordinating agency for all small arms work.

"It may even be possible and desirable to combine Army in-hcmse sm'S.ll arms R. & E. activitles such as:

"The small arms weapons system manage­ment, procurement, quality assurance, etc., functions; and

"The small arms ammunition test and evaluation functions.

"(3) -current Defense Establishment plan­ning emphasizes readiness of forces in being. As the readiness obJective is achieved, the requirement for an ln-house, manufacturing capability :for mobilization diminishes."

"THE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE, ' Washington, D.O.

"Mr. HARRY L. VINCENT, "Vice President, B-ooz, Allen & Hamilton, Inc., "Washington; D.O.

"DEAR MR. VINCENT: This is in reply to your letter of May 6, 1965, in connection with the Springfield Armory. We believe that you have correctly interpreted most of t!le facets presented by the present situation as il'egards Anny arsenals. ·

" In the context of small anns, we see two trends underlying the changing emphasis from arsenal to commercial development. 'l'he first is that the concept of small arms

lias changed ·to include weapons of larger caliber and higher rates of :fire. In such. cases vehicle mounting 1s usually desired and design tradeoff& With other parts ,of 1the eombinecl system are needed. Secondly; there has been a trend on the pact ot Ameri­can industry to enter this field due to con­tinuing U.S. and foreign needs. A concomi­tant ·increase tn industrial competen.ce ln operational research and effectiveness eval­ulatlons has enabled ln.dustry to prepare professional, attractive proposals and has demonstrated emerging creativity and com­petence. .As we .see the future, industry wm prepare technical data packages, and do pilot production as well as full-scale pro­duction. When this occurs, we believe that the tn-house responsibnlty wm cllange to one of technical evaluation as practiced ln other commodity al'eas. Perhaps we should use some other name than ••arsenal .. mission for the changed responsibilities.

.. If you have any further questions I would be most happy to meet with you at any time.

.. Sincerely, "CYRUS VANCE.~'

"Hon. GYaus R. VANCE, "Deputy Secretary oj Dejense, "The Pentagon, "Washington. D.C.

"DEAlt MR. VANcE: We appreciate very much your .reply to our letter dated May 6, 1965. which dealt with the plans and. policies of the Department of Defense for .small arms research, development, engineering, and manufacturing.

"As w.e have continued to stu4y the Spring­field Armory situation our analysis has con­firmed the importance of these plans and policies, as necessary ingredients for our study of the Springfield situation. In addi­tion, we believe that a clear understanding of these plans and policies within the De­partment of Defense is vital to the effective management of the overall .small arms mis­sion. Thus, we wish to be absolutely sure that in our recent exchange of correspond­ence we have accurately depicted the current DOD policy.

"It is our understanding that the current policy of the Department of Defense, with respect to small arms weapons and weapons systems. includes the following:

"1. Hardware design and development leading to a technical data package shall be procured from industrial companies.

"2. Technical data packages and pilot pro­duction shall be procured :from industrial companies.

"3 .. Quantity production, except in those few instances where military security or lack of industrial capability dictate 'in-house' production, shall be procured :from industrial companies.

"We would appreciate your confirmation that we have accurately articulated these policies of the Department of Defense.

"Very truly yours, "Booz, ALLEN & HAMILTON, INC., "HAimY L. VINCENT, Jr.,

"Vice President."

THE DEPUTY SECRETAltY OP DEFENSE, Washington, D.O.

"Mr. !LumY L. VINCENT, .Jr., "Vice President, Booz, Allen & Hamilton, Inc., "Washington, D.O.

"DEAR MR. VINCENT: Your letter of June 24, 1965 correctly states the current pollcy of the Department of Defense with respect to small arms weapons and weapons systems.

"Sincerely, . "·CYRUS VANCE."

Insofar as we know, other than Mr. Vance's brief confirming letter to the Booz, Allen & Hamilton people, no steps have been taken to fully implement these policies de­veloped by this firm. Yet these very pol-

lcles have been retted upon tO reammf the ~lier declalon to close Springfield.

"'bls entire atrair seems to us to be com­pletely Incongruous wlth the :respective roles ot the Congress and the Executive. It 115 a matter which we feel ,your committee should explore to the fullest extent. We urge that this be done.

.Mr. BOLAND. Mr. Speaker~ I ask unanimous eonsent that the gentleman from Massachusetts £Mr. CONTE] may extend his remarks at this point ln the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Massachusetts? Th~e was no objection. Mr. CONTE. Mr. Speaker, the second

in a series of articles published by the Gun Report magazine entitled ··mstocy of the Springfield Armory," and written by Mr. Christopher Dvarecka. contains further examples of the indispensable contributions made by this facility to the welfare and security of the United States.

It also contains some provocative in­formation in regard to historic quality control methods in the days before com­plete machine automation. when .such equipment as bayonets had to be fash­ioned largely by band. The techniques described in part two of the story of the Springfield Armory undoubtedly have a great deal to do ,.,.ith the reputation of the armory for promptness and reliability in production. T.hese are assets which prevail today in the operation of the ar­mory and account in large measure for the effectiveness of U.S. firepower in the Vietnam conftict where our forces have so often been outnumbered by the enemy.

Under unanimous consent, I include the second of this series of articles at this point in the RECORD:

liiSTOltY OF THE .SP.RINGFIELD ARMORY­PART Two

(By Christopher L. Dvarecka.) At the beginning of the 19th century, this

eountry was at peace with the world at large; with no immediate use for firearms then being made at the armory and faced with the possible accumulation of some 53,000 pieces by 1809, the sale of weapons :from stores began-and Indians were the buyers in most instances.

At first the Indians were persuaded to trade for the French model musket, but soon their demand was "small gun, no good; blg gun, big noise, big bullet-no boy's gun for Indians." After that they would only buy those of larger caliber. such as the King's and Queen's Arms, rather than the Charle­ville model.

Production figures show that in 1817 about 14,000 muskets were made here. By 1836 there were 260 men employed and 13,500 guns were-turned out that year. At the close of 1936 there were 170,000 guns stored in the arsenal.

The first pistols at the armory were pro­duced in 1818 when about 1,000 caliber .69 pistols were made. In 1822, a new model of the flintlock musket was manufactured here. This 1822 model was considered superior to any foreign muskets then on the world market. · The early plan of construction on the hill shops was that of a group of buildings ar­ranged in a quadrangle in the general area known today as Armory Square. The first permanent bullding in the quadrangle was a two-story brick 'Storehouse called the west arsenal, erected 1807-08. This bullding. which stands on tbe brow of the hill facing

5832 CONGRESSIONAL gECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 State Street, is the oldest existing 'building a.t the armory. A third story was added in 1863. At various times it has been used as a. barrel house, storehouse, and recreation building . . It was also used as an enlisted men's barracks. Duril.lg World War II it was made an officers' club and is still-used for that purpose today-nearly 150 years later. .

The first building erected for manufac­turing purposes on Armory Square was a two-story brick building used to house the filing and stocking shops, completed in 1809. This building was burned down on a raw, cold day in March 1824. The building· burned to the ground with an estimated loss of $30,000. The high winds that day car­ried the cinders as far away as the water shops. The building was rebuilt that same year and parts of it are now used for offi­cers' quarters. The first permanent officers' quarters erected were quarters No. 7, 10, and 17 in 1838. The middle arsenal was built in 1836 on the south side of the quadrangle. In 1812 the plot of land now embracing Fed~ eral Square was purchased. A two-story of­fice building was constructed in 1819 for the armory superintendent, master armorer, and payma.ster. This building, after extensive remodeling, is now the armory's main ad-ministration building. ·

As has been previously mentioned, the water shops in this period consisted of three plants along the Mill River. The 23 buildings comprising these plants were not of a permanent nature and nothing remains of them today. A road connecting the works at the hill shops and the Mill River fac­tories was built in 1811 over the area called Walnut Street today.

During the War of 1812, the U.S. armory, being a Goverpment post, often saw soldiers quattered in the barracks and houses. The dwelling houses were ordinarily occupied by armorers, but at short notice that soldiers were coming they moved out and the sol­diers took over. A portion of the ground now occupied by the long storehouse was then used as a graveyard and soldiers were often buried there in full military regalia. During the 1840's while foundations were being dug for the long storehouse off Pearl Street, the remains of 12 soldiers dressed in full regimentals were uncovered.

workmen formed a company of artillery arid paraded with wooden guns and a battery of a dozen lead cannon. One day as Superin­tendent Prescott was on his way to the Water Shops via horse carriage, the boys were hav­ing a parade on the street. Spotting "Old Prescott" driving toward them, one of the men cried out, "Here comes Old Prescott: let's fire at him." A line was quickly formed on each side of the road and a half-dozen loaded cannon were placed in front of each rank. Intent upon his business, Superin­tendent Prescott paid no heed to the hostile reception committee and rode through the ranks. He was thunderously saluted with gunfire from both flanks. Emerging un­scathed and feeling the greeting was meant as a compliment, he returned the greetings by shouting "Well done, well done, boys."

Old armorers had great respect and affec­tion for Lt. Col. Roswell Lee and his admin­istration was recognized by armory experts as able and aggressive. Once or twice during his tenure in office (the longest on record here) , his vigor carried him to extreme lengths.

It was a source of anxiety to him that the armorers spent so much of their earnings for rum, and his zeal in checking this prac­tice caused quite a scene in 1816. The old Toddy Road was named for obvious reasons and Lee did not reduce the travel along this road as much as he had hoped. He dis­charged two workmen who were found wres­tling publicly in the midst of a circle of fellow workmen. There was a liberty pole in the center of the ground where the incident occurred that had been erected by the sub­scription of ·the workmen, and here the friends of the discharged men gathered to protest the firings. A rum bottle quickly made the rounds and the cry went up, "If we can't have any liberty, we won't have any liberty pole," and an axe was put to work on the pole. Clerk Wolcott, then the colonel himself, then Master Armorer Foot with some out-of-town officials hastened to the scene. The pole was saved, and the little "rum re­bellion" was ended. It had a good effect all around, however, and greater understand-. ing prevailed. Toddy Road did not lose its name for some years though.

One of Springfield Armory's great distinc-

The early superintendents at the armory were civilians, mostly natives of Massach~- _ setts. There was no "command" as such. Superintendents, master armorers, and store­keepers vied with each other for control. With the appointment of Lt. Col. Roswell Lee in 1815, the first mmtary superintendent, there was, naturally, much controversy and for a long time the question of military or civilian control split the town into two fac­tions. Following Lee's 18-year sup~rintend­ency (1815-33), civilian supervision again took over for 8 years. In 1841, a military superintendency was reestablished.

tions is its pioneering role in the develop­ment of the principle of "interchangeability of parts," an outstanding contribution of American industry to the manufacturing world.

Along these lines, in 1822, Thomas Blanch­ard, an armory workman, designed a machine for turning gunstocks. The original machine, which is the forerunner of all machines since used for this purpose, was in operation for many years in the shops (and is now on display in the museum).

Blanchard is also credited with many other models or forms, the prototype of many now used extensively in the duplication of parts in modern manufacturing methods.

first item produced. The next machine was made for the express purpose of turning a gunstock and proved to be just what was needed at that time and also (not thEm real­ized) the forerunner of all machines, models, or forms which are now used to make every component part of a gun interchangeable.

During these same years, as already indi­cated, many of the workmen were a pretty · rough bunch and quite lawless. They could not forget their old "camp" habits and did a great deal of foraging in the countryside. One Sunday a group of some 20 men started

·out on one of their expeditions, the objec­tive point being a certain watermelon patch in the. vicinity of Longmeadow.

The good people of that town were at church, but the news of the impending raid was quickly conveyed to the town constable. He promptly raised a posse and surrounded the threatened watermelon bed. The ma­rauders hove onto the scene and were quickly captured and imprisoned in a nearby tavern. Most of the men were barefoot. The townspeople went down to the tavern to get a look at the rascals. The landlady whose patch had been the goal of the raiders also came down to take a look at the culprits. With spectacles balanced at the end of her nose, she glanced at one man's foot and saw that the foot had only four toes-the big toe was missing. She promptly walked up to him and, .shaking an accusing finger in his face, shouted, "You are a thief. You are an arrant thief for I've seen your tracks in our watermelon bed more than a hundred times."

While some of the armory workmen were on the lawless side of the ledger, many em­ployees of that time were hard-working, law­abiding citizens. In fact many families have contributed generations of workmen to the armory. The names of these local families ar~ legion. The longest in point of service, however, was the Hosmer family. The first Hosmer employee began service in 1809 and finally ended with the retirement of William E. Hosmer, chief inspector here, in the 1930's.

The Springfield Armory of the 1840's pre­sented an imposing yet attractive appearance to those who had occasion to view it.

There is no better way , to describe the setting and what the viewer saw than to repeat it in the words of a visitor to the armory.

A color picture set in the words and de­scriptive phrases of that day went like this:

"The village of Springfield is one of the most beautiful villages of New England. The business part of it lays along the bank of the Connecticut, on a sort of plain; and from this plain, streets ascend to more elevated land behind it, which is covered in every direction with handsome villas overlooking the village and the river, and the broad and beautiful valley of the Connecticut.

Following the first superintendent, David Ames, civilian superintendents were Jo­seph Morgan ( 1802-05), Benjamin Prescott (1805-13), Henry Lechlar (1813-15) and Prescott again for 5 months in 1815.

Concerning Blanchard's revolutionary in­vention, an old armorer who was a fellow boarder at the time recounts the following . incident:

"The principal buildings of the armory are situated upon another plain, which extends back from this elevated land, at the distance of perhaps half a mile from the river. The buildings are very large and handsome and are arranged around the sides of a spacious square which is ornamented with walks and rows of trees. The effect is one of appearing

The first quarter of this century saw many exciting and humorous scenes and in­cidents between the workers and the super­intendents, among the employees themselves, and between the workmen and the towns­people.

Benjamin Prescott, the third superintend­ent, was capable of managing any number and all kinds of men, but as he l).ad some rough and ready ones to deal with, he some­times had to resort to tough discipline. In 1812-15, the usual license was restricted.:......: · the Nation was at war with Engiand; the State militia and the Regulars needed guns; the men must be on: the' job; bOys, even the workmen's sons, must not enter the shops. Military enthusiasm was running high and the spirit became contagious. The Hill Shops

"One Sunday we particularly noticed Mr. Blanchard for he had in his hands a musket which. he seemed to be meditating upon. This meditation was· nothing new; for he was a man who said but few words, a man who communed with himself . or, rather, did a great deal of brain work in a quiet way. But now he had something in· his hands upon which his thoughts seemed to rest, and this was uncommon. The gun was turned over and over: it was looked at from tip to breech; evidently he was thinking-hard; after a long time thought became words, 'I believe that I can turn a stock like this,' and eventuall-y he did."

The first machine made to turn ·irregular forms was made and put into operation at the Upper Water Shops: shoe lasts were the

like the buildings of a college. . There was one ediface in the center of the principal front of the square which had a cupola upon it, as if it were a chapel. This was th·e office and counting house. The other buildings were shops and storehouses.

"On one side was a long -row of houses which were used for the residences of the officers and others connected with the ar­mory. From this central square, streets diverged in every direction over the plain which were bordered with small but very neat and pleasant houses for the workmen. These houses were ornamented with trees and shrubbery and surrounded with pleasant yards and gardens. The whole scene pre­sented, on every side, a very pleasant prospect t" the view.

March 15, 1966. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 5833 "Walking from the buildings on the plain

in a southerly direction, a winding road de­scended, into a valley where the water .shops were located. It was a beautiful glen, shad­ed by trees, with a ·millstream :flowing through the center of it. There .was a road, leading up and down the valley, on each side of the stream with a bridge connecting one road with another. Above the bridge was a dam of handsome mason work with various :flumes for conveying the water. There were also some large and handsome shops, on each side of the stream, with torrents of water pouring out from beneath them, indicating that they contained machinery which was carried by water.

"There are three water shops on the stream, about half a mile apart.

"Entering into the middle shop, one saw a very large apartment on the ground :floor, and not well lighted, except by the blazing fire of the forges. There were rows of forges extending through the whole length of it, which were glowing with the intense heat of anthracite fires, urged by bellows which were carried by water.

"Connected with each forge was a great hammer worked by water. The handle was a beam of wood, perhaps 10 feet long, which m.oved on an axle near the end of it. The end of the handle projected a short distance beyond 'the axle on which it turns and was armed at the extremity with iron. Beyond it was a Wht!el with projecting cogs or pins of iron which struck against the end of the handle, as the wheel turned round, and drove it down. This made the head of the hammer rise up. Then, when the cog in the wheel, which had struck against the end of the handle, slipped by, it let the end of the handle up and the head of the hammer fell down upon the anvil or, rather, the work placed upon the anvil to be forged.

"The lower water shops building had sev­eral activities going on simultaneously. In one area, iron bars were rolled out and cut in lengths suitable for forming the barrels.

"Also in the lower of the three dam build­ing areas, was the stocking shop where the stocks of the guns were turned. The water power supplied by the dam turned the wheel and machinery which made possible the shaping of the wooden stock.

"Another in the most interesting processes seen during the visit was the grinding of the barrels after · they had been turned. Al­though great effort is made to keep the ma­chinery and the barrels stationery, the bar­rels are still not precisely alike when they come from the lathe. Some will be a little thicker or thinner in some parts than others. Then, besides, the tool does not leave the iron perfectly smooth, for as it moves slowly along at the same time that the iron revolves, it cuts in a s:;>iral direction · and leaves the work marked with a sort of spiral depres­sion. This ·depression has to be ground away by an enormous grindstone, 5 or 6 feet iL diameter revolving with great velocity, in order to make smooth the barrel through­out.

"Machinery for polishing the outsides of the barrels were also included in the shop. There were two machines for polishing and each had four gun barrels in it. The form of the machine was an upright iron frame and the barrels were placed in it in a per- · pendicular position. '!,'he· upper ends were attached to wheels, by which they were kept in constant revolution, and these wheels were also attached to a beam which ascended and descended continually, like the beam over the piston rod of a steam engine or that which carries the saw in a sawmill. Thus the barrels were alternately drawn up and pushed down, continually revolving at the same time. They passed in this manner be­tween a set of leather cushions covered with oil and emery-a fine powder used for polish­ing. These cushions were pressed together

by springs with the barrels between them, and thus all the roughness of the iron, left · by the grindstone, was gradually worn away and the barrels ~ame out at last highly polished.

"The smaller parts of the musket, such as the ~crews, bands, and parts of the lock, were polished in a different manner-by holding them one by one against wheels revolving with great velocity.· Many of the wheels turning were revolving with a rate of 1,500 times per minute.

"Testing of bayonets were also conducted in one of the Water Shops buildings. The manner of testing bayonets was like this: a workman put them, one by one, upon a gun, and then, striking the point a little into the :floor, he would spring it forcibly one way and the other, to see if it would bear the necessary strain. By this operation, the bayonet was bent a little to one side or the other. This was called taking a set. The more highly tempered the steel, the less easy it is to 'make' a set. The bayonet require­ments include a desirab111ty , to have it elastic-but not too brittle.

"Another ingenious way of testing for · elasticity was this: there was a place fitted at the end of the bench where the workman could res.t the neck of the bayonet upon a solid support, which seemed as sort of a fulcrum. The point of the bayonet was then inserted into a loop in a wire, which had at­tached to the end of it a heavyweight of lead. Then, by bearing down upon the end of the gun, the lei'J,d was lifted, the whole weight of it resting upon the point of the bayonet. This weight was so heavy it bent the bayonet that would spring back nearly into place but not quite. It 'set' about a quarter of an inch. The man who was examining the bayonets said that if they did not set more than a quarter of an inch in lifting such a weight, they were considered as passing a satisfactory trial in respect to their elastic! ty.

"The workmen said that losses of bayonets due to workmanship are marked against the payment of the worker. Losses due to metal defects are not charged to the worker. All bayonet work was done by the piece and if the part did not stand inspection, the loss was charged against the man who made it.

"Most of the machinery making the parts cost about a hundred dollars each.

"The finishing shops and the storehouses of the armory were located around the great square on the plain above Springfield. The first building entered was near the north­west corner of the square. On entering it, a long spacious apartment with a double row of forges extending through the middle of it, could be seen. The :floor was paved with fiat stones. The walls and ceiling were neatly whitewashed. Over each forge was a pair of blacksmith's bellows.

"Apparatus used here was much more com­plicated than in the Water Shops.

"Large anvils at each forge had a variety of depressions and perforations on the fiat surface rather than a smooth surface. There were also smaller anvils called stakes beside each larger anvil, also full of depressions and perforations.

"These anvils were used in forging irregu­lar parts by placing hot iron into the de­pressions and perforations, covering it with another piece of steel called a jumper and then · driving the whole upon the stake.

"At other large buildings on the plains, various other operations connected with fin­ishing the locks and guns were going on. In one room, men were employed smoothing over the gunstocks; others were fitting the locks to the stocks, filing and finishing the small parts of the lock.

"Each bench in one of the big apartments was fitted for one particular branch of work. The patterns were made of steel and the workmen filed the work to correspond with

them exactly. All pieces were made .exactly alike.

"Finally, after leaving the manufacturing rooms, I went into the central building, on the main front of the square, for this was the office and counting house. Here I asked to go into the arsenal which was one of the large buildings where the muskets were stored after they were finished.

"The walk to the arsenal from the count­ing house was along a gravel walk which led between two rows of trees toward the center of the square. When the door of the arsenal was opened we were struck with the imposing spectacle presented to view.

"Except for the necessary space for pas­sages, the room was entirely filled with mus­kets. They were arranged with the utmost perfect precision and symmetry in an upright position, the butts resting in frames made for the purpose and raised at a little distance from the :floor. The tops of the bayonets reached nearly to the ceiling. The dark and glossy brown color of the stocks, with the highly polished luster of the bayonets and the other metallic parts, gave to each indi­vidual gun. a very beautiful appearance; but in addition to this, there was a most surpris­ing effect produced by the immense numbers and admirable arrangement of the whole. The rows of bayonets glittered in a long per­spective. Even the locks, and the ramrods, and the sights upon the barrels, and in fact, every single part of the gun, were presented to the eye, in long ranges, extending up and down the room. The guns were placed on the frames only about half an inch apart, and yet so precise was the arrangement that, by standing at one end of the room and looking through, the window at the other end of the room which was at a hundred and twenty feet distance and 40 feet wide, could be seen. There was another such room on the second story, of the same dimensions and filled in the same manner.

"There were more than 100,000 muskets in the building with each ready to be fired. Each of the guns was taken down and oiled every few years to keep the parts bright and clean and free from rusting."

(The foregoing was excerpted from "Marco Paul's Travels and Adventures: The Spring­field Armory" by Rev. Jacob Abbott. The book, printed in 1843, was made available to Chris Dvarecka by Brian King, editor of the Springfield Republican roto section. The courtesies of Mr. King are appreciated since it provided the necessary color for the historical period indicated.)

JAMES PATrON OF NATIONAL FARMERS UNION

Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from South Dakota [Mr. BERRY] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extra­neous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tennessee?

There was no objection. Mr. BERRY. Mr. Speaker, I wish to

join my colleagues in extending con­gratulations to James Patton, of the Na­tional Farmers Union, on his many years of service to his organization. I offer

. him my best wishes on his retirement. Congratulations are also in order for

Mr. Gleim Talbott who is also stepping down after 25 years of service.

Much progress has been made by both of these gentlemen in the direction of agricultural income commensurate with the other areas of our economy which are

5834" . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· HOUSE

soaring ahead. · ARd yet, we- must not­lose sight. at the fact that we ha.ve much· to. do for the American farmer in guar­anteeing a decent :price for :his products. ··

I am certain that the Farmers: Union will feel deeply the loss of their president, but ·look forward to working closely with the new leadership of this important group which is working · hard for the American agricultural producer.

CONSERVATION IN SOUTH DAKOTA Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr.

Speaker~ I. ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from South Dakota. [Mrr BERRY] may extend his remarks at tQ!S point in the REcoRD and include extra­neous matter.

The SPEAKER ppo tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tennessee?

There was no objection. Mr. BERRY. Mr. Speaker, 'it is very

encouraging to note that the Soil Con­servation Service budget for :fiscal year 1967 is $228· m1llion or $2 miliion above last year's level. It is encouraging be­cause a near tragedy was narrowly averted last year when the administra­tion cut the program and fortunately the funds to- continue this effective program. were restored by Congress.

Budget forecasts made by the SoU Conservation Service indicate that $3.7 million will go toward activities in South Dakota. ·

The largest item estimated for the State program is $2.1 million for conser­vation operations, followed by $1 million for the Great Plains conservation pro­gram, in which South Dakota is a leading participant.

Other budget estimates include $300,-000 for watershed protection, $100,000 for watershed planning, and $121,000 for the resources and conservation development program in Bon Homme and Charles Mix Counties.

The Bon Homme-Charles Mix budget includes an additional $5,000 for plan­ning purposes which may include Doug­las County in the project.

It is my sincere hope that this budget will be sustained by the House Appro­priations Subcommittee and the Congress so this important work can continue without interruption.

It is essentially that the-Soil Conserva­tion Service program be carried on at its current funding level; and I can think of no better endorsement for the fine work that is being done in the Second Con-. gressional District of South Dakota than the announcement of the Soil Conserva­tion Service that three conservation dis­tricts have received awards in the na­tionwide district newsletter contest· sponsored by the Farm & Industrial Equipment ·Institute and the National Association of Conservation.

The purpose of the contest is to stim- · ulate eff-ective-communications between districts and the rural and urban inter­ests in conservation. The Bennett County district at Martin, S. Dak., was a second place winner iri the riatiomil category. Sully County's district head- ·· quartered at Onida, S. Dak., placed sec­ond in the Northern Plains area, and the

Edmunds County district- at. Ipswich,· s. Dalt., placed second fu. the special new newslett.er division for dis.tric.ts begin­rung publication during the conte~t year.' . ~ awards speak very" well of the·

dedication of district boards in. soil .and water conservation districtS' in South. Dakota to keep rural and urban interests· currently informed of' the conservation. efforts being carried on by them and the services available. · These outstanding: efforts must. be car:.­

:ried on uninterruptedly by providing adequate funding for this key program in our Nation's battle to conserve its natural resources and bolster· guaran­teed agricultural income.

THE 90TH ANNIVERSARY OF CALVIN COLLEGE AND SEMINARY, GRAND RAPIDS, MICH. Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr.

Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the- gentleman from. Michigan [Mr. GER­ALD R. FoRD] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tennessee?

There was no objection. Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker,

Calvin College and Seminary in Grand Rapids, Mich., today is observing the 90th anniversary of its founding. Beginning in an upper :Foom of a school" building in 1876 Calvin College has outgrown one campus and today,. with nearly 3,000 students, is constructing a new campus to meet the needs of 5,000 students arid :representing an investment in excess of $20 million.

Owned and operated by the Christian Reformed Church, it serves a nationwide constituency and attracts many students from Canada. Religiously orientiated and highly acclaimed in the academic community, Calvin College and Seminary is devoted to preparing young people to serve God and their fellowmen.

I mention this college and its anni­versary today because I never cease to marvel at the faithfulness and resource­fulness of its supporters, the competence and dedication of its staff, the en­thusiasm and determination of its student body, and the loyalty and accom­plishments of its graduates~ I take this opportunity to extend greetings from the U.S. House of Representatives to Calvin. College and Seminary on its 90th anni­versary.

May I add that two members of my staff are Calvin graduates, and that rp.any others a:re serving in the Govern~ . mentor the Armed Forces in the Wash­ington area.

''FACE THE NATION" AS BROADCAST OVER THE CBS TV AND RADIO

. NETWORK WITH CONGRESSMAN LAffiD Mr. DUNCAN 'of Teimessee. Mr.

Speaker, I ask unani._mau.S cpnsent tbat the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. GER­ALD R. -FORD] may ·extend his remarks at ·this point in the RECORD· and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request o! the gentleman: from Tennessee?

· There wa8 no objeetion. · Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker,

one of my most able', knowledgeable, and responsible colleagues, the · gentleman from Wisconsin, MELvm· R~ LAIRD, ap­peared ·on the Columbia. Broadea.sting System program.., ""F'ace th.e. Nation," on March 13, 1966.

Because of Representative LAIRD's vast experience on the House Committee on Appropriations his penetrating observa­tions and constructive views should be a part of the REcoRD~ O.n this. program Representa:t;ive LAIRD contributed to the publi.c information on the crisis our Na­tion faces both at home and abroad. I am honored to submit the text of this­program for inclusion in the body of the RECORD.

"FACE" TlDl NNI'ION" (Broadcast over the CBS Television Network,

and the CBS Radio Network, March 13, 1966) Guest: The Honorable MELVIN R. LAIRD,

u.s. House of Representatives, Republican, of Wisconsin.

News eorrespondents: Martin Agronsky, CBS News; Neil MacNeil, Time magazine; George Herman, CBS News.

Producers: Ellen Wadley, Prentiss Childs. Director: Robert Vitarelll. Mr. AGRONSKY. C<>ngres.s.ma.n LAmn, you

have . charged that the President is not be­ing candid with the American pe6ple on ~e real facts of the Vietnam war. What is be­ing withheld from the people?

Representative LAIRD . . It seems to me that the President of the United States should make very clear what the sb,ort-term aims and long-term objec~ives are of the p-nited States in Vietnam; whether he_supports t~e statements· ~al;ie by his press s~retary or his Vice President. It is important so that there will not be a miscalct4ation on the part­of the Communists and confl,lSion on the part of the American _people. . ..

ANNOUNCER. Live, from CBS Washington, "Face the Nation," a spontaneous ~nd un­rehearsed news interview , with Representa­tive MELVIN LAIRD, of Wisconsin, chairman of the House Republ19an conference. Mr. ~mD will be questioneq. by CBS News Cor­respondent George Herman;.. Neil MaeNe~l, chief congressional correspondent, Tiple magazine; CBs News Conespondent Martin Agronsky will lead tlle ques.ttoning.

Mr. AGRONSK.Y. Congressman LAnm, I pre­sume the fact that you f.eelis being. withheld is what the United States would do in Viet­nam about including. C<>mmunis.ts in a coali­tion government.

Now, you have recently declared that if the United States is prepared to accept the inclusion of the Communists in a coalition g.overnment in Vietnam, then the fighting­there makes no sense. Is that your point?

Representative LAIRD. I think it is very true that if we decide that we are going to take in Communis.ts in the coalition govern­ment, then we might as well announce that now, because the war in Vietnam it would seem .to me would ease considerably. That is what the shooting is all about in Vietnam at the present time. As one memb!r of the Defense Appropriations €ommittee, "I . have always felt that that 18 what the · war was · all about. ·

Mr. MAcNEn.. Mr ~ LAIRD, you are put in a position I think .of -saying that the elections if held-I am · asking · this, rea.Hy-th-at the Republicans would not be prepared to accept under any terms the admission · of Commu­nists in the South Vietnam--

/

March ·15, -1966 CONGRESSIONAL R:ECORD -HOUSE 5835 Representative LAIRD. That is not what I

said.. The dispute seems to be in . regard to whether the Commuliists will be given a place before free elections. I think that is the important issue involved here. And I think the administration has to make its position very clear.

· As far as withholding information from the American people, I think that there are many areas in which all of the facts are not put before the American people, and I think that they should be put before the American people.

For instance in the area of the SOviet in­volvement in the Vietnamese war-I think there are a lot of people in the United States that do not understand fully and clearly the full involvement of the SOviet Union in the

. Vietnamese fighting, and in supplying "the North Vietnamese and the Vietcong at this time. ·

I think that there are also other areas in which facts are being classified. For in­stance, the ships that are being used to carry goods into the port of Haiphong. The Red Chinese know the names of these ships, the Russians know, the North Vietnamese know. Yet this information is classified informa­tion as far as the American people are concerned. .

Now, when the enemy or the potential enemy knows these facts, why should they be withheld from the American people?

Mr. HERMAN. Mr. LAIRD, obviously we are going to get back to these points which you have just raised. But before we do, I just want to clear up a point which sort of got left behind. And that is about the partici­pation of the Communists. You said they should not be allowed to participate before -a government. Does that mean that you and your party rule them out as participants in negotiations before an election?

Representative LAIRD. I think the Secretary of State has made the position of the coun­try very clear-that the Vietcong WQuld be able to come into any kind of a conference as a part of the North Vietnamese represen­tation, because, ·after all, the war is being run from Hanoi, and I think that most peo­ple that are in~ormed on the , a:ctivities of this war effort know full well that the shots are being called , in Hanoi and in. Red China.

Mr. HERMAN. But . that would be accept­able to you-that the Vietcong should be in­cluded in some way in negotiations.

Representative LAIRD. Well, I would assume that Hanoi would include them with their representatives at any kind of a conference. This would be a decision that Hanoi would make, not a decision for our Government to make, it would seem to me. .

Mr. AGRONSKY. I don't want to belabor the point, but the statement that you had made was that if the United States is pre­pared to accept the inclusion of the Com­munists in a coalition government in Viet­nam, then the fighting makes no sense.

Now, the thrust of that statement would seem · to be that under no circumstances would you want to see the inclusion of Com­munists in a c·oalition government in · Viet­nam.

Is that correct or is it not, sir? Representative LAIRD. Well, if after free

electi<;ms they elect people----. Mr. AGRONSKY. You would accept them. Representative LAIRD (continuing). To

, positions that are members of the Commu­nist Party, I think that is a different ques- · tion. But the question that was originally addressed to me had to do with before free elections, and it had to do with the dispute that is going on within the Democratic Party over this issue.

Mr. AGRONSKY. Let's talk about it after elections. Would you permit the inclusion of Communists in a coalition government?

Representative LAIRD. I would support the decisions that came about through free elec-

tions in Vietnam. But I think you have to understand, Martin, that free elections are a long way off as far as SOuth Vietnam. South Vietnam is not in· a position to con­duct any kind of elections. We can elect village chiefs and so forth-they can be elected. And there would be the procedures for that. But as far as a national election in south Vietnam that you are talking about now, which is an entirely different question, I think you will find that that kind of an election process is quite a way off when YO\.l­consider the amount of land territory now that is completely beyond the control of any established government in South Vietnam now.

Mr. AGRONSKY. I am not arguing the time­table. I am talking about the principle . Because when you said that to accept the Communists in a coalition government, then the fighting makes no sense, that would clearly indicate you would exclude them.

Representative LAIRD. I was referring to the kind of a settlement that we had in Laos. This was an imposed settlement in which the eight points that Secretary Rusk so adequately set forth as the prerequisites to having a solution in Laos were not lived up to when the agreement was finally made.

We imposed a coalition government, giv­ing the Communists a veto power, without any free elections at all. And it would seem to me that the fine statement that Secretary Rusk made prior to the Laotian agreement is a statement that I would stand on and I think a statement that he continued to stand on, but the negotiations which were conducted by Governor Harriman did not live up to the Rusk criteria.

I would like to say that I have great re­spect for Secretary of State Rusk, and I am thankful each day that he is our Secretary of state.

Mr. MACNEIL. Mr. LAIRD, some Republi­cans-former Vice President Nixon-have been making charges in recent weeks _that some of the Democrats are in effect advocat­ing appeasement. · If, after free electionS, there were Com­

munists in the Saigon government, would that be a political issue with Republicans? Would you be. chargin·g in effect that the Johnson administration had been guilty in some way or another of appeasement?

Representative LAIRD. No; this is not the question that we have before us. The ques-

. tion befor~ us now is that Secretary-the Secretary of State, President Johnson, have made conflicting statements as far as the interim government is concerned. Senator KENNEDY has advocated taking the Commu­nists into an interim government; that it would be all right with him. Press Secre­tary Moyer indicated that perhaps this would be all right with the administration.

Now, it seems to me that we have to clear up this question and there is only one man that can clear up that question and that is the President of the United· States.

I think it is most important that this question be answered, f!O that not . only the American people know what the position of our country is,_ ~ut that . the North Viet­namese_, the Red Chinese, yes, and the SOviet Union know what the position of the United states is in regard to peace ter,riu;.

Mr. MACNEIL. ~- LAIRD, you sit on the Defense Appropriations Subcommittee of the House, and as such you receive top-level briefings, both from the Defense people and from our own CIA.

I would like to ask you what they are telling you. For example, how much more money is this war going to cost; how long is it going to take?

Representative LAIRD. Well, first, I am not at Uberty to break classification on any in­formation. The . Secretary •of Defense is able to do this and make a determination,

as he did in his press conference, where in­formation that had been given us on a classified basis was used. He can do this for his own political security, sometimes I don't think in the interest t:>f national se­curity. But I cannot.

But I would like to tell you one thing. That· is, that the defense needs of this

country are being underestimated. They were underestimated in the President's budget of 1966, when it was originally sub­mitted, by some $15 billion. The supple­mental request which we will act upon in the House of Representatives on Tuesday or Wednesday of this week-I ·think the Ameri­can people were led to believe that that was all the money that would be necessary for the remaining portion of fiscal year 1966. It is simply not true. We will have another supplemental bill for defense spending even to cover military pay before us within a very short period of time.

The · 1967 budget, Martin, is underesti­m_ated again. As .a matter of fact, the Army manpower limitations that were in that 1967 budget, 2 days after the budget was submitted to the Congress, had been re­moved, making that budget out of date. ·

Mr. AGRONSKY. Are you contending that the President, that the administration is deliberately misrepresenting both the mone­tary and manpower needs of this war to the American people today?

Representative LAIRD. No. They want to finance it on a supplemental basis instead Off a pay-as-you-go basis---tney want to . come in on a supplemental basis and have refused in 1966 to estimate adequately what the needs would be in southeast Asia, as well as the needs to meet the other defense requirements which we have all over the world.

Now, this is done for one reason, and it is important to get this point across. It is done so that the other programs of the Great Society can be funded in the budget. And it is done because they know the Con­gress will always come along and finance national security and defense needs at a later time.

Mr. AGRONSKY. Well, if it is not mis­representation, what do you call it?

Mr. HERMAN. Yes, that is the point. There is a complication of language in her~ which I am not sure most of the audience will get. You say they want to do it on a sup­plemental basis. I don't think most Ameri­cans know what a supplemental basis means. You mean that they are under--

Representative LAIRD. Well, they don't want to put it in their budget estimate.

Mr. HERMAN. They are understating it originally.

Representative LAIRD. Now, in 1966-· they are understating it. Take this fiscal year in which we are currently.

Mr. HERMAN. Deliberately understating it. Representative LAIRD. Deliberately un­

derstating it, I believe. And I have . so charged over a period of the last few months.

Back when the defense bill was up in 1966-for the 1966 fiscal year, we filed a · · "minority report stating that the defense needs ·were u~derestimated, and .we made this very clear in our minority views. This is done deliberately so · that . the · Ameriean · people get the first impact, as they did in the 1966 budget, when it was announced that it was going to be under $100 billion. There was a great hue and cry all over what a grand job the President had done in submitting a budget less than $100 billion. Those of us on the Defense Appropriations Committee-and we so stated in our report-knew full well that this was a phony figure, because the defense needs were not adequately esti­mated, not a single dollar was put in the bill to carry on for the escalation of the war in Vietnam in tl:ie submiSsion that was made in January for the 1966 fiscal year.

5836 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 Mr. HDMAN. This implies ano.ther whole

string of eeonomlc problems. does it not? It they are underestimating, 1! the Viet­namese war is going to cost a great deal more than. we- have been told, it" brinp up--

Representative LAmD. Well. that has been proven~ We have already got: a sup­plemental that is going to be voted on-­

Mr. HBBKAM. And you are expecting an­other.

Representativ!" LAmn. Additional money for ftaeal year 1966, a new obligation au-· tbority--Mr~ HD.liiiAM. And you personally expect"

another. Representative LAnm. I expect another

for 1966, and there will be still further supplementala covering the 1967 fiscal ~-

Mr. AGRONSKY. Have you any idea of how much money you are talking about?

Representative LAIBD. Well, I know that the defense bill, the defense budget for fiscal year 1966 was underestimated by at least $15 blllion as far as new obligational authority, and that Is being proven now by the string of supplemental&. This is a supplemental, an additional request for new obligational authority, new appropriations tor fiscal year 1966.

Mr. HimM.ur. That is on the order of 15 percent of the total budget". What is this going to do to the economy-how about our tax structure?

Repres-entative LAmo. Well, it seems to me that this 1s a problem that Is being-given too little attention as far as the administration is. concerned. This whole question of infia­tion is a.n issue which it seems to me the President has been so preoccupied With the deep divlslons that exist Within his own po­lltica.l party on a national basis. that: little attention is being paid this problem of' infia­tlon which Is being brought about by these. huge expenditures and continuing the idea that we can do business as uauar and st111 fight a war.

Mr. AGRONSKY. Congressman LAmn, not. a single Republican said nay in either the House or the Senate on the. de:fens.e appro­~latlon that waa just passed. Not one said no.

Representative LAIRD. That 1s. the very point I make. And I. believe that you will find that we wm continue to support the na.t.ional security need& and the defense. needs. of this c.ountl'y r

Mr. AHOII'SKY. But 1f there 1a s misrep.re­senta.tion, why don't you say sa? Why don't you indicate tts nature?

Representative LAIKD. We certainly did We gave you ourmlnorityreviewsin the: 1966 b111. We have done so in the report that will be made public this weekendr as far as the supplemental request tm fiscal year 1966.

Mr. AaaoNSKY. Again may I ask you what is the size of that supplemental that you think is. not being adequately reported.

Representative LAIRD. $12.2. billion is' the supplemental which wm be_ acted on as far aa the mllitary is concerned on Tuesday of this week. And I intend to support it. I hope all Republicans, I hope all Americans, Will support lt. These fund& are. needed in order to meet our worldwide commitments as outlined by Secretary Rusk so. adequately in his appearance before the senate Foreign Relations Committee. just two weeks ago-.

Mr. MAcNBIL. Mr. LAIRD, r would like to come- back to a question I originally asked you which Is, Hasi"'t the CIA or someone in­dicated an expectation of how long this war 1s going to go? There is no indication at' all-without violating security or anything like that?

:Representative LAIRD. Well, we--Mr. MAcNEIL. Is thfs open-ended'l Representative LAmD. We have had very

optimistic reports on this war from Secre-

tary of Defense McNamara for the last 4 years. Back in the 88th Congress he- told us that we would be withdrawing our troops from South Vietnam and at that time: we had less- than 18,000, by sometime- in Decem­ber of 1965. We have always had optimistic­reports from the Secretary of Defense. It seems- each time he has gone to Vietnam. he has come back and given llS a more opti­mistic report as to the conditions there.

I_ would not want to use those re-ports of the Secretary of Defense as the basis for such an estimate, because he has always given optimistic estlmat~s as- far as Vietnam is concel!ned.

Mr. MAcNEIL. The reason I am asking this question rs tt seems to me that we are en­~ed in an open-end war in Vietnam, and that we are, in MacArthur's phrase, bogged down in a land war in Asia.

Now, the Republicans have said they would not support such a commitment. And yet you are.

Representative LAIKD. Well, we have made very clear in o.ur coordinating council state.­ment', whi.ch represents the Governors, the. House, and Senate leadership, and the top party leaders of our country, that we would. suggest to the- President, and we did suggest in December, that rather than continue es­calating the war on the ground, as he has proposed, that we first try to use the sea and air power; that we believe that 1f negotia­tions are. our goal, peace through negotia­tions, we should use the. pressure in the area where we can best bring about these negotia­tions..

By merely going on the. ground, escalating on the ground and putting. the ma1or em­phasis on the ground, that. we. do not use the kind of pressure that. is best likely to­bring about. the desired neg otis tionL

Mr. MAcNEIL. But the emphasis is on. the ground, and you are supporting it.

Representative LAmn. Now we seem. to have a differe-nt policy. The negotiation policy o! course was a. policy enuncia.ted by President Johnson in his April 7 speech at Johns Hop­kins. University. Now Vice President Hux­PHRE.Y ~ In allot hia speeches, is talking about "£ictory-whether it" be a speech in. Saigon, his speech in Australia, his speech before the VFW and the American Legion. It is not so much the emphasis of the Johns Hopkins speech that the President. made in April. It is more of a harder line statement as set forth by the Vice President.

Mr. AGRONSKY. What change would you recommend? Would you have Haiphong bombed, or would you have the policy of hot -l?ursuit into China? What would you cfo?

Representative LAmn. I would stand by the Republican Coordinating Council's statement_

I think that greater use of air and sea power is a better means than building up and esca.fating the ground forces to 400,000, 500,000 or perhaps more.

Mr. AGRONSKY. Where would you bring, the gxeater air and sea power to bear?

Representative LAIRD. It. seems to me-wa hava had. our recommendations rejected, as. you know, Martin.

The- President did not follow our recom­mendations. He rejected the idea of more adequate use of air and sea power against signific.ant, military targets-and. we have always limited it to that. This was rejected by the President of the United States. He is the. Commander in Chief and he has the authority to reject our coordinating councll.-s statement, which he did.

But that is no reason for those o! us in the Republican Party- which is the minority party in thfs country- today to say-"well, we are not going to support the President of the United States- as- our Commander in Chief,'' simply because he rejected' the recommenda­tions which were included' in our party posi­tion statement as enunciated by the coordi­nating coUncil.

I think it would be a mistake to do that, Martin.

The national security of our country is involved, and it seems to.me that we in the Republican Party should put our country first alwais.

We are used-the President uses us on many oeca.sions. When there is a hard de­cision to- make. the President always calls my leader, Congressman JERRY FoRD, to the White House-when it is a deeislon to re­sume bombing,_ when. it is a. decision about landing marines in the Dominican Republic. But when it is a declslon to go to the United Nations or to stop bombing, then my leader, JERRY FQRD,.. is not called. to the White House.

Now, we in the Republican Party know that we are- being used. in this area;. but we are being used, we !eel, in the intex:ests of our country, and w& shall always continue to put our country ahead of our party.

Mr. AGRONSKY. Congressman LAmo, there are many more. things- we would like to ask you, an:d we Will continue the questioning- in a moment.

• • • • • Mr. AGRONSKY. Congressman LAmo-, is the­

Republican Party for a tax increase now? Representative LA:mo-. I think it would be

a great mistake for the RepubUcan Party to come out now for a tax increase. This would take the lid completely off expenditures as far as the administration is concerned. We shoufd call for a listing of priorities from the- administration, sueh as the listing tha't was call-ed for by Senator- Johnson. when he was majority leader of the U.S. senate, when President Eisenhower was President. This listing of priorities on domestic expenditures is-most needed now.

It we come- out for a tar increase at this­time, the lid wlll be completely- off on ex­penditures and runaway inflation will be the order of the- day.

Mr. AGRONSKY. You are against a tax increase.

Representative LAmu. Well, I had voted the other- day for a tax increase-. I think if we have to have a tax increase, I Will be one that wm be in favor of not having- a budget that is completely out of balance. But let's put t-he emphasis on expenditure reductions-. And if we in.theminorityparty come out-for a tax increase now, it would be the greatest mistake we could make. it woul<f do a great · disservice to our country. Ana I. hope- that we do not fall into that trap. Let us keep the pressure on reduelng-expendltures for the time being.

Mr. MACNEIL. Mr. LAIRD, I would like- to turn to the elections. How many seats do you expect the Republicans to win this !aU?

Representative LAmD. I would expect at least 50.

Mr. MAcNEm. How do you expect those?­Representative LAIRD. Well, at the present­

trme, as you know-we received about 43 percent" of the vote, as you lrn:ow, in the 1964 elections. Two percent increase in our popu­larity would mean 31: additional seats.

Accomlng to the recent polls we have taken, Republican preference has increased in the last 6 weeks by a total of 2.5 percent. If we have a 5-percent increase in acceptance of Republicans-this is strictly a mathematical calculation, and' you can do this for House seats-a 5-percent increase in popular ac­ceptance for- Republicans in the Republican Congress- would mean 58 seats~ I _ do not be­lieve a 5-percent increase is out- of line at all, in view of the !'act t'ha1; we have moved 2.5 percent in a short period o:r 6- weeks.

Mr. MACNEIL. r wanted to ask you about those polls-. A year ago you had some polls, and at that time you said tha1; the Republi­cans in CongresS" ha:d failed to develop any i'ssue up to that point.

What do these polls re1Iect in terms of the issues that you have developed now, lf any?

Representative LAIRD. wen, the No. 1 con­cern, of course, is Vietnam that has shown

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5837 up in these polls. No. 2 is the cost of living, particularly among women polled at the present time--this increase in the cost- of living, 2 percent last year _and at least 3 per­cent in the President's own budget revenue estimates-anticipated increase in the cost of living of 3 percent, and I believe it will be closer to 5 percent. This is like levying a national sales tax on each wage earner in the United States. And this is of great concern, I believe, to the American people, and this-­the President likes to take credit and the Democratic administration for good times. I think they also have to take credit for the tremendous increases in the cost of living.

Mr. MACNEIL. How are you going to respond to the Democratic claims that we now have 5 years of unbroken prosperity? Unemploy­ment is down, the lowest point in--

Representative LAIRD. Well, I think unem­ployment is down-and that is a very good question. But I think it is easy to solve the unemployment problem if you continue to increase the draft, if you continue to increase the Peace Corps, the Job Corps·, and all o! these other programs, and putting everybody on the Federal payroll.

Mr. AGRONSKY. Gentlemen, I'm terribly sorry, but our time is up. Thank you very much, Mr. LAIRD, for being here to face the Nation.

CLEVELAND URGES EXPANDED WATER-POLLUTION FIGHT; OF­FERS Bn..LS TO FOSTER STATE, AND INDUSTRY EFFORTS Mr. CLEVELAND. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent to extend my remarks at this point in the RECORD.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Hampshire?

There was no objection. Mr. CLEVELAND. Mr. Speaker, dur­

ing the past few years, we have become increasingly aware of the severe water­pollution problems confronting this Na­tion.

This Nation's tens of thousands of lakes and streams were once deep, clear, and swift-running; teeming with game fish; rich in oxygen and pure and safe enough to drink from the stream's or lake's very shore. But today many of those lakes and streams are shallow, sluggish, arid clogged with municipal and industrial wastes and the millions of tons of silt which have eroded from stripped and barren watersheds. Today our silt­choked rivers cannot begin to handle the overload of oft'al, bilge, and filth that is being poured into them.

This Nation has a near-catastrophic water-pollution problem. There is just not enough clean water for municipal industrial, commercial, and irrigatio~ purposes.

What there is, in most places, is so polluted that taxpayers and industries must pay ever-increasing taxes. and spend ever-increasing ·sums of money for purification. Some' of this Nation's greatest rivers have become sewers to the sea.

WATER POLLUTION, A NATIONAL CRISIS

In my opinion, there are few problems confronting this Nation today of the magnitude and seriousness of maintain­ing sufficient and pure water supplies. The need for adequate. good quality

water for all of this Nation's uses is paramount, for water pollution destroys natural beauty, menaces - the public health, reduces our property values, and raises taxes.

The water supply and pollution prob­lems are so great that one is no longer called an alarmist when he talks of either running out of water almost en­tirely or of running out of potable water entirely. Many areas of the National­reaqy suft'er acute water shortage prob­lems, and other areas suft'er acute water pollution problems. New England suf­fers from both.

Toward the end of maintaining an adequate supply of clean water in this Nation,. many Federal, State, and local officials, in a spirit of cooperation, are moving ahead with many dynamic pro­grams to control water pollution. .

On December 14, 1965, the New Eng­land Interstate Water Pollution Control Commission, met in quarterly session in New York, N.Y., to discuss water pollu­tion control measures. The commission adopted two resolutions which I consider to be of prime significance.

NEW ENGLAND RESOLUTIONS Mr. Speaker, at this point I include

these two important resolutions in the RECORD: RESOLUTION OF THE NEW ENGLAND INTERSTATE

WATER POLLUTION CONTROL COMMISSION To URGE CONGRESS To .AMEND THE FEDERAL WATER PoLLUTION CONTROL ACT Whereas the rate of municipal sewage work

construction is greatly determined by the availability of Federal construction grant funds; and

Whereas the rate of construction must proceed at a much higher annual rate if the rate is to meet water pollution control needs and protect vital water resources in a reason­able time; and

Whereas in order that sewage works con­struction may proceed at the greatest pos­sible rate: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That tl).e New England Inter­state Water Pollution Control Commission urge the existing Federal Water Pollution Control Act be amended to include provi­sions for paybacks to State governments Which advance the Federal share and to local governments which incur construction costs in anticipation of receiving Federal aid for this purpose in instances where the existing -annual appropriations are insufficient to meet current demands.

