Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 16, 2016
Document Release Date: 
September 29, 2004
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
April 27, 1961
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1.pdf5.63 MB
6388 ApprovedCFa8V1ggs (%1/1Wi1~o -RCP RqW46R000200160015-1Apri& 27 done. The first thing to recognize is that whatever is done should not be done hastily. There must be no repetition of the in- credibly inefficient intelligence analysis of the Cuban situation which preceded last week's fiasco. To those who knew the sit- uation in Cuba and knew the formidable strength of the leaders and their regime, the outcome of such an invasion attempt was inevitable. And even had it succeeded, the CIA concept of putting in a right-wing government that would have been branded as a Yankee creation was dreadfully wrong. It is obvious that the first step must be to reorganize the personnel and methods of the Federal officials dealing with the Cuban problem today. Any policy, any action to be taken in the future must be based on an accurate assessment of the situation. There are certain developments that would force the United States to act; and such action would be fully understood by the world at large. If the Russians, for in- stance, were to set up missile bases or move in with a dangerous degree of military sup- port; if Americans were killed and the lives of the remaining Americans were jeop- ardized; if Premier Castro were to attack Guantanamo Bay or mount military in- vasions against his Caribbean neighbors- in such cases the United States would, of course, have to intervene directly, and presumably so would other members. of the Organization of American States. Barring such obviously dangerous, al- though unlikely, developments, the United States should not intervene. Why not? The grave political consequences; the blow to the moral standards and principles by which we live and which are a source of strength in the cold war; the fact that armed inter- vention without the clearest provocation would reduce our policies to a crude con- test in power politics; the loss of needed allies; the perilous international complica- tions-these are the results that would flow from such armed intervention by the United States in Cuba. Even more basic than our differences in economic system is our philosophic differ- ence with the Communists: We believe in freedom and the rule of law among indi- viduals and among nations. This is the es- sence of what America stands for in the world, and it is our greatest source of strength. We must preserve it. The hegemony of the United States in the Western Hemisphere is threatened for the first time in a century. It can only be de- fended by a positive, creative policy, one that builds. Of course, we are strong enough to crush the Castro regime, but to do so by force would lose us far more than we could gain. It is hard to be patient under such provocation and defeat as we have experi- enced. Yet it is the mark of true strength to take both defeat and victory in one's stride. The chief danger to the United States and the rest of Latin America is not Cuba by herself, but Cuba as a possible model for other revolutions, and Cuba as a base for the spread of anti-Yankee or communistic doctrines. How to counter the creeping sub- version of the totalitarians is the great problem for the free world, as President Ken- nedy has recognized. It cannot be done by adopting their methods. That would be to surrender. Defend the security of the United States. Continue by all legal means to encourage the anti-Batista, anti-Castro Cuban exiles in their determination to establish a free and democratic regime with social justice. They must not be abandoned. Above all, prove-by deeds not just words- that we are determined ' to support the de- mands for social reforms throughout Latin America; that we are not merely anti-Com- munist; that we will opose right-wing-re- actionary military dictatorships as we do left- wing, communistic dictatorships; that we ask partnership and cooperation, not sub- servience. This is the only kind of inter- vention that can permanently succeed in Latin America. FEDERAL AID TO EDUCATION Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, I ad- dress myself to the subject of Federal aid to education. There are several bills pending, on this subject, and notwith- standing what a specific bill might be numbered or might contain, the end re- sult will be eventual Federal domination of our system of public education and the absorption by the Federal Govern- ment of one of the last remaining privi- leges of home or self-rule and determi- nation. For the Congress now to ac- quiesce to the pressure demands against which it has stood so firmly, and rightly so, for more than a century and a half will mean complete capitulation against the will of a vast majority of the citizenry of our Nation. Mr. President, the record will clearly show that it is not local school boards, not the municipal or county govern- ments, nor even the State governments that are demanding that the Federal Government wedge its way into this field. And for those few who have yielded and subscribed to the philosophy, "Let the Federal Government do it and relieve us of the cost," they speak with inconsider- ate tongues and blindness over their eyes. Mr. President, none but the blind will deny that, if the Federal Government is going to pay the piper, it is most certainly going to call the tune. There was a salutary lesson on this subject back in 1959, when several leading institutions of higher learning refused to accept Fed- eral moneys under the National Defense Act of 1958 because of certain federally imposed requirements. Dr. Griswold, president of Yale, one of the universities involved, expressed the views of that uni- versity in this manner: Such restriction partakes of the nature of the oppressive religious and political test oaths of history, which were used as a means of exercising control over the educational process by church and state. I do not wish to take sides in this past controversy, but simply to use it as an illustration. It does seem that both par- ties were acting within a reasonable con- cept of duty. The two universities, on the one hand, were perfectly within their rights to reject the funds and to guard jealously their freedom from the politi- cal dictates of the State. But on the other hand, the State was certainly also well within its rights in saying that it will not use its governmental power to lay taxes upon all the people and then use the money collected to subsidize those people who believe in or teach the overthrow of the very Government that is supporting them. In any event, it is foolish to suppose that the State will do such a thing. Sometimes it might be reasonable in what it asks; sometimes it might not be, but again, if the State is going to pay the piper, it is most certainly going to call the tune. The vision of the great many W?