1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 6183 their products together under one roof, to off er them for sale to the buyers from all of North and South America at our principal port and the hub of our mer­chandising and marketing industry: New York City.

The well-being of all of us depends upon the ability of each to produce prod­ucts, goods or services which others need. Without trade we wither and die. · At the close of World W.ar II we rec­ognized this and in an effort to restore the devastated lands we established the Truman and Marshall plans. Point 4 aid enabled millions of people throughout the world to start rebuilding. It is now as it has always been, the policy of the United States to assist other& to achieve greater prosperity for themselves through freedom and trade. This is a continuing policy. The dole, the hand­out is no part of it. Necessity has at times required such measures, both at home and abroad, but it is a well-krwwn fact of life that a policy based on hand­outs is bankrupt and debilitating; the giver does not like it; the receiver de­tests it and in time comes t .o despise the benefactor. We all know this truth.

It is the same in international life as it is in family life. The brother-in-law who needs and gets monetary assistance to overcome temporary financial diffi.-

. SENATE . " THURSDAY, APRIL 12, 1956

<Legislative- day -of Monday, -April p, 1956) ..

The Senate met at 12 o'clock meridian, on the expiratiOn of the recess. ·· · · The· Chaplain-~ Rev. Ffedei'ick ' Brown

_Harris, · D. D., offered the · fo1lowing prayer:

God of grace and God of g_lory, Thou hast summoned the few among the many to serve in this forum of democracy when millions in awaking nations are halting between two opinions. We are keenly conscious that this is an age on ages telling, when the forces of darkness and the armies- of light are locked in contest for the bodies and souls of men. Save us, we pray Thee, from panic and despair in a decisive day when the bright prospects ·of peace and freedom are chal­lenged and seemingly dimmed by malig­nant forces of destruction. As the battle rages may we be strong and of good courage, enabled by Thy grac.e to live as well as to defend the truth that alone can make all meri free: "Our strength is dust and ashes, our

years a pa1)sing hour; We pray Thee, use our weakness to

magnify Thy power." In the dear Redeemer's name. Amen.

THE JOURNAL On request of Mr. JOHNSON o{ Texas,

and by unanimous consent, the reading of the Journal of the proceedings of Wednesday, April 11, 1956, was dispensed with.

culties does not resent the help at first .. But as it goes on, if he continues to accept a weekly gift, he begins to lose self-con­fidence and self-respect. The giver meanwhile deplores the lack of initia­tive he sees. How much better it is to help him find a job so that he might earn his own way. Then the formerly dependent in-law becomes a productive, happy, and proud member of the family.

The United States World Trade Fair presents a unique opportunity. At the Coliseum businessmen of all nations will assemble in the most modern exhibition hall in the world. Each will demon­strate what he produces and offer it for sale, ·proving again what we all know: Every dollar earned in trade is worth hundreds in aid.

The cold war is now being waged in the economic arena. I stressed this fact last June when we considered the for­eign-aid bill. Russia has for the time forsaken bluster and force. Now she re­sorts to guile and economic penetration.

Russia is in reality trying to play our game. Let them play, for we will tri­umph. By a positive, continuing pro­gram in keeping with our historic aims, we can and shall help others to help themselves and to eliminate want and fear, disease and hunger, war and pov­erty.

COMMITTEE MEETINGS DURING SENATE SESSION

On request of Mr. JOHNSON of Texas, and by unanimous consent, _the follow­ing c9mmit.tees . were authorized to meet during .the session of the Senate today:

'The Internal Security . Subcommittee . of the Committee on the Judiciary, and the Subcommittee on Public Health, Education, Welfare, and Safety of the Committee on the District of Columbia.

NOTICE OF HEARING ON BILL TO ENCOURAGE THE MAXIMUM DE­VELOPMENT OF LOW-COST ELEC­TRIC ENERGY . FROM ALL SOURCES, INCLUDING - SPECIAL NUCLEAR MATERIAL Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, as

chairman of a subcommittee of the In­terstate and Foreign Commerce Commit­tee; I desire to give notice that public hearings will be held on S. 2643 from April 17 to April 20 in committee room G-16 of the Capitol. · This bill seeks to encourage the max­imum development of low-cost electric energy from all sources, including special nuclear material, through amendments to the Pl;lblic Utility Holding Company Act.

Any persons who are interested in tes­tifying are invited to do so, and should so advise the clerk of the committee.

EXECUTIVE SESSION Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­

dent, I move that the Senate proceed to the consideration of executive business, and take up the nomination8 on the Ex­ecutive Calendar.

The United States World Trade Fair is a tangible demonstration of our desire to work with and help peoples in all na­tions, through free and competitive en­terprise. World trade, the mutual ex­change in an international market place of goods and services, of arts, crafts, cultural and scientific ideas and advances is the high road to world peace and world prosperity. No greater goal can be de­. sired. This is our aim.

On the other hand, pure or prepon­derantly military alliances, as history has demonstrated time and again, are highly perishable.

Economic ties are ties of strength and solidarity when based upon an aware­ness of common goals and common hopes and will result in the creation throughout the free world of indestruct­ible alliances, freely and openly made, desired by all and impervious to Com­munist threats or guile.

Let us then join together, here and with our friends abroad, to stride for­ward with determination; and with hope and strength, confident in the knowl­edge that through efforts such as this

· trade fair, part of a continuing, morally forceful and responsible program of in­ternational trade, we shall as partners in . the free world achieve that ultimate goal: peace, prosperity, and freedom.

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate proceeded to the consideration of executive business.

EXECUTIVE REPORTS OF A COMMITTEE

The following favorable reports of nominations were submitted:

By Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina, from the Committee on Post Oifice and Civil Serv­ice:

Maurice E. Stans, of Illinois, to be Deputy Postmaster General; and

Two hundred and seventeen postmaster nominations.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. If there be no further reports of commit­tees, the clerk will state the nominations on the Executive Calendar.

UNITED NATIONS The Chief Clerk read the nomina­

tion of James W. Barco, of Virginia, to be deputy representative of the United _ · States of America in the Security Coun­cil of the United Nations.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With­out objection, the nomination is con~ firmed.

DIPLOMATIC AND FOREIGN SERVICE The Chief Clerk read the nomination

of Lowell C. Pinkerton, of Missouri, to be Ambassador Extraordinary and Plen­ipotentiary of the United States of Affierica to the Sudan.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With­out objection, the nomination is con­firmed.

6184: CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE April '1-2-

CIVIL .AERONAUTICS BOARD The Chief Clerk read the nomination

of James Durfee; of Wisconsin, to be a. member of the Civil Aeronautics Board.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With­out objection, the nomination is con­firmed.

COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY The Chief Clerk read too nomination

of Herman H. Druebert, to be an ensign in the Coast and Geodetic Survey.

The PRESIDENT. pro tempore. With­out objection, the nomination is con­firmed. · The chief Clerk read the nomination of James c. Sainsbury to be an ensign in the Coast and Geodetic Surve~~. Th~ PRESIDENT pro tempore. With­

out objection, the nomination is con­firmed.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I am happy the Senate has taken prompt action on the Executive Calen­dar, as it has this morning, and as it consistently has done during this ad­ministration.

I was pleased to make the acquaint­ance of Mr. James Durfee, of Wisconsin; the nominee for the Civil Aeronautics Board, whom I met only yesterday. He impressed ·me as being an able and ·con­scientious _public .servant. and I .am glad the Senate has promptly acted to con­firm his nomination, because· there is no agency of Government that has more

.important work fo do than has this fine Board. · ·· - ~

Mr. President, I now ask that the Pres­ident be notified-forthwith -of the nomi-nations tociay confirmed. ·

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With­out objection, the President will be im­mediately notified. ·

LEGISLATIVE .SESSION Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-.

dent, I move that the Senate resume the consideration of legislative business. .

The motion was agreed to; and the Senate resumed · the consideration of legislative business.

ORDER FOR TRANSACTION OF ROUTINE BUSINESS

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. · -Mr. Presi­dent, I ask unanimous consent· tqat there may be ·the ·usual morning h.ou+, with a 2-minute limitation on state-

. ments. · The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With­out objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I suggest the absence of a quorum. _ .

The PRESIDENT pro tempor~. Th~ clerk will call the roll.

The Chief Clerk proceecjed to call the roll.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With­out objection, 1t is so ordered.

COMMITTEE SERVICE Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. · Presi­

dent, on behalf of the Democratic steer-

ing committee, I request that the Sena­tor from North Carolina [Mr. ScoTT] be relieved from further service on the Committee on Interior and Insular Af­fairs, and that he be assigned to the Committee on Public Works, to fill an existing vacancy.

Mr. President, the assignment of the junior Senator from North Carolina [Mr. SCOTT] to the PUblic Works Com­mittee is one in which all of us will take particular pleasure.

W. KERR ScOTT is one of the newest Members of the Senate, but already he has established himself in the affections and iii the esteem of his colleagues. He is forthright, hard working, diligent, at-· tentive to his duties, and responsive to his obligations and responsibilities.

On the Public Works Committee, he will be backed by a knowledge and an experience that will be excellent for the committee, and productive of good for the Nation. He has displayed a deep interest in the subject matter of the· committee's jurisdiction. · This assignment has the unanimous approval of the Senate majority steer­ing committee, and I predict it will have the approval of all who are interested in the vital work of the Public Works Com­initt-ee.

North Carolina has sent many 'dis­tinguished Membe-Fs to this body.- Sena­tor ScoTT-like his able senior col­league-walks in their 'tradition.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The question is on agreeing to the request of the senator from Texas. · The ·request was agreed to. '. Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-· dent, on behalf of the r:;>emocratic steer­ing committee, I ask that the Senator from West Virginia [Mr. LAIRD] be named to the existing vacancy on the Committee on Interior and Insular Af­fairs.

The PRESIDENT pro tenipore. The question is on . agreeing to. the request of the Senator from Texas. . The . r_equest w~s agreed to. _

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, the appointment of the junior Sen­ator from West Virginia [Mr. LAIRD] 'to . the Committee on Interior and Insular Aff aifs was approved by the Senate ma­jority steering committee .earlier today, The recommendation was based upon his past experience, and upon the qualifica­tions he has demonstrated already, even though his service· has been brief.

Mr. President, during the past few years, the ·majority has operated on the premise that every Senator-regardless of his seniority-should have at least one major committee. This policy has re­sulted in uncovering talent that other­wise would not have become readily ·ap-· parent. - We have tried to combine the experi­ence of seniority and ·the enthusiasm of the youthful Members. The result, I think, has been of benefit to the whole Nation. _ ·· The -junior Senator from West Vir.:­ginia is j.n this pattern. All of us who know him are confident that he will serve with distinction, and will con• tribute work and thought that is sub.l stantial to the· committee's deliberations.

PETITION The PRESIDENT pro tempore laid be­

rore the Senate a resolution adopted by a convention of the southern region of the California - Junior· Statesmen of America at El Monte, Calif., relating to subscription television, which was re­f erred to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

BOOKER T. · WASHINGTON-RESO­LUTION OF MICHIGAN HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Mr. POTTER. Mr. President, I ask

unanimous consent to have printed in. the RECORD House Resolution 40, adopted by the House of . Representatives of the State of Michigan. The resolution was submitted by two distinguished members of the. Legislature of Michigan, com­memorating the birthday of Booker '!'. Washington. . Under the rule, the resolution was ordered to be printed · in the RECORD, as follows:

House Resolution 40 Resolution relative to the centennial of the

· birth of B~oker T. Washington · Whereas on April 5, .1856, just 100 years

ago tomorrow, there was born to slave par­ents in a hut on a farm in the State of Virginia a son; then destined to· lifelong drudgery in .slavery, with education denied to him by law; and

Whereas when ,that boy, J3ooker T. Wash­ington, was 9 years_ olq he )Vas emancipated by the triumph of Lincoln's armies and op­portunity in 'life began: to- beckon the ' freed boy: and ' - · - · - Whereas that Booker T .. Washington· grew

to be a great educator., a grfted leader of his race, then started on -the great highway to fullness of life and an inspiration to those who struggle to succes_s ~espite tremendOUf! handicaps, overcoming l;ligh racial barriers with great benefit to·the Nation; and . . , Whereas, well signalizing , the .tooth anni-· versary of that slave boy who came to lead a people ~nd bless a Nation, the United States Congress, by unanimous action in each House, has just sent to the President the bill creating the Booker T. Washington National Monument, ~omprised of the old plantation where he was born; and

Whereas the State <>f Virginia by appropri­ation completed the purchase of the lands of the old home and birthplace, t .hus giving full recognition of worth, even though in a l:>lack skin: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved, That this House commends the unanimous recognition by the ·congress of this great educator and national leader a century after his slave birth in surround-. ings of ignoran~e. and cherishes the hope that the coming century may well obliterate the racial prejudices which tend to handicap the fullest development of our people and their fullest usefulness to the Nation; and be it further . Resolvedr That a copy of·this resolution be sent to each House of Congress, to the secre­tary of state of Virginia, and to the 'Director of the Nation,al Park Service.

'BILLS INTRODUCED Bills were introduced, read the first

time, and, by unanimous- consent, the ~econd time, and rE'.ferred as follows:

By Mr. HRUSKA:· ~- 3618. A bill for the relief of Jan Mroz;

to the Committee on the Judiciary. · By Mr. NEELY '(oy ·request):

S. 3619. A bill to amend the District of Columbia Public School Food Services Act:

1!J56 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE "6185 to tiie -co~~ittee on the · riisirtct -of ·co~ lumbia. _

By Mr. HILL (for himself, Mr. PURTE~ · Mr. -MuluiA.1'",- Mr. · SMJTH ot N'ew

Jersey, Mr. LEHMAN, and Mr. IVES)~ S. 3620. A bill to encourage expansion of

teaching and research in the education of mentally retarded children through grants to institutions of higher learning and tq State educ~tional agencies; to the Commit­tee on Labor and Public Welfare.

(See the remarks of Mr. HiLL when he in­troduced the above bill, which appears under a separate heading.) · ·

By Mr. JACKSON: · S. 3621. A bUl to amend the Atomic Energy

Act of 1954; as amended; with reference to the ·utilization of special nuclear lllaterial, atomic energy, and radioi:ic:tive m~t~rial by nonprofit eleemosynary or charitable in­stitutions; to the · Joint Committee ori. Atomic Energy.

(See the remarks of Mr_ JACKSON when he introduced the above bill, which appear under -a separate heading.)

By Mr. WELKER: . . S. 3622. A bill for the relief of Mrs. Kenna

Moore (nee McCarthy): to the Committee on the Judiciary. ,

By Mr. WELKER (tor himself and Mr .. DWORSHAK) ; '

B. 3623. A bill !or the relief of certain alien sheepherders; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. MAGNUSON: . S. 3624. A bill for the relief _of Matsue

Harada; S. 3625. A bill for the relief of Po-ling Liu,

his wife, Hsin-cheng , Liu, and their minor child, George Yu-teh Liu;

s. 3626'. A bill for the relief of Chih Yee Wu, also- known as Jerry Wu; and

S. 3627. A bfll for the relief of Cecelia Therese Lynch; to th~ Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr~ MAGNUSON (for himself and Mr. JACKSON) :

S. 3628. A bill to authorize the Secretary .of the -Intel'ior to construct; operate and maintain seven units of the.Greater .wari.at­chee Division, Chief JQseph Project, Wash­ington, and fo_r other purposes; to the Coro• mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

By Mr. ROBERTSON: S. 3629. A bill to amend section 24 of the

Federal Reserve Act with respect to lease:­hold and construction loans which may· be made by na.ti9~a1 baJiks; ~ );h:_e . Committee on Banking and Currency.

~ . . . _ .· -By Ml' . . YOUNG: , S. 3630~ A bill for the. purpose . of con­

structing a;t the Dunseith, N. Dak., port of entry Federal facilities for the Bureau of

.customs .and Immigration and Naturaliza­· tion: Service; to the Committee. on .Public .Works.

By Mr. DWORSH4~· .: . S. 3631. A bill to amend the Mining Claims

Rights Restoration Act of 1955, to. permft the "mining; development; and utilization· of the minera1 reso\ll'ces ol. all - public. lands withdrawn or. reserved. for reclamation reser­voir sites, and for other purposes; to the Committee- on Interior and Insular Affairs.

By Mr. WATKINS (by request)~ s _3632. A bill for . the. relief. of Reas H.

Nesrallah; to th.e ·committee on the Judi­ciary.

By Mr. MORSE~ s. '3633. A bfil for the relief of H. G. Purvis;

to the committee on. the Judiciary. (See the remarks of Mr, MORsE.'.-when be

. introduced . the above bill. which · appear under a separate heading.)

By Mr. SMATH_ERS: . S. 3634. A bill to authorize _hospitallz!,\tion

and medicail .. tr.eatment for persona. who ha~e served as acting assistant- or contract sw:­geons or contract dentar surgeons; to the Committee- on Labor- and Public Welfare.

CII--389

EXPANSION OF TEACIDNG AND .RE..: SEARCH IN EDUCATION OF MEN­TALLY RETARDED CHILDREN Mr. mLL. Mr. President, on behalf

of myself, the Senator from Connecticut [Mr. PURTELL], the Senator from Mon­tana [Mr. MuilRAYJ, the Senator from New Jersey [Mr. SMITH], and the Sen~ ators from New York [Mr. LEHMAN and Mr. IvEs.], I introduce, for appropriate reference, a bill to encourage expansion of teaching and research in the educa7 tion of mentally · retarded children through grants to institutions of higher iearning and to State educational agen­.cies. I. ask unanimous consent to have .a statement in explanation of the bill printed in the RECORD. ·

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will be received and appropriately referred; and, without objec;:tion, the ex­.planatory statement will be printed in the RE.CORD.

The bill <S. 3620) to encourage expan­sion of teaching and research il,l. the edu'." cation of -mentally retarded children through grants to institutions of highe,r learning and to State educational agen- . cies, introduced by Mr. HILL (for himself ·and Mr. PURTELL), was received, read twice by its title •. and referred to the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. . The statement presented by Mr. HILL is as fallows: EXPLANATORY 'STATEMENT ON Bµ.L To EXPAND

TEACHING · AND RESEARCH IN> EDUCATION Oi' MENTALLY RETARDED CHILDREN

There is a gre:it shortage of persons trained to work as teachers of the mentally retarded

.in both public and private day and residen­tial schools, to supervise in State and local ·school systems, to serve as administrators, to conduct college and university programs for the preparation o:r more professional work'­ers, and. to do the basic research which is -required for real progress in providing ap­propriate education and training of the men .. tally retarded . .

A numtally :retarded person may be de­: fined as one who is deficient in his abtlity to learn, due to either organic or nonorganic causes. The range of. deficiency is . great,

·-varyfng .tiom. ·very mild r.etardation. to v,ery .severe: · Unfortunately, · it is n-0t possible- to . indicate precis.ely- llow many i:eta:rded. per-sons there are in the United States~ Refine,­

. roent of the figures is dependent upon fur:. · ther factfinding and more basic research in ·this neglected field, which constitutes. · an extensive health, education, and welfare problem. It is estimated that. ther.e are some 4 million mentally"retarded persons, of whom about 1,500,000 are children. Estimates range f.rom 1.Y:i to 5 percent of the children

'. up to ..18 ·~ears, with 3 percent being the gen­: erally accepted and most mrarly- veri-fled fig-ure. Of t-he 1,500,000 children, only about

. 125,000 are in· school, pubiic and private. ~ ( Approximately 150,000 mentally retarded ·children and adults have been placed in in-stitutions. The estimated cost- of such in­

. stitutional care is $50,000 per individual ·for , the lifetime of the severely retarded who ar.e institutionalized. . ,

If all 150,000 of those in institutions . were ' assumed to be school-age children, thfs ·would still give a total of only 275,000- cur­~ rently; provided for. Undoubtedly there are among those not receiving education or

· training many Children too· severely retarded . to be able to profit fro.m it~ If the number . of tho6e. ·beyond the help of. educational pro­- grams is estimated at. 225,000 and if this number is added to the 275,000 currently be­ing provided for; the- tetal is 500-,000. This

still leaves perhaps as many as 1 million re­tarded children who are not now being pro~ vided for.' . · · It has been estimated that between_ 75,000 and I00,000 mentally reta_rded childre~ are born each. year. Even though mental re­tardation from genetic or hereditary c~uses ~s not Increasing in proportion tCJ the gen­eral population, there is eVidence to indi­cate that the percentage of retardates will increase in relation to the total population. Thfs increase is chiefiy the result of im.; proveµ J+tedicar techniques through which the lives of many brain-injured children ar~ saved and the lives of others prolonged. With lower rates of infant mortality and the continuing increase i;n. the expected life span, there Will be a resultant increase in the number- ot retarded children for whoni. education and training ·must be· provided until the hoped-f.or day when medical science finds ways- to prevent or further alleviate mental retardation. - The schools throughout ' the Nation are being faced by a steadily increasin-g volume of urgent requests by ·parents· t:hat special­ized attention be provided for mentally re­tarded children. Special legislation proVid­ing funds for the education of the mentally retarded has been · enacted in a number of States, in addition to local provisions, in re­cent years and a number of other jurisdic­tions are currently considering such enact.;. ments. However, the serious nationwid~ -shortage of supervisors of education of the ·mentally retarded, and the shortage of per­sons prepared to train teachers of the men­tally retarded, indicate clearly· that Federal assistance. and . leadership are necessary if this problem is to be met effectively and 'With dispatch. ·

One of the most pressing personnel needs ·1s for teachers who will work directly with mentally retarded children in both · public and private schools. At present there is a .total of 10,000 teachers employed in such positions. This represents less than 1 per:­cent of all public-school teachers in the .country. However, to provide for 1 million retarded children would require approxi:. mately 65,000 teachers. (In actual practice there may be from 8 to 20 pupils per teacher, but this estimate is based on a ratio of 15 .children to 1 teacher.) If the 10,000 teach­_ers currently employed are subtracted from the estimated need of 65,000, there still re­-mains a shortage of 55,000 teachers to pro­vide- education and/or training for mentally

. reta~ded chJldren. , In this country- there-_ are approximately

,141 uni-versit1es. 732 libet:al-•arts colleges, and '192 teachers' colleges. However, . in 1954: ;there . were _only 40 instituticms - o~ highe! education which reported a sequence of

'courses on any level for the preparation ot . teachers of the mentally retarded, and of .'these only 18 institutions.reported students 'on both the undergraduate and graduate ,levels. The average numbers of studentS ·specializing in mental retardation in these institutions was 17 on the undergraduate

·level and 15 on the graduate level. In the 2 institutions reporting the largest numbers

"of und.ergraciuate.students .the ratio of x:egu­)ar faculty members to students.. was 2 to 60 and 1 to 55. In the 2 institutions re,"­porting the largest numbers of graduate stu­

. dents. the ratio was 1 faculty member to 45 ·students. and 1 faculty member (responsible "tor all areas of exceptionality) to 40 stu-dents. Although no direct comparisons can be made. 1 faculty member to 15 students

·on the undergraduate level and 1 faculty member to 10 students on the graduate level is more nearly typical practice. .

Some indication of the quantity as well · as the quality of personnel available in a. · given area of specialization in indicated by : the setting up of State certification require-ments for teachers. · In 1954 more than half t-he States· did not have any such require.­ments for teachers-of. the mentally retarded. TherEt were only 21 States- which did have

6186 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE April 12 them. Among these 21 States requiring cer­tification there were only ·15 which also had institutions of higher education offering teacher training in mental retardation, leav­ing 6 States which had set up the certifica­tion requirements but which did not have teacher-training programs available within their boundaries. Among the 27 States not having special certification requirements for teachers of the mentally retarded in 1954, there were only 3 which had institutions of higher education offering special teacher­training programs in this area.

There are eight States in which no one is employed by the State Department of Educa­tion specifically for work either in the broader area of special education (which in­cludes all types of exceptional children) or more specifically in the area of mental re­tardation. Among the remaining States which do employ someone in either or both of these areas, there are nine reporting va­cancies at this time which cannot be filled because there are no qualified personnel available.

Support is ·urgently needed on the gradu­ate level in order to provide the desired de­gree of specialization in mental retardation which will qualify individuals to fill super­visory and administrative positions in State programs, to fill positions as faculty mem­bers in institutions of higher education, and to engage in researcl.l on the basic problems of mental retardation. The vacancies exist­ing in State education departments, the un­favorable ratio of faculty members to stu­dents specializing in mental retardation, and the dearth of reliable research findings in this area all serve to emphasize the need for ·graduate programs.

The need for support is important also a't the undergraduate level. The undergradµ­ate programs must be the major source of supply for the 55,000 teachers ' needed 1n the educational ·institutions - throughout' the country in order to provide for mentally re­tarded chi'ldren who ·are able"to benefit from attendance in special classes in public and private schools. In addition, the under­graduate programs must also provide the source of supply from which promising graduate students may be drawn for more advanced training. The present shortage of persons with adequate undergraduate train­ing including a major in mental retardation makes it extremely difficult to recruit any substantial number of master's and doctoral candidates who can qualify for admission in the leading graduate schools without addi­tional preparation.

Deep concern for all the problems of the mentally retarded is shown throughout many of the organizational units which make up the Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Services for the .mentally re-. tarded are pro-vided by the Social r Securl ty '.Administra t.ton, ·chiefly. , .in the Children's

· Bureau with its programs of maternal and child health and of c:Oild welfare, and in th.e Bureau of Public Assistance; by the Public

.Healt(h Service, primarily in th'e National In­stitute of· Mental Health and the National Institute of Neurological • ' Diseases .• and

·Blindness; by the Office of Vocational Re­habilitation in a wide range of services fo-

. cused toward help for the handicapped in all categories; and by the Office of Education in its services to State educational agencies per­taining to educational programs for men­tally retarded children and youth, in its program for research in the education of the mentally retarded, and tts support of train­ing programs for those desiring to specialize in the education of the mentally retarded.

This program is coordinated by the De­partmental Committee on Exceptional Chil­dren which, through its wide representation, is aware of the many pressing needs of men­tally retarded children. One vital answer to several of these needs is to be found ih programs of education and training which will permit these children to achieve their

own maximums of development according to their own capacities. It is the purpose of the proposed legislation to aid in training enough teachers, supervisors, administrators, and researchers to provide more and better programs of education and training for the retarded children who are now denied these benefits.

The enactment of this legislation is an im­portant part of a program which it is firmly believed will insure substantial progress toward achieving the following objectives:

(a) Reducing the number of the mentally retarded who need and require institutional care.

(b) Reducing the .degree of dependency of the mentally retarded who live at home.

(c) Makng mentally retarded dependents more nearly self-supporting.

(d) Reducing, by grouping the mentally tetarded into special classes for special in­struction, the disproportionate amount of time and attention which the mentally re­tarded inevitably require in the average classroom.

( e) Increasing the significance of life for mentally retarded children.

(f) Bringing added satisfaction to those families of which mentally retarded children are a part. ·

AMENDMENT OF ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF 1954, RELATING TO USE OF NUCLEAR MATERIAL BY NON­PROFIT INSTITUTIONS

and electricity. However, this project involves conventional design, either coal or oil-fired.

The university has advised the Atomic Energy Commission that if the Com­mission would like to have the university construct and operate a nuclear power­plant in place of a conventional-type plant, the university is willing to forego present plans and cooperate with- the Commission, providing the Commission underwrite the additional cost involved.

I have been advised by Harold E. Wess ... man, dean of the College of Engineering at the University of Washington, this is not the -only university so situated. A number of State universities are faced with a similar need of expanding and modernizing .their campus powerplants. These schools are not in the position to underwrite the additional cost of nuclear power over and above that of a conven­tional-type steam plant. However, with Atomic Energy Commission assistance they could build reactors that not only would provide the power they need, but also which would provide a new nuclear training facility.

I want to be sure the Commission has ·authority to enter into contracts of this type, since a major need of our country at this time is for many more nuclear scientists. This need recently has been

Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, I in- dramatized by the Library of Congress troduce, for appropriate reference, a bill manpower report prepared for the Joint to amend the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, Committee on Atomic Energy and by the as amended, with reference t.o the utili:- appointment of the President's Commis­zation of . special . nuclear material; 'Sion on Scientific Manpower; public at­atomic energy, and radioactive material tention . again . will be focused on this by nonprofit eleemosynary or charitable need next week when Congressman -I

institutions. · · PRICE'S Sµbcommittee -on Research and This bill authorizes -the Atomic Energy Development, of the Joint Committee

Commission to enter into contracts with on Atomic Energy, begins its hearings on universities and colleges and hospitals to the shortage of scientists. assist financially in the construction and The bill I have introduced is a step operation of reactors and other facilities toward increasing the number and qual­either for training, for research and de- ity of our scientists, a step in developing velopment, for the generation of usable peaceful nuclear power, and a step to-energy, or for medical therapy. ward greater understanding of the atom.

The bill specifically permits the insti- I hope the Senate will respond to our tutions, themselves, to use the power nuclear needs by passage of this bill. produced by such reactors. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The

Mr. President, this bill performs the bill will be received and appropriately necessary function of clarifying the au- referred. thority of the Atomic Energy Commis- The bill <S. 3621) to amend the Atomic sion to enter into contracts of this type. Energy Act of 1954, as amended, with During the recent hearings on the peace- reference to the utilization of special ful ·uses of atomic energy members of · .nuclear , materfal, . atomic, energy, anQ. ~··: -the .Commission · expressed , doubt that radioactive· materiaL by nonprofit elee.:. ' · existing. law gives them this authority. ·. · mosynary or charitable institutions, in_.

I propose to take out of the realm of traduced by Mr. JACKSON, was received, doubt the intention of Congress that read-twice by it,s title,· and referred to the educational institutions and hospitals Joint Committee on Atomic. Energy. sho'tlld be encouraged by AEC assistance to step up the rate of training nuclear scientists and technicians. This bill amounts to a directive from Congress to the Atomic Energy Commission to pro­ceed with such a program.

While there are many educational in­stitutions presently participating in the Nation's atomic energy program, there are a great many more which desire to participate or to participate more fully, but find themselves financially unable to do so.

The University of Washington in my own State is a case in point. The uni­versity is about to spend at least $1 mil­lion to build an addition to the present steam powerplant for campus heating

H. G. PURVIS Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, H. G.

Purvis, a resident of my State, was for-. merly in the employ of a very substan­tial corporation doing business in the State of Oregon. Mr. Purvis performed the services of an accountant for the corporation, and in that capacity was familiar with transactions that related to the company's income-tax obligations to the Federal Government.

During-the course of his employment Mr.. Purvis became convinced that the corporation was not paying the Federal

. Government the full amount due under the internal revenue laws. He resigned

. "

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD--SENATE . 6187 his position with the corporation, re­ported the alleged. corporate income-tax shortages to Internal Revenue officials, and as the result of his disclosures the Bureau of Internal Re\lenue recovered delinquent taxes from the corporation. Mr. Purvis is convinced that the amount recovered totaled more than $1 million in taxes, penalties, and interest.

Pursuant to the provisions of the In­ternal Revenue Code authorizing pay­ments by the Commissioner of Internal Revenue for information leading to the recovery of unpaid Federal taxes, Mr. Purvis filed a claim for reward in the sum of $150,000, plus 50 percent of any penalties assessed. The Bureau of In­ternal Revenue tendered him a check in the amount of $1,250 in full settlement of his claim. Under the circumstances, Mr. Purvis feels that the tender is gross­ly inadequate.

I have studied this case very thor­oughly and have communicated with the Internal Revenue Service and the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue, and 1 am convinced that a larger amount should have been paid to Mr. Purvis for his services. The difficulty in arriving at a conclusion in this case centers around the fact that the Internal Rev­enue Service takes the position that the law does not permit disclosures of the amoun~ that was actually recovered from the corporation as the result of infor­mation ·suppfied by Mr. Purvis. - How­ever, it is quite obvious that if the Gov­ernment in fact recovered a million dol­lars, or even half or a quarter of that amount, Mr: Purvis has not received a fair and just reward for the valuable service he has· rendered to the Federal Government.

In fairness to Mr. Purvis, I feel that a committee of the Senate should check into this case very carefully. According ly, Mr. President, in order that we may ascertain the facts, I introduce, for ap­propriate reference, a bill for the relief of Mr. H. G. Purvis. If the facts are as Mr. Purvis alleges, I am · sure the com..: mittee will report a bill that provides just compensation for this individual. On the other hand, if the committee con­cludes that Mr. Purvis' claim for a sum in excess of $1,250 cannot be justified, at least we wili have the satisfaction of knowing that the Government has been fair in its dealings with him.

The principle in this case is extremely important. On the one . hand, we have the policy of the Government expressed in a ·statute which authorizes the pay­ment of rewards for information leading to the recovery of unpaid tax moneys. On the other hand, we have enormous risks assumed by individuals who supply information pursuant to the Federal statute. To illustrate what I mean I have only to refer to the fact that as the re­sult of the public service performed by Mr. Purvis in this case, he has been un­able to find .comparable employment in

. his profession and has lost several years income. _ Unless the Government scru­pulously observes rules of fair play in these cases and indulges in reasonable presumptions in favor of individuals sup­plying information to the Internal Rev­enue Service . in cases of tax delinquen­cies, we are likely to find extreme reluc-

tance on the part of the people who pos­sess tax information that could be of great help to t:qeir Government.

I trust that the committee to which this bill is referred will go into this mat­ter very· thoroughly. I urge the commit­tee's prompt and sympathetic considera­tion of the bill which I have just intro­duced.

I ask unanimous consent that the bill be printed in the RECORD.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The bill will be received and appropriately ref erred; and, without objection, the bill will be printed in the RECORD.

The bill (S. 3633) for the relief of H. G. Purvis, introduced by Mr. MORSE, was received, read twice by its title, referred to the Committee on the Judiciary, and ordered to be printed in the RECORD as follows:

Be it enacted, etc., That (a) the Secretary of the Treasury is authorized and directed to pay to H. G. Purvis, of Portland, Oreg., the sum of $100,000. Such sum shall be in full satisfaction of his claim against the United States for compensation for infor­mation furnished by him to the Bureau of Internal Revenue (now the Internal Reve­nue Service), in connection with a case in­volving incorrect tax returns filed by a cor­poration in Portland, Oreg., for the years 1941 to 1947, inclusive, such information having substantially assisted the Internal Revenue Service to collect from such cor­poration a large sum in Federal taxes.

(b) The amount authorized to be paid by subsection (a) of this act shall be reduced by any amount heretofore paid the said H. G. Purvis for the information described in such subsection, and shall be paid out of any funds appropriated for rewarding per­sons who submit information concerning violations of the internal-revenue laws: Pravided, That no part of the amount ap­propriated in this act in excess of 10 percent 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 exceeding $1,000. ·

BENEFITS FOR SERVICEMEN AMENDMENT

s-µRVIVORS OR AND VETERANS-

Mr. BEALL submitted an amendment, intended to be proposed by him, to the bill (H. R. 7089) to provide benefits for the survivors of servicemen and veter-' ans, and for other purposes, which was referred to the Committee on Armed Services, and ordered to be printed.

AMENDMENT OF RULE XXV OF STANDING RULES OF THE SEN:­ATE-RECOMMITTAL OF RESOLU· TION

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I ask unanimous consent that Or-: der No. 1, Senate Resolution..17; to amend rule XXV of the Standing Rules of. the Senate, be taken from the calendar. and recommitted to the Committee on Rules and Administration. I have checked the matter with the distinguished mi­nority Jeader.

The PRESIDENT pro tern.pore .. With.; out objection, it is so ordered.

ADDRESSES, EDITORIALS, ARTI­CLES, ETC., PRINTED L'1 THE REC­ORD On request, and by unanimous con­

sent, addresses, · eaitorials, articles, etc., were o:::-dered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

By Mr. WILEY: · Excerpts from address delivered by him

before Shrine Club of La Crosse, Wis., on April 6, 1956.

LEGISLATIVE PROGRAM Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­

dent, I should like to make an announce­ment for the information of the Senate. When we conclude action on the unfin­ished business, Calendar 1193, Senate Concurrent Resolution 36, requiring con­ference reports to be accompanied by statement~ signed by a majority of the managers of each House, I should like to have the Senate be on notice of the pos­sibility of considering Calendar 1184. Senate Joint Resolution 97, to amend certain laws providing for membership and participation by the United States in the Food and Agriculture Organiza­tion and International Labor Organiza­tion and authorizing appropriations therefor; Calendar 1928, Senate bill 3340. to transfer the functions of the Passport Office to a new agency of the Department of State; Calendar No. 1745, House bill 4909, relative to consolidation of the Na­tional Tax Association; and Calendar 1746, House bill 10004, making supple-­mental appropriation_s for the fiscal ye.ar ending June 30, 1956, and for other pur-poses. .

Calendar 1746, House bill 10004, is a very important appropriation bill. The­reports on it are available for study by all Members of the Senate. Under the rule; the bill would not normally come up un­til next week. - However, if it is the pleasure of the Senate to have the bill brought up this week, it could be sched­uled for consideration on tomorrow or Saturday. I am continuing negotiation& with the distinguished minority leader and with all other Senators who are in­terested in this appropriation bill, ·and, I desire to have all Members of the Sen­ate be on notice that the bill has been reported unanimously by the Appropria­tions .. Committe·e, and that so far as I­know, there is no great controversy re-: garding the bill. . Let me ask the chairman of the Ap­propriations Committee, the distin­guished senior Senator from Arizona. CMr. HAYDEN], whether he expects any controversy or floor fight on that supple­mental appropriation bill? '

Mr. HAYDEN. · No; apparently every­thing is peaceful. · Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I thank the Senator from Arizona.

Let me inquire whether the distin-· guished ranking minority member of the Appropriations Committee 'so under­stands.

Mr. BRIDGES. Yes; I believe so. Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Of course.

we are hopeful that we shall be able to clean up the calendar. _ I also include. .in this. announcement Calendar 1747, Senate bill 3481, to amend

6188 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD'- SENATE April· 12

the Foreign Service Act of 1946, as amended, and for other purposes. · We should like to have that bill considered.

That concludes the measures which have been cleared up to the present time, Mr. President.

Mrs. SMITH of Maine. Mr. President, let me inquire of the Senator from Texas whether I correctly understood him to say there will be a session on Saturday.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. No, Mr. President; we ·have no such plan, and we hope to avoid a Saturday session. · If it is possible for .us to pass the supple-

. mental appropriation bill on tomorrow, Friday; we should like to do that. It may be that, instead;' we shall take up the bill on Monday, and thus preclude any possibility of a Saturday session, and make it possible for Senators who, during the week, have made engagements to speak on Saturday, to fulfill those en­gagements. I think we are away ahead of schedule, anyway.

At any rate, I am .hopeful that I shall be able to work out some problems which exist on my side of the aisle, .and that the distinguished minority leader [Mr. KNOWLAND] will be able ta work out some problems which exist on. his side of the aisle, so that we shall be able to take up the supplemental appropriation bill on Friday, and pass it on that day. If that is done, of course, we shall not have to have a Saturday session.

APPLICATION OF NORTHEAST AIR­LINES FOR ROJJ:TE TO FLORIDA. Mr. BRIDGES. Mr. President, an ini­

tial examiner's- decision has just been announced in the so-called New York­Florida proceeding, which has been pend­ing before the Civil Aeronautics Board for the past 19 months. On the·day be­fore yesterday, the distinguished major­ity leader of the House of Representa­tives, Mr. McCORMACK, of Massachu­setts, made some remark's which were very pertinent ·to this subject, and I de­sire to compliment him upon them.

This morning, a meeting of the Sena­tors, of both political parties, from the six New England States was held, and

· at the meeting this subject was discussed as a matter of grave concern to all of us.

In the proceeding before the Civil Aeronautics Board, the .Board has the responsibility of determining which one of several scheduled airlines should be permitted to share in the lucrative route, extending north and south along the Atlantic coast, which is now occupied exclusively by two large airlines. It is conceded that the increase in traffic along this route warrants participation by a third carrier, and, in this case, as is so often true under our system of free enterprise, it clearly is in the best inter­est of the traveling public that a third airline be permitted to compete.

One of the soundest and most deserv­ing applicants in this case is Northeast Airlines, the smallest of the 13 original trunklines in the Nation, but one which has given excellent service to New Eng-· land for the past 23 years. Many of the original pioneer airlines have been per­mitted to grow with the increase in air traffic, and to extend their routes in such

manner as to become profitable enter­prises. Such is not the case with North­east. This airline has been forced to struggle along with a short-haul route structure which makes profitable opera­tion an absolute impossibility. As a matter of fact, without the help of Gov­ernment subsidy, it is doubtful if North­east Airlines could operate at all. It is a matter of grave concern . to me that northern New England may ·be faced with the possible loss of scheduled air service. In my own State of New Hamp­shire, the loss of commercial air trans­port would strike a severe blow to the development of small diversified indus­try,. as well as to .the recreation business which is so important to our economy. Northeast Airlines has conscientiously given New Hampshire, as well as other New England States, dependable and convenient air service, even on routes which have proven to be uneconomical. We cannot afford to lose this service.

In addition to the economic liabilities imposed by these short-haul routes, Northeast is faced with the handicap of operating under the most difficult sea­sonal conditions of any scheduled airline: During the summer months, there is ex.; tremely heavy traffic into the recrea­tional areas of northern New England, and Northeast has done a commendable job in meeting the demands of these peak months. In the winter, however, there is a much lower volume of vaca­tion traffic, and the situation is com­plicated further by the greater frequency of adverse flying conditions. In brief, the combination of short-haul ·routes and seasonal fluctuations in : ttaffic, and weather conditions makes it literally im­possible for Northeast to operate at a profit.

It is well known throughout the air­line industry that a carrier must have the revenues of one or more long-haul routes, if it is to avoid operating at a loss. This is an economic fact of life which long has been recognized by the Civil Aeronautics Board itself.

In 1951, Northeast Airlines made ap­plication to_ extend its route from New York to Washington and then to three points in Florida. Northeast made this application in good faith. As an estab­lished scheduled airline of proven ca­pabilities, it was believed that Northeast could supply the type of competitive serv­ice ,which is required to handle the in­creased tra:ffic between New York and Florida. It .was believed also that the public interest demands one-carrier serv­ice from New England to points in the South. Finally, it was believed that Northeast, with its trained organization, could engage in successful competition for this traffic; and I, for one, still think so.

Successful competition on the part of Northeast Airlines would not only re­_move the possibility that New England might lose the fine service which North­east has provided for many years, but it would also mean that Northeast would be in a position to enlarg·e and improve that service. It most certainly is in the interest, not only of New England alone, but of the entire country, that every reasonable and legitimate effort be made to improve . and stabilize air service ·to

and from the northeast corner of the country. Insofar as I know, Northeast Airlines is the only scheduled carrier which has shown any inclination to give this type of service throughout New England.

Yet, in spite of the fact that the Civil Aeronautics Board's own Bureau of Air Operations strongly endorsed the appli~ cation of Northeast Airlines, and recom­mended that Northeast, and Northeast aloi::ie, be chosen as the additional airline to service the New York-Florida route, the examiner in this case has recom­mended that Northeast's application should be denied and that the certifi­cate should be awarded to another car­rier. In effect, the examiner's recom­mendations in this case would make a big airline bigger, and would force Northeast Airlines into the position of being permanently subsidized by the taxpayers, at least for so long as it con­tinues to operate.

In my judgment, such a finding is completely inconsistent with what I conceive to be the intentions of the Con­gress with respect to route assignments by the Civil Aeronautics Board. It shows a thorough disregard for the prin­ciples of healthy, competitive develop­ment among the public carriers and a total disregard for the needs and re­quirements of those of us who live in New England.

Time does not permit me to discuss in detail the recommendations in this case. It is sufficient to say, however, that I find something to challenge in practi­cally every one of the examiner's ob­servations. I consider his findings unsound and his recommendations un­tenable. I know that my views on this matter are shared by the other Senators from the New England States. It is my firm hope and belief that the Civil Aero.: nautics Board, which has ultimate re­sponsibility for the final decision, will consider this case with its usual logic and commonsense, and will reverse the unsupportable findings of the examiner.

So. far as we are concerned, New Eng­land is an integral part of this Nation. Sometimes we .feel that we are forgotten: that we are in a remote corner of the Nation; but we are a ver·y important part ?f it and we do not want to be entirely ignored by the Civil Aeronautics Board or any of its examiners. I wish publicly

· to protest this examiner's decision and I know that I speak for most of' New England when I do so.

Mr .. SALTONSTALL. Mr. President, will the Sena tor yield?

Mr. BRIDGES. I yield. Mr. SALTONSTALL. Mr. President

I should like to add my word to what the senior Senator from New England on this side of the aisle has said. This is a subject which is very close to the hearts of many of us in New England, particularly in the cities and towns out­side the metropolitan area of Boston. I agree with what the Senator from New

. Hampshire has just stated. I believe that the decision of this examiner should be given very careful consideration by the Civil Aeronautics Board, and I hope the Board, in its final action, will reverse the decision of its examiner.

19-56~ CONGRESSIONAL -llECORD - . .S:f:NA'tE 6189 THIRTIETll ~NN!ViERSAR~ OF .

UNITED AIR LINES ·Mr .. · BIBLE. Mr. President, an an­

niversary of great significance to the progress and growth of civil aviation was observed on April 6 when United Air Lines, the country's· oldest · air carrier, marked its 30'th birthday, and 'American aviation passed another important mile­stone.

·n is interesting to recall that my own State of Nevada _played · an "important role in the birth of American air-carrier s-ervice. Turning back the pages of time 30 years, we find that Varney Air Lines, predecessor to United Air' Lines and awarded · one of first Government air­mail contracts, - flew the 4·50-mile route between Elko, Nev. and Pasco, Wash., on April 6, 1926.

· It shm~ld be remembered that Rear Adm. Richard E. Byrd, of Antarctic ex­ploration fame, and one of the Navy's early fliers, made a special survey flight before that pioneer mail run. .

Thirty years ago it took ·a pilot 6% hours to fly the uncharted 460 miles be­tween Elko, Nev., and Pasco, Wash.

Today, United Air Lines flies its DC-7's froPl the Atlantic to the Pacific Ocean in 7 % hours. In 1959 United plans to fly jet airliners from ocean to ocean in 5 hours.

This story speaks for itself as it shows the great contribution United Air Lines has made to American civil aviation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous con­sent to have printed in the RECORD at this point an article, -entitled, "One Man's Flight Into History," printed in the Chi­cago American on April 5 and commemo­rating the events about which I have spoken.

There being no objection, the article was ortiered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

ONE MAN'S FLIGHT INTO HISTORY-OLDEST

AIRLINE MARKS 3-0TH YEAR

Thirty years of scheduled air service were celebrated April 6 by United Air Lines· as the Nation's oldest air carrier. It is also the only major airline headquartered in Chicago.

United had its origin in Varney Air Lines, founc1ed in 1925 by a California aviation en­thusiast, Walter T. Varney. As the only bidder for an airmail contract over a barren 460-mile route between Pasco; Wash., and Elko, Nev., Varney received one of the orig­inal airmail contracts.

Varney purchased 6 Swallow biplanes and hired an accountant, a traffic promoter, 4 mechanics and 4 pilots, with Leon D. Cudde­back as chief pilot. Charles T. Wrightson, the accountant, is now United's station man­ager at Fresno, Calif. Cuddeback, who later became a division superintendent for United, today is western area supervisor -of the Bu­reau of Safety Investigation, Civil Aero­nautics Board, at Oakland, Calif. Hal E. Nourse, one of the first traffic men for Varney, today is United's vice president for economic controls.

Aviation experts of that day said flying over the route between Pasco, Wash., and Elko, Nev., was impossible. Elko and Boise were separated by great stretches of un­inhabited desert and broken volcanic hills ill which an emergency landing could be little other than fatal.

Froni Boise north, the pro1fosed route passed over .a short stretch of level farm­lands that ended abruptly in bleak badfands leading almost ,to the . foot qf the towering Blue Mountains ~f - _Oregon, . snowclad and

subject to se:vere :winter bllz~rds. Rolling wheatfields- led down the north slopes of tliis range for many miles before a fairly leyel approach was seen leading into Pasco beside the- Columbia River. · · ··

NINETY MILES AN HOUR

The first· scheduled fiight . of Varney was completed on April 6, 1926. . C1,1ddeback took off from Pasco at 6 a. m., landed at Boise about 4 hours later, then flew on to Elko, arriving at 12 :38 p. m. Averaging less than 90 miles an hour, his storm-buffeted Swal- . low carried .261 pound!3 of airmail. .

Of the first day's :fiights, sent off with great ceremony, only 1 of 7 reached its destination. Others were down with motor trouble.

Six months after the oper~tion was started the planes still carried meager .loads that did not even · approach the operating ex­penses.

Varney Air Lines for months thereafter staved off collapse and eventually became moderately prosperous. In October 1926, its southern terminus was extended to Salt Lake City. By 1928 Varney Air Lines had 27 employees and a fleet of 9 single-engine bi­planes.

Three other pioneer lines became part of United's route structure. Pacific Air Trans­port began Seattle-Los Angeles operations in September 1926. Boeing Air Transport linked Chicago and San Francisco in July 1927, using 25 single-engined Boeing 40-A's. National Air Transport inaugurated airmail service between Dallas and Chicago in May 1926. It extended eastward to New York in September 1927, flying single-engined Cur­tis and Douglas planes.

. The pioneer companies and Varney sub• sequently were welded together as United Air Lines, resulting in the Nation's first inte­grated coast-to-coast system-the main line.

FL YING TIME SLASHED

Boeing 247's, prototype of today's airliners, went in service in 1933, cutting coast-to-coast time to ·.19Yz )lours. Successive models, each improving ·on the other, in turn joined United's fieet-DC-3's, DC-4's, DC-6's, DC-6B's, Mainliner Convairs. DC-7's added in 1954 cut cross-country time to 7¥2 hours.

Delivery of 45 new planes this year and next will provide United with 220 piston­engine craft. In 1959 the first jets will start scheduled service, flying 4 Yz hours from At· lantic to Pacific. Jets will span west coast­Chicago route in 3Yz hours, Chicago-New York run in lYz hours.

FAILURE OF AR.MY AND AIR FORCE TO DEVELOP ADEQUATE RESERVE PROGRA~S , Mrs. SMITH of Maine. Mr. President,

for many years now I have been con­cerned over the failure of the Army and the Air Force to develop realistic and adequate Reserve programs for the se­curity of our country. In contrast I have admired and commended the manner in which the Navy developed and admin­istered its Reserve program. I have re­peatedly at committee hearings ex­pressed my disappointment with the Army and the Air Force on this matter and asked if they couldn't learn some­thing from the Navy.

Recent history shows that one expla-­nation between the encouraging record of the Navy on Reserve matters and the disappointing record of the Army and the Air Force is that during World War II the Navy kept its Reserve planning intact and worked diligently on it imme­diately after the end of hostilities, while the War Department, wherein the Army and Air Force were still housed, literally

abandoned any planning or thinking during World War II about. future Re­serve plans and program and. after the war for many years made only half­hearted efforts on a Reserve program.

There are indications that the Air Force is developing a Reserve program consciousness similar to that of the ad­mirable attitude of the Navy. For that I commend the Air Force.

:But according to an editorial in the April 1956 issue of the magazine Air Force, roadblocks are being thrown· in the way of the Air Force and obstruc­tionist tactics used by the Department of Defense to thwart real progress on an A.ir Force Reserve program that the Air For.ce is trying to develop.

· I ref er to the editorial by Edmund F. Hogan, Reserve affairs editor of the mag­azine Air Force, "titled "Why the Reserve Has No Technicians'' on page 30 of the April 1956 issue of that magazine-and I invite the very close attention of every Member of this body to it. I ask unan­imous consent that it be placed in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD at this paint of my remarks. ·

Mr. President, the implications of this editorial are so serious that I urge that the Senate Armed Services Committee make a full inquiry into this matter and determine exactly what is .the nature and character of the controversy between the Department of Defense and the De­partment of the Air Force with respect to this particular phase of the Air Force Reserve program. ·

Each side of this controversy should be heard. The ·American people are en­t~tled to know what is going on:. Con­gress, and especially the Senate Arm,ed Services Committee, has a solemn obli­gation to . lciok into anything that smacks of obstructionist tactics that hamper the development of a realistic Afr Force Reserve program so vital to our national security. · There are increasing indications that

the Department of Defense is reaching down pretty deep in each of the services to dictate details on service operations instead of sticking to overall . policy for­·mulation for which the Unification · Act created the Department of Defense. This controversy is one of the latest in­dications.

I ask unanimous consent that the editorial entitled "Why the Reserve Has No Technicians," be printed in the REC­ORD at this point as a part of my remarks.

There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the REC­ORD, as follows:

WHY THE RESE;RVE HAS No TECHNICIANS

(By Edmund F. Hogan) As we have pointed out before ,Air Force,

January 1956) the establishment of an air technician program is a basic requirement for the Air Force Reserve.

Briefly, this program uses full-time civilian employees in place of the active-duty Air Force people who are now assigned to Reserve fiying units. The civilian employees, how­ever, must be members of the units in which they are employed and go on. active duty with their units when mobilized.

The. Air .National Guard has had a ·similal' program since 1946; The years ·have proved it · to be an unqualified success. There is every reason to believe that · this program in

6190' CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE April 12 the Air Force Reserve would be equally- suc­cessful. An air technician plan for the Re­serve was developed by Continental Air Com­mand a year ago. It is specifically designed

, to improve the combat-readiness of the 24 Reserve flying wings. But there are other important byproducts.

First, the technician plan would release some 9,000 active-duty Air Force officers and airmen for assignment · elsewhere in the active establishment. Second, it would save about $2 million a year in salaries alone and an estimated $9 million a year in hidden costs required to support the present system.

Last June the Air Force submitted the plan to the Department of Defense, specifically to Carter L. Burgess; Assistant Secretary of De­fense for Manpower and Personnel. Mr. Burgess looked it over and sent it back to the Air Force for answers to questions which had risen from a review of the plan by his staff.

On August 31, Air Fbrce Secretary Quarles sent a memorandum to Mr. Burgess, replying to the questions P,e had asked. One of these concerned civil service status of the techni­cians. The legal land technical staffs of the Civil Service Commission agreed to the plan, but the Commission chairman wanted the endorsement of the Department of Defense. Mr. Quarles' memo urged that Department endorsement be conveyed to the Civil Service Commission as soon as possible.

That endorsement is still to come. In fact, every attempt to get Mr. Burgess to approve the plan has failed. Even the recommenda­tion of his own top advisory group, Defense Department's Reserve Forces Policy Board, has not moved Mr. Burgess. This Board, headed by Dr. Milton G. Baker, has approved the air technician plan. Moreover, a few weeks ago Dr. Baker, in a personal appearance before Defense Secretary Wilson's Armed Forces Policy Council, specifically recom­mended that the air technician plan be given the green light. Still the plan remains pigeonholed.

Recently Congressman En EDMONDSON, of Oklahoma, asked Mr. Burgess to tell him why he continued to hold up the plan, Mr. Bur­gess replied as follows:

"The plan is currently being studied in my office both with regard to its intrinsic merits and its relationship to other important ele­ments of the program.

"When our review is completed, a deter­mination will be made as to whether the proposal will contribute to the effectiveness of the Reserve program."

That would indicate that Mr. Burgess has no confidence in his own Reserve Forces Policy Board, much less in the Air Force itself. It would seem that he still is not convinced that the plan "will contribute to. the effectiveness of the Reserve program," despite the proved success of the same proj­ect in the Air Guard, and despite · the fact that everyone else concerned has approved it. But Mr. Burgess is far too smart a .man to be so illogical as that.

Why does Mr. Burgess continue to sit on 'the plan? For the answer to this myt:tery we apparently must consider a few exten­uating circumstances.

Mr. Burgess happens to be directly respon­sible for the success or failure of the admin­istration's National Reserve · plan. This law offers young men a number of options for

· completing required military service. One option permits a youth to volunteer for 6 months of active-duty training, following which he has a total Reserve obligation of 7Y2 years.

Up to the moment, at least, the Air Force has wanted no part of this plan, on the grounds that the 6-month training cannot possibly fUrnish it with the highly complex skills it needs. Mr. Burgess has been almo~t violent in his insistence that the Air Force use the plan.

So the plot thickens. With the atr'-tech­nician plan in his bottom drawer, Mr. Bur­g-ess has something the Air Force wants. I!

the Air Force wants the technician plan badly enough it presumably, can get it, by accepting the 6-month feature of the Na­tional Reserve plan.

Mr. Burgess indicated this himself not. long ago. When asked why he was holding up approval of the technician plan, Mr. Burgess replied, in effect:

"When the Air .Force shows some good faith to us, we'll show good faith to them."

Now there is no connection between the air-technician plan and the 6-month train­ing program. Each should be considered on its own merits. There is no reason why the Air Force should be required to take 6-month tr.ainees-and jeopardize its recruiting pro­gram-in order to get civilian employees for its Ready Re1:1erve. No reason, that is, except Mr. Burgess.

Many times in the past when the Air Force Reserve program has bogged down, it has been difficult to pinpoint those respon­sible. Not so in this case. The responsibility lies squarely with Carter Burgess.

We think it's high time Secretary Wilson stepped in, and stepped on his ambitious Assistant Secretary.

We hope the Air Force holds tight and refuses to make a deal in order to get air technicians, despite ·the obvious need for them. Once it becomes party to gangster­ism, there'll be no end to it.

Congressman GEORGE MAHON of the House Appropriations Committee has promised to take a full look at the Defense Department's delayin~ action. We hope this will result in full support of the air-technician program. ·

Lacking such straight-forward action, many thousands of reservists have every rea­son to wonder whether they are getting more lipservice than sincere leadership in building a Ready Reserve.

COMMENDATION OF THE WORK OF THE DONOVAN EMERGENCY COM­MISSION OF THE INTERNATIONAL RESCUE COMMITTEE, EXPOSING THE COMMUNIST COME-HOME CAMPAIGN Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, I should

like to convey my most earnest com­mendation of the splendid public service performed by the Emergency Commis- . sion of the International Rescue Com­mittee, which investigated the Commu­nist ·redefection campaign, the so-called come-home drive.

This Commission, ably headed by the distinguished former head of the Office of Strategic Services, Gen. William J. Donovan, has come up with a great many important recommendations for specific United States and allied action to counteract and def eat the treacher­ous efforts of the Kremlin to lure back behind the Iron Curtain refugees from communism.

I send to the desk a statement which l have prepared on this subject, and ask unanimous consent that it be printed at this point in tlte body of the RECORD, along with several of the opening pages of the Donovan Commission's report.

There being no objection, the matters were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,

as follows: STATEMENT BY SENATOR WILEY

One of my deep interests has always been in the welfare of those heroic souls who have taken their lives in their hands and fled across the barbed-wire Iron Curtain.

The heart of the American people has been stirred by innumerable stories of the in­credible hardships and sacrifices experienced by liberty-loving refugees in order to es-

cape to freedom from either Eastern Eu­rope, North Korea, North Vietnam, Soviet China, or other Red-held areas. THE· HEROISM OF REFUGEES lN ORIGINALLY

FLEEING We may never know how many of these

refugees lost their lives while attempting their escape-how many died under Com­munist rifle and machinegun fire at the borders, from Communist land mines, elec­trified wire, from tracking down by Com­munist police dogs, from being betrayed, or by any other means.

We do know, however, from the stories of those who have been successful in their flight. that some of the truly epic stories-­of human courage and ingenuity, have been written by the refugees who risked all in order to escape from the Red terror. REDS SQUEEZING PROPAGANDA OUT OF REDEFEC­

TIONS Of late, however, we have noted with deep

concern the infamous redefection campaign, designed to induce a fiow from the West back to the East, as conducted by a tre­mendous variety of means. Moscow has been attempting to lure or threaten back behind the Iron Curtain as many refugees as possible.

The Reds have, of course, been trying to squeeze propaganda value out of each sin­gle case of redefection. Moreover, they have been trying to shatter the morale of the mass of refugees who do not redefect.

SPECIFIC INSIDIOUS TECHNIQUES BY SOVIETS Exactly how are the Soviets trying to in­

duce redefection-return to the Iron Cur­tain? Basically by maintaining the most complete dossiers on the refugees whom they then subject to merciless pressures tailored to fit each particular case. Spe­cifically, the Reds utilize pamphlets, news­papers, and circulars. They have set up come-home committees asserting that all is changed, all is forgiven in the satellite coun­tries. They have issued so-called amnesty decrees~ directed personalized radio broad­casts to individual refugees and camps. They have made mysterious, anonymous phone calls to refugees. There have been unexpected visits from agents of f;!oviet Em­bassies and consulates abroad. And the Reds have used signed, personal letters from families and friends.

Moreover, as always, the Reds have used blackmail-threats of vicious reprisal against innocent relatives and friends behind the Iron Curtain. When all else has failed the Reds have not hesitated to use direct vio­lence-to kidnap and kill, as in West Ber­lin.

MORE THAN 1,100 REDEFECTIONS How successful has the "voluntary" and

other redefection campaigns been? Since January 1, 1955, it is estimated that 1,158 refugees, excluding East Germans, Poles from France, and Yugoslavs, have returned behind the Iron Curtain.

But one cannot judge the effectiveness of the Red redefection campaign solely on the basis of statistics. Why? Because, as pointed out by the Donovan Commission, the redefection campaign is but a segment of the overall subtle propaganda drive of the Krushchev clique of the Kremlin.

A single well-publicized redefection can cause immense psychological harm among the innumerable refugees who do not return.

Of course, the overwhelming proportion of refugees have wisely completely resisted Communist redefection efforts thus far. They know from bitter, personal experiences what atheistic communism really means to their homelands. They never want to re­turn until and unless their lands are gen­uinely free.

Nevertheless, the refugees are entitled right now to reasonable efforts on our part to protect them against the Communist re­defection e1Iort; to protect their rights and

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 6191 liberties in the sanctuary to which they have come.

I point out that the International Con­vention on Political Asylum, signed by Ger­many, Austria, Italy, and Greece, adequat.ely safeguards the refugee in case of any official requests by Communist governments for visits with the refugee.

But the refugee has no legal safeguards thus far against the dangers inherent in unofficial contacts by Red Embassy officials and agents.

OVERALL ANTIREDEFECTION CAMPAIGN ESSENTIAL

But we cannot defeat the redefection cam­paign by any single measure. Rather, it will take comprehensive well-integrated action, designed to frustrate the comprehensive well-integrated Communist plans.

The refugees must, for example, after ade­quate screening, be more promptly and effec­tively integrated into free economies. They must not be permitted to l~nguish endlessly in refugee camps. They must be saved from the loneliness and despair in a foreign land and foreign culture, despair which so often arises in refugee hearts.

RED EFFORTS TO LURE BACK POLES What I am saying, of course, applies to all

the refugees from behind the Iron Curtain. I cite, for example, the insidious efforts by the Communists to lure back Polish refu­gees. In France alone, there are 750,000 Poles, most of them prewar emigrants and their descendants.

The Communist forces have infiltrated ·in­numerable agents among the .refugee Poles, spreading false rumors, conveying offers for repatriation, putting direct and subtle pres­sures, conveying invitations to professors, offering scholarships to youngsters, and the like. Poles in West Germany are subjected to the same type of pressure.

And one could go on, citing the experiences of East Germans, Hungarians, Czechs, Rumanians, Bulgarians, Lithuanians, Eston­ians, and Latvians.

I have of course previously commented in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD on the serious­ness of the redefection efforts. LET'S CELEBRATE POLISH CONSTITUTION DAY BY

ACTION Under these circumstances, comprehensive

action by public and private authorities in the United States becomes imperative now.

I point out that in less than a month, we will celebrate another Polish Constitution Day-May 3. We will pay tribute once more to the devout, freedom-loving land of Pader­ewski, Kosciusko, Pulaski, Tschaikowski, Curie. What better specific way could we do so than by countering the Communist rede­fection campaign? Moreover, how better can we repay our overall debt to Poland, than by our intensified message to the mlllions of enslaved people of · Poland, reaffirming our continued desire for their liberation.

That is why I, for one, have on many oc­casions, sponsored legislation emphasizing the United States' desire for liberation of the Polish and other peoples, and it is why I shall continue my efi'orts in connection with the Polish-American congress and with Ameri­cans of all ancestry who respect what Po­land has meant to the world.

OPENING PAGES OF DONOVAN REPORT There follow now the opening pages of the

report of the Donovan Commission and an index of its overall contents:

"MEMBERS OF COMMISSION "Gen. William J. Donovan, former head of

0. S. S., former United States. Ambassador to Thailand; partner, Donovan, Leisure, New­ton & Irvine.

"Irving Brown, AFL-CIO liaison officer. "Joseph Buttlnger, author; political anal­

yst; vice chairman, IRC. "Leo Cherne, executive director, Research

Institute of America; chairman, IRC.

"Hon. Angier Biddle Duke, former United States Ambassador to El Salvador; president, IRC.

"Claiborne Pell, vice president and direc­tor, Bell News Corp.

"Herman W. Steinkraus, president, Bridge­port Brass Co.; former president, United States Cham"Qer of Commerce.

"William Vanden Heuvel, associated with Donovan, Leisure, Newton & Irvine.

"Richard R. Salzmann, executive secretary, · v\ce president, IRC.

"This report is based on information gathered by the members of the Commission on a mission to Europe and on written re­ports submitted to them. In the course of its trip the Commission visited France, Aus­tria, Switzerland, and Germany in February and March 1956. It examined reports on the Communist repatriation campaigns in Bel­gium; Sweden, Italy, Greece, Turkey, and South America. Developments in the United States were closely watched and are included as part of this report.

"Members of the Commission wish to ex­press their deep appreciation to officials of the governments of the countries visited; officials of the United States Government; to representatives of the United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees; and to the di­rectors of numerous private organizations for their hospitality, invaluable cooperation and support, without which this investiga­tion would have been impossible. "REPORT OF DONOVAN COMMISSIO~ OF me ON

COMMUNIST REDEFECTION CAMPAIGNS "1. Introduction

"During recent months there have been increasing reports of Communist pressure on escapees from behind the Iron Curtain, aimed at forcing these escapees to return to Soviet and satellite countries. In Europe the campaign has been intensive-but it has by no means been confined to Europe.

"The International Rescue Committee has received mounting evidence from refugee leaders in the United States that similar pressure is being put on escapees i~ this country. In the course of examining the problem in the United States and Europe, a pattern emerged. It is clear that we are dealing with a large-scale, well-financed, and well-integrated Communist program with many elements of novel effectiveness.

"An Emergency Citizens Commission was therefore organized under the chairmanship of Gen. William J. Donovan to assess the problem in detail. It was the Commission's intent to study and evaluate the Commu­nist objectives, methods, extent, and effec­tiveness in these campaigns.

"The results of its personal investigation are the following recommendations for counteraction which are based on the con­viction that these redefection efforts are long-term, extravagantly financed, and well­coordinated with Communist agents and agencies throughout the world.

"II. Recommendations "The following five general recommenda­

tions are submitted by the Commission: "1. A major effort should be made to arouse

the free world to the real danger posed by the Communist redefection campaigns, and to the need for more effective counter-action.

"2. It is in tne interest of the United States to expand its cooperation with other nations on behalf of refugees from com­munism. There is an urgent need to co­ordinate existing programs and equalize the burdens of refugee care, especially in co­operation with such countries of first asylum as Germany, Austria, Greece, and Italy, as well as with France, Belgium, Switzerland, and other nations.

"3. First priority should be given to speed­ing the processing of refugee and escapee cases. The time of investigation can be shortened. Requirements that must be met by the refugee can be simplified. In these

ways the cost of care and · maintenance in camps, and the corrosion of morale during waiting periods; can be reduced to a mini­mum.

"4. Our findings show the need for a pro­gram to strengthen morale among the ref­ugees and to provide follow-up counseling for a period of 1 year after settlement.

"5. Special measures for the care of old, ill, and incapacitated refugees who because of injury in escape, illness incurred during long months in refugee camps, death of the breadwinner of the family,' and many other similar reasons, are incapable of becoming economically self-sufficient should be intro­duced by the United States. A special basis of admission of a limited number of such persons into the United States over and above present immigration provisions can · be developed as the United States share of the solution to this hard core problem.

"INDEX "I. Introduction. "II. Recommendations. "III. The Communist purpose. "IV. The methods. "V. Effectiveness.

"APPENDIX "Existing 'counter-measures. "Survey of methods used.

"EXHIBITS "1. Brief survey of Soviet repatriation ef­

forts. "2. Repatriation campaigns among various

Nationalists. "3. Excerpts from satellite amnesty de­

crees. "4. Some representative letters urging re­

turn. "5. Thematic analysis of Communist Re-

turn to the Homeland publication. "6. Summary statistics on return. "7. The Hanke case. "8. Official statements re '100,000 Soviet

Citizeus Detailed on German Soil.' "9. Statement on United States escapee

program, eligibility provisions. "10. Statement of President Eisenhower,

February 8, 1956. "11. A case history of redefection and re­

turn. "12. Poland-A unique approach."

CIVIL RIGHTS LEGISLATION Mr. HENNINGS. Mr. President, I

send forward a statement I have pre­pared which I ask to.have printed in the body of the RECORD at this point. It re­lates to certain proposed legislation which has been reported from the Sub­committee on Constitutional Rights of the Committee on the Judiciary. I also ask that at the appropriate place in the statement there be printed certain cor-

. respondence from the Attorney General of the United States directed to the late Senator Harley, M. Kilgore, farmer chair­ma~ of the Committee on the Judiciary, and letters addressed to the Attorney General by the late Senator Kilgore.

There being no objection, the state­ment and correspondence were ordered to be printed in tjle RECORD, as follows:

STATEMENT BY SENATOR HENNINGS I rise to speak briefly in behalf of those

thousands of our fellow American citizens who have long been deprived of their con­stitutional rights in many localities of our country, and to urge the earliest possible action by this Senate to give them redress of their grievance. These fellow Americans are not in this room, and the only reason that I happen to be here ls that I have been called upon to represent a great many of them in their Government, just as other

6192 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-. .SENATE April 12 Senators from other States b~yond Missouri a.re here to represent them.

I know of no elected Member of this as­sembly who was ch~sen to come here to rep­resent merely the fortunate, or the privi­leged, or the secure within his community. I know of no Senator here who was chosen tQ represent only the white men or only the Negroes within the State which gave him the high privilege and honor of our legisla­tive responsibilities. As for me, I was sent here to represent as best I may an entire community, including rich and poor, young and old, people of diverse faiths, and diverse ancestries. And in partlc:ular, it seems to me, a responsibility was laid upon me to

· speak and to vote and to act on behalf of those people within this American Republic who are wrongfully deprived of their just rights, under our Constitution.

For a long time, now, as chairman of the Senate's Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights within our Judiciary Committee · I have been working with other S.enators who have my deep esteem, to formulate legisla­tion giving the real protection of Federal law to those thousands of people who need 'it badly, since in some situations they get in­adequate protection under statutes of their local governments. I know that there are a good many other Senators, both Republi­can and Democratic, who are not members of this committee, who also are Wm'king in dif­ferent ways toward that same objective.

But because of my chairmanship of this Senate subcommittee I have been specially concerned with this matter, and was very happy to be able on February 9 of this year to act with my colleagues, in the prescribed legislative manner, in reporting favorably four civil rights bills for the consideration of the Senate Judiciary Committee. I re­gret to say that in the work of this sub­committee of yours we received no help whatever from the Attorney General of the United States. We asked for it. We asked him for his recommendations in the matter of protecting the constitutional rights of our fellow citizens now deprived of them. We asked him specifically for his views on legislation whfoh we were considering.

The Attorney General of the United States during his 3 years of 'tenure has been apparently very busy in l\andling affairs he must have deemed of more importance than protecting the constitutional rights of American citizens. I must confess I do not know exactly what these affairs were. I certainly have seen no record of the Attor­ney General's activities in the newspapers, from the time he first was elevated to the rank of a Cabinet officer and placed in -charge of the Department of Justice up to this very minute, which would be of any greater importance than upholding the con­stitutional rights of American citizens.

This Department of Justice was created by our forefathers to see that the people of this country got justice, or else I mistake its basic purpose. Therefore, I suppose, I should have been delighted several days ago to learn that the Attorney General in charge of our De­partment of Justice was at long last bestir­ring himself, and at least had recognized the existence of that problem of justice with which your subcommittee and other Sena­

·tors had been wrestling, without his aid, for many months. Yet after I read on Monday the text of the proposals which he had sent

.to this Congress, as representing the ablest, constructive thinking of the Republican ad­ministration in the matter, I felt no elation.

·I will have to admit it. I would like to call attention to the fact

that the Senate Subcommittee on Consti­tutional Rights 2 months ago, at almost. the very outset of this session, reported favor­ably a bill to create a Civil Rights · Division in the Department of Justice. It also re­p.orted -favorably a bill to pretect the voting rights of all our citizens in Federal elections

and primaries. It also reported favorably an antilynching bill. Beyond that the sub­committee reported favorably a bill to pro­tect members of . the Armed Forces against bodily attack. And the subcommittee has now pending before it four other measures designed to strengthen the powers of our fellow citizens of every race and color to maintain the rights which they now possess in fact, and to obtain those rights which have been denied them so long as to con­stitute an international scandal. ,

Let me repeat that--rights denied them so long as to constitute an international scan­dal, and a reproach to the good name of our country, and a weakness of our country in its dealings with other nations.

We now have these four measures re­ported ou~ favorably, and we have others on their way. I would like to assure the Mem­bers of the Senate and those thousands of our fellow citizens too long denied the jus­tice due them that our measures go far beyond the proposals now offered from the Department of Justice. I will speak of these proposals of the Attorney General's shortly. But before I speak of them I would like the Senate to have full knowledge of the re­quests which our subcommittee made of the Attorney General for assistance within the last year. Believe me, we were very solicitous ·of his cooperation, so that a truly bipartisan support might be given to civil-rights legislation.

At this point I insert into the rec9rd of the Congress the entire correspondence be­tween the Senate Committee on the Judi­ciary, relating to the bills of the Subcom­mittee on Constitutional Rights, and the Department of Justice. This correspondence consists of the following:

A letter to the Justice Department dated February 8, 1955, requesting its views on S. 90~to strengthen the laws relating to con­vic~ labor, peonage, slavery, and involuntary servitude. ·

A letter to the Justice Department dated July 27, 1955, requesting its views on S. 903-to protect the right of every citizen to po­litical participation.

A letter to the Justice Department dated March 22, 1955, requesting its views on S. 902-to establish a Civil Rights Division in the Department of Justice; S. 905-to amend and supplement existing civil rights stat­utes; S. 906-to establish a Commission on

· Civil Rights in the executive branch of the Government; S. 907-an omnibus bill con­taining the major provisions of S. 902, S. 903, S. 904, S. 905, and S. 906.

A reply from the Department of Justice dated April 19, 1955, concerning S. 904 stat­ing that it would have no objection to the enactment of this legislation.

A reply from the Department of Justice dated September 8, 1955, concerning S. 903~ stating that whether this particular meas­ure should be enacted constitutes a question of policy concerning which the Department of Justice prefers to make no recommenda­tion. · · A reply from the Department of Justice dated September 8, 1955, concerning S. 906, stating that whether or not the measure should be enacted constitutes a question of policy concerning which the Department of Justice prefers to make no recommendation.

I would like to point out that the De­partment of Justice has made no response to the committee's request for its views on S. 902, S. 905, and S. 907.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ATTORNE.Y GENERAL,

Washington, September 8, 1955. ,Hon. HARLEY M. KILGORE,

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate, .

Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR: .This is in response to your

·request for the views of the Department of -Justice concerning the bill ( s. 903) to . pro­tect the right to political participation.

. Section 594 of title 18 of the United States Code subjects to criminal penalties persons who interfere ·with- the right of other per­sons to vote in any · election held solely or in part for the purpose of electing a candi­date for the office of President, Vice Presi­dent, presidential elector, Member of the S~nate, Member of the House of Representa­tives, Delegate or Commissioner from a Ter­ritory or possession. As defined in section 591 of the same title, the term "election" does not include a primary election. Section 1 of the bill would amend section 594 so as to make the section hereafter applicable to primary elections.

Section 2'004 of the revised statutes, for­merly set forth in section 31 of title 8 of the United States Code but now contained in section 1971 of title 42, provides that all c;itiZens of the United States who are other­wise qualified by law to vote at any election by the people in any State, Territory, etc .• shall be entitled and allowed to vote with­out distinction of race, color, or previous condition of servitude. Section 2 of the bill would amend this section in a number of respects. Firat, it would extend its scope to primary elections. Second, the phrase "pre­vious condition ·or servitude" would be omit­ted from the enumeration of factors which

. are not to form the basis of discrimination and in its place the words "religion . or na­tional origin" would be substituted. Third, a new sentence would be added to the sec­tion as follows:

"The right to qualify to vote and to vote. as set forth herein·, shall be deemed a right within the meaning of, and protected by, the provisions of title 18, United States Code, section 242, as amended, section 1979 of the Revised Statutes (8 U. S. C. 43), and other applicable provisions orlaw."

Section 242 of title · 18 imposes · criminal penalties upon anyone who, under color of law, willfully subjects any inhabitant of any State, Territory, or District to the depriva­tions of any rights protected by the Consti­tution or laws of the United States. Section 1979 of the Revised Statutes (now 42 u. s. c. 1983) provides for civil liability under sim­ilar circumstances.

Section 3 o! the bill would provide that any persons viola.ting the provisions of the first section shall be subject to suit by the .party injured, or by his estat~. in an action at law, suit in equity, or other proper pro­ceeding for damages or preventive or decla­ratory or other relief. The section further would provide that the Attorney General may enforce the provisions of the act in the United States district courts, as defined therein. It would also provide that the dis­trict courts will have jurisdiction concur­rently with State and Territorial courts.

Section 4 of the bill is a customary severa­bility clause.

The purpose of this bill, as stated tn tts title, is "To protect the right to political participation." This purpose is a laudable one with which the Department of Justice is in full accord. Whether this particular measure should be enacted constitutes a question of policy concerning which the De­

·partment of Justice prefers to make no rec­ommendation.

The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there is no objection to the submission of this report.

Sincerely, WILLIAM P. ROGERS,

Deputy Attorney General.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY,

ATTORNEY GENERAL, Washington, September 8, 1955.

Hon. HARLEY M. KILGORE, Chairm~n, Committee on the 'Judiciary,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

DEAR SENATOR: This is -in response to your request for the views of the Department of

1956 ·coNGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE ~193 Justice concerning the bill (S. 906) 0 to es· tablish a Commission on Civil Rights in the Executive Branch of the Government."

As indicated in its title, the bill would es ... tablish a Commission on Civil Rights in the Executive Branch of the Government. The Commission would consist of five members appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. Its duties would be "to gather timely and authoritative information concerning economic, social, legal, and other developments affecting. the civil rights of individuals under the Con­stitution and laws of the United States; to appraise the policies, practices, and enforce­ment program of . the Federal Government with respect to civil rights;. to appraise the activities of the Federal, State, and local gov­ernments, and the activities of private indi· viduals and groups, with a view to determin­ing what activities adversely affect civil rights; to assist States, counties~ munici­palities, and private agencies in conducting studies to protect civil rights of all Amer­icans without regard to race, color, creed, or national origin; and to recommend to the Congress, legislation necessary to safeguard and protect the civil rights of all Americans."

The measure would require the Commis­sion to make an annual report to the Presi­dent and to the Congress as to its findings and recommendations with respect to civil rights matters. Section 5 would authorize the Commission to establish advisory com­mittees to assist it in its work, and would direct it to utilize the services, facilities and information of Government agencies and private research agencies in tbe performance of its functions. · The sixth section of the bill (erroneously designated as "Sec. 104'') would empower the Commission to issue subpenas requiring the attendance and testimony of ·witnesses and the production of any evidence that relates tp any matter b~ing studied or investigated by it. Members of the Commission ·would be empowered by the section to administer oaths and affirmations, and to examine wit­nesses and receive evidence. The . attend­ance of witnesses and the production of evidence may be required from any place in the continental United States or any of its Territories or possessions. Subsection (b) would provide for applications by the Com­mission to the district courts of the United States to effect compliance with Commission subpenas.

Whether or not this. measure should be en­acted constitutes lt qnestton of .policy con,. cerning which the Departm-ent- of Justice .prefers to make no recommendation. .

The Bureau of the Budget has advised that there 1s no objection to the submission Oi this report.

Sincerely, . WILLIAM P. ROGERS, ·

Deputy Attorney General-.

FEBRUARY 8, 1955. Hon. HERBERT BROWNELL, Jr.,

The Attorney General, Washington, D. c.

DEAR MR. ATI'ORNEY GENERAL: The · Judi­ciary Committee is herewith transmitting S. 904 for your study and report thereon in triplic .. te.

To facilitate the work of the committee, tt is urgently requested that your report be submitted within 20 days. The committee should be formally advised in writing if any delay beyond this time period is necessary.

Most sincerely yours, HARLEY M. KILGORE,

Chairman.

MARCH 22, 1955. Hon. HERBERT BROWNELL, Jr., .

The· Attorney General, Washington, D. C.

DEAR MR. ATI'ORNEY GENERAL: Attached herewith are copies of S. 902, s. 905, s. 906,

and S. 907, concerning the protection of civil rights, amending and supplementing existing civil rights statutes, and establishing a Com­mission on Civil Rights in the executive branch of the Government.

These four bills are now pending before the Standing Subcommittee on Constitu­tional Rights, which intends to schedule hearings on all of the above-mentioned measures within the very near future.

Accordingly, it will be appreciated 1f you will submit to the committee as soon as possible individual reports on each of these measures.

With kindest regards, I am Most· sincerely yours, ·

HARLEY M. KILGORE, . Chairman.

JULY 27, 1955. Hon. HERBERT BROWNELL, Jr.,

The Attorney General, Washington, D. C.:

The Judiciary Committee is herewith transmitting S. 903' for your study and report thereon in triplicate.

To facilitate the work of the committee, it 1s urgently requested that your report be submitted within 20 days. The committee should be. formally advised in writing if any delay beyond this time period is necessary.

Most sincerely yours, HARLEY M. KILGORE,

' Chairman.

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE, OFFICE OF THE DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL,

Washington, April 19, 1955. Hon. HARLEY M. KILGORE,

Chairman, Committee on the Judiciary, United States Senate,

. Washington, D. c. DEAR SENATOR: This is in response to your

request for the views of the Department of Justice concer~ing the bill ( S. 904) to strengthen the laws relating to convict labor, peonage, slavery, and involuntary servitude.

The bill would amend sections 1581, 1583, and 1584 of title 18 of the United Statea Code, the provi~ions of law which relate to peonage and involuntary servitude, so as to make criminal all attempts to commit the acts proscribed by such sections,

The proposal to amend section 1583 would also make the sectiqn applicable .not only to the enticement of persons to go on board .a vei?sel with the intent that such persons be made slaves but to similar enticement to go on board- any- other -means . of transpor­tation. · · -- ·

The Department of Justice would nave no objection to the enactment of this legts: lation.

The committee, however, may wish to con­sider amending... the ·title of the bill to delete the reference to convict labor since such is ·not within the scope pf the sections to be amended. The 13th amendment to the Con­stitution expressly exempts involuntary servitude "as. punishment for crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted" .from the constitu-ttonal probibl:ttons. agaip.st slavery and involuntary servitude.

The B'Ureau of the Budget has advised that there ts no objection to the submission of this report.

Sincerely, WILLTAM P. ROGERS,

Deputy Attorney General. By this record Senators will see that of the

four b1lls reported by the subcommittee on .February 9 of this year, your subcommittee requested Mr. Brownell's views on two. We asked his. views more than a year ago. The two bllls on whi.ch we asked his views are S. 902 and S. 903. The first of these is a bill to create a special division of civil rights within his own department. The second is a bill to protect every citizen'S' right to full participation in the political life of this

, country. It is a bill to protect the right to

vote. We asked Mr. Brownell's views on these measures on March 22, 1955. Up to the time the committee reported favorably the bUl to create a special civil rights division in the Department of Justice, 1t had received from the Attorney General no reply whatever to its request for his views on the desirability of the legislation. To the subcommittee's request that he speak out on the desirabil· 1ty of a law to protect our fellow citizens' right to vote,- Mr. Brownell did, indeed, make a brief reply. He said that this mat­ter concerned a question of policy and there­fore he preferred to make no recommenda· tion.

A matter of pollcy. - I would like to pause just a moment so we may consider the full implication of this curious· statement. In the view of this Republican administration's Attorney General, the chief of this admin· istration's Department of Justice, the ques~ tion of whether American citizens should be protected in their right to vote was a matter of policy, as yet undetermined. It was a matter of policy, in which Mr. Brownell would prefer to make no recommendation. Mr. President, high ranking officers of this administration have declined at times to tell the Members of this Senate some of · the things we have sought to ·learn about the manner in which they are conducting affairs of our country. Therefore, I suppose no one would tell just who in thisJ Federal admin­istration decided finally that it was a mat­ter of good and sound public policy to do something or, other to protect the constitu­tional rights of our citizens. I presume, of course, it must have been lately a subject of very earnest conversation among those per· sons who finally make up the administra· tion's mind on what is good policy, or per­haps even good politics.

When I was a boy I .heard it said that hon~ esty was the best policy, and I have never doubted it. I hope you will not take: it as unduly partisan o! me if I remind Mr. Brownell and whoever else was: concerned with this administration's recent determina­tion of policy, that living by an oath of office is always good. public policy. And I think we all remember an oath to maintain and uphold the Constitution of these United States which has been taken by members of this administration. It is high time they found it good public policy to advocate giv· Ing Federal protection to citizens denied their constitutional rlghts, and we welcome their decision, belated as it is, to help to do .th1s. ·If they really mean tt; . Since Mr. Brownell and the other mem• bers ·of his atlministration have been in of.,. fice, there has been one Congress; the 83d, whieh was under control of their party. During that Congress, the similar committee which preceded your Subcommittee on Con­stitutional Rights, ·reported no legislatimi. 'whatever in all the field of civil rights. That committee had a Republican chairman.. The Republican Party had control of this Con­gress for 2 years, and during all that time this Attorney General, who is chief of the Nation's Department of Justice neglected to bestir himself on. any occasion. whatever in behalf ·of legislation to protect the constitu­tional rights of Negroes in this country, or to give them that justice which has long been denied them.

What do you really suppose is now the reason for this sudden and unexpected in­terest which Mr. Brownell and other gentle"'.' men in the Republican Party's high com­mand are taking in justice for Negroes, and the protection of their constitutional rights? Let us all hope in our hearts that the fact of 1956 being an ·election year has not been the reason for this tardy gesture of" the1rs. This national problem of obtaining justice for those thousands of Negro citizens, long denied it, is too important to our country to be made a political football, or the subject or political maneuvering.

As I look around this Senate, and think of all the Senators here who ha.ve been striving

619-4 CONGRESSIONAL ~CORD - SENATE April 12 for years to bring equality of political rights to all our citizens I think we have the right to ask Mr. Brownell and the leaders of his party where they have been all this time. What have they been doing? Why have their voices been silent?

It is now more than 20 years since I intro­duced my first civil-rights bill in the House of Representatives. All through the years of my public life I have been speaking and working to obtain the full equalities of citi­zenship for all our citizens. At the same time I have been working through such or­ganizations as the Urban League for a better understanding between .American citizens of different ancestry to-create a . social climate throughout our Nation in which the rights of all citizens would be respected. I have done this as the representative of a border State. In my State of l\iissouri many of our people are linked by unforgettable ties of family and early memories to the people and history of our Southern States. Within my own family were men who fought for the Confederacy. We pay them honor, and it is right that we do. These men who fought for a lost cause were both brave and honor­able. But one of the many reasons which I have to love my native State -is the way in which its people are progressing toward that great ideal of human equality, under consti­tutional law. I could not truly represent the spirit of Missourians, both white and Negro, if I did not speak for continued prog­ress. I am doing that now, and I have done it for years. To me, then, there are several aspects of Mr. Brownell's amazing arrival within the past few days at this Nation's Capitol with }l.is sq-ca,lled civ_il-right~ . pro­gram. In the first place, Mr. Brownell ~as well aware that there .al:r;eaqy: was a . program here :which more than covel~d those pro­posals he macie· il),•his letters to ·the Speaker. of the House of RepresentatJves and the Vice President of the. Unitea States. He was well aware also of thli,nature 11.nd , ~he func-, tiona of the Senate Judici_ary Co~ittee, and of what it was doing. May I remind Mr. Brownell that he has come before the Ju­diciary Committee on several occasions, and that he has sought the help of the Judiciary Committee in .such things as approval of his administration's appointments of Fed­eral judges; May I remind him also that I .went to the support of his administration on several of these appointments when they were ·subject to serious challenge within the Senate.

If he will think it over I am sure the At­torney General will come to the same con­clusion I have. He has not been entirely candid with the people of these United States in blowing all the trombones of publicity and banging all its drums for a small part of the ·program which he knew was ali:eadr. i~ ~xist_­ence here on this hill. Tliere was somethll).g a little les~ than that political acumen for which the 'Attorney General 1-8 'deservedly 'so highly esteemed and justly celebraied in this 11th hour unveiling but a fraction of a pro­gram already ~ adv~nced by Sena tors whose cooperation his adminis,tra:tioI]. ~eeks. so often-and I am glad to say obtains.

But if Mr. Brownell has finally had a green light given to him by whatever superior is now formulating the administration's poli­cies he can do a great deal to help give our citizens true Federal protection in the ex­ercise of their constitutional rights.

He can help to throw the influence of the administration into the voting on civil rights legislation already before the House and the Senate which more than covers this program he has now announced with such publicity and fanfare. If he will only do that, or if any man in this Republican administration who actually is determining its policies will only do that, we can get some action during this session of Congress.

May I comment briefly on this idea of a new commission to study and report on denial of constitutional rights.

Many months ago when a bill to create a commission was first written within the Sen­ate Subcommittee on Constitutional Rights, we asked Mr. Brownell's suggestions on it. As the record of correspondence shows, his Deputy Attorney General, Mr. William o: Rogers, replied last September 8 that this was a. matter of policy on which the Attorney General would prefer to make no recom­mendation. What do you suppose has now changed his mind?

There was a very eminent Commission ap­pointed in 1946 by President Harry S. Tru­man to study this questfon and the chairman of it was no other than President 'Eisen_­hower's Secretary of Defense, Mr. Charles E). Wilson.

So you can see that it was a bipartisan Commission. If you study the roster of the illustrious citizens -who were members of that Commission you_ will see that it included quite a few of our country's most eminent citizens.

This Commission was appointed by Presi­dent Truman in 1946 and in November of 1947 brought in a report that is absolutely authoritative, reflecting a great deal of thought and sincerity. Because of that re­port the methods of denial of constitutional rights are already well known. So are the places where those rights are denied. So are the persons who fight to continue this debasing denial of constitutional rights. Debasing, I say, not only to those thousands of' our fellow citizens whose rights are de­nied but degrading also to those who deny them.

I am perfectly willing to have a continuing commission of study and report, such as the Attorney General is advocating. But what this -country -needs right now is imme­diate action 1 on what is now known, as well as further study on what may not be: Any dilatory, spurious, politically . minded ma­neuvers which delay that action are repre­hensl:ble and ·unworthy of sincere ' public servants.

May I suggest in closing that the admin­istration's leaders and spokesmen join sin­cerely in passing the legislation already pending within this Congress. Let them help in erasing as soon as we can this blot upon the freedom and dignity of American citizens, which our Nation so proudly pro­claims.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there further morning business? If not, morning business is concluded.

REQUIREMENT THAT STATEMENTS ACCOMPANY CONFERENCE RE­PORTS ·;· The Senate ·resumed the consideration

of the , concurrent resolution <S. Cori. Res. 36) requiring··conference reports to .be accompanied by statements signed by a majority· of the managers of each House.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I understand that the distinguished chairman of the Committee on Rules and Administration, the senior Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. GREEN] has a brief statement to make in explanation of the concurrent resolution.

Mr. GREEN. Mr. President, the con­current resolution merely provides that all conference reports shall be accom­panied by a statement signed by the ma­jority of the managers on the part of each House. At present the House has such a rule, applicable to its own man­agers, but the Senate has no such rule. The concurrent resolution would provide for a single statement, to be signed by the managers on the part of both Houses.

The Senator from California CMr. KNow­LAND] and' the· Senator from Arizona CMr. HAYDEN] are both cosponsors of the concurrent resolution.

I may add that practically the same resolution was twice adopted by the Sen­ate on previous occasions. However, it failed of adoption in the House. The same reason applies for adopting it now as applied then.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The concurrent resolution is open to amend­ment. If there be no amendment to be proposed, the question is on agreeing to the concurrent resolution.

The concurrent resolution CS. Con. Res . . 36), requiring conference reports to be accompanied by statements signed by a majority · of the managers of each House was agreed to, as follows:

Resolved by the Senate (the House of Rep­resentatives concurring), That there shall accompany every report of a committee of conference a statement, in writing and signed by at least a major~ty of the managers on the part of each House, explaining the effect of the action agreed on by the committee.

SEC. 2. The foregoing section shall be a rule of each House, respectively, and shall supersede any other rule thereof but only to the extent that it is inconsistent with such other rule.

AMENDMENT OF FOREIGN SERVICE ACT OF 1946

Mr. JOHNSON. of _ Texas. Mr. Presi- . dent, I ask unanimous consent that the Senat~ proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 1747, -Senate bill 3481. Th~ P~ESIDENT ·pro tempore. The

.biil will be stated by, title fbr the inf or~ " matioh of the Senate. ·

The CHIEF CLERK. A bill cs. 3481) to amend the Foreign Service Act of 1946, · as amended, and for other purposes.

The P~ESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the Sen­a tor from Texas?

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill, which had been reported from the Committee ori Foreign Relations with amendments.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, the purpose of S. 3481 is to strengthen the Foreign Service of the United States in order that it may be a more effective instrument for carrying out United State~ . fqreign policy, for protecting the lives and property of American citizens, ·,~. and for advancing the national securlt'y of the .United States. .. ~

Hearings were held oil the bill and' thre·e witnesses appeared froi:n the" State ' Department in belialf of the bill. · It w"as reported unanimously . by the sub.: committee appointed to hear the matter, and later the bill was unanimously re­ported to the Senate by the Committee on Foreign Relations.

The purposes of the bill are to effect an increase in salaries of Chiefs of Mis'­sions; the addition of two classes to the Foreign Service schedule, and the ad­justment of salaries; the removal of the ceiling on lateral entries into the For­eign Service; the computation of retire­ment benefits; the establishment of com­missaries and messes; increased medical ·benefits for members of the Foreign Service, though still not comparable with those now being received by mem­bers of the Military Estabiishment; and provision !Or recreational facilities

I•,

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - - ·SENAT:Ji 6195: where such facilities are lacking and where the posts are considered to be on a hardship Qasis.

I urge the passage of the bill. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The

Secretary will state the committee amendments. ·

The amendments of the Committee on Foreign Relations were on page 2, be­tween line 11 and 12, to strike out "Class 8__ 4,100 4,250 4,400 4,550 4,700 4,850 5,000 5,150 5,300." and insert "Class 8__ 4,300 4,450 4,600 4,750 4,900 5,050 5,200 5,350.' "; on page 3, line 8, after the numeral "7", to strike out "by striking out the word 'forty' and in­serting in lieu thereof the words 'one hundred and sixty-five'; by deleting the period at the end of the second sentence of the aforementioned section and in­serting in lieu thereof the following: "as a Foreign Service officer.'; and by add­ing a new sentence at the end of the second sentence of the aforementioned section which shall · read as follows: •Notwithstanding the above provisions of this section, the limitation on the maximum number of appointments au­thorized herein shall not be applicable in the case of any person appointed or assigned by the Secretary of State as a Foreign Service Reserve officer and who thereafter has · served in a position of responsibility in such capacity for the required period prior to appointment as a Foreign Service officer.' " and insert "and by deleting the second sentence of section 517:"; on page 4, after. line 19, to insert:

SEC. 11. Section 902 of such act ls amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 902. The Secretary may, under such re~ulations as he may prescribe, make an allotment of funds to any post to defray the unusual expenses incid~mt to the operation and maintenance of official tesidences suit­able for principal representatives of the United States at that post:" ·

On page 5, at the beginning of line 3, to change the section number from "11" to "12"; on page 6, line 15, after the word "shall,", to strike out ", insofar as prac­ticable,"; on page 7, after line 2, to strike out: · , SEC . . 12. _ Section 941 of such act is amended by striking out "941." and inserting "941 (a)" in lieu thereof; and by adding at the end thereof a new paragraph "(b) "which shall read as follows: · ·

"(b) In the event a dependent of a United States citizen officer or employee of·. the Serv­ice who is stationed· abroad, incurs an · illness

. or injury while located abroad, which re­quires hospitalization and which is not the result of vicious habits, intemperance, or misconduct, the Secretary may, in accord­ance with such regulations as he may pre­scribe, pay for that portion of the costs of treatment of each such illness or injury at a suitable hospital or- clinic that exceeds $35.00 up to a minimum limitation of 120 days of hospitalization for each such illness or injury, except that such maximum limita­tion shall not apply whenever the Secretary, on the basis of professional medical advice, shall determine that such illness or injury clearly is caused by the fact that such de­pendent is or has been located abroad."

After line 20, to insert: SEC.· 13. Section 941 of such act is amended

to read as follows: · "SEC. 941. (a)° In the .event an officer or

employee of the Servfoe who is- a: citizen of the United States · incurs an illness or -in-

jury while such person ls located abroad, which requires hospitalizati9n or .,similar­treatment, and which is nqt t:p.e !e~ult of vicious habits, intemperance, or misconduc1; on his part, the eecr~tary may, in accordance with such regulations as he may prescribe, pay for the cost of treatment of such illness or injury.

"(b) In the event a dependent of a United States citizen officer or employee of the Serv­ice who is stationed abroad, incurs an illness or injury while such dependent is located abroad, which requires hospitalization or similar treatment, and which is not the re­sult of vicious habits, intemperance, or mis­conduct on his part, the Secretary may, in accordance with such regulations as he may prescribe, pay for that portion of the cost of treatment of each such illness or injury that exceeds $35 up to a maximum limitation of 120 days of treatment for each such illness or injury, except that such maximum limita­tion shall not apply ·whenever the Secretary·; on the basis of professional medical advice; shall determine that such illness or injury clearly is caused by the fact that such de­pendent is or has been located abroad.

"(c) After sufficient experience in the op.,. eration of the medical protection plan au­thorized in subsections (a) and (b) of this section has been obtained, as determined by the Secretary, and if J;le ·considers that the benefits so authorized can be provided for as well and as cheaply in other ways, the Secre­tary may, under such regulations, and for such persons, locations, and conditions as he may deem appropriate, and within the limits prescribed in such subsections, contract for medical care pursuant to such arrangements, insurance, medical service, or health plans as he may deem appropriate."

On page 9, a·t the beginning of line 6, to change the section number from "13'.' to "14"; on page 10, at the beginning of line 5, to change the section number from "14" to "15"; on page 11, after line 8, to strike out: ·

SEC. -15. (a) Foreign Service officerS- pres~ ently serving in the class of career minister shall receive the salary"prescribed for career ministers by section 412 of such act, as amended.

After line 12, to insert: SEC. 16. (a) Foreign Service officers pres­

ently serving in the class of career ambassa­dor and the class of career minister shall receive the sa.lary prescribed for career am­bassadors and for career ministers, respec­tively, by section 412 of such act, as amended.

On page 13, in line 4, after the letter "(f) ",to strike out "The class and salary

. adjustments made pur:suant to para­graphs (a), (b), and (c) of this section

Class L-------------~---~----- $14, 600 ,. $15, ()()(). Class 2------------------------ 12,600 12, 900. Class 3------------------------ 10, 600 10, 900 Class 4 __ __ · _______ :_ ____________ 9,000 9,250 Class 5 ______ . ________ : _________ 7,400 7,650 Class 6------------------------ 6, 100 6,300 Class 1-----------------------· 5, 100 5, 250 Class 8------------------------ 4,300 4,450

5,'350."

SEC. 4. Section 414 (a) of such act is amended by striking out the word ."six" arid inserting the word "eight" in lieu thereof; and by striking out the number "6" arid inserting in lieu thereof the number "8".

SEC. ·5. Section 516 of such act and the heading thereto- is amended by striking ·the words "cla.ss 6" wherever they appear ·therein and inserting the words "class 8" in lieu thereof.·

SEc. 6. Section 517 of such act and the heading thereto is amended by striking the heading thereto and substituting in lieu thereof "Admission to classes 1 to 7, in­clusive"; by striking in the aforementioned section the number "6" wherever it ap­pears therein and inserting· in lieu thereof

shall be made e.ff ective as of the first day ()f the first pay period which begins after the date of enactment of this act or on the:first day of the first pay period which begins after July i,-1956', whichever shall be later" and insert ".The class and sal­ary adjustments made pursuant to para­graphs (a), (b), and (c) of this section and the salary increases for chiefs of mission authorized by section 2 of this act shall be made effective as of the first day of the first pay period which begins after the date of enactment of this act or on the first day of the first pay period which begins .after July l, 1956, which.­ever shall be later."