Attest: THOMAS C. McMAHON,

Executive Secretary.

RESOLUTION OF THE NEW ENGLAND INTERSTATE WATER POLLUTION CONTROL COMMISSION RECOMMENDING CONGRESS ADOPT FEDERAL LEGISLATION PROVIDING FINANCIAL INCEN­TIVES TO INDUSTRY FOR CONSTRUCTION OF WATER POLLUTION CONTROL FACILITIES Whereas industrial waste constitutes a sig-

nificant portion of the overall water pollution problem, and

Whereas the abatement of industrial pollu­tion is not keeping pace with the municipal programs, t>,nd

Whereas the benefits to be derived from in­dustrial pollution abatement are regional and interstate in character justifying the concern and active support of Congress: Now, there­:rore, belt · Resolved, That the New England Interstate

Water Pollution Control Commission recom­mend adoption of Federal legislation to pro-

vide financial inducement for abatement of water pollution such as accelerated tax writeoffs of plant investments made in the interest of water pollution control.

Attest: THoMAs C. McMAHON,

Executive Secretary.

Mr. Speaker, these two resolutions are only a. small indication of the vast amount of time and attention being de­voted by concerned public officials and interested private parties in. the New England area and in the State of New Hampshire to take adequate measures to insure clean water for now and the future.

CLEVELAND BILLS DESCRmED

Mr. Speaker, today I have introduced two bills with a view toward controlling water pollution. It is my understanding that the first bill will most probably be referred to the Committee on PlJ.blic Works, a committee on which I have served for 4 years. I understand that the second bill will most probably be re­ferred to the Committee on Ways and Means. I sincerely hope that both com­mittees will favorably consider these two proposals.

Mr. Speaker, the first bill, which I in­troduced today, is to amend section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act as amended, to authorize reimbursement to States, municipalities, or intermunici­pal or interstate agencies that undertake the construction of treatment works in advance of the availability of funds. If prior to commencement of constructio~ of any sewage treatment works in ad­vance of the availability of funds for a grant under section 8 of the act, the Secretary of Health, Education, and Welfare approves such project, and the State, municipality, intermunicipal, or interstate agency for the control of water pollution thereafter constructs the proj­ect and submits an application to the Secretary approved by the appropriate State water pollution control agency or agencies for a grant for the project, the Secretary, upon his approval of such ap­plication, is authorized to make a grant under section 8 for the project to be paid from future appropriations.

No such grant shall be made unless all of the provisions of the act have been complied with to the same extent and with the same eft'ect as though the grant wer_e to be made for future construction of the project, and no such grant shall b~ made in an amount exceeding a grant which would otherwise be made under this section for the future construction of such project.

To prevent any entanglements regard­ing either ~ the authorization or the ap­propriation of funds for the Federal water pollution control program by the Congress. neither an approval of the project by the Secretary prior to con­struction, nor the making of a grant by

. the Secretary for a project to be paid from a future appropriation, nor any other provisions of the subsection which would be added to the law by this bill, shall be construed to constitute .'a com­mitment or obligation of the United States to provide funds to make or pay any grant for a project.

5838 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 DIFFERENCES NOTED

Tins proposal differs from others which have been introduced to amend section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act, as amended, which would authorize reimbursements of States that prefinance certain treatment works. The legislation which I have introduced would go beyond the reimbursements of States which have used the proceeds of bonds issued by States, counties, cities, or other political subdivisions of the State for the construction of projects which otherwise woul·..l be eligible for a grant under section 8. Under those leg­islative proposals, the political entities may claim payment of any portion of the sums allotted or reallotted to it under this section to aid in the retirement of the principal of bonds at their maturi­ties, to the extent that the proceeds of such bonds have been actually expended in the construction of one or more of such projects.

My legislation would go beyond the mere bond concept. It would extend to the financing of the construction of treatment works in advance of the avail­ability of funds for a grant by whatever means the political entities may employ in raising their revenues for such con­struction.

TAX INDUCEMENT FOR INDUSTRY

Mr. Speaker, the second bill which I introduced today is one to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to en­courage the construction of treatment works by private industry to control water pollution by permitting the de­duction of capital expenditures for the construction, erection, installation, or acquisition of such treatment works.

Under this bill, the construction of pollution treatment facilities is treated as a capital expenditure and there is provided an accelerated writeoff over a period of 3 years.

The treatment works would be re­quired to meet certain specifications, and a certification of the project would be required.

STATE EFFORTS NEED FEDERAL BOOST

This latter bill is not a new concept. Bills of this nature have been introduced since 1947 by many Members of Con­gress. A number of States have recently moved forward and adopted measures to ease State and local taxes in order to encourage good pollution control prac­tices by industry. But the task which lies ahead is still great. I am convinced that it will take legislation on a Federal level to obtain a full realization of the concepts embodied in such a proposal.

Mr. Speaker, only by concerted action on Federal, State, and local levels of gov­ernment to claim the water which falls on our land and rises from it, by mak­ing adequate and good use of that water as it winds its way to the sea, and to implement effective water pollution con­trol, can we assure the citizens of this great land that there will be adequate clean water for the future. The answer lies in the effective use and reuse of water, and that cannot be achieved with­out the cooperation of government and industry, from the Nation's Capital to every county courthouse, and from

monstrously large enterprises to small plants.

The people of New Hampshire, the people of New England, the people of all America needed an effective water pollu­tion control program.

FREEMAN VERSUS ACKLEY ON CCC DUMPING

Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. NELSEN] may extend his remarks at this point in the RE'coRD and include extra­neous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tennessee?

There was no objection. Mr. NELSEN. Mr. Speaker, in Min­

neapolis last week, Secretary of Agricul­ture Orville Freeman referred to my re­marks to the House concerning the· dumping of Commodity Credit Corpora­tion corn stocks on the feed market as "a lot of political noise."

Freeman continued: We hear this sort of talk every time an

ounce of grain is moved out of storage • • • I keep telling our farm people they can't have their cake and eat it too.

The Secretary questioned my figures which showed that the CCC dumping ac­tivities had dropped the price of corn 6 cents in Chicago, and said that 2 cents was more accurate. He quoted the Chi­cago price at $1.29 a bushel which, in his opinion, is a "pretty healthy price."

The facts are that 175 million bushels of corn were dumped in the first 9 weeks of 1966, and it has been reported to me that approximately 80 million more bushels were unloaded last week. Rough­ly 250 million bushels of corn make for a lot of "ounces."

In regard to the prices at Chicago, it is obvious that both Mr. Freeman and I can use any particular day's market quo­tations we prefer. However, on March 9, 1966, the day Mr. Freeman made his Minneapolis remarks, the price for No. 2 com at Chicago was $1.27 a bushel. How can this be considered a "pretty healthy price" when it is 5 cents a bush­el lower than the $1.32 price of March 9, 1965?

In the face of these lower prices, the Department of Agriculture Index of Prices Paid for Commodities and Services by the farmers has gone up 11 points. Thus, the farmers are paying higher prices to produce their corn but are re­ceiving a lower return for their labors.

Compare the farmers' return with the average weekly gross earnings of produc­tion workers in all manufacturing which increased from $105.52 in January 1965, to $110.00 in January 1966. Contrary to Mr. Freeman's assurances, the farmers are not even getting their cake, so there is not too much worry about them taking too big of a slice.

Mr. Speaker, I have suggested that the Department of Agriculture is purpose­fully holding down the market price of com. Mr. Freeman has scoffed at this as "a lot of political noise." On March 10, 1966, the day after Mr. Freeman's speech, Gardner Ackley, the Chairman of

the President's Council of Economic Ad­visors was quoted as follows during an interview with Ray Scherer of NBC News on the Today Show:

Increase in supplies of pork depend on the difference between the price of hogs and the price of corn, and we're trying to hold down the price of corn. The Govern­ment's acquired large stocks of corn in its past price support operation, now we're re­leasing them into the market.

Surely the Secretary of Agriculture would not accuse the Chairman of the President's Council of Economic Advisers of putting out "a lot of political noise." Perhaps the Secretary is merely con­cerned with the corn market price in view of the fact that as of February 25, farmers had declared their intention to divert only 11 million acres of feed grains under the feed-grain program compared to 19.1 million acres during the same period in last year's signup program. The Secretary neglected to mention this possibility in his response to me.

A FLAIR FOR INDEPENDENCE Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr.

Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. MooRE] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extrane­ous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tennessee?

There was no objection. Mr. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, in this

day and age of mayors and Governors coming to Washington with their hats in their hands requesting Federal finan­cial help, it is refreshing to read of places still displaying the good old-fash­ioned American spirit of pulling them­selves up by their own bootstraps.

Such a place is Welch, W.Va., a city of about 5,000 population located in the heart of West Virginia's southern coal­fields.

Welch is unique in that it has a mayor who preaches of the dangers of State and local political leaders abdicating their responsibilities by continually looking toward Washington for finan­cial help. Welch is unique in that it has a mayor who practices what he preaches. He is Mayor W. B. Swope. Mayor Swope recently addressed a dinner in Bluefield, W. Va. His speec:1 was fully reported by the Bluefield Daily Telegraph.

I wish that my colleagues will have a chance to read of this mayor of a small city in West Virginia, a mayor with a fiair for independence. Under unani­mous consent I include it with my re­marks:

BUREAUCRACY, EROSION OF FREEDOM ARE FLAYED

Federal bureaucrats are operating a. "crooked poker game" that is going to bank­rupt both States and municipalities and eliminate the last vestiges of freedom in the United States unless present trends are reversed, Mayor W. B. Swope of Welch said Thursday night.

Swope told a Mercer County Lincoln Day dinner gathering that only a dictatorship can result if State and city political leaders continue to abdicate their responsib111ties and turn to Washington for financial help for every locaJ. improvement.

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5839 .. It makes me sick to see how helpless com­

munities have become," he said, ''when It can be demonstrated that any community can do almost anything it needs to htive done at a fraction of the cost required when the Federal Government helps do it."

BUILDS rrs OWN

Swope said his own city of Welch, which recently turned down a $625,000 Federal sewer-building grant. has discovered that lt can build a better system for $160,000 of Its own money than it could by accepting the Federal money and the rules and regulations that go with such grants.

"We are building an interceptor sewer system for almost what lt would cost for engineering and legal fees if we had taken the Federal grant," he said,. "and we are avoiding the rules and regulations that the Government would fasten on us."

Swope said Welch also had discovered that it could have completed another project. which he did not identify. for $70,000, but that it actually cost $160,000 when the Fed­eral Government became involved.

He noted a recent newspaper report that Princeton is considering a request for Fed­eral aid to improve its sewer system, and added:

"I'm sure that they can build whatever they need for about what it would cost them to fill out the papers they'll need to get Federal help."

vrcxous cmcLE Swope said his experience as mayor of

Welch indicates that the Federal Govern­ment's huge array of grants and loans is going to bankrupt both States arid cities which not only have to supply the money the Federal Government uses but then must come up with more to match what the Fed­eral Government returns in the form of aid.

"I don't understand," he said. "how the Government can take our money, change its name and call it 'Federal money,' con us into going into these programs, where we put up more money, and then tell us how to spend both."

Swope said he also was proud of the fact that the Republican city administration of Welch had reduced its own annual budget from $260,000 to $220,000 during a period when most municipal budgets were increas­ing at an average of 10 percent a year.

EROSION OF FREEDOM

He said he and all Republicans are partic­ularly concerned over the continued erosion of basic American freedoms, and that this is typified by Federal agencies like the Internal Revenue Service.

Swope said the tax collectors have com­pletely reversed the old American principle that a man is innocent until proved guilty. "Now they (the tax collectors) tell you how guilty you are, and it's up to you to prove you aren't," he said.

He said he spoke from bitter personal ex­perience, because it once cost him 3 years of work and $4,000 to prove that his tax returns were accurate, and that in the end he re­ceived "a refund of $40.20 and an apology."

Swope was introduced by a former Welch resident, J. Don Clark of Bluefield, who called him "the greatest mayor in the United States." Brief remarks also were made ·by Republican County Chairman A. Harry Vest. Mercer County Republican Club President Earl Landers, Wade H. (Jim) Ballard lli of P eterstown, and Stat~ Republican Chairman John C. Shott, who also served as master of c :;r emonies. The group was welcomed by Mrs. Ben H. Williams, president of the Blue­field Republican Women's Club which spon­sored the dinner. The pledge of allegiance was led by former Republican national committeewoman Mrs. Sayers. F. Harman o!

Bluefield. Plano music was by Mrs. Olivia H. Canaday.

THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION _ CONTROLACT

Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from New York [Mr. KUP­FERMAN] may extend h1s remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extra­neous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tennessee?

There was no objection. Mr. KUPFERMAN. Mr. Speaker. to­

day I introduced a bill to encourage States .and local subdivisions to take 1m­mediate and effective action with respect to water pollution.

It 1s obvious that the tremendous ex­penditures which are necessary effec­tively to deal with the problem of water pollution, require the intervention of the Federal Government. However, we would not want the States and localities to sit back and wait for such help. Ac­cordingly this legislation would insure that if any State or locality proceeds in this area, it will not be penalized and will obtain its proper share of Federal reim­bursement when the Federal Govern­ment finally does make additional and sufficient funds available for this purpose.

states should be encouraged to initiate w.ater pollution control programs now. with the assurance that if Federal funds become available at a later date they will be reimbursed. This· retroactive provi­sion w111 eliminate any lingering doubt that the pioneers in such an important movement for conservation and restora­tion of our w.ater resources might lose the opportunity to share in future Fed­eral funds.

I believe that this legislation, entitled "A bill to amend section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to authorize reimbursement of states that pre:finance certain treatment works," w111 provide the necessary safeguard and the incen­tive for immediate action for clean w.ater.

A copy of the bill follows : Be it enacted by the Senate and House of

Representatives of the United States of Amer­ica in Congress assembled, That section 8 of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act is amended by adding at the end thereof the following new subsection:

"(h) Any State that shall use the proceeds of bonds issued by the State, county, city, of other political subdivision of the State for the construction of one or more projects which otherwise would be eligible for a grant under this section may claim payment of any portion of the sums allotted or re­allotted to it under this section to aid in the retirement of the principal of such bonds at their maturities, to the extent that the pro­<?eeds of such bonds have been actually ex­pended in the construction of one or more of such projects. Such claim for payment may be made only when all of the provisions of this Act have been complied with to the same extent and with the same effect as fihough payment were to be made to the State for a proj.ect !or future construction, and the Federal share payable with respect to such p~oject shall not exceed the amoll?t

which a grant could have been made under this section for such project."

WAR ON HUNGER Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr.

Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentlewoman from Washington [Mrs. MAYJ may extend her remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tennessee?

There was no objection. Mrs. MAY. Mr. Speaker. the Wash­

ington Association of Wheat Growers held their 11th annual convention at Spokane, Wash., last December, and it was my pleasure to have participated 1n the convention, along with a group of knowledgeable and highly regarded ex­perts in their fields.

A great deal of attention was given to the subject of how our wheat pro­ducers might best assist 1n the develop­ment of plans for the worldwide war on hunger. and how best our wheatgrow­ers can participate to help assure success of such a giant undertaking.

As my colleagues are aware, our House Committee on Agriculture is delving into this subject at the present time and will. before long, have recommendations for the consideration of the House. For this reason, I feel it appropriate to bring to the attention of my colleagues a partic­ularly interesting talk given at the Washington Association of Wheat Grow­ers Convention by Mr. Nonnan Kraeft, an agricultural editor for 15 years who has served as national agricultural editor for both the Mutual Broadcasting Sys­tem and the American Broadcasting Co. Among other enterprises in the agricul­tural field, Mr. Kraeft is editor of the agricultural management letter of the Bailey Fann Business Service.

Under unaniin.ous consent, I ask that excerpts from Mr. Kraeft's speech be printed at this point in the RECORD:

THE NEW TELESCOPE

(A speech by Norman Kraeft at the 11th an­nual convention of the Washington As­sociation of Wheat Growers at Spokane, Wash. , December 7, 1965) From my Washington, where we special­

ize in the crop known as words, to your Washington, where you produce more tangi­ble crops, such as wheat, the word is out: Let's start a war we can win, a world­wide war on hunger. Let's set our produc­tion sights in terms of the needs of the world. That would mean, of course, a di­rect and complete reversal of our public pol­icy for agriculture in the United States as we have known it for a third of a cen­tury. It means that we set about produc­ing more rather than less. It means that we think in terms of a world food shortage rather than in terms of surplus production for U.S. needs. It means a deemphasis---1! not a complete rejection-of acreage or poundage controls and the consequent price support mechanisms. That's the new tele­scope. Through it, we see increased produc­tion by American farmers to help meet world food needs.

The prospect holds some exciting possi­bilities. Every farmer I have ever talked with in 15 years as a farm editor wants to produce food to feed people, not to go

5840 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE· March J5, 196({ into storage. If the worldwide war on hunger becomes a reality, farmers wlll be able to take the brakes off their production machines and really produce. Such a development could mean that Government would play a lesser role and that farmers could play a larger part in running the Nation's farms.

As far as the internationalization of agri­culture is concerned-and that's what we are talking about--American wheat growers have led the way for many years. Under Pub­lic Law 480, our food for peace program, we have in recent years exported 50 percent or more of total U.S. wheat production. Wheat is bread and bread-from time im­memorial-has been the staff of life. That is true here in the United States and it is equally true in many parts of the world. Raymond Ioanes, Administrator of USDA's Foreign Agricultural Service, pointed out at USDA's last annual outlook conference that wheat represents about 60 percent of our to­tal food for peace program. I think that figure attests to the important role that wheat, the food you produce, plays in feed­ing the world's hungry. I think, further, that those in and out of Government who are planning the worldwide war on hunger could well look to you wheat producers and learn much from your experiences in satis­fying world food needs.

Man may not be able to live by bread alone, but in a hungry world it's a pretty good start.

Through the new telescope, we will not only see a step-up in our food aid programs, but in our trade programs as well. Here, too, you wheat people are doing outstanding work. In his report, Mr. Ioanes said that our wheat exports during the July-Septem­ber quarter of this year were running 12 percent higher than a year earlier and that most of this increase was in commercial sales for dollars. Last year we exported 728 million bushels of wheat; 22 percent of the total was commercial sales, 78 percent food for peace. Your market development orga­nizations, such as Western Wheat Associ­ates and Great Plains Wheat, are doing an outstanding job of promoting, selling, and merchandising wheat around the world.

The war on hunger about which we are hearing so much these days is a vast con­cept and a long-range idea. Being world­wide in scope, it would be an undertaking of huge complexities. Therefore, the warn­ing flags thrown up by persons such as your own Members of Congress, Mrs. CATHERINE MAY and Mr. ToM FoLEY, are very much to the point. I don't think we can quarrel with Mrs. MAY's suggestions to go slow, to learn to crawl before we start running in unfamiliar territory, or with Mr. FoLEY's projection to the effect that we probably will not be 'in a position to move ahead sig­nificantly in this area until the 1970's.

I want to pause here and pay tribute to your Members of Congress who represent the wheat country of Washington State. I have known Mrs. MAY for the last 4 years and have observed her work as a member of the House Committee on Agriculture. There are few members of that important committee who are more diligent than CATHERINE MAY In attendance at committee hearings and meetings or who are more familiar with the issues upon which they speak and vote. ToM FoLEY, in his first term in Congress, is doing· an excellent job on the Agriculture Com­mittee.

Some of you are personally familiar with the committee on which CATHERINE MAY and TOM FOLEY serve.

This is democracy at work. The 35 mem-· bers of the committee (34 men and Mrs. MAY) represent every major agricultural re-­gion and every Important commodity or commodity group In the· United States: They are Democrats and they are Republi­cans. They are northerners and they -are

southerners, not to speak of easterners and westerners. They are farm boys (and a girl) and they are ~'city slickers." They swear by Government farm programs and they swear at Government farm programs. Considering the diversity of the committee, it is a won­der that the farm legislation which is pro­duced is as good as it is.

Being the diverse group that it is, the House Agriculture Committee usually evolves farm legislation only with great difficulty. The workings of the committee, however, are only a reflection of the point that Sir Winston Churchill once made about dem­ocracy. "Democracy," said the Prime Minis­ter, "is the worst form of government ever conceived by the mind of man, except for au the rest."

If you have any doubts that our democ­racy is the greatest political system in the world, a gOod refresher course would be a few visits to open hearings of the House­or Senate-Agriculture Committee. Pity the witness who comes unprepared or who has frail nerves. The committees pride themselves on never having refused to hear anyone who wished to be heard. Having asked to be heard, however, the witness had better be prepared to defend his point of view under some of the most vigorous ques-

. tioning he will ever encounter. It's a no­holds-barred atmosphere in the congression­al Committees on Agriculture, as committee members work to get to the bottom of the issue before them at a given time. Observ­ing this, one silently offers thanks that we live in a country whose laws are stm devised in an atmosphere where ideas are batted back and forth like volleyballs in plain view of everyone who cares to look, rather than delivered from the desk of a dictator­ship.

At this point may I say, and emphasize, that all this is taking place in Congress, the legislative branch of our Federal Govern­ment. That is where the future of our democracy is protected. Which means, that is where we, the people, must protect the future of our democracy.

Senator HERMAN E. TALMADGE of Georgia, a member of the Senate Committee on Agri­culture and Forestry, issued this reminder a short while back:

"Our Founding Fathers devised a system of government comprised of three separate and coequal branches, each one independent, and each acting as a check on the power of the others. In recent years the separation of powers has become less and less distinct. We have seen the Chief Executive issue orders that have legislative authority. In numerous instances, we have seen the U.S. Supreme

- Court hand down decisions that had the effect not only of legislation, but also of amending the Constitution itself. For the most part in tpe past 30 years, we have seen the legis­lative branch of Government decline in im­portance. Congress seems to have lost its independence. It is sad but true at the pres­ent time that the Congress' primary role appears to be the consideration of bills that have been sent up by the executive branch of Government. I do feel that the Congress should assume more of its duties, and take an independent and active role in our Gov­ernment in keeping with its constitutional responsibilities."

It is true that, for the most part today, the executive branch proposes, and Congress disposes. But in disposing--one way or an:; other--of legislation proposed by the execu­tive branch, Congress feels increasingly the heavy hand of the executive in making its decisions. ·

The point Is that these decisions affect all Americans. Since they do, all Americans should have a voice In those decisions. Never forget that the legislative branch has 535 Members (Senators and Representatives)., All 535 are elected by the people. Of .the

m111ions of people in the executive branch, the people elect only two: the President and . the Vice President. The rest are appointed and, in point of practice, appear too often to give their first allegiance to the system which gave them employment rather than

· to the American people as such. I leave it to you as to which branch of the Federal Government--the legislative or the execu­tive-is more directly responsive to the wishes of the American people.

I know a man who, for years, began every speech he made with the words, "Every morn­ing I give thanks that we don't get all the government we pay for." In the light of the growing size and power of the executive branch, I am fearful that we may be getting all the Government we pay for, and more.

On the subject of Congress, I would like to take issue with those who make much of the diminishing numbers of Congressmen from farming and rural areas. We hear in some quarters that it is going to be harder and harder to pass farm legislation through Con­gress because there are fewer Congressmen from farming and rural America in Washing­ton. I consider such talk as an insult to Congress.

I believe that Congress--for all its diver­sity-does legislate in the national interest . Has Congress withheld its favors from agri­culture recently? I don't see how anyone can say that, considering that Congress in 1965 passed the biggest, most expensive, most extensive farm bill ever enacted into law in the United States of America, including 4-year commodity programs for wheat, feed grains, cotton, dairy and some other com­modities. If Congress, from time to time, takes a dim view of certai~ farm legislation that comes before it, I believe the congres­sional opposition · that develops is based on Congress' belief that the bill in question constitutes bad legislation. I have never observed that Congress opposed farm legis­lation because it is farm legislation.

No, I don't think it is Congress that farm­ers must worry about. Has the present Sec­retary of Agriculture taken a position on leg­islative reapportionment, for example? He has not, even though most farmers and their organizations are strongly opposed to the U.S. Supreme Court's one-man, one-vote decision of last June.

Was it Congress which suggested that 1 million farmers may be enough to feed the Nation? No,- it was the Director of the Bureau of the Budget, who is responsible to the White House. On this subject, I have often wondered '?/hat is so magical about the 1 mlllion figure. What guarantee is there that the drop in farm numbers will stop there? How do we know that, a few years from now, we won't hear that 500,000, or 50,000, or 5,000, or 500 or 50 farms will suffice? Is it not a matter of public policy as well as economics as to whether we shall have many or few farms dotting the American land­s-cape? Is democracy more likely to thrive in a land where many farmers own and operate their own farxns or where relatively few farm­ers employ large numbers of hired laborers to do the farming?

I think I sleep a little better at night know­ing that America is still covered with farms, most of w:hich are operated by their owners. William Brake, longtime master of the Michigan State Grange, has said: "The owner-operator concept in American agricul­ture is our greatest bulwark against com­munism." I believe that we will allo:w this concept to slip away from our national life at. our national peril.

This is a matter of utmost urgency. Refer­ence to ·the dwindling away of farms and farmers from -the American scene has been made a number of times at this convention. We have been losing farJllS and farmers at about the same rate under both Secretary Benson and Secretary Freeman. A Minne-

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5841 sota farmer expressed surprise when national attention was focused on the closing Qf the Studebaker plant in South Bend, Ind., some time back, throwing thousands of people out of work. The Minnesota farmer did a little arithmetic and reported: "We lose that many farmers every 2 weeks and nobody cares."

Meanwhile, is the war on hunger to be maimed before it ls born? Certainly, Mrs. MAY in her speech yesterday gave us good reasons why we should look at the idea care­fully before rushing ahead. Careful analysis of the proposals in this area is a major pur­pose of the proposed U.S. World Food Study Commission, supported by many Republican Members of Congress. The war on hunger will undoubtedly be an important study topic also in the President's new National Advisory Commission on Food and Fiber. It will be an ironic repetition of the historic divisions· which have split the house of agriculture over the years if the war on hunger falls prey to a war between commissions.

Incidentally, President Johnson has said that his new · Commission is ·composed of Americans "of broad experience and great talent." If that is so-and I think it is­why did he feel it necessary to appoint with the Commission a Committee on Food and Fiber to be chaired tiy the Secretary of Agri­culture? Must the Commission operate in the shadow of Government officials? Why, in this democracy, cannot a citizens' commis­sion or committee advise the Government, without Government help? Many people in Washington are fearful that, in the present instance, we may be in for yet another advis­ory committee operation. We have seen ad-

· visory committees come and go by the do;z;ens under Secretary Benson and Secretary Free­man and, more often than not, these commit­tees end up as sounding boards for proposals of the administration in power. The com­mittees, alas, have been more noteworthy for taking rather than giving advice.

Representative HAROLD D. Cooi.EY, of North Carolina, chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, has promised early hearings in 1966 on extension of Public Law 480, the food-for-peace program, titles I and II of · which expire as of December 31, 1966. (Titles III and IV are permanent legislation.)

One of the points that may develop into a major controversy during these hearings is the President's recent action transferring the food-for-peace program to the Depart­ment of State. After all, the State Depart­ment operates the foreign policy of the United States. U.S. foreign policy today is heavily involved-in one way or another-in hot and cold wars around the world.

Is there not a danger that the best of U.S. motives may be misinterpreted abroad when one agency, the State Department, adminis­ters cold policy for hot wars and dispenses food at the same time? Are we not in this manner flirting with the fire of a world opinion that may view [wrongly, perhaps] our food-for-peace programs as pawns on the chessboard of foreign policy?

The new telescope is going to require many careful adjustments before we can see our way clearly in an attempt to gage our public policies for agriculture in terms of world food needs.

Our best hope in this anc;l other fields of action in this democracy is for all of us to do everything we can to see that Congress, the legislative branch of the Federal Gov­ernment, remains a separate, strong, and independent branch. By electing the best man or woman in each instance, we can con­tinue to make our national will known and respected. In that way we can help assure that the executive and judicial branches will be responsive to the national will.

There is good, much good, on both sides of the political aisle. Working with Mem­bers of Congress every day, I have yet to meet the Member I do not like or the Mem-

ber who can be condemned out of hand for the work he does ..

The genius of our political system is its checks and balances. That means that we must have two strong, responsible parties to bring out the best in America, for Amer­ica. Remember, power corrupts and absolute power corrupts absolutely. A strong two­party system means a strong America. It always has, and I trust it always will. Thank

. you.

THE MAZE OF TAXES

Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. CURTIN] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extrane­ous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tennessee?

There was no objection. Mr. CURTIN. Mr. Speaker, the grow­

ing maze of taxes, particularly what has been described as the hungry search of State and local taxing bodies for new tax revenues to be extracted from com­panies located wholly outside their juris­dictions, is a critical problem that needs immediate attention and remedial .action by ~his session of Congress.

A Special Subcommittee on State Tax­ation of Interstate Commerce of the Committee on the Judiciary has recent­ly been conducting hearings on H.R. 11798, the proposed Interstate Taxation Act. On February 24, the subcommittee heard forthright testimony from one of my constituents, Werner N. Davidson of Bethlehem, who is vice president of fi­nance for Caloric Corp., Topton, Pa., gas range and appliance manufacturer.

Mr. Davidson said that: The exploding T-bomb of State taxation

has produced a fantastic fallout of paper­work that threatens to slow down the mo­mentum of marketing.

He urges favorable action by the sub­committee on H.R. 11798, a bill that would limit the bases on which States can impose taxes. He pointed out that States currently levy corporate taxes on as many as four factors: sales, inventory, payroll, and real property. H.R. 11798 would remove sales and inventory as bases for State and local taxation. This would quite properly leave payroll and real property as the bases for State and local levies.

Mr. Davidson went on to say: This would eliminate the sales factor,

which is the greatest source of confusion, without restricting the traditional right of State and local taxing bodies to levy taxes against citizens over which they have juris­diction. Today the overlapping State, county, city, and school district tax structure reminds me of a pyramid built by drunken Egyptians.

The witness cited State income taxes, payroll taxes, disability taxes, State, county, and city franchise taxes, sales and use taxes, ad valorem taxes, gross receipts taxes, and occupational license taxes ..

Some of these must be reported monthly . . Others .must be reported quarterly; others semiannually, and still others annually. And many of these taxes feature a unique

formula for arriving at the total dollars to be paid. Trying to find one's way to the top of the pile is a nigh,tmare.

In 4 years, the number of tax returns my company has had to file has increased 36 per­cent, from 999 to 1,363. In addition, we find that our cost of preparing our average tax return has increased 57.2 percent in that period, from $70 per return to $110. '!'bus, the total cost of filing the Caloric tax returns has doubled in 4 years, from $70,000 to $149,998.

I take personal issue with last month's statement by the National Association of Tax Administrators that progress toward uni­formity of State and local tax regulations has been made. If I ,understand the state­ment correctly, the NATA is asking for 4 more years so that NATA can do the job. We need H.R. 11798 now, not 4 years from now.

The range manufacturer spokesman pointed out that his firm had recently purchased a Honeywell computer and it is operated around the clock, with one of the three shifts devoting virtually all of its time to developing and maintaining tax data.

It's fortunate that computer technology matured during the past 4 years. Without the electronic computer, our cost per return would have increased even more than it did.

The work doesn't stop when the return is filed and the check is in the mall. There is a peculiar tax torture device called the audit. Last year, we had 18 such audits by State and local tax auditors. Each one required a minimum of 1 day. And !rom what my friends in the "financial fraternity tell me, our company had relatively few audits.

The cost to my company of gathering the information, preparing the State and local tax returns, handling the accounting anci cooperating in the audits exceeds the total cost of all the State, county, and local taxes which we pay by a substantial margin. And, if it costs us (as a company) more for the paperwork than for the taxes, the measurable benefits of taxes to the State taxing bodies must be questionable, because the collection cost must be astronomical. We need a Marquis of Queensberry to convert the law of the jungle in tax collecting into a rule-of­law, commonsense activity.

Mr. Speaker, for companies doing busi­ness across the State lines, this is an acute and growingly critical problem. The House subcommittee is performing an outstanding service in bringing these facts to light in connection with H.R.11798.

HORTON CITES CERTAIN REPRIS­ALS AS B~CKDROP FOR HUNGAR­IAN INDEPENDENCE DAY Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee. Mr.

Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from New York [Mr. HORTON] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extrane­ous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tennessee?

There was no objection. Mr. HORTON. Mr. Speaker, this week

thousands of American citizens through­out this wonderful country will pause to pay tribute to the anniversary of the 1848 revolution for Hungarian independence. I am pleased to take this opportunity to offer congratulations to those thought­ful Americans and a few remarks on the revolution and its background.

5842 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966

-Before reviewing the valiant and fasci­nating history behind the celebration of Hungarian Independence Day, however, I feel compelled to remind my colleagues of Hungary's present enslaved condition~ For while we mark this week the li8th anniversary of the 1848 revolution, this year is also the lOth anniversary of the Hungarian freedom fighters revolution of 1956-a revolution against Communist enslavement which ended with a: brutal crushing of Hungarian liberty by Soviet armored divisions.

Political, social, and economic dissent­ers in Hungary are no safer from punish­ment now than they were in 1956. As evidence of this alarming fact, which is contrary to assurance we have had from the Communist Kadar government that restrictions have been lifted since the 1956 revolt, I submit the following re­port of events that transpired in Hun­gary since the first of the year:

Reliable sources in Vienna estimate that 5,000 persons were arrested in Hungary dur­ing the past 2 months. In Hungary, unrest spread in industrial areas due to food short­age and food prices raised recently by the government. Reports say that workers in Csepel rioted January 9 and that they scumed with factory militia and the police. Approx­imately 160 arrests were made. In the in­dustrial complex of Dunaujvaros, January 10 approximately 100 persons were arrested. The hanging of Party Secretary Janos Kadar was suggested by designs on walls in Pees. The city of Miskolc and localities in Nograd county also reported unrest. ·

In an obvious attempt to intimidate the Hungarian people the official Communist Party organ Nepszabadsag announced Feb­ruary 19 that several persons were arrested for the "suspicion of an attempted con­spiracy." A priest and a newspaperman were mentioned among those arrested. Ac­cording to information received by the Hungarian Freedom Fighters Federation of this country a total of 400 persons were arrested on February 19, all of whom were participants in the 1956 rev.olution. A con­ditional amnesty in 1963 set these persons free. These persons, many. of them in their early twenties, will have to complete their suspended sentences in addition to the term that wlll be imposed on them by new trials.

Nepszaba.d,ag went into great length ex­plaining that the people arrested were not just exercising honest criticism, but were actually conspiring to overthrow the gov-ernment. ·

The food shortage in Hungary is due to the continued exploitation of the country's re­sources by the Soviet Union, ·and to the ir­responsible management of _the socialistic economy. Prime Minister Gyula Kallal, now on a round-the-world tour, promised to United Arab Republic President Nasser the shipment of food amounting to $50 million.

This report was carried recently by the Associated Press, and has beeri veri­fied to me by sources within the Hun­garian Freedom-Fighters' Federation in this country. Only with these present conditions in mind, and with the deep concern we must all feel for the people who are forced to live under these cir­cumstances today, can we meaningfully approach the subject of the successful 1848 revolution. In that historic event, we may find a ray of hope for improviilg the lives of H~garians in the 1960's. ·. ·

·The fight for Hti.ngarian independence did not just spring up overnight, but was

t]le painstaking outgrowth of former Austrian Emperor joseph II's attempted germanization, which.aroused a new na­tionalism throughout Hungary. At first that nationa~st ~xpressio~ took the ~oriQ. ef a linguistic, literary, .and romantic revival; but when the economic slump following the Napoleonic Wars set in, the movement widened into one for political, economic, and social reform directed largely against the dead hand of Aus­tria. For example, in 1823 Francis I of Austria tried to raise money and recruits by unconstitutional means; but the re­sistance was such that tne Diet-legisla­ture---had to be convoked in 1825 and regularly thereafter. Among the chief figures in the new movement were the Hungarian patriots Ferenc Deak and Lajoz Kossuth. They agreed on some basic points, but the fiery Kossuth was the leading proponent of breaking ties with Austria. The others were primarily interested in achieving reforms within the existing context of relations with Austria.

While some reforms did occur, Aus­trian political leaders were afraid of the consequences if Kossuth were permitted to continue his agitation for Hungarian independence. Thus, in 1837 he was im­prisoned, but was released in 1840. Upon his release, Kossuth resumed his e:fiorts in behalf of Hungarian independence, this time through Pestl Hirlap, the first Hungarian political journal. More concessions were won, but Kossuth's dar­ing and constant demands for independ­ence led some of his more moderate sup-porters to desert his cause. .

However, in February 1848, the entl.re Austro Hungarian empire was shocked by news of the revolution in Paris and its efiects throughout Germany, where every government was threatened with being overthrown. Once again Kossuth demonstrated his leadership and the lower House of the Diet adopted his pro.­posal for the appointment of an inde­p.endent, responsible ministry. Emperor Ferdinand hesitated, but on March 13 the Vienna revolution broke - out and Prince Metternich, the former Foreign Minister, :fled to England. Ferdinand then quickly appointed Count Louis Batthyany premier of the first responsi­ble Hungarian ministry, which included Kossuth as Minister of Finance. He soon became its leader in rallyiilg the nation's defenses, and in April 1849, pro­claimed Hungary an independent state.

We are all too familiar with the story of the ensuing collaboration between the Austrians and Russians in quashing the young Republic's .independence. How­ever, Austria's decadent government was in no position to negate all the gains made by the Hungarians. As a result, the Compromise of 1867 established a dual monarchy of Austria and Hungary and allowed the Magyars a degree of self -government. · .

The story of Lajos Kossuth and his deep-seated belief in an independent Magyar ·state is one ·which has contin­U!:!-llY . inspired ·and encouraged freedom fighters throughout the· world~. KosSuth had a dream---:-a dream of .a Magyar state in which his people · could hold their

heads high and be pro.ud to proclaim their . allegiance to their . own . country. His . life's . work was dedicated to the achievement of that dream. Though in­dependence was short lived, he did live to see that d:ream com~~true. · ._

THE tt.LEGAL STOCK VOTING PRAC­TICES OF CLEVELAND TRUST CO., SHOULD BE STOPPED The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under

previous order of the House, the gentle­¢an from Texas [Mr. PATMAN], is recog­nized for 30 minutes.

Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Speaker, it has been truly said that eternal vigilance is the price of freedom.

This applies to economic freedom, as well as political freedom.

The right to vote would become a hol­low mockery in an economy dominated by ruthless business buccaneers whose sole concern is their own selfish aggran­dizement. Many times in our national history it has become necessary for the people, acting through Congress and their State legislatures, to curb the grow­ing power of greedy overlords of business and finance.

Today, I would like to· tum the spot­light on a little group ·of men who rule--­and, I ventUre to say, rule illegally-a multibillion dollar sector of the American economy. - These men are absolute czars over many great corporations. Their deci­sions a:fiect the-destinies of millions of men and women. in many .major indus­hies. It ·mtght be "sS:ic:i· that · they have as much, if not mor~ _P<;>wer· to set wage~ price, and industriat.iie'velaptnent policies as the President of the United States.

These men do not wield this awesome authority by right of ownership or PoPU­lar election. Indeed, the source of their power may be described as a completely rigged and probably 1llegal election.

I am talking ab.out the rulers of the Cleveland Trust Co., one of the Nation's mightiest financial institutions.

Next March 23, at 1:.30 p.m., a few men and women will straggle into a meeting i,n this bank's main office in the heart of downtown Cleveland. Formally, they will be attending the annual stockholders meeting of the largest bank ·in Ohio, a financial institution with more than $2 billion in assets.

Theoretically, a stockholders meeting is a form of economic democracy. The stockholders are entitled to set the poli­cies of their company through their se­leetion of directOrs, just as the American people guide their National, State, and local governments through their election of public officials.

Can you imagine the outraged outcries that would arise if, in a National, State, or local election, the administration 1n power started of! the count by casting one-third of the total votes hi itS own favor-and did so-in flagrant defiance of the law of-the la-rld-1 : ·, ···. ·

"It cannot happen - here~" ·you · might say. · · ·

But this is exactly what will happen March 23 at the Cleveland· Trust' Co/s stockholders· meeting. ·

March· 15; 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ..:_HOUSE 5843 For many years, the bank's manage-.

ment has perpetuated itself iii power­and has gradually extended its influence over industry-by voting one-third of its stock in its own favor. ·

The corporation laws of Ohio state clearly that a company may not vote its own stock in such an election, but the rulers of the Cleveland Trust Co. evade this regulation through a tricky decep­tion.

This stock, I might explain, is literally the property of widows, orphans, and other heirs. It is owned by various estates of which the bank is trustee and administrator. Legally and tradition­ally, the bank's officers are under oath and obligation tO manage these estates in the best interests of the beneficiaries­not to enhance and expand their own in­terests and economic power. Please con­sider the facts and judge for yourself whether or not this oath and obligation is being honored. .

Probably recognizing bot!h the ille­gality and impropriety of voting this stock in its own name, the Cleveland Trust Co. has established a dummy part­nership known as A. A. Welsh & Co. Vot­ing rights of stock held by the bank's trust department are assigned to A. A. Welsh & Co., and this shadowy append­age exists for no other purpose than to advance the interests of the Cleveland Trust Co.'s top management.

I repeat, A. A. Welsh & Co. functions to the benefit of the little clique that con­trols the bank-not to the benefit of the bank's stockholders, the beneficiaries of the estates which own the stocks, or the public in general.

Through the stock-voting rights as­signed to A. A. Welch & Co., two officers of the bank-George Gund, the board chairman, and George Karch, the presi-­dent-have placed themselves on the boards of directors of more than 40 ma.: jor corporations in such basic industries as steel, coal, newspaper publishing, and paint.

When the Cleveland Trust Co.'s stock­holders meeting is convened March 23 the one-third of the company's stock held by its own trust department will be voted by A. A. Welsh & Co. to reelect Gund and the other incumbent directors to the board.

Gund is going ahead with this pro­gram in open d~fiance of a special inves­tigation ordered by the Ohio State Leg­islature.

This investigation was voted almost unaniinolisly~ with bipartisan support, by both houses of the Ohio Legislature.

· · The bill set~ing up the inquiry specifies that · the · joint . house-senate inquiry would examine the "legality and pro­priety of a bank management perpetuat- ·

· ing itself in power by voting its own . 'stock. · · :·

With such an investigation underway, one might expect the bank to seek an imll).ediate clarification of its position, .or else to forgo use of its roundabout tech­nique of voting its own stock until the air is cleared. ·

But Gund and his little clique of col­leagues, having defied the -letter and spirit of the law for several decades, ap-

:Parently have no intention of changing their course now.

It seems to me that State and Federal agencies which are charged with pro­tecting the public's interest in this mat­ter have long been remiss in doing their duty. For example, I see no reason why the Ohio ·superintendent of banks. or the Ohio attorney general could not stop this illegal stock voting practice at once.

Let me point out a few ramifications of the Cleveland Trust Co. situation.

This bank, through A. A. Welsh & Co., also votes large blocs of stock in other major banks in Cleveland and Akron. H. Chapman Rose, a former Under Secre­tary of the U.S. Treasury, who is legal counsel for 'the bank, shares a law office with Jol1n Reavis who is a director of the National City Bank of Cleveland and also legal counsel for that bank. - It is quite obvious that Gund and Karch, by perpetuating their manage­ment of the Cleveland Trust Co. through the illegal voting of a third of the bank's stock, have achieved control of many bil­lions of dollars of lending power and of corporations with additional billions of dollars worth of assets. They have, in effect, the power to decide whether a mechanic may borrow money to buy a home or an auto, or whether a great corporation can have the cash it needs for a $100 million expansion program.

Their decisions can affect the daily lives, the bread and butter, the comforts and conveniences, and the ability to send their children to college of millions of Americans who never heard of George Gund and George Karch.

I submit that the great economic power wielded by these men and the manner in which they attained and continue it should be a matter of major and im­mediate concern to Congress and the American people.

In recent weeks, a number of ·articles. spotlighting the manner in which the Cleveland Trust Co. exerts dominating power over various Midwestern industries has been published in the Lorain Jour­nal, a daily newspaper at Lorain, Ohio. These articles, written by Irving Leibo­witz, editor of the newspaper, deserve careful study and evaluation by everyone concerned with the maintenance of eco­nomic freedom in the United States. I herewith insert them in the RECORD for the consideration of the Members, along with some Cleveland Press articles.

It would be an ironic tragedy if this Nation, while committing its money and manpower to the . defense· of freedom .abroad, were to slip into economic bond­age at home because public officials and the people were either asleep at · their posts or unaware of the menace. · Tl)e newspaper articles follow: .THE CLEVELAND TRUST AND THE OHIO BANKING

· PROBE (By Irving Leibowitz)

The Cleveland Trust Co. is not a bank so much as it is a powerful empire ruled by two financial kings-Chairman George Gund and President George Karch.

They have the immense power, with other directors of the bank, to perpetuate them­selves on the throne.

They rule a financial kingdom that has control or inftuence with two other Cleveland

banks (National City Bank·and Union Com­merce) , the Firestone Bank of Akron (more ~han 50 percent of -the stock) , and a large ~nterest in two banks in Canton and Warren, and one bank in each of_ the following Ohio cities: Ashland, Elyria, Findlay, Franklin, Mount Vernon, Painesville, Port Clinton, Sandusky, Shelby, and Tiffin.

Using its vast economic power, the Cleve­land Trust Co. has placed its two financial kings-Gund and Karch-on the boards of 43 corporations, including the Cleveland Plain Dealer, the Sherwin-Williams Co., the Cleveland Cliffs Iron Co., and Island Creek Coal Co.

How did the Cleveland Trust obtain . this tremendous concentration of economic power?

The bank controls much of the stock it holds in trust for various estates. As a re­sult, the Cleveland· Trust controls 33 per­cent of its own stock and the bank officers vote the share to perpetuate themselves in power. ·

The State of Ohio has a law which pro­hibits corporations from voting its own stock. National banks chartered by the U.S. Government are not allowed to vote their own stock.

The Cleveland Trust is not a national bank. Its officers say it is a coxnmon prac­tice among trust companies and financial institutions and is permittted by the Ohio act, holding securities as fiduciaries, passed in 1945.

However, there have been legal opinions by eminent corporation lawyers that hold that under Ohio law a bank may not directly or indirectly vote shares issued by it.

How does the Cleveland Trust do it? Congress WRIGHT PATMAN, respected chair­

man of the House Banking Committee, said in Washington:

"The Cleveland Trust Co. skirts this rule . by assigning voting rights to a third of . its

stock to a duxnmy partnership known as A. A. Welsh&Co. . "Through this same device, using the economic power of stock held for various

. estates by its trust department, this ban'k has placed its chairman and president on the boards of 43 corporations.

"Through these board memberships, they either control or have a loud voice in the af­fairs of companies with billions of dollars in assets.

"Through a combination of these positions and the power of their bank to grant or deny credit, these men wield vast economic power which would seem to be totally out of keep­ing with the principles of our economic free enterprise system."

Alarmed by the consequences of having so few men in control of so much, the Ohio State Legislature passed a resolution to in­vestigate banks voting large blocks of their own and other banks' and corporations• stocks.

The first meeting of the Ohio Bank Study Co~mittee will be held Wednesday at 1:30 p.m. in ' the senate hearing room at Colum­bus. The legislation originated 1n the house of representatives with Representative A. G. Lancione of Bellaire and was · sponsored iii the senate by Senators Ray T. Miller, Jr., of Cleveland and Oliver Ocasek of Suxnmit. ~ 1

President Karch of the Cleveland Trust hl:!-S explained that the purpose of A. A. Welsh & Co.--called nominees-is for efficient handling of numerous accounts, including those set up by individuals and charitable institutions. He termed it a common practice among trust companies and financial institutions.

His statement did not mollify the legis­lators. They issued a statement which said: "It is apparent, in some cases, _that groups of men have seized enormous economic power through either their open· defiance of the

5844 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-_ HOUSE March 15, 1966 laws of Ohio, or because of loopholes in the law or ambiguity in existing laws."

In Washington, Congressman PATMAN said: "It has long been the public policy of the United States to curb and prevent such con­centrations and power of life and death over whole industries and the entire economy."

Tomorrow: Does the Cleveland Trust mis­use its vast power for its own benefit or to the detriment of any other corporation?

THE CLEVELAND TRUST: WHO Is PROTECTING WHOM?

(By Irving Leibowitz) When a person dies, his estate-money,

land, iltocks, business-is left sometimes to a bank to manage and distribute. This is a precious and personal relationship between the dead person's estate .and the bank.

Because the Cleveland Trust Co. is the biggest bank in Ohio and one of the largest in the Nation, it gets mlllions of shares of stock in its ~t department to control.

Today, on the eve of an investigation of Ohio banks by a study committee in Colum­bus, the question has been raised as to whether the immense concentration of eco­nomic power of the Cleveland Trust Co. is ever misused for its own benefit or to the detriment of any other corporation.

Chairman George Gund of the Cleveland Trust Co. says that the voting of stock held in trust is controlled by the terms of the wills. He said some are voted with the ap­proval of a third person and some wills give the bank the authority to vote the stock as it sees fit. ·

Legislators ·in Columbus, however, are challenging the legality and propriety of the officers of the bank voting the bank's own shares to perpetuate their own control, and also using the bank's trust department to dominate many major corporations.

At the heart of the probe is whether the Cleveland Trust misuses its trust.

In May of 1962, Probate Court Judge Frank Merrick of Cuyahoga Oounty told the Cleve­land Trust to stop using an estate in its charge as a level for opposing and delaying the development of a competing bank­Society National.

Commenting on the case editorially, the Cleveland Press said:

.. The bank was committing far more money and time to pushing an appeal of the Society case than the estate heirs possibly could have received in benefits.

"The Cleveland Trust's motive clearly was not to protect the interest of the heirs, but rather to push its own interests against a fast-footed new competitor."

As Judge Merrick stated it: "Would the impression be dominant that

Cleveland Trust was engaging in harrassment of a rather new arrival in the local field of trust banking?"

One of the targets of the legislators in the current banking probe is whether a huge bank could limit competition.

The Cleveland Trust, for example, is the largest stockholder in its only major com­petitor in Lake County, the First National Bank of Painesville.

It is rare for a newspaper to criticize a bank. Most banks conduct themselves with the dignity of great and respected financial institutions. However, in the case of the Cleveland Trust and Society National, the Press editorialized against the Cleveland Trust:

"This is Cleveland's biggest ~ank-one of the biggest in the country. And it should, of course, set a pattern of decency -and fair­play. But It chose, instead, to indulge in a cynical kind of obstructionism."

In Columbus tomorrow, a group of legis­lators will start the study of Ohio's banking laws and regulations. Most of them will be interested in the gigantic operations of the

Cleveland Trust and how its officers control­and vote 33 percent of their own stock.

President George Karch, of the Cleveland Trust CO., told the Wall Street Journal last year that the bank acts as trustee, agent or custodian for numerous accounts, including those set up by individuals and charitable institutions. Corporate stocks held by such accounts, Karch said, are carried in the name of A. A. Welsh & Co., a nominee partnership registered with the Internal Revenue Serv­ice.

The purpose is for efficient handling of the accounts and has been authorized by Ohio law, he said. Karch explained it was a com­mon practice.

He said that since many of the accounts are established by Cleveland Trust share­holders "it is only natural" that some Cleve­land Trust shares would be held in the ac­counts.

Karch added that a total of 461,672 Cleve­land Trust shares were held in 594 trust ac­counts last year. In this total are about 357,000 shares for which the bank-on advice of legal counsel--does not need approval under terms of the trust to vote the stock, he said, while there are about 103,000 shares that can be voted with appr_oval of the trust or voted unless otherwise instructed. Con­sequently, some 460,000 nominee shares were

-voted at last year's meeting. Karch said there are some 156,000 shares

among the 357,000 for which the bank has voting rights which cannot be sold under terms of the trust and about 107,000 shares over which the bank has complete .control to vote or sell.