*io advocate that the Federal Government come to the aid and succor of our educa- tional system runs only so far as to see that the system is in need of money and that the Federal Treasury is large. They delude themselves into thinking that somehow they. c -m tap this cornucopia and pay no price for it. The community of taxpayers through- out the Nation has provided well for ele- mentary and secondary education. The diversity of local school boards, of local governmental bodies, provides that these schools shall not be run on monolithic lines; some have more reasonable re- strictions put upon' them by those who support them than do other like institu- tions, but all of them, let it be noted, are beholden to the public that pays the lo- cal taxes, and therefore to the political agents of the local public. Manifestly a great danger lurks in a single state, the Federal Government, providing money for all schools over the Nation. For them diversity will be lost, all eventually must conform to a national standard, and there will be lost that freedom which is most prized. FEDERAL CONTROL UNAVOIDABLE Now ' Mr. President, there are those who decry the suggestion that Federal aid to education will bring about Federal control and restrictions. Let us exam- ine just two of the proposed bills. In one, S. 1021, I read that funds would be provided for teacher's salaries and school construction and, now hear this, and penalties would be provided for States whose school effort does not increase each year at a predetermined national percentage. In S. 8, if my interpreta- tion of the language is correct, funds would be available for teacher's salaries and school construction and, now here it is again, penalties for States whose school effort falls below the national average. Mr. President, rightly so, the Federal Government cannot be expected to make loans, grants, or gifts of money for any program without placing restric- tions according to national goals or na- tional standards; and in what other light or manner, Mr. President, can any- one but the blind see that these national goals and standards are nothing more than Federal controls? The majority of these pressure groups who so strongly advocate Federal aid to education say they are shocked by such accusations and statements. They say, have no fear, the Federal Government will not dictate to us and our schools will continue to operate in complete local independence and freedom. But now, Mr. President, let us look at the record and listen to talk out of the other side of their mouths. Increasingly, there have been voices within the educational profession that say "local control of education has clearly outlived its usefulness on the American scene" and that "the United States is inexorably moving toward a national system of education." An edi- torial in a leading journal of school ad- ministration stated that "the national welfare demands the national system of education." And yet, Mr. President, these very same people say Federal aid Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 196 Approved For Reletbe a .(gRf&ATA 0 4 003gfK0AQ,?,J00160015-1 6387 Mr. President, the will of a great na- ians. It is essential that this initiative tion should not be manifested by pre- be 'forwarded and that the prospective cipitate action. Instead, its will must be program be doubled in money and man- shown with wisdom, as well as with power, so that barriers to expansion of power and purpose, as befits a great na- tion. The administration must have an opportunity to do this. It is already clear that the administration will not yield to any temptation that will inter- fere with that opportunity, and will not renounce, as the President reminded our neighbors, freedom of action essential to our "primary obligations which are the security of our Nation if the nations of this hemisphere should fail to meet their commitments against outside Communist penetration." So the first lesson is that at this time our Nation should act wise- ly-not precipitately-at a time which we choose, not at a time when we may feel that we are being rushed to take action. Second, it would be unwise and would hamper our own national interests if Congress were to undertake a public in- vestigation of the CIA. The President has acted with propriety in the appoint- ment of a high-level review body "for a governmentwide study of paramili- tary operations within the Government" to be heavily concentrated on the CIA. General Taylor, Attorney General Ken- nedy, Admiral Burke, and, CIA Director Dulles comprise a body 'which should adequately assure the country that the review will be thorough and meaningful and will, I believe, be undertaken with- out reservations. This certainly does not exclude the consideration of the desirability of a joint congressional committee, similar to the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, to oversee the operations of the CIA, sub- ject to the full safeguarding of security. That, too, should be done without our engaging in a process of washing our linen in public, with the accompanying embarrassment arising from a public in- vestigation. This means that the CIA should not be made the subject of a pub- lic investigation. In addition to this self-examination, I believe there are two areas in which we can also help meet with vigor and vision the Cuban challenge. First. We must concentrate our ef- forts on activities that will implement the President's Latin-American develop- ment program, the Alliance for Prog- ess. An auspicious start has been made by the House, led by its appropriations subcommittee-heretofore unfriendly to foreign aid-which now has granted fully the President's request for $500,- million to launch the project, plus an- other $100 million to help Chile recover from last year's disastrous earthquake. I have urged that the 18 principal European nations and Canada, that are parties to the OECD, which the United States has already joined, should make the Alliance for Progress its first part- nership effort, thereby doubling the available resources to meet the urgent need for economic development in Latin America. I think they will do that- in view of the way I have seen their interests manifested in connection with the work in the NATO parliamentar- Lain American exports be lifted in We,tern Europe and that the private eco lomy in Western Europe and the Un ted States be effectively tied into the tot{l effort. Every expert points out that if Communist-oriented Castroism is to find any important support in the Western Hemisphere, it will be because of in wa time the trade, health, education, ;er and soil resources, land use and er economic potentials of Latin America. In addition, the emphasis on sel-help in the Alliance for Progress should convince the other American re- publics that we are a partner, not a patron. For the people of Cuba them- selves, the Alliance