After line 16, to insert: SEC. 17. A new section 936 is hereby added

to such act as follows: "APPLICATION OF '\NNUAL AND SICK LEAVE ACT

. OF 1951

"SEc. 936. The Annual and Sick Leave Act of 1951, as amended. (5 U.S. C. 2061 and the following), shall apply to care-er ministers and Foreign Service officers, who are not serv­ing as chiefs of mission or who are not serv­ing in a position in the Department which requires appointment by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and to Foreign Service Reserve offi­cers who are commissioned as diplomatic or consular officers, or both, in accordance with section 524 of the Foreign Service Act of 1946", as amended, notwithstanding the provisions of section 202 (c) (1) (A) of the Annual and Sick Leave Act of 1951, as amended."

And, on page 14, at the beginning of line 6, to change the section number from "16" to "18"; so as to make the bill read: ·

Be it resolved, etc., That this act may be cited as the "Foreign Service Act Amenci.­ments of 1956."

SEC. 2. Section 411 of the Foreign Service Act of 1946, as amended, is amended by striking out the second sentence of that sec­tion and substituting in lieu· thereof the fol-

· lowing: "The per annum salaries of chiefs of mission within each class shall be as fol­lows: Class l, $27 ,500 per annum; class 2, $25,000; class·3, $22,500; and class 4, $20,000.'•

SEC. 3. Section 412 of such act is amended to read as follows: ·

"SEc. 412: There shall be 10 classes of For­eign Service officers, including the classes of career ambassador and of career minister. The per annum salary of a career ambassador shall be $20,000. . The per annum salary of a career minister shall be $17,500. The per annum salaries of Foreign Service officers within each of the other classes shall be as follows:

$15,400 $15, 800 $16, 200 $16, 600 $17, 000 13, 200 13, 500 13, 800 14, 100 14, 400 11, 200 11, 500 11, 800 12, 100 12, 400 9, 500 9, 750 10, 000 10, 250 10, 500 7,900 8,150 8,400 8,650 8, 900 6,500 6, 700 6,900 7, 100 7,300 5,400 5, 550 5, 700 5,850 6,000 4,600 4, 750 4,900 5,050 5,200

the number "8"; by striking out · in the aforementioned section the number "5" wherever it appears therein and inserting in lieu thereof the number "7"; and by de­leting the second sentence of section 51 7.

SEC. 7·. Section 634 (b) of such act ts . amended by striking the words "classes ·4 . or 5",- and inserting ·in ·lieu , thereof the

words "classes 4, 5, 6 or 7"; by strik-. ing the words "class 4" and . inserting

in lieu thereof the words "classes 4 or 5"; and by striking the words "class 5" and inserting in lieu thereof the words "classes 6 and 7".

. - SEC. a. ·Section 635. of such act and the heading thereto anci ·section 63'1 (a) of sueh act are amended by striking the number

6196 . CONGRESSIONAL· RECORD - SENATE April 12

• 16" wherever tt appears therein· and by inserting in lieu thereof the number "8".

SEC. 9. (a) Section 821 (a) of such act is amended by striking the word "thirty" and inserting in lieu thereof the word "thirty­five".

(b) Section 821 (b) of such act is amended by striking the phrase "for the five years next preceding his retirement" and insert­ing in lieu thereof "for his highest five con­secutive years of service".

SEC. 10. Section 871 of such act is amended by striking the word "thirty" and inserting in lieu thereof the word "thirty-five".

SEC. 11. Section 902 of such act is amended to read as follows: - "SEC. 902. The Secretary may, under such regulations as he _may · prescribe, make an allotment of funds to any post to defray the unusual expenses incident to the oper­ation and maintenance of official residences suitable for principal representatives of the United States at that post."

SEC. 12. Section 921 of such act is amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 921. (a) The Secretary may, un­der such regulations as he may pre­scribe, establish and maintain Government­operated commissary and mess services ~t posts abroad, and he may authori:z:e and as­sist in the establishment, maintenance, and operation, by officers and employees of the Service, of non-Government operated com­missary and mess services, including the furnishing of space, utilities, material, stocks, supplies, equipment, or services. Re­imbursement shall be made for all space, utilities material, stocks, supplies, equip­ment or services furnished to both types of f~cllities, · and shall be deposited into miscellaneous receipts of the Treasury. However, in the discretion of the Secretary, space, utilities, or services, other thaJ?. full­time services, may be furnished without re­imbursement. Further, reimbursement shall not be required wh'enever ·the Secretary shall certify that substantial losses have been suf­fered by such commissaries or ·mess services as a direct result of destructive forces of nature, armed conflict, civil strife, or other causes beyond tJ;le control of the officers and employees concerned. Necessary sites, build­ings, and equipment may be acquired, and construction, alterations, and repairs may be provided, for the purposes of this section, in accordance with the provisions of the Foreign Buildings Act, 1926, as amended (22 U. S. C. 292-300).

"(b) Commissary or mess .services estab­lished pursuant to this section shall be made available, insofar as ·practicable, to officers and employees of other Government agencies and their dependents who are sta­tioned abroad. Such commissary or mess services shall not be established in localities where another United States agency operates simUar facilities unless the Secretary de­termines that such additional facilities are necessary. Notwithstanding the provisions of title 10, United States· Code, section 1253, or other law, charges at any post abroad by a commissary or mess service of any Govern­ment agency shall be the same rate for all civilian personnel of the Government ser­viced thereby, and all charges for supplies furnished to such a service abroad by any Government agency shall be at the same rate as that charged by the furnishing agency to its civilian commissary or rr..ess services. If space, utilities, or services are provided on· a nonrelmbursable basis to any non-Govern­ment operated facility established under the provisions of this section, profits accruing to such facility over and above prudent op­erating reserves, shall be deposited into mis­cellaneous receipts. Periodic audit of non­Government operated facilities shall be con­ducted in accordance with such regulations as the Secretary shall prescribe." ·

SEC. 13. Section 941 of such act is amend­ed to read as follows:

"SEC. 941. (a) In the event an officer or em­ployee of the Service who is a citizen of the United States incurs an illness or injury while such person is located abroad, which requires hospitalization or similar treat­ment, and which is not the result of vicious habits, intemperance, or misconduct on his part, the Secretary may, in accordance with such regulations as he may prescribe, pay for the cost of treatment of such illness or in­jury.

"(b) In the event a dependent of a United States citizen officer or employee of the Service who is stationed abroad, incurs an illness or injury while such dependeiit is located abroad, which requires hospitaliza­tion or similar treatment, and which is not the result of vicious habits, intemperance; or misconduct on his part, the Secretary may, in accordance with such regulations as he . may prescribe, pay for that por~ion of the cost of treatment of each such illness or in­jury that exceeds $35 up to ' a maxi~um limi­tation of 120 days of treatment for each such illness or injury, except that such maximum limitation shall not apply when­ever the Secretary, on the basis of profes­sional medical advice, shall determine that such illness or injury clearly is caused by the fact that such dependent is or has been lo-cated abroad. ·

"(c) After sufficient experience"in the op­eration of the medical protection plan au­thorized in subsections (a) and (b) of this section has been obtained, as determ,ined by the Secretary, and if he considers that the benefits so authorized can be provided for as well and as cheaply in other ways, the Secretary may, under such regulations, and for such persons, loca_tions, and conditions as he may deem appropriate, and within the limits prescribed in such subsections, con­tract for medical care pursuant to such ar­rangements, insurance, medical service, or h~alth plans as he may deem appropriate."

S:i;;c. 14. (a) Section 942 (a) of sucp. ac~ is amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 942. (a) In the event an officer or employee of the Service who is a citizen of the United States or his dependent incurs an illness or injury requiring hospitaliza­tion, not the result of vicious habits., in­temperance or misconduct, while statfoned abroad in a locality where there does not exist a suitable hospital or clinic, the Sec­retary may, in accordance with such reg'ula­tions as he may prescribe, pay the travel expenses of such person by whatever means he shall deem appropriate and without re­gal'.d to the Standardized Govermpent Travel Regulations and section 10 of the act of March 3, 1933, as amended (68 Stat. 808, 5 U.S. C. 73b), to the nearest locality where a suitable hospital or clinic exists, and on his recovery pay for the travel expenses of his return from such hospital or clinic. If any such officer, employee, or dependent is too 111 to travel unattended, the Secretary may also pay the round-trip travel expenses of an attendant or attendants.

"(b) Section 942 (b) of such act is amend­ed by inserting the words "a physician" and a comma immediately following the phrase "the services of"; _and by inserting imme­diately following the words "a nurse" a com­ma and the phrase "or other medical per­sonnel."

SEC. 15. A new section, "SEC. 951" is hereby added to such act, together with a heading as follows:

"PART F-RECREATION FACILITIES "SEC. 951. Whenever the Secretary shall

certify that adequate recreation facilities are lacking at a post abroad and that the establishment of such facilities is necessary in the interests of morale and efficiency, he may, under such regulations as he shall prescribe, establish, maintain, and operate recreation facilities for use by officers and employees of the Service and their depend­ents who are stationed at such posts. Rec-

reation facllit1es established pursuant to this section may be made available to officers and employees of other agencies of the Govern­ment and their dependents. The Secretary shall m _ake such charges for the use of such recreation fac111ties as he deems fair and equitable. In no event shall these charges exceed the estimated cost to the Govern­ment of such recreation facilities. Any fees so collected shall be deposited into miscel­laneous receipts of the Treasury. Necess~y , sites, buildings, and equipment may be ac- · quired, l;\nd construction, alterations, and repairs may be provided, for the purpose_s C?f this section, in accordance with the provi­sions of the Foreign Buildings Act, 1926, as amended (22 U. S. C. ,292-300). Notwith­standing the provisions of section 16a of the act of August 2, 1946 (5 U.S. c. 78 (a)), the Secretary may authorize any ·principal officer tq approve the use of Government­owned vehicles located at his post for trans­P<>rtation "of United States Government em­ployees who are American citizens, and their dependents, to and from recreation fac111ties when public transportation is unsafe or is not available."

SEc. 16. (a) Foreign Service officers pres­ently serving in the class of career ambas­sador and the class of career minister shall receive the salary prescribed for career am­bassadors and for career ministers, respec­tively, by section 412 of such act, as amended.

( b) Foreign Service officers and Reserve Officers in the other classes shall be trans­ferred to the new classes established by sec­tion 412 of such act, as amended, as follows: Officers of class 1 to the new class 1; officers of class 2 to the new class 2; officers of class 3 to the new class 3; officers of class 4 to the new classes 4 or 5 as determined by the Secretary, in accordance with the second sentence or· this· subsection; officers of class 5 to the new class 6; and officers of class 6 to the new class 7: In accordance with such regulations as the Secretary may prescribe there shall be transferred to the new class 4 those officers of the present class 4 who either are re·ceiving the sixth through the eighth step rates of the present class 4 or who were eligible and were recommended for promotion by the selection board next preceding the effective date of this act. All remaining officers in the present class 4 shall be transferred to the new class '5.

( c) Each officer -transferred pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section shall, under such regulations as the Secretary may pre­scribe, r~ceive basic salary at that one of the rates of the class to which he is transferred which shall, as nearly as possible, correspond to the salary he is receiving at the time of transfer, except that no officer shall suffer a reduction in basic salary as a result thereof.

(d) Service in a former class shall be con­sidered as constituting service 1n the new class for the purposes of determining ( 1) eligibility for promotion, in accordance with the provisions of section 622, and (2) liabil­ity for separation, in .accordance with the provisions of section 633. Officers who are transferred to new class 7 in accordance with paragraph (b) of this section shall continue to occupy probationary status pursuant to section 635.

( e) Officers transferred in accordance with the provisions of this section shall receive credit for time s'erved in a previous class to­ward class promotion in accordance with section 625.

(f) The class and salary adjustments made pursuant to paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this section and the salary increases for chiefs of mission authorized by section 2 of this act shall be made effective as of the first day of the first pay period which begins after the date of enactment of this act or on the first day of the first pay period which begins after July 1, 1956, whichever shall be later.

.,

1956 CONGRESSIONAL- REGORD - SENATE 6197;: SEC. 17. A new section 936 is hereby added

to such. act as follows: "APPLICATION OF ANNUAL AND SICK LEAVE ACT

OF 1951.

"SEC. 936. Tue Annual and Sick Leave Act of 1951, as amended (5 U.S. C. 2061 and the following), shall apply to career ministers and Foreign Service officers, who are not serving as chiefs of mission or who are not serving in a position in the Department which requires appointment by the Presi­dent, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, and to Foreign Service Reserve officers who are commissioned as diplomatic or consular officers, . or both, in accordance with section 524 of the Foreign Service Act of 1946, as amended, notwithstanding the pro­visions of section 202 ( c) ( 1 ) (A) of the Annual and Sic~ Leave Act of 1951, as amended."

SEC. 18. Notwithstanding the provisions of this act, existing rules, regulations of or applicable to the Foreign Service of the United States shall remain in effect until revoked or rescinded or until modified or superseded by regulations made in accord­ance with the provisions of this act, unless clearly inconsistent with the provisions of this act.

·The PRESIDENT pro . tempore. The question is on agreeing to the committee amendments.

The amendments were agreed to. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The

bill is open to further amendment. If there be no further amendment to be proposed, the question is on the e?-­grossment and third reading of the bill.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed for a third reading, read the third time, and passed, ·

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE A message from the House of Repre­

sentatives, by Mr. Maurer, its reading clerk, announced that the House had agreed to the amendments of the Senate to the bill <H. R. 6712> to amend section 1237 of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954.

ENROLLED BILL SIGNED The message also announced that the

Speaker had affixed his signature to the enrolled bill <H. R. 12) to provide an im­proved farm program, and it was signed by the President pro tempore.

CONSOLIDATION OF THE NATIONAL TAX ASSOCIATION WITH THE TAX

. INSTITUTE . Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­

dent, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Order No. 1745, H. R. 4909.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Secretary will state the bill by title for the · information of the Senate.

The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. A bill (H. R. 4909) relative to the consolidation of the National Tax Association, a corporation organized under the laws of the District of Columbia, with the Tax Institute, Inc., a corporation organized under the mem­bership corporations law of the State of New York, in accordance with the appli­cable provisions of the membership cor­porations law of the State of New York.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the present considera­tion of the bill?

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill, which had been reported from the Committee on the District of Columbia with amend­ments.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

'The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.

.Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With­out objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. · Mr. Presi­dent, I ask unanimous consent that there be. inserted at this point in the RECORD the complete report of the committee on the bill.

There being no objection, the report <No. 1722) was ordered to be printed in

the RECORD, as follows: The Committee on the District of Colum­

bia, to whom was referred the bill (H. R. 4909) relative_ to the consolidation of the National Tax Association, a corporation or­ganized under the laws of the District of Columbia, with the Tax Institute, Inc., a corporation organized under the member­ship corporations law of the State of New York, in accordance with the applicable pro­visions of the membership corporations law of the State of New York, after full con­sideration, report favorably thereon with amendments, and recommend that the bill, as amended, do pass.

The amendments are as follows: Page 1, line 5, insert the word "of" be­

tween the words "Code" and "Law." Page 4, line 8, after the word "Association",

insert the following: "or in any proceeding for the enforcement of the rights, if any, of any member of the National Tax Association."

Amend the title so as to read: "An act to authorize the consolidation of the National Tax Association, a corporation organized under the laws of the District Of Columbia, with the Tax Institute, Inc., a corporation organized under the membership corpora­tions law of the State of New York, in ac­cordance with the applicable provisions of the membership corporation law of the State of New York."

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS

Tue first section of the bill authorizes the National Tax Association, organized under the provisions of subchapter 3 of chapter 18 of the Code of Law of the District of Columbia, approved March 3, 1901, as amended, to consolidate with the Tax In­stitute, Inc., a corporation organized under the membership corporations law of the State of New York. The section further pro­vides that the said corporations may be con­solidated so as to form a single corporation under the law of the District of Columbia or under the law of any 1 of the 48 States of the United States of America.

Section 2 of the bill provides that the con­solidation shall be effected by the procedure prescribed for the consolidation of foreign and domestic membership corporations by sections 51, 52, and 53 of article VII of the membership corporations law of the State of New York.

Section 3 provides that upon the adoption of an agreement for consolidation by the governing . bodies of the National Tax Asso­ciation and the Tax Institute, Inc., as pro­vided by the membership corporations law of the State of New York, the agreen;ient for consolidation shall ~ submitted to each member of the National Tax Association who

has the right to vote for the election of the members of its governing body at' a meeting called for the purpose of taking action for the adoption or rejection of such an agree-

. ment. Provision is also made for notice of the time, place, and object of said meeting, and the procedure for adopting or rejecting such agreement for consolidation by the voting members of the National Tax Asso­ciation.

Section 4 of the b111 provides that if the consolidated corporation is to be governed by the laws of any State other than the District, that it irrevocably appoint the Com­missioners as its agent to accept service of process in any proceeding for the enforce­ment of any application of the National Tax Association, and it must also file an agree­ment that it may be served with such process.

Section 5 of the bill provides that nothing ln this act contained shall be so construed as to prevent Congress from altering, amend­ing, or repealing the same.

EXPLANATION

Tue National Tax Association is a non­profit corporation, organized under the laws of the District of Columbia for the general purposes of gathering and disseminating in­formation ·With respect to tax matters and matters .of puqlic finance. It is presently negotiating consolidation with the Tax In­stitute, Inc., a nonprofit corporation organ­ized under the laws of the State of New York and having comparable general . pur­poses. Tue two corporations anticipate that consolidation will reduce overlapping activi­ties and wm further the accomplishment of their stated purposes. During the consolida­tion negotiations, a question has been raised as to the authority of the National Tax Asso­ciation to consolidate unless the continuing corporation is organized under the laws of the District. This bill would provide for the consolidation and would permit the con­tinuing corporation to be organized under the laws either of the District or of any one of the States.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, it is my understanding that the bill was reported unanimously from the Committee on the District of Columbia. The purpose of the bill is to enable the National Tax Association, a nonprofit corporation, organized under the laws of the District of Columbia, for the pur· pose of gathering and disseminating in­formation with respect to tax matters. to consolidate with the Tax Institute. Inc., a corporation organized under the· laws of the State of New York. Negotia­tions looking to a consolidation are now underway. The bill provides that the corporations may be consolidated so as to form a single corporation under the laws of either the District of Columbia. or of any of the States of the Union .

The PRESIDENT pro tempo~e. : The Secretary will state the first committee amendment.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr.· Presi­dent, I ask unanimous consent that the amendments of the committee be con-sl.dered en bloc. -

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection? The Chair hears none. and it is so ordered.

The amendments of the Committee on the District of Columbia are as fol­lows:

· On page 1, line 5, after the word "Code", to insert "of", and on page 4, line 11, after the word "Association", to insert "or in any proceeding for the enforcement of the rights, if any, of any member of the National Tax Association."

'6198 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - ·SENATE April 12

.The PRESIDENT pro tempore .. The him make a statement with reference to question is on agreeing to the committee the bill. amendments en bloc. The PRESIDING OFFIC~R. The

The amendments were agreed to. Senator from Minnesota is recognized. The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I

bills open to further amendment. If appreciate the opportunity to discuss there be no further amendment, the the bill. It has been reported by the question is on the engr.ossment of the Committee on Government Operations. amendments and the third reading of It was prepared by the committee, in the bill. consultation with the staff, as the re-

The amendments were ordered to be sult of a very careful analysis of the engrossed and the bill to be read a third Passport Office, the manner in which it time. is operating, and the problems which

The bill was read the third time· and have beset that office over many years. passed. Later on in the discussion I should

The title was amended so as to read: like to off er an amendment des'igned to "An act to authorize the consolidation clarify certain language of the bill. I of the National Tax Association, a cor- should like to seek information from poration organized under the laws of the the Chair as to whether it is appropriate District of Columbia, with the Tax Insti- to offer the amendment at this time, so tute, Inc., a corporation organized under that the proposal may be before us, since the membership corporations law of the I am sure there will be some discussion state of New York, in accordance. witn of. the bill. the applicable provisions of the mem- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill bership corporations law of the State of - is open to amendment. New York.'' Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, will

REORGANIZATION OF THE PASS­PORT OFFICE

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Order No. 1628, S. 3340.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The Secretary will state the bill by title for the information of the Senate.

The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. A bill (S. :3340) to transfer the functions of the P.assport Office to a new agency of the Department of State, to be known as the United States Passport Service to establish a passport service fund to finance the operations of the United States Passport Service, and for other purposes.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Is there objection to the present consid­eration of the bill.

There being no objection, the Senate

the Sena tor from Minnesota yield? Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield.

· Mr. KNOWLAND. The only difficulty I can see, unless the Sena or has pre­pared mimeographed copies of his amendment, making it available to all Senators, is that, as I understand, the bill in its present form---of course, I do not know whether the amendment would change the situation-is objected to by the State Department and by the Bureau of the Budget.

I understand also that no hearings were held by the committee and that the bill was reported as the result of a staff report. There may be a great many sug­gestions of merit in the bill the Senator has proposed; but it seems to me that in making an internal change within the state Department, it would at least .have been well to l1ave held hearings, in order to give the Department of State an op­portunity to appear before the commit­tee and to present what they felt were

proceeded to consider the bill. The PRESIDENT pro tempore.

bill is open to amendment.

cogent reasons why the passport fee The should not be increased, and why a par­

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The secretary · win call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. RREAR in the chair). Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, a parliamentary inquiry.

ticular organization should not be set up in the manner proposed by the bill.

The very fact that the staff now sug­gests that certain amendments be made in itself indicates to me that time might be saved and a more orderly procedure might be followed if the bill were recom­mitted to the Senator's committee. The Senator could then arrange to have the amendments submitted to the other members of the committee, and then afford the representatives of the Depart­ment of State an opportunity to appear and to present their views.

I have read the testimony which D~p­The uty Under Secretary of State Loy Hen­·The · PRESIDING OFFICER.

Senator will state it. Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. The pend­

ing business is Order 1628, Senate bill 3340; is that correct?

The PRESIDING OFFICER. That is correct.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I invite the attention of the distin­guished Senator from Minnesota CMr. HUMPHREY], who is the author of this proposed legislation and whose commit­tee reported it, and I should like to have

derson gave when the matter was being discussed before the House Committee on Appropriations. Mr. Henderson raised what appeared to me to be rea­sons which were entitled to a respectful hearing on the part of the committee, rather than to try to perfect rather in­tricate legislation in this way on the :floor of the Senate, in view of the fact that committee hearings were not held.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I say 'most re­spectfully to the minority .leader that

while no hearings were-held on the bill, there were several months of staff con­S'Ultations with representatives desig­nated by the Bureau of. the Budget to assist in the reorganization of the Pass­port Office, the General Accounting Of­fice, the General Services Administra­tion, and members of the committee.

Besides being sponsored by me, the bill is cosponsored by the Senator from Arkansas [Mr. McCLELLAN], the Senator from Washington CMr. JACKSON], the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. KEN­NEDY], the Senator from Missouri [Mr. SYMINGTON], the Senator from Wiscon­sin [Mr. McCARTHY], the Senator from South Dakota rMr. MUNDT], the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. COTTON], and the Senator from Ohio [Mr. BENDER].

The issues which the Department of State has raised are such issues as would naturally be raised by an agency which would like to retain the status quo; and that is about what this amounts to.

The amendment I was about to propose is merely a clarifying amendment, to take ,care of what appears to be an un­grounded, unfounded fear, in the light of the purpose of the bill and the ex­planation which was made of the bill in the committee. I . refer to a feeling on the part of Mr. McLeod, of the De­partment of State, which is obvjously carried up through channels, that the security provisions which are now a part of passport clearance would be in some way weakened by the bill. That, of course, is not true. The bill vests full authority for whatever activities may be necessary relating to passports in the · Secretary of State, the Secretary, in turn, can pass on to any of his subordi­nates or associates the responsibility for the security clearances which relate to passports.

In order to make this intent perfectly clear, I have an amendment which I shall not offer at the moment, but shall merely mention. It provides as follows:

The Secretary of State may from time to time make such provisions as he shall deem appropriate authorizing the performance by the Director of the Service, or by any other officer, or by any agency or employee of the Department of State of any of the functions transferred to the sei:vice pursuant to the :first section of this act.

That would give the Secretary of State full responsibility. That is where the re­sponsibility belongs, and it is what the Hoover Commission has recommended. The Hoover Commission recommenda­tions, however, insist that there be a clear line of authority up to the Secretary of State. . When we looked into the Passport

Office we found conditions to be unbe­lievable. We found, for example, that passparts were readily within the grasp of individuals visiting in the office. We found a lack of adequate files. and a lack qf adequate organization. We found an office which had not been improved sub­stantially, in terms of administrative or­ganization, for more than a decade. I believe, in fact, that the last increase in fees for passports occurred in the 1930's, if I am not mistaken. .

The question of fees has b~en brought up by travel agencies. · I spoke to the staff director yesterday, and have talked

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 6199 with some of my colleagues about the matter. Raising the passport fee from $9 to $18, which is doubling the amount, may seem to some persons to be exces­sive, but I can document the fact today that it is below what it really should be. However, rather than to impose the full increase at one time, I propose to suggest as an amendment that the increase be only to $15.

I shall also propose in due time the above suggested amendment, which will make it specifically clear within the lan­guage of the bill itself that the Secretary of State shall have any and all authority to designate an official such as a security officer, to be in charge of such security provisions and protectfons as may be in­volved in the issuance of pas~ports.

I have reason to believe there are some officials of the Department of State who think their respective little bureaus will be weakened. That is a foolish tQought. What we are looking forward to is having an efficiently functioning office.

Miss Knight, the Director, is doing out- · standing work to bring the Passport Office up to date by bringing the service to the people.

The whole proposal has been examined into carefully by the persons concerned with the operations of the State Depart­ment, and in particular the Passport Office.

The Office of the Comptroller General has been consulted at length about the matter. The Bureau of the Budget, to be sure, does not approve of this measure because of the departmental resistance; that is exactly the reason for the disap­proval by the Bureau of the Budget~ But if departments of the Government were reorganized only on the basis of how the departments felt, we would be back in about the 1860's. The attitude of the Bureau of the Budget, from my point of view, is hardly honest.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, will the Sena tor further yield?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. Mr. KNOWLAND. I do not believe

there is any Senator, on either side of the aisle, who has more jealously guarded the prerogatives of Congress as the legis­lative arm, as a coequal arm, as a co­ordinate, and not a subordinate, than has the minority leader.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I understand; I appreciate what the Senator from Cali­fornia has said.

Mr. KNOWLAND. The only point I raise, and I think it a perfectly valid one, is that no hearings have been held. Frankly, I did not know until today that there had not been hearings held, to which the Department representatives might have been called to testify.

Once there has been an opportunity afforded the Department to present its case to the committee, and to have its representatives examined and cross­examined by Members on both sides of the aisle, if they desi:fe to do so, the bill would then come to the Senate, after the committee had had the official views of the Department. There would be a rec­ord of the hearings. The Senate then would have the benefit of the testimony, it could give whatever weight it wished to give to the testimony which was pre­sented, and could then make its decision.

It seems to me that we are more or less· reversing the :field when we begin to re­organize internally a department, when apparently the heads of the Department have not had the opportunity, at least, to appear before the committee and to make what they feel are valid objections to the · bill. I respectfully suggest that even though the end result might be the very same, after the members of the committee had heard the testimony, I think time probably would be saved. I should have preferred the Senator from Minnesota to have raised the point on his own motion, whether it prevailed or not from this side of the aisle, on the ground that the Secretary, or his repre­sentatives, as a matter of good legislative pr<;>cedure, should have the opportunity to testify which, of course, they cannot have on the :floor of either the Senate or the House.

I would feel happier if the members of the committee, on both sides of the aisle, had the opportunity to examine and cross-examine Mr. Henderson or whoever else might come from the De­partment to express the views of the De­partment, rather than merely to have Mr. Henderson read an ex parte state­ment, which perhaps might be in error; because, after all, the executive depart­ment makes mistakes also, and I am not claiming that Mr. Henderson or anyone else in the Department of State is in­fallible.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I say most respect­fully to the Senator from California that the bill as reported by the committee is the result of prolonged staff study, and of innumerable complaints made about the Passport Service-complaints about which the State Department did noth­ing. The junior Senator from Minne­sota . has written to the Department again and again about the complaints. I became interested, as did the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. MUNDT] and other Senators, because of innumerable complaints which were received by my office about the Passport Service. The State Department has shown no interest in the matter, except to oppose the com-mittee's proposal. ·

The Committee on Government Opera­tions has authority, under the Legisla­tive Reorganization Act, to make post audits for the purpose of reorganization. I am proud of the work of our committee. We have saved the Government millions of dollars.

It is not an unusual performance for the Committee on Government Opera­tions to introduce bills such as this. The committee has presented bill after bill as a result of staff studies and as a result of · executive sessions of the full committee. Every member of the com­mittee is cognizant of the reports which have been made.

The last staff memorandum on this bill which was presented to the members of the committee as a result of a staff study is about 10 pages in length. The committee has discussed the bill with representatives of the State Department, and the State Department is opposed to the bill. The State Department is op­posed to the bill because the Passport Office, which is now a bureau in the Department, will be established as a

special service, subject' to the adminis­trative authority of the Secretary of State. The Secretary, therefore, will have direct administrative responsibility for the Passport Office. The day the Passport Office can be looked upon as a simple, little adjunct of government is over. Thousands upon thousands of passports are issued, far beyond the wildest dreams of the most optimistic travel agency. Next year-I have for­gotten the exact :figures-it is expected that there will be a 15 or 20 percent in­crease, or even more, in the number of passports issued.

What the bill does is simple. There is not much to it, except it gives the Sec­retary of State direct authority to place the Passport Service in the State De­partment, where the office ought to be, rather than leave it locked down, as it has been locked down from time imme­morial.

I may say to the Senator from Cali­fornia that when I visited the office I found it in a basement. I found it with facilities which were such that em­ployees were passing out because of in­ability to get fresh air. I found it with windows open, and so located that a per­son walking by ·could reach in and take a passport, if he wanted to.

Mr. KNOWLAND. May I ask how long the office was in that condition?

Mr. HUMPHREY. For years . . If there ever was a bipartisan mess, this was it. If there was ever need for a bipartisan revision, this was it. This office was dying on the vine. We were encouraging people to travel and go over­seas, a~d they were waiting 5, 6, and 7 weeks for passports.

When it comes to the question of secu­rity, what kind of security was there with respect to passports, which are among the most vital documents which can be had? A person walking on the street by the office could actually reach in the window, if he had long arms, and take a passport. There were not even ade­quate office machines. The employees were not being treated like human beings.

Those conditions were not due to any­one's diabolical purpose. The office was forgotten. Why was it forgotten? Be­cause it was a little unit or agency of Government. The issuance of passports is becoming a big business. It is vital to the whole program of .international policy of the United States.

The bill simply does two things. It says, "Mr. Secretary, the Passport Office should be under your control within your department. What do you want to do with it?" We elevate it to a service rather than a unit, and leave it to the Secretary to put it where it will best serve the Government. Secondly, the bill establishes a revolving fund, so the accounting of funds will be simplified, and adequate :flexibility provided to meet seasonal demands for passports. The office gets hundreds of checks back and forth, in connection with its activities, and is required to meet demands for service which :fluctuate during the peak travel season.

Revolving funds have been established under many acts of Congress. I may say

'})200 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE April 12 the Comptroller General's Office has co­operated very e:ffectively with us in try­ing to meet these problems. Many of ·the objections to the original bill have been eliminated, and the bill has been rewritten and rewritten until it has met at least with the overall approval of the Comptroller General's Office. .

I know what the opposition to the bill is. By the way, this is not a matter of life and death to the junior Senator from Minnesota. This is not a great policy matter. It is a matter of making the Government operate more efficiently. Where does the opposition come from? I am going to pinpoint it.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Where does the op­position come from?

Mr. HUMPHREY. From Mr. Mc­Leod's office, which does not want to lose this unit. I am not criticizing Mr. McLeod. If the Secretary wants to put the unit back under Mr. McLeod, he has . the authority to do it under the bill. The bill brings the office directly under the control of the Secretary, and does not leave it out in Mr. O'Malley's barn or pasture, to be looked at occasionally.

By the way, I want the record to be -clear that I was not one who supported Miss Knight when I first came to know

· of her, but I have come to know her, and I know it has been her steadfast purpose to make the office efficient.

I could not imagine that this would be a controversial bill, except that there would be opposition from someone down­town whose rank might be judged by the number of employees in his pool, and who has decided that the bill must be stopped.

Mr. President, I do not believe the bill should be recommitted. It is on the

·noor, and I think it oug-ht to be voted up or down.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. Mr. KNOWLAND. In addition to the

'purposes of the bill which the Senator has mentioned, does the bill not also double the passport fee?

Mr. HUMPHREY. The fee is raised by the bill from $9 to $18. I shall sug­. gest an amendment increasing the fee to $15, instead of $18. I shall present facts to show the cost of processing pass­ports has gone up 118 percent since the $9 rate was established. The same arguments which were made in 1932 when the rate was increased from $5 to $9, are being made against the in-

. crease now proposed. If a person who is planning to go overseas cannot afford to pay $15 for a passport, I should want to know whether a passport were necessary.

I recognize the fact that travel agen­cies oppose any increase in passport fees. Nevertheless, in the Committee on For­eign Relations without any hearings we recently doubled those fees which are retained by local and State court officials handling passport matters. The State Department on that occasion objected to the increase in fees. Yet the bill was reported by the committee and was passed by the Senate. In the same committee where the present bill orig­inates, the Committee on Government Operations, one reorganization bill after

another, of a technical nature, has been .considered without hearings and re· ported by the committee to the Senate.

If the bill involved a great policy mat­ter, for example, a revision of the immi­gration laws or the Refugee Act, I would say there should be hearings. The State Department was consulted. The Bureau of the Budget was consulted. The Bu­reau of the Budget opposes a revolving fund. They always oppose such funds. I have a list of the number of revolving funds Congress has authorized. · I think the Congress has authorized 11 or more revolving funds, over the objection of the Bureau of the Budget. . Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. Mr. KNOWLAND. The only point I

am raising, which I feel needs to be raised on the floor, is that in view of the cir­cumstances, the fact that there were no hearings, and there are what appeared to me to be cogent reasons against the bill, the officials should have an oppor­tunity to present the reasons to the com­mittee. I wanted to inform the Senator of those circumstances and to express the hope that he might think it more orderly procedure to permit the officials of the department to testify. Then I might

·agree with him, if that were done, and if the bill were reported to the Senate, either with the amendments the Senator ·intends to offer, or with additional amendments.

I wish to say most respectfully· I think the Senator's committee is one of the able and outstanding committees of the Senate. Certainly we know the commit­tee has reported to the Senate measures of importance with relation to the re­organization of the executive branch of

·the Government. I agree with what he says about the

·present head of the Passport Office. From all I know, I think Miss Knight is doing a fine job. I say most respectfully, regardless of how competent the profes­sional staff of the committee may be-I do not know that they are any more competent and I do not say that they are less competent than the employees who are working 365 days a year within the Department doing this work-it seems to

· me the responsible heads of the execu­. tive departments of the Government at ·least ought to have an opportunity to give their testimony and be pross ex­amined before the committee. That is the only point I make. Then certainly, as the sole repository of the legislative power under the Constitution, the Con­gress can take such action as in its judg­ment it thinks should be taken, regard­less of the objection of the Department. But I do not believe in foreclosing the

· views of the Department from the com­. mittee.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I want to say to the Senator from California, first, that the

. bill is a result of months of study. It is · not as the junior Senator from Minne­sota has said, a bill which involves a great policy matter. I was asked byr the chair­man whether or not I would be willing to present it to the Senate. I said I would. I was interested in the matter.

When the language of the bill is un­derstood, I think it will be seen that the

State Department is suddenly and be­latedly raising objections which ap­parently it did not feel too strongly about earlier. Only in the last few days did I ·hear that the State Department was con­cerned because it had not had an oppor­tunity to testify. The State Department .was consulted, and the Bureau of the .Budget was consulted. Sometimes it is rather difficult, of course, to obtain a quorum of our colleagues for the pur­poses of a committee hearing. I have attended many subcommittee hearings at which I have had to hold the hearing alone or with one other member of the subcommittee.

I have discussed the bill with the other members of the committee. The memo­randum from the State Department is on file before the committee.

The bill has been rewritten in the light of the objections raised by the Comp­troller General, the Bureau of the Budget, and the State Department, with­out sacrificing our purpose in connec­. ti on with the bHI.

When we read the bill we find that it simply provides:

That all functions, powers, duties, and au­thority of the Passport Office of the Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs, Depart­ment of State, together with those funds, liabilities, commitments, authorizations, allocations, personnel, properties, and rec­ords of the Department of State which the Secretary of State shall determine to be pri­marily related to, and necessary for, the ex­ercise of such !unctions, powers, duties, and authority, are hereby transferred to the United States Passport Service, established pursuant to section 2 of this act.

It is to be an integrated unit, I digress to say. ,

I read further from the bill: SEC. 2. There is hereby established in the

Department of State an agency to be known ·as the "United States Passport Service" (hereinafter referred to as the "Service") which shall be headed. by a director who shall be appointed by the Secretary o,! State in accordance with the civil-service laws, and whose position shall be allocated to grade 18 of the General Schedule as prescribed in the Classification Act of 1949, as amended.

It was at that point I wished to have a clarification amendment included, so as to state clearly that the Secretary shall have the. right to move this office to wherever he deems desirable, and to designate any other agent of the De­partment of State or any other agency to perform whatever functions it may be necessary to perform in order to as­sist this particular service-such as the functions of the Consular Service, for · security clearance on passports. So there would be no difference at all in that re­spect. insofar as concerns the situation fallowing enactment of the bill.

Let me say that the third section of the bill provides for establishment of a revolving fund, so as to tighten up the bookkeeping. .

Section 4 provides, in part: SEC. 4. In accordance with the provisions

of existing law-( a) the Secretary of State shall prepare

and submit an annual business-type budget program for the Service;

(b) there shall be installed and main­: tained in the Service an integrated system of accounting, including proper features of

1956. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD= SENA TE ._6201 internal control, which Will · c 1) assure ade .. quate control over all assets and liabilities. of _the fund, ( 2) afford full disclosure with respect to the financial conditions and op­erations of the fund according to the accrual method of accounting, and (3) supply on the basis of accounting rtlsults the data for the annual budget of the Service with re­spect to the last completed fiscal year. The system of accounting shall conform to prin­ciples and standards prescribed by the Comp­troller General of the United States . so as to accomplish· the purposes of this section, ~nd shall be subject to such review by the Comptroller General as may be necessary to assure its conformance with the principles and standards· prescribed and its effective .. ness in operation.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, will the Senator from Minnesota yield at this point?

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. COT­TON in the chair). Does the Senator from Minnesota yield to ·the Senator from California?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. Mr. KNOWLAND. Perhaps I should

have carried the figure in my mind, but it is difficult to do so. Will the Senator from Minnesota state the proposed sal­ary schedule under class 18?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I think it ls be­tween $14,000 and $15,000.

Mr. KNOWLAND. What is the pres­ent salary?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I believe it is some­what below that figure, but I shall ob­tain that information for the Senator from California. The bill will upgrade all of them in the fl,n;tount .of approxi­mately what we might call one step up­ward in the salary ~chedule. . Mr. WATKINS rose.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield now to the Senator from Utah, who wishes to ask some questions.

Mr. WATKINS. I noted that the Sen­ator from Minnesota said the passport business is now big business.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes. · Mr. w ATKINS. And I have noticed that there has been proposed a 100-per­cent increase in the passport fee. ·

I wish to call the attention of the Sen­ator from Minnesota to the fact that literally thousands of American college students make tours abroad; and the pending bill, if enacted, would add to their difficulties in connection with making those trips.

At the moment I do not say whether the increased fee called for by the bill is a proper one; but I wish to state that it seems to me we should give ample con­sideration to the situation of those who are to . pay the fee; and if the passport business is today big business, hearings on this subject should be held, and we should receive sufficient testimony to show whether the big increase in fees the bill calls for is necessary.

Mr:HUMPHREY. I have that infor­mation.

Mr. WATKINS. But the other Mem· bers of the Senate do not have the bene­fit of it, for they do not have the benefit of a hearing record, and thus they are unable to know the views of those who are to do the traveling and who are to pay the fees. ·Such persons have not had an oppprtunity to testify about the bill. I am sure that many of our colleagues

Cll--:--390

would like to have ·an opportunity af .. · forded to numerous persons to appear at a committee hearing and testify in re .. . gard to thts subject. A number of col­leges are in the custom of sending stu .. dents abroad for a part of their college education, and giving them credit for the courses they take while they are abroad. Those colleges and universities never charge those students the entire amount required for the service they render the students in that conection, and I think the Senator from Minnesota recognizes that fact.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes; I do. Mr. WATKINS. Enactment of the bill

would handicap such colleges and uni­versities by calling for the expenditure of considerably larger amounts of money.

Let me state to the Senator from Min­nesota that I am informed that the fees presently charged bring in sufficient funds to pay the cost of the operation of this bureau.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I am sorry to dis­agree, but I must inform the Senator from Utah that information made avail­able to the committee would indicate that that is not correct.

Mr. WATKINS. I was advised by a staff member, I believe, that the amount of money brought in last year by the fees, covered more than the actual cost of operation.

Mr. HUMPHREY. If one considers only the operation of the Passport Serv .. ice itself, without considering the costs in connection with security and consular matters which relate to that function, that is true; but if we consider the other costs, the total is much larger than the total of the fees received.

Mr. WATKINS. Of course we have our consular offices overseas, and their operations have now been vastly expand­ed, although the service they render to traveling Americans is small, as com­pared to the other work those offices do. I have found that to be a fact from my own experience. _

Mr. HUMPHREY. That is true. Let me say that I am no Scrooge, and

I wish to have the fees made as reason· able as possible. It has been my opin­ion-judging from my service on the Committee on Government Operations, on which I serve as just a member, with no particular title-that the desire was to have the fees charged for govern­mental services of an amount sufficient to compensate for or equate to some ex­tent, at least, the costs involved in the processing of the particular documents or in the handling of the particular serv­ices. Therefore, let me say very frankly that I am not particularly concerned about a $9 increase in the fee. Whether the fee be $9 or $12 or $15 or $18, I think is a matter of detail, and can be covered by an amendment to be submitted dur­ing our consideration of the bill. Cer­tainly the exact amount of the fee does not constitute a major stumbling block.

I believe that the real issue involved in the bill is the organization of the State Department as it relates to the Passport Service. In my opinion that is the real issue. '

If the Senator from Utah wishes to submit an amendment in regard to the size of the fee-and let me say that I

understand ·another Senator wishes to offer an amendment relating to the fee-­we can vote sueh .an amendment up or down.

Frankly, I have felt that the increase in fees called for by the bill may be a little too high, and I have so stated; and I am preparing to offer an amendment to reduce them. But that is not what the State Department was complaining about.

Mr. WATKINS. Mr. President, will the Senator from Minnesota yield fur­ther to me?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. . Mr. WATKINS.' I should like to point out that the reorganization programs are suppcsed to result in efficiency.

Mr. HUMPHREY. That is correct. Mr. WATKINS. Then I cannot see why

we should allow what we do in connec­tion with reorganization to result only in increasing the fees charged, and thus bring in more money for the operation of the agency concerned.

Mr. BEALL. Mr. President, I com­mend the Senator from Minnesota for his very fine statement on the Passport Division. In particular I commend him for his remarks with respect to Miss Knight. My experience over the years is that that office has been very efficiently operated, and I certainly believe that something of the kind proposed in the bill should be done.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I thank the Sena .. tor.

.. Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. Mr. DOUGLAS. Am I correct in be­

lieving that the Senator from Minnesota has made an inspection of the Passport Office?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I would not call it a full-scale inspection. However, I have at least taken a look at it, and I have had long talks with members of the sta:ff.

Mr. DOUGLAS. The Senator from Il­linois spent an hour going through the office, and he was greatly pleased with the obvious increase in efficiency which has been effected by Miss Knight, and the very systematic way of handling ap­plications and rendering prompt-and I think just-judgments upon them.

The Senator from Illinois wishes to join the Senator from Minnesota in say­ing that this service should be recog­nized by being accorded a greater dig­nity and a certain degree of greater inde­pendence, as well as by an increase in the salary of the Director. When we see a public official doing a good job under great difficulties, I think we should give proper credit. I am not impressed with the contention that because the Office has increased in efficiency it should be denied appropriations. It needs addi­tional appropriations in order that it may have the facilities with which to func­tion.

In this case the workload is increas­ing. The speed of processing applica­tions has greatly improved, and I believe that good service should be rewarded. I am very happy to support the bill in­troduced by the Senator from Minnesota.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I shall conclude my discussion with a few brief additional observations.

6202 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE . April 12 The bill, as reported by the committee,

conforms specifically to the recommen- · dations of the Hoover Commission, by ertablishing, within the Department of State, a United States Passport Service, and by transferring from the Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs to the Secretary of State those functions which are now carried on by the Passport Office of that Bureau. The Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs was established within the Department of State under the provisions of the Immigration and Nationality Act, and the Passport Office was incorporated as a part of the Bu­reau pursuant to that act.

Thus the pending bill actually would remove a statutory impediment or a stricture between the Secretary and the Director of the Passpart Office, by es­tablishing a United States Passport Service as a separate unit within the Department of State. It would place the Director of the Service under the direct control of the Secretary of State. Since it would in no way alter the ex­isting authority of the Secretatry to dele­gate the functions involved, and to con­trol the Passport Service, Senate bill 3340 conforms fully to the recommendations of the Hoover Commission to which I have referred.

I note that the Hoover Commission's recommendations, in its report on Gen­eral Management, which were ref erred to by the Deputy Under Secretary of State in his testimony before the House Committee on Appropriations on March 14,· 1956, were as follows:

1. That each department head should re­ceive from Congress administrative author­ity to organize his department and to place him in control of its administration.

2. That the department head should be given authority to determine the organiza­tion within his department.

What we are really doing in this bill fs going back to the original act relat­ing to the reorganization of the Depart­ment of State, which was enacted in ei~her 1951 or 1952. The provisions of that act were upset or altered by the Immigration and Nationality Act pro­visions, which require that the Passport Office be included in the Bureau of Secu­rity and Consular Affairs.

I remind my colleagues that the origi­nal act relating to the reorganization of the State Department in accortlance with the first Hoover Commission rec­ommendations gave the · Secretary the authority to place agencies in the De­partment within the organizational structure where they would make the most sense and promote the greatest efficiency.

Then the Congress came along with the Immigration and Nationality Act and imposed a block, a stricture, or an impediment in the way of the Secretary being able to design the use of the re­spective agencies in his Department.

·This bill would unfreeze that situation. The ·bill would provide the Secretary

with authority over the Passport Service. It would make the Passport Service a separate unit, and it would permit the Secretary to place the Passport Service in the Department where he deems most desirable from an· efficiency and policy point of view.

The point which has been raised with respect to fees can be readily resolved. Furthermore, if the bill passes the Sen­ate, it will be a forward step. It will have to go to the House. There is no reason why the State Department could not be heard before the House Commit­tee on Government Operations, which has a larger staff than our committee has. It has dozens of subcommittees. It has much more time to go into spe­cific problems in detail. The State De­partment could make its presentation before that committee.

The criticisms of the State Depart­ment are twofold. First, there is the belated criticism based upon the fees·. Second, there is the criticism based upon the proposal to remove the Passport Of­fice from the Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs.

I submit, Mr. President, that the Pass­port Office is big enough and important enough to have a separate status; and that the Secretary can designate a Bu­reau of Security and Consular Affairs as an auxiliary agency to the Passport Of­fice, to perform whatever functions may be necessary in connection with the issuance of passports.

Insofar as fees are concerned, I am in­formed that the State Department has had under consideration, practically ever since the Immigration and Nationality Act was amended in 1952, a bill which may be presented to Congress shortly, to increase the rate for passports from $9 to $15, and to extend the time of the original passport from 2 years to 3 years, with a 2-year renewal privilege. That is what the State Departmen: now has under consideration, and according to information developed b= the staff· of the committee, is about ready to present to the Congress in the form of a bill for its consideration.

What I am suggesting is that, instead of the $18 fee proposed in the bill, which I thought was rather excessive-and which is a subject I have discussed with others-we reduce the fee to $15. Sec­ond, since some question has been raised as to the Secretary's at.thority under the bill to make whatever adjust­ments may be necessary in the aline­ment of agencies within the State De­partment, I am offering what might be called an explanatory amendment, which would read as follows:

The Secretary of State may from time to time make such provisions as he shall deem appropriate authorizing the performance by the Director of the Service, or. by any other officer, or agency, or employee of the Depart­ment of State of any of the functions trans­ferred to the Service pursuant to the first section of this act.

Mr. President, that covers any possi­bility of there being any difficulty what­soever, in terms of security clearance, in our consular offices overseas.

Before I yield the floor I wish to pre­sent my amendment and ask that it be considered. The amendment would be on page 2, line 12.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Secretary will state the amendment.

The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. On pp,ge 2, at the end of line 12, it is proposed to insert the following :

The Secretary of State may froin time to time make such provisions as he shall deem

appropriate authorizing the performance by the Director of the Service, or by any other officer, or by any agency or employee of the Department of State of any of the functions transferred to the Service pursuant to the first section of this act.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amend­ment offered by the Senator from Min­nesota.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent-

The PRESIDING OF.eICER. ~e Senator from Texas.

Mr. JOHNSON Of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, if other Senators will indulge me, I should like to make a brief statement to the Senate.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I thought the Senate would consider the amendment I have presented.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I am sorry. I thought the Senator from Minnesota had yielded the floor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Minnesota offered his amendment. After the amendment has been offered and stated, he cannot hold the floor. The Chair has recognized the Senator from Texas.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I shall not argue the point. At the time I offered the amendment, I did so with the intention of having it acted on. I did not intend to yield the ~oor. However, I will not argue the pomt.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. The Sen­ator from Texas is in no hurry. He will be glad to yield to his friend from Minnesota.

Mr. HUMPHREY. No; I shall return later.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amend­ment offered by the Senator from Min­nesota.

THE FARM BILL . Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I have a very brief statement I de­sire to make on another subject.

Mr. President, one of the outstanding features of the debate on legislation to ir.. .. prove the conditions of farming has been the constant stream of predictions that the bill will be vetoed.

Throughout the discussion, opponents of the legislation have proceeded on the assumption that they had a club in the White House closet. They are begging the President to take that club out and beat the farmers over the head with it.

I do not know whether the President will use his power and veto the bill the Congress has passed. The responsibility of the veto has been granted to him by the Constitution, and there is no one else who can presume to exercise it.

I am not going to join the ranks of the "informed''-or ••uninformed"-sources who predict before the bill reaches him what the ~resident will do. Personally, I sympathize with anyone who wakes up every morning to find out that others are telling the world what he is thinking and what he is planning.

But a discussion of the results that would flow from a veto is certainly in order.

A veto at this time would leave Amer­ica's farmers completely at the mercy of

J.956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE

Secretary of Agriculture Ezra Taft Ben­son. I believe Mr .. Benson to be a man. of integrity and hcmesty of purpose, but he is also a man who has made clear his belief in factory farming al).d low farm income as a way of life. ·

A veto at this time would transfer the responsibility for low farm income from the Agriculture Department to the. White. House itself. This would be a Presiden-· tial stamp of approval on the conditions which have lost our farmers a minimum of $3 billion in income in the past 3 years,

A veto at this time, the majority leader believes, would cost the farmer a mini­mum of $2 billion in cash income this year.

A veto at this time would discourage American agriculture and speed up the drift from the farm to the city.

The senior Senator from Texas can understand the perplexity which must bedevil the President at this time.

On the one hand, he bas a bill which represents the collective judgment of Congress, and which has been considered by two great committees; debated in· both branches; put into final form by a distinguished conference committee rep­resenting the House and Senate; ap­proved with the votes of members of both parties; and which has been overwhelm-. ingly approved by the conference com­mittee, with the votes of members of both parties.

On the other hand, he has the neces­sity of reversing a trend which was set in motion by his owil Secretary of Agri­cnlture 3 years ago, and which his own

· Secretary still apparently sincerely approves.

It is a difficult problem-to save the faith of American farmers in their gov­ernment or save the face of the Secretary

. of Agriculture in his cabinet. I hope the President will ignore the

pleas of those who are urging him to use the club in the White House closet. The American. economy cannot be sound un­less there is a prosperous and healthy agriculture, and the measure which the Congress has passed is needed.

REORGANIZATION OF THE PASS.;. PORT OFFICE

The Senate resumed the consideration of the bill (S. 3340) to transfer the func­tions of the Passport Office to a new agency of the Department of State to be known as the United States Passport Service to establish a passport service fund to finance the operations of the United States Passpor.t Service, and for other purposes.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on the amendment offered by the Senator from Minnesota .[Mr. HUMPHREY].

Mr. WATKINS. Mr. President, I am in full accord with the statement made by the distinguished minority leader with respect to the necessity of holding hearings on the measure which ~ now before the Senate. There are many trav­elers nowadays. The number has been increasing rapidly over the years. In fact, the travel rate to Europe is increas­ing by leaps and bounds.

As I indicated in .a colloquy with ·the distinguished .Senator. from Minnesota, many of the travelers are young college s.tudents who are taking courses pre­scribed for them involving travel to Eu­rope where they study the cultures of European countries, and the countries themselves. All colleges are not self­supporting. At least, they do not obtain sufficient tuition and other fees to main­tain themselves. It would be a heavy burden on these young people, and upon the schools, and would have a bad effect upon the courses which have been out­lined for the students, if the fees were increased. That is one of the things which cannot be handled in this so-called reorganization measure. It goes beyond reorganization.

I think the question of fees should be studied further. Statements have been made with respect to necessary reforms to make the Passport Division more effi­cient. I think, in all fairness, we should have before us the communication from Mr. Loy W. Henderson. Deputy Under Secretary for ·Administration, with ref­erence to the reorganization.

Mr. President, I invite attention to the statement made by the distinguished ju­nior Senator from Minnesota with re­spect to the lack of diligence in follow­ing through on suggestions. In this connection I think a letter written by Mr. Henderson should be read into the RECORD. It is dated March 24, 1956. It reads as follows:

DEAR SENATOR McCLELLAN: Your Commit­tee on Government Operations has been ad­vised through established channels of the Department's position on S. 3340.

As the officer of the Department respon­sible for management and administration generally, I want you to know that the De­partment appreciates the keen interest dis­played by your committee at;1.d its several members during the past several months in improving the . operations of the Passport Office. Indeed, the work of your committee and its staff has done a great deal to help speed up needed changes. The Department has also obtained. unusually prompt assist­ance from several other Departments of the Government.

Many of the recommendations made by your committee and by other agencies of the Government have been placed irito effect. High priority has been given to provide the necessary administrative support, including adequate funding to the Passport Office, so that these combined efforts will reach opti­mum effectiveness. I am pleased with the conspicuously good record of performance by the several administrative units of the Department that have been called upon to assist the Passport Office. In my letter of March 16, 1956, addressed to Senator HAYDEN, a copy of which was sent to you, I advised that the additional $10,000 needed fcir equip­ment. mentioned in your committee's report had been made available by reprograming funds from other areas of the Department. Similarly $37,.885 was recently made avail­able to the Passport Office to meet urgent requirements for printing additional pass­ports.

The studies that have been underway for some time on the matter of passport fees have not been completed. As soon as they are completed -the Department will express its views on the level of the fees to be col­lected and will advise your committee prompty: ·

Mr. President, I regard that as a very important paragraph. This matter, in-

volving, as it does, so many persons ·who have the right to travel and who are en­couraged by the administration to travel, certainly should have some further study. Representatives of the Depart­ment should have an opportunity to ap· pear . . Mr. rHUMPHREY. Mr. President, will

the Senator from Utah yield? Mr. WATKINS. I should like, first, to

·finish the -reading of the letter before I yield.

I read further from Mr. Henderson's letter:

If the Department's budget request for the next fiscal year is approved by the Congress, adequate provision will be made for meet­ing any unpredictable developments in pass­port operations. I refer specifically to the appropriation requested for "Emergencies in the Diplomati_c and Consular Service" and to the general provision for the transfer of funds from that appropriation to other ap­propriation accounts to meet unforeseen re­quirements. 'It is most important not only for the Passport Office but for a number of other areas of the Department that our 1957 budget provide funds that will give us neces­sary fiexibility to meet emergent and unan­ticipated demands. Provision has, of course, been made in the budget for the Passport Office for all operations of that Office that can be anticipated at this time.

Much remains to be done in improving the Passport Office's operations. We believe the objectives of S. 3340 to improve that Office can be accomplished in large measure under the present structure. If we find that

. t-here are serious impediments in our path we will welcome an opportunity to discuss this problem with your committee at that time.

Sincerely yours, LoY W. HENDERSON,

Deputy Under Secretary for Administration. ·

Mr. President, that is a statement of the Department.'s position, and I think the last paragraph indicates a view to which we should give some consideration. It would be well to have these officers be­fore the committee so they· can be ques­tioned with respect to the plans they have underway, and whether it is neces­sary to have this proposed reorganization to improve the efficiency which they themselves wish to bring about and which the· committee wishes to bring about.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will the Senator from Utah yield at that point?

Mr. WATKINS. I yield. Mr. HUMPHREY. I am very much

impressed with Mr. Henderson's letter, because what it relates is exactly what the committee has done. He tells of the improvement which the State Depart­ment made in the Passport Office, and he is kind enough to say that the reason for that is -that the committee insisted that the improvement be made.

There is on the desk of every Senator a report in which: there is a note as to a very substantial amount of work which was accomplished. I should like the Senator to note that on page 3 of the re­port it is stated:

In compliance with the request regarding the management supervision of the pro­gram, the Bureau of the Budget arranged

· with Miss Knight and Chairman Young of the Civil Service Commission to have the

6204' CONGRESSI0NAL RECORD·- · SENATE, April 12 -

Director of the Bureau of Management Serv-­ices_ of the Civil Service Commission as- · signed to work with the Director of the Pass­port Office (1) in :the development and in­stallation of the new reorganization pro­gram,- (2) in defining the functions of the newly created divisions and sections (3) in flxing responsibilities and delegations of au­thority, (4) in developing standards of per­formance and staffing patterns, and (5) in overall improvements in personnel adminis­tration and general management . .

This is what finally came out of the consultation with the many bureaus of the Department in connection with the management survey; at the prodding of the committee and the committee staff. The bill carries out exactly what the management survey recommends.

In the last paragraph of Mr. Hender-son's letter he says: ·

Much remains to be done in improving the Passport Office's operations.

Mr. WATKINS. I read that, if the Senator will remember.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Here is what Mr. Henderson says:

We believe the objectives of S. 3340 to im­prpve that Office can be accomplished in large measure under the present structure . .

Mr. WATKINS. Without additional legislation.

Mr. HUMPHREY. But, I may say that through several administrations, Republican and Democratic, as far back as one can point, . until Congress has stepped in improvements haye not been made. I can show the Senator the hearings in 1920, 1924, 1934, and 1936, and it is always the same.

What is proposed to be establisJ:.ed by legislative. enactmeµt is a management design in an administrative organiza­tion. Basically all we are doing is to go back to the reorganization statute relating to the State Department which was passed, in 1951, as a result of the Hoover Commission recommendations. That statute gives the Secretary the authority to aline the agencies in ·the Department according to an adminis­trative pattern which the Secretary may design in his own Department. That pattern was · obstructed, or an impedi­ment was placed in the way, by the Im­migration and Nationality Act, which transferred the Passport Office to the Bureau of Security and Consular Affairs.

The bill merely provides that the Sec­retary of State shall have the power to place the Passport Office where he deems best in ~he Department, and to elevate the Office to one of service, rather than to have it simply in the status of a unit, and thereby give to it greater stature and posit~on in the Department of State, commensurate with its responsibility.

Mr. WATKINS. I am not trying to argue the merits of the bill, except with respect to the increased fee provided in section 3. I point out that in a matter of this kind, which involves so many per­sons and regulations, and the like, it seems to me the committee could have made much better progress if it had held a hearing and let those who were inter­ested, such as the persons i have men­tioned-college personnel and the literal­ly hundreds of thousands of persons who travel-or their representatives, come before the committee and testify. In a

matter which involves such a vast ·num~ ber of persons, it seems to me that the much better way would have ·been to fol .. .­low the practice which Congress has fol- · lowed over the generations, namely, to hold hearings, so that persons interested could present their views.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I think that is a meritorious point.

Mr. WATKINS. Senators then could have heard the discussion and the argu­ments pro and con about the fees to be charged. They would have heard the discussion by the Bureau of the Budget, and would have heard the give and take between the members of the committee and the representatives of the Depart­ment. In that way they would have ascertained the views of the executive department. From the exchange of views, I think the Senate would have had a much better understanding of what is proposed~

I am arguing for that which the dis­tinguished minority leader urged, name­ly, that hearings he held on the bill, so as to let the persons in ·the executive departments who are experts in the mat~ ter come before the committee and dis­cuss the bill. I think that would be much better than simply to have ex­changes of letters and staff studies on which to judge this legislation.

If we are coming to the point of letting staff members hold hearings, with Sen­ators not taking the direct responsibil­ity, we shall be making a great departure from the ordinary Senate procedure, and overall congressional procedure, as well. such orderly procedure is what I am ar­guing for at this moment.

In addition to what I have already said, I call the attention of the Senate to a letter which was received from the executive vice president of the American Automobile Association.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield at this point?

Mr. WATKINS. If the Senator will · permit me to pursue the matter a mo­ment--

Mr. HUMPHREY. I merely wish to say that this material was presented to the Senator by the committee. It is not as if that had not happened.

Mr. WATKINS. I understand that, but certainly I think a mistake was made, if I may be permitted to say so, in not yielding to the suggestion made by the American Automobile Association. The next to the last paragraph of that letter reads:

However, we must disagree with the need of recommendation ;3. calling for a 100-percent increase in passport and renewal fees. There appears to be no justiflcat~on for an increase at this time. It would clearly be a deterrent to foreign travel and in marked contrast of the policies of the Government to facilitate trips made by our citizens abroad.

The American Automobile Association was making a plea to the committee for the very thing which the committee de­nied. It may wen be that · the commit­tee did not write them. a letter and say their request would be denied; but the association requested a hearing.

I am certain the Department of State and the Bureau of .the Budget would have liked to have been heard and to have

presented .their-views in. an orderly man­ner. In that :way, I think the commit .. tee might have drafted a· better reorgani­zation plan than has been suggested.

Further, -on the matter of reorganiza .. tion, the way the system now works might very likely be the same way in which it would work· if the bill were amended as the Senator has suggested. The Secretary of State under the pro­posed amendment could designate the identical bureau in the Department of State that now controls the passport unit to have complete control and direction of the Passport Service in the future.

Mr.· HUMPHREY.- There would be some difference.

Mr. WATKINS. I fail to see the dif­ference.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Accounting meth-· ods are prescribed in the bill.

Mr. WATKINS. That is objected to· by the Bureau of the Budget. Whether their reasons are sound or unsound, I do not know.

Mr. HUMPHREY. The Bureau of the Budget does not object to the accounting methods; it objects to the revolving fund. I think there will always be an objection to a revolving fund, just as, I suppose, King George III objected to July Fourth. We will always :i.1ear objections to a re .. volving fund.

Mr. WATKINS. I. do not know the reasons which King George III ·might have had for objecting to July Fourth.

Mr. HUMPHREY. He expressed sonie objection to the Fourth of July 1776.

Mr. WATKINS. At any rate, I should like to hear the objections made by the Bureau of the Budget, and not leave it to ·the Senator from Minnesota to say whether they are sound or unsound. I should like to hear a discussion of the matter by the responsible' officials of the departments t.wolved. ·

I still believe it would be a wise move on the part of the Senate to recommit the bill and to hold hearings. Even if only 2 or 3 Senators were present at the hearing, a record could be made, and the Senate then would know what. the sit­uation really is. I came into this dis .. cussion cold: - I have no personal inter­est in the matter.

Mr. HUMPHREY. May I ask the Sen­ator if he came into the matter at the request of the Department of State? -

Mr. WATKINS. I came into it because I was notified that hearings had not.been held and that the matter was something which should be considered carefully.

I do not happen to be on the commit­tees, but I happen to be a member of the subcommittee on 'immigration arid have very close connections with the State Department on questions involving immigration and naturalization. It is for that reason, I assume, that my at­tention was called to the bill. I have niade some investigations in Europe an<,l the Near East of th..e Consular Service and of the way in which the Passport Service operates. ·

Moreover, the minority leader re­quested me to fake a look at the bill. As a matter · of fact, I ' understand that in the House the bill will be referred to the Committee 'On the Judiciary, because a request has already been made to have the bill referred to that committee. In

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 6205-the Senate the bill was· referred to the committee of which the Senator from · Minnesota is a member, and not to the· Committee on the Judiciary.

Mr. HUMPHREY. The bill was not ref erred to the Committee on Govern­ment Operations at all; it was born in that committee. 'Not only was the idea of the bill conceived and given life by that committee, but the committee also reported the bill as a result of its own work.

The report indicates that in July, 1955, a study was undertaken. The Senator from Arkansas [Mr. McCLELLAN], the chairman of the committee, at the re­quest of the Senator from South Dakota [Mr. MUNDT], myself, . and other .sena-

. tors, directed the staff to make a study: The committee proceeded to work with the Civil Service Commission, the De- . partment of State, the Bureau of the Budget, and the General . Services Ad­ministration; and, as the Department of State, through Mr. Henderson, ac­knowledges, substantial reforms and im­provements have been made. I say most charitably, kindly, and considerately that those improvements were not made until the committee moved into action.

Mr. WATKINS. Let us give the com­mittee full credit for that. I do not criticize what the Senator and his com­mittee have done up to that point, with respect to the investigations which have been made. I maintain that a mistake was made in not permitting a hearing to ·be held on the bill.

Mr. HUMJ>HREY. I agree that the Senator makes a point on that ground. I should be the last person to say that hearings are not generally desired. But the committee received no particular re­quests for hearings. The bill was under consideration for a long time. The com­mittee report was circulated among the agencies of the Government. The De­partment of State did not raise any par­ticular fuss about hearings until March 24.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, will the Senator from Minnesota yield?

Mr. HUMPHREY. I Jlield. Mr. KNOWLAND. I think the Sen­

ator has just indicated in the colloquy some additional information which I re­spectfully suggest constitutes an addi­tional reason for what I hope will be the ultimate decision of the Senator from Minnesota himself to ask for hearings. The hearings could be limited in scope.

In the normal course of events, a bill is introduced on the floor and is then printed. Notice of the introduction of of the bill is given to all Senators. Copies of the bill can be obtained by Senators who desire them. . As the Senator stated, quite properlY­

and I make no criticism of the practice, because many committees follow it-in this instance, the bill originated in the Committee on Government Operations. Apparently it was reported as what might be called a clean bill or a com­mittee bill. Therefore, while the mem­bers of .the committee might have been advised, while the persons concerned in the executive department might have been advised, and while the committee might have been advised and might have had ample time in which to consider the

staff study, nevertheless, so far as the average Member of the Senate was con­cerned, he would not have been alerted to the fact that the bill was in the hopper, so to speak, until the report of the com­mittee was submitted with the bill. I might say to the Senator it was not until yesterday that I realized for the first time, when the report was avallable, that there had not been hearings on the bill. That may have been due to an inadvert­ence on my part. I do not say that in

· any criticism of the committee, because I think the report is perfectly factual and perfectly proper, but I had assumed the report had been submitted following the normal legislative procedure, that is, after· hearings.

'l commend the interest the Senator has taken in the passport service. I commend him and the diligence of his committee and the work he has done, but I respectfully state that, from the point of view of normal legislative function­ing, to me-while we may disagree with some of the policies of the heads of the great departments of the Government of the United States, which in this instance is the State Department, while we may disagree as to the way they think their internal organization should be set up, yet they should have at least their day in court, so to speak, to present their points of view, or I prefer to say day in committee, so the two branches of the Government can be kept properly sepa .. rated. .

Mr. President, I do not wish to labor the point. I think the viewpoint of the Depart~ent would more properly be ·presented by testimony of Mr. Hender­son himself, but I should like to read a brief stfl,tement from the Department, so at least the views of the Department may be available in the RECORD; and then I hope that rather than have a motion by some Senator not on the committee, the distinguished chairman of the sub­

. committee may at least off er to take the bill back to committee, give officials of the Department a chance to be heard and be cross examined, and then, if the bill is again reported, we shall be pre­pared to exercise our constitutional and legislative prerogatives.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Does the Se:1;1ator now hold to this rule on every bill re­ported to the Senate without hearings?

Mr. KNOWLAND. No, I would not say that, because I do not think all bills require hearings, or that the depart .. men ts would feel there should be hear .. ings; but I do think it is a different case when a bill involves a matter ' of inter­nal organization, when the matter of fees is involved, which is an indirect tax, or a direct tax, of a kind, on a certain number of American citizens, when cer .. tain responsibilities are placed on a de­partment, and when officials of that de­partment want to have their views pre .. sented.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I should like to ask one question, and I appreciate the courtesy of the Senator from California.

Mr. KNOWLAND. The Senator from Minnesota is a valued member of the Foreign Relations Committee, with whom I sit on that committee. Legis .. lative proposals come before that com­mittee. Sometimes there are hearings.

Sometimes there are not formal hear­ings, in the sense of prolonged public hearings. It depends on what is pro· posed, and what the facts are.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Since I under· stand the department is considering the preparation of a bill which would do the same thing with regard to fees as does the pending bill, and as to which I understand the department will prob­ably recommend a fee of $15 rather than $18, as contained in the bill, if that pro .. vision were stricken out would the Sen­ator feel any more kindly or charitable with respect to the bill, since it has to go to the House? . Mr. KNOWLAND. l do not feel either unkindly or uncharitable about the senafur's proposal. If ·the officials had a chance to be heard, I might very well support the Senator and be in oppo­sition to the department. It would not be the first time I would be in opposi­tion to the department.

Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator has been a valued ally.

Mr. KNOWLAND. I hope the Sena­tor will see his way clear to do what I have suggested.

Mr. President, I should like to read a general statement of the Deputy Under Secretary for Administration, Loy W. Henderson, concerning Senate bill 3340:

The Department has made a careful re­vieV{ of the bills recently introduced to pro­vide fpr reorganizing the · Pa.Ssport Office. The following comments are submitted. CREATION OF THE UNITED STATES PASSPORT

SERVICE

The establishment of a United States Pass­port Service as a semiautonomous agericy within the Department, which would ap­parently report direct to the Secretary, would place additional responsibilities upon an already over-burdened Secretary and might deprive him of the time and energy which should l;>e available for policy prob'." lems. Creation of the Service and determi­nation of its fu,nctions by statute would limit the discretion of the Secretary in making future decisions concerning organi­zation of the Department. This action is in conflict with the principle stated by the first Hoover Commission as follows:

"Each department head should receive from the Congress administrative authority to organize his department and to place him in control of its administration. • • • The department head should be given authority to determine the organization within his department."

By making the proposed Passport Service a semiautonomous agency, it would be pos­sible for the Service to provide its own per­sonnel, fiscal and operating facilities. If done, this would result in duplication of services now provid_,d by the Department.

ESTABLISHMENT OF A REVOLVING FUND

On a continuing basis the financial prob­lems of the Passport Office can be resolved through regular budgetary processes. Ad­vanced financial planning, together with a budget submission reflecting that plan, will assure adequate consideration of the needs of the Passport Office by review authorities within and outside the Department. The · establishment of a revolving fund cannot be considered as a substitute for adequate planning and will not in itself insure the efficient use of funds.

Because of the nature of its operations the Department of State is constantly faced with unanticipated contingencies. Fluctua­tions in workload are common to many parts

6206 CONGRESSIONAL- RECORD-· SENATE April 12 of the Department as well as to the Pass­port om.ce. The_ workload of the Pass­port Oftice can in fact be forecast with a greater degree of accuracy than is possible in many other areas. The problem of meet..; ing workloads, which could not reasonably be anticipated, is department.wide and th·e Department. is at present giving considera­tion to ways and means by which it may be met.

The proposed revolving fund would be used to pay only direct costs. The regular appropriations of the Department would meet the indirect costs. This artificial sep­aration of costs would pose a continuing problem to the Department and would make impossible the identifying of related costs within one account. SEPARATE ACCOUNTING AND INTERNAL AUDIT

SYSTEM Through its regularly established admin­

istrative procedures and controls the De­partment can provide satisfactory account­ing service to the Passport Otllce which will recognize the problems peculiar to that Office. Further; the int ernal audit of pass­port activities should be part of the depart­mentwide internal audit program since the Secretary of State continues to be responsi­ble for them. ONE HUNDRED PERCENT FEE INCREASE FOR ISSU•

ANCE AND RENEWAL OF PASSPORTS It is the policy of the executive branch,

enunciated in Bureau of the Budget Circular No. A-25, dated November 5, 1953, to estab­lish fees that will recover to the fullest extent possible the aggregate costs incurred in per­forming the service for which the fee ls col­lected. This policy was reaffirmed by the President, when he stated that special serv­ices. beneflttting individuals should be self­supporting-not profltmaking.

While available costing data does not per­mit precise calculations, it is. apparent that the proposed increase in fees would produce a revenue in excess of that required to pay the costs of the issuance of passports. The establishment of fees at the rates proposed would result in the making of a profit on the issuance of each passport. It would in addi'­tion have a negative impact on: the program to facilitate 1nternational travel. The De­partment has been studying this problem for some time but its studies to date are not sufficiently conclusive · to permit a recom-

· mendation for a change in the current level of fees.

CONCLUSIONS During the past several years as a result

of the growing interest in travel abroad and the availability of low-priced and speedy travel facilities the activities . of the Pass­port Office have greatly increased. The De­partment has not been unmindful of the problem posed by this increased activity. In recognition of the problem st~ps have been taken to modernize and mechanize the office

·and to equip it to . handle the increased volume of business.

The Department shares the concern dis­played by .the Senate Committee on Gov­ernment Operations and will continue the efforts ot recent months to improve the ef­fectiveness Of the Passport Ofilce to the end that the Office is properly equipped to meet the steadily increasing demands placed upon it and to assure- a high standard of service to the public. The Department does not feel, however, that such improvements re-

. quire the establishment of a semiautono­mous . agency for passport operations. or the financing of such an operation through a revolving fund. Furthermore, the establish­ment by statute of a semi-autonomous agency wlthin the Department of State would be contrary to the sound principles of man­agement endorsed by the Hoover Commission and by general Governµient practice:

The Acting Secretary of State has author­ized .me to " state ·that · the- -Department- of

States ls of the opinion that the passage of this bill would not be in the public interest.

In closing, I should like to submit for the record a copy of a letter from the Bureau of the Budget dated March 9, 1956, setting forth its views on the proposed legislation. The views of the Bureau of the Budget coincide in general with those of the Department.

I may say to the distinguished Sen­ator from Minnesota that after the Sec­retary or those representing the Depart­ment have a chance to appear before the committee, and to be examined by it, and after an opportunity is afforded to submit other information to the com­mittee, it may be that the committee will wish to report the bill in precisely the same form as that in which it is now before us. But I say respectfully, as o_nly one Member of this body, that I would feel much happier, and would believe we were proceeding in the more normal fashion, if the distinguished Senator from Minnesota on his own volition would take the bill back to the commit­tee, and would permit such persons to appear before the committee and testify, and if the committee would then report to the Senate whatever bill in its judg­ment would be sound under the cir­cumstances.

Mr. HUMP HREY. Mr. President, will the Senator from California yield?

Mr. KNOWLAND. I yield. Mr. HUMPHREY. I am in a some­

what difficult position, because, let me say first of all, this is the committee's bill. I have had the theoretical honor of presenting the bill on the floor, although now I am not so sure it is an honor, for it has become somewhat of a burden. But the committee itself decided on the bill it wished to report. So I am not disposed to take the bill bacl.t to the committee on my own volition, because the committee thought the bill was a rather good one.

Let me inquire as to the date of the comments from the Department of State.

Mr. KNOWLAND. March 14. Mr. President, I hope the - Senator

from Minnesota will do what I have sug­gested, because, after all, if the com­mittee itself is still of the same mind, it will be able to report the bill again in the same form. On the other hand, if it is then found that the committee desires to make an amendment in the bill, that can be done. After all, we want an im­proved and an efficient Passport Service, and we want any department or agency of the Government to be mindful of the

_recommendations of the legislative branch. . If representatives of the Department have an opportunity to testify before the committee and there present their views,

. and if we then do not agree with them,

. I would be the first to say that, under the Constitution, all legislative power resides in the Congress of the United States; .and I would not feel bound to go against my .best judgment, and I do not believe any other Sena tor would be

· bound to go against his best judgment, based on what is shown by the facts.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Certainly the Sen­ator from California takes a very hon­orable position. But I think he will rec­ognize, with me, that ·the State Depart-

· -ment's ·-representatives ·testified· before

the members ot the committee, during the first session of this c ·ongress, on the very matter of the re.organization of the Passport Office, whic.h has been the sub­ject Of . some. consideration for a con­siderable period of time.

Mr. President, instead of continuing at this time, I now wish to yield to the distinguished · Senator from Rhode Island [Mr. GREEN]; who repeatedly has requested the floor.

Mr. GREEN. _Mr. President, I wish to take a few moments to read some com­ments on the pending measure. These comments are based on a letter which I have received from -the Clerk of the United States Distrfot Court for the Dis­trict of Rhode Island. · I shall read a part of the letter, and then request that the entire letter be placed in the RECORD. The letter relates to the proposed re­vision of the law regarding applications for passports. I now - read from the letter: ·

As clerk of a United States district court, I am authorized to accept applications and empowered to administer oaths in connec­tion with passport procedure. This is pro­vided for in the United States Code, title 22; section 213._ In performance of this duty we have had applicants who as enlisted per­sonnel of the :United States Navy were pro­ceeding abroad under Navy orders. The processing of their applications under section 2.14 of the above-mentioned tit.le requires us to collect the $1 fee for the execution Of each application for· a passport. The $9 fee for its issuance is waived u:qder the same section,

· provided' the applicant ~alls within the cate­gory above described. The point to be stressed is that it does appl!ar an incon­gruous requirement wherein a fee for execu­tion is mandatory, in view of the status of the applicant, whfch is that of an involun­tary traveler leaving this -country strictly in

' the performance of a duty on the business of the Government.

In the letter, reference is made to the collection ·of these fees, particularly as they apply to the large number of appli_­cations received from enlisted personnel, many of. whQm are stationed in Rhode Island, at Quonset Point. When they are sent abroad, in many instances they have to go to the clerk of this court and pay a fee of $1.

In the letter, reference is also made tO a number of other regulatory require­ments.

Mr. President, I now ask unanimous . consent to have the entire letter printed . at this point in the RECORD, as a part of my remarks.

There being no . objection, the letter . was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: . .

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT OFFICE OF THE CLE~K,

. DIST.RTCT OF RHODE ISLAND, Providence, April 3, 1956 •

Hon. THEODORE FRANCIS GREEN, United States Senator,

Senate Office Building, Washington, n . .c.

DEAR SENATOR: At the request of your ad­' ministrative assistant, Mr .. Edward J. Higgins, · I am incorporating herein some thoughts on · passport application .procedure with refer-ence to any proposed revisions of the law. on that subject. ,

As clerk of a Uni~ed States distJ:ict court I am authoriz~d to ac~ept ~pplications and empowered to administer oaths in connection

' with passport procedure: -This ls provide"d · for- tn the -united States· code, title 22, se·ction

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 6207 213. In performance of this duty we have had applicants who as enlisted personnel of the United States Navy were proceeding abroad under Navy orders. The processing of their applications under section 214 of. the the above-mentioned title requires us to collect the $1 fee for the execution of each application for a passport. The $9 fee for its issuance is waived under the same sec­tion, provided the applicant falls within the category above described. The point to be stressed is that it does appear an incon­gruous requirement wherein a fee for execu­tion is mandatory, in view of the status of the applicant, which is that of an involun­tary traveler -leaving this · country strictly in the performance of a duty on the business of the Government.

In the Clerk'.s Manual i~sued by the Ad­ministrative Office of . the United States · Courts ' at section 11.03 is the sentence; "Clerks shall collect a fee of $1 for their services in connection with the · execution of each passport application (22 U. S. C. 213 and 214) ." This appears to be the official interpretation of sections 213 and 214 on the fee requirement.

As you can well imagine the demand of the $1 fee by a clerk is looked upon as "usurious" by an enilsted man who has been ordered to proceed abroad in the service of his coun­try and it is with some reluctance that that fee is levied by this clc:.rk.

other, and then consider the amendment of the Senator from Rhode Island.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Rhode Island yield, for the purpose of permitting action to be taken on the amendment of the Sen· ator from Minnesota?

Mr. GREEN. Yes, Mr. President; I yield for that purpose.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amend­ment of the Senator from Minnesota [Mr. HUMPHREY].

The amendment was agreed to. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The

amendment of the Senator from Rhode Island is now in order.

Mr. ,. GREEN. Mr. President, this amendment would appear at the end of the bill, where a new section would be added.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. If the Senator from Rhode Island will send his amendment to the desk, it will be read by the reading clerk. ·

Mr. GREEN. Very well, Mr. Presi­dent; I now submit the amendment and send it to the desk.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. . The amendment will be stated.

The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. At the end of the bill, it is propased to add a new sec­tion, as follows:

SEC. 6. Section 1 of the act of June 4, 1920,

There are other requirements that are regulatory in nature rather than statutory. These appear to me to be beyond the rea­sonable record requirements of most other Government agencies. I have specifically in

.mind that regulation which calls for a birth record to contain an impression seal. The director of health · for the ~tate of Rhod~ Island ~ssues a certificate acknowledging. the

. • recording Of the birth •Of an infant in t!lis • " • ·state at the time 'o! birth. The certificate

·as amended (22 U. S. C. 214), is amended «I) by striking out. "4,nd provided further," and inserting in 'lieu thereof "Provided fur­ther", .itnd (2) . by inse·r~ing befofe the pe­riod ~t the end thereof a colon and tJ:ie fol;. lowtng :· "And provided further, That·no fee shall be require.d ·hereundel' by ·any officer

• I ' j ,. II •contains a p.rtnted' Seal Whi'Ch Causes it •to be ' ' ') ~ : , . rejected for -. -passport purposes even though

' or· employee of the United States or any court of the United States for executing any application for a passport in the case of any member of the Armed Forces of the United States proceeding abroad in the dis­charge of his official duties, or any member of his immediate family."

one or' .the notations on the reverse side of the certificate informs its holder that it can be used, among other uses, for passport pur­poses in establishing the nationality of the individual named. The regulation issued by the State Department to clerks of court pre­cludes the use of such an instrument for lack of an impression seal, although all the other State Department requirements are present. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The

These are a few of the procedures that question is on agreeing to the amend­might bear examinati9n in an effort to re- ment offered by the Senator from Rhode lieve some unneecssary hardship. I believe Island [Mr. GREEN]. that if Congress were to make the execution Mr. GREEN. Mr. President, I invite fee or $1 discretionary with clerks of court attention to the fact that this amend-1n the cases outlined above, it might be a satisfactory solution to that particular prob- ment applies to passports with respect to lem. which the application is made before a

Any further information or discussion on Federal official or a Federal court. It · -· the _subject ~f pas~sport applic.atio~ ·proc~gm;e ,does not apply tQ . applications made in

• will be gladly sup.pli~d by me at your i:iaquest . . State courts . . · . · . , .With . kindest 'pe~sonal re~ards and best ·. The PREsIDING •·OFFICER: The

wishes, I · am - t· · · · t th d · · ; .•.. , Sincerely, . ques ion is on agreemg o e amen • NEA1'E D. MURPHY~ • · ment qfiered by the Senator from Rhode

1.' ,,.\ l! .. , . . . - -Island (Mr. GREENJ.

~r. GREE~: · ~r. · P~esr~ent, I .1;>:0 W The amendment was agreed to. desire to subrlnt an amendment to the bill.

The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. NEUBERGER in the chair). The Chair is SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS informed that another amendment is now pending. So the amendment of the distinguished Senator from Rhode Is­land is not in order at this time.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will the Senator from Rhode Island yield to me at this point?

Mr. GREEN. I yield. Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, the

amendment I offered is a technical and explanatory one. I should like to call it up now. If there is not to be ex· tended debate on the amendment, we can dispose of it now, one way or an·

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi· dent, I ask the attention of the distin­guished Senator from Illinois [Mr. DouGLAsJ and the distinguished minority leader [Mr. KNOWLANDJ. I have pre­viously discussed this subject with the senior Senator from Delaware [Mr. WIL­LIAMSJ. I ask that Senators give atten­tion to the unanimous-consent request which I am about to propound.

I ask unanimous consent that, upon the conclusion of action upon the unfin. ished business, the Senate proceed to the consideration of Calendar No. 1746,

House bill 10004, notwithstanding the provisions of section 139 (a) of the Re· organization Act.

The bill to which I refer is the sup· plemental appropriation bill. I have talked with the distinguished senior Sen­ator from Delaware, as well as with the distinguished minority whip [Mr. SAL· roNSTALL], who is a member of the Ap· propriations Committee, and the distin· guished ch.airman of that committee, the Senator from Arizona [Mr. HAYDEN].

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield. Mr. KNOWLAND. The majority

leader discussed the subject with me. The request is agreeable to me. I have discussed it with the ranking Repub­lican member of the Appropriations Committee, and it is agreeable to him, if the request meets with the approval of the Senator from Delaware.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I have sent for the Senator from Delaware, and I note that he is now entering the Cham­ber.

Mr. DOUGLAS rose. Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I yield first

to the Senator from Illinois. Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, re·

serving the right to object, this is an­other case in which sufficient notice has not been given to . the Senate before an appropriation bill is brought up for actfoh. .

'.°'.f'h'e rules of the Senate are very spe- .1 C'ific on this point. I read from section 190 .(f)- of ·the General and Permanent

' Lairs Relating to the Senate: . ..: -No g~neral appropriation bill shall be co~­

sidered in either House unless, prior to the consideration of such bill, printed commit­tee hearings and reports on such bill have been available for at least 3 calendar days for the Members of the House in which such bill is to be considered.

In other words, by the Reorganization Act of 1946, 3 days' notice is required after a bill is reported, before it may be

· considered by the Senate. The calendar of business which I hold

in my hand .indicates that this bill, the second supplemental appropriation bill for 1956, was reported to the Senate on April 11, which was yesterday. So, in effect,. . what is. being 'asked is that we· · · ~hould . pass upon .the second supple- ' · mental appropriation bill witn only 1 day's opportunity to consider it, and really ,only a few minutes' opportunity for consideration, because . not until , I reached my desk a.few moments ago did · ~ · I have a copy of the second supplemental appropriation bill. Prior to that time I did not have any effective opportunity to obtain a copy.

If this were the first time· unanimous consent was being requested to take up an appropriations bill out of order, one might acquiesce. But this has happened time and time again.

The Senator from Delaware [Mr. WILLIAMS] on the other side of the aisle, and the Senator from Illinois, on this side of the aisle, have tried to enforce the 3-day rule. The procedure is stand­ard each time. We discover that the 3-days' notice has not been given. We give ·evidence of the fact that we intend to object. Then our good friends come

6208 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE April 12

to us and say, "Won't you make an ex­·ception this time? There is a pressing need." Or we are told, ''There are per­sonal considerations which make it im­portant that this bill be considered."

The Senator from Iliinois, wishing to be a cooperative colleague, and, I am afraid, probably not being able to resist

. the blandishments and seductions of those who are more skilled in parlia.;.

,mentary procedures than he, always finally yields and succumbs.

The last -time -the Senator from Illi­nois yielded to such blandishments wa.S in March; when the Treasury and Post

·office appropriation bill came up . . 1 wa~ .assured ·by the distinguished Senator from.Virginia.that if I agreed to permit ·that bill to be considered, it would never happen again. -

The violation of this rule is, indeed, very similar::. to the practice ~of Rip-Van Winkle, who took a pledge that he ~ould never take another drop of llquor. Then, when a glass or bottle was , ofiered to him, he would take it and say, "But we will not count this time."

So our good friends on the Appropria­tions Committee always profess that "This is the last time we wrn ever ask .for an exception to the rule." The· Sen­ator from Illinois is always placed µi the · position of rising futilely, make some objection, and then being surrounde.d by his good friends, who apl?eal t9 his sense of kindness; and he yield~. But .I must admitrthat each time this hap­pens the steel- in -Phe S~nator ~ from Illinois increases and his backbone stiffens. -

There was a reason why the 3-aay provision was inserted. in the rules of the Senate. The reason was to afford Members of the Senate an opportunity to examine appropriation bills and deter­mine whether or not they approved of every item.

If the Senate is to be a deliberative body the general mem'o.srship .should have the opportunity, and, if they believe it proper, exercise the right, to question certain items-. -- We have- full apprecia­tion of the ability of members of the Appropriations-Committee. We appre~ ciate the· hard work which they do. · We also have a full appreciation of their power. , Individually I know them to be gracious .and kindly men. ; But, if we get 1n their bad graces, although the ax is never threatened, sometime the ax may fall. So Senators are reluctant to chal­lenge the -Appropriations.. Committee. The tendency is to pass these huge ap­propriation bilrs, now totallng consider.;. ably more than $60 ·billion a- year, as they are reported from the committee.

I may say to my friends on the other side of the aisle that in the old days they used to object to appropriation bms pro­posed by a Democratic administration; but I do not find most of them having the same zeal for economy now that the ap­propriation bills are proposed by execu­tive agencies under the control of their party. Some of the fighting zeal for economy seems to have departed from our friends on the Qther side of the aisle.

From time to time, when adequate notice has been given, the membership of the Senate has- been able to effect economies. · I remember that the other

day a point of order was raised by the distinguished senior Senator from Loui­siana [Mr. ELLENDER], whose eagle eye detected the fact that there was in the appropriation bill then pending legisla­tion which would have authorized addi­tions to the famous "additional" Senate

·Office Building, to which the Senator from Louisiana and I objected. The plans · seem to grow and swell with the ·years.

The danger of rushing appropriation bills through without adequate consid­era.tion is especially great in the case of supplemental appropriation bills or urgent ·deficiency appropriation bills. rt is said that, "The mon:ey is needed right away; and unless it is appropriated, Government services will cease." So, in ·a sense, the Senate operates with a pistol at its head, held by Governmeht de:. 'partments and by the Appropriations Committee.

Mr. President, in this particular in­stance it is n9 small sum of money we are being asked to appropriate. It amounts to $859 million. However, this is not the first supplemental appropriation bill for the current fiscal year. · There was an­other one at the end of last year, which carried more than $1,600.,000,000, or to be precise, $1,656,626,000.

Adding the present supplemental amount to the preceding supplemental amount, the total is two and a half bil­lion dollars. That is not all. There was -an ·urgent deficiency bill also. That was not a supplemental · bill; apparently it was considered a special bill which had to be rushed through. That amotmted to approximately $65 million. Then there is another bill upon which the Senate will act shortly. That amounts to $13 million.

Therefore we face the fact that more than two and a half billion dollars are being asked for in supplemental and de­ficiency bills, which amounts were not provided for in the original budget. That -raises a very important question of budgetary procedure.

As I have sat here for some years, the .suspicion· has dawned upen me that fre­.quently executive· departments do not ask ·for all the money they intend to ask for:; th-at they scale~ down their demands· ill the original budget and then the admin­is.tr.ation claims.. th.e_ credit for economies effected. Word goes out to the country .of how they have cut the budget . . Then in the supplemental bills, which come along later, the departments get addi­tional sums of money, but that money never e~ters into the computations..-...

I wish to point out that the budget sub­mitted last year, upon which the admin­istration is taking credit for economy, is two and a half billion dollars short of the amounts which it will ask us finally to appropriate. Mr. President, a great deal of the economy in January or February in one year evaporates by the time the departments get into full swing.

Therefore I am somewhat reluctant to give consent to the consideration of -the bill at this time. It is quite possible that the biandishments of the chairman of the Committee on Appropriations and of the majority leader and of the minority leader may once again cause the Senator from Illinois, in his desire to be obliging, to give consent. ·

SCHOOL LUNCH FUND SHORTAGE

I should like to say also that along with the extraordinary sums which we are being asked to appropriate, there was one omission which struck me very markedly, and that was the failure of the supple­mental budget to carry any additional funds for school lunches. The school lunch program is one of the very best ·ways we have of spending money, be­cause it gives food to youngsters who need it. It builds up their vitality. It is 'in the truest sense of the word an invest­ment in national resources.

Yet the school 'lunch program has· run -out of funds: Ill ·my State the program has stopped on the. 7th of April. It is .true that the milk program continues.; but the slices of bread and the pats of 'butter aµ.d the carrots and potatoes and _lettuce and the other vegetables, which should go with an adequate school lunch program, are no longer provided.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, the Senator from Texas has dis­cussed the subject with the leadership on the other side of the aisle. We have fewer than a half dozen bills remaining on the calendar. - We felt, since this ap­propriation bill was a noncontroversial bill, it could be passed this afternoon. If the Senator from Illinois has any deep feeling in the matter, and would prefer the bill can go over until Monday. Th~ reason we are caught. up on all the bills which have been· reported is that the Senator from Minnesota [Mr. HuM;. PHREY] was of the opinion that there was little opposition to his bill. It may have to be recommitted. If it is agreeable to .the Senator from Illinois, we would like ' to take up the appropriation bill this ' afternoon.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I think it is improper time after time to violate the 3-day rule. .However, the Senator from Illinois does not wish to be a "killjoy.'' On the other hand, I do not wish to have the rules vio-lated so constantly. ·

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. P:resi­dent, if the Senator will . yield, I -should like to- say .that I do not wish to debate tpe matter- with my friend f:rom Illinois. It is not a matter of violating any rule of the Senate, if the Senate gives its consent. The Senator from Texas is not at all anxious to .take up the measure if there is any Senator who does not wish to give his consent.

I had hoped that it would meet with the approval of the Senator from Illinois, because there are several items. in the bill which are quite important. How­ever, I .do. not wish .to -be unduly persua­sive with the Senator. Of course I know I could not be. If the Senator from Illi­nois would agree to go along with us, I would appreciate it very much. How­ever, if he feels that he conscientiously cannot do so, very well. ·

Mr. DOUGLAS. May I be privileged to ask a question of the · chairman of the Committee on Appropriations, the dis­tinguished senior Senator from Arizona?

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I ask unanimous consent that the Senator from Illinois may be permitted to ask a question of the Senator from Arizona [Mr. HAYDEN] without his los­ing the floor.

!956 . CQ~(JRESSIQNAL_ RJ!CQRQ_-. SENATE 6209 The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without

objection, it is so ordered. Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, I

should like to ask this question of · the distinguished chairman of the Commit­'tee on Appropriations, whose hard work 'on the committee we all very deeply ap­preciate. J; should like to ask him whether he considered the question of appropriating additional funds · for the school lunch program so that the chil­dren of the country may have the usual school lunches for the remainder of the year.

Mr. HAYDEN. That question comes up ea.ch year. Congress makes what is estimated to be an adequate appropria­tion for· the school-lunch program. Then it turns out that perhaps some States administer the program care­lessly, and some do not; or some schools participate in the program that were not in it originally; and so on. Then the cry is raised that there is not quite enough money. What is the situation the Senator has in mind?

Mr. DOUGLAS. Would the Senator correct me if I am wrong in my under­standing? Am I correct, first, in under­standing that for a number of years the appropriations have been about $83 mil­lion?

Mr. HAYDEN. That is correct. Mr. DOUGLAS. Am I to understand

-further that last year the Secretary of 'Agriculture, in the budget which he sub­mitted. cut the figure from $83 million to $68 million?

Mr. HAYDEN. That is correet. Mr. DOUGLAS. Am I to understand

also that by motion on the :floor the school-lunch appropriation was raised by $15 million, to the former level of $83 million?

Mr. HAYDEN. The correction re­storing the amount was made in the House of Representatives. It came over to the Senate in the same amount as the year before. ·

Mr. DOUGLAS. That was done in the House l>Y the committee, as I understand.

Mr. HAYDEN. Yes; that is correct. It was restored in the House by the com­mittee.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Is it not correct to -say that during the past few years, al­though the appropriation for the school­lunch program has 'been pegged at $83 million, there has been a tremendous increase in the school enrollment, par­ticularly in the lower grades; so that the same amount of money is now being used to feed a greater number of children?

Mr. "HAYDEN: That is correct. However, in addition to the amount

of money appropriated in the bill under .discussion, there have been very large milk donations made otherwise.

Mr. DOUGLAS. That is true with re­spect to milk. . However; I am speaking ·of programs other than the milk pro­gram. IS it not true that the Secretary of Agriculture has not asked for any additional funds for the school-lunch program?

Mr. HAYDEN.: That is true. Mr. DOUGLAS. And unless he asked

for it, the committee did not feel that an increased appropriation should be rp.ade?

Mr. HAYDEN. With donations of food and other things, we assumed that the allotment provided was satisfactory.

Mr. DOUGLAS.· Mr. President, I should like to point out a grave error

. on the part of the Secretary of Agricul-ture. I do not blame the Appropriations

·Committee, but I do blame the Secre­tary of Agriculture for not realizing that the number of children to be fed in schools has been increasing, and for fail­ing to request adequate appropriations. I wish to point out, also, that Mr. Ben­son's request for next year of $83 million, is also inadequate.

I am also puzzled by the fact that while it is said that he is in favor of devising new methods of disposing of agricultural surpluses, here at home is an obvious way of decreasing the sur­plus. I put the children first, but, of course, there is a secondary factor in­volved in providing additional outlets for farm products.

I should like to ask the Senator from Arizona this question: Would the Sen­ator be willing to add $2<>% -million, which is the sum needed· to continue the .school-lunch program for the remainder of the present fiscal year?

Mr. HAYDEN. I should first like to be sure of the amount of money which is aetually needed.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I wonder if we could not have this discussion when the bill comes before the Senate. I have two unanimous­consent requests to make.

REORGANIZATION OF THE PASSPORT OFFICE

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I ask unanimous consent that Order No. 1628, Senate bill 3340, pro­viding for the reorganization of the Passport Office, be recommitted to the Committee on Government Operations. · The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the request of the Senator from Texas?

Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I shall not object.

I have discussed the matter with the chairman of the committee [Mr. Mc­CLELLAN], but I wish to serve notice that the State Department representatives will ·be asked to appear before the com­mittee tomorrow morning, and we will be prepared to report the bill next week. . The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the reqµest of the Senator .from Texas. is agreed to.

SUPPLEMENTAL APPROPRIATIONS, 1956

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I ask unanimous consent for the immediate consideration of House bill 10004, second supplemental appropria­tion bill, 1956. . . The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill will be stated by title for the informa­tion of the Senate.

The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. A bill (H. R. 10004) making supplemental appropria­tions for the fiscal year ending June 30', 1956, and for other purposes.-

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there -Objection to the present consideration of the bill?

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, may I ask the Senator from Arizona, if he will

· accept an additional appropriation of · $10 million for the purpose which we -have discussed?

Mr. HAYDEN. I shall give it very careful consideration aftei: the bill is before the Senate.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, the .Senator from Arizona · is a man of very ..cautious speed. but he also holds to his word. The gleam in his eye is kindly and friendly, and with faith in my heart that he will look upon my suggestion with favor, I withdraw any objection.

Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I assume the Senator from Illinois has in­dicated that he has some kind of an amendment which he wishes to off er pro­viding for an additional expenditure of money, if not in astronomical figures at leaiSt, in some substantial figures--'

Mr. DOUGLAS. Ten million dollars. . Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President I think the matter will be carefully c.~n­sidered by the Senate, but as a member of the Appropriations Committee and as minority leader, I would not wa~t the Senator from Illinois to be under any il­lusion that there is an advance commit­ment of $5 million, $10 million $15 mil­lion, or any sum over and above that recommended by the committee. Pos­sibly we can be convinced that such a sum should be included. , The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the request of the Senator -from Texas that the Senate proceed to the consideration of the supplemental appropriation bill?

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President I have examined the bill and I find o'nly one item as to which I have any serious ~uestion. That is the item on page · 4, Imes 11 and 12, providing for $30 million in connection with maritime activities. I have not been able to find adequate evidence to support this item. It is my understanding that if I permit the bill to come up at this time the provision will be eliminated.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. That is the understanding of the Senator from Texas, of the minority leader •. and of the chairman of the committee.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the consideration of the bill?

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the bill,. which had been reported from the Committee on Appropriations, with amendments.

Mr. HAYDEN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the commit­tee amendments be agreed to en bloc, that the bill be considered as original text for the purpose of amendment, and that no points of order be waived.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection? The Chair hears none, and it is. so ordered.