Karch said at the time that counsel had advised the bank that banks are not governed by an Ohio State law which prohibits a com­pany fr<?m voting directly or indirectly any shares issued by it. He said the State bank­ing code governs banks.

Tomorrow: How the Cleveland Trust in­fluences other corporations, such as the Cleveland Plain Dealer and what it means to you.

THE CLEVELAND TRUST AND THE . CLEVELAND PLAIN DEALER

(By Irving Leibowitz) Congressman WRIGHT PATMAN, respected

chairman of the House Banking COmmittee, has charged that the powerful financial em­pire of the Cleveland Trust CO. has either control or a loud voice in the affairs of many companies with millions of dollars in assets.

Today in Columbus, legislators have opened an investigation of Ohio's banking laws and regulations.

They are mainly interested in the legality and propriety of the officers of the Cleveland. Trust Co. voting the bank's own shares to perpetuate their own control, and also using the bank's trust department to dominate major corporations.

Congressman PATMAN says Chairman George Gund and. President George Karch, of the Cleveland· Trust Co., are on the boards of 43 corporations and that through a combi­nation of these positions and t'he power of their bank to grant or deny credit, they have vast economic power which would seem to be totally out of keeping with the principles of our economic free enterprise system.

One lllustration of the power of the Cleve· land Trust is the active interest it has taken in the management and control of the Forest City Publishing Co., publishers of the Cleve­land Plain Dealer.

In 1944, I. F. Freiberger, an officer of the Cleveland Trust Co., became president of Forest City Publishing Co. He continued in that capacity until the early 1950's. Then, he became chairman of the board. He is still serving as chairman of the board of Forest Publishing Co. and is a director of the Cleveland Trust.

Who is Frieberger?

He started with the Cleveland Trust in 1901, working in the trust department, which deals with estates. He became vice president of the bank in 1923, later became president and chairman.

He was a high ranking officer of the Cleve­land Trust, With a voice in the policies of the bank, when he became president of ~orest City Publishing Co. For a time, he served as both chairman of the Cleveland Trust ·and the Forest City Publishing Co.

In 1962, he left as chairman of the Cleve­land Trust, but retained an important direc­tor's seat on the policymaking board of the bank. Freiberger was 87 on Decembr 12.

How much the Cleveland Trust has influ­enced. editorial or business policies of the Cleveland Plain Dealer is not known.

But at all times, the power was there. In addition to having an opportunity for

an influential voice in the community ·and State, through the Plain Dealer, the Cleve~ land Trust has a dominating interest in many other large- Ohio corporations, including Sherwin-Williams CO., the Cleveland Cliffs Iron Co., Island Creek Coal Co., and many other prominent midwestern corporations. _

The Cleveland Trust is the largest bank in Ohio. Through its dummy partnership of A. A. Welsh & Co., called nominees, the bank is the largest stockholder in its own bank as well as National City Bank and Union Bank of COmmerce, all of Cleveland.

It also is the largest stockholder in its only major competitor in Lake County, the Lake county National Bank, and has more· than 50 percent of the stock of the Firestone National Bank of Akron. Cleveland Trust has consid.: erable stock in many other banks in Ohio.

In spearheading the study of Ohio banks, three legislators--Representative A. G. Lan­cione of Bellaire, and Senators Ray T. Miller of Cleveland and Oliver Ocasek of Summit­issued a statement which said, in part:

"This is a situation which, in one way or another; affectS the dally lives and pocket­books of every individual and company in Ohio."

Other legislators on the bank study com­mittee are:

Chairman Charles W. Whalen, of Dayton. Senate: William H. Deddens, of Cincinnati;

Robin F. Turner, of Tiffin; Anthqny 0. Cala­brese, of Cleveland; Davld T. Matia, of Cleve• land. -- House: Carol D. Long, of Urbana; Don Goddard, of Bartlett; Charles Fry, of Spring­~eld; Margaret Dennison, of Warren; John Wets, of Lancaster; -Vernal Riffe, of New Bos­ton; John Corrigan, of Lakewood; and wu .. llam Elliott, of 1\lalta.

IT's A GoOD LEGAL QUESTION: ATTORNEY GEN• ERAL CoMMENTS oN BANKS VoTING THEm OWN STOCK

(By John W. Saffell) CoLUMBUS.-Attorney General _William

saxbe said today he is surprised that someone has not gone to court to test whether a bank could vote its own stock.

Saxbe made. his comment as legislators opened the first meeting of the Ohio bank study.

The Journal, in a series of articles, has pointed out that officers of the Cleveland Trust Co., vote much of the stock of the bank and perpetuate themselves in office. The bank holds and votes 33 percent of the stocks it has in trust.

"I'm surprised someone' hasn't brought an action in court," Sa.zbe said. "We are fol­lowing it (the probe) with a great deal of interest. We know a great. deal about it." - .Asked whether he has written a legal opin­ion on whether bank officers can vote the bank's own stock, Sax be said:

"No--and no opinion has yet been re­quested. I don't imagine we will get such a request until after. the hearings. This is a good legal question ••• whether the om­cera of a bank can vote their own stock."

March 1.5, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 5845 The State of Ohio has a law which pro­

hibits corporations from voting ~h~ firm's stock. Officers of Cleveland Trust say thu is a common practice among trust companies and financial institutions and 1s permitted by the Ohio act, holding securities as fidu­ciaries, passed in 1945.

However, there have been legal opinions by eminent corporation lawyers that hold that under Ohio law a bank may not directly or indirectly vote shares issued by it.

State Senator Charles Whalen, Jr., of Day­ton, chairman of the Ohio Bank Study Com­mittee, told the Journal:

"We start today • • • and we must have an outline of what we are going to investigate and study . .''

Asked whether the committee will explore the Cleveland Trust situation, Whalen said:

"Yes, we will bring up the Cleveland Trust situation and the adequacy of the present law, especially in light of Federal laws deal­ings with concentrations of power • • • and about banks voting their own stocks, and anything else."

Under a headline, ''Predict Whitewash of Banks That Vote Their Own Stock," the Cleveland Press said yesterday: ·

"And the political betting in Columbus is the committee will come up with little, if anything, to comply with the original intent of the legislative resolution."

A large stockholder in the Cleveland Trust--but unfriendly to its management-­told the Journal that the bank was hoping to be able to vote its stock at the March 23 meeting and then try for a change in the Ohio law during the next session of the legislature. ·

Chairman George Gund of Cleveland Trust was not available for comment since yester­day morning.

CARL STOKES AND SENATOR 0CASEK DEMAND ACTION: CLEVELAND TRUST UNDER FIRE AT HEARING ON OHIO BANKS

(By John Saffell) COLUMBUS.-The Cleveland Trust Co., big­

gest bank in the State, has become a storm center at legislative hearings that could lead to changing Ohio's banking laws.

Several legislators are calling for a close look into what they describe as a Cleveland Trust practice of voting its own stock and some it holds in trust.

Representative Carl -Stokes, who just narrowly lost the race for mayor of Cleve­land to Ralph Locher, sent this telegram to State Senator Charles W. Whalen, Jr., chair­man of the bank study committee.

"The Lorain Journal has published this week a series of articles highly critical of the policies and · practices of the Cleveland Trust Co., the largest financial institution in Ohio. I urge you to bring these articles to the attention o! all members of y<mr com­mittee at the beginning of your investiga­tion of Ohio banks."

State Representative Stokes added: "I was deeply disturbed to read in the

Cleveland Press a story which predicts that your committee will whitewash the banks in their practice of voting their own stocks and in other acts that many consider tO be 11-legal and improper. The common man has a deep interest in the ethical standards of our financial institutions and I am confident that your committee will do a good job in the important study which the senate and the house have instructed you to under· take."

State Senator Oliver Ocasek, of Northfield, was responsible for the resolution which started the probe in Columbus. He kept off the study committee ..

Senator Ocasek, nevertheless, also sent .a telegram _to the QolX\IXlittee, saying:

"The Cleveland Trust Co. stockholders meeting to elect directors- for a year, occurs

CXII-369~Part 5

next month. It is reported that the bank again intends to vote some 35 percent of its own stock for a board of directors selected by its chairman. In my opinion, the laws of Ohio forbid an Ohio bank to vote stock issued by it.

The senator also said: "The public interest demands that your

committee investigate and report prior to their impending annual meeting on th,e le­gality and ethics of insiders in banks per­petuating themselves in office by voting of stock held in trust for widows and or­phans. I would weicome an opportunity to discuss this with your committee."

The initial 2Y2-hour session of the 15 member committee- proved somewhat of a ."feeling out" period in which the scope of the study was discussed.

The committee agreed to take up three of the less controversial areas first:

Adequacy of the State division of banks to conduct regular examinations.

Standards and methods used in granting charter and branch permits.

Advisability of changing the method of selecting the superintendent of banks. (Now, he is appointed by the Governor.)

The three hot items on the agenda will .be taken up last, later this year, and pos­sibly not in time for the next session of the legislature in January. They are: .

The legality and propriety of any bank voting its own shares of stock.

The possible adverse effect upon competi­tion and other public interests of interlock· ing holding of stocks among various banks of the State.

The possible need for enlarging the pow­ers and responsibilities of the State bank­ing advisory board.

CLEVELAND TRUST FLAYED FOR SECRETIVE TRUST OPERATION

The Cleveland Trust Co. came under new criticism today for operating a trust "secret­ly" and "restrictively."

While the bank was under attack, State Banks Superintendent Clarence Luft was criticized.for not cooperating with the State bank study committee, which is taking a hard look at the Cleveland Trust and other financial institutions in the State.

Cleveland Trust holds the purse strings for Kingwood Center, a :flower garden and beauty spot which the late C. K. King left in trust for the benefit of the people of Mansfield and Ohio.

In an editorial, the News Journal of Mans­field said:

"As corporate trustee, the Cleveland bank has never revealed publicly the amount of the trust, nor has it revealed the amount of

·annual earnings from which Mr. King desig­nated that Kingwood Center be operated and

·maintained. "The public has no way of knowing whether

the trust is being capably and wisely man­aged. It appears to be the attitude of Cleve:. land Trust that this is none of the public's business even though Mr. King clearly in­tended that the center be operated for the benefit of the people of Mansfield and Ohio.

"Recently when it was sought to deter­mine if ·a theater could be built, as Mr. King suggested for part of the center's develop­ment, the answer came back from Cleveland Trust: "No chance for at least 5 years. Plan­ning requires knowledge of funds on hand and reasonably anticipated. When the knowl­edge is withheld, so is the opportunity to

·outline future progress. "Inasmuch as C. K. King began planning

for the establishment of· Kingwood Center for many years before his death, it appears unlikely that he ever envisioned such restric· tions upon scheduling of future growth and development as now exist.

"Legally and technically, the Cleveland Trust may be entirely correct. As a matter of public relations it is dead wrong."

State Banks Superintendent Luft was chastised by the Cleveland Press and Gov­ernor Rhodes urged to make sure his em­ployees cooperate with the legislature. The editorial said:

"The leisurely probe of State-chartered banks by the legislature's bank investigat­ing committee got off to a sorry start. Neither State Banks Superintendent Clarence Luft nor any of his employees appeared as re­quested.

"This uncooperative attitude gives added weight to those speculations that the probe will accomplish little. So does the date of the next public meeting, March 14.

"This investigation is important. Ohioans should know how much financial power is concentrated in State-chartered banks. Luft and his staff insult the legislature and the public by their uncooperative attitude. Gov­ernor Rhodes should be sure his employees are present when the committee resumes March 14."

CLEVELAND TRUST RESOURCES TOP $2 BILLION; Omo FIRST--EARNINGS GREATEST OF NA­TION'S BANKS The Cleveland Trust Co., which is under

fire for its immense concentration of eco­nomic power, today reported that it had be­come the fl.rst bank in Ohio to achieve $2 bil­lion in total resources.

The annual report also showed that 1965 was the year in which net operating eru:nings increased 19.8 percent--the greatest improve­ment reported by a~y of America's top 25 banks.

Two Ohio legislators-State Senator Oliver Ocasek and State Representative Carl Stokes-want the new Ohio Bank Study Committee to challenge the property and ethics of the Cleveland Trust voting its own stock and dominating major corporations and banks. The next meeting of the legis­lative bank committee is March 14 at Columbus.

In the Cleveland Trust's notice to stock­holders of the annual meeting March 23, 1966, at 1:30 p.m., at 916 Euclid Avenue, Chairman George Gund and President George Karch pointed out that its dummy part­nership, A. A. Welsh & Co., holds 502,329 shares (33.48 percent) of the outstanding stock of the bank.

Stewart Anthony, secretary of the bank, explained that A. A. Welsh & Co. is a partner­ship organized by the bank for the sole pur­pose of acting as "nominee" to take and hold record title to registered securities held by the bank in various trust capacities.

The bank officers vote this stock, along with another 25,278 shares held by the bank in other capacities, including F. J. Haffner & Co. and Custo & Co.

Much of the criticism leveled by legislators and Olthers boils down to the charge that the bank officers vote the stock to perpetuate themselves in office and to dominate and con trol other. corporations.

Here's how the voting of 527,560 shares are held in the bank's trust capacity:

One: 12,994 shares were registered in the n ames of principals of agency or custodian accounts and the bank as fiduoiary has no power to vote the shares.

Two: 61,309 shares were held in agency or custodian accounts where the direction of the principal is required before voting.

Three: 3,931 shares were held in trusts where the direction of the donor, cotrustee, or other person is required before voting. .

Four: 51,607 shares were held in trusts or estates where the approval of the donor, cofiduciary, or other designated person or persons is required before voting.

5846 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 Five: 152,351 shares were held in trusts

or agency where the bank as fiducia.ry may determine the manner of voting only in the a.bsence of instructions from one or more designwted persons.

Six: 245,368 shares (16.38 percent of the total shares outstanding) were held in trusts, estates, or agency where the bank as fidu­ciary has sole voting power.

The bank management solicited proxies from stockholders to vote for new directors. The Cleveland Trust appointed to handle and vote the proxies the following of i-ts own directors:

Herman L. Vail, president of the Cleveland Plain Dealer; George Gund, chairman of the Cleveland Trust; Arthur W. Steudel, chair­man of Sherwin-Williams Co.

[From the Cleveland (Ohio) ·Press, Feb. 16, 1966]

THE BANK EXAMINERS If the special bank investigating commit­

tee created by the 1965 legislature has the best interest of all Ohio in mind, there will be no whitewash of any bank practice, nor of any particular bank or banks.

Under its chairman, State Senator Charles W. Whalen, Jr., of Dayton, the committee has opened its hearings in Columbus. The legislator responsible for its creation-sen­ator Oliver Ocasek-was not shown the courtesy of being named to the committee.

But Ocasek has said he will be present. Certainly the committee can do no less than hear him explain in detail just why he be­lieved Ohio needed such a probe into its State-chartered banks at this time.

If he suggests, as he has indicated he would, that there are dangerous signs of ex­treme concentration of power in State bank­ing circles, then let's see if such concern is justified.

The banking community of Ohio is in need of no whitewash. It is sound enough to take without a quiver a searching examina­tion into its methods of operation-and its interlocking interests.

We in Cleveland, home of the State's larg­est banking institution-the Cleveland TrUst Co.-will be watching the work of this com­mittee with great interest.

[From the Cleveland Press, Feb.17, 1966] BANK'S CHIEF SKIPS LEGISLATURE'S HEARING

(By Gordon C. Raeburn) COLUMBUS.-The first legislative study of

Ohio's banking laws and regulations ·since 1933 is off to a slow start because of the State commerce department's division of banks.

The six senators and nine representatives wanted to discuss the State's problems in regulating and examining Ohio's banks at yesterday's first hearing.

Neither Banks Supt. Clarence C. Luft nor any of his employees appeared as requested.

State Representative W1lliam L. Elliott, Democrat, of Malta, the committee's vice chairman, said "It is extremely relevant that we have someone here from the banking de­partment."

State Senator Anthony 0. Calabrese, Demo­crat, of Cleveland, said the committee could not go ahead until the superintendent of banks appeared to discuss problems in the banking industry.

Meantime, the legislative service commis­sion has been asked to gather information it can in two areas:

Adequacy of the State division of banks to conduct regular examinations of . banks as required by law.

Advisab111ty of changing the method by which the superintendent of banks is se­lected.

Dave Johnson, acting head of the legisla­tive service commission, told the committee

that present Ohio law makes no reference to experience requirements of the superin­tendent. He is appointed by the Governor.

He suggested a look into the method of se­lecting the superintendent and scrutiny of the bank examination requirements and whether they are being met as part of a six-point study of the banking industry and laws.

Other points on the Johnson recommenda­tion, which the committee temporarily ac­cepted, were:

Legality and propriety of any bank voting its own shares of stock.

Adverse effects of interlocking directorates and holding of stocks.

Appropriateness of standards used in granting charters and branch bank permits.

Enlarg~ng the powers of the banking ad­visory board.

State Senator Charles W. Whalen, Jr., Re­publican, of Dayton, chairman, asked the leg­islative research commission to obtain a transcript of all testimony concerning Ohio banking which has been given before the House Banking Committee, headed by Con­gressman WRIGHT PATMAN, Democrat, of Texas.

The executive manager of the Ohio Bankers Association, 0. E. Anderson, said his organi­zation welcomes the study.

"We have complete confidence in your abillty in not allowing this to become a witch hunt," Anderson said.

He said the association is sure the com­mittee would "approach it [the study] on an industry basis and not be swayed by ex­traneous matters and personalities."

Although the committee is pririlarlly con­cerned with State banks, it will compare regulations affecting national banks with State laws.

There are 548 banks in Ohio, of which 332 are State banks.

"The largest bank in Ohio is a State bank­the Cleveland Trust Co.," Anderson said. "The second largest is a national bank, the National City Bank of Cleveland."

[From the Cleveland Press, Feb. 18, 1966] UNJUSTIFIED ABSENTEEISM

The leisurely probe of State-chartered banks by the legislature's bank investigat­ing committee got off to a sorry start. Nei­ther State Banks Superintendent Clarence Luft nor any of his employees appeared as re-quested. ·

This uncooperative attitude gives added weight to those sp_eculations that the probe will accompli~h little. So does the date of the next public meeting, March 14.

This investigation is important. Ohioans should know how much financial power is concentrated in State .. chartered banks. Luft and his staff insult the legislature and the public by their uncooperative attitude. Governor Rhodes should be sure his em­ployees are present when the committee re­sumes March 14.

FREE AIRMAIL SHIPMENT TO SERVICEMEN IN VIETNAM

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under previous order of the House, the gentle­man from New York [Mr. HALPERN] is recognized for 15 minutes.

Mr. HALPERN. Mr. Speaker, today I introduced legislation to provide free airmail shipment of parcels to our serv­

. icemen in Vietnam. I have had the privilege of visiting our

fighting men in Vietnam, and I can at­test to the fact that there is nothing like a gift from home, to boost the morale of

our GI's at mail calL Whether it be knitted socks from a GI's girlfriend, a box of cookies from mother or an inter­esting book from father, it makes a GI feel more remembered.

I firmly believe that this is the least we can do. The sending of gifts on a large scale will reflect to our fighting men, a gratified public; and the free use of the mail will reflect a grateful govern­ment. Campaigns urging the public to send books and other gifts of interest have been gaining considerable support, but they would be given a real impetus if we allowed these modest mailing privileges. ·

The bill would, among other things, allow for the free airmail shipment of parcels weighing up to 10 pounds to our servicemen in Vietnam. In addition, the language is broad enough to cover any similar future situations in which U.S. forces are engaged in hostilities with any foreign force.

I believe that those who donate, col­lect and wrap these gifts, and carry them to their local post offices perform a truly laudable service, and the least the Fed­eral Government can do is absorb the three or four dollars it costs to ship one of the'se gifts.

I invite my colleagues to join in spon­soring this legislation, and I urge the Committee ori Post Office and Civil Service to accord full consideration to this measure.

FREE WORLD SHIPPING TO NORTH VIETNAM

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under previous order of the House, the gentle­man from Michigan [Mr. CHAMBERLAIN], is recognized for 10 minutes.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to include lists.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the ~:.equest of the gentleman Michigan?

There was no objection. Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Mr. Speaker,

from time to time during this past year, I have endeavored to keep my colleagues of the House informed about the serious problem of free world shipping to North Vietnam. Just recently I received the report on this shipping for the month of February and take this occasion to make this information available to the Mem­bers of the House.

The unclassified information for the month of January shows that seven free woi'Id ships called at North Vietnamese ports during that month as follows: NAME OF SHIP, FLAG, GROSS TONNAGE, AND

DATE ARRIVED Agenor, Greece, 7,139 gross tons, January 25. Amon, Cyprus, 7,229 gross tons, January 28. Hellas, Greece, 7,176 gross tons, January 19. Kanaris, Greece, 7,240 gross tons, January

19. Milford, United Kingdom, 1,889 gross tons,

January 4. Shienjoon, United Kingdom, 7,127 gross

tons, January 9. Shirley Christine, United Kingdom, 6,724

gross tons, January 31. ·

March 15, -1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5847-During the month of J;i'ebruary. there

were six such arrivals, all of United Kingdom registry, as follows: NAME OF SHIP, FLAG, GROSS TONNAGE, AND

DATE ARRIVED Ardtara, United Kingdom, 5,975 gross tons,

February 15. Greenford, United Kingdom, 2,961 gross

tons, February 19. Milford, United Kingdom, 1,889 gross tons,

February -. Shiimfoon, United Kingdom, 7,127 gross

tons, February 2. Shienfoon, United Kingdom, 7,127 gross

tons, February -. Wakasa Bay, United Kingdom, 7,040 gross

tons, Ffibruary 7.

While the volume of this trade has decreased substantially from what it was during the first 2 months of 1965, I hasten to point out that the secret re­ports show more than twice the number of vessels just mentioned.

While it is regrettable that this t_raffic was permitted to flourish for so long, the administration officials responsible for finally acting to bring about a reduction of this trading with the enemy are cer­tainly to be commended for their efforts. That this trade has been reduced clearly shows that effective measures can be taken to discourage our friends from such shipping activities.

In recent weeks there have been re­ports that Norwegian shipowners have privately agreed to stop plying the North Vietnamese trading lanes. In addition, King Constantine of Greece signed a de­cree effective as of March 10 forbidding the use of Greek-flag vessels in carrying cargoes to or from North Vietnamese ports, except for those already under charter before the decree was effective. 'rhese actions are most encouraging.

Nevertheless, the attitude of our own Government remains decidedly less than fully satisfactory. The gap in our official efforts has invited, and perhaps required, the independent initiative of non-Gov­ernment organizations to bring full pres­sure to bear to dry up this trade such as the threatened boycott proposed by the maritime unions of the east and gulf coast ports. As I join those who com­mend the maritime unions for their concern I must at the same time express disappointment with the administra­tion's abdication of the ·conduct of for­eign policy in this field.

Now, however, is not the time to relax our efforts. Our momentum must .not be lost. It must be accelerated to elimi­nate entirely the possibility of even one free world ship going to North Vietnam. To accomplish this there must be fuller information provided. to the American people and to the world about this trade. If free world ships are helping to supply the enemy, why should our people be told half the truth-why not the whole truth?

A good measure of the success achieved in curbing this trade has been due to an aroused and informed public opinion both within and without the Congress. If we are to keep faith with the hun­dreds of thousands of boys we have sent to Vietnam, we must not fail in giving them our full support. r call upon the administration to be more forthright in

reporting the true extent of this aid and comfort to the enemy.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman ·yield?

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I am happy to yield to my colleague from Iowa.

Mr. GROSS. Again I commend the gentleman from Michigan for bringing this information to the Members of the House. I ask the gentleman if it is not also important that pressures be applied to these various countries, including Britain, which are shipping to Red China? . By this devious route they can still provide the sinews of war to North Vietnam.

This involves not alone the question of shipping to Haiphong, but also the question of shipping to Red China.

Why should there be, also, shipping to Communist Cuba, which has become the spawning ground and the training ground for subversion in the Western Hemisphere?

It seems to me that the State Depart­ment and the officials of this Govern­ment ought to be applying pressure not only with respect to North Vietnam but also with respect to trade with Red China and with Communist Cuba.

Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I thank the gentleman for his contribution. I share those views completely.

The administration certainly should be looking at these areas.

I have called attention to North Viet­nam because this is such a flagrant case. Hundreds of thousands of our boys are there tonight, in combat with the enemy, while our friends are carrying material to keep the war going. This should not be tolerated.

CffiCAGO TRIBUNE'S SPECTACU­LAR REPORT ON CffiCAGO

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gen­tleman from Illinois [Mr. PuciNSKI] is recognized for 15 minutes.

Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?

There was no objection. Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, the

Chicago Tribune has begun a spectacular series on the history, growth, and the present magnitude of Chicago as a world center of commerce, industry, science, religion, education, sports, and culture.

I am taking the liberty of putting this series in the REcORD as it unfolds be­cause I would like to share with my col­leagues and the distinguished readers Who follow the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the real story of how Chicago-once called the crime capital of the world­today stands as a model city of the world.

The Chicago Tribune deserves the highest commendation for its fair and impartial writing of one of the great stories of our time-the renaissance of America's second largest city.

Mr. Dave Halvorsen has magnificently captured the spirit of Chicago, 1966.

I hope those .around the world who are so quick to criticize this thriving metropolis known as Chicago . will read Mr. Halvorsen's penetrating series.

Recently I said that the second half of the 20th century belongs to Chicago. This dynamic series in the Chicago Trib­une fortifies my contention; and it gives a new spirit of pride and dedication to 3% million people who live in Chicago.

The Chicago Tribune is performing a most significant public service in bring­ing to all Americans-through its influ­ential and widespread national circula­tion-the real story of Chicago as it exists today.

The first articles of the Chicago Trib­une series follow. It is my plan to in­clude the rest of the articles as this im­pressive series unfolds: [From the Chicago (Ill.) Tribune, Mar. 5,

1966} CHICAGO SHAKES OFF OLD LABEL OF SECOND CITY-"PRAIRIE ToWN" ADDING NEW FRONTIERS

(By David Halvorsen) (NOTE.-Chicago has come alive in the last

10 years and is experiencing the greatest prosperity in its history. Its citizens see its municipal development not as problems but as challenges. The Tribune begins today a comprehensive and exhaustive series of arti­cles analyzing Metropolitan Chicago's resur­gence and what it will mean in years to come.)

Chicago forged a giant structure of pros­perity in the last decade to place the city at the threshold of the greatest era in its his­tory.

The midwestern metropolis is fulfilling the dreams of those who believe in it.

Once called a prairie town because it was one, and later called a prairie town in spite, because it was not one, the city has come alive and is one of the most vibrant, pro­gressive cities in the world.

Thomas H. Coulter, chief executive direc­tor of the Chicago Association of Commerce, has called it "the most enlightened city in the world today."

HAS YET TO HIT PEAK

The city has yet to reach the peak of its current resurgence, and chances are 1t will not for a long time, asserts Mayor Daley.

Chicago is not advancing in the wake of a prosperous economy; it is leading the surge. It has shaken off the inferiority complex of the crime-ridden prohibition era and the era's legacy of civic doldrums which set in after the depression and lasted for nearly 25 years.

"For years we believed wh.aot everyone sa.l.d about us," said a city hall official. "We kept comparing Chicago with perfection. Now we have changed. We are comparing it with other great cities, and we are ooming out first.

"Perfection is the ultimate goa,l. We are clos·er to it than anyone else."

Oivic leaders are calling this the "sensa­tional sixties," outstripping even the great rebuilding era following the Chicago fire of 1871 which burned out 2,124 acres of the central city and caused property damage of $200 million.

PRODUCT IS HUGE Metropolitan Chicago's share of the gross

national product, the sum of all services and manufactured goods, is $34.4. This is six times more than the national output of Austria and greater than that of all the Scandinavian countries combined.

The area's industrial development Is twice that of its nearest competitor-ru1d that in­cludes New York City. More than 4,000 new factories have been constructed here 1n the last 20 years, most 1n the last decade.

5848 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March '15, 19()6 "At one time the industrial center of the

United States was just west of New York City," Coulter pointed out. "Now i·t is in Chicago and will be for a long time to come."

Studies by Coulter's association shOw the average family income of metropolitan Ch4.­cago to be $11,400. This is 30 percent more than the national average and $1,000 more than New York City.

The association places the Indiana coun­ties of Lake and Porter and the Illinois coun­ties of Cook, Lake, McHenry, Du Page, Kane, and Will in the mectropolitan area.

LOOP IS FOCAL POINT

The drama of the city's prosperity is per­formed in the central business district with the Loop as a stage for all the world to see.

He.re are giant buildings, some with revo­lutionary forms of architecture.

The erection of the Prudential Building in 1955 was the breakthrough. It was the first major structure built on the Loop since the Field Building in 1932.

New York City experienced an extraordi­nary post-World War n construction boom while little was happening in Chicago. Now, New York is beset with major municipal problems while Chicago and its suburbs leap ahead.

Daley, a Democrat, first was elected in 1955. Chicago's revival closely parallels the emer­gence of his leadership.

Businessmen, industrialists, labor and civic leaders all give their respective professions much of the credit for this new vitality, but they point to Daley as the person who brought all the forces together.

BRINGS ABOUT RAPPORT

"The mayor has brought about an amalga­mation of the best of labor, politics, religion, education, and business," said Edward Loge­lin, vice president of the United States Steel Corp. and chairman of the Chicago plan com­mission. Logelin is a Republican.

"When he gets us around the conference table, it is not to talk about differences but the common interests of Chicago."

In pinpointing the reasons for Chicago's resurgence, 1959 is a vintage year.

After 7 years of discussions, work com­menced on O'Hare International Airport. The St. Lawrence Seaway opened, making Chicago an international port. Chicago was host to the Pan-American games. The city's first international trade fair took place and the Queen of England came to visit.

Her reception was quite different from that of the first royalty to visit the city.

PRINCE WAS INVITED

That was in 1860, when Long John Went­worth, the mayor, invited Albert Edward, Prince of Wales and later to become Edward VII, to visit Chicago.

The prince accepted on the condition he could come · incognito as Baron Renfrew. There was to be no fanfare.

Edward underestimated Chicago's resource­fulness. When he started to tour the city, shiny fire engines fell in behind his carriage. Then came numerous floats representing the city's industries, and 50,000 persons lined his route along Wabash and Michigan Avenues.

This sort of spirit always has been a char­acteristic of Chicago.

It is with this same energy that Chicago is beating the drums for new business. The city's emissaries have been well received in New York City and other cities by business­men anxious to learn of the advantages of­fered here.

COMPUTER TELLS STORY

When Chrysler Corp. decided to build a new plant, it collected basic information from probable sites throughout the country. This data was put on 1,600 tabulating cards and fed to a computer. The answer came up Belvidere, east of Rockford, and only 75 miles northwest of Chicago.

A key reason was Chicago's vast transpor­tation network. It is the center of the world's air, rail, and truck systems and is rapidly developing as a seaport.

Businesses are finding that the prestige address of New York City may be costing them thousands of dollars in extra operating costs.

An accountant association in New York City made a survey of operation costs in Chicago. The association found it could save $70,000 annually in air fares alone by locating here.

A confectionery company discovered it's more economical to import cocoa beans, needed for chocolate, through Chicago and market the finished product from here than to import the beans through east and west coast ports. The company closed down its coast operations.

FOUNDED AS TRADING POST

Chicago is only 129 years old. It was founded as a frontier trading post. It is now the greatest trading center in the world.

Its image has been given a big boost be­cause of the misfortunes that have befallen New York City.

New York has a per capita bonded debt of $446.07. Chicago's is $145.90. Further­more, Chicago's bonded debt is of short duration and represents 42 percent of the city's constitutional limit of indebtedness.

New York's heralded World's Fair fell short of expectations. The city has experienced crippling newspaper strikes and the recent transit strike. It was the victim of a power surge which blacked out the New England States.

The east coast metropolis faces another severe water shortage this summer unless New England gets above-normal snowfall the rest of this winter.

Crime publicity, which had made Chicago a favorite whipping boy for three generations, has tapped a lucrative source in recent years in New York City.

Chicago has not had a newspaper strike in 17 years. It last had a mass transit strike in 1922. Commonwealth Edison has said that the massive blackout which hit New England is unlikely here.

WATER SUPPLY IS EXCELLENT

The water supply in Chicago is excellent. A city resident can get unlimited water for approximately $30 a year. This includes garbage pickup. Chicago provides water to 61 suburbs. The city put into operation a year ago the world's largest and most modern water filtration plant.

Jarred by the Summerdale police scandal in 1961, Chicago reacted positively to reform. Police Superintendent 0. W. Wilson stream­lined the police communications system, in­creased the number of squads on the street, boosted the prestige of the policeman, and instituted Operation Crimestop, a program encouraging citizens to report crimes and suspicious activities.

Last year, crime on Chicago streets de­clined 12 percent although every other me~ro­politan city and the Nation as a whole re­ported substantial increases. Chicago's police administration has become a proto­type for other municipalities, both foreign and national.

The summer before the great fire of 1871, Chicagoans were paying more in fire insur­ance rates than they were contributing in municipal, county, and State taxes combined.

By contrast, Chicago tOday has a class II rating from the National Board of Under­writers for fire insurance. What makes this remarkable is that no city has a class I rating and only 11 cities have class II. Chi­cago is the only city of more than 1 million population among the 11.

HAS LOW DEATH RATE

The city had the lowest metropolitan tramc death rate in 1960, 1962, and 1964, and.

earned the honor again in 196&. Chicago has received the cleanest city award in 5 of the last 6 years.

The resurgence reaches far beyond the boundaries of the city or the 7.5 million persons living in the eight-county metro­politan area. Chicago's influence on the en­tire Midwest is probably greater than is actually realized, civic leaders point out.

For example, a truck pulling out of a Chi­cago terminal tonight With a cargo of manu­factured goods will be unloading at a ware­house in Charles City, Iowa, 360 miles distant, tomorrow morning.

Many producers have found it more eco­nomical to export overseas from the port of Chicago than through the coastal cities of

, New Orleans and Baltimore. A canning factory in Madison, Tenn.,

which exports canned corn to northwestern Europe, has found it cheaper to ship through Chicago than New Orleans.

GET FAVORABLE RATES

Minnesota, Nebraska, and Kansas pro­ducers are discovering more favorable ship­ping rates through the Chicago port.

Businessmen are continually revising the boundaries of the Chicago trade area. Now they think in terms of a 500-mile radius which includes a population of 63 million.

The revitalization of the railroads, the completion of the Interstate Highway Sys­tems and city expressways, and the expan­sion of the seaport make all of this realistic.

Historians have called Chicago the most American of all cities. Some have been critical of the premium put ·on the dollar by Chicagoans.

MANY BECOME WEALTHY

The society of other great cities was based on heritage. Chicago's society was deter­mined by bank accounts. Great personal fortunes have been made here, and in many different ways.

The Palmers, Armours, Fields and others became some of the world's wealthiest families. ·

In ·assessing the drive behind Chicago's current prosperity, history may offer a lesson. At the very beginning, Chicago's wealthy

. leaders found private gain and public in­terest were compatible.

A healthy city meant a prosperous busi­ness. The formula is still working today.

[From the Chicago (Ill.) Tribune, Mar. 6, 1966]

CHICAGO GROWTH TO GREATNESS Is ONLY BEGINNING

(By David Halvorsen) The wagon trains trundled regularly into

the dirt streets of Chicago in the 1830's. They set up temporary camp south of Fort Dearborn along what is now Michigan Ave­nue.

Most were fortune seekers heading west­ward, but some assessed, quite accurately, that the frontier town had a future and therefore was a place to make a lot of money and make it fast.

Indian trails had led to the confluence of the Chicago and Des Plaines Rivers, and for much the same reason the pioneers fol­lowed these routes. It was a logical way to get across th_e country.

GEOGRAPHY TRUMP CARD

Soon followed the steam locomotive. Chi­cago became the terminal between the East­ern and Western railroads. Later came the highways bearing motorcars, the waterways to the Mississippi River and the sea, and the airlines.

Geography has been Chicago's trump card since the city went after the high stakes of becoming one of the world's great urban centers.

In the last decade the city has been dealt a handful of aces.

March 15, 1966. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· HOUSE 5849 1. Metropolitan Chicago is the industrial

center of the world. The area,. with 8.8 per-· cent of the national population, produces 5.1 percent of the gross national product •.

NEAR POPULATION CENTER 2. The pop).llation center of · the United

States is on a 160-acre farm, 6.5 miles north­west of Centralia and about 1 mile south­southwest of the community of Shattuc in Clinton County.

3. Illinois is the leading agricultural pro­ducing State in the Union.

4. Chicago is the center of the world's greatest transportation network.

5. The opening of the St. Lawrence Sea­way has made Chicago an international port of call.

With these cards on the table, this is what Chicago gets:

l.The highest average income in the world. 2. The highest employment rate in the

Nation. There is a labor shortage of 100,000 in skilled jobs.

FARSIGHTED LEADERSHIP s. The greatest investment in future eco­

nomic development of any metropolitan area in the country.

In short, Chicago can produce more, trans .. port more, and sell more goods than any city in the world.

Behind this ability are farsighted lead­ership, diverf!ity, and the bedrock stab111ty of private development. The city has gotten few of the Federal contracts that boomed the economies of the west coast and Texas.

Chicago's pioneer industrialists and mer­chants were frugal men who employed the sound principles of moneymaking. When they died, so did the one-man corporation.

It was replaced by the board of directors, which may lack the colorful personality of an Armour or a Palmer, but not their sound moneymaking codes. ·

Diversification of industry forms a solid economic base. Chicago leads the Nation in 16 major categories of manufacturing. It produces goods in 96 percent of all manu­facturing categories.

The largest concentration of metropolitan Chicago's manufacturing employment, 13.6 percent, is in electrical machinery produc­tion.

This compares with 19.1 percent of work­ers in Los Angeles concentrated in the elec­trical industry, 40.8 percent in Detroit's auto industry, and 44.2 percent in Pittsburgh's primary metals (steel) industry.

NEED LARGER SHARE Chicago leaders believe the city must get

a larger share of Federal contracts, particu­larly in the fields of research and develop­ment.

"What has happened during the last few years simply is that the Nation has come to Chicago," explains Thomas H. Coulter, exec­utive director of the Chicago Association of Commerce.

"Cities that once were too far away are now considered in our trade area and they depend upon us. The channel of the eco­nomic mainstream has shifted to put us right in the middle."

MOVE FROM ST. PAUL . Coulter noted another trend that is be­

coming important to Chicago. Major corpo­rations are developing regional headquarters and getting away from centralized opera­tions.

A timber firm shifted from St. Paul to Chicago to get into the regionai main.stream, even though it took the company farther away from the forests of the Northwest. _

Edward C. Logelin, vice president of United States Steel _<?orp. , said his company is find­ing it more etncient to loeate some of its purchasing operation in the Chicago region_ rather than do it all through the Pittsburgh head-quarters, the past policy. ·

EXPAND INTO LAKE Chicago, incidentally, used to be an ~in-:

porter of steel products. Now it and the vast Gary steelworks produc~ more than one­third of the Nation's primary metals.

In 1959, United States Steel completed an automated structural steel mill in its south Chicago works. Two buildings had to be cleared away for construction of the new plant. Now the corporation is seeking to ex­p and on landfill in the lake because it has no other way to go.

In Coulter's opinion, and it is shared by many, Chicago is only beginning to realize the potential of navigating the econoinic mainstream.

Industrial and commercial development programed for the next few years bears out this statement. Investment in industry in Metropolitan Chicago has increased to record figures in each of the last 3 years.

Investment in new industry amounted to $737,788,000 in 1965. A siinilar sum is ex­pected for 1966 with many plans already on the drawing boards.

Most of this huge amount has been in ex­pansion of the steel industry in Lake and Porter Counties in Indiana. Though the money was invested in 1965, the construction will take up to 3 years.

Construction of 1,037 commercial build­ings, such· as the 100-story John Hancock center, totalled $418,428,000 in 1965. There has never been anything in Chicago's history to compare with it.

(From the Chicago Tribune, Mar. 8, 1966] RAILROAD LAND, ONCE A "WASTE," Now GOLD

MINE (By David Halvorsen)

Railroad property on the near south side that was once termed a millstone around the industry's neck has become a diamond neck­lace.

The railroad has 150 acres of the most de­sirable land in the city. The tract is sur­rounded by 2,000 acres of homes and build­ings that need to be upgraded.

ROOM FOR HOUSING The proximity to the central business dis­

trict is considered ideal for several uses. Suggestions have been made to develop it

as a sports center. Another possib111ty is an international trade mart to meet the needs of Chicago's global business.

A housing development, such as Carl Sand­burg Village on the near north side; has been recommended. Some 9,000 persons live in the area now. The development could pro­vide dwellings for 150,000.

City planners are thinking in terms of an expanding central business district that could take part of the area. Industry would like to see research laboratories on the rail­road land.

"The Chicago Loop of the future may be three times as large as the present one," John Duba, head of the new department of city planning and development, has pre­dicted.

What it boils down to . is a 50-year-old puzzler for Chicago: the consolidation of the city's railroad terininals.

Realization of this goal was never closer than in 1960 when the city was seeking a site for the University of Illinois campus. When the campus was finally located in the Har­rison-Halsted area, the consolidation drive faded out like the old steam locomotive.

MERIT AGREED UPON The merit of a single terininal had been

agreed upon in principle many years ago. · What is needed is the impetus of economic necessity.

This may be at hand. Chicago is finding. that many manufacturers are moving to the suburbs because they cannot find room in choice locations in the city.

Premium land is selling for $10~;000 · an acre in the city. A company can locate in the suburbs for $25,000 to $40,000 an acre. · ·

In the view of those working on the prob­lem, they see the possibility that it Inight solve itself. Where civic incentive has failed to get the job done, the lure of high profits may succeed.

City planners are keeping an eye on the proposed merger of the New York Central and Pennsylvania railroads. If it comes to pass, it is doubtful that the New York Cen­tral will continue to operate from the La Salle and Illinois Central stations and the Pennsylvania from the Union Station.

Everybody is in favor of consolidating the terminals, including the railroads.

"It is a very complicated thing to work out," explained Thomas H. Coulter, execu­tive director of the Association of Commerce and Industry. "We need some genius to solve these matters."

THE STATIONS INVOLVED The stations are the Illinois Central,

Grand Central, La Salle, Dearborn, Union, and North Western. In some, passenger service is less than 10 percent of what it was in World War II.

In others, only the frequent arrival an<l departure o! commuter trains break the si­lent monotony in the trainsheds. Of the 110,000 persons daily using the railroad sta­tions, only 6,500 are intercity travelers. The rest are commuters.

Donald Graham, vice chairman of the Continental Illinois National Bank & Trust Co., heads a mayor's cominittee to resolve the problem. •

One of the stickiest issues is joint owner­ship of the stations. Railroads sharing ownership must work out an agreement among themselves before much progress can be made on consolidation.

A member of the mayor's cominittee said it is a matter of marking time until the pro­posed merger of the New York Central and Pennsylvania is settled.

"If this merger comes otf, we can see a breakthrough," he said.

STEP-BY-STEP DEATH Some city planners believe the consolida~

tion will come step by step; that is, one sta­tion closing -at a time when the costs of operating it for so few passengers becomes prohibitive.

There is more than just a passenger terininal involved. The railroads own con­siderable warehouse property around the terminals. Furthermore, some are building special facilities to accommodate the piggy­back carriers, now a lucrative source of reve­nue.

The city would prefer to see these facill­ties built away from the Loop, but there is little it can do to stop construction in the near South Side yards.

"Railroads have a history of tenaciously holding on to land they acquired back in the Inid-1800's, even if they do not need it," a civic leader said. "This tradition is one of the problems we must overcome."

In 1935, the city planning commission ob­served that a terminal was essential if Chi­cago is to keep its supremacy in transpor­tation.

A huge station was proposed at Randolph Street, just east of Michigan Avenue. It was estimated that a modern terminal to serve" 18 railr·oads could be built for $15 million ..

ESTIMATES OF COSTS Now the estimates range from $20 to $30

million to renovate one of the existing terminals into a central station to more than $100 million to build a new one.

Where the money will come from is an­other question· blocking consolidation. There is a sJ;rong feeling among the railroads that the city should finance it. City plan­ners, on the other hand, have suggested that

5850 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- HOUSE March · 15, 1966

profits derived by the railroads from develop­ment of the old ·terminal areas should be in­vested in the central terminal.

[From the Chicago (I!l.) Tribune, Mar.9,1966]

CHICAGO LURES AMBITIOUS MEN FROM FAR EAST-VAST MARKETS BRING 45 FmMS FROM JAPAN

(By David Halvorsen) In the 1840's, thousands of families mi­

grated from the east to Chicago in pursuit of the wealth the prairie town offered. In the 1960's they are still coming, only now it is from the Far East.

Mitsuo Sakata started his career as a Japa­nese pearl farmer. He learned his skills well in the small bays guarded by Mount Fuji. Sakata and his brother formed their own pearl company in Tokyo.

LIVING OYSTERS SEEDED The cultivation of pearls is in itself a fas­

cinating operation. Living oysters are seeded by hand with the nuclei of pearls. They are fertmzed and placed back in the calm inlet of a bay in wire cages. The cages are sus­pended on racks made of bamboo.

Nature is left to cultivate the pearls for 2 or 3 years, although they are taken from the water every month for inspection.

The story of Sakata and his pearl farm meant nothing ·to Chicago until 7 years ago. Sakata, a former water ski champion, came to the United States to find a new market for his pearls. He spoke only a few words of English.

VISITS TRADE FAm New York City had always been considered

the best market and he looked it over care­fully. But Chicago was holding its first in­ternational trade fair in 1959 and Sakata was interested.

He visited the fair, conferred with Chicago businessmen, some of whom he had met when they were in Tokyo, and he studied the mar­ket. One important fact stood out in his mind. Ninety percent of the mail order mer­chandise industry was located in Chicago.

Sakata went back to Japan to weigh the merits and probletns of expansion to the American market. He made two more trips to the United States before deciding that Chicago was a prime market for his pearls.

OPENS OFFICE HERE Two years ago, he opened an office on

Michigan Avenue. Through the use of in­terpreters he hired here, Sakata went after the mail-order companies. They liked what he offered.

The Japanese businessman transferred his headquarters from Tokyo to Chicago and brought his family here. They rented an apartment in Carl Sandberg Village.

Within 1 year his operation was so success­ful that he opened a branch office in New York City.

TELLS OF AMBITIONS "I have a small company now," he said.

"But I am ambitious. There is no city in America that offers more opportunity to an ambitious man than does Chicago.

"My office is here. It will be all my life." In 1959 when Sakata first visited Chicago,

there was not a single Japanese trading com­pany here. Now there are 45 and indications that more will come.

What one Japanese businessman learned is what Chicago has been telling the world for years. The city has much to offer the man who wants to get ahead.

BRITAIN "FINDS" CHICAGO On the other side of the world, Britain

has "found" Chicago. Prince Philip will visit Chicago in a few days with the dual pur­pose of good will and promoting trade.

"His most important speech on commerce and industry will be made in Chicago," ex-

plained R. Winfield Ellis, president of the British-American Chamber of Commerce in the Midwest.

"This is not a one-shot affair. Britain has mapped a program· of concentrating on the Chicago area through 1966 and 1967.

"A serious effort has never been made here before by British traders. The purchasing power in Chicago is very high. Surely, the opportunity is here."

CONCENTRATES ON COASTS Britain traditionally has concentrated its

trade on the seaboards, particularly the At­lantic. The increasing number of trade companies that have located in Chicago in recent years points up the new direction of British merchants.

"There are three things needed to attract new business,'' asserts Thomas · Coulter, ex­ecutive director of the Chicago Association of Commerce and Industry.

"They are wealth, creativity, and a market. We have all three in Chicago. Mitsuo Sakata will tell you that."

[From the Chicago Tribune, Mar. 10, 1966] LABOR Poqcms ARE BIG FACTOR IN CITY'S

SURGE-DALEY IS GIVEN THE CREDIT BY L~DDS ~

(By David Halvorsen) Considering the turbulent beginnings of

the labor movement in Chicago, it might seem paradoxical that management and la­bor agree today the city has a good labor climate.

Chicago was the scene of the violent Pull­man strike and the riot in Haymarket Square. Frightened city leaders gave the Government 600 acres of prime North Shore land in ex­change for a Federal garrison at what is now Fort Sheridan to be available to quell labor disturbances.

Labor agitatora found a ready audience in the immigrant workers of Chicago. Their cause was aided by the recalcitrance of such men as George Pullman, who refused to ac­knowledge delegations of his employees whose main grievance was that their take-home pay had dwindled to as little as 7 cents a week.

CHURCH STANDS EMPTY Pullman cut the salaries of his employees,

but not the rents in his model community on the far South Side or the prices in his company store. He asked such a high rent for the community church that for years it sat empty because no denomination could afford it.

Chicago is a highly unionized city. Many of the union bosses are in their late sixties and seventies and battled on the streets for what they believed was right.

"Perhaps it is our bitter struggle for recog­nition that makes us feel so responsible to improve our community today," suggests Stephen Bailey, first vice president of the Chicago Federation of Labor.

"Chicago has the best labor climate in the Nation," declares Earl J. McMahon, president of the building trades council.

HARMONY IS CITED "The harmony between labor and manage­

ment has attracted commercial investment in Chicago," said Thomas H. Coulter, execu­tive director of the Chicago Association of Commerce.

Observers note that labor earns more in Chicago, in terms of buying power, than in any other metropolitan area in the Nation. The average family income in Chicago is higher than anywhere else in the world.

The demand for labor also contributes to peace, it was pointed. out. Jobs are opening up faster than skilled workers · can be de­veloped to fill them. Industry has found it necessary to start its own training progratns to ease critical labor shortages.

In the last 24 months, 145,000 new jobs have been created in Metropolitan Chicago.

The U.S. Department of Labor estimates there are 100,000 job openings b.ere.

About 60,000 young people entered the labor force and 50,000 older adults went to work in the last 2 years. Many of the older workers are housewives supplementing fam­ily incomes.

Employers will be seeking 170,000 new, qualified employees this year. Indications are this demand will increase in the next few years.

HAVE JOINT BOARD An example of how labor and management

came to a meeting of the minds is the joint conference board o;f McMahon's contractors.

Around 1900, legitimate union leaders and contractors found themselves frustrated by the unsavory elements of both sides. The results were lockouts, strikes, and very little construction.

Much of the turmoil centered on juris­dictional disputes within the trades.

A -joint conference board of 10 contractors and 10 union men was established in 1913. The board constitution requires that a juris­dictional complaint 'Qe settled within 48 hours.

A subcommittee is appointed to make an on-the-scene investigation and deliver its recommendation to the board. McMahon said the procedure has been so successful that there has not been a major jurisdic­tional work stoppage in 30 years.

Many cases are warded off before they get to the board by an informal prejob confer­ence between McMahon and the contractor handling the work.

SOME BALK AT ACTION Some out-of-town contractors have balked.

Only Boston and New York City also have joint boards. As a result some contractors are dubious of sitting down with a labor man before the first nail has been hammered.

"We have had cases where local contractors have stepped in and set the out-of-towners straight on how we do business in Chicago," McMahon said.

Bailey gives credit for the labor harmony to his close personal friend, Mayor Daley.

"Daley keeps labor support because you can believe in him. He says yes or no and you are on your way."

The hard core of Daley's Democratic Party political strength comes from labor.

LABOR HAS A SEAT The mayor assures that labor is repre­

sented on all his committees, along with management. He has given both major sides responsibilities, with the result that management and labor leaders have found thetnselves working in a common cause.

McMahon serves on the zoning board of appeals and is a trustee of McCormick Place. Labor has a seat on the board of education.

[From the Chicago (IlL) Tribune, Mar. 11, 1966]

CHICAGO LOOKS TO LAKEFRONT AS RECREATION AREA--8EEKS TO IMPROVE A-LREADY HIGH LAND RATIO

(By David Halvorsen) Chicago and the surrounding metropolitan

counties have rolling acres of open land for recreation, but there is a growing need for more and the price is getting higher each year.