for Progress is su- premely important. They must have aid for adequate economic development an4 economic justice. They can get these and we can help enormously with- out the totalitarian regime which they are now suffering. The Alliance for Progress should certainly be available to ',them as they throw off the Castro dictatorship. The Castro regime prom- ise$ them only lower living standards, deprivation of their liberties and will confine Cuba more and more to the low estate in terms of its economy and the enjoy oment of life by its people-con- dit ns so typical of a Communist satel- lite. We must make clear that we are opposed to dictatorships of the left as well. as to dictatorships of the right. Second. We must preserve the oppor- turl:ity to proceed multilaterally. We mist constantly keep before the eyes of they other free nations of the Western Hemisphere the tyranny of Castroism, with the expectation that they will rec- ognize it as the threat it is to their own freedom and security, and will meet their commitments to defend the hemi- sphere against Communist subversion. I believe there is a fair prospect that the other American Republics will recog- nize, first, that the Communists will use the doctrine of nonintervention to mask their subversive purposes; and, second, that the size and weight of the Com- mt}nist-furnished arms makes the Castro regime far more of a threat to the security of the other Republics in Latin America than had been realized. Al the American Republics must recog- ni a the juridical as well as the moral pr priety of invoking the authority of th Inter-American Treaty of Recipro- ca Assistance of September 2, 1947-- the Rio Pact, which, for the Western Hemisphere, is tantamount to the NANO Alliance-as implemented by the Declaration of Solidarity adopted at thinter-American Conference at Caracas-the Caracas Declaration--on March 28, 1954. A role in the informa- tioial part of this process may well be- co ie a most vital function of the ref- ugees from Cuba and may be very sig- nificant to the ultimate course of events. I point out again that article 6 of the Rib Pact speaks precisely of the inviola- bility and integrity of the "sovereignty or political-independence of any Amer- ican State" being "affected by any fact or situation that might endanger the peace of America." Under such cir- cumstances "the organ of consultation shall meet immediately, in order to agree on the measures which should be taken for the common defense and for the maintenance of the peace and secu- rity of the continent." The decision may be taken by two-thirds of the sig- natory States that have ratified the treaty, and may result in "recall of chief, of diplomatic missions; breaking of diplomatic relations; breaking of consular. relations; partial or complete interruption of economic relations or of rail, eea, air postal telegraph, and ra- diotelephonic or radiotelegraphic com- inun:ieations; and use of armed forces." Only as to the use of its own armed force? is such a decision not binding on every signatory State. The other sanc- tions must be applied, if voted under the terms of the treaty. It is a very tight treaty; and only two-thirds of the nations participating are needed in order to bring it into operation, This treaty is supplemented by the Caracas Declaration, which says: The domination or control of the political institutions of any American State by the international Communist movement, ex- tending into this hemisphere a political sys- tem of an extracontinental power, would constitute a threat to the sovereignty and political independence of the American State, endangering the peace of America. The signatories to the Rio Pact are all the 21 American Republics. Those represented at Caracas were the same, with reservations only on the part of Guatemala, Mexico, and Peru. We in the United States have a right to expect that, at the proper time, enough of the signatories to the Rio Pact, rec- ognizing the immediate and present threat posed by Castroism to freedom in the hemisphere and-and I emphasize this---to their own security, will make the Rio fact effective in this instance. In the tradition of a bipartisan for- eign policy-as sponsored by the late Sene,tor Arthur Vandenberg-in circum- stances such as these, I urge support for the balanced approach that I have here described. I hope very much that this may also be the view of my colleagues. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD an editorial enti- tled "A Policy on Cuba," from the New York Times of recent date. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: A POLICY ON CUBA Whit next in Cuba? The Cuban exiles have been defeated militarily and the United State:., which supported them, has suffered a political defeat. However, history as not like a bon ng match or a baseball game. It flows like e, river. The United States and Cuba are too much intertwined by history, geo- graphy, economics, and strategy to be sepa- rated. Cuba has been. caught up in the vast etorm of the cold war. All the forces unleashed by the Cuban revolution are still operating.. Thfrefore, something has to happen, and the instinct is to say: something has to be Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 1961 Approved For R aNRgf & 1Al: IZfC;C 6 B MTE 0200160015-1 of conference on the dij_.g;eeing votes of the two Houses on the amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 4884) to amend title IV of the Social Security Act to authorize Federal financial par- ticipation in aid to dependent children of unemployed parents, and for other purposes. I ask unanimous consent for the present consideration of the report. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The re- port will be read for the information of the Senate. The legislative clerk read the report. (For conference report, see House pro- ceedings of April 25, 1961, pp. 6271-6272, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.) The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there objection to the present consideration of the report? There being no objection, the Senate proceeded to consider the report. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the conference report. Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi- dent, I should like to make a brief statement on the report. There were no major differences be- tween the House and the Senate in re- gard to the temporary program to ex- tend Federal assistance to the children of needy unemployed persons in which the Senate yielded to the House. In al- most all instances the House receded ,to the Senate position, with these exceptions: The Senate receded to the House pro- vision which requires that a State plan for the new program must provide that cooperative arrangements be entered into with the State vocational education agency looking toward maximum utiliza- tion of its service facilities to encourage retraining of the unemployed parent. The program will last for a 14-month period, from May 1, 1961, through June 30, 1962, as provided in the Senate bill. Louisiana in asking that the Senate ap- prove the conference report. Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask that the question be put again. The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the confer- ence report. The report was agreed to. NOMINATION OF JULIUS C. HOLMES TO BE AMBASSADOR TO IRAN Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. Mr. President, earlier this week the Com- mittee on Foreign Relations ordered re- ported the nomination of Julius C. Holmes to be Ambassador to Iran. When this nomination is considered by the Senate it is my intention to oppose Mr. Holmes' confirmation. Much has been said in recent months by both congressional committees and the Attorney General of the United States about the need for higher morals and greater integrity in private industry. Yet by confirming the nomination of Mr. Holmes as Ambassador to Iran the Senate will be placing a cloak of respect- ability upon "shady deals" maneuvered for the purpose of making "a fast buck" when such shady deals involve Govern- ment officials. Are we to establish a lower standard of morals for Government service than is required of private industry? Can either the Congress or the Depart- ment of Justice point the finger of scorn at questionable business practices while closing our eyes to "slick deals" involv- ing Government officials? In a later speech in opposition to this nomination I will deal more specifically with the impropriety of some of Mr. Holmes' financial deals. I shall then point out how by question- The House accepted a Senate amend- able maneuvering, if not in actual viola- ment, with a modification, postponing tion of the law, Mr. Holmes and his asso- the effective date of the provision ciates pyramided a $101,000 investment whereby there will be no withdrawing into a quick profit of $31/'4 million. of Federal payments because of such But today I shall merely enumerate a statutes for any period up to September few of the points at issue. 1, 1962. Under the conference agree- Several years ago Mr. Holmes and his ment, States will be allowed a further two associates-Joseph E. Casey and E. period in which study may be given to Stanley Klein-were engaged in a highly this problem, and the Secretary of questionable tanker deal in which they Health, Education, and Welfare can co- placed the making of "a fast buck" above operate with the States in working out the national interest. a solution. At the time Mr. Holmes and his as- The Senate receded as to its amend- sociates purchased eight tankers from ment which would have changed the the Maritime Commission there was a name of the "aid to dependent chil- law prohibiting their sale by the Govern- dren" to "aid to families with depend- ment to foreign-owned or foreign-con- ent children." It is the understanding trolled companies. It was likewise illegal of the conference committee that the for an American company purchasing Department of Health, Education, and these tankers from the Government to Welfare is looking into all aspects of the resell them to foreign-owned or foreign- aid to dependent children program and controlled companies without having ob- that the appropriateness of the change tained the prior approval of the Maritime of name will be thoroughly explored at Commission. The purpose of this pro- that time. vision was to guarantee that these With those exceptions, Mr. President, tankers would remain under the control the House receded to the Senate position of the U.S. Government. in all other respects. By circumventing the law, or at least the intent of the law, Mr. Holmes and The PRESIDING OFFICER. The his two associates sold all of these tank- question is on agreeing to the confer- ers to companies which were both for- ence report. eign-owned and foreign-controlled. Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. Mr. Mr. Holmes tries to claim that they President, I support the Senator from did get the approval of the Maritime Commission, but every member of the Maritime Commission emphatically de= Hied when testifying under oath before a senatorial committee that any notice had been given concerning the proposed sale or that any approval had been ob- tained. I quote the Hoey committee's report confirming this statement: There is no credible evidence that Mr. Morris or any other representative of the United Tanker Corp. group made a complete disclosure to the commission concerning the arrangements between the Casey group and the United Tanker group which were entered into as early as January 1948. What is even worse, one of these eight tankers, the Kettleman Hills, which the Holmes-Casey group turned over to a foreign owned and controlled company was subsequently leased to Soviet Rus- sia. The tanker was then used by Rus- sia for the purpose of transporting oil from Romania to ports in Communist China and North Korea. Mr. Holmes tries to shrug off respon- sibility for what this foreign owned com- pany did with the tanker after his com- pany sold it. But we must not overlook the fact that this tanker came into the possession of these foreign owners as the result of highly irregular, if not actually illegal, maneuvering on the part of Mr. Holmes and his associates. The Hoey subcommittee which investi- gated these sales in 1952 strongly de- nounced these transactions as morally wrong and clearly in violation of the in-' tent of the law. Mr. Holmes and his two associates, in violation of the clear intent of the law and without taking any financial risk at all received $150,000 clear profit for each tanker they turned over to this for- eign group. Therefore, they cannot dodge some responsibility for what hap- pened. The most bitter denunciation of this transaction whereby one of these tank- ers was chartered to Soviet Russia for use in transporting oil to Communist China and North Korea came from former Secretaries of Defense Louis Johnson and General George Marshall. Beginning with October 1949 and ex- tending through October 1950 they wrote a series of letters to the Secretary of State bitterly denouncing the use of these American tankers to transport Russian oil and emphasized that such action was definitely detrimental to the security of the United States. It was not until December 1950, 6 months after the outbreak of the Ko- rean war that the use of these vessels in Russian trade was stopped. Now, what excuse did Mr. Holmes and his two associates give for selling this tanker, the Kettleman Hills, and two other tankers to this foreign owned and foreign controlled company? They said they considered the com- pany to which they sold the tankers- the United Tanker Corp.-to be an American owned and controlled company because the company had only four stockholders, three of whom were Ameri- can citizens. Therefore they reasoned that the company was 75 percent Ameri- can owned.and controlled. Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 Approved For Release 2004/1 p/1 P64gQQ34000200160015-1 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE April 27 What Mr. Holmes, Mr. Casey, and Mr. two vessels; were engaged in Communist and that confidence is endangered when t Klein did not disclose was that this trade. ethical standards falter or appear to falter. company-the United Tanker Corp: at " " In concluding his message, President the time they exercised the option to This entire investigation has demonstrated Kennedy said: capitalized for to the subcommittee calculating how various groups of buy these tankers was shrewd and calculating businessmen and at- Ultimately, high ethical standards can be $2,500,006. Of this $2,500,006 capital- torneys, through an intricate series of cor-? maintained only if the leaders of Govern- ization the one foreign stockholder, a porate and financial transactions, were able ment provide a personal example of dedica- Chinese citizen, owned $2,500,000 while to realize substantial profits by taking ad- tion to the public service and exercise their the three Americans had investedin the vantage of the confusion and mismanage- leadership to develop in all Government em- company exactly $2 each or a total of $6. ment which marked the administration of ployees an in.reaeing sensitivity to the etid- How naive can any man be? By what the surplus ship disposal program by the old Cal and moral conditions imposed be above line of reasoning can anyone with a Maritime Commission. service. straight face claim that three men with reproach. The subcommittee concluded with this a total investment of only $6 in a $2,- statement: I know of no stronger statement which 500,006 corporation can control its The subcommittee is of the opinion that could be me,de against the confirmation operation? As if this claim were not there appears to be sufficient evidence of of Mr. Holmes. Certainly his conduct ridiculous enough it developed that the violations of the civil provisions of the was not above reproach. foreign stockholders had an option to Merchant ! Ship Sales Act in these tanker / buy even this small amount of stock the Department of Justice. roInpaddition the VW THI4 LESSONS OF CUBA $1from for these each man. Americans at a price of concealment ment and misrepresentation of perti- Obvi Obviously, these three men merely got tent of factsiby various officers and representa- Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, at this ry In time of examination and self-examina- inquiry n tives P t $10,000 each for the use of their names their deal~e; fingarms s involved ed I n this iu with the Maritime Commis- tion of the events in Cuba, I believe it is just as Mr. Holmes and his two asso- Sion leads the subcommittee to believe that important that those of us who hereto- ciates got $150,000 per tanker for the use various criminal statutes may have been fore have spoken on the subject should of their names in getting title to three violated by these individuals. make clear our present position. Happi- tankers from the U.S. Government for * ly, we are relieved of the worry about the purpose of turning them over to this This was a unanimous report of the sub- France, and can turn again 1-41 the Cuban foreign group. committee. situation. This is but one example of the many CLYDE R. HOEY, A serious reverse was suffered by the flimsy excuses advanced tiMr. Holmes Chairman. forces of freedom in the Western Hemi-L. MCCLELLAN. and his associates to justify Mr. series Joan H. sphere when the Cuban patriots were of shady and highly irregular proce- THOMAS x. R. N. UNDERWOOD. repulsed 011 the shores of Cuba. But the dures surrounding many of the trans- JOSEPH R. MCCARTHY. President has made clear, in his historic actions involved in the purchase of eight KARL E. MUNDT. address to the American Society of tankers, every one of which was ulti- RICHARD M. NIXON. Newspaper Editors, that-- mately transferred to foreign owned and I thinly the Washington Post in its edi- The Cuban. people have not yet spoken controlled companies. All of these tonal of February 22, 1952, best summed their final piece. transfers were made without the legal up this transaction when it said: Neither :have we, because, as the Presi- approval of the Maritime Commission. The involved surplus ship negotiations of dent also slid : I will discuss these transactions in Joseph E.' Casey and his associates seem to greater detail when we consider the We do not intend to abandon Cuba to the fall somewhere in between what is legal and Communists. nomination, but today I shall close by what is proper. The Inquiry by the Senate reading from the conclusion of the Hoey investigating committee may not show that From our experiences in Cuba we can subcommittee which investigated these the Casey group actually violated the law. learn some valuable lessons. transactions. The Hoey subcommittee On the other hand, the procedure whereby First and foremost, a high order of na- report was filed on May 29, 1952. I great profits were realized on transactions tional and partisan discipline is now which resulted in American surplus tankers , quote from the report: ending up under the control of foreign- called for. It is not a time for anl,ry The clear and stated purpose in selling financed I corporations will strike at least postmortems on blunders. President surplus tankers under the Merchant Ship some persons as a slick deal. Eisenhower, Vice President Nixon, Gov- Sales Act was to develop and maintain an ernor Rockefeller, Senator Morton, Sen- efficient and adequate American-owned mer- Mr. President, Iran is a very important ator Dirksen, and Representative Halleck chant marine. In the opinion of the sub- country.] It is located in one of the have made this admirably clear to the committee, it was never the intent of the world's most sensitive areas. It is very Nation and to the world, in the name: of law to allow this type of profit grabbing in important that the U.S. Government be the Republican Party. Full opportunity the allocation or sale of Government-owned represented at this important post by an surplus tankers. Ambassador whose integrity is above must be eaforded our Government to Furthermore, representatives of both the take stock of our own situation, and, National Tanker Corp. and the United Tan- reproach. through channels readily available, to ker Corp., in their negotiations with the Any individual who was connected evaluate the situation in the 19 other Maritime Commission which resulted in with a financial transaction which was American republics, and to determine United obtaining control of the three tan- widely recognized as a "slick deal" by the significance of the Cuban episode in kers, did not disclose the complete facts 'shrewd ! and calculating businessmen" respect to the entire cold war struggle concerning the transactions to