The committee amendments agreed to en bloc are as follows: · Under the heading "Chapter I-Depart­ment of Agriculture--Agricultural Research Service--Salaries and ·Expenses," on page 2, -line 7, after the word "Research", to strike out ".$1,217,530" .and insert "$2.,217,530'!.

On page 2, at the beginning of line 9, to strike out ."$1,527,780" and insert "$2,-252,780'', and in the same •line, after the

6210 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE April 12 word "which", to strike out "$500,000" and insert "$725,000".

Under the subhead "Farmers' Home Ad· ministration-Salaries and Expenses," on page 3 at the beginning of line 11, to strike out "$1,350,000" and insert "$1,620,000."

Under the subhead "Commodity Credit Corporation," on page 3, ·une 17, after the word "to", to strike out "$30,500,000" and insert "$30,964,000". .

Under the heading "Chapter II-Depart­men t of Commerce--Bureau of the Census­Salaries and Expenses," on page 3, at the be­ginning of line 23, to strike out "$503,000" and insert "$528,000", and in the same line, after the word "which", to strike o~t "$75,000" and insert "$100,000".

Under the subhead "Maritime activities,'' on page 4, after line 3, to strike out:

"SHIP CONSTRUCTION

"The limitation under this head in the Department of Commerce and Related Ag~n­cies Appropriation Act, 1956, on the number of 'cargo ships for replacement, for which payment may be made for construction dif­ferential subsidy and national defense fea­tures, is increased from 5 to 20."

On page 4, after line 12, to insert:

"WAR SHIPPING ADMINISTRATION LIQUIDATION

"The limitation under this head in the Department of Commerce and Related Agen­cies Appropriation Act, 1956, on the amount available from prior appropriations for the liquidation of certain obligations approved by the General Accounting Office and for the payment of obligations incurred against the working fund titled 'Working fund, Commerce, War Shipping Administration functions, December 31, 1946', is increased from '$5,900,000' to '$24,000,000'. Provided that the amount of such increase shall be available only for Court of Claims and dis­trict court judgments and payments to dis­abled seamen authorized by 58th Statutes at Large, page 758."

On page 5, after line 19, to insert:

"INDEPENDENT AGENCIES

"Small Business Administration

"Revolving fund "For additional capitai for the revolving

·fund authorized by the Small Business Act of 1953, as amended, to be available without fl.seal year limitation, $20,000,00Q."

On page 7, after line 17, to strike out:

"'CORREGIDOR BATAAN MEMORIAL COMMISSION

"Salaries and expenses "For expenses necessary to carry out the

provisions of the act of August 5, 1953, as amended (67 Stat. 366 and 69 Stat. 589), $56,000, to remain available through June 30, 1957."

Under the heading "Chapter V-Inde­pendent Offices-Civil Service Commission­Administrative Expenses, Employees' Life In­surance Fund," on page 9, line 5, after the word "to", to strike out "$100,000" and in­sert "$135,000".

Under the subhead "Federal Home Loan Bank Board," on page 9, line 18, after the word "to", to strike out "$3,338,800" and in­sert "$3,438,800".

On page 10, after line 14, to insert:

"'ACQUl:SITION OF LAND AND BUILDING., CHICAGO, ILL,

"For the acquisition of the parcel of land located at 536 South Clark Street, Chicago, Ill., together with all improvements thereon and appertaining thereto, including inci­dental expenses, to remain available until expended, $3,000,000, to be derived by trans­fer from the appropriation 'Sites and plan­ning, purchase contract, and public build· ings projects'."

On page 10, after line 22, to insert: "EXPENSES, GENERAL SUPPLY FUND

"For an additional amount for 'Expenses, general supply fund,' $450,000, to be de­rived by transfer from the appropriation for 'Sites and planning; purchase contract, and public buildings projects'."

Under the subhead "National Science Foundation-International Geophysical Year," on page 14, after the word "Year", to strike out "$26,000,00-0" and insert "$28,-000,000".

Under the heading "Chapter VI-Depart­ment of the Interior--Ofilce of the Secre­tary-Research in the Utilization of Saline Water," on page 16, after line 16, to insert:

"OIL AND GAS DIVISION

"For an additional amount for 'Oil and Gas Division,' $35,000."

Under the subhead "Bureau of Land Man­agement-Management of Lands and Re­sources," on page 16, .line 23, after the word "resources", to strike out "$800,000" and in­sert "$1,200,00-0".

At the top of page 17, to insert:

"CONSTRUCTION

"For an additional amount for 'construc­tion,' $2 million, to remain available until expended."

Under the subhead "Bureau of Indian Af­fairs--Education and Welfare Services,'' on page 17, line 7, after the figure "$1,871,00-0", to insert a colon and' the following proviso: "Provided, That the Secretary of the Army is authorized and directed to transfer to the Secretary of the Interior without exchange of funds, 46 school buses presently on loan to the Bureau of Indian Affairs."

On page 17, after line 11, to insert:

''CONSTRUCTION

"For an additional amount for 'construc­tion,' $240,000, to remain available until ex­pended: Provided, That the funds herein used for' restoration of Indian irrigation fa­cilities shall be nonreimbursable: Provided further, That not to exceed $54,0-00 used for emergency reconstruction, replacement or re- . pair of the San Carlos irrigation facilities damaged or d estroyed by flood and storm in 1955 shall be nonreimbursable."

Under the subhead "National Park Serv­ice--Construction," on page 18, at the begin­ning of line 3, to strike out "For an addi­tional amount for 'construction', $3,000,000". and insert "For an additional amount for 'construction', $360,000, to remain available until expended."

On page 18, after line 5, to insert:

"JONES POINT BRIDGE

"For expenses necessary for the construc­tion of a bridge over the Potomac River pur­suant to the provisions of the Act of August 30, 1954 (68 Stat. 963, 964), $500,000, to re­main available until expended: Provided, That the unexpended balance of the appro­priation granted under this head in the Sec­ond Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1955, is hereby merged with this appropriation."

Under the heading "Chapter VII," on page 19, after line 1 7, to insert : '

"DEPARTMENT OF LABOR

"Bureau of Employment Security

"Mexican farm labor program "For an additional amount for 'Salaries

and expenses, Mexican farm labor program', $65,000, to be derived by transfer from the appropriation 'Unemployment compensation for veterans'."

Under the heading "Department of Health, Education, and Welfare," on page 20, after ilne 17, to s.trike out:

"CONSTRUCTION OF RESEARCH FACn.ITIES

"For construction of a laboratory building for the biologics standards activities of the

National Institutes of Health, and for ex­pansion of and additional equipment for the boiler plant, including the preparation of plans, supervision, and fixed equipment, to remain available until expended, $3,190,000, together with not to· exceed $310,000 of the unobligated balance of funds previously ap­propriated under this head."

On page 21, after line 2, to insert:

"CONSTRUCTION OF BIOLOGICS STANDARDS LABORATORY BUILDING

"For construction of a laboratory building for the biologics standards activities of the National Institutes of Health, and for ex­pansion of and additional equipment for the boiler plant, including the preparation of plans, supervision, and fixed equipment, $3,190,000, together with not to exceed $310,000 to be ,derived by transfer from 'Con­struction of research facilities'."

On page 21, after line 11, to insert:

"INCREASED PAY COSTS, CAREER INCENTIVE ACT

OF 1955

"For additional amounts for appropria­tions for the fiscal year 1956, for increased pay costs authorized by the act of March 31, 1955 (Public Law 20), as follows:

"'Assistance to States, general', $55,000; " 'Communicable diseases', $55,000; " 'Sanitary engineering activities', $70,000; "'Foreign quarantine service', $20,000; " 'Retired pay of commissioned officers',

$130,000; "The Surgeon General is authorized to

transfer between appropriations to the Pub­lic Health Service such amounts as may be necessary to meet increased costs authorized by Public Law 20, 84th Congress, but no appropriation shall be increased by more than $10,000 as a result of such transfers."

Under the subhead "Social Security Ad­ministration-Grants to States for Public Assistance,'' on page 22, line 6, after the word "assistance", to strike out "$47,000,000" and insert "$50,000,000".

On page 22, after line _10; to insert: "NATIONAL MEDIATION BOARD

"For an additional amount for 'Salaries and expenses', $25,000, to be derived by trans­fer from the appropriation 'Arbitration and emergency boards', fiscal year 1956."

Under the heading "Railroad Retirement Board-Salaries and Expenses, Railroad Re­tirement Board (Trust Fund)," on page 22, line 19, after the word "fund", to strike out "$548,000" and insert "$888,000".

Under the heading "Chapter VIII-Public Works," on page 22, after line 22, to insert:

"TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORITY

"For an additional amount for 'Tennessee Valley Authority', $3,500,000, to remain avail­able until expended."

Under the heading "Department of Jus­tice--Legal Activities and General Adminis­tration-Salaries and Expenses, General Legal Activities," on page 24, line 14, after the word "activitie&", to strike out "$500,000" and in­sert "$550,000".

Under the subhead "Fees and Expenses of Witnesses,'' on page 24, line 20, af ter the nu­merals "$100,000", to insert a semicolon and "and the limitation under this head in the Department of Justice Appropriation Act, 1956, on the amount available for compensa.;. f;ion and expenses of witnesses or informants, is increased from '$175,000' to '$200,000' ."

Under the heading "The Judiciary-Courts of Appeals, District Courts, and Other Judi­cial Services-Salaries of Referees,'' on · page 25, at the beginning of line 19, to strike out "$6,375" and insert "$8,375". ·

Under the heading "Chapter X," on page 26, after line 16, to insert:

"POST OFFICE DEPARTMENT

"Operations · "For an additional amount for 'Operations,'

$16 million: Provided, That the Postmaster

1956 ·coNGRESSIONAL· 'RECORD - --SENATE $211 General, with the approval of the Director of the Bureau of the Budget, may transfer such sums (not to exceed $2 million) as he deems necessary from any appropriation available to the Post Office Department for the re­mainder of the fiscal year ending June 30, 1956, to any other such appropriation or ap­propriations without regard to the limita­tions imposed by the first proviso contained in the paragraph under the heading 'Oper­ations' in title II of the Treasury-Post Office Appropriation Act of 1956.'• . Under the 'heading "Chapter XI-District

of Columbia-Department of Public Health," on page 27, line 19, after the word "Health," to strike out "$130,000" and insert "$150,000".

Under the heading "Chapter XII-Legis­lative Branch," on page 29, after line 14, to insert:

11.SENATE "For payment to Lois Lilly Kilgore, widow

of Harley M. Kilgore, late a Senator from the State of West Virginia, $22,500.''

On page 29, after line 18-, to insert:

"SALARIES, OFFICES AND EMPLOYEES .. Office of the Secretary~ For an additional

amount for the Office of the Secretary, $2,535: Provided, That the basic compensation of the . assistant to the majority -and the assistant to the minority may be fiXed by the majority the minority leaders, respectfully, at a rate not to exceed $8,8-20 per annum; and that effective April 1, 1956, the basic amount available for clerical assistance and. read­justment of salaries in the disbursing office is increased by $3,000."

On page 30, after line 2, insert:

"CONTINGEN'I' EXPENSES OF l'HE SENATE. ••Joint Committee on the Economic Re­

port: For an additional amount for salaries and expenses of. the Joint Committee on the Economic Report, $10,914.''

On page 30,_after line 6, to insert: . "Inquiries and investigations: For an addi­

tional amount for expenses of inquiries and investig:ations, $600,000."

On page 30, after line 8, to insert.: "Stationery: For an additional amount of

stationery, $2,900, and the amount available for stationery for committees and officers of the Senate is hereby increased to $-12,900.''

On page 30, after line 12, to insert: "ADMINISTRATIVE PROVISIONS

"The third proviso in the paragraph re­lating to the authority of Senators and com­mittee chairmen to rearrange the basic sala­ries of employees 1n their respective offices or committees·, which appears in the Legisla­tive Branch Appropriation Act, 1947, as amended (2 U. S. C. 60f), is amended to read as follows: 'Provided further, That Sen­ators and committee chairmen, on or before the day on which they are to become effec­tive, shall certify in writing such changes or rearrangements to the disbursing office of the Senate which thereafter shall pay such employees in accordance with such certifica­tions, except that, in the case et any change or rearrangement, other than original ap­pointments, to become effective on or after the first day and prior to the 10th d ay of any month, such certification may be made at any time not later than the 10th day of such month'.''

Under the heading "Chapter XIII-Claims for Damages, Audited Claims, and Judg­ments," on page 32, line 9, after the word "in", to insert "Senate Document No. 110 and"; and in line 11, after the word "Con­gress," to strike out "$1,614,562" and insert "$2,367 ,341 ".

Under the heading "Chapter XIV-In­creased Pay Costs," on page 33, after line 11, to insert:·

"Senate: ·~ 'Salaries, ·<>ftlcers and employees', $3,763,•

750;

11Contlngent expenses of' the Senate: "'Joint Committee on the Economic Re­

port', $10,985; "'Joint Committee on Atomic Energy',

$14,715; •• 'J9int Committee on Printing', for com­

piling, preparing, and indexing material for the biographical directory, $140;

"'Vice President's automobile', $325; " '·Automobile for the President pro tem­

pore', $32&; "'Automobiles for majority and minority

leaders', $650; 0 'Reporting Senate proceedings•, $10,925; .. 'Folding documents', $2,000; ••'Inquiries and investigations', including

$'7,500 authorized by Public Law 295, 84th Congress, approved August 9, 1955, $67,880;

.. 'Miscellaneous items', $15,130." On page 38, after line 6, to insert: "National Mediation Board~ National Rail­

road Adjustment Board: 'Salaries and ex­penses' (decrease of $18,000 in the limitation upon the amount available for comp.ensation and expenses of referees);".

Under the subhead "Department of De­fense-Military Functions,'' on page 42, line 12, after the numerals "$769,000", to strike out the comma and "to be derived by trans­fer from. the appropriation 'Military Person-· nel, Marine Corps'"; in line 14, after the numerals "$27,500", to strike out the com­ma and "to be derived by transfer from the appropriation 'Military personnel, Marine Corps'"; and in line, 18, after the numerals "$41,400", to strike out the comma and "to be derived by transfer from the appropria­tion 'Military personnel, Marine Corps.' ".

Under the subhead "Department' of the Navy," on page 42, in line 21, after the fig­ures "$7,400,000". to strike out the comma and "to be derived by transfer from the a:ppropriation 'Military personnel, Marine

, Corps' ", and in line 24, after the figures .. $2,180,000'', to strike out. the comma and "to be derived by transfer frE>m the, appro­priation 'Military personnel, Marine Corps'".

Under the subhead "Department of the Interior," on page 46, line 19, after the word "maintenance", to strike .out "$162,5.00" and insert "$187,500":

On page 47, line 6, after the word .. ex­penses", to strike out "$150,000" ani:i insert "$-170,000".

Mr. ·KNOWLAND. Mr. President. I suggest the absence of a quorum.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk ·wm caU the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to cali the roll.

Mr. SALTONSTALL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for the quorum call be rescinded.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

The bill is open to further amend­ment.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, I offer an amendment which I ask to have read.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will state the amendment offered by the Senator from Illinois.

The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. On page 2, after line 25, it is proposed to insert the following:.

AGRICULTURAL '.MARKETING SERVICES School.-Zunch program

For an additional amount for neeessary expenses to carry out the provisions of the National School Lunch Act, $20,000,000.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, I shall speak very briefly on the amendment. There has been approximately a 25 per­cent increase in school enrollment dur­ing the past few years; Yet during that

period the appropriations for school lunches themselves have been · kept at approximately the same figure ..

In a number of the States of the Union, including my own State of Illinois, school lunches have been discontinued during the current year because of the lack of funds. In Illinois the school-lunch pro­gram was suspended on April 7.

I ask unanimous consent to have printed at this point in my remarks a letter dated March 26, 1956. from Harold A. Wolfe, director of the school-lunch program in the State of Illinois, ad­dressed to the sponsors of the school­lunch program. The letter relates to the discontinuance of the program in Illi­nois.

There being no objection, the letter was ordered to ·be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

STATE OF ILLINOIS, SUPERINTENDENT OP'

PuBLIC INSTRUCTION, Springfield, March 26, 19-56,.

DE'AR SPONSOR: Due to a limited apportion­ment of Federal :funds for reimbursement for type A lunches, and a decided increase in P.articipation, the State agency finds tha't these funds will be exhausted after approxi­mately 7 operating days in the month of April. Therefore, only a percentage ratio of the type A indemnity will be pa:id for April's operation.

This in mo way affects funds avaflable for the special milk program whicb will be suf­ficient to assure the current indemnity rates for the' balance of this sc;:hool year.

Even though this situation exists and the schools will not receive indemnity for type A lunches f'or the balance of the school year. the Federal agen.cy has notified us that claims must be filed in the same· manner, and the same· records maintained for the balance of the school year for the following reasons:

1. To assure continued distribution of Government. donated food commodities. f.or the balance of the school year.

2. To provide the State agency with the necessary records to comply with the 3' to t matching requirements that exist for this 1955-56 fiscal year.

3. To keep the present agreement in eifect to avoid any misunderstanding for the next school yea:r's participation.

4. To assure continued reimbursement in the special milk program for the balance o.f this current school year.

Therefore, the State agency takes thfs op­portunity to impress the sponsors of the type A programs of the necessity of maintaining proper records and of filing their claim forms in the same fashion that they have previ!­ously, even though they will only receive a portion of their reimbursement :f.or the month of April and none thereafter :for this current school year.

In order to avoid any delay, we would ap­preciate the cooperation of each sponsor in properly preparing the remaining claim forms for this school year as outlined above.

Very: truly yours, HAROLD A. WOLFE,.

Director, School Lunch Program.

Mr. IX>UGLAS. Mr. President, I sin­cerely hope the amendment will be agreed to.

Mr. NEUBERGER. Mr. President, I support the amendment o:ff ered by the distinguished Senator from Illinois. The State of Oregon, which I have the honor, in part, to represent, happens to have had one of the largest proportionate in­creases in school-child population of any State in the entire Nation during the

:6212 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE April 12

past -few years. As a result, in many sections of the State, I have been in­formed, the school-lunch .pro.gram has had to be abandoned entirely because the amount of money available per child per meal has become so small that it is virtually infinitesimal . when compared with the amount which is necessary to provide adequate lunches for the children: ·

Therefore, it seems to me it is in­cumbent upon Congress to provide, some auxiliary funds for the school-lunch pro­gram, and I am very much pleased that the Senator from . Illinois has seen fit to off er an amendment to accomplish that purpose.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amend­ment offered by the Senator from Illi­nois [Mr. DOUGLAS].

Mr. HAYDEN. · Mr. President, what is the amount provided in the amendment?

Mr. DOUGLAS. The amount sug­gested by me is $~0 million. ·

Mr. HAYDEN. I am certain the Sen­ator from Illinois is aware of the fact that recently there was included in an­other bill a provision for an additional quantity of milk. for the school-lunch program. ·

Mr. DOUGLAS. I am aware of that. This amount would not be for the milk program; it would be for the school­lunch program. Excellent as milk is, some additional calories are needed.

Mr. HAYDEN. A half pint of milk is provided in the progfam at present.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I think that' is cor­rect.

Mr. HAYDEN. The Senator wants to make certain that enough milk is made available so as to provide a half pint, as has been the practice in the past.

Mr. DOUGLAS. I am, of course, in­terested in milk; but I think also that carrots, lettuce, and other green vege­tables are needed.. So I would not like to see the school-lunch program reduced merely to a milk program. Like the Senator from Vermont [Mr. AIKEN]. I am for milk; but I am for milk plus.

Mr. HAYDEN. This would be a cash contribution; 'it could be used for any purpose.

Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. HAYDEN. I yield. Mr. HOLLAND. I should like to as­

certain whether any showing has been made that an additional $20 million is required to keep the school lunch pro­gram in operation for the remainder of this year. This is a supplemental ap­propriation bill. The appropriations made by the bill for this purpose, if any, will be expended in the remaining por­tion of the year, will they not?

Mr. HAYDEN. That is correct. Mr. HOLLAND. I should like to ask

if any Senator has information as to the amounts which will be needed to ftll out the program for the remainqer of the school year; and whether $20 million is too great a sum, a sufficient sum, or an insufficient sum for that purpose.

Mr. HAYDEN. I was about to suggest to the Senator from Illinois that not hav­ing the complete. data on the subject, perhaps he .might suggest half the amount he has pl'oposed-say, $10 mil-

lion. Then it could be determined in conference whether, the . funds could come from cash or could be provided by the Commodity Credit Corporation.

Mr. DOUGLAS. That is .perfectly satisfactory to me. I merely ·point out that about 8 weeks still remain in the normal school term. In a great many States, school lunches have ceased com­pletely. Unless funds shall be added to the bill, probably there will be no more school lunches this year in a large por­tion of the country. Therefore I hope something will be done to remedy the condition. However, I am perfectly will­ing to accept $10 million instead of $20 million, with the understanding that the committee of conference will look into the matter at greater length.

Mr. HAYDEN. We; will certainly in­quire of the Department of Agriculture as to the exact situation in each State as · the Department knows the situation to be. The Department will give us the . facts on which to work. As to the mat­ter of providing funds, we can then de­termine whethe11 they wm come from cash or from the Commodity Credit Corporation.

Mr. ELLENDER. The funds would have to come from a direct appropria­tion. As the Senator knows, a few weeks ago Congress provided. $10 million for the milk fund. That amount will come from Commodity Credit Corporation funds. But this particular amount must be a direct appropriation.

Mr. HAYD:.....:N. we· can ascertain · an the facts in the committee of conference.

Under the circumstances, I shall be · glad to accept an amendment providing for $10 million, if the Senator from Il­linois will modify his amendment to that extent.

Mr: DOUGLA·s. I shall be glad to modify my amendment accordingly.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the Senator from Illinois modify his amend­ment so as to provide for $10 million instead of $20 million?

Mr. DOUGLAS. I do. Mr. SALTONSTALL. As a member of .

the committee, am I not correct in my understanding that there has been no request made of Congress by the admin­istration for this amount? The House provided nothing for this item, and the Senate Committee on Appropriations has not considered it in any way. · Mr. HAYDEN. That is correct. Mr. SALTONSTALL. I want to see

the school lunch program carried for­ward just as everybody else does, but, as the Senator from Florida has said, it should be carried forward in an orderly way. If it is the understanding of the chairman of the committee that the item appropriating additional $10 million will be taken to conference in order to get data concerning the program, that is satisfactory. I should · like to make it clear, as one prospective conferee, that if it is found out later that the money is not needed, or that it will be provided in another supplemental appropriation bill, we shall use our best judgment as to whether the item shall stay in or out of the bill. · Mr. HAYDEN. Mr. President, all I .have promised the Senate is that we shall

get. the .facts, and we shall have $1'0 mil­lion to work on until we get the facts.

Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. HAYDEN. I yield. · Mr. DOUGLAS. · Let me: add one fact

to the pile of facts the Senator is going to accumulate, namely, that the Federal contribution to the States where the pro­gram has been carried out has been re­duced from about 9 cents to 5 . cents a meal. For some reason or other, the Sec­retary of Agriculture does ·not seem to look with favor on the school:"'lunch pro­gram. If we wait until he becomes an advocate of it, we shall wait for a long time. In the meantime children are go­ing to be hungry. I think it is entirely proper for the Senate as a whole to leg­islate on the matter, and that we should not wait merely until the Secretary's recommendations are handed down. Furthermore, I want to st~te that in my own State of Illinois, funds for the cur­rent year have been exhausted. This is true of some other States as well.

Mr. AIKEN. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. HA,YDEN. I yjeld. Mr. AIKEN. I wish to support the

amendment offered by the Senator from Illinois. I do not know whether $10 million is the right amount or not. I as­sume the conferees will determine what the right amount is and settle on that figure. Also, if more money than· is needed is appropriated, it will revert to the Federal Treasury on the first of July.

I also wish to say that it looks rather bad when a statement is made that 'the ~ederal contribution per ·meal has been reduced from 9 to 5 cents a pupil. I point out that during the past few years far more in the way -of appropriations and commodities have been made avail..: able to school-lunch · programs than were ever made available before. As I understand the reason for the reduction in the per capita allowance, it is that the people of the United States have been freed from the threat of war, and there 'has been a greatly increased interest 'in community affairs. Among community interests perhaps none has been of more benefit than the school-lunch program. The result is that there are thousands of schools participating in the lunch pro­grams now, which, when we were en­gaged in war, had to be interested in other matters. There is the tremen­dous interest in community affairs which people can have when they are freed from the threat of war, and there result programs such as the school-lunch ·program. Consequently, although rec­ord appropriations have been made dur­ing the past few years for the school­lunch programs, the amounts appropri­ated have turned out to be inadequate, and some States are short of funds, and some communities in some States are short of funds. So I am glad to be in favor of the amendment. · . Mr. SALTONSTALL. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr .. HAYDEN. I yield. Mr. SALTONSTALL. The Senator

from Vermont is a close friend of the present Secretary of Agriculture, and has been.with him on many, many occa­sions. There is certainly no evidence

,•

'. \

1956 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 6213 that the present Secretary. is against the· school-lunch prog.ram, is there?

Mr. AIKEN. None whatsoever. The Secretary of Agriculture has to cut the cloth to flt the condition. I do not think that is quite the way to say it, but there has been such a tremendous increase in the school-lunch program that, neces­sarily, he has had to reduce the amount available to each pupil. . I hope the Appropriations Committee, in making the appropriation for next year, will anticipate, so far as possible, what the requirements for fiscal 1957 will be, and will make adequate appropria-tions. · , . . ·

Mr. HAYDEN. The Senator can be sure that the Senator from Georgia will take the matter up. Hearings on the agricultural appropriation bill will start next week'.

Mr. AIKEN. I · know that will be done. For years there has not been a vote against an appropriation for the school-lunch program in either House. So far as I know, the appropriations bills have been going through both Houses without a dissenting vote. If one of us has made a mistake on the amount ap­propriated, the other 95 Senators have also made a mistake.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amend­ment of the Senator from Illinois, as modified. . _

The amendment, as modified, was agre~to. · . ·

The .PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill is open to further amendment.

Mr. WILLIAMS. · Mr. President, I send an amendment to the . desli and ask to have it stated.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The amendment of the Senator from Del­aware will be stated.

The CHIEF CLERK. On page 4, it is proposed to strike out lines 10, 11, and 12, as fallows: ·

OPERATING-DIFFERENTIAL SUBSIDIES

For an additional amount for "Operating­ditferential subsidies,'' $30,000,000, to remain available unttl . expended.

Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I shall speak very briefly on the amendment. First, I wish to comment on the previous

· action of the Senate. The Senator from Illinois m.ade a rather eloquent address

- in the Senate a few moments .ago with regard to the fact that the ·84th Congress is giving very little, if any, attention to reducing the appropriation bills. He gave the Senate a rather strong lecture on the need for economy; however, I can­not refrain ·from calling the attention of my good friend from Illinois to the fact that there is a slight inconsistency be­tween his remarks and the action of the Senate in accepting his amendment. I call attention to the fact that the action of the Senate a few minutes ago in ac­cepting the amendment of the Senator from Illinois, which provided for an ap­propriation of $10 million, was for an item as to the need for which there was not one bit of evidence, either before the Appropriations Committee or before the Senate as based upon the statement of the Senator from Illinois. That is a glaring instance of fiscal irresponsibility to which the Senator from Illinois has

referred. I most respectfully recom- 21 of the. report on the second supple.. mend that my friend read his ow:Q mental appropriation bill. . . . lecture. It strikes me, Mr. President, that it is

Mr. President, the amendment which high time that those committees which I am offering strikes out an appropria- require such huge suins for their so­tion of $30 million for operating-differ- called inquiries and investigations should ential -subsidies for the merchant ma- be required to appear before the Appro­rine. The reason I am offering the priations Committee to justify and prove amendment is that in the bill and -the their case before money is made avail­report there is no data which would sup- able to them. Port the item. I have discusse.d this It is my hope,. Mr. President, that in with members of the Committee on Ap- the light of these huge expenditures for propriations and understand there is inquiries and investigations, a little more agreement to accept my amendment. . attention will -.be paid to the actual ne­This amendment would reduce the ap- . cessity for some of these. app:ropriations, propriation by $30 million. not only by the Committee on Rules and

The.· PRESIDING. OFFICER. The Administration, but by the committees question is on .agreeing to the amend-1 which instigate these investigations. It

· ment of the ·Senator from Delaware on is also my hope that instead of resolu­page 4, to strike out lines 10, 1i, and 12. tions for investigation expenditures be­

Mr. HAYDEN. Mr. Pl·esident, we ac- ing referred only to the Committee on cept the amendment. R 1 d d · ·

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The u es an A mm1stration by committees question is on agreeing to . the . amend- of the Senate which seek . authority for ment. these investigations, the Appropriations

The amendment was agreed tO. Committee will be permitted to have a The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill say in the matter. I hope to propose the

. is open to further amendment. adoption of such a procedure in the next If there be no further amendment t~ session of the Congress. After all, Mr.

President, if the Committee on Appro­be offered, the question is on the en- priations is to fully perform its tasks, it grossment of the amendments and the third reading of the bill. should be permitted to pass upon the

The amendments were ordered to be need for additional funds. It should not engrossed and the bill to be read a third be required to merely rubberstamp a time. · · , fait accompli . .

The bill <H. R. 10004) was read the third time and passed. : ORDER FOR RECESS TO MONDAY

Mr. HAYDEN. Mr. President, I inove that the Senate insist upon its amend­ments, request a conference with the

. House thereon, an(} that the Chair ap..­point conf e'rees .on · the part o'f the Seri.-ate. - ·

The motion was agreed to; and t:Pe · Presiding Officer appointed Mr. HAYDEN, Mr. RussELL, Mr. CHAVEZ, Mr. ELLENDER, Mr. BRIDGES, Mr. SALTONSTALL, and Mr. YOUNG conferees ·on the part of the Sen­ate.

Mr. ELLENDER subsequently said: Mr. President, I regret very much that while the second supplemental appro-

. priation bill was being considered by the Senate, I was called off the floor. It was my desire to invite the atten.:. · tion of the Senate to another appro­priation of $600,000 for inquiries and in­vestigations. It will be recalled that a total of $900,000 was added to the $1,224,000 that was provided in the reg­ular appropriation bill, bringing the

. total as of that time to $2,124,000. I wish to call the Senate's attention to the fact that for 1955 the entire amount of money tha_t was appropriated and spent for inquiries and investigations amounted to $2,059,150. With the ap­propriation that is carried in this sec­ond supplemental appropriation bill the sum of money that will be spent this . flscal year for inquiries and investiga­tions will total $2,724,000. ,

That is almost three-quarters of a mil­lion dollars more than was spent last year. I wish to point out that the Com­mittee on Appropriations has very little control over these appropriations, be­cause the expenditures are made and au­thorized by the Senate, irrespective of what amount happens to be in the c')n­tingent fund. The fact is noted on page

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-- dent, I ask unanimous consent that when the Senate concludes its business today · it stand in recess until Monday next, at 12 o'clock meridian. i

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

PARTICIPATION BY THE UNITED STATES IN THE FOOD AND AGRI­CULTURE ORGANIZATION AND INTERNATIONAL LABOR ORGANI­ZATION

. Mr. _JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, I ask unanimous consent that the Senate proceed to the consideration of Order No. 1184, Senate joint Resolution 97, and that it be made the unfinished business.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The joint resolution will be stated by title

· for th~ information of the Senate . The CHIEF CLERK. A joint resolution

<S. J. Res. 97) to amend certain Jaws providing for membership and participa­tion by the United States in the Food and Agriculture Organization and In­ternational Labor Organization and au­thorizing appropriations therefor.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the request of the Senator from Texas?

There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the joint resolu­tion.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the amend­ment heretofore proposed by the Senator from Louisiana [Mr. ELLENDER], to insert a new section on page 2, after line 5.

Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­dent, for the information o_f the Senate,

6214: CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENA-TE April 12

I should like to say it is not contemplated eral. years-continued through the second that any further business will be trans-- half of 1955. acted today. Under the order previously The report attempts to support this entered, when the Senate concludes its theme by various economic indicators. business today, it will recess until Mon- The first supporting statement is that: day next. It may be that on Monday the Throughout most of 1955 the trend of unfinished business will be set aside, but I · business failures was downward. desired to have some business pending, and for that reason I made the request which I have just made.

DISTORTED PICTURE DRAWN BY SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRA­TION'S REPORT ON SMALL BUSI­NESS Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I wish

to make a brief statement regarding a distorted picture which has been drawn by the Small Business Administration's report on small business.

I am chairman of the Small Business Subcommittee of the Committee on Banking and Currency. This subcom­mittee is primarily concerned with legis­lation governing the program of the Small Business Administration. In the last session_ of this Congress we acted upon bills to extend and modify the Small Business Act of 1953, and during the early weeks of. the present session we reported proposed legislation to expand the disaster roan -activity of the Small Business Administration. As Chairman of the Small Business Subcommittee, I maintain a continuing interest in the Small Business Administration; and I feel it a duty to discuss with the Senate a recent action by that agency.

Let us look at the facts. Here are the statistics on business failures for the last 6 years-President's Economic Re­port of January 24, 1956, page 231: 1949 _______________________________ 9,246

1950_______________________________ 9, 162 1951 _______________________________ 8,058 1952 _______________________________ 7,611

1953_______________________________ 8.862 1954 _______________________________ 11,086 1955 _______________________________ 10,969

I think that anyone looking for the true significance of these figures could draw three very simple conclusions:

First. The number of business failures was dropping steadily from 1949 through 1952; in fact, the number of failures in 1952 was almost 18 percent lower than the number in 1949;

Second. The number of business fail­ures has been rising significantly from 1952 through 1955; in fact, the number of failures in 1955 was over 44 percent higher than the number in 1952; and

Third. In no year since 1~41 have there been more business failures than there were in 1954 and 1955.

Based on these facts, I think the report could have more properly stated that "Although there were 117 fewer business failures in 1955 than there were in 1954, 10,969 failures is alarmingly high. Since virtually all of these failures occur among small businesses, vigorous action is nec­essary to halt the rising failure rate which began in 1953."

The second supporting statement in 1the report is that: ·

Section 215 of the Small Business Act of 1953 requires that once every 6 months the administration shall make a report upon the activities of the agency, and shall include, ·among other things, "such comments and recommendations as the administration may deem appropriate;" I have before me the Fifth Semiannual New business incorporations hit a new Report made by the Small Business Ad- peak. ministration; and if the total import Mr. President, everyone knows that were not so tragic, I would be greatly our economy is expanding, and that it amused by the "comments" deemed · must expand to accommodate our rising "appropriate" in this fourth year of the population and our enormous responsi­great Eisenhower crusade. bilities in a troubled world. Thus, a real-

Mr. President; this document was re- · istic 'indicator of the expansion of our leased on April 2, 1956, with all the fan- · economy is not the number of "new busi­fare of a soap salesman's announcement ness incorporatrons", but is the net in­of a new product which will wash clothes crease in the number of active business without getting them wet. I have come : firms. Here are the facts, as revealed on to expect exaggerated claims of success · page 231 of the President's Economic from the present caretakers of the exe- · Report of Janl:lary 24, 1956: cutive branch, and it seems that they . Net increase will never learn the old maxim about of o-perating not fooling all of the people all of the · Year: businesses time. 1949----------------------~----- 52,ooo

Mr. President, I am not fooled by this 1950---------~-:._______________ 50, ooo phony advertisement; and I want to · 1951----------.------------------ 58, ooo spread on the RECORD the dismal picture · 1952---------------------------- 59• 000 1953 ____________________________ 26,000

of how well a big-business administra- 1954---------------------------- -4, ooo tion functions as a small-business un- 1955 ___________________ "7 _______ .:. (1)

dertaker. I shall concentrate ·on five · i Not available. fantastic claims, supported by ·half-truths, appearing :fn. the Fifth Semian- · Although :final ,figures for 1955 are not nual Report of the Small Business- Ad- , available, it appears that the increase in ministration. business firms for 1955 will be no higher

The principal theme of the report ·is , than that in 1953. · · st'ated on page 1, as follows: Here are the tragic conclusions which

The improvement in the position of small must be drawn from these statistics: business which took form in mid-1954-after First. From 1949 through 1952, the a decline in .small-.business health ·o¥er .sev- · number 'Of operating businesses was in-

creasing at a rate commensurate with the necessary expansion of our competi· tive economy,, and. the. average increase was about 55,000 for these 4 years;

Second. Beginning . in 1953 the in­cr~ase in the number of operating busi­nesse~ declined over · &O percent; and in 1954 there was a net reduction in the number of operating businesses; and

Third. Nineteen hundred and fifty­four is the only year since 1943 in which there has b~en a reduction in the number of operating businesses in -this country.

If the present administration had any inclination to be honest with the Ameri­can people, the comment in -the report should read something like this:

The sharp drop in the increase of operat­ing businesses experienced in 1953 and 1954 is completely inconsistent with the needs o:t :an expanding competitive economy. While gross national product has reached unprecedented levels, the fruits o:t this pro­duction are becoming concentrated in the hands of fewer entrepreneurs. Consequent­ly, the administration urges the Congress to explore this threat to the survival and growth of larger numbers of business units, and we pledge our support in finding some solution to this inconsistency in the devel­opment of our free-enterprise system.

But, Mr. President, what did the Con­gress receive? A false analysis of the situation, and no recommendation what-soever. . '

A third comment by the administra­tion is that :

There was sharp improvement in small firms' .earnings, both before and after taxes.

I do not know why the "before taxes" situation is stressed, when all of us know "that earnings "after taxes" constitute the only meaningful measure of business

. success. Consequently, I shall cite the record on earnings .after taxes for large businesses and small businesses. based up9n data extracted from the SBA re­port. The bias in favor of large con­cerns is a computation which I have

_made for purpose of comparison: - United States manufacturing corporations

earnings (after taxes) by asset size [Ind~x-1947-49=100) -

Assets Assets Bias in Yeart under over favor·of Avcr-

$1 $1 large age million million concerns

----. -,---1------------19-17 _____ ____________ _

1948 ______ - - ---- ------' 1949. _________________ _

1950 ____ . ----- --- - - ---1951.. __________ ---- ·-4th quarter 1952. ____ _ 4th quarter 1953 _____ _ 4th quarter 1954 ____ _ 1st quarter 1955 _____ _

•· t Annually 1947-51.

98 103 ,55

122-90 8& 49 59 68

143 112

• 90 130 106 103 103 119 127

451 19 3~ ' 22

10 17

~ } 58

Mr. President, this record of earnings over the past 9 years shows quite clearly what has happened to small-business

. earnings since · 1953. \Vhile the bias· in

. favo:r of. big business aiveraged only 22

. inqe~ :point~ for the ,period 1947-52, this bias averaged almost 58 index points for 'the years 1953~ 1954., and 1955:. The bias in earnings in favor of big business has alm:ost tripled throughout tpe 3 years of 'this big-business administration. I can-not conceive how anyone- could look at

''

, . r ,, ' ~

"·-t ' ..

1956 CONGRESSIONAL -RECORD - - SENATE 6215 this record and could report to the Con­gress that "there was a sharp improve­ment in small firms' earnings." It is true that the small business earnings index is up, as compared with the index for 1954; but the index for 1955 is still far below the index for 1952; and the dis­parity between the index for small firms and the index for large firms continues to be outrageously high.

The record· of earnings on stockhold­ers' equity. is equally distressing; and this leads me to the fourth comment by the Small Business Administration. The report, doing its best to paint a rosy picture for small business, contains a feeble statemerit that-

Beg_inning in 1954 .and througb 1955 there · was an improvement for both smaller and

larger corporations. ·

After examining the data on page 16 of the report, I can well understand why the administration shies away from this subject. This is the data on page 16 to which I have .added a column showing bias in favor of large concerns: United States manufacturing corporations

earnings (after taxes) on stockholders' equity by asset size '

[Expressed in percentage]

Assets Assets Bias 1n under over favor of Aver-

Annual rate for year $I mil- $I mil· large age li<cm lion . concerns

----'-'----·!-----------1947 -~---------·-------- 10.3 · 15. 5 ' 0.8

): · mt:::::::::i= =~ == = 12.6 16. 3 3..,

·' :1.0 10. 6 3 .. 6 2. 8 1950 ____ - ____ :._·:<.. _:._ -- 12.5 15. 7 3. 2

~-ii~:===~=~~=~=;=~= = ; 1l .. o 12. 6 3.6 7.fJ 10. 6 2.-7 , _, 7.'l · 10: 8 - 3. 1 } 1954 ___ : _ -~ : _____ : ___ - 5.A ' 10.3 4. 9 4. 7 1955 _________________ - 6.9 12.3 5. 4

These data show that the percentage of earnings on stockholders' equity has declined 1 percent for small businesses from 1952 to 1955, but that the percent­age for large business has increased 1.7 percent . during the same period. Fur­thermore, the average bias in favor of large firms throughout the period 1947-52 was only 2.8 percent, whereas this

· bias has averaged 4.7 percent over the years 1953, 1954, and 1955. Why does

· Iiot the administration admit this sorry record and try tq do something about

·· it? No good can ·come from conceal-. ing the truth-even· when · tn_e : tr~th. ·

hurts. It is becoming apparent that. the , farmers of this Nation are awakening

to the truth of· the-Eisenhower:..Benson · farm philosophy.;~ahd the truth of "- the Eisenhower-Humphrey-Weeks business philosophy is gradually emerging in spite of the reams of camouflaging prop­aganda emanating from the executive agencies.

Mr. President, the fifth comment which I wish to discuss in detail concerns the net sales of manufacturing corpora­tions. The SBA report states that-

Net sales of smaller manufacturing corpo­rations, those with assets under $1 million, continued their recovery during 1955.

With big business sales at such high levels, something had to trickle down to the little fellow. The following statis­tics ·are based upon data extracted from

page 14 of the report; and I have added a column to show bias in favor of large concerns.

I ask unanimous consent to have the table printed in the RECORD at this point as a part of my remarks.

There being no objection, the table was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: United States manufacturing corporations

net sales by asset size [Index-1947-49=100]

' Assets Assets Bias 1n

Year 1 under over favor of Aver-$1mil- $1 mil- large age

lion lion concerns --------

1947 ___ _______________ 94 100 (I

) 1!148 _______ - ---- ----- - 105 107 2 1949 _____ - ---------- -- 97 100 3 15 195() _____ ___________ - - 104 120 16 1951 ____ - - ---- - - --- - - - 115 140 25 4th quarter 1952 ______ 115 150 35 4th quarter 1953 ______ 97 146 49 } 4th quarter 1954 ______ 103 150 47 49 3d quarter 1955 _______ 108 158 50

There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: SMALL BUSINESS--BARNES APPLAUDS GAIN IN

SALES oF NEW IssuEs BUT FAILS To REVEAL WHOLE STORY

(By Ralph Hendershot) In his report to President Eisenhower,

Wendell B. Barnes, administrator of ·the Small Business Administration, appeared to take a great deal of satisfaction from the increase in the amount of new capital raised for companies under his observation in 1955. This total, he said, amounted to $269 million, as compared with $195 _million the year be­fore.

Mr. Barnes called 1955 a banner year and observed that "this indicates that new op­portunities which have not existed since 1929 have been ·opened for common stock financ­ing for small companies. This is ci.ue to the lessened attractiveness of well-established issues to many investors because of the high levels of the market and the opp9rtunities for capital gains in smaller issues."

This department would like to be as pleased over the 1955 results of security flota-

1Annually 1947-51. tions for small companies as Mr. Barnes. Mr. MORSE. These statistics show But it can't enthuse over market conditions

that the sales of small businesses were which make it necessary for these small con­slightly better in 1955 than in 1953 and cerns to pay 25 percent or more for their 1954; but small business sales for 1955 money. Nor can it get excited over the fact

that only a small percentage of the enter­are still far below their sales for 1951 and prises needing ·long-term capital, even at 1952. The true significance of these sue~ high costs, are· able· to get it. statistics could be stated as follows:

The big business bias in the indices of net WHERE FAULT LIES sales of United States manufacturing corpo- The fault, of course; does not lie with Mr. rations has increased alarmingly in recent' Bar~es, although we .. suspec_t he .. is but a years . . This bias aver9:gec). only 15 irid~x . casua~ observer in ,this phase ef small com• points through the y~ars 1947-52, ·but has pany operations: · Rather, .the basic reason jumped to an average of 49 index points for wliy small companies fare so badly at the the years 1953, t 9$4, and 1955. The trend new capital feed bunks in Wall Street is that to sales dominance - by-: large firms ts· con- foader.s in t.Q.e investment_ banking field ~iye sisterit with· increases "in earnings and return , such concerns little or ·no-attention. · • · 'on investment which have also characterized - Small companies -and the firms' which' seek big business activity since 1953. to raise capital for them are the orphans of

Wall Street. They are shunned by the better Mr. President, that would be a true underwriting houses as though they had the

story of the big business crusade---or as plague. This is trµe no matter how worthy it is more properly described, the small the proposed financing may be. Even the business funeral march. I could go on soundest of the little companies seeking at greater length, in rebuttal of the financial aid are sent to the other side of the Small Business Administration's claims railroad tracks where, if they are lucky, they of success in the fields of financial as- may get the funds they require. sistance, Government procurement, pro- couLn HELP SITUATION duction and management assistance, and Wall Street is geared for big business, and other activities of ·the Small Business the big houses can ·hardly be expected to Administration. But the proof of: the bother too much with the smaller concerns.

th t . d t d' Such financing would cost them money. But pudding is-in e ea mg, an he IS- the leaders in the field should be sufficiently tressed condition of the small business interested in small corporations to see to it community is .. a~ple proof of -the. in-.·- that provision·s are made for their ·accom-effectiveness of .the present administr.a- m(!dations~ - .- ,· , . .~." . ; '.,., . tion in dealing •with small business It is a big ass-ignment to be sure but it is .,. problems. The record of·the last 3 years a highly important one. Our big companies shows what is bound to happen when a were small once but the majority of them got tomcat is expected'to look after the gold- ~ their start when income taxes were either fish while the family is away from home. · .SW~ll_or nonexis~en~. As_ a ,r"'sult tbey were When the family returns, there· will be · able to gr~w by plowing· earnings· .back (nto

their properties. Those days are gone and. no goldfish. And if the policies of the our small concerns today have little hope for present administration are continued, growth unless they get a lift with long-term small businesses can expect to be capital from the investing public. crushed or swallowed whole by the fat We would have been better pleased with cats of the business world. Mr. Barnes' report if he had put basic con-

Let us hope that the next report of the ditions in the new capital field on the line Small Business Administration will show for the President. some awareness of the true situation, and Mr. MORSE. While on the subject of that it will contain some recommenda- recommendations, it seems quite appro­tions for dealing with the situation. priate to remind the Senate of a very sig·

Mr. President, I ask unanimous con· nificant bill now pending in the Finance sent to have published at this point in · Committee. This bill, s. 3129, was my remarks an article by Ralph Hender- introduced by the chairman of the Bank· shot, financial editor of the New York ing and currency Committee, the Sena­World-Telegram and Sun, on April 7, tor from Arkansas [Mr. FuLBRIGHT]. I 1956. . was pleased to join the Senator from

".

6216 co:NGIIBssioN.A:c :RE·coRn - sENATE April 12 Arkansas in this· bill, as were severai othei- Senators interested in the prob­lems of small businesses. In addition to the Senator from Arkansas and me, the cosponsors include Senators S:PAR~N, CAPEHART, HUMPHREY, WILEY, KENNEDY, SMATHERS~ BEALL, LEHMAN, and DOUGLAS. We are an convinced that this bill gets to the very heart of the difficulties plaguing small businesses. .

This Nation has grown strong through the efforts and initiative of thousands of private producers, competing honorably under laws which reward the .enterprise of free men. But when these laws be­come so biased~~ in thefr application · to business units, that the growth of large units is enhanced and the growth or sur­·vival of small units is threatened, then I say that· the free economy we have known is in grave 'danger.. I have heard many people bemoan,the size of the Fed:. eral Government and speak of the "dead hand of bureaucracy," meaning Govern,­ment bureaucracy. While such a warn­ing deserves our attention, I am far more disturbed at the prospect of big business bureaucracy and the dead hand it lays upon the brow of small business.

Tax relief is a direct answer to this threat, and I believe that S. 3129 pro­poses a: reasonable redistribution of the corporate tax burden, without reducing the overall Federal revenue. At this

tions $100 mi1i1on and over '1.4 cents per 'dollar}. Smaller corporations also losing out in volume of sales, increased only 3 per':' cent 1954-55-, as against 19 percent for l~ge corporations. Large corporation grea.tly ex­ceeds· smalnn ratios· of profit on investment'. (Second qui:trter of 1955: 5.3 percent for small, 13.5 percent for large.) , Number of new firms- decUnes: Annual in~ crease of new firms 55,000, 1948 to 1952; only 28,300 from 1954 to 1955. _

Business ..!allures: Increasing. exclusively small businesses. In 1945, 809; 1953, 8,862; -19-54, 11,086; 1955, 10,969.

Mergers also increasing. Dexter M. Keezer, -vtee president, McGraw-Hill Publishing Co.: "Maintaining · this rate (present corporate tax rate) means that ·you are going to have

·1arger· corporate unitS' at the expense of smaller units, a matter of gr.eat social,, polit­ical and economic significance."

Effect of a normal tax rate , oJ ZZ percent and a S'lfrtax rate of 31 percent

I

Fre.~ent Ero posed Change tax tax

Income liability liability subject to (normal (normal

rate 30 rate 22 normal tax percent, percent, Per-and surtax surtax surtax Amount cent rate 22 rate 31

percent) percenO --

$5,000.. •••• ~ -- $I, 500 $1, 100 -$400 -26. 7 $10,()()0 ____ ___ .!. 3,000 2,200 -800 -26. 7 $15,000..---··-- 4,500 3,300 -l,200 -2.6, 7 $20,()()Q ________ 6,000 4,400 -1. 600 -20. 7 $25,()()() ________ 7,500 5,500 -2,000 -26. 7 $50,00Q.. ______ 20,500 18, 750. -1, 750 -8.5

cently released · by the Small Business Administration. .

So far as the Senator from Oregon is concerned, this is a vital issue which the American people ought to face be­tween now and '-November- if they wish "to maintain a healthy economy, to the advantage of small business as well as large business. · · ·

. ~J; •• FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, first ·1 should like to congratulate the Sena­tor from Oregon [Mr. MORSE] on his ·analysis of the report of the .Small Busi­·ness Administration. He is a true friend ·of small business-or, rather, I should -say, ·of-a free democratic· economy. He has done a great job as chairman of the ·Small Business Subcommittee. I should , also like to express my agreement with his thesis that the present administra• tion is biased int favor of big business and is attempting to cover up this bias with a publicity campaign which seeks to relate the prosperity _of all s~gments of the economy to that which is indis­putabl~ being enjoyed by b_ig . business.

I have read the press release of the Small Business Administration and note that its opening line is as follows:

A steady improvemen~ in the position of -small b.usiness, as smalleP. fir-ms--continued to share· in •the overall .national prosperity, .was noted by Wendell B: Barnes, Adminis­trator of. 'the Sma:U Business 'AdminiStration.

point in my remarks'! ask to have printed _ .. The Senator has. a.Jx~dy. analyzed this a summary of the needs !Or and the report and shewn this statement to be

$100,000 •• _____ ' . 46, 500 45, 250 -ti)250 -2.1 $225,0QO _______ 111, 500 111, 500 ' (1) . $500,QOO __ ___ 2M,500 257,250 +2, 750 . +1.1

effects of S. 3129, and I · commend · it to false, and I shall not repeat his-analysis. the thoughtful consideration of all Mem-· · However~ there is onff · aspe-ct · ot the

$1,00(1,000 _____ 514, 500 522, 250 +7,750. +1.5 $10,000,00Q.'.._ - - 5, 194, 500 5,292,250 +97, 790 +1.9 $100,000,000. __ 51, 994, 500 52,992,25() +997, 750 +I.9

bers of the Senate. economy which is so bad~ that even the There being no objection, the summary r No change. public-relations people in the ·· adminiS-

was oredered to be printed in the REC- Mr~ MORSE.. Mr. President, in clos- tration could not ignore itL The SBA ORD, as follows: ing my remarks on this subject, I wish handout and · the report itself ·both say EQ'5ITABLE READJUSTMENT OF TAX BURDEN FOR to SaQ, as chairman of the Subeommit- -that.-

SMALL BUSINESS WITHOUT REVENUE Loss . tee on Sn:all Business Of the Commit- r Small businessea cotnpTu.in of ,inabilit~ to Sponsored by Senators Fm.BRIGHT, SPARK- .• tee on Bankin~ al}d Currency, and as a obtain steel, steel scrap, alumLnum, copper,

MAN, CAPEHART, HUMPHREY, KE'NNEDY, BEAL.L, member of the Select Committee on nickel, lead, newsprint, plate glass, and oth~r DUFF, MORSE~ SMATHERS, LEHMAN, DOUGLAS, : Small .Businecs 'of the Senate, that I in- materials. and WILEY. · They complain also of higher prices., such

Present law provides noqnal tax rate of ' tend to continue to maintain a vigilant as f.or steel scrap. which. they are unable to 30 percent, surtax rate ·or 22 · ·percent; ·The · '. wa'tch over the representations and mi~- · absorb: They potnt out that the hlstorlca1-first $25,000 is ex:empt:"from surtax. representations of the present adminis- · allotment system used by suppliers discrimi­

. The -amendment reduces the normal cor- tration as ·to the economic-condition in -nates against small firms- beeause they a:re poration tax .rate to-22 percent, and increases which American small business finds it- · unable to obtain greater, allotments. and. if the surtax-to 3L pereent., The -31·. percent self. ' they are new users, sometlme& ~re~not" able

. rate would apply .ta income. over·$2ti,OOO. On the ba~is of hearings before . mv to get supplies at all. Shortages; bottlenecks, Effect on. revenue: In.crease by $20 mil.lion , "t' "' , and.... price increases which -are. chara.cteristic

a year. . . subcommittee, and on the basis: of the of a boom economy belie the threat of reces-Effect on corporations: See table. Exam- .record Wllich has been made by small sion, despite the sag in some individual sec­

ples: Corporations with incomes .. $5-,000' an~ . business witnesses who have come from · tors which may occur'; like· that in the anto-less .. save:~.uao, .26Jl .percent;. .$15.00t>, .save · across the country to ·testify before us, . motive field. ·

As the. Senator knows, the President.'s ' economic report and' other' statements

$1,200, 26.'Z percent; $25,000, save $2000, 26.7 I am · convinced that on many of the c

percent; smaller savings on incomes up to . main streets of America today there is $225,000;. slight increase on incomes abo'!e . already a deep recession among small-$225.ooo. · b · t of the administration have spoken in

Number affected:. Latent figures ( 1952 i~- business men. Many usmessmen oday come tax returns) shaw <mt of 672,071 active _on the ·main streets of America .are car­coi:parations only, 13,194-earned over $25~- rying -a large percentage of the con­ooo. This. proposal would reduce t~es· for 9~ . sumers of their. respective- communities percent of all corporations, with no revenue . on .the .cuff. More than $40 billion of loss. · · , , consumet credit- is now on the books of

NEED the businessmen. of: the country., with ,:'hree sources of small business capital: ' more than $12 billion of it on wheels

Equity, loans, and retain~d earnings. Ell- th h" h f A · · "d pense of raising equity of ~300,000 _in s~cu- on e ig w~ys 0 me:rica · m unpa1 -rities market; 20. to 3°' percent. Large cor- for cars. Compare the more than $40 poratlon :financing may be fraction ot. ·1 pet- . billion of consumer credit today with cent; -iO to 50 times as expensive to small the _:figure of $7 billion as recently as corporations. Loans: 6 percent or higher for . 1939. In the light of such comparison, small, 3¥,i or 4 percent for large.. • . I say tpat it is a great disservice on. the

Small corporations are, therefore, moi:e . part of: this adminiStration to the peo-dependent on retained earnings, yet earn l Ies~ per- doliar of sales. (Second quarte~ of : ple Of .ttie country to. lnis ead them by 1955 corporations with ·assets under $250,000 ...the . kind. of soe.P. ·-salesmanship to be

. earned 1.1. cerits per .doI)Jl.r. of sales; corpora- found in the pages -of the re part re-

· g:towing·terms about alleged price stabil­, ity~ It is a very simple ~atter to deter­, mine that this price stability has been · at the expense of the smail businesses ~ and the farmers of this country.

These statements gloss over- a sedotts ' situatioh which nas be.en developing and which threatens the abnity of small busi­

. nesses. to compete and ultimately threat­ens the. le:vel of conswner prices and the

_stability of the dollar. This factor is the constant increase in materials prices. As the Senatol! k:qo.ws .. there are very few

r.small-bu,sin,ess pr:o~ucers of basic mate­rials. On the contrary, most small busi­nesses are purchasers of materials which

~ they ' fabricate or process, or they are · wholesalera and ·retaiiers:

1056 .. . - . '~ .... - . - . . .. - .,. . ":'\

CONGRESSIONAl RECORD - SENA T-E 6217. I have a tabie -which' shows industrial

whole price indexes, with.1947-49 as· 100, for various commodit1es for the year · 1952, for- January· 1955, and Februazy · 1955_. I should like to insert : into the RECORD -a few of these indexes. ·

..

I ask Unanimous consent that the 'entire· tabl~ be inserted in ·the REcoiip at this· point. . .

There beln~ no objection, the table . was ordered to. be printed in the RECORD, .as follows; ·

-months have passed sfnce .Colonel Nasser ari­~nounced tha~ he would limit to 30 the num­' ber o! Sovi.e.t tecpnici.ans admi.tted to EgyP,t , to _ train Egyptian fo~c.es i.n the . use of the modern weapons mitensiply .$>Id to Egypt by the Communist bloc. .The Associated Press

·reported from Carro· sevei:aI weeks · ago ·that , there were alreacl,y 150.. We have reliable

1952 January December February: and imdisputed information that. the actual

1955 1955 1956 :number is close to 3,000 select.Russian, Czech, Polish, and East German officers posing as

All commodities o.ther than farm products and fqocL__ 113. 2 115. 0 ·146. 0 161. 5 144.3 140. 8 120.0 116.6 116.3 110.0 106.2 130.1 135. 8

119. '1 151.0 233. 5 152. 7 158.1

technicians. · . u~~f "In addition to substantial numbers of jet 185: 1 bombers and fighters and other heavy mili· 152. 7 . tary equi.pment~ Russian. submarines sup· ~~- ~ posedly solg to Egypt are going to enter the lil3, 8 · Mediterranean. Nasser says these are for the 125. 4 _purpose of defending Egypt agai.nst Israel's 116.-8 fieet. • • • The truth is that tbey form a ug~ ~ -constant threat to the American Sixth Fleet 148: 8 in the Mediterranean. Egypt has never had 121. 8 submarine sailors. These craft will be 170:6 manned.and officered by Russians, just as the }g~~~ . whole Egyptian military machine will be 153. 3 directed by the technicians.

07 07-11--02 07-21-01

·01-21-11 08-1 08-14-01 09

Rubber and rubber products__________________________ 134. O No. 1 ribbed smoked sheets of natural rubber_____ 191. 9 Passenger tires· ___ :_ ___ :. __________ ~-- ---~ --~----- . 130. 4 Truck and bus tires_______________________________ 136. 1

Lumber .. --,---------~------------------------------ 120. 5" . 126.4 133. 8 123.6 114.2 1.1.9.3 143. 9 147. 2 126. 4 170. 3 154.8 155. 8 153. 3 204.4 159.1 156.0 133.1 1~.o 133. 0 126. 5 143. l 148. 5 141. 5 125. 4 131.1 132. 3· 144, 6

Red oak flooring ________________ .____________ _____ 112. 6 Pulp paper and allied products _______ ·-------.---- ~ ----- · 119. 6 -

Woodpulp ________ -------------- ------------------ 111. 5 09-1 09-52 Paper bags and shipping sacks.------------------- 114. 9 10 Metals and metal products ____________________ _-_ _____ 123. 0 10-1 10-12 10-13 .

Iron and steeL.---------------------------------'-- 124. 7 Iron and steel scrap.------------------------------- H4. 2 il4.5

158. 7 144.6 127.9 142.6 142.6 136. 5 124.3 118. 7 117.8 125. 8 121. 5 133. 2 135.1 128'. 6

Semifinished steel products·----------------------- 131. 2 10-14 10-'-2 10-22-01 10-22-06 10-25 10-26 10-5 10-7