Fortunately, early planners such as Daniel Burnham provided open spaces in the de­veloping . city. Burnham's visionary lake­front plan and Cook County's unique forest preserve system have provided Chicago with the finest natural recreation areas of any metropolitan city in the United States.

Enjoying an expanding economy, the met­r~"politan area finds it is confronted with mounting pressure to · churn the soil for homes and buildings rather than for flowers and trees.

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5851 DEER GROVE FIRST

When the first land, an acreage called Deer Grove in northern Cook County, was pur­chased in 1915, it cost $70 an acre. Today, the average cost is near $2,500 for a similar parcel.

Housing subdivisions overlap into pastures. It is not uncommon to find a winding street of new homes end a few feet from an old barn. Industry, once restricted to en­claves in the central city, has shifted ex­tensively to suburban industrial parks.

Chicago's city planning and development department, the Northeastern Illinois Plan­ning Commission and the open lands group of the Welfare Council of Metropolitan Chi­cago are three agencies directly concerned with conservation and recreation.

That ample outdoor facilities are essential to the quality of life is the premise for estab­lishing developments that are green and growing, explains Louis Wetmore, deputy city planning commissioner.

PLAYGROUNDS UNPARALLELED

The lakefront of Chicago has been called the most beautiful in the world. Its beaches, marinas, and parks offer unparalleled sum­mer playgrounds for Chicago's millions.

Anyone who has been on a lakefront beach on a steamy July 4 might arch an eyebrow at a proposal to make the lakefront accessible to more people, but that is the prime objec­tive of a new study for which the Chicago park district has appropriated $100,000. The survey has been given a high priority by Mayor Daley.

The city is considering means of providing more transportation to the lakefront. The outer drive and the Illinois Central railroad right-of-way are barriers along much of the lakefront, Wetmore pointed out.

PLAN WINTER USE

Plans go beyond getting more people to the beaches on July 4, however. The lakefront is not used in the winter, and fac1lities must be developed for winter recreation, Wetmore asserted.

Primarily, this means construction of field­houses and other types of enclosures that can be used in cold weather.

Wetmore acknowledges that objections will be raised to the construction of buildings, but he believes that the right type of struc­tures will fit into the natural appearance of the lakefront.

Another consideration is whether the peo­ple would use such facilities if t:J;ley were available. The lake, glazed With ice in the dimness of winter's gray shroud, may ap­pear foreboding.

It is the purpose of the study to find answers to these questions.

EXPANSION IS PROBLEM

There is also the matter of expansion. Property acqt:isition is out of the question on the lake front. The alternative is land­fill, Wetmore said, and 2 square mlles are recommended. The city may try for half of this in the first stage.

The standard of 10 acres of open space for each 1,000 persons is used for planning purposes. In Cook County, the present ratio is 11 acres for each 1,000 the highest ratio in the Nation.

In breaking down that standard, a dif­ferent picture emerges. Five acres should be for regional parks, such as the forest preserves, and 5 acres for neighborhood parks.

For Chicago the ratio is 8.5 regional and 2.5 neighborhood, which illustrates a need for local parks.

Federal funds are available to help ac­quire and clear open spaces. Another means is to provide recreation space in urban re­newal developments.

PRIVATE DEVELOPMENT CONTROLLED

The city also has control over large pri­vate developments. It can deny approval

of plans that do not provide outdoor recre­ational facilities.

The county purchased 2,140 acres of land for the forest preserves in 1965. This is the second largest purchase ever made in a single year.

• • • .. [From the Chicago (Ill.) Tribune,

Mar. 15, 1966] CITY Is BLESSED WITH LEADERSHIP

IN UNIVERSITIES

(By David Halvorsen) The development of Chicago's universities

is no less extraordinary than that of Chicago itself. Founded through unusual circum­stances and blessed with brilliant leadership when needed, this city's higher education has reached preeminence in keeping with the vitality of an enlightened metropolis.

Concerned with the easy morality of Chicago in the 1940's, Methodist leaders sought an area north of the city that might be ideal for a university of a community of desirable citizens. The university was chartered as Northwestern in 1851 and the community named Evanston for Dr. John Evans, a leader in developing the university.

llT IS ESTABLISHED

The forerunner of Illinois Institute of Technology was established because a minis­ter, speaking from the pulpit, boldly sug­gested how his richest parishioner, Phllip D. Armour, Inight spend some of his wealth.

Impressed by the sermon, Armour agreed to give $1 million if the mipister would give 5 years of his time to Armour Institute. Today, IIT is the third largest technical school in the country and is embarked on a $25 Inillion fundraising drive, its greatest in history.

The role of the ministry figures promi­nently in the founding of the University of Chicago. The institution's subsequent growth may have been in a large part due to the cycling pleasures of its president and benefactor.

TELL ROCKEFELLER'S ROLE

The benefactor was John D. Rockefeller, in 1886 said to be the world's wealthiest man. Prevailed upon by Baptist clergymen Rocke­feller agreed to contribute $600,000 if the ministers would come up with $400,000.

The ministers appealed to Baptist churches throughout the Midwest to get the money. It took many months, but they succeeded.

William Rainey Harper, a Yale professor, was named the first president, and he fre­quently went to Cleveland where he and his fainily wouid cycle with the Rockefeller clan, opening the door for discussion of new build­ings for the university.

Harper came back with another million dollars and planned a university even grander than he had hoped for.

SEEKS $160 MILLION

The university is now embarked on the greatest fund drive in its illustrious history, seeking $160 Inillion. Like in its founding days, the school is faced with a challenge, this time from the Ford :Foundation.

The foundation has put up a challenge grant of $25 million. The university must raise $75 million to get the Ford money.

There are 58 colleges in the Chicago area. For most of them, the 1960's are a time for expansion and this brings a pressing need for more money.

A general anal~rsis of one of these institu­tions and how it sees itself in the 1960's tends to point up what all schools of higher ~ucation are facing.

ONE MILLION-POOF

Armour Institute was established on the million-dollar handshake of a preacher and a financial tycoon. That million dollars would operate Illinois Tech for a week in toda.y's economy.

John T. Rettaliata is president of Illinois Tech and in keeping ·with the Chicago tradi­tion, he is the right man at the right time.

He cannot stay in an ivory tower nor can he build a wall around IIT, and isolate the campus from the city. In the first place, he would have to tear down the wall every few years for expansion.

In 1940, Armour Institute covered seven acres and consisted of four buildings be­tween 32d and 34th Streets, Dearborn Street on the east and the Rock Island Railroad tracks on the west.

Not far away were the once-elegant brown­stone homes on Prairie Avenue of Chicago's great families, the Armours, the Fields, and the Pullmans. ·

The IIT campus of today stretches for 120 acres from 30th to 35th )3treets and Michigan Avenue to the Rock Island Railroad tracks.

Further expansion is on the drawing boards. It will take in the section from Michigan to Indiana Avenues between 31st and 34th Streets.

An institutional planning committee told Rettaliata in 1964 that IIT would need $60 million in the next 10 years to meet its needs. So as not to scare benefactors away, IIT de­cided to take progress in degrees and set its first stage target at $25 million.

Within 8 months, IIT had 48 percent of its goal, not counting a $5 million challenge grant from the Ford Foundation.

FACULTY SALARIES INCREASED

All of this expansion will be paralleled by an increase in enrollment. The present en­rollment is 8,300, an increase of 500 in 1 year. The institute also must expand its faculty, which Rettallata has substantially upgraded through paying the third highest salary level in Illinois.

The University of Chicago and Northwest­ern University are the only schools in the State with higher pay scales.

The campus of the University of Chicago embraces the midway of the Columbian Ex­position of 1893, a marvel in its own right, though history has imprinted as its best known legacies, a belly dancer called "Little Egypt" and a massive steel girder amusement wheel invented by a man named George Ferris.

The university's academic reputation is one of the finest in the United States. One of 10 college presidents either was graduated from or was on the faculty of Chicago.

HIGH STANDARDS CONTINUE

For its continued high standards of scho­lastic excellence and complex demands of ad­ministrative leadership, Chicago has Presi­dent George W. Beadle, a Noble Prize winner for his work in genetics.

The university has 12 hospitals and clinics, the Argonne National Laboratory, and insti­tutes for computer research, the study of metals, biophysics, and the famed Enrico Fermi Institute for Nuclear Studies, named after the faJther of controlled nuclear energy.

Northwes·tem University found the land set aside by its Methodist forefathers was not enough, but the only option to expan­sion was eastward into Lake Michigan.

FILL IN 7 4 ACRES

It required 2 years to fill in 74 acres of the lake to permit the university to expand. The task cost $6.8 million. A computer center built in the new tract has a machine capa­ble of 380,000 additions per second.

De Paul University is campaigning for $22.5 million and Loyola University is em­barked on construction of a medical center costing $34.5 million.

The most recent and spectacular addition to Chicago's higher education is the Univer­sity of Illinois Circle campus on the near West Side.

The need for this school had long been apparent. Its beginning was not cast

5852 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 1[ , 1966 through the words of a. sermon or the benev­olence of a Rockefeller. Rather, its battle was to find a home.

HOUSEWIFE'S EFFORT FAILS

It found a home, despite the almost single efforts of Mrs. Florence Scala, a. housewife, to block the campus in the Harrison-Halsted area.

The first stage of Circle campus cost $60 million and now the university is moVing ahead on the $27 million second step in development.

The impact of these universities on their immediate neighborhoods has been signif­icant. The University of Chicago has spent $29 million of its own money in helping to improve the Hyde Park-Kenwood area.

Rettaliata serves on the Chicago plan com­mission and is directly involved in the re­development of the area around TIT near West Side neighbors of Circle campus have been renovating their homes and shops in a conservation program of the city department of urban renewal.

"Universities have been a spark plug for urban renewal in Chicago," Rettaliata said. "The decision of liT to stay in its present location encouraged the New York Life In­surance Co. to finance the Lake Meadows housing project near here."

NEW DIRECTION AND NEW EMPHA­SIS IN FOREIGN AID

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the gen­tleman from Massachusetts [Mr. MoRsEl, is recognized for 1 hour.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. Speaker, over the years there has been significant Repub­lican support for the foreign aid pro­gram, but those of us who have sup­ported the program have consistently believed that the program needed im­provement. To that end a group of Republicans in the House has worked for several months, developing recommen­dations which might be made to the ex­ecutive branch of the Government, which could effectively improve the for­eign aid program.

Mr. SHRIVER. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield to the gentleman from Kansas.

Mr. SHRIVER. I call attention to the fact that 25 Republican Congressmen have joined in a statement which I shall ask to have printed in the RECORD, which is the result of a 6-month study by this group concerning new directions and new emphasis in foreign aid.

This is a statement by the following Congressmen: MARK ANDREWS, of North Dakota; SILVIO 0. CONTE, of Massachu­setts; PETER H. B. FRELINGHUYSEN, of New Jersey; WILLIAM S. MAILLIARD, of California; F. BRADFORD MORSE, of Mas­sachusetts; GARNER E. SHRIVER, of Kan­sas; ALPHONZO BELL, of California; WIL­LIAMS. BROOMFIELD, of Michigan; WIL­LIAM T. CAHILL, of New Jersey; BARBER B. CONABLE, JR., of New York; ROBERT J. CORBETT, of Pennsylvania; FLORENCE P. DWYER, of New Jersey; ROBERT F. ELLS­WORTH, of Kansas; SEYMOUR HALPERN, of New York; FRANK HORTON, of New York; JoHN c. KUNKEL, of Pennsylvania; THEODORE R. KUPFERMAN, Of New York; CLARK MACGREGOR, Of Minnesota; CHARLES McC. MATHIAS, JR., of Mary­land; JosEPH M. McDADE, of Pennsyl-

Vania; OGDEN R. REm, of New York; HOWARD W. ROBISON, of New York; HENRY P. SMITH III, of New York; CHARLES M. TEAGUE, Of California; and JoHN W. WYDLER, of New York.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the statement may be printed in the R ECORD at this point.

The SPEAKER _pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentle­m a n from Kansas?

There was no objection. The statement is as follows: NEW DIRECTIONS AND NEW EMPHASIS IN

FOREIGN AID

At its outset, the American foreign aid pro­graxn was a unique endeavor in the relations among nations. While the American people were willing to embark upon the most gen­erous experiment in all human history, it was nonetheless an experiment. We had no precedents to guide us. We did not know how long it would take. We did not know who should and who should not receive our help. We did not know which programs promoted long-term growth and which did not. We did not know how to organize the effort. We did not even know what the specific goals of our policy should be.

As the Marshall plan evolved into aid to the developing countries, we knew for sure only that our security, our freedom, and our economic prosperity were somehow tied to the security and the long-term growth in freedom and prosperity of the billions of people striving for a better life in the south­ern half of the globe. This is as true today as it was then.

Mid-2oth century communications have built not just an interdependent world but a world in which all men can and in­cre:lSingly do know of the advantages which others enjoy. The deprivation of the people in the southern half of the globe and the prosperity of the people in the northern half of the globe are visible to all. And so the demands of the people in the develop­ing countries, encouraged by the promises of their political leaders, have created a full­blown crisis in each developing country and a collective instability which may be an immediate threat to the security of the entire world. ·

Whatever the successes or failures of our foreign aid program to date, the crisis which demanded our attention two decades ago is as severe and as perilous today as it was then. If we do not recognize the very real revolution of rising expectations in Asia, Af­rica, and Latin America, and if we make no effort to guide that revolution in a peaceful course toward political stability and eco­nomic prosperity, we will soon have to choose between wars of national liberation every­where or an illusory isolation in a world where the cause of freedom seems doomed to failure.

If there is an undeniable lesson from the history of Vietnam, it is that the same thing can happen in any country where the popu­lation is susceptible to organization in the pursuit of more progress than the Govern­ment is providing-where Communist prom­ises have appeal because rising expectations have been inadequately fulfilled. Our econ­omy cannot afford to fight Vietnam-type wars everywhere; our security cannot afford Vietnam-type wars everywhere. Our only course, therefore, is to attempt to guide the revolution of rising expectations in the knowledge that prosperity, political stabil­ity, and political freedom are the surest paths to peace.

The United States has now had two dec­ades of experience in foreign aid. This ex­perience has taught some very clear lessons which we believe are refiected in the recom­mendations below.

We welcome the President's new emphasis on education, food, and health in the foreig aid program. The importance of this new emphasis is that it represents an effort to reach the people with our aid.

Sure the purpose of U.S. foreign -aid is to help people achieve progress. Unless the people benefit from development efforts, no meaningful progress can result from foreign aid. It is equally true that unless the people contribute to development efforts no mean­ingful progress can result from foreign aid.

The only reasonable measure of commu­nity progress-whether it be progress in so­cial, cultural, political, or economic terms­is the degree of progress in which each indi­vidual in the community can share an d benefit. Development which does not reach the people is not progress in human terms, and thus cannot significantly better the community. A grandiose economic infra­structure of transportation networks and physical plants and port facilities and in­dustrial capacity is not by itself evidence of human progress or worthwhile development.

For progress the economic infrastructure must be an integral part of the community. It must provide direct benefits to the people; it must be compatible with the political, cultural, and social behavior of the people; it must be intermeshed with the people of the community it is designed to serve.

In short, an economic infrastructure can­not provide meaningful human progress un­less it springs from a vibrant human infra­structure. The task of development might best be expressed not in sterile economic terms, but in terms of people-their aware­ness of the possible, their education and skills, their determination and participa ­tion-the impetus they provide and the sat­isfaction they receive.

A human infrastructure where the people are engaged and engage themselves in the process of development can assure progress­in social, cultural, political and economic terms.

Our recommendations refiect, as well, an­other lesson of the foreign aid adventure. It is that nonviolent progress in many of the developing countries is impeded by the inability of their gov.ernments to adminis­ter and accommodate change. In a few cases, governments may not desire change-and in those cases foreign aid makes no sense. Most developing countries, however, desperately want change, but lack the administrative skills, the political techniques and the man­agerial capacity to provide for orderly prog­ress which reaches the people.

U.S. foreign aid must place new emphasis on building the capacity of governments to administer development. Unless we do so, most foreign aid funds will be wasted-and worse, the revolution of rising expectations, infiamed by Communist promises, will turn violent.

We will support a constructive program of foreign aid. We believe that our recom­mendations will contribute to such a pro­gram.

Our support is far from indiscriminate however. While aid should not depend upon the utterly predictable foreign policy sup­port of its recipient, aid should not be extended to those who make anti-American­ism a hallmark of their policy. While we should not insist upon carbon copies of Western political institutions, aid which diminishes or tends to discourage popular participation in government is not justified. While evidence need not be in the form of visible development aid projects such as stadiums, dams and highways which do not necessarily insure development progress, the U.S. foreign aid administration must be able to give meaningful evidence that its pro­grams justify the expenditure.

The program outlined by the following recommendations will not require an in­crease in public !oreign aid funds. It will

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 5853 require an increasingly determined effort to make the most productive use of the current level of funds requested-and it will require an expanded involvement of private U.S. in­stitutions in the foreign aid program.

1. The administration should issue a firm declaration of the purposes of its foreign aid program. With a precise statement of for­eign aid objectives the program may be able to achieve greater support at home and minimize suspicion of U.S. motives abroad. Having once defined the objectives of for­eign aid, the administration. should not vary in pursuit of them;· aid for purposes of temporary political expediency is unwise.

2. Just as the United States should not hesitate to declare openly the precise objec­tives of its aid program, neither should it hesitate to identify U.S. aid with a U.S. label. It is important that the people who receive aid know where it comes from. The bond between peoples, one sincere in -Its de­sire to help and the other appreciative for the help received, can be a vital source of international stabllity over coming genera­tions.

3. The U.S. foreign aid program should place new emphasis on the need for the growth of popular participation in the de­velopment programs of the developing coun­tries and the increased capacity of recipient governments to perform effectively in the broad spectrum of development tasks.

4. AID might appropriately consider, on a case-by-case basis, the transfer of specific industrial and economic development proj­ects to multilateral management by the World Bank, the International Development Association or the Inter-American Develop­ment Bank when such a transfer is feasible in economic, political and administrative terms. Such a transfer would increase AID's capacity to concentrate on other aspects of development such as aid for civic institu­tional improvement and for popular partici­pation In development. Project transfers to multilateral management should not in­volve any increase in U.S. aid expenditures.

5. All of the recommendations of the Wat­son Advisory Committee on Private Entel'­prise in Foreign Aid should be given care­ful attention l?Y the Congress in order to increase private U.S. foreign investment in the developing countries in support of eco­nomic development projects. The Presi­dent has reported that some of the Watson committee proposals are already being put into effect, but the entire package deserves the most detailed consideration by the Congress.

6. A new position of Deputy Administra­tor of AID should be created for the sole purpose of encouraging greater U.S. private investment in the developing countries.

7. In accordance with the recommenda­tion of the National Citizen's Commission to the White House Conference on Interna­tional Cooperation, "a permanent Interna­tional Private Investment Development Board (should) be established consisting of a small number of leading American busi­nessmen who would be given extensive ad­visory responsibilities within the U.S. for­eign assistance program."

8. The United States should encourage a program of selectivity and emphasis for de­velopment assistance among the developed allles. The United States, for its part, should be selective in the number of coun­tries in which it has an aid involvement; and it must be selective in the choice of the countries in order to assure that aid re­cipients have the desire and abil1ty to make the best use of ald. The United States has a special responsibility for development in Latin America, and it should receive .special emphasis. A greater concentration of effort and funds can better achieve the purposes of foreign aid.

9. New emphasis on foreign aid in Latin America requires efforts to restore the flag­ging enthusiasm of the Alliance for Progress. The excitement of promise created in its early days must now be matched by the ex­citement of achievement. Public relations is not a subst itute for accomplishment.

10. The Agency for International Develop­ment should restructure its thinking to give new attention and emphasis to the need for effective governmental administration and greater popular participation in the develop­ment programs of aid recipients. Such an emphasis will require a new effort to enlist the support of the private voluntary associa­tions in the United States and particular attention to the following seven recommen­dations.

11. Consistent with new emphasis on the administration of and popular participation in the development, U.S. foreign aid should be made contingent upon a defined set of basic criteria which conduce toward political growth. For example:

While we should not insist upon carbon copies of Western political institutions, aid which diminishes or tends to discourage pop­ular participation in government is not justified.

No gove~nment-to-government aid should be extended to any country that shows no interest in holding popular elections, estab­lishing broad suffrage, or creating a civil service system based on merit.

No government-to-government aid should be extended to any country whose develop­ment plans do not extend to each segment of its population-including the rural peas­antry and the modernization of agriculture.

No government-to-government aid should be extended to any country where corrup­tiop. or inefficiency in the government are so widespread that progress is impossible, and where no effort is being made to correct it.

12. Similarly expanded AID emphasis is required, not just in general education as outlined by the President, but in programs of education in administrative skills and in the theoretical and practical elements of political science. In particular AID support should be given· to the establishment of training institutes for teachers at the second­ary and primary levels and for programs of aid in translated political science textbooks. Such efforts should concerttrate in the teach­ing of political sk1lls, but care should be taken not to assume that particular Western political institutions are necessarily appro­priate in the underdeveloped areas.

13: The United States should promote the establishment of a Latin American Civil Service Academy, as recommended by the House of Representatives Republican Task Force on Latin American Affairs.

14. New emphasis on the administration of and popular participation in development wm require expanded AID attention to pro- . grams for community development, includ­ing health facllities, housing, schools, li­braries, transportation, communications, sew­age disposal facilities, and savings institu­tions. These programs in turn depend upon and encourage the growth of active political participation by the people in democratically organized popular efforts.

15. This emphasis in AID programing also requires increased concentration on facili­tating the means of communications by which the government of a developing coun­try can reach and engage the people, the people can make their desires known to the government, and the purposes of national and international development programs can be explained.

16. u.s. food and agricultural technology can be and should be used as positive instru­ments for development and peace. They are

the best evidence of the superiority of West­ern democracies over communism in supply­ing the basic needs of man. Public Law 480 should be reoriented to eliminate the impression that the program is designed merely_ to dispose of unwanted surpluses. The purpose of our food aid should be to help those in need and to demonstrate that a free society can produce agricultural abundance. Because our food supplies are not endless, because world population continues to ex­pand dramatically, and because a viable ag­ricultural economy can be a bulwark against communism, the United States must couple its food aid with programs to expand agri­cultural productivity and technical skills in the developing countries. Local currencies received in exchange for food should be used toward this end.

17. Because the tools and processes of as­sistance to the administration of and popu­lar participation in development are not as yet well defined, AID must undertake and sponsor broad programs of research to de­velop the tools and methods necessary to create the human infrastructure in the de­veloping countries which will encourage and accommodate orderly growth.

18. The U.S. Government, with the enthu­siastic leadership of the White House, should make a broad effort to engage the private voluntary associations of the U.S. democracy in a people-to-people aid program so as to encourage the growth of participation by the people of the developing countries in their own development plans. The follow­ing nine recommendations are particularly relevant. ·

19. In addition to a broader program of financial investment in the developing coun­tries, the American business community should be encouraged to establish and par­ticipate in its own training programs in the developing countries to teach technical and administrative skills.

20. In support of national foreign aid policy, the business community should be asked to lend, at its own cost, junior execu­tive talent to AID on a rotating 1-year basis.

21. The U.S. labor unions should be asked to continue their efforts to help organize the labor force of the developing countries in democratically based unions, and should per­mit a greater decentralization of their efforts so that local unions can cooperate in local people-to-people projects.

22. The major farm and agricultural worker organizations in the United States should be encouraged to increase their activities to bring agricultural productivity and modern­ization to the developing countries.

23. Through AID and private foundation contra·cts, American colleges and universities should be asked to increase their efforts in support of American foreign aid in the de­veloping countries, particularly with new emphasis on the theoretical and practical aspects of political science, public adminis­tration and business management.

24. With enthusiastic cooperation from the administration, private foundations such as the International Development Foundation should be promoted in order to assist in facilitating the more competent administration of national development programs and the growth of popular partic­ipation in development.

25. With AID encouragement and finan­cial assistance if necessary, other U.S. voluntary associations such as church groups, women's organizations, professional societies, and student groups should be en­couraged tf) undertake their own programs to establish ties with counterpart groups in the developing countries and to encourage their participation in the human infrastruc­ture necessary to achieve and accommodate meaningful progress. '

5854 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 26. The Republican and Democratic

parties, acting in concert, should undertake a carefully devised but vigorous program of support for development in Latin Amer-

, ica, including greater contact between United States and Latin politicians, help in the establishment of legislative reference

· services for Latin American parliam.ents, and establishment of a Latin American In­stitute for Democratic Development at which representatives of Latin American political parties might learn the theoretical and practical aspects of political science.

27. Under the enthusiastic leadership of the Governors, and the enthusiastic support of the administration and AID, the U.S. State governments should seek to establish their own program.s for popular participation in development with individual countries in Latin America. In a State-to-country pro­gram, contracted under AID arrangements as in the present Chile-California program, the state governments should attempt to enlist the business community, the educa­tional institutions, and the voluntary as­sociations in their own States in support of coordinated programs to 'Qlake people-to­people aid projects more effective and dramatic. The congressional representation for each State participating in such a pro­gram should share in the responsibility for making the program successful and effective.

28. In order to coordinate this greatly broadened private aid effort, and in order to minimize duplication and waste, AID should establish an official Government clearing­house and coordination center for the pri-vate aid program. .

29. The Congress should establish a special staff unit of expert technicians to provide continual field evaluation of foreign aid. It should report on good as well as inadequate performance. It would fill a vital need in keeping the Congress, and through the Con­gress the people, informed of the use to which foreign aid funds are being put.

30. The appropriations for military assist­ance and other foreign aid assistance should be kept separate, as recommended by the administration.

31. Foreign military aid in the form of hardware should, whenever possible, be ex­tended only to regional defense organiza­tions.

32. The administration should make re­newed efforts to find new uses for U.S.-owned foreign currency funds available for aid pro­grams in the developing countries. Except in those cases where their use would contri­bute to a severe inflationary spiral, these foreign currencies should be put to use in support of development programs, through legislative appropriation as part of the AID budget.

The purpose of these recommendations is to strengthen the security of the United States by making its foreign aid program more realistic and effective. The major thrust of the recommendations has been to­ward a greater recognition of the role which popular participation in development must play in the growth of the security of in­dependent developing nations. With new emphasis on this aspect of development, the u.S. foreign aid program can enter into a new and more rewarding phase--in which the American people can be engaged directly in the process and in which real development needs will be served.

Attention to the administration of and popular participation in development will re­quire also new emphasis on diplomacy and tact. It will require a willingness to face a new form of suspicion of our motives. But in the end, it will serve the purpose of our own national security, the security of in­dependent nations everywhere, the growth of modern democracy, and the evolution of peace and freedom which are and must al­ways be the ultimate goals of American for­eign aid and American foreign policy.

Mr. MORSE. I thank the gentleman. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker,

will the gentleman yield? Mr. MORSE. I yield to the gentle­

man from New Jersey. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker,

I should like to commend the gentleman from Massachusetts for his presentation here today.

Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my remarks at this point in the RECORD.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from New Jersey?

·There was no objection. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. Speaker,

the United States has now had 20 years of experience with foreign aid. During that period many billions of dollars have been spent, the economies of many coun­tries have been strengthened, and in other areas also a great deal has been accomplished. However, let us admit, frankly, that mistakes have also been made during these past 20 years. The question now is how to avoid similar mis­takes in the future, and how, on the basis of 20- years' experience, we can de­velop more effective programs.

The foreign aid recommendations which we are discussing today are based on a careful study of past experience. It is our feeling that a new emphasis, and a change of direction, are needed. We recognize that even now we still do not have all the answers. For example, tO insure more effective use of foreign aid, we need still more research-into the processes of changes, of what occurs when peoples and nations become in­volved in the development process, and into the significance of the external re­sources contributed by others.

It is evident, we feel, that the United States needs policies and guidelines for foreign aid that are clearly enunciated by our policymakers, and broadly under­stood by our peowe. There must be pop­ular understanding that foreign aid is more than a response to an appeal to our humanitarianism, that the welfare and security of the United States and the free world are enhanced as other nations ac­quire political and economic inde­pendence.

Coupled with this need for general principles for the conduct of an effecti':'e foreign aid program is the need for flexi­bility in furnishing assistance. Coun­tries which need aid differ widely in climate, geography, culture, history, and resources and in stages of development. For aid to be effective, each country needs a program tailored to its needs, and the methods of achieving the desired objectives must be defined with preci-sion.

The development of plans by individ­ual countries, and the receipt of aid in conformance with priorities established in such plans, does not, of course, always produce successful results. In some cases, as in the case of Taiwan, aid provides the needed stimulus for solid advances, but in other cases the results are negli-. gible. Why should this be so?

Experience indicates clearly that many factors are needed for success in develop­ment programs. One lesson we have

learned the hard way is that it is a seri­ous error to concentrate on either the agricultural or the industrial sector at the expense of the other. At first we seemed to assume that since developed societies were industrial, and undevel­oped societies were agricultural, that we needed only to concentrate on rapid in­dustrial growth. We have come to learn, in the words of Walt W. Rostow:

A failure to modernize agriculture can produce two results--often at the same time--neither of which is socially and politi­cally sound for the life of the Nation. It may yield a rush Of rural folk to the cities, in an effort to share ·somehow the advan­tages of modern life; or it can entrap in the

· countryside manpower badly needed for in­dustrial development, leaving the Nation split between a vital modern sector and an impoverished archaic traditional sector.

The effect of industrialization in a de­veloping country is quite different from industrial activity in devel'Oped Western countries. In underdeveloped countries per capita income is so low and broad purchasing power for consumer goods so minimal that it is not possible to achieve profits with high sales volumes and low profits or. each sales. Even if a manu­facturer in a developing country lowers his prices, he does little to increase his market. Since that is so, he may even increase his prices, relying on the wll'l­ingness of the rich to continue to buy­but the fruits of industrialization fail to reach the masses.

So too we have learned the error of concentrating, as we did at first, in urban areas at the expense of rural areas. Since 70 percent of the . population of developing t:..reas live in v1llages and rural areas, it is obvious that organiza­tion and modernization in this sector could have tremendous impact. It is noteworthy that this is where the major thrust of Communist orga'nizational ef­forts takes place-as was obvious in Cuba, and is today obvious in Vietnam.

To achieve a reasonable balance be­tween competing demands, and to pro­vide the needed skills to execute the plans, is obviously no small task. In many developing countries, unfortu­nately, the necessary skills are not avail­able, skills incidentally which include not only the ability to read instructions on machinery. Also needed but frequently not available is useful technical know how, the capacity to handle administra­tive jobs, and the capacity to assume po­litical responsibility.

Experience indicates clearly the im­portance of finding ways by which our ow:n. knowledge and skills can be applied to help meet the needs of developing na­tions for managerial and administrative skills, education and training for specific jobs, and to improve comm~nications generally. In these ways our aid can re­duce critical shortages which inhibit de­velopment, and by raising skills we can bring about a better balance between in­dustrial and agricultural development.

The administration is to be commend­ed for recognizing the importance of meeting the needs of developing coun­tries in the fields of education and health and in agricultural development. There' is danger, however, in raising

CONGRESSI0NAI -.RECORD.::,..:... HOUSE 5855 . hopes too high. Would it not be wiser; for exi:urtple, to concentrate educational · efforts on management, administration, · and communication? All these are skills which· would improve a government's capacity to administer development pro­grams, anL. facilitate popular participa­tion in the development process.

Nor do I think it possible to over-­emphasize the importance of private groups in encouraging the political and economic progress of developing coun­tries. Too little has yet been done to encourage or secure the support of pri­vate organizations, business groups, farm groups, labor unions, and the like.

The partners of tbe alliance program is a good example of the kind of people-to­people involvement we need, not only in Latin America, but elsewhere. My State of New ,Jersey is engaged in the partners program . with the State of Alagoas, Brazil. New Jersey citizens, recruited from business, labor, and civic organiza­tions, work directly with a counterpart committee of citizen leaders in Maceio, tr.e capital of Alagoas. The New Jersey committee has been supplied with a list of over 100 projects and, since the pro­gram is a two-way street, Alagoas is en­gaged in projects involving New Jersey.

In conclusion let me say that I per­sonally can see no advantage in the pro­posed 5-year authorization for foreign aid. As I have pointed out previously, we still are making changes in the rela­tive importance of various objectives and how we should handle the job. Presi­dent Johnson himself has come up this year with major new recommendations which he did· not make a year ago. Next year we may easily see another set of changes. !f Congress had no full op­pOrtunity for an annual review, there might well not be this continuing search and effort to improve existing foreign aid programs.

Mr. CAHILL. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. MORSE. I yield to the gentleman from New Jersey. ·

Mr. CAHILL. Mr. Speaker, I, too, would like to commend the gentleman in the well [Mr. MoRSE], for his leader­ship in what I think has been a very constructive piece of work and one which I think will be helpful in the en­tire field.

Mr. MORSE. Mr. Speaker, I should like to call the attention of the House to the significant contribution made by the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey [Mr. CAHILL], in the preparation of this document.

Mr. Speaker, on behalf of my col­league, the Honorable SILVIO CoNTE of Massachusetts, I ask unanimous con­sent that he be granted permission to extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentle­man from Massachusetts.

There was no objection. Mr. CONTE. Mr. Speaker, I have

heard it said that a man becomes an old man once he has lost his enthusiasm for life. So, too, it can be said that the sup­porters of our ongoing foreign assistance efforts become disenchanted when they

lose their enthusiasm for the program...,... when, year 'after . year, the same hack­neyed phrases are used to describe, less than enthusiastically, the same warmed­over programs and musty projects, over­seen by the same stereotyped function­aries. Over it all could be waved a ban­ner proclaiming, "What was good enough for the Marshall plan is good enough for southeast Asia--or Africa--or Latin America."

But it is not. And, I have not lost my enthusiasm for

the program nor the will to try to see it changed-with new ideas-and with new directions.

Foreign aid should be neither com­pletely self-serving nor completely self­sacrificing, for us or for the recipient countries. The underlying motivating spirit of foreign aid is the mutual, co­operative relationship which cannot al­ways be measured in dollars and cents, which cannot always have as its hall­mark success, but which moves the de­veloping country forward-slow as that progress may at times be.

U.S. foreign aid is a giving relation­ship, in which the ·overall needs of the developing nation must guide our as­sistance, but the individual must not be overlooked or forgotten.

U.S. foreign aid is a receiving relation­ship, in which the development of the needs of the nation and its people en­ables them, in many instances for the first time, to be able to choose a demo­cratic way of life and make it work. Then, we receive the quid for the quo in the new-found security of yet another country and its government and a greater security for this country.

With a new appreciation of the role which the administration of develop­ment assistance must play in promoting the security of developing nations, must also come a great realization that, if our aid is to be effective, we must be better organized for the task than we are.

This is not to say that yet another administrative overhaul of our aid-dis­pensing agency should be called for, for administrative overhauls seem generally to succeed in little more than attaching a new facade and a new set of .initials to what is otherwise the same old ad­ministrative problems and the historic, tangled web of bureaucratic redtape and procedure.

Better organization can many times be most successfully achieved by a little effective reorganization than by resort­ing to a totally new organization. Therefore, in order to preserve a con­tinuity in our aid efforts and the lessons of hard experience we have le'arned over the past two decades, we ask for no attack to be launched against the present structure of AID, but, rather, we devote our attention to, and ask your consider­ation of, other enormous organizational questions remaining. to be resolved­questions posed by such new directions as multilateral versus bilateral aid, the role to be played in future aid efforts by the private sector, the use of our agricul­tural products and technology for de­velopment, the role which should or must be played by our developed allies, and · the criteria we will utilize in deter-

min1ng how many and what countries will be recipients of aid.

THE ROLE OF THE AID ORGANIZATION

The emphasis in foreign aid which we recommend will not be a completely new departure from prior and existing AID practice. It is true that the structure of the agency, its personnel, and the re­porting of its statistics have been pri­marily geared to the essentially economic· theories of growth. There have been exceptions, primarily in the Latin Amer­ican bureau, where there has been a growing realization that the creation of an economic base is meaningless with­out a human involvement to give impetus to change and without dramatic improve­ments in the governmental capacity to perform.

No doubt, AID has been hesitant to embark boldly upon programs to build the recipient government's capacity to administer development and to encour­age popular participation in develop­ment out of fear of a misunderstanding of U.S. motives. To alleviate this fear and to allay suspicion of our motives abroad, therefore, we have set out as our first recommendation that the adminis­tration issue a firm declaration defining the objectives of its foreign aid program.

It is imperative to understand that we are not proposing, and AID must never attempt, to interfere in the political processes of independent nations.

U.S. foreign aid should never insist upon or attempt to establish particular governmental institutions.

U.S. foreign aid should never be in league with political movements in op­position to government power.

The politics in aid recipient countries is their business, not ours.

What we propose is not interference in the domestic affairs of independent nations, but help to those nations to make their development programs more effective.

U.S. foreign aid must strive to help recipient governments· attain the capac-. ity to accommodate change, to admin­ister development.

U.S. foreign aid must strive to help recipient countries to build the human base of popular participation which will create progress and allow the people to share in that progress.

If foreign aid ignores these tasks it cannot be effective.

It is true that in large measure the process of building participation on the part of the people, in the manifold in­stitutions of a modern society, is a proc­ess which must be left to people-to-peo­ple aid relationships-that is, relations between the U.S. private sector, the pro­fessional societies, the labor unions, the churches, the private foundations, and similar institutions, on the one hand, and the people of the developing coun­tries, on the other.

Even in this sphere, however, AID has a vital, if indirect, role to play. Com­munity development projects, agricul­tural cooperatives, political science edu­cation, are all areas where our foreign public aid has a direct byproduct of encouraging the involvement and civic consciousness of the people.

5856 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 AID can act directly, however, in· the

expansion of the developing countries' governments' capacity to perform. By increasing the emciency of the govern­ment through training, education, and technical advice; by encouraging greater decentralization of administration; and, by direct aid to government programs which increase the capacity of the gov­ernment to communicate effectively with the people, the needs of development will be served.

This is most important a:r;1d obvious in the areas of communications and educa­tion. The communications needs are immense. Tbe people must learn to, and how to, communicate with their gov­ernment; the government must learn to, and how to, communicate with the peo­ple. The people must be able to com­municate with each other, so that through association they can achieve common ends.

The tasks 1n education seem even more immense. We applaud the Presi­dent's new emphasis on education for the people through foreign aid. It must provide facilities for teacher training, but it must also provide to the people the texts and knowledge of relevant tech­nical skills, the science of agricultural modernization and the use of simple and complicated tools.

The forms of public and private aid in education can be many: international student exchange, expanded exchange programs in the United States for po­tential leaders from abroad, technical advisory missions, national institutes for expert knowledge, and local schools for rudimentary and technical knowledge. But, even more important than all of these will be the educational responsi­bility that every man and woman, who engages in the foreign aid operation, must carry. For it will be their respon­sibility, through patience, understanding, and persistence, to teach indirectly and by example the essential civic sk1lls which every American tends to take for granted, but upon which the develop­ment of our society has relied.

AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTS AND TECHNOLOGY

U.S. foreign aid in agriculture must have two quite distinct goals.

The first is to help to get food and nutrition to the two-thirds of the people of the world who are hungry.

The second is the modernization of the agricultural capacities of the devel­oping countries so that they need not rely on emergency food supplies from abroad and so they can free the man­power necessary for industrial develop­ment from their struggle with the earth for a food supply that is thwarted by the methods employed.

One-third of the world must diet while two-thirds of the world is starving.

Fifty percent of the preschool age children in the developing countries of the world suffer from malnutrition.

Minds, diverted by hunger, do not seek the road to development.

The conscience of the developed coun­tries, with their incredible agricultural productivity, must be engaged in a new program.

Public Law 480 provides for the sale or donation of some agricultural sur-

pluses. The law is a generous one, but it is essentially a negative one-designed primarily as a means to make some use of, and to gain some economic advantage from, American farm produce. Merely providing a market for our surplus does not meet the need of the developing countries nor employ the productive capacity of the agricultural capabilities of this country.

A more positive approach would be to determine how much food is needed to provide adequate nutrition to the people now suffering and to coordinate, through our foreign aid program, the efforts of this country to produce, rather than to dispose, to supply this need. Public Law 480 should be reoriented. Food for Peace should be translated into a posi­tive effort to fight starvation.

At the same time, the additional for­eign currencies coming to this country as a result of increased activity in trans­actions involving food supplies, where food commodities are supplied on a sale basis to the developing countries, must increase the urgency for the long-await­ed action for the utilization of these currencies--putting them to work for us and for the good of the recipient coun­try.

Of course, we are not advocating, nor have I or any Member for whom I am speaking today, ever advocated the willy­nilly use of foreign currencies--the spending of these funds merely for the sake of getting rid of them. But it is time to stop talking and to start acting to ensure that excess U.S.-owned foreign currency funds, available for develop­ment projects in a recipient country, be put to development use. Caution must be exercised in every instance to a void any inflationary effect on the internal economy of the country, but the coordi­nated efforts of the administration, AID, and omcials of the developing countries could ensure that the potential provided by these funds is effectively tapped.

Again, I remind you, the utilization of these funds need not be contingent upon an increase in foreign aid expendi­tures, but upon the inventive applica­tion of these currencies to expenses cur­rently incurred in the program and otherwise funded directly by American dollars. There should be no continua­tion of arguments over the language by which this should be done nor the com­mittee within whose jurisdiction the question comes. It is a problem of the American people and must be a concern of every Member of the Congress. We have waited for action too long and the continued accumulation of these funds around the world in this country's ac­count is as inimical to the interests of the developing countries as it is our own.

The second goal of aid in agriculture must be a simultaneous effort to increase the agricultural productivity of the de­veloping countries themselves. By mod­erruzmg agriculture, the developing countries can reduce their dependence upon emergency food 9Jd, free some labor for the growth of industry, create · popular participation 1n the develop­ment of rural areas, and serve to bring the progress of development to the peo­ple. This effort will require promotion of farming cooperatives, the teaching of

the technical skills of modem agricul­ture, in which the United States is un­surpassed, and the supply of the modern instruments of agriculture.

PROGRAM OF EMPHASIS BY SELECTIVITY

If the security of the United states depends upon the security of the de­veloping countries, and if the security of the developing countries depends upon our assistance 1n specific programs for development, then it makes no sense for the United States to continue foreign as­sistance programs denied the opportu­nity of success by the failure of the de­veloping countries to do those thingb essential for their success. Neither does it make any sense for- the United States . to continue keeping a "hand in" in countries where we have no total de­velopment commitment, · where the as­sistance programs are denied, the op­portunity of success by the failure of this country to do more than maintain a presence.

There is a desperate need to inject into the U.S. program of foreign aid a more realistic attitude toward the establish­ment of criteria under which aid is extended.

The United States has made some progress in recent years in making our aid program more selective. While this progress is welcome, it cannot divert our awareness from the fact that some 40 percent of all our foreign assistance is spread among 65 countries and 5 per­cent of our foreign aid is going to 41 sep­arate countries. In terms of national development, these programs could hardly be effective. In many instances, without contributing significantly to the ·development process, our aid may only have a nuisance value and complicate political relations without achieving corresponding benefits.

I have called in the past for a further implementation of a program of care­fully planned selectivity and I welcome the support and approval today of my Republican colleagues of this proposal as it is embodied in the recommenda­tions we have made.

Operating within a reasonable budget for expenditures, the needed emphasis to facilitate the earliest obtainment of the high goals we set for our aid efforts can be made possible only through a carefully implemented program of selectivity. We must be selective in the number of countries in which we will have an aid involvement and we must be further se­lective in the choice of the countries fill­ing out that number in order to assure that those countries in the program will coordinate and cooperate in the efforts we extend.

THE ROLE OF OUR ALLIES

For many years, there has been a ris­ing demand within the United States that our European allies, the recipients of our assistance during Marshall fund days, assume a more active role in shar­ing the burden of development aid to the southern half of the globe today. This demand persists and is understand­able. However, many Americans may not fully appreciate the extent to which these governments have undertaken major foreign aid programs of their own. Germany, Italy, Israel, and Japan

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5857 all hlive major and expanding foreign assistance programs. France· extends more foreign aid per capita than any other nation in the world, including the United States. The British development assistance program is certainly as large, if not larger, than her precarious bal­ance-of-payments situation will allow.

The problem is not a lackadaisical ef­fort by our allies, although they could, perhaps, increase their efforts. . The problem is . that time is so short and the problems are so great that the avail­able financial resources of all the devel­oped Western allies are insufficient for the task.

We must make a more effective con­centration of our efforts and encourage a program of emphasis by selectivity among our developed ames, such as that I have proposed for this country. It is applicable to the efforts of these allies, just as the program of our allies must be considered in implementing our own program of emphasis by selectivity.

It cannot be ignored tha.t for the United States to maintain expensive, but relatively minor, foreign aid programs in two countries, neither one of which is sufficient, denies it the opportunity to spend the total amount of funds in one country where, perhaps, an adequate job could be done. Similarly, whatever the potential value of even a minimal U.S. presence, a minor foreign aid program in a country which also receives signif­icant foreign aid from one of our allies, inevitably causes duplication of efforts, overlapping of programs, and dilution of results despite the most sincere efforts at interallied cooperation. PRIVATE FOREIGN INVESTMENT AND ECONOMIC

DEVELOPMENT

We have said that the emphasi~ of the past on development and growth of an economic base at the sacrifice of involve­ment of the people and development of their talents an_d capabilities has been a weakness of the foreign aid efforts. In stressing the necessity of AID to enlist popular participation and administra­tion in development, it cannot, of course, come at the complete sacrifice of an on­going economic development, building an economic structure within the develop­ing country into which the people's knowledge and skills can be channeled. However, for the Government, the time is too short and the resources too limited to move successfully forward at both levels of development. A greater encour­agement and involvement of the Amer­ican private business community to in­vest its capital and human resources in economic development projects will per­mit the necessary freedom for AID to emphasize the new directions in foreign aid we are recommending.

I think we know, as I have emphasized in the past, that the vast reservoir of financial, managerial, administrative, and technicar resources of our American businesses must be tapped if we are to. successfully· move the developb1g coun­tries around the world into the 20th century as partners in future progress with the United States. It is even more important to marshal these forces to join with the Government in this fight against the deprivation of human liberty

and the desecration of human dignity of the peoples dependent upon the con­current economic development of their countries. -

Last July's report of the Watson Ad­visory Committee on Private Enterprise in Foreign Aid to AID is an outstanding contribution toward the more effective utilization of the private sector in sup­port of the purposes of foreign aid. The President has reported that some of the Watson Committee recommendations are being followed. I urge, as we have, recommended, that the Congress care­fully study all of these recommendations for potential incorporation in legisla­tion.

Above all, however, there must be a new atmosphere at AID and throughout the administration, which not only makes the business community feel wel­come in its participation in the develop­ment process, but actively seeks to en­gage the business community in support of the development process.

AID must have a Deputy Administra­tor to serve this task alone. It should also have a business board to advise it on investment policies and opportuni­ties. The task is too big, the funds are too limited, and the time is too short, to rely only upon the Government. The business community must be engaged, and the business community must also accept the responsibility of offering its resources to the foreign aid program so that it may serve this vital national purpose, as well as its own economic prosperity. MILITARY ASSISTANCE AND REGIONAL MILITARY

ORGANIZATIONS

The President has proposed the sepa­ration of the legislative package for mili­tary and other assistance. Military as­sistance in the fonn: of hardware may, in some circumstances, add to a nation's security, but it does not have a direct relation to the development process. Therefore, I have previously proposed and we recommend today the extension of such military aid, whenever possible, to regional military organizations rather than to individual national military es­tablishments.

CONTINUING CONGRESSIONAL EVALUATION

Congress, working through its com­mittees, is severely hampered in dis­charging its responsibilities of author­izing and appropriating funds annually for the conduct of our foreign aid pro­gram by the limitations imposed upon it due to inadequate staffing and lack of sources of independnt evaluation of pro­gram specifics.

The status of current projects, the needs of a country in a particular area of development, the work of the AID field personnel, the acceptance of the re­cipient country of the development ef­forts being made in terms of people and ideas, all these important and determ­inative factors must be gleaned from ceremonial inspection trips by congres­sional delegations and justification ma­terials submitted to the congressional committees by the very agencies directly concerned with making a bed of roses from a can of worms. I have found my personal attempts at getting an unan­nounced first-hand look at some of these

projects thwarted ahd -I am sure every­one here has heard stories of our. pow.; dered milk being used to mark off a ball field in some developing country.

Therefore we are recommending the establishment of a special investigative staff, to function under the authority of the House through its responsible com­mittees, to travel in every country in which we have an aid involvement, to inspect every program and project for which American dollars are going into these developing countries, to . talk with the people in the recipient countries, and not just the heads of state, but those same people we are asking AID to involve in its development efforts, to talk with the field personnel of AID and to report back to the Congress on their findings. The personnel of this staff will not be individuals out after a "cushy" job nor will they be antagonists of the person­nel or harassers of the program. Their evaluation will be an independent one, their criticisms constructive and their

.praise of worthy efforts encouraged Just as the history of our assistance ef­forts through the past 20 years have had bipartisan spokesmen and support, theirs will not be a partisan appraisal­but a report to the entire body.

With such assistance, the Congress will be better able to evaluate all aspects of the foreign aid program, to coordinate efforts, to emphasize successes and to get rid of potential powder kegs before they explode under us. This staff team would be of special value to both the Foreign Affairs Committee and the Appropria­tions Committee in discharging respon­sibly their duties to this body and would enable every Member of this body to be better informed in their reports to the people, on whom we call for support of our foreign aid program.

CONCLUSION

We are emphasizing in our statements and our proposals, not a sweeping de­parture from prior and existing practices and programs of the Agency for Inter­national Development, but, rather, that this is the time to propose, consider. and implement solutions to the enormous organizational questions undermining the overall effectiveness of our assistance efforts, and to strike out in new direc­tions to stimulate the development of the countries around the world looking to us for help.

TOWARD A THEORY OF EFFECTIVE DEVELOPMENT

Mr. MORSE. Mr. Speaker, the rec­ommendations we have made today for the conduct of our foreign assistance ef­fort go beyond changes in administra­tion. They are designed to provide an entirely new dimension in our programs to assist the developing nations. De­velopment on the scale necessary if these countries are to beco.me proud and stable members of the international commu­nity is principally a job for government of these countries: . only government can provide the legal and institutional framework that is essential for the_ ef­ficient application of technological . ·and other tools of development. We can, I believe, help these governments develop

5858 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE March 15, 1966

the capacity to direct and shape develop­ment.

We must give our attention to two separate spheres. For a society to achieve growth it must, on the one hand, have a government with a highly de­veloped capacity to perform. The gov­ernment must be able to plan efficiently, to administer effectively, to communi­cate with the people easily and to en­gage the participation of the people in the development process.

Popular participation involves the ability to communicate with govern­ment, the capacity to organize and the competency to initiate and fellow through on projects through techniques and instruments the people have de­veloped for themselves.

The governmental capacity to per­form: Many of the developing countries have only recently achieved self-govern­ment; many others have only recently become aware of the opportunities for advanced economic prosperity. It is understandable that they are still reach-. ing for the capacity to effect change. They have experienced difficulties with various combinations of problems in­cluding a lack of a sufficient number of competent officials, inadequate knowl­edge of their own geography and re­sources, rudimentary transportation and communications systems, and traditional political viewPoints and institutions.

If the foreign-aid program is to be successful, the United States must as­sist these nations in improving their per­formance. We should not seek to impose an institutional pattern, but rather to instill respect for a process of govern­ment that engages the people in decision­making. U.S. foreign aid must never be an instrument of uninvited interference in the domestic. affairs of independent countries.

The United States has a number of opportunities to influence quite directly the establishment and growth of some of the most fundamental instruments of government. Our help is occasionally asked for in the drafting of national con­stitutions. Legislators in the developing countries can learn a great deal from U.S. experience in developing staff and research support for the legislative proc­ess. Our assistance in helping parlia­ments establish legislative reference services would be of important practical utility.