the Commis- is not such a man, in this hemdsphere. Certainly this is not Sion." Today' Mr. President, we received a time for precipitate action. Between July 1949 and May 1950, two fromthe President of the United States It would be very easy to yield to the American-flag tankers owned by subsidiaries an excellent message recommending cer- perfectly natural impulse to seek, of the United Tanker Corp. and the China tain needled legislation to deal with the by whatever means required, to rid the International Foundation, Inc., were char- conflict-pf-interest problem. At the same Western Hemisphere of the threat of the tered to the Soviet Government and car- time, the President emphasizes to Con- Communist-oriented Castro regime. But ried six cargoes of petroleum and other oil gress an d to all Government officials the such a policy would also prove to be products between Constanza, Rumania, and importance of establishing high moral shortsighted and unwise. As the Presi- Koma, and iaports in North China, North standards in Government. I shall read dent has said, so clearly and porten- The , of the opinion that excerpts', from this excellent- message tously: The subcommittee ub no American-flag vessels should have en- from the President of the United States: A nation of Cuba's size is less a threat to gaged in the Communist oil trade. These There Can be no dissent from the prim- our survive:_ than it is a base :for subverting were the only American-flag vessels known ciple that all officials must act with unwaiv- the survival of other free nations throughout to have been trafficking in the Communist ering integrity, absolute impartiality, and the hemisphere. It is not primarily our In- oil trade at that time, and it is paradoxical complete'. devotion to the public interest. terest, our security, but theirs which is now that other vessels of the United fleet were This principle must be followed not only today in ever greater peril. It is for their making substantial profits In the carriage of in reality but in appearance. For the basis safety as well as our own that we must show ECA oil during the same period that these of effective government is public confidence, our will. Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 Approved For 646TE00200160015-1 April '27 gram which may be described as compre- hensive4 In the old-age assistance programs in 1958, 49 of the 53 States and territories made specific provision for nursing home care; 39 for drugs; 36 for dental care; 35 for hos- pitalization; 35 for physicians' and other practitioners' services; and 34 for prosthetic appliances' It has been estimated that about 70 percent of the payments made to suppliers of medical services in behalf of public assistance recipients in all four cate- gories were made for old-age assistance recipients. The rising costs of the medical care com- ponent of public assistance, particularly for the 2.4 million persons on old-age asssistance, has led to public concern, and there has been a growing recognition of the need to evaluate public assistance medical care pro- grams. As a result, systematic reviews of State and local programs have been under- taken with increasing frequency in recent years .0 Typically, the commissions, the committees, and the consultants making these reviews describe the administrative structure of the program, the scope of serv- ices provided, and the patterns of providing services. Cost data are usually presented in some detail; service or utilization data, with few notable exceptions, are not pre- sented, generally because they are not avail- able. Such program reviews are of only limited usefulness in the evaluation of public assist- ance medical care programs. To be sure, some inferences concerning the quality of the care provided may be made from de- scriptions of administrative patterns with respect to staff organization and respon- sibility, the presence or absence of profes- sional advisory committees, the scope of services available, and the manner in which they are provided. But such basic questions as: How much medical care is actually being received? and: Is it enough? cannot even be approached without carefully collected and properly interpreted utilization data. Furthermore, as regards qualitative ade- quacy, the question, To what extent do re- cipients receive medical care meeting ac- cepted standards of quality? must also be answered. Measures of the quality of care by professional service auditing ("medical audits") would provide the answer? How- ever, these technics, which were developed for use in hospitals and in selected health insurance plans, have not been used in pub- lic welfare medical care program reviews. A notable feature of the program re- views mentioned above is their emphasis on cost data. This is due to the tradi- tionally fiscal orientation of public assist- ance programs and is reinforced by the prevailing method of purchasing medical 4 Bierman, P. Where Are We Going in Tax- Supported Medical Care? Paper presented at APWA Southwest Regional Conference (Apr. 7), 1959. s Social Security Administration, Bureau of Public Assistance, "Medical Care in Pub- lic Assistance: Information Relating to Changes, Early 1957 to January, 1958," State Letter No. 333, Apr. 8, 1958. 0 See for example: American Medical As- sociation, Council on Medical Service, "A Report on Medical Care for the Indigent in 18 Selected Communities," 1955; New Jersey Commission to Study the Adminis- tration of Public Medical Care. The Report and Recommendations, October 1959. 4 (a) Rosenfeld, L., "Quality of Medical Care in Hospitals." A.J.P.H. 47:856, July 1957. (b) Daily, E. F., and Moorehead, M. A., "A Method of Evaluating and Improving the Quality of Medical Care," A.J.P.H. 46:848, July 1956. care in public assistance programs, i.e., by vendor payments. Dollar figures originating in the agency's -ccounting office flow quite naturally as a byproduct of the process of paying physicians, hospitals, and other vendors. Emphasis on the almost exclusive collection of cost data stems also from widespread lack of appreciation of the rele- vance of utilization data for program evaluation. Both cost and utilization data are necessary for program evaluation. But in assessing the relative value of each for this purpose, it should be borne in mind that when utilization data are available, a conversion can readily be made to cost data by applying prices to the items of serv- ice. The reverse process, the conversion of cost information into utilization data, is more difficult, and at times, not possible. Moreover, differences in fee schedules and hospital charges invalidate interprogram comparisons based on cost data alone by obscuring variations between programs in the volume of service rendered. The American Public Welfare Association, among other activities directed toward the improvement of public welfare administra- tion, has given special attention to medical