Finished steel products _____ ~------------·----"-----· 127. 2 Nonferrous.metals... ____ ______________ :, ______ ~--- -- 123. 5

~~~:Yu~o~~~=====================·===~====== m: g 204.4 "The same mistakes .that resulted in the }~~~ ! .loss of China and most of the Far East ~o 133. 1 · communism are being committed again. 128:8 , Unless we substitute a new bold I?Olicy, we

Nonferrous mill shapes-------------- ~ ---·----.------ 125. 3 Wire and cable.. ___ , _____ __ .._ __ . __ ~--·---------------- 122. 9 Plumbing equipment ____________________ ____ .______ 117. 4 Fabricated structural metal products ____ .__________ 115. 1

. 11 Machinery and motive prodwts ___________ ~ ____ .:_____ 121. 5 13315 . will lose the Middle East too." · · 11-1 11-2 11-3 11-4 13 13-1 13-22 13-4

. Agricultural maehinery·and equipment:__________ 121. 6 }~~'. ~ - Although this warning was issued nearly 151; 1 . 2 months ago; the ,most recent utterance by 141. 7 . Secretary Dulles on this subject was a defense 121~ 2 , of Egypt's military dictator, Col. Gamal Abdel }~~j Nasser, as a "patriotic nationalist."

Construction machinery and equipment: ... ~----- = 125. 4 Metalworking machinery and equipment_________ 128. 5

- General purpose machinery and equipment.-.. ~--:. 122. ti Nonmeta'llic minerals, structiiraL_~_.: ______ _,.___________ 113. 6 122. 0

- FlateJ~i:it======== = = = =============~======:====== _ ---- ~ ~~~~~ _ 123. 9 129. 9 135. 8 145. 6 And yet this is what Dictator Nasser's Structural clay products. _______________ . ___ .:______ 122. 0

. Radio Cairo has been trumpeting to his Ar~b

Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, I ~ also have noticed in newspapers recent ·statements of profits of some of the com:· panies which are producers of these

· materials:

i ' Net income

Company _ 1954

~ Kemiecott Copper_~~-------- ~ $.77, 906, 288 Anaconda Co ... ..:-----~------- 26, 653,,085 . Phelps Dodge __________ __ _._! __ 41, 249,391 Aluminum Company of . . America ________ _ ___________ 46,.471, 470 Kaiser Aluminum & ChemJcaL 14, Ol 5, 715 Reynolds Metals Co.--------· 20, 280, 908 Goodrich Tire ______________ ,__ 38, 815, 737 United States SteeL __________ 195, 417, 611 Bethlehem SteeL:. ____________ 132, 837, 154

1955

$125, 516, 291 65, 256, 306 72,319, 224

87, 6oo;so8

~:ggg:m 46,662, 127

370, 197, 625 180, 191, 708

My· purpose: in Pointing out these facts is to show what small businesses, as well as the consumers of this country, are to

· be faced with. If prices of basic mate­rials continue to rise to sustain the high profits of 1955, . then 1 of 2 things wiil

. happen-either the small-business man will · be squeezed by his inability to raise the price of his ·products, or the rise will be passed on to consumers and the gen­eral consumer index· will also rise. · To

·date, · the administration has · been abie to claim stability in the - overall ·price index only because farmers and smaU­business- men are receiving -an unfair portion of ·the national ·product.

THE MIDJ?LE EAST SITUATION

Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, i had planned to discuss the Middle East sit· uation this afternoon, but time will not

. permit. · Therefore, I -~sk unanimous coli­

. sent ,tµat there pe pril}.ted in the· RECOR,D at this point the statement which I ·had

· planned to . make · on the- Middle East . ~i~U~t_iOJ.}. . __ . - . ,

CII-391

listeners 2 months: . . > There being no objection, the state- October ·11, 19-55: "The United . St:ij.tes, o

·ment was ordered -to be · printed. in· th:e : Arabs, does p.ot wa,.nt t<;> offer aid which is not "RECORD; as follows: , · backed-by influence. She does -not want to

STATEMENT BY SENATOR MORSE . loan funds without interest in some form of It is reported in the press that the other · coloniz~tion. • ~ • Rµssia - on · her part,

day Secretary of State Dulles told congres- seizes the golden opportunity and begin.s to .sional leaders to be prepared to, give the a(\· express support and g~t closer, and indeed

to offer economic aid, financial or technical .ministration authority to · use American 'without- Amedca.'s · excessive demands: • • :~ tro.ops in t'he .Middle .East. . This presages a . Russia is fully readj to offer . ·aid without new Korea on the other side of · the world. ·desiring to buy consciences, freedoms.· or

Two months ago, in an advertisement in homelands. • • · • The United States shuns the New York Times of February S; the Com- . us-, lets us ·down and prevents aid from reach· mittee To Save the Middle East From Com- ing us." . munism declared: And quoting the daily, Al Akhbar, October

' -"The fact is that Russia is turning· [the . 14, 1955: "* • • Justice and logic require Arabs] into North Koreans. Biblical Gaza

. will become the new 38th parallel. • • • ~ that we now defend and not .attack Russia, · and that we now attack and not defend

"Must we wait until it becomes imperative Britain and America, Which ha.ve shown false-. to send American Gis to fight aga_in i~ . di~- hood, deceit, fallacy and ill will." . tant lands-to protect America's vital inter·

. ests in the strategic Middle East?" And only 3 days ago, the New York Times Why are America's interests in the Middfe quoted an Egyptian Minister .of state (who

. East .so vital 'l · , could speak only with . the ·Dictator's ·ap-;Louis Bromfield, until his tragic death last proval) in another violent attack on "J.nr.

. month the chairman of the Committee To ' perialist America" and a spirited defense on Save the Middle East. From Communism, ex- "democratic Moscow." ·

·plained it in his last public statement, macie Mr. Bromfield's statement .. went qn to sa~: to a press conference in New York on Feb· "We call on the State Department to in'.·

· ruary 13: · · augurate a bold and decisive policy in tlie "_The Middle East contains i:nore ·than half Middle East. If Nasser really fears ·a possi­

. the world;s -known oil reserves . . Without this · ble IsraeU attack upon ~B5ypt's sovereignty,

. oil, Europe could not survive. If we lose · let us guarantee the integrity of Egypt's ,acces:;; to these deposits, our own industrial border against any attack. But, let us not life will be sel'iously affected. • • • The permit him to use this as a pretext to give

, Middle East is o;f crucial strategic importance Russian imperialism a foothold in an area : for oth~r reasons thari oil. It is the gateway -that it has wanted · but failed to penetrate _to Africa with its vital strategic resources since czarist times. ' · and '. millions·. o! people. · It is the backdoor "The other aspect of' our mistaken Middle -to Asia. Russia's entrenchment astride the East policy is ·our· attitude toward the strong­.Suez ·canal wo.uld constitute a · far greater est military power 1n the Middle East ne'!ft · blow to our national security than the Ios's · to Turkey-the Republic ·or !srael. To deny of Formosa or · the ·Philippines. - . arms to Israel for defense against. Russian

"This dangerous situation has de".eloped ' weapons and oftlcers. is. like denying arms to behind a successful ,Communist. smokescreen , Formosa, South Korea or Vietnam."

-which· keeps us. pelieving that this· is ,still ' Weeks after this warning was made, the · merely an, Arab-Israeli squa}Jble.' The fact ts ' 'Situation had deteriorated still more, · and ·that this has become an East-West confiict-.:- · so had our S.tate Department policy. In an­· or to put ~t plainly; 'a ·Russian-American -other advertisement in the New York Times .conflict." ·. ; ;February 29; tl'i:e Committee. To Save thB

Mr. Bromfleld explained:. · : Middle East· From- Communism... declared: _ "T)le ,;a_w;si~~ are Rast masters of the am; - "The. cine ·hope of saving the Middle EaS't of infiltration and the f,ast grab. Oply~ ~-few ; from canuµunism-and the blood not only of

·6218 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE April 12 Arab and .Israeli .but of American soldier.s 'too--rests in the man who appointed Dulles ·to the offtce he now holds. • • • [the han-dling of] this explosive situation can no longer be delegated to Secretary Dulles · and his assistants • • • . who have so completely and so conspicuously failed in the eyes of the entire world." .

Another month has passed and still the ·President has done nothing that could possi­bly hold back the march toward another Korea. His statements have served only to encourage Nasser to provocative acts while the Communists perfect his military ma­chine.

But it may still not be too late. A clear statement by this country that we will back up the only democratic state in the Middle East, not only with a mutual defense treaty but with sufficient defensive weapons to han­dle the new Russian MIGs and bombers, will sufftce to remove all chances of attack by the Arabs against Israel. Russia will nqt make any overt attack h~rself; she will act only through stooges, of whom Nasser has become one. But Nasser will not strike at Israel unless he feels he can knock it out quickly. If Israel has, or is likely to have, sufficient strength to stand off a knockout blow at Tel Aviv or Haifa by the fast Ilyushin bombers Russia gave Nasser, Nasser will not strike. ·

It does not take much. A handful of fast jet fighters, a few jet bombers, some defen­sive guns and tanks, ·to bolster up the only dependable ally we have in the area-is that too high a price to pay to spare the blood and lives not only of -Israelis and Arabs but of American boys as well?

The Committee· To Save the Miqdle Ea~t From Communism reiterates its query · of February 5:

"That's why .we ask: American arms now, or American armies later? Wliich will it be?"

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE'S ANIMA1" DISEASE LABORATORY ON PL't)l\I ~SLAND., N : ~· Mr. THYE. · Mr. President, I have re­

ceived a report from the Department of Agriculture which discloses some of the research accomplishments of the De­partment's animal disease laboratory on Plum Island, N. Y. I was instrumental in obtaining authorization to create this research laboratory. Much has been ac­complished in the field of research.

I ask unanimous consent that there be printed in the body of the RECORD at this point, as a part of my remarks, a statement on what is being accomplished at the research laboratory conducted by the Department of Agriculture on Plum Island.

There being no objection, the state­ment was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as fol~ows: · ·

STATEMENT BY SENATOR THYE

Frequently we ·ran to recognize the valu­able contributions research has made · both to the betterment of oµr living and to .the

. protection of the health. and welfare of the American people. It is needless, I know, to point out to my colleagues the many spe­cific achievements that have been made through research, but I am prompted today to mention one particular research project which has recently come to my attention again in connection with a report issued by the Department of Agriculture. The report deals with the progress made on foot-and­mouth disease research in the United States.

The Department reports that "Scientists of .· the United State,a Department of Agricul­_ ture's Animal Disease Laboratory on Plum

Island, N. Y., report success in growing the virus of foot-and-mouth disease in cultures of swine or bovine kidney cells."

The Department further states that this ·accomplishment is the result of work by Drs. H. L. Bachrach, W.R. Hess, and J. J. Callis, of the Plum Island laboratory staff, and through this research, the Department states that the door is now open to use of practical tissue-culture techniques in ( 1) diagnosis of the disease and identification of the type of virus present, (2) determination of concen­trations of the viruses and antibodies pro­duced in animals, and (3) large-scale pro­duction of the virus for fundamental studies and vaccine investigatiOns."

Scientists at the Plum Island laboratory foresee that the application of this new method will allow research to proceed at an accelerated rate so as to achieve eventual control of the disease at an earlier date.

I have long had an interest in this prob­lem, and I am particularly gratified at the recently announced results of research for the reason that it was ·under the provisions of an enacted bill I introduced in the 80th Congress whereby the Secretary of Agricul­ture was authorized and directed to conduct research on foot-and-mouth disease and other diseases of animals. Subsequently, the Animal Disease Laboratory on Plum Island of New York was established.

I want to take this opportunity of espe­cially commending and congratulating Drs. Bachrach, Hess, and Callis, who have been primarily responsible for the recent ·achieve­ment, and I wish to express my commenda­tion of the entire Laboratory staff for their diligent etrorts. At the same time, I should like also to say that indeed all of the re­search activities ·of the Department of Agri­culture, including animal and poultry hus­bandry research and dairy husbandry re­search, are deserving of the highest praise and commendation by the American people for the many contributions which have been made to agriculture and to the general wel­fare of the Nation as a whole.

ORGANIZATION OF AMERICAN STATES

Mr. SMATHERS. Mr. President, the learned historian, Arnold Toynbee, has said that history will characterize our epoch not for the immense technological strides which have been made, not as the atomic age, but rather as the period when man for the first time reached across boundaries of race, religion, and nationality, to help his fellow men, for the good of all mankind. If Dr. Toyn­bee is correct, then the Organization of American States, whose development we will commemorate on April 14, will oc-· cupy a place of honor in history. The growth of pan-Americanism, viewed in historical perspective, will surely be con­sidered by posterity as one of the notable achievements of our era.

Pessimism, born of the failure of the League of Nations and nourished by the frustrations of the United Nations, has been corroding our faith in international organizations. for maintaining peace. The Organization of American States stands alone, but firm, as proof of the effectiveness of international coopera­tion. It stands as a beacon light in the dark, inspiring optimism when doubts assail us. It is fitting that we pause each year to reexamine the evolu­tion of that institution, and by so doing, to rekindle our hope that the noble prin­ciples motivating it will spread to other .parts of the world.

The . Organization of American States was not easily arrived at or built over night. A good many obstacles had to be surmounted: fears had to be as:. suaged, prejudices eradicated, and self­interests repressed before the 21 nations that make up the membership could work together in their collective interest. As far back as 1826 the great South American liberator, Simon Bolivar, c01i.­ceived of the idea of a union of the democracies of the Western Hemisphere. In those days the newly independent nations were menaced by the Holy Alli­ance of Austria, Russia, and Prussia; it was Bolivar's idea that by union, the young states could protect themselves against any threat. The rought draft prepared by Bolivar for the conference he called in Panama contains these prophetic words:

This Congress seems destined to form the vastest league, the most extraordinary and the strongest which has ever appeared on earth. • • • N~ one ·or (the nations) will be weak in respect to any other; no one will be stronger. A perfect equilibrium would be established in this truly new order of things. The strength of all would come to the aid of any one which might suffer from the ag­gression of a foreign enemy.

The Panama Conference, as you know, was a dismal failure. Owing to factional opposition in the United States Con­gress, there was much delay in appoint­ing the American delegates to the gath­ering. One of two that were finally ap­pointed died on the way to Panama, and the other arrived too late. The politi­cians in Buenos Aires, jealous of the leading part played by - Colombia, de­clined the invitation. Paraguay, then a principal state, also remained aloof. When t:he Conference met, only Mexico, Central America, Colombia, and Peru had delegates present. ·-Under ·the cir­cumstances, Bolivar's magnificent dream of a union of the American nations in the interest of peace, protection, and general advancement, went up in smoke. But it did establish a definite precedent for future inter-American meetings.

Later in the century other attempts were made to get joint action. One gathering in Peru in 1847, with delegates from New Granada, Ecuador, ·Bolivia, and Chile in attendance, was directed against the United States who was at war with Mexico. The avowed aim of the Conference was confederation for the purpose of preserving independence, ter­ritorial integrity, and sovereignty. No permanent results came from the meet..: ing, or from other conferences of small groups of Latin American states held later in the century.

In the meantime, some of the South American nations themselves fell into battle with each otlier. In the 1860's the population of Paraguay was decimated in a war against an alliance consisting of Argentina, Brazil, and Uruguay. In 1879, Chile went to war against Peru

. and Bolivia, and claimed the victor's spoils, which included Peru's nitrate­rich provinces of Tacna and Arica and

·Bolivia's seacoast. The Chaco War be­tween Paraguay and Bolivia that began in 1932 killed about 60,000 Bolivans and a good many Paraguayans; continental animosities sharpened when ·Chile ac-

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE 6219 tively supported ·Boliva, and Argentina threw its aid to Paraguay.

In spite of the bitterness generated from these flareups, certain unifying forces were at work. The revolutionary ·struggles by the American States against Spain and England left in their wake powerful sentiments shared by all the people of the New World. They held themselves to be different from those in the Old World, a new race on a new continent. They believed that Europe was old, corrupt, torn by wars, governed by tyranny, pessimistic, and declining. On the other hand, they ·believed that America was the opposite, young and vigorous and destined to fulfill man­kind's utopian dream.

From these basic convictions, a mass of related sentiments derived. It was held that democratic republican govern­ment is the best. form of government, all others being inclined to tyranny; that States are equal, irrespective of size and power; that being equal, no State has a right to intervene in the affairs of an­other; that disputes between States could be settled peacefully by substi­tuting the rule of law for that of force; that cooperation would replace compe­tition. So deep seated were these con­victions, that they withstood the turbu­lent years of reorganization and inter­mittent warfare.

While sometimes lost in the clash of fraternal battle, Bolivar's vision of a family of American nations never com­pletely died. In 1889, a first major step was taken to make the dream a reality. In that year, at an invitation from the United States to meet in Washington to discuss commercial matters, 18 of the then 19 American Republics responded favorably. This was the first of the se­ries of international conferences of American nations. The delegates to that first feeble effort at cooperation on a hemispheric basis did not realize the precedent they were establishing. One contemporary United States newspaper, reflecting the prevailing opinion, even declared that "the Pan American Con­ference is pronounced a failure by those most concerned.'' Today, with the ad­vantage of _hindsigl).t, we commemorate the 66th anniversary of that conference as the modest beginning of the mighty union we now have.

But not all was clear sailing for the inter-American ship after the first Pan American Conference. In the first dec­ades of the 20th century the United States pursued a course that was bitterly unpopular in Latin America. This policy consisted of unilateral intervention of United States Armed Forces in other American nations to protect United States lives and property, or to prevent real or imagined threats of European intervention; the -practice of dollar di­plomacy, whereby the United States 'sought to control the finances of certain of the Caribbean countries; and the de­cision on the part of the United States to apply the ·Monroe Doctrine without consulting the other American States. Under the circumstances, it is not sur:.. prising that progress toward uriity was not achieved. · ·

All of us know the happy eonsetjuences which resulted when· the United States

signed the treaty of Montevideo in 1933 pledgi.ng nonintervention. With the shift to the good neighbor policy, the whole concept of pan-Americanism had a rebirth. After that, in rapid succession the sister republics laid the foundation~ for hemispheric solidarity. When war clouds began to darken the horizon in Europe, the nations of America gathered in Buenos Aires and agreed upon a pro­cedure for consultation in emergencies. Actual outbreak· of World War II put the machinery of consultation into effect. During the war, the American nations worked in close cooperation. After the war the 21 republics formalized their sys­tem of mutual defense and peaceful set­tlement of disputes by the Rio and Bo­gota pacts.

Today the Organization of American States is a far cry from the timid excur­sion into .inter-American cooperation of 66 years ago. It comes very close to realizing Bolivar's dream of the New World united in defense of the noble principles of freedom and independence.

But today the threat to our institu­tions comes not only from physical at­tack, as Bolivar feared from the hands of the Holy Alliance. Instead, every country in the Western Hemisphere is under constant insidious assault. The current enemy, international com­munism, has created a new dimension in international warfare. Communism attacks at the very moral fibers of a na­tion. It has developed a modern Trojan horse technique of boring from within, of first spreading dissatisfaction and fear and suspicion, and then presenting itself as the savior.

In Latin America, this precise moment in history is auspicious for the Commu~ nist scheme. The people have awakened from their apathy and resignation. They are seething with discontent for their lot, and no longer accept gnawing hunger and disease as their . portion. Twelve of .the 20 Latin American coun­tries have annual per capita incomes of less than $200 a year, while only in Vene­zuela does it exceed $400. The life ex­pectancy of a man in Mexico is only 38 years, which is about average for our sister republics. Literacy, too, reflects the low standard of living: 41 percent in Venezuela, 57 percent in the Dominican Republic, 10 percent in Haiti, to mention a few. The Communist defection of Guatemala, however short lived, should serve as a warning that it can happen here. The removal through revolution of Communists from influential posts in Guatemala has done nothing tO" relieve the conditions that fostered the rise of those Communists in the first place.

All the mutual defense pacts and pledges of solidarity will not halt the war of ideas the Communists are waging. I do not mean ·by this statement to belittle

·the effectiveness of the inter-American ·system. Its continuous and upward growth in the face of difficulties, culmi­nating in the fine Organization of Ameri­can States which exists today, is an island 'in the turbulent sea of international re­lations. I do mean, however, that we must not stop . working to make it even more effective. We must not be so satis­fied with our handiwork to date that we permit our thinking to ossify. We must

keep it fluid so that we are prepared to meet every new challenge in this dynamic and changing world.

S~nce it. is presently unlikely that the Soviet Uruon will launch physical war­fare . upon one or more of our sister re-

. pubhcs, we must be prepared to combat a diff.erent type of assault. The Latin Americans need help to raise the living standards o~ their people quickly, before they .turn m desperation to the false

-pro~ises held out to them by the Com­m_umsts. Our full hearted cooperation ~Ith Latin A~erica in the economic field Is as essential to the preservation of Ameri.ca.n. institutions as is our military' and political cooperation. Ye~our showing to date has been mea­

ger, mdeed. Of the $37 billion total grants and credits in the postwar decade Latin America received about $1 billion' or approximately 2.5 percent. Our sis~ ter. republics received only 1 percent of ~mted States grant-aid in the same pe­:1od. I h~ve noticed that various prom­ment ~tm Americans, among them the Argentme and the Colombian Ambassa­dors, and the Chilean delegate to the United Nations, have been critical of this tendency to overlook Latin America for cr~tical regions elsewhere. They have comed the name El Continente Olvi­dado--the forgotten continen~which in ~his age of slogans certainly well de­scribes the current situation. If we are ~o meet .the threat posed by Communist mfil~ratJon and other totalitarian evils, we must take bold, original measures. We must keep our powder dry, yes, but we must keep working at Pan-American­ism with constancy and wholehearted faith.

It is my fervent hope and prayer that the unity of purpose of the sister re­publics of the Western Hemisphere will be incre.ased and strengthened, and that t~e nations of the New World, through smce~·e efforts at cooperation, will march steadily toward the fulfillment of' Boli­var's vision of a prosperous and free con­tinent, at peace with the world.

RECESS TO MONDAY The PRESIDING OFFICER What

. is the pleasure of the Senate? · Mr. SMATHERS. Mr. President it is

my intention to niove that the S~nate take a recess until Monday. Before do:.. ing so, I wish to ask the Senator from M.ichigan, who is the acting minority leader, if he knows of any other busi­ness to come before the Senate from his side of the aisle.

Mr. POTTER. It-is my understand­ing that there are no other Senators on this side of the aisle who desire to speak at this time; and that it was in­tended that the Senate should stand in recess until Monday after the distin­guished Senator from Florida had ·com­pleted his speech.

Mr. SMATHERS. Mr. President, in ....~ccordance with tp.e order previously en­tered, I move that the Senate stand in recess until Monday next, at 12 o'clock noon.

The motion was agreed to; and (at 3 o'clock and 58 minutes p. m.) the Senate

6220 CONGRESSIONAi. RECORD - HOUSE April 12

took a rec·ess, the recess being, under the The Journal of the proceedings of Mr. COOPER. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my re­marks at this paint in the RECORD on the bill H. R. 6712.

order previously entered, until Monday, yesterday was read and approved. April 16, 1956, at 1~ o'clock meridian.

CONFIRMATIONS Executive nominations confirmed by

the Senate April 12 (legislative day of April 9, 1956:

UNITED NATIONS James W. Barco, of Virginia, to be deputy

representative of. the United States of Amer­ica in the Security Council of the United Nations.

DIPLOMATIC AND FOREIGN SERVICE Lowell c. Pinkerton, of Missouri, to be

Ambassador Extraordinary and Plenipoten­tiary of the United States of America- to the Sudan. ·

CIVIL AERONAUTICS BOARD James Durfee, of Wisconsin, to be a mem­

ber of the Civil Aeronautics Board for the ·remainder of the term expiring December 31, 1960.

COAST AND GEODETIC SURVEY The following-named persons for perma­

.nent appointment to the grade indicated, 11ubject to qualifications provided by law:

To be ensigns Herman H. Druebert · James C. Sainsbury

' t

.•• .... •• HOUSE 'OF REPRESENTATIVES ·

. '

THURSDAY, APRIL 12, 1956

MESSAGE FROM THE SENATE The SPEAKER. Is there objection to A message from the Senate, by Mr. the request of the gentleman from Ten­

Carrell, one of its clerks, announced that nessee? the Senate agrees to the report of the There was no objection. committee of conference on the dis- Mr. COOPER. Mr. Speaker, it will agreeing votes of the two Houses on the be recalled that the House-passed ver­amendments of the Senate to the bill sion of H. R. 6712 amended section 1237 (H. R. 12) entitled "Ari act to amend the of the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended, That &ection provided special rules for with respect to price supports for basic the taxation of gain from the sale of real commodities and milk; and for other property to the extent that a taxpayer is .purposes." not to be considered as holding property

The message also announced that the . primarily for sale to customers in the .Vice President has appointed Mr. ordinary course of business solely be­JoHNSTON of South Carolina and Mr. cause he subdivided the tract, subject to CARLSON members of the joint select certain conditions. Under the 1954 code, committee on the part of the Senate, as section 1237, was limited to real prop­provided for in the act of August 5, 1939, erty in the hands of a taxpayer other entitled "An act to provide for the dis- than a corporation. position of certain records of the United H. R. 6712 as . passed by the House States Government," for the disposition would extend the scope of •the section of executive papers ref erred to in the re- to ·include corporations if ·no shareholder

. port of the Archivist of the United States directly or -indirectly holds real property numbered 56-11. ~ for sale to· custdmers in the ordinary

The message also announced that the course of trade or business: Vice President has appointed the Sena- The second section of the House­tor from Minnesota, Mr. THYE, a mem- passed version of the bill would allow ber of the Board of Visitors to the United certain property to come within the

. States Air Force Academy vice the Sena- scope· of section 1237 even though the tor from Maine, Mrs. SMITH. taxpayer had made certain improve-

. ments on the property. The bill would provide that the taxpayer could install

ELECTION TO STANDING other public utilities on the subdivided ' COMMITTEE property as well as those listed in the

·Mr. MARTIN. Mr. Speaker, I offer a present paragraph (3) (A) of section The House ~et at 12 o'clock noon. resolution CH. Res. 466 ) -and ask for its 1237 without losing the benefit of the The Reverend Joseph F. Thorning, immediate consideration. · · section.

D. a, honorary professor in . the Uni- ·The Senate in its consideration of The Clerk read the resolution, as fol-versity of Santo Domingo, offered the lows: H. R. 6712 adopted two amendments to ·following prayer: the bill.

Resolved, That WALTER NoRBLAD, of Oregon, T·he first of these amendme ts ld Heav. enly Father, auth.or of 11'ght and n wou be, and he is hereby, elected a member of extend the treatment to corporations

of love, let the brig!1tness of Thy cotmte- the standing Committee of the House of only if the corporation is holding prop-nance shine radiantly upon the Speaker :1~he~~:~.tatives on Merchant ~arine and erty orig.inally acquired through fore-of this House 'tmd upon all the Members closure of a lien thereon, ·or a limited 6f the United States Congress together The i:esolution was agreed to, and a · amount· of adjacent property. This · with their fellow legislators throughout motion to reconsider was · laid on the would include a corporation to which

· the Western Hemisphere. table. was transferred the foreclosure bid in Grant a special blessing to the Presi- exchange for all of its stock and other

dent of the-United States of America and AMENDING SECTION 1237 OF THE . consider~tion or a corporation was itself to all who counsel him. · INTERNAL REVENUE CODE the ~red1tor. ·

Pour out Thy divine graces most The second amendment adopted by the abundantly upon that type of exalte~ Mr. COOPER. Mr. Speaker, I ask Senate amends the reference to "other Christian leadership in the American Re- unanimous consent to take from the public utilities" and substitutes the term publics that promotes spiritual under- Speaker's desk the bill H. R. 6712, an "drainage facilities." ·This . Senate standing and an enrichment of those re- act to amend section 1237 of the Internal amendment narrows tb,e scope of the ligious values of the Old and the New Revenue Code of 1954, with Senate House-passed version of H. R. 6712 by

. Testament which help to make all good amendments thereto, and concur in the limiting the types of improvements that citizens conscious of their brotherhood Senate amendments. the taxpayer may make and remain under God. The Clerk read the title of. the bill. within the scope of section 1237.

Guide us, dear Saviour, in the ways of . The Clerk read the Senate amend- Mr. Speaker, I ask that the House righteousness and fairness toward our ments, as follows: agree to the Senate amendments which neighbors in Latin America and in Page 1, line 7, after "business" insert "and I have just described. Canada. , · · . only-in the case of property described in the .Mr. REED.of New :York. Mr. Speaker,

We thank Thee, Almighty God, fo.r the last sentence of subsection (b) (3) ." I ask unanimous consent to extend my presence in our Capital of the talented Page 1, strike out lines 10 and 11 and in- remarks at this paint in the RECORD on devout son of the noble nation that sert: the bill H, R. 6712. brought Christianity to this new world. "(a) In subparagraph (A) strike out · · The SPEAKER. Is there objection to

Enlighten our minds, we beseech Thee, 'water or sewer facilities' and insert 'water, the· request of the gentleman from New and fortify our wills that we may en- sewer, or drainage facilities'." York? throne principle over expediency, com- The SPEAKER. Is there objection to There was no objection. bining love of country with devotion to the request of the gentleman from Ten- Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, mankind. nessee? H. R. 6712, introduced by my distin-. We implore these divine graces in the There was no objection. guished colleague on the Committee on

name of our most Holy Redeemer, the The Senate amendments were con- Ways and Means CMr. BOGGS], was Christ Jesus of the Andes, who is the curred in, and a motion to reconsider passed by the House on August 1, 1955. Prince of Peace. Amen. was laid on the table. The bill amends section 1237 of the Inter-

I;

! •

1956 .CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -~llOUSE :

nal Revenue Code of 1954 relating to real property subdivid~d 'for sale. ' '

Under this bill the capital-gains treat­ment generally granted by section 1237 is extended to certain corporations ·and other taxpayers who may not qualify un­der the present section. The bill also allows taxpayers under certain circum­stances to make ·public-utility -improve­ments on the property that is within the scope· of this section. ·

In the form passed by the Senate on March 26, 1956, the bill contains two amendments, which are acceptable. One amendment would -permit corpora­tions-to qualify only if the corporation is holding property originally acquired through foreclosure of a lien thereon. This would include a corporation to which was transferred the foreclosure bid in exchange for all of its stock and other consideration, or a corpor~tion was itself the creditor. The second amend­ment removes a reference in the House­passed bill to · ~other public utilities" and substitutes "drainage .facilities." This amendment narrows the scope of the House bill by limiting the types of im­provements that the taxpayer may make and remain within the scope of the sec­tion in question.

PAN-AMERICAN DAY The SPEAKER. Pursuant to a reso­

lution providing that the House of Rep­resentatives designate Thursday, April 12, 1956,- as the date to celebrate Pan­.American Day, ·on which day appropriate remarks on the occasion may occur, the Chair recognizes the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr. HAYS]. · Mr. HAYS of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, I offer a resolution <H. Res. 467), which I send .to the desk and ask for its im­mediate consideration.

The Clerk read the resolution, as fol­lows:

Whereas April 14, 1956, will mark the 66t~ anniversary of the founding of the Pan American Union, now the Secretariat of the Organization of American States; and

·Whereas . the House of · Representatives, ever since the founding of the Pan Ameri­can Union, has encouraged and fostered the development of inter-American cooperation and solidarity in the mutual best interests and aspirations of the peoples of this hemis­phere; and

Whereas continued inter-American co­operation and solidarity are essential to the peace and security of this hemisphere and of the free world; and

Whereas the legislatures of the 21 Ameri­can Republics h~ve traditionally . obstlrved April 14 as Pan-American Day: Therefore, be it

Resolved, That the House of Representa­tives extend its most cordial greetings to the legislative bodies of each of the other Ameri­can Republics in honor of Pan-American Day and in recognition of. the importance of inter-American cooperation and solidar­ity to the peace and security of this hemis­phere and of the free world.

Copies of the present resolution shall be distributed through appropriate cha~nels to the legislatures of the other American Re­pubUcs and to the Secretary · General of the Organization of American States. -

Mr. HAYS of Arkansas.· Mr. Speaker, r am very .happy to call to the atten­tion of the House the 66th anniversary

• • • .;• •. I' • '

of the founding of the Pan American Union~ . It .is a -fitting tribute. to the common interests and working harmony of the 21 member American Republics that they are able to celebrate this long and fruitful association in an atmos­phere of close friendship and good . f el­lowship. · This organ1zation stands as a remarkable symbol to · the world that many millions of people have been able to establish an instrument for achieving peace and cooperation through the years when warfare and belligerence have been the general rule. Pan-Amer­ican· Day serves to remind us of the unique union of the nations in the West­ern Hemisphere in what is now officially called the Organization of American States.

The Organization of American States dates back to the First International Conference of .American States in Wash­fngton in 1889-90 and is founded upon the charter signed at the Ninth Inter­national Conference of American States on April 30, 1948. The Pan American Union was created as the permanent central organ and General Secretariat on April 14, 1890, and it is this date we honor today. Since the time of its creation, this organization has provided a means for many interchanges between the United States and our sister Re­publics in economic, sociai, juridical, and cultural fields. So also has it been the vehicle for achieving regional solidar­ity, strengthening collaboration, and de­fending the sovereignty, territorial in­tegrity, and independence of the mem­ber nations, now under the regional agency provisions of the United Nations.

In 1933 President Franklin D. Roose­velt said in his inaugtiral address:

In the field of world policy, I would dedi­cate this Nation to the policy of · the good neighbor-the neighbor who respects his ob­ligations and respects the sanctity of his agreements in ·and with a world of neigh­bors. ·

This was the.origin of the good-neigh­bor policy which has done so much to strengthen the friendly relations be­twe~n the peoples of this hemisphere through the inter-American system.

This year on April 14, representatives of the 21 American Republics will gather in the Pan American Union to pay trib­ute to one of our countrymen who was one of the chief architects of this great inter-American system, the late Secre­tary of State Cordell Hull. On that day a bust of -this illustrious American will be unveiled in the Pan American Union. In his· lifetime, Cordell Hull worked mightily for the cause of world peace. "Father of the United Nations," his la­bors earned him the Nobel Peace Prize, but among the peoples of this hemisphere his memory will be particularly cher­ished ·for his effective work in making the good-neighbor policy a reality . . · Mr. BOGGS. Mr~ Speaker, will the gentleman yield? · ·

Mr. HAYS of Arkansas. I am glad to yield to ·the distinguished gentleman from Louisiana. . '

Mr. BOGGS. I would like to call the attention of the gentleman and the Mem­bers· of tfiis body to tli.e creatfon of the Cordell Hull Foundation, w~th which ,the

g~ntleman is familiar. The Cordell Hull Foundat.ion is sponsored by 'Interna­tional Hous~ of the city of -New ·orleans. It has for its purpose the promotion of the ideals and -principles" of the great Tennessean, Cordell Hull. - We are hon­ored in having the Governor of Tennes .. see, _ Governor Clement, as · president of the Cordell Hull Foundation. One of the princ.ipal purposes of the founda­tion is the promotion of scholarships, for students from the 21 Latin American Republics.

Mr. HAYS of Arkansas. I am glad to have the gentleman from Louisiana [Mr. BOGGS] develop that fact, because, as he so well knows, these young people are carrying back to their countries a reflec­tion of ·American friendship, and, of. course, will contribute greatly to the cause of peace and :American unity.

Mr. Speaker, we · in the United States may well be proud of the fact that our neighbors have looked to us as the ex­ample in patterning their national con­stitutions and their forms of govern­ment. The very creation of the Organ­ization of American States indicates the eager willingness of these young repub­lics to submerge their differences in background and culture in order to ob­tain the blessings of freedom and dignity. made so infinitely desirable by the ex­perience of the United States. The progress so far made by the American Republics · in· seeking ways to ground their independence and · liberty upon solid foundations has been very gratify­ing and represents the patient efforts of the farsighted American statesmen who have Provided able leadership- for their peoples. They have all contributed much to the success of the inter-Ameri­can system we honor today.

It is the fervent hope of all Americans that the Organization of American States may continue to serve as a model to the world of the deep feelings of understanding and cooperation that are possible of achievement when nations agree to work together in peace.

Mr. SEELY-BROWN. Mr. Speaker. will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HAYS of Arkansas. I yield to the gentleman from Connecticut. . Mr. SEELY-BROWN. In connection with the remarks the gentleman is making I ask . unanimous consent, Mr. Speaker, that my colleague from Con­~ecticut [Mr. MoRANO] may extend his remarks in the RECORD immediately fol­lowing the remarks of the gentleman from Arkansas.

Mr. HAYS of Arkansas. May I mod­ify the gentleman's request to this ex­tent: Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous con­sent that first my colleague from Illi­nois [Mr. GORDON], who is chairman of ' the Subcommittee on. Inter-American .A.ff airs, be permitted to extend his re­marks immediately following mine, those to be followed by . the remarks of the gentleman from Connecticut and then that all Members may be privileged to extend their remarks on this subject. . Mr. LECOMPTE. Mr. Speaker, if th~ gentleman. will yield, I have here re­marks of the gentleman· from Pennsyl­vainia [M~_. Fm;.'l'.oNJ on the . s1:1bject . of Pan American Day and I . was goin_g: to

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-- HOUSE April 12

ask permission for his remarks to be inserted at-this point in the RECORD. I have no remarks of my own to insert.

Mr. HAYS ·of Arkansas. That is in­cluded in my request that all Members may extend their remarks, and further that all Members may have 5 legislative days within which to extend their re­marks in the RECORD on this subject matter.

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

There was no objection. Mr. HAYS of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker,

I yield to the gentleman from Massa­chusetts.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, for the past 12 years, through the coopera­tion of our Chaplains, Father Joseph F. Thorning has offered the prayer in this body on Pan-American Day.

This is appropriate because the Rev­erend Dr. Joseph F. Thorning has been described on the floor of this House as ''the padre of the Americas." · He is a professor of the world-famous Univer­sity of Santo Domingo, Ciudad Trujillo, in the Dominican Republic. This uni­versity, founded in 1538, is the oldest institution of higher learning in the Western Hemisphere. It is a teaching center for philosophy, literature, law, medicine, surgery, dentistry, engineer­ing, fine .arts, the natural sciences, the social sciences, and other important subjects.

The rector of the University of Santo Domingo, Dr. Pedro Troncoso Sanchez, is one of the most eminent educators in the world. He has served his country with distinction in many parts of the free world. In the work of the univer­sity he has been given every possible fa­cility by His Excellency, Generalissimo Rafael Leonidas Trujillo Molina, LL. D., guiding genius of the Dominican Re­public.

It must be gratifying to these noble leaders in education and in public life to know that Father Joseph F. Thorning, honorary professor in the celebrated University of Santa Domingo and a doc­tor of divinity in the Catholic Univer­sity of Chile, Santiago de Chile, has of­fered the invocation in the United States Capitol on every official celebration of Pan-American Day since the inception of this session dedicated to the cause of inter-American friendship.

In his beautiful and appropriate prayer Father Thorning noted the pres­ence at this time in the United States of the Minister of Forelgn Affairs of Spain, Senor Don Alberto Martin Artajo.

Between the people of the United States and the people of Spain there has been a most cordial and friendly feeling throughout the decades. I sincerely hope that Senor Artajo's visit to the United States will be a most happy and pleasant one, as well as one that wjll be productive of results consistent with the national interest of both countries.

Since 1930, when Pan-American Day was first officially proclaimed to be April the 14th, the spirit of interhemispheric cooperation and friendship has been growing and ref tirbishing the best of the aims and ideals of the many cultures of the Americas. In fact, the regional or-

ganization-known as the Organization... of American States-stands as a model today of international cooperation for the rest of the world to study and emu­late.

Only a century ago Simon Bolivar, the Latin American leader whose name is identified with early dreams of for inter-American unity, made the pro­phetic declaration that in the freedom of America lies the hope of the world. In order to further his ideas on conti­nental cooperation and the similar proj­ects of other contemporary American leaders, a congress was convened in Panama in 182'6. This congress proved to be premature, but it did succeed in arousing the peoples of North and South America to the possibilities which could eventuate from a pan-American organi­zation based on mutual interests and desires. Several other conferences were convened in South America during the 19th century, but not until the Washing­ton Conference of 1889-90 did a truly hemispheric meeting take place. '!'his was the first pan-American conference and since that time the vision and faith of many people of the Americas have continued to help this system of inter­American cooperation fulfill the h ighest aims of freedom, independence, and peace.

The International American Confer­ence in Washington of 1889 launched a regional system on its course which, in the short span of 65 years, has made the common goals for hemispheric solidarity a reality. Today the Organization of American States amply demonstrates that the sharing of the responsiblity for the preservation of freedom can result in a reconciliation of divergent opinions and different backgrounds that may serve as a bulwark of security and coop­eration. The joint endeavors of the Latin American countries and of the United States in the pan-American field have encountered many obstacles and difficulties throughout the years. N'ev­ertheless all these governments and na­t ions have shared the same common pur­poses, and in an atmosphere of good neighborliness these countries have been counseling together on mutual problems and reaching 'decisions and agreements that are redounding to the benefit of all.

The devotion to the ideal of freedom and the belief in the dignity of man are ingrained in the cultures of both groups, and the highest hope for we of the Amer­icas on this Pan-American Day is that the past successes in reciprocal ex­changes and mutually benefiting schemes of interhemispheric coopera­tion will further encourage respect for each others' ideas, convictions, and cul­tures.

Mr. GORDON. Mr. Speaker, as chair­man . of the Subcommittee on Inter­American Affairs of the House Foreign Affairs Comlajttee, it is my great pleas,. ure to join with iny colleagues in cele­bration of the 66th birthday of the mod­ern pan-American movement, which has done so much to create a feeling of mu­tual t.rust and friendship among the 335 million people of the United States and Of the 20 Republics of Latin America.

Officially, it is the 66th anniversary of the founding of the Pan American

Union, which is now known as the Or­ganizatipn of American States. The rec­ord of this great, hemispheric organiza­tion in maintaining the peace and con­tributing to the economic prosperity and well-being Of all of us has been a bril­liant one. It has influenced almost every aspect of our lives, and yet a great part of its work is accomplished in a spirit of quiet harmony incompatible with wide or spectacular publicity. For this reason, it may not be amiss to remind ourselves on this occasion of some of the major recent contributions which the OAS has made to a better life for all the people of the Americas, from the Canadian border to the Straits of Magellan. . For example, the Inter-American

Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance, signed at Rio de Janeiro in December 1948, has been applied on four occasions when the peace of our hemisphere has been threat­ened by internal disputes: twice in con­troversies between Nicaragua and Costa Rica; in the Caribbean in 1950; and in the Guatemalan situation in 1954.

These controversies have provided the more spectacular examples of the work of the OAS. But meanwhile it has car­ried on a broad program of activities 1n less controversiaf fields, contributing immeasurably to the long-range welfare of all the people of the Americas. These include projects to improve housing, ed­ucation, agriculture, health, travel facili­ties, and child welfare, to mention only a few.

In 1950 the OAS began a new program of technical cooperation, under which technicians from several Latin-American republics have been able to study new techniques in farming, teaching, nurs­ing, and housing. Meanwhile, the or­ganization has also devoted a major ef­fort to wiping out illiteracy and expand­ing free education in the Americas.

Such work is a monument to the spirit of cooperation and mutual assistance which has long been hallmarks of our inter-American system, while providing at the same time an example and an in­sp1ration to other governments and peo­ples throughout the world. It is posi­tive, demonstrable proof of our historic contention that free nations can live as neighbors in an atmosphere of mutual :r:espect and cooperation, without oppres­sion of the weak by the strong, the pros­perous by the less prosperous.

In particular, it should serve as a source of hope-a light in the dark­ness-for the oppressed peoples of the Iron Curtain countries who have been forced to sacrifice their liberties under the oppression of Soviet communism.

It is, indeed, an honor and a privilege for us all to salute this great organization on Pan-American Day and to tender our respects to the governments and people of the Latin-American republics who have joined their vision and statesman­ship with that of our own country to make it possible. CORDELL HULL: APOSTLE OF PAN-AMERICANISM

Mr . . COOPER. Mr. Speaker, day after tomorrow, on Saturday, April 14, a mem­orable ceremony will be held here at Washington in the Aztec Garden of the Pan American Union. The occasion will be the official celebration of Pan-Ameri-

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 6223 can Day. The celebration, which is always an important inter-American event, will have added importance this year because one of its principal events will be the unveiling of a bust of Cordell Hull.

The Ambassadors from the American Republics who form the Council of the Organization of American States voted last year to erect this monument to Sec­retary Hull in recognition of his long · dedication to the cause of hemisphere solidarity and his magnificent accom-· plishment in that regard. It is most fit­ting that this monument should stand in the grounds of the Pan American Union which he loved. It is likewise fit­ting for us to recall today in this body of which he was long an honored mem­ber how often and how eloquently Cor­dell Hull spoke in behalf of the coopera­tion among the American peoples as an element essential to the. freedom and peace of the world. Forty-eight years ago, in 1908, his maiden speech in the House of Representatives of the United States Congress advocated freer :flow· of trade as a means toward global peace. He saw the regional cooperation of the American Republics as a pattern for all nations. He never deviated from his conviction that the inter-American maintenance of freedom, peace, and jus­tice through voluntary cooperation is for this hemisphere a tower of strength and for the rest of the world a beacon and an example. - Seventeen years ago, in 1939, he spoke

of · the importance of every individual citizen in furthering our national and bipartisan policy of the good neighbor.

The relations among our nations must not rest merely on contacts between diplomat and diplomat, political leader and political leader, or even between businessman and businessman- .

He said-They must rest also on contacts between teacher and teacher, between student and student, upon the confluence of streams of thought as well as upon more formalized governmental action and constructive busi­ness activity.

The bronze bust of Cordell Hull in the Department of State bears President Roosevelt's phrase characterizing him as "the father of the United Nations." The Medal for Merit with an Oak Leaf Clus­ter presented to Cordell Hull by President Truman cited him for "exceptionally meritorious conduct" in strengthening the forces against aggression and pre­paring the way for world peace. The proclamation issued by President Eisen­hower 1 year ago on the sad occasion of Cordell Hull's death and directing a na­tionwide tribute of mourning and honor to his memory attested "his integrity of purpose, his high sense of obligation, and his long and fruitful labors in the cause of peace."

Here in these Halls which witnessed so great a part of his service to his coun­try and to the free world, I consider it a privilege to pay this small tribute to Cordell Hull today. And in doing so I wish to express what I am sure is the sense of gratitude of this august body as a whole for the great tribute which will be pa.id his memory on April 14 at the

Pan American Union-a tribute which would have been particularly gratifying to him, since it comes from representa­tives of the other nations of America in recognition of his services to this hemi­sphere and to mankind as a public­spirited citizen of the United States and of the world.

Mr. MORANO. Mr. Speaker, I wish to pay tribute to the spirit and motive em­bodied in Pan-American Day which will be observed throughout the Americas on April 14.

At a time in our history when the peace and territorial security of nations is in constant jeopardy, it is comforting to know that the solidarity of the Western Hemisphere is unshakable.

The House of Representatives has long · worked toward the goal of ever-increas­ing inter-American cooperation and friendship. Mutual understanding and a basic bond have led to a union which is normally strong, . faithfully dedicated to increased standards of living, eco­nomic stability, and the maintenance of peace.

It is fitting that on this special day we take official cognizance of our neighbors and friends to the south, and affirm our desire for continuing cooperation in our common cam:e.

I am happy to extend cordial greetings to all of the American Republics on the occasion of Pan-American Day.

Mr. DODD. Mr. Speaker, today's cele­bration of Pan-American Day is an ap­propriate occasion on which to direct our attention to the Organization of Ameri­can States-one of the world's most sea­soned and experienced regional organi­zations, an organization ·for the mutual defense of the 21 American Republics of this hemisphere, an organization en­gaged in the development · of their cul­tural and economic resources, and one firmly dedicated to the maintenance of peace in the New World.

One of the distinguishing features of the Organization of American States is the equality of responsibility which is evidenced in its deliberations. Every one of the 21 Republics, regardless of its size or the present state of its economic and political development, is equal to every one of · the other American Republics. That is a singular achievement-there is no veto, and in this hemisphere there are no satellites. The further development of broader democratic institutions and of greater respect for the rights of the individual-which are goals of the peo­ple of this hemisphere-can best be achieved through the unity of purpose which is exemplified by the Organization of American States.

During recent months, the people of the United States along with the other peoples of the Americas have watched with interest the political developments occurring within one of their sister Re­publics. After a number of years of growing oppression during which they lost many of their clterished rights, these people have arisen to reestablish them­selves in their rightful place within the inter-American system. At the same time, they are engaged in rescuing their economy from the low state to which it has fallen through ~isguided and cor-

rupt direction over the years. In their evident determination to rebuild their nation on progressive democratic prin­ciples and to work in a spirit of friendly cooperation with their neighbors in this hemisphere, these people can be assured that we stand ready to give them the moral and economic support they may need in this tremendous task. With our own background and tradition, the peo­ple of the United States are proud to welcome this virile and energetic people back into the ranks of the really free nations of the world and to wish them Godspeed in their efforts toward the more effective development of their im­mense natural resources for the benefit of themselves and their neighobrs.

We· can, today, take note with gratifi­cation of the latest step which the Gov­ernment of the Republic of Argentina has taken to identify itself more solidly with its sister Republics. A few days ago the provisional Government of Ar­gentina deposited with the Pan Ameri­can Union its instrument of ratification of the Bogota Charter. - This instrument, conceived and agreed to at Bogota in 1948 by the Foreign Ministers of the ·American Republics, is the basic charter of the inter-American system. With the ratification of Argentina, the roll is now comple:te-all the 21 Republics have now ratified the charter.

The new Argentine Government has also made known recently its awareness of the threat of international commu­nism, when it became the 20th of the American Republics to ratify the Caracas Declaration of 1954. The Caracas Dec­laration recognizes that if international communism should get control of the political institutions of any American State it would be a danger to the peace of the entire hemisphere and call for joint action. Only one of the American Republics-Mexico-has not yet ratified this Caracas Declaration.

Let there be no misunderstanding however. The interest of the people of the United States is not limited to any single nation or group of nations in the hemisphere. The United States hopes to make a real and useful contribution to ~he efforts of all of our sister Repub­lics to build stronger national economies and to raise the standards of living of their people. In doing so we serve our own national interest. Our contribution toward the economic development of the hemisphere is being made through pro­grams designed to strengthen and in­crease inter-American trade, to spread more widely within the hemisphere our common store of technical knowledge and experience, to encourage our private investors to enter those areas where they are welcomed, and to intensify the activ­ity of the Export-Import Bank in loans for economic development. In all of this, we act in a way consistent with our basic philosophy that private enterprise and initiative can do far more than govern­ments can to build strong economies and

· better living st.andards. Mrs. FRANCES P • . BOLTON. Mr.

Speaker, on Saturday we are privileged once again to celebrate Pan-American Day. It is an appropriate occasion on which to call particular attention to the

6224 . CON(JRESSIONA.L RECORO - HOUSE Apr:il 12

common goals of the 21 republics of this hemisphere. It is the day on which we give expression to the good will, mutual respect, and understanding which unites us with our southern neighbors.

Likewise it is a day on which we ap ... propriately bring to the attention of our own people an evaluation of the recent progress made in inter-American rela­tions. They are indic.ative of the spirit and achievements of the countries of the Western Hemisphere. , The past year has seen notable prog ... ress being made in strengthening and making more effective the Organization of American States. This regional or .. ganization has come to occupy a unique position in the world today. In the Qr .. ganization of American States the 21 American Republics meet as equals to discuss their problems and find mutually satisfactory solutions. So effective have they been in this undertaking that the OAS has come to be the most solid inter .. national organization of free people on earth.

In the Inter-American Treaty of Re .. ciprocal Assistance the peoples of this hemisphere have an effective instrument for the maintenance of peace in this· hemisphere. 'rhis treaty, which was the outcome of the meeting of foreign min .. isters in 1947, not only binds the Ameri ... cans together against aggression from abroad but also provides machinery for the settlement of disputes between two or more of the American Republics. un ... fortunately such disputes do arise. But how fortunate it is-and what an exam .. ple to the rest of the world-that we in our 21 republics have devised the means of resolving them. It is well that we take note today that now all of the 21 repub ... lies have ratified the Bogota Charter, the basic document of the inter-American system. Only a few days ago the new provisional government of Argentina de­posited with the OAS its instrument of ratification, thereby making ratification hemispherewide. .

So effective has the machinery of the Organization of American States become that this active cooperation of the Amer­ican Republics has served as a . working model f Qr other areas. The structure of the United Nations itself benefited from the experience which had been gained by the Americas in the development of .the OAS. .

In the economic field, as in the politi­cal field, we can derive satisfaction from the closer ties which have developed among the American Republics in recent years. Latin America is now experienc ... ing a phenomenal growth and develop .. ment . . The strength and resources of its nations have not been wasted in war. Their past achievement is largely intact to support further advancement. Our

,Government and our private industry are a.iding in this further development by

.providing stable markets for Latin America's exports, by capital invest­ments, by developmental loans, and by the exchange of technical know-how. . On this 66th .anniversary of Pan .. American Day we join with our Latin­American friends to give fitting recogni ... tion to the strength and the importance of_ the inter,.American system through

which we work for our common security and our common welfare. For the ·best interests of all of the Americas I sin­cerely hope that through mutually shar­ing of the responsibilities. and the bene­fits of closer cooperation and friendship among all of the sister American Repub­lics we can build an even better life for all of the peoples of this hemisphere.

THE POLICY OF FRIENDSHIP

Mr. MERROW. Mr. Speaker, the United States has always taken pride and satisfaction in its relations with the other Republics of this hemisphere. It is a national pride, which both our great political parties and all our national ad­ministrations justly share.

Thomas Jefferson, who was our first Secretary of State, expressed this when he said, regarding Latin America:

We have the same object, the success o! representi:\,tive government. Nor are we act.;. ing for ourselves alone, but for the whole human race.

Secretary John Foster Dulles ex­pressed it in another way on Pan-Ameri­can Day last year, saying:

This great inter-American system, which was first a vision and a dream and then an experience of faith, has become in our own time the most solid international organiza­tion of free peoples on earth-beneficial to all mankind. ·

At the International American Con­ference at Washington in 1889, from the sessions of which our present mighty Or­ganization of American States has de­rived, Secretary of State James G. Blaine defined the hemisphere of the American peoples as a policy of ''friendship and not force."

Secretary Elihu Root, at the Third In­ternational Conference , of American · States at Rio de Janeiro in 1906, called on the American peoples to show the world that liberty is the twin sister of justice and peace.

Let us unite-

He urged-in creating and maintaining and making ef­fective an all-American public opinion whose power shall influence international wrong, bring us ever nearer to the perfection of or­dered liberty.

A generation ago, in 1925, Secretary Charles Evans Hughes reaffirmed this te­nacious belief of the global impact of our inter-American system of partnership. He emphasized the fact that hemisphere cooperation, while based on the primary and mutual interest among the Ameri­can Republics in a special relationship, does not isolate our peoples from the rest of the world. On the contrary, he said, our hemi&phere cooperation "in itself .constitutes a most important contribu­tion to world peace."

One dozen years ago, on Pan-Ameri ... can Day in 1944, Cordell Hull, who is being so fittingly commemorated at the Pan American UniQn this week, made the following characteristic statement:

As the· years have goµe on, t_he true prin­ciples underlying inter-American unity have been made more speCific as one inter­.Ametican conference has followed another

1 Jn the years between the World Wars the ·trust and confidence between the American nations grew ever stronger, while else;w:here

the growth of ambitions of conquest by force brought division and fear. It is the common pride of the American Republics and the good fortune of all mankind that the. torch of international cooperation has burned at its brightest in the affairs of this hemisphere precisely at a time when it was being blacked out elsewhere. It is natural that the history of an international associa­tion which has endured longer than any oth­er should provide encouraging guidance for the future.

The view that the American family of nations affords a practical example of international relationships for the fam­ily of man is in truth so well established as to be looked on as a matter of fact. Our Congress in both its Houses, and without regard to political party lines, has long proved itself to be of this mind. From our beginnings as a nation to the present day, our Chiefs of State-again Thomas Jefferson, John Quincy Adams; Abraham Lincoln, Herbert Hoover, Franklin D. Roosevelt, Harry S. Truman, Dwight D. Eisenhower-have voiced this same belief in the kindling, the inspiring power of the inter-American achieve­ment. At every period of our history our leaders have voiced the same View, well expressed. We find it as long ago as 1826 in President Adams' prophetic confi­dence in the opportunities through in­ter-American cooperation to "promote the prevalence in future ages of peace on earth and good will to man." We find it as recently as . 1956 in President Eisen .. bower's statement that-

In our hemisphere, the inter-American system has continued showing its vitality in maintaining peace and collective outlook on .world problems. ·

Our cherished inter-American rela­tionship of the good neighbor, the good partner, is the unshakable foundation of ·hemisphere solidarity. It is the most ef­fective guaranty of the increasing prog­ress, the continuing independence, and the sustaining freedom of our 21 Repub­lics. It has · been said, and justly said, that inter-American neighborliness and partnership are not only established pol­icies of all our Governments but states of mind of all our peoples. While we have made traditional the excellent practice of publicly proclaiming this fact anew .every year on Pan-American Day, the important thing is that this state of mind shall guide our . actions on each of the 365 days of the year. _

Mr. CARNAHAN. Mr. Speaker, April 14, 1890, was an historic day, for it

·marked the inauguration of the great hemispheric association of free peoples which is today called the Organization of American States.

It is fitting that we should pay special tribute today to that organization, and to the 335 million Americans whom it represents. These peoples, diverse as to racial origins, languages, and cultures, are joined together by the common bond of their devotion to liberty, democracy, and the· proud free enterprise institu­tions of th~ western world.

.From the Canadian border to _Cape Horn, we live jn a community of 21 American Republics which, to quote our Secretary of State, "avoids on the one hand the snares and delusions of alien

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE .)1225 domination and on the other the pit- formed, and now, 66 years later, we can ter-Americanism which had been deve1-falls af narrow nationalism." look back with pride at the increasing ·oping: since -1890.

The unity of spirit and purpose has friendship and increasing trade and cul- Today, on the anniversary of pan-not been easily w-0n, and perhaps too . tural relations which have taken place Americanism, the American Republics

·many people in our own country are in- between the United States and our sister . appropriately and proudly celebrate the . clined to take it for granted . . In fact, Republics of the south. This could not ;pr.ogress made by .their community. In . it represents th·e end product .of. over :a have been achieved were it .not for the , the short span of 66 years, they hav.e suc-century. of slow and often painful prog- combined efforts in our mutual interests · ceeded .in maintaining peace and. secu­ress starting with the first Congress of of the Latin American Republics and Tity on the continents; they have raised Panama convoked by the great Ameri- ourselves through the instrumentality of the health and living standards of the can.patriot. and liberator, Simon Bolivar · this .great international organization, the . American states; they have cooperated in 1826. ·Pan American Union, which now serves in the development of resources, indus-

The governments and peoples of the as the secretariat to the Organization try, and trade for their mutual benefit; United States and the 20 Latin Ameri- · of American States. . they have, collectively, made the Amer.-

.can..Republics have traveled a long road One -of the functions of the inter- . icas better lands in which to live. , With indeed since Bolivar's day, marked as it American system which· is -seldom men- such a record of accomplishments, they was . by. the struggles of infant na.tions · tioned is the mutual defense arrange- · look forward to still greater inter-Amer .. to gain their freedom from colonialism ment which exists for the defense of the ican cooperation in the future. and secure a firm economic foothold in hemisphere. Along with other regional Mr. FULTON. Mr. Speaker, as we are what was then largely a virgin wilder- defense systems, the inter-American sys- all aware, President Eisenhower has is­ness. tern, exemplified -by and through the sued a proclamation designating April

How diff~rent a spectacle today. Along American states, constitutes an impor- 14 as Pan-American Day, and the period the coasts of Central and South America, tant bulwark of defense and security .for April 8-14 ·as Pan-American Week. It

. on the pampas of Argentina, and in the the United States and the free world. has become -customary for the President jungles of Brazil, great modern cities It is well for us on this day to greet ·our ~o set aside such a period.each year, dur-

. have arisen. Fleets of ships and air- fellow legislative bodies in Latin Ameri- mg which we pay special tribute to the planes carry the commerce of the Amer- ca and to reassure the peoples of the 20 inter-American system of friendship and icas from one nation to another in this Latin American Republics of the friend- mutual cooperation which has served hemisphere, and around the rest of the ship which our.people .hold for them. the peoples of the Western Hemisphere world. Indeed, in the case of Brazil an This is also a fitting occasion for us to so well since it was first formalized 66 ~ntire era. of progress, as it developed talce stock of the ways and means -by years ago with the establishment of the m the Umted States-the western push · which we can increase the mutual under- - Pan American Union-now the Organi­of the railroads-may be byp:;i,ssed and standing and friendship between us ·so zation of American States-which has n;iade unnecessary by ~he ~-PI<;i expan- that we may stand together as pillars of its permanent seat in Washington and s1on there. of commercial aviation. a strong free world which is constantly of which the United States and tbe 20

Meanwhile our sister .republics are in- . being menaced by ·a ruthless interna- Latin American republics are members. creasing their population at the re- . tional communism. This will require It is customary .also in connection with markable ra~e of 2¥2 percent ~ year. not only mutual understanding but ml,1- thi~ annualocc~sl~n.for the people of the The population of Latm Amenca has tual .effort and mutual sacrifices as well . . Umted States, md1vidually and through

· doubled sin~e .1915, .and is . expected to May the inter-American system flourish · t~1eir Government, to sa.lute the .175 mil­, reach ~00 nullion by the end of the c~n.,. . :and grow in strength, understanding. , 11on .people of the Latm American .::e-tury-Just 44 years away. Meanwhile, , prosperity and free world solidarity. publics who over the years have contnb-in a single_ generation. these p_eople have ' uted so much to .the enrichment of our attained an economic development whieh THE EXPANSION OF PAN-AMERICANISM culture, the maintenance of our eco-

. the older industrialized nations took 150 · Mr. WILLIAMS of New Jersey. Mr. nomic prosperity and the safeguarding , years to ach~eve. Speak~r,. .it was Simon Bol~va-r wh? was of the security of the hemisphere.

It is with a sense of justifiable pride the prmcipal author of the idea of mter- We American people are realizing a _ that we. pause to. reflect this Pan-Amer- American cooperation, ·which we cele- genuine comprehension ·of . the impor­ican Day on the contribution which the · bra.te today. At the Congress of Panama · tance of our mutual association in this people of the United States have been in 1~32, he ~rged the 21 A~erican Re- hemisphere. The average United States privileged to. make in the economic and publics to _umte a~d to establish a s~stem · citizen hears much about the difficul­technical development of this vast area, of pan-Americamsm ba~ed ~m the ideals ties and the dangers which beset our

· while at the same time we contemplate of peace~ ;freedom~ and Justice. relations with other parts of the world, with appreciation and respect the many · Bolivar'.s hopes were fulfilled at the but we hear too little about the dynamic benefits which have accrued to our coun- first Iriter-Americ&n Congress, held in progress and manifold opportunities of

· try from our association with the peoples Washington in 1890; for a.t this gather- our neighbors of' the new world. o.f Latin America. ing of American nations the first co~- In part this may be attributed to the

Out of 'our association in the council crete step toward the est~blispment of old .adage that go.ad news does not make or the Organization of American States, our inter-American system was taken headlines as often as bad. I hope we our treaties of mutual defense and re- with 'the formation of the International Americans will never take for granted

· ciprocal assistance, our trade and our · Uni.on. of A~erican Republics: ~his· as- the friendship of our sister nations in · cultural contacts, has developed an soc1at1on, based on the prmc1ples of · this hemisphere, and focus our attention

ever-growing sense of partnership and equalit_y of all members and mutu~l co- solely on critical problems elsewhere. common purpose. .operation for the welfare and security -Of The members ·of ·our Foreign Affairs

I am sure that in the years to come the hemisphere, provided a firm founda- Committee and Foreign Relations. Com­the people of the United States will bend tion for the growing Pan American struc- · mittee whG are responsible under the their best efforts to support ·and ture. President's leadership for the conduct strengthen this relationship, in the in- Successive inter-American conferences of our foreign policy, and the millions terests not alone of the people of the strengthened the bonds that united the of our pl'ivate citizens who have busi­western hemisphere but the entire free republics .. The system became mature ness · contacts in Latin America, are world, to whom the inter-American sys- as the American nations continued to clearly conscious of the importance of tern has become a symbol of. the coop- share responsibility for the promotion of Latin America to the defense of the eration and mutual respect which it is peace and security and the development hemisphere, and to the economic well­possible to develop in a community of of economic, social, and cultural endeav- being of our good country. free and independent nations. -0rs. Finally, at the Ninth Inter-Ameri- This is evident in the tone of Presi-

Mr. RICHARDS. Mr. Speaker, April can Confere~ce, held at.Bogata~ 1948, dent Eisenhower~s Pan-American Day 14 will mark the 66th anniversary of the the Commumty of American Nat1~ns be- proclamation, which is an ·eloquent inter-American system which governs . came a permanent structure with the statement of the interdependence of all the r.elations .between the 21 American formation of the Organization <>f Ameri- American republics in maintaining the

. Republics of this hemisphere. On April can States. This organization solidified . peace and the freedom of the Western 14, 1890, the Pan American Union was the initial purposes and principles of .in- Hemisphere, and of the importance of

·e22s CONGRESSIONAL ·RECORD-· HOUSE April 12

.. maintaining our traditional 'friendship the progress and well-being of the OAS. situatton involving the ·1mbject airports. with our sister nations in Latin Amer· Florida's historical and cultural ties with In order to project a practical resolution ica. · her Latin American nelghbors have deep of this vexing problem, it is essential that

Among private or governmental peo· roots. Even the name of our great State all of the facts be known. ple whose work brings them into contact reflects its Spanish heritage. As we know, the airlines exert a tre­with Latin America there is no need to For this reason, Florida has made mendous influence upon Congress. I underscore the importance of this great great efforts to promote inter-Ameri- have received a rumor that no action area to the United states, nor is it neces.. can relations on the level of individual will be taken on this resolution. If this sary to list the reasons for our growing citizens. The University of Florida, for is true, it wiil be obvious to the public interdependence. The facts are too self· instance, has become one of the major that the airlines are getting· the same evident. They know that the population centers for studying all aspects of Latin preferential treatment that the railroads of Latin America is growing at the rate America-political, economic, historical, received many years ago. of about 2.5 percent a year, and at that geographical, and cultural. A new and My intention is not to force anyone rate may hit 500 million by the end of novel project for getting the American -into a position that is improper, but to the century, just 44 years from now. peopl~both north and south of the Rio bring about a solution by which the They read the trade figures, which show Grande-better acquainted is presently public will be properly served. that Latin America accounts for 22 per- taking shape on Biscayne Bay in Miami. The text of the resolution is as fol-cent of our total exports, and 32 percent We are building an Inter-American Cul- lows: of our total imports, and that 35 per· tural and Trade Center, 1,800 acres of Resolved, That there ls hereby created a cent of all United States direct foreign beautiful fairgrounds to house industrial select committee to be composed of 3 Mem­investment is there or approximately and handicraft exhibits of the 21 sister bers of the House of Representatives to be $6,256,000,000. republics. We hope it will become a appointed by the Speaker, 1 -of whom he

They know also that the Communist meeting ground for exporters and ini- shall designate as chairman. Any vacancy nations do not underestimate the impor- porters throughout the hemisphere. We occurring in the membership of the com-

d t mittee shall be filled in the same manner tance either of the area or its people. hope, too, that the fine pro uc s on

1 in which the original appointment was made. Far from attempting to conceal their in- display will help the many peop e who The committee is authorized and directed terest, the Soviets have stated frankly visit Florida each year to get some idea to conduct a full and complete investigation and publicly that they hope to develop of the wonderful people we call our and study of (1) whether the Detroit-Wayne closer economic, cultural, and political neighbors. Major Airport should be developed and uti­ties with the Latin America republics. On this threshold of the 67th year lized as the major civil air terminal serving

These are some of the-considerations of the existence of the union of Pan- the Detroit area, (2) whether the scheduled that we should all bear in mind while we American republics, it is fitting that we air ' carriers now using the Willow Run Air-

11 B 1. • h t· t t t port should transfer their operations to the celebrate this Pan-American Day. It is reca 0 ivar s prop e IC s a emen : Detroit-Wayne Major Airport, (3) whether not only an occasion for festivities and Freedom of the Americas is the hope of the Willow Run Airport sliould continue to rejoicing. It is an opportunity to pause . the universe. be operated under civil ownership as a joint and think serio?sly of the: l;>rea?th arid For it is only by our working diligently civil and military airport, (4) whether Air the depth of mter~Amer.1can .mterde· and harmoniously together that our be- Force Reserve fighter squadrons should be

d F h A N th relocated "from Selridge Air Force Base and pen ~nee. or eac menc~n, m or loved freedoms can be secured. Let us, established on the Willow Run Airport, (5) A~er1ca and South Am~rica, to ask then, rededicate ourselves today to the whether the naval air sta,tion snould be .re­h1mself what !1e c.an contribute perso~- lofty .principles and high ideals embodied located from Grosse Ile and established on ally to tl;le sohd~nty of the .free .peoples .. in the Organization of American States · the Will9w Run Airport, (6) whether tlie of our wonderful Western Hemisphere, as we wish it a "Happy Birthday" and Air National Guard' squadrons now stationed really_ the new world. Godspeed in the year to come. at Detroit:.wayne Major Airport should be ~r. SIKES. . Mr. · Spea~er, Satu~da_Y, . ·The SPEAKER. The question is ·on · transferrE;id to the )Villo'Y Run .6.irport, ap.d

_April 14, 1956, marks the 1_66th· anmver .. · tlie ·resolution.' - ', · (7) whe~hei: a master Pl.an of _an .tl].e air-f th f d · f th p A · ports in the Detroit metrop<;ilitan area can

sary o . . e oun . mg 0 ~ an l!len- _ The resolution was agreed to, and a and should be established in order to most can Umon. This oldest mternat1onal motion to reconsider was laid on the effectively utilize their facilities. . association in the world has grown into table The committee shall report to the House what we now know as the Organization · (or to the Clerk of the House if the .House of American States. On this· date we . SELECT COMMITTEE TO INVEST!- is not in sessiop.) as soon as . practicable pa.use each year to contemplate · the during the present Congress the results bf handiwork that built this union, and I GATE PROBLEMS RELATING TO its investigation and study, together with think we may be pardoned for our pride. THE DETROIT AREA AIRPORTS such recommendations as it deems advis-That such a union of 21 independent, Mr. LESINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ask able: . sovereign nations of many races, and unanimous consent to address the House For the purpose of carrying out this reso-d . It d 1 h Id for 1 minute, to rev1·se and extend my lution .t:he' committee, or any subcommittee iverse cu ures an anguages, s ou thereof authorized by the committee to hold have been conceived of .in the first place remarks, and include a resolution. hearings, is autho~iz~d to sit and act during is remarkable indeed. That it has ea- The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the present Congress· at such times and dured and grown stronger over the years the request o,f the gentleman from , places within the .Untted States, whetl;ler the in spite of occasional conflicts between · Michigan? · Houi;ie is in session, has recessed, or has all• its member states and the world shaking There was no ,objection. . journed, to hold such hearings, and to re-e:ffect of 2 major world wars is truly Mr. LESINSKI. Mr. Speaker, I am qu~re, by subpena or otherwise, the attend-extraordinary . . I take this opportunity today introducing a House resolution for . ance and testimony of such witnesses and to congratulate the other republics of the purpose of creating a select com- the production of such books, records, cor­the inter-American f,amily . on another mittee of three Members of the House of responc;lence, memoranda, papers, and docu-ments, as it deems necessary. Subpenas may year of earnest work toward perfecting ·Representatives to conduct a full and . be issued under the signature of the chair­our mutual alliance. The existence of complete investigation relating to the man of the committee or any member of the the organization should be an inspira· problems of the Detroit area airports, committee designated by him, and may be tion to the world that where good will both civilian and military. served by any person designated by such and patience reign; international under.. The resolution calls for recommenda· chairman or member. · · standing and cooperation are possible. tions by the committee as to which air·

All of US know, however, that the SUC• port should be utilized to the utmost for cess of an international organization in civilian purposes and for proper military BATAAN DAY COMMEMORATION promoting peace and prosperity depends, relocation. It also calls for complete DINNER in the main, on the public support it en· hearings and the subpenaing of . any Mr. LECOMPTE. Mr. Speaker, I ask joys. No matter how fine . a building it witnesses, records, documents, and other . unanimous consent to address the House occupies or how devoted are its em- evidence as necessary. and t.<>. include a Bataan Day message p1oyees, an international organization . As you see, the ·resolution is not in· from President Dwight D. · Eisenhower of sovereign states can do no more than tended to prove a point, but' simply to to President Ramon Magsaysay and also reflect public opinion: We in Florida :find out all the facts relating to the message from 'President Ramon Magsay .. . feel, perhaps, a particular concern for many contradictory statements about-the say to President Dwight D. Eisenhower.

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 6227 The SPEAKER. Is there objection to

the request of the gentleman from Iowa? There was no objection. Mr. LECOMPTE. Mr. Speaker, it was

my privilege to be present-the other eve­ning at the Bataan Day commemoration dinner at the Mayflower Hotel given ·by Gen. Carlos P. Romulo and the Philip­pine Association. It was · a pleasure to see in attendance a large number of Sen­ators, Congressmen, C&binet members, Justices of the Supreme Court, the high echelon of the State Department, our Armed Forces, leading businessmen and industrialists, with their ladies, all of them gathered together to honor the American and Filipino soldier.s who put up that magnificent display of courage and heroism in Bataan.

It was a splendidly arranged dinner worthy of the .historic occasion for which it was held. Two addresses were de­livered, one by the host and the other by the guest of honor, our own Speaker SAM RAYBURN, ~ho was at the same time con­ferred the highest decoration in the gift of the Government of the Philippines. These two addre2ses and the citation were inserted-in the RECORD by our dis­tinguished colleague. the Representative of Massachusetts, Congressman Mc­CORMACK, April 10, 1956.

I wish to comment on General Romulo's speech because I believe it is a good example of how to talk to the American people. It was a forceful and .vigorous one because it highlighted what we should do in the Philippines that we are not now doing, but it was done in such a graceful, friendly way that no one can take exception . to any part of it. There were no threats, no attempts at ·intimidation, no straining for political effect, no oratorical lamentations over our supposed failures. But it was clear ai:id emphatic in its statement of facts of what our Filipino friends feel and want, as subtle as it was gentl('!, as diplo­matic as it was effective. It was sobe:i: and restrained, ~with a dignity that can­not help but command :r;espect and ad­miration.

I underscore General Romulo's speech, its tone and its style. because too often some of our foreign friends seem to think that to impress us they must either talk

·tough or adopt theatrical attitudes of disenchantment at what they magnify as our neglect of friends. They do not know or they choose to ignore that the American people cannot be intimidated and that an appeal to our inherent sense of fairness goes a long way with us be­cause it is always our endeavor to be rea­sonable and just. The standing·ovation ·given General Romulo showed that he achieved the result he wanted to get. His speech was realiy an invitation to each of us in Congress to indulge in a searching national introspection.

Two messages were read during the evening that revealed statesmanship of the highest order. · I include the message of President Eisenhower to President Magsaysay and the latter's reply:

BATAAN DAY MESSAGE FROM PRESID_ENT DWIGHT D. EISENH_9WER

President RAMON MA-GSAYSAY: · ' · . I · send greetings, on behalf of •the -people of the United States, to our .. friends in· the PhHipph)es on : this. day of ,,memories and

dedlcatlon. Yt 18 fitting that Bataan Day should ibe the :Chosen time to commemorate Philippine-American friendship for it re­minds us of the unity that was our;s in times of str.ess .and trial.

The ensuing 14 years have brought ever­tncreasing understanding and cooperation. This year you will mark the 10th annlver­<Sary of the independence of your nation. We can be justly proud of the ·example of international brotherhood which we, to­gether. have provided during the past dec­ade.

Our hearts should be :filled with gratitude toward those brave men whom we remember un this day-not only for their service in war, but for the legacy of courage and in­'Splratlon which they left !or us to follow in time of peace.

DwIGHT JllISENHOWER. APRIL 9, 195ft

BATAAN DAY MESSAGE FROM PRESIDENT RAMON MAGSAYSAY

President DWIGHT D. EISENHOWER: I am grateful to you for your message

commemorating Bataan Day and I wish to reciprocate your cordial greetings. Our two peoples are united by an imperishable bond that was forged in Bataan by the courage and heroism of our soldiers.

We have fought together in war and are eooperating with each other in peace to up­hold freedom and democracy. Ours is a friendship based on mutual respect and be­ing on such a firm basis it is an enduring one.

It is my hope that our close collaboration in working for the peace and security of the free world will continue to demonstrate that whatever inevitable temporary and super­ficial diiferences we may have from time to time, they are no .barrier to the mutuality of our responsibility to serve the best interests of our respective countries and our common dedication to fight for the democratic ideal.

As we commemorate a historic event which signalizes a spiritual victory over a military ·defeat I wish to reiterate my people's faith in the righteousness and invincibility of the cause of freedom and human dignity to which we are dedicated.

RAMON MAGSAYSAY. APRIL 9, 1956.

THE EX ORBIT ANT PRICE OF SCRAP STEEL

Mr. BEAMER. 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 In­diana?

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

call the attention of the House and the -entire country to a condition that has arisen and that is persisting in reference to the prices of steel and iron scrap. It happens that in the fifth district of In­diana which I have the privilege to represent we have some semi-integrated steel plants which have found it neces­sary to purchase most of their supply of material for smelting purposes from people who are , charging exorbitant prices. for .scrap steel.

This exorbitant increase in the price of scrap steel results from the large ex­_portation of this scrap to other coun-tries. In fact, since 1953 1t has multi­plied nearly 15 times. - I hope that the Department of Commerce and other in­terested agencies will investigate this

. :serious . situation~.' -

Mr. MCCORMACK. Mr. Sp-eaker. will-the gentleman yield?

Mr. BEAMER. I yield to the gentle­man from Massachusetts. - Mr. McCORMACK. I agree with the gentleman. I am very much interested in this subject and had inserted in the RECORD the other day a compilation showing the tremendous increase in the amount of scrap metal being sent abroad. The gentleman says it has in­ereased more than 15 times in a period <>f 2 years, from a little over 300,000 tons to over 5 million tons. The gentleman addresses the House on a very important subject.

Mr. BEAMER. I thank the gentle­man from Massachusetts.

ALGER HISS AT PRINCETON UNIVERSITY

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to ad­dress the House for l minute and to re­vise and extend my remarks.

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

There was -no objection. .Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr.

Speaker, you will find, beginning on page 6162 of yesterday's RECORD, the gentleman from New Jersey tMr. TUMULTY] expressed some criticism ot the judgment of officials of Princeton University because they had agreed to permit a Mr. Hiss to address the student body. Unfortunately, as I understood, I agreed with the gentleman because I thought he was only criticizing their -judgment.

Thinking over his argument and the principle involved last night, and this morning I am convinced that something more than a question of policy is in­volved.

I want to go one step further than we did yesterday and go along with 'the idea.

. that it is improper for any institution of learning to bring in a speaker, es­pecially one who is known throughout the Nation and who has heretofore pub­licly been engaged in an effort to over­throw our Government by force and violence who has been convicted of de­liberately intentionally g1vmg false testimony to speak before and advise a student or any other group as to the

. foreign policy we should follow on a matter where he has heretofore .served the interest of an enemy country. I think we might just as well bring in an embezzler who was seeking a position in a bank to explain banking procedure. It is my purpose to withdraw any thought or expression of opinion that you were right in only questioning their judgment. I think we should have gone further and asserted that no one who ·was an advocate of a policy or . program the adoption -of which would mean the end of our ·form of government has the right to express such views publicly.

PRINCETON. UNIVERSITY Mr. TUMULTY. Mr. Speaker, I ask

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

~228 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April ·12 The SPEAKER. Is there objection to

the request of the gentleman from New Jersey?

There was no objection. Mr. TUMULTY. Mr. · Speaker, in

answer to my distinguished colleague, the gentleman from Michigan CMr. HOFFMAN], may Lsay that I agree quite thoroughly with him. I spoke extempo­raneously yesterday, and I thought I made myself clear. I said I thought that Dr. Dodds, the president of Princeton University, should take Mr. Hiss and throw him out by the scruff of the neck. I do not concede that educators have the right to permit the universities un­der their control to be used by the · ene­mies of our country to advance their cause. I assume an educator is sup­posed to teach his students, and I assume when students do something wrong, whether they are children of 6 or chil­dren of 18, the educator would and should reprove them. I said I thought Dr. Dodd, president of Princeton, should put the "children" involved-because that is what they are-over his knee and pad­dle their Red aspirations thoroughly. So, I agree with the gentleman, and thank him for his interest as he is a dis­tinguished American.

Students having such .a disregard for college and country should be disciplined by the faculty-if the faculty is doing its duty to the students and their parents.

AUTHORIZING CONSTRUCTION .FOR THE MILITARY DEPARTMENTS Mr. VINSON. Mr. Speaker, .I move

that the House resolve itself into .the Committee of th~ Whole House on the State of the Union for the further con­sideration of the bill <H. R. 9893 > to au:. thorize certain construction at military installations, and· for other purposes.

The motion was agreed to. Accordingly the House -resolved itself

into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the further consideration of the bill H. R. 9893, with Mr. DELANEY in the chair.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog­

nizes the gentleman from Michigan CMr. FORD],

Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, at the time I was speaking yesterday, I pointed out that if the action of the committee stands as it is, the construction of this vitally important jet base in the State of Michigan will be delayed, 1 year,. and, secondly, an additional cost of a mini­mum of $5,188,950 will be involved.

·At ·this time I should like-to point out again that the statement as to delay is predicated on a letter I received from the Secretary of the Air Force on March 21, 1956. I quoted the pertinent portions of the letter in my remarks yesterday.

At this point I should like to turn specifically to the cost factor. The testi­mony before the House Committee on Armed Services indicates first that if the Air Force is required to change the site from what is kiiown as the Kalkaska site, which is here Cindic~ting on chart] to the Manistee site, which is here, the loss in dollars will be a minim.um of $350,000 and probably closer to $500,000. The

reason for that wasteful · expenditure is cost would be $938,950 cheaper than the precisely this. The Air Force last Au- Manistee · site. gust got concurrence from the respec- When you add it all up, the picture is tive committees of the House and Senate precisely this: If we move from Kal­for the initiation of construction at the kaska to Manistee we throw away at so-called Kalkaska site. The Air Force least $350,000 and possibly $500,000. If in good faith went ahead with that con- we move from Kalkaska to Manistee we struction. They have done design work charge ourselves, the Federal Govern­on the runways. They have made deft- ment, at least $2,700,000 more and pos­nite plans. They have signed contracts. sibly $4,600,000 more over a 10-year There is no doubt that they have spent period. If we move from Kalkaska to at least $350,000 and probably closer to Manistee we find that in the latest flg­$500,000, which amount of money will ures submitted by the Air Force there be totally wasted if the base is changed is a differential in cost of construction from Kalkaska to Manistee. , of almost $1 million. When you take

·Secondly, this base is a very imper- the cost and the. delay, it seems to me tant part of our national-defense pie- that the position of the · committee was ture. It is tied in with what we call the in error. SAGE system; that is, semiautomatic I intend to offer an amendment to re­ground environment program. It is a store the language the way the Air Force 10-year lease between the Air Force and proposed. · I would certainly · hope that Western Electric and constituent com- the members of this committee would panies of the A. T. & T. When you figure support this amendment. It has been the cost on the SAGE system, you have a very unfortunate situation that has to figure what the operational cost will developed over a period of . about 2 Y2 be over a 10-year period. There will be years. I dislike very greatly getting into a minimum annual excessive cost if the this problem; but when you see the facts site is at Manistee over Kalkaska of and figures I feel that you cannot help $270,000. ' but take the course of action I have

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the taken. gentleman from Michigan CMr. FORD] There is one point I should like to .. has expired. bring out. It has been stated, and I

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield think .it is.. accurate, that the former the gentleman 5 minutes additional. Secretary of the Air ForGe promised ,the

Mr. FORD. There is a , ve.ry distinct . gentlewo.:QJan from Michigan CMi~s possibility that the annual excessive cost ·THOMPSON] that this base would be con­could go up to $460,000. So, if you take structed in her district. It was origi­$270,000 times 10, it is an excess cost nally proposed that the base be in what $2,700,000. Or, if you use the figure was called the Long Lake area, whicJ::i $460,000 and multiply it by 10, it comes is somewhere around here as indicated to $4,600,000. on this map. That .was vetoed because

I am sure that many Members wonder it was felt it would .be too close to a very why there is a differential on an an- famous music camp. Then the Air. Force nual basis. The reason is very simple. proposed that it be built in what we call The SAGE system ties into certain basic the ,. Benzi~ site. The Commi~tee on vital trunklines that the telephone com- Armed Services through one pf its sub-pany has throughout the country. It so committees vetoed that site. · happens that at the present time the Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the Michigan Bell Telephone Co. has a ma- gentleman yield? . , . jor trunkline which runs more or less Mr. FORD . . I yield· to the gentleman up through the Cadillac area, northward from Georgia. . into Michigan. The SAGE system com- Mr. VINSON. The gentleman is not munication lines are tied into that trunk- accurate when he says the Committee on line. The facts and figures indicate that Armed Services vetoed the Benzie site. from this trunkline which runs up like What the Committee on Armed SeFvices this Cindicating on chartJ the Kalkaska did after our own investiga.tion was de­site is approximately 24.· miles · closer to termine that it should not be located the trunkline than the Manistee site within 15 miles· of the music center. would be. It is purely a mathematical Mr. FORD. The gentleman from problem, measuring the distance from Georgia is very correct. The net effect, each site to the trunkline. If you take however, is that the Benzie site was ve­the rate which is identical for each site toed. When the Benzie site was removed and multiply it by the distance, you ar- as a possible site, the Air Force then rive at the figure. As I indicated, the went down to what we call the Cadillac 10-year differential between the two site. The Benzie site and the Cadillac s:ites in dollars will be a minimum of site are both within Miss THOMPSON'S dis­$2, 700,000 and patentially it could be trict. The district line runs right here. $4,600,000. Here is the 11th District and here is the

Those facts and figures can be sub- 9th District. · stantiated by the Air Force. I have In December of 1954 or in January of asked them to check and doublecheck 1955 the gentlewoman from Michigan with the people who will do the con- [Miss THOMPSON], according to her tes­struction, and there is no question in my timony in these hearings, contacted the mind that they are accurate. chairman oJ the Committee on Appro-

The third factor that involves this priations and other members of .the $5 million excessive cost is this: In the Committee on Appropriations indicating· letter from Secretary of the Air Force her objection to the Cadillac site. Our Quarles on March 21, after I asked him committee; the Subcommittee on Mili­as to the comparative cost figures for tary Appropriations, at the request of initial construction, he indicated that the gentlewoman from Michigan CMiss the Kalkaska site initial construction THOMPSON] undertook a thorough inves-

. ' ..

1956 .. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- - HOUSE " '6229 tigation of the cost and the selection of this site. The committee requested from ., the Air Force all the -factual data we could accumulate. That factual data _ was submitted to our committee, and our · committee felt, after looking at the in­formation, that we as a committee could not approve the construction of this site. In effect we agreed with the gentlewom­an from Michigan [Miss THOMPSON].

The Air. Force then had two alterna­tives left. They could go to the Kal­kaska site, or they could go to the Manis­tee site. The Air Force then decided on their own that they would select the Kal­kaska site. They were not directed by Mr. VINSON'S committee, nor were they directed by Mr. CANNON'S committee, nor by the subcommittee under the gentle­man from Texas [Mr. MAHON].

The Air Force.selected this site out of these two alternatives. Then they got permission to go ahead, and they did in­vest this money .to get construction start­ed. They have a .contract for 7,100 acres of State-owned land in this area. The State conservation commission appmved the contract. They have it on a . $1-a­year lease. Actually; they have to clear considerable fine timberland. They went ahead and cleared one-third of it when this committee action was taken about 3 weeks ago.

I might say one further thing. The gentlewoman · from Michigan [Miss THOMPSON] was promised that this base · would be in her district. On this chart. you see the dividing line between the gentlewoman's -district and the district of the· g~ntleman from Michigan_ [Mr. KNoxJ. This base is 1 mile from Miss THOMPSON'S district, and Traverse City is a sizable community in· her district. I would say with complete assurance that probably 90 percent of the economic ben­efits and impact would accrue in the fol­lowing way. Here you see a town - of 1,250 people, and here is a community with 16,900 people. The answer is that most of the· economic benefit will accrue that way.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FORD. I yield. , Mr. GROSS. The fact of the m.atter

is that even if she were assured that this air base would be in her district, it might just as well be 100 miles .away as 1 mile away. The fact remains that according to your proposal, it will not be located in her distriQt: _is that not correct? .

Mr. FORD. Technically, you .are cor­rect, but I do not think we can justify the expenditure of $5 million extra and the delay -of 1 year because a base is geo­graphically s~tuated. 1 mile ac~oss a con­gressional district line.

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FORD. I am delighted to yield. Mr. VINSON. Does the .distinguished

gentleman from Michig~ n9t_ think t_hat it comes with P<;>0r grace for him fo be discussing -the matter of delay?

Mr. FORD. I am very glad ~hat tbe gentleman raises that question.

Mr. VINSON~ If I may finish my question-in the first instanc~, th~ _Air Force put it at c~dillac an_d the gentle­man and his committee delayed it until this present day. .. - · ·

Mr. FORD. I~ pleased the gentle~ man from Georgia raised that question because our committee was not asked to take . any action on this problem , until the distinguished gentlewoman from Michigan requested such action. She is a highiy respected Member of this. body and when she made the charges, ·which she did, it was incumbent upon a re­sponsible committee of this body to look at the facts. We did .that, and after getting the facts from the responsible authorities in the Air Force, we agreed with the gentlewoman from Michigan [Miss THOMPSON].

Mr. VINSON. May I say in view of that statement, let us not talk about de­lay because the committee which refused to appropriate the money delayed it and it is still delayed. As a matter of fact, it may be that after a while it may be decided that the security of the country does not require any base up there at all. But, for the time being, let us for­get about delay because I do not think it comes with good grace for our good friend to be talking about delay. : The CHAIRMAN. The time of the

gentleman from Michigan has again ex­pired.

Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 20 minutes to the gentleman from Mich-igan [Mr. KNOXJ. -

Mr. KNOX. Mr. Chairman, it is with some regret that I find myself con­strained today to take the well of this House in the n:ltne of the people of this Nation, and also in the cause of . na­tional security, but I feel constrained to do so because this recommendation of the Committee on Armed Services will cause the taxpayers of this Nation to for­feit a half-million dollars that has al­ready been spent on a site that was se­lected by the Air Force. As Mr. FORD has said, it had the · approval of the four committees which have jurisdiction over such facts.

Mr. Chairman, in the Yery able re­marks by my distinguished and esteemed chairman of the Committee on Armed Services on Tuesday on the pending leg­islation, the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. VINSON] very properly pointed out to the Members of this body the vital character of this base in the Traverse City area. The distinguished chairman discussed with the Members the fact that approximately 150 miles of vital indus­trial area will be left unguarded until such time as the base in this area is com­pleted. His very able remarks bear re­peating at this time. I quote from 'the distinguished gentleman's remarks of Tuesday: -

.Today there is a .gap in om: defen.se line across the northern part of the United States and this gap will be filled by the airbase which will be built in what has been called the Traverse City area. ' Wurtsmith Air Force Base ls about 75

miles south and east of the Traverse City area and Kinross Air Force Base is about the same distance north of the Traverse City area. This means that there is - a gap of something 1n the order of 150 miles which is ·today not adequately protected.

· That is the end of the quotation ·from my· distinguiShed friend's . remarks of 'J;u~sd~y. · -

Now, Mr. Chairman, I support the con­cern expressed by the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services on this project.

On January 18, 1955, I wrote ·Hon. CARL VINSON, chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, the following letter:

As the Representative of the 11th Con­gressional District of Michigan, I have been called upon to request of your committee, an appointment for a delegation from -Trav­erse City, Grand Traverse County, and the city of Kalkaska, Kalkaska County, for the purpose of conveying to the Armed Services Committee their position on the location of the proposed jet airbase which was au­thorized by Congress on July 27, 1954.

. Both groups are interested in giving the committee all of the factual information they have, and which they believe to be in the best interest as far as the jet base is concerned.

It is my hope that you will look kindly upon this request and inform me at your earliest convenience of the date set for the Traverse City and Kalkaska delegations to meet with you. .

The distinguished gentleman from Georgia, chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, replied to me immedi­ately, and I should like to quote from that letter which the chairman sent to my office.

I quote from Mr. VINSON'S letter as fol­lows:

The committee has been faced in the past on several occasions with the same problem which exists here, that is, the selection by one of the departments of a site for a mili­tary installation only to have the site se­lected unsatisfactory to people in the im­mediate or adjoining areas.

It has been the experience of the com­mittee. that unless there ~re obvious and compelling reasons for reconsideration · of the site selected, .and these reasons should. ih the last analysis relate directly to our de­fense, no useful purpose is served by' en­gaging in action which can well be con­strued as substituting the judgment of the committee for the qualified people in the military departments.

It is my judgment that the defense posture of the United States and our-mil­itary greatness may in large part be at­tributable to the efforts and wisdom of the distinguished chairman of the House Armed Services Committee. I believe his counsel merits great attention by the Members of the House. · Therefore I believe it is essential that

the base in the Traverse City area be completed with the utmost expedition at the location to be selected by the D~­partment of the Air Force based on con­siderations of military suitability ·and economy. These objectives can only be realized by continuing the base at Kal­kaska.

Mr. Chairman, when the military con­struction bill is read for amendment I shall join with my colleague from MiCh­igan [Mr. FORD] in offering an amend­ment to section 301 of H. R. 9893, to pro­vide for the continuation of construction already begun on a jet interceptor base at Kalkaska, Mich., rather than to ·start all over again at a new location with _ a jet base at a site to be selected at Manis­~ee, Mich. Not to continue the b.ase. at Kalkaska will mean a· 1 year's delay in the completion of a jet base so vital and ~rge:Q.t to our northern defense perimeter QY the pep~rtment of the AJr Fo_rce.

.

' .

.6230. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

~ At this point, Mr. Chairman; I call to Y<>Ur attention an article appearing in the Washington Post of April 6 entitled "A Wonder of the World Takes Form in the · Arctic."- ~his .article brings to the attention of our country the 3,000-mile radar defense system known as DEW line. If this new radar system is going to accomplish its purpose, then it is most essential that we have the necessary jet interceptor bases along the northern perimeter of the United States to receive the alert from the radar to intercept the enemy before he can strike with his devastating bombs on the industrial cen­ters of the United States, which are the nerve centers of the production of weapons and material for our security.

The Kalkaska base site is one of the overall vital installations in this system according to the Department of the Air Force.

We once again go back to the distin­guished chairman of the Armed Services Committee which he well documented in his statement on Tuesday, that there is this gap and that unless it i~ filled we will be vulnerable as far as any enemy may be concerned.

Our amendment to continue the base at Kalkaska will save the American tax­payers millions of dollars in construc­tion and maintenance costs. So, as an aside, the savings will be.nefit the same taxpayers who in a few days will be called upon to make their final tax accounting for the year 1955.

Our amendment to continue the base at Kalkaska will be in accord with the expert strategical and military judgment of the Department of the Air Force and will be in accord with the House and Senate Committees on the Armed Serv­ices and the Committee on Appropria­tions, which have previously specifically and expressly approved the location of the jet base in the Kalkaska area. The amendment that will be offered to re­tain the. jet base at· Kalkaska has the support of ·the Department of the Air Force because of urgent defense consid­erations. It has the support of Sena­tor POTTER of Michigan and a large ma­jority of the members of the Michigan delegation in the Congress.

Senator POTTER gave a release and I am going to read the release that Sen­ator POTTER issued to the press on Mon­day; March 12, in which the Senator said:

There ls but one paramount consideration in the construction of this base and that is our effort in furthering the defense of our entire country. Such a base should not be lpcated or relocated for any reasons of lo­cal interests. An air base is a matter of na­tional concern. My position has always been, and still is, what is in the best interests of our national defense-

And he continued on. Mr. CEDERBERG. Mr. Chairman,

will the gentleman yield? · Mr. KNOX. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. CEDERBERG. I want to associ­ate myself with the remarks of the gen­tleman from Michigan. I served as a member of the Subcommittee on Appro­priations that handled the hearings ·on this base in northern Michigan. -I was interested personally in a. base in my dis-

trict, this identical base, but after going over the facts with the Air Force I came to the conclusion, reluctantly I may say, and I am not so sure that the Air Force was right, that they should have put it in my district, but nevertheless we have reached the point now where the Kal­kaska site should be maintained. The very fact that the Michigan Department of Conservation has already leased some seven or eight thousand acres to the Fed­eral Government for this site, the ·clear­ing of the site is under way at the present time, the fact that it will cost more to have the base located in Manistee than it will at Kalkaska, is something that this Congress ought to take· into considera­tion, and that includes not only the orig­inal cost, but the accruing annual costs which are a factor here. It seems to me that this body in its wisdom ought to restore the Kalkaska site because it is the logical site from the national defense point of view. I do not think we ought to delay this airbase 1 year longer.

Mr. VINSON. Mt. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. KNOX. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. VINSON. In reply to the state­ment of the distinguished gentleman, I r.ead from the record the testimony of Mr. Ferry of the Department of Defense. I asked this question:

From the military standpoint are they equal?

Mr. FERRY. Yes, sir~ •

Mr. CEDERBERG. I believe that from a military standpoint that may be true; however, there are economic factors involved here as far as costs are con­cerned that some are not familiar with.

Mr. VINSON. I will put in a telegram i received this morning from some tele­phone people up in that section which assures me that we need not be disturbed by ·any excessive charges on account of the operation regardless of the site chosen. The telegram says:

In the opinion of the Michigan Independ­ent Telephone Association, the telephone section of the Michigan Public Utility Com­mission and our omce, we assure the Con­gress and the Air Force of approximately the same operational costs of the SAGE device at Manistee as at Kalkaska.

Mr. CEDERBERG. May . I ask the distinguished chairman of the Com­mittee on Armed Services a question? I would not dispute those figures, al­though I understand the Air Force has figures that do not quite bear that out. In view of the fact that the State De­partment of Conservation has already leased some seven or eight thousand acres, should that not be taken into con­sideration?

Mr. VINSON. May I call attention to the fact that it was developed in the committee, by witnesses who testified, that litigation is now in process on ac­count of this land being made available. Is that the fact? I ask the distinguished gentleman, is that not t~e fact?

Mr. KNOX. Mr. Chairman, I will be very happy to answer. that question. There is no litigation as far as the 8,000 acres of land is concerned. The Con­servation Department has leased 8,000 acres of State-owned lands at a cost to

the Federal Government of $1 a year for a 99-year term lease. Now, the rest of the property, which is privately owned, is being purchased by a group of citizens who have put up their own dollars in order-to acquire the property to be deeded in title to the Federal Government for airport purposes. Now, there has been some $19,000 of that money expended at this time, Mr. Chairman, and I believe further proeeedings have ceased since the action of the committee. . Mr. VINSON. It is true, is it not, that

we accorded you, as we do all Members, the privilege of testifying, and you heard the witnesses testify that litigation was taking place now by citizens of that community involving either taxes or use of money in connection with the establishment of this base?

Mr. KNOX. I believe, Mr. Chairman, you have reference to what we in Mich­igan know as the swamp tax fund. The State of Michigan pays back to the school districts of each district in the State of Michigan 10 cents an acre for all of those lands that are held by the State of Michigan in title, which they can use for school and township purposes. Now, I understand that Mr. Comfort of St. :i.cmis, Mo., has gone into the courts and is endeavoring to get an injunction to restrain the county from releasing · those .funds that were dedicated for school purposes and compel the State to pay them. Now, that is a matter of local concern; that is not any concern of the Congress at all.

Mr. CEDERBERG. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield further, I want to state very definitely that my district is not involved in this in any manner. And, I am sure that the chairman wrn agree with me in· this, that the location of airbases, when you come to decide whether you are going to put an airbase in a given location, is an area proposi­tion and not pinpointed. It is not whether a military base could not be built here 01~ there or anywhere. In fact, is it not a fact that the Air Force has stated that there will be a 1-year de­lay if there is a change of location in this area?

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield further? ·

Mr. KNOX. I yield. Mr. VINSON. I agree with you that

we designate an area, the Traverse-City area, and following that out, it ulti­mately was decided it would be Cadillac, and the gentleman's committee said, "No, we are not going to let you place it at Cadillac; you must go somewhere else" Now, is that not a fact?

Mr. CEDERBERG. Let me say this. I was not on the subcommittee at that time. I had left the subcommittee when that decision had been made. But, just let me say this: Originally the Traverse City area was decided upon. Kalkaska is closer to the Traverse City area than any other location. Is that not correct, Mr. Chairman? ~ Mr. VINSON. That may be, but this

other site is in the same area, too, and Cadillac was in the same area, and your committee was the one that said, "No, we are not going to let it go to Cadillac," and that is .in the area. Now, I do say, and I repeat, with all deference to my

/

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 6231 good friend from Michigan, it does not come with good grace for any of you to talk about delay. · Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. KNOX. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. FORD. It also should be pointed out, however, that the first delay in this controversy resulted from action taken by the subcommittee of the Committee on Armed Services when they drew a 15-mile circle around the Interlachen Music Camp. That decision by the com­mittee then forced the Air Force to go to Cadillac.

Mr. VINSON. Then, when we drew a limitation of 15 miles, then you stepped into the picture and said, "Now, the Air Force has made a further survey, and we are not going to let you go down to Cadillac." So, it may not be becoming to me to talk about delay, but I think certainly is not becoming to you to talk about it.

The CHAffiMAN. The time of the gentleman from Michigan has expired.

(Mr. KNOX <at the request of Mr. VINSON and Mr. SHORT) was permitted to proceed for 10 additional minutes.)

Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield further?

Mr. KNOX. I yield. Mr. FORD. To conclude my com­

ment, we all admit that this action by the committee will result in a year's de­lay. There does not seem to be any doubt about that. So, I am willing to assume some responsibility for the delay, and I presume that the members of th~ Armed services Committee will likewise assume some responsibility. The delay that came about through our Committee on Appropriation resulted from a request of the gentlewoman from Michigan to Mr. CANNON and Mr. MAHON to investi­gate the selection at Cadillac. At her request the committee did go into the matter. We did not get into it until we were specifically asked to do so. We did not initiate the inquiry.

Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield at that point?

Mr. KNOX. I am glad to yield to the gentleman.

Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I had re­solved to say not one word before the House on this matter because of the awful mess we are in. The grave mistake was made after I, as chairman of the Committee on Armed Services, named Mr. Shafer, Mr. Rivers, and Mr. Wicker­sham as a subcommittee and sent our counsel, Mr. Blandford, to Michigan to inspect these sites. That subcommittee reported to the full committee. The full committee on their recommendation and after a personal inspection by the Secre­tary of the Air Force, decided to send it to Cadillac. When the matter came to the Committee on Appropriations the Subcommittee on Appropriations arro­gated to themselves by an unlawful transgression upon the jurisdiction of a standing legislative committee of this House the power to say, "No, we will not vote funds to send this to Cadillac."

We could have avoided this nasty fight and bitterness if the will of the Commit­tee on Armed Services after they had explored the matter and after the deci-

sion had been made by the Secretary of the Air Force, had been carried out. We have reached the point where I do not care how the House votes on the matter, but I wanted to get just a little dime's worth in the RECORD in order that truth might be known.

Mr. KNOX. Mr. Chairman, the ques .. tion of delay, of course, is a very im­portant one as far as I am concerned. The fact that the airbase is located in my district was not my doing. It was the doing of the Air Force and had been approved by these· committees. I hold in my hand am.davits from people in the area who have expanded their business, who have contracted for new dwellings, new . facilities, amounting to $462,685. These people acted in good faith. The Air Force informed them that the air· base was going to be constructed there. They also informed the Corps of Engi .. neers that they should proceed with the acquisition of the privately owned land. Everything went along in accord with the best interests of the Air Force.

Mr. Chairman, if this committee rec­ommendation should prevail, you are going to break faith with the people who took Congress at their word as of 1 year ago and approved this jet interceptor base in the Kalkaska area. These people have no method of recovery. They will have to take their loss. There is one man contracted for $150,000 in order to get necessary facilities in there which would go along with the needs as far as the Air Force is concerned.

I think it is very vital that this ques­tion be settled once and for all so that we sh·ould not cause a 1-year's delay, plus the fact that we would be wasting half a million dollars that the Air Force has already spent at the Kalkaska site; also the fact that the Air Force has said that it will cost from $270,000 to $500,000 more annually to operate at the Manistee site than it will at the Kalkaska site where they are now located.

Mr. Chairman, I should like to bring to your attention a statem·ent in the hearings before the Committee on Armed Services. The gentleman from Okla­homa [Mr. WICKERSHAM], a member of the committee, speaking to Mr. Ferry said:

If you desire to expand in the future can you expand at one base as easily as you can at the other?

Mr. FERRY. No, sir. We can expand more readily at the Kalkaska site than at the Man­istee site because of soil conditions. We run into a rather difficult peak situation. It would be difficult to extend our runways.

Those are not my words, those are the words of the military experts. I do not believe that they should be ignored. We are rapidly developing new weapons com· ing in with our new-type planes that have been known to fly close to 1,000 miles an hour. You know that when they come to put these planes on the bases they must extend present runways. It is impossible for them to operate off the same runways we are operating from today, where our planes are flying only 450 to 600 miles an hour.

The amendment that will be offered is supported by the people of the commu· nity of Kalkaska and Traverse City, Mich., because of their patriotic aware-

ness of the vital part that such a base would play in the Nation's defense against an enemy attack. The people of Kalkaska are virtually unanimous in their view that if the Air Force wants Kalkaska, Kalkaska wants the Air Force.

I have here a letter that I should like to read to the Members. This is ad­dressed to Merle C. Lutz, president of the Kalkaska Air Base Committee, Inc.:

DEAR Sm: Last summer I was only able to spend about 2 weeks up at Torch Lake. For 3 days out of those 2 weeks, I carried a petition around opposing the airbase. As I talked to the various types of people up there, that is renters, owners, and per­manent residents, I became aware of the fact that there were two sides to the story. However, I am of the opinion now that there are three sides to the story: The permanent residents', those of us who are summer resorters', and the Air Force. As I talked about the airbase with different people, I became less sold on my side of the story. I felt like an aristocrat robbing the less for­tunate of their right to make a living. This was the argument used by the residents. They said that the airbase would bring business to them. I don't believe that this would be the case, because from my expe­rience with the Armed Forces I have found that they don't use too many civilians.

I have now had a chance to look at the situation objectively, and I feel that we, as citizens of the United States, have an obli­gation to our country. That obligation is to back our Armed Forces. I have two brothers who have served, and I have many friends who have, and are now in the service. I have talked with them and heard of their experiences. I think that it is the least we, who do not have to spend 2 or 3 years out of our lives (important years, I might add) in this type of service can do.

The men who will be stationed at this base are of the highest caliber. They are risk­ing their lives so that the Midwest area will be safe from enemy attack. With this in mind, I have come to the conclusion that we need this base, and if the Air Force thinks that the Kalkaska site is the best, then let them put it there. The only thing we as resorters and permanent residents can do is make them welcome and ignore the few who may, on occasion, misbehave.

I do not know on what side o! this issue you and your committee stand, but I have put a great deal of thought into this situa­tion, and I feel that I must take this position.

This letter is signed by J. L. Anderson. Here is a young lady who on request

circulated a petition to oppose the air· base at Kalkaska but now she has a com .. pletely different view of the Air Force and has withdrawn all of her objections to the Air Force being located at Kal· kaska.

After testifying before the House Committee on Armed Services in the support of the Kalkaska site, the Air Force representatives informed the com­mittee that the Kalkaska area was de· sirable from an operational and com .. munity support viewPoint meeting every criteria of the Air Force. They stated that Kalkaska represented the cheapest site for construction of any of those that could be considered. They also re­ferred to the substantial work that al· ready had been done at Kalkaska. They have gescribed the project as being urgent and of the utmost importance. These representatives stated to the com ..

. mittee that one of the reasons for the Air Force support of the Kalkaska site

CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

over any other . site was the fact that Detroit on March 18, 1956, adopted a Kalkaska had the most to off er in terms resolution expressing the views of their of community support-with respect to great patriotic organization that the housing, schools, churches, and social base should be retained at Kalkaska. centers close to their base, which is one This resolution is on the subject of air .. of the ·factors in the selection of such defense site, and it reads: a thing. That committee was informed REsoLUTioN by the Department of the Air Force that Whereas the air-defense program of the the development of the base at Kalkaska United states, and in particular the defense in terms of original construction costs of the Great Lakes area, including Michigan, would be $200,000 less than the cheapest may be seriously impaired by a controversy Manistee site, and that furthermore involving the location of an airbase in Michi­there would be annual savings in main- gan; and tenance costs of $250,000 to $500,000 by Whereas if permitted to become a pol~tical locating the base at Kalkaska as com- issue, rather than standing exclusively as a

Pared with the Manistee site. With re- problem in national security, we of this area may lose a vital segment of our northern

spect to cost, the Air Force representa- defense line: Therefore be it tive also informed the committee, which Resolved by the executive committee of I have stated before, that the Federal the American Legion, Department of Michi­Government has already invested ap- gan, in spring meeting assembled in Detroit, proximately $500,000 in the project at Mich., this 18th day of March 1956, That the Kalkaska. They also went into the ques- Department of Defense and particularly the tion of delay of 1 year. I certainly do not Department of the Air Force should be the

d I b r determining agencies as . to the location of have any forewarning, nor 0 e ieve this important air-defense site based on its any Member of the Congress has, that strategic mission and the economic formulas the enemy is going to withhold striking within which our military organization must at this Nation fo-r 1 year until we have operate; and be it further an Air Force base constructed in this · Resolved, That the American Legion, De­vita! spot so far as the protection of the partment of Michigan, does through this in­United States is concerned. strument call to the attention of each mem­. I also want to say I do not believe I ber of Michigan's congressional delegation· could conscientiously go along with the the need for a united front in aiding the

Department of the Air Force to locate as proposition of once again putting the expeditiously and as economically as possible needle into the taxpayer's arm and giv- the needed air-defense base in northern ing him another injection saying we are Michigan that will meet the specifications just going to toss away $500,000 of your and requirements of the Air Force. money and move it from that particular (Approved by the National Security Com-site over to another site and then say mission. March 17, 1956.) once again we are going to put the needle Unanimously adopted by the executive in and take out some more blood in the committee of the American Legion, De:part-

ment of Michigan, at a meeting held in De­form of $270,000 to $500,000 for every trait, Mich., March 1a, 1956. year and then on as long as that base is in existence. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the

Mr. Chairman, I cannot believe that gentleman from Michigan has again ex­we have that kind of money in the pired. United States of America to willfully Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 waste when we have the documents from minutes to the gentleman from Mary­the Air Force as to the amount of money land [Mr. DEVEREUX]. that they have spent and the amount of Mr. DEVEREUX. Mr. Chairman, this additional money it is going to take in question comes up about the location, order to construct this base at Manistee whether we go to Manistee or let the plus the fact that you cannot expand at base remain in Kalkaska. There have Manistee-according to the Air Force, been many statements made on the floor and these are not my words but the of the House with respect to the delay, words of the Air Force o:tficials-they costs, and so on. I might say that the are not able to expand in that area. committee is not in a particularly good

Mr. Chairman, it has been said on the position to talk about · costs. All the :floor that the State of Michigan made facts and figures are in the hands of the available to the Air Force on a 99 year Air Force. But one particular point I lease base approximately 8,000 acres of would like to address myself to is the State-owned lands and has already cut question of the continuing cost, as far a large part of the timber located on that as SAGE is concerned. Apparently they land. I am informed that if the Con- did not think of that when they recom­gress sustains the action of the Commit- mended the base at Benzie, which would tee on Armed Services and provides for be just as far removed from this cross­the transfer of this jet base from Kal- State telephone cable as the proposed kaska to Manistee that the state con- base at Manistee. servation Commission which has full On the question of responsibility for control and jurisdiction over the prop- delays, I think, too, the Air Force must erty in the state of Michigan, and which shoulder a very definite responsibility. also takes in this area in Manistee, will They knew the thinking of the commit­be prone not to make additional land tee, the Congress, and despite the number

of assurances given to Miss THOMPSON, available for the base. they deliberately located the base out-

Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I yield side of that particular congressional dis-the gentleman 2 additional minutes. · trict. Many of us have talked about the

Mr. KNOX. In connection with the question of national concern. I might essentiality of this jet interceptor base to . say I was the member o.f the committee our national security, the executive com· · who moved that the base be relocated

· mittee of the American Legion, Depart- from Kalkaska to Manistee. The reason ment of Michigan, at a meeting held in · I made that motion was simply this, and

I think it is a matter of national con­cern, too: If · the executive department can make certain commitments to a Member of the legislative branch, as ap­parently they did-and nobody has re­futed it yet-then they are placing the Member in such position as to seriously embarrass him.

If we allow this sort of thing to go on we then permit the executive branch of the Government to exercise authority which they have no right to exercise; in other words, they can go to any one of us and have us stick our necks out, have us go forth and say the Department's going to do such and such in an area. The individual Member would naturally publicize that and without any aye, yes, or no, or justification the Department would say they had changed their mind and were going to locate J;his particular base some other place.

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DEVEREUX. I yield to the gen­tleman from Georgia.

Mr. VINSON. It is a matter of record, is it not, that the former Secretary of the Air Force stated to the gentlewoman from Michigan [Miss THOMPSON]' that this base would be located in her district?

Mr. DEVEREUX. That was certainly my understanding; and the testimony that we have before us from the gentle­woman from Michigan bears that out. As I have said, nobody yet has refuted it.

Mr. VINSON. The gentleman from Maryland has stated, . I believe, that he offered the motion to make this change in designated sites.

Mr. DEVEREUX. That is correct. Mr. VINSON. Another question: Is it

not a fact that when that motion was made the roll was called and 21 members of the Committee on the Armed Services voted to make the change?

Mr. DEVEREUX. That is correct. Mr. Chairman, I think this is something extremely vital. .

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DEVEREUX. I yield. Mr. GROSS. I think the gentleman is

making the most importaint stat_ement that has been made in this debate on the subject of the authority or lack of au­thority of the Air Force to change the location of bases at its whim and caprice.

Mr. DEVEREUX. I thank the gen­tlemain from Iowa. It is certainly true that to allow this to go on would make it possible for the executive branch to put any Member in a most embarrassing position if they were, so to speak, to pull the rug out from under him. To carry this a little further, suppose the execu­tive branch found 1, 2, or 3 Members of this body who did not go along with them, did not believe in some of their proposals; it would be a very very simple matter to put that Member of this body

· in a position so that they could go out and embarrass him politically to the ex­tent that they could get rid of him. I do not suggest that that factor is present

· in this case, but I do suggest the possi­bifity, aind I do direct to your attention the fact that we should be on guard against such a move.

Mr. FULTON. Mr. Chairman, will the · gentleman yield?

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 6233 Mr. DEVEREUX. I yield to the gen­

tleman from Pennsylvania. Mr. FULTON. I have heard ai good

deal of debate to the effect that this kind of installation is of benefit to- the local community. I have a jet air base in my district near Pittsburgh. It is ainything but a benefit; as a matter of fact the people of the area wish they would take it some place else. · We would like to have the -jet Air Force base re­moved from the immediate Pittsburgh area. I ask it for the people of my dis­trict, and I ask it on behalf of the peo­ple of the city of Pittsburgh . and of the . county commission.

Mr. DEVEREUX; I can appreciate the gentleman's statement as · far as benefits are concerned. I must say, how­ever, that I believe the Kalkaska loca­tion will be just as beneficial to the 9th Congressional District as it will be to the 11th, and without all the headaches and noise.

Mr. FULTON. May I comment on that?

Mr. DEVEREUX. Certainly. Mr. FULTON. When these new jets

are taking off. when they are maneuver­ing, when they swoop low and come in low over chimney tops, when they stand and rev up beginning before the crack of dawn, it has depressed property values around our airport. Likewise, it inter­feres with civilian and commercial avia­tion. Our air base in the Pittsburgh area should be considered solely on the basis of national security and the condi­tions existing in our community. 1 Mr. DEVEREUX. The question of de­lay and the action of the Armed Services Committee suggests ailowing a gap to exist in the defenses of our country. That I cannot subscribe to despite the fact there have been letters read sup­porting that position. If any delay ex­ists I think that much of it must be ascribed immediately to the Air Force. · Knowing what the situation was, they have never yet justified not having lo­cated at Manistee, which was one of the sites being considered. From a military point of view we have had testimony to the effect that both sites are equally suit­able. So my question is, Under such conditions and with such a ba-ckground why did the Air Force then not locate at Manistee rather than at Kalkaska?

If they went ahead with their plans and so on I would suggest they have made an error, though they were tech­nically within the law, I grant that, but they were in error in policy in not having located at Manistee.

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chai~an. I yield 3 minutes to the distinguished gentle­man from West Virginia [Mr. BAILEY].

Mr. BAILEY. Mr. Chairman, I feel that I would be remiss in my duty as a citizen of the State of West Virginia. and as one of the State's Representatives in the Congress of the United States, if I failed at this time to register a vigorous protest against the pending legislation. I speak not only for myself but I speak the sentiments of the entire West Vir­ginia delegation.

Some 2 years ago when we were con­sidering a military co~truct~on .bill. I had projects proposed for West_ Virginia.

CII-392

I was told at that time if I did not press those projects there would be some­thing included in the next proposal. I :find, Mr. Chairman, considering this par­ticular bill, H. R. 9893, and the com­mittee report accompanying it, that ence more West Virginia is being treated not only as a stepchild, as I said 2 years ago, but now we are down to the cate­gory of a foster child and soon we will be just a ward of the Government.

-Mr. BYRD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BAILEY. I yield to the gentle­man from the. Sixth District of west Virginia.

Mr. BYRD. Mr. Chairman, I wish to compliment my colleague, the gentleman who represents the Third District of West Virginia, on his forthright and timely remarks. He has been trying for a - long time to have recognition given toward West Virginia as a State which has many advantages to offer in regard to certain types of military installations. I,· too, have been disturbed and con­cerned at not finding anything listed in this bill for west Virginia. My State, of all the 48 States, is the 1 State that has apparently been omitted, and I know that this cannot tie a matter of oversight. The citizens of ·my State have made their share of the contributions to our na­tional welfare in time of peace, and they have made their share of the sacrifices in time of war. They rightfully expect to receive a just proportion of the appro­priations for military installations, but they have been disappcinted. It is com­mon knowledge that the economy of West Virginia has been seriously im­paired by the closing down of coal mines throughout the past 3 or 4 years. Inas­much as we have heard it said that a chain is only as strong as its weakest link, is it not important to the economy of the body politic that every segment of that economy be healthy and stable? Is it not important to the economy of the whole Nation that the economy of a sin­gle State like West Virginia be lifted out of the doldrums? I should think that this would be imperative. not only from the standpoint of the economic welfare of the country but also from the stand­point of our country's defense. I, there­! ore, add my protest to that of my dis­tinguished colleague, and I hope that our protests will be heard by those whose responsibility it is to give consideration to the location of military installations, and consideration to the authorization of expenditures for military projects. west Virginians do not ask for mercy. We only ask to be given justice.

Mr. BAILEY. I thank the gentleman. Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the

gentleman yield? Mr. BAILEY. I yield to the gentle­

man from Georgia. Mr. VINSON. May I state to theCom­

rii.ittee, to the distinguished gentlemen from West Virginia, and to the country at large, that there is an item in this bill for West Virginia. It is a classified item, it is one of the most classified in all of the classified items referred to in the bill, and it involves immediately an ex­penditure of about $1,500,000. and w:m ultimately cost $20 million. I cannot dis­cuss aQy more about it. W ~st Virginia

has not a single military installation in it until this bill becomes law.

·Mr. BAILEY. I want to thank the dis­tinguished chairman of the Committee on Armed Services.

Mr. Chairman, I would like to leave one further thought. Back in World War I the Government came into West Virginia and invested $134 million in an armor plate plant at Charleston. It was operated during World War I. It was operated partially for a couple of years during World War II. It is now in mothballs and is costing the Govern­ment nearly $1 million a year in main­tenance. They came in in World War II and built an ammonia plant in the city of Morgantown, and that today is rented out to private capital and the Govern­ment is getting about a quarter of a million dollars a year rent. It is time we were getting plants for jobs for our people.

We authorized some $3 billion for military installations at home and abroad, only 2 years ago. Now we pro­pose another $2 billion and not a single cent is allocated for West Virginia. In view of the statement of Chairman VIN­SON that our State is to have an in­stallation out of the present authoriza- · tion I shall withhold an amendment I have to ask approval of one of the proj­ects rejected by the committee 2 years ago.

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, I yield the remainder of the time to the gen­tleman from Michigan [Mr. HOFFMAN].

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Chairman, being an advocate of econ­omy, I expected, and fully, to go along with my colleague .from the Fifth Con­gressional District of Michigan [Mr. FoRnJ. I understood from the statement that he made that we, by adopting his amendment, would save something like, oh, over $400,000 a year on the tele­phone service. Now I find-at least, my figures show or my information is--that that is not correct.

Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. If you give me another minute, I will yield for a question.

Mr. FORD. If I had the time I would be very glad to.

Mr. HOFFMAN . of-Michigan . . I yield. Mr. FORD. On that question, I have

in my hand a communication from the Secretary of the Air Force which reads as follows:

The Kaleva Telephone Co. has offered to relinquish without cost that portion of their "franchise area as directly affects the SAGE land line rental at the Manistee location. This offer would not reduce the difference to any sizable degree inasmuch as the differ­ence in cost is based upon a requirement to install additional communication facilities and the distances involved.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I think you read that yesterday, did you not?

Mr. FORD. I do not believe I did yesterday.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I think so. .

Mr. FORD. I made the state~ent without referring to the specific location.

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. All right. Anyway, we all know how and

6234 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April-12

where you get your figures, and I know wrong in outmaneuvering somebody. the gentleman would not intentionally That is what the ·armed services try to mislead me, and I know he did not. He do all the time, and it is only because of may be right, but I just do not a_ccept their success that we won and maintain those figures. It is a little bit like a law- our freedom. suit I tried once. We had a fellow on the Mr. KNOX. I agree with you. In witnes~ stand and we tried to get him to this particular case they have endeav­tell the fair market price of junk. The ored to outmaneuver the Air Force, lawyers tried, but we could not get an which caused great injury to the people answer. The question related to the fair I represent, who pledged themselves to market price of junk. We could not get bring community support to that base anything out of him. Finally Judge Ses- which is sorely needed in any Air Force sions, later a Federal judge at Grand base selected throughout this country. Rapids, tried for an answer. And all Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. That is anyone got out of that gentleman, all we all right. You have done very well for got out of him when we asked him to give them, and I know they will be lucky to us the fair market price of junk was, "Do be able to keep you. Look what you you want to buy, do you want to sell?" have done for them. You have ·an air­Now, there you are. You get all sorts of port-a jet base-over here at the Soo figures at different times from different [pointing to the map], just a little bit sources. The. gentleman gets his figures southeast, .a whale of a big one. I have from the Air Force. I get mine from the been up there. I have seen it. It is a hearings and from the Committee on fine one. Armed Services. They have an airport over here in the

I listened to my friend from Grand other district, the district represented Rapids. I admire him, because he is able, by the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. ~dustrious, and always endeavoring to BENNETTJ. He is. another good man. do a better and better job. I have great They will keep him here if they are wise. admiration for my colleague from the Frank Hook is running against him. Upper Peninsula, the gentleman from Then they have this one at Marquette. Michigan [Mr. KNoxJ. He served 16 Then they have one which is not marked years in the Legislature of Michigan. He on this chart, up here. They have a was speaker for 6 years. He is an astute field there that I think is 2 or 3 miles long politician, and I know of no one in Mich- and about a mile and a half wide. How­igan that I would rather have support me ever, there are no buildings there. They in the coming election in Michigan in put that up there during the war to de­the Fourth Congressional District. But fend Mr. KNox's locks, or more accu­h.ere is a lady in distress because of the rately, the Nation's locks. action of the Secretary of the Air Force. . Then, over and above everything else, There is merit in her claim. I know if my information is correct, the gentle­where I will have to go. I will just have · man from Michigan [Mr. KNoxJ has up to do it, notwithstanding my personal de- there the best trout-fishing stream that sire to vote with my other colleagues there is in the world. And they moved from Michigan. The Air Force and the another big plant,up there. The gentle­gentlemen have outmaneuvered her. man from Michigan [Mr. KNoxl is a There is no question about that. They . real go-getter. are adroit. They are capable. They are What is the sense of putting all up experienced. They are good at this po- there in one spot where all can be de­litical game. And that is all right. I stroyed in one raid when they do not have no complaint, but I think the north- need them all up there? Will you accept ern peninsula of Michigan has enough up the judgment of the Committee on the there just now. It has no need for politi- Armed Services instead of the judgment cal patronage for the 11th District, nor of the Air Force spokesman? will anything be saved or the security of I will say to the gentleman, I sympa­the Nation be advanced by building the thize with you; my heart goes out to you. base at Kalkaska. I go along with the I hope you tell those bureaucrats at the general, the gentleman from Maryland, · powerplant at the Soo, at St. Marys, the General DEVEREAUX~ who just preceded next time I come up there to fish on that me a minute ago. I think there will not river, instead of sending their patrol be a gap in our national defense if the boat out to drive me oft'., that they give base goes where the armed services said me permission to fish there as does the it should, to Manistee. That location is Coast Guard the plant employees. They less than 80 miles from Kalkaska. After let the people who live there at the Soo all, the Armed Services Committee repre- and the gentleman himself fish up there. sents all of our national-defense organi- All he has to do is to go over there and zations, not just the Air Force.. The they recognize him, at least they should, judgment of that committee and of those and they say to him-at least they should upon whom it relied I rather accept than because he is their good and faithful the reported statement of the Air Force. servant-"Here is your rod, here is the

Mr. KNOX. Mr. Chairman, will the boat, there is the motor, and we will send gentleman yield? somebody along to fish with you." Me,

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I yield I have to sneak in around the edge and to the gentleman from Michigan. when they catch me, I have to call Wash-

Mr. KNOX. To my esteemed col- ington and get somebody to rescue me. league from Michigan, I might say to I go along with the General from him that I have not tried to outmaneuver Maryland who served with much distinc­anyone at all. tion with the Marines. Here they prom-

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Well, I ised to put this base in the Sixth District think you have been negligent if you of Michigan. Of course, that should not have not, if you thought the base should stand in the way of our national defense, remain at Kalkaska. There is nothing if that was involved; but it is not. It is

. I

just a question· of who gets the pie. I should like to see it located in the district Miss THOMPSON represents, because we all admire her and we know the value of · her services here. And located there it will cost no more to ·be as efficient as elsewhere. Moreover, the executive de­partment should be made aware of the fact that they should give us an honest, sound opinion in the first instance and cannot without reason disregard a sol­emn promise.

What do you think about it? You are not going to turn down a woman Member who asks for something like that which has been promised to her or a Member when the keeping of the commitment will serve the interests of the country, are you, just because we have on the other side the gentleman from Michi­gan? I know my friend, Mr. FORD, the gentleman from the Fifth District. He is a great economist. He in effect says you are going to pour this money down a rathole if you vote with the armed services. I do not think so. That is not according to the testimony we get here. But if it is true-if it is true, there are a lot of ratholes we are pouring money down and if tax dollars are to go down a rathole I would rather ha.ve one of my own selection and one in Michigan than 3 or 4 thousand miles away. The com­mittee.says the amendment will not save anything, will not weaken our defense. I will go along.

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the gentleman from Michigan has expired. ~r. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 1

mmute to the gentleman from Pennsyl­vania [Mr. FULTON].

Mr. FULTON. Mr. Chairman, I should · like to say this to those Members of the ·

· House who refer to these jet Air Force bases as benefits. In my district south of Pittsburgh we have one of the largest jet Air Force bases in the world. These jet plane installations near large indus­trial and residential areas are not un­mixed blessings because of crowding air lanes and excessive noise from takeo:trs and tuning up planes.

I formally ask · the Committee on Armed Services, through the chairman and the distinguished ranking minority member, the gentleman from Missouri [Mr. SHORT] as well as all of the members of the Committee on Armed Services, and the Department of Defense, to make a survey to find the best strategic location for the jet airbase at the Greater Pitts­burgh Airport. The present Air Force base is causing unavoidable trouble on the matter of air traffic, noise, and danger, and has caused real concern in our district.

I ask that attention be given to this serious problem that has been studied by the Allegheny County Aeronautics Com­mission, as well as by the Board of Com­missioners of Allegheny County and civic groups, each of whom want action for relocation. The Air Force jet base to protect our area should be located where it should be for defense and stra­tegically, not just because it may be in my own or any congressional district.

Mr. WICKERSHAM. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlemari yield?

Mr. FULTON. I yield to the gentle­man from Oklahoma .

1950 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE 6235 Mr. WICKERSHAM. Mr. Chairman,

as a member of the Committee on Armed Services, in the absence of anyone else speaking on this matter, we should be delighted to have the base in Oklahoma.

Mr. DIES. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FULTON. I yield to the gentle­man from Texas.

Mr. DIES. Mr. Chairman, I think there is enough noise in Oklahoma now. Let us send it to the quiet State of Texas.

Mr. MATTHEWS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

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

Mr. MATTHEWS. I should like to say to the gentleman I surely would like to have the Committee on Armed Services consider that base for the Eighth District of Florida. We have many communities that would be delighted to have the base.

Mr. FULTON. No Federal installa­tions should be located by the Depart­ment of Defense except for strategic pur­pases, and for efficiency and economy.

Mr. DEVEREUX. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. FULTON. I yield to the gentle­man from Maryland.

Mr. DEVEREUX. I am glad the gen­tleman brought up the question about the feeling of the people in the ·different communities. The testimony before our committee indicated that there was op­position from a group of people from Kalkaska as to locating the base there, whereas the people from Manistee who appeared before our committee were in favor. I know some people will say that the groups that appeared before us in opposition to the Kalkaska site were not representative, but there is no question about the fact that there was a definite feeling among some people who had an interest in Kalkaska that they did not want it, whereas at Manistee the people who appeared before us did want it.

Mr. FULTON. May I close by saying that these Air Force bases that use these modern jets that start revving up around 4 or 5 in the morning and go right through from time to time to midnight, should be placed farther away from the great industrial and residential centers than they are now. I wish the Commit­tee on Armed, Services would take that into consideration. Especially these jet and missile bases should be located away­from residential centers and a survey made as to how close to the centers of defense areas, these new-type speedier planes, and guided missile installations, should be built for best defense. I can­not see how the boundaries of a congres­sional district get mixed into the deci­sions on these vital strategic matters, and they should not be any factor where. the security of an area, or of the whole American people is involved.

Mr. SHO~T. Mr. Chairman, I yield·. 5 minutes to the gentleman from Nevada. [Mr. YOUNG]. .

Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Chairman, on page 13 of the pending legislation there is con­tained an item of some $8,304,000 · for the purpose of expanding the naval auxiliary air station at Fallon, Nev.

I might say in a prefatory manner that there is no lack of unity in Nevada's delegation in the House of Representa-..

tives with regard to ·this project. Last was no passibility of any joint use. The week, after much deliberation, I came Department of Defense and the Air -out in favor of it. But I think there are Force before the Committee on Interfor certain circumstances surrounding the and. Insular .Affairs in January again re .. selection of this area that warrant the iterated that statement. It. was with attention of the members of the com- some surprise that on March 1 we re­mittee. ceived word from the Air Force that

My remarks might be entitled "The slightly in excess of 1 million acres would Expansion of the Fallon Naval Auxiliary , be made available for joint use by other Air Station," or "Why Did the Air Force agencies. Mr. Chairman, it was quite a Change Its Mind"? or "What Will Hap- bit in excess of 1 million acres. As a. pen With Regard to 1,800,000 Acres of matter of fact, the total released for Contaminated Land in Southern Ne- joint use was approximately 2,200,000 vada"? . acres. This, of course, was somewhat

Last year in August the Navy filed an embarrassing to the Navy, which was application for some 2,846,000 acres in · then forced to reexamine the plans made northwestern Nevada for the purpose of with regard to acquisitions which they establishing two gunnery ranges, one 23 were seeking in northern Nevada. Had by 50 miles and the other 30 by 50 miles the Air Force, when the NaVY previously in size. In the 1957 budget there was requested joint use of the southern Ne­contained an addition.al request for some vada range, indicated such use -was pos-300,000 acres, bringing the total to about sible, perhaps, the Navy would not have 3,100,000. When the final area is se- been Justified in spending some $11 mil­lected, I am sure this amount will be re- lion at Fallon and currently carrying out duced to a minimum, considerably below a program of about $5 million to improve this total. the facilities at the Fallon Airbase. But,

Considerable opposition arose among acting on the assurance of the Air Force my constitutents following this an- that joint use was not possible in south­nouncement. In contrast to West Vir- ern Nevada, the NaVY then proceeded to ginia, Nevada has some 14 installations expand the facilities at Fallon. If they varying in size from 3 acres to about 3 were now to move to southern Nevada, million acres. About 10 percent of our there would be a waste of about $15 mil­land area is now either held by the mili- lion and delay in obtaining the ranges tary or included in applications which necessary to carry out their air-to-air are now pending. Sometimes there is gunnery training. So for this reason I almost a sardonic twist in Nevada's mot- feel, then, that the acquisition in north­to, which is "All for our country." ern Nevada sho\}ld be supported. What

There was some difficulty in getting will happen to the land that has been information in regard to this application released by the Air Force of some 2,200,­last fall. However, I do want to com- 000 acres? Fortunately, the Atomic mend the Navy for its cooperation since Energy Commission apparently desires the beginning of this year. to take over some 341,000 acres and is

I think most people who considered considering an additional 240,000 acres. the desirability of this installation ap- There would then be 1,800,000 acres re­proached the problem with three ques- maining for joint use by other services. tions in mind: First, is there a need for Why cannot this be turned back to the this installation? Second, was the area Department of the Interior or to the selected in fact the best area in which General Services Administration and to locate these two gunnery ranges? used for mining, grazing, or recreation? Third, if the answers to those two ques- The reason it cannot be turned back is tions are in the affirmative, what can be simply this~ It has been contaminated done to lessen the impact upon the local by unexploded ordnance. There are ap­nonmilitary use? · proximately 1,800,000 acres in southern

I think the NaVY has convincingly Nevada which are not suited for farming proved it has a need for this area. They nor for mining, nor is it safe for recrea­are flying at the present time only 34.5 tional use or hunting. It would cost percent of the necessary sorties on the about $18 million to decontaminate this west coast. However, when considering land and again make it suitable for use this need, I could not help reflecting for nonmilitary purposes. I would like occasionally on a statement I overheard to suggest to the Committee on Armed a few months ago in an elevator in the Services that they very carefully scruti­House Office Building. A passenger nize requests that have been submitted asked one of the riders, a military by other branches of the armed services colonel, how things were. The colonel . to make sure that there is no possibility responded, "Fine; we have crises we of using the 1,800.000 acres .which is now not even used yet." contaminated in southern Nevada.

I feel, though, on balance, that the Mr. ENGLE. Mr. Chair:man, will the NaVY did demonstrate convincing need gentleman yield? for this area. Mr. YOUNG. I yield.

Another question presented was this: Mr. ENGLE. Would the gentleman Is the area being sought in northwestern indicate why the Navy cannot fly its air­Nevada of 3,100,000 acres in fact the planes for gunnery practice over this 1 best area? One of the most persistent million acres of land or in excess of 1 inquiries that was heard in my State million acres of land which is contam­was this: Why cannot the Air · Force or inated? As I understand it, they do the Navy Air Force use jointly with the not want the surface anyway, but they Air Force some 3,300,000 acres that have just want the air space there to :Hy already been withdrawn in the southern around in. Why can they not go down part of the State? The Air Force, in · to. the other area at Las Vegas and have response to a NavY inquiry in 1953 and their gunnery practice and use this con• again in 1955, stated categorically there taminated a1rea? ·

:6236 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE. April 12

Mr. YO'QNG. It is contended by th~ Navy that there are plans currently un­der consideration by the Atomic Energy commission for the establishment· of a joint ballistics range in that viciJ:?.ity for the next 2 years according to the inf or­mation received by us, and they will fly some 50 to 70 missions or sorties each year, requiring the use of that range for about 10 days out of each month. Be­cause of this the Navy claims that it is not usable so far as their purposes are concerned.

Mr . . SHORT. Will · the gentleman yield?

Mr. YOUNG. I yield. Mr. SHORT. I think the answer to

the question of the gentleman from Cali­fornia [Mr. ENGLE] is that the Navy base is too far removed from the area to make a round trip by jet plane, to the training area and perform the training mission over the area.

Mr. ENGLE. That is what I under­stood to be the reason, but I figured out how long it would take them to go down there in a modern jet, and it seemed to me it would take about 4 minutes.

Mr. YOUNG. The Navy is also seek­ing to get 800,000 acres within the gen­tleman's district. I am sure the gentle­man does not desire them in his district. Perhaps the Navy would do well to in­vestigate the 1,800,000 acres now lying contaminated in southern Nevada.

I would like to discuss one more aspect of this · problem. The · Navy has re­quested a standard withdrawal order with regard to the millions of acres they are seeking in northern Nevada. Many of the sportsmen, nonmilitary users, miners, and sportsmen are reluctant to see a standard withdrawal order given the Navy. Even if they acquiesce in the Navy's request for the land, they would like to see .inserted in the withdrawal order, which will be written by the Sec­retary of Interior, certain safeguards . and provisos which will assure to them the fact that they will have an oppor­tunity to use this area along with the military service.

I would like to include at this point certain suggested provisos and com­ments of the Navy thereon. I will rec­ommend that provisos such as these be included in any withdrawal order issued by the Department of the Interior, affect­ing this land:

The following general statement ls con­sidered as an essential part of the answers to questions 4, 5, and 6 which follow and it must be considered along with all answers which pertain ·to other uses of the areas in question insofar as time is concerned. In seeking the use of these areas to reduce its training deficit . the Navy ·has computed the capacities of these proposed ranges as:

Black Rock (30 - by 50 nautical miles): 18,600 annual sorties.

Sahwave (23 by 50 nautical miles) : 16,000 annual sorties.

These capacities were not computed on full year-round naval use but on partial use, time-wise, to accommodate the various in­terests desiring to use them. For the two areas, computations were: ·

Black Rock:. Estimated utilization 180 week days. Not used about 1 month in the spring and 1 month in the fall for cattle rouµdups. Not used at other times during the year for stock inspection, provision of salt, etc.

Sahwave:. Estimated utilization 143 week days. Not used during January, February, and March during sheep grazing. Not used 1 month in the spring and 1 month in the fall for cattle roundups. Not used at other times for stock inspection, provision of salt! etc.

Bearing on questions 5 and 6 ls the Navy's previously stated position that land with­drawals should be standard by public-land order with certain exceptions hereinafter in­dicated and that the requirements of all lo­cal .interests and the Navy be determined locally, and detailed arrangements worked out locally.

4. Question. Would there be any objection to the conduct of gedlogic exploration activi­ttes on the area withdrawn if it did not in­terfere with training activities of the base?

Answer. No objection as long as the ex­ploration is conducted during the time when the range is being used for sheep grazing ~nd cattle roundup.

5. Question. In the event that the Navy's request for withdrawal is approved, the fol­lowing provisos for withdrawal orders have been suggested with respect to grazing, tak­ing wildlife, water, timber harvesting, ma­terials, etc. Would such provisos be ob­jected to by the Navy? If so, why? If in­cluded, would they interfere with the train­ing objectives of the Navy?

Answer. Subject to comments made above, the Dep:;i.rtment of the Navy prefers that withdrawal be accomplished by a standard withdrawal order as stated in answer 41 pre­viously submitted.

GRAZING

Question. Grazing use of the lands shall be administered by the Bureau of Land Man­agement under the provisions of the act of June 28, 1934 (48 Stat. 1267), as amended by the act of June 29, 1936 ( 49 Stat. 1976; 43 U. S. C. 315, et seq.), at such times and in such manner as may be agreed upon by the Bureau of Land Management and the De­partment of the Navy.

Answer. The Department of the Navy has no objection.

Question. The lands shall continue under the administration of the Bureau of Land Management for grazing purposes except for such times as their exclusive use is required for the purpose for which they are reserved by this order.

.Answer. The Department of the Navy has no objection provided the agreement men­tioned in the question above is included in this question. _ Question. Grazing use of the withdrawn lands shall be administered by the Bureau of Land Management. Such use shall be per­mitted at the discretion of the official of the Bureau of Land Management in charge, dur­ing the period from ------------------ to ------------------ of each year, during which season no use of the lands for bomb­ing or gunnery shall be permltted; pro­vided that the Navy offi.cer in charge may authorize grazing use earlier or later in all or part of the withdrawn laµds if such use will not interfere with military use of the lands. _

Answer. The Department of the Navy has no objection provided minimum time re­quired, as stated above, will not be de­creased. It is not· planned to use these _ranges for bombing purposes.

TAKING WILDLIFE

Question. The taking of all species of wild­life upon the withdrawn lands shall be strict­ly in accordance with the game laws of the State of Nevada, and the Department of the Navy shall take appropriate measures to as­sure the continual enforcement of such laws.

Answer. The Department-of the Navy con­curs that the taking of all species of wildlife should be in accordance with t~e law._s of Nevada, but will not undertake to assure the continual enforcemen~ ~f .such laws· as _far · as

nonmilitary personnel are concerned, but will issue appropriate. dil'ectives .to its personnel.

Question. Except for tl'aining purposes or the security of the military project and its personnel, the use of firearms for any pur­pose is prohibited on the · withdrawn li:i,nds and all of the lands shall be closed to the taking of wil~life.

Answer. The Department of the Navy con­curs as a preferable alternate to the question above. · ·

WATER

Question. The withdrawal made by this order shall not extend to any nonnavigable waters in or upon the lands. Any such waters not heretofore appropriated shall con­tinue subject to such appropriation, includ­ing appropriation by the Department of the Navy, as may be authorized by applicable law. -

Answer. The Department of the Navy does not contemplate development of water re­sources within the ranges. The position of the Department of the Navy was stated by the general counsel of the Navy in his c;tate­ment of January 28.

TIMBER HARVESTING

Question. The timber resources on the lands shall be subject to management and dispbsal by the Bureau o'f Land Management pursuant to applicable law.

· Answer. The Department cf the Navy has no objection provided- harvesting does not conflict with operational requirements.

MATERIALS

Question. The mineral materials in or on the lands shall be subject to disposal by the Department of the Interior pursuant to the act of July 31, 1947 (61 Stat. 681) as amended by the act of July 23, 1955 ( 69 Stat. 367; 30 U. S. c .. 601 ,. et seq.) under sue}) r~asonable restrictions as may be required. tiy the use of the lands for military pur.'.

· poses, and as may be ·agreed upon by the Department of the Interior and the Depart­ment of the Navy.

Answer. The Department of the Navy has no objection, provided the mining of mineral materials does not conflict with operations requirements.

ALL INCLUSIVE

Question. The Bureau of Lmid ·Manage:. ment may issue leases or p-ermits · for the surface use of such ' lands . and· . conduct sales of timber or other materials · thereon, under applicable laws, and otherwise admin­ister the lands, provided that all documents authorizing the use of or access to the lands s.hall provide that every person occupying the lands under authority thereof shall va­cate them during the periods of firing or other conflicting use by the Army, without compensation for loss of use of the lands or for damages caused by Army use.

Answer. The Department of the Navy con­curs except to change the word "Army" to Navy and provide that. the administration of the lands is subject to the same provision as that applying to documents. · 6. Question. The following have been sug­gested as provisos to be inserted in a with­drawal order with respect to management and harvest of game in the area being sought. Would these provisos be objected to by the Navy? If so, why? If included, would they interfere with the training objectives of the Navy? If not acceptable in present. form, would you suggest amendments which would make them ac.ceptable?

(a) Provision should be made for an open hunting season Of 6 weeks starting about October 1.

(b) - A provision for approximately a 2 weeks' hunting· season on antelope and sage hen.- · ·

·(c} Permission for wardens to·conduct pe­riodic . insp_ections of the areas, including wUdli.fe surveyfl,; ~:n, cooperation with -the Navy.

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE · 6237 (d) No special privileges to military per• Secondly, .there are disputes as . to cannot be effective in influencing the

sonnel in connection with hunting and fish· whether or not there will be any addi.· decision of thoughtful Members. 1ng. . tional cost. The Air Force has stated Mr. FORD. I can give the gentle-

(e), Fish and game laws of the State to be that the cost will be between $270,000 woman the answer to that. The Air adhered to at all times, including regulations and $500,000 per year more to operate Force and Western Electric felt they had set up by tlie commission.

(f) operations for predator control shall the base at Manistee over Kalkaska. to have 613 circuits between the main be provided by mutual agreement. Those are facts that I think this body trunkline and the base at either site or

(g) Other mutual problems shall be ar· ought to take info consideration. Per- at any site. On subsequent - analysis, ranged in cooperation with the Navy. sonalities should mean absolutely noth- however, they decided they could reduce

Answer. The Department of the Navy con- ing. As a matter of fact, I have several it from 616 circuits to 383. That is why curs in questions (a), (b), and (c), provided constituents who have cottages at Torch there is a variation of between $270,000 the restrictions would not decrease the time Lake. They write me and say they do and $460,000 per year. · · that ranges would be available, ·and subject not want the base at Kalkaska. I write The CHAIRMAN. The time of the to the Navy desire that a standard with- b k d I b t gentleman from M1·ch1'gan has aga1·n ex-drawal ·order be issued. them ac an say am sorry u as

(d), (e); ('f), and (g): The Department of far as I am concerned I .think that pired. the Navy has no objection. Kalkaska is the logical place for it. I Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I yield ·

· will read what I wrote to one of my the remainder of my time to the gentle-! think from the investigation which constituents: · man from Michigan [Mr. KNoxL

has been ·conducted under the very able Mr. CEDERBERG. Mr. Chairman, leadership of the gentleman from Cali- While I appreciate your personal interest fornia [Mr. ENGLE] in the Comm1ttee on in this matter due to the location of your will the gentleman yield?

summer home at Torch Lake, my personal Mr. KNOX. I yield to the gentleman Interior and Insular Affairs of this House, opinion from having diligently studied all from Michigan. • a number of important conclusions can of the facts is that the base should be Io- Mr. CEDERBERG. I want to say in be drawn and observations made. cated in Kalkaska County for economic as view of the costs involved, whether it be

First,,' tije fa.ct that approximately 2% well as tactical reasons. $270,000 or $460,000, that one of the , million .ac:r:es have been rele&sed by the I think the tactical reason is the 1 important ·facts we overlook, I think, is .. Air Force since the committe~ hearings year's delay in this very vital important the 1-year · delay in making this base

began early in January justifies the sus- network of our Air Force. The Presl.dent operational. I think that is very im-picion that perhaps more land was being has just sent a request for half a billion portant. · held than was actually needed. Land ciollars more for our continental defense The CHAIRMAN. All time has ex· has been released since the commence- and I do -not see how this body can in- pired. The Clerk will read the bill for ment of the January. hearings at 'the rate telligently suggest that we ought to take amendment. of 25,000 _ a.ere~ per day, over . lAOO ~cres this base from Kalkaska, and put it ov'er The Clerk read as follows:~ per hour, ·or. almost 17 acres per. minute. at Manistee ·in view of the fact that to Be it eri.acted, etc.-

Secondly, this astonishing rate of re- do so would mean 1 year's delay in mak- TITLE 1 lease might suggest that the metp_9d of ing it operational. That is my owri

· b th d · d D SEC. 101. The Secretary of the Army may review Y e arm.e services an e- opinion and the very fact that there are f t ·1·t h Id establish or. develop military installations

partment of Defense o i s mi 1 ary, 0 - dollars involved here from the United and facilities by acquiring, consti:ucting, ings has. not been adequate or effective. States Treasury is something that we as · converting, rehabilitating, or installing per­

The CHAIRMAN. The time of the responsible Members of this body ought : manent or temporary public works, including gentleman from Nevada [Mr. YOUNG] to take into consideration. · site preparation, appurtenances, utilities and has again expired. Mrs. CHURCH. Mr. Chairman,· will ·equipment, for the following i::irojects:

Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 be gentleman yield? Inside the United states minutes to the gentleman from Michigan · - Mr. CEDERBERG. I yield' to the· gen- Technical Services Facilities [Mr. CEDERBERG]. tlewoman fro:in Illinois. (Ordnance corps)

Mr. CEDERBERG. - Mr. Chairman, I Mrs. CHURCH. I am tremendously Aberdeen Proving Ground, Maryland: reluctantly take this time, 'but I feel it impressed with the earnestness of the Training and storage facilities, $147,000. is necessary to cool the air and probably gentleman, but there is a practical mat- Jet propulsion laboratory (California Insti­get some of the facts before· you in these ter in which I am very much interested; tute of Technology), California: Research last moments. namely, the variation in the estimate of and development facility, $143,000.

I want ·to say definitely that as far as cost. I am wondering if those estimat- Pueblo Ordnance Depot, Colorado: Main-d d I' k t 1 t t' tenance faciJity, $2,142,000. . I am concerne , an I am sure spea . ing cannot ge any c oser o an es 1- Seneca Ordnance Depot, New York: 'Q'til-

for my colleagues [Mr. FORD and Mr. mate than the difference between $200,- ities, $B8,000. BENTLEY] who have also spoken on this 000 and $500,000. · That is a very loose Umatilla Qrdnance Depot, Oregon: storage matter that we have no personal con- estimate, and therefore in my ·mind is facilities, $258,ooo. siderations in this affair · whatsoever. subject to great question. Redstone Arsenal, Alabama: Maintenance There are none as far as I am concerned. The CHAIRMAN. The time of the facilities, training facilities, and utilities, However, we have facts here that I think gentleman from Michigan has expired. · $5,259,ooo. •

- we ought to consider. I notice my good Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I yield White Sands Proving Ground, New Mexico. friend the gentleman from Maryland the gentleman · 1 additional minute. · Utilities, $693,ooo •. [Mr. DEVEREUX] when he made his re- Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, if the <.Quartermaster Corps) marks, said: · gentleman .will yield. Atlanta General Depo_t, Georgia: Opera-

If we ·change the present location from Mr. CEDERBERG. I yield. tional facilities and mamtena:nce facilities, K lk k t ..... i t , D I t th . . $832,000. a as a; o J.vJ.an s ee. Mr. FOR . n r.esponse o e inquiry Columbia Quartermaster Center, South

· I think the general was ;right when he by the gentlewoman from Illinois, I have Carolina: Administrative facility, $98,000. _ said "Present location," for to all in- before me data prepared for the Air Fort worth General Depot, Texas: Opera-

tents and. purposes the present location Force by the. co~p~ny that prob~bly will tional faciliti~s. maintenance facilities, I.and is at Kalkaska. I am interested-in noth.; provide these facilities. They indicate acquisition, and utilities, $1,285,000. • ing but the facts. The State Depart- that the Manistee site in question is sim- New Cumberland General Depot, Pa .. ment Of Conservatl·on i·n M1'ch1"gan has ply farther away from the main trunk- Maintenance facilities, $631,000.

. . . - Sharpe General Depot, Calif.: Maintenance already leased approximately 8,000 acres lme. If you use 383 .c1rcwts the cost dif- facilities, $655,0QO. to the Air Force. They have made con- ferential per year is $270,000. . If you . -tracts for clearing the land. As a mat- use 683 circuits the cost differential per (Chemical Corps)

· · th f year is $390,000. Army Che~ical Center, Md.: Troop hous-ter of fact, the land is m e process o M CHURCH I appreCiate that but Ing, community facility, and operational clearance ·at the present time. There rs. · . . • fac1lity, $889,ooo. · have been very definite statements made I hope the gentleman will let me make camp Detrick, Md.: storage f'ac111ties and that any change in this location will de- the suggestion that it seems very remark- utilities, $913,000. lay the operational date of the base by 1 able that business people cannot come Dugway Proving Ground, Utah: Research year. That is a factor that I think this any closer than the difference between and development facilities and utilities, House should take into consideration. $200,000 and $500,000. Such a guess $867,ooo.

6238 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

(Signal Oorps) ~

Fort Huachuca, Ariz.: Troop h .ousing, maintenance facilities. storage facilities, ad­ministrative facility, and ut1llties, $6,856,000.

(Corps of Engineers) Fort Belvoir, Va.: Storage facility, training

facility, operational facilities, maintenance facilities, research and development facili­ties, and utilities, $492,000.

(Transportation Corps) Fort Eustis, Va.: Operational facility,

maintenance facility, and utilities, $1,231,000.

(Medical Oorps) Walter Reed Army Medical Center, Dis­

trict of Columbia: Research and develop­ment facility and community facility, $4,209,000.

Field Forces Facilities (F'irst Army Area)

Fm:t Devens (Camp Wellfleet), Mass.: Land acquisition, $302,000.

Fort Dix, N. J.: Training facility, $54,000. Oswego, N. Y.: Training facilities and land

acquisition, $583,000. Fort Totten, N. Y.: Troop Housing, storage

facilities, and utilities $1,212,000. (Second Army Area)

Fort Knox, Ky.: Maintenance facilities, and community f.a.cilities, $1,698,000.

Fort George G. Meade, Md.: Operational facilities, maintenance facilities, medical facility, troop housing, and utilities, $5,885,000.

South Park Military Reservation, Pa.: Ad­ministrative facility, storage facilities, and utilities, $190,000.

(Third Arrp.y Area) Fort Benning, Ga.: Administrative facili­

ties, maintenance facilities, communications facilities, and community facilities, $422,000.

Fort Bragg, N. C.: Administrative facilities, operational facility, and utilities, $645,000.

Charlotte Armed Forces Induction Station, N. C.: Administrative facility, $302,000.

Fort McClellan, Ala.: Troop housing, train­ing facility, and community facility, $397;000.

Fort Rucker, Ala.: Operational facilities, maintenance facilities, training facilities, storage facilities, administrative facilities, trailer site facilities, land acquisition, and utilities, $7,300,000.

(Fourth Army Area) Fort Bliss, Tex.: Training facilities, main­

tenance facilities, administrative facilities, · troop housing, community facilities, and utilities, $5,301,000.

Fort Hood, Tex.: Community facilities, maintenance facilities, and storage facilities, $2,457,000.

Fort Sill, Okla.: Training facilities, $4,173,000.

(Fifth Army Area) Fort Carson, Colo.: Storage facilities, ad­

ministrative facilities, troop housing, train­ing facilities,_ and land acquisition, $3,253,000.

·Fort Benjamin Harrison, Ind.: Troop hous­ing, $140,000.

Fort Leavenworth, Kans.: Communications facilities and troop housing, $1,092,000..

Fort Rile_y, Kans.: Administrative facilities, community facilities, troop housing, and ut111ties, $1,519,000.

St. Louis Support Center, Mo.: Adminis­trative facility, $3,346,000.

(Sixth Army Area) Fort Lewis, W~sh.": Community facilities,

training facilities, maintenance facilitie13, family housing, and utilities, $3,022,000.

Fort Ord, Calif.: Maintenance facility and community facility, $2231000. _

United States Disciplinary Barracks, Galif.: Community facility, $197,000.

Yuma Test Station, Ariz.: Troop housing, research and development facility, and stor­age faciltty, $1,520,000.

(Military District of Washington) Fort McNair, D. c.: Academic facilities,

$4,111,000. (Armed Forces special weapons project)

Val'ious installations: Utilities, $4"'78,000. (Tactical site support facilities)

Various locations: Administrative facili­ties, maintenanpe facilities, storage facilitie~. and land acquisition, $8,506,000.

Outside the United States (Alaskan Area)

Ladd Air Force Base: Troop housing and maintenance facilities, $1,688,000.

Fort Richardson: Storage facilities, $2,333,-000.

Whittler: Storage facilities and training facilities, $2,849,000. .

Wildwood Station (Kenai): Storage facil­ity, $352,000.

. (Far East Command Area) Okinawa: Storage facilities, operational

facilities, and maintenan~e facilities, medi­cal facilities, and utilities, $540,000.

(Pacific Command Area) Alimanu Military Reservation, Hawaii:

Land acquisition, $143,000. Helemano, Hawaii: Community facility,

land acquisition and utilities, $136,000. Schofield Barracks, Hawaii: Family hous­

ing and land acquisition, $2,668,000. (Caribbean Command Area)

Panama Canal Zone: S:.::wage disposal sys­tem for Army, Navy, a-nd Air Force facilities, $1,060,000.

(United States Army, Europe) Various locations: Operational facilities,

maintenance facilities, community facilities, storage facilities, training facilities, admin­istrative facilities, medical facilities, troop housing, and utilities, $17 ,994,000.

SEc. 102. The Secretary of the Army may establish · or develop classified military i~­stallatlons and facilities by acquiring, con­structing, converting, rehabilitating, or in­t,;talling permanent or temporary public works, including land acquisition, site prep­aration, appurtenances, utilities, and equip­ment, in a total amount of $188,783,000.

SEC.103. (a) Public Law 161, 84th Congl1!SS, is amended with respect to Fort Jay, N. Y., under the heading "Continental United States" and subheadings "Field Forces Fa­cities (First Army Area) " in section 101, by striking out "$731,000" and inserting in place thereof "$1,081,000," and in clause (1) of section 502, by striking out "$224,927,000" and "$533,904,000" and inserting in place thereof "$22'5,277,000" and "$534,254,000,'' respectively.

(b) So much of section 401 of Public Law 534, 83d Congress, as reads "Adak Station, Alaska: Operational Facilities (including troop housing), $70,000" is amended to read "Adak Station, Alaska: Operational facilities (including troop housing), $180,000" and clause ( 4) of section 502 thereof, ls amended by striking the figure "$462,600" and insert­ing in place thereof "$572,600."

SEC. 104. The Secretary of the Army shall make all necessary studies, by contract or otherwise, to determine an appropriate site for the relocation of the San Jacinto Ord­nance Depot, Texas; such studies to be com­plete<;! by January 31, 1957. Expenditure of $25,000 out of appropriatipns available to the Department of the Army is authorized for such studies.

TITLE .ll

SEC. 201. The Secretary of the Navy may establish or develop ni111tary installations and - facilities by acquiTing, constructing, converting, rehabilitating, or installing per­manent or temporary public works, includ-

lng site preparation, appurtenances, ut111tiee, and equipment, for the following projects:

Inside the United States

Shipyard Facilities Naval shipyard, Boston, Mass.: Replace­

ment of pier, and plans and specifications for drydock facilities, $7,332,000.

Naval shipyard, Charleston, S. C.: Dredg­ing equipment, $148,000.

Naval mlnecraft base, Charleston, S. C.: Operational facilities, personnel facilities, training facilities, maintenance facilities, storage facilities, community facilities, se­curity facilities, and utilities, $7,902,000.

Naval shipyard, Long Beach, Calif.: Facili­ties for remedy~ng effects of ground subsi­dence and waterfront facilities, $5,984,000. - Navy underwater sound· laboratory, New London, Conn.: Research ·and development facilities and land acquisition, $340,000.

Harbor defense base, Norfolk, Va.: Person­nel facilities, $300,000.

Naval shipyard, Norfolk, Va.: Utilities and land acquisition, $244,000.

Navy mine defense laboratory, Panama City, Fla.: Medical facilities, $84,000.

Naval shipyard, San Francisco, Calif.: Plaris and specifications for drydbck facilities, $1,300,000. '

Naval industrial reserve shipyard, Tampa, Fla.: Land acquisition, $200,000.

Fleet Base Facilities Naval station, Key West; Fla.: Utilities,

$927,000. ' Naval station, Long Beach, Calif.: Water­

front facilities, $2,256,000. Naval station, New Orleans, La.: Utilities,

$226,000. Nayal station, Newport, R. I.: Waterfront

facilities, personnel facilities, · community :facilities and utilities, $11,672,000.

Naval station, Norfolk, Va.: Personnel facil­ities, $2,844,000.

Naval station, Orange, Tex.: Flood-protec­tion facilities, . including land acquisition, $265,000.

Aviation Facilities . (Naval air training stations)

Naval Auxiliary landing field, Alice-Orange Grove, Tex.: Airfield pavements, $2,242,000.

Naval auxiliary air station, · Chase Field, Tex.: Personnel ,facilities, operational facili­ties, community facilities, station and air­craft maintenance facilities, and utilities, $2,247,000.

Naval air station, Glynco, Ga.: Airfield pavements, personnel facilities, aircraft maintenance facilities, training facilities, fuel pipeline and storage facilities, and land acquisition, $4,003,000.

Naval auxiliary air station, Kingsville, Tex.: Personnel facilities, training facilities, air­craft maintenance facilities, community fa­cilities, and utilities, $2,610,000.

Naval air station, Memphis, Tenn.: Fuel storage facilities, and aircraft maintenance fac111ties, $511,000.

Naval auxiliary air station, Meridian, Miss.: Site preparation, utilities .• plans and specifi­cations for je.t aircraft training facilities, and land acquisition, $8,231,000.

Naval air station, Pensacola, Fla.: Commu­nity facilities and plans and .specifications for waterfront facilities, $347,000. · Naval auxiliary air station, Whiting Field, Fla.: Land acquisition, $13,000.

(Fleet support air stations) Naval air station, Alameda, Calif.: Aircraft

maintenance facilities, $2,675,000. Naval air station, Atlantic City, N. J.: Navi­

gational aids and ·land acquisition, $421,000. Nava! auxiliary air station, Brown Field,

Calif.: Personnel facilities· and utilities, $778,000.

Naval air station, Brunswick, Maine: Per­sonnel facilities; airfield pavements, station maintenance facilities, community fac111ties, and storage facilities, $3.738.000.

I.

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE. 6239 Naval air station, Cecil Field, Fla.: Aircraft

maintenance facilities, personnel facilities, storage facilities, operational facilities, train:. ing facilities, community facilities,, and utm­ties, $4,052,000.

Naval air station, Chincoteague, Va.: Air­craft maintenance facilities, $170,ooo: · Naval auxiliary air station, Edenton, N. C.:

Aircraft and station maintenance facilities, airfield pavements, fuel dispensing facilities, operational facilities, administrative facili­ties, personnel facilities, communications fa­cilities, community facilities, and utilities, $13,926,000.

Naval auxiliary air station, El Centro, Calif.: Aircraft maintenance fac~lities, and land acquisition including not to exceed $660,000 to be paid to Imperial County, Calif., to partially defray the county's cost in relocating the Niland-Blythe Road, $831,-000.

Naval auxiliary air station, Fallon, Nev.: Training facilities, aircraft maintenance facilities, community facilities, and land ac­quisition, $8,304,000.

Naval air faci11ty, Harvey Point, N. C.: Air­field pavements, waterfront facilities, fuel storage and dispensing fac111ties, naviga­tional aids, aircraft, and station maintenance facilities, utilities, and land acquisition, $6 m1llion.

Naval air station, Jacksonville, Fla.: Navi­gational aids, operational facilities, and land acquisition, $2,380,000.

Naval air station, Key West, Fla.: Aircraft maintenance facilities, $170,000 . .

Naval air station, Lemoore, Calif.: Plans and specifications for development of master jet aircraft fac111ties, and land acquisition, $10,089,000.

Naval air station, Miramar, Calif.: Person­nel facilities, operational faciltties, training facilities, ordnance facilities, land acquisi­tion, and : obstruction removal .for flight

·clearance, $8,835,000. · · Naval air station, Moffett Field, Calif.: Land acquisition, $89,000.

Naval air station, Norfolk, Va.: Aircraft maintenance facilities, $170,000.

Naval air station, North Island, San Diego, Calif.: Airfield pavements, qrdnance and ammunition storage facilities, aircraft main­tenance· facilities, waterfront facilities, op­erational facilities, navigational aids, and land acquisition, $13,072,000.

Naval air . station Oceana, Va.: Aircraft maintenance facilities, personnel facilities, operational facilities, community facilities, training facilities, ordnance facilities~ open storage facilities, security facilities, utilities, and relocation of Coast Guard facilities, $5,286,000.