Decentralization of governmental functions and political power may also provide a constructive area for study. Formal federalism may not be appropri­ate for many developing countries, but our experience may be useful in empha­sizing that decentralization will not bring benefits in governmental capacity or popular participation unless the peo­ple are involved in the government that decentralization brings closer.

Although the administrators of our foreign-aid program have recognized the importance of establishing effective, honest, and competent civil service and public administration, the United States has not given this field sufficient atten­tion in our aid effort. Technical assist­ance in the development of merit sys­tems, examination programs, and in­service training could be extremely use-

ful. ·This is the kind of thing the Re­publican Task Force on Latin America had in mind last November when it rec­ommended the establishment of an In­ter-American Civil Service Academy.

One of the most important tests of any government's performance is its ability to maintain law and order. Both the armed services and the police have a role here if the civilian government· em­ploys these powerful tools with restraint. The training of law enforcement officials in the use of power and restraint would be an appropriate use of foreign aid funds. Likewise in the military sphere, assistance in the form of hardware does not contribute directly to the develop­ment process, but assistance in the form of training can help transform the mili­tary of the developing countries from a feared vehicle of authoritarianism to a popular instrument of progress. Here again U.S. experience with the Army Corps of Engineers and the use of the military to enforce civil rights is rele­vant.

The performance of a government will also be reflected in the strength of its mechanisms for channeling popular sup­port. The political party structure need not follow a two-party pattern. The ex­perience of Mexico demonstrates that a single party coalition can be a major instrument of development; in a multi­party system competition between par­ties for popular support can provide impetus for reform, communication be­tween people and government, and a popular voice in governmental decisions about development.

To be sure, many political leaders need greater understanding of the concept that elections involve not only victory, but a mandate from the people for the conduct of policy in their interests. New techniques for the training of lead­ers and the organization of support must be brought to their attention; much can be done even with simple programs of instruction in how to run a meeting, how to operate a mimeograph machine, and how to raise funds for political action.

Political participation of the people: It is at the point of governmental mobili­zation of support and opinion that the problems of governmental capacity and popular participation merge. I think that our experience with development over the past 20 years has demonstrated that sound development depends on the participation of the people.

Alexis de Tocqueville commented more than once on the vitality of U.S. local government am! private voluntary asso­ciations. Of local government he wrote:

Local assemblies of citizens constitute the strength of free nations. Town meetings are to liberty what primary schools are to science; they bring it within reach; they teach men how to use it and how to enjoy it. A nation m ay establish a system of free government, but without the spirit of municipal institu­tions, it cannot have the spirit of liberty.

For a variety of reasons, both historic and philosophic, many developing na­tions have extremely strong central gov­ernments. It is difficult for a govern­ment that is distant to win the allegiance of the people. Yet, even a government that is close must involve the people in its decisions.

We cannot urge a· drastic realinement of administrative and political power in the developing countries, but we can make available to them the benefits of U.S. experience with strong local gov­ernment. We can suggest techniques of developing leadership in the villages and rural areas; we can assist in the develop­ment of recruitment programs that will provide the government with a source of personnel to be trained in the techniques of public administration and then set to work among their own people.

We should certainly improve our knowledge of the attitudes of people to­ward government. What steps should be taken to increase their belief in their own ability to effect change? How can government encourage and assist in the exercise of popular initiative? These questions may best be answered through the efforts of the private voluntary in­stitutions and associations which contri­bute to the initiative, achievement and accommodation of change. De Tocque­ville commented on the range and effec­tiveness of such groups in the United States:

As soon as several of the inhabitants of the United States have taken up an opinion or a. feeling which they wish to promote in the world, they look out for mutual assistance; and as soon as they have found one another out, they combine. From that moment they are no longer isolated men, but a. power seen from afar, whose actions serve for an exam­ple and whose language is listened to.

Such · associations are practically un­known in the developing world. Too often the kinds of associations, such as trade unions, which we know as both supporting and opposing participants in the democratic process, may be, in some of the developing countries, an instru­ment by which the government controls workers.

Our foreign aid e:ffort should recog­nize the significance of private groups in change and development and make an effort to bring to the developing coun­tries the concepts of democratic partic­ipation, education, equality and public service that have informed U.S. private groups.

The natural groups of society-labor, students, professional people, farmers, women, and so forth-must be encour­aged to organize to serve their common purposes. They must be encouraged to recognize and analyze their common in­terests, and the advantages of joint ac­tion and self -discipline on behalf of the greater national development purpose. The sensitive teaching of these lessons and responsive understanding of them will contribute to the consciousness of group capacity to shape the future.

Aside from political parties, one of th( most obvious areas for voluntary as­sociation is in labor-industrial labor in the cities and agricultural labor in the rural areas. The Communists know this lesson and have been busy. They have perceptively applied the Marxist doctrine that the source of revolution was to be found among industrial wage earners to a theory of agrarian revolt. Che Gue­vara has written:

In underdeveloped America the country­side must be fundamentally the locale of the armed struggle.

March . 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 5859" This was also the burden of the

Chinese Defense Minister's statement of last fall on the inevitability of conflict between "the cities of the world" in North America and Western Europe and "the rural areas of the world'' in Asia, Africa, and Latin America.

We began too late in this area, but we do know that in a very literal sense the modernizing of a society begins with the work of the labor force; those who work in the development process will be most attuned to its potential and its fail­ure. Their participation can be enlisted for the national program, or for those who promise a brighter future.

Organization is particularly vital and far more difficult in the rural areas. The organization of agricultural workers to initiate, administer, and support agri­cultural reform and technological ad­vance is imperative. Per capita agricul­tural production in most of Latin Amer­ica has actually decreased in the past decade. . Cooperatives and other volun­tary associations should be encouraged, not only as desirable vehicles of civic action but as sources of technical edu­cation as well.

Rural development requires, as AID Administrator David Bell has said, not just better agricultural techniques, but "improvements in marketing and trans­portation arrangements, in education and health facilities, in better institu­tions of local government, and of private cooperation." It requires housing, schools, libraries, hospitals, and savings and credit institutions. The develop­ment and channeling of initiative on the part of the rural population is a proper area for U.S. support.

Engaging the American people in for­eign aid: In light of the tremendous impetus that has been given to reform by various forms of citizen groups in the United States throughout our history, it is ironic that this should be a missing ingredient in our foreign assistance efforts.

The Watson Committee recently rec­ommended:

The role of the nongovernment groups­of business enterprises, labor unions, pro­fessional societies, and all the rest--must be greatly expanded.

While the committee had words of praise for AID officials, it pointed out:

Private organizations are generally capa­ble of greater speed, fiexibiUty and incisive­ness than Government agencies.

In fact, it continued, without re­straints of bureaucracy, "private organi­zation can outperform official agencies."

Not only would a greater involvement of U.S. private groups increase the qual­ity and volume of our foreign aid effort, it would help to create a larger constit­uency for the foreign aid program here in this country. Decentralization of the aid process would involve sustained en­thusiasm from the White House and a constant determination at AID to utilize all the private sources of influence in the task of promoting and sustaining a network of voluntary associations in the developing countries.

If we believe that the development process will depend on the political ef-

fectiveness of those it seeks to serve, we must seek to engage the efforts of the people of the United States in its success.

Business: The extraordinary responsi­bility which American business has dem­onstrated in its participation in local community affairs has proven to be not only an important key to community im­provement but of economic benefit to business. The 3,000 U.S. businesses which maintain facilities abroad have increasingly realized that their practices and policies abroad have a direct impact upon the success of American foreign policy.

Business can build upon this hopeful record of public service by playing a more active role in support of foreign aid. Business has, in three important spheres, an opportunity to become an active participant in development, while at the same time demonstrating to the developing world some of the gains that can result from efficient, economic, re­sponsible private enterprise.

First. U.S. private investment abroad can be increased. It is here that the recommendations of the Watson Com­mittee are particularly important, and I am presently drafting amendments to foreign aid legislation that will reflect those recommendations. The magni­tude of the need for additional capital is reflected in the committee's estimate that the gap between the amount of cap­ital available to the developing countries and the amount which they need ranges from $5 to $20 billion annually.

Increased public attention should also be given to the work of the Atlantic Community Development Group for Latin America-ADELA-an association of United States and European govern­ment and business leaders who are at­tempting to encourage private foreign investment in Latin America. Just 2 weeks ago, Britain's Foreign secretary, Michael Stewart, indicated that Britain was considering ways to increase its cap­ital export to Latin America.

Second. U.S. business abroad can launch a program of management and vocational training in the underdevel­oped countries, particularly in Latin America. This would have an enor­mous impact upon the capacity of mod­ernizing societies to develop the skills necessary to accommodate growth. The International Executive Service Corps provides one creative channel for such assistance. There are others, such as greater use of U.S. plants for the con­duct of AID sponsored vocational and technical education programs, and sup­port for institutions, such as the School of Administration and Finance in Me­dellin, Colombia, which will provide an increasing supply of technical and middle-level management. The recent recommendations made to the White House Conference on International Co­operation Year are also worthy of study.

Third. As the Watson Committee rec­ommended, U.S. business can make available to Government foreign aid op­erations some of its own highly compe­tent personnel on a short-term basis. This would not only be a significant busi­ness contribution to the foreign aid ef­fort, but has potential for improving f.ts

administration as well. Such an ar­rangement worked satisfactorily during World War II and has been tried with outstanding results by Gov. James Rhodes of Ohio.

Labor: The American labor movement has no peer as a private institution de­voted to participation in private in­ternational affairs. Its contribution through the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions has been substan­tial. While there have been criticisms that labor's overseas activities have not always been sensitive to internal political situations in the host countries, I think it is clear that the American labor move­ment has been unique in its willingness to contribute its services and resources in support of the PUrPOses of American foreign aid.

American labor will not always be wel­come. Particularly in Latin America, where labor union development has fol­lowed the European pattern, there is some feeling that private European ef­forts are more appropriate.

Perhaps the most productive contribu­tion that American free labor can make is to help instill the sense of national consciousness and national responsibil­ity that has made labor such an effective force in U.S. economic growth. Decen­tralization of the labor effort may be of value too. Locals might beneficially be allowed more freedom to cooperate in community-to-community and people­to-people projects organized for a vari­ety of local organizations acting to­gether.

Farm groups: The American Farm Bureau Federation, the National Grange, and the National Farmers Union fully recognize that the world's population ex­plosion imposes on American agriculture not just the potential benefit of increased sales, but the responsibility of helping to feed the hungry of the world. It im­poses on them also the responsibility to extend the knowledge of agricultural productivity and modernization to the developing countries. It is clear that not even the enormous productivity of Amer­ican agriculture will be able to feed a world population that is growing at the current rate.

Through private programs, extending the technical knowledge of American agriculture to the rural areas of the southern half of the globe, American farmers can offer not only technical skills, but the means by which agricul­tural workers and farmowners can be­come an effective voice in public policy. Groups such as the 4-H Clubs, with their youth and enthusiasm have a vital role to play and should be encouraged.

Educational institutions: American colleges and universities have an out­standing record of support for U.S. for­eign aid. Largely on contract to AID or philanthropic foundations, they have undertaken valuable research projects that have served the foreign aid program well. Through exchange programs and the establishment of schools in the de­veloping countries, they have brought skills and knowledge. Two of the most outstanding efforts are the schools for middle-management capabilities op­erated in Peru and Central America

5860 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966

under contract with AID by Stanford University and the Harvard Business School respectively.

Management administration, techni­cal skills and teacher training are all so desperately needed that there is no dan­ger of doing too much. Equally impor­tant, however, is expanded teaching of political science. This is a new discipline to many developing countries, but there is growing evidence that the younger generations are eager for the tools of social science to help them shape their future.

American colleges and universities must be encouraged to accept every op­portunity for bringing ·~o the developing world a greater knowledge of political science and organization skills. Greater attention should be given to the law schools where the great U.S. tradition of the partnership between law and public policy can serve as a useful example to societies where the study of law is more narrowly conceived.

Private foundations: The contributions of the Ford, Rockefeller, Carnegie, and other foundations to the development process know no equal. The opportuni­ties for such foundations tt.re immense. They are uniquely equipped to provide the kind of financial and technical as­sistance needed to expand the teaching of political science and to help reshape uni­versity curriculums to reflect modern needs.

The International Development Foun­dation has served as one kind of model for an experiment in creating independ­ent private foundations. It is worth considering whether initial and support­ing capital for such an operation could come directly from AID. Of course, it would have to be made clear that both the foundation's operations were consist­ent with the U.S. foreign aid program and that its policies and programs were established and implemented privately. National sensitivities in this field in efforts to increase popu~ar participation may be aroused but the ends of develop­ment are too important for the means of development to be limited merely by fear of controversy.

Other voluntary associations: There are a number of other groups in the United States that have given form and shape to our own development as a mod­ern society. It is impossible to think of a single segment of American society that does not have its institutional rep­resentation. All of these groups, the League of Women Voters, the Knights of Columbus, the American Bar Association, and the National Council of Churches, to name just a few, represent the inter­ests of their members. Independently, these groups are effective; collectively they have undeniable strength in a de­mocracy. They are a creative and vital force that must be engaged in the for­eign aid program.

Political parties: The most obvious voluntary public associations in the United States are, of course, the two ma­jor political parties. Their potential in support of foreign aid is immeasurable. It is important that whatever they do they try to do collectively.

Merely a greater facilitation of contact between U.S. politicians and their coun­terparts in the developing countries would be extremely beneficial in build­ing an understanding of the develop­mental process. But more broad and specific programs could be designed. The short-lived Institute for Political Educa­tion established in Costa Rica to teach political skills and public policy knowl­edge to progressive Latin American po­litical parties may have provided an im­portant clue as to the most valuable con­tribution which the Republican and Democratic Parties collectively can make.

Proposals in this country have been made for a Latin American Institute for Democratic Development to aid Latin American political parties in the identifi­cation and training of new leaders, in education in political science and organi­zation skills. It would be an important and appropriate initiative taken col­lectively by the two great U.S. political parties to found such an institute, to finance it and to sustain it.

A further important role could be served by both parties at the national and local levels if they would take it upon themselves to encourage other private voluntary associations to participate ac­tively in the foreign aid program. The Republican and Democratic Parties now reach into every community in the United States. They have a responsi­bility to engage themselves and to seek to engage others in support of develop­ment in the developing countries.

A new role for the States: There are now 28 Par tners of the Alliance programs which have enlisted American States, or portions of them, in mutual development efforts with nations or regions of Latin America. The purpose of the Partners program is not to build roads and bridges, but to build the confidence of the private sector, in the United States and in Latin America, in the goals and purposes of the Alliance for Progress. My own State of Massachusetts has a Partners Program with the Department of Antioquia, Co­lombia. The goals are modest, but the dividends are great, not only for mutual understanding, but for a new faith in the development process.

This program, in my judgment, has been given too little attention and too little support. Its potential for increas­ing the foreign aid constituency here in this country and for providing the high impact support perhaps most needed in many parts of Latin America is enormous.

Another example ·of successful decen­tralization of responsibility for foreign aid is the Chile-California Program of Technical Cooperation, by which the State of California, under contract with AID, has undertaken to assist the people of Chile in the planning and research of development projects. Since the pro­gram was undertaken in the spring of 1964, eight technical assistance project studies calling for a U.S. contribution of $1,367,000, have been negotiated. The projects cover research, in Chile and at California universities, in transporta­tion, agricultural development, educa­tion, budgeting, and regional planning.

When I visited Chile last fall, I was impressed by the enthusiasm and support the program was receiving. Historic ties and similar geographic conditions have increased the responsiveness of the Chileans to the California-administered program. Certainly, this pattern can be repeated successfully. One of the rea­sons for the Partners of the Alliance pro­gram between Massachusetts and An­tioquia was the similarity of our mutual development patterns. The Common­wealth of Massachusetts has the educa• tional facilities, the business community, the labor movement, and the church, professional, youth and political groups to undertake a broad collective effort to participate in the development of Co· lombia.

The States would not be in competi­tion with AID, but would cooperate fullY with AID guidelines and coordination. AID should welcome their initiative and the opportunity to engage the people in a direct and beneficial State-to-State program that can facilitate the partici­pation in development we believe is so necessary to meaningful economic growth.

A clearinghouse for private aid efforts: In 1955 the Technical Assistance Infor­mation Clearinghouse, a private center for the collection and dissemination of information on overseas private devel­opment programs, was established and supported under contract by the pred­ecessor of AID. The clearinghouse has served as an information center on the programs and operations of U.S. volun­tary agencies, missions, and foundations engaged in technical assistance abroad. It maintains comprehensive files on more than 400 organizations and their tech­nical assistance programs, AID contract information, and related material. This information is available to Government and private agencies for their use in planning programs and to individuals and groups seeking channels for using their special skills and resources.

This limited concept of a clearinghouse may have been adequate in 1955. It is inadequate today. And if the private sector of the American economic and political communities is to be engaged in support of development abroad in a more active way, as has been proposed here, the existing clearinghouse will prove to be obviously insufficient. It is necessary to have this information exist within AID itself, for the coordination­as opposed to direction-of the multitude of private aid efforts by a multitude of voluntary associations in the United States will require extraordinary em­phasis and attention.

With over 400 agencies in the private aid field already, with over 3,000 private U.S. business concerns operating with facilities abroad, and with an ever-in­creasing participation of local communi­ties and other voluntary groups, it is essential to establish a clearinghouse and coordinating office that will be able to minimize the duplication of effort and maximize the information available on what efforts are being undertaken and what efforts need assistance. The pro­gram to engage the private sector in the development process in the support of

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL · RECORD--HOUSE 5861 foreign aid imposes a new obligation upon AID to provide the administrative framework within which such a vastly expanded program of personnel and com­munications can be effectively and orderly managed.

Conclusion: We believe that the rec­ommendations we have made here today will contribute to the strength and ef­fectiveness of our efforts to assist the developing countries. Insofar as they reflect a sharp break with the past, we recognize how little we really have learned about the development process. We have learned a good deal about pro­grams and policies that will not work; we have learned a good deal less about those that will.

We really do not know to what extent the experience of U.S. voluntary agen­cies will be transferable to a situation which differs so sharply from our own. We really do not know just what it is that will give people in the rural back­waters of Latin America, Asia, and Afri­ca a sense of their own political effec­tiveness.

But we do know that there is a revolu­tion going on. Either we will use our re­sources in an effort to channel that rev­olution in a direction that promises freedom, or we will leave it to those for whom freedom has no value.

If we truly believe that the principles of freedom, liberty, equality, and self­government have relevance for all peo­ple in the modern world, we must, as a matter of national interest and moral conscience, move in the direction we have proposed today.

HUNGARIAN INDEPENDENCE DAY Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent to extend my remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from lllinois?

There was no objection. Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I am

proud to join my colleagues in the House of Representatives today in a commemo­rative tribute to Hungarian independ­ence.

The Hungarians fought for their in­dependence against the Hapsburgs in 1848 and, more recently, against the Communists in 1956. Throughout their history, .the Hungarian people have ex­hibited a love of freedom and independ­ence which cannot be quenched though their country be overrun by those who have sought in vain to impose tyrannical regimes upon the land.

Our colleague, the gentleman from New York, Congressman FRANK HoRTON, has introduced a resolution to provide for a memorial to be built here in Wash­ington to commemorate the great spirit of the Hungarian people so nobly sym­bolized by the heroic stand of the free­dom :fighters only 10 brief years ago.

I support my colleague in his efforts to arrange for a site for this memorial in WaShington. This city represents the hope of the world and I can think of no more ntting location for such a statue.

CXII--37Q--Part 5

The memorial would be erected by the Hungarian Freedom Fighters Federation and maintained by our Department of Interior. It would serve to remind Ainericans and all who visit here of our unrelenting struggle to secure the bless­ings of self -determination and freedom for the people of the captive nations.

The Hungarians have been in the fore­front in the fight for human liberty. As long as they, and their neighbors behind the Iron Curtain, are kept under Com­munist domination, we in the free world will remember and pay tribute to their gallant past, when freedom truly was an intrinsic part of each man's life. Such a day, hopefully, will dawn once more for the Hungarians and all those oppressed millions who now rely on us ¥>speak for them in the free forums of the world.

IMMIGRATION ACT OF 1965, SPEECHES OF JAMES J. HINES Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous .consent that the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. FOGARTY] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from lllinois?

There was no objection. Mr. FOGARl'Y. Mr. Speaker, under

leave to extend my remarks I include two speeches delivered by James J. Hines, General Counsel of the Visa Office of the Department of State. One of these

· speeches was given before the American Immigration and Citizenship Conference at New York, N.Y., on December 7, 1965. The other was delivered before the re­gional conference sponsored by the Michigan Committee on Irnmigration and the United Community Services of Metropolitan Detroit on February 28, 1966. Mr. Hines is a recognized expert in his field and I commend his analysis of, and comments on, the new Immigra­tion Act to all my colleagues:

THE IMMIGRATION ACT OF 1965 (By James J. Hines, Ge.neral Counsel of the

Visa Office) 1

I am very grateful for the opportunity to be with you this morning and to discuss the role of the Visa Office and the U.S. Consular Service in the implementation of the Immi-gration Act of October 3, 1965. ·

Long before the dramatic signing of H.R. 2580 at the Statue of Liberty on that beau­tiful Sunday afternoon in October,2 the Visa Office was in constant communication wlth our 200 immigrant visa 1ssuing posts abroad, keeping them abreast of developments in the Congress. The consuls in the field were well aware of the ·contents of H.R. 2580 by the time the President afiixed his signature on October 3. The duty of the Visa Office to instruct and ad vise the consular service on the technical aspects of the new law is a continuing process, and it will carry on for many months to come. The Department in my opinion has responded to the challenge of

1 Address made before the American Immi­gration and Citizenship Conference at New York, N.Y., on Dec. 7.

' For remarks tnade by President JohnsOn on signing the bill, see Bulletin of Oct. 25, 1965, p. 660.

Public Law 89-236 in a very responsible and creditable manner. ·

One of our major responsibilities under the new law, as in the past, is that of controlling the distribution of quota numbers. The process has not been substantially changed, but the dimensions of the task are more ex­pansive. Any discussion of the quota-con­trol process may seem unduly involved and technical, but I think there is a public in­terest in the mechanics of quota control. There certainly are some misconceptions about where the quota-control function is centered.

Actually, the determination is made by the quota-control unit in the Visa Office of the Department of State, on the basis of reports received monthly from some 200 visa issuing offices throughout the world. These reports reflect the qualified demand for visas within each of the preference categories as well as within the nonpreference category. It is on the basis of these reports that the requested numbers are allocated, subject of course to the availability of sufficient numbers to meet the demand and subject to the statutory ceilings.

Heretofore, intending immigrants have competed for the limited supply of quota numbers within their respective national quotas. It made no difference to the fourth­preference Greek or Spanish registrants how many fourth-preference Italians were on the waiting list. They were not competitors prior to December 1, but they are today.

The competition for the 55,000 visa num­bers constituting the immigration pool for this fiscal year is now worldwide. These numbers will be allotted to qualified prefer­ence immigrants, without regard to country of birth, strictly in the order in which the approved petition was filed with the Attor­ney General and in the order in which the immigrants otherwise qualify for a visa, pro­vided they cannot promptly obtain an im­migrant visa under the national quota to which they would normally be chargeable.

In other words, the filing date of the peti­tion is not necessarily controlling. The con­sul does not request a visa number until the alien has qualified in all respects, and this depends to a large extent on how promptly he assembles the supporting documents and forwards them to the consul.

During the remaining 7 months of this fiscal _year, we wlll have sufficient numbers to meet all qualified demand in the first four preferences, and this being so, priority dates will not be too important. But they wil1 be important so far as concerns fifth preference, where we anticipate a qualified demand in excess of the available numbers. Some adjustments have had to be made in order to make numbers available for the sixth pref­erence (labor in short supply) and the seventh preference (refugees). Otherwise, the first five preferences might preempt all available nutnbers.

This will not happen after July 1, 1968, when the tnaximum authorization of 170,000 numbers could as a practical matter be fully utilized. But as for this :fiscal year, we are limited by the 55,000 numbers in the pool plus the numbers which will be made avail­able from the national quotas, and the latter allotments have normally not exceeded 100,000 in any one year. It is estimated that we may not exceed 150,000 visa numbers for this year, and yet the preference ceilings are geared to the higher figure of 170,000. This explains why we have had to be realistic and have reserved a portion of the numbers for the sixth and seventh preferences.

So far as concerns the U.S. consul" abroad, his duties certainly are not diminished by the passage of Public Law 89-236, although with the repeal of the Asia-Pacific triangle restriction, he is relieved of the task of detennining the ancestry of intending im­migrants in order to charge them to the

5862 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 proper Asian quota. The consul is assuming new duties in connection with the more restrictive labor safeguard which, with the possible exception of those provisions phasing out the national origins quotas, is the most significant aspect of the new law.

How much additional workload will de­volve upon the consul by reason of the pub­lished lists of skills and occupations in short supply or oversupply remains to be seen, but it could be very substantial. I! the alien's particular skill or occupation appears on the short-supply list as compiled by the Department of Labor, this will constitute the Secretary of Labor's certification and relieve the applicant of the necessity of securing an individual clearance. On the other hand, where Labor's short-supply list does not in­clude the applicant's profession or occupa­tion, or where the applicant does not clearly qualify in any profession or occupation on the short-supply list, the responsibility for further action will revert to the Department of Labor. In the circumstances, the consul will suggest that the applicant seek an indi­vidual clearance, or he may request an ad­visory opinion from the Department of Labor on the question of the alien's qualifications.

The Department of State will, of course, cooperate fully to minimize the number of individual clearances, but the consul's pri­mary responsib111ty is not changed by the new law, that is, to examine visa appli­cants in relation to grounds of ineligibiUty such as crimes involving moral turpitude, moral character, public charge, fraud, draft evasion, and security. Responsibility for the enforcement of the labor safeguard is en­trusted solely to the Secretary of Labor.

MEANING OF TERM "LABOR"

In the visa regulations which were pub­lished in the Federal Register of November 30, 1965 (22 CFR 42.91(a) (14)), we used the expreesion "gainful employment" in imple­menting section 212(a) (14) of the act, whereas the statute refers to "aliens seeking to enter the United States for the purpose of performing skilled or unskilled labor." Ob­viously, the executive branch cannot expand the meaning of the statutory language. The more general words "gainful employment" merely serve the purpose of indicating a broad interpretation of the term "labor." When we consider that members of the pro­fessions, as well as the arts and sciences, are made subject to the Secretary of Labor's certification under section 212(a) (14), it seems quite apparent that the legislative purpose was to give the term "labor" a rather broad meaning.

In an opinion rendered by the Attorney General on September 20, 1963, on the ques­tion of whether airplane pilots and flight engineers perform "labor" within the pur­view of section 212(a) (14) of the Immigra­tion and Nationality Act, it was observed that not every occupation involves "labor." I quote from that opinion: "No one would suggest that the work of a college professor, concert pianist, doctor, consulting engineer, or corporate officer, for example, could fairly be described as labor." Nonetheless, I think that the labor provisions of Public Law 89-236 override any such limited meaning of the term "labor" as expressed in the 1963 opinion of the Attorney General. Since the third-preference professionals, artists, and scientists are subject to the labor certifica­tion, we could hardly contend that the same individuals are not coming here to perform labor when they apply for a visa as a Western Hemisphere special immigrant or as a nonpl'eference immigrant.

LABOR SAFEGUARD PROVISION

The language of the new immigration law, if read literally, would subject every non­preference immigrant and every Western Hemisphere special immigrant to the Sec­retary of Labor's certification regardless of whether he or she would be employed in the

United States. We are indebted to Senator (EDWARD] KENNEDY Of Massachusetts for what I consider the most helpful legislative history of the entire debate on H.R. 2580. In his opening statement, he explained the new labor safeguard as follows:

"Mr. President, this provision was included in this bill to further protect our labor force during periods of high unemployment. But it was included with the intent that it be meaningful only where it has some meaning. Section 212(a) (14) of the act which is amended here relates only to those aliens who come here for the purpose of perform­ing skilled or unskilled labor. Hence one would not expect a nonpreference housewife to be forced to seek a specific case clearance from the Secretary."

Also the amended sec'tion 212(a) (14) ex­pressly subjects third- and sixth-preference immigrants to the Secretary of Labor's certi­fication. I have difficulty understanding why this was necessary.

The fact is that third- and sixth-prefer­ence petitions are approved by the Attorney General only after consultation with the Secretary of Labor. What is the purpose of this consultation if it is not to deterinine possible displacement of American workers and adverse effect on American wages and working conditions? Furthermore, a sixth­preference petition cannot be approved ex­cept for labor in short supply, and yet the regulations will require the prospective em­ployer (sixth preference) first to apply for the certification and then, if he obtains it, file a petition with the Immigration Service.

The only purpose thus served by the first step is to deterinine adverse effect, a fact which could be ascertained in the process of approving the petition. In third-preference cases, I understand that Labor's certification and the approval of the petition will be handled in a single action. In other words, the procedures are more involved for em­ployers who desire to import skilled or unskllled labor in short supply, and, as a consequence, the labor safeguard is rendered even more restrictive by administrative action.

I wish to make an observation as regards present thinking on the matter of prear­ranged employment in the cases of non­preference immigrants and Wes•tern Hemi­sphere special !minigrants. The newly pub­lished regulations clearly imply that a spe­cific offer of employment will be a pre­requisite to any certification under section 212(a) (14) with respect to these two classes of immigrants. It may be tha-t the Labor Department officials feel that this is a neces­sary condition to any favorable certification. I want to make it clear that the Depart­ment of State ha.s never imposed any such requirement on immigrants with respect to the public-charge provisions of the law. As a matter of fact, the third-preference profes­sional need no longer have prearranged em­ployment, and this was dOne for reasons which are explained in the section-by-sec­tion analysis which accompanied the admin­istration's bill, S. 500. I quote as follows:

"Under present l·aw, skilled specdalists may qualify for pre!erred status only when a petition requesting their services is filed by a U.S. employer. This requirement unduly restricts our ability to attract those whose services would substantially enhance our economy, cultural interests, and welfare. Many of these people have no way of con­tacting employers in the United States in order to obtain the required employment. Even if they knew whom to contact, few openings important enough to attract such highly skilled people are offered without personal in·terviews, and only a few very large enterprises or institutions have repre­sentatives abroad with hiring authority. Thus many such skilled specialists cannot obtain the employment presently required for first-preference status."

If the alien of high education, exceptional ability, or specialized experience had diffi­culty locating an employer, you oan imagine how much more difficult t.t will be for non­preference iminigran.ts and Western Hemi­sphere special immigrants.

Another fa.r-reaching change effected by the act of Ociober 3, 1965, is the elimination of the Asia-Pacific triangle. This restriCitive provision, designed to limit immigration from Asi·a, unquestionably created an un­wholesome atmosphere in our foreign rela­tions. Although the act retains the national quotas until June 30, 1968, and provides that the annual quota. of any quota area shall be the same quota which existed for that area on June 30, 1965, I believe that the abolition of the Asia-Pacific triangle implicitly terini­nates the Chinese pe·rsons quota which the Congress authorized in 1943 for the exclusive use of Chinese immigrants regardless of their country of birth.

The Chinese persons quota is part and parcel of the triangle philosophy, and its retention after December 1, 1965, would stand in contradiction to any assertion that the last vestige of racial discrimination had been stricken from our immigration laws. Fifty percent of this quota was mortgaged to the year 2028, and this represented a total of 2,664 numbers. These mortgaged numbers were canceled with the expiration of the Chinese persons quota on December 1, 1965. The quota of China, first estab­lished under the Immigration Act of 1924, will continue in effect until June 30, 1968. Consular officers will henceforth be relieved of the responsibility for deterinining the ancestry of visa applicants in order to charge them to the proper Asian quota, no simple task at best. PROBLEM OF THE "MALA FIDE" NONIMMIGRANT

As with all major legislation effecting basic reforms, the Iminigration Act of Oc­tober 3, 1965, presents a challenge to those charged with the responsibllity for its ad­ministration, but at the same time it poses no insurmountable problems. We anticipate that the new labor restriction will tempt some intending immigrants to misrepresent their skills, or lack of them, in order to by­pass the noncertiflcation lists as compiled by the Department of Labor. If this occurs, a serious question of visa eligibility will arise. One of the basic exclusion provisions of existing law bars aliens who w1llfully seek to procure a visa by fraud or misrepresen­tation of a material fact.

The criteria for determining materiality are well established, but the unresolved question is whether a Inisrepresentation made directly to an official of the Depart­ment of Labor in attempting to obtain a section 212(a) (14) certification will sup­port an adverse finding under section 212 (a) (19) of the Immigration and National­ity Act. This question will inevitably arise and will require serious consideration. Also we expect that the more stringent lStbor safeguard will cause certain intending !m­Inigrants to pretend to be temporary visitors and use the nonimmigrant visa as a means of entering the United States.

At a recent visa conference held in London one of the consuls asked me how the De­partment could successfully pursue a loose nonimmigrant policy and a tight immigrant policy at the same time. He had in ·mind, of course,' our current policy of waiving per­sonal appearance and issuing nonimmigrant visas by mail in about 70 percent of the cases and a policy of strictly enforcing the labor restriction in immigrant cases. We recognize that this will present a real problem.

In the past the mala fide nonimmigrant generally was one who sought to circumvent quota limitations by posing as a temporary visitor or possibly a student. In the future, I suspect, it will be the Secretary of Labor's certification which he wlll attempt to evade,

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL "RECORD- HOUSE 5863 now that the quota situation has been con­siderably eased. This wlll call for greater vigilance on the part of the consular officer, and where he has reason to doubt the good faith of the nonimmigrant applicant, the consul's discretion to waive personal appear­ance wlll not be exercised. In any event, the mala fide nonimmigrant will encounter the labor restriction in attempting to regu­larize his status in the United States, but this may not deter him.

WESTERN HEMISPHERE IMMIGRATION COMMISSION

As to the future, we look forward to the recommendations of the Select Commission on Western Hemisphere Immigration. There are incongruities in the law which deserve attention.

The Western Hemisphere has no preference system; it has no provision for refugees and wlll have no foreign state limitation if and when the 120,000 celllng takes effect on July 1, 1968. Moreover, the new labor restriction does not apply equally to the Western and Eastern Hemispheres. For example, brothers and sisters of U.S. citizens who happened to be born in the Eastern Hemisphere are ex­empt from the restriction, but their counter­parts in the Western Hemisphere are subject to it. This is likewise true of the adult sons and daughters (married or unmarried) of U.S. citizens. If born in the Eastern Hemi­sphere, they do not require a labor certifica­tion but do require it if born in the Western Hemisphere. Also, as regards immigration from the Western Hemisphere, no distinction is made in the law between the skilled and the unskilled; between the immigrant of ex­ceptional ability or specialized experience and the immigrant who lacks ablllty and ex­perience in any field of endeavor.

If family unity and needed skills are im­portant in relation to immigration from the Eastern Hemisphere, surely tb.ey are no less important in relation to immigration from the Western Hemisphere. Perhaps the more stringent labor safeguard will compensate in some degree for the lack of preferences in the Western Hemisphere because the immi­grant who is educated, skilled, or talented in some particular line of work will have a bet­ter chance of getting the labor certification. It is the unskilled worker in the main who will be found among the noncertlfied.

These are matters which the Commission will doubtless consider in formulating its recommendations. What is emerging, I sus­pect, is a single immigration system uni­formly applied to both hemispheres, a sys­tem which places all nations on equal foot­ing, and which distinguishes in the selection of our prospective citizens solely on a basis of individual merit and national interest.

THE IMMIGRATION ACT OF 1965 (Statement of James J. Hines, Oftlce Of the

Legal Adviser, Department of State, before a regional conference held in Detroit on February 28, 1966, and sponsored by the Michigan Cominittee on Immigration and the United Community Services of Metro­politan Detroit) I think it is fitting that we meet today in

the State of Michigan for a discussion of the Immigration Act of 1965. History will record the names of many distinguished legislators who formed the vanguard of a long and con­stant struggle to achieve a more equitable immigration law, but no name will deserve more acclaim than that of your able and thoughtful Senator HART. When he ad- · dressed the Senate on September 17, 1965, during the debate on H.R. 2580, he was not unmindful of the many friends of the im­migrant, outside of Congress, who had suc­cessfully welded public opinion 1n support of immigration reform, particularly the abolition of the national origins quota sys­tem which President Kennedy once desert bed

as a system· without basis in logic or reason. Senator HART said on that occasion:

"The heroes, Mr. President, of this long and historic struggle to achieve the abolition of the national origins system of selectivity, are properly tens of thousands of Americans. They have organized through community, religious, and fraternal groups to achieve the victory now being consummated in the Con­gress. It is these Americans, who in years past opened their homes, their communities, their businesses to welcome the refugee, the relative, and the homeless of the world. These citizens conducted community con­ferences and urged their national organiza­tions to press for immigration reform. To­day is their victory."

I feel sure that the Michigan Cominittee on Immigration was uppermost in Senator HART's thoughts when he spoke these gen­erous words.

During the past 2 weeks I have been think­ing seriously about an appropriate subject for discussion at this conference. There are many aspects of the new imlnigration law which I am sure you would find timely and interesting. However, a recent article pub­lished in a national magazine gave me an idea. It conveyed the impression that the adininistration's immigration blll, S. 500, which the President sent to Congress on January 13, 1965, was rejected by the Con­gress and that H.R. 2580 as passed by the House of Representatives represented a com­pletely new approach to immigration reform. I would like to take this occasion to examine each bill in a general way, to compare those provisions which were common to both bills and to point out the disparities. The follow­ing provisions were contained in the admin­istration's bill, S. 500, and in H.R. 2580 as passed by the House of Representatives:

1. Repeal of the national origins quota system;

2. Elimination of the Asia-Pacific triangle restriction;

3. Nonquota status for Jamaica and Trini­dad, thus providing equal treatment for na­tives of all independent countries in the Western Hemisphere.

4. Nonquota status for the parents of U.S. citizens (S. 500 stipulated no age limit for the citizen relative whereas H.R. 2580 fixed the age lilnit at 21 years);

5. Elimination of the requirement of pre­arranged employment for professionals and others of exceptional ability in the arts and sciences, i.e., those aliens who formerly comprised the first-pre:erence class;

6. Preference status for labor in short supply;

7. Discretionary authority granted con­sular officers to require departure bonds in visitor and student cases;

8. Discretionary authority granted the Attorney General to waive the inadmissibil­ity of certain aliens found excludable on medical grounds (S. 500 was more inclusive in this regard) ;

9. Discretionary ' authority granted the Secretary of State to reregister aliens on the waiting lists, and to regulate the time and manner of the payn1ent of visa fees;

10. Elimination of "epilepsy", and sub­stition of "mental retardation" for "feeble­mindedness" as grounds of exclusion;

11. Prohibition on issuance of quota visas to immediate relatives of U.S. citizens.

.12. Authority conferred on consular officers to retrieve visa nUinbers for allocation to other qualified immigrants;

13. Relief for refugees included in the per­manent law for the first time although the manner of giving relief to refugees differed considerably in each bill;

14. Absence of any numerical restriction on lmmigration from the Western Heini­sphere. (The 120,000 ceiling was added by the Senate and adopted in conference.)

The two b1lls were dissiinllar in the fol­lowing major respects:

1. H.R. 2580 did not include the adininls­tration's proposal to establish an advisory Iminigration Board consisting of Members of Congress and other members appointed by the President.

2. H.R. 2580 rearranged the order of the preference classes giving priority to family unity, added a sixth preference for labor in short supply and a seventh preference for refugees; it also modified the percentage lim­itations on allocation of visas within each preference class.

3. H .R. 2580 increased but retained a ceil­ing on immigration from colonial and other

· dependent areas. (S. 500 would have re­moved this cell1ng over a 5-year period.)

4. H.R. 2580 restricted adjustments of status in the United States by denying the benefits of section 245 to all natives of the Western Hemisphere.

5. H.R. 2580 strengthened the labor safe­guard.

I think it is fair to conclude from this comparative review of the major provisions of the two measures that except for two or three proposals which would have attained the same objectives by different means, the similarities outweighed the disparities.

The principal reform contained in the Immigration Act of October 3, 1965, con­cerned the national origins quota system. It wlll be phased out over the next 2¥2 years. In the meantime, the Department wm be allocating visa numbers from two sources, namely, the national quotas which continue in etrect until June 30, 1968, and the immi­gration pool which consists of the quota numbers unused during the previous fiscal year. The. numbers in the pool for this fiscal year total about 55,000, and they are being made available regardless of the allen's coun­try of birth, for visa issuance, Ior adjust­ments of status in the United States, and for the conditional entry of refugees. One of the principal differences between the quota reserve under S. 500, and the immigration pool under H.R. 2580 is that the numbers constituting the pool may be used only for preference immigrants whereas . the numbers in the quota reserve would ha:ve been avail­able to both preference and nonpreference immigrants. We had estimated that the iminigration pool for the fiscal year begin­ning July 1, 1966, would contain about 62,000 numbers, that is, the total quota numbers remaining unused at the end of this fiscal year.

It now appears that our estimate was too conservative. Nonpreference visa issuance in previous years accounted for 80 percent of all quota immigrant visas issued. This is not likely to be the case in the future. With 4 months of the fiscal year remaining it is safe to assUine that all of the 55,000 numbers in the immigration pool will be allocated and used but as concerns the available numbers under the national quotas (158,000 in the aggregate), it is quite apparent that the al­locations for this year, inclusive of visa is­suances and adjustments in the . United States, will be appreciably below last year's total of 102,892. The immigration pool for the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1966, may reach a total of 70,000 numbers, and next year's estimated qualified demand in the preference categories will fall far short of the 70,000 numbers. Consequently, a sizable por­tion of these numbers in the pool will not be used. This prospect lends some merit to Congressman CoNTE's bill which would give nonpreference immigrants access to the im­Inigration pool, but the unknown factor in any projection of nonpreference qualified demand is the labor certification. It cannot be stated with any certainty that all of the 70,000 nuznbers would be absorbed U non­preference applicants are given access to the immigration pool. We recognize that it is

5864 CONGRESSIONAL .RECORD-· HOUSE March ·15, -19£1'6 too early :to assess the real impact of the new labor restriction and that it -takes time to set the machinery in motion. However, 1! the trend of visa issuance as reflected in the statistics covering the first 2 months of operation under the new law continues, a significant change in the character of our immigration is forecast. A few examples will lllustrate what the initial impact of the strengthened labor safeguard has been:

Nonquota visa issuances

December January

1964 1965 1965 1966

---------MontreaL----------- 874 303 906 216 Toronto_------------ 875 187 836 120 Quebec _____ _; ________ 258 85 232 44 Vancouver ___________ 329 71 352 60

Quota visa issuances

December January

1964 1965 1965 1966

--------1------------London _________ ~---- 1}88 326 003 427 Paris_--------------- 182 65 170 29 Frankfurt ______ ------ 656 38 675 87 Hamburg ____________ 219 5 178 27 Dublin __ - ----------- 219 2 306 12 Rotterdam_--------- 196 54 162 66 Naples _______________ 360 2,446 249 1, 767 Palermo.------------ 136 564 129 965 Vienna.------------- 85 11 77 12 Warsaw __ ----------- 392 976 395 591 Hong Kong_------- -- 26 328 22 435 Manila. __ ----------- -------- 132 1 251 Athens.------------ - 52 341 48 353

An analysis of these figures shows that at those posts where we had a heavy preference backlog of relatives of U.S. citizens or per­manent-resident aliens, such as Naples, Palermo, Lisbon, Hong Kong, Manila, and Athens, visa issuance for the months of De­cember l965 and January 1966 has shown a substantial increase. These relatives, as you know, are not subject to the labor certifica­tion. On the other hand, a substantial de­crease in visa issuance has occurred at posts such as London, Paris, Vienna, Dublin, Frankfurt, Hamburg, and Rotterdam, where traditionally we have had no _ preference backlogs in the relative categories, and where visa issuance in the past has been heavily nonpreference. It is too early, in my opin­ion, to measure the full import of the above :figures which cover the first 2 months of operation under the new law.

With the exception of those provisions of Public Law 89-236 which will ultimately abolish the national origins quota system, it is generally agreed that the labor provision is the most significant aspect of th"e new law. We had no indication in the Department of State of any dissatisfaction with the labor safeguard which the committee reports ac­companying the McCarran-Walter Act of 1952 described as "adequate." The ·labor certifications under section 212(a) (14) had steadily increased in recent years. D~ring the period from June 3, 1957, when the first cer­tification issued, to May 22, 1964, the Secre­tary of Labor issued 60 nonagricultural cer­tifications against specifically named employ­ers and eight area certifications. Twenty­four of both types were issued during the first 5 months of 1964. Some of these cer­tifications resulted from an administrative arrangement between the Department of State and the Department of Labor whereby visa cases involving 25 or more workers destined to the same employer in this coun­try were reported to the Department of Labor for investigation. Effective July 1, 1963, we instituted a special procedlire with. respect to immigration from Mexico · because of a widespread practice of falsifying job offers. This procedure required prospective em-·

ployers of Mexican workers to submit their job offers to the U.S. Employment Service for approval prior to the issuance. of a visa. Un­der this program 6,740 certifications barring the entry of the immigrant were issued 'by the Secretary of Labor during the period from July 1, 1963, to August 1, 1964. They accounted in large measure for a 41-percent decline in immigration from Mexico during the fiscal year beginning July 1, 1963. It was for these reasons that we assumed the labor safeguard contained in the 1952 act was fulfilling its intended purpose.

What is the essential difference between the labor provision eriacted in 1952 and the more restrictive provision contained in Pub­lic Law 89-236? Prior to December 1, 1965, the responsibillty for taking the initiative to establish displacement of American workers or adverse effect on wages and working con­ditions devolved upon the Secretary of Labor. The labor restriction had no force in the absence of a certification and, as a matter of fact, the provisions of section 212(a) (14) were completely dormant for 4~ years after the McCarran-Walter Act came into force. The preamendment certifications of the Sec­retary of Labor had the effect of excluding any intending immigrant whom the consular officer found to be within the scope of the certification. Now under the amended pro­visions of section 212(a) (14) a labor certifica­tion has the effect of admitting the particular immigrant or immigrants for whom it is granted, and the burden of proving nondis-. placement of American workers and no ad­verse effect has been transferred to the Amer­ican employer. There are other important differences. The labor certifications under the former law were directed against specific employers in this country or against desig­nated geographical areas and were issued on a selective basis. They were, in other words, limited in scope as contrasted with the re­cently published schedule B (occupations in oversupply) which has a nationwide applica­tion. We appreciate the problem inherent in any listing of the schedule B occupations ori an area-by-area. basis, since this tends to invite evasion, but the language of section 212(a) (14) clearly contemplates a determina­tion (shortage of able, willing and qualified workers) with respect to "the place to which the alien is destined." Congressman FEIGHAN emphasized this point during the debate on H.R. 2580 when he said the following: "New labor controls are established to govern the admission of all immigrant worker classes. These new controls require the Secretary of Labor to make an affirmative finding on an individual case basis that, with respect to the job the immigrant worker is to fill in the locality to which he is destined, there is no

· able, willing, qualified and available Ameri­can worker to fill that job."

In conclusion, I can assure you that the administrative officials who ·share respon­sibility for enfor.cement of the immigration law have been remarkably flexible in their .construction and application of the new labor safeguard. Particularly commendable was action of the Secretary of Labor in giving a blanket certification for some 150 Polish immigrants who, short of possessing pass­ports, had qualified for visas in all respects when the new law came into force. Equally commendable was his ruling that Cuban parolees in the United States are. not subject to the labor certification when they apply for immigrant visas abroad. A blanket cer­tification has been granted for persons in the service of. religious de~ominatioils~ There is general agreement that the labor provision applies only 'to the head of the family and not to his spouse and children; also, that it does not apply to the self-em­ployed, or to those who will not be gainfully employed in this country. Doubtless there will be other rulings of a like nature. I think they reflect a disposition on the part of gov­ernment to be fair and reasonable as we

strive to carry out the will of Congress. The Secretary of State in the last 2 years made four appearances before the congressional committees in support of immigration re­form. Each time he accented three features of the former law which were advel'f)ely af­fecting our foreign relations; namely, the national origins quota system, the Asia­Pacific triangle restriction; and the· denial of equal status to immigrants born in two of our American Republics. These irritants were removed by the act of October 3, 1965, and this is one reason by, when we appraise that act in terms of all its provisions, the conclusion is inescapable that the immigra­tion law today is infinitely more equitable than at any time in our history.

FEDERAL IMPACT FUNDS SHOULD NOT BE REDUCED

Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Rhode Island [Mr. ST GERMAIN] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?

There was no objection. Mr. STGERMAIN. Mr. Speaker, in

1950, after its Education and Labor Com­mittees held hearings throughout the Nation, the Congress recognized its · re­sponsibility to communities where its activities imposed special burdens and enacted Public Laws 874 and 815. These now famous laws provide financial as­sistance for maintenance and operation and assistance to construct facilities needed because of Federal impact.

The rationale of this legislation is that while the Federal activities create addi­tional school enrollments, Federal prop­erties do not contribute property tax revenues. Thus, Public Laws 874 and 815 were designed for the Federal Gov.­ernment to accept the responsibility of the normal citizen in a community. ·

Since the passage of this legislation 16 years ago, the burden has increased as the cost of education and the num­ber of boys and girls has increased. Though the legislation was designed to be of a temporary nature, the burden im­posed on local communities has proved to be permanent; -thus, currently requir­ing legislation designed to adequately compensate for the progressive and last­ing nature of this burden.

Throughout its history, there has been and shall continue to be a progressive need for greater funds under this legis­lation. Since 1952, the second year o! its operation, entitlements under Pub­lic Law 874 have increased from $45 mil­lion to $283 million in 1964, an annual increase of 16% percent. Yet, each year we are confronted with proposals to reduce the amount of funds and are faced with the same problem: an in­adequate law to take care of a. highly significant .and progressively greater problem. . _

To recapitulate, we, the. Federal Gov­ernment, after acknowledging the exist­ence of the problem, enacted legislation to meet the . immediate problem without realizing its continuing and progressive nature and, consequentlY., we raced .the problem each year without taking steps

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE '5865 to alleviate 1n any way the problems of the future. -

In November of 1964 the Stanford Re­search Institute conducted a thorough study of the ·Federal assistance program to federa1ly impacted areas in accord­ance with the President's request. I would like at this time to highlight the findings revealed in its report to the Commissioner of Education in June of 1965.

The study revealed that: (a) the :financial burdens created by the

establishment of a Federal project are not restricted to the project's initial impact, but are continuing burdens; and (b) t:hat finan­cial burdens created by Federal activities vary from district to district.

It further noted in Public Law 874 that school districts that just meet the 3-per­cent requirement--that is, 3 percent of the school enrollment consists of chil­dren whose parents work · and/or live at Federal installation~get paid for all the federally connected children in their dis­tricts while those who just fail to meet the requirements get no Federal pay­ments.

With the aforementioned in mind, I propose that this House take into con­sideration the importance as well as the need for refining the present legislation.

I advocate at this time, even as vocifer­ous voices have been raised to reduce payments, that we express our opposition to such reductions and consider the fol-

_lowing revisions: First, that the require­ment of 3 percent of the entire enroll­ment consist of children whose parents live and/or work at Federal installations be lowered to 1 percent so as to meet the burden by those communities that are presently not able to receive compensa .. tion for the burden thrust upon them by Federal activities, and, second, that the criteria for payments be based on the per student cost of education in that par­ticular district, thus allowing for the dis­parity between districts and meeting the burden imposed on that particular dis­trict. Also on this basis the districts that spend more per student--and it is interesting to note that the study by the late Dr. Paul Mort of Columbia Uni­versity which served as a basis for the present Rhode Island State aid struc­ture revealed a strong correlation be­tween moneys spent and quality of edu­cation-will receive more, thus encour­aging greater local spending and· the fostering of qualitY-education.

By making payments in this manner, the Federal Government is paying for the education received by the children of its employees and it will free State funds for education to be used where most needed. This also will remove pay­ment inequities to local districts because of various plans of State aid to educa­tion, always inherent in past payments where State aid affected the expenditure listed as "local contribution rates."

Gentlemen, I am frankly disturbed to see so much money expended by this Government to help other nations and to provide a diversity and multitude of nice programs for our own folks and yet, in a matter as crucial as education and one in which a heavy burden is placed upon local school districts by the impact

of Federal -activities, we speak of a re­duction of funds and fail to provide ade­quate legislation to meet the demands made upon local school districts because of the lasting impact of Federal acti vi­ties.

In my own State of Rhode Island the proposed reductions would amount to a 50-percent cut from $3,051,729 to $1,546,501. If approved, the proposed changes would eliminate all payments 'to nine Rhode Island communities; com- , munities that have been burdened, and

. will continue to be burdened by the 1m­

. pact of Federal activities--an impact, gentlemen, that studies have revealed to be of a lasting and not temporary nature.

Therefore. a reduction of funds to meet this burden simply is not justified. If anything, the funds should be progres­sively increased as they have in the past to meet the rising cost of education and the expansion of our school population.

PERMANENT MILK PROGRAM Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent · that the gentle­woman from Hawaii [Mrs. MINK] may extend her remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Dlinois?

There was no objection. Mrs. MINK. Mr. Speaker, I have to­

day introduced a bill which will provide for the establishment of a permanent milk program for all children in our pri­mary and secondary schools as part of the school lunch program.

This year, quite unexpectedly and al­most unbelievably, the administration has recommended that the special milk program begun in 1954 be phased out and that milk only be provided for those who will be tagged as needy.

While it is true that this program got its begi_nning to help promote the con­sumption of our surplus milk, once it became part of the school program throughout the Nation, it was quickly recognized as a great step in the overall improvement of the health of our children.

I believe that our administration is wrong in asking that this program be cut back to needy children only, for now not only the unfortunate poor benefit

' from the consumption of milk, but all children enjoy the same relative benefit.

I am also so convinced of the great value of this program as a health meas­ure that I do not believe it ought to be tied to the presence or absence of dairy surpluses, but ought to stand on its own as a program which deserves our support. We have seen it grow in importance, in acceptance, and in the consumption of increasing amounts of milk, since its in­ception in 1954. It is a tested and proven program, and ought not be sacri­ficed for any reason.

This $103 million program was cur­tailed this current year to $100 million administr;:ttively. In next year's budget proposal, it is reduced to the paltry sum of $21 million for the entire country as·

- a program only for the needy children.

Mr. Speaker, this program has been ­so successful that in fiscal 1965 between 24 and 26 million students participated in approximately 93,000 schools across the country. The consumption of half pints of milk is recorded as over 3 bil­lion. And the cost to the Federal Gov­ernment was .only a little over $100 mil­lion. I believe it is false economy to remove this Federal support and jeopar­dize the continuation of this worthwhile program by letting the child decide whether he personally wants to drink milk at 8 cents cost to him, or pocket the money for an after school bottle of car­bonated watet. It must be apparent to all who have had children what the

· choice will likely be. It is obviously not a case of affluence dictating wisdom in the child. · · I am in total agreement that the pro­gram ought to pay greater attention to the needy children, and that the support ought to be increased to make possible special programs tor these unfortunate youngsters, such as the serving of hot milk for breakfast, or milk with cereal, and the like. But because this special program is gaining emphasis, it ought not to justify the discontinuance of the program to all children. I plead that this Nation is mighty enough to do both.

Hawaii's schoolchildren have utilized this special milk program in fiscal 1965 by consuming 5,310,000 half pints of milk.

I urge my colleagues to help save this program by enacting it as a permanent part of our regular school lunch pro­gram.

The bill that I have placed before the House today will provide for an expanded program to cover the special needs of the poor children in addition to the benefits to all our youngsters, and will extend coverage to American Samoa, Guam, the Virgin Islands, the trust territories, and Puerto Rico.

Mr. Speaker, I include the bill in its entirety at this point in the RECORD for the reference of the Members of this House:

H.R. 13630 A bill to provide a permanent milk program

for children Be it enacted by the Senate and House of

Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the "Children's Milk Act of 1966",

LEGISLATIVE FINDING

SEC. 2. The Congress finds that the in­creased consumption of :fluid milk by a maxi:­mum numb'er of American children is in the public interest in order to promote public health and nutrition.

SEC. 3 . The Act of July 1, 1958, as amended (72 Stat. 276, 74 Stat. 84, 75 Stat. 147, 75 Stat. 319), is hereby repealed.

SEc. 4. The Secretary of Agriculture shall, under such rules and regulations as he may deem in the public interest, encourage the consumption of :fluid milk by children in the United States in (1) nonprofit schools of high school grade and under, (2) nonprofit nursery schools, child-care centers, settle­ment houses, summer camps, and similar nonprofit institutions devoted to the care and training of children, and ( 3) in programs for children or youths conducted, under the Economic Opportunity Act of 1964, by non­profit associations or institutions. For the purposes of this Act "United States" means

5866 CONGRESSIONA~ RECORD- HOUSE March 1.5, 1966

the fifty States and the District of Colmnb.la, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Guam, American Samoa, the Virgin Islands, and the Trust Territory of the Pacific Islands. ·

SEc. 5. All sums appropriated under this Act, less such amounts as the Secretary s)lall. determine to be reasonable and necessary for his administrative costs and reserves and less $21,000,000 in each fiscal year for allocation under the next sentence, shall be allocated at the earliest possible date for the use of nonprofit schools, other nonprofit institu­tions, and nonprofit associations desiring to participate in the program and shall be used to reimburse such nonprofit schools, other nonprofit institutions, and nonprofit asso­ciations for fiuid milk served to children. The sums reserved under the preceding sen­tence for allotment here'.lnder shall be al­lotted by the Secretary to nonprofit schools, other nonprofit institutions, and other non­profit associations, on such basis as he deems most equitable, to be used to make reim­bursement for milk served to needy children. Any such allocation, or portion thereof, which the Secretary shall determine will not be fully utilized by any such nonprofit school, other nonprofit institution, or nonprofit as­sociation as then allocated, shall be reallo­cated by the SecrE?tary so as to accomplish maximum use of such funds.

SEc. 6. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated to carry out the purposes of this Act for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1966, not to exceed $176,000,000; for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1967, not to exceed $181,000,000; for the fiscal year ending June so, 1968, not to exceed $186,000,000; and for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1969, and each succeeding fiscal year thereafter, not to ex­ceed $191,000,000.

CIVIL RIGHTS PROTECTION ACT OF 1966

Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentle­woman from Hawaii [Mrs. MINK] may extend her remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tilinois? -

There was no objection. Mrs. MINK. Mr. Speaker, I introduced

on March 10 the bill proposed by the President in his state of the Union mes­sage calling for broad reforms in jury selection and in the overall administra­tion of justice. In his message, President Johnson urged Congress to "establish unavoidable requirements for nondis­criminatory jury selection in Federal and State courts, and to give the Attorney General the power necessary to enforce those requirements."

I am in total agreement with this rec­ommendation and with the bill, S. 2923, The Civil Rights Protection Act of 1966, submitted in the Senate on February 10, 1966. However, since the Senate bill failed to recognize that there are still States in this country which bar women from jury duty and States which exempt women from such duty merely because they are women, I hav~ submitted this bill with amendments to assure the women of this Nation equal responsibil­ity in the execution and administration of justice through the jury system.

My bill, Mr. Speaker, is submitted in the hope that it will lead to uniformity throughout America of the procedures to be followed in the selection of juries.

Trial by jury is basic to the American way of life, and I believe that we seri­ously undermine our principle when we continue to allow individual States the right to exclude women from jury duty. It is shocking to reflect that women have been eligible to serve on all Federal juries only since 1957, and my bill is designed to extend the privilege and responsibility of such service -to women in all of the States.

I urge my colleagues to demonstrate their support of total nondiscriminatory selection of juries by supporting this leg­islation.

OFFICIAL RESIDENCE FOR THE VICE PRESIDENT

Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. SICKLES] may ex­tend his remarks at tbis point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is th~re objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?

There was no objection. Mr. SICKLES. Mr. Speaker, ·since

World War II, the Vice Presidents of the United States have been called upon more and more to perform duties of the. highest importance. The duties and re­sponsibilities of our present Vice Presi­dent, for example, provide excellent proof of the expanded role of the office of the Vice President.

No longer does the Vice President merely preside over Senate debates. He now chairs the National Aeronautics and Space Council, the Peace Corps Ad­visory Council, the Special Cabinet Task Force Travel U.S.A., and the Cabinet Task Force on Youth Opportunity.

The Vice President is also honorary Chairman of the National Advisory Council to the Office of Economic Op­portunity; he is a member of the Nation­al Security Council and the Board of Regents of the Smithsonian Institution, and at the request of the President he helps coordinate and implement the Federal Government's responsibility in the areas of civil rights and property.

In addition, the Vice President is of­ten given highly important diplomatic assignments as was the case of President Johnson when he was Vice President, and as exemplified by recent assign­ments of Mr. HUMPHREY.

His · increased stature presents new problems. Personal security, for exam­ple, becomes a greater necessity. The lack of an official residence designed for the office places the Vice President in the awkward position of selecting his own home on factors such as his income rather than what is in the best interest of the office and the country.

It is my strong feeling, therefore, that legislation to provide an official resi­dence for the Vice President is long overdue. As our society becomes more complex and as our domestic and inter­national problems multiply, the respon­sibilities of this office will in all proba­bility increase rather than decrease. As a matter of fact, the Vice President now perfor~ so many official functions that reduce the President's burdens that

it is unfair to expect the Vice President to defray the costs of these .. additional functions.

It is, therefore, my very strong hope that the House will vote overwhelmingly in favor of this measure to provide an official residence for the Vice President of the United States.

H.R. 13480, AMENDING THE NA­TIONAL DEFENSE EDUCATION ACT TO INCLUDE HEALTH INSTRUC­TION AND PHYSICAL EDUCATION Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from Florida [Mr. PEPPER] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tilinois?

There was no objection. Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, Ameri~

cans today are living in an age of para­dox: The paradox of advancing to land a man on the moon and yet being stymied by the sudden New ·York blackout. The paradox of being a nation on wheels and yet being short-changed of parking places. And the paradox of creating new technology and now being physically de­stroyed by it. For the technology which originally grew out of our energy and skill now deprives us of the. activity nec­essary for healthy physical development . .

We )lave become inert with our mod­ern conveniences and have grown stale with our abundance of le.isure time. Con­sequently, we have more time for walk­ing and keeping in good physical condi­tion, but all too often use the time for sitting and performing only as a spec..; tator. This led President Kennedy to refer to us as "soft Americans." · This is why I proposed on March 10, H.R. 13480, to eradicate this reference by amending titles m and XI of the National Defense Education Act to in­clude health instruction and physical education. It is unpleasantly fa­miliar, yet necessary, to reiterate the findings we have heard before. Americans are not as physically fit as they were a generation ago, or as fit as the people of other lands today. One­third of all American young men are judged to be unfit for military services for health reasons. The life expectancy of the American male has not increased significantly in the last decade. Men of at least 26 nations can look forward to longer life expectancy at age 45 than can American males. And in at least 11 countries, the women age 45 have more remaining years than American women.

The statistics prove similar in regard to American youth. As recently as last year, tests were given to measure physi­cal :fitness of pupils in one-half of the Nation's schools. Of those tested, about one-third failed to achieve the desired level of performance. It is shocking also to learn that one-third to one-half of American children are overweight. Since the bad habits connected with obesity begin early in life, it is imperative to start health 'instruction and physical educa­tion at a young age,

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5867

This can be best accomplished by amending title m of the National De­fense Education Act to include health in­struction and physical education in the list of critical subjects to be taught in our Nation's schools. However, I feel that we must be explicit in assigning the area of athletic equipment to be pur­chased with Federal funds in order to avoid extraneous supplies or . uniforms, and so forth.

Legislation has been justly enacted to encourage the excellence of academic and vocational eduaction in America's schools. The President's Council on Physical Fitness ha~ attempted to sup­ply the gap made in the realm of physical education, but this is an area which re­quires congressional support so that it may reach out to every American school system.

According to "A Report to the Presi­dent" on 4 years of fitness from 1961 to 1965, 14 States did not even have a full­time person in their State education agency to provide leadership in health' and physical education. Also, a shortage of health and physical education spe­cialists was particularly noted in the ele­mentary schools, and many of the physi­cal education teachers were inadequate­ly trained. I believe that many of these weaknesses could be eliminated by amending title XI of the National De­fense Education Act to provide regular sessions or short-term instruction for those now teaching or planning to teach school health and physical education.

President Johnson has so aptly said: The fitness of our Nation for the tasks of

our time can never be greater 'than the gen­eral fitness of our citizens. A people proud of their collective heritage will take pride in their individual health.

I join with President Johnson in his observations and state that we can only endure the tasks of our time if we im­prove health instruction and physical ed­ucation. We will progress little if we make a visit to another planet before solving our earthly problem of why 1% million Americans miss work on an av­erage day because of illness.

THE FLOWERING OF AMERICAN DEMOCRACY-GREEK BRANCHES AND JEWISH ROOTS Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from Florida [Mr. PEPPER] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?

There was no objection. Mr. PEPPER. Mr. Speaker, on Febru­

ary 28, at the midwinter convocation at the Temple Emanu-El in Miami Beach, I had the honor to hear an outstanding address by Prof. Bernard Mandelbaum.

Dr. Mandelbaum is the provost at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America, in New York City. Dr. Mandelbaum's address was entitled "The Flowering of American Democracy-Greek Branches and JeWish Roots."

Mr. Speaker, under permission granted, I place this wonderful lecture at this point in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: THE FLoWERING OF AMERICAN DEMOCRAC:Y­

GREEK BRANCHES AND JEWISH RoOTS

(By Dr. Bernard Mandelbaum) Mrs. Kennedy, Chancellor Finkelstein,

Vice Chancellor Arzt, Dr. Lehrman, Mr. Samuel Friedland, Mrs. Friedland, colleagues, honored guests, ladies and gentlemen, the simplest of everyday experiences convey the profoundest of insights. For example, the framework of this lecture is illustrated by a young boy who came into a store, and hurried to the phone booth. In his haste he left the door open and the store owner overheard the following: · "Is that job you advertised a week ago still open? Oh, it is filled. Well, are you satisfied with the boy's work? Oh, you are. Well, thank you." When he exited from the booth, the owner said, "I could not help overhear your conversation, and young man, with your det_ermination, you don't have ·to worry; you will get a job." The boy answered, "Oh, I have sir; as a matter fact I have that job." Then "Why did you call?" "Well," said the lad, "I was just checking up on myself."

In the same way, my remarks this after­noon seek to check on ourselves, as Ameri­cans, as free men, seeking a world of peace and plenty, for all mankind.

We turn the pages of history to find, some guidance and strength. There is a funda­mental issue that underlies todays tensions between nations and the problems within our own American borders: What hope is there that freedom-the way of life identified with America and the West-will win the hearts and minds of men?

The record of history is not always en­couraging. Consider the time and place de­scribed in the following:

"Our Constitution favors the many instead of the few; this is why it is called a democ­racy. If we look to the laws, they afford equal justice to all in · their private differ­ences; if to social standing, advancement in public life falls to reputation for capacity. If we turn to our military policy, there also we differ from our antagonists • • • never to exclude foreigners from any opportunity, although the eyes of an enemy may occa­sionally profit by our lib~rality. Instead of looking on discussion as a stumbling block in the way of action, we think it an indis­pensable preliminary to wise action." 1

Is this the United States of America..-in our time-at any time? The words are those of the Athenian statesman, Pericles, who lived 2,300 years a.go. It is his description of the glory that was Athenian Greece. The briefest reflection on the tyranny · and tur­moil, the inhumanity and strife, that fill the pages of world history since that time must give us great pause. If there was such a vis­ion-if not the reality-of man and society so long ago, why has there been no greater progress toward its fulfillment? If Greek thought and life, the powerful world influ­ence in its time, could not advance the dem­ocratic society, why assume that we, in our time, will do any better for ourselves and for generations to come? Is there any difference between the state described by Pericles and the American ideal that can give us reason to hope that what the free society seeks for itself today has some promise of realization?

Thucydides' history .Qf Greece, and Greek philosophy generally, reveal the powerful currents of thought that shaped ancient Athens. In Pericles' day there was a cold war between the sea power, Athens, and the land power, Sparta. Between these compet­ing empires was the little island of Melos,

1"The History of the Peloponnesian War," Thucydides. -

which wished to preserve its neutrality in the struggle. The democratic progressive Athens answered the appeals of Melos in these words:

"Right, as the world goes, is only in ques­tion between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must." 2

Athens attacked Melos. The description of what Athens did to Melos may have shocked past generations. However, we in our time have but to recall the Nazi fiends' massacre of men, women, and children in the little city af Lidice, and we have apcient Melos before our eyes.

This brutality of the Athenians was possi­ble because of seeds of thought deeply im­bedded in Greek soil. The noble sentiments of a Pericles could not raise the behavior of the Athenian s.tate above a morality that was nourished by a concept of man and society that had the seeds of its own destruction.

Indeed the facade of democratic political structures as described by Pericles could not be improved upon. Democratic institutions adorned Athenian society. However, just as a building's strength, security, and longevity depend upon its unseen foundations rather than its visible superstructure, so the permanence and influence of the structure of a society ultimately depends upon its deep­rooted commitments. The ideas and prin­ciples on which it is founded-rather than its external forms. · ,

Greek life, at its best, was elevated by the philosophy of a Plato and an Aristotle. Their use of reason to probe the meaning of truth, justice, the good society, yielded a literature and a method of inquiry that helped shape the Western World. However, they built their structures on foundations of sand. · For at the base· of what they taught was a view of man and God and freedom that doomed all that rose above it.

Consider this view of man. According to Plato: "Some are by nature free and others slaves," "xnan is a troublesome animal • • • a troublesome piece of goods." According to Aristotle: "Man is by nature, and in all ways superior to woman." (I just saw half the audience jump.)

Consider this view of God (for the Greeks, the power in the world greater than man), according to Solon, "The power above is full of jealously and fond of troubling our lot."

Consider this view of justice, as reported by Thucydides and Thrasymachus: "It is nothing else than the interest of the stronger."

I submit then that the cause of the failure of the Periclean ideal of Greek democracy to forge a permanent, new pattern in society may be discovered in a maxim of the rabbis in the "Ethics of the Fathers." 8 Greek democracy was like a "tree whose branches are many, but whose roots are new; the wind comes and plucks it up and overturns it upon its face." The winds of temptation-empire building; accumulating power, self-seeking­are strong in human history. To resist them a nation requires more than the branches, the exterior of democratic forms; to resist them a nation must be deeply rooted in a be­lief in man, in God, and in the promise of society.

The contention of this analysis is that American democracy is unique in human his­tory. It is like a tree whose branches---whose external image--are not always the best or the most numerous, but whose roots are many and deep.

For basic to the ideology of this New World democracy is- an Old World view of man and his universe that has biblical roots and that is planted in the rich soil of faith ih God and hope for man. "We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal."

2 Ibid. a Ch. 3: 22.

5868 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE March 15, 1966 One hundred and eighty-nine years, since

1776, is a. brief paragraph in the 5,000 years of recorded history, yet the history of Amer­ica, with all its difficulties, frustrations, and disappointments, is unique in its achieve­ment, and even more in its promise. The democratic purpose of this country is an imaginative, external structure with a solid foundation, a vision for ·the future derived from the wisdom of an ancient Hebraic heri­tage, a program for mankind as whole with a. profound respect and endless concern for each man, woman, and child. The Ameri­can ideal that can endure and serve as a basis for the good society, is not articulated neces­sarily in the details of our particular form of government but in the ideas and beliefs on which this country is founded.4

Foundations, too, are made up of several levels, from that which is hid!ien under­ground to the part just visible above the surface. On the surface of the American foundation is a concept of human society involving two seemingly paradoxical ele­ments-diversity and unity. Maturing be­yond the late 19th and early 20th century ideal of this land as a melting pot that dis­solves differences of culture and background, we now view the pluralism of our society as one of its most remarkable characteristics. Actually, it is a wholesome acceptance of a feature of America. from colonial times, of Quakers, Anglicans, Puritans, Jews, Negro, and white. Samuel Eliot Morison records:

"There were already enough Irish in New York in 1764 to celebrate St. Patrick's Day, enough Jews to maintain a synagogue, enough Scots to support a Presbyterian church, enough Germans to maintain four services in their language." G

In 1840, Alexis de Tocquevllle, a student of American democracy observed:

"The sects that exist in the United States are innumerable. They all differ in respect to worship which is due to the Creator; but all agree in respect to the duties which are due from man to man." 8

The subsequent history of immigration to these shores enriched the diversity of popu­lation. As Louis Adamic reported in 1938:

"Within its population of slightly less than 130 milllon, the United States has today over so million citizens--the overwhelming majority of them young citizens--who are the American-born children of immigrant parents of various nationalities: German, Italian, Polish, Czech, Slovak, Servian, Croatian, Slovenian, Bulgarian, Jewish Rus­sian, Carpa.tho-Russian, Ukrainian, Lithu­anian, Finnish, Hungarian, Norwegian, Swed­ish, Danish, Dutch, French, Flemish, Spanish, Portuguese, Rumanian, Armenian, Syrian, Lett, Albanian, Greek, Turkish, and of course, English, Scotch, and Irish." 'I

Morison again points to the amazing para­dox, and most promising feature of American history: that this diversity was paralleled by a growing unity. Colonial America. of 1763 consisted of 13 separate British colonies, with

4 "In Democracy In America," Alexis de Tocqueville writes: "I am very far from thinking that we ought to follow the ex­ample of the American democracy and copy the means that It has employed to attain this end. But I am of the opinion that if we do not succeed in gradually introducing democratic institutions into France, if we despair of imparting to all the citizens those ideas and sentiments which first prepare them for freedom and afterwards allow them to enjoy lt, there will be no independence at all, either for the middle classes or for the noblllty, for the poor or for the rich, but an equal tyranny over all."

5 The OXford History of the American Peo­ple," samuel Eliot Morison.

6 For source, see note 4 above. 'I "My America," Louis Adamic.

tensions between Delaware and Maryland, Georgia and South Carolina, with immi­gration from New England and the middle colonies to the southern colonies. The De­claration of Independence of these colonies in 1776 was the first major step, but only the first, in the uniting of States. The ex­panding frontier reached out, uniting a nlJ.­tion beyond the Missouri River and finally beyond the Rocky Mountain, to the west coast.s Economically and politically there was a hard fought but steady forging of the United States of America--one land, one na­tion, but with a many faceted, multicolored diversity.

In fact, then, the history of this country is a microcosm of human society; one world, with diverse nationalities, cultures and re­ligions. This view of the diversity within the unity of society traces back to a concept of· creation. The rabbis teach in the trac­tate of Sanhedrin:

"For this reason was man created alone * * * to proclaim the greatness of the Holy One, blessed be He. For if a man strikes many coins from one mould, they all resemble one another, but the supreme King of Kings, the Holy One, blessed be He, fashioned every man in the stamp of the first man, and yet not one of them resembles his fellowman." o

Men have a common dignity; they are fashioned in the same mould. Yet each man has his precious individuality. Such unity and diversity is true of everything from blades of grass to the nations of the world. Diversity, a basic feature of the world, expresses itself in the pluralism of American life. Living with it, appreciating it, building with It is not only the unique strength of this land, but also the source of its ultimate influence on world civilization.

Diversity within unity, or pluralism, is the visible part of the foundation of American society and derives strength from its roots in a concept of creation. It is supported by a deeper layer of truth-a concept of man and his possibilities. What is commonly labeled as "American optimism," and some­times caricatured as the "get-up-and-go" mentality, has its source in a profounder reality of the American mind. The earliest 17th century Pilgrims, the 18th century pioneers of the West, the most recent immi­gran~ to these shores, have all been moti­vated by the conviction of the biblical view of man and life: "I have set before thee life and death, the blessing and the curse: therefore choose life, that thou mayest live, thou and thy seed." 10

The United States of America have been synonymous with "choose life,'' new life, a. new beginning-materially, intellectually, spiritually. The biblical view of man that is spelled out by the rabbis in classical Judaism in the details of life and law also permeates the American ethos. In an unpublished manuscript of a revised study of the Phari­sees by Dr. Finkelstein, the following sum­mary of rabbinic thought expresses the na­ture of man as viewed in this land:

"The purposes of creation is the emergence of man as creator. It stresses man's initia­tive, rather than his obedience. Unlike the physical universe, the moral one is subject not only to discovery but also to creation. Judgment and discrimination, vital to effec­tive and creative decisionmaking, are avail­able in large measure to all." u

"Judgment and discrimination, vital to effective and creative decisionmaking, are available in large measure to all • • *" this has been the underlying faith in our com-

·B See note 5. eMishnah Sanh~drin, ch. IV. 1oDeuteronomy 30: 19. u Unpublished paper on the Pharisees,

Louis Finkelstein.

mitment to the power of man to grow and improve his own values and behavior, to every man's role in shaping the destiny of our Nation.

In life, significant change is never quick or easy. Thus it was that only 89 years after the founding of thts Nation did equal rights become the law of the land, and it took a Civil War to do it. It is taking a hundred years and more to make the law into a reality of life. However, there is movement for­ward because the underlying faith in equal rights of all men-regardless of creed or color-is at the very foundation of the struc­ture of American democracy. In Biblical and Rabbinic Judaism there was continuous de­velopment of laws to weaken and ultimately eliminate the· practices of slavery which were common at that time. Yet in the 700 years of ancient Greek hegemony (from the fifth century B.C.E. to the fourth century C.E.; including the Roman culture, which was basically Hellenistic) there was no elimina­tion of slavery because Greek thought ac­cepted it as a fact of nature; the rights of women were seriously limited because women were viewed as basically inferior; exploitation of people in another part of the world or in one's own society was possible because there was no reverence for the sanctity of life.

Another attempt at a. brief summation of systems of thought, patterns of culture, and trends in history suffers from oversimplifi­cation. Many of the finest aspects of Ameri­can culture-art, letters, science-derive di­rectly from Greek influence on the Western mind. American thought and life, with their biblical roots have been darkened at times by provincialism and superstition. However, in terms of underlying commitments and what a contemporary rabbinic scholar, Prof. Max Kadushin, calls emphatic trends, the principal roots of American society are nour­ished by ideas that account for the unique­ness of American history and give promise of its moral influence in the future~

In summary, therefore, the growth and development of the United States, the rise and fall of Greek society, and history gen­erally, instructs us in a fundamental truth. The posture and purpose of a nation are determined by the power of ideas that are continually active; in the words of Emerson, "even when men are sleeping." When slavery, the rule of force, or materialism are the foundation of a society its destiny is ultimate collapse. When the rights of all men, justice and the sanctity of life are the foundation of a. society its destiny is as permanent as the world created l?Y God.

There is a delightful story in Jewish folk­lore which illustrates this hidden power of an idea and shapes the world. The rabbis tell us that the righteous will be rewarded in the world to come with the opportunity to study continuously with the Almighty. (Indeed, it may explain why some people aren't working too hard to get there.)

In this world, too, then, the study of God's word, the Torah, is a primary value. All of Jewish religious life, the legend tells us, is dependent on the example of a famous "masmich" in Poland, a saint, who studies continuously 20 and 22 hours a day. How so? Well, the "masmich" studies 22 hours a day. The rabbi sees the "masmich" studying 22 hours and says to himself: "Well, if he studies 22 hours daily, then I must study at least 11 hours a day." The cantor sees this and says, "Well, the rabbi studies 11 hours a day, then I must study at least 5 hours." The principal of the school sees this and he says: "Then I must study 2 hours a day." The president of the synagogue in Poland, sees this and he says: "I must study at least 1 hour a. day • • *" and the legend con­cludes, "you know the Jews in Paris who attend the synagogue only three times a.

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5869 year-it is only because of the influence of the 'masmich' in Poland."

The power of ideas permeate the world almost as if they flow in the hidden recesses of the earth and the unseen currents of the atmosphere.

Indeed the hope that all men-the world over--can enjoy life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is strengthened by the ideas, the spiritual roots of American civ111zation which give it nourishment. America has the re­sources to sustain itself, to survive the winds of adversity, and to lead. It must be a lead­ership of example, understanding, and com­passion. This kind of leadership is itself one of the outgrowths of the ideas which have shaped America. The importance of this leadership for the future of man was antici­pated with rare prescience by Alexis de Tocqueville in 1840 when he wrote:

"The question here discussed is interesting not only to the United States, but to the whole world; it concerns, not a nation only, but all mankind. I am aware that there are many worthy persons at the present time who are so tired of liberty as to be glad to repose far from its storms. They judge of absolute power of the despotism of one man by what it has been and ~ot by what it might become in our time." 12

This warning of the dangers of despotism was written in the 1840's, before the world knew of a Hitler, a Stalin, a Mao, and their modern societies built on those ideas of an­cient Greece which were primitive-slavery, the rule of force and materialism.

The alternative-the hope of mankind­is the dream of America which is built on the Biblical and Rabbinic ideas of human equality, justice, and peace. In our day, this dream of America was projected as a goal of the 1960's. But in mysterious ways known only to God, the words with which I con­clude have become a clasl;iic expression of the dream of all mankind.

"The same revolutionary beliefs for which our forebears fought are still at issue around the globe-the beliefs that the rights of man come not from the generosity of the state, but from the hand of God.

"We dare not forget today that we are the heirs of that first revolution. Let the word go forth from ·this time and place, to friend and foe alike, that the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans-born in this century, tempered by war, disciplined by a hard and bitter peace, proud of our an­cient heritage-and unwilling to witness or permit the slow undoing of those human rights to which this Nation has always been committed, and to which we are committed today at home, and around the world.

"Whether you are citizens of America or citizens of the world, ask of us the same high standards of strength and sacrifice which we ask of you. With a good conscience our only sure reward, with history the final judge of our deeds, let us go forth to lead the land we love, asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own." 13

MEDICAL CARE FOR RETIRED MILITARY PERSONNEL AND THEIR DEPENDENTS Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from California [Mr. TuNNEY] may ex­tend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from lllinois?

There was no objection.

12 "Democracy in America." 18 Inaugural address, Jan. ·20, 1961, John

Fitzgerald Kennedy.

Mr. TUNNEY. Mr. Speaker, I am in­troducing legislation today which I hope will solve the .Problem of insufficient medical care for retired military person­nel and their dependents.

Beginning in 1960, large numbers of military personnel who began their mili­tary careers prior to, and during World War II became eligible for retirement by virtue of completing 20 years or more of active military service. The impact of these large-scale military requirements is, I am sure, of great concern in many areas. The need for a long-range solu­tion became more urgent when in Sep­tember 1962 the Department of Defense announced that pending the develop­ment of an overall solution to the retired problem, no beds or other inpatient fa­cilities for retired members or their de­pendents would be programed in new military construction.

The enactment of the Dependents' M;edical Care Act in 1956 gave specific statutory basis for the "space available" medical care which the military services had been providing as a matter of policy and moral obligation to servicemen who had been advised that this was one of the fringe benefits available to them for re­maining in active service. This was one · of the methods of enticing men into re­maining in service until retirement. We are now told, however, that we have ar­rived at a period when traditional and promised military benefits will no longer be provided in military medical facilities.

The size of our military retiree popu­lation is rapidly increasing and has doubled in the last 4 years and will again double by fiscal year 1971.

In fiscal year 1960 the retired military population of 275,000 increased to 475,000 and will go to 840,000 by fiscal year 1971. Retired dependent population now is over 1 million and will be 2.3 million by fiscal year 1971.

The total retired military population by 1971 will be over 3 million and over 4 million in1980.

The limited medical service that is now being provided in certain areas will rapidly diminish. Retirement records reflect that of all service retirees, 22 per­cent have located in southern California. ·I know that in my district there is a shortage of personnel especially as far as the outpatient clinic of March Air Force Base near Riverside, Calif.

The Los Angeles through Palm Springs area is serviced by the 150-bed facility at March Air Force Base where retirees and their dependents can be hospitalized. This hospital services a retiree popula­tion area equivalent to the entire State of Florida.

The retired military population in the area is doubling every 3% to 4 years. At the old March Air Force Base Hos­pital facility there was an average daily patient load of about 100 inpatients. In the new hospital, there are about 145, a 50-percent increase. In 1964, 29 percent of the average daily patient loa.d were retired families. In 1965-January through October-35 percent of the average daily patient load were retired families. The total effort expended by the medical staff at the March Air Force Base Hospital on retired families is 60 to 75 percent.

Our commitment in southeast Asia has taken a large percentage of our mili.­tary resources. I believe that the De­partment of Defense plans to draft a great many more physicians. These physicians will not be used to care for retired military personnel. More and more active duty personnel are being sent overseas while their dependents re­main at home. Care of retired military families is continuing but at a decreas­ing rate. The volume of retired person­nel is so large in southern California that if the military medical personnel devoted all of their time to care for them, there would still be a shortage of staff, facilities, and funds to do an adequate job.

There is a strong moral obligation on the part of the Government to continue to provide medical care by some means for the retired military population and their dependents.

There have been stated and implied promises of medical care following re­tirement as a standard part of personnel recruitment and retention efforts.

I feel that the enactment of this legis­lation will guarantee retirees and their dependents medical care in civilian fa­cilities if military facilities are not avail­able. The Secretary of Defense will be given discretionary authority: to arrange for such care beginning in 1967.

The Government is under a moral ob­ligation to insure that retired military personnel and their dependents receive medical care. A promise was made to them and this promise must be kept.

LETTER FROM CANON CHARLES MARTIN, HEADMASTER, ST. AL­BANS SCHOOL, WASHINGTON, D.C. Mr. PtJCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. FARNSLEY] may ex­tend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?

There was no objection. Mr. FARNSLEY. Mr. Speaker, under

leave to extend my remarks I would like to include in the RECORD a letter from Canon Charles Martin, headmaster of St. Albans School in Washington, D.C.:

JANUARY 30, 1966. DEAR FRIENDS: There is a blizzard on out­

side. The drifts are high, and the wind is strong and biting, the cold is intense. It is good to be home, unless, of course one should be somewhere else. And then she should be there.

Early this morning it was black, cold, and forbidding. I hated to get moving, but after shoveling out the snow that fell in the house when I opened the door and after shoveling a path to the street, I felt better. It was exhilarating to pit oneself against the wind and snow. At school and after that at the cathedral, I felt positively comfortable, even self-righteous. The latter state was quickly dispelled by a brief conversation with a young acolyte.

"Hello." "Hello." "How did you get here?" "Walked and hitch-hiked." "Where do you live?" "Out by the District line."

5870 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 Now I am back home making a few obser­

vations evoked by the blizzard. First, when I got out in the storm, it was

rough, but not nearly so rough as I had anticipated. In my experience, most of our problems are in our mind, not in the facts of life themselves. Twenty-five miles is a considerable distance to an easterner; one hundred miles, a modest one to a westerner. Mental states, attitudes, make a great differ­ence. One fears to face up to a long pull, a difficult situation, but when he does, he finds the pull not so long, the situation not so difficult as he had anticipated and, no matter how long the pull or how great the difficulty, he often finds the experience strengthening, even exhilarating.

On my way to church this morning I saw my neighbor who is the choirmaster at a church in Silver Spring working on his car with a broom, cleaning the windows and windshield. Beside him was a shovel, and his car was parked downhlll. My guess is that with this kind of preparation and so early a start, he wlll be playing the organ in his church, and on time. One doesn't meet life successfully unless he is prepared. And most of us do little preparation for storms of the atmosphere or for the storms of life.

There were only a few persons present at the service in the cathedral this morning, but it had a greater reality than usual. We gave thanks for the hard and demanding in life that makes for strength; and we gave thanks for the new appreciation of our de­pendence one upon another. We remem­bered those made to suffer by the storm and all the hardships in life, and we prayed that we and others might, in sympathy and un­derstanding, be useful to them. Even the formal prayers had a new reality-the col­lect for the day had a new relevance to life:

"0 God, who knowest us to be set in the midst of so many and great dangers, that by reason of the frailty of our nature we cannot always stand upright; . grant to us such strength and protection, as may sup­port us in all dangers, and carry us through all temptations; through Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen."

And this is my experience: When one faces life as it comes, not evading the hard, he is stronger; knows a new sense of de­pendence, and is granted an inner quiet and well-being that is satisfying and enables him better to face life.

Now back to my acolyte. If I had been his parent, I would have been greatly troubled at the thought of his going out on such a hazardous trip, and it would not have been easy to allow him to do it. But I am sure the boy is stronger and better for his experience. Life has risks. They must be faced and not evaded. And it is amazing the strengths that are within us when we are really tested. We can scale the 14-foot fence when the bull is behind us; we can pass the difficult algebra course when we make up our minds to; we can face the sad and tragic when we must and become finer human beings as a result.

American life does not make these truths at once evident, for the whole emphasis is on making life easier and more comfortable. The escalator saves us from walking up a flight of stairs; the pushbutton gadget saves us from getting out of the chair and tuning the TV, and many of the programs save us from thinking. The thermostat saves us from firing the furnace and the air conditioner from fanning ourselves. On the whole, this is good and we ought to enJoy and accept with thanks the increasing comforts of life. On the other hand, we ought not to be softened by them or misled by them. There are always going to be flights of stairs to be climbed, and our hearts, minds, and bodies need to be ready for them. Intellectual e1fort is always going to be required, and we ought not to allow our minds to become

flabby. While temperatures may be con­trolled within the house, the rise and fall _of events in life cannot be controlled and we have to be able to meet them and to adjust to them.

This is very clear at school in all kinds of ways. Take college entrance, which is much on our minds today. Competition is very strong and it is difficult to get into college. I wish it were not so, but it is. While all boys can get into college who should get in, there is fierce competition for admission to the more prestigious colleges which makes for worries and anxieties. Worse, secondary education is often vitiated by a narrow pre­occupation with preparation for college in­stead of being concerned with the healthy development of individual gifts that comes, among other things, from relaxation, free­dom, and-time to do nothing. But the fact remains that we live at a time when one cannot enter a college for the asking. This has to be accepted, adjusted to, taken in stride.

When I finish this letter I am going to call on two young friends whose fathers just died. Death is the ultimate reality that we have to meet. We generally ignore it and we seek to escape its reality with all kinds of euphemisms and strange customs, but we cannot escape its finality-we must meet it.

While we all must meet the ultimate real­ity of death, there are all kinds of other, less shocking but still demanding experiences that we must meet. As we face them, we shall be surprised at the resources within ourselves, perhaps previously unknown, that give us strength. We shall also be surprised at the understanding and kindness that come from people, the help that come out of life itself-from God himself.

This is why I don't like to see a boy late, or a boy stay indoors when he has the sniffies, or a boy stay out of sports because his leg hurts, or a boy stay home when he feels in­disposed, or a boy drop a subject when he finds it hard; and this is why we don't close the school when it storms. I know we have to be prepared to meet life as it comes. I know we have great untapped resources within us and strengths that are undevel­oped; I know that it is good for us to be forced to depend one upon the other; I know it is good for us to know that we have re­sources outside of ourselves in life itself, in God.

Storms are good; life is good; it is fun to be in the midst of both.

Faithfully, CHARLES MARTIN.

EDGARD VARESE Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. FARNSLEY] may ex­tend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from nunois? .

There was no objection. Mr. FARNSLEY. Mr. Speaker, -un­

der leave to extend my remarks I would like to include in the RECORD articles that appeared in the New York Herald Trib­une of November 7, 1965, and the New York Times of November 14, 1965, about Edgard Varese, who died on November 6. (From the New York Herald Tribune, Nov. 7,

1965] EDGARD VARESE, 82, PIONEER OF AVANT-GARDE

MUSIC

Edgard Varese, 82, one of the last of the great pioneers of modern music, died early yesterday morning at University Hospital of complications following an operation.

Mr. Varese, who was born in France, had three careers: one, in Germany before the World War I, as a conductor and promising modernist protege of Richard Strauss and Feruccio Busoni and the model for Romain Rolland's "Jean Christophe"; a second, in this country after the war as a controversial modernist and prophet of the new, and a third in recent years as a pioneer of electronic music and the acknowledged American mas­ter of the young avant-garde.

Mr. Varese long ago anticipated the whole new world of electronics and he lived long enough to compose the first masterpieces in the new medium. He was the first to think of music in three dimensions, as a series of sonorous spatial objects moving and colliding in a new, imagined musical space. He was the first to compose music purely in :terms of sonorous objects--densities and intensities built up in great layers of sound and express­ing, not classical ideals of order, but the rhythm and poetry of modern life as he understood and interpreted it.

In 1917, the New York Avant-Garde maga­zine 391, edited by Marcel Duchamp and Francis Picabia, published an article by Mr. Varese in which he said: "I dream of instru­ments obedient to my thought and which, with their contribution of a whole new world of unsuspected sounds, will lend themselves to the exigencies of my inner rhythm."

This was to remain Mr. Varese's credo for the rest of his life, a great portion of which was taken up with an unending search for the new technical means to realize this inner vision.

He was, to his last day, almost the only older composer regarded by the younger gen­eration as a genuine avant-gardist. But Mr. Varese himself had no use for the term or the concept of "avant-garde." "Poof," he would say, "the composer is never ahead of his time, it is the audience which is behind." Told again and again by dubious critics and a hostile public that what he wrote was not music, he merely shrugged his shoulders and dubbed it organized sound.

Now, with the old controversies of atonal­ity, 12-tone, neoclassicism and neotonality long since past, the music that Mr. Varese _wrote and performed in New York 40 years ago has a greater relevance than ever to the development of contemporary ideas.

Mr. Varese considered himself an Amer· lean composer and held an unswerving devo­tion to New York which he considered the real cultural center of the West. The very prototype of the rugged individualist, both in his intense square-cut features and in personality, he endured hostility, then, even worse, neglect, and lived long enough to see himself acclaimed as a prophet now out of the wilderness.

The musical community was celebrating his 80th birthday this year but, in tact, the generally accepted date of his birth is an error. He was born in Paris in 1883 of Italian and French parentage. His father wanted him to be an engineer or a scientist and gave him education on this line. But Mr. Varese studied music privately in Italy and was accepted at the Schola Cantorium in Paris ln 1904 as the pupll of Vincent d'Indy and Albert Roussel.

Mr. Varese began a lifelong love affair with medieval Rennaissance music at the Schola which was then doing pioneer work in this field.

But the budding modernist was not much for academe routine; he did not get on with d'Indy and he left the Schola for the Paris Conservatqire. Here the story was much the same; his principal teacher was the aca­demic Widor and he fought with the Con­servatoire director, Gabriel Faure. In 1907, he left France for Germany.

Through Romain Rolland, leading critic and writer who used Mr. Varese as the lead· ing character of his famous novel about a composer, Varese was able to meet the lead-

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAl RECORD- HOUSE 5871 tng figures of the day. Bu'soni and Strauss helped get his music performed and got him engagements as a conductor. One of the most remarkable aspects of his Berlin stay was his friendship with Hugo von·Hofmanns­thal, the well-known poet and. librettist of Strauss' operas "Salome," "Elektra," and ••Der Rosenkavalier." Hofmannsthal and Varese collaborated on an opera, "Oedipus and the Sphinx," which was just completed in 1914 when World War I broke out. As an enemy alien, Mr. Varese had to fiee back toFrance. ·

Varese served briefiy in the French Army and received a medical discharge. Back in Paris, Debussy tried to help him. ("A com­poser has a r!ght to make the kind of music he wishe·s," Debussy once told him, "provided the music is his own. Your music is your own. But I don't understand it.") Dis­illusioned, however, with France, Varese set sail for the New World.

The break with the past was to be even greater than he anticipated. His manu­scripts were stored in a warehouse in Berlin that was burned during the war. Nearly all of his earlier works, including the opera, were destroyed.

In New York, Varese conducted a mam­moth performance of the Berlioz Requiem 1p. the New York Hippodrome and his reputa­tion as a conductor was made. Getting his music (or any other modern music) per­formed was not quite so simple and Varese himself was instrumental in the formation of the New Symphony Orchestra, the Inter­national Composers' Guild, and later, the Pan-~erican Association of Composers, all devoted to modern music.

With the help of Mr. Varese and others, New York became one of the major impor­tant centers for modern music and new ideas-in many ways surpassing anything in Europe at the period. Varese produced his series of now-famous path-breaking works, "Ameriques," "Offrandes," "Hyperprism," "Octandre," "Integrales," "Arcana," and culminating in the famous all-percussion "Ionisation" of 1930-32.

Nearly all of these works ca1,1sed a sensa­tion and the reputation of "Ionisation" with its siren and its battery of things to hit, scratch, and smash was notorious. Yet it can be seen today as a serious and thought­ful attempt to get away from the conven­tional tempered scale and widen the means of musical expression. At this time, he also worked on a large-scale piece called Espace in which "electrical" (we would say "elec­tronic") means were to be used to project and resynthesize sound in many directions and dimensions.

In fact, the work was never realized. From the thirties there is only the "Equatorial" and the famous "Density 21.5., written for the solo platinum flute of Georges Barrere and then 15 years of silence.

Mr. Varese's silence has been attributed to neglect--it was the period when American music turned away from avant-gardism to a more popular style-but it was partly also that the composer was searching for the means to realize his ideas. He talked to Bell Laboratories and he even went to Holly­wood to visit the sound studios, but all to no avail. Only with the beginning of elec­tronic music in 1950 was he finally able to realize his life dream. His "Deserts" for in­struments and electronic sound sources, writ­ten in 195Q-54, and his "Poeme electro­nique,:• commissioned for the Le Courboisier Phillips Pavilion at the Brussels Fair in 1956-58, are masterful sound collages and aston­ishing breakthroughs in the entirely new medium which he had predicted so many years before.

In his last years, after the "Nocturp.al" of 196Q-61, Mr. Varese again went back to his old "Espace" concept in a new work, pro­visionally entitled "Nuit." It is not known if

the composer left this or any other music in a performable state.

Surviving are a daughter by a first mar­riage and his second wife, Louise Varese, a well-known translator of Rimbaud, Baude­laire, Stendahl, .Nobel Prize winner S.t.-John Perse and other major French writers. Ac­cording to the composer's wishes, there will be no funeraL-ERIC SALZMAN.

[From the New York Times, Nov. 14, 1965] MAVERICK, REVOLUTIONARY, AND FATHER TO

• A GENERATION (By Harold C. Schonberg)

For a composer with only a handful of works to show for a lifetime in music, Edgard Varese exerted an influence all out of pro­portion to his output. But though his oeuvre was slender, it was remarkably po­tent, and as far back as the 1920's he was writing music that was a remarkable antic­ipation of some of the farthest-out music today. To the younger generation he was a symbol. More than Stravinsky, more than Bart6k, more than anybody he represented the maverick, the natural revolutionary, the uncompromising creative mind that lives by and for an ideal.

And so he lived to be hailed as a hero. All interested in modern music paid hom­age to him. To the general public he was not well known; but at concerts of new music in recent years there always was a buzz when his sturdy body entered an auditorium. "Varese-Varese-there's Varese." He repre­sented something bigger than life, and it was as much for that as for his actual accom­plishment that he was hailed. It is given to few to live a life exactly as one wants to live; to ignore the frills and concentrate on the basics; to create purely for the satisfaction of creation; to be content to have what one has and not wish for more-not if it would interfere with the ideals that govern the very act of existence.

NO SERIALIST If not for the strange turn that music took

after the Second World War, Varese at best would today be considered an eccentric, a man who experimented with pure planes of sound. But such is the wheel of art. It spun around, and Varese's name came up. This was all the more astonishing, for Varese be­longed to no school. He was not a serial composer; indeed, he had -little respect for

. serial technique. No school formed around him, his music was little played, and he went pretty much his own way, convinced that orthodox music had played itself out, con­vinced that new instruments, new textures, new organizations had to be developed.

But what he did do, long before 1945, was concentrate on pure sound, abolish melody (in the traditional sense of the word), ex­plore spatial relationships, invent new meth­ods of notation, pulverize tone, and, in ef­fect, anticipate a good deal of what the new school is doing. He may be saint, he may be devil. If there is a shift in values, his music will be forgotten. If the new music takes hold for good, he will be enshrined.

He lived only for the new, the experi­mental. As a young man he served as con­ductor and had a thorough knowledge of music of the past. But certainly during the last half of his 82 years he had virtua-lly nothing to do with any music except the new and preferably the avant-garde. His · listening tolerance for "old" (pre-1920) mu­sic was admittedly low; he would get bored, then restless, after a half hour of listening. He needed new sounds, new combinations, to interest and stimulate him.

Just about 20 years ago this writer first interviewed Varese. It was like trying to encircle a geyser. Varese, pugnacious and lively, had strong views about everything. The thing that bothered him most, those days, was what. he called the commercialism

of music, and he had tart remarks for some hallowed figures. He spoke violently about those who would prostitute their art to make money. And he had some dire predictions to make.

"You will see," he said. "This country will die because of the middleman. Here in America there is always great excitement to see what's coming next. Always the man­ager, the middleman, will try to make a dis­covery-a new virtuoso, a new .singer. Con­ductors, they are anxious to get first per­formances, and then never play the music again."

Varese, who always had a low boiling point, got excited and started to wave his arms. What is it, a first performance? What does it mean? The lOth, the 20th performance-that's the important thing. Unfortunately for the majority in America, art is only tolerated. It is not a necessity. We must draw a line between entertainment and art. Art is from the shoulders up. The others is from the hips down." · This was early in 1946, and he had some prophetic words to say about the future of music. He grew furious when the concept of "American art" was mentioned, and said that it was pitiful for composers to try to recreate a style that had vanished.

"Previously," he snorted, "there could be provincialism, but not today. When the atomic bomb fell, nationalism was wiped out. I think all over the world this is happening. Today is one complete world, not individual countries barred from the rest. National art is a ridiculous concept; it has broken up. You cannot have a protective · tariff on thought, which is what many nationalists want. Fifty years ago, yes; today, no. Let me repeat what I have said. You cannot have a protective tariff on thought."

What Varese predicted has come true, at least in the avant-garde. There is an inter­national style today, what Virgil Thomson has called the musical Common Market. Na­tionalism is completely passe. New instru­ments are being created, and the electronic composers are assuming more and more im­portance. This especially pleased Varese in his last years. He always had been interested in electronic instruments; had fooled around with the theremin, and as soon as tape music came into being was one of the first to ex­periment with the new medium. As is well known, early Varese scores--"Ionization," especially-are startlingly close in sound and texture to electronic music, even though composed long before there were f,Uly elec­tronic instruments to use.

OLD MASTER As an old master, and one who generated

admiration for his pioneer work from all composers, Varese around 1950 found himself in the enjoyable position of having all of his works called masterpieces. Stravinsky's re­action is typical. After some hedging in his "Memories and Commentaries" of 1960, he came to the conclusion in the 1963 "Dialogues and a Dairy" that "Varese's music will en­dure. We know this now because it was dated in the right way. The name is synony­mous with a new intensity and a new con­cretion, and the best things in his music­the first seven measures from No. 16 in 'Arcana,· 'the whole of 'Deserts'-are among the better things in contemporary music. More power to this musical Brancusi." . Yes; tt became very fashionable to give blanket endorsement to Varese. But that did not help him get performances. By and large his music was played only by the small avant1garde groups and occasional perform­ances of "Ionization" by the bigger ensembles only accentuated the lack of knowledge about his later works. Fortunately there are a few recordings. Whatever his eventual place, he will occupy a special niche as innovator, ex­perimeter, and as spiritual father to a new generation: a sort of latter-day Sa tie.

5872' CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 1-5, ' 1966

A GOOD WORD FOR L·.B.J. Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. FARNSLEY] may ex­tend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?

There was no objection. Mr. FARNSLEY. Mr. Speaker, I in­

clude in the RECORD o.n editorial by Roscoe Drummond that appeared in the Washington Post on March 13, 1966, about the President's management of the Vietnam war.

A GOOD WORD FOR L.B.J. (By Roscoe Drummond)

I would like to say a good word about President Johnson's management of the Vietnam · war. · Obviously there is a great risk of timidly doing too little to arrest the aggression and a great danger of recklessly doing so much that Red China enters the fighting. .