Naval air station, Quonset Point, R. I.: Aircraft maintenance facilities, and naviga­t !onal aids, $2,753 ,000.

Naval ·auxiiiary air station, Sanford; Fla.: Aitcraft maintenance facilities, airfield .pave­ments, personnel facilities, and utilities, .E'.6 ,926,000. . '

Naval air station, Whidbey Island, Wash.: Utilities,, $149,000.

(Marine Corps air stations) Marine .Corps auxiliary air station, Beau­

fort, S. C.: Aircraft and station maintenance facilities, administrative facilities, medical facilities, pei;-sonnel facilities, training facili­ties, Gperat.ional facilities, covered and cold storage facilities, community facilitfes, fuel dispensing facilities, and utilities, $17,-384,000.

Marine Corps air station, Cherry Point, N. c.: Aircraft maintenance facilities, $170,000.

Marine Corps air station, El Toro, Calif.: . Aircraft maintenance facilities, administra­tive facilities, airfield pavements, storage fa­cilities, ammunition storage facilities, medi­cal facilities, training facilities, personnel facilities, operational facilities, and :utilities, $6,863,000.

Marine Corps auxiliary air station, Mojave, Calif.: Aircraft maintenance facilities, air­field pavements, personnel facilities, train­ing facilities, community facilities, fuel stor­age and dispensing facilities, land acquisi­tion, and utilities, $12,556,000.

(Specia1 purpose air stations) Naval air facility, John H. Towers Field,

Annapolis, Md.: Land acquisition, and plans for specifications for aviation facilities, $4 million.

Naval air development .center, Johns­ville, Pa.: Plans and specifications for re­search and development facilities, $693,000.

Naval air station, Lakehurst, N. J.: Re­search and development facilities and equipment maintenance facilities, $6,438,000.

Naval air station, Patuxent River, Md.: Aircraft maintenance facilities and research and development facilities, $475,000.

Naval air missile test center, Point Mugu, Calif.: Waterfront facilities, fuel dispensing facilities, aircraft maintenance facilities, and community facilities, $1,682,000.

Naval air turbine test station, Trenton, N. J.: Research and development facilities, $128,000.

Supply Facilities Naval supply depot, Clearfield, Utah:

Utilities, $149,000. Naval supply depot, Newport, R I.: Stor­

age facilities, $390,000. Naval supply center, Oakland, Calif.:

Utilities, $50,000. Naval supply depot, Seattle, Wash.: Re­

placement of seawall, $199,000.

Marine Corps Facilities Marine Corps supply center, Albany, Ga.:

Storage facilities, personnel facilities, main­tenance facilities, community facilities, and utilities, $1,742,000.

Marine Corps supply center, Barstow, Calif.: · Operational facilities, maintena'nee facilities, personnel facilities, administra­tive facilities, and community facilities, $3,436,000.

Marine Corps base, Camp Lejeune, N. C.: Personnel facilities, administrative · facm-. ties, training facilitte.s, community fac~li­ties, medical facilities, storage facilities, and utilities, $5,092,000. ·

Marine Corps recruit depot, Parris Island, S. C.: Personnel facilities, administrative facilities, stox:age facilities, training facili:­ties, community facilities, and utilities,. $4,-266,000.

Marine Corps base, Camp Pendlet9n, Calif.: Utilities, boat basin fac111ties, and land acquisition, $3,429,000.

Marine Corps cold weather battalion, Bridgeport, Calif.: Utilities $294,000.

Marine Corps training center, Twentynine Palms, Calif.: Community facilities and land acquisition, $1,165;000.

Marine Corps supply forwarding annex, Portsmouth, Va.: Security fac111ties, $91,000.

Marine Corpf!. schools, Quantico, Va.; Training facilities, ammunition storage and ordnance facilities, community facilities, and utilities, $2,178,000.

Marine Corps recruit depot, San Diego, Calif.: Personnel facm ties and community

-facilities, $1,67~,ooo. Ordnance Facilities

Naval ammunition depot, Bangor, Wash.: Ordnance facilities, $1,100,000.

Naval ammunition depot, Charleston, S. C.: Ordnance facilities, $404,000.

Naval ordnance test station, China Lake, Calif.: Research and development facilities, aircraft maintenance facilities, airfield pave­ments and fuel storage and dispensing fa­cilities, $6,028,000 .

Naval ammunition depot, Earle, N. J.: Ord­nance facilities, $600,000. ·

Naval ammunition.depot, Fallbrook, Calif.: Ammunition storage and ordnance facilities, $1,584,000.

Naval ammunl~lon d~pot, Hingham, Mass.: Ammunition_ storage and ordnance facilities, $993,000.

Naval ammunition and, net depot, Seal Beach, Calif.: Ordnance facilities, $2,176,000.

Naval mine depot, Yorktown, Va.: Am­munition storage and ordnance facilities and utilities, $3,480,000.

Service School Facilities Naval Academy, Annapolis, Md.: Earth­

worlt and land acquisition, $7,469,000. Naval training center, Brainbridge, Md.:

Personnel facilities, training facilities, and utilities, $6,569,000.

Naval receiving station, Brooklyn, N. Y.: Personnel facilities, $97,000.

Naval amphibious base, Coronado, Calif.: Training facilities, personnel facilities, and utilities, $5,660,000.

Fleet air defense training center, Dam Neck, Va.: Personnel facilities, $237,000.

Naval training center, Great Lakes, Ill.: Personnel facilities, and training facilities, $8,413,000.

Medical Facilities Naval hospital, Great Lakes, Ill.: Medical

facilities, $12,730,000. Naval hospital, Portsmouth, N. H.: Hos•

pital elevator, $57,000.

Communications Fac111ties Naval radio station, Cheltenham, Md.:

Communications facilities, personnel facili­ties, and utilities, $2,489,000.

Naval radio station, Maine: Utilities and land acquisition, $2,450,000.

Naval communication station, San Fran­cisco, Calif.: Communications facilities, and .personnel facilities, $2,029,000.

Naval communication station,, Seattle, Wash.: Communications facilities, $.45,000.

Naval radio station, Winter Harbor, Maine: Communications facilities, $83,ooo:

Offi.ce of Naval Research.Facilities Naval research laboratory, District of Co­

lumbia: Plans and specifications for re­search.and development facilities, $1,300,000.

Yards and Docks Fac,ilities • Public-works center, Norfolk, Va.: Ut111ties

and land acquisition, $443,000. Naval construction battalion center, Port

Hueneme, Calif.: Replacement of wharf, and storage facilities, $2,581,000.

Outsiae the United States Shipyard Fac111ties

Naval ship repair facility, Subic Bay, Phil­ippine Islands: Waterfront facilities, $1,637,-000.

Naval base, Subic Bay, Philippine Islands: Utilities at Olongapo, flood control and drain­age facilities and community facilities, $9,378,000.

Fleet Base Facilities Naval station," Adak, Alaska: Operational

facilities, and laundry and dry cleaning fa­cilities, $2,351,000.

.. Naval station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba: Utilities, $680,000.

Aviation Facilities Naval air station, Atsugi, Japan: Airfield

pavements, aircraft maintenance ,facilities, fuel storage facilities, personnel facilities, and utilities, $1,961,000.

Naval air station, Barber's Point, Oahu, Territory of Hawaii: Personnel facilities and aircraft maintenance facilities, $870,000.

Naval air station, Cubi Point, Philippine Islands: Personnel facilities, $1,264,000.

Naval air station, Guantanamo Bay, Cuba: Aircraft maintenance facilities, personnel facilities, communications facilities, family housing, community facilities, and utilities, $4,572,000. .

Naval air station, Iwakuni, Japan; Aircraft maintenance facilities, airfield pavements, dredging, navigational aids, and fuel-storage facilities, $1,704,000. ·

6240 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

Marine Corps air station, Kaneohe Bay, Oahu, Territory of Hawaii: Aircraft mainte­nance facilities, airfield pavements, and operational facilities, $1,045,000.

Naval air facility, Port Lyautey, French Morocco: Aircraft maintenance facilities, and -family housing, -$'1,401,000. ·

Naval station, Roosevelt Roads,• Puet'to Rico: Aircraft maintenance facilities, air­fied pavements, fuel storage facnities, ord­nance facilities, personnel facilities, medical facilities, and utilities, $4,470,000.

Naval ~ir station, Sangley Point, Philip­pine Islands: Airfield pavements, breakwater, ~nd _personnel facilities, $3,811,000.

Supply Facilities Naval station, Adak, Alaska: Replacement

of fuel storage facilities, $5,000,000. Naval station, Argentia, Newfoundland:

Fuel storage facilities, $1,599,000. Naval supply depot, Subic Bay, Philippine

Islands: Covered and cold storage facilities, administrative facilities, operational facili­ties, maintenance facilities, waterfront facil­ities, and utilities, $11,598,000.

·Ordnance Facilities Naval ammunition depot, Oahu, T. H.:

Ordnance facilities, $971,000 . . Naval ordnance facility, Port Lyautey,

,French Morocco: Ordnance facilities, $245,-000.

Naval ordnance facility, Yokosuka, Japan: Ordnance facilities, $241,000.

Communications Facilities Naval communication unit, Futema, Okl­

.nawl;l.: Communications .facilities, $75,000. Naval communication -station, Guam, Ma_,.

riana Islands: Communication facilities, $222,000. .

Naval communication facility, Philippine Islands: Communications facilities, and land acquisition, $4,320,000.

. Yards and Docks Facillties Fifteenth naval district, Canal Zone: Util;;.

ities, $2,210,000. SEC. 202. The Secretary of the Navy is

authorized to obtain, by contract such en­gineering, location, and site planning stud­ies as may be necessary to enable him to determine the feasibility and advisability of establishing, continuing, or relocating the following facilities: Naval air station, Nor­folk, Va. (bombing targets); Naval air fa-. cility, John H. Towers Field, Annapolis, Md.; Naval magazine, Port Chicago, Calif. Ex­penditures not to exceed $100,000 for such studies may be made out of the appropria­tion "Military construction, Navy." The .Secretary of the Navy shall report to the Committees on Armed Services of the Sen­ate and House of Representatives the con­clusions of these studies together with such recommendations as he shall consider ap­_propriate. · SEC. 203: The Secretary . of th~ ~avy may

establish or develop classified naval instal­lations and facilities by constructing, con­verting, rehabilitating, or installing perma­nent or temporary public works, including land acquisition, site- preparation, appur­tenances, utilities, and equipment, in the total amount of $~2,997,000.

SEC. 204. Public Law ~o5, 82d Congress, as amended, is amended as follows:

(a) In section 201, as amended, strike out so much thereof under the heading "Continental United States" and subheading "Supply Facilities" as reads as follows:

"Harpswell Neck Fuel Facility, Portland, Maine, area: Aviation gasoline and jet fuel bulk storage; $2,766,500"; and insert in place thereof the following:

"Harpswell Neck Fuel Facility, Portland, Maine, area: Aviation gasoline and jet fuel bulk storage and land acquisition "'2 766 -500." • 'I' • •

(b) In section 201, ·under the heading "Outside Continental United States" and

subheading "Communication Facilities", strike out so much thereof as read as follows:

"Naval communication station, Philippine Islands: Consolidated communication facil­ities~ $2,694,500"; and insert in place thereof the following:·

"Naval communication statton, Ph1llpplne I-slands: Consolidated communications, fa­cilities, and land acquisition, $2,694,500." ,

SEC. 205. Public Law 534, 83d Congress ls amended as follows: . (a) In. section 2.01, under the heading ''Continental United States" and . subhead­ing "Aviation Facilities", change the amount for "Naval air missile test center (San Nicolas Island), Point Mugu, Calif.", from "$1,132,000" to "$1,816,000." · (b) In section 201, under the heading "Continental United States" and subheading "Ordnance Facilities," change the amount for "Naval ammunition depot, Hawthorne, Nev." from "$308,000" to "$538,000."

(c) In section 502, clause (2), change the amount for public works authori·zed by title II for inside continental United States from "$102,042,000" to "$102,956,000"; and total amount from "$201,893,000" to "$202,807,000."

SEC. 206. Public Law 161, 84th Congress, is amended as follows: · ·(a) In section 2Dl, under the heading "Continental United States" and subheading ''Shipyard Facili~ies," change the amount for "Naval electronics laboratory, San Diego, Oalif.", from "$143,000" to "$162,000."

(b) In section 201, under the heading "Continental United States" and subheading "Fleet Base Facilities," change the amount for "Navy ·Department, District of Colum­bia", from "$81,000" to "$114,000." _' (c) In section 201, under the heading "Continental United States" and subhead­ing "Aviation Facilities," change the amount for . "naval. auxiliary air station, El Centro, Calif." from "$366;000'' to "$450,000"; strike out so much thereof as reads as follows: · "Naval air station, Norfolk, Va.: Aircraft maintenance facilities, training facilities, communication facilities, operational facili.:. ties, $4,660,000"; and insert in place thereof the following: , "Naval air station, Norfolk, Va.: Aircraft maintenance facilities, · training facilities, communication facilities, operational facili­ties, and land acquisition, $4,660,000." .

(d) In section 201, under the heading "Outside Continental United States" and subheading "Ordnance Facilities," strike out so much thereof ·as reads as follows:

"Naval ammunition depot, Oahu, T. H.: Testing facilities, and railroad facilities and barricades, $1,132,000"; and insert in place thereof the following: . .

"Naval ammunition depot, Oahu, T. H.: Testing facilities, railroad facilities and bar­ricades, and land acquisition, $1,132,000."

(e) In section 502, clause (2). change the amount for public works authorized by title II for inside continental United States from "$299,690,600" to "$299,826,600"·; and the to­tal amount from "$564,224,300" to "$564,360,300."

TITLE llI

SEC. 301. 'l'he S~cretary of the Air Force may establish or develop military installa­tions and facilities by acquiring, construct­ing, converting, rehabilitating, or installing permanent or temporary public works, in­cluding site preparation, appurtenances, utilities and equipment, for the following projects:

Inside the United States Air Defense Command

Buckingham Air Force Base, Fort Myers, Fla.: Operational and training facilities, _maintenance facilities, supply facilities, hos­pital and medical facilities, administrative facilities, housing and community facilities, and utilities and ground improvement, $13,168,000.

Duluth Municipal Airport, Duluth, Minn.: Operational and training facilities, mainte-

nance fac111ties, supply fac111ties, and land acquistion, $863,000.

Ent Air Force Base, Colorado Springs, Colo.: Housing and community facilities, $342.~00. . - Ethan Allen Air Force Base, Winooski, Vt.: Operational and training ·facilities, mainte­nance · facilities, supply · facilities, and land ·acquisition, $4,211,000. · Geiger Field, Spokane, Wash.: Operational ·and training facilities, maintenance facili­ties, and housing and com,munity facilities, and family housing, $2,827,000.

Glasgow Air Force Base, Glasgow, Mont.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­·nance facilities, utilities and -group improve­·ments, land acquisition and family housing, '$2,470,000. - Grand Forks Air Force Base, Grand Forks, N. Dak.: Operational and -training facilities, and maintenance facilities, $1,999,000.

Grandview Air Force Base, Kansas City, Mo.: Operational and training facilities, ·maintenance facilities, housing and com­munity facilities, utilities and ground im­·provements, and land acquisition; $1,673,000. · Greater Pittsburgh Airport, Corapolis,-Pa.: ·operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, supply facilities, housing and community facilities, and land acquisi­tion, $1,087,000. · Hamilton Air Force Base, San Rafael ·Cal~f.: Operational and training facilities'. mamtenance facilities, utilities and ground 1mprovements, and land acquisition,- $2,966,-000.

K. I. Sawyer Municipal Airport, Marquette, Mich.: Operational and training facilities, •maiz.itenance facilities,< supply facilities, ad­_mimstra:tive facilities, ~ousing · and com~ munity ·facilities, utilities and ground im­provements, and land acquisition, $5,051,000.

Manistee Air Force Base, Manistee, Mich.: 'Operational and training facilities, mainte­_nance facilities, . _supply !acilities, admin­istrative facilittes, housing and . community facilities. and utilities and .ground improve­ments, $2,906,000.

Kinross Air Force Base, Sault Sainte Marie Mich.: Operational and training facilities: _maintenance facilities, housing and com­munity facilities, and land acquisition, $2,156,000.

Klamath Falls Municipal Airport, Klamath Falls, Oreg.: .Operational and training facili­ties, maintenance facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisition, $1 130 -000. • •

McChord Air Force Base, Tacoma, Wash.: Operational ~md training facilities, mainte­_nance . facilities, and . land acquisition, $1,514,000.

McGhee-Tyson Airport, Knoxville, Tenn.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, administrative facilities, housing and community facilities, and land acquisition, $2,054,000. . Major :f'ielµ, GreenviUe, Tex.: Operational ·and training f~cilities, and land acquisition, $440,000: Provided, however, That none of the funds here authorized for appropriation shall be expended until the field has been recaptured by the United States.

Minneapolis-Saint Paul International Air­port, Minneapolis, Minn.: Operational and traini!lg facilities, and maintenance facili­ties, $3,015,000. ~inot Air Force Base,.Minot, N. Dak.: Oper­

ational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, supply facilities, housing and com­,munity facilities, utilities and ground im­provements, and land acquisition "'21 215 -.000. • 'I' ' •

Newcastle County Airport, Wllmington, Del.: Operational and training facilities main_tenance facilities, supply facilities: hoUSlng and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acqui­sition, $6,184,000.

Niagara Falls Municipal Airport, Niagara Falls, N. Y.: Operational and training facili-

1956: CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE ,62,41 ties, maintenance facilities, supply faeilittes, housing and community facilities, and land acquisition, $3,030,000.

otis Air Force Base, ·Falmouth, Mass.!. Op.­ierational -and training facilities, · mainte­nance facilities, supply facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, land acquisition and family housing, $11,577,000.

Oxnard Air Force Base, Camarillo, Calif.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisition, $2,292,000.

Paine Air Force Base, Everett, Wash.: Op­erational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, supply facilities, and land acquisition, $4,127,000.

Greater Portland, Oreg., area: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facili­ties, supply facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisition, $13,-508,000.

Presque Isle Air Force Base, Presque Isle, Maine: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, housing and com­munity facilities, utilities and ground im­provements, and land acquisition, $8,057,000.

Richard Bong Air Force Base, Kansasville, Wis. : Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, supply facilities, ad­ministrative facilities, housing and com­munity facilities, and ntmties and ground improvements, $6,801,000.

Selfridge Air Force Base, Mount Clemens, Mich.: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, supply facilities, and land acquisition, $2,494,000.

Sioux City-Municipal Airport. Sioux City, Iowa: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, housing and com­munity facilities. and land acquisition, $2,• 288,QOO.

Stewart Air Force Base, Newpurgh, N .. Y.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, housing and community fa­Ctlities, and land acquisition, $1,802.000. · Suffolk County Air Force Base, Westhamp­ton Beach, N. Y.: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground i~provements, and land acquisition, $5,-441,000'.

Truax Ffeld, Madison, Wis.: Operational and traini:Qg facilities, maintenance facili­ties, housing and community facilities, and land acquisition, $2',874,000.

'Vnrtsmith Air Force Base, Oscoda,. Mich.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, supply facilities, adminis­trative facilities, housing and community fa­ciliities, utilities and ground improvements, land acquisition and family housing, $3,-278',000.

Youngstown Municipal Airport. Youngs­town. Ohio: Operational and training facil­jties, maintenance facilities, utilities and ground improvem.ents. and. land acquisition, $2,255,000. .

Yuma County Airport, Yuma. Ariz.: Oper­ational and training facilities, maintenance facilities. administrative facilities, housing and community · facilities, and land acqui­sition, $3,545,000.

Various, locations:· Operational and train­ing facilities, maintenance facilitie.s, supply facilities, administrative facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisition, $37,760,000.

Air Materiel Command Brookley Air Force Base, Mobile, · Ala.:

Housing and community facilities; and land acquisition, $1,541,000.

Griffiss Air Force Base, Rome, N. Y.: Oper­ational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, research, development and test faeilities, supply facilities, housing and com­munity f'acilities, utilities and ground im­provements, and land acquisition, $17,966,000'.

Hm Air Force Base, Ogden, Utah: Main· tenance :facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ·ground improvements and land acquisition, $1,339,000'.

Kelly Air Force . Base, San Antonio, Tex.: Operational and· training facilities, main­tenance facilities, and utilities and ground 1mprQvements; $1,570,000. _ ·

Marietta Air Force Station, Marietta, Pa.: Supply facilities, $52,000.

McClellan Air Force Base, Sacramento, Calif.: Administrative facilities, housing and community facilities, and land acquisition, $1,424,000.

Mukilteo Fuel Storage Station, Mukilteo, Wash .. : Land acquisition, $4,000.

Norton Air Force Base, San Bernardino, Calif.: Operational and training facilities, and housing and community facilities, $1,-572,000.

Olmsted Air Force Base, Middletown, Pa.: Maintenance facilities, administrative facil­ities, and utilities and ground improvements, -$3 ,983 .ooo.

Robins Air Force Base, Macon, Ga: : Oper­ational and training facilities, housing and community facilities, and utilities and .ground improvements, $5,478,000.

Searsport Fuel Storage station, Searsport, Maine: Supply facilities, $473,.000.

Tacoma Fuel Storage Station~ Tacoma, Wash.: Supply facilities, $129,000.

Tinker Air Force Base, Oklahoma City, Okla.; Operational and training facilities:, and housing and community facilities> $3,-498,000.

Wilkins Air Force Station, Shelby, Ohio: Family housing, $89,000.

Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, Dayton, Ohio; Operational and training fa.cilities, maintenance facilities, research. develop­ment and test facilities, housing and com­munity faeUities, utilities and ground im­provements, and land acquisition, $17,-138,000.

Various locations~ Administrative facili­ties, housing and community facilities, and utilities and ground improvements,. $444,000.

Air Proving Ground Command. Eglin Air Force Base, Valparaiso, Fla .. : Op·

erational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, research, development and test. facilities, hospital and medical facilities, housing and community facilities. utilities .and ground improvements, and land ac.qui­~ition. $21.094,{)00.

Air Training Command Bryan Air Force Base, Bryan, Tex.: Hous­

ing and community facilities, and land ac­·quisition, $1,288,000.

Craig Air Foree Base, Selma, Aia:. ~ Opera­tional and training facilities, and land ac­quisition, $18,000.

Edward Gary Air -Foree Base, San Marcos, Tex.: Maintenance facilities, $'183,000·. · Ellington Air Force Base, Houston Tex.: ·Land aequisitfon, $63,000. · Francis E. Warren Air Force Base, Chey­enne, Wyo.: Housing and community facili­ties, and utilities and ground improvements, $! ,654,000.

Oood!eUow Afr Force Base, San Angelo, Tex.: Operational and training facilities, supply facilities, utilities and ground im­provements, and land acquisition, $8,804,000.

James Connally Air Force Base, Waco, Tex.: Operational and training facilities, and rand acquisition, $4,687,000.

Keesler Air Force Base, Biloxi. Miss;: Land acquisition, $34.000.

Lackland Air Force Base, San Antonio, Tex.: Hospital and medical facilities, $3,• ~40,000.

Laredo Air Poree Base, Laredo, Tex.: Utili­ties, and ground improvements, and land acquisition, $225,000.

Laugb.li:n Air ·Fol"ce Base, Del Rio; Tex.: Operational and tl"aining facilities, and hous­ing and community facilities $212,000.

Lowry Air Fo11ce Base, Denve11, Colo.: Land acquisition, $1,587,000.

Luke AiJ! Force Base., Phoenix, Ariz.: Opera­tional and. training · iacilliities, :tnairntenance facilities, and land acquisition, $2,902,000-. · Mather Air Force Base, Sacramento, Galif.: ,Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, supply facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisition, $2'1,-65-0,000.

McConnell Air Force Base, Wichita, Kans.: Land acquisition, $396,000. -

Moody Air Force Base, Valdosta, Ga.: Operational and training :liacmties, and maintenance facilities, $1,848,000.

Nellis Air Force Base, Las Vegas, Nev.: Operational and training facilities, and land acquisition, $3,456,000.

Parks Air Force Base, Pleasanton, C'alif.: Utilities and ground improvements', $111,000>.

Perrin Air Force Base, S'.herman, Tex.: Operational and training facilities, and :rand acquisition, $2,2.60,000.

Randolph Air -Force Base, San Antonio, . Tex.~ Land acquisition, $133,COO.

Reese Air Force Base, Lubbock, Tex.: Operational and training facilities, and land acquisition, $4,164,.000.

SCott Air Force Base, Belleville, Ill.: Opera• tional and training facilities, supply facilities, and land acquisition, $3,296,000·.

Sheppard Air Force Base, Wichita Falls, Tex.: Hospital and medical facilities, and housing and community facilities, $6,8'42',000.

Stead Air Force Base. Reno, Nev.: Supply facilities. housing and community :facilities:, utilities and ground improvements, and! land acquisition, $2,221,000.

Tyndall Air Force Base, Panama. City, Fla.: Operational and training · facilities,. and maint.enance facilities, $'116,000.

Vance Air Force Base, Enid, Okla.:· Opera• .tional and training, facilities, a.nd land. ac• .quisition, $9'1'1,006. . Webb Air Foree Base. :Big Spring, Tex.: Operational and training facilities. $90,00&.

Williams Air Force· Base·. Chandler~ Ariz:.: Operational and training :fa.cilities, mainte. nance• :facilities, and, land acquisition, $6.-347,000.

Air University Maxwell Air Force Base, Montgomery, Ala.:

Ope.rational and training facilities, and hous­ing and community facilities, $215,000.

Continental Afr Command :Beale ·Air Force· Base. Marysville. Calif.:

_Operational and training facillities,. supply facilities, and utilities and ground improve· ments. $9.563.000.

Brooks Air Force Base. San Antonio. Tex.: Operational and training facili.ties, and maintenance facilities, $23'1,000.

Dobbins Air Force Base, Marietta, Ga.: Housing and community facilities, $345,0UO. . Mitchel Air Force Base. Hempstead, N . Y.: Utilities and ground. improvements, $205,0.00.

Headquarters Command Bolling Air Force Base, Washington, D. C.:

Utilities and ground improvements, $8.UOO.

Military Air Transport Command Andrews, Air Foree Base,, Camp Springs,

Md.: Operational and training :liacUities .. sup­ply facilities, housing and community fa:cUi.­ties, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisition, $7.335,000.

Charleston Air Force Baise, Charleston, s. c.: Operati.onal and training facilities . and .utilities and ground improvements, $86.8,000. · Dover. Air Force Base, Dover, Del.~ Opera­.tional and training facilities, supply :facili­ties,. administration facilities, housing and community . facilities. and utilities and ground. improvements, $3,195,000.

McGuire Air Force Base, Wrightstown, .. N . J.: Operational a.nd. training facilities, supply facilities, hospital and medical facili­ties. administra,tive facilities, and housing and community faciliti.es, $2,169'.000.

'6242 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12 Palm Beach Ali' Force Base, Palm Beach,

Fla.: Operational and training facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisi­tion, $1,545,000.

Vint Hill Farm Station, Warrenton, Va.: Operational and training facilities, $768,000.

Research and Development Command canal Air Force Pla_nt No. 62, Hartford,

Conn.: Research, development, and test fa­cilities, and utilities and ground improve­ments, $22,4'ZJ:5,000.

Edwards Air Force Base, Muroc, Calif.: Re­. search, development, and test facilities, and

housing and community facilities, $5,488,000. Holloman Air Force Base, Alamagordo, N.

Mex.: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, research, develop­ment, and test facilities, and housing and community facilities, $7,877,000.

Indian Springs Air Force Base, Indian Springs, Nev.: Housing and community fa­cilities, and utilities and gr.ound improve­ments and family housing, $961,000.

Kirtland Air Force Base, Albuquerque, N. Mex.: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, and research, devel­opment, and test facilities, $5,481,000.

Laredo Test Site, Laredo, Tex.: Research, development, and test facilities, and land ac­quisitions, $1,219,000.

Laurence G. Hanscom Field, Bedford, Mass.: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, research, development and test facilities, housing and community facilities utilities, and ground improvements, and land acquisition, $6,939,000.

National reactor test station, Idaho Falls, Idaho: Operational and training ·facilities, research, development and test facilities, and utilities and ground improvements, $11,415,000.

Patrick Air Force Base, Cocoa, Fla.: Opera­tional and training facilities, research, devel­opment and test facilities, housing and com­munity facilities, utilities and ground im­provements, and land acquisition, $15,169,000.

Sacramento Peak Observatory, Sacramento Peak, N. Mex.: Family housing $153,000.

Strategic Air Command Abilene Air Force Base, Abilene, Tex.: Op­

erational and training facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisition, $1,-043,000.

Altus Air Force Base, Altus, Okla.: Housing and community facilities, and utilities and ground improvements, $1,003,000.

Barksdale Air Force Base, Shreveport, La.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, administrative facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisi­tion, $2,117,000.

Bergstrom Air Force Base, Austin, Tex.: Operational and training facilities, supply facilities, housing and community facilities, and land acquisition, $531,000.

Biggs Air Force Base, El Paso, Tex.: Opera­tional and training facilities, and housing and community facilities, $922,000.

Campbell Air Force Base, Hopkinsville, Ky.: Operational and training facilities, and util­ities and ground improvments, $479,000.

Carswell Air Force Base, Fort Worth, Tex.: Operational and training facilities, and main­tenance facilities, $2,438,000.

Castle Air Force Base, Merced, Calif.: Op­erational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, hospital and medical facilities, .and housing and community facilities, $2,179,000.

Clinton-Sherman Air Force Base, Clinton, Okia.: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, supply facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisi• tion, $7,004,000.

Columbus Air Force Base, Columbus, Miss.: Operational and training facilities,

supply faclllties, 'housing and community facilities, and land acquisition, $1,654,000.

Davis-Monthan Air Force Base, Tucson, Ariz.: Operational and training facilities, and land acquisition, $503,000.

Dow Air Force Base, Bangor, Maine: Oper­ational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, supply facilities, housing and com­munity facilities, and utilities and ground improvements, $7,665,000.

Ellsworth Air Force Base, Rapid City, s. Dak.: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, housing and com­munity facilities, and land acquisition, $943,000.

Fairchild Air Force Base, Spokane, Wash.: Operational and training facilities, main­tenance facilities, housing and community facilities, and utilities and ground improve­ments, $4,457,000.

Forbes Air Force Base, Topeka, Kans.: Operational and training facilities, and housing and community facilities, $1,271,000.

Gray Air Force Base, Killeen, Tex.: Opera­tional · and training facilities, $23,000.

Greenville Air Force Base, Greenville, Miss.: Operational and· training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, supply facilities, and land acquisition, $2,4.83,000.

Homestead Air Force Base, Homestead, Fla.: Operational and training facilities, hospital and medical facilities, housing and commu­nity facilities, utilities, and ground improve­ments, and land acquisition, $1,694,000.

Hunter Air Force Base, Savannah, Ga.: Op­erational and training facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisition, $1,131,000.

Lake Charles Air Force Base, Lake Charles, La.: Operational and training facilities, housing and community facilities, and utili­ties and ground improvements, $1 ,552,000.

Lincoln Air Force Base, Lincoln, Nebr.: Operational and training facilities, main~e­nance facilities, housing and commumty facilities, and utilities and ground improve­ments, $4,685,000.

Little Rock Air Force Base, Little Rock, Ark.: Operational and training facilities, maintenance fa~ilities, supply facilities, ad­ministrative facilities, housing and com­munity facilities, and land acquisition, $1,528,000. .

Lockbourne Air Force Base, Columbus, Ohio: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, housing and commu­nity facilities, and land acquisition, $4,-952,000.

Loring Air Force Base; Limestone, Maine: Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, supply facilities, and hous­ing and community facilities, $2,522,000.

MacDlll Air Force Base, Tampa, Fla.: Op­erational and training facilities, maintenance fa.cllities, and housing and community facil­ities, $3,262,000.

Malstrom Air Force Base, Great Falls, Mont.: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, and housing and com­munity facilities, $1,236,000.

March Air Force Base, Riverside, Calif.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, housing -and community fa­cilities, and land acquisition, $5,156,000.

Mountain Home Air Force Base, Mountain Home, Idaho: Operational and training fa­cilities, maintenance facilities, housing and community facilities, and utilities and ground improvements, $2,064,000.

Offutt Air Force Base, Onlaha, Nebr.: Op­erational and training facilities, supply facil­ities, housing and community facilities, util­ities and ground improvements, and land acquisition and family housing, $5,697,000.

Pinecastle Air Force Base, Orlando, Fla.: Housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisi­tion, $786,000.

Plattsburg Air Force Base, Plattsburg, N. Y.: Housing and community facilities, $1,491,000.

Portsmouth Air Force Base, Portsmouth, N. H.: Operational and training facilities, and housing and community facilities, $661,000.

Smoky Hill Air Force Base, Salina, Kans.: Operational and training facilities, hospital and medical facilities, administrative facili­ties, housing M1d community facilities, util­ities and ground improvements, and land acquisition, $3,882,000.

Travis Air Force Base, Fairfield, Calif.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, and utilities and ground im­provements, $923,000 .

Turner Air Force Base, Albany, Ga.: Op­erational and training facilities, housing and community facilities, and land acquisition, $781,000.

Walker Air Force Base, Roswell, N. Mex.: Operational and training facilities, supply facilities, and ·housing and community fa­cilities, $2,791,000.

Westover Air Force Base, Chicopee Falls, Mass.: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, supply facilities, ad­ministrative facilities, housing and commu­nity facilities, utilities and ground improve­ments, and land acquisition, $9,315,000.

Whiteman Air . Force Base, Knobnoster, Mo.: Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, supply facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisi­tion, $815,000.

Tactical Air Command Ardmore Air Force Base, Ardmore, Okla.:

Maintenance facilities, supply facilities, and land acquisition, $330,000.

Blytheville Air Force Base, Blytheville, Ark.: Operational and training facilities and maintenance facilities, $933,000.

Bunker Hill Air Force Base, Peru, Ind.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­

, nance facilities, housing and community fa· cilities and removal of hazard, $2,169,000.

Clovis Air Force Base, Clovis, N. Mex.: Op­erational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, housing and c·ommunity fa­cilities, and relocation of structure, $4,• 505 ,000.

Donaldson'Air Force Base, Greenville, S. C.: Operational and training facilities, $2,428,000.

England Air Force Base, Alexandria, La.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, administrative facilities, and housing and community facilities, $2,919,000.

Foster Air Force Base, Victoria, Tex.: . Op­erational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, and utilities and ground improve• ments, $952,000.

George Air Force Base, Victorville, Calif.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, supply facilities, and hous­ing and community facilities, $3,144,000.

Langley Air Force Base, Hampton, Va.: Operational and training facilities, and land acquisition, $2,613,000.

Larson Air Force Base, Moses Lake, Wash.: Operational and training facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and land acquisition, $1,111,000.

Myrtle Beach Municipal Airport, Myrtle Beach, S. C.: Operational and training facili­ties, maintenance facilities, hospital and medical facilities, and housing and commu­nity facilities, $1,665,000.

Pope Air Force Base, Fort Bragg, N. C.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, and land acquisition, $1,106,000.

Sewart Air Force Base, Smyrna, Tenn.: Operational and training facilities, mainte­nance facilities, utilities and ground , im­provements, and land acquisition, $1,583,000.

Seymour Johnson Air Force Base, Golds­boro, N. C.: Operational and training facm­ties, maintenance facilities, supply fac11ities, ·hospital and medical facilities, administra-

1956, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE .6243 tlve facilities, and housing · and community facilities, $6,637,000.

Shaw Air Force Base, Sumter, S. C.: Opera­tional and training facilities, maintenance facilities. and housing and community fa-cilities, $3,805,000. .

Wendover Air Force Base, Wendover, Utah: Operational and training facilities, $67,000.

Special Facilities Various locations: Research, development

and test facilities. administrative facilities, and land acquisition, $1,240,000.

Aircraft Control and Warning System Various locations: Operational and train­

ing facilities, maintenance facilities, supply faci:Iities, hospital and medical facilities, ad­ministrative facilities, housing, and com­munity facilities, utilities and ground im­provements, and land acquisition and family housing, $80,942,000.

Outside the United States

Alaskan Air Command Eielson Air Force Base: Operational and

training facilities, maintenance facilities, and family housing, ~14,984,000.

Elmendorf Air Force Base~ Operational and training facilities, maintenance facilities. supply facilities, housing and community facilities, and utilities and ground improve­ments, $5,444,000.

Galena Airfield~ Operational and training facilities and supply facilities, $1,772,000.

King Salmon Airport: Operational and training facilities, $289,000'.

Ladd Air Force Base: Operational and training facilities, supply facilities, and utilities and ground improvements, $7,055,-000.

Various locations: Operational and trai~­ing facilities, $6,628,000.

Far East Air Forces Hickam Air Force Base, Honolulu, Ha­

waii: Operational · and training facilities, $991,000.

Johnston Island Air Force Base, Johnston Island: Operational and training facilities and housing and community facilities, $724,000.

Various locations: Operational and train­ing facilities, maintenance facilities, supply facilities, hospital and medical facilities, utilities and ground improvements, land ac­quisition, and family housing, $25,969,000.

Military Air Transport Service Various locations: Operational and train­

ing facilities, maintenance facilities, supply facilities, housing and community facilities, and utilities and ground improvements, $55,-859,000.

Northeast Air Command Various locations: Operational and train­

ing. facilities, maintenance facilities, supply facilities, hospital and medical facilities, housing and community facilities, utilities and ground improvements, and family hous­ing, $70,250,000.

Strategic Air Command Andersen Air Force Base, Guam: Opera­

tional and training facilities, maintenance facilities, supply facilities, housing and com­munity facilities, utilites and ground im­provements, and family housing, $23,980,000.

Harm()n Air Force Base, Guam: Land ac· quisition. $14,000.

Northwest Air Force Base, Guam: Opera­tional and training facilities and main­tenance facilities, $229,000.

Ramey Air Force Base, Puerto Rico: Oper­ational and training facilities, maintenance facilities, and land acquisition, $1,523,000.

United States Air Forces in Europe Various locations: Operational and train­

ing facilities, maintenance facilities. supply facilities. hospital and medical facilities, ad­ministrative facilities,. housing and commu­nity facilities, utilities and ground improve-

ments, and erection of prefabricated struc­tures. $97,123,000.

SEC. 302. The Secretary of the Air Force may establish or develop classified military installations and facilities by acquiring, con­structing, converting, rehabilitating, or in­stalling permanent or temporary public works, including land acquisition, site prep­aration, appurtenances, utilities and equip­ment, in the total amount of $163 million.

SEC. 303. Section 1 of the act of March 30, 1949 (ch. 41, 50 U. S. C. 491), is amended by the addition of the following:

"The Secretary of the Air Force is au­thorized to procure communication services required for the Semiautomatic Ground En­vironment System. No contract for such services may be for a period of more than 10 years from the date communication serv­ices are first furnished under such contract. The aggregate contingent liability of the Government under the termination provi­sions of all contracts authorized hereunder may not exceed a total of $222 million, and. no termination payment shall be final until audited and approved by the General Ac­counting Office Which shall have access to· s.uch carrier records and accounts as it may deem necessary for the purpose. In procur­ing such services, the Secretary of the Air Force shall utilize to the fullest extent the facilities and capabilities of communication common carriers, including cooperatives. within their respective service areas. Ne­gotiations with communication common carriers, including cooperatives, and repre· sentation in proceedings involving such car­riers before Federal and State regulatory bodies where such negotiations or proceed­ings involve contracts authorized by this paragraph shall be in accordance with the provisions of section 201 of the act of June 30, 1949, as amend.ed (40 U.S. C. A. sec. 481) ...

SEC. 304. (a) Public Law 161, 84th Con­gress. is amended, under the heading "Con­tinental United States" in section 301, as follows~

Under the subheading "Air Defense Com­mand"-

(1) with respect to Buckingham Weap­ons Center, Fort Myers, Fla., strike out "$11,577,000" and insert in place thereof "$15,4.62,000."

(2) with respect to Duluth Municipal Air­port, Duluth, Minn., strike out "$1,200,000" and insert in place the.reof "$'1,623,000."

(3) with respect to Grand Forks site. North Dakota, strike out "$5,822,000" and insert in place thereof "$7,709,000."

(4) with respect to Greater Milwaukee area, Wisconsin, airbase to be known as "Richard Bong Air Force Base'', strike out "$16,608,000" and insert in place thereof "'$23,859,000."

(5) with respect to Greater Pittsburgh Airport. Coraopolis, Pa., strike out "$404,000" and insert in place thereof "$525,000."

(6) with respect to Hamilton Air Force Base, San Rafael, Calif., strike out "$1,501,-000" and insert in place thereof "$2,229,000."

(7) with respect to Klamath Falls Munic­ipal Airport, Klamath Falls, Oreg., strike out "$2,042,000" and insert in place thereof "$2,656,000."

(8) with respect to McGhee-Tyson Air­port, Knoxville, Tenn., strike out "$582,000" and insert in place there.of "$817,000."

(9) with respect to Minot site, North Da· kota, strike out "$5,339,000" and insert in place thereof ·~$6,603,000."

(10) with respect to Niagara Falls Munic­ipal Airport, Niagara Falls, N. Y., strike out "$1,748,000'~ .and insert in place thereof "$2,575,000."

(ll) with respect to Paine Air Force Base, Everett, Wash., strike out "$1,039,000" and insert in place thereof "$1,199,000."

Under the subheading "Air Materiel Com­mand"-with respect to Searsport Air Force Tank Farm, Searsport, Maine, strike out "$133,000" and insert in place thereof "$329,000."

Under the subheading .,. Air Tra.Ining Com­mand"--- •

( 1) with respect to Ellington Air Foree Base, Houston, Tex., strike out "$2,816,000"' and insert in place thereof "$3,438,000 ...

(2) with respect to Greenville Air Force Base, Greenville. Miss., strike out '°$349,000" and insert in place thereof "$500,000."

(3) with respect to Luke Air Force Base, l1hoenix, Ariz., strike out "$1,557,000" and insert in place thereof "$1,923,000."

( 4.) with respect to Nellis Air Force Base. Las Vegas, Nev .• strike out "$1!,153,000" and insert in place thereof "$1,837,000."

( 5) with respect to Perrin Air Force Base, Sherman, Tex.~ . strike out "$956,000" and insert in place thereof "$1,210,000."

(6) with respect to Randolph Air Force Base·, San Antonio, Tex., strike out "$549,000" and insert in place thereof "$730,000."

( 7) with respect to Scott Air Force Base~ Belleville, Ill., strike out "$1,247,000" and insert in place thereof "$1,862,00&."

• (8) witb respect to Tyndall Air Force Base, Panama City. Fla., strike out "$478,000" and insert in place thereof "$534,000."

(9) with respect to Vance Air Force Base, Enid, Okla., s1'rike out "$871,000" and insert in place thereof "$1,181,000." .

( 10) with respect to Williams Air Force Base, Chandler, Ariz., strike out "$1,045,000" and insert in place thereof "$1,215,000."

Under the subheading ••Air University"­With respect to Maxwell Air Force Base, Montgomery, Ala., strike out "$2,661,000'• and insert in place thereof "$3,031,000."

Under the subheading "Continental Air Command"-

(!) with respect to Brooks- Air Force Ba.se, San AntonfO', Tex., strike out "$590,000" and! insert in place thereof "$6971,000."

(2) with respect to Dobbins Air Force Base,. Marietta, Ga., strike out "$758,000" and insert in place thereof "$859,000."'

Under the subheading "Military Air Trans­port Service"-With respect to CharI.eston Air Force Base, Charleston, S. C., strike out "$4,032,000" and insert in place thereof "'$5,306,000."

Under the subheading, "Research and De­velopment Command"-. (1) with respect to Edwards Air Force Base. Muroc, Calif., strike out "$12.,429,.000" and insert in place thereof "$13,299,000."

(2) with respect to Hartford Research Fa­cility, Hartford, Conn., strike out "$22.375-000" and insert in place thereof "$25,780,000."

(3) with respect to Holloman Air Force Base, Alamogordo.N. Mex., strike out "$4,965,· 000" and. insert i:n place thereof "$5,637.000."

Under the subheading, ''Sti:ategic Air Com­mand"-

(l) with respect to Abilene Air Force Base, Abilene, Tex., strike out "$4,214,000" and insert in pla.ce thereof ••$4;656.000.'•

( 2) wi tb respect to Ellsworth Air Force Base, Rapid City, S. Dak., strike out "$12,380,000" and insert in place- thereof "$15,186,000's.

(3) with respect to Forbes Air Force Base, Topeka, Kans., strike out "$4,753,000" and insert in place thereof "$5,885,000."

( 4) with respect to Great Falls Air Force Base, Great Falls, Mont., strike out .. $5,435,-000" and insert in place thereof "$6,713,000."

(5) with respect to Hunter Air Force Base, Savannah, Ga., strike out "$4,115,000." and insert in piace thereof . "$4,951,000."

(6) with respect to Pinecastle Air Force Base, Orlando, Fla., strike out "$4,118,-000" and insert in place thereof "$5.559,000."

Under the subheaqing "Tactical Air Com­mand''.-With respect to Larson Air Force Base, Moses Lake, Wash., strike out "$3,574,-000" and insert in place thereof "$4,724,000."

Under . the subheading "Aircraft Control and Warning System."-With respect to "Various locations" strike out "$100,382,-000" and insert, in place thereof "$120,382,000."

6244: CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE· April 12

.(b)- Public Law 161, 84th Con,gr.ess, 1s amended, under the heading "Out§ide Conti-­nental United States" in section 301, as follows:

( 1) With respect to Kena! Airfield under the subheading "Alaskan Air Command" strike out "$356,000" and insert in place thereof "$2,247,000."

(c) Public Law 161, 84th Congress, as amended, is amended by stl'iking out in clause (3) of section 502 the amounts "$743,-989,000", "$530,563,000" and "$1,279,902,000" and-inserting in place thereof "$800,913,000", "$532,454,000" and "$1,338,717,000", respec­tively.

(d) Public Law 534, 83d Congress, is amended, under the heading "Continental United States" in section 301, as follows:

. (2) . the Secretary of Defense and. the Comp­troller General have agreed .upon alternative methods for adequately auditing those con­tracts; the President may exempt those. contracts from the requirements of that section.

SEC. 405. Contracts made by the United States under this act shall be awarded, inso­far as practicable, on a competitive basis to the lowest responsible bidder, if the national security will not be impaired and the award is consistent with the Armed Services Pro­curement Act"of 1947 (41 U.S. C. 153 et seq.).

SEC ... 406. The Secretaries of the military departments may acquire land, and interests in land, not exceeding $5,000 in cost ( exclu­sive of administrative costs and defic;iency judgment awards), which the Secretary con­cerned determines to be urgently ·required in the interests of national defense. ·The authority under this section may not, hoy;­ever, be used to acquire more than one parcel

Under the subheading "Air Defense Com­mand" with respect to Klamath Falls Air­port, Klamath Falls, Oreg., strike out "$4,133,000" and _insert in place thereof "$5,077,000." .

(e) Public Law 534, 83d Congress, as amended, is amended by striking out in clause (3) of section 502 the amounts "$405,-176,000" and "$415,005,000'' and inserting in place thereof "$406,120,000" a:tld "$415,949,• 000", respectively.

• of land unless the parcels are noncontiguous or, if contiguous, do not exceed $5,000 . in total cost.

TITLE IV

General Provisions SEC. 401. The Secretary of each military

department may proceed to establish or de­velop installations and facilities under this act without regard to sections 1136, 3648, and 3734 of the Revised Statutes, as amended. The authority to place permanent or tempo­rary improvements on land includes au­thority for surveys, administration, overhead, planning, and supervision incident to con­struction. That authority may be exercised before title to the land is -approved under section 355 of the Revised Statutes, as · amended, and even though the land is held temporarily. The authority to provide fam­ily housing includes authority to acquire such land as the Secretary concerned deter­mines, with the approval of the Secretary of Defense, to be necessary in connection with that .housing. Th'e authority to acquire real estate or land includes authority to make surveys and to acquire land, and interests in land (including temporary use), by gift, purchase, exchange of Government-owned land, or otherwise.

SEC. 402. There are authorized to be ap­propriated such sums as may be necessary for the purposes of this act, but appropria­tions for public works projects authorized by titles I, II, and III shall not exceed-

(1) for title I: Inside the United States, t86,016,000; outside the United States $29,-763,000; section 102, $188,783,000; or a total of $304,562,000;

(2) for title II: Inside the United States, $296,572,000; outside. the United States, $61,-625,000; section 203, $42,997,000, or a total of $401,194,000; and .

(3) for title III: Inside the 1Jnited States, $661,446,000; outside the United States, $312,-834,000; section 302, $163 million; or a total of $1,137,280,000.

. SEC. 403. Any of the amounts named in title I, II, or III of this act may, iµ ,the dis­cretion of the Secretary concerned, be in­creased by 5 percent for projects inside the United States and by 10 percent for projects outside the United States. · However, the total cost of all projects in each such title may not be more than the total amount au­thorized to be appropriated for projects in that title.

SEC. 404. Whenever-( 1) the President determines that com­

pliance with, section 4 (c) of .the Armed Serv­ices Procurement Act of 1947 (41 U. S. C. 153 (c)) for contracts made under t:Q.is act for the establishment or development . of mmtary installations and facilities in for­eign countries would interfere with the car­rying out of this act; and

SEc. 407. The Secretaries of the military departments may, with tht! approval of the Secretary of Defense, acquire, construct, re­habilitate, or install permanent or temporary public works, including site preparation, ap­purtenances, utilities, and equipment, to restore or replace facilities damaged or de­stroyed in a total amount not to exceed $30 million.

SEC. 408. (a) Under such regulations as may be prescribed by the Secretary of De­fense, the Secretaries ·of the military depart­ments may expend out of appropriations available for military construction such amounts as may be required for the estab­lishment and development of military in­stallations and facilities by acquiring, con-structing (except family quarters), convert­ing, rehabilitating, or installing permanent or temporary public works determined to be urgently required, including site preparation, appurtenances, utilities, and equipment, for projects not otherwise authorized ·by law when the cost of the project ls in excess of $25,000 but not in excess of $200,000, sub­ject to the following limitations:

(1) No such project, the cos'!; of which is in excess of $50,000, shall be authorized un­less approved in advance by the Secretary of Defense.

(2) No such project, the cost of which is in excess of $25,000 shall be authorized un­less approved in advance by the Secretary of the military department concerned.

(3) Not more than one allotment may be made for any project authorized under this section.

(4) The cost of conversion · of existing . structures to family quarters may not exceed

$50,000 in any fiscal year at any single facility. (b) The Secretaries of the military de­

partqients may expend out of appropriations available for maintenance and operation amounts necessary to accomplish a project which, except for the fact that its cost does not exceed $25,000, would otherwise be ·au­thorized to be accomplished under subsec­tion (a) .

(c) The Secretary of Defense shall report in detail semiannually to the Armed Serv­ices Committees of the Senate and the House of Representatives with respect to the exer-

- cise of the authorities granted by this· sec­tion.

(d) Section 26 of the act of August 2, 1946 (60 Stat. 853, 856; 34 U. S; C. 559), is repealed. · .

SEC. 409. (a) The Secretary of Defense, acting through the Secretary of a military department, may provide family housing· for the· Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and certain commissioned officers and en­listed personnel attached to his staff by the construction or rehab111tation of five sets of family housing, and emergency communica­tion facilities, without regard to the second proviso of section 3 of the act of June 12,

1Q48 (62 Stat. 375, 379), or section S of the act of June 16, 1948 (62 Stat. 459, 462).

· (b) Appropriations not to exceed $300,000 available to the mllitary departments for military construction may be utilized for the purposes of this section without regard to the limitations on the cost of family housing otherwise prescribed by law.

SEC. 410. As of July 1, 1957, all .authoriza­t~ons for military public works to be accom­plished by the Secretary of a military depart­ment in connection with the establishment or development of military installations and ·facilities, and all authorizations for appro­priations therefor, that are contained in acts enacted before July 15, 1952, and not super­seded or otherwise modified by a later au­thorization are repealed, except-

(1) authorizations for public works and for appropriations therefor. that are set forth· in those acts in the titles that contain the general provisions;

(2) authorizations for public works proj­ects as to which appropriateg funds have been obligated in whole or in part before July l, 1957, and authorizations for appro­priations therefor;

· (3) the authorization for the rental guar­anty for family housing in the amount of $100 million that is contained in section 302 of Public Law 534, Eighty-second Congress; and . (4) the authorizations for public works and the appropriation of funds that are con­tained in the National Defense Facilities Act of 1950, as amended (50 U.S. C. 881 and the following).

SEC. 411. (a) The first paragraph of section 407 of the act of September 1, 1954 (68 Stat. 1119), ·as amended,' is further amen·ded to read as follows:

"In addition to family housing and com­munity facilities otherwise authc:irtzecf to be constructed cir :acquired- by the Department of Defense, the Secretary of Defense is au­thorized, subject to the approval of · the Director of the Bureau of the Budget, to construct, or acquire by· lease or otherwise, family housing for occupancy as public quar­ters, and community facilities, in . foreign countries through housing and community facilities projects which utilize foreign cur­rencies to a value not to exceed $250 million acquired pursuant to the provisions of the Agricultural Trade Development and Assist­ance Act ·or 1954 (68 Stat. 454) or through other commodity transactions of the Com-modity Credit Corporation." _

(b) There are authorized to be appro­priated to the Secretaries of the military de­partments such amounts other than foreign currencies as are necessary for the construc­tion, or .acquisition by lease or otherwise, of family housing and community facilities projects in foreign countries that are au­thorized by section 407 of the act of Sep­tember 1, 1954 (68 Stat. 1119), as amended, but . the amount so appropriated for any such project may not be more than 25 per­cent of the total cost of that project.

SEC. 412. Section 515 of the act of July 15, 1955 (69 Stat. 324, 352) is amended to read as follows: -

"SEC. 515. During the fiscal years 1956, 1957, and 1958 the Secretaries of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, respectively, are .authorized to lease housing facilities at or near military tactical installations for assignments as pub­l'ic quarters to military personnel and their dependents, if any, without rental charge U:pon a. determination by the Secretary of Defense or his desfgnee that there ls a lack of adequate housing facilities at or near such military tactical ' installation~. · Such hous'." ing facilities shall be leased on a family or individual unit basis and not more than 3,000 of such units may be so leased at any ·one tiine. Expenditures for the rental for such housing fa:cilities may be ·made out of appropriations available for maintenance and operation but may not exceed $150 a month for any such unit." · ·

' !

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 6245 SF.C. 413 .. The net floor area limitations pre­

scribed by section 3 · of the act of June 12, 1948 (5 U. S. C. 626p) do not apply to 47 units of the housing authorized to be con.:. structed at the United ·States Air Force Academy by the act of April 1, 1954 (68 Stat .. 47). The net floor area limitations for those 47 units are as follows: 5;000 square feet for 1 unit for the superintendent; 3,000 square feet for each 2 ·units for deans; and 1,750 square feet for each of 44 units for department heads.

SEC. 414. Section 3 of the National Pefense Facilities Act of 1950, as amended (50 U.S. C. 882) , is further amended by striking out clause (a)' and inserting in place thereof the following:

" (a) acqµire by purchase, lease, or trans­. fer., construct, expand, rehabilitate, convert and equip such facilities as he shall deter­mine to be. necessary to effectuate the pur.­poses of this act, except that _ expendi~ures for the leasing of property for such purposes may be made from appropriations otherwise available. for · tlle payment of rentals and without regard to the monetary limitation otherwise imposed by this section;".

SEC. 415. To the extent that housing is to be constructed ·at a military installation un­der title IV of the Housing Amendments of 1955 (69 Stat. 635, 646), ~my outstanding authority under the act of September 1, 1954 (68 Stat. 1119), the. act of, July 15, 1955 (69 Stat. 324), and this act·to provide hous­ing at that installation niay be exercised at other military installations of the depart­ment concerned.

SEC.· 416. The Secretaries of the military departments . ~re authorized to contract for the ;;Storage, handling, and distribution of liquid fuels for periods not exceeding 5 .years, with option to renew for additiona;l periods not excee_ding 5 years, for a total not to exceed 20 years. This authority is limited to

· facilities· which ·conform to the criteria pre­. scribed by _the Secretary ot Defense for pro­

tection, including dispersal, and also are in~Iuded- ,in .a. prograr,n · approved by the

. .Secr~tary of_ ~fense for ~he . protection of petrol~_um facilities. Such cont.racts may provide that the Government at the expira.­tiou or termination thereof shall have the option to purchase the facility under con­tract without regard tO sections 113.6, 3648, and 3734 or the Revised Statutes, as amended, and prior to approval of titie to the un~er~y- · ing land by the Attorney General: Provided further, That the Secretaries of the military departments shall report to the Armed Serv­ices Committees of the Senate and the House of Representatives with respect to the names of the contractors and the terms of the contracts, the reports to be furnished at times and in such form as may be ltgreed . upon between the Secretaries of the military departments and the Committees on Armed ~ervices. · ·

s:Ec. 417.. In the design of the family hous­ing and other repetitive-type ·buildings in the Continental United States authorized • ty this act, the military departments shall, . to the extent deemed practicable, use the principle of modular design in order that

· tl'le facility . may be bunt by conventional construction, on site fabrica~ion or factory fabrication, whichever the successful bidder may elect. , '

SEc. 418. Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, no contract shall be en­tered into by the United States for the con­struction of family housing units by or for the use . of ·military or civilian personnel of any of the · military services of the Depart­ment of Defense unless. such housing has been justified to the Armed Serv,ice& Commit­teei; of the Senate and House of Representa-tives. .

SEC. 419. Section 404 of the Housing Amendments of 1955 is amended to read as follows:

"SEC. 404. Whenever the Secretary of De· fense or his designee de~m it necessary for

the purposes of this title, he may acquire by you Army plans for a review of Army 1n­purchase; donation, or other means· of trans- stallations. At that time I agreed that the fer (but not by condemnation), any land Army would be prepared to inform you by or (with the approval of the Federal Hous:. April 15 of those posts within the con­ing Commissioner) any housing financed tinental United States which it felt jus­With mortgages insured under the provisions . tified as designating permanent installa.­of title VIII of the National Housing Act as tions. in effect prior to the enactment of the Haus- I am pleased to be able to inform you 1ng Amendments of 1955. The purchase price that the Army' studies on this subject have of any such housing shall not exceed the · been completed. After a careful review of actual cost (as that term ls defined in sec• the recommendations of the Army staff, I tion 227 (c) of -the National Housing Act with am today designating Camp Gordon, Ga., respect to new construction) of the housing Camp Stewart, Ga., Fort Jackson, S. C., Camp as determined by the Commissioner less de- Chaffee, Ark., and Foi:t Leonard Wood, Mo., preciatlon thereon at a rate of 2 percent as p'ermanent Army 'installations. My de­per annum, less the amount bf a~cumulated cision with respect 'to these five stations ls unexpended reserves for replacement, and based ·entirely upon military requirements ·less the principal amount and accrued ln- and· long-range estimates pertaining to the terest under any mortgage or other.indebted- strength of the Army. I am confident that ness outstanding thereon and assumed by you and the members of your committee

, the .Government. Property acquired under will support my decision in this respect. this section may be occupied, used, and im- The designation of the five stations !llen-proved for the purposes of this section prior tioned in the preceding paragraph repre­to the approval of title by the Attorney Gen- sents a maximum estimate as to future re~ era!, as required by section 355 of the Re- qulrements for Army Forces in the United vised Statutes, as amended. The authority States under planne<;l worldwide · deploy­so to acquire housing may be exercised by men ts. I do not anticipate that any · ex­acquiring the capital stock of a corporation tension of permanent Army estatlishments, owning and operating housing financed with including the five stations in question, can be mortgages insured under the provisions of justified within the foreseeable future. title III of the National Housing Act as in Sincerely yours, effect prior to the enactment of the Housing WILBER M. BRUcKER, Amendments of 1955, but without deduction Secretary of the Army. for such reserves for replacement as are held · . -by the corporation at the time of the trans- Mr. VINSON. 'Mr. Chairman, I o:ffer fer of the capital stock to the- Government;" an amendm~nt.

. . . -- , · ' -The Clerk read as-follows: Mr. VINSON (interruptmg the read"'." ·

ing 'of the bill). Mr. Chairman_, 1 ask ' Amendment offered by Mr. ' VINSON: •On, . page 29, following line 21, insert the follow-

unanimous consent that further reading · ing language: . , . · · · of the bill be dispensed with, thSit it .be , ."Majors Fiel,d; .Greenville, Tex.: Opera.:­printed in the RECORD at thjs point and be tional and training facilities, and land, ac:­open to amendment at any "point in the guisi~ion, $4-lp,OOO; Providl!d, however, That bill. . . - none qf the funds here authorized for ap-

The CHAIRMAN . . Is there objection propriatioil .Shall J:)e 'expended until the field · to the request of the gentleman froin has been recaptured by the United States."

Georgia? _ . :Mr . . VINSON . . 'Mr. Chairman; the There was. no objection. . . , purpose of this amendment is to have the . Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, I offe,: Air ForcEt recapture a field at this desig~

an amendment. . nated point in Texas. After it has been The Clerk read as follows: recaptur~d anq the title _to the field ·is Amendment offered by Mr . . VJN89~: On . back in the. Government, then we .au;­

page 8, strike. all of section 104 ~nd op line thorize an expenditure o·f $440,000 for _25, c1:J.a.nge "S~c: i.05" so i:is t? read "SEc. 104". improvement of the base. , . .

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, in ex- Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I move · plariation of the amendment just offered, to strike out th~ la~t w<;>rd. . · '. . may I say that section 104 designated Mr. Chairman, I take this time be· certain camps · as permanent installa- cause during the early part of general tions. In view of a communication re- debate I asked the gentleman from ceived on March 21 from the secretary Georgia a question concerrung the of the Army designating, in his capacity Grandview Air Force Base, which I prefer as secretary of the Army, the identical to call the Truma:µ Airport at Kansas camps as permanent, I, therefore, de- City. , The gentleman from Georgia at sire to strike from the bill section 104. that time said he would have so.me in-

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on formation l.ater. My questio?- is, How the amendment offered . by the- gentle· ~uch has been expeD:ded on this 'F1"~m~~ man from ·Georgia [Mr. VINSON]. ~ . A1rwrt at Kansas City ~P to thl;S time.

The· amendment was agreed to. Mr. VINSON. Knowing the interest Mr. VINSON. Mr. Clrairman, I ask of · th~ distinguished gentleman ~rom

unanimous consent to insert at this Iowa m a. great many of these thmgs, point in the- R:EcoRD the letter received ~nd .knowing -he ~o~d proPQund some from the secretary- of the Army. ·. · mqwry along .this lme, here are ~he

The CHAIRMAN. Is · there objection facts: ·'Fhe toial ~o.unt of C?nstruct1on

t th t f the gentleman from authorized for this installation for the o ~ ;eques 0 fiScal year 1955 is $3,402,000.

Georgia. . . Mr. GROSS. That is the airbase? · There was no obJection. . • MI-. VINSON. Total amount of funds (The letter referred to follows·) applied to this authorization through

Hon. CARL VINSON, MARCH -21, 1956.. fiscal year 1955 is $15,600,000~ The fiscal

Chairman, committee on Armed Serv­ices, House of Representatives.

DEAR Mn. CHAIRMAN: This letter will con­firm my personal QOnference with you this morning.

You will recall- that General Taylor and I,, in January of this year, discussed with

year 1956 military construction program contains line items in the amount of $3, .. 402,000. I knew the gentleman was go­ing to ask for that information, so I am happy to give it to him.

Mr . . GROSS. That is the dea.1 that started out at $9 million, then went to $13

6246 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

million, and now is going to come to Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I ask what?-$19 million or something like unanimous consent to 'proceed for 5 ad-that before they get through with it? ditional minutes.

Mr. VINSON~ Well, I will give you The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the whole history if you want it. the request of the gentleman from Iowa?.

Mr. GROSS. No; I do not want the There was no objection. whole history. But. would you mind Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, if the answering this question? .Have they got- gentleman will yield further. there are ten rid of the septic tanks out there? 59 officers in this area that have homes

Mr. VINSON. I am sorry. I do not provided by the Congress and main­know. But I will ask my committee to tained. Now, the Chairman oi the Joint designate the gentleman from Missouri Chiefs of Staff has no permanent domi­CMr. SHORT]. or someone else. to go down cile fixed by the Congress. and find out. Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, will the

Mr. GROSS. Another question I gentleman yield? · would like to ask the gentleman is this: Mr. GROSS. I yield to the gentleman Has the Continental Air Command been from Missouri. moved down there yet? Mr. SHORT. In further answer, we

Mr. VINSON. No. it has not. all know that the Commandant of the Mr. GROSS. And never will be. will Marine Corps has a very fine residence

it? here in Washington, as well as the Chief Mr. VINSON. I doubt it. of Naval Operations. These buildings Mr. GROSS. And we were sold this provided for in this authorization will be

erected on ground already owned by the bill of goods on the premise that the Government. Not only will the money Continental Air Command would be moved to Grandview? · be spent on the homes, but a rather ex-

Mr. VINSON. -This is a very impor- tensive communications system Will be set up. And, if we should ever have

tant base to that great section of the another Pearl Harbor, we would not want country. I think all of this information the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff, should place the gentleman in a very t 1 receptive mood so that he will take the the most powerful military man no on y

in our own Nation · but perhaps in the viewpoint of the Committee on Armed world, to be without adequate quarters. Services on this bill.

Mr. GROSS. I have fought this deal Mr. GROSS. I do not think we wduld for a long time, but I think I know when like to see the Vice President of the I am licked, so I am not going to offer United States wiped out in a bombing an amendment to the Grandview appro- raid, either, but we do not p;rovide him priation. Now I see a provision in this with a $300,000 home. . bill for a $300,000 appropriation to build Mr. SHORT. They should have done a housing setup for the Chairman of the it a long time ago. Joint Chiefs of Staff. I wonder if the Mr. GROSS. I do not agree with the gentleman would explain that. gentleman. In my opinion, there are

Mr. VINSON. With pleasure. In the plenty of houses available, for instanc~. last authorization bill that same item at Fort McNair. What is wrong with appeared, but when it reached the Seri- those houses? ate it was deleted and we could not Mr; SHORT. Well, those houses are place it back in conference. so, again already occupied. They have a shortage. this year we bring it before the Commit- Mr. GROSS. Then, let us move some-tee for its consideration. Now, the plan body·out. . is this: There is no permanent residence Mr. SHORT. Certainly we should for the Chairman of. the Joint Chiefs have a respectable, decent home for the of Staff. It is proposed to construct on Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff what is known as the Naval Observatory that is commensurate with his dignity site . up on Massachusetts A venue two and importance in the management of or three buildings for him and his as- affairs of the most powerful nation on sista.nts which will cost in the neigh- earth. borhood of $300,000. This includes a Mr. GROSS. The question is, Should very important communications center. we pay out money at the rate of $300,000 The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of for a house? Staff must have some of his officers with Mr. SHORT. This $300,000 is not for him all the time, and it is highly im- a house. It is for houses and an inter .. portant that facilities be made available communication system. to his close personnel who must carry ·Mr. GROSS. I think the gentleman out his orders promptly. well knows that the bulk of the $300,000

Mr. GROSS. Does the gentleman not will go into a house. think he is going overboard with a Mr. SHORT. It should. $300,000 appropriation for this purpose? Mr. GROSS. For one person, the

Mr; VINSON. Of course, it does not Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff? mean just one building; it means several Mr. SHORT. It sho_uld. _ houses up there will cost that much. . Mr. GROSS. That is. for 1 house, to Those and the imp-Ortant coinmuriica- house 1 man and his family: - I do' not tions facility. - agree with that at all. I think you are . Mr. GROSS. Even if you divide 5 going far overboard; You are going to mto .$300,o.oo'. yo~ ~ave some pretty ex- build something here that·wm come close pensive ~uildmgs g01ng up tqer~ to house _ to being goldplated. I do not think we the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of are in a position in this country today Staff and the people that-attend :Pim. _ to finance that sort of thing. .

The CHAIRMAN . . The time .of - the ' Mr. SHORT. Today $300,000·does not -gentleman from Iowa. has expired. build too fine a house in Washington. -

Mr. GROSS. The ·gentleman from Missouri says that $300,000 does not build a good house?

Mr. SHORT. It is the same as an item we approved last year.

Mr. GROSS. I will say to the gentle­man that I intend to offer an "mendment to strike it out. It probably will not succeed.

Mr. SHORT. I do not think it will. Mr. GROSS. I am certainly going to

try to stop it. I do not seem to · have much luck on items of that kind, but I ·shall try.

I should like to ask the chairman of the 'committee this question. Do I under­stand that there is $800 million in this bill for overseas bases?

Mr. VINSON. The total amount for the Army overseas is $29,763,000; for the Navy. $61,625,000; for the Air Force, $312,834,000. About $4.00 million of the $2 billion represent authorizations out-side of the United States. -

Mr. GROSS; In other words, approxi­mately half a billion dollars will go for installations outside the United States?

Mr. VINSON. For various things. Mr. GROSS. The gentleman cannot

tell us where those bases are? I sup­pose that is classified.

Mr. VINSON. I may say that they are all over the world. If the gentleman will examine the report. the report will give him as much information as to where they are located as it is . possible to di-vulge publicly. ·

Mr. GROSS. Can the gentleman tell us whether there is any money in this bill to expand or to build airbases in Iceland?

Mr. VINSON. It is not listed. Mr. SHORT. If the gentleman will

allow, the gentleman will get a complete list of these projects if he will turn to the report at pages 42 and 43.

Mr. GROSS. I am very much· inter­ested in the proposed expenditure for overseas purposes.

Mr. SHORT. We all are. Mr. GROSS . . Because we .are learning

that many of these nations are going neutral on us. I wonder what is going to happen to the installations for which we are making expenditures if these na­tions become neutrals at a time when we are going to need them most. I wond·er how much of this money ought to be ex­pended on overseas bases . .

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Chairman. will the gentleman yield?

Mr. GROSS. I yield. _ Mr-. HOFFMAN of Michigan. I do not

think the gentleman need worry about this item as much as some of the others, because they cannot transfer this house to Russia or any other nation. It is go­ing to be. in this country.

Mr. GROSS. I was not talking. about that $300,000 house; I was talking about the military installations . in foreign

. countries upon which we have already expended billions of dollars and upon which it is now proposed to spend an­other half billion.

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentle­man from Georgia CMr. VINSON].

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, I Ofter

an amendment. I desire to state to the

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 6247 Committee that this is what is known Mr. BROWN of Ohio. We are waiting So far the authority granted is entire­as the SAGE amendment which was for the gentleman's appearance before ly clear. However, the language in the printed in the RECORD. the Rules Committee. law immediately following that which I

The Clerk read as follow~: Mr. SCRIVNER. Mr. Chairman, will have just quoted permits the Secretary Amendment offered by Mr. VxNsoN-: On the gentleman yield? of Defense, on his own initiative to ex­

page 51, strike all of section 303 and insert Mr. VINSON. I yield to the gentle- empt the Department of Defense from in lieu thereof the following new section man from Kansas. the exercise of the authority granted to 303: th d "SEC. 303. section 1 of the act of March Mr. SCRIVNER. In the rapid reading e A ministrator of General Services. 30, 1949 (ch. 41, 50 u. s. c. 491), is amended by the Clerk of the amendment, I was That means that when the Secretary has by the addition of the following: not able to catch all of the last phrase exempted himself, the General Services

"'The Secretary of the Air Force ls au- about appearance before State and Fed- is excluded from any of the activities thorized to procure communication services eral regulatory bodies. which are the subject of the law which required for the Semiautomatic Ground En- Mr. VINSON. We are following the I quoted. vironment System. No contract for such law as it is today. The only thing which can prevent the services may be for a period of more than 10 Secretary of Defense from exempti·nf! Years from th dat i ti i Mr. SCRIVNER. Would the gentle- -e e commun ca on serv ces himself is for the President to "otherwi·se are first furnished under such contract. man mind stating briefly what this sec-The aggregate -contingent liability of the tion 201 is about? I am not familiar with direct." If the President otherwise di­Government under the termination provi- it myself. rects, then the General Services steps in sions of an contracts authorized hereunder Mr. VINSON. The amendment reads the picture and performs all of the func-may not exceed a total of $222 million, and in part as follows: tions which are described in the law. no termination payment shall be final until The authority given the General Serv-audited and -approved by the General Ac- In procuring such services, the Secretary ices Administration-is an important au-counting Office, which shall have access to of the Air Force shall utilize to the fullest ex- thority and it was granted to that agency such carrier records and accounts as it may tent the facilities and capabilities of com- by the Congress with the t!lought that deem necessary for the purpose. -in pro- munication common carriers, including ' co-curing such services, the Secretary of the operatives, within their respective service the General Services Administration Air Force shall utilize to the fullest extent areas. Negotiations with communication should maintain a proper surveillance of the facilities and capabilities of communi- common carriers, including cooperatives, the utility contracts entered into by the cation· common carriers, including coopera- and representation in proceedings involving United States. I believe this was a wise tiyes, within their res:pective service areas. such carriers before Federal and State regu- provision of law. Negotiations with communicatio_n common latory bodies where such negotiations or I am aware that former President Tru­carriers including cooperatives, and repre- proceedings involve contracts authorized by man took proper and strong action to sentation in proceedings involving such this paragraph shall be in accordance with t carriers before Federal and State regulatory the provisions of section 201 of the act of preven any exemption by the Depart-bodies where such negotiations or proceed- June 30, 1949. ment of Defense under section 201 (a), ings involve contracts authorized by this which was to the effect that General paragraph shall be in accordance with tne The basic act reads: Services Administration should partici-provisiorts of section-201 of the act of June Provided, That contracts for public utility pate actively -in .these utility contracts. 30, 1949, as amended (40 U. s. c. A., sec. services may be made for periods not exceed- However, President Eisenhower revoked 481)' ." ing 10 years; and former President Truman's letter so that

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, this (4) with respect to transportatiqn and today the Secretary of Defense is 'free amendment was discussed during the other public utility services for the use of to. exempt himself, and, therefore, Gen-

executive agencies, represent such agencies 1 s · Ad · · t Presentation of-the rule and also when era ervice~ _ mmis ration has no voice in negotiations with carriers and other pub- · th t I addressed the Committee during gen- lie utilities and in proceedings involving car- m ese ma ters. eral debate. The amendment was riers or other pubiic utilities before Federal If the Secretary of Defense does ex-placed in the · CONGRESSIONAL RECORD on and state regulatory bodies; - empt himself, it simply means that the last Tuesday. I understand that it is Provided, Tb.at the Secretary or · Defense Department of Defense is in the position in thorough accord with the viewpoints may from time to time, and unless the Presi- of being both the contracting party and of all the gentlemen who have interested dent shall otherwise direct, exempt the Na- the representative of the Federal Gov-themselves with the Committee on tional Military Establishment from action ernment. · · · Armed Services on this matter. taken or which may be taken by the Ad- I might say that it is the intention of

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, ministrator under clauses (l)' <2>' <3>' and the committee to closely follow and (4) above wllenever he determines such ex-will the gentleman yield? emption to be in the best interests of na- watch any rates charged for communi-

Mr. VINSON. I yield. tional security. cation services in any contracts made Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Does this under the provisions of this section and,

amendment apply to the matter of Mr. SCRIVNER. I thank the gentle- particularly so, if the Secretary of De-SAGE that was discussed on the fioor man. f ense should exempt the Defense Depart­during general debate, at which time Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, I have ment from any jurisdiction by the the gentleman paid a very kindly tribute a very well prepared statement giving Administrator of General Services, and if to the gentleman from Massachusetts some detail about this amendment, and it the President does not direct otherwise. [Mr. McCdRMACKJ" and myself? ' · is as follows: The committee is cooperating as effec-

Mr. VINSON. It does, and I am going I wish to draw the particular attention tively as possible with the Defense De-to do so again. of the House to the last sentence of the partment, but recognizes that this field

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I intended to amendment which I have just offered. is a very delicate one, in which the in- · show my wife that kindly reference in That sentence reads as fallows: terest of the Federal Government should the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and I could Negotiations with comm1i1.n1cation com- be adequately and thoroughly protected. not find it in the RECORD. I just mon carriers, including cooperatives, and I sincerely trust that the Secretary of wondered if the gentleman would be representation in proceedings involving such Defense will not exempt the Department willing- to reinsert it in the RECORD so carriers before Federal ai:d State regulatory of Defense. The effect of that would be that Mrs. Brown and Mrs. McCormack bodies where such negotiations or proceed- to eliminate the General Services Admin-

1ngs il49'<'>1ve contracts authorized by this · t t• · · could know that Mr. McCORMACK and I paragraph shall be in accordance with the is ra ~on from any consideration of these were doing something that was of bene- provisions of section 201-of the act of June j very important matters. If the Secre- · fit to our country. 30, 1949, as amended (40 uscA, sec. 481). tary seeks to exempt himself, I sincerely

Mr. VINSON. I am going to do that /. . . . trust that President Eisenhower will, in right now. - Th.e _law which I have cited ~ives the accordance with the law and the intent

Mr. BROWN of Ohio. And will the A~~m1st~ator of ~eneral Services Ad- of the law, "direct otherwise" and there­gentlemail · permit it to remain in the ~irustration authority to represe~t agen- by bring the General Services Admin-RECORD? I would appreciate having cies of the Governmen~, mcludu:ig . the 1 istration into the picture. / that comment again. Defense Department, m negotiations I believe that the House and the coun.:

Mr. VINSON. Recognizing the fact with carriers and other public utilities try owe a debt of gratitude to the that I have to be before the Rules Com- and in proceedings involving carriers or gentleman from Massachusetts CMr. mittee in a few days, I will be sure to other public utilities before Federal and McCORMACK], the gentleman from Ohio have it in the RECORD. State regulatory bodies. CMr. BROWN], and the gentleman from

6248 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12.

Virginia, Judge SMITH, and to the Hous~ But the House of Representatives very . Mr. McCORMACK. May I ask the Armed Services Committee for the de- wisely and very kindly and very gener- gentlewoman. if the statement I just voted manner in which we both have ously followed the request and the rec• made, that the .Massachusetts· delega~ studied and pursued all of the phases re~ ommendation of. the united Massachu- tion understood, either expressly or by Iating to the SAGE system. It is through setts delegation in this .body and put in implication, .that if the Congress put .in theil' combined . efforts that the -esti- .the appropriation bill . the necessary the necessary appropriation to keep the mated annual cost, of communication money to keep the Murphy Army Gen- -hospital open for- this :fiscal year, they services for SAGE, after it is in full op- -eral Hospital open during the last .fiscal would do so during the fiscal year? · eration, have been cut from $240 million year, and the present fiscal year. We Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Yes. a year to $157 million a year. This is a received assurances that if the appro- That was my very definite understand­savings of $83 million per year, or a sav- priations necessary were- put into the ing. ·One reason they did not have more ings of $830 million over the 10-year bill that the hospital would· be kept open patients at the Army hospitaHs because period. during· the fiscal year for which funds they have been shipping them out every,;.

1 repeat, in my judgment the House were appropriated. They kept that where where they should not go. There and the country owe a debt of gratitude promise in the last fiscal year. For the are a great many women who expect to to our distinguished colleague, to the 'present fiscal year, money has been ap- have their babies there. I do not know distinguished gentleman from Massa- "propriated to keep it open until June 30, ·where they can go if they cannot go tO chusetts [Mr. McCORMACK], and I wish ·1956. But, we are faced with a rather this hospital. to 80 state publicly. · unpleasant situation where the Depart;. Mr. McCORMACK. so, we are faced

Again, I want to take this opportuni- ment of Defense has utilized some of with this situation, that administra• ty publicly to express my appreciatio:J?. the space in the Murphy Army General tively they are moving in there other and I am sure the thanks of the Con- Hospital for Air Force activities, and ·activities for nonhospital purposes. I gress and the country at large for the while that is inconsistent with the un- have no controversy with· the Army en• deep hterest that the distinguished ·derstanding which we thought existed, gineers, because they have to go where gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. nevertheless, it was not a sufficient :they are 'told to go, but if they go in the McCORMACK]' the distinguished gentle- occupation of space to destroy completely hospital then th h ·t 1 . d t ed the effectiveness of the hospital as ·such. · • e ospi a 15 es rpy . man from Ohio [Mr. BROWN], the dis- .for hospital ·purposes. If ._the money is tinguished gentleman from Viriginia We now find that they are going to ·CaTried 'in the next appropriation biU [Mr. SMITH], and the ,entire 37 mem,.. .move the Army engipeers in there, and ·to keep it open, they will say "Why, the bers of the Committee on Armed Serv- ·that plans are under way to do so, and ·hospitans closed." ices have shown and the part they have that this is being done administratively. · The CHAIRMAN. The time of the Played l·n br· i·nging about a reduction Now if that is done before June 30, and gentleman f om M h tt has

·before we have an opportunity to pass r assac use s from $240 million in annual charges expired. down to $157 million or a saving of some upon .the Defense Department appropri- ' (By· unanimous consent, ·Mr. McCoR-·$83 million a year. As this is a 10-year ation bill, at least as one member, of the MACK was granted 5 additional minutes.)

t t th t . b th tl · Massachusetts delegation, I shall con-con rac , e scru my y ese gen e-, . sider that such action is inconsistent Mr. McCORMACK. It is Closed. May men and other& will bring about a sav- ·I make one further observat1·on? Sev with the expresseri or implied promises · -ing of $830 million. I think all who -t eral weeks ago we passed a bill unani-played any part iri this are entitled to made to the Massachusetts delegation. ·mousJy to · provide ~ adtlitionat· medical the thanks of the ·Congress and the Mr. NORRELL. t Mr. Chairman, will services for dependents of men in the country for that saving. I think this the gentleman yield? · · ' · w · l d.d Mr. McCORMACK. I will be glad to ·service. e wise Y 1 so. Men wh-o bears the repetition I hav~ given it. are in the serv1·ce i·n all parts f t"'· · · · yield to the gentleman. from Arkansas, · 0 .u.e The CHAIRMAN. The question i& on ·world, serving their country, must know the amendment offered by the gentle- · because the Arkansas delegation ls in their dependents are taken care of. The man from Georgia [Mr. VmsoN]. a similar situation. . tl f G . . Mr. NORRELL. I would. like to sa;tr gen eman rom eorgia · [Mr. VINSON]

The amendment was agreed to. ..., · handled that bill, and it was a very, very ' Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, I offer · that the entire delegation from Arkansas fine bill, and it was passed unanimously.

an amendment. . goes. along with you on your Massachu- N t 11 th t b·n .11 . · · setts hospital, as well as that great Army · a ura y, a 1 WI reqmre addi-Tlie c 'lerk read as follows: tional hospitalization. .

Committee amendment offered by Mr. and Navy hospital in Arkansas. Those I_ wrote . the .Secretary of the .· Army VINSON: On page 59, lilies 3 and 4-, strike two hospitals ought -not to be closed, ' calling his att.ention to tlia.t fact · in re­"$292,572,000" and ill.sert "$296,572,000''; . and ·I hope that the Armed Services will lation to Murphy General Hospital, and and on line 5, strike "$397,194,000" and see to it that as far as 'they are corl- · I ·suggest that my friend from Arkansas insert "$401,194,000... · cerned they are not closed, and· I ~am . [M N J k ·th t b·n .

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, this sure the Appropriations Committee will :r. ORRELL eep a 1 m mind . do likewise. . · also in relation to the hospital in amendment is a technical amendment · Arkansas. , . merely correcting certain figures in the Mr. McCORMACK. · I thank the Mr. GAVIN. Mr. Chafrman, will the bill. The bill is loaded down with fig- ~ gentleman. ~ gentleman yield? ures of an sorts and, of course, they must Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr. Mr. McCORMACK. I yield. be made accurate. , Chairman, will the gentleman yield? ·Mr. GAVIN. 1 listened with a great . The CHAIRMAN. The question is on Mr. McCORMACK. I yield to the deal of interest to what. the gentleman

the amendment offered by the gentle- · distinguished gentlewoman from Mas- r has had to say about the Murphy Gen-man from Georgia ~Mr. VINSON]. sachusetts. .' eral Hospital and I concur in everything

The amendment was agreed to. . ·Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts . . It . the ge:ntleman has ·stated. As a member Mr. McCORMACK~ ·Mr. Chairman •. ! . seems incredible-to me that this hospital : of the subcommittee: of the Armed Serv-

move to strike out the last word. should be closed at this time. When , ices Committee, several years ago we Mr. Chairman, a little· earlier in· tlie we hear that civilian defense is asking spent several days visiting,Murphy Gen­

day the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. · for more beds and more hospitals, when · eral Hospital. There has been an at­DEVEREUX] made some very effective re- · all of our hospitals in Massachusetts are . tempt made to close that hospital for the marks during which he said in sub- , so crowded that we. cannot get people in, , past several years. I agree with what stance that the pepartment ·of Defeuile'' then to close it w~en the East is so in.- you have to say about the hospital. at times places Members of the Congre5s , flamed, it seems to me inc:i;edible. l do :· Murphy General Ho~pital is a very .im­in a very bad position by some of the not understand it. My · own feeli~g . is portant segment of the hospital program

· things that are done. The delegation . that many of the people who have sug- r in the·Bosron .area . . It 'is a facility that from the State of Massachusetts can well · gested closing it will regret it. What on · is greatly needed throughout that section subscribe to that fact. We have in Mas- ~ earth will we- do if we suddenly have .a · of the country. It is utilized and neces­sachtisetts the Mur.phy ·Army General : lot of wounded people, or if we have an sary. What the .objective is to close tbe li<?SPit_al. 1'he . Members a.re . wen · ac- . epidemic? I hav~ tried to get _people : hospital ·I c·ann9t,understand, but.several quairited with that: hospital because the · into civilian hospitals and could not do · years. ago we conducted a very thorough De'partnient of Def~nse for the last : 2 . rt~ .and in two instances· they died. · I , investigation of the Murphy General fiscal years have been trying to close it. speak with great feeling. Hospital and the committee .determined

I •

.

. . 1956 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE

it was essential tO the hospital program Servic~s· Medical Program Agency with The Clerk read as follows-: in the entire Boston area. · I assure the the under.standing that a military plant : Amendment offered by Mr. VINSON: On ·gentleman· that I will be <;>nly too pleased :or hospital would be maintained in that 'J>age 57, strike an of lines· 6 throµgh 9 anci to cooperate in any way I can to .see that -Government-owned installation. At ·on line 10 following the word "Congress/' in­the Murphy General Hospital remains· in that time he was told by the De1ense De- <Sert the words "as amended,•; and on.lines operation. It is.doing .a·great and needed -partment that it was impossible to have ·1'2 and 13, 'Strike the figures "$458,563,000l' work and it is essential that it should be -a military installation in the same prop- and "$t.2o7•9o2.ooo" andJnsert tn lieu· there-­continued. It. would be in my opinion a .erty as a hospital because it would deny of "$5SO,fiBS,OOO" and "'$l;279,902,000". . serious mistake-to ·c10se this· institution. to that hospital the protection of the . Mr. 'VlNSON. Mr. Chairman, this is a This matter should be pursued futher to Geneva Convention. At -that time my ·reduction of ·$72 million in· the bili due see tbat this hospital temains in opera- distinguished -predecessor resPonded ·-to to the fact that that.item was taken from tion. . ~ that argument that it was completely this bill and put in another bill which

¥1"· McCOR:MACK~ I. -i;i,ppreciate the .farcical .and fantastic. I want to know has already passed the.House and Senate remarks of the gentleman ·from Pennsy1- -whether that argument is still relied on . and has been signed by the President . . vania. .. _ - · · · ~ by the Defense Department. "The $72 million .. therefore, should . come

May I say the Army Engineer Head- : Mr. McCORMACK. In reply to the out of the .Pending bill. _ :quarters should be in Boston. The hos- _gentleman's statement I may say that Mr. METCALF. ·Mr. Chairman, I pita! is out in Waltham, and it will cost . there was a ciistuiet understanding that move to strike out the last word. four or , five hundred thous.and dollars -this hospital would be operated during Mr. Chairman, I join in the remark.s for the· Army engineers. to go in there. this fiscal year. Plans are now- under made by the distinguished gentleman There is a new Feder-al lease-purchase way to occupy-a great majority of the ·from Georgia, chairman of the Commit-­building _proposed for Boston, and it is ·space there so there· will be no hospital tee on Armed Services, about the saving intended that the Anny engineers will ·and then when we make an effort to get as :::i. result of the alertness of the gentle·­occupy at least 100,000 square feet of --approp:i'iatiohs- for next year they will man from Massachusetts .[Mr. McCo.n..­space in :there, if a certificate of. deed ,make the argument Uiat there is no hos,- MACK], in connection with these SAGE ·comes from· the Def en8e .Department. pita! there. contracts. I include as a part of my re.­The Army Engineel'. · He-adquarters be;- , The CHAIRMAN. The time of the marks the following editorial taken from longs properly in Boston. ' : · , gentleman from Massachusetts has ex- the Boston Sunday Post of April a; 1956:

Mr. PHILBIN. :Mr. Chairman, will ·pired. ·McGoaMAcK's sCRirT1NY oF SAGE coNTRAcTs the gentleman yield? : .Mrs .. ROGERS 'of Massachusetts. Mr. RESULTS IN PROJECTED $830 MXLLION·SAVING.

Mr. McCORMACK. l yield. . Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that (By John Kelso) Mr. PHILBIN. I want to· associate . the~ gentleman from Massachusetts [Mr. WAsHINGToN, April 7.-House M-ajorify

'myself -completely with t:tie most appro- cMCCORMACK] be allowed to proc'eed for )eader 1JoHN w. McCo&MAcK, of Boston, has priate remarks made by the majority 1 additional m~nute. _made a projected saving of $830 million for leader. Repeatedly, year ~at:ter year, we . Mr. ·CHAIRMAN. Is there objection the American taxpayers. . . . . , . ·have been assured by the 'Defehse De:. ·to the reque.st of the gentlewoman from · Thts -whopping ·pre-April .15 saving :re-partment'that.the Mprphy:Genera1 Hos~ ~Massachusetts? . . sulted from the close scrutiny McCoRMACK ·pita! would remain ·open· to' serve .0111' ~ 'l'here was Il.O ObJ'ect1'on. gav& tt.i-e contracts ·!letting up the :multi-armed services personnel and their de- _ . billion:-dollar program . known as. SAGE-pendents . . Tbe_re i,s a ·real, l,lr'gent nee(! Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr. ' l>emi-automatic -ground environment. for it. If it is to be deactivated, as is now ·Chairman, wm the gentleman· yield? SAGE ·wm complement DEW..,-tlistartt

M 0 K I · Id · t th. ea:rly. warning line7':-tq .form a protectiv.-e Proposed' and ·steps are ....,.·lre.ady· 11nder ' Mr. CC RMAC . y1e o e "' " radar screen in the atomic ·age a:round . tbe ·way to that end-the equiP.mer,i.t is befog gentlewoman from Massachusetts. · United states. .. _ .. , moved; patients are refused admission; Mrs. ROGEES of Massachusetts. .'.r . Wl_len plans for SAGE first hit capi.tol Hill ·personnel is being reassigned, then we .would like to .remind the House that ·one figure in ·them ca1led for an annual 10-will be wit.nout a general Army hospital -some years ago when the Murphy Gen- year expenditure of $240 million." ~ ·in Massachusetts for the first 'time in a ~ era! Hospital was closed at great ex- , .. This has since be-en pruned ·to $157 mU­great many years. · · · pense., a few months afterwa-rds war was .Hon-a saving of $83 miUion .a year, or $8®

In these cireumst-an~es, it·-will· be-nee·- ·declared and it . had to be reopened at . million for 10 years. . essary for those reguiring medical treat• : great .expense. t.am very suspicious and . McCORMACK stood virtually alone 1n Con­gress in his ·dete.rmination to get a much

-ment to which they are entitled as inem- -superstitious that tpey snould want to closer look at the costs involved in SAGE. bers . of the ~rmed -services in an Arm~ ·close this hospital with · the situation as · His fight has also meant that Congress first ·geReral-hes13ital, -tO. t-ravel all the way to cdin:icult and .. pr.eCaTiOUS .as it",is t0day re- J must· authori~e the pro.feet b"efore any funds Phoenixville, Pa., to seeuPe-it. · ..: .. gardi:ng_,a_ w.orld oonfiagration. ' can be appropriated for it. It was-'plann:ed

Ithlilk this-situatioa is ·something that Mr. McCORMACK .. All 1-a:sk is tha't origtnally to -push-.·S.AGE•threugh· by m-ea.ns. -requir-es ·our careful, immediate atten- · they :agree to keep this hospital open . ..of .a budget item .. tion. I would like ·to commend the able : the balance -of this year until Congress Legislation which would authorlze SAGE .majority leader .for setting forth tbe ·: ha~ .. an op'porturuty of determining ~ wilrrea;ch the House.floor this coming Thurs-

day. There is a distinct possibility, it was .. facts :and . .the urgency so clearly; suo- ; whether · or -not there .shouid be a.ppro- . said, that .further cut.s in the program will be · cinctly, and f.orcefully.. I assure him o'f priations made to keep it open during made after this open -debate. my complete cooperation and hope his "the next :fiscal year. . The exact item on which the $83 mlllion and our .combined ·efforts to · c1ear and My remarks apply also to the A-rkan- · annual cut was made, acording to a tran­Settle this question will- be successful a·t sas E;ospital. I think got.id-· faith re- · script of a hearing, involved the yearly pay-s. very early date. · qilires them -to keep the expressed or "ments of the Government for the use -of tele­

M-r. McCORMACK. ·1 appreciate the -implied .)lromise they nave -given ·to "the · phone lines essential to the -eontinental de-gentleman's remarks. ~ Massachusetts delegation. ·· : tense proJect.

Mr. JOHANSEN .. Mr~· Chairman, will . The CHAIRMAN. The time of the · MT. Chairman, as a result of the pub-the gentleman·yield'? · · · .gentleman from Massachusetts has licity . that the distinguished· majorit:y

Mr . .MoCORMACK. '!yield. · again expired. · · leader gave to thjs last fall, the rural Mr. JOHANSEN. Do 1' understand M VlNSON . Mr -ch- 1· ·h th -telephone companies throughout the

."'""" .dIS . . t~1nguished maJ·"'~ leade0¥ to sa1"' ·_ - r · ' - · : · ·a rman, ~s ' e t t ft · w.ic . ..., ...... .,3 .. 'J amendment been voted on? · United S a es were aware o heir part that the hospital is still operating · but in this SAGE organization. Some of

· that -currently militacy mstallations .are The CHAIRMAN. Not yet. . them wrote to me. I have taken the -being put in th'esamebuilding? - ., M;r. 'VINSON. 1 ask·for -a vote on the floor .and .come down to the well ' of the

Mr. McCORMACK[ .. . -:Yes. Vinson amendment. · House twice to discuss this ,matter ·- with " ID. JOHANSEN. · -:i ·am~ most biter- I..· The CHAIRMAN. The question is oh ¥embers of -the Howie and members of e.sted in that because .at 'the ~tline -Of' the the amendment-off-ered by the gentiemah this.committee. As a 'result of .the. pub-

, closing .of , the :Percy. Jones .Hospital 'in · frotn· Qeor.gia .LMr.-VlNsONJ: · llcity .in.itia"ted by the~ majority :leader, Battle Cxeek, my d1sting.Uisb~d ~tedeces- '.: 'The .amendment w.as agreed to. the rural telephone companies were sor,: .Mr . . Shat.er,. $ought: to .. secure.--the· Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman; 1: off el- : aware of· the ·pa;n;· th:ey ·were geing· to -transfer to ..Percy J.ones .of the Armed -another .amendment. play in this. vast SAGE organization. ·

CII-393

6250 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

When I presented the matter to the committee, the chairman of the Com­mittee on the Armed Services, and the members of that committee, gave me a very courteous and attentive hearing and wrote into this bill and into the re­port language which I believe protects to the utmost the interest of the rural telephone companies. However, after the hearing before the committee and after the courtesy that was shown and after the distinguished gentleman from Georgia directed the Armed F.orces to permit the rural telephone companies to participate in SAGE, a representative of the rural telephone companies had a .conference with a representative of the Air Force. That was an unsatisfactory conference because the Air Force said: "Well, you, the rural telephone com­panies, are represented by the Bell Sys­tem, or you are represented by the inde­pendent telephone companies."

As a result of that, the head of the National Rural Electric Cooperative As­sociation, who was representing the rural telephone companies, said:

Our people do not feel they are getting a fair shake in this matter. They want some representation in the SAGE project other than that of the Bell companies and the United States Independent Telephone Asso­ciation.

Since then, ho.wever, the Bell com­panies have by letter to Mr. Riggs Shep­perd, president, National Telephone Co­operative Association, said:

I have been asked by this company-

- American Telephone & Telegraph Co.­to inform you that it would be happy to have a representative of your organization as ohe of its members-

Of the Industry Committee. After I received a copy of this letter

yesterday I called the Air Force and they said they would be happy also to have a representative of the Rural Telephone Association on the Industry Committee. So I feel as a result of the activities of the Armed Services Committee and its distinguished chairman, and as a result of the publicity that the distinguished majority leader gave this matter last year, the interests of the rural telephone companies are now adequately and amply protected.

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

·Mr. METCALF. I yield to the gentle­man from Georgia.

Mr. VINSON. I want to thank the gentleman for the contribution he has

. made, for it was he who brought to the attention of the House and the commit­tee the importance of including the local telephones and the co-ops in this SAGE program.

Mr. METCALF. And the gentleman from Georgia deserves and merits the thanks of the rural telephone companies everywhere for his contribution.

(The letter to Mr. Sheppard is as fol­lows:)

APRIL 10, 1956. Mr. RIGGS SHEPPARD,

President, National Telephone Cooper­ative Association, South West Texas Telephone Cooperative, Inc., Hondo1

Tex. DEAR RIGGS: I had expected to hear from

you before this time with regard to the

selection of a representative of the National Telephone Cooperative Association for the Industry Coordinating Committee for SAGE. As we discussed on April 3, following Mr. Thiessen's request to Mr. Todd, of the Moun­tain States Telephone & Telegraph Co. that your association be represented, this commit­tee asked me to inform you that it would be happy to have a representative of your or­ganization as one of its members assuming he has the necessary security clearance.

The industry committee, as I mentioned to you, includes representatives from the Lincoln Laboratories, Bell Laboratories, the Air Defense Engineering Service, Western Electric, manufacturers of independent tele­phone equipment, USITA, and Rural Elec­trification Administration as well as repre­sentatives of the operations and engineer­ing department of A. T. & T. The commit­tee's primary responsibility is to consider in­dustry proposals and coordinate the provi­sion of telephone facilities and equipment for the various SAGE sites. Their activities relate principally to the technical considera­tions involved in the installation and main­tenance of the telephone and signaling equipment required.

As explained to you the committee has no responsib1lity for the location of SAGE sites and only comes into the picture after a site has been established by the Air Defense Com­mand and the orders have been issued by the ADC for the provision of the facilities re­quired. It was my impression after we had discussed the committee's responsibility that you would like to check further with some of your members and officials and would let me know your desires. .

As I. indicated in our telephone conversa­tion, we will be very happy to assist your association in any way practical in obtaining security clearance for _your representative if it is decided that you would like to have someone on the Industry Committee.

We also discussed the possibility of fur­nishing you with site location information, facility requirements, etc., as soon as such advice is received from the Air Defense Com­mand and it is determined that the location is in the operating area of one of your mem­bers. As you probably know, for the con­venience of the Air Force, this information is generally furnished through the Long Lines Military Communications Office of this com­pany to the associated companies who in turn notify the independent companies or cooperatives involved. I find that in addition our Long Lines people can readily furnish direct to you the information relating to your ·members if you will kindly give me ·a list of them.

It would be helpful to have your decision regarding the selection of a committee mem­ber as soon as possible. In the meantime if there are any questions in connection with the SAGE project as it affects your telephone cooperative association or any of its members or if I can help in any other way, please do not hesitate to call me.

Your very truly, L. L. MOODY.

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the committee amendment offered by the gentleman from Georgia [Mr. VINSON].

The committee amendment was agreed to.

Mr. VINSON. Mr. · Chairman, I offer another amendment.

The Clerk read as follows: Committee amendment offered by Mr. VIN­

SON: On page 68, line 1, strike out "(a)" and strike out all of subsection (b) which appears on line 8 through line 12.

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, the ef­fect of the amendment is this: Under the Capehart law the life of the military housing mortgage is 25 years. The·com-

·'

mittee on Armed Services reduced it to 20 years. We abandoned the position we had previously taken, and we are re­storing it back to 25 years.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. VINSON. I yield to the gentle­man from Iowa.

Mr. GROSS. On page 68, section 418, there is this language:

Notwithstanding the provisions of any other law, no contract shall be entered into by the United States·for the -construction of family housing uni ts by or for the use of military or civ1lian personnel of any of tbe military seryices of the Department of De­fense unless such housing has been justified to the Armed Services Committees of the Senate and House of Representatives.

I wonder why that language. Mr. VINSON. I will tell you why.

Under the Capehart amendment it is provided for the construction of 100,000 units for the armed services. The Armed Services Committee feel that they should know and have knowledge of what con­struction is going on for the armed per­sonnel. Now, we will have Wherry houses, we have private-enterprise houses, and we have Capehart houses, and we want to be sure that there are not going to be too many houses and that they will not be put in places where they are not warranted or justified. The other day the Air Force asked for over 30,000 units, and we had to break that down. Here it is broken down. We took up each one of these items at each installation, and we found out how many Wherry houses there were, how many private-enterprise houses there were, and how many other houses, to see whether or not they were justified in building Capehart houses.

Mr. GROSS. Have there been serious abuses?

Mr. VINSON. Well, it just started. It is just going into effect. It just started, and we want to put our finger on it.

Mr. RAYBURN. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. VINSON. I yield to the distin­"guished Speaker.

Mr. RAYBURN. I know that recently the Army, the Air Force, and so forth have recommended the building of 50,000 units at various places. A great many of them were to be at places where there are Wherry houses. Now, I want to ask · the gentleman if he and his committee are going to keep their hands on this thing so that when there are Wherry houses, with the Government making a 90 percent guaranty on the loan, whether or not his committee and those working with him are going to see to it that where these Wherry :iouses are built and . are sufficient that their value is not going to be destroyed by building .other houses by the Army, the Navy, or the Air Force.

Mr. VINSON. I will say to the distin­guished gentlem!:!tn from Texas, the hon­orable Spea!rnr of the House, that is the very purpose of section 418. Were it not for that section, the Congress would have no control over it at all, because strictly speaking today they can build 100,000 units without coming before the

_ committee. But, we had an understand-

195() CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· HOUSE 6251 ing .that they must clear these . things even before this bill goes into law. Therefore, the Air Force appeared before the committee the other day and asked for several thousand units, and we made them break it down to where Wherry houses are to be built, where private en­terprise houses are to be built, and that is the purpose of it. We will watch it very closely. If the House passes this bill in the language it is in, you can rest assured that the distinguished gentle­man from Missouri [Mr. SHORT J, the distinguished gentleman from South Carolina IMr. RIVERS], and myself~ and others who constitute the subcommittee will look into this closely. We will be satisfied that there is an absolute bona fide need before we approve ·any one of them.

The CHAIRMAN. The question is on the amendment offered by the gentle­man from Georgia [Mr. VINSON].

The amendment was agreed to. - :Mr." VINSON. Mr. Chairman, I offer a committee amendment.

The Clerk read as fallows:· Committee amendment: On page 15, line

21, insert: "Naval air facility, John H. Towers Field,

Annapolis, Md.: Land acquisition, and plans for ·specifications for aviation facilities, $4,000,000."

The committee amendment was agreed to ..

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman~ I desire to state that those are all the commit­tee amendments. "I offer a suggestion to the distinguished gentleman from Mich­igan [Mr. FcmDJ, that he offer his amendment at this time. ·

Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, I offer an amendment.

The Clerk read as fallows: · Amendment offered by Mr. Foan:· On page 29,. line 3, .strike th.Ei words "Manistee Air Force Base, Manistee, Mich.," and insert in lieu thereof the words, "'Kalkaska Air ·Force Base,' Kalkaska, Mich."

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, I should like to see if it is possible to reach an agreement on time on this amendment. I am very anxious that the gentlewoman from Michigan [Miss THOMPSON] be permitted to address the Committee for at least 20 minutes. The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. FoRD J is recognized now for 5 minutes. I should . like 5 minutes myself, and I be~ lieve the gentleman from Michigan .[Mr. KNoxJ would like 5 minutes:

Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan . . If the gentleman is offering a unanimous­consent request, reserving the right to object, I very · much desire · to have 3 minutes in order to apologize to the gentleman from Michigan f Mr.. KNoxJ .. · · Mr. V.INSON. ·· Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that debate on ·tliis amendment and all amenqents · there­to dose in · 45 minutes with the under­standing that the gentlewoman from Michigan [Miss THOMPSON] will have at least 20 minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the r.equest of the gentleman from Georgia?

There was no GbjeeUien . .. ~ · - - · -- -- ~

, The . CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. FORD] is recog­nized for 5 minutes on his amendment.

Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, this amendment puts the airbase back where the Air Force has been constructing· an airbase for the past 7 or 8 months. The question legitimately is asked, Why did the Air Force initiate construction at that base? The Air Force did it in good faith because on July 28, 1955, the chair­man of the House Committee on Appro­priations by letter approved construc­tion at Kalkaska. The Air Force initi­ated construction in August of last year at the Kalkaska site because on July 29, 1955, the Honorable CARL VINSON, chair­man of the House Committee on Armed Services, in a letter to the Assistant Sec­~etary of the Air Force, said:

I am gratified tha.t final selectf.on of this base has been mad~. since I know of its im­portance to our .Air Defense Command.

The Air Force initiated construction last August because on August 11 the 1955, Senator HAYDEN, chairman of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, in . a similar letter said:

In addition, the committee has approved the development of Kalkaska, Mich., Air Force Base.

, The Air Force initiated construction last August because on August 11, the chairman of the Senate Committee on Military Construction, the Real Estate Subcommittee, ln a letter to the Air Force told them to go ahead.

The Air Force in good faith initiated this construction in August of 1955, spending taxpayers' money to get the job done. Now we find that they in ef­fect are told they must change to .an~ other site.

If the Manistee site is selected, we will find this will be the result~ In the first place, the Air Force will waste at least $500,000 of funds which in good faith they have spent on the Kalkaska site. In addition, there will be an increased cost at Manistee on an annual basis for a 10-year period of $3,900,COO. That is the additional cost of SAGE at Manistee over Kalkaska.

In addition, if the Air Force cannot construct its base at Kalkaska and has to do it at Manistee, there will be $938,000 1n additional initial construction cost. In other words, you· are going. to find, if this amendment is not agreed to, that at least $5 million more Will be spent ·On the Manistee site than would be spent ori the Kalkaska site.

Furthermore, we have another prob­lem. The people of Traverse City, Mich., a community of 18,000, after getting word that the Air Force· would proceed and authority was given by the responsi­ble chairmen of the various committees, went out and raised··on their own $84~000 to buy land for the Air For~e. That }and is in the process of being procured. . .

I am told that the"Community of Man­istee, the alternative· site, has refused to off er any funds for the procurement of land, and that that will put an additional $134,000 burden on the Federal Treas­ury.

How can we in good faith, after these people in ·this comm11nity have gone out and raised $84,000, tell thmn, .. 'No, .. we

are changing the base"? l .cannot un.­derstand that.

Thirdly, the Michigan State Conserva­tion Commission agreed to make 7,100 acres of State-owned -timberland avail­able to the Air Force to build this air­base at Kalkaska. A contract was signed. They started to cut the land. Now this committee says they cannot proceed.

The State Conservation Commission has said, and I have in my band a news­paper article concerning it, that they will not sign a contract with the Air Force for any other locality. If you move the airbase to the Manistee site, the Air Force has to procure 5,400 acres from the State Conservation Commis­sion, and they say they will not author­ize it. I do not blame them, because we have broken faith with them already, if this amendment is not .agreed to. They cannot have any faith in our judgment if we are going to sign a contract and then the Air Force is told they cannot carry out its responsibilities. I am re­liably in~ormed they will not make any other contract . with the Air Force for State-owned land.

In conclusion, let me say just this~ On the basis of dollars, on the basis of time, on the basis of good faith with the State Conservation Commission, .and the people of Traverse City, in my humble judgment we ought to agree to this amendment permitting the Air Force to continue construction at a site where they have been building since August of 1955.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog­nizes the gentlewoman from Michigan [Miss THOMPSON] for 20 minutes.

Miss THOMPSON of Michigan~ Mr~ Chairman, I appreciate the privilege of speaking before the House on a subject that has become very contro:versial in my district, and which I sincerely· hope may be resolved by this great body. I am not here to ask for anything that is unfair, or that is not right.

On February 10, 1954, I received a letter from the Secretary of the Air Force, Harold E. Talbott, stating that a jet air base.would be located in the Ninth Congressional District, in the Traverse City area. Not knowing the probable pros 'and cons in relation to a jet airbase, I was very happy and expressed .my .ap ... proval. Of course, it never occurred to me to influence the Secretary in the ex­act choice .of the site. That was his busi­ness, arid to have it within my district was enough for me.

The Air Force engineers first explored the possibility of placing the base in the Long Lake area, Grand Traverse County, but immediately Dr. Joseph E. Maddy, <>wner and operator of the National Music Camp,. and some others, protested against that. site beeause of -its -nearness to that institution-a distance of about 10 miies. At this ·point, I want to· call your attention to the fact that .the Air Force withdrew from the Long Lake site be­cause of its proximity to an' established resort area.

After the Secretary received the above 'Objections, he ordered the Air Force en~ gineers to l'ecommend another · .site4 They then proposed the Benzie County

6252 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April- 12

site in Homestead Township. Immedi- The Manistee site, which has been ately Dr. Maddy objected to that site designated by the House Ar~ed Services stating that it would also be objection- Committee for development, has many able to the music camp. advantages. Located in the north-cen-

Representative Paul Shafer, of Mich- tral portion of Manistee County, it is lgan; Victor Wickersham, of Oklahoma; almost equidistant from four cities, and Mendel Rivers, of So.uth ~arolina, namely, Manistee, Frankfort, Traverse all members of the House Armed Serv- City, and Cadillac. In the center of a ices Committee, sustained his objections. square served by these four communi-

When the Homestead site was ruled ties, the site can draw on their joint·coin­out by the Shafer subcommittee, the munity support. The culturai, · educa­Secretary had to select another site. He tional, recreational, hospital, and retail designated Cadillac on December 2, 1954. facilities of all four. will be available to At this point, the Secretary became ve,ry personnel of the proposed interceptor al)gry because I had accused him of· not base. In addition, the nearby villages being honest with me. From then on he of Kaleva, Copemish, Brethren, Bear refused to answer my daily telephone Lake, Onekama, Benzonia, Beulah, calls over a period of 5 days . . I then Honor, Mesick, and Wellston willingly wrote him a letter and waited 10 days offer community support. The towns­for a reply. None came. l\{y colleagues people of these cities and villages have

, will appreciate my position at that time. officially expressed a welcome to the Air Six months after the selection of the Force and pledged their cooperation in Benzie site was made public, the Secre- making the existence of airmen at the tary abruptly switched sites with no ex- base as comfortable and enjoyable as planation to me. During those 6 months possible. Organized conservation groups,

. he repeatedly assured me that the base agricultural groups, and business people would be built in Benzie County. On his ' in Manistee County have publicly prom­advice, I relayed this information to my ised support. There is no foreseeable constituents. To say the least, I was objection to be raised by groups or indi­subjected to embarrassment and a feel- viduals to the location of the base in ing that pressures, unknown to me, had Manistee County, as have been at other been brought to bear on Secretary sites. . Talbott. From a transportation standpoint, the

I then saw Secretary Wilson and as a Manistee site has excellent facilities. result, Secretary Talbott called me. He Four motor freight lines and two rail­suggested that I should go ahead and do roads coming into the area would provide whatever I thought would be -best. I the Air Force with maximum freight went to Congressman MAHON and he sug- service. One. of these railroads and two gested that I should state my case before bus lines provide passenger service. Cap­him and Chairman VINSON. I did so to ital Airlines, based nearby at Traverse them and in the presence of Secretary City, now furnishes air connection to any Talbott, General Hipps of the Air Force, point in the world. The cities of Mani­and committee counsel. The Secretary stee and Frankfort have developed neither confirmed nor denied the state- harbors on Lake Michigan which could ments which I made to him in repeating economically be the terminala for fuel his earlier conversations with me and his pipelines from the base, using Great promises. Lakes tankers. Passengers may embark

In July 1955, the House Appropriations from either Frankfort or Ludington by Committee ruled out Cadillac. way of ferry to Wisconsin ports. Five

The next step was for the Secretary to paved roads provide a ne~work linking designate Kalkaska or Manistee, even the communities in the area for automo­though the Kalkaska site had been re- bile travel. In summary, all phases of jected as early as June 1954 because of transportation are available to a degree the need for development of a highway not found anywhere else in northwestern· to Traverse City upon which it would be Michigan. dependent for community support. Sec- From the communications angle, retary Talbott chose Kalkaska, out of my Manistee is the only site which has of­district, and refused to· survey the Man- fered the free use of telephone facilities istee site until ordered to do so by the to the Air Force. The Kaleva Telephone chairman of the Subcommittee on Mili- Co. has agveed, in writing, to make avail­tary Construction of the Appropriations able its franchise for SAGE installations Committee, Hon. GEORGE MAHON. With- at no cost. in a few days, the President accepted The House should give great weight to Secretary Talbott's resignation because the statements of the Air Force, made of alleged irregularities in office. When before the House Armed Services Com­the new Secretary Donald A. Quarles, mittee as late as March 7, 1956, to the took over, he stated to me that he had no effect that any and all of the sites that reason to rescind Secretary Talbott's de- have been surveyed in the Traverse City cision. This reply was to my plea to area are acceptable from the standpoint Quarles in favor of a site in the ninth of national defense. All of the Manistee district. sites can serve the defense perimeter es-

The 11th District-Kalkaska-has a tablished by the Air Defense Command in population of 227,810, considerably less northern Michigan. I desire to call my than the Ninth District, which has 275,109 colleagues' attention to the fact that the people. In spite of that difference, the one and only requirement of the Air 11th District already has a jet air base Force was that a jet base be built in the at Kinross, and has been awarded an vicinity of Traverse City. The Manistee IIJ.ternational Pulpwood mill at the Sault. site is approximately 30 m::es from The Ninth District has no Federal in- Traverse City, and meets all operational stallations. requirements. ·

When I came to Congress in 1951 I did not know· a single Member of the Con­gress of the United States. I went into the House dining room one morning and the only person there was my good friend and colleague, the Honorable Paul Shafer. I would like to read a letter which I have, written by Mr. Shafer be­fore he died. It is dated August 12, 1954, and is addressed to the Honorable Harold E. Talbott, Secretary of the Air Force, the·Pentagonj Washington, D. c.:

DEAR MR. SECRETARY: I am taking the lib­erty of commenting further with reference to the jet interceptor base to be located in the Traverse City area, Mich.

Let me say first of all, that I am sorry, Mr. Secretary, that differences developed be~ tween us and that our tempers caused our discussion to become rather heated.

I am most anxious to see this problem re­solved in the best interests of our defense program and to the satisfaction of the greatest number of interested persons possible.

Naturally I cannot alter the decision of the Armed Services Committee, and have no desire to do so, but perhaps a compromise solution is possible.

My sole interest throughout has been that of protecting the National Music Camp at Interlachen. For that reason I have avoided suggesting any specific alternate site.

However, it is my hope that a solution ls possible which will still locate the base with­in the Ninth Congressional District. I be­lieve this ls possible, since I know you have surveyed and considered at least one other such site. ·

If it is possible to locate a site within the Ninth District which meets your require­ments and conforms to the committee rec­ommendations, I will be entirely satisfied.

I sincerely trust that you and I will see eye to eye on any future matters which may require ·our joint consideration.

Cordially, PAUL SHAFER.

Mr. Shafer wrote this letter on Au­gust 12, 1954. He died on August 17. 1954.

Mr. Chairman, in view of this situa­tion, I respectfully urge the House to confirm action taken by the House Armed Services Committee, and direct that the Air Force build the proposed base at the Manistee site, which is obviously the most desirable from a noise, safety, con­struction, and operational viewpoint.

Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Miss THOMPSON of Michigan. I yield to the gentlewoman from Massa­chusetts.

Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr. Chairman, I was tremendously impressed with the statement of the very able and splendid gentlewoman from Michigan, Judge THOMPSON, and as I listened I felt I could not do anything else but vote to have the site in her district as a matter of simple justice and I should know if I did not do so that I would have no pro­tection in the future from promises by one of the services that an installation would go into my district. It seems to me that as a matter of honor and fair play the site should be placed in the district of the gentlewoman from Mich­igan. It would be very unfair not to do so and I am very sure that Secretary Quarles if he understood the situation would agree with that.

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 6253 I have a very fine airfield in my own

district. I have found Secretary Quarles extremely fair and very helpful and al­ways cooperative when he understands a situation. It seems to. me clearly that justice is on her side, and I believe that she will be successful and that the Con­gress wilJ support her.

Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

Miss THOMPSON of Michigan. I yield to the gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. DONDERO. What was the vote in the Armed Services Committee to des­ignate the Manistee site?

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield? : Miss THOMPSON of Michigan. I yield to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. VINSON. Here is what the record shows, and this is from the minutes of the committee. It is permissible to use this.

The committee considered the item for Kalkaska Air Force Base, Kalkaska, Mich. It was moved and seconded that this air defense base be relocated at Manistee, Mich., rather ·than at Kal­kaska. A rollcall vote on this motion was as follows:

Yeas-Mr. Vinson, Mr. Short, Mr. Cole, Mr. Johnson, Mr. Gavin, Mr. · Hebert, Mr. Van Zandt, Mr. Price, Mr. Cunningham, Mr. Fisher, Mr. Ba.tes, Mr. Hess, Mr. Nelson, ;Mr. Doyle, Mr. Devereux, Mr. O'Konski, Mr. Mil­ler, Mr. Bray, Mr. Bennett, Mr. Wilson and Mr. Huddleston.

Twenty-one Members voted to locate the site as in the bill.

Those voting in the negative are as follows:

Mr. Durham (proxy), Mr. Rivers (proxy), Mr. Winstead, Mr. Hardy, and Mr. Green (proxy).

Present, Mr. Wickersham.

Twenty-one Members voted to change the site based upon the testimony that there is no military difference between them. What happened? I asked Mr. Forry this question:

From a military standpoint, they are equal?

Mr. FORRY. Yes, sir.

When he stated that from a military standpoint they were equal, then as one member of that committee I wanted to cast my vote to help right a wrong that had been done an honorable Member of this House.

Mr; WALTER. Mr. Chairman, will the gentlewoman yield?

MiS.S THOMPSON of Michigan. I yield .to the gentleman from Pennsyl­vania.

Mr. WALTER. As I understand it, the p .. <>posed site is in the <;enter of a locality in which there are a number of cities and towns?

Miss THOMPSON of Michigan. Yes. Mr. WALTER. Would that not ob­

·viate the necessity of constructing the · usual facilities that must be constructed when a new base is erected anywhere?

Miss THOMPSON of Michigan. I would think so.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog­nizes the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. KNOX].

Mr. BENTLEY. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. KNOX. I yield to the able gentle­man from Michigan. · Mr. BENTLEY. We have heard some

information about the amount of money that has already been invested in ·the Kalkaska. site by the Air Force, about a half million dollars. I wonder if the gentleman can tell us what this invest­ment consists of?

Mr. KNOX. To my distinguished col­league, I will say that the investment is mostly in plant, engineering, and surveys that have been made by the Air Force with a view to getting the base under construction in July of this year as au­thorized by the Congress and as so urgently demanded by our national security.

Mr. BENTLEY. Ha.S there been any actual physical work done on that Kal­kaska site?

Mr. KNOX. Yes, by the Department of Conservation of the State of Michi­gan who have given a 99-year lease. The timber was taken to such an extent that the conservation department people now feel they will have to continue the cutting of this timber in order that they can do some replanting.

Mr. BENTLEY. How much timber has been cut approximately?

Mr. KNOX. I cannot say in acreage, but better than one-third of the cutting operations have peen completed.

Mr. BENTLEY. Right up to this mo­ment?

Mr. KNOX. Right up to this moment, that is correct. ·

Mr. CEDERBERG. . Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. KNOX. I yield to the distin­guished gentleman from Michigan.

Mr. CEDERBERG. We have heard the statement that the military aspects of both sites are the same. The Kal­kaska site is in the Senate bill, the mili­tary location is all the same, the State has granted leases to 8,000 acres of land; ·we have spent a half million dollars. I cannot understand why we should change the location.

Mr. KNOX. I thank the gentleman for his contribution. However, I would point out that the military aspects are ·not the same in that the Manistee site, according to Air Force testimony, cannot be as readily expanded as can the Kal­kaska site.

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? ·

Mr. KNOX. · I yield to the gentleman from Georgia, the distinguished chair­man of the Armed Services Committee.

Mr. VINSON. The gentleman asks, "In view of the fact this military in­stallation is the same, why are you mak­ing the change?" I will tell you the rea­son why. ·Twenty-one Members voted to make the change. As I said a moment ago, we wanted to do right by a Member of this House who had been the victim of unfortunate circumstances. That is the reason. And I base m·y vote entirely upon that ·ground. _Mr. KNOX. I may say; Mr. Chair­

man, in all fairness, that I am carrying ·no torch for ~he former Secretary of the Alr Force. , Mr. VINSON. Let . me say this: I know this situation from the very be-

ginning, and I want to say again the only way that ·this House can do justice to the gentlewoman from Michigan is to vote down the amendment that has been proposed by your colleague.

Mr. KNOX. Mr. Chairman, I should m.ake it clear that I served notice on the House membership in this past week that i was going to off er an amendment to the bill.

The gentleman from Michigan [Mr. FoRDJ has offered the same amendment that I was to offer, and therefore I am supporting his amendment. The main reason I am supporting the amendment is in the cause of national security and the need for keeping faith with the patriotic citizens in the Traverse City area of Michigan.

Mr. Chairman, I want to go back to my point that a defense gap is left. to­day in our northern defense perimeter for the security of the metropolitan areas of Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, and Ohio. I would repeat, as I stated be­fore on the ftoor of this chamber, that the 1-year delay, in my estimation, could create circumstances leading to another Pearl Harbor. The Communist menace is such that we can ill afford complacency with respect to any gaps in our defenses. I believe it is time that we recognize the fact that we leave to the Air Force mat­ters involving of judgment that is pe­culiarly in the competence of military experts. In building air bases abroad it is the Air Force that selects sites in all foreign countries. We do not dictate to them where they shall build that foreign base, on what section of ground, in what country, or any other matter. We give the Air Force that prerogative. They are the military experts, and I for one today am not going to substitute my judgment for that of the military ex­perts. We have an Air Force today that we expect to be in complete command. of the skies. Why? Just so that we will never have a catastrophe in this country that would be equal to some of those in foreign countries. I am quite disturbed over the entire situation, and I do hope that the membership will support the Ford amendment when it comes time to vote on its passage.

The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog­nizes the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. DEVEREUX].

Mr. DEVEREUX. Mr. Chairman, I probably will not take the 5 minutes. I .do not believe it is necessary, since we have had a great deal of discussion about .this whole proposition. I must simply reiterate my position on it, that we can­not allow., the Executive to take such action as it did i:- the case of the gentle­woman from Michigan. If they can do that we certainly are not keeping faith with the gentlewoman from Michigan

'or the Congress. The Air Force made a commitment and promised that this jet base would be located in r.er district. I think they should have gone through with it. And, if we allow ourselves to be ·placed in a position like this, we will be derelict in our duty insofar as the over­all picture of our Government is con­cerned.

Now, I would like to quote just one lit­tle paragraph from a release from the

6254 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

cnief of the Michigan Conservation De­partment, forestry division, dated March 10, 1956.

No material damage has been caused by timber-cu:tting operations which started on. tlle site {Kalkaska) 2 weeks ago.

A swath of jackpine was being cut to clear ~pace for a runway at the rate of 40 cords per day. However, the Department immediately sent out word to successful bidders to hold up any cutting of red pine. The jackpine a1ready cut was most1y mature timber and ready to be cut anyway. The cutting "might even improve the area from a game stand­point," he said.

Mr. KNOX. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DEV!EREUX. I yield to the gen­tleman.

Mr. KNOX. Mr. Chairman, I should like to say this, that as far as the site is concerned, if it were within my power certainly I would be willing to dedicate that part of Kalkaska County to the Ninth Congressional District of · Michi­gan, if it would help any. I am · con­cerned about one factor only and that is the national security of my country.

Mr. DEVEREAUX. · I think it has been demonstrated that the Committee on Armed Services also is concerned with the national security of our country. We -considered this whole proposition at some iength and came to the conclusion by a - vote of 21 to 5, that this is th~ proper thing to do. National security does not rest necessarily upon the loca­tion of a jet base at one plac.e or an­other. 'There are other considerations to be kept in mind. I think the support of a Member of this House is also a mat­ter of national security; the question whether we are going to carry out .our traditional legislative re-spon.sibility or whether we are going to abdicate our responsibility 'and allow .an executive department to dictate however they will.

Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. DEVEREUX. I yield to the gen­tleman.

Mr. FORD. On March 16 195'6 the Michigan State Conservatiori. con{mis­sion said this;

The State Conservation ..COmmisslon de­clared itself today as unanimously .and em­phatically opposed to any shift of the pro­posed Northern Lower Peninsula .Jet Air Base from Kalkaska to Manistee area.

Here is what several members were quoted as saying when this matter was brought up. Commissioner .Lawrence J. Gotschall of Baldwin. Mich .• said:

I went for it once but I wouldn't go for lt again.

Other members of the Commission chimed in and said, "Good, good, good."'

Mr. DEVEREUX. It seems to me that is simply an expression of pressure .on the House of Representatives as to the action they shall take.

The CHAIRMAN. The -time of the gentleman from Maryland CMr. D.Ev.­EREUXJ has ·expired. The Chair recog­nizes the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. HOFFMAN] for 3 minutes. ·

:rv;tr. H;OFFMAN of Michigan. Mr. Chair.man, my purpose is tO most lmmbly and sincerely apologize to my good friend and colleague from northern Michigan [Mr. KNoxJ. He has taken time · to ex-

press disapproml of wna't I said earlier. I never questioned his ability, his pa­triotism, his effectiveness, his sincerity, nor his desire that the -security of our Nation be advanced or protected. That was not my purpose. I am very sorry if he took offense when I said that he went out fislling. I hoped that his constituents had a high enough opinion of his value to them and to the district to take him fishing. They shou1d. I never knew that it was a fauU to be a fisherman. St. Mark tells us that both Simon and An­drew, his brother, were fishers in the Sea of Galilee .and Jesus said that if they would come after Him, He would make them fishers of men. The only thing wrong with the fishermen of today is that they are inclined -a little bit to ex­aggerate, or so it has been said. But I noticed here today that others than fish­ermen fallowed along the same line of exaggeration.

Figures do not mean a thing today. It all depends on the source from which the figures are derived. When you talk about security, what nonsense that is. Look at this chart. Here is Kalkaska [indicating on the map]. Now it is pro­posed to move the base over here to Manistee-about 75 miles. If you listen to my colleague from the northern pen­insula, you would think that the whole Nation was going to be threatened be­cause the base was going to be moved a few miles southwest.

This ta~k about timber being wasted is all nonsense. Does timber become valueless when it is cut? Certainly not.

There is no question of national de­fense here today. Nor is there an econ­omy issue unless we accept without ques­tion the figures of the Air Force-I will accept the record made by the committee and its report and recommendation. ·The question is as was indicated by the gen­tleman from Maryland, General DEVE­·REux, a:nd by the gent1eman from Georgia [Mr. VINSON]. When an ex­ecutive department makes a promise as to what will be done 'and then just ar­bitrarily changes its mind without good cause, -are we going to let it switch us back and forth? It is the Supreme Court that kicks us around most of the time. Now, again an executive department is trying it. When, if ever, will we assert ourselves and take over our- functions .express our will and say to these peopl~ to whom we give jobs and authority through our appropriations and legisla­tion that they must keep their word as given to us? That is the issue here and it is the only real :substantial one.

_The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog­ruzes the g>en'tleman from Georgia [Mr. VINSON] to close debate on the pending amendment. .

Mr. VINSON. · Mr. Chairman, the gentlewoman from Michigan has been the victim 'Of an unfartuna·te seri-es of circumstances beyond our control. The way to right that is ·to vote down this amendment. I ask for a vote.

The CHAffiMAN. The question is on the amendment offered,.. by ·the gentle­mar:. from 'Michigan [Mr. FORD]~

The question was taken; and on. · a division (demanded by Mr. FoR:D) there were-ayes 52, noes 85. ' '

Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, I demand tellers.

Tellers were r.efused. So the amendment was rejected. Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I offer

an amendment. · The Clerk read as follows:

Amendment offered by Mr. Gaoss; On page 62, strJ:ke out lines 11 through 24.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman. this amendment would strike out lines 11 through 24, the provision in the bill ~hich would provide for a $300,000 hous­ing setup :for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

'The section apparently ,provides for 5 housing units. 1 for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff and 4 other structures. This seems to me to be a pretty plush expenditure for the Chair­man of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. If the

_expenditure were divided evenly among fiv.e structur.es it would be $60,000 for each. struc:ture, but I do not think any­one m this Chamber believes that the noncommissioned officers who will be stationed the:e are going to have a .$60,-000 house to llve in. We have no detailed information from the committee con­cerning this expend_iture. The report does not break it down as to how much the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of ~t~ff is going to get for his housing, so it lS reasonable to assume that the bulk of the expenditure wm go for a mansion. for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.

Mr. Chairman, it seems to me we could very well house the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff at Fort . Meyer~ There are some . pretty good buildings there, or down at Fort McNair. There are some good building units there. They are nicely located. I would not mind liv­ing in one of tho::;e houses between the Anacostia and the Potomac. I see , no reason why simply because a mistake was made in providing ho'.lses for other mem­bers of the ;Joint Chiefs of Staff that we have t? go. overboard and spend $360,0CYO <>n this kmd of enterprise. I do not know what the reason was which made the ot_he~ body refuse to approve the ap­propr~a;t10n that was in this bill last year for this purpose, but I hav.e an idea, how­ever, that the reason was that it would be throwing money awa-y pretty fast.

Mr. 'VINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield? . Mr. GROSS. Yes, I w~iI be glad to

yield to the chairman if he can shed some light on this -expenditnrc.

Mr. VINSON. In connection with the action of the other body, later .as the body gathere_d. information about this, they were willmg to bring in a separate bill to cover it. But I suggested to let it ride for the year so that it would be brought in ~his year as it is now. Of ~ourse, you can say that a $300,000 house lS a verr expensive house-and it ls a very expensive house. But, this is being built -in· accordanc'e with the digni-ty and re­·spohsibility and high office of the Joint Chiefs . of Staff • . , There wm not be just .o~e ~01:15:~ ther~ ~il~ -be a series of homes, and this is necessary. I _want this coun-try, th~ ~rea~t- Nation in the world, to house its officials in tbe proper kind of dwelling. I do not want it to be said

1956 CONGRESSIONAL lt.ECORD - HOUSE 6255 that the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the right .. hand advisers of the Congress on mm .. tary matters as well as of the President, has to live in some hothouse or some rented house. The Government ought to provide it. Of course, $300,000 is a considerable amount of money for a house. The gentleman from Iowa does not have that kind of a home and neither do I, nor do other Members of the Con­gress, but the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of staff is under the obligation of entertaining officials. Iiis dwelling must be a place of dignity. It must be an im­posing home, and in addition to that there are 3 or 4 other houses for his aides to live in. The gentleman should look at it in the light that this is almost a public building, you might say.

Mr. GROSS. Let me say to the gentle­man that this goes beyond just satisfy­ing the dignity of an officer in the United States Army. · It seems to me that with this kind of legislation, we are establish­ing some kind of military royalty in this country.

Mr. VINSON. We are doing nothing of the kind. Let us have a vote on the gentleman's amendment. ·

Mr. GROSS. I am perfectly 'willing for the Members to vote on my amendment, but I must say that I will have no part in building this $300,000 home for offi­cers of the United States Army when we have plenty of military housing now available in this area in which the Chair­man of the Joint Chiefs of Staff or any other military officer can live in dignity and comfort.

Mr. VINSON. Of course, may I point out to my distinguished friend that this provision of $300,000 would not be before us if it provided for a dwelling place for just one individual. This is a series of houses. There will probably be 4 or 5 houses which will be built on Govern­ment-owned land.

Mr. GROSS. What is it proposed to spend on the house for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff? The gentle­man must know that.

Mr. VINSON. The entire thing can­not exceed $300,000.

Mr. GROSS. But what is proposed to be spent on this one house?

Mr. VINSON. I regret that I do not have the breakdown on that, but the en­tire group of houses · will not exceed $300,000.

Mr. GROSS. I understand that per­fectly, but I would like to know what you are . going to spend on this plush estab­lishment. I am willing to bet that before you get through, you will spend a half to two-thirds of the $300,000 on a home for the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I am saying to you that the taxpayers of~ the United States do not have that kind of money. ,

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, I rise in opposition to the amendment.

Mr. Chairman, I sincerely trust that as the facts have been developed that the Committee will vote this amendment down. I want to make this statement. This request comes directly from the other end of the avenue. Mr; Chair .. man, I ask for a vote.

The CHAIRMAN. '.I'he question is on the amendment.

The question was taken; and on a division <demanded by Mr. GRoss) there we.re--ayes 34, noes 54.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I ask for tellers.

Tellers were ref used. So the amendment was rejected. Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. Mr. Chair­

man, I off er an amendment, which I send to the desk.

The Clerk read as follows: Amendment offered by Mr. O'HARA of Illi­

nois: On page 58, immediately after line 20, insert:

"SEC. 402. (a) In the case of the construc­tion of any tactical installation and facilities performed before or after the date of enact­ment of this act in a portion of a park lo­cated in a. municipality, which portion is leased for such purpose, or is being used under a license or other arrangement, for a nominal consideration, the Secretary of the military department having jurisdiction over such installation shall pay a reasonable rental (as determined by impartial appraisal, or as agreed to by the local agency having jurisdiction over such park) for. the use of such portion, without regard to any pro­vision of such lea.se, license, or arrangement, specifying a nominal consideration for such use.

"(b) In the case of the construction of any tactical installation and facilities per­formed before or after the date of enactment of this act in a portion of a park located in a municipality, the Secretary of the military department having responsibility for such construction shall perform such construc­tion, or in the case of construction performed before the date of enactment of this act shall modify such construction, so as to make such installation consistent with the con­tinued use of such park as a park and recre­ational area, through landscaping, altera".' tion of buildings or construction of build­ings, planting or replanting of trees and shrubs, and otherwise improving the area surrounding such construction. The Secre­tary concerned is also authorized in any such case (1) to reimburse the local agency having jurisdiction over such park, from sums ap­propriated therefor, for the cost to such agency of providing additions to the park, or of providing additional park and recreational ~acilities elsewhere, comparable to the por­tion of the park on w_hich the construction has been performed, or (2) to provide such additions, or additional park and recreational f_jl.cilities, directly from sums appropriated t'herefor."

And renumber the following sections ac­cordingly.

Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. Mr. Chair· man, I ask unanimous consent to pro· ceed for 10 minutes.

The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Illinois? · There was no objection.

The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman from Illinois is recognized for 10 minutes.

Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. Mr. Chair-. man, at the outset I wish to state that in the event the Committee on Armed Services does not approve of this amend­ment and the chairman of that great committee makes a clarifying and satis­factory statement I shall not press fur­ther this amendment. · Mr. VINSON. Is the gentleman pre­dicting defeat for his amendment?

Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. I would pre­f er to talk about that after I have pre­sented the case of the people of the dis­trict I have the honor to represent and the distinguished chairman has given

his assurance, as I believe he ·wm, tnat there is within the committee the power and the will to accomplish what is sought · in my amendment.

Nevertheless, I pave felt this was a matter that should be brought to the attention of the House. The situation is not peculiar to Chicago. Something of the sort obtains in many of the large cities of the country. There are many Members who have an interest in the subject springing from the concern of their constituents.

In our program of tactical installa­tions, which those responsible for our national security believe necessary, we are selecting sites in the hearts of our cities. These in~tallations are attended with deposits of explosives of high power, and there is definitely a certain degree of danger.

Whether these installations will be outmoded within the next year or ·two no one knows. From the progress we are making it is presumed they may be. Also we have heard the great chairman of the Committee on Appropriations from this well state that in the event of a war none of these installations would be effective, that the decisive blow would have been struck within a matter of hours or a day. I concede that we in prudence and in good commonsense can take no chance, but we are in a field where there is little historfo background and everything is more or less experi­mental and, we hope, temporary.

Let me say that in the Second Con­gressional District of Illinois everyone wishes to make every sacrifice necessary for our na.tional defense, but we do not wish steps to be taken that are ·not nec­essary and that destroy the recreational facilities that have been built at great expense to the taxpayers of our commu­nity. This does not mean that if neces­sity and well-considered judgment com­mand, we will not willingly make every sacrifice.

The site for this installation which is regarded as necessary by the Depart­ment of Defense-and I am not criticiz­ing the judgment of men who have train­ing and experience as well as a great responsibility-is on one of the spots of greatest scenic . attraction in Jackson Park. I am told the site could have been located as far south as 97th Street. To condemn private property entails a large expenditure of money; I think they fig­ure something like $1,200,000, whereas by having a site in Jackson Park the cost would be almost nothing.

Whether the site could or could not have been located elsewhere-and I do not presume to pass upon that question­is not moot, as the site already has been taken over. What I am concerned in now is that there should be money avail.­able for some recompense to the people, perhaps in the development of other park recreational facilities to replace those taken over, and in any event to dress up and maintain in the most pre­sentable manner possible the landscape surrounding the installation. There should be provision, too, for the removal .of the installation when no longer needed and the restoration of the land to its former condition. -

6256 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUS~ April 12

'I ·repeat, 'I th1nk provision shou1d be made to .recompense these park districts in some way .by ~st.ablish1ng . somewhere else in the parks recreationaiJ. facilities to take the place of those taken over by the Gnver.nment. 'There also should be an appropriation fo beantif y these .sites and to see that .ev,erythmg is done to keep fr:o.m spoiling the beauty <Of the parks.

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. O'HARA of lllinois. I ,am very happy to yield.

Mr* VINSON. I may state to the gen­tleman and for the benefit l{)f the .com­mittee that 81 Nike sites ha:v.e .been. eon-­structed in parks in cities ail iover the United States • .and the peopie have re­ceived many dollars for ever.y one they have contributed as their [Share of ·the defense. That is the record right .hereA

:Now m~y I say <0ne thing furthe.r; of course the gentleman's amendment goes tar beyond .Jaekson Park, .but .in J.ackson Park .I find ·tha,t we paid $85,,0-00 .for tvees that were cut down. We usually take 6 acres .. but .at J.ackson Park we to0k ·only 2 acres. I was very .happy t-o give the distinguished gent<Ieman. from lllin.ois a hearing before the lCom.mittee. We tried t0 work out the .situatlo~ I sympatbiZJe with him, but to> g;o along with him I cannot. I hope that we may work out something satisfa-ctory to him in a hear­ing before the committee.

Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. I thank the chairman of the Committee on Armed Services for his words of 1eooperation. and for his courtesy at an times in trying to understand our problem. H-ere is wha.t ccmcerns me, and I hav.e discussed this with the chairman. Later on an appropdation may be p:voposed to .cover :Certain. restora;tion Df these park dis­tricts and I wanted to be .sure there was sufficient authorization in this .bill for an appropriation should it be pro­posed and should it become necessary. On that the chairman has assur.ed me. While he does not ,gee any authorization in the .bill .as it .now stands, he thinks mon.ey can be obtained for tllat purpose from ,some fund now .available. He would know more about where he can get the money than I would. Mr~ VINSON. The gentleman can.

tell his people in Chic.ago that we will be more than delighted to give th-e gen.­tleman a hearing, at which .he may g·ive minute details ·with :ref.e:rence to Jaek-­.son Park or a general policy .in refer­ence to all of these 7B sites c:w,er 'the country. We would consider .a .bill if .he will ·in.tr.oduce one, or if .the i.ae:ts war­rant 'it I will introduce it myself. Mr~ O'HARA of 111inois. Mr. Chair­

man., I ask un.animous consent to with­draw my amendmen~.

The· CHAIRMAN. Is there objec•tion to the request of the gentleman. from 'Illinois~

There was no objec·Ucm. Mr. WILSON nf · California. Mr.

Chairman, .I move to strike out the last word. . _ Mr~ Chairman, as a member ()f the

ComJnitt-ee '011 Armed Services, I am much ,ooneerned· over tbe azrgum.ent and crit!cism o~ .our missile p.rogram, partic­ularlf t.4~ partisan attacks in the ·o~her

oody and "elsewhere .concerning resear-ch design 'Of missiles and the size of the appropriations for missile production.

Our Armed Services Committee, here in the House of Representatives, is.work­ing harmoniously for ,the eommon -good of our country. This may be a ~'do nothing" Congress as some ·claim; but the Ar·med Services is 'R "'do plenty" com­mittee. We have turned out ·to-date under our Demoerartie committee ~eader­ship, -:39 legislative pr.ojects this y.ear alone in support of the Eisenhower ad­ministration's defense program. I wish to compliment -my committee associates in both parties and our distinguished chah:man and minority leader the gen­tleman from Mlssouri IMl' .. SHORT] for the harmonious, .nonpartisan way in whic'h so much has be.en accomplished in this field.

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Chairman, wlU the gentleman yieid?

Mr. WILSON of California. J: yield to the gentleman from Georgia.

Mr. VINSON.. I think the distin­guished ·gentleman from ca1i'f ornla anticipated what was running through my .mind. .I .want to call the attention of the Members of the House to the fact that notwithstanding the letter that ,ap­peared .in t'lile paper a few days ag;o about various bil'ls, of those '5 bills r.ef erred to, 3 of them have :a,qready passe<ii the House. We have been. in -session hardly 90 days., yet we have passed over 4'0 bills reported by the Committee on Armed Services invDl:v1ng an authorlzation of .around $4 billion. Ther.e is no commit­tee in the House that has kept this .floor as busy ias has the Armed Services Ce>m­mittee. We have been here.so often that 'Sometimes I think we wm wear out our welcome.

Mr. WILSON of Californ1a. :I might say .that we .are always under the whip­lash of the chairman of our ,committee.

I do .not pose as an expert cm guided missiles, or ballistie missiles, but as a member uf the ~rmed 'Servl-ces ·Com­mittee I belieye .I have about as much general ln:for.mation on the prograim as any Member of either body of Congiress. San Diego, which I represent, might weh be cai!le.d tlm missH.e ·prmliuction capital of the world. Therefore, I possess some insight into the missile situati~n and some .firsthand knowledge about . mis­siles as weapons in our armament. Crit­icism, I .asser.t. is both misdirected and unwarranted. ·

In this missile controversy, our mili­tary chiefs are in .an. untenable positien. They cannot defend Ol!lr c11rrent .situ­ation, ,since to def end would be >to .reveal basic inf or~ation Of value to our enemies~

I can say, however, that more Ar.my expenditt:1re 1s g-0ing into tb.e pmcure­ment of missiles than into all other con-:ventiona1 weapons ·com.bined. .

.As for .Army public works, $305 million in this bill is authorfaed for eonst~ue­t.ian. Nearly half .. pr 47 percent., is ·ear­marked f.or missile installations. . The real tragedy .m ·,G>Ul' ·missile :pro­gram was 'Olil" :foolishness at the , end o'f World Warm, in a,Uow;iing Rus;sia, to hire any 1of the German rock-et and missile scienti~ts.

'l'heref ore, when an inv.estigatlon of the missile situa·tion ls started in tbe ather body, as -anticipated, the iaqwry should begin with Fennemunde am:I the · day the German missile production cen.­ter was eapt1ued.

One of the mast ~-0cife11ous critics ·of 0-Ur present defense pr~p.ar.e.dness was himself an .ac'tiv-e ]Jarticipan.it and ru.rec­tor in the first stages of .our missile pro­gram. · What wer.e the facts?

In 1.946, we brought in 3'5 .scientists but Russia took a . .few .more than we did. We sei.ected -about 2'i0 tor ouir needs and a year later incr~ased this .selection rta 1,000~ Ultimately, we br.ought ..over about 800, 'but Russia took a f,ew mor.e than we did.

However, betw.een 1947 and 195D" we wer.e more .concerned with cutting down our military strength fr.om the ''M> air wings :authorized by the . 8oth Congress to 48 air wings. 'That was August in 1949 when.one of the contemporary :mis­sile critics was Secretary of the Air Foree.

Am.d 48 wings we had when we were faced in June of 1'.950 with war in Korea. We were tragically unprepar.ed.

Likewise, it was this period of time w.hen ·we allowed basic .reseaxch on :ntis­siles to wither and almost die. Only tlil.e tlo.resight of :a few scientists .and ;aircraft manufaetuveirs kept us from losing tw.o priceless years of development.

We had no missile ()r rocket program worth men.ti.onimg in l.9t9, or 194'1 for that matter. Up to 1950, nothing was authorlzed for missile production,. then $:26 million. ·was appropriated.

Missile production during the fiscal years of 1951-''5'2 ,amounted ~o an ex­penditure of $189 Iriillion. Under the first 2 fiscal years of the Eisenhnwer administr:ation, the outlay grew to $1.9.9 million. For the 2 years ending this :coming June, we will .spend $1,5'.50 mil­lion. · .Is that a reC.Ord of weakness in pre­paredness, or a record of factual mm­taT.Y aeceomplishment?

Furthermore, I am. at liberty to ~.e­port that facilities for actual produel.ion of the intercontinental bamstics missile, the ultimate weapon, so-called, are under way~ ·

.In San Dieg;o taday, we .are humming with missile production because 'Eisen­hower raised the missile program :from <Class .2 -priority to class 1 ear],y in 19.53..

·w'e can speed up the :Sii>Bmding on· the ·missile ·program, but we cannot .speed. ·up itiae :brai.nw..ork; trying to for.ce-f:.eed scientific r-esearcn 1s like trying to speed. up t'he lblassGm.ing of a de'lic.ate bud. All ·talent that ean be 'SJ)ared from other essential ·programs is [i).OW ·concentrated on the perfection of missiles. J: say this without qualification. · -

I must repeat, how.ever, what a -pity, <What·.a national .shame ·it w.as, that we did not take :a.11 of rthe Pennemund:e sclentist-s when we ha'Cl the oppG.rtunity .back in 1946and1947. ..

In spite of our. folly, I am c·onfider.~ w..e .ar.e still leading the W;()rld in the :r.ao.> for missile supremacy,, and ·I .am ,p11ou.<i. of -the accomplishment of_ the Eis.en-

. hower administration . in this .r.egardr

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE ~251. Mr. SHORT. Mr. 'Chairman, will the

gentleman yield? Mr. WILSON of California. I yield

to the gentleman from Missouri. Mr. SHORT. Mr. Chairman, I wish

to congratulate the gentleman from California [Mr. WILSON] on the very splendid and timely statements he has made. He is one of the most faithful, hard-working, and earnest members of our Committee on Armed Services.

Mr. WILSON of California. I thank the gentleman from MissourL - Mr: SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair­man, I move to strike out · the last two words. ·

Mr. Chairman, ther.e is a question in connection with the military construc­tion bill which we are considering that is important to many -Of my constituents. I have asked for this time to secure an opinion from the very able chairman of the committee handling this bill as to the liability of the Federal Govern~ent for school bonds which cover part of the property to be acquired for the erection ·of a jet interceptor base~ ·

Plans are under way to purchase or -condemn a considerable number of acres at a village called Kansasville; which is in Racine and Kenosha Counties. At the present time the State and local schqol officials are concerned about school bonds affecting the property _to be acquired.

The State superintendent. of schools in a letter to me has stated there is no Fed­eral law which would ·relieve outstanding bonded indebtedness for a local school district where the Federal Government acquired property for a Federal building.

To me this presents :an inequitable sit­uation in view. of the possibility that the -burden of the bonds would be shifted from Government-owned property to the -remaiµing property owners in the school district. In view of that situation I . would ask the chairman if that question has ever been raised in committee. '

Mr. VINSON. That question never has been raised. I should not like to give an opinion on- it. That is a legal question. That if?, where there are bonds of acer­tain character on certain property and ·the Government acquires the property, the question raised J;>y . the gentleman is, Do those bonds continue to follow . .even

·though the ownership is in the-Federal Government? ·

Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. That is l"ight, sir.

Mr. VINSON. That is a very impor­. tant question,. but I am .. frank_ that I would rather not risk .an opinion on -it, because there are so many able lawyers present, such as my colleague, the gen­tleman from Virginia {Mr. HARDY]. If he were not here perhaps I might ven­ture an opinion.

I will say to the g-entleman that we shall try to get some information on the question and advise the gentleman.

Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. If the gen­tleman has no objection, I shou1d like to submit a statement on the situation so -that I may assure my people · that the Committee on Armed Services is doing all it possibly can to se'ttle the question satisfactorily to my constituents.

Mr. VINSON. We shall make inquiry not only of the Department of Defense .but .of the Attorney General. ..

Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. I thank the gentleman.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I move to strike out the requisite number of words.

Mr. Chairman, there is entirely too much fat and blubber in this bill for me to accept it, and if there is not going to-be a rollcail vot·e, I want the RECORD to show that I am opposed. .

"Ther,e is $4.million in this bill for .what appears to . be . the start of·. a na v.al air academy at Annapolis despite all the air training facilities presently being oper­ated by tne Navy Department. No one seems to know .how many more millions will be expended upon this project. It is this <iuplication and waste to which I -str.enuously ..object.

It is my under.standing that. there is nearly a half billion. dollars for con­struction and expansion of new and already established bases in foreign countries upon :which billions have al­ready been expended. How much further is it proposed to go with this con­struction in foreign countries which give little evidence of having any real desire to defend themselves? The record shows that despite all of our spending, more and more of our bases and installations are. being jeopardized as more and more countries move into the orbit of neutralism.

Then there is the provision in this bill to provide .$300,0GO for the construction ·of a facility to .house the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Stair. Have we lost our minds? Have we lost all regard f·or the .a,bility of the taxpayers to pay the bills? It is beyond belief that we should author­ize the construction of a mansion :for Just ·one officer in the Military Establishment that will cost any substantial part of $300,000. And yet that is what is pro­]losed and what you will approve if you vote for this bill.

I have -consistently voted for the ade­quate defense of this country, but here iS a bill that calls for the spending of

·more than $2 billion for construction _purposes .alone. · As far as I am able to .determine, ~ this huge spending provides ·for not a single weapon as such . . Tb.is burden is becoming intolerable. There ·are thousands ·of citizens in the Third District of Iowa who, because of the farm depression and its effect upon business, will pay little or no Federal income taxes this year. I am convinced that wise use of facilities already available, both in this country and abroad, could have "resulted in a substantial reduction in this spending. It is for the reasons I have stated and others that I must .op­pose passage of this bill.

Mr. VINSON . .Mr. Chail'Dl.an, I will say to the gentlemen that I intend to ask for a rollcall vote when the question is put on final passage.

The CHAIRMAN. If there are no far­ther amendments. under the .rule, the Committee rises.

Aecordingly the Committee .rose; and the Speakel' having -resumed 'the ehair, Mr. DELANEY, Chairman of the Commit­tee of the Whole House on the State of the Union, l'e_ported that that Committee, having had under consideration the bill

CH. R. '9893) to authorize certa.rin con­struction at military establishments, and for ·other purposes, "Pursuant to House Resolution 444, he reported the bill back to the Hause with sundry amendments adopted by the Committee of the Whole ..

The SPEAKER. Under the rule, the previous question is ordered.

.J:s a separate vote demanded . on any amendment? If not, the Chair will put them en bloc.

The amendments were agreed to. The SPEAKER. The question is on

engrossment ' and third reading 'Of the bill.

The bill w,as ordered to be ·engrossed and read a third time, and was read the third time. .

The SPEAKER. The question is on passage ,of the bill.

Mr. VINSON. Mr. Speaker,: on that I ask for the· yeas and nays.

The· yeas and nays were ordered. The question was taken; and there

were--yeas 377, ·nays 3, answered "pres­ent" 1, not voting 52_, as follows:

[Roll No. ·25]

YEA8-377 Abbitt Carrigg Aberneth}' Cederberg Adair Cell er AddoniZio Chase Albert Chelf Alexander Chiperfield Alger Chudo1f Allen, Calif. Church Allen, Ili. Clark Andresen, Clevenger

Augu_st H. Cole ' And.rewa : Colmer Arends Coon Ashley Cooper Ashmore Corbett Aspinall Cramer A uchincloss Cretella A very Cr~mpacker Ayres Cunningham Bailey Curtls, Mo. Baker ·· Davis, Ga. Baldwin Davis, Tenn. Barden Davis, Wis. Barrett Dawson, Ill. Bass, N. H. Deane Bass, Tenn. .Delaney Bates Dexp.psev Baumhart Denton Beamer ·nerounian Becker. Devereux Belcher Dies Bell . Diggs Bennett,, F.la. Dingell Bennett, :Mich; Dixon -Bentley · Dolllnger · Berry . Dolliver Betts Donder.o Blatnik ' · Do'nohue. Boggs Dorn, N .. Y. Boland Dorn, S. C. Bolling Dowdy Bolton, Durham

F rance-a P .. Edmondson Bolton, Elliott

Oliver P. Ellsworth Bonner Engle · Bosch Evins Bow Fallon Bowler F~ll .Boyle Feighan Bray Fenton Brooks, La. Fernandez Brooks, Tex. Fin-0 Brown, 'Ga. Fisher Brown, Ohio Fjal'e Brownson Flood Broyhill Flynt Budge F.ogarty Burdick Forand Burleson F-Ol'd Burnside .Forrester Bush Fountain Byrd Frazier Byrne, Pa. Fre11nghuysen Byrnes, Wis. . .Friedel .ca.nuon Pulton Carlyle Garma tz Carnahan Gary

Gathings Gavin Gentry George . Granahan Gray . Green, Oreg. Gl'een,Pa. Gregory Grtmths Gubser

· Hagen Halleck Hand Harden Hardy Harris Harrison, Nebr. Harrison, Va. Harvey· Hays, Ark. Hays, Chio Hayworth Healey H~bert

· Henderson Herlong Heselton Hess Hiestand _ -

, Hill Hillings . Hoeven.

· Hoffma.n,J\llch.; Holifield Holland

- Holmes Holt Holtzman Hope Horan Hosmer Euddleston Hull Hyde Ikard Jackson Jarman Jenkins Jennings J ·ensen Johansen J'Qhnson, Wls. Jonas jon-es, Ala. Jones, Mo. Jones,N.C. Judd Karsten .Kean Xearney · Keams Keating Kee Kelley, Pa. KellY, N. Y • Kilburn Kilday

6258 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12 Kilgore King, Calif. Kirwan Kluczynskt Knox Knutson Krueger Laird Landrum Lane Lanham Lankford Latham LeComi:te Lesinski Lipscomb Long' Lovre MeCa.rthy McConnell McCormack McCulloch McDonough McDowell McGregor McMlllan Macdonald Machrowicz Mack, Ill. Mack, Wash. Magnuson Mahon Mailliard Martin Mason Matthews Merrow Metcalf Miller, Md. Miller, Nebr. Miller, N. Y. MUls Morrison Moss Moulder Mumma Murray, Ill. Murray, Tenn. Natcher Nicholson No11blad Norrell O'Brien, Ill. O'Brien, N. Y. O'Hara, Ill. O'Konski O'Ne111 Ostertag Passman

Patman Patterson Pelly Perkins Pfost Philbin Phlllips Pilcher · Pillion Poage Poff Polk Preston Price Priest Prouty Quigley Rabaut Radwan · Rains Ray Reece, Tenn. -Reed,N. Y. Rees, Kans. Reuss Rhodes, Ariz. Rhodes, Pa. Richards Riley Rivers Roberts Robeson, Va. Robsion, Ky. Rodino Rogers, Fla. Rogers, Mass. Rogers, Tex. Rooney Roosevelt Rutherford Sadlak St. George Saylor Schenck Scherer Sch wen gel Scudder Seely-Brown Selden Sheehan Shelley Short Shuford Sieminski Sikes Siler Simpson, Ill. Simpson, Pa. Sisk

NAYS-3

Smith, Kans. Smith, Miss. Smith, Va.

· Smith, Wis. Spence Staggers Steed Sullivan Taber Talle Taylor Teague, Calif. Thomas Thompson, La. Thompson,

Mich. Thompson, N. J. Thompson, Tex. Thomson, Wyo. Thornberry Tollefson Trimble Tuck Tumulty Udall Utt Vanik Van Pelt Van Zandt Velde Vinson Vorys Vursell Wainwright Waiter Watts Weaver Westland Wharton Whitten Wickersham Widnall Wier Wigglesworth Willianis, Miss. Williams, N. J. Wiliiams, N. Y. Willis Wilson, Calif. Wilson, Ind. Winstead · Withrow­Wolcott Wolverton Wright Yates Young Younger Zablocki

Andersen, Gross Marshall H. Carl

ANSWERED "PRESENT"-1 Scrivner

NOT VOTING-52 Anfuso Gamble Blitch Gordon Boykin Grant Buckley Gwinn Canfield Hale Chatham Haley Chenoweth .Hinshaw Christopher Hoffman, Ill. Cooley James coudert Johnson, Calif. Curtis, Mass. Keogh Dague King, Pa. Davidson Klein Dawson, Utah Mcintire Dodd Mc Vey Donovan Madden Doyle Meader Eberharter Miller, Calif.

So the bill was passed. The Clerk announced

pairs:

Minshall Mollohan Morano Morgan Multer Nelson O'Hara, Minn. Osmers· Pow,ell Riehlman Rogers, Colo. Scott Sheppard Springer Teague, Tex. Zelenko ·

the following

Mr. Christopher with Mr. Canfield. Mr. Keogh with Mr. Minshall. Mr. Klein with Mr. Morano. Mr. Anfuso with Mr. Coudert. Mr. Buckley with Mr. Dague. Mr. Gordon with Mr. Scott. Mr. Davidson with Mr. James. Mr. Haley with Mr. Springer. Mr. Madden with Mr. Riehlnlan. Mr Dodd with Mr. Osmers. Mr. Multer with Mr. McVey. Mr. Boykin with Mr. Curtis of Massachu-

setts. ·

Mr. Powell with Mr. Hoffman of Illlnols. Mr. Grant with Mr. Johnson of California. Mr. Zelenko with Mr. Mcintire. Mr. Miller of California with Mr. Cheno-

weth. Mr. Doyle with Mr. O'Hara of Minnesota. Mr. Mollohan with Mr. Meader. Mr. Eberharter with Mr. King of Pennsyl ..

vania. Mr. Chatham with Mr. Gamble. Mr. Sheppard with Mr. Gwinn. Mr. Morgan with Mr. Nelson. Mr. Donovan with Mr. Dawson of Utah. Mr. Rogers of Colorado with Mr. Hale. Mr. Teague of Texas with Mr. Hinsb,aw.

The result of the vote was announced as above recorded.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

ESTABLISHING AN EDUCATIONAL ASSISTANCE PROGRAM FOR CHIL­DREN OF SERVICEMEN . Mr. DELANEY, from the Committee

on Rules, reported the following privi­leged resolution <H. Res. 470, Rept. No. 1996), which was referred to the House Calendar and ordered to be printed-:

Resolved, That upon the adoption of this resolution it shall be in order to move that the House resolve itself into. the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H. R. 9824) to establish an educational assistance program for children of servicemen who died as a result of a disability incurred in line of duty during World War II or the Korean -serviee. period in combat or from an instru­mentality of war. After g~neral debate, which shall be confined to the bill, and shall

. continue not to exceed 2 hours, to be equally

. divided and controlled by the chairman and ranking minor~ty member of the Co~mittee on Veterans' Affairs, the bill shall be read for amendment under the 5-minute rule. It shall be in order to consider without the intervention of any point of order the substi­tute amendment recommended by the Com­mittee on Veterans' Affairs now in the bill, and such substitute for the purpose of amendment shall be considered under the 5-minute rule as an original bill. At the conclusion of such consideration the com­mittee shall rise and report the bill to the House with such amendments as may have been adopted, and any Member may demand a separate vote in the House on any of the amendments adopted in the Committee of the Whole to the bill or committee substi­tute. The previous question shall be con­sidered as ordered on the bill and amend­ments thereto }o final passage without· 'inter-

. vening motion except one motion to recom-mit w~th or without instructions.. ·

UNITED ~TA'i£'ES v. AI.PO LORENZO . ICARD I

The SPEAKER laid before the House the following communication from the

.q1erk of tl~e House, which was read: APRIL 12, 1956.

The honorable the SPEAKER, H01.tse of Representatives.

SIR: From the District Court of the United States for the District of Columbia, I have received a subpena duces tecum, directed fo me as Clerk of ~he House of Representatives, to· appear before said court as a witness in the case of the United States v ."Aldo Lorenzo Icardi (No. 821-55), and to bring with me certain and sundry papers therein described in the files of the House of Representatives.

The rules and practice of the House of Representatives indicates that the Clerk may not, either voluntarily or in obedience to a

subpena. duces tecum, produce such papers without the consent of the House being first obtained. It is further indicated that he may : not supply copies of certain of the documents and papers requested without such consent.

The subpena in question ls herewith at­tached, and the matter is presented for such action as the House in its wisdom may see fit to take.

Very truly yours, RALPH R. ROBERTS,

Clerk, United States House of Representatives.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will read the subpena~

The Clerk read as follows: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE

DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA-UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. ALDO LORENZO !CARDI, No. Ca. 821-55

To RALPH R. ROBERTS, Clerk, United States House of Representatives, Capitol, Wash­ington, D. C.:

You are hereby commanded to appear in the United States District Court for the Dis­trict of Columbia at Third and Constitution Avenue NW., ill the city of Washington on the fourth floor, courtroom 8, 16th day of April 1956 at 10 o'clock a. m. to testify in the case of United States v. Aldo Lorenzo Icardi and bring with you certified copies 'of the documents described on the attached list.

This subpena is issued upon application of the United States.

April 11, 1956. MARVIN B. SEGAL,

Attorney for the United States~ · Department of Justfce.

.HARRY HULL, Clerk. ~ • By LAWRENCE PROCTOR,

Deputy Clerk. _[Atta5lhed list}

Certffled copies of: ( 1) House Resolution 2, 84th Congress. (2) Extract of the Journal of the House

of Representatives showing the establish­ment of the Armed Services Committee of

·the 83d Congress and the membership thereof during the months of January, Feb­ruary, March of 1953.

(3) Minutes of the Committee on Armed Services dated January 27, 1953.

(4) Report of the Special Subcommittee of the Committee on Armed Services of House of Repres~ntatives under the author­

·ity of House Resolution 125 (83d Cong., 1st sess.), printed for use of the Committee on Armed Services.

(5) Rules of the Committee on Armed Services, House· of Representatives, 83d Con­gress, 1st session.

Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I ofI~r a resolution <H. Res. 471) and ask for its ·immediate consideration. Th~ Clerk re~cl the resolution, as fol­

lows: Whereas in the case of the United States

of America against Aldo Lorenzo Icardi (criminal case No. 821-55), pending in the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, a subpena duces tecum was

.issued by the said court and addressed to Ralph R. Roberts, Clerk of the House of Representatives, directing him to appear as a witness before the said court on the 16th day of April 1956, at 10 a. m. and to bring with him certain and sundry papers _in the possession and under the control of the House of Representatives: Therefore be it

Resolved, That by the privileges of this ·House no evidence of a documentary char­.acter under the ·control and . in the posses­sion of the House of Representatives can, by the mandate of process of the ordinary courts of justice, be taken from such con-

1956 CONGRESSIONAL .RECORD - -HOUSE '.6259 tro1 ·or possession but by its _PeTmissi-on; be it further -

Resolved, That when it appears by the order of the court or of the judge thereuf, or of any legal officer charged with the administration of the orders of such court or judge, tl~at documentairy .evidence in the possession and under the control of the House is needful for use in any court of justice, or before any judge or such legal officer, for the promotion of justice, this House .will take .such order thereon a.s will promote the ends of justice consistently with the privileges and rights of this House; be it further

_'Resolved, That Ralph R. Roberts, Clerk of the House, be authorized to appear at the place and before the court named in the subpena duces tecum before-mentioned, but shall not take with him any papers or docu­ments on file in his office. or under his con­trol or in possession of the Clerk · of the House; be it further

Resolved, That when said court determines upon the materiality and the relevancy of the papers and documents cal1€d for · in the subpena. duces tecum, then the said court, through any of its officers or agents_, have full _permission to attend with - au prop~r parties to the proceeding and then .always at any place under the orders ancl control of this House and take copies of any docu­ments t>r papers ~nd the Clerk is author­ized to ·supply certified copies of such docu-

-men ts and papers in posS'esslon· or c0ntrol of said Clerk that the court has f<!lund to be· material and rel€vant~ except minutes and transcripts of executive sessions, and any evidence of witnesses in respect thereto which the court or other 'proper officer thereof . shall deslre, so as, however, the possession of said documents and papers by the said Clerk shall not be clistur~bed or the same shall not be removed from their place of file or custody urider said Clerk; and be it further

passage without intervening- motion, ~x-cept one motion to recommit, with or without instructions.

SPECIAL ORDER EXTENDED Mr. MASON. Mr.t Speaker, on Mon~

day next I have a special order for 15 minutes. Because of the general inter­est in it on the part of my southern colleagues, I ask unanimous consent that the 15 minutes be extended to 30 min­utes, not in order for me to speak longe;r but f.or some of the others who may desire to be heard.

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

There was no objection.

PROGRAM FOR NEXT WEEK Mr. ARENDS. Mr. Speaker, I ask

unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minuter ·

The SPEAKER. Is there object1on to the re-quest of the gentleman from Illinois'!

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

this time to ask the majerity leader if he -might tell us about the program for next week.

Mr. McCORMACK. I will be very glad to accede to my friend's r:Cquest. :

On Monday there will be the call of the Consent CalendaT. There will also be two suspensions: H. R. 9424, prior notification corporate mergers, and House Resolution 37-0, continue United .States policy regarding injustices in the world. Resolved, A copy of these resolutions be

transmitted to the said court as a respectful answer to the sub~ena. aforementioned. I am also informed that tnere is a

eonfereme report, submitted by the The resolution w:,as agr~ed to, and a gentleman from South .Carolina [Mt.

motion to reconsider was laid on the RICHARDS], on s. 1287, the so-ca1led table.-- annuities bill.

TUesday is Private Calendar d'ay, but CIVIL AERONAUTICS ACT OF 1938 there are no bills on the Private Cal­

endar . . . Mr. O'NEILL, from the .Committee on Rules, reported the' following privileged resolution <H. Res. 472, Rept. Ne>'. 1997), _ which was referred to the House Calen­dar anc ordered to be printed:

Mr: Speaker, I ask unanimous consent 1

..that· the call of the Private Calendar on Tuesday be dispensed w·ith. . - Mr.- ~ARTIN. Mr. Speaker, reserv- 1

ing the right to object-and, .of course, I Resolv.ed, That upon tb.e adoption of thts h 11 t b · ~ ·1 h Id l"k t k

resolution it shall be in order to move that s a no 0 JeCir--"'. s OU 1 e O as the House resolve itself into the Committee . relative to the proposed suspension of of the Whole House on the state of the Union the rules .for the consideration Pf the for the consideration bf the bill (S. 2972) to bill H. R. 9424. May I ask what· bill is punish the willful damaging or destroying of that? .aircraft ,and attempts to damage or. destroy Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, will the , aircraft, and for other purposes. · That '3.fter - gentleman yield to me? general debate, which shall be confined to -_the bill and continue not to exceed 2 hours, Mr. McCORMACK. I yield to the gen-t<:> be equally divided and controlled by the - tleman from New York. chairman and ranking i:nlnority member of Mr. CELL'ER. That' is a qiJl that re­the Committee _ on Interstate, and Foreign quire~ notice to be given to the Depart­Commerce, the bill shall be read for amend- ment of Justice and the Federal Trade ment under the 5-minute rule. After the · commission ·before there can lbe consum­reading of the first section of such bill it mation of the merger '. of any two cor­shall be in order to move to strike out all

· Mr .. 'McC.ottMACK. For 'Tuesday, Wed­nesday, Thursday, and Friday I have programmed tlle fallowing bills: -

S. 1188. examination of national banks. S. l736, qualifications of national bank

directors. H." R. 9285, to extend -authority; the

direct purchase bill. · · This bill is on the program for this

week: · H. R. 5299, authorizing the Virgin Islands National Park.

'The following ·bills may be brought up if they are reported and rules for their .consideration are grantied:

H. R. l03H7, to authorize appropria­tions for the Atomic Energy Commission cm certain projects.

H. R. 8836, the highway _construction bill. '

I make the usual reservations., that any further program will be announced later, and conferenee reparts may be brought up at any time.

Mr. POAGE. If the gentleman will yield, _I wonder wllat has hapIYened to the scheduling of the watershed bill. _

Mr. McCORMACK. That bill could not be r~ached this week, anyway. I will bring i·t up just as soon as I possibly can.

Mr: POAGE. Are we to understand -it is going to be put off, or a-re we going to bring it up any time soon?

Mr. McCORMACK. It will be 'brought up in the near future, but not next week.

Mr; POAGE. Will· the ' gentleman explairi why it will not be brought up next week? "Mr. - McCORMACK. - -we have .. tnis

other legislation. Mr. POAGE. Yes; .but this was sched­

uled before the others. .. Mr. McCORMACK. No. Every one of these -bills I have -scheduled -for next week preceded tpe watershed bill, with the excepti-0n of- th-e Atomic Energy Commission authorization and the road bill. .

Mr. POAGE. That is right, and they have not even been reported out.

l\4r. McCORMACK. . I said that any further progr.am will be announced. If those bills are not rep-orted out and w.e dispose of the .other bills, then the bill to which t'he genti-eman refers is in or­der for my announcing it. to the House.

Mr. ARENDS. Does the gentleman in­t-end to ask ' unanimous consent to ad­journ over until Monda-y, after the com­pletion of the next bnI on the program for today? -

Mr. McCORMACK. Yes. The SPEAKER.· Is there objection to

the request _ of tne gentleman from Mas_sachuse,ttsfl

There was no objection. .after the enacting clause and insert.as as.ub- porations where the resultin,g combined stitute the committee amendment l'eeom- assets w:ould be more than $10 million .

f1 ADJQURNMEN'.I' OVER

·mentled in the bill E:E. '319 ·as reported to owing from the merger. The bill has the House by the Committee on the Judi- the approval ' of the White House; The Mr. McCORMACK.- -"M:t. Speaker, I ciary and all points of -ordel" against such White House recommended such legis- ask . unanimous consent that . when the amendment are hereby waived. At the con- lation. House adjourns toda-y it adjourn to meet <:Iusi-0n of -the <lonsideratian of the -biH- s. · -M . MARnN 1 · t th t - d on Monday next. -2972 the Committee Shall rise ·am.d report the · r · · apprec1a e a • an, bill to the House with such amendments as I -am for the bill. But several members The SPEAKER. Is there objection to may have been adopted, and· the previous of the Committee on Rules have advised the r.equest of -the gentleman· from

« question .s-hal1 "be. toDSiderett .:aS:. ordered .on· . .me:that:it·would not-be.<iise~eet ,to .. bdng. ·, Massachusetts-?. , ___ . , - - ·, -the bill and amend·men.ts thereto to final it-up ·oft·MOnday,nex.tr .. , . ... . -.. ., _ Therewas·.no ob,tection.. -~ v .. - · ·- .N._,_.

6260 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

CALENDAR WEDNESDAY BUSINESS Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I

ask unanimous consent that the business in order on Calendar Wednesday of next week and the following week be dis­pensed with.

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

There was no objection.

EXTENSION OF GI HOME LOAN PROGRAM

Mr. FASCELL. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my re­marks at this point in the RECORD.

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

There was no objection. Mr. FASCELL. Mr. Speaker, I am,

today, introducing legislation which is extremely important to the overall econ­omy of our great country. It is an ex­.tension of the GI home-loan program for World War II veterans.

This legislation amends section 500 of the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1944 to provide an additional period for World War II veterans to obtain guaran­teed loans. It will provide the disabled veteran with an opportunity to exercise his right of purchasing a home under this law for a period of an additiona} 3 years from the present termination date which is July 25, 1957. It further provides a

1-month extension of eligibility for each 2 full months of service for those wlio served actively after September 15, 1940, and before July 26, 1947. ·

An abrupt termination of the GI home-loan program such as is now pro­vided in the law would have an unhealthy and inflationary e:fiect upon the entire Nation's economy. It would be almost certain to create a heavy housing de­mand which would result in highly in­flated prices. It would be humanly im­possible to obtain materials, equipment, manpower, or financing to build the homes that would be required if the expi­ration date is not extended.

However, a simple extension of the program is not the answer. Therefore, this bill provides for an orderly termina­tion of the program over a period of 3 years. This would soften the shock of an abrupt end, spread out the demand °for new housing over the period of sev­eral years, allow the veteran who has served his country more time to exercise his rights, and ·still answer those who state that if the plan is extended for 1 or 2 years, that extension would go on ad infinitum. "

I want to make it clear that I firmly believe that the veterans' program must expire within a reasonable period, but it would be unfair to our Nation's veterans and our entire population to permit such an abrupt termination. I think this is a practical solution to a difficult problem and I urge the support of veterans groups and all others for this bill.

The need is borne out by the fact that 11,224,089 World War II veterans have not yet reached the state of financial sta­bility which would permit them to pur­chase a home of their own. NUMBER 01' VETERANS '\YHO HAVE USED THEIR

GI RIGHTS

As of February 1956 there were 2·2, 226,000 veterans in civilian life; 15,385,-000 World War II; 4,469,000 with Korean service. Of whom 849,000 also had Worl~ War II service leaving only 3,620,-000 . with Korean service only. Of this number, 4,353,310 had received guaran­. teed home loans, 292,399 of whom were Korean veterans. And the total amount of loans guaranteed reached $32,955,000,-000, of which Korean veterans loans were valued at $2,765,000,000; and World War II veterans had loans for an amount of $30,190,000,000. · The overall figures on home loans are

.misleading. Although 26 percent of the eligible v~terans have used their home­loan entitlement, the distribution has varied widely 1n different areas of the count_ry. For example, for the 10 years ending in 1954, only 11.5 percent of the veterans in the Chicago metropolitan area had received home loans, compared with 56 percent in Wichita, Kans.

The following table I is a table showing for 75 metropolitan areas, the total num­ber of home loans closed in the 10-year period 1944-54, and the percent of home

-loans to the veteran population in those areas.

TA;BLE I.-VA guaranteed home loans in 75 metropolitan areas, 1944-54

Standard metropolitan area

Akron, Ohto. ______ : __________________ _ Albany, N. y ____ ; ____________________ _ Albuquerque, N. Mex ________________ _

!i\~~~~da~-~=========:::::::::::::::: Augusta, Ga __________________________ _

Austin, TeX--------------------------- ­Baltimore, Md._--------------------- ­Baton Rouge, La __ ------- -------------Beaumont-Port Arthur, Tex __________ _ Birmingham, Ala _____________________ _ Boston, Mass _____ ---------------------Bridgeport, Conn __ ------------------- -Buffalo, N. Y--------------------------

: l~~~@it~~m~~m~m~~mm~ Corpus Christi, Tex ___ ---------------~

· E:~t~h'.1'6~11<>==::::::::::::::::: : :~:::: I · E~rr~T~: ~~~~--:=:=~:::::::::::::::::::: El Paso, TeX---------------------------Flint, Mich ______ ----------------------Fort Worth, Tex ______________________ _ Fresno, CallL ____ _ ---------------------Grand Rapirls, Mich __________________ _

~~~~f~g: ~~~:::::::::::::::::::::::: Indianapolis, Ind_---------------------Jacksonville, Fla ______________________ _ Kansas City, Kans. and Mo _________ _ _

~0l~~~fei'e~if_:::::::::::::::::::: Loulsville, KY-------------------------~T~~~ia~~~::::::::::::::::::::::: Milwaukee, Wis-----------------------

Estimated veteran -

population October 1953

(World War II and Korea) 1

55,030 62, 780 20, 900 50, 100 81, 780 20,000 20, 540

157,490 19, 700 24,310 63, 5f0

349, 280 62, 900

127, 730 22, 230

677, 830 102, 160 179, 920

60, 900 21, 400 83. 700 52, 270 76, 430

367, 770 23,020 33, 780 45, 800 32, 340 33,820 65, 500

111, 800 68, 500 37, 440

1@2, 570 40, 290

047, 700 68, 070 55. 400 67, 660

100, 640

Total number of home loans

closed, 1944 through De­cember 1954 2

14, 967 15, 180 9, 535

10,688 31, 853 6,853 5,439

52,398 6, 732 6,896

17, 987 119,339 13, 302 42, 990 7, 732

77, 738 15. 725 38, 451 11, 274 8, 644

32, 433 12, 406 26, 912 99, 104 6,024 6, 3:IB

15, 075 7, 544 5,559

15, 242 53, 284 13, 960 16, 490 32, 818

6, 670 217, 948 14, 443 25, Hl5 31, 336 17, 005

Percent of home loans

to VA population

Standard metropolitan area

Estimated veteran

population October 1953

(World War II and Korea) 1

Total number Percent of of home loans home loans

closed, 1944 to VA ~~b~~h1R:·2 population

Zl. 2 Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minn__________ 144, 880 48, 197 33. 3 24. 2 Mobile, Ala ___ ------------------------- 23, SOO 4, 255 17. 9 45. 6 Nashville, Tenn ____________________ :_ __ 37, 920 14, 829 39. 1 21. 3 New .Orleans, La __ : __ .---------------- 79, 320 17, 062 21. 5 38. 9. New .York, N. Y. and N. r____________ 1, 556,650 342,080 21.8 34. 3 Norfolk, Va·- - - - · - -- -------------- ~ --- - 49, !170 9, 472 19.1 26. 5 Oklahoma City, Okla _____________ .____ _ 44, 800 32, 374 72. 3 33. 3 Omaha, Nebr-------------------------- 42, 200 10, 742 25. 5 34. 2 Orlando, Fla ___ _ .______________________ _ 13, 400 3, 821 28. 5 28. 4 Philadelphia, Pa_______________________ 443, 630 141, 553 31. 9 28. 2 Phoenix, Ariz__________________________ 37, 000 8, 379 22. 6 34. 2 Pittsburgh, P a________________________ _ 292, 930 50, 749 17. 3 21. 1 Portland, Oreg __ ______________________ : 85, 190 13, 576 15. 9 33. 7 Providence, R. !_______________________ 90, 730 14, 682 16. 2 34. 8 Richmond, Va _________ : _______________ 38, 700 13, 700 35. 4 11. 5 Rochester, N. Y _ ---------------------- 56, 000 22, 395 40. O

~f- ~ ~rt~i~tk~~~~f=== ======= ==== ======== 1 ~: ~~g 16, 197 42. 2 u~: 5 Salt Lake City, Utah__________________ 35, 010 3~; ~g ~~: ~

40. 4 San Antonio, Tex____ __________________ .55, 880 21, 038 37. 6 38. 7 San Bernardino, Calif _________________ ._ 34, 000 . 13, 969 41. o 23. 7 San Diego, Calif__ __ ___________________ 72, 330 20, 450 28. 3 35. 2 San Francisco, Calif___________________ · 288, 450 102, 696 35. 6

~i: i i~~~~:~~Fs~= ======================= ~: m :!: ~~ ~: ~ ~: ~ ~r~~tg~'.a6~~s~::::::::::::::::::::: ~ g: ~~ 1~: g~g ~~: ~ ~- 4 i~~~~~\~~s~::::::::::::::::: : ::::: : ~~'. ~ 16, 217 40. 2 47:g Tampa-St. Petersburg, FJa_____________ 46,890 ft;!~ ~~:i 20. 4 Toledo, Ohio_____ ______________________ 49. 260 10, 647 21. 6 44. 0 Washington, D. C--------------------- 196, 070 53, 078 27.1 32. 0 Wichita , Kans- -- - ----------~---------- 32, 900 18, 447 56 O 16. 6 Youngstown, Ohio _____________________ 67, 390 13, 744 20: 4 ~t ~ 75 metropolitan area ___________________ ---------------- ---------------- ------------

45· 4 TotaL --------------------------- 8, 639, 350 2, 355, t'.37 27. 3 46. 3 United States total _____ ,:_______________ 17, 005, 000 3, 607, 101 21. 2 16. 9

1 The veteran population estimates by counties are based on the 1950 census ad­justed to prevailing cdnditions in the second half of 1953. Some of the estimates may appear conservative due to difficulty to appraise frilly migratory trends in fast ex­panding areas.