With these two opposite perils in mind, I cannot escape the feeling that many more Americans will come to see that the Presi­dent is bringing wisdom, caution, and deter,­mination to bear on the conduct of the war.

surely the touchstone of wisdom in our role in Vietnam 1s to do whatever is needed to secure South Vietnam from conquest and to ' use our massive military power in such a prudent and measured manner that Pel­ping is given no legitimate reason to enter the war.

Such a course will not get the easy plaudits of those who want to win quickly at any cost by bombing North Vietnam to bits; will not get the praise of those who want to quit at any cost by pulling out; and will not get a high Gallup rating from those who suggest we haven't the resources to defend South Vietnam and that, anyway, a little aggression in southeast Asia is no concern to the United States.

As these conflicting views find their level in public opinion, I believe that the Nation, on reflection will feel even more reassured that Gen. Curtis LeMay is not deciding the bombing over North Vietnam, that Senator WAYNE MoRsE is not managing the defense of South Vietnam, and that Senator FuL­BRIGHT is not deciding where aggression con­cerns the United States and where it doesn't.

During the period when he was determin­ing how the mounting attacks directed from Hanoi should be met, President Johnson-as reported by Charles Roberts in his book, "L.B.J.'s Inner Circle"-remarked to his inti­mates: "I'm not going north with Curtis LeMay, and I'm not going south with WAYNE MORSE.''

Fortunately, the President is not easily· pressured either by events or by extremist· advice.

He did not act hastily, but deliberately; not recklessly, but with great care; not timidly-he committed the United States to do whatever is necessary to defend South Vietnam successfully, but no more.

These ingredients of mind have marked the President's course in Vietnam: deliberate­ness, prudence, and determination.

They have produced a clear and properly limited objective: to keep South Vietnam from being taken over by force.

And to make it least likely that Red China will enter the war, he is not using U.S. air­power to bomb cities in the north; not. send:­ing U.S. ground troops to occupy North Vietnam; not seeking the downfall of the Hanoi regime; not asking for the uncondi­tional surrender of Hanoi. He is asking only for an unconditional end to aggression against its neighbor.

NEW DIRECTIONS AND METHODS FOR NATIONAL TRANSPORT

. NEEDS Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from Kentu.cky [Mr. FARNSLEY] may ex­tend his remarks at this point in the · RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is tnere objection to the request of the gentleman. from Tilinois?

There was no objection. Mr. FARNSLEY. Mr. Speaker, on

March 7 the Louisville, Ky., Courier­Journal outlined some of the reasons why a single agency is needed to handle transit problems.

It noted that President Johnson has asked for a Cabinet level department consolidating the activities of 11 sepa­rate Federal agencies. It added that while the idea is not a new one, a whole new set of imperatives has arisen "which make the proposal more timely than ever."

The article is most informative and because others will want to see it, I otrer it for inclusion in the RECORD. NEW DmECTIONS AND METHODS FOR NATIONAL

TRANSPORT NEEDS The entire transportation picture is

changing so rapidly that it has become es­sential to create a single agency of the Federal Government to keep track of what is going on and to channel Government spending and research into the areas where they are most needed.

To this end President Johnson has asked for a Cabinet-level department consolidat­ing the activities of 11 separate Federal agencies. The suggestion is not a new one. Presidents John F. Kennedy and Dwight D. Eisenhower considered creating the same post. A whole new set of imperatives has arisen in the meantime which make the proposal more timely than ever.

The Nation has at last become conscious of the need for a drive, coordinated at the Federal level, for safer automobiles and tires. There have been calls for an end to the meaningless numbers game in reporting traf­fic fatalities and a start on a more scientific approach to the reasons so many of us drive ourselves to our deaths. There has been comment about the disparity in death rates between various modes of transportation and speculation about how this relates to the amount of money spent on safety research.

The President's message was responsive to this concern. He called for increased Federal grants to State highway safety pro­grams, construction of a national highway safety research and test center authorizing the Secretary of Commerce to determine the need for additional safety standards for automobiles.

The whole question of priorities has also come in for a good deal of public attention lately. Is it fair to subsidize the automobile by putting up 90 percent of the cost of interstate highways while starving mass transit? . Is it worth rebuilding the Nation's merchant marine fleet at vast cost to the

·Federal Government? Would it make more sense, for example, to put the money into hydrofoil boats which could ply the inland waterways? The President has indicated that he means to stick with a 1974 dead­line for a supersonic airliner, but it could be that a transportation czar would see more need for a subsonic jet bus which · could carry 750 passengers at low rates and thus lure more travelers into the air.

The transportation problems of the east­ern seaboard are forerunners of what cities like Louisville and Lexington may someday

be faced with. ·Railroads, the single great· unsubsidized portion of the American trans­portation system; must revive their com­muter and short-haul passenger service if the .travel needs of our populous areas are to be met. Once in or near a large city, mass transit must be added to the transportation mix if we · are• 'to avoid being. choked to death by our· own automobiles. At present, ~ass transit is the responsibility of the Department of Housi-ng and Urban Develop­ment. Ultimately, it should be transferred to the new Department so that the Presi­dent's goal of having all transportation func­tions coordinated "in a single coherent in­strument of Government" can be met.

TOWARD PEACE Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from Kentucky [Mr. FARNSLEY] may ex­tend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?

There was no objection. Mr. FARNSLEY. Mr. Speaker, an edi­

torial in The Courier-Journal of Louis­ville, Ky., on March 2, 1966, reminds us that the hard line being taken by Hanoi does not mean that America should abandon all etrorts to negotiate a peace in Vietnam.

At present, the paper points out: Hanoi makes negotiation unattainable,

while loudly accusing America of bad faith in its efforts toward peace.

Since this article sheds light on an issue of such vital concern, I include it in the RECORD: . . HANOI'S FIFTH POINT MAKES PEACE TALKS

IMPOSSmLE Many millions of Americans hope fervently

for negotiations to end the fighting in Viet­nam. Many have not always been fully sat­isfied with the zeal of the Johnson adminis­tration in promoting that objective. At the same time, they are certainly getting no encouragement from the Communist side.

Washington's position, indeed, has soft­ened on one vital precondition for talks, while the position of Hanoi and Peiping has hardened significantly. This is the question of who would speak for South Vietnam at the bargaining table.

A few months ago, the Johnson adminis­tration indicated that the government we support in Saigon would have to be the only spokesman for the South Vietnamese. But we have pulled away from that doctrine. The President himself has not said that he would also accept the Vietcong at the con­ference table, but his willingness has . been vouched for by such close associates as Ambassador Harriman and Press Secretary Moyers.

On the other side of the line, the position has been altered for the worse. Ho Chi Minh has added a fifth point to the four he had previously set as conditions for peace talks. It 1s that the National Liberation Front (Vietcong) must be the sole spokes­man for South Vietnam in any negotiations. This condition is stressed in every propa­ganda statement from Peiping.

FOUR PREVIOUS POINTS The North Vietnamese Natlonai ·Assembly

on April 10, 1965, had posed these four points· as conditions for negotrations: ' · · · ·

1. All u.s. troops ' mtist. ·withdraw from South Vietnam. (It was not stipulated that withdrawal would have to take place before a negotiated settlement rather than after,

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 5873 so this point was appe.rently left open for : bargaining.) .

2. Pending peaceful reunification o! Viet­nam, the 1954 military · agreement mUst be respected. and both North and South remain neutral.

3. Internal affairs must be settled by South Vietnamese themselves, "in accordance wi.th the program of the Naltional Liberation Front," without any foreign interferen·ce.

4. Peaceful reunifi.cation of Vietnam to be settled by Vietnamese people in both zones Without foreign interference.

These conditions are subject to long and tortured interpretation, but they are not a complete bar to discUssions. They are not irreconcilable with the 14 points set forth by President Johnson on January 3, 1966.

The President's offe;r of negoti.ation terms, however, quickly dil"ew the new and impos­s,ble fifth point from Ho Chi Minh. He ­knows of course that we could not refuse a place at the conference ta.ble' to the govern­ment we have supported in Saigon. To do so would be to surrender the people we have ri'l.ade our allies to the . Communists, fully and finally. It would be to seal the fate of South Vietnam without an expression of the will of the people.

It is a familiar technique in a dispute for one side to offer to talk, but set conditions it knows its opponent cannot conceivably accept. The Soviet Union has played that game in the long struggle for disarmament. Now Hanoi makes negotiation unattainable, while loudly accusing America of bad faith in its efforts toward peace.

The intransigence of Hanoi does not mean that America should abandon all efforts to negotiate. If anything, it increases our duty to maintain and strengthen our peaceful intentions.

But in the meanwhile there i.s . no use blinding ourselves to what is happening in }fanoi and Peiping. The Communist leaders believe they are going to win, and they will at present accept no compromise short of total victory.

SUPPORT OF POLICY Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from Utah [Mr. KING] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois?

There was no objection. Mr. KING of Utah. Mr. Speaker, the

Salt Lake Tribune states editorially that in voting additional funds to conduct the war in Vietnam "Congress acted respon­sibly-and in accordance with the views of most Americans."

The paper believes that most Ameri-. cans do not want an "unrestrained es­calation," but that tb.ey ·do want an hon­orable peace and that they are ready for "unconditional negotiations toward that end anywhere, under any auspices."

Because the summation made by this newspaper will be of interest to many, I am making the editorial available by offering it now for publication in the RECORD:

CONGRESS VOTES SUPPORT OF VIET POLICY There seems little doubt that the over­

whelmin~ approval in Congress of additional funds to finance the war in Vietnam is a vic­tory for the administration in the current debate over its Vietnam policy.

. The House voted approval of the additional $4.8 billion by 392 to 4, the Senate by 93 to 2.

Approval of the money was inevitable, for Congress could hardly vote in effect to aban­don the more than 200,000 American troops now engaged with the Communists on the ground in South Vietnam.

But the vote might not have been so over­whelming, and it need not have been pre­ceded by such a smashing Senate defeat of Senator WAYNE MORSE'S .effort to repudiate the 1964 resolution pledging congressional support for "all necessary measures" to resist Communis~ aggr~ssion in southeast Asia.

On a motion t6 table (kill) Senator MoRsE's motion, · only 4 Senators · joined MoRSE, with 92 in effect voting to reconfirm the resolution.

NO ESCALATION MANDATE A minority of House and Senate liberals­

put at 77 in the House and 17 in the Senate-­deny the vote for more Vietnam funds was a man.d!!-te for unrestrained escalation of the war.

Of -course it wasn't. And only a small minority of Americans advocate such escala­tion, just as only a small Ininority advocate American retreat.

Even. Senator FULBRIGHT, chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who voted with MoRSE on the 1964 resolution repudiation, did not advocate withdrawal in explaining his vote. He rather simply pointed to the need for seeking a "general accommodation" in southeast Asia for "neu­tralization of the entire region as between China and the United States."

But as l;'eter Lisagor, of the Chicao Daily News Service, points out, administration spokesmen have supported a neutral Laos and Cambodia, and have agreed to a non­aligned South Vietnam if the Communists will call off their aggression. It is Commu­nist China, not the United States, which has consistently rejected neutralization.

Despite the contipued negative attitude of both Communist China and North Vietnam, President Johnson again extended the olive branch. While the Senate was debating the increased aid bill, he called again on Hanoi to "negotiate peace" and renewed his offer for a "massive effort of reconstruction" after a settlement in both North and South Viet­nam.

UNDER CAREFUL CONTROL While this was balanced by a promise to

continue the "measured use of force," the White House said the President would "con­tinue to act responsibly" and it reiterated his New York pledge to use "prudent firm­ness under careful control."

It seems to us that this is all anyone can ask, and that Congress acted responsibly­and in accordance with the views of most Americans. They desire, no more than the President, unrestrained escalation of this war. They want a peace settlement which will permit the orderly and honorable with­drawal of American troops. They are ready for unconditional negotiations toward that end a~ywhere, under any auspices.

It is not new American policy to support people resisting Communist aggression, nor to uphold the basic principle of self-deter­mination of people. American policy in Viet­nam is simply a continuance of a firm U.S. stand against Communist aggression which this country has followed for nearly 20 years at a dozen points along the vast periphery of the Russian and Chinese -communist em­pires. And we believe that fundamental policy has the same basic American support today that it had when it first took form under Presid~nt Truman.

TOO MANY COOKS Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from Utah [Mr. KING] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD an'd include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from lllinois?

There was no objection. Mr. KING of Utah. Mr. Speaker, the

Washington Evening Star editorially praises· the President's recommendations made in his · message on pollution and conservation.

His recommendations included trans­fer of the Water Pollution Control Ad­ministration from the Public ·Health Service to the Interior Department, and establishing a National Water Commis­sion "to review and advise on the entire range of water resources problems."

The Star concludes that: Perhaps the great conservation task that

so badly needs doing is at last about to shift into high gear.

The timely appraisal will interest my colleagues, and I therefore make the edi­torial a part of the RECORD:

TOO MANY COOKS Two things emerge from President John­

son's message on pollution and conservation that may have more long-range significance than the specific requests he has made. These are his recommendations to transfer the Water Pollution Control Administration from the Public Health Service to the In­terior Department, which controls most water programs, and to establish a National · Water Commission "to review and advise on the entire range of water resources prob­lems."

At the moment there are far too many cooks at the Federal level involved in the field of conservation. For example, in our own Potomac Basin a White House-backed team working to make the Potomac a model for the Nation is confronted with coordinat­ing antipollution planning among four · agencies. The President's recommendation would at least narrow this to three.

What is really needed, of course, is a much greater concentration than this. The Hoover Commission recommended that total con­servation responsibility be co:J;lcentrated in a Department of Natural Resources. And a bill sponsored by Senator Moss, of Utah, aimed at this desirable goal even now is be­fore Congress.

The political complexities in any such re­organization are great and there can be no quick and easy solution. But the proposals to transfer antipollution responsibility and coordinate water resource planning look like steps in the right direction. Perhaps the great conservation task that so badly needs doing is at last about to shift into high gear.

VIETNAM Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from Utah [Mr. KING] may extend his remarks at this point in the-RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Tilinois?

There was no objection.

5874 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March 15, 1966 _

Mr. KING of Utah. Mr. Speaker.,. the congressional dialog on Vietnam con­tinues apace, and few there are, by now, who have not spoken out. My own posi­tion is that we must continue to resist Communist aggression and terrorism. I have affirmed, and reaffirmed, this prop­osition on occasions too numerous to mention.

I willingly concede that we have made mistakes. If it were possible to unravel the tangled fabric of the past, no doubt a better fabric could then be rewoven. But that is not our present option. It was Adlai Stevenson, I believe, who said: "If the present persists in setting in judgment on the past, the future is lost."

The time is now for action. The sig­nals have already been called, and the ball is in motion. Amerioa has no other choice than to execute the play, and to smash forward to a touchdown. This does not mean that our policy or methods are no longer open to discussion, or even to crtticism. Far from it. On several oc­casions I myself have raised my voice against sloppy and inefficient practices which I felt were militating against our success in the field. -I shall continue to do so.

It is one thing, ·however, to offer con- ' structive criticism, in order to improve the war effort. It is another thing to embarrass, or obstruct, or to deliberately weaken our national will to fight. With any such effort I have no sympathy.

There has been so much said about what we are doing wrong, and so little, comparatively speaking, about what we are doing right. It is with a view to strengthening our will, and putting our present posture into a truer perspective that I am taking this time to review, briefly, the splendid work of our JUSPAO organization, and the success it has had in the field of psychological warfare. We hear so much about the conventional battles that are raging in Vietnam, and about the statistics on casualties suf­fered, lives lost, and planes and materiel destroyed. The real war however, is being fought, not for the bodies but for the minds of the Vietcong. The work of JUSPAO is ·no less significant because it receives so little recognition. In my opinion it is our ultimate weapon.

SELECTIVE ACHIEVEMENTS OF JUSPAO

GENERAL

Just as crucial as, and in the long run more important than, the current mili­tary effort in Vietnam is the struggle for the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese. At the heart of this psychological task is communication-particularly communi­cation between the populace and their government. In the U.S. mission, the agency with primary responsibility for counseling and assisting the Government of Vietnam-GVN-in the field of psychological action is the Joint United States Public Affairs Ofllce-JUSPAO.

JUSPAO was created in' May 1965 as a result of President Johnson's decision giving the Director of USIA authority over all U.S. psychological -operations· in · Vietnam. The majority of the American staff are USIA officers, but others come from the Department of State, AID, and the U.S. military. Headed by a senior

USIA official-who is also Minister Coun­selor · of Embassy for Information­JUSPAO is a U.S. mission organization which provides unified direction for all . U.S. psychological action in Vietnam. · Having directly integrated the com­munication media functions of .USAID Vietnam, JUSPAO is the U.s. civilian channel for providing communication equipment and technical advice to the GVN. Through policy direction given to the psywar operations of MACV's Politi­cal Warfare Directorate, JUSPAO helps assure . close coordination· between U.S. civilian and military psywar personnel in provincial operations.

JUSPAO has three main psychological objectives: First, to strengthen the Viet­namese will to support GVN/US mutual objectives; second, to strengthen the gov­ernment's communication media and programs to increase popular support of its overall objectives; and third, to strengthen free world support for Viet­nam and of Vietnamese support for U.S. worldwide policy objectives.

In pursuit of these objectives, JUSPAO has over 150 American officers and nearly 400 Vietnamese employees. Ideas, per­sonal contact, media materials, and com­munication equipment are tools and channels in this war for men's minds. The impact of various JUSPAO programs very often is localized. The successes may not lend themselves to newspaper headlines. They are the backside of news, and some of these are capsulized below.

RADIO

In a country like South Vietnam where literacy rate is low, particularly in the rural area, radio is a vital link between the Government and the people. In the past, the Radio Vietnam-VTVN-with a station in Saigon and several regional transmitters was not fully utilized or co­ordinated because of poor organization, lack of trained personnel and program­ing skills. As a first step toward helping the GVN develop a more truly national radio network, JUSPAO convinced and assisted the GVN in December 1965 to restructure Radio Vietnam into a semi­autonomous broadcasting corporation.­Steps are now being taken to link the existing stations into a national network. Two JUSPAO radio advisory teams are actively engaged in training Vietnamese in program production, station and net­work management and administration, and central and regional programing. One of the team::: is assigned to the VTVN while the other is assisting the Vietnam­ese Defense Ministry's Voice of Free­dom Station which broadcasts to North Vietnam.

JUSPAO also produces locally between 60 and 75 hours of radio programs every week for placement with Vietnamese stations. From Washington, the Voice of 'America broadcasts to South and North Vietnam 6¥2 hours daily in Viet­namese. The Voice maintains a trans­mitting and relay complex in Hue, South Vietnam, just south of the 17th parallel. 'the 50,000 watt, medium-wave relay transmitter has directional antennas capable of providing strong signals to both North and South Vietnam. Over the past year and a half, incidentally,

the site_ has been shelled by the Vietcong . several times.

OTHER MEDIA

JUSPAO effort is not confined to radio. A publication adviser is working with the Vietnamese Ministry of Psywar -in the · ·production of Pamphlets; leaflets, and posters. In· the GVN15 National Motion Picture Center, a JUSPAO adviser helps · in all aspects of the conception and pro­duction of newsreels, documentaries, and feature films. To help the GVN improve its press · output and thus to facilitate coverage of Vietnam developments by foreign newsmen, a JUSPAO press ad­viser is assigned to the Vietnam Press, the Government's national news agency, to provide on-the-job training and class­room instructions on journalism. PSYCHOLOGICAL OPERATIONS IN THE PROVINCES

JUSPAO operates extensively in rural South Vietnam, and some 40 American JUSPAO field representatives are sta­tioned in the provinces to give assistance and support to cadres of the Vietnamese Information Service-VIS-in psy­chological operations. The tasks of JUSPAO field representatives cover a wide spectrum; namely, stimulating action by provincial psychological oper­ations committees in every province; as­sisting in the publication of 24 provincial newspapers and programing of re­gional radio stations; showing GVN and JUSPAO films made for provincial audiences; developing posters, pam­phlets, leaflets, and other publications designed for audiences in a particular province or even district; employing air­borne loudspeakers and leaflet : drops for fast exploitation of locaU.ssues; and deploying VIS and · JUSPAO cultural troupes which present a government message via entertainment.

A considerable part of the JUSP AO effort in the provinces has gone into supporting the Government's Chieu Hoi-Open Arms--program which en­courages Vietcong and their followers to return to government-controlled areas. Where local Chieu Hoi programs are imaginatively and vigorously pursued and where especially effective leaflets and other messages are employed, the psychological tasks of persuasion has yielded results. The following incidents show this by the extent of Vietcong re­action and counteraction.

In August 1965, 150,000 copies of a JUSPAO-originated leaflet were air­dropped into parts of Vinh Binh Prov­ince in the Delta. According to re­turnees who defected on the basis of it as well as captured Vietcong documents, within 3 days every Vietcong found picking up or holding this leaflet was immediately transferred to another re­gion so that he would not "contaminate" others. Also around this time, in Vinh Long Province nearby, the Vietcong were driven to holding public meetings to counter the Chieu Hoi appeal. The villagers in these public ·meetings were warned that anyon~ found with a leaflet was liable to be shot. They were also told that anyone gofug over to the gov­ernment side in response to the appeal would be tortured.

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 5875 That Vietcong threats and intimida­

tion have not been fully effective can be seen in the number of individuals who have responded to the Chieu Hoi ~ppe_al since the program was launched in Feb­ruary 1963. From · that time to date, some 30,000 Vietcong and their followers had returned to the government side; 11,000 of them came b~ck during 1965 alone. The monthly returnee rate last year is particularly notable for its sharp upward trend. In January 1965, there were 406 returnees; by Pecember the

· number had climbed to·1,482. In Janu­ary 1966, the 1,672 Chieu Hoi returnees who came back set an alltime record. These statistics reflect the impact of U.S.

. military buildup, upswing of Vietnamese morale and the series of GVN-US mili­tary successes. Since JUSPAO psycho­logical operations were aimed at rein­forcing and exploiting these favorable trends, the Chieu Hoi statistics are in part a measure of JUSPAO accomplish-ment. .

Statistical profile aside, there have also been instances of specific reaction to the GVN/US psychological operations aimed specifically at the Vietcong.

On October 24, 1965, copies of eight different leaflets were airdropped in a coordinated psywar campaign into Viet­cong strongholds in the IV Corps area. In the next week, a check of Vietcong defectors indicated that of the '86 coming in from the areas covered, 62 carried copies of the leaflets dropped on October 24. Reacting to other media used; the Vietcong in one instance moved into a village and removed all anti-Vietcong slogans and banners and warned the peo­ple not to take part in any demonstra­tion being organized as part of the psy ~ war campaign. Yet in another village, as a result of demonstrations held, the villagers drew up a letter stressing their determination to resist Vietcong pres­sure. The letter was signed by 65 vil­lagers-an act of considerable courage since it could easily turn into a Vietcong death warrant.

A comP.lete unit defection, that of a 22-man Vietcong guerrilla platoon oc­curred in mid-December 1965, in Binh Tuy Province, as a result of a coordi­nated military-psychological warfare operation. JUSPAO played an active role assisting the Vietnamese in carrying out the psychological phase which in­cluded ground and air loudspeaker oper­ations and leaflets. Wives of known Vietcong were permitted and encouraged to cross the frontline positions to con­tact their husbands and assure them that they would be well treated and that they should surrender. The surrender appeals specified that the Vietcong should come via roads, with their shirts off, hands over their heads and with their rifles slung, muzzles pointed down­ward. Within a week of the operation, Vietcong defectors began to come in, usually in two's and three's. The 22-man platoon, however, brought with

_ them 9 rifles and, as a group, followed the explicit instructions mentioned above.

JUSPAO SUPPORT TO SOCIAL REFORM

Compared to the immediate impact of psyWar efforts,, the JUSPAO role in sup­port of social improvement and reform

programs in South Vietnam is of a longer range nature. To assist the Gov­ernment to win and maintain the loyal­ties of its people, particularly in rural areas, JUSPAO exploits the economic and social progress which the GVN with AID support has been able to achieve in the countryside. There, military secu­rity must precede economic and social developmental efforts, but such develop­ment is directly related to a favorable psychological climate which JUSPAO activities aim to create. This involves more than publicizing GVN projects car­ried out with AID assistance; it involves instilling confidence in the benefits of self-help on the part of the villagers as well as confidence that the Government is sincerely interested in helping the peo­ple and in- fact is doing so in various fields; and of great importance, in help­ing the GVN communicate to its people its plans for a social revolution.

Media- products on AID activities are produced by JUSPAO for use not only in Vietnam but-through USIS posts­in many third countries as well. A series of photo packets are periodically sent to some 78 USIS posts worldwide for place­ment in the indigenous press and period­icals; these contain a substantial num­ber of AID stories. Two USIA officers are assigned full time to maintain liaison with USAID in Saigon; they help develop media materials on AID projects and facilitate third-country coverage of these projects. In motion pictures, the JUSPAO biweekly series of news maga- · zines deals with U.S. aid to . South Viet­nam, among other topics. And between one-third and one-half of the regular radio series-produced by JUSPAO in the· field or . USIA in Washington-are frequently on AID topics; such as round­table discussion on economic develop­ment programs, documentary coverage of AID projects, interviews with "un­common people," among whom are AID technicians and experts.

AID stories and articles on agricul­tural hints and self-help projects are featured prominently in the JUSPAO mass-circulating magazine, Rural Spirit. A monthly magazine written in simple language designed principally for a peas­ant audience in support of the GVN rural construction program, Rural Spirit is distributed in 350,000 copies per issue. The Vietnamese edition of Free World magazine also carries the story of eco­nomic development and nation build­ing · to a more sophisticated audience of schoolteachers and students. Its monthly circulation is 235,000 copies.

POSTSCRIPT

As James Reston wrote in the New York Times of February 18, 1966 :

Vietnam is the first American war * * * fought with the television cameras right on the battlefield. The advantages are obvious. These * * * scenes of our men under fire are taking some of the silly romance out of war, but inevitably they portray only one side of the story.

The Vietnam struggle is indeed many sided. The material herein represents a quick review of some aspects of the U.S. nonmilitary effort in South Vietnam, in which USIA is directly and intimately involved.

INCREASE DAIRY PRICE SUPPORTS Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent that the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr. KAsTENMEIERl may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Dlinois?

There was no objection. Mr. KASTENMEIER. Mr. Speaker, I

have introduced a bill today to amend the Agricultural Act of 1949 to give the Department of Agriculture the addi­tional authority it needs to increase qairy support lev~ls.

The falloff in milk output, which be­gan last year, has hastened the disap­pearance of a national surplus that al­ready was dwindling. The total milk production for 1965 fell to some 125 bil­lion pounds, a drop of 1% percentage points from the 1964 level. The January 1966 figures indicate an even more drastic decline. The reports for that month show that the .total U.S. milk pro­duction fell 5.3 percent below the year ago level. The decline was far more alarming in the top two milk producing States-a 7-percent drop in Wisconsin, the No. 1 producing State, and a 14-per­cent decline in the No. 2 producer, Min­nesota.

The Department of Agriculture's count of the Nation's dairy herd reported a January total of 16.6 million. . This is 5.6 percent less .than the previous year and the largest year-to-year percentage decline on record. . The qurrent dairy price support is 75

percent of parity-some $3.24 a hundred for 3.7 milk. This price has been in effect since April 1, 1965. A new support level will be announced for the new mar­keting year that starts April 1, 1966.

Mr. Speaker, unless price supports are raised, there simply is not enough incen­tive, at the current price suport level, for the farmer to remain in dairying. Tempted by soaring meat prices, many dairymen have switched to the feeding of cattle or the raising of hogs. Others have left farming entirely to take advantage of the industrial boom and other off-the­farm opportunities. The exodus from dairy farming reached an alarming rate of an estimated 12 departures a day in Wisconsin during 1965.

The present support price is much too low to allow for a reasonable return on labor and investment. Furthermore, if the current downward trends of dairy production continue, we will be faced with acute shortages of milk and dairy products.·

Under current legislation, the Secre­tary of Agriculture is limited in his ac­tion to set the support price. The price he must set, under the law, is simply the price that will assure an · adequate sup­ply of milk during the next marketing year.

My bill would broaden the price set­ting power by directing the Secretary of Agriculture to take into consideration the· present supply factor as well as three additional related factors in the setting of a price support level somewhere be­tween 75 and 90 percent of parity.

5876 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE March _15, 1966 .

The four factors, then, to be consid­ered would be, first, the supply of milk in relation to the demand; second, the importance of milk to agriculture and the national economy; third, the ability to dispose of stocks of dairy products acquired through price support opera­tions; and fourth, the need of dairy farmers for a fair return on their labor and investment.

This bill is designed to provide what is needed to meet the current crisis­more administrative discretion in deal­ing with the present slump in dairy pro­duction.

If we hope to reverse the current dairying trends, we must have higher support levels in order to assure an ade­quate income for the dairy farmer. In the absence of increased price supports, we may well confront a situation in which dairy production continues to drastically decline and dairy prices rise to inflationary proportions.

FARMERS HOME ADMINISTRA­TION'S RURAL RENEWAL PROGRAM

Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. BANDSTRA] may extend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Dlinois?

There was no objection. Mr. BANDSTRA. Mr. Speaker, I am

today introducing legislation which, if enacted into law, would greatly improve the effectiveness of a rural renewal pro­gram being conducted by the Farmers Home Administration in the U.s. De­partment of Agriculture.

This legislation is of particular impor­tance to Appanoose and Monroe Coun­ties in Iowa, since these two counties comprise one of five areas in the United States now designated as eligible for rural renewal assistance.

The basic purpose of this program is to stimulate long-range economic devel­opment in rural areas where family in­comes are relatively low. The program itself is sound ·and constructive, but the legislation under which it was estab­lished is badly in need of improvement.

Under the Food and Agriculture Act of 1962, the Farmers Home Administra­tion was authorized to allocate rural re­newal loan funds to "local public agen­cies" in designated areas. These local public agencies, in turn, would then make long-term rural renewal loans to private individuals or groups.

Examples of projects which might be undertaken and financed with rural re­newal loan fUnds, under existing law, are as follows:

Purchase of small tracts of land, con­solidation of the tracts, and resale as family-sized farms or for nonfarm use;

Purchase of large tracts of land for subdivision and resale as family-sized farms or for nonfarm use;

Development of a reservoir or system of reservoirs for flood control, conserva­tion, recreation, and water supply;

Construction of water and sewer sys­tems and service buildings, when required

to make possible a broad land-use im­provement project;

Purchase of scrub timber land and its development, including timber stand im­provement, construction of access roads and conservation measures; and

Purchase and development of a graz­ing area for use by ranchers and farmers.

The potential of this comprehensive program has been recognized by the local citizens in Appanoose and Monroe Coun­ties. In an effort to take advantage of the program, they formed the Appa­

velopment on land near the reservoir, it would result in an even greater economic stimulus for the two-county area.

I am hopeful that the Congress will act favorably on this legislation. The rural renewal program can be of great value to Appanoose and Monroe Coun­ties, as well as other areas in the Nation, . but only if the existing law is amended to remove unnecessary limitations.

HUDSON RIVER noose-Monroe County Rural Develop- Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask ment Corp. In 1964, the organization unanimous consent that the gentleman published a detailed 12-5 page report, from New Jersey [Mr. DANIELS] may ex­pointing out the rural development needs · tend his remarks at this point in the of the two-county area. RECORD and include extraneous matter.

However, because of restrictive Ian- The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there guage in the existing law, the organiza- objection to the request of the gentleman tion in Appanoose and Monroe Counties from Dlinois? has been unable to make any rural re- There was no objection. newal loans. The problem arises from Mr. DANIELS. Mr. Speaker, I am very the limitation that these loans can be happy to join with our colleague, the made only by "local public agencies." gentleman from New York [Mr. OT-This difficulty is not confined to Iowa. TINGER], who has worked so hard and

The Farmers Home Administration, in long for the Hudson River, and more addition to my home State, has desig- than a score of Members from New Jer­nated rural renewal areas in Arkansas- sey and New York, in introducing legis­Little River and Sevier Counties; Flor- lation which will authorize the Secretary ida-Washington, Holmes, and Walton of the Interior to begin negotiations Counties; North Carvlina-clay, Gra- leading up to an interstate compact for ham, and Cherokee Counties; and West the Hudson River. Virginia-Hardy and Mineral Counties. Mr. Speaker, the congressional district

Only in Arkansas and North Carolina which I represent is adjacent to the Hud­have the State legislatures passed the son River. As a matter of fact, the 14th necessary enabling legislation allowing District lies entirely within the bound­establishment of "local public agencies" aries of a county which has received its to administer rural renewal programs. name from the river which is the very Thus three of the five designated areas lifeblood of our area. The people of cannot benefit from ~he program. - Hudson County need the Hudson River

Under the bill I am introducing today, restored and it is time that action is this problem would be resolved by taken to see that the resources of this amending the existing law to allow "local great artery are protected by Federal as nonprofit organizations," as well as "local well as State and local action. public agencies," to make rural renewal I commend the gentleman from West-loans. chester County, N.Y. [Mr. OTTINGER],

If this legislation becomes law, it would for the tremendous leadership he has enable the Appanoose-Monroe County shown in his struggle to preserve and Rural Development Corp. to move ahead redevelop the Hudson River. The bi­with a rural renewal program in the two- partisan approach he has taken in this county area. It would also clear the way matter is a credit to the people- of West­for action in present and future desig-:- chester County who have sent him to the nated areas where "local public agencies" Congress. The people of Westchester cannot be formed. can take pride in their unusually able

There is ample precedent for this legis- Representative. Few Members have ation. Local nonprofit organizations are made the fine impression upon col­authorized to conduct programs estab- leagues on both sides of the aisle that lished under the Economic Opportunity he has made in his first term. The peo­Act of 1964 and the Public Works and pie of our part of the United States will Economic Development Act of 1965. I always be indebted to him for his tireless can see no reason why such organizations efforts in behalf of the Hudson River. should not be allowed to administer a Mr. Speaker, I think it is time that all rural renewal program. levels of government work together to

The bill which I am introducing also restore the Hudson River. This river is would amend the present law to permit vital to the very existence of our part of the use of rural rene"al loans for the the Nation, but I would not want to leave development of recreational facilities. the impression that this is a local bill of This would greatly enhance the economic interest only to New Jersey and New potential of the existing program, since York Members. On the contrary, the recreational activities can be an effective Hudson River is a keystone of the Na­source of new income for rural areas. tion's economy and the future of the

Appanoose and Monroe Counties, for United States is inextricably linked with example, will benefit greatly from the the future of this river. recreational development at the Rath- Mr. Speaker, I cannot overstate the bun Reservoir. The 11,000-acre reser- need for action to save the Hudson. voir, which wm cover portions of the two This bill which I have introduced today counties, is expected to attract about 1 will, in my view, assist the Federal Gov­million visitors a year: If rural renewal ernment to promo.te negotiations between loans could be used for recreational de- the two States involved as well as pro-

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 5877 vide interim protection for the Hudson while these negotiations are proceeding. I urge prompt action on this bill.

A TRIDUTE TO THE LATE RABBI MORRIS ADLER

Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. CoNYERS] may ex­tend his remarks at this point in the RECORD and include extraneous matter~

The SPEAKER pro temt>Ore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from illinois?

There was no objection. Mr. CONYERS. Mr. Speaker, the city

of Detroit has been greatly saddened by the loss of one of her most distinguished scholars, theologians, and civic leaders. Death came to Rabbi Morris Adler on March 11, a month after he was shot by one of the young people whom he loved so well. The tragic attack upon Rabbi Adler in the new synagogue of the Shaa­rey Zedek congregation of more than 6,000 members shocked the entire Nation.

Rabbi Adler was an eminent scholar and theologian who- was respected and admired not only by the members of his faith, but by Catholics and Protestants alike. His scholarly achievements brought fame and honor to the city of Detroit, his home since 1938. Our city w111 long mourn the loss of this spiritual giant who personally worked so. tirelessly to foster brotherhood and understand­ing among men of all faiths. Rabbi Ad­ler dedicated his life to the improvement of the human condition through his re­ligion, his learning, and his involvement in the affairs of his community.

I personally recall Rabbi Adler's sense of justice and impartiality as chairman of the United Auto Workers Union Pub­lic Review Board. I appeared before him several times as attorney for indi­viduals who had grievances to present. Rabbi Adler always dealt fairly with my clients and impressed me with his respect for all men ari.d their opinions. Rather than try to list all the things that Rabbi Adler meant to each of us who find a sudden emptiness at his passing, I in­sert following my remarks a collection of eulogies taken from newspapers around the country. To all those closest to him­his wife, his daughter, and his con­gregation at Shaarey Zedek-may your memories of Rabbi Adler and the fruits his great work sustain you.

The eulogies follow: (From the Detroit (Mich.) News]

DETROIT SHARES FAME WON BY RABBI ADLER (EDITOR'S NOTE.-A close friend of Rabbi

Morris Adler, Detroit News Religion Writer Harold Schachern, was shocked to hear of the shooting in the synagogue. Schachern was covering a Catholic-Lutheran series of unity talks at the University of Chicago at the time.)

(By Harold Schachern) CHICAGO, February 12.-Rabbi Morris Ad­

ler, as much as any churchman in the city's history, has brought distinction and honor to the Detroit community.

Just as his synagogue, Shaarey Zedek, is considered by architects and artists as one of the great religious buildings of the United States, Rabbi Adler's name also looms

CXII--371-Part 5

impressively in the awareness and admira­tion of the Nation's churchmen and scholars.

HOLDS LIFE TITLE . The 59-year-old spirtual leader has since

1954 been designated as rabbi for life of Shaarey Zedek, ·Detroit's second oldest Jewish congregation and its largest COn­servative congregation. · Having no great seminaries of either the

Jewish or Christian tradition, Detroit is not known as a city of famous religious leaders.

However, Rabbi Adler has overcome this barrier by his own scholarly dedication and achievement.

His contributions to scholarly journals have won him a wide following in American intellectual circles, both Christian and Jewish.

Despite these achievements he has main­tained a common touch which made his messages rea.dily understandable at a lesser intellectual level.

Rabbi Adler's knowledge and sympathy with his neighbors of other faiths had made him a key figure in the ecumenical scene, both local and national.

He has been as fam111ar a figure at Catholic and Protestant meetings and social func­tions as he is at Jewish gatherings.

Rabbi Adler has traveled extensively and leaders of Jewish thought in Israel have }{)()ked to him as one of their principal spokesmen in the Western World.

A CLUTTERED DESK

Like most busy men, Rabbi Adler has had difficulty saying no to those who would have imposed on his time. His desk, about which visitors often joked, has always been piled high with correspondence, pamphlets, mag­azines, and other literature which he always insisted on reading before disposing of.

At each visit to his otfice, he always insisted on teasing visitors that the pile was a new one--that he had gone through the stacks that they had seen last time.

His personal library in his study at the synagogue was larger and contained more vol­umes than that boasted by some institutions of learning.

LONG HOURS OF STUDY He had a comfmtable couch there where

he often would study late and spend the night there to be fresh for morning services.

The writer recalls the night of President Kennedy's assassination when Rabbi Adler left his pulpit at the crowded sabbath eve service to go to a telephone in the synagogue corridor. In a choked voice he expressed his desolation of spirit at the President's death.

Like many scholars and theologians, he takes his work seriously but never himself. He is ever ready to joke about the lighter side of theological subjects and employs a ready wit to ease strained relations when sectarian issues were raised.

BUILDING FOR CENTURIES More than 1,200 persons attended the dedi­

cation of the monumental $4% million syn­agogue in June 1962. The building, Rabbi Adler said then, was the largest of the con­servative movement in the United States.

"We're building here for centuries," he said.

In private conversations, he cautioned his members that this was a building, not to express worldly prosperity or pride, but to express the honor and glory of God.

Clean shaven most of his life, the Russian­born rabbi grew a beard on a visit to Israel several years ago and has worn it ever since.

He is no pallid scholar, but a big broad­shouldered, barrel-chested man with the build of an athlete.

He came to America in 1906 and attended College of the City of New York before grad­uating from the Jewish Theological Semi-

nary in 1935. He came to Congregation · Shaa.rey Zedek in 1938.

During the last 2 years of World War n he served as chaplain of Rhodes General Hospital as it moved from the Philippines to Japan.

He has been active in the Round Table of Catholics, Protestants, and Jews and has par­ticipated in city-sponsored management conferences.

Until last September he was on a year's sabbatical leave with Mrs. Adler in Israel.

Only last month he received an honorary degree from the Jewish Theological Seminary and a group of Christian friends joined his coreligionists in a fiight to New York City to attend the ceremony.

[From the Detroit (Mich.) Free Press, Feb. 13, 1966]

RABBI A SCHOLAR, LEADER, LEGEND Rabbi Morris Adler is a man who has be­

come a legend in his own time. The spiritual leader of Shaarey Zedek, one

of the Nation's largest synagogues, with a congregation of more than 6,000 spread across the Detroit metropolltan area.

A religious scholar and teacher and au­thor of learned tomes; an expert on Judaism, Zionism, and the modern State of Israel, where he spent a year absorbing the young nation's new-old culture.

A hard-working civic leader-chairman since its founding in 1957 of the United Auto Workers Union's public review board, vice president of the UAW-sponsored Community Health Association, founder and board mem­ber of the Detroit Round Table of Christians and Jews, adviser to Wayne State Univer­sity's department of Near Eastern languages, member of the Governor's committee for higher education, past national chairman of the B'nai B'rith Commission on Adult Jew­ish Education.

"Rabbi" means "teacher," and "Sha.arey Zedek" means "gates of righteousness." . Dr. Adler is a teacher and practitioner of

righteousness. Steeped in the centuries-old traditions of

Judaism-his father was also a rabbi-Dr. Adler has worked tirelessly for religious and racial tolerance.

He has preached in Protestant churches. He has encouraged members of other faiths to attend services at Sha.arey Zedek. He has brought Negroes and whites together, saying he knows the "position of a minority in a democracy."

He has served his country in peace and war. During World War II, he was an Army chaplain, and he was the first and only Jewish chaplain in Japan when that nation lmrrendered. He is a past national chap1ain of the Jewish War Veterans.

Raised in the Orthodox faith, Rabbi Adler switched to the conservative practice while he was an honor student at the Jewish The­ological Seminary of America.

He spent 3 years as a rabbi in Buffalo, N.Y., before coming to Detroit in 1938 to be assistant rabbi at Shaarey Zedek.

In 1954, he became chief rabbi of the syna­gogue.

It was in that year that he made his first trip to Israel. He had helped finance the creation of the new nation, serving as pres­ident of the Zionist Organization in Detroit.

He made a second trip to Israel in 1964 and stayed until last August. His congrega­tion had raised a special fund to finance the yearlong stay of Dr. Adler and his wife, Goldie.

Dr. Adler, 59, has one daughter, Mrs. Eli Benstein, and three grandchildren.

But his "family" extends to the thousands, with members of his congregation looking upon him as a wise father.

"A rabbi practices the most unspeclalized profession in the universe," Dr. Adler said

5878 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE March ·15, 1966

in a recent interview. "But my association with the young people is, for me, the most satisfying part of my work."

It was one of the "young people" who turned on him Saturday.

[From the New York Times, Feb. 13, 1966) RABBI IN DETROIT SHOT AT SERVICE-ADLER

CRITICALLY WOUNDED BY FORMER MENTAL

PATIENT

DETRoiT, February 12.-A former mental patient climbed to the pulpit of a crowded synagogue today, told the congregation that its members "make me ashamed to say that I am a Jew," and shot the rabbi.

The young xnan, a member of the syna­gogue, then shot himself in the head. The congregation of about 1,000 included his par­ents, grandmother, and sister. Some mem­bers ran weeping into the street.

Both men were critically wounded. They were rushed to local hospitals.

Rabbi Morris Adler, 60 years old, a nation­ally proininent leader of conservative Juda­ism, was shot in the back of the head as he pushed a teenage boy from the line of fire. He underwent emergency surgery for 2 hours.

Since 1963, he had served as chairman of the highly influential Adult Jewish Educa­tion Commission of B'nai B'rith.

Rabbi Adler, a close friend of Walter P. Reuther, president of the United Auto Work­ers, is a member of the Michigan Fair Elec­tion Practices Commission and a member of the Labor-Management Citizens Commission.

In recent years, he had been active in the roundtable of Catholics, Protestants, and Jews and is regarded as one of the leading spokesmen for the Jewish community in Detroit.

ASSAILANT IDENTIFIED

Police identified his assailant as Richard S. Wishnetsky, 23, of Detroit and said that he had once been a mental patient. The shooting occurred in the modern new syna­gogue of Congregation Shaarey Zedek, founded more than 100 years ago. It is lo­cated in suburban Southfield.

Witnesses said that Wishnetsky rose from his seat as Rabbi Adler was :finishing a por­tion of a bar mitzvah service for Steven Frank. Wishnetsky's younger sister bad participated in the service.

He climbed to. the pulpit, firing a shot in the air, seized the microphone from Rabbi Adler, pulled a prepared speech from his pocket and read it. His words were recorded by a tape recorder used to preserve all serv­ices at the synagogue.

"This congregation is a travesty and an abOinination," he said. "It has made a mockery by phoniness and hypocrisy of the duty and spirit of Judaism and is composed· of people who, on the whole, make me ashamed to say that I am a Jew.

"With this act I protest an unacceptable situation."

THREE SHOTS FIRED

He fired three times. The first shot hit Rabbi Adler in the arm. The wounded rabbi turned and pushed the Frank boy down. The second shot hit the rabbi in .the back of the head.

Wishnetsky then turned the gun on him­self.

Eugene Merkow, a member of the con­gregation who was sitting .on the pulpit participating in the service, calmed the con-gregation. ·

Wishnetsky's father rushed to the pulpit and leaned over his son.

"Oh, my God, that's my son," he cried. Mr. Merkow told the congregation to file

out in an orderly fashion. They did, al­though the police said that earlier the syna­gogue worshipers had been in near hysteria.

Mayor Jerome P. Cavanagh urged the peo­ple of Detroit to "pray for the recovery of Rabbi Adler."

- "He is truly one of our great citizens," the xnayor said. "He. has worked tirelessly and unselfishly to create a climate of decency and understanding in this community. It is deplorable that a man of such noble inten­tions should be the victim of this senseless act."

[From the Detroit (Mich.) News, Mar. 11, 1966]

RABBI ADLER Is DEAD-SERVICES SUNDAY-WIFE AND DAUGHTER AT BEDSIDE-VICTIM IN COMA SINCE SHOOTING A MONTH AGO

Rabbi Morris Adler died today in Sinai Hospital, where he had been in a coma since he was shot February 12 during a sabbath service in Congregation Shaarey Zedek.

With him when he died were his wife, Goldie, who has spent much of the time since the shooting at his bedside, and his daughter, Mrs. Shulamith Benstein.

The religious leader had suffered brain damage from a bullet wound in the head. His condition had worsened during the last several days despite intensive care and two brain operations.

SUNDAY SERVICES

Services for Rabbi Adler will be held at 2 p.m., Sunday in Shaarey Zedek, 27375 Bell, Southfield. His body will not lie in state. The place of burial has not been decided.

His family requested that memorial offer­ings be made to the congregation's Morris Adler Scholarship Fund, or to any charity.

Governor Romney proclaimed Sunday as a day of mourning throughout the State. ·

Rabbi Adler died at 7:42a.m. His attacker, 23-year-old Richard Wish­

netsky, who had a record of mental illness, died of a self-inflicted wound. 4 days after the shooting.

The death of the 59-year-old rabbi robs the city of a great humanitarian and a leader of religious thought.

A WIDE ROLE

Although his duties· as spiritual leader of Detroit's largest Conservative Jewish con­gregation were taxing in themselves, Rabbi Adler's role in the city went far beyond this.

In his 28 years as rabbi of Congregation Shaarey Zedek he became a key figure in the national and local ecumenical scene because of his understanding of other faiths.

A man of great sympathy and good will, he was a founder and board member of the De­troit Round Table of Catholics, Protestants and Jews.

Widely traveled, Rabbi Adler had recently concluded a sabbatical year in Israel. That young nation had come to regard him as one of its leading spokesmen to the Western World.

Born in Russia, Rabbi Adler was brought to the United States in 1912. He graduated from College of the City of New York and then from the Jewish Theological Seininary.

He was named rabbi · at Congregation Shaarey Zedek in 1938 after serving in Buf­falo. During World War I, he served in the Pacific Theater as chaplain of Rhodes Gen­eral Hospital.

DEDICATES SYNAGOGUE

His physical monument in his lifetime was the magnificent, $4%, Inillion synagogue building dedicated in 1962.

He pointed out at the time that the build­ing was the largest of the conservative move­ment in the United States and declared:

"We're building here for centuries." But he often cautioned that the building

was to express the honor and glory of God rather than to reflect worldly prosperitf·

HEADS UAW PANEL

In 1957, Rabbi Adler was named chairman of the UA W Public Review Board which acts as a final appeal panel for union members.

Board's and civic bodies on which he served included the Governor's Committee for Higher Education, the State Cultural Com­mission, the Governor's Commission on prob­lems of the Aging, the Fair Election Prac­tices Commission and the Citizens' Commit­tee for Equal Opportunity.

On his 25th anniversary at Shaarey Zedek, state and community leaders joined in a special "service of tribute."

ROMNEY AT TRIBUTE

Speakers included Governor Romney, Fed­eral Judge Wade H. McCree Jr., UAW Presi­dent Walter P. Reuther and the Reverend Henry Hitt Crane, pastor-emeritus of Cen­tral Methodist Church.

Surviving Rabbi Adler are his wife, his daughter and three grandchildren.

[From the Detroit (Mich.) News, Mar. 11, 1966]

ROMNEY, CAVANAGH LEAD ADLER TRmUTES

Tributes to Rabbi Morris Adler as a spir­itual leader not only of Congregation Shaarey Zedek bqt also of the entire Detroit metro­politan area came today from Governor Romney, Mayor Cavanagh, prominent churchmen, civil leaders, and union otllcials.

Governor Romney also proclaimed Sun­day as "a period of mourning throughout the State of Michigan."

Governor Romney said in Lansing today: "PERSONAL FRIEND

"The State of Michigan has suffered a great spiritual and civic loss with the passing of Rabbi Morris Adler.

"His magnificent contributions to the moral and spiritual betterment of all men knew no theological bonds.

"In addition, he was a good personal friend. His advice and counsel on ethical and moral matters were constant sources of help to me for many years, in industry and in public life.

"Mrs. Romney and I join thousands of other citizens in extending our deepest sym­pathy to his widow and family, and to the members of his congregation."

OBSERVE MOURNING

"I urge every citizen to observe this suh­day mourning period in his own way and to personally strive in thought and action to fulfill the high standards of moral and ethical behavior to which Rabbi Adler de-voted his life." ·

Mayor Cavanagh said: "Rabbi Adler was one of the great citizens

of our community. His death is a personal loss to me as a friend.

"I offer the sympathy of the people of Detroit to his widow and daughter and to the members of the Synagog Shaarey Zedek.

"Rabbi Adler was a renowned scholar, edu­cator, spiritual leader;· and a man deeply conscious of human problems.

"Besides great learning, he had that rare quality of simplicity which endowed him with wisdom as a counsellor and a deep sensitivity for the needs of people. His efforts to create a climate of decency and a true spirit of brotherhood in our community are traits for which he will long be remem­bered.

"All faiths will Iniss Rabbi Adler's devo­tion to religious understanding which he worked so hard to achieve through the Round Table of Protestants, Catholics, and Jews."

PRAISED BY DEARDEN

The Most Reverend John F. Dearden, Catholic archbishop of Detroit, said:

"A dedicated and inspiring life has been lost to the world in the passing of Rabbi Adler.

"In the name of the archdiocese, I ex­press my· deepest sympathy to his family.

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· -HOUSE 5879 to Congregation Sha.a.rey Zedek, and to the entire community.

"We shall remember him in our prayers.'" Dr. G. Merrill Lenox, executive director of

the Metropolitan Detroit Council of Churches, paid .this tribute:

"Rabbi Adler was one of Detroit's most distinguished religious leaders; none was more able than he; only a few, if any, were more influential.

"He was sensitive to the needs of all peo­ple--especially those least able to speak for themselves. He was respected and heard among the mighty but honored as well in the ranks of the disadvantaged.

"Intellectually, he was a towering giant; religiously, a good balance between priest and prophet; civically, a concerned and. powerfullea.cter ." · ·

IMPORTANT FIGURE "He was amused when referred. to as a

figurehead by an enthusiastic chairman, who, of course, meant to characterize him as an important. figure in the community.

"Indeed, he was a great figure in the com­munity. His moral, mental, and. spiritual strength more than matched. his stalwart physical frame.

"Our sympathy is extended to his heroic widow who, through the ordeal, has mani­fested all the qualities of a great person, possessing a deep and effective religious faith.

"Her concern for the innocent parents of her husband's assailant was in itself a meas­ure of her great character. and spirit.

"To Congregation Shaarey Zedek, in its crushing loss, the Metropolitan Detroit Coun­cil of Churches expresses its profound sym­pathy and the hope that the example of the noble leadership of this prophet of God might long remain as a source of challenge and. inspiration."

L:EA.DING CITIZEN The Right Reverend Richard S. Emrich,

bishop of the Episcopal diocese of Michigan, said:

"Detroit has lost one of its leading citizens and I personally have lost a dear friend.

"We honor a man chiefly by carrying on his work. One statement of Rabbi Adler's that I clearly recall was, 'Remember that silence can be a sin.'

"Let any of us who see injustice in the world remember Rabbi Adler's statement­and fight for justice."

Edward L. Cushman, vice president of American Motors Corp., said:

"Rabbi Morris Adler's death is a tremen­dous loss to all of us who knew and worked with him in community betterment.

"He was a man of wisdom and deep concern for 'all sorts and conditions of men,' includ­ing businessmen.

"Since 1956 he had served as a member of the clergy panel, which has advised American Motors management on moral and ethical matters involving corporate human relations. He will be sorely missed." ·

LOSS FELT BY ALL The Detroit District of the Lutheran

Church-Missouri Synod, said in a state­ment:

"Rabbi Adler's death is a loss felt by all of us. He was not only a spokesman for his faith-and a very articulate one-but fre­

. quently for the entire community. "A sensitive concern for people, coupled.

with outstanding leadership ability, brought him into a warm and respected relationship with those on all levels of city and national life.

"Our heartfelt and deepest sympathies go out !;o his. widow, and all of his 'church family' at Shaarey Zedek."

Because .of Rabbi .A~ler's .death, :~he :a•nal B'rlth Hillel Foundation a:t Wayne State University has canceled plans for a dance a.t

8 p.m. tomorrow ln McKenzie Hall on the university campus.

WORKED AS RIEND

UAW President Walter P. Reuther, a friend. of Rabbi Adler, called his · death a "grievous and deeply personal loss." Reuther said:

"To us in the UAW with whom he worked closely and intimately as a friend and col­league,. his life will be measured by the timeless qualities which his noble spirit reflected-love of people, social mindednei!IS, courage, and intelligent, unselfish leadership.

"He walked in quiet nobility as a man among men."

[From the New York Times, Mar. 12, 1966) RABBI MORRIS ADLER, 59, DIES-SHOT DuRING

SERVICE ON FEBRUARY 12-DETRoiT CoN­SERVATIVE LEADER HAD BEEN IN A COMA SINCE ATTACK IN SYNAGOGUE DETRoiT, March 11.-Rabbi Morris Adler,

spiritual leader of Detroit's largest Conserva­tive Jewish congregation, ·died early today in Sinal Hospital, where he had been in a coma since he was shot February 12 during a Sabbath service in Congregation Sha.arey Zedek. He was 59 years old.

With him when he died were his wife, the former Jennie Resnick, and his daughter, Mrs. Shulalnith Bensteln.

Rabbi Adler ha:d suffered brain damage from a bullet wound in the head. His condi­tion had worsened during the last several days despite two brain operations.

His attacker, 23-year-old Richard Wish­netsky, who had a record of mental illness, shot himself moments after he had shot the rabbi and died 4 days later.

Today, Gov. George Rotnney declared Sun­day as a day of mourning for Rabbi Adler throughout Michigan.

A DISTINGUISHED EDUCATOR Rabbi Adler, prominently identified with

Conservative Judaism, was one of the coun­try's most distinguished Jewish educators. His lectures and writings were known here and in Jewish communities the world over.

He often decried the absence of "creative conservation" among the different philoso­phies of Judaism, and "the gaps and misun­derstanding and resentment" that threat­ened Jewish community life.

Once, in a lecture, he tenned as "an irony of American Jewish life in our times" that when new forms of communication have linked the world "the Jewish community has seemed to have lost its capacity for com­municating across denominational and ideo­logical lines."

With an almost around-the-clock devotion, Rabbi Adler toiled in behalf of adult Jewish education. Since 1963, he had served as chairman of the highly influential Adult Jewish Education Commission of B'nai B'rith.

In 1964, he initiated an experiment in Jew­ish adult education that linked 14 study groups in 13 cities for a lecture and discus­sion by telephone. The project was spon­sored by )3'nai B'rith. Rabbi Adler con­ducted the experiment from his study of Congregation Shaarey Zedek in Detroit on the subject: ~·wm Jews Be Jews in 2084?"

In addition to writing on numerous ar­ticles ·on every phase of Jewish life, he was the · author of two books, "Selected Passages From the Torah," published in 1948, and the "World of the Torah" (1958).

Rabbi Adler was born in Russia, the· son of Rabbi Joseph Adler, and came to this country in 1913. He was graduated from City College in 1928, was ordained a rabbi at the Jewish Theological Seminary of America in 1935 and was given hon"Orary degrees by Wayne State University, where he had been an adviser to its department of New Eastern ,languages and literature.

Hi.s , first pulpit .was at Temple Emanu-El in Buffalo, from 1935 until 1988, when he

went to Detroit. From 1943 to 1946 he served 1n the Army.

He directed the building of the $4.5 mil­lion synagogue in Detroit, which was dedi­cated in 1962 and is considered to be one of the largest of its kind in the Conservative xnovexnent. ·

Rabbi Adler was a close friend of Walter P. Reuther, president of the United Auto Work­ers. He was 'a member of the Michigan Fair Election Practices Commission and of the Labor-Management Citizens Commission.

In recent years, he had been active in the roundtable of Catholics, Protestants, and Jews and was considered a leading spokes­man for the Jewish community in Detroit.

Last September he returned to Detroit after a year's sabbatical leave in Israel.

[From the Washington (D.C.) Post, Mar. 12, 1966]

ASSASSIN'S BULLET FATAL TO RABBI MORRIS ADLER

DETROIT, March 11.-Rabbi Morris Adler died today, victim of an assassin-a young man with a twisted mind-who gunned him down nearly a month ago during a service at his synagogue.

Gov. George Romney declared a day of mourning for all of Michigan Sunday.

A Russian immigrant who rose to leader­ship of one of the Nation's most powerful and respected congregations, Rabbi Adler, 59, died of complications ·resulting from the coma he entered 27 days ago when Richard Wishnetsky shot him in his head.

He never regained consciousness. Doctors at Sinai Hospital had performed two . opera­tions but extensive brain damage made the battle almost hopeless. They warned Tues­day night that the end was near.

Wishnetsky, 23, a Phi Beta Kappa scholar whose writings revealed a mind torn between flashes of genius and pits of darkness, died February 16 of the the bullet wound he in­flicted upon himself moments after he shot Rabbi Adler.

The shooting occurred during a bar mitzvah service. Wishnetsky jumped to the platform and denounced the congregation, saying he was "ashamed" to be a Jew. The audience, including members of other faiths invited for an ecumenical experiment, watched in horror as Wishnetsky fired two shots at the Rabbi and then shot himself.

Romney said Rabbi Adler "was a good per­sonal friend. His advice and counsel on ethnical and moral matters were a constant source of help to me for many years in indus­try and public life."

United Auto Workers Union President Walter Reuther said Rabbi Adler "walked in quiet nobility as a xnan among men. His good works will live long after him~ And we who grieve for him are better for having shared his friendship, his compassion, and his affection."

Rabbi Adler served on the union's publtc review board since 1957. He was also a strong spokesman for civil rights and a former na­tional chairman of the B'nai B'rith Cominis­sion on Adult Jewish Education.

In Washington, Dr. William A. Wexler, president of the B'nai B'rith, in a statement this morning, said: "The Jewish community has suffered the loss of one of its most dis­tinguished scholars whose passion for right­eousness, incisive brilliance of learning, com­passion for the troubles of others and capac­ity to articulate goodness and wisdom were harmoniously combined in a wonderful human being."

A delegation of high officials of the Jewish service organization, .including members of its adult Jewish education commission, will fiy to Petroit to attend the funeral service on Sunday at Sha.arey .Zedek, the multi-mlllion­qollar synagogue. Rabbi Adler built in sub­urban Southfield-the temple from which he was carried February 12.

5880 eONGRESSIONAL RECORD----HOUSE March 15, -1966

A HEAVYWEIGHT CHAMPION? Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask

tinanimous consent that the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. CLARK] may ex­tend his remarks at this point in the REcORD and include extraneous matter.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from nlinois?

There was no objection. Mr. CLARK. Mr. Speaker, it was a

cloudy morning, and quite cool over the fiat bush-filled fields of France that day in i944. It was, or at least seems like a long time ago. From my pilot's seat the windo\11' of the glider was semi­frosted and the land seemed to be passing by so fast that it was but a blur as the glider descended. Mr. Speaker, I do n9t know as I compile these remarks to my colleagues that I can be completely dis­passionate or entirely objective. For I want these remarks really to project a

·feeling I have for this land of ours that first, I would suppose, occurred to me . over the fields of France some two decades ago.

I recall that within recent weeks Sen­ator LoNG of Louisiana said on the Sen­ate floor, that, as he walked about our Capitol his chest swelled a little every ti'me he saw the Stars and Stripes flying from a pole. With all of the controversy over Vietnam, and in general a healthy discussion of such a subject is a proper function of the Congress, it sometimes seems as though the virtue of patriotism is going out of style. As I wrote in my recent newsletter to constituents quoting Tennyson:

There is no such thing as a good war or a bad peace.

No one wants to see bloodshed on the jungle-tangled plains of South Vietnam. Americans are constituted, by our past history and military glories, to fight a war as quickly as possible, win it as quickly as possible, and settle back to peace as quickly as possible. Unfortu­nately the war in Vietnam is not that kind of a war. _

Surely no one in this entire Nation feels more pain when reading the casu­alty lists each day than the President of the United States. He must face, in his high office, the agonizing decisions that can and will affect the human life of Americans over there. I do not envy him that task. I do not find it easy my­self to hear and read of boys from my district who have been wounded or killed in this frustrating struggle but the United States is-committed to the cause of freedom, in southeast Asia, and every­where else. To welch or back off from that commitment is as unthinkable as surrendering to Adolf Hitler or Mussolini would have been in my days of military service.

The discussion of the best course to be followed for resolution of this · bloody struggle will and must go on. But there is some stage at which our use of free speech and open discussion becomes a transgression on good commonsense. There are times, certainly, when it can even come close to giving aid and com­fort to the enemy. At least the discus­sion in the Halls of Congress revolves

around resolution of the problem, not privileges, or duties. But they all go to­total avoidance of it. I . am sure that a gether. Who is he, or any other citizen number of my colleagues presently of any race, creed, color, or denomina­sitting in this Hall would be hard pressed tion, to have the right to march to the to remember exactly when the resolve sound of different drums. came upon them to take up public service I laud the intention of the American as a career. But I would bet my bottom Legion to picket any theater in this Na­dollar that it occurred to many of them tion that shows this man's next fight while in military service or shortly there- whenever it is held, if at all. I further after. urge that the Legion be joined by the

It does seem logical enough that after VFW, the Spanish American Veterans, skimming hedgerows in France or the veterans of all of our wars, organized landing on sandy Anzio Beach or pushing or not. Further than that I urge the through the steaming and rotting jungles citizens of the Nation as a whole to boy­of an Okinawa or Guadacanal that you cott any of his performances. To leave think to yourself-"Let us go back and these theater seats empty would be the make something of this land of ours." finest tribute possible to that boy whose Surely it was said in a thousand different hearse may pass by the open doors of the ways and each and every day in 'this theater on Main Street, U.S.A. Chamber we have our differences as to And I am not talking about black or what the best road is to that better land white. I am talking about green. The of ours. But we each seek our own truths Green Berets that move quietly through and do the best we can. And that best the devastated overgrowth of South Viet­in so many cases originally stemmed nam. And I am talking about red. Not from a feeling of pride in the service we the red blood that may fiow from this had given, as we should, to our country. man's opponent's nose and spill on a can-

While it is the flags flying on Capitol vas at $1,000 an ounce. But the red flagpoles that give the distinguished Sen- blood of Americans, black and white, that ator from Louisiana a slightly swelling - spills on the foreign ground of a south­chest, it is the recent action of two of east Asian nation in the cause of free­our Governors, in States other than my dom, without an inflated price tag. And own, who give me a feeling of pride. As I am talking about blue. Not the blue­I say, as a former boxer myself, that it is black of boxing shorts or the blue-hued the actions of_the heavyweight champion purple shorts of a man who can hardly be of the United States or the world, as it called a champion after his recent utter­may be defined today, turns my stomach ances. But rather the tattered and torn and leads me to recall those days in blue Navy uniform of a boy blown from France with even more pride. I am not a the deck of his ship off the shores of that hero. I am not a superpatriot. But I feel distant land and continent. that each man, if he really is a man, owes I hope the citizens of this land will rise to his country a willingness to protect it up in righteous indignation and take the and serve it in time of need. I think, money·they would have spent at the box further, that that debt or obligation is office and send it to CARE or some other proportional to what this Nation has worthy charity. But above all I hope given to the individual. The more he has that each and every seat of each and r~ceived the more the Nation can rea- every theater will stand empty in tribute sonably expect, if not in actual service, to our men in Vietnam. I hope the voice for there may be legitimate reasons or of the announcer coming from Toronto limitaticns, at least in public mein or or wherever and whenever another of his attitude. . fights may be held will ricochet all over

From this standpoint the heavyweight the walls of those empty theaters just as champion has been a complete and total the bullets ricochet around the bel­disgrace to the land that has provided meted heads of our fighting men. Only him with the opportunities to make mil- in this way we say to these men "we will lions of dollars. I applaud the action of not tolerate those who are unwilling to the Governors of Illinois and Maine in serve our Nation." We must, and should, rejecting out of hand, the appearance grant anyone the right of free speech, of such an ingrate within the boundaries unless and until it becomes seditious. of their States. Surely such a produc- But can we do less for those men who are tion must necessarily bring some revenue fighting and dying for this Nation in a to their States but what price glory. Is foreign land. Let us grant them their there a price tag that can be placed on equal time and the right to free speech the coffins . being loaded on ships off by an overwhelming and stunning si­Vietnam? lence. The .silence of hundreds of empty

It is encouraging to see that men of theaters. courage and vision and above all patriot-ism sit in the statehouses of this Nation. It is almost totally discouraging to see a man who has reaped the profits of the public say this war is not his war. Is it my war? Is it President Johnson's war? It is everyone's war-and we hope that just as soon as possible it will be no war at all.

But until that time it is an effort on the part of all of the American people. And the heavyweight champion should bear an equal share of that load. . There is no citizen . of this land who deserves better or worse when it comes to rights,

THE WAR IN VIETNAM

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under previous order of the House, the gentle­man from California [Mr. COHELAN] is recognized for 5 minutes.

Mr. COHELAN. Mr. Speaker, the war in Vietnam is the most important and difficult problem which confronts us today. The situation is complex. The solutions are not simple or clear cut, and the efforts to substitute negotiations for shooting are not entirely within the con­trol of any single government.

March 15, 1-966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORO ·- · HOUSE 5881 Learned observers disagree as to just

how this war developed, and historians of the future will debate the wisdom of spe­cific policy decisions of the past 12 years. The one thing on which all reasonable men can agree is that we want to end this war, with its terrible toll of lives and its tremendous drain on the resources of this and other countries, as soon as possible.

We seek peace and we seek independ­ence and freedom for men to determine their own future. We prefer to achieve these goals by peaceful means. We pre­fer to work out at the conference table the means by which the Vietnamese peo­ple can freely establish their own govern­ment, build their own society, and de­velop their own economy.

If our present efforts to achieve nego­tiations and a cease-fire through the United Nations, or through a reconvened Geneva Conference, are unsuccessful, I believe we must continue energetically and persistently to persuade our oppo­nents that we desire not war but peace; that we desire neither personal gain, m1litary bases, nor political dependence. I believe we must continue our efforts to persuade them, through every direct and indirect recourse at our command, that we desire only a conference without pre­conditions, an effective cease-fire and self -determination for the South Viet­namese.

In the meantime, we must use our military force with prudence and re­straint. We must limit it to the meas­ured response which will prevent the other side from achieving its goal of domination, and we must guard wisely against the kind of escalation which could bring China into the war.

One of the responsibiliti~s of a Mem­ber of Congress is to see that his views, and the views of his constituents, are made known to our policymakers. This responsibility I have pursued repeatedly. In statements to the House and in con­ferences with members of the adminis­tration I have expressed my views and the deep concerns of many of my con-stituents. ·

Since last summer I have advocated, both publicly and privately, that the full resources of the United Nations be brought to bear in seeking a peaceful settlement. I have advocated negotia­tions based on the Geneva accords and including all parties to the con:tlicts.

I joined in the preparation and circu­lation of a letter to the President on January 21, signed by 77 Members of the House, urging this country to for­mally request the U.N. to seek an effec­tive cease-fire; supporting the moratori­um on bombing North Vietnam; and encouraging continued efforts to bring the war to the conference table.

On March 1, I presented a statement to the House in behalf of 78 Members, stressing that our vote for a supplemen­tal authorization to support our troops was not a mandate for unrestrained or unrestricted enlargement of the war, but rather was cast in the context of the President's assurance that our objec­tives were limited and designed to bring about a cease-fire and negotiations.

In separate remarks to the House on the same day, based in part on my just completed 5-day inspection trip to Viet­nam, I emphasized my belief that we must intensify our efforts to :find a peaceful settlement of this war. I stated that I shared many of the doubts and questions raised by such distin­guished men as Senator FuLBRIGHT, General Gavin, and Ambassador Ken­nan, and that we must not overlook any reasonable diplomatic initiative. · I again warned against the risk of taking military steps which, in an at­tempt to hasten victory, might bring on a still larger war. And I emphasized the importance of encouraging our policy planners to make clear that we would negotiate with all those who are actively engaged in carrying on this war.

In this connection, it is pertinent to mention that as far back as August 9, 1965, Congressmen HENRY REUSS and I, in a television broadcast on channel 2, Oakland, stated that we should nego­tiate with all the people who are shoot­ing at us, including the Vietcong.

I would also like to make it clear that I endorse the present open hearings of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and applaud the committee's efforts to throw more light on our policy and re­lationships with Communist China.

As a former labor negotiator, I know that practical realities limit the extent to which conferees can unilaterally an­nounce in advance what positions they will take if and when the other side agrees to talk. Our Government has repeatedly said, in public announce­ments and in private communications, that it imposes no prior limitations or preconditions on what can be discussed or negotiated. Much as we would like the President and other om.cials to spell out more details, we must recognize that the success of their efforts is even more important.

Many have asked why the other side persists in :fighting if we have made clear our willingness to negotiate and to abide by the results of free elections. I do not know the answer, and the ques­tions trouble me, too.

Perhaps our opponents expect to win militarily and deliberately reject the risks of free elections.

Perhaps they do not believe us, or perhaps they mistrust the Saigon Gov­ernment.

Possibly the discourse between Hanoi, Moscow, and Peiping involves complexi­ties and con:tlicts which require more time to· resolve.

Whatever the stumbling blocks, we must tirelessly seek to overcome them. With the dangers of a larger and much more costly war on one hand, and the unmet needs of our own society on the other, the stakes are simply too great not to make every reasonable and prac­tical effort.

The decisionmaking process in a de­mocracy involves the study and counsel of many advisers. Inevitably they will vary in their views as to which course is wisest.

For my part I shall continue to urge, by whatever means my judgment indi-

cates will be most effective under the circumstances, that we adhere to our announced policy of a :firm but limited military resistance; that we encourage long-needed economic and social re­forms; that we search tirelessly for some means of bringing this con:tlict from the battlefields to the conference table; and that we support free elections, under ap­propriate international safeguards, so that the people of Vietnam may truly and independently determine their own future.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE By unanimous consent, leave of ab­

sence was granted the following Mem­bers (at the request of Mr. GERALD R. FORD):

Mr. MATHIAS, for today, on account of illness.

Mr. REINECKE, for the balance of the week, on account of official business.

Mr. ELLSWORTH, for today, on account of illness.

Mr. MooRE, for today, on account of family illness.

SPECIAL ORDERS GRANTED By unanimous consent, permission to

address the House, following the legisla­tive program and any special orders heretofore entered, was granted to:

Mr. COHELAN <at the request of Mr. PuciNSKI) , for 5 minutes, today; to re­vise and extend his remarks and include extraneous matter.

Mr. BoLAND for 30 minutes, today; and to revise and extend his remarks.

Mr. MoRSE <at the request of Mr. DuNCAN of Tennessee) , for 60 minutes, today; to revise and extend his remarks and to include extraneous matter.

Mr. GuBsER <at the request of Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee), for 30 minutes, on Wednesday, March 16, 1966; to revise and extend his remarks and to include extraneous matter.

Mr. GUBSER <at the request of Mr. DuNCAN of Tennessee), for 30 minutes, on Thursday, March 17, 1966; to revise and extend his remarks and to include extraneous matter.

Mr. GuBSER <at the request of Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee), for 30 minutes, on Friday, March 18, 1966; to revise and extend his remarks and to include ex- . traneous matter.

Mr. AsHBROOK <at the request of Mr. DuNCAN of Tennessee>, for 15 minutes, today; to revise and extend his remarks and to include extraneous matter.

Mr. PUCINSKI, for 15 minutes, today.

EXTENSION OF REMARKS By unanimous consent, permission to

extend remarks in the CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD, or to revise and extend remarks was granted.to: .

<The following Members (at the re­quest of Mr. DUNCAN of Tennessee) and to include extraneous matter:)

Mr. ROUDEBUSH. Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN. Mr. FULTON of Pennsylvania in two

instances.

5882 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - ·HOUS-E March 15, 1966

<The following Members <at the re.;;. quest of Mr. PuciNSKI) and to include extraneous matter:)

Mr. ANNUNZIO. Mr. CALLAN. Mr. SCHMIDHAUSER. Mr. JOELSON. Mr. TRIMBLE'. Mr. KLUCZYNSKI. Mr. FEIGHAN. Mr. KASTENMEIER. Mr. BoLAND.

SENATE BILLS AND CONCURRENT RESOLUTION REFERRED

Bills and a concurrent resolution of the Senate of the following titles were taken from the Speaker's table and, under the rule, referred as follows:

s. 2573. An act to validate the action of the Acting Superintendent, Yosemite Na­tional Park, in extending the 1955 leave year for certain Federal employees, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Post Ofilce and Civil Service.

s. 2719. An act to provide for the striking of metals in commemoration of the 100th anniversary of the purchase of Alaska by the United States from Russia; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

s. 2831. An act to furnish to the Scr:l..nton Association, Inc., medals in commemoration of the 100th anniversary of tlle ;founding of the city of Scranton, Pa.; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

S. 2835. An act to provide for the striking of medals in commemoration of the 75th an­niversary of the founding of the American Numismatic Association; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

s. Con. Res. 71. Concurrent resolution to approve the selection of the U.S. Olympic Committee and to support its recommenda­tions that the State of Utah be designated as the site for the 1972 winter Olympic games; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. ·

SENATE ENROLLED BILL SIGNED

BILL PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT

Mr. BURLESON, from the Committee on House Administration, reported that that committee did on March 14, 1966, present to the President, for his approval, a bill of the House of the following title:

H.R.12889. An act to authorize appropria­tions during the fiscal year 1966 for pro­curement of aircraft, missiles, naval vessels, tracked combat vehicles, research, develop­ment, test, evaluation, and military construc­tion for the Armed Forces, and for other purposes.

ADJOURNMENT

Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House do now adjourn.

The motion was agreed to; accordingly (at 6 o'clock and 34 minutes p.m.) the House adjourned until tomorrow, Wednesday, March 16, 1966, at 12 o'clock noon.

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC.

Under clause 2 of rule XXIV, execu­tive communications were taken from the Speaker's table and referred as follows:

2180. A letter from the chief seout execu­tive, National Council, Boy Scouts of Amer­ica, transmitting the 56th annual report of the growth and effectiveness of the Boy Scouts of.America, for the year 1965 (H. Doc. No. 410); to the Committee on Education and Labor and ordered to be printed with illustrations.

2181. A letter from the Director, Bureau of the Budget, Executive Ofilce of the Presi­dent, transmitting a report that the appro­priation for the Post Ofilce Department for "Transportation" for the fiscal year 1966, had been reapportioned on a basis indicating a need for a supplemental estimate of appro­priation, pursuant to the provisions of 31 U.S.C. 665; to the Committee on Appropria-

The SPEAKER announced his signa- tions. ture to an enrolled bill of the Senate of 2182. A letter from the Director, Bureau the following title: of the Budget, Executive Ofilce of the Presi-

s. 2614. An act to provide for u.s. par- dent, transmitting a report that the appro-tat id 1 b ti priation for the Post Ofilce Department for

ticipation in the 1967 s ew e ce e ra on "Operations" for the fiscal year 1966, had of the centennial of the Alaska Purchase. been reapportioned on ,a basis indicating a

ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED

need for a supplemental estimate of appro­priations to provide for certain increased pay costs and for handling a greater mail

Mr. BURLESON, from the Committee volume, pursuant to the provisions of 31 on House Administration, reported that U.~.c. 665; to the Committee on Appro-

. that committee J:ad examined and found · pr~~~~~~ letter from the Secretary ot the truly enrolled bills of the House of the Interior transmitting a report that an ada­following titles, which were thereupon quate s~il survey and land classification of signed by the Speaker pro tempore: the lands in the Garrison diversion unit,

H.R. 432. An act to amend the Federal Em- Missouri River Basin project, North Dakota, ployees' Group Life Insurance Act of 1954 has been completed as a. part of the investi­and the Civil Service Retirement Act with gations required in the formulation of a def­regard to fillng designation of beneficiary, inite plan for project development, pursuant and for other purposes; to the provisions of Public Law 83-172; to

H.R. 3584. An act to amend the Federal the Committee on Appropriations. Coal Mine Safety Act so as to provide further 2184. A letter from the Deputy Secretary for the prevention of accidents in coal mines; of Defense, transmitting a. draft of proposed

H.R. 8030. An act to provide for the dis- legislation to authorize certain construction continuance of the Postal Savings System, at military installations and for other pur-and for other purposes; and poses; to the Committee on Armed Services.

H.R. 12752. An act to provide for graduated 2185. A letter from the Secretary of the withholding of income tax from wages, to Army, transmitting a report of the number require declarations of estimated tax with of ofilcers on duty with Headquarters, De­respect to self-employment .income, to ac- partment of the Army, and the Army General celerate current payments of estimated in- Staff on December 31, 1965, pursuant to the come tax by corporations, to postpone cer- provisions of section 3031(c) of title 10, tain excise tax rate reductions, and for other United States Code; _ to the Qommittee on purposes. Armed Services.

2186. A letter from the Acting Comptroller General of the United States, transmitting a report of need for improvements in the management of moneys held in trust for Indians, Bureau of Indian Affairs, Depart­ment of the Interior; to the Committee on Government Operations.

2187. A letter from the Acting Comptroller General of the United States, transmitting a. report of audit of loan program financial statements for fiscal years 1962, 1963, and 1964, Agency for International Development; to the Committee on Government Opera­tions.

2188. A letter from the Acting Comptroller General of the United States, transmitting a report of need for improved procedures for determining ability of patients and re­sponsible relatives to pay for care at St. Elizabeths Hospital, Department of Public Health, District of Columbia government; to the Committee on Government Operations.

2189. A letter from the Acting Comptroller General of the United States, transmitting a report of review of the management of in­ventories by the Army Map Service, Wash­ington, D.C., Department of the Army; to the Committee on Government Operations.

2190. A letter from the Acting Comptrol­ler General of the United States, transmit­ting a report of review of the relocation of railroad facilities, Walter F. George lock and dam, Fort Gaines, Ga., Corps of Engineers (Civil Functions), Department of the Army; to the Committee on · Government Opera­tions.

!H91. A letter from the Acting Comptroller General of the United States, transmitting a report of possible savings in ocean trans­portation costs for surplus agricultural com­modities donated under titles II and III, Agricultural Trade Development and Assist­ance Act of 1954 (commonly known as Pub­lic Law 480), Agency for International De­velopment, Department of Agriculture; to the Committee on Government Operations.

2192. A letter from the Chairman of the Board, Virgin Islands Corporation, transmit­ting the annual report of the Virgin Islands Corporation on the operation of its saline water plant at St. Thomas, V.I., for the year ending June 30, 1965, pursuant to Public Law 85-913; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

2193. A letter from the Secretary of Com­merce, transmitting the 53d Annual Report of the Secretary of Commerce for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1965, pursuant to the provisions of 5 U.S.C. 604; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

2194. A letter from the Secretary of Com­merce, transmitting a draft of proposed leg­islation to authorize the Secretary of Com­merce to settle and pay certain claims aris­ing out of the taking of the 1960 Decennial Census; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

2195. A letter from the Postmaster Gen­eral, transmitting a draft of proposed legisla­tion to extend the authority of the Post­master General to enter into leases of real property for periods not exceeding 30 years, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Post Ofilce and Civil Service.

REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of committees were delivered to the Clerk for printing and reference to the proper calendar, as follows:

Mr. ROGERS of Texas: Committee on In­terior and Insular Affairs. H.R. 707. A blll to authorize the Secretary of the Interior to construct, operate, and maintain the Tuala­tin Federal reclamation project, Oregon, and for other purposes; with amendments (Rept. No. 1324). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union.

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL-RECORD ~HOUSE 5883 Mr. PEPPER: Committee on Rules. House

Resolution 774. Resolution providing for the consideration of S. 2394, an act to provide for the acquisition of an official residence for the Vice President of the United States; without amendment (Rept. No. 1325). Re­ferred to the House Calendar.

Mr. YOUNG: Committee on Rules. House Resolution 775. Resolution providing for the consideration of H.R. 6785, a bill to estab­lish uniform dates throughout the United States for the commencing and ending of daylight saving time in those States and lo­cal jurisdictions where it is observed, and for other purposes; without amendment (Rept. No. 1326). Referred to the House Calendar.

Mr. BARING: Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. H.R. 1791. A bill to confirm in the State of Utah title to lands lying be­low the meander line of the Great Salt Lake in such State; with amendments (Rept. No. 1327). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Un­ion.

Mr. MORGAN: Committee of Confer­ence. H.R. 12169. An act to amend further the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as amend­ed, and for other purposes; without amend­ment (Rept. No. 1328). Ordered to be printed.

PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS Under clause 4 of rule XXII, public

bills and resolutions were. introduced and severally referred as follows:

By Mr. COHELAN: H.R. 13614. A bill to direct the Secretary

of the Interior to cooperate with the States of New York and New Jersey on a program to develop, preserve, and restore the re­sources of the Hudson River and its shores and to authorize certain necessary steps to be taken to protect those resources from adverse Federal actions until the States and Congress shall have had an opportunity to act on that program; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

By Mr. CORMAN: H.R. 13615. A bill to direct the Secretary

of the Interior to cooperate with the States of New York and New Jersey on a program to develop, preserve, and restore the re­sources of the Hudson River and its shores and to authorize certain necessary steps to be taken to protect those resources from adverse Federal actions until the States and Congress shall have had an opportunity to act on that program; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

By Mr. CRAMER: H.R. 13616. A bill to encourage the pre­

vention of air and water pollution by allow­ing the cost of treatment works for the abatement of air and stream pollution to be amortized at an accelerated rate for income tax purposes; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. CURTIN: H.R. 13617. A bill to amend the act of Au­

gust 4, 1950 (64 Stat. 411), to provide salary increases for certain members of the police force of the Library of Congress; to the Committee on House Administration.

By Mr. ELLSWORTH: H.R. 13618. A bill to mesh the combined

efforts of government at all levels with pri­vate endeavors to provide jobs and dignity for the poor; to the Committee on Educa- · tion and Labor.

By Mr. FOGARTY: H.R. 13619.· A bill to amend the Tariff

Schedules of the United States with respect to the determination of American selling price in the case of certain footwear of rub­ber or plastics; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. FRIEDEL: H.R. 13620. A bill to amend the Railroad

Retirement Act of 1937 to provide a 7-percent increase in all annuities and pensions payable thereunder, and to provide child's insurance annuities for children between 18 and 22 who are full-time students; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. HALPERN: H.R. 13621. A bill to amend title 39, United

States Code, to extend certain mailing privi­leges with respect to parcels to members of the Armed Forces and other ·Federal Gov­ernment personnel in Vietnam and other overseas areas, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service.

By Mr. HAWKINS: H.R. 13622. A bill to extend and amend the

Library Services and Construction Act; to the Committee on Education and Labor.

By Mr. HUOT: H.R. 13623. A bill to amend the act of

May 28, 1924, to revise existing law relating to the examination, licensure, registration, and regulation of optometrists and the practice of optometry in the District of Co­lumbia, and for other purposes; to the Com­mittee on the District of Columbia.

By Mr. JOELSON: H.R. 13624. A bill to amend titles 10 and

37, United States Code, to provide career incentives for certain professionally trained officers of the Armed Forces; to the Com­mittee on Armed Services.

By Mr. KING of Utah: H.R. 13625. A bill to direct the Secretary

of the Interior to cooperate with the States of New York and New Jersey on a program to develop, preserve, and restore the re­sources of the Hudson River and its shores and to authorize certain necessary steps to be taken to protect those resources from adverse Federal actions until the States and Congress shall have had an opportunity to act on that program; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

By Mr. KREBS: H.R. 13626. A bill providing for jury se­

lection in Federal and State courts, pros­ecution and removal to Federal courts, civil preventive relief, civil indemnification, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. KUPFERMAN: H.R. 13627. A bill to amend section 8 of the

Federal Water Pollution Control Act to au­thorize reimbursement of States that pre­finance certain treatment works; to the Com­mittee on Public Works.

By Mr. McMILLAN (by request) H.R. 13628. A bill to amend the District

of Columbia Police and Firemen's Salary Act of 1958, as amended, to increase salaries of officers and members of the Metropolitan Police force, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

By Mrs. MAY: H.R. 13629. A bill to exclude from income

certain reimbursed moving expenses; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mrs. MINK: H.R. 13630. A bill to provide a permanent

milk program for children; to the Committee on Agriculture.

By Mr. OLSEN of Montana: H.R. 13631. A bill to amend the Public

Health Service Act to provide for the estab­lishment of a National Eye Institute in the ·National Institutes of Health; to the Com­mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

H.R. 13632. A bill to adjust the rates of basic compensation of certain officers and employees of the Federal Government, and for other purposes: to the Committee on Post omce and Civil Service.

By Mr. PATMAN: H.R. 13683. A b111 providing for an addi­

tional administrative assistant for all House

Members; to the Committee on House Administration.

By Mr. RESNICK: H.R. 13634. A bill relating to the appoint­

ment of postmasters and rural carriers from civil service registers; to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service.

By Mr. ROBERTS: H .R. 13635. A blll to increase the rate of

pension payable to veterans of World War I, World War II, or the Korean conflict, and the widows and children of such veterans who are receiving pension under the provi­sions of title 38, United States Code, as in ef­fect on June 30, 1960; .to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

By Mr. ROUDEBUSH: H.R. 13636. A bill to amend the Merchant

Marine Act, 1920, to prohibit transportation of articles to or from the United States aboard certain foreign vessels, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries.

By Mr. SAYLOR: H.R. 13637. A bill to authorize the Secre­

tary of the Interior to establish a National Visitor Center, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Af­fairs.

H.R. 13638. A bill to assist the States in providing technical recreation service and ad­vice to private landowners and local public agencies relating to the management and de­velopment of areas for public outdoor recrea­tion, and for other purposes; to the Com­mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

By Mr. SELDEN: H.R.13639. A bill to amend section 2 of

Public Law 88-240 to provide that the Cor­regidor-Bataan Memorial Commission shall cease to exist on November 6, 1967; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

By Mr. ST GERMAIN: H.R. 13640. A bill to amend the Federal

Deposit Insurance Act and title IV of the National Housing Act (relating to the insur­ance of savings and loan accounts) with re­spect to the maximum amount of insurance which may be provided thereunder; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

H.R. 13641. A bill to amend the Internal Revenue Code of 1954 to allow a deduction for additions to a reserve for certain guar­anteed debt obligations, and for other pur­poses; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. TEAGUE of Texas (by request) : H.R.13642. A bill to include railroad re­

tirement benefits as income of veterans for Veterans' Administration pension; to the Committee on Veterans• Affairs.

H.R. 13643. A bill to amend section 902 of title 38, United States Code, to eliminate certain duplications in Federal benefits now payable for the same, or similar, purpose; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

H.R.13644. A bill to amend title 38, United States COde, in order to credit physicians and dentists with 20 or more years of service in the Veterans' Administration with certain service for retirement purposes; to the Com­mittee on Veterans' Affairs.

H.R. 13645. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, in order to credit physicians, dentists, and nurses with 20 or more years of service in the Veterans• Administration with certain service for retirement purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

H.R. 13646. A bill to amend title 38, United States Code, in order to credit physicians and dentists with 20 or more years of service in the Veterans' Administration with certain service for retirement purposes; to the Com­mittee on Veterans• Affairs.

By Mr. TRIMBLE: H.R.13647. A bill to amend the River

and Harbor Act of 1965 to prohibit certain fees being charged in connection with proj­ects for navigation, flood control, and other purposes; to the Committee on Public Works.

5884 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE March 15, 1966

By Mr. TUNNEY: H.R. 13648. A bill to amend chapter 55 of

title 10, United States Code, to increase health benefits for dependents of members of the uniformed services; to the Commit­tee on Armed Services.

H.R. 13649. A bill to amend chapter 55 of title 10, United States Code, to authorize a civilian health benefits program for retired members of the uniformed services and their dependents; to the Committee on Armed Services.

By Mr. CELLER: H.R. 13650. A bill to amend the Federal

Tort Claims Act to authorize increased agency consideration of tort claims against the Government, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

H .R. 13651. A bill to avoid unnecessary liti­gation by providing for the collection of claims of the United States, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

H .R. 13652. A bill to establish a statute of limitations for certain actions brought by the Government; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. CLEVELAND: H.R. 13653. A bill to amend section 8 of

the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to authorize reimbursement of States, mu­nicipalities, or intermunicipal or interstate agencies that wish to undertake the con­struction of treatment works in advance of the availability of funds; to the Committee on Public Works.

H.R. 13654. A bill to encourage the pre­vention of water pollution by allowing the cost of treatment works for the abatement of stream pollution to be amortized at an accelerated rate for income tax purposes; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. CRAMER: H.R. 13655. A bill to amend section 8 of

the Federal Water Pollution Control Act to authorize reimbursement of States, munici­palities, or intermunicipal or interstate agencies that wish to undertake the con­struction of treatment works in advance of the availability of funds; to the Committee on Public Works.

By Mr. DANIELS: H.R. 13656. A bill to amend the Federal

Employees Compensation Act so as to accord injured employees entitled to benefits there­under freedom to choose the services of optometrists; to the Committee on Education and Labor.

By Mr. KASTENMEIER: H.R. 13657. A bill to amend the Agricul­

tural Act of 1949, as amended, relating to price support for dairy products; to the Com­mittee on Agriculture.

By Mr. MACHEN: H.R. 13658. A bill to amend title 28 of the

United States Code to provide that the judi­cial district of Maryland shall be comprised of a northern and southern division; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. OLSON of Minnesota: H.R. 13659. A bill to authorize the Secre­

tary of Agriculture to regulate the trans­portation, purchase, sale, and handling of dogs and cats in commerce; to the Commit­tee on Agriculture.

By Mr. PATrEN: H.R. 13660. A bill to regulate interstate

and foreign commerce by preventing the use of unfair or deceptive methods of pack­aging or labeling of certain consumer com­modities distributed in such commerce, and for other purposes; to the Committee on In­terstate and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. PHILBIN: H.R. 13661. A bill to authorize the disposal

of battery grade synthetic manganese diox­ide from the national stockpile; to the com­mittee on Armed Services.

H.R. 13662. A bill to authorize the disposal of refractory grade bauxite from the na-

tional stockpile; to the Committee on Armed Services.

H.R. 13663. A bill to authorize the disposal of ruthenium from the supplemental stock­pile; to the Committee on Armed Services.

By Mr. ROBERTS: H.R. 13664. A bill to amend chapter 13 of

title 38, United States Code, so as to increase the rates of dependency and indemnity com­pensation payable with respect to service­connected deaths; to the Committee on Vet­erans' Affairs.

By Mr. STAGGERS: H.R. 13665. A bill to amend the Federal

Airport Act to extend the time for making grants thereunder, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

H.R. 13666. A bill to establish safety stand­ards for motor vehicle tires sold or shipped in interstate commerce, and for other pur­poses; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. TUPPER: H.R. 13667. A bill to promote international

trade in agricultural commodities, to combat hunger and malnutrition, to further econom­ic development, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Agriculture.

By Mr. BANDSTRA: H.R. 13668. A bill to provide a special milk

program for children; to the Committee on Agriculture.

H.R. 13669. A bill to amend title Til of the Bankhead-Janes Farm Tenant Act, as amended, to provide for additional means and measures for land conservation and land utilization, and for other purposes; to the Committee on _ Agriculture.

By Mr. BURKE: H.R. 13670. A bill to provide a special milk

program for children; to the Committee on Agriculture.

H.R. 13671. A bill to provide for the im­position of quotas on mink skins; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. DANIELS: H.R. 13672. A bill to direct the Secretary

of the Interior to cooperate with the States of New York and New Jersey on a program to develop, preserve, and restore the re­sources of the Hudson River and its shores and to authorize certain necessary steps to be taken to protect those resources from ad­verse Federal actions until the States and Congress shall have had an opportunity -to act on that program; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

By Mr. FULTON of Pennsylvania: H.R. 13673. A bill to amend the Economic

Opportunity Act of 1964 to prevent certain employees of community action agencies and Volunteers in Service to America from engaging in pernicious political activi­ties; to the Committee on Education and Labor.

By Mr. HATHAWAY: H.R. 13674. A b111 to amend the act en­

titled "An act to promote the safety of em­ployees and travelers upon railroads by limit­ing the hours of service of employees there­on," approved March 4, 1907; to the Commit­tee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. JARMAN: H.R. 13675. A bill to require certain safety

devices on motor vehicles sold, shipped, or used in interstate commerce, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

H.R. 13676. A bill to prescribe certain safety features for all motor vehicles manufactured for, sold, or shipped in interstate commerce; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. POLANCO-ABREU: H.R. 13677. A bill to provide that the social

security benefits provided by the Tax Ad­justment Act of 1966 for certain uninsured individuals at age 72 shall apply in the case

of residents of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico: to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. THOMPSON of Texas: H.R. 13678. A bill to exclude from income

certain reimbursed moving expenses; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. GLENN ANDREWS: H.J. Res. 895. Joint resolution proposing an

amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to equal rights for men and women; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. ASHBROOK: H.J. Res. 896. Joint resolution proposing an

amendment to the Constitution of the United States; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. FRELINGHUYSEN: H.J. Res. 897. Joint resolution to author­

ize the President to designate October 31 as National UNICEF Day; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. GOODELL: H.J. Res. 898. Joint resolution to provide

for the designation of the second week of May of each year as "National School Safety Patrol Week"; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. HELSTOSKI: H .J. Res. 899. Joint resolution authorizing

and directing the National Institutes of Health to undertake a fair, impartial, and controlled test of Krebiozen; and directing the Food and Drug Administration to with­hold action on any new drug ·.pplication before it on Krebiozen until the completion of such test; and authorizing to be appro­priated to the Department of Health, Educa­tion, and Welfare the sum of $250,000; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

By Mr. MORGAN: H.J. Res. 900. Joint resolution to authorize

the President to designate October 31 of each year as "National UNICEF Day"; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. OLSON of Minnesota: H.J. Res. 901. JoJnt resolution to provide

for the designation of the second week of May of each year as "National School Safety Patrol Week"; to the Committee on the Judi­ciary.

By Mr. SAYLOR: H.J. Res. 902. Joint resolution to establish

the American Revolution Bicentennial Com­mission, and for other purposes; to the Com­mittee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. BURLESON: H. Res. 776. Resolution providing addi­

tional compensation for services performed by employees in the House Publications Dis­tribution Service; to the Committee on House Administration.

By Mr. CELLER: H. Res. 777. Resolution authorizing .the

Committee on the Judiciary to conduct studies and investigations relating to certain matters within its jurisdiction; to the Com­mittee on Rules.

By Mr. FRIEDEL: H. Res. 778. Resolution authorizing the

printing of the prayers offered by the late Chaplain, the Reverend Bernard Braskamp, doctor of d ivinity, at the opening of the dally sessions of the House of Representatives dur­ing the 89th Congress to the time of his demise; to the Committee on House Admin­istration.

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 1 of ru1e XXII, private bills and resolutions were introduced and severally raferred as follows:

By Mr. BATES: H.R. 13679. A bill for the relief of Mrs.

Matteo Groppo; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE 5885 By Mr. BELL:

H.R. 18680. A bill for the relief of Mrs. Lucille Colucci; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

Ey Mr. BOGGS: H.R. 13681. A bill for the relief of Nadia

Khalaf; to tr.e Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. BOW:

H.R. 13682. A bill for the relief of Donald E. Auseon; to the Committee on the Ju­diciary.

H.R. 13683. A bill for the relief of Robert A. Ivins; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. BRADEMAS: H.R. 13684. A b111 for the relief of Pantelis

Andreas Gavrilos; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr.DYAL: H.R. 13685. A bill for the relief of Maj.

Robert Sanabria; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

H.R. 13686. A bill for the relief of Mrs. Edith H. Amos; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. FULTON of Tennessee: H.R. 13687. A b111 for the relief of Dr. Luis

G. Valdez; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. GILBERT: H.R. 13688. A bill for the relief of Mario

Noto; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. IRWIN:

H.R. 13689'. A b111 for the relief of William Scoville Rogers; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. JOELSON: H.R. 13690. A b111 for the relief of Sarah

Kozminsky; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. McCARTHY: H.R. 13691. A bill for the relief of Mrs.

Eleanor D. Morgan; to the Committee on the Judiciary. ·

By Mr. O'HARA of Michigan: H.R. 13692. A bill for the relief of Nicolo

Miri; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By .Mr. OLSEN of Montana:

H.R. 13693. A bill for the relief of Dr. Johan Zwaan and his wife, Fransje Zwaan; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr . .ROSENTHAL: H.R. 13694. A bill for the relief of Mr. and

Mrs. Antonio Davi; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. ST GERMAIN: H.R. 13695. A bill for the relief of Luis

Botelho Mota; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

PETITIONS, ETC. Under clause 1 of rule XXIl, 350. The SPEAKER presented a petition

of the Democratic Central Committee of the District of Columbia, Washington, D.C., rela­tive to home rule for the District of Colum­bia., which was referred to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

I I ..... •• SENATE

TuESDAY, MARCH 15, 1966

The Senate met at 12 o'clock meridian, and was called to order by the Acting President pro tempore <Mr. METCALF).

Rabbi Maurice Lamm, Hebrew Insti­tute of University Heights, Bronx, N.Y., offered the following prayer:

Father of Mercy, on a globe seething with tumultuous, dramatic upheavals, percolating with military revolutions abroad, and cybercultural revolutions on

this continent, with bursting crises of freedom in the new nations across the seas and old minorities at home, we ask Thee to bless these legislators in whom is entrusted the welfare and security of this Nation, and keep their minds free from oppressing personal di:fficulties of ill health and dome~tic unrest, so that they freely may apply their unflagging energy and deep human wisdom to the solution of the problems of America and the work:..

As these Senators gather in this au­gust House, to weigh and balance the measures that will determine the fate of men and nations, at this critical his­toric moment--as tense as that moment between lightning and thunder-we find ourselves in an interlude between crea­tion and possible cremation, in the dan­gerous crevice between the runaway breakthroughs of man's technology and the sluggish pace of his emotions and consciousness, in the terrible psycholog­ical pause between the startling beauty of the truly open society and the worn­out ugliness of the tattered ancient blink­ers; we pray that their brilliant minds, their pure motivations, and their clear vision be equal to the huge and complex burdens of contemporary national lead­ership.

Finally do we pray, dear God, that not by the rocket's red glare and the bombs bursting in air, may we have proof that the flag is still there-but by the tran­quillity of men's souls, the decency of their actions, and the unspoiled quiet of nature's dawn, will we have proof that the stars and stripes are forever.

For this do we pray, 0 Lord, and so may it be. Amen.

THE JOURNAL On request of Mr. MANSFIELD, and by

unanimous consent, the reading of the Journal of the proceedings of Monday, March 14, 1966, was dispensed with.

MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT Messages in writing from the President

of the United States, submitting nomina­tions, were communicated to the Senate by Mr. Jones, one of his secretaries.

EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED As in executive session, The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tP.m­

pore laid before the Senate messages from the President of the United States submitting sundry nominations, which were referred to the appropriate com­mittees.

<For nominations this day received, see the end of Senate proceedings.)

LIMITATION ON STATEMENTS DUR­ING THE TRANSACTION OF ROU­TINE MORNING BUSINESS On request of Mr. MANSFIELD, and by

unanimous consent, statements during the transaction of routine morning busi­ness were ordered limited to 3 minutes.

COMMITTEE MEETING DURING SENATE SESSION

On request of Mr. MANSFIELD, and by unanimous consent, the Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights of the Commit­tee on the Judiciary was authorized to meet during the session of the Senate today.

BOXCAR SHORTAGE CURTAILS LUMBER PRODUCTION IN MON­TANA Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President,

early this morning I received the follow­ing wire from one of the major lumber producers in Montana:

ST. REGIS PAPER Co., Libby, Mont.

Sincerely regret to inform you that the Montana operations of St. Regis, Forest Products Division, located at Libby and Troy, are shutting down all departments at the end of Monday's shifts, the 14th, because of the complete absence of any railroad boxcars for shipping purposes. This shutdown will be in effect until further notice; 1,386 employ­ees and their families are affected. We have experienced shortages of boxcars since the first of this year. Last week this entire operation received 23 boxcars. The daily requirements are 30. From information available to this operation, it does not ap­pear that any effective relief is in sight. Urgently request that you take immediate steps to assist us in securing adequate num­bers of boxcars so that we may resume normal operations. We have endeavored to keep operating so that our employees can have work, but stockpiling of products has reached the saturation point. Serious prob­lems will result if sufficient boxcars are not made available for future operations. Copies of this message sent to Gov. Tim Babcock, Senators MIKE MANSFIELD and LEE METCALF, and Representatives JAMEs BATTIN and ARNOLD OLSEN.

A. J. AGATHER, Resident Manager.

ROBERT N. HELDING, Manager, Public Affairs.

This is the latest in a series of develop­ments in the railroad boxcar shortage which is having very serious economic effects in the Northwest. What used to be a seasonal nuisance has now become a year-round problem of mounting pro­portions. The grain trade and the lum­ber industry have been the hardest hit. Those of us from the congressional dele­gations in the Northwest have made re­peated requests to the Interstate Com­merce Commission and to the Railroads, asking that they take immediate action in expediting the flow of unused boxcars to these congested areas. To date, there has been: little or no relief.

This afternoon a meeting has been scheduled by the able chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee, the senior Senator from Washington [Mr. MAGNU­soN], with the members of the Interstate Commerce Commission, representatives of the grain industry and Senators, Con­gressmen, and their representatives. I sincerely hope that this meeting will bring about a clarification of the prob­lem. Just exactly what is the cause, what can the ICC and the industry do now and what, if need be, must the Con­gress do. When people are being laid