2 As of the end of 19541.-,.most of the V f,.. home loans closed were for World War II veterans. The share of J:\.orean veterans was nominal but it was increasing steadily

in relative importance.. While less than 4 percent of the cumulative total of home loans closed through 1954 were for Korean veterans, such loans accounted for about a quarter of all home loans guaranteed in 1954 alone.

· Sources: Loan Guaranty Section and Reports and Statistics Service of the Vet· erans' Administration.

1-956 . CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE

As this table clearly indicates, there are still many areas of the countcy where veterans have, as yet, not had full op-

portunity to .exercise their home loan guaranty benefits:

TABLE II.-Veteran participation in VA loan program in metropolitan and nonmetropolitan · counties (cumulative as of end of December 1955) · _

.,.

Loans made as percent of vet- Estimated

Estimated eran population number of Number . veteran Totalnum- guaranteed veterans

who have of coun- population berloans loans ties December made not used

1955 entitle-Home Direct ment loans loans

All United States counties----------------------- 3,074 18,894,000 4, 623, 716 22. 5 0.4 14, 270,300

Metropolitan coilnties '-------------------------- 282 11, 761, 500 3, 519, 257 28.3 .1 8, 242, 200 Nonmetropolitan counties, medium size 2 ________ 148 1, 281, 000 288, 908 20. 9 .6 992, 100 Nonmetropolitan counties, small 3_ -------------- 2,644 5,851, 500 815, 551 11.0 1.1 5,036,000 Small nonmetropolitan counties which are wholly

eligible, by veteran population size groups: 5,000 and over---------------------------:----- 45 371, 200 47, 256 10.8 1.3 323, 900

2,500 to 5,000--------------------------------- 284 l, 199, 400 142, 721 9.1 1. 5 1,056, 700

ij~~e~01~~::::::::::::::::::::::~::::::::~: 959 1, 930,390 201, 711 6.9 1. 4 1, 728, 600

1,018 750, 900 63, 827 4.4 1.5 687,000

1 Metropolitan counties, as classified by Bureau of Census. 2 Nonmetropolitan counties where 1950 population of largest c!tY was between 25,000 and 50,000. a Nonmetropolitan counties where 1950 population of largest city was less than 25,000.

. As table II shows, they have been niore prone to exercise their rights in metro­politan areas, and the larger ones at that, th.an in open country outside the metro­Politan areas or in the smaller towns. For example, 28.3 percent of those living in the larger cities have used their rights, whereas only 11 percent of those living in the smaller met_ropolitan counties have done so, and less than 10 percent of those living in counties with less than 5,000 population. This clearly indicates that whether or not the veteran has exercised his right depends on the availability of housing under GI terms; because :financ­ing under GI terms has not been so readily available in the smaller towns, the veterans in · those towns have been denied a full opportunity to exercise the privileges which the Congress granted them. To close out the program before they had received fuller opportunity to exercise these rights would not only be a denial of their rights, but would be dis­tinctly unfair treatment as compared with veterans who happened to be living in the larger cities. This would be par­ticularly unfortunate at a time when VHMCP and the direct-loan VA program appear to be offering a remedy, in part, to this inequity.

Moreover, many of the veterans who have obtained home loans still have re­maining substantial portiQns of their entitlement; at least 90 percent of all veterans, particularly, those receiving their home-loan guarantees before Au­gust 1954, have some entitlement left. As a matter of fact, 2 out 3 vets who have used their ·entitlement have from $3,500 to $5,500 left of the $7,500 entitlement available to them. TABLE III.-Percent of entitlement used and

remaining for VA home loans (cumulative through August 1954)

Number of loans: TotaL------------------------------------ 3, 703, 000 Home------------------------------------ 3, 420, 000

Amount of entitlement Per- Entitlement remaining used cent

Up to $2,000--------~-------$2,000 to $4,ooo ____________ _ $4,000 to $6,000_ -----------­$6,000 to $7,500_ ------------

18 $5,500 or more. 48 $5,500 to $3,500. 22 $3,500 to $1,500. 12 $1,500 or less.

Probably most of the loans closed since August 1954, have been for the full en­titlement or nearly so. HOW MANY VETS ARE LIKELY TO USE THEIR GI

BILL IN THE FUTURE?

. No specifics are available on this out­side of the Bradley study :figures. · However, we can make some estimates based on age of the veteran population. The typical home-buying veteran, ac­cording to a survey made last year by the VA, was 3? years old.

As of December 31, 1955, there were 2,218,000 veterans under 29 years of age in .the veteran population; and an addi­tional 5,062 were between 30 and 34 years of age, giving a total in the home-buying age range of over 7 % million veterans.

The VA has prepared additional data which show by age groups the number of veterans who have not exercised their veterans' benefits. See table IV fol­lowing: TABLE rv.-Use of GI home loan guaranty by

vets with World War II service [Numbers in thousands]

Have used Have not entitle· used entitle-ment ment

Age Total

Num- Per· Num- Per-ber cent ber cent

--25 years and under_ 65 7 10. 7 58 89.3 26 to 29 ____ _________ 1,888 408 21. 6 1, 480 78.4 30 to 3L ___________ 4, 765 1, 322 27.8 3, 443 72.2 35 to 39 _____________ 3, 902 l, 187 30. 4 2, 715· 69. 6 40 to 44 _________ _. ___ 2, 066 533 25.8 1, 533 74. 2 45 and over _________ l, 862 325 17. 5 1, 537 82. 5

----------All----------- 14, 548 3, 782 26.0 10, 766 74. 0

Median age 35. 7 35.7 years __ 35.6

On the basis of the figures in table IV, it is evident that there is a very large number of veterans, over 5 million in the home-buying age grouP-under 35-who have not yet used their entitlements and will lose them under terms of the cur­rent law.

This fact is emphasized by the large number of this group under 29 years of age-1,538,000-who are well below the average home-buying age and who, in many cases, have not yet arrived in their personal lives at the sta.te where they are ready to be homeownerf).

TABLE V.-Median age of World War_ II ve.ts who have used their entitlement /or home loans by year of loan origination

Year ofloan origination Total of all ages '

Median age end of

year loan made

Thom and& 1944-45 ____ ___________________ _

1946 ___ ------------ - - ----- - - -- -1947 __________ ________ _. _______ _

1948_ - -- --- -- - ----------- - ---- -1949 ___________ _______________ _

1950 ______ -------- - - - - -- -------1951 ____ - - - - -- --- - - - --- -- - - -- - -1952 __ ------------ - - - - --- - -- - - -1953._ ------- - -- - -------------- -1954_ - -------- -- - ------ __ .,; _ --- -1955_ ------ - ------------------ -

. 20 389 506 329 252 469 439 292 278 332 476

29.3 29.0 29.4 30.0 30.3 30. 5 31.1 31. 4 32.0 32. 7 33.6

OLDER VETS ARE NOW USING THEIR ENTITLEMENT

Moreover, as table V shows, the me­dian shows, the median. age of the vet using his entitlement has steadily risen. In 1946 the typical vet who received his entitlement was 29 years old; each year the age has risen, and by 1955 the typical vet who received a VA guaranteed home loan was 33.6 years of age. This indi­cates the likelihood that a large number of those in the 30-35-Year age group who have not yet made use of their entitle­ment would probably do so if the oppor­tunity were available through extension of the benefits beyond the current cutoff date. Thus, in the earlier days of the program its major value was to the vet­erans just approaching 30, who had already reached the family status where home ownership became desirable. In more recent years, maximum usage has been evident by somewhat older veterans who have taken somewhat longer-per­haps because of educational require­ments-to make their permanent living arrangements.

Assuming that 400,000 veterans exer­cise their rights between now and July 25, 1957, this leaves a total of 4.6 million ~till potentially in the market. ,

Apply further the rule of thumb that 1 out of 4 veterans will exercise their rights-more than 1in4 in the under 35-age grouP-but this group does include some who have already made relatively permanent arrangements. On this ba­sis, · it is assumed that if the benefits are extended for 3 years, that over a million more veterans will take advantage of their GI rights to purchase a home if the program is extended to 1960.

The statistics clearly indicate that in recent years the program has had even more importance for veterans and for the home-building economy than in ear­Il.er years, that it has gradually come to be one of the really significant props for our economy. TABLE VI.-Total private housing starts and

starts under VA as percent of private starts

• , Number of home Total loans closed

Year private VA starts starts ~xist-Total New ing

--Per- Thou- Thou- Thou-

Thousands cent sands sands sands 1951_ ________ 892. 2 14. 6 447. 3 286. 4 122. 8 1952 _________ 939.1 13. 2 306. 4 192. 2 109.4 1953 _________ 932. 8 14. 7 322. 0 202.8 115. 2 1954 _________

1,07.7.3 25.5 410. 7 243.1 164.1 11}55 _________ . 1, 190. 2 30.0 649.4 387. 6 25.5.5

6262 ' CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE April 12

' As the table VI shows, ·year by year since·1951, the program has been of more and more use to veterans. One in every 7 homes started in 1951 was under the VA program; close to 1 in 3 last year was GI. The total number of home loans closed mounted steadily in those years, from 447,373 in 1951 to 649,412 in 1955. At the same time, an increasing proportion of these were for new homes, increasing from 286,432 to 387,647 in 1955. . The 1955 totals of home loans closed, both new and existing were at all-time highs for the program.

These are scarcely the characteristic features of a program on its way to ex­piration. They reftect a program which has been of increasing use to the vet­eran, never more than in the past year, and one which will probably continue to be of value to him unless the stopper is pulled. As a matter of fact, if abruptly ~erminated, the program will terminate at the height of its usefulness to the veterans in our population. . . In the opening months· of 1956, this pace, though down somewhat, has con­tinued, with the volume of starts and home loans closed all continuing at very high levels indeed.

THE ECONOMIC ARGUMENT

Entirely apart from the hardship on the individual veterans who, for valid personal reasons, may have been pre­vented from exercising-prior to June 1957-the housing opportunities open to millior_s of other veterans, the cessation Qf the program on that date will have far reaching economic impact.

The years from 1955 through 1960 are the so-called .soft .years . in the housing market. They are the years when the low birth rates of the 1930's will show up in a lower net family formation, .cer­tainly below the 1950-55 level. The im­pact on housing demand from this nega~ tive factor will, undoubtedly, be a factor. until the war and post-war baby crop i?tarts forming their own families in the i960's at which time a surge in new family formation can be expected.

In the years right after the war, net household-nonfarm-forma ti on rose to 1.5 million; in 1950, it was 1.6 million, but by 1955, it had fallen to about 850,000, and will continue at that level or slightly lower for the rest of the decade.

To remove the added stimulus that can be given by the continuing avail­ability of GI benefits at this time will have a more severe effect on the home building economy than it will have in the years after 1960, and then it might have had · in the earlier years of great housing shortage and consequent high demand.

To eliminate the GI program at this period is to restrict housing aids at the very time when liberal terms are most needed.

The overall housing economy in the last :£ew years has been greatly influ­enced by the · availability of the GI pro­grams. · Housing started under the VA p:rogr'am has, in recent years, been an

increasingly 'larger part of the· total as the table shows:

Year

1950 __ ------------1951 _____________ _

1952_ -------------1953_ - ------------1954_ - ---- --------1955_ -------------

1 Not available.

TABLE VII

New private starts

Thousands 1, 150. 7

892. 2 939.1 932.8

1, 077. 3 1, 190. 2

VA starts

(1) 148. 7 141. 3 156. 6 307.0 392.8

VA as percent of total

(1) 14. 6 13. 2 14. 7 25. 5 30.0

These :figures clearly indicate the up­trend in the relationship of VA starts to total new home building. That relation­ship is more significant now than at any time in the past, and any abrupt shift­such as will be occasioned if the law is allowed to terminate on June 25, 1957-will have a very serious impact on the home building as well as the overall na­tional economy.

At 392,800 units, 1955's new GI housing accounted for over $4 billion of our na-

. tional product, provided over 400,000 man-years of employment on site-at least an equivalent amount of offsite em­ployment.

A careful review of the situation indi­cates that at the very least the conse-

. quences of allowing the law to termi­nate, as scheduled next year, will mean a severe disruption of home building in many areas of the country, as well as an inevitably sharp cutback in total housing production and employment. VA PROGRAM HAS BEEN BENEFICIAL IN HELPING · TO PROVIDE A VOLUME OF MIDDLE INCOME

HOUSING

. Despite a continuing increase in sales price, the typical VA house has still been priced somewhat under the convention­ally :financed home. In 1954, the average veteran paid $11,640 for his home com­pared with a Bureau of Labor Statistics average for all homes of $12,300. Since tpe Bureau of Labor Statistics :figures in­clude the VA, it is obvious that the VA program has held the overall average down, and the average for houses :financed outside the VA and FHA pro­grams would be even higher than $12,300. In 1955, the typical VA house sold at $12,476, compared with $13,700 reported for all houses by the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

Thus, elimination of the program moves in precisely the opposite-direction from the trends of housing legislation in recent years. Its elimination will make even more difficult the task of providing good private housing for lower and middle income families, and will mean a step backward in the achieve~ent of the goal of providing good housing oppor­tunities for all Americans.

Nonveterans, too, have profited as a result of the VA loan guaranty1program. Millions have been provided with an op­portunity to purchase homes that would otherwise not have been available had this program not -been in existence. It has enabled the builders to produce .a home at a price commensurate with the family income. This was accomplished largely because of the builders' ability to purchase large quantities of materials

and ·to develop mass production tech­niques in building. This mass building program has provided :financial stability for the building tradesman, kept him steadily employed at the highest income levels he has ever experienced, therefore enabling him and the other millions of middle-income families to purchase numbers of homes never before possible in the history of the country.

IMPACT OF AN ARBITRARY CUT-OFF DATE

Although it has been known for. some time that the law was scheduled to ter­minate in mid-1957, it is clear .that the full impact of this onrushing date has not been anticipated by individual builders and suppliers in the industry. Few, for example, realize that its effects will be­gin to be felt in the early fall of 1956, since the July-25, 1957, cut-off date ap­plies to the guaranty, not the housing start. Thus, if --the termination date stands, it will be an ab:rupt shock for the. private home building industry, one which will create a substantial amount of dislocation, and eventually of severe eco­nomic difficulties for many builders and suppliers and related industry groups, their millions of employees, and the vet­erans and nonveterans alike, since it comes at a time when homes started un­der the VA program amount to from 25 to 30 percent of the total.

It will also mean an enormous jam-up in most VA offices in the late months of 1956 and early months of 1957, as it becomes known more generally that the GI program is about to expire. It is scarcely necessary to point out the un­favorable consequences such logjam would have on the smoothness of opera­tion not only in the offices, but in the home building economy .

Also, earlier :figures have indicated that wide range of difference in the use of the GI program. This points to the additional fact that those areas in which GI home loans have been an important part of the construction economy will feel the impact of termination even more than other areas where it has not yet played an important part. For example, in some of the areas of rapid growth, such as the west coast and southwestern areas, the GI program has, in recent years, accounted for close to 40 or 50 percent of all new home building. The impact on the economy of these locali­ties will, undoubtedly, be severe.

Cities such as Miami; Los Angeles, San Francisco, Dallas, Houston, and so forth, have all suffered from .the impact of the recent change · in mid-1955 on FHA and VA maturities and downpayments. It is not difficult to understand how much more direct and devastating an effect elimination of the .entire VA program for World War II vets will have in these and similar communities all over the land.

FHA CANNOT TAKE OVER THE VA WORKLOAD

The argument is sometimes made that much of the potential VA volume after the cutoff date will go to FHA. FHA volume of new units in applications is now running about two-thirds of the VA total in appraisal requests for new homes. FHA certainly does not have the staff or office facilities in most areas of the coun­. try to take on overnight a 150-percent increase in their workload. To add such

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 6263 a staggering addition will mean swamp-· ing the offices as well as inevitably· months of confusion in recruiting and training new personnel, even assuming that the FHA is given timely authority to expand its services, receives the neces­sary congressional appropriations, and can hire qualified personnel.

CONTINGENT LIABILITY EXPOSURE OF UNITED STATES TREASURY

It is sometimes argued that the con­tingent liability being assumed by the Federal Government under the GI pro­gram imposes an excessive burden on the Government fiscal status. ·

A 3-year extension, during which time volume will probably taper off-as indi-

, cated by the increasing age of World War II veterans-would .impose little or· no additonal liability on the Federal Government.

Payoffs on GI loans during 1955 amounted to about $2 billion. They are sure to increase in the years ahead, in­asmuch as the mortgage schedule in ef­fect · makes for gradually increasing amounts of the monthly payment to go into mortgage reduction rather than in­terest with each year on the mortgage's life.

On the assumption that the level of new loans made will ease off in the next 3 years-in the event of an extension-to about 300,000 per year, then the level of new contingent liability arising out of these loans will be close to the level of payoffs on earlier mortgages, meaning no increase in total contingent liability.

VETERANS HAVE BEEN GOOD CREDIT RISKS

The VA loan guaranty program has not been a burden on tlie taxpayer.

By and large, veterans have made an astoundingly good record on their GI home loans. By January 31, 1956, the millionth veteran had repaid his GI loan in full; 809,511 of the repaid loans for a total of $4.6 billion, were GI home loans.

In the 10-year life-through December 1955-of the program, VA has had to pay claims on only 24,168 of the 4,353,000 loans made. It has paid out $66.3 mil­lion on these but has recovered to date $47.3 million, leaving a net loss-sub­ject to still further recovery-of $18.6 million. Its loss on these loans has amounted to only 0.06 percent of the to­tal amount of over $32 billion GI loans. Moreover, by the end of 1955, less than ·1 percent-0.97 percent-of all loans out­standing were in default, · a percentage which has declined year by year under the program; and of the 33,346 loans in default, only one-tenth of those were in serious trouble; on most of the rest of the loans in default status, it was aptici­pated that the defaults would be cured before they ran into serious trouble. That less than one-tenth of 1 percent of the outstanding VA loans are in serious default is truly a remarkable tribute to the stability of the GI pro­gram and the typical American veteran.

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY Mr. TUMULTY, Mr. Speaker, I ask

·unanimous consent to address.the Hoilse for 1 minute ..

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

There was no objection. Mr. TUMULTY. Mr. Speaker, the As­

.sociated Press carries the following story: The student newspaper at Princeton Uni­

versity said today that cancellation of a campus talk by Alger Hiss would mean that Princeton "can be browbeaten by outside pressure groups."

Apparently this is an admission that the invitation to Mr. Hiss is an inside job. What the students forget is that Hiss represents an outside pressure group, Soviet Russia. I might say to the pro­fessors at Princeton, "You ought to go back to kindergarten to teach the stu­dents to think a little better."

WASTE OF TAXPAYERS' MONEY Mr. QUIGLEY. 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 Pennsylvania?

There was no objection. Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I noted

with interest that one of my colleagues on the other side of the aisle-a member in good standing of the political party that has for so long now made a big thing of preaching economy in Government­yesterday commended Housing Adminis­trator Cole for having the courage to plan and schedule the forthcoming Wom­en's Congress on Housing.

I, too, want to make note of Mr. Cole's courage in this instance. I think Mr. Cole is a most courageous man. It takes an awful lot of intestinal fortitude to publicly squander the taxpayers money in such a :flagrant manner as Mr. Cole is doing. And speaking of courage, I wish to congratulate my Republican col­league for being so daring as to publicly defend Mr. Cole's waste ·of our tax dol­lars-and to do this even in an election

. year. I deeply regret that my admira­tion for my colleague's courage cannot, however, extend to his sense of fairness or accuracy. In his remarks yesterday the gentleman indicated that I indicated "that what woinen think, particularly with regard to the choice of a home they wish to occupy is 'silly and useless.' '' Nothing could be further from the truth. Anyone who will do me the courtesy of reviewing each and everyone of my pro­nouncements on Mr. Cole's "Housing Contest" will quickly and surely see how completely out of context my colleague ·has quoted me.

My use of the words "silly and useless" were never directed at Mr. Cole's rec~ ognition that the women of America were the best possible experts on the subject of what should be i11 a house. I denounced-and still do-as "silly and ·useless" Mr. Cole's need to gather this information from the ladies and, even ·more important, the wasteful method by which he proposes to do it. I question -the need for Mr. Cole to gather this in­formation; first, because the Govern­ment agency he heads does not build homes-it insures mortgages and super-

vises local authorities in the construction of public housing units; second, because Mr. Cole already has on hand enough information on What People Want When They Buy a House to publish-less than 4 months ago-a whole book on the sub­ject.

However, if Mr. Cole feels compelled to learn all over again what people want when they buy a house, I submit that he should obtain all his information by standard business methods which would cost the taxpayers far less than his "Housing Contest."

Surely my Republican colleague re­members a few years back when Mr. Harlow H. Curtice was head of the Buick division of General Motors and each year the automobile owners of America re­ceived a questionnaire in which they could check off-with or Without com­ment-the features they would like to have incorporated in their next car. Seeing what has sine~ happened to both Buick sales and to Mr. Curtice, I sug­gested to Mr. _Cole that he too might adopt this proven approach of General Motors as a substitute for his silly, use­less, and expensive contest gimmick. This truly_ might be one instance where what is good for General Motors is good for the United States.

JQNQUILS FROM THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to re­vise and extend my remarks.

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

There was no objection. Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr.

Speaker, I rise to express my gratitude and appreciation to the gentleman from the great and beautiful State of Wash­ington [Mr. TOLLEFSON] and to his very thoughtful constituent · for the very beautiful daffodils or jonquils, which they have provided for us in the restau­rants and other rooms of the Capitol. They brought sunshine and cheer to us, and I enjoy them so much. This is only one of the many courteous and kind things my colleague, Mr. TOLLEFSON, has done for the Congress.

TENNESSEE VALLEY AUTHORIT~ Mr. JONES of Alabama. 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 gentle~an from Ala-bama? '

There was no objection. Mr. JONES of Alabama. Mr.

Speaker, the newspapers this morning informed us that President Eisenhower, in signing the upper Colorado River bill, remarked:

This bill represents what I believe in­treating a whole river valley as a unit, as a whole thing.

As one who has long supported this country's oldest and most outstanding example of comprehensive, basinwide resource development-the Tennessee

.,264 CONGRESSIONAL RECOl:lD - HOUSE April 12 .

Valley Authority-I want to express my participate: and ascertain what part the gratification that the President has agencies might play in a research arid devel­finally come to the realization he ex- opment program and in what fields Federal or

State governments might best cooperate; " pressed yesterday. . (2) whether or not there is a posJ>ibility

If the President really believes this- · that an effective research program for coal and I have no reason to doubt it-then might be develol>ed in the same magnitude, this is great news for the TV A and those and on the same general organizational basis, who support it. as those which have been and are now cur-

The principles of comprehensive, uni- rently conducted by the Atomic Energy Com-. d 1 t ft t d mission, the National Advisory Committee

:fied river eve opmen • rs expresse for Aeronautics, the National Science Foun-over 50 years ago by President Theodore dation, and similar groups; Roosevelt, were written into the TVA (3) and investigate fields of research into Act 23 years ago and have been faith- which such a program might delve in order· fully followed ever since. Now that to accomplish the best and most·expeditious President Eisenhower has reaffirmed results for an economic revival of the bi-. these principles and stated his belief in tuminous coal industry. Such fields of re­them I am hopeful . that the TVA can search should cover the general categories look forward to more deserving treat- of coal production .. coal transportatioJ:l, coal

distribution (market studies, and so forth), ment at the hands of the Eisenhower coal utilization in conventional forms, de­administration. :velopment of new and expanded uses of coal,

Those of us who support TV A and also including gasification, chemical production voted for the upper Colorado-and there and a general appraisal of all coal technol­were many of us-are in favor of com- 9gy; . prehensive river-valley development (4) what progress has heretofore been

't · f 'bl W •t made in the production of synthetic liquid wherever I IS eas1 e. e agree WI h fuel in the overall energy p1·ogram and what President Eisenhower that a whole river advances in our present knowledge and skills. valley ought to be treated as a unit. We with respect to the production of synthetic are now ready for him to take the next liquid fuel may be reasonably anticipated

· step and act as responsibly toward the in the future; and Tennessee Valley Authority as he has (5) whether the public interest would be toward the upper Colorado. ser_ved by the construction of a plant for the

conversion of coal ·into a synthetic fuel to

COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CURRENCY

Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Banking and Currency may have until midnight tonight to fil.e a report on the bill :H. R. 9052. _ The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Okla"! homa?

There was no objection.

SPECIAL ORDER VACATED Mr. BAILEY. Mr. Speaker, due to the

lateness of the hour, I ask unanimous consent that the special order granted to me today be vacated and that the same privilege be extended to me at the conclusion of the legislative business on Tuesday next.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection? There was no objection.

RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAM FOR THE COAL INDUS­TRY OF THE UNITED STATES Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker

by direction of the Committee on Rules' I call up· the resolution CH. Res. 400) and ask for its immediate consideration.

The Clerk read the resolution, as fol-fu~: '

Besolved, That the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, acting as a whole or by subcommittee, is authorized and directed to conduct a full and complete study on the possibilities of a research and development program for the coal industry of the United States. In particular, the committee or sub­committee shall seek to determine-

( 1) whether or not there is a possibility o! developing under existing law, a coopera­tive research venture in which the Federal Government, interested and affected state governmentf!, as well as industry, labor or­gani_zations ~n~ private cor_porations might

permit more rapid development of tech­niques for the production of synthetic liquid fuels; since it is inevitable that the exhaus­tion or conservation of other fuels will re­quire synthesis fuels to assume major im­portance in supplying the energy require­ments of the Nation in time of war and peace.

Economic projections of future industrial requirements are in general accord that, so far as the energy supply is concerned, greater dependency must be placed on c.oal which has the largest reserve of any of our known fuel sources. - Paradoxically, the Federal Government is appropriating billions 9f dol­lars tor research and development projects in the field of new energy sources, but little or no consideration is given to 11 study of the possibilities for wider u.tilization of coal.

The committee shall report to the House (or to the Clerk of the House if the House is not in sessfon) as soon as practicable during the present Congress the results of its study, together with such recommendations as it deems advisable.

For the purpose of carrying out this resolu­tion the committee or subcommittee is au­thorized to sit and act during the present Congress at such times and places within the United States, its Territories, and possession~_, whether the House is in session, has recessed, or has adjourned and to hold such hearings as it deems n,ecessary.

The SPEAKER. The Clerk will re­port the ·committee amendments.

The Clerk read as follows: Committee amendment: Page 1, line 3,

strike out "and dfrected".

The committee amendment was agreed to.

The Clerk read as follows: Committee amendment: Page 3, .line 10,

strike out all of line 10, down to and in-cluding line 18, '

The committee amendment was agreed to.

Mr: FENTON. Mr. Speaker, I offer an amendment. ·

The S_PEAKER. Does the gentleman from Virginia yield?

Mr. · SMITH of Virginia. I do not yiel_d, Mr. · Speaker.

~ Mr. FENTON. Will the gentleman yield for a .question?

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield for my friend to make a state­ment. I have no knowledge of his pro­posed .amendment. It has never been submitted to me. I do not know what it is all about . .

Mr. FENTON. I am sorry. It is just a clarifying amendment to strike out one word "bituminous."

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. If the gentle­man will let me have it for a few minutes. as soon as I get through with my re­marks, I will be glad to look it over.

Mr. FENTON. It just strikes out the word "bituminous."

Mr. SMITH .of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield for the gentleman's amendment.

The SPEAKER. The Chair would think it would be wiser for the gentleman from Virginia to offer the amendment; otherwise he might lose the floor.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. I thank the Chair for calling my attention to the parliamentary situation. I would not want to lose the floor. · _ Mr. Speaker, at the request of the gentleman from Pennsylvania, I offer an amendment.

The Clerk read as -follows: Amendment offered by Mr. SMITH of Vir­

ginia: On page 2, line 13, after the word "the" strike out the word "bituminous".

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman fram Pennsylvania.

Mr. FENTON. Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the word bituminous, was inserted through error. The preamble of the resolution calls for a study of the coal industry, and nowhere throughout the whole resolution except at that one point does the word "bituminous'-' appear. I spoke to the author of the resolution. He has agreed to the amendment.

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

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. For what purpose does the gentleman want time?

Mr. FULTON. I just want to place myself on record as being in favor of the resolution and hoping that it passes.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speak­er, this is a resohltion providing for an investigation of the coal industry with respect to · research that might be con­.ducted that would lead to further uses of that valuable national resource. It has been felt for some time by the coal industry that comprehensive re­search might well develop many uses for coal that are not now known that would be of great assistance to the industry. The matter was very ably presented to the Rules Committee and it was the unanimous opinion of that committee that the resolution was desirable and the committee recommended it.

The amendment to strike out the word ".bituminous',' is simply in order to make it plain that this resolution is to foster researc_h in all types of coal, bituminous as well as anthracite. That was the pur~ pose of the· author of the resolution, and that is the sole purpose of the amend­ment.

Mr. Speakel"., ·I ask. for a vote on the amendment. · - ·

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 6265 The SPEAKER. The questfon is on

the amendment o:ff ered by the gentleman from Virginia.

The amendment was agreed to. Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speak·

er, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. VAN ZANDT] asked me to yield him a minute so he could get away. I do not see him on the floor. . Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. VAN ZANDT] has requested that I insert his remarks in the RECORD.

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

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. For . what purpose?

Mr. BAILEY. I wish to comment on the bill.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. I will yield to the gentleman in due course. ·

Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Vir­ginia [Mr. JENNINGS].

Mr. JENNINGS. Mr. Speaker, I am in full agreement with the purposes of House Resolution 400, which would au­thorize a study leading to the establish­ment of a research and development pro­gram for the coal industry. I wish to commend my colleague [Mr. SAYLOR] for introducing this resolution, and the House Rules Committee for reporting it to the floor for action. This is a worthy undertaking, one that will mean much to the coal-producing areas of the Na­tion. It has my full support ..

We are all aware that the coal industry is vital to the welfare of our Nation. However, in recent months this impor­tant, basic industry has suffered--a de­clining market and unemployment has resulted. This resolution will aid the industry, which has made considerable recovery in recent weeks, to continue these strides. It will he~p to assure that the industry remains strong and able to provide the huge quantities of coal needed in our Nation's economic life.

My own State. of Virginia is a large producer of bituminous coal, and this production is concentrated in my con­gressional district. The economy in certain of my southwest Virginia coun­ties is based on coal, which has played a steadily important role in the economy since the first trainload was hauled from the area 70 years ago. Coal is Virginia's most valuable mineral asset, accounting for considerably more sales than all other minerals lumped together.

I strongly contend that the future of the Nation's and Virginia's coal would be strengthened by the adgption of this resolution. It will authorize a study leading to the establishment of a coop­erative research and development pro­gram. The need for such research in the general categories of production, transportation, distribution - market studies-coal utilization in conventional forms, development of new and expanded uses of coal, including gasification, and a general appraisal of all coal tech­nology, is generally recognized. This res­olution is the first step in getting such a broad program of research started.

The distant outlook for coal cannot be forecast with any degree of accuracy. However, I believe that without a doubt

Cll--394

the Nation c·an expect an enormous in• crease in the consumption of its energy resources during the next 20 years. It seems to me that coal will continue to play an impartant, major role as a source of this energy,

I urge adoption of this resolution as a means of getting under way the neces­sary research and development of our coal industry, so that we will be ready as the need continues to grow. Tech­nological advances, I am sure, can oper­ate in many ways to brighten coal's future. The program envisioned in this resolution will hasten these technological advances. WEST VIRGINIA NEEDS A FEDERAL COAL RESEARCH

PROGRAM

Mr. MOLLOHAN. Mr. Speaker, the resolution before us today I believe to be one of the most important proposals to come before us in this session. Our in­dustrial civilization is in constant search of new sources of energy and additional supplies of raw materials. These are the very life blood of the technology which supports our Nation.

In recent years, we have been greatly preoccupied with the development of atomic energy, This new source of power has fired the imagination of all of us. We have spent and are spending untold bil­lions to harness the energy of the atom. It is money well spent, but in our enthu­siasm, I believe, we have lost perspective and failed to realize the enormous possi­bilities of chemieal fuels-particularly coal. Our fabulous coal resources, if ex­ploited fully and intelligently, can pro­vide an abundance of low-cost power and thousands of products as yet undreamed of.

The promise of atomic energy is an ex­citing one. However, there are many difficult problems in its exploitation, some of which are unlikely to yield to early solution. For example, the massive shielding now needed for protection from radioactivity rules out the application of atomic power in small powerplants such as are needed for automobiles, trucks, farm tractors, and so forth. No promise of solution is in sight.

An even more serious problem exists in the disposal of atomic wastes. Pres­ently, they are being dropped in deep ex­cavations, then embedded in concrete and the site then fenced off as a danger­ous radioactive area. It has been sug­gested that these wastes be placed in rockets and shot off into space.

It is generally conceded that even with the solution of many of these problems, atomic power will still be more expensive than power generated by chemical fuels in areas where chemical fuels are abun­dant. In our country, fabulous reserves of coal are distributed through 23 of the 48 States. ·These reserves are estimated, at the present rate of extraction, to be sufficient to serve the needs of several generations.

As a fuel, coal has been most effectively .used in the generation of electric power. A ton of coal today produces three times as much electric power as it did a gener­ation ago-the result of painstaking and intelligent research.

However, energy is but one of a mul­titude of products available from coal.

It is perhaps the most versatile raw ma.~ terial on earth. The aspirin tablet you take for a headache, the rayon cord in the tires on your automobile, the dye which colors the clothes you wear, and hundreds of other products you use, are coal derivatives. The door of this treas­ure house has barely been cracked. It can be opened wide through research.

Some aspects of coal development and research cannot be delayed. Each year our demands for petroleum products climb-and over the years our depend­ence on foreign sources has .steadily in­creased. At the present time we pro­cure about 10 percent of our petroleum from foreign nations. The bitter ex­periences of World War II with shocking tanker losses by enemy submarines demonstrated the folly of dependence on petroleum suppljes from abroad which must be shipped by sea. ·

There is no need for this heavy lean­ing on petroleum supplies from overseas. Research already completed demon­strates the feasibility of converting coal into petroleum products.

Some processes using coal already ap­proach costs which are competitive with fuels refined from crude oil. Additional research can bring this price down even further. In view of steadily rising costs of petroleum exploration, it is not in­conceivable that eventually coal can pro­vide liquid fuels at lower prices than crude oil.

The general welfare and our national security will benefit immeasurably from a coal research program to extend its uses and reduce production costs.

The research program must also have a conservation objective. While our coal reserves are enormous, they are not in­exhaustible. Research is needed to con­stantly increase the rate of recovery in mining operations and to devise eco­nomic methods for extracting coal from deep and narrow seams. Research must be applied more intensively to achieve maximum use of the energy in coal.

H. Res. 400 calls for coal research on a scale comparable to that now being applied to fissionable materials and atomic energy, I believe that this pro­posed program will be immensely re­warding and will achieve results at a far more rapid rate than current research programs on atomic energy, The de­mands of our technological economy and civilization on our natural resources are growing at a fantastic rate. Let us now undertake a research program in coal, our most valuable resource, and prepare not only for current demands, but for the needs of generations to come.

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon [Mr. ELLSWORTH].

Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the gentle­man from Pennsylvania [Mr. VAN ZANDT] may insert his remarks at this point in the RECORD.

The SPEAKER. Is tbere objection to the request of the gentleman from Oregon?

There was no objection. Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, I

want to commend my colleague, the gen­tleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SAYLOR]

6266 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

for his initiative in bringing to the :fioor House Resolution 400, which, if approved, will authorize a complete study by the House Committee on Interior and In­sular Affairs on the possibilities of a re­search and development program for the coal industry of the United States.

As the gentleman from Pennsylvania knows, the Nation's supply of bituminous coal is adequate to meet the needs of our people for hundreds of years to come, but the question is, How can it be used to the best advantage from an economic, indus­trial, and social standpoint?

Already much research is under way in the coal industry, and it is my opinion that House Resolution 400 and the study it authorizes will not only open up new fields _f research and development but will also coordinate the present program and the results obtained to date.

Like the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SAYLOR], I represent a district lo­cated in the heart of the bituminous coalfields of Pennsylvania, where coal is a basic industry.

Suffering from unemployment over a period of years because of the inroads made by substitute fuels, we welcome this effort to further explore the poten­tial usages of the great deposits of coal that are part of the great resources of this Nation.

In studying House Resolution 400, I find that it is primarily for research and development, and while my suggestion may be foreign to the intent of this reso­lution, I hope that the study will reveal, among other things, the glaring inequi­ties that exist in regard to freight rates and other preferential treatment en­joyed by competitive fuels which have destroyed numerous markets of the coal industry in this country.

If the coal industry of this country is treated fairly by the Federal Govern­ment, anrl if new usages are found for coal, there is no doubt in my mind that the coal industry again will take its ~ightful place as a basic industry of the trnited States, and a pillar, both in the field of national defense and in the econ­omy of our Nation.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Maryland [Mr. HYDE].

Mr. HYDE. Mr. Speaker, I heartily approve of the objectives expressed in Representative SAYLOR's resolution, House Resolution 400. I regret that it was cleared for House action with the words "and directed" stricken from the measure. The aims of a coal research and development program are so impor­tant to our economy that we should per­mit no opportunity for delay in begin­ning the study. The future for the coal industry has brightened since the low ebb of 1954 and its present improved po­sition is due to the favorable climate provided by the present administration. I would like to draw the House's atten­tion to the problem faced by the coal producers through the loss of markets in the dieselization of the railroads and the shift to gas and oil for household purposes-a loss which amounted to about 35 percent of the market. It is gratifying to report that much of this loss is being set aside · by increased de-

mand of the steel and utility industries. The most important gain, though, has been made in the export market which has increased threefold since 1954. In fact, exports this year are likely to total some 50 million tbns.

The future of coal is so important to our economy that I feel the House should authorize the study provided for in Rep­resentative SAYLOR's measure. Yet, I am bound to say, I do not believe the Con­gress should be content with &n Interior and Insular Affairs Committee study, as valuable as it may be. The Congress should authorize a broader search for new uses for coal and its byproducts and for new markets. I am of the opinion this can best be done by the Secretary of the Interior and have introduced a joint resolution directing such . a study be made. · The joint resolution would also authorize the funds necessary to pursuit of the research program. I have in­cluded in my joint resolution a provision for a study of methods of preventing the deterioration of the physical plants of idle coal mines-plants idled for the lack of markets. It is important to maintain our coal-producing facilities as a ready reserve in the event of a national emer­gency.

Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. Ei>eaker, I yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SAYLOR].

Mr. SAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, I want to take this opportunity to thank the dis­tinguished gentleman from Virginia [Mr. SMITH] Chairman of the Rules Commit­tee, for granting a rule on this resolution and bringing it before the House at this time. I personally know that this action is appreciated by all the Members from coal-producing areas. I would also like to take this oppor-tunity to thank the dis­tinguished Majority Leader [Mr. McCOR­MACK] for having this resolution called up at this time so that the House Interior and Insula;r Affairs Committee can begin to work on this great problem. ·

Regardless of the section of the coun­try which an individual Member may represent, it is unlikely that he will find any objectionable provisions in House Resolution 400. True, the objectives of this resolution are applicable to an in­dustry that is currently producing in only 26 of our States; yet every area and every community of this Nation will be­come progressively more dependent upon the productive capacity of this industry as the years go by.

If my colleagues from States far re­moved from the Nation's coal districts are inclined to question this assertion, let me make it clear that I am not neces­sarily implying that at some time in the future you will be getting coal shipped right into your home areas. It is of course understood that every person in the Nation uses coal in some form or another-whether it is in clothing that comes from coal chemicals, or in plastics, medicines, and the thousand and one. other items whose origin is in bituminous coal. Even if somehow we were able to distinguish between whether these prod­ucts came from a coal or a petroleum base, there is no escaping the fact that the steel and steel products in your home, automobile, and other everyday facilities

were produced through the use o.f bitu­minous coal. Without coal, there would be no steel. The steel industry consumes a ton of bituminous coal for every ton of steel that comes from its mills.

When I say that the coal industry will become a progressively more important part of your life in the years to come, I refer to other considerations which Con­gress cannot overlook and which Con­gress should not delay in resolving. We are all aware of the fact that the coun­try's reserves of oil and natural gas make up only a very small proportion of the total energy resources in nature's store­house. Together, they account for somewhat less than 2 percent of the reserves of traditional fuels. Solid fuel reserves, on the other hand, are so abun­dant that the 1 % trillion tons of mine­able coal remaining amounts to perhaps 90 percent of the overall total. Oil shale accounts for most of the remainder.

Our great petroleum and natural gas industries are doing a remarkable job in uncovering new reserve pockets of these valuable fuels. The fact remains, how­ever, that the United States and the world are consuming more and more petroleum and natural gas, and fuel ex­perts do not hesitate to remind the gen­eral public that stocks are being depleted at an enormous rate. The need for supplementing domestic oil and gas sup­plies is always spotlighted as the reason for importing great quantities of these products. The quantity of imports and the types of fuels that are admitted into ~his country are a constant source of controversy right here among us, so that issue is one with which we are all famil­iar.

What happens as. our supplies of petro­leum and natural gas begin to fall below demand? The answer has been provided by engineers within the Government, the petroleum and natural-gas industries and the coal industry. We will get ou~ liquid and gaseous fuels from oil shale and coal by synthesis. I believe that the following two paragraphs from the re­port of the President's Materials Policy Commission of 1952 explain very em-· phatically what I mean when I say that the constituency of every one of our 435 Members will be dependent to a greater extent upon coal at some time not too far away. Let me quote these para-graphs: ·

At some point beyond 1975, however, more serious problems are likely to arise when natural gas supplies will eventually have shrunk to the point that the general uses in gas-producing areas and special uses in all areas are forced to shift to substitute fuels. Costly dislocations may result in the economy of the Southwest, heavy capital costs of con­version will be forced upon nearby and dis­tant customers, and the extensive transpor­tation, distribution, and utilization systems may be rendered useless.

The impact could be reduced if it becomes economic to manufacture gas for at least some of these gas customers, presumably from coal, which could then be distributed through portions of existing transmission and distribution lines, though large segments of such lines would probably be no longer used.

The same analysis may eventually be applied in the case of oil and oil products. Even before it is necessary to begin ship-

1956 CONGRESSION/\L RECORD-~HOUSE 6267J ping synthetic fuel substitutes into areas in which oil and natural gas are native resources, gas and oil by synthesis will­have to supplement supplies -in other parts of the country; otherwise, you would find shortages right in your own backyards, and I am sure that conserva­tion 'laws within the individual producing· States are going to prevent the exporta­tion of materials needed in your home communities.

In addition to this economic implica..­tion, coal must be -ready at all times-­as long as ruthless international aggres­sors are on the prowl_;_to take over a greater part of the energy load at a mo­ment's notice. If an emergency devel­ops, the military machine will make such tremendous demands upon the petroleum industry, in particular, that great quanti­ties of coal will have to be diverted as replacement fuel; in addition, coal's own markets will call for vastly increased sup­plies. Coal, then, is of vital importance to the national economy and the national security. ,

Foi:' the further elucidation of the Members of the House, I should like to offer a quotation from the White House Report on Energy Supply and Resources Policy. This report was issued in Feb­ruray 1955, after an exhaustive survey which included meetings and discussions with representatives of all the fuel in.; dustries as well as disinterested econo­mists· representing government and other segments of our economy:

7. Research and development .Program for coal: We recognize that coal is a great na­tional asset and endorse a cooperative study to determine what research and development could be undertaken. The coal industry and both Federal and State Governments should participate in this study and its. cost.

Mr. Speaker, the necessity for keeping the coal industry in a vigorous condi-. tion and for assuring that it. will reach points, where and when needed, is now. an accepted economic principle. House Resolution 400, which I introduced and is now being considered, covers not only the production, transportation, and dis­tribution phases, but also includes util­ization and other ramifications affecting the industry, its labor forces, and-in . effect-the public welfare.

House Resolution 400 proposes only that a study of the possibilities for a research and development program for the United States coal industry be au­thorized and directed. After the Com­mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs has had an opportunity to carry out such a study, the House will of course be presented with whatever recom­mendations may evolve and will thus be able to decide upon the feasibility of these proposals. No commitment of any kind is contained or implied in House Resolution 400, other than the ·actual study described therein.

I trust, therefore, that this resolution will receive the unanimous approval of the House· of Representatives at tllis time. -

·Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I

yield such time as he may desire to the gentleman from Indiana CMr. BRAY].

Mr. BRAY. Mr. Speaker, I am very Seven of the eleven counties iD. my happy to support the Saylor resolution. district have great coal resources-. This This resolution calls for a study of the entire area has the capabilities of enor­coal industry. The study would deal mous industrial development and has. with the production, transportation, and as I previously stated, an almost unlim-· distribution of coal, as well as its ited supply of coal-coal especially valu­utilization. . able for the production of power. We

The information gained by this study already have great power production in would not be the sensational type that that area and it can be increased to an occasionally comes out of Congress, but almost unlimited extent at a reasonable it would be a report which would be of price. This area also has ample water great value, not only to the coal miners supply, excellent transportation facm..;· and coal companies but to our entfre ties, both by rail and road, and greatest national economy. All too little atten- of all there is a surplus of labor of proven tion has been paid to the coal industry, stability and efiiciency. by our Government. This is not in- I believe that America has before it a · tended as criticism of our present ad- period of great industrial expansion, and ministration any more than of the past I believe that a substantial part of that administration. For many years the coal industrial expansion is going to center in industry has been a neglected stepchild the areas where there is ready access to of each administration. No protection coal, for coal means power; and Amer­was given to the coal industry from the ica's future economy is a power economy. importation of residual fuel oil from Those areas which have been forgotten South America. Billions of dollars have in our economic development are going been spent to subsidize hydroelectric to become of increasing importance. powerplants which have at times been The adoption of this resolution is a step constructed in · the midst of coalfields. in the proper direction. In spite of all this, coal is essential to Mr. ~SWORTI!. Mr. Speaker, I the economic and industrial life of yield such time as he may desire to the America in an increasing degree. Today gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. BAKER]. production of coal is steadily increasing. Mr. BAKER. Mr. Speaker, I strongly Practically all of the hydroelectric power urge the passage of this resolution and in the Midwest has already been de- feel that this investigation will be most veloped. The needs and demands for helpful to the coal industry. power by industry is increasing at a rapid Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. Speaker, I rate and in the foreseeable future this yield such time as he may desire to the power can only be obtained from coal. gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. FEN-The entire chemical industry is becoming TON]. . more and more dependent upon coal and Mr. FENTON. Mr. Speaker, I appre· research in the use of coal may well dis- ciate very much the courtesy of the cover many new uses. The gas and oil chairman of the Rules Committee in reserves of the United States are being permitting me to offer my amendment depleted at a rapid rate and at the pres- to House Resolution 400 in addition to ent time constitute less than 2 percent the amendments offered by the Rules of our total fuel reserves. On the other Committee. ha:t;ld, 92 percent of our fuel reserve con- As· stated before, it was an apparent sists of coal. Only approximately 3 per- oversight to use the word "bituminous" cent of our entire coal supply has as yet on page 2, line 13, since it was the only been mined and there is in the United place in the whole resolution in which States at this time more than a thousand it appeared. billion tons of minable coal. There is I am sure that the House Committee another possible development which our on Interior and Insular Affairs will do country is in no way preparing to meet. a fine job in their investigation and stud­If for some reason the oil from South ies on the possibilities of a research America and the Near East should be and development program for the coal denied us, the rationing of oil and gas industry of the United States which, of becomes immediately necessary, and our course, means bituminous, anthracite. coal reserves take on even greater sig- lignite, and all types of coal. nificance. The coal industry should be The anthracite coal industry has in­maintained in a manner which would deed been in very dire straits for a great permit it to expand quickly in an many years. emergency, not only for heat and power Our unemployment has been such that but as the best product to be used in the anthracite area of Pennsylvania has the manufacture of synthetic gasoline. been designated as a distressed labor

While there is abundant coal in our area for quite a number of years. country, mines have deteriorated and for With our. vast ·coal r~se:ve.s throu~h-· years we have not been training young out the Umted States it is imperative, men to be coal miners. This entire in my opinion, that a study be made situation should be brought to the at- su~h as contemplated in House Reso­tention of all concerned as soon as pas- lution 400. sible I want to congratulate our colleague

· . . . . the gentleman from Pennsylvania The mvestI?at1on called for m the [Mr. SAYLOR] for introduCing the reso-

_Saylor resolution should place before all lution and concur wholeheartedly with America the present and future use of him. · · coal. There are in southwestern In- Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, diana, especially in the Seventh District I yield 5 minutes to the gentleman from which I represent, great economic possi- Kentucky [Mr. PERKINS]. · -

bilities. This area su:fiered economically Mr. PERKINS. · Mr. Speaker, I rise when coal production decreased. in support of the . resolution.

)

6268 CONGRESSIONAL .RECORD-.HQUSE , · .. •. '• I

Apri.l 12

Our,~· industrial development ha~ reached a stage at which almost all fu­ture improvements· will depend on de­tailed and complete research programs. tn the past we have taken our good fortunes, in the form of almost unlim­ited natural resources, for.granted, mak­ing little effort to develop sound indus­trial research programs. These grer-t natural resources have enabled us to attain an outstanding position in world economy, even though a minimum of research was carried on by governmental agencies.

That policy, or rather lack of any re­search policy, was changed during war­time and a number of major research projects were initiated. The atomic age was initiated by the expenditure ·of bil­lions of dollars in public funds for the most daring and courageous research program in the history of the world. · We continue to pour hundreds and mil­lions of dollars annually into research on industrial use of atomic energy, but we have dismally failed to continue our other industrial research programs. We have all but given away such outstand­ing projects as our synthetic-rubber-re­search plants, our coal-to-oil research programs, and other major projects which were established ill the time of need. The Louisiana, Missouri, coal-to­oil research plant was able to produce gasoline with a cost of only 2 cents above the standard commercial production cost of gasoline, yet this plant was all but given away and has been dismantled. There is every reason to believe that had the research project been continued, the process developed would have been able to successfully compete with current prices and remain a ready substitute for gasoline as our oil reserves become de­pleted. This new use of coal would have been a real boon to the coal indn.stry and at the same time the increase of reserves for future production of gaso­line, which is essential at all times. Such projects should not be limited to our war effort, and research into industrial uses of a major source of power such as coal is fully justified in both peace and war.

House Resolution 400, introduced by the Honorable JOHN P. SAYLOR, proposes an industrial research program designed to study the byproducts of coal and de­velop new uses such as the production of oil and gasoline from this fuel which bas proven to be the best source of power our country has. Our fossil fuels, which have served as the major source of power for our great industrial · development, may be utilized to a much greater extent than they have in the past. It is time to apply at least a portion of our na..: tional income to research programs for a more complete utilization of coal and its products. Our coal resources, while best developed in the eastern mountains, are available in ·almost unlimited quan-tities in every geographical region of the country. We should not stand by in the fond hope that our atomic research will make this new source of power avail­able for all industrial needs but, rather, look at it as a source of energy for future generations a11d plan for more-intensive. and intelligent use of established re-s9urces suqh as .coal.. · -

Our known recoverable coal reserves are sufficient to maintain the current rate of production for several hundred years. On the other hand, known reserves o~ oil and natural gas, chief energy fuels that can be used as a substitute for <?Oal, are sufficient tO maintain the current rate of production for only 25 years. Considerable study has been made o:r;i the production of oil from coal and oil shale. In fact, this Cop_gress authorized the expenditure of $89,600,000 on such a reserve program from 1944 to 1955, in­clusiv·e. This wor~ was discontinued during the past 2 years, even though the progress was such that many of the scientists working on the program felt that it should have been considered suc­cessful, and, at the worst, was on the threshold of a successful completion.

Almost two-thirds of our electric power is produced from coal and less than one­third by hydroelectric installations. Oil and gas play a minor role in the produc­tion of electric power. During the 35 years from 1920 to 1954, hydroelectric power production increased fivefold while steam-generated electricity increased twelvefold. This ratio has undoubtedly continued the trend toward dependency on steam-generated electricity during the last 2 years which have seen the greatest increase in .the production· of steam­generated electricity of any 2-year. pe­riod in our history with no major new installations for hydroelectric production being either completed or under con­struction.

In the face of this future shortage of oil and gas fuels and the current policy limiting the development of hydroelec­tric power, it is a must that we give more attention to coal and its uses.

,Mr. SMIT'H of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr. BAILEY]. . Mr. BAILEY. Mr. Speaker, coming from the Nation's largest coal-producing State, the . State of West Virginia, and realizing the bad situation surrounding the coal industry at the present time, I want to be recorded as being in hearty accord with the intent and objective of this resolution. Knowing, too, that the anthracite coal industry is in difficulties, I can also go along with the amendment that was added to the resolution making it broad enough so that it will cover all of the different categories of coal.

I want to express my appreciation to the -gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. SAYLOR] for his efforts, also-to the gen­tleman from California who spopsored the resolution, to the Rules Committee for making it possible for it to be con­sidered on the floor today and to the leadership for permitting it to be brought up at this time. .

Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama [Mr. ELLIOTT].

Mr. ELLIOTT. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the pending resolution to au­thorize a study leading to the establish­ment of a research arid development pro­gram for the coal industry. ,

Mr. Speaker, . in each _ Congress since the 8lst I have introduced a resolution calling for a broad study .of the coar in~ dustry. The resolution .befQre us is not

as all inclusive as mine was, but it, never­theless, is a good, big step in the right di­rection, and it is entitled to the support of the entire membership of.the House.

The resolution gives the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs the neces­sary authority to "conduct a full and complete study on the possibilities of a research and development program for the coal industry of the United States."

For a long time now, the distress, the unemployment, the hunger,- and the misery in America's coalfields have called for ari investigation. " Not only that, the conditions that exist in America's coal­fields -call for such remedial and helpful legislation as the Congress may consider and pass.

I have been disappointed that the Con­gress has failed to consider and pass remedial legislation. The Members here present know that I have urged it to do so. It woufd be in keeping with the his­tory and practice. of American Govern­ment that our Government show the dis­tressed coalfields some special considera­tion. You ask what can be done? Here is what the Federal could do. It could favor the distressed areas with building programs, such as improvements o{ the rivers of the areas involved.. Housing programs could be geared to favor such areas. The unsuitable, and oftentimes unfit, school buildings of the distressed areas could be rebunt. Needed hlghways could be built. There are many ap­proaches to the problem. The Govern­ment could, as an official policy, encour­age industries to locate their expanded plants in such areas.

Mr. Speaker, our Government is pur­suing a feeble policy with respect to re­building the economy of our coalfields. We are wonderfully blessed with coat. We have enough to do' a thousand years. It is a potential source of liquid fuels for the future. The resolution before us should be passed. Then, we should go on to do much more to relieve the un­employment of the coalfields. Mr~ SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker,

I yield 1 minute to the gentleman from South Carolina [Mr. DORN].

Mr. DORN of South Carolina. Mr. · Speaker, I would just like .to say that there is not a lump of coal mined in South Carolina, but we are very much in favor of this .resolution in the national interest of this country.

Mt. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, if there are no further requests for time I move the previous question. · '

The previous question was ordered. The resolution was agreed to, and a

motion to ·reconsider was laid on the table.

COMMITTEE ON RULES Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker,

I ask unanimous consent that the Com­mittee on Rules may have unfil midnight Friday to file reports." - · ·

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the req~es~ of the g~~tleman from Virginia? .

There was no objection. _

• l

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- . HOUSE 6269 FURTHER PROGRAM FOR NEXT

WEEK . Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I

ask nnanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute.

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

There was no objection. Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, in

announcing the program a little earlier, I overlooked mentioning the fact that Tuesday is primary day in New Jersey~ and if there are any rollcalls on that day, they. wm· go over until Wednesday. I have conferred on this matter with the distinguished gentleman from Massa­chusetts [Mr: MARTIN]. ' ·While I doubt there will be any rollcalls on Monday, if there are, we have agreed that they go over until Wednesday, also.

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I

ask unanimous consent, on behalf of the gentleman from New York [Mr. CELLER], that the Committee on the Ju­diciary may sit all of next week during general debate.

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

There y;as no objection.

SPECIAL ORDER TRANSFERRED· Mr. QUIGLEY. Mr. Speaker, I ·ask

unanimous consent that my special or:. der for today be vacated and be resched­uled for Monday.

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

There was no objection.

PETITIONS TO FORCE CONSIDERA­TION OF H. ·R. 11 TO HELP HOME.:. TOWN MERCHANTS AND OTHER SMALL AND INDEP~DENT BUSI­NESSES -The SPEAKER. Under previous order

of the House; the gentleman from Texas £Mr. PATMAN] is recognized for 30 min­utes.

Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Speaker, the gen­tleman from New York has made much of the point that the discharge petition was filed for the consideration of H. R. 11 after a date for hearings had been announced. Incidentally, a Member .told me today he had just signed and his number was 173. We lack 45 more names to make the needed 218.

The fact is, there is no necessary re­lationship between the discharge peti­tion and his announcement to hold hear­ings on the bill. I am sure it was an­nounced by me that a discharge petition would be filed before the gentleman from New York [Mr. CELLER] called hearings on this bill for the latter part of April, too late to be effective this session.

The gentleman's main point is that the discharge petition is unnecessary.

I suggest that the discharge petition will still be necessary after the commit-

tee of which he is chairman, has held hearings. -

Necessary for what? The gentleman from New York has not indicated for what purpose the discharge petition is unnecessary. If our purpose is merely to let small-business people come in and re­peat what they have already said many many times to the Judiciary Committee and to a number of other committees of Congress on this issue, then I would agree that the discharge petition-is un­necessary. But this is an extremely grave matter to small business people. They will not be content just to come in to speak their piece. Small business .wants the bill passed. Many of us here in the House want the bill passed; and I suggest that if it is passed the discharge petition, with 218 names on it, will be necessary.

NO NEW ISSUES INVOLVED

If this were a new issue, or if the Ian.:. guage of the bill were new, that would be a horse of another color. The fact is that the precise issue presented by H. R. 11 has been the subject of almost con­tinuous hearings, study, and debate in the Congress over the past 8 years. . Be­fore that the precise issue was the sub­ject of hearings and debate in 193.5 and 1936, when we finally passed the Robin­son-Patman Act. And before that the precise issue was the subject of hea~ings and debate in 1914 when the original Clayton Act was passed. Before that, the Supreme Court thrashed the issue over in several famous antitrust cases during the first decade of this century. I date say that there is no other single business problem which has been so much debated and so fully understood.

NEW HEARINGS UNNECESSARY

Beginning with hearings and debates of 1935 and 1936, the gentleman from New York has had his fingers continu­ously on this problem; he has in fact played a big role in all of these debates. During the past 8 years, the Committee on the Judiciary has, on several occa­sions, held hearings on the precise issue presented by H. R. 11. As late as May of last year, the Antimonopoly Sub­committee of the Committee on the Judiciary, which subcommittee is chaired by the distinguished gentleman from New York, heard the arguments and pleas of all of the small business organizations on the precise issue pre­sented by H. R. 11, and H. R. 11 itself. The subcommittee also heard the prin­cipal spokesmen in opposition to H. R. 11. Surely the distinguished chair­man of the Judiciary Committee knows the temper of his committee on this issue. He is as intimately acquainted with the 42-year history of this legisla­tion as any man alive. I should think that by now that he even· knows the temper of his own mind and knows how he stands on the issue.

PRICE DISCRIMINATION MUST BE PREVENTED

What is the issue? It is quite simple. It is the practice of price discrimination. This is a practice by which big business abuses its power-its sheer size-to take unfair advantage and. to destroy small business. Big suppliers destroy small

suppliers. Big buyers get· nnearned ad­vantages in the ~rices they pay, and these advantages add to their ability to squeeze out smaller buyers. Since all busine~s firms are both buyers and sellers, unchecked discriminations in price give big business a double unfair advantage over small business. Small businesses are destroyed without respect to their efficiency-as several hnndred small business firms now are being de­~troyed in each week of the month that rolls by.

COMPARE WITH CHAIRMAN CELLER'S BILL '

Now the distinguished gentleman from New Yorl:C is the author of an anti;. merge;r law. - I believe that he now has a bill pending for strengthening the procedures for enforcing that law. His antimerger law does not prohibit all mergers. But it does prohibit mergers where, and I quote:

The effect may be substantially to lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly.

Now would it not be absurd if we tacked another qualifying amendment onto this law which says that it is all right for big corporations to merge with the effect of substantially lessening com­petition and creating a monopoly if the corporations merge in good faith? ~~t that is precisely the absurdity

which has been attached to the anti­price discrimination law. It was at­tached to the law by a majority opinion of the Supreme Court in the Standard Oil of Indiana case in 1951.

H. R. 11 removes that absurdity. It uses precisely the same language that appears in the antimerger law. It says simply this: Good faith is no excuse for violating the antiprice discrimination law where the effect of the discrimina­tion may be substantially to lessen com­petition or tend to create a monopoly. NINETEEN FORTY-NINE EFFORT TO NULLIFY ACT

In 1949 some of the opponents of the Robinson._Patman Act undertook to nul­lify the act as to its real purpose-which purpose was to give small-business pro:. tection against the abuse of big-busi­ness power. Senator CAPEHART headed a subcommittee which held extensive hearings, and S. 1008 was the result.

On the Senate floor it was pointed out that the good-faith defense in s. 1008 would nullify the Robinson-Patman Act as an instrument for protecting small business. It would have, as reported to the Senate, made good faith an excuse for price discriminations even though the discriminations substantially les­sened competition and tended to create a monopoly. The bill was amended on the floor of the Senate, by what was known as the Kefauver amendment. That amendment allowed the good-faith proviso of the bill to stand, but added to it the fallowing proviso:

Except where the effect will be to substan­tially lessen competition or tend to create a monopoly.

In September 1949, the House Com-. mittee on the Judiciary held hearings on S. 1008. It took out the safeguarding Kefauver amendment and substituted some ineffective language, On the floor

6270 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

of the.House the gentleman from Louisi­ana [Mr. WILLIS], and the gentleman from Colorado [Mr. CARROLL] pointed out that the· committee's language would re­store good faith as an excuse for abus'l" ing power to the extent of substantially lessening competition and tending to create a monopoly. The gentleman from Colorado [Mr. CARROLL] offered a sub­stitute amendment which.I believe is the same language which is in H. R. 11 today. That Carroll a.mendment was fully de­bated on the floor of the House. .The distinguished gentleman .from.New York then opposed it, but the House adopted it. .

CHAIRMAN CELLER HAS RECORD AGAINST H. R. 11

There was then a conference with the Senate and the distinguished gentleman from New York headed up the House · conferees. The ~ conferees reported the bill, neither the Carroll or Kefauver ·amendments, but substituted language which would tend to nullify the law. Many of us felt that the conference report was outside the limits set by the .House and the Senate bills and the par­.Jiamentary question was raised in the Senate on this point. The President of the -Senate however ruled in favor of the conference report, saying that he thought that the conference language was within the general spirit of the Ian• guage of both the Senate and House bills. S. 1008. passed but fortunately .President Truman vetoed it.

NINETEEN FIFTY-ONE STANDARD OIL CASF;

Then in the Standard Oil of Indiana opinion in 1951, the Supreme Court did precisely what the opponents of the Robinson-Patman Act had been trying to do. It ruled that the discriminatory ·practices carried on in go~d faith are ·exempt from tl;le law even though these practices substantially lessen competi• tion and create a monopoly; Further than that, the Court made a partial ·Construction of the phrase "good faith."' .The Court declared that one supplier is justified in discriminating to meet an• other supplier's price, if the second sup­plier's price is a lawful one. In other words, the ruling was that ·one competi.;. tor's obeying the law justifies another competitor's breaking the law. I hardly think that the distinguished Chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary needs give thi:s proposition very deep study to find that such a construction of law nullifies the law.

Following the Supreme Court's peci• sion in· Standard Oil of Indiana, there was a rash of bills introduced to do what was called to confirm this decision, and cement it into law. Naturally the op­ponents of the ·anti-price-discrimination laws had great fears and apprehensions

2820. The committ.ee did. not report the bills; and as time has proved, it was unnecessary to cement the Stand­·ard Oil of Indiana opinion into law. It is now cemented into law, and as a re'." sult every week that passes several hundred small businesses are destroyed. NUMEROUS HEARINGS ON QUESTION INVOLVED

Here are a few of the hearings which have been held in recent years on' the precise issue presented by H. R. 11:

In January and February 1949, the Senate Interstate and Foreign Com­merce Committee held hearings on S. 236, the main issue being the same as that presented by H. R. 11 today.

In June 1949, a subcommittee of the House Judiciary Committee held hear­ings on S. 1008, the principal issue being precisely the same presented by . H. R. 11 today.

In June 1949 the full Committee on the Judiciary held hearings on S. 1008,

In June and July 1949 the House Small Business Committee held extensive hear­ing on S. 1008.

In July 1951 the Senate Small Business Committee held hearings on S. 719; the main .issue peing precisely the same as presented by H. R. _11 today.

In July and September 1951, the House Judiciary Committee held hearings on S. 719 and a companion bill H. R. 2820, the main issue again being the same issue presented by H. R. 11 today.

In May, June, and September, 1955, the Antitrust Subcommittee of the Sen­ate Judiciary Committe·e held extensive :Qearings on several monopoly problems, ·including extensive hearings on the s'ame issue presented by H. R. 11 today. Rep­resentatives of all the small business as­sociations testified on this issue, and op­ponents ·of the Robinson-Patman Act testified. · · · '

In May 1955 the Antimonopoly Sub­committee of the House Judiciary·Com• mittee held hearings at which ·represent­atives of all the small-business associa~ tions testified on the issue presented by H. R. 11 today; and the principal big­business spokesmen on this issue also testified.

In November 195'5, · the House Small Business Committee held ·hearings at which representatives of all the small business associations, as well as labor and farm organizations, testified on the same issue presented, by H. R. 11 today~ · The .big business spokesmen also testi-fied. _

.Surely there has been enough testify­ing· on this .very simple issue: Should the law allow big business to abuse its power to the extent of substantially lessening competition and creating monopoly, or should small business ··have some protec­tion against this deadly abuse of p~wer?

that the Court would rather promptly GOOD FAIT,H DEFENSE

'have an opportµnity to _catch its ei:ror, ·, When the Robinson-Patman Act was and that it would reverse the st-andard being debated; the principal issue was ·on of Indiana opinion. There was· _a . the same "good · faith" defense. The bill in the Senate for this purpose; S. 719; "good faith" defem;e had nullified the and a companion bill was introdueed in .old Clayton Act. · The principal purpose .the House by the gentleman from Penn- of the Robinson .. Patman Act was to put sylvania [Mr. WALTER] .H. R. 2820. At a severe limitation on -this defense-and that time the Committee on the Judici... remove the loophole in the old Clayton ary considered , this issue and a · sub.. Act. .committee ef that committe.e. held. h.ear.~ ··-The _ distinguished. . gentleman ~ f.rom_ ings on S. 719 and a companion biUH~ R. · New York oppos·ed·- the · Robinson-Pat-

man Act. He led the fight against it. The bill did pass the House by a vote of 29Q to 16. Prior to that. there was a long history of the good faith defense under the original Clayton Act. _ . In 1914 Congress set about to pass a bill which would curb price discrimina­tion and give small ·business somewhat a fairer chance to survive. Section 2 of the old Clayton Act was however amended to include the good faith de­fense. The result was, .as you know, precisely the same situation we are in today. During the 1920's we had an un­precedented prosperity of big business, while small busihesses were being de· stroyed by the tens of thousands.

A. & P. TEA CO. OPPOSES BILL H. R. 11

In terms of numbers, by far the great­est losses were among independent re­tailers and wholesale:rs. Tens of thou­sands of independent local merchants were destroyed for ·the benefit of a few big chains, and the greatest beneficiary of this monopoly practice was the Great A. & P. Tea Co. The hearings and in­vestigations of our committee revealed unjustified discriminations maqe in the favor of A. & P. of ~11ch monstrous scope, that within a few more years there would pave been no independent grocers left in this count_ry. _

It was a habit of many political ora­tors in the 1~20 · decade · t:o praise farm­ers and small businesses as the backbone of America. -- But farmers · enjoyed a severe depression; and· small business was wen on the way to. extinction; while only big business prospered. I~ . the first quart~r of this year big

business profits and stock-market prices have been at an all-t.ime high. Small busin_ess faiiures on the _other.band have been the greatest for any period since l:afore World War II: . .

We are back where we were in the 1920~. . .

The iSsue is quite simple. I suggest it does. not require any further hear­ings· and consideration for Members to make up their minds. It is simply a question ·of which side we are on. Are we ,so much on the sid_e of big business 'that we want big business to have the deadly ~dvantage of a monopolistic prac­tice, in addition to all the other ad­vantages which big business enjoys? Or ' -are we sufficiently· on the. side of ·small business, and the consumer, and our -ideals of political freedom, 'that we will ·give small business some chance to sur:. ·vive and help maintain a competitive · system of private business? ·

UNITED · STATES "ADVISORY COM-. -MISSION ON INFORMATION

: The SPEAKER. Under previous or .. _d.er of the House, the · gentleman from Ohio LMr . .FEIGHAN] .is recognized for 60 minutes. · ,

Mr. FEIGHAN. Mr. ·Speaker, , the ·united States Advisory. ·Commission on Information, established by the United 'states Informatfon and Educational E:x­.change Act of 1948, yesterday .submitted its seventh semiannual report. The law requires this Commission to transmit to Congress,. such semiannual reports .con ... cerning the policies .and. programs· car-

1956 CONGRESSIONAL· RECORD - HOUSE 6271 ried on under authority of the act, in­cluding appraisals when feasible, as tO the effectiveness of the several programs, and such recommendations as it deems necessary.

This Advisory Commission is made up of five public-spirited citizens who serve without pay and represent a cross section of professional and business experience in the communications field. The mem­bers are appointed by the President with the advice and consent of the Senate. Dr. Mark May, director of the Institute

· of Human Relations, Yale University, is Chairman. The other members of the Commission are Edwin D. Canham, editor of the Christian Science Monitor; Sie­gurd S. Larmon, president of Young & Rubicam, Inc.; . Judge Justin Miller, of Pacific Palisades, Calif.; and Philip O. Reed, chairman of the board of directors of General Electric Co. I have had the opportunity to observe the work of the Advisory Commission firsthand and have come to know its able Chairman, Dr. May, and other members of the Com­mission. These men have carried on this most important work at great per­sonal sacrifice to themselves. As pro­fessional men and experts in this field, they know the importance of an adequate United States international information program, the importance to our national security, and to the winning of a just and lasting peace. The members of the Ad­visory Commission are to be commended for the fine contributions they have made in strengthening the security of the United States and increasing the pros-

. pects of peace. ~ · The Advisory Commission's report is

divided into three principal parts. The first part addresses itself to an appraisal of the need for, and the work of the United States Information Agency. The second part is addressed to recommenda­tions to the Director and actions taken on them. The third part of the report is devoted to recommendations to the Congress.

In part 1 an examination is made of the present challenge presented by the latest propaganda offensive of the Krem­lin. It points out that events of 1955 have made it clear that the case of com­munism versus freedom will be tried in the court of world opinion. The Rus­sian leaders have publicly stated that ·while their ultiinate goal of world con:. quest remains unchanged, greater em­phasis is to be placed upon the use of peaceful means for attaining their goal rather than acts of armed· aggression which have become the international trademark of communism. It points out that Communist propaganda will now be presented with a smile and that a smiling Communist leader is a far more formidable opponent ·than a scowling one. The report emphasizes that the Kremlin leaders will continue to present their case in the so-called "spirit of Geneva" which, ever since the summit meeting, has been overworked as a So­viet propaganda theme. The Russians will try to delude p-eople all over the world into believing that the "spirit· of Geneva" is· the harbinger of a stable peace. It is certain that the devious zig­zag which has characterized Commu• nist maneuvers in the past will continue

on and will only be adjusted to fit the Communist goal for world conquest.

I would like to quote a part of this re­port which I believe sums up one of the greatest problems confronting us and other nations of the _f~ee 'Y~r~d..:;:

Our military defenses, strong as they are, our economic aid to others, much as it is needed; our diplomacy, clever as it may be, are not in themselves enough to assure our national security. The effectiveness of our defenses, economic aid, and diplomacy de­pend to a large extent on how our acts and words are understood-the meaning they have to others.

All of this means the task that lies ahead for the United States Information Agency is a heavier one, and a far more difficult mission than it has ever before undertaken. To win the contest against Communist propaganda, the United states will be required to prepare and present its side of the case with the great­est possible skill and courage. We will be required to take positive and construc­tive steps to maintain free world al­liances, to demonstrate to the so-called neutral nations, that it is impossible to dance with the Russian bear without losing one's national sovereignty and in:.. dependence of action and at the same time, maintain the confidence of those hundreds of millions of people behind the Communist Iron Curtains who have had faith in us and in the cause of human freedom.

The advisory commission has made. a number of recommendations · to the di­rector of the United States Information Agency antj. to the Congress as steps that should be taken in order , to ·strengthen programs now being carried out by the United States Information Agency and to lay the foundation from which it will be possible to launch a winning program in what has so often been called the battle for the minds of men. The first recommendation to Congress is as fol­lows:

That the 84th Congress, 2d session, ap­point a Joint House-Senate Committee on International Information.

The Advisory Commission has ad­vanced the following arguments in sup­port of this recommendation:

For the past 3 years this Commission has believed that the appointment -of such a committee would be · instrume:ntal in strengthening the work of the United States Government in this field. We would not ask ;the Congress to add another committee •to the almost overwhelming number that now exists, were it not for the inescapable fact that the importance of information in in­ternational affairs, and for our own national security, is rapidly increasillg. One sign of this is the fact that more and more Mem­bers of Congress are concerning themselves with the overseas work of our Government by making trips to the field.

For some time I have advocated that Congress establish such a joint commit­tee. I have been aware that the Advi­sory Commission has made this same rec­ommendation in three previous reports to Congress. As a member of the former Select Committee To Investigate Com­munist Aggression, 83d Congress, I be­came convinced, after a most intensive study of the international conspiracy of communism. that the importance of our

international information programs justified the creation of such a joint committee. More recently and in recog­nition of the serious threat posed by the latest Russian propaganda offensive, I have become convinced that such a com­mittee is an absolute necessity. During the last session of Congress, I introduced House Joint Resolution 433, which pro­vides for the establishment of a Joint Committee on United States Interna­tional Information Programs.

I am encouraged to note that this lat­est report of the Advisory Commission recommends that Congress take favor­able action on my resolution-House Joint Resolution 433-during the present session. ·

House Joint Resolution 433 sets forth the purposes and duties of the joint com­mittee which I have proposed. The pur­poses, very briefly, are as fallows:

First. To conduct public hearings on and cause studies to be made concerning the extent and effectiveness of all United States international information pro­grams. It is important for us to know whether or not the extent of current pro­grams is sufficient to meet the worldwide challenge being made by the master propagandists of the Kremlin. It is im­portant for Congress to determine, so far as feasible, the effectiveness of current programs in carrying out the mission which is set forth in Public Law 402, 80th Congress.

Second. To cause studies to be made of the techniques, special characteristics, and the various types of Communist propaganda. It is· absolutely necessary for us to know in as much detail as pos­sible what the Communist propaganda campaign is in every country of the world, just as it is important for us to identify the techniques and the special characteristics of their work. This basic information is necessary in order that we will be able to adequately and fairly judge the extent and effectiveness of our present international information pro­grams. In addition, it is important that the American people be told about the tricks, the zigs and zags, and all other features of Communist propaganda, not only that which reaches our shores but also that which seeks to cause other peo­ple of the world to hate the American people. At the present time this impor­tant · function is not given full time or regular attention by any committee of the Congress.

Third: To inquire into the extent to which . scientific research and' develop­ment in the field of mass communication has progressed in the United States and the degree to which such scientific ad­vances are used in our international in­formation programs. It is a well-known fact-that the Russians are working over­time on new types and facilities of mass communications in the hope that they will develop devices which, for all practi­cal purposes, will make all the people of the world a captive audience. The Rus­sians attach as much, if not more, impor­tance to progress -in the field of mass communications as they do to the devel­opment of an intercontinental guided missile. The United States must not be allowed to lag in any way in either scien­tific research ·or development in the field

6272 'coNGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

of mass communications. This commit­tee would make certain, by methods of inquiry and consultation, that we do not fall behind and that our information pro­grams are making maximum use of all the scientific advances in the field of mass communications. No committee of Congress is at this time concerned with ·these very important questions.

Fourth. To provide a continuous, co­operative ·relationship between Congress and the .information programs through ·regular discussions and conferences with ·the executives and policymakers of ·such programs. Members of Congr-ess have individually made substantial contribu­·tions to the work of our information agencies. Many .other Members,·1 know, feel that Congress can make an ever­. increasing contribution to this important work. I am certain that the executives in charge of · our information programs would welcome the opportunity for regu­lar consultation and exchange of views with a joint committee of Congress which takes the time to study and understand the grave problems which they must face up to and which must be quickly resolved.

I also believe Congress can and should develop a better public understanding of both the need for, as well as the ob­jectives of our international information programs. The tremendous advance­ment of science in the last 50 years has,

·for practical purposes, so · reduced the size of this earth that the vast expanse of the past is gene. Long and tedious

·journeys of the ·past ·-have been reduced to but hours of luxuiy travel. Commu­nications which once .took many months are now carried out in a matter of sec­onds. Science has made possible com­munications on a mass scale which at times defy the imagination. It · is· no longer a luxury to have an adequate· in­ternational· information program. It · is an absolute necessity. That is the kind of world we are living in. .

Fifth. It'is a well established fact that · 1n any undertaking or program which seeks to accomplish anything worth­while, errors and mistakes are lil::ely to

·occur. This is a fact which is immedi1-; ately recognized by anyone who has at~ ;tempted tO do- anything at . all worth=­:while. It is only reasonable to expect that in a public undertaking as impor-·tant as the· mission assigned to our-m.:.. 'ternational information programs, tha-t some mistakes are bound to occur. I say this because such undertakings and programs of necessity are required tQ ·pioneer into fields of activity which are ·new or untried by Am.t!rican free enter.;. ·prise. I believe that if our information programs are worth the investment we make in them, they are certain to make some errors. But what is important is that Congress and the executives of our international information programs know when an error or mistake has been made and move rapidly to correct it. Moreover, we must make allowances ·for ·an honest difference of opinion on what may be the best course for us to follow in a given situation. In some instances involving important issues, the answer as to which should be the proper course to follow may not be determined until a course of action is well under way and the practical results begin to appear.

I am sure that my colleagues will agree an expanded and vastly strengthened that the more important the issue, very international information program. often this makes more difficult the deci- I want to pay tribute to the fine work sion as to the course of action to be ·which has already been accomplished in taken, and consequently any error that the information field by the chairman occurs in these circumstances is almost [Mr. ROONEY] and members of the sub­always a grave one. A joint committee committee on appropriations. Members of the Congress would, in my opinion, of Congress are aware that despite the serve the purpose of catching mistakes many other important tasks assigned to

. at an early date so that corrective action ·that subcommittee, the chairman and its can be taken as well as making unneces- members have made noteworthy con­sary public attack upon the work of any · tributions to the development of sound of .our information programs as a means ·and more effective international inf or• of bringing about corrective action. mation programs. ·

. Perhaps more important in this connec- I ·am very encouraged that a distin­. tion is that a .joint committee, working · guished. Member of the other House yes­. with the executives in charge of our in- · terday introduced in the Senate a resolu-formation programs, will minimize the tion identical to House Joint Resolution probability of errors and mistakes in the 433. I hope that a goodly number of conduct of our information programs. ·other Senators will have the opportunity

And finally I should like to point out to study the purposes of this resolution that President Eisenhower, in a meeting and will join in support of its introduc­with the leaders of Congress during · tion. I feel certain that those Mem­December 1955, called for a vastly ex- bers who have long been interested in

.panded effort in our international infor- · the development of a sound and winning mation programs in order to meet the international information program, will latest propaganda challenge being made see the merit as well as the urgent need by the Kremlin conspiracy. President for Congress to take favorable action on Eisenhower, in calling for added support that resolution. from Congress for this program, received I hope that every Member of this House the assurance of our distinguished will take the time to read this very sig­Speaker, SAM RAYBURN, that Congress nificant and timely report which was would not be found wanting in facing up made to Congress yesterday. It carries to this grave problem. Speaker RAY- a message which bears upon the secu­BURN, following their conference at the rity and well-being of the American peo._ White House, publicly stated that Con- ple and the hopes of all mankind for a .gress should .strengthen our foreign in- peace with justice for .all. I am hopeful formation program· and -he· pointed out . that Congress will see fit to increase our that in this field-"! think we have been ·participation in the.important work car,.. lagging. We have been defeated all ried on through our information pro­over the world in propaganda." grams. One way we can do that is by

Our foresighted majority leader, JOHN putting into affect the recommendations McCORMACK, has, on innumerable occa- ·to Congress made by the Advisory Com·-· sions, ·pointed out the need to expose the mission on Information, which Congre5s evil conspiracy of communism and _to itself set up to make certain that the present to all the people of the world the ·purposes and spirit of Public Law 402, truth concerning the United States 80th Congress, were carried out. I hope hopes and aspirations for all the people that before this session of Congress ends, _of.. the ·world, together with our willing- ·authorizing legislation will have passed ness to make every sacrifice to attain for the establishment of a joint commit­-that great goal .of peace and freedom. tee on international information · pro-

'l'he v.ery able chairman of the ,House ' grams along the lines set forth in House ·Foreign Affairs Committee. [Mr,, Rica,. ·Joint Resolution 433. . · -ARDS] has .also called for an expanded ~r. O~H.A~A of Illinois. Mr: Speaker, effort on the part of our internatio~al :will tbe gentl~man yield?- · ·information programs in order to meet Mr. FEIGHAN. I am happy to yield ·the duplicitous worldwide challenge of to the distinguished gentleman from Illi­!communism: All 'of us. know ·the great ·nois, . who has made . a remarkable ·con'­.dedication that Mr. RICHARDS has ·tribution to the improvement of our in­brought to the work of our Foreign Af- ·ternational information programs by fairs Committee. and the great contribu- his advocacy of a project which all of us tion he has made by his careful analysis have come to know as · the Classics of of and objective approach to those grave Democracy. ·dangers which confront our Amfil'ican _ Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. What the "way of life. I cannot ·help but · express gentleman is ·interested ·in; as I take it, at this time my re·gret that this able and is winning the battle for the minds and dedicated leader is retiring from Con- ·hearts of men the world over? gress and that in future sessions, we will Mr. FEIGHAN. Yes, indeed. I firmly not be ·able to count upon his always believe that the great opportunity is ours profound and sage advice. for the taking, to win a just and lasting

peace, and to prevent world war Ill. To All of these leaders have made it abun- do this it is my conviction that we must

dantly clear that our own national secu- engage in positive and imaginative and rity demands that we face up to the ·practical programs calculated to win the worldwide challenge to human freedom minds and hearts of men the world over. now being made by the Russian leaders Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. The gentle-1n the Kremlin. It is most fitting, there- man realizes, and I believe the distin­f ore, that we, as Members of Congress, guished Committee of which Dr. May is should respond to the call for assistance ·chairman, that at the present time we made by President Eisenhower, and the : seem to be losing in that battle. I am urging of our con~ressional leaders for convinced that we will c·ertainly lose that

195@ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE-

battle unless we attach to our interna­tionalJnformation programs_ the impor­tance that I believe they deserve. : We have got to make certain that the .e.'ltecu­tives in _charge of those ·programs are provided with the wher~withall to carry on a winning program.

But, as I understand it, there is no similarity between the resolution offer~d by the . distinguished gentleman fram Ohio fMr. 'FEIGHANl and the resoiution offered in the Senate by the gentleman from Montana to create a joint com­mittee to overlook the work of the CIA,

Mr. FEIGHAN. The gentleman is correct. The resolution which I have proposed has nothing to do with the work of our intelligence agencies. More­over, it has nothing to do with the work carried on by our established security agencies. This resolution addr,esses it­self exclusively to the work .carried on by our international information pro­grams. l .should like to make another point clear. ·The joint committee which I have proposed is not in any sense to be considered a watchdog committee, The joint ,committee which I have pro­posed has a mucb more important mis­sion, and that is why I ha¥e taken the time today to spell out in my opening . remarks the purposes of .the joint com­mittee.

Mr. O'HARA of mfnois. I thought it was well that the gentleman should make that very Glear, This ls merely to study and to augment and aid the work of the Congress, the work we are already doing in that field? ·

Mr. FEIGHAN. Y~. My colleague from Illinois is absolutely correct in stressing the positive aspects of the work which the joint committee which I have proposed will carry o'n.

Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. 'I was . very mucb interest~d in reading in that re­markable report by Dr. May's C{)mm1s­sion that the recommendation was made that the 84th Congress adopt a resolu­. tion providing for a joint committee in this field.

Mr. FEIGHAN. Yes. I w.as most en­eourag-ed .to see 'th.at the Commission for the fourth time has made this same rec­ommendation to Congress. In my judg­ment, this latest action by tbe Advisory .Com.mission emphasizes the importance Di this .reeommendation whieh they first made as far back .as February 1953. 1 hope that .Members of Congress wm take into account the persistent '.e1for1t made by the United States Advisory Commis­sion on Information in support of the creation of a joint committee of Con­gress o~ inter.natk>nal information pr-0-.grams.

Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. I was also interested in reading the recognition .given tG the . wQrk, of which [ am a humble part, the greater part belonging to the great citizens of Chicago who started it, that provide for translation into inexpensive editions. of the Classics o.f American ,Democracy, to be distrib­uted :an ov.e.r _the world. . .

Mr. FEIGHAN. I believe that the Ad­visory Commission is to be .complimented un bringing added public attentiol_l ·. to the work <>f 'tbe dis.tinguished ,~ntie­man from Illinois J:Mr.' o•HAu] bymak­.ing very favorable and specific reference

to the Classics ol American Democracy in its report to Congress yesterday.

Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. When the idea of a project for Classics of Democ­racy was presented to editors, educators, labor leaders, capitalists, leaders in an our activities, the verdict was unanimous tha·t such a work 1should be undertaken.

It was surprising to me when I first went into it to find that even the Fed­eralists papers had been translated, and that inadequately, into only 1 or 2 lan­guages. Following the interest shown by the leaEiers of America who responded to the questionnaire the United States Information Agency organized a pilot project to test out the idea of conveying in approximately 10 foreign languages, the basic political and social concepts which form the foundation of American lif.e. For example, the .Federalists were translated into Italian. Within several weeks some 40,000 or 50,000 ·copies of

. that translated version were sold to the Italian public who welcomed literature of this type because it was most inspiring to them as well a.s comforting to them in meeting many of the problems which they must face each day.

I mention that as only one small phase of what the distinguished gentleman from Ohio contemplates in his resolu­tion; that is, that in au these fields where we can get to the minds and hearts of men we want to do it; and, of course~ in the doing of that efficiently and promptly there should be it seems to me as proposed by the gentleman rrom Ohio the guiding and the advising of' a joint committee of this Congress.

Mr. FEIGHAN. I think the joint com­mittee which ·1 have proposed w.ould be of inestimable value in helping the ex­ecutives in charge of our international information programs in carrying out many projects .similar to that proposed by our colleague from Illinois [Mr. O'HARA]. · .

Incidentally, I want to tell the Mem­bers of the House that the .distinguished gentleman from Illinois was the -one who started this idea of translation of the Classics of Democracy into many lan­guages of the world for distribution at a very cheap price. eertainiy in an edi­tion within the ..financial reach of work­ing peqple throughout the world. I am confident that projects such 'a8 this are an excellent means by which we can convey to the people of the world a true picture of our political institutions. our social system, our customs .. ideals, econ­omy, and aspirations.

Mr. O'HARA of Illinois. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend the gentleman from Ohio for the diligence he has shown in pursuing his objeetiVes in this, and I .Certainly hope that his resolution is -adopted by the <>ther body and that within the course of the next month or six weeks this joint committee can be created and be in operation during :the present session. I say this because it is my conviction that we wm lose the 'fight · against the intensified worldwide Russia;n Communist propaganda pr-0-gram if we delay any longer in having Congress accept a full and responsible 'role in the development of our inter­national information programs .. '

Mr. FEIG.HAN. I think the creation of the joint committee which I have proposed will go a long way in helping us to win that fight. I have said on many occasions in the ·past that the struggle between the ·forces of human freedom and those of Communist ,Slav­ery .m the mo.st dangeri0us fight that has ever faced mankind in the history of the world. The outcome of this strug­gle may very w.en determine the des­tiny ()f . all. mankind for hundreds and hundreds of years. It is time for Con­gress to accord adequate .!recognition to our int:ernational information programs because the people responsible for run­ning tho.se programs occupy the front lines in the struggle for the minds .and hearts of men. If that front line is broken. we are almost eertain to be plung1ed into a devastating world war !II. If that line is held :successfully, it can avert World ·war III, and 'bring us to an era of peace, prosperity, and freedom.

I urge you, my colleagues, to read and give your most careful attention to the proposal which I have made for the creation of a Joint Committee on United States International Information Pro­g·rrons.

ISRAEL AND THE MIDDLE EAST The SPEAKER. Under prevfuus ,or­

der of the House the gentleman from ;Massachusetts [Mr. Cuu1:sl is recog­.nized for 5 minutes.

Mr. CURTIS of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, the po1iti-cal problems of Israel are closely related to the physical aspect of the country and to the type of ·civili­zation which has so recently been de­veloped there. A visit there .is, therefore, '.Of unusual importance in atrording an insight into the problems of the area.

Two T<ecent visits have given me an opportunity to see the setting .in which the problems of Israel arise, and to· fonn certain judgments about them . . . The most Vivid impression .foTiowing such a visit was that here :had arisen a modern democracy with a bustling type of .machine-age life .similar to what one might find in an American community. This remarkable development had taken place in a short period .of time, and stood out the· more because of the less devel­oped aspect of some of the other areas in that corner of the world. · Tlie ne:X,t most viv.id impression was of the cou:rage and determination of the people who h:ad built up this land, and were taming the deserts and the rocky hillsides, much as Ameriean frontiersmen -had developed our own country. This courage and initiative is evident in the faces and bearing of the peQple. · They earry themselves proudly as become a people who are _ IIH1.king sueh rapid "Strides. ·

A. third impression is that here is a -smali country where intensive efforts are needed fo make the land PToductive, where every acre is important, and where the frontiers are ·always but a ·short distance away. . · · ·

It follows that frontier incidents and .border dispute.s, wb:ich,might be of minor consequence to a large nation. affect the very vitals of this much smaller nation.

6274 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

It follows also that such a country is vulnerable to sudden attack, that the lines must be held right at the frontiers, and that defensive arms and measures are of unusual importance.

Difficult conditions now confront Israel as the result of a recent war with her neighbors, terminated only by .an un­easy armistice. The country faces block­ade of its land communications on all sides. War in the area is threatened, and that is now upsetting the whole world.

Our own Government has authorita~ tively stated that the continued exist­ence of Israel is a basic tenet of Ameri­can policy. That policy of course implies much more than existence. It means existence in an atmosphere of peace and friendliness with opportunity for pros­perous trade and all the rights which other nations enjoy.

If that be American policy, the time has come for us to reassure ourselves that we are taking the best and wisest steps to implement that policy and to aid in bringing about peace in the area.

Secretary of State Dulles in his sreech of last August 26 stated that the United States would participate in an interna­tional loan to enable Israel to pay com­pensation to refugees, and also to make possible irrigation and water develop­ment projects, and would be ·willing under certain conditions to join in col­lective security measures for the area.

But it seems now that more is needed. I was impressed by the remarks of Sen­ator DuFF of Pennsylvania at a dinner held by the conference of American Jew­ish organizations in Washington on January 18, 1956. He stated that now was the time for decisive action in the Near East, and urged that the free world "should guarantee the existing borders between the disputants," and should "off set arms to Egypt by arms to Israel­not to encourage an arms race but to maintain a proper balance between them."

Since then there have been many simi­lar expressions in editorials and articles. The opinion has been expressed that present American policy has not been effective, and only the other day a lead­ing New York newspaper called for a "bold, new policy."

I agree with that, and, speaking only as an individual, urge the following ac­tion:

First. The United States should sell defensive arms to Israel in order to main­tain the balance of arms in the area and to off set the recent flow of arms from Iron Curtain countries to Egypt. Even if help from the outside could be expected in case of aggression against Israel, arms would still be necessary to ward off im­mediate attack and until -effective help could arrive.

Second. The United States should fur­nish no arms to Israel's neighbors so long as they refuse to negotiate in good·faith for peace.

Third. The leading nations of the free world should off er a security pact to Israel which would be open also to her neighbors; and if this cannot be ar­ranged, then the United States should make such an offer. The Tripartite Declaration of 1950 is only a declaration,

and should be backed up by a more defi­nite commitment, which only a pact or treaty can provide.

Fourth. In view of the fact that the Tripartite Declaration contemplates the possible use of force, congressional au­thorization should be sought by the re­quest for passage of a Formosa-type of declaration, giving advance authority for military measures in a defined area and under defined conditions, if later found necessary.

Finally, the policies announced by Sec­retary Dulles in his speech of August 26 last, referred to above, should be imple­mented and vigorously carried forward.

This is the type of bold, new policy which will bring the greatest benefit both to the United States and to the Middle East area. It is also clearly in the iµter­est of the Western World to aid and pre­serve this western-oriented democracy and outpost of the free world. This pol­icy will sustain and preserve a nation with which the United States has had mutual friendship since its birth as a na­tion, and in whose development the United States and her citizens have played such an important part.

This is a dynamic program which will answer the charge that our policy has been indecisive, and which will go far to assure peace in the Middle East.

LEAVE OF ABSENCE By unanimous consent, leave of ab­

sence was granted to: Mr. ROGERS of Colorado (at the request

of Mr. ASPINALL), for April 12 and 13, on account of official business.

Mr. CANFIELD for April 12 and 13, on account of official business <member, Board o! Visitors to Air Force Academy).

Mr. JACKSON for 10 days commencing Monday, April 16, on account of official business <Los Angeles, Calif., hearings of House Committee on Un-American Activities) • ·

SPECIAL ORDERS GRANTED By unanimous consent, permission to

address the House fallowing the legis­lative program and any special orders heretofore entered, was granted to:

Mr. SADLAK, for 15 minutes, on May 3. Mr. CURTIS of Massachusetts, for 5

minutes, today. Mr. RoosEVELT, for 45 minutes, on

Monday next. Mr. BAILEY, for 1 hour on Wednesday

next, vacating ~pecial order for Tuesday next.

EXTENSION OF REMARKS By unanimous consent, permission to

extend remarks in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, or to revise and extend remarks was granted to:

Mr. ZELENKO. Mr. RADWAN. Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mrs. KEE. Mr. BAILEY and include a news dis­

patch from Nagoya, Japan. Mr. LONG and to include related mate­

rial. Mr. BOGGS and to include extraneous

matter, notwithstanding the fact that

it exceeds two pages of the RECORD and is estimated by the Public Printer to cost $240.

Mr. HARRIS and to include a speech. Mr. ELLSWORTH and to include a letter.

ENROLLED BILL SIGNED Mr. BURLESON, from the Committee

on House Administration, reported that that committee had examined and found truly enrolled a bill of the House of the following title, which was thereupon signed by the Speaker:

H. R. 12. An act to provide an improved farm program.

BILLS PRESENTED TO THE PRESIDENT

Mr. BURLESON, from the Committee on House Administration, reported that that committee did on this day present to the President, for his approval, bills of the House of the following titles:

H. R. 12. An act to provide an improved farm program; and

H. R. 8107. An act to amend the Armed Forces Reserve Act of 1952, as amended.

ADJOURNMENT Mr. METCALF. Mr. Speaker, I move

that the House do now adjourn. The motion was agreed to. Accordingly <at 5 o'clock and 28 min­

utes p. m.) the House, pursuant to its previous order, adjourned until Mon­day, April 16, 1956, at 12 o'clock noon.

EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS. ETC. Under clause 2 of rule XXIV, execu­

tive communications were taken from the Speaker's table and referred as fol­lows:

173·5, A communication from the Presi­dent of the United States, relative to urging that legislation be enacted such as is out­lined in a letter by the Secretary of Defense, reviewing the serious nature of the personnel situation in the Armed Forces. It also out­lines the major legislative proposals which the administration has presented to the Con­gress as a means of improving military career incentives (H. Doc. No. 378); to the Committee on Armed Services and ordered to be printed.

1737. A letter from the Comptroller Gen­eral of the United States, transmitting a re­port on our examination of the United States assistance program for Egypt which the In­ternational Cooperation Administration of the Department of State and the predeces­sor agencies have conducted, pursuant to the Mutual Security Act of 1954 (68 Stat. 832) and pertinent prior legislation; to the Com­mittee on Government Operations.

1738. A letter from the Secretary of the Interior, transmitting a draft of proposed legislation entitled "a bill to add certain federally owned land to the Lassen Volcanic National Park, in the State of California, and for other purposes"; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

1739. A letter from the Director, Adminis­trative Office of the United States Courts, transmitting a draft of proposed legislation entitled "a bill to amend title 18, United States Code, section · 3651, so as to permit confinement in jail-type institutions or treatment institutions for a period not ex­ceeding 6 months in connection with the grant of probation on a 1-count indictment"; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 1740. A letter from the President, Export­

Import Bank of Washington, · transmitting the semiannual report of the Export-Im­port Bank of Washington covering the period July through December, 1955, pursuant to section 9 of the Export-Import Bank Act of 1945, as amended; t(} the Committee on Banking and Currency.

"1741. A communication from the Presi­dent of the United States, transmitting pro­posed amendments to the budget for the fiscal year 1957 :(or the Small Business Ad., ministration involving a net increase of $19,-600,000, and proposed revisions in 1957 . pro~ grams -Of the Department of Defense "Civil functions" (H. Doc. No. 379); to the Com­mittee on Appropriations and ordered to be printed.

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. ENGLE: Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. H. R. 7850. A bill to au­thorize th~ Secretary of the Interior to con­struct, operate, and maintain the Little Wood River reclamation project, Idaho; without amendment (Rept. No. 1994). Re­ferred to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union.

Mr. ENGLE: Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. H. R. 9511. A bill to au­thorize the county of Custer, State of Mon­tana, to convey certain lands to the United States; without amendment (Rept. No. 1995). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union.

Mr. DELANEY: Committee on Rules. House Resolution 470. Resolution ·for con­'Sideration of H. R. 9824, a. bill to establish an educational assistance program for · chil­dren of servicemen who died as a result of a disability incurred in line of duty during World War II or the Korean service period in ecmbat or from an instrumentality of war; without amendment (Rept. No. 1996). Referred to the House Calendar.

Mr. O'NEILL: Committee o:n Rules. House Resolution 472. · Resolution for con­sideration of S. 2972; an act to punish the willful damaging or destroying of aircraft and attempts to damage or destroy aircraft, and for other purposes; without ame.ndment (Rept. No. 1997). Referred to the House Calendar.

Mr. SPENCE: Committee on Banking and Currency. H. R. 9052. A bill to amend the Export Control Act of 1949 to continue for an additional period of 3 years the authority provided thereunder for the regulation of exports; with amendment (Rept. No. 1998). Referred to the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union.

PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 4 of rule XXIL public bills and resolutions were introduced and severally referred as follows:

By Mr. BOGGS: . _ H. R. 10457. A bill to amend the Social

Security Act with respect to the matching iormulas for old-age assistance, aid to ·the blind, and aid to the permanenitly and ta­tally disabled; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

· H. R. 10458. A bill to provide for the pre­vention of the erof!ion of the banks of the Bayou Barataria; to the Committee on Pub-lic Works. . · . By -Mr. CELLER: .

H. R.10459: A biU to Improve the Unlted states ·Code by enacting into law title 26 entitled .. Internal .Revenue:•; 'to t]1e ·eom­mittee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. CHUDOFF: H. R. 1!0460. A bill to extend and amend

laws relating to the provision and improve­ment of housing and the conservation and development of urban communities, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Bank­ing and Currency.

By Mr. DENTON: H. R. 10461. A bill creating the City of Can­

nelton Bridge Commission, defining the au­thority, power, and duties of said commis­sion; and authorizing the commission and its successors and assigns to construct, main­tain, and operate a bridge across the Ohio River at or near Cannelton, Ind., and Hawes­ville, Ky., and for other purposes; to the Committee on Public Works.

By Mr. FASCELL: H. R. 10462. A bill to establish an addi­

tional judicial district within the State of Florida; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

H. R. 10463. A bill to ,provide for a term of court of the fifth circuit court of appeals to be held at Miami, Fla., in the southern dis­trict of Florida; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. FERNOS-ISERN: H . . R. 10464. A bill to amend the Social Se­

curity Act to remove existing limitations on the total amounts which may be made avail­able to Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands under the public-assistance programs in that act; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. KEATING: H. R. 10465.. A bill to relieve certain vet­

erans from liability for repayment of amounts erroneously paid to them while members of the Armed Forces; to the Com­mittee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. SAYLOR: H. R. 10466. A bill to amend title III of

the Servicemen's Readjustment Act of 1.944, as amended, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

l3y Mr. UDALL: H. R. 10467. A bill to authorize and direct

the Secretary of the 'Interior to transfer ap­proximately 9 acres of land in the Huala,pai Indian Reservation, Ariz., to School District No. 8, Mohave County, Ariz.; to the Commit­tee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

By Mr. WILSON of Indiana: H. R. 10468. A bill creating the City of

Lawrenceburg Bridge Commission, de.fining the authority, power, and duties of said com­mission; and authorizing the commission and its successors and assigns to construct, maintain, and operate a bridge across the Ohio River at or near Lawrenceburg, Ind., and 'Boone County, Ky., .and for other pur­poses; to the Committee on Public Works.

By Mr. FASCELL~ H. R. 10469. A bill to amend section 500 of

the Servicemen's Readjustment Act oI 1944 to provide an additional period for World War 11 veterans to obtain guaranteed loans; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

By Mr. FULTON: H. R. 10470. A bill to provide for the issu­

ance of a special series uf postage stamps in commemoration -of the 200th anniversary of the founding of the city of Pittsburgh, Pa.; to the Comm.ittee on Post Office and Civil Service.

By Mr. GARY: H. R. 10471. A bill to amend section '1'391 of

title 28, United States Code, ·relating to venue generally; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. GRAY: H. R. 10472. A bill to assist areas to develop

and maintain .stable and diversified econ­omies .by a program of financial and techni­cal assistance and otherwise, and for · other purposes; to the Committee on Banking and currency.

By Mr. JENNINGS: H. R. 10473 . . A bill to amend the Internal

Revenue Code of 1954 to -prov.ide ·that the benefits of Jl!leetlon 1231 .shall b.e available with respect to livestock held f'Or any pur-

pose by a taxpayer for 6 months or mo~; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. PfilLBIN: . H. R. 104'74. A bill to amend the Civil Serv·

ice Retirement Act of May ,29, 1930, to provid.e immediate annuities to widows witbout de­pendent children of employees who die in the service; to the Committee on Post omce and Civil Service.

By Mr. REES of Kansas: H. R. 10475. A bill to establish a Veterans

Preference Employees Appeals Office .• and for other purposes; to the Committee on Post Office and Ci vii Service.

By Mr. REES of Kansas (by request) : H.R.1047.6. A hill to amend the Internal

Revenue Code of 1954, to provide a soil ex­haustion allowance for land used in farm­ing; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

By Mr. TEAGUE of Texas: H. R. 10~77. A bill to prohibit the pay­

ment of pension to persons confined in penal institutions for periods longer than 61 days; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

H. R. 10478. A bill to amend sect:on 21 of the World War Veterans' Act, 1924, to pro­vide for the disposition of certain benefits which are unpaid ·at the death of the intend­ed beneficiary; to the Committee on Vet­erans' Affairs.

By Mr. THOMPSON of Texas: H. R. 1047.9. A bill to authorize the Ad­

ministrator .of General Services to convey certain land to the county of Galveston, Tex.; to the Committee on Government Op­erations.

By Mr. THOMSON of Wyoming: H. R. 10480. A bill to amend section 6 of

the act- of August 13, 1953, relating to the amendment of farm units on Federal recla­mation projects; to the Committee on In­terior and Insular Affairs.

By Mr. SIKES: H. J. Res. 602. Joint resolution to provide

for a medal to be struck and presented to each suryi ving veteran of the War Between the States; to the Committee on Banking and Currency.

By Mr. COOPER: H. Con. Res. 230. Concurrent resolution

authorizing the printing of additional copies of the hearings on H. R. 5550 for the use of the Committee on W.ays and Means; to the Committee on House Administration.

By Mr. PRICE: H. Con. Res. 231. Concurrent resolution to

provide that the United States delegation in the United Nations request free elections in the Slovak nations; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

By Mr. COOPER: H. Res. 468. Resolution authorizing the

Committee on Ways and Means to employ one additional employee~ to the Committee

· on House Administration. By Mr. LESINSKI:

H. Res. 469. Resolutlon creating a select committee to conduct an investigation and study of the various means of utilizing the civil and military airports in the Detroit, Mich., area; to the Committee on Rules.

MEMORJ;ALS

Under clause 4 of rule XXII, memorials were presentetl and ref erred as follows:

By Mr. FORAND: Memorial of the General Assembly of the State of Rhode Island, urg­ing arms for Israel due to threat of Arab aggression with Communist arms; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs.

By· Mr. KEARNEY: Memorial of the Legis­lature of the State of New York, ·memorial­izing the Congress -0.f the United States to enact such legislation as may be necessary for the removal of certain Flederal restric- -tions on 'the ratsing of crops for the feeding of livestock; to tbe Committee on Agr:ic:u.l'­ture.

6276 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS

Under clause 1 of rule XXII, private bills and resolutions were introduced and severally ref erred as follows:

·By Mr. ALLEN of California: : ·H. R. 10481. A bill for tbe relief of Magojl and Eiju Nakashima; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. ANFUSO: H. R.10482. A bill for the relief of Biagio

Vertuccio; to the Committee on the Judi­ciary.

. By Mr. BATES: H. R. 10483. A bill for the relief of Aloisia

and Margarete Herzog; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. CHUDOFF: . . H. R. 10484. A bill for the relief of Myrrine

and Fitzgerald Christie; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. CORBE'CT: H. R. 10485. A bill for the relief of Kan

Chen; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. DURHAM:

H. R. 10486. A bill for the relief of Theo­dore Triantafillopoulos; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr~ FASCELL: H. R. 10487. A bill for the relief of Mrs.

James B. Daunais; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mrs. KELLY of New York: H. R. 10488. A bill for the relief of Simeon

Krammer also known as Sidney Krammer; to t .he Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. MAHON: H. R. 10489. A bill to provide for the con­

veyance of certain mineral rights to Mrs. James T. Worley, Andrews, Tex.; ·to the Com­mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

H. R. 10490. A bill to provide for the con­veyance of certain mineral rights to Mr. John W. Cadenhead of Meadow, Tex.; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

H. R. 10491. A bill to provide for the con­veyance of certain mineral rights to Mathew G. Mathews, Denver City, Tex.; to the Com­mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

H. R. 1049~. A bill to provide for the con­veyance of certain _mineral rights to Mrs. Lillian Beal Williams, Tokio, Tex.; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

H. R. 10493. A bill to provide for the con­veyance of certain mineral rights to Marvin B. King, Bledsoe, Tex.; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs.

H. R. 10494. A bill to provide for the con­veyance of certain mineral rights to the descendants of James H. Haney, Bledsoe, Tex.; to the Committee on Interior and In­sular Affairs.

By Mr. MAILLIARD: H. R. 10495. A bill for the relief of Dennis

Da Costa; to the Committee on the Judici­ary.

civil service retirement· with the old age and survivors' insurance (social security) as em­bodied in the Reed bill, H. R. 9090, and the Carlson bill, S. 3041, and favoring liberaliza-

By Mr. PERKINS: H. R. 10496. A bill for the relief

trud Kreen; to the Committee on

tion of civil service retirement as contained of Ger- in the Morrison bill, H . R , 88121 and the the Ju- , Johnston bill; S. 2875; to the Committee on

Ways and Means. . . dietary. · By Mr. SPENCE:

· H . R.10497. A bill for the relief of Franca Van Landingham; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. WILSON of California: H. R. 10498. A bill for the relief of

Tsuruichi and Hatsu Shibata; to the. Com­mittee on the Judiciary.

H. R. 10499. A bill for the relief of Raul Banuelos-Felix; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

PETITIONS, ETC.

. 887. By· Mr. LECOMPTE: Petition of VFW past, Sully, Iowa, urging the enactment of .a separate and liberal pension program for vet­erans of World War I and their widows and orphans; to the Committee on Veterans' Af· fairs. · 888. Also, petition of VFW post, Hedrick, towa, urging the enactment of a separate and liberal pension program for veterans of World War I and their widows and orphans; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

889. By Mr. MARTIN: Petition of residents of Massachusetts requesting separate pension program for World War I veterans; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

Under clause 1 of rule XXII, petitions 890. By Mr. RABAUT: ' Petition of Donald and papers were laid on the Clerk's desk P. Ryde, Grosse Pointe Park, Mich., and other and referred as follows: residents of Detroit, urging immediate en­

882. By Mr. BOW: Petition of George C. Tyler and others of Tuscarawas County, Ohio, for a separate pension program for World War I veterans; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs. .

883. By Mrs. GRIFFITHS: Petition of all ·organized groups of Ukrainian women in metropolitan Detroit in cooperation with branches of the Ukrainian 'congress Commit­tee of Detroit and the Federation of American Ukrainians of Michigan, urging the enact­ment of legislation to i~stitute appropriate action in the United Nations, with the object of firm defense of millions of political pris­oners in U. S. S. R., tortured, in overt viola­tion of the Charter of the United Nations; to the Committee on Foreign Affairs. · 884. By Mr. HAYS of Arkansas: Petition of

Mr. and Mrs. R. B. Cash, Little Rock, Ark., and others urging favorable consideration of H . R. 4264 which grants a pension of $100 per month to all honorably discharged veterans of World War I who are 60 years of age and ·which authorizes the Administrator of Vet­erans' Affairs to prescribe regulations to carry out these provisions; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

885. By Mrs. KEE: Petition of P. C. Brown, Renick, W. Va., and 40 other residents of Greenbrier County, W. Va., urging immedi­ate enactment of a separate and liberal pen­sion program for veterans of World War I and their widows and orphans; to the Com­·mittee on Veterans' Affairs.

886 By Mr. KING ·or California: Petition of the Angel City Branch No. 24, National As­sociation of Letter Carriers, containing the signatures of approximately 3,000 Los An­geles letter carriers opposing coordination of

actment of a separate and liberal pension program for veterans of Woz:ld War I and their widows and orphans; to . the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

891. By Mr. SHORT: Pe~ition of J . W. Was­. son and .other citizens of Jasper County pro­testing the passage of H. R. 9075 in its present form; to the Committee on Ways and Means.

892. By Mr. SILER: Petition of Mrs. Re­becca J. Williams and 1,173 other residents of Ohio, Tennessee, Virginia·, California, Illinois, Indiana, N~w York, and Egypt urging enact­ment of legislation to prohibit the trans­portation of alcoholic beverage advertising in interstate commerce and its broadcasting over the air; to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce.

893. By Mr. VORYS: Petition of 44 resi­dents of Ohio, urging immediate enactment of a separate and liberal pension program for

·veterans of World War I and their widows and orphans; to the Committee on Veterans' Af­fairs.

894. Also, petition of 90 residents of Ohio, urging immediate enactment of a separate ·and liberal pension program for veterans of World War I and their widows and orphans; to tlie Committee on Veterans' Affairs. ·

895. Also, petition of 45 residents of Ohio, urging immediate enactment of a separate

· and liberal pension program for veterans of World War I and their widows and orphans; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

896. By Mr. WOLCOTT: Petition of Henry B. Williams, of Anchorville, Mich., and 44 others, urging enactment of legislation pro­viding for a separate and liberal pension pro­gram for . veterans of World War II, their widows and orphans; to the Committee on Veterans' Affairs.

EXTENSIONS- OF REMARKS

Address by Hon. Alexander Wiley, of Wisconsin, Before La Crosse, Wis., Shrine Club

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

HON. ALEXANDER WILEY OF WISCONSIN

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

Thursday, April 12, 1956 Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, it was my

·privilege recently to deliver an address before the Shrine Club of La Crosse, Wis. I ask unanimous consent to have

printed in the RECORD certain excerpts from that address.

There being no objection, the excerpts were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: SENATOR WILEY URGES 10-POINT PROGRAM FOR

WISCONSIN DEVELOPMENT

(Excerpts of address by Hon. ALEXANDER WILEY, Republican, of Wisconsin, at Shrine Club, La Crosse, Wis., April 6, 1956)

dOMPETITIVE RACE WILL BE INTENSIFYING IN

48 STATES

These days, we ·hear a great deal · about competitive coexistence between the United States and the Soviet Union.

I need not comment in detall to you, the members of the Shrine (who know the great

patriotic record of our own Shrine organi­zation), how significant is this coexistence race. We of this country must make sure in this jet-atomic age that we stay ahead in the race for national survival. We · must make sure that we are well prepared-on the ~ome and foreign fronts-against any

. danger that may arise.

·PATRIOTIC RECORO OF THE SHRINE

The Shrine, as we all know, is the play­ground of Masonry.

But the Shrine has its .'serious moments too. And throughout all Shrine activity, there runs the undertone and overtone of

. patriotic service,. of prqmoting civic welfare and human betterment whether it be on

-behalf of crippled chilclren or any other , worthy cause.

·-1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-· _HOUSE And, of course, there ls no cause more

worthy, .more essential than national survi­val-the greatest single obligations of this Republic-which is the great beacon to man­kind.

THE RACE AMONG THE 48 STATES ·

I would like to point out, however, to my brother Shriners, that there is another type of competitive race-over and above our race with the Soviet Union. It occurs right in our own country. It is the race among the 48 States for progress and prosperity.

Every day, new developments are occurring in this competitive race. Factories niove from one State to another. Companies start new plants or subsidiaries in one State or another. 1

We of the Badger State are ~nxious J;o keep our State to the fore. We want to move up-­not to fall ~ack..:..:.in the competitive race.

We , want more contracts for ·wisc_onsin, more and steadier jobs, fuller pay enyelop~s. more jingling tunes in the cash registers, more tourist income, more farm sales.

To achieve this, we'll require action, plan­ning, teamwork, cooperation.

WE ARE INTERESTED IN QUALITY

Of course, . we are definitely not trying to get the largest population, we are not trying to attract any type of plant, just for the sa~e of piling up big statistics of new business.

We are interested in quality. We want the best type of ind1:1stry in Wisconsin. We want our own existing population to enjoy ever higher income. - We don't want to sacrifice living standards but rather to raise them.

For these purposes, I am in continuous contact with the officials of our State govern­ment, with our governor, our State planning

, commission, and with :other State officials. I would· like to spell out now a 10.-point

prograz.n for making sure that Wis~onsin keeps moving forward in 1956 and m the years to come. .

This is by no means a complete list, but it will indicate to you the sort of things which must be done.

CAPITALIZE ON MISSISSIPPI AND THE L_AKES

1. Further use the great natural arteries available to us. That means the mighty Mississippi. It means the Great Lakes.

It means roads along the Mississippi and river traffic on the Mississippi, roads along­side the lakes and commerce on the lakes.

we must capitalize on these assets to the fullest. We must get all the possible traffic we can out of them-out of barge traffic and along the lakes, out of deepwater traffic.

2. For full lake benefits, we must secure the prompt deepening of the Great Lakes

- connecting channels. This means we must make all possibie speed in securing con­gressional approval of the initial $5 million (out of the overall $110 million authorized) to deepen and improve the Great Lakes connecting channels west of Lake Erie.

EXPAND CREDIT FOR SMALL BUSINESS

S. Utilize the splendid facility of the Wis­consin ·credit Development Corp. This is the orga nization. designed at Madison., by our State officials with the cooperation of our State's banking profession, to _provide needed capital wherever necessary, and other­wise unavailable, so as to expand industry or bring in new industry.

4. Further develop our Wisconsin highway system, which is so vital to our tourist in­dustry, as. well as to }nexpensive transporta­tion of our farm and business pro.ducts.

Under Federal aid, the highway legisla­tion now before the House, Wisconsin will get an estimated $345 million in the coming 13-year period for road impr<;>vement.

5. Strengthen Wisconsin aviation-mean­ing improve our airport system, our navi­

. gational aids. Facilitate· the work of North Central Airlines, Northwest Airlines, and other fine airline companies serving our

State. Expand the number of our pilots and civilian planes, as may be necessary.

MORE CONTRACTS FOR BADGERS

6. Bring in more Federal contracts wherever possible to utilize the skills and ab1lities of Wisconsin industry and workers for defense purposes.

7. Utilize Wisconsin camp facilities-like Camp McCoy-to the fullest. This has been my constant aim in Washington.

WISCONSIN WANTS FAIR-PRICED NATURAL GAS

8. Increase the amount of the fuel at good prices available to our citizens. .

Right now, there are, as ·you know, nu­m!'lrous applications pending before 'the Feet.!. eral Power Commission for bringing in more natural gas pipelines to Wisconsin. I, for one, want , every additiona.l cubic foot . of natural · gas we can get and use-for· our homes, offices, stores, ang factories. And I want it at good, competitive prices. ·

Thanks to President Eisenhower's wise veto of the Harris-Fulbright bill, we can feel reasonably assured that we are going to get fuel at a fair price. Had that bill not been vetoed, Wisconsin would have paid through the nose to the gas monopoly.

Fuel is a mighty important factor that is considered when a company weighs moving a plant to a particular State. We don't want Wisconsin companies moving to the South or anywhere else, so as to get ,cheaper fuel, subsidized by the Federal Government.

We want adequate fuel and/ or fafr private enterprise prices, for our State. '

9. Keep Wisconsin ahead in scientific re­search, both through our great private labo­ratory teams, as well as through the mar­velous research conducted by the University of WiSconsin and other splend~d edl,lcational . institutions. . . . .

This is a scientific age, and the State with scientific and technical know-how will forge ahead of other States which lag in scientific development.

KEEP WISCONSIN INDUSTRIAL PEACE

10. Last but not least, let's keep Wiscon­sin as a model of cooperation between labor and management, industry and agriculture, farm and city. ·

As we look elsewhere, we see first right now, as you know, the South is paying ·a bitter price because of racial tension.

Here in our own State, let's make ~ure of cooperation between all groups. Let's try to avoid the type of industrial warfare which crippled the great Westinghouse Corp. for

· 156 days, the kind of heated labor-mana:ge­ment bickering which causes losses to all, particularly the public, as a whole. .

These then, are but 10 points in our "For­ward, Wisconsin" program. You and I can and will add many more points as we seek to assure rising and lasting prosperity for the Badger State.

Trade Mission to Japan

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

HON. CLEVELAND 1\1. BAILEY OF WEST V,IRGINIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTA,TIVES

Thursday; April 12, 1956

Mr. BAILEY. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the CoN­GREssioNAL RECORD, I desire to call the attention of my colleagues to certain practices being used by the Department of Commerce. I ref er specifically to their sending representatives of_ the Commerce Department on a trade mis­sion to Japan.

In this connection, I would like to read a dispatch from Nagoya, Japan, under date of March 29:

Japanese businessmen asked the visiting United States trade mission to use its influ­ence to prevent any increase in American tariff or other restrictions against Japanese pottery, plywood, and sewing machines. The mission in turn said, "There is plenty of room to increase American imports of these products." The mission is headed by Mr. Eugene Braderman, United States Depart­ment of Commerce.

I' am today writing the Department of Commerce demanding to know what is

· the purpose of ·this mission, who ap­pointed them, why American business­men who must compete with foreign im· ports are not officially notified by the

··Department of Commerce when such trade missions were sent abroad, and the . purpose for which they are being sent.

This, Mr. Speaker, is just another in­stance of the "high-handed'' bureau­cratic methods being used by some of our executive departm~nts.

Dateline Washington

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

HON. HALE BOGGS OF LOUISIANA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, April 12, 1956

Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, my Loui­siana colleagues and I have the pleasure of participating regularly in a ti.lmed tel· evision program, Dateline Washington, presented every other week as a public service to our constituencies by station WDSU-TV of New Orleans.

This is a half hour, unrehearsed dis .. cussion program, produced and moder­ated by Miss Ann Corrick, Washington correspondent for WDSU. It alternates weekly with a local program, Dateline New Orleans, in which WDSU-TV pre­sents local personalities in discussions of civic and other matters of interest to the citizens of the New Orleans area.

Dateline Washington concentrates on national and international issues which affect-directly or indirectly-the lives of all Americans, with particular em· phasis on matters under consideration in Congress.

We invite as our guest a personality ex­pert in his field, and devote the half hour

- program to an informal discussion and exchange cf ideas. In this way, we are able to present to the people of south Louisiana all sides of an issue, so they may form their own opinions on the vital issues of our times.

In the past 2 years, on this program, we have presented the up-to-date facts on such vital issues as the peacetime uses of atomic energy; the state of our na­tional defenses; the problems and needs of American education; the development of the Salk antipoiio vaccine program; the operation of our foreign policy; the extent of narcotic addiction and its causes and timely reviews of the ever· changlng political situation. Dateline

6278 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April 12

Washington has presented interviews with such topnotch authorities as U. N. Ambassador Henry Ca-bot Lodge; Admin­istrator Theodore · Streibert, of the United States Information Agency; Maj. Gen. Samuel Sturgis, Chief of the Army Engineers; Selective Service Director Lewis Hershey; Treasury Secretary Humphrey; Sir Roger Makins, the Brit­ish Ambassador; House Speaker Ray­burn; CBS Overseas Correspondent Howard K. Smith; and, of course, many of our able and informed Democratic and Republican Members of House and Sen­ate. In order to present an unbiased pic­ture of the political situation, we have had as our guests both Leonard Hall, Re­p_ublican National Committee chairman, and Paul Butler, Democratic National Committee chairman. Many of these programs have made front-page news throughout the country.

In recognition of the consistently fac­tual, timely, and public interest offerings of the Dateline Washington series over the last 2 years, the Sylvania television award panel last November awarded Dateline Washington and WDSU-TV a special citation for local public service.

In consonance with the high standards maintained by this program, on Sunday, April 8, Dateline Washington presented a guest and topic of such importance and inspiration that I herewith submit the transcript of this discussion so others may benefit from its content.

Our guest was Maj. Gen. Melvin Maas, former Member of the House from Min­nesota, whose brilliant career · with the United States Marine Corps was cut short a few years ago when he lost his eyesight. General Maas' account of his work as Chairman of the President's

. Committee on Employment of the Physi­cally Handicapped should give heart and hope to other disabled persons who haye every right to work and live with the dignity we in this country accord to all our citizens.

The discussion with General Maas fol­lows:

Miss CORRICK. Good a1'ternoon. This is WDSU's Washington correspondent, Ann Corrick.

Thirty million American citizens are phys­ically d ' sabled in one way or another. .Most are completely helpless. But an estimated 2 million disabled persons, if they knew how, or if they had the proper training, could be gainfully and usefully employed. Congress

· recognized this possibility · in 1945, and, 2 years later, established- the ·President's Com­mittee on Employment of the· Physically Handicapped~ Through. the efforts.:. of this Committee many thousands of disabled per­sons each year are restored to gainful em­ployment. Dateline Washington's guest to­day is the Chairman of th,e President's Com­mittee, retired Marine Corps Maj. Gen: Mel­vin J. Maas. He fully understands the prob­lems of disabled persons, for , in 1951, 1 year before he retired from the Marines, General Maas was overtaken wtth ;tota:l blindness. Although this dropped· the curtain on three separate careers, for General Maas it opened up a new and rewarding challenge for his tremendous and unselfish energies. He ·be­came Chairman of the President's Committee on Employment of the. Physically · llandi­capped in 1954.

Last year he was elected national com­mander ot: the Disabled American Veterans.

General Maas' first career was in business back in his native State of Minnesota, where he organized his own insurance firm. He spent 16 years in Congress as a Republican Member of the House from Minnesota, from 1927 to 1943. However, during that period he took time out to pursue another, over­lapping career in the Marine Corps, where he specialized in marine aviation. He served as a priva te in World War I; as the youngest Marine Corps colonel in uniform in world War II, and he put on his uniform again in the Korean war to help revise the entire Reserve program.

The general made many friends while he was here in Congress, and here with us to­day are two who served with him-New Or­leans Congressman F . EDWARD HEBERT, chair­man of the House Armed Services Investigat­ing Committee, and HALE BOGGS, member of the House Ways and Means Committee.

Now, the general has been decorated many times for his services, and among his medals is t h e Carnegie Silver Medal for heroism, and there is quite a story behind that medal. It is legend, especially here on Capitol Hill, because the battlefield on which that medal was earned was the House of Representatives. It wali..in 1933, was it not, General--

General l\Lus. No; 1932. Miss CORRICK. That a man appeared in the

House gallery with a loaded revolver and he threatened to shoot up the Congressmen. What did you do?

General MAAS. Ann, you mentioned an in­cident that bas always been embarrassing to me, getting this Carnegie medal for it. I think I will reveal to you now the truth of what actually J:lappened that day.

Miss CORRICK. I wish you would. General MAAS. This nut in Congress-:.!

mean the one up in the gallery-was waving - this gun around. I did not see hill?- to · be­gin with. We were having a teller vote and

- I was one of the tellers. All of a sudden there was a great deal of confusion and everybody left suddenly.

Then F iorello La Guardia grabbed me by the arm and said, "Come on, Mel, let's get

· him," and with that he pointed up in the gallery. That is the first time I saw thls b ird waving this pistol arourid. , To get to him, you had to run up the ·atsle; out some swinging doors, around the halls and up some marble steps.

Just as we got to the door, La Guardia went on out and I took one last look over there an d I saw that this bird put his foot up on the rail. I was sure he was going to jump, and probably break a leg, so I had nothing more heroic in mind that running over and jumping on the guy when he was down-=-

. but when I got under him, the darn fool had not jumped. Here I was standing looking up at h im, and he spotted me and waved the gun at me, and he said, "Will you give me 20 minutes to make a speech?"

Give him 20 minutes, I would have given him the shfrt off my back. I said, "Yes, yes, yes, but it is against the rules to speak with a gun in the .House. Gi.ve . me the gun and you can m ake your speech."

He said, "I will give it to you," and with that he cocked it. It looked like a .75 milli­meter cannon abou·t that time.

The newspapers cotnmented afterward how remarkable it was that I disarmed ·him with a smile. It was not a smile-it was a darn silly grin.

- Congressman HEBERT. What would have happened if · he had not thrown you the

, gun?· . General MAAS. Instead of running for Con­

. gress as I used to, I think ·I would have rtin from Congress. ·

Suddenly he changed his mind and did drop the gun to me. As soon as he dropped the gun, the cops an jumped out from be­hind the seats and grabbed him.

Congressman BOGGS. Mel, that is quite an interesting and very great career you have had. Why don't you tell us a little bit

· about the work you are doing now. General MAAS. Well, Hale, I am actually in

the most rewarding work . that I have ever done. I do not mean financiaUy because all of us on the President's Committee serve without any compensation of any sort. However, I am receiving more compensation in the way of gratification, feeling that I am making a contribution, more so than . I have ever felt by doing anything else.

The work of the President's Committee is educational and informational. We are not a Government agency. We have a small Federal staff, but the Committee ·is made up of about- 300 organizations representing the heart of America. All of th~ great labor unions are members, all of the great em­ployer groups like the Association of Manu­facturers, and the United Sfates Chamber of Commerce, are members, all of the vet­erans' groups, the Federation of Women's Clubs, the medical profession, social work­ers, and just dedicated men and women.

What we are doing is trying to educate employers and the labor unions and the general public as to the employability of handicapped men and women.

There are so many people who think that just because some of us · have a personal physical inconvenience we cannot work. This is not true at all. We have to overcome centuries of prejudice and intolerance and discrimination against men and women. who have a physical handicap.

It is tremendously hear.twarming to see the growing increase in interest and awareness and desire to help in this campaign.

Congressman HEBERT. The work which you are doing with this Comn11ttee is very inter­esting and, of course, very constructive; but what is your feeling about a program which would educate people to . prevent the acci­dents which cause disability?

General MAAS. Eddie, of course that is one of the disgraces in this country. .However, the vast majority of those for whom we have to find jobs, strangely enough, are not handi-

. capped by way of industrial accidents. Of course, these accidents are deplorable, but the vast majority of these handicapped peo­ple have become so handicapped by reason of lllness and disease.

Congressman HEBERT. That is exactly what I was hoping you were going to say, Mel. I think the work of the President's Committee is. quite creditable and lauda'!:>le and you are indeed doing a splendid job with respect to rehabilitating these people.

I think the b.ig problem is, however~and I would like your comment on this-is edu­cating through research and prevention. As I put it the other day in New Orleans when I was down there to dedicate the Lighthouse for the Blind, w e all run to the m an who has a white stick in his hand, but our great­est efforts should be given to preventing him from· getting the whtte ·stick: ·

General MAAS. Of course~ that· ts true, 'and we are tremendously interested in these re­search programs and their development. If the proper job is done in preventive cam­paigns-the biggest single number that we

· have are cardiac cases-if we can lick them · at the · beginning, then you would not have

any need for the President's Committee on Employment· of the Physically 'Handicap.ped.

Congressman HEBERT. ' What suggestions do · you have? .. What program do you have for

pr.eventioil? · " · ae·neral MAAS. I believe a great deal more

. intensified research must be 'done. Once yc:iu · know how to prevent ~ disease or cure it, then the matter becomes routine: But the

- greatest mass of people who are physically · handicapped are contii:ming-actually it 1s about 275,000 a year added to· these rolls of

r

\,

•

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 6279 the seriousiy physically handicapped. We need more research. -

Congressman BoGGS. It seems to me in your work you have two basic problems: One is to convince an employer that a handiCapped person can be a satisfactory employee, and the other, it would seem to me, would be the psychological problem with the handi­capped person himself to convince him that he is still a useful member of society and can perform gainful employment of some kind or another.

How do you approach those two separate problems, the individual problem and then the employer problem?

General MAAS. You -have identified them. They are the big problems. There is a third one, too, and that is educating those who are nonhandicapped workers to accepting a handicapped worker beside them.

Today there is considerable resistance among workers who just do not want handi­capped workers working near them for fear that the handicapped person will cause an accident that will involve the nonhandi­capped. Just to dispose of that, we have checked all of the records, and as far as we could determine throughout the country, we have yet to find one single case where a handicapped worker has involved a fellow worker, so the nonhandicapped do not have to worry about that.

The problem of educating the employer ls our major problem, of course. The other problem is a social one, getting the handi­capped to find out that there is such a thing as opportunity for rehabilitation; that they can be given· vocational training so that they can become self-supporting. Some work is being :done along those lines, but .what the Congress has charged our Commit­tee with is primarily in the field of educat­ing employers and labor unions, because there are .problems involving labor contracts . in this matter-.-educating them as to the desirability of giving the handicapped an opportunity to work and then cortvincing them that a well-trained, properly placed handicapped worker is not only as good as the average but, in most cases, they become superior. Being trained in a specialty, they become very expert in that specialty. The handicapped man or woman who is given a job is grateful for it, for one thing, ·and there is much less tendency to switch jobs.

Miss CORRICK. In what fields of endeavor are the handicapped people finding places today? .

General MAAS. Actually, everywhere. There isn't any kind of a job today in this country that is not being performed by some kind of a handicapped person. .

Miss CORRICK. Mostly in industry? General MAAS. I would say the preponder­

ance of the absorption of the physically han­dicapped has been so "far in illdustry. In ·fact, ·we are quite concerned at the failure of the professions to accept them. I am thinking particularly now of the blind. V.Tith the critical teacher shortage in this country, there are hundreds of blind men ari,d women who are qualified education­ally and by temperament to teach.:_and yet through prejudice they cannot get jobs as teachers. Yet, there are many very fine blind teachers, not only in the colleges but in the secondary schools and even in the primary schools. .

Col}gressman HEBERT. I think the figures show in this country today there are some 314,000 blind people. In referring · to the blind, Mel-and I know you are not· sensi­tive about your affiiction at all, .and I think you and I both know that-I think it would be most interesting and most informative and certainly most inspirational if you would take a moment to tell us exactly what your reaction was when you went blind. I knew you and served with you when you had good eyesight, and I have known you for the years

that you have been blind. It intrigued me as I am sure it intrigued those of the audi­ence who watched you light that cigar just now; and what you told us before the pro­gram about the book you're writing called "How to Eat Soup With a Fork." To me; it is an inspiration. Just what did you do after you went blind and how did you re­habilitate yourself?

General · MAAS. I was in the hospital at the time it happened for an entirely different thing. I had developed violent stomach pains which turned out to be an ulcer, and it was while I was being treated for the ulcer that my eyesight failed. Failed in one eye within a week and in the left eye within a . couple of months, but it failed quite rapidly.

When the doctors gave me the verdict that I was going to be blind and it was going to be permanent . blindness, actually for the first couple of days I wanted to die. I con­ceived of myself as just a blind, helpless old man. About the second morning I was lying in bed in a cold sweat. I could still see. I got up and went into the bathroom, took my shower, shaved, and dressed, keeping my eyes closed the entire time, and I sud­denly realized that it was not going to be as bad as I thought. I could do normal things.

Then actually, Eddie, from then on, I was so busy that I never had time to think of it again. I was handling liaison with the Con­gress at the time and handling this Reserve legislation that we had up and they were sending people out from the Pentagon to see me, and you Congressmen were calling me and sending your secretaries up, so I had them put in a telephone next to my bed, and from i;hen on I contip.ued to carry on on the telephone 8 or 9 hours a day. Then I was sent to rehabilitation. I think learning about rehabilitation very early, before I was totally blind, was a tremendous lift. I learned, that I could go to Hines, Iil.--

Congressman HEBERT. I would like for you to develop that point just a bit because I think that must be one of the secrets of this whole program-your own rehabilitation and how you apply it to other people in your work today.

General MAAS. When I learned that I was going to be able to be trained to get about pretty much normally, and that I would learn to substitute a cane for eyesight for traveling, that I was going to learn typing so that I could communicate written mes­sages to other people, and I would learn Braille, it was a tremendous lift to me. . When I got to the rehabilitation center I

found how ,practical all of these solutions were-in fact, they had a slogan to the effect that when you finished this course you could do anything that you did before except drive a car. I made sucke.rs out of them on that, because I drove a car. , ' •

Congressman HEBERT. A lot of people are driving riow who think they can see.

General MAAS. In fact, it was a whole new challenge to me.

You mentioned how I lit a cigar. I , was getting quite frustrated. You know, being al'l.. old Congressman, I have to smoke my cigars. I was so frustrated that I was about to quit smoking. I took a match and just drove it up into the bottom of the cigar and struck it. It lit, but I had to laugh at myself because I had to. smoke the wood. Then I got to experimenting and found that by holding a match underneath I could make it work every time.

In developing those things like dialing a telephone, I learned that if I put a little adhesive ·tape on the fifth dial of the tele~ phone, then I could count very fast because I had four places to count from. I will bet you that I can dial a · telephone faster than you can or anybody else with eyesight, be.; cause I do not have to waste time looking at the numbers.

Congressman HEBERT. With my eyesight, I cannot dial a phone at all, as you well know. I am in the same position. _

The reason I had a personal interest in ask­ing you about these things was that I hope :When the day comes when I am in the same position, I will have the courage to be as brave as you. .

General MAAS. EDDIE, it isn't that. You have great vitality and you will carry on.

I found, in fact, that I am able to travel more extensively now than when I had good eyesight. Last year, I traveled 150,000 miles and I do all of my traveling alone.

Congressman HEBERT. You went to New Orleans alone last year to make the Novem­ber 11th address.

.General MAAS. I have no difficulty getting around. With . radio and- the wonderful "talking books" that Cortgress provides for the blin_d, I am doing more reading now and better reading than I did when I had sight.

For instance, I get the Reader's Digest each month on these "talking books."

Congressman HEBERT. Is that a Braille book? -

. General MAAS. No, a "talking book" con­sists of long-playing records. They have marvelous voices. They get the best actors and actresses and radio personalities, and they read books. Right now, I am reading The Robe on "talking books." The Govern­men~, through the Library of Congress, will furnish any of these "talking books" to a blind person. They do not have to be a vet­eran. They will also furnish the recording machine for playing these records. They lend it to them for life and then these long­playing records are put in fiber cases and they are mailed to the blind person, the reg­ular catalog, without cost. When the blind

· person has read the boolc, he gives it back to _the Post Office Department and the books are mailed back to the Library of Congress. It is like a circulating library. -

· Congressman HEBERT. Exactly what is the procedure for receiving those "talking books," Mel? I think that is most interesting to blind people. Of course, they can write to :their Congressmen, I know, but let us tell :them how to get the books themselves.

General MAAS. All they have to do is get a doctor's certificate that they are totally blind or unable to read. With just that certificate they can write to the Library of Congress or, in fact, they can get the information through their local library in most cases. Other.wise, they can write directly to the Library of Con­gress, Washington 25, D. C.

Congressman BOGGS. What do you do at these meetings you attend all of the time?

General MAAS. Talk about the problems of hiring the handicapped and cite to them cases of employers who have hired the handi­capped and what good employees they are. The. most . enthusiastic supporters of this program are the employers who have hired some handicapped people. They are good workers and they are not troublemakers. !!'hey have fewer accidents and their safety record is high. Their absen:teeism is perhaps even a little less than the average worker.

Congressman BOGGS. I am certain that you must have the figures, but it seems to me that there must be a tremendous gap in the situation where you have a handi­capped person who cap earn a gainful liv· ing or a handicapped person who is depend· ent either upon his family or the State or the ·Government in some capacity. What is the difference?

General MAAS. I am awfully glad you asked that, because it is quite dramatic.

The average throughout the Nation-and this will vary in different States and differ­ent cities-for maintaining a person on wel· fare is about $1,500 a year. That goes on forever as long as you are maintaining that

•

6280 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE April i2 person. The average . cost for rehabilita~ tion, however, ts about $600, and that is a one-shot expeng.tture. So take a $1,500 welfare person, glve him rehabilitation and get him on the job~ and you have not only saved the $1,500 but you have started re· ceivtng taxes from ·such an - individual be. cause these rehabilitated persons, both men and women who are on the job, very soon become themselves taxpayers. -

Last y.ear alone the men and women who became rehabUitated and were placed on jobs - in the aggregate earned $115 milllori and paid ·somewhere between $9 million to $15 m1llion in taxes. Whereas, the year before they had -been costing the country nearly $50 million.

Congressman BoGGs. Tha:t is remarkable .. Congressman HEBERT. Mel, in your pro-.

gram to educate people, it has been called to my attention that you hold annual essay ~ontests. I have ·here the list of youngsters 1n Louisiana who won this year's contests:

First place; Sally Bett Grace, 304 Soutn Holly Street, · Hammond, La.: Southeastern High School. .

Second place: Caroline Gayle Morgan~ route 4, Joor Road, Batcin Rouge, La., Cen· tral High. -;

Third place: Marie Massiminl, 2130 Jena Street, New Orleans, Fortier Senior High. ·

Fourth place: Urline Andoni, 8335 Birch St reet, New Orleans, Redemptorist High.

Fifth place: A tie by Juanita Matherne, 1508 Riviera Drive, New Orleans, Holy Angels Academy, and Charles Barry Hillebrandt, 1920 Second Street, Lake Charles, La., ·Lake Charles High School.

What were those essays? General MAAS. It is a wonderful program~

EDDIE. We sponsor nationally-and, inci­dentally, the E>AV, which Ann mentioned'~ of which I am national commander, has put up the money for the essay winners·.

'The. first prize is $1,000, and they pay the expenses of the five winners to Washington to have their prizes '~presented to them at our annual meeting. It is a wonderful proj~ ect ·because these youngsters write on some phase of the handicapped. We· set the sub:.O Ject each year. . Of course, it is the first time they have . thought .much- about it-; an:d they take it home and d iscuss it with their parents. Well, it is the first time that most of the par.ents have ev.en thought about the problem or knew that, there was such a problem. It also gives these kids a lot more confidence in knowing that if any..; thing __ s~ould happlm to- them,. they can be t aken care of~ .They have n0-w learned that ·Ufe will not be a .blank for them: They have -learne<:l _that the blind~ the crippled.i the amputees, can lead a perfectly normal life. As each generation comes along, they are learning .more and more about it . . They; ~re going to be the employers ·and t:O.e em., ployees of the future, so we feel ·that it is . a most wonderful project.

Congressman Bpaas. Mel, is there some co., ordination in your work with tl_le other pro· grams ·like the program for retarded chil"' dren, and that sort of thing? .

General- MAAs. - We are not in the _ mental defl.ci~ncy side of it, . because we are char· tered only for the physically handicapped.

I think that will come along in time. We are paving the way. ·

As we open up opportunities for the physl· cally handicapped and educate the country to the acceptance of the physically handi~ capped, .we feel it _will open the path for the rehabilitated and retarded person. _ Congressman BOGGS. In ·conjunction with the rehabilitation of. the physically handi­capped. the Lousiana. State Unemployment Service has a special division for the employ .. ment of the physirially handicapped. ,

Cong.ressman HEBERT. I think they au do. General MAAS .. Every State now does; in

fact, in every local employment office there

will be a specialist on the pr~biems of plac.., lng the handicapped. . · ' . '·

Congressman HEBERT. In N~w Oi;leans •. they go one step further, Hale, and I am sure you 'are fammar with this. I thtnk they call i~ 'the Good Will Industries.

Stella Hanlon is the head of it down there~ · Congressman BOGGS. They have that in all the . States? . .

General MAAS. That ts international. Congressman !BOGGS. And then they giv~

the physically handicapped employment and very gainful employment.

Congressman HEBERT. That is a fine thing; lt is operated everywhere. That is a privat~ operation.

Miss CORRICK. The general was honoi:ed recently by the Good Will Industries. _

General MAAS. Yes, I was very proud to receive their international achievement award . . - Congi;.essman HEBERT. That is another de-

served honor. · . Miss CORRICK. General, in your travels, you

go overseas quite frequently, and I wondered . ~f you could tell us what countries overseaE! are doing for their handicapped people. ·

General MAAS. There are some programs, 'but they are nowhere ·near what we do. We are beginning to stimulate them arid it is giving them quite a lift and quite a challenge. . I have been particularly interested in Asian and African countries where traditionally nothing was ever .done for handicapped peo­ple. They were ashamed of handicapped peo.; ple, and yet they have great numbers of them because of malnutrition, disease, and illness. Our program is giving them a tre­mendous lift.

Incidentally, an entirely new and different concept of America has been brought to their attention which is quite the contrary to the · co~cept they were getting from Communist propaganda .. . I attended these international con~erences on rehabilitation of the World Veterans Federation. We now have 30 riat ions in it. I talked with delegates from Thailand; Cey.:. lon, Pakis.tan, Indonesia, India, Nigeria, Israel, and Eg~pt, and ·they are tremendously impressed · with. what we are doing for our handic'appea . . When they learn·· that 'these great . volunteer teams like the President's .Committee and Governors' committee take the cripples, as they call them,.·and give theni .medical restoration, vocational rehabilita~ tion, and then actually get them jobs-to them, that is almost unbelievable. It is hav· ing a tremendous impact upon them.

I have had so many of them tell me, '/Well. General, if.. your. people think so much of. the dignity .of the .individual- that .you take your cripples and restore them. so that they c~4 have dignity, then we believe that you are aecent p'eopfo . and the Communists . have p.een -l:ying -to .. us. . The.. Communists have sa!d that you are nothing but money-mad dollar-grabbing people. But those kinds of people do not worry about· the dignity of ~nd_ividuals._ So, if they have been lying tci us about that, maybe they are lying to us about a lot of other t:hlngs." So you see this lJrogram ls havl.ng 'a very wonderful iin~ pact on the rest of the world. · · ' ' Miss CORRICK. In helping to combat Com­munist propaganda against us?

General MAAS. Yes. The one thing that these Asians a.nci

Africans want after centur~es of supp~essi.on and colonization is not the Communist thinking of .just . more money and better clothing and more rhousing. · · ~ Miss ComucK. I am awtupy sorry, Genera\ Ma.as, but the clock is running out on us; .and we ~u~t stop. . ,_

Thank you so much !Qr.being here pn Date .. line Washington, General Melvi~ ;Maas, with Congressmen Hale BO'",.s and . F. Edward Hebert. · · ' · · QQ '

~is is Ann Corrick.

Inter-American .Solidarity

EXTENSIO~ OF REMARKS OJ'

HON. EDMUND ·P. RADWAN OF NEW YORK

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTAT1VES

Thursday, ~pril 12, 1956 " Mr. RADWAN. Mr. Speaker, in cele.,.

brating this Pan -American Day, we are .celebrating the 66th anniversary of that .day in 1890 when the American Republics ·united to form an association now known ·as the-Organization of American States--:;. an organization which constitutes the oldest international association of the world. In commemorating this eveni _symbolic in the history of the Western Hemisphere-and indeed . the , whole world-Americans throughout the 21 American Republics may well t~ke pride 'in the significance and importance of their continuous efforts in achieving the inter-American · solidarity .whfoh exists 'today. For· this deep-seat~d solidarity has many roots and has survived, many difficulties. . . · Even before the end of~ the colonfai period, during the la$· quarter of the :18th · and fil,"st quarter of the 19th --cen~ turies, . certain concepts were 'evolving throughout the Western Hemisphere .which have provided a unique framework for the special relationship charactertstic IOf inter-American reJations from · lsa; through modern times. This unique framework was compoun'1ed, first, from a feeling of distinctne8s from the EUro~ peans, -Asians, Africans, and others; sec; ond, from a heritage· common to all peo~ ples who have shared in chiseling out of a formidable wilder~es.s a new · way . of •life built upon courage, self-reliance, and determination; ahd, -finally, from the. mutual respect and understaridini;t common to peoples .' wh.o have . fre.ed the~se:lvea from_ coJoni~l domination.

The history of inter-American re1a~ tion8 w:Q.ich began in the'. early 19th pentury, falls· essentially into three eras; The first, 1810-95, was highlighted -by the evolvement in .182:3 of the Monroe Poctrine-a doctrine-designed primar~ly :to PJ:Otect the Western Hemisphere from European interference. However, dur+ ing this period each of,the Republics -waa concerned with its internal affairs. ,· .In the United States attention was concen.., trated during the middle of the century pn its Civil War and subsequently upon ~he mighty w~stern movement. In Latin America in the early part of the 19th century, UPheavaLwas rampant. Until 1825 when the last of the Republics had freed themselves from European political ,domina_tio~. waves _ of r.evolution swept from the Isthmus of Panama to the :Straits of Magellan. Following that great convulsi~n.- the· nations of the new free world . .were · still concerned -that European powers would return·. and -re· conquer their hard·won lands.- To off .. set such. a. threat, sinlon -Bolivar the gr~atJiberator. of northern Latin kner~ ica, convened a 9ongress Jn Panama iri 1826 t'! ,d~~uss m~l!r~ fQ:t :P~mispheric .cie!ense. And ,out Of this congress, came

~CONGRESSiONAL ~RECORD ._ HOUSE 6281 . a treaty qf perpetuar uniOp.," league and ·confederation. The .treaty related to mean$ for common def ehse, peaceful set-

. tlement of disputes and the -n;iaintenance of the territorial integrity of the mem­. b~r.s 9f . , the confederation-a theme which in essence has permeated all sub--

_sequent ·· conferences. · ·However, the hopes envisioned in the purpose of tha·t significant congress and its subsequent treaty were not quickly realized. As in the United ·States, the new Republics were busy with th'eir internal affairs, and

·the period from 1826 was punctuated with civil wars and intrahemispheric clashes. Nonetheless, still faced with

. the possibility of reconquest by Spain, the various Republics continued to meet from time to time to consider defense measures, the peaceful settlement of dis­pute~. cooperation in commerce an.sJ. navigation, and, later, questions of law and the control of contagious dis~ase&. . Thus, the dream of inter-American co-oper"ation was far from lost.

The second major era in inter-Ameri.:. can relations began in 1889 when the United states invited.· the. American Re: publics to the first Ii:lternational Con~ f erence of American State& here in Washington. This conference-the first

·of the series of modern conferences-was called to consider peaceful means of settling disputes and meaps of. im­proving commercial relations among the

·American countries.. From this confer":" ence came a multilateral treaty for the

·arbitration of disputes and the estab­.lishment· of that momentous "Interna­tional Union of ·American Republics" which we commemorate today. This In• ternational union was not ·a . political Union, '..but, ·rather; a · commercial one:. A perma:µent burea1:1 }Vh.ich constituted its secretariat was located in Washing7 ton. In 1910 this bureau was renamed the Pan American Union, and its terms of reference were expanded .in -keeping

:with the broadened scope·of the cooper­ative plans of the International Union ·which as the years passed had moved into the realm of economic, social, and cultural affairs as well as the purely commercial. All of these .factors con­tributed to and were indicative of closer .understanding and hemispheric solidar­ity. . . However, the real high tide of inter.:.

.American relations was during the pe~ riod 1933-1956, which constitutes the third era of these relations. Before this time, though there had been a · steady ·development in the direction of inter­American solidarity along cultural and economic lines, there· had been political difficulties which at times had been se~ rioq.s enough to threaten the Interna­.tional Union. But with the shift of posi­tion by the United States at the Mon­tevideo Conference · in 1933 concerning .the question of · interveµtion and with the conclusion there of a convention on the rights and duties of states more in accord with the views of the Latin Amer• icall. states than had been our stand in the past, th~ gooq-neighbor policy was launched. In the subsequent per.iod fro~ 1933 to 1946 numerous·conferences were .held, e~Q resulting ip. ·stronger declara~ tions of solidarity_ t,han before. With

CII~95

. . - . . .

the outbreak of World War II all but one of the Latin American nations con­tributed its full cooperation to tlie war effort. The Chapultepec Conference held in 1945 provided for continued joint

· defense of all the states of the hemi• ·sphere in case of aggression against any ·one of them, for steps to strengthen th~ ' inter-American system by increasing the authority of the Pan American Union, and for the establishment of an Inter­American Economic and Social Council.

·But the meetings in 1947 and 1948 not only put the cooperation which had ex-

. isted during the war years on a per­manent : basis,' but also reaffirmed the prillciples of · inter-American solidarity which had been developing over the en­tire century. At the conference in Bra-

·Zil in 1947, the American states adopted ·the Inter-American Treaty of Recipro:. cal Assistance which ·provided for per­manent collective self-defense in the ·event of an armed attack or threat against the peace and security of any one of the signatories, from within or from· outside the hemisphere. At the

:many ~ successful technical~assistance programs which have since been launched throughout the world.

The impressive spectacle of 21 inde­pendent and individualistic -Republics quietly; steadily, and persistently worl{­ing together in an '- atmosphere of dig­nity and harmony for the cause of peace and democracy, has always been a source . of pride in the Western :aemispnere and a source of 'admirati-on in· hemispheres other than our own. But today, with the threat of communism as great if not

. greater throughout the world than it has · ever been in the past, we' dare not rest on our laurels. We must, at every 1evel

-of our international relations-the po­litical, the economic, the cultural, and the social-rededicate ourselves to the

. service of that solidarity on which our splendid inter-American system stands and in so doing rededicate ourselves t~

· the service of the cause of world peace ·and progress .

Conference in Colombia in 1948, they Free Government Behind the Iron Curtain ·adopted the Bogota pact which consoli-dated and coordinated the many earlier ·agreements on arbitration and other ·peaceful means for settling disputes among member states. It was also at

,this conference that the Inter-American

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

liON. HERBERT ZELENKO . _· .system was given its new name-the or- OF N~w YORK

·ganization of American States. The new IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES . ·charter, in addition to tightening the Thursday, April 12, 19S6 administrative organization, rea:ffirmea the Organizatfon's concern with cultural, Mr. ZELENKO. Mr. Speaker, today'! social, and intellectual matters. The Or- recorded a speech for Radio Liberatiori,

· ganization of American... States has al- a democratic, anti-Communist radio sta­.ready. effectively proved its strength in .tion broadcasting to the peoples of the times of. crisis as exemplified by its Soviet Union in 17 languages. ·swift. action and dramatic success in con- . I gave my talk on the ·occasion of the ·nection with various controversies and 50th anniversary of Russia's first parlia­threatening situations which have arisen ment; the State Duma. I took that op­since 1948. portunity to point out that now more

But aside .from .the happy example to ·than ever Russia needs a freely elected the world of a group of 21 nations liv- ·government, a government which will

·ing · side by side, not always agreeing, heed the needs and aspirations of the but still' managing to work out our differ:. ·people. Only such a government can re._

·ences within the framework of an effec- · spect the dignity of the individual, the tive inter-American system, the in:fiu- ·right to dissent without fear of punish­ence of this remarkable system reaches ment, and -the -right to worship as one far beyond the confines of its hemi'- plea'ses. · My . listeners behind· the Iron spheric borders in still other ways. rt Curtain were told that not being a mili­was upon the · insistence of the Latin tary man, I did not understand fully all ·American countries that adequate pro- .the implications of an open inspection of ·Vision was included in the United Na- .one another's military instal~ations, but · tions Charter· for the continued ex.ist- .as a legislator I know for sure that an ence and operation of the regional or- .open inspection of each other's election -ganization system upon which so much procedures by all the nations of the emphasis has been placed in recent world would be the best guaranty for years. In fact, the Inter-Ame1·ican peace and freedom in the world. -Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance was the We in this country, of course, do not first regional agreement signed under fear the examination of our election pro';. :the provisicirr of article 51 of the United cedures. As a matter of fact, we encour:.. Nations Charter. Moreover, it was upon age the world to follow them. I believe this regional agreement that the North the Soviet· Union and the Iron Curtain .Atlantic Treaty Organization itself was cou_ntries woulq be more _apt to accept an .later modeled. ' ·open: inspection of their military instal­. In the area of technical assistance and ·lations than of their voting procedures, :economic cooperation, the inter-Amer:. :for such an· inspection would-shake to the ·ican system has also proved of partic:.. very foundations the fundamental prin• ular significance. For the United States ·Ciples of a totalitarian Communist gov:­tSPonsored program of extensive cultural -ernment. However, if they would con­and technical interchange .with Latin ·sent to it, I am sure that by the next elec­·American .countries under the aegis of tion we would have free governmentS ·the good-neighbor -pQlicy in effect behind the Iron-Curtain truly represent• served. as a . proving ground for the ing the people. ·

~6282 CONGRESSIONAL ·RECORD - HOUSE April 12

Peacetime Application of Atomic Power

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OJ'

HON. ELIZABETH KEE OF WEST VIRGINIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, April 12, 1956

Mrs. KEE. Mr. Speaker, the current news about the experimental gas turbine test automobile now on a cross-country tour comes at a time when Members of Congress are concerned with another type of industrial development in which the Federal Government has become deeply involved. Apparently the new car is still so much in the research stage that it is impossible to predict what the ulti­mate results will be. What is important is that further scientific and research developments may lead to an actual rev­olution in the automotive industry, so far as the propelling force is concerned.

This turbine power engine in the auto­mobile now on tour has been developed by the Chrysler Corp. without assistance from the Federal Government. It is an example of what can be accomplished under free enterprise through the cour­age of investors and the creative genius of America's technicians. How much longer will be required to put this kind of motorcar on a practical operating basis is not known. The Chrysler Corp. no doubt has earmarlrnd a special fund for this project, which will continue to be carried out on a schedule based on practicability and on budgetary consid­erations. Management knows how much can and should be spent in this work.

Now let us loek at the other industrial development to which I have referred: the peacetime application of atomic pow­er. As everyc;m~ realizes, the Federal Government went into the business of putting the atom to use for defense pur­poses. With the realization that :fission­able materials might be utilized in a number of ways other than for destruc­tion, the Government began a research program to learn just what could be ex­pected of the atom in a peacetime economy.

A great deal has been learned and a great many billions of dollars have been expended since the Federal Government undertook this program. We have, in fact, reached a point where the whole effort now needs to be reappraised. Through research, it has been deter­mined that electrical power can be gen­erated by using the atom as a fuel. That revelation is a welcome one. We are all enthusiastic at the possibilities opened through development of reactors which can be used to produce light and heat and power in contributing to a better life for all of us.

My question, Mr. Speaker, is this: Now that the way for atomic-produced elec­tric power has been opened, how much more of the taxpayers' money should be expended in this field? It is estimated that reactors now in the process of con­struction will be able to create electric

' power at perhaps 10 times the price of . what it would cost to do the same job through the use of coal. Our experts are convinced that this cost will be progres-

sively reduced as more is learned about the atom and how to handle it. I do not think that anyone would challenge this conjecture. It is entirely poE3ible that at some time in the future electricity from atomic plants will be competitive­pricewise-with that which comes from steam plants using coal. Perhaps Amer­ica's public-utilities industry will be able to accomplish this reduction in price through their own research and devel­opment programs. In any case, I believe that it is time for the Federal Govern­ment to stop going to the Treasury so that such ::t program can be expedited.

Let us have another look at the Chrysler research ·car. That car is a creation of private industry. If the Gov­ernment were to invest several billion dollars to bring about the consummation of the work envisioned in this develop­mental program, I am confident that the gas turbine automobile could be on the showrooms floors throughout the coun­try within a very short time. Similarly, if the Government continues to invest more Federal funds in the reactor pro­gram, America is certain to get a good supply of atomic generated electricity much quicker than if the electric utilities were forced to run on their own re­sources. I therefore suggest that Con­gress hesitate before approving of any further expenditures by the Atomic Energy Commission in this direction. The electric pawer company in my dis­trict of West Virginia has done all that can be asked of it without resorting to Federal contributions. When demand for greater supply of electricity has arisen, the Appalachian Electric Power Co. has increased its capacity. It will continue to do so in the future.

We in the Fifth Congressional District are making every effort possible to at­tract more industry. Our vast coal re­serves, which are the power behind elec­tric power, are one of · the inviting fea­tures of the area.

If the public utilities want to invest more of their earnings in the atomic energy program, the people of West Vir­ginia are certainly . not going to oppose the plan. We object, however, when the .Government insists upon contributing to a project which actually will create un­employment. I have come to the con­clusion that it is time for private indus­try to withdraw the hand that is accept­ing-under the garb of free enterprise­these Federal handouts in the so-called participating projects. It is at least ob­ligatory upon the Congress to object to the Atomic Energy Commission's con­tinued use of public funds for this pur­pose.

I call your attention to a letter which presumably went to the entire member­ship of the House from Mr. Tom Pickett, executive vice president of the National Coal Association. Mr. Pickett, who dis­tinguished himself in the House of Rep­resentatives as a Congressman from Texas, gave this brief explanation of the coal industry's Position with respect to the commercial development of atomic generated power:

The Government should conduct basic and applied research;

Government sponsorship of the develop.. ment phases of a power generation program

is justified-on the grounds that it may pro­vide economically feasible nuclear power for underdeveloped or power-~hort nations;

There is no urgency for the domestic de­velopment of atomic-generated power-an adequate supply of coal reserves guarantees a continued adequate supply of low-cost electric power;

Government subsidies should not extend beyond the development stages, and the amount of such subsidies be made public information.

It appears to me that Mr. Pickett has gone just as far as he possibly could in accepting the proposals for Government experimentation in the commercial ap­plication of nuclear power. It may be, in fact, that the Atomic Energy Com­mission is allowed too much latitude, especially in the light of its ambitious attempts to push the electric pawer pro­gram beyond the bounds of reason.

In the latter part of November of last year, President John L. Lewis- of the United Mine Workers of America, ap­peared before a Senate subcommittee and expressed this opinion regarding peacetime application of atomic power:

Atomic power, if, as, and when it comes, and if, as, and when we can survive its arrival, will only be able to produce energy for a very small percentage of our economic and industry requirements. As a matter of fact, I think it ls a safe assumption that the amount of dollars that is being put in and will be put into the development of atomic energy is much more than atomic energy will ever render American industry. Because by the time they encompass all of the prob­lems and make atomic power relatively etil­cient and learn how to coexist with atomic power-which has not yet been done-then some genius is going to harness the sun or harness the tides, or perform some other modern miracle that will render atomic power obsolete. . In the meantime, we have to keep warm

and keep our economy functioning. So we will do it with coal.. The coal industry for the first time for a long time is facing a clear road ahead. Modern mines, well designed, well managed, well financed with commer­cial outlets and credit are offering, today, as attractive opportunity for American in­vestment as can be offered within the limi­tation of our economy.

Congress must take these views into consideration before giving the Atomic Energy Commission a free hand to in­vest taxpayers' money in what should be a commercial business enterprise. By contributing most of the construc­tion and agreeing to provide the fuels for operation of atomic plants, the Atomic Energy Commission is in fact taking away traditional coal markets, whether or not these markets are within close .proximity of coal-producing areas. De­spite the encouraging increase in coal production for last year over 1954, we still have a very great number of un­employed miners in West Virginia. Some of them have not had employment for a long time, and tlieir families have had to depend upon surplus food and upon other such items which they are willing to accept only because they have been deprived of an oppartunity to earn their own subsistence. Government and private fuel experts have promised that consumption of bituminous coal in the United States by 1975 will be approxi­mately twice that ef the present time. Although output per man-day has been

1956 · CONGRESSIONAL -RECORD- HOUSE 6283 increaising steadily, it will still require a large force of skilled technicians to ex­tract the coal nece.5sary to meet rising demands; it is, therefore, illogical for us to permit the Government to follow pol­icies that would discourage our mining families from remaining in the coal­produeing areas. Our families have es­tablished their homes within working distance of the mines and they are quite naturally opposed to any Federal pro­gram that calls for using Government subsidies to drive them out of their jobs.

What also must be taken into account is that it is unfair for taxpayers to as­sume so much of the :financial ris~ in this whole undertaking. If the Federal Government completes the research, builds the reactors, underwrites the risks involved, and provides other subsidies, then turns over everything-plants and know-how-to private companies, how can such transactions be conducted in the name of free enterprise?

Mr. Speaker, I ask that Members of Congress keep these facts in mind when they read more about the gas turbine automobile· engine. As a creation of pri­vate enterprise, it will be produced if it is proven to be feasible and practicable; if not, the conventional motors will re­main in our cars until some newer de­velopment comes about. If the electric utilities, through their own :finances and ingenuity, are able to provide electricity from the atom at rates lower than those of coal-fired steam plants, America will welcome this progress. Until that day arrives, however, it is incumbent upon the electric power companies to use tra­ditional fuels.

The Overton-Red River \V aterway

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

HON.GEORGES.LONG OF LOUISIANA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, April 12, 1956

Mr. LONG. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the CoNGRES­sioN AL RECORD, I include a clipping from the Alexandria Daily Town Talk Times: HARDIN AGREF.s WITH REPRESENTATIVE LONG

ON CANAL STUDY SHREVEPORT, LA.-Maj. Gen. John R. Hardin

agreed with Representative GEORGE S. LoNG Tuesday in suggesting a new survey of the proposed Overton-Red River Waterway. ·

General Hardin, Lower Mississippi Valley Division engineer of the United States Army Corps of Engineers, told members of the Red River Valley Association a. reevaluation of the economics of the waterway would be neces­sary before it can be built.

"Great changes in the economy Qf the region t_o be served by the Overton-Red River Waterway and increased construction costs have made it necessary," Gen. Hardin said.

LONG NOT OPPOSED Earlier, Representative LoNG, an opponent

of the canal project as now: planned, told delegates from 4 States he was ~ot opposed to the project in principle. But he said he wanted a new survey before giving it his full backing.

General Hardin turther elaborated by say­ing, "When the initial report was made rec-

ommending the waterway, an economic study of costs and benefits, prepared in 1944, was

. a most important part of the supporting data. A comparison of costs and benefits arrived at 12 years ago must be reexamined before we can say that what was a good in­vestment for our country then is still good in 1956.

"We - are required, as a matter of long­standing policy, to demonstrate to ' the Chief of Engineers, the Bureau of the Budget, and the congressional committees that the proj­ect is sound before construction funds are requested," the general said.

BENEFITS VERSUS COSTS

"The economic analysis is a. weighing of benefits against costs and comparing it to business studies for plant expansion or en­largement of sales territory," General Hardin said.

The study involves a survey of current potential transportation savings, drainage benefits, up-to-date detailed construction cost estimat es, and a determination of the costs of relocating bridges, gas lines, p ower and telephone lines, roads, re.al estate costs for rights-of-way, and spoil-disposal areas.

On the profit side of the ledger is a com­merce analysis. He said that a study is b.e­ing made of exist ing commerce that m igl:it reasonably be expected to move into or out of the area by water.

Despite General Hardin's suggestion not to get too hasty in building was ignored by the meeting of the association.

EXTENSION SOUGHT Ending its second day of work, the asso­

ciation called for a speedier release of an engineer's report on a proposal to extend the inland canal from Shreveport to Texarkana and Jefferson, Tex. ·

The Members also passed a resolution r~­questing a speedup on a final status r~port by the Unit ed States Corps of Engineers de­tailing the possibilities of the long-sought Overton-Red River canal project. '

Fred Webb of Shreveport was elected presi­dent of the association.

EXCERPTS FROM A SPEECH DELIVERED BY HoN. GEORGE S. LONG, OF LOUISIA.NA, AT THE ANNUAL MEETING OF THE RED RIVER VALLEY

spring floods, cannot fall to be impressed with the absolute necessity for sumcient funds to protect this fertile valley which is indeed the breadbasket of America.

Now, my friends, much has been printed in the newspapers in recent weeks about the stand I have taken 1n connection with the Overton-Red River Lateral Waterway. I want to ass_ure the assembled guests, the Corps of Engineers, and the Red River Valley Association that I have never made the state­ment that I am opposed to this project, or any other project which might bring indus­try and progress to our section. What I have said is this: I am opposed to this or any other project which cannot stand the light of day upon it; I am opposed to any pro­posal which will damage beyond estimate the many in order to benefit the few.

I have asked the Corps of Engineers to furnish me with certain information which, tb date, they have not done. The data being used to justify the Overton-Red River Lat­eral Canal was put together in 1946, accord­ing to my information, n.ot by the Corps of Engineers, but by another agency hired to do the work. Times have changed sinca 1946 and it could well be that reexamina­tion will show a different picture altogether. So let me say in conclusion, my friends, that I want to endorse this project; by the same token I want the committees to have access to the data and evidence used in their sur­vey. I want the findings presented to the newspapers and TV and radio in order that the people can be informed. I want a de­tailed estimate of what it will cost local in terest and I want the cost-to-benefit ra­tio well discussed and justified. 'Iben my friends of the Red River Valley Association and of the Corps of Engineers, you will find GEORGE LONG in your corner. Thank you.

The Oregon Corrupt Practices Law

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

HON. HARRIS ELLSWORTH OF OREGON

ASSOCIATION, SHREVEPORT, LA., APRIL 2, 1956 IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES . Mr. Webb, members of the Red River Val- Thursday, April 12, 1956

ley Association, my colleagues in Congress, and honored guests, I am sure that I can Mr. ELLSWORTH. Mr. Speaker, in safely speak for every member of the Red the RECORD for Monday, April 9, there River Valley congressional delegation when appeared in the Senate proceedings a I say that we Members of Congress look letter published in an Oregon newspaper forward with great anticipation to this time signed by the State chairman of the in the spring when we have high hopes to Democratic Party. The same letter was be invited to the Red River Valley Associa- apparently submitted to many Oregon tion '.s annual meeting. It is indeed a high newspapers and printed in several of point in our life. So, Roy, let me insist that no meetings be held unless we are asked to them. I saw the letter in · the Portland attend. <Oregon) Journal. It is a political ef-

Almost every one of our friends here today fort but · contained so many untruths can be classtfied as expert on flood control that I thought it should be answered. and related subjects and we are bound by The Oregon Journal very kindly printed a desire toward a common goal-that 1s, pro- nearly all of the letter I wrote in reply. tection from one of mankind's most relent· Under leave to extend my remarks in the less enemies-uncontrolled water. However, RECORD and include a letter I present I believe the time is now when we can at the full text of my letter to the Journal long last, look down the road and see a glimmer of light shining on this protection. which was printed in part in its The Peo-I believe they Congress, the Chief Executive, ple Speak · column April 3: · the Bureau of the Budget, and all other offi- MARCH 28, 1956. cial agencies, and the heads of whatever To the EDITOR, OREGON JOURNAL, party might happen to be in majority, has Portland, Oreg. come to the conclusion that we can no DEAR Sm: A letter to the e.ditor ,which was longer afford to ignore the need for protec- printed in the Oregon J ournal Sunday, tion against floods. It is just this simple- March 18, 1956, signed by Howard Morgan, :floods are much too expensive to tolerate. chairman of the Democratic Party of Oregon, I am sure that the members of Appropria.- impells me to call your attention to a para­tions Committees who have ever visited the graph of the qregon corrupt pr~ctlce law. mighty Mississippi when it was bank fUll It read as follows: . . and rampaging; who have ever visited the · · "260.370. Political criminal libel; penal­Arkansas, the Red, and the other rivers in ty: (1) No letter, circular~ poster, ·bi11, pub­this great Southwest of ours in times of lication or placard shall contain any false

.6284 CONGRESSIONAL -RECQRD - HOUS-E April 12 statement or charges reflecting on .any can­didate's character, morality, or integrity. The author and every person printing or knowingly assisting in the circulation of the matter described "in this section shall be guilty of political criminal libel; (2) viola­tion of this section is punishable, upon con­viction, by imprisonment in the penitentiary for not more than 3 years."

The Morgan letter certainly contains false statements reflecting on my character and integrity, and I am a candidate.

The Morgan letter says: "Representatives NORBLAD, COON, and ELLSWORTH have spent the last 3 years parroting the private power line that the Federal Government has stopped building power dams."

No such statement has been made by any of us.

The Morgan letter says: "The record dem­onstrates that these men have dragged the.tr feet on every authorization or appropriation bill for Federal dams in the Northwest."

That is totally an untruth. I introduced and secured passage by the House of the bills to authorize the Cougar and Green Peter Dams and the Talent irrigation proj­ect as Federal multiple-purpose projects, including power. I have vigorously. sup-

. ported all such authorization bills. I have battled consistently for appropriations for these projects for 10 years and am doing so this year. Written records easily available prove this statement.

The Morgan letter says: "They offered no help to Senators MORSE; and NEUBERGER and Representative GREEN in last year's success­ful Democratic fight for three new starts on Federal dams in the Northwest."

That is an untruth. I appeared before the House Appropriations Committee strongly urging ·appropriations for those dams.' The Democrat Members of Congress made similar testimony some 2 weeks later.

The Morgan letter says: "They tried to de­authorize every Federal power project so the private power companies, after endless de­lays, can try to get authorization for gravy­train partnership deals."

This is likewise a falsehood. There has been no attempt to deauthorize Federal projects by Oregon Republicans. _

Those printed statements are clearly "false statements or charges reflecting" on my "'character, morality, or integrity"-to use the language of the law quoted above.

It was obviously the intention of the Oregon Legislature in passing that law to protect the public against untruthful state­ments and to protect candidates against such character assassination as contained in the Morgan letter quoted here. · Apparently, our opposition will, in des­peration, continue to make such attacks. This seems to be the New· Look in Oregon politics. I hope you, and the other editors and publishers in Oregon wm give most care­ful attention to all pol1t1cal material offered for publication to the end that the spirit as well as the letter of the Oregon law is not again violated.

Sincerely yours, HARRIS ELLSWORTH.

Development Little River Basin, Ark.-Okla.

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

' HON. OREN HARRIS OF ARKANSAS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, April 12, 1956 Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, along

with other Members of Congress, I was

invited to speak to the annual meeting of the Red River Valley Association in Shreveport, La., Monday, April 2, · 1956. It was my privilege to speak to the dele­gates of the association that afternoon. · The Little River and its tributaries in Arkansas and Oklahoma are a tributary of the Red River, which traverses several States, including Texas, Oklahoma, Ar­kansas and Louisiana. The development of the Little River Basin for flood control and water conservation is a part of the comprehensive Red River program.

There is a lot of interest in the devel­opment of this watershed and since the major part of the program would be in my district, I spoke to the association on this problem. Because of its impor­tance and the interest of the people throughout the area, I presented. a plan which I believe should be a basis to com­promise the differences and get this de­velopment under way. As a matter of public information and because of its importance, I include the speech I made at that time in the RECORD: ADDRESS BY HON. OREN HARRIS BEFORE RED

RIVER VALLEY ASSOCIATION ON APRIL 2, 1956 Mr. Chairman, members of the Red River

Valley Association, distinguished guests of , the Corps of Engineers, and friends, it is good to be back with you for this annual occasion. I consider it a signal honor and privilege to liave the opportunity of this visit and to participate in this program: I appreciate the courtesy of your kind invita-tion. ·

This second se~sion of the 84th Congress · is about half over. These few days of respite

. give us an opportunity to · reorganize and reinforce our vigor and vitality, which we hope will be conducive to more formidable results toward the best interest of our Na­tion. We are hopeful that out of the maze of activity, we will experience the best pos­sible decisions for the betterment of the American people.

I . want to commend this association for your efforts and continued progress toward the development of the Red River Basin. I know it appears sometimes that progress in this· development is slow. It is sometimes discouraging but through the patience, un­derstanding and determination of your of­ficers and members, and with the drive of your able and forceful executive vice presi­dent and manager, Roy Matthias, you have achieved some very fine results.

It has been my pleasure to work with :and cooperate with you and the people throughout the Red River Basin on those programs so necessary and imperative.

To be sure there are differences her4'! and there which are only natural and to be ex­pected in an area as big as Red River and which traverses some 4 or 5 States. The end result is the more important, however, as it always provides benefits and protection that bring advantages and economic oppor­tunities to the people. We have worked to­gether before the committees of the Con­_gress in authorizing these important proj­,ects and obtaining appropriations for their development. ,

I have been an ardent supporter of the programs for flood control and to develop our rivers and streams, and in the conser­vation of our water resources throughout my years of service in the Congress of the

· United States. It means so very much to the protection and economic opportunities of our people and thus strength to our Nation. I have personally observed what it has meant to the localities and the areas affected by such development.

Permit me to say that we have the finest support in these justified and worthwhile

projects of our Corps of Engineers. I am glad to see such a good representation of the corps here today. I want to commend them for the fine service they are performing for our country and to express my apprecia­tion for the cooperation I always find them

·Willing to give when at all possible. We are deeply appreciative of the fact

that we have been well received and had fine support and understanding from our congressional committees on this program for the development of the Red River Basin. The Public Works Committee and Appropria­tions Committee have both been quite con­siderate of our problem. Some of the major projects have been completed, as you know, such as, Bodcaw, Texarkana Dam and Fer:.. rell's Bridge, which is now under way, and there are many others.

There are others to be developed. The major and most important ones necessary to the comprehensive· Red River program are those in the Little -River Basin, a major tributary of the Red River. The major part of this proposed development is in my district. In view of the circumstances and the importance of controlling and utilizing the waters of the Little River Basin, I feel it is appropriate for me to discuss it on this occasion .

In the first place, I want to make it very clear that I am not an engineer and do not claim any capabilities as an engineer. We maintain a Corps of Engineers for engineer­ing data and information.

I also wish to say that I do not claim to know all the answers or to be in the position of determining myself what should or should not be done. It tequires joint effort on so huge a task.

My mail has been_ exceedingly heavy, indicating the tremendous importance of this program. A lot of people, good people, with good intentions have contacted me a°!)out it. I am always glad . to have such expressions of interest.

Also, let me say that I fully recognize the differences of opinion that prevail over the method of this proposed development. I am fully aware of the intense interest that exists and to the extent that many are ap­p~rently alarmed.

I cannot help but feel that some- of the tension which exists is the result of some misunderstanding, some misinformation, and some fears of sophistry which in my opinion are not present, together with some prejudices in the minds of a few well-mean­ing citizens to the extent this has almost become an obsession.

I wish that I was capable of presenting . the facts on which calm judgment would be

exercised and just decisions made. I think I know most of the people affected and I know them well enough that they want to do what is right and best for an concerned.

I a-m going to undertake then to present this in a way, based on the knowledge and facts that I have, which I hope w111 be un­derstood and considered accordingly. I want it perfectly understood that neither I, nor do I believe anyone else would want to do any injustice to anyone, or any area.

I have been quite familiar with this prob­lem since its inception. I, therefore, believe

. I know somethin~ about the facts and the problems involved. -

Let me give you something of the back-, ground of this matter for information. The

Corps of Engineers reported some years ago a program for the comprehensive develop­ment of the Red River Basin below Denison

· necessary to protect the lives and property of the people throughout the basin and its tributaries, including the Little River in Arkansas and Oklahoma. ·

In 1945, we experienced the biggest and most devasting flood in recorded history of the valley. As a result, the Congress au­thorized a number of projects in the Flood Control Act of 1946. Millwood Dam in my

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 6285 area was one of those major projects. The major . P.art of this . program · being in my district, imposes . terrific responsibiljty on me as your Congressman, which I am glad to assume, I feel .it my duty to do the best I can for my people.

It was authorized as a flood-control proj­ect only. There were no provisions made for conservation or water supply. In fact, there was no request for it at that time. I supported the authorization of the project, along with others then, and do not recall any serious objection being offered. This was in 1946.

In 1950, there was a; budget request of $150,000 for planning funds of the project. The Appropriations Committee of the House approved the planning funds and it was in­cluded in the bill reported by the committee.

At this stage, opposition to the project as authorized began to show, and an amend­ment on the floor of the House was offered to strike the planning funds. It was de­feated. . The bill went to the Senate and the oppo­sition had become more forceful and came to a head before the Senate Committee. The opposition was based on a desire for the development of upstream reservoirs and a reduced facility in the vicinity of Millwood.

As a result of the controversy, the Senate Appropriations Committee provided an addi­tional $200,000 and directed the Corps of Engineers to make a further study as to the economic feasibility and justification of de­veloping a number of upstream projects.

Remember, this happened in 1950, and no further progress has been or can be made until the report of the Engineers which was authorized at that time is filed with the Congress. Th.e Congress has not yet had the benefit of the report from this addi­tional study and now 6 years have elapsed.

In 1954, this question unfortunately was injected intp a political campaign in my district. When you infect politics into one of these type problems, so often nobody wins and everybody loses. _ .

I thought I saw what would be necessary if we were ever to be able to work out a solu­tion.

I endeavored to obtain engineering data and information from our ·Corps of Engi­neers to be used as a basis for a decision which I believed to be best. Therefore, I took a definite position on the c.ourthouse front at DeQueen, in Sevier County, and outlined · a program that I would support, should it be economically feasible, as deter­mined by the Engineers.

I stated public.ly then and unequivocally that I would support the development of upstream dams with modification or reduc­tion of Millwood making it a much smaller project. I had been advised by the Division Engineers Office that it might be possible and that such a program, if it could be worked out, would reduce the Millwood project by some 25 or more percent of its original authorized capacity. This was 2 years ago.

I have not changed my position since that announcement, as I have had no further in­formation that any other plan would be more feasible, justified, · or acceptable.

A year ago, the Red River Valley Associ­ation included a request to the Appropri­ations Committee, $250,000 for planning of the presently authorized Millwood project. There was no budget request before us. I appeared with your group representing this association and opposed the request to the committee for planning funds at that time. I did so on the basis that the Congress had previously provided for and directed the Engineers to make the survey of ·the up:.. stream projects and report. I _ urged the committees then of both the House and the Senate to join me in requesting the Engi.· neers to ,get their report in to the Congresi;;.

Last September, the district engineers and the southwest division i:Q.· Dallas submitted

technical data and information to_ the Chief of Engineers' Office in Washii:igton, with cer­tain recommendations. This information will be on the basis of the final report. Some seem to think that the information and data filed, together with the recommendation of the field engineer is the final decision. This is not necessarily true at all.

Under established procedure, it ls yet to be considered by the Board of Rivers and Har­bors, composed of top otncers in the Corps of Army Engineers. It is then submitted to the governors of the States affected for com­ment and the Federal agencies.

The Chief of Engineers will consider all of this information as he makes his decision, -which will be fi·nal and which decision will be included in his report filed with the Con-gress. .

Now, as to the present status. The divi­sion engineer has announced the submissio.n of their data and information, together with their suggestions to the Board of Rivers and Harbors in Washington. The announcement explains the recommendations of the district engineer. In addition, it invites attention that there may be further consideration giv­en to the justification of including (1) Luk­fata in Oklahoma, and (2) water supply at Millwood. It invites interested parties to present views on these two questions along with the other suggestions in the report. Comments are to be received by the Board of Rivers and Harbors by April 17.

Following this public notice, the Board has issued a notice of public hearing to be held in Washington on April 25. All who are interested or may be affected by the plan of improvement to be considered are invited to appear.

Now, as to the question of what should be done in the best interest of all who may be affected. I should like to give you what I honestly believe would be in the best inter­est and call on all parties today to consider it with reason, calm, sound judgment, and on a .practical and realistic basis.

rt is a compromise proposal which I sub­mit as a basis of agreement and as a joint and united · effort.

In considering this compromise proposal I wish to remind you that there are two pro­posed methods for the development of the Little River Basin. ( 1) Millwood Dam and Reservoir as authorized in 1946, which would

. require the taking over by the Government a huge reservoir area of 107,000 acres of land, and (2) the construction of some six up. stream reservoirs with a greatly reduced Millwood in capacity and acreage require­ment.

In presenting this proposal for your con­sideration, let me ask you to keep in mind three basic facts. These three basic facts from my information cannot be denied or re­.futed. They are the basis for determining the method of properly and adequately con­trolling the waters of the Little River Basin to better serve the interest of all the people.

The first basic fact we must keep in mind is that the waters of the-Little River Basin will inevitably and ultimately have to be controlled as a part of the comprehensive flood-control program of the Red River Ba­sin. This is recognized by most everyone familiar with this problem. It is an accepted fact.

To meet this problem and to provide ade­quate flood protection, water conservation arid water supply I think the public would be better served by providing for the con­struction of upstream reservoirs to .be sup­plemented with a reduced facility at Mill­wood.

Therefore, I think the upstream reservoirs should be authorized and · constructed as a basic part of this program. I think all six of the proposed dams in the upstream areas should be included as a comprehensive pro­gram in the upper reaches of the Little River Valley. This would include Lukfata Dam in

Oklahoma, about which there seems to be some close economic question.

I think there should be as much fiood­control protection in these six upstream reservoirs as · they can provide.

I think each of these upstream dams should have as much water supply as the reservoirs can provide for the use and benefit of any possible development in the area.s affected. For this water supply the upstream reservoirs would have first call on the water that could be impounded in them for this use.

Many people have asked me in letters and through other contacts to support the con­struction of upstream dams. This is a part of my proposal which I believe should influ­ence people in this area to accept this com­promise plan and join me in getting it under way. To give assurances for the upstream dams and supply of water I would be favor­able to specific provisions in the act as a safeguard, similar to the language contained in the authorization of Denison some years ago.

U the people of Oklahoma and in my area in western Arkansas affected want these ben­efits and heavens knows they need them, I will lend my wholehearted support to obtain them, just as I said I would 2 years ago.

The second basic fact which must be con­sidered is that to economically justify and provide adequate flood protection it will be necessary to have modification of the pres­ently authorized Millwood project. This is a fact confirmed in every report or statement of the Engineers.

Some people have been led to believe and sincerely feel that it would be sutncient to satisfy the program by the development of these six upstream projects and thus make it unnecessary to have any facility _at Mill­wood.

I am informed by the people who know, that is, the Corps of Engineers, that in the first place it is not possible to provide suf:­flcient flood protection by these several smaller projects, and in the second place, un­less there is a modified facility at Millwood, the Government could not justify the ex­penditure of the funds necessary for the construction of the upstream projects.

I am informed that in addition to the flood protection that can be provided by upstream projects, there should be a facility at Miil­wood sufficient to provide maximum flood protection of 1,666,000 acre feet. This would be a reduction in capacity of that facility .by a little more than 25 percent from the original proposal.

With the construction of such a facility to provide this minimum requirement, some are fearful that it would adversely affect present highways, railroads, and some existing in­dustry. I want to here and now allay any such fears.

Highway 71 'would remain where it ls. It would be raised slightly in varying amounts .for a distance of 5.5 miles, I am advised.

The G. N. & A. Railroad from Nashville to Ashdown would not be relocated. It would be raised by varying amounts for a distance of about 14 miles. The service it provides would not be impaired or afiected, in any way.

Neither would the Missouri Pacific Railroad or the Kansas City Southern Railroad be af­fected at all.

The town of Okay would not be affected because it is located above the reservoir area.

The Okay Cement Plant would 'not be endangered or aftected. It would be ade­quately protected by a levee more than 8,000 feet long. ·

The town of Mineral Springs and the town of Horatio would not be adversely a1Iec.ted or ever be threatened in any way with' :ftobd-waters. .

Another thing, some of our Oklahoma friends are fearful that some ·of theil' '1liinds will be submerged by a Millwood ;) facility.

'6286 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- HOUSE April 12 With a modified Millwood, not 1 foot of land in Oklahoma would be fiooded with even a. maximum fioOd.

This is not my word as a. layman, but it is assurances from the Engineers who know what the :facts are.

Therefore, if .anyone has any such :fears. on these questions let them pass from your minds. ,

Now, then, another important question is~ how much area would be affected?

Under the original proposal which was authorized in 1946, 107,000 acres o:f land would have been subject to floods. That amount of property would for all practical purposes have been useless except for flood protection. ·

Therefore, the third basic fact is that with a modified Millwood complementing the up­stream dams, the 5 year fioOd line would in­clude an area of approximately 63,500 acres of land. This acreage would be required whether the proJect would be an open, so­called dry dam, or a closed, so-called wet reservoir.

This land would become useless for alf practical purposes other than :flood control. A small percentage of it could perhaps be usable for pasture purposes. Thts is a re­duction of some 40 percent of the acreage involved as originally contemplated in the authorized project.

Nevertheless, this sixty-odd thousand acres of land would be necessary to the project as a necessary part of the overall pro­gram, regardless of whether it would be an open or closed dam.

Should, in addition, ~water supply be in­cluded in MillwoOd for utilization in the area, it would require an additional estimated '1,300 acres of land, or less, depending upon the amount of water supply.

Therefore, whether there would- be an available supply of water for municipal, ' in­dustrial, and other purposes, or it would be a dry dam used only for :flood protection in­volving only some 7,000 acres of land.

I think these are facts that ought to be understood by everyone in the consideration of this question.

Another fact, which is apparently mis­understood, if my mail is any indication, is that o:f the acreage which would be affected by the project, either wet or dry, only about 10 percent are cultivatable lands. A few acres, about 1,000 in fact, of tllis cultivatable land affected are located in Howard County. Only 2,000 acres or less in Sevier County and some 3,000 in Little River County. The rest ,of it is wooded lands, with a goodly portion o:f timber already cut out.

I repeat that this will be the effect, whether the project would be open or closed.

Another question which has been so highly exaggerated and misunderstooct according to my mail, is the effect it would have on con­tinuous timber harvesting operations. Some have been led to believe, and ·honestly feel, that there are enormous amounts of timber­lands involved with the issue.

As it is in the case of the acreage, it would only amount to some 'l,300 acres, or less, dependent on the amount of water supply. No one could seriously contend that this relatively small acreage could have any great effect on any large timber operation.

I am assured by the Engineers that there is plenty of water for all the storage supply that can be provided by the upstream dams and an amount in Millwood depending on the acreage of storage supply available. Therefore, even if water supply were to be included in the Millwood Reservoir, it would not deprive the upstream proje~ts of 1 gal-lon of water. ·

Thus, the entire issue hinges on a difference of only 5,000 to 10,000 acres of land involved, dependent upon the aznount of water sup­ply and most of this would be cut-over timb,ered lands. ' This to me, when. all the facts are recog­nized, should not be of sufficient conse-

quence to cause such grave concern o:r a. proper and just settlement to fail.

Therefore, it is my intention to go before the Board o:f Rivers and Harbors, on the 25th of April, in support of a. program based on these facts for the construction of au six upstream reservoirs for such flood pro­tection and water supply as they will pro­vide; as . necessary to complement them, I will support and recommend a modified Millwood Dam with flood protection of 1,500,000 acre-feet- capacity.

This is 166,000 acre-feet less than sug­gested by the district engineer, which would be converted to and to provide for a water supply for municipal, agricultural and in­dustrial purposes in the area.

If this were to be accepted, no additional acres of land would be involved by the water supply storage. The same number of acreS' of land would be required with this pro­posal as if it were to be a dry or open dam suggested in the data and information of the Division Engineer.

In my opinion, this would not materially affect, if at all, flood protection. In fact, it would provide over 600,000 acre-feet more of :flood capacity than the original Millwood proposal would have provided. .

If this recommendation is unacceptable ta the Engineers. as an alternate plan, I will suggest that the additional acres necessary of some 5,000 to 10,000 acres be included to provide such water supply depending upon the amount engineeringly feasible.

If, as has been established, this would not atrect the highway, the railroads, the· cement company, or · these communities adversely, and would not deprive any of the upstream reservoirs of any part of their water supply, and thus not interfere with any opportunity for the development of industry, and would not involve but 1 a few additional acres. of land, if any, that would in no way impair or affect timber or mill operations, there could be no legitimate, obJection to this approach to the problem.

Again, I call on all ol those throughout the area affected, to seriously consider this ap­proach as a practical and realistic method of determining this questfon.

If we could have unity and united effort, we could get this to the Congress and au­thorized this year. If not, it will be most difficult and perhaps impossible to get it in this year's omnibus authorization.

If this or some similar approach is not ac­cepted the alternative will be tragic to our area. We may very well be faced with a problem which would be beyond our reach.

As I have already said, Millwood Dam is presently authorized for :flood cont:rol pro­tection only. If we fail to reach some ac­ceptable compromise there will inevitably be a budget request for this presently au­thorized project.

The Engineers, the Government and the Congress, no doubt would conclude that since we have not reached. an agreement the presently authorized project at Millwood should be constructed. Certainly the Red River Valley Association will be urging it. Should a budget be submitted to the Con­gress to initiate its construction it would very likely be accepted regardless of our ef­forts. This is so, because as. I have said, as a basic fact, the waters of the Little River Basin will inevitably be controlled.

Should this happen we would never be able to get any of the upstream reservoirs. We would in fact be barred forever of making them economically feasible.

Should this happen there would be no water supply in the Millwood Reservoir . . The people throughout all of the area would be forever barred of any water supply so badly needed and n.ec~ssary i! we are to have any

, future development. ' Therefore, you can see :why I plead for ·

some acceptable compromise in. order that we will not lose the greatest economic op-

por-tunity ever a_fl'orded for the future of this area.

The only objection in my opinion that could be seriously entertained against this solutlon would be on the questien of pollu­tion. I cannot conceive of anyone advocat­ing that. this -river be used as a sewer dis­posal. If so, they might as well change their thinking.

This river has been one of the :fl.nest streams for recreation in the country. The people are not going to permit it to be so destroyed. Our Stat.e and the Conservation Department of Arkansas, in my opinion,. would never permit.

In fact, industry throughout the country is fast coming to a full realization that pol­luting the streams must come to a halt and other methods of disposal adopted. There is urgency now for legislation to prevent pollution, both in the States and in the Na­tional Congress. This. is a policy the country might as well in my judgment get ready for. I hope it will so be understood at the outset in this particular instance.

I earnestly solicit serious consideration. o:f the members of the Re'd River Valley Asso­ciation and o! all those who may be affected throughout the area of this position which I take, and these recommendations; which I believe would do justice to all concerned ..

There is no area anywhere in greater need or economic opportunities and development than the area affected by this watershed in Oklahoma and Arkansas. There has never been a water project developed anywhere that did not bring opportunities !or eco­nomic development to it. I want to see some of these advantages brought to our part of the country, and I am thoroughly convinced that If the people· throughout the area would jofn together with me in this development, it would enhance our- economy manyfold. It is our chance, let us take advantage of it.

Analysis of Farm Bill

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

HON. A. L. MILLER OF NEBRASKA

IN THE' HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Thursday, April 12, 1956

· Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Speak­er, the agriculture bill of 1956 represents the combined judgment of 10 top men on the Senate and House Agriculture Committees. They worked many days and nights diligently and carefully in order to produce a bill that would be acceptable to the administration. It is very difficult to write an agriculture bill that will fit all parts of our agriculture economy in the 48 States. There were conflicting ideas that had to be compro­mised.

I believe the bill the conferees brought to the House· was brought by men who lifted themseives above prejudices and partisan politics. They tried to write a bill that would serve agriculture, but they naturally did not please all sections of agriculture. . Indeed, the three great farm organizations do not see eye to eye on the question of accepting or rejecting the bill. I have listened carefully to the debate; I have read the bill, and I am of the opinion that there is more good in the bill than there is bad. There are some things . that I would have liked to have taken out of the bill-there are some things that I would have kept in

1956 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 6287 the bill. It seems to be the best measure we can get.

I voted against recommitting the farm bill because the only provisions that would increase the farm income for 1956 would have been stricken from the bill had it been recommitted.

The President, in his message to Con­ress on January 9, 1956, set up a 9-point program and urged prompt action in or­der to increase the farmer's income this year. The soil bank would have placed about $1.2 billion in the pocket of the farmer. It is too late for the soil bank to take effect in 1956. It seemed to me that the only way to carry out the Presi­dent's wishes to raise the income of the farmer this year would be by keeping parity prices up for 1 more year. With­out this provision there would have been a reduction in the parity prices as well as in the acreage. You cannot help the farmer by taking land out of production, and at the same time reducing the prices he receives. ·

I feel there is more good in the bill than bad. . The soil bank, which will go into effect next year, is designed to pay the farmer for taking land out of production. · The present bill contains a domestic parity plan for wheat. This must be voted on in 1957 and carry, by two-thirds vote of the wheat farmers, in order to become effective. The bill carries .a dual, modern pric·e system for 1 year. This is designed to raise farm income until the soil bank can become effective. It con­tains a provision for $500 million to proc­ess surplus crops and get them into chan­nels of relief both in this country and in foreign countries. It contains a provi-

SENATE MONDA y' APRIL 16, 1956

<Legislative day of Monday, April 9, 1956)

The Senate met at 12 o'clock meridian, on the expiration of the recess.

Rev. Charles Duell Kean, D. D., rector, Church of the Epiphany, Washington, D. c., offered the following prayer:

Almighty and most merciful God, who art the Sovereign Lord of men and na­tions, in whose hand the rise and fall of empires are but as grains of sand, yet who carest in infinite love for all Thy children;

We pray Thee for the Senate of these United States assembled in Thy presence, that Thou wilt bless its Members in the performance of their duties, and· that Thou wilt prosper their underta:rings as these can be related to Thy divine providence.

Give to the several Members of the Senate, we pray Thee, O Lord, wisdom, courage, and consecration; overcome their fears, support them when they are tormented by anxiety; enlighten them when they are perplexed and uncertain; strengthen them when they are under pressure; and comfort them when they face misunderstanding.

Relate their deliberations and coun­sels, O Lord, to the welfare of this Nation

sion for a commission to study the prop­osition of converting surplus crops into industrial alcohol. It contains a provi­sion to prohibit production of supported commodities on Government-owned land.

I am convinced that the buying power of the farmer is essential to the men and · women in labor, industry, and business in all communities. Farmers find them­selves in a price-squeeze situation which in many towns has severely affected all business.

Farm income was estimated in 1955 to be about $10.8 billion. That is down 9 percent from 1954. In 1954 farm in­come was less than it was in 1953. The 1953 income was less than in 1952. The President said in his January 9 message, "Farm prices and incomes are depress­ing; unless corrected, these economic re­verses are a direct threat to all of our people." I believe this bill as enacted, with the dual modern parity system, will bring income to the farmer this year. Dual parity and 90-percent parity will be the only means for a year to assure the farmer additional income. This is the only way you can carry out the President's desire to raise the income of the farmer, because the soil bank, which would have cost -$1.2 billion, cannot be­come effective this year. The 90-percent parity will cost less than the soil bank.

If the farmer approves the domestic parity plan for wheat by his vote in 1957, it will not cost the Government one thin dime. I think it is a good provision. There are some consumers who claim it will increase the cost of bread and flour, but the evidence shows that ftom 1948

and the physical, moral, and spiritual health of all its people; use their en­deavors to bring peace and harmony in all the length and breadth of this land; and make their achievements serve Thy sovereign purpose through contributing to the wider peace of the world.

All this we pray in the name and for the sake of Jes us Christ, our Lord. Amen.

DESIGNATION OF ACTING PRESI­DENT PRO TEMPORE

The legislative clerk read the follow­ing letter:

UNITED STATES SENATE, PRESIDENT PRO TEMJi'ORE,

Washington, D. c., April 16, 1956. To the Senate:

Being temporarily absent from the Senate, I appoint Hon. ALBEN W. BARKLEY, a Senator from the State of Kentucky, to perform the duties of the Chair during my absence.

WALTER F. GEORGE, President pro tempore.

Mr. BARKLEY thereupon took the chair · as Acting President pro tempore.

THE JOURNAL On request of Mr. JOHNSON of Texas,

and by unanimous consent, the reading of the Journal of the proceedings of Thursday, April 12, 1956, was dispensed with.

to ·1955 wheat prices declined 31 percent, while the price of bread went up 28 percent.

Under the present farm bill, wool and sugar are supported at about 100 percent parity; cotton, tobacco, and peanuts at about 90 percent parity. The only crops not being supported at near 90 percent parity would be corn and wheat.

When the soil-bank provisions become effective, there ought to be a reevalua­tion and a restudy of the parity situation.

I repeat, you cannot help the farmer by taking land out of production or by reducing the parity price he receives. I trust the President will consider this when he decides the question of signing or vetoing the bill. I trust his advisers will point out that the soil bank cannot become effective this year, and that if he really wishes to keep the income of the farmer in balance, then the dual­parity and the 90-percent-parity provi­sions in the bill will be in existence this year. They are only for 1 year's dura­tion.

There are some provisions in the bill that I do not particularly like; but when you consider that 10 earnest, sincere men worked many days on the compromise, you must conclude that there is more good in the bill than harm. It cannot please everyone. Each Member of Con­gress has a duty to perform to his district, State, and Nation. I have followed the dictates of my conscience. I hope the advisers to the President will weigh care­fully the pros and cons of the bill, par­ticularly in the light of the President's message of January 9 this year.

MESSAGES FROM THE PRESIDENT Messages in writing from the Presi­

dent of the United States submitting nominations were communicated to the Senate by Mr. Kibbe, one of his secre­taries.

MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE A message from the House of Repre­

sentatives, by Mr. Bartlett, one of its clerks, announced that the House had passed a bill <H. R. 9893) to authorize certain construction at military installa­tions, and for other purposes, in which it requested the concurrence of the Senate.

HOUSE BILL REFERRED The bill <H. R. 9893) to authorize cer­

tain construction at military installa­tions, and for other purposes, was read twice by its title and referred t9 the Committee on Armed Sei·vices.

LEA VE OF ABSENCE On request of .Mr. JOHNSON of Texas,

and by unanimous consent, Mr. GEORGE was excused from attendance on the sessions of the Senate until a week from today.

EXECUTIVE SESSION Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi­

dent, I move that the Senate proceed