care programs in public welfare depart- ments. It has recently developed a "self- evaluation schedule for medical assistance programs," B and is currently sponsoring, with funds secured from the Public Health Ser- vice, a program of research in the adminis- trative aspects of public assistance medical care programs. Studies leading to the im- proved administration of these programs are now being carried out by the Bureau of Public Health Economics, University of Michigan. In reviewing research efforts to date' it soon became evident that there is very lit- tle information on the amount of medical care received by recipients of public assist- ance. A preliminary field survey indicated that even in the relatively few States which collect such data, there are important gaps. Also, the limited information which was available did not lend itself to meaningful interstate comparisons because of differ- ences in definitions of service and the ab- sence of basic caseload data from which to develop utilization rates for comparative purposes. Recognizing that evaluation is a critical element of sound administration and that adequate utilization data are necessary for the evaluation of public assistance medi- cal care programs, it was decided to focus the initial phase of the research program on the collection of such data and on the quantitative appraisal of services received by recipients of public assistance. Although it is difficult to separate quantity from quality in regard to the adequacy of medi- cal care, studies of quality as such, e.g., the application of medical audit technics, have been deferred. The selection of the public assistance medical care programs for study in the initial phase of the research was in part dictated by considerations of time and cost. It was decided to limit this phase to old-age assistance medical care programs in a rela- tively small number of States. The OAA category is a more homogeneous popula- tion group than the other three categories. The largest proportion of total outlays B American Public Welfare Association, "self-evaluation schedule for medical assist- ance programs, 1957." ? American Public Welfare Association for medical care in public assistance Is absorbed by this group. Finally, the OAA category was selected because of widespread interest in medical care for the aged, an in- terest which has been intensified by the debate over the Forand bill. No attempt was made in this study to present a national picture of OAA medical care programs or to estimate the amount of medical care received by the 2.4 million persons on old-age assistance. Attention was directed rather toward the development of satisfactory methods of collecting ade- quate utilization data, solving the problems which were encountered, and indicating the ues of these data in program evaluation. A word of caution regarding the limi- tation of utilization data is in order. Rec- ords of the use of services are limited to those services for which the administering agency makes a payment. In some areas, welfare recipients may receive a broad array of services for which no payment is made by the welfare agency and of which the agency will have no record. Such "free" services vary in amount and, if they are of some magnitude, they should be taken into account in making interprogram compari- sons in terms of utilization data. Two criteria were used for the selection of States. In order to secure utilization data on a broad array of services, only those States with comprehensive medical care pro- grams for OAA recipients were considered. The State program would have to include at least physicians care-general practitioner and specialist-in office and home; hospital care; dental care; and prescribed drugs, to be selected for the study. Second, States were chosen whose record systems make the collection of utilization data feasible. For example, State programs which provide for important elements of medical care through money payments to the recipient, rather than by vendor payments, present many complex problems in the collection of utili- zation data. With these considerations in mind, the old-age assistance medical care programs of four States, Rhode Island, Connecticut, Maryland, and Illinois, were selected for study. The Maryland program is distinctive in that it is administered by the health de- partrnent; there are also some differences among all four States in the services pro- vided and in payment to vendors. However, the similarities between them in terms of the services provided, in methods of provid- ing service, and in other administrative fea- tures far outweigh the differences, so that utilization data were collected in four basic- ally similar, comprehensive medical care programs for the needy aged. The method- ology of data collection and the complete findings of this study will be presented in a monograph to be published by the Ameri- can Public Welfare Association.10 This paper deals with some of the ways in which utilization data can be used in the evaluation of OAA medical care pro- grams. Illustrative data from three of the four States studied are presented. If the question, How much medical care is actually being received? can be answered, then a sec- ond question, Is it enough? must also be asked. In the absence of generally accepted norms of quantitative adequacy, utilization data, taken from published reports of the experience of a medical care plan for an in- sured population 65 years of age and over (the Health Insurance Plan of Greater New York) and of the experience of the general and Bureau of Public Health Economics, "American Public Welfare Association University of Michigan, "Public Assistance and Bureau of Public Health Economics, Medical Care: Areas of Needed Research University of Michigan, "Old-Age Assistance and an Annotated Bibliography," Novem- Medical Care: A Four-State Study," (to be her 1959. published). Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 1961 Approved For elasESSI)NA/L ifC -]MP64 i4f000200160015-1 f, hoping we can devise a plan for long- ciety, which is dedicated to fighting com- This cont3nti0n is supported by sta- distance transmission of power. This is a munism. The good news is that the founder tistics on utilization data in connection very exciting new field, so that we can trans- and head of the society has discovered each with old age assistance health programs, fer power hundreds perhaps thousands of of the foll?wing persons to be a Communist that the percentage of eli- miles, and do it cheaply, and that this will agent: Dwight D. Eisenhower, the former which Bible p show show s receiving physicians' care mean tremendous efficiencies in terms of the President of the United States; Earl War- economics involved. ren, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court; was about six times the number who had Mr. CLAPPEI: Mr. Secretary, you have the late John Foster Dulles, who was Secre?? to be hospitalized. threatened to George Marshall, the owner tary of State; and Allen W. Dulles, the di- I ask unanimous consent to have of the Washington Redskins football team, rector of the Central Intelligence Agency. printed in the RECORD, with my remarks, that you will take action if he uses the At first glance, admittedly, there Is some?? an article entitled, "The Evaluation of federally owned Washington Stadium-the thing almost frightening in the thought that Old-Age Assistance Medical Care Pro- new stadium being built now, next fall- so many Communists were able to creep into " wl tten by Dr. S. J. Axelrod Mr. ROLFSON. Pete, I am sorry, I can't such high Tositions in the Government. But. g' wr even let you finish that question. We have upon mature reflection the reader will per- and grams, p t in the Journal of Public only 1 minute left which we would like ceive the heartening side of this disclosure. Health. Secretary Udall to use as he will. It proves the Communists to be a piffling There being no objection, the article Secretary UDALL. In summing up I would sort of menace. With the executive and was ordered to he printed in the RECORD, perhaps in part repeat what I have said. I judicial branches of the Government safely as follows: do think there is a quiet crisis in conserva- in their h nds, they were utterly unable to THE EVALOnTTOK of OLD-AGE ASSISTANCE tion in America. I think whether we know make them designs effective upon, or even MJATlo CARE PROGRAMS it or not that our character as a people and apparent to, the rest of the Nation. $o ICAL our basic inner strength as a people is re- disorganized were they, indeed, that the (By S. J. Axelrod, M.D., M.P.H., F.A.P.H.A) lated to our land and to the way we treat heads of ICommunist governments abroad In 1941, Reed and Clark, discussing the our land. And I think in conserving and obviously lever were informed that America need for app;:ai al of public assistance medi- wisely using and developing the resources of was under} Soviet control, and often spoke cal care programs, wrote: "Considering the our land that we will be determining the very harshly, and by name, of their Ameri- magnitude cf these programs, surprisingly future strength of America. After all our can agents. The conclusion seems inescap- little Is known about them." x Almost 20 strength -as a people comes in the long run able thatI America Is able to absorb any years :later, public assistance medical care not from our arms, for example, but from number of such conspirators with no ill programs are of even greater magnitude and our basic resources, from our land, our effects whatever. the same observation can still be made: Sur- water, our wood, the resources that arise out Grateful as we are to the John Birch people prisingly little is known about them. of the land itself. And therefore conserva- for so ene uraging a revelation, we neverthe- The growth of these programs can be tion although it has been pushed into the less look jpon the group, with some irrita- gauged by expenditures of Federal, State, background more now than in previous times tion, as a . upstart in the field. As it hap- and local funds for medical care of the needy it is an important area of activity and I am pens, we Fare a member of a sort of semi- over the years. In 1939 annual expenditures hoping this administration canmake one of secret organization ourself-one that has of such funds were estimated to be about $50 the finest records in the field of conservation been In continuous existence for nearly two million. By 1949 this figure had risen to that can be made. We are going to tackle hundred years. To be-sure, its attention has $125 million. Since then, there has been these problems aggressively and I hope we not been wholly fastened on fighting Coda- more than a threefold increase. Currently, will have the support of the American peo- munism, but it has done quite a lot of good medical care expenditures in public assist- ple. work, in ts way. There are some who be- ance programs, including both money pay- Mr. ROLFSON. Thank you very much, Mr. lieve that this organization, whose members menu to recipients to-purchase medical care Secretary. Thank you for being with us on have infiltrated every craft and profession, as well as vendor payments, are estimated to "Issues and Answers." deserves H L u c h of the credit for America's be about $420 million a year 2 These in- I di Mr. GRUENING. Mr. President, will the Senator from Montana yield? Mr. METCALF. I yield. Mr. GRUENING. I merely wish to say that I, too, heard the program in which Secretary Udall participated; and I agree completely with the interpreta- tion the distinguished Senator from Montana has made. I believe he has put the matter into proper perspective. Mr. METCALF. I thank the Senator from Alaska. THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, much has recently been said of the possible dangers to our free institutions from secret societies which take it on them- selves to judge the best way to fight com- munism and to determine what policies the United States is to follow. A recent comment in the well-known national magazine, the New Yorker, puts this situation in a perspective which I believe to be most helpful, in comment- ing on the John Birch Society. I ask unanimous consent that the item from the New Yorker of April 15, 1961, may be printed at this point in the body of the RECORD. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: [From the New Yorker, Apr. 15, 19611 THE TALK OF THE TOWN: NOTES AND COM- MENT The best news we have heard in the last couple of weeks comes from a semisecret organization known as the John Birch So- cs care enjoyment of the oldest unaltered system of creases are due in part to rising me government in the world. The membership costs and In pert to the more adequate pro- is Impressively large, and, unlike that of the vision Of medical care services to recipients Communi~t Party or the John Birch So- of public assistance. Amendments to the ciety, it 1$ not composed of secret cells. In Social Security Act in 1950, 1956, and 1958 fact, the only real secrecy concerns the elec- have encouraged more States to give more tion of officers, which is performed in jeal- medical care to more recipients of public as- ously guarded privacy. The rules of mein- sistance by :Waking possible Federal match- bership are few and basic, but upon many ing of funds for vendor payments for medi- matters there is an unspoken consensus. It cal care and by increasing financial partici- is generally considered bad form, for in- pation. by the Federal Government in med- stance, f r one member lightly and frivo- ical care expenditures for recipients of pub- - though It nas Deen Known mo nappen. inc members' receive no gaudy uniforms-not even so much as an armband-but each does receive a! title. It is not an imposing title, we suppo~e, but it makes up in homely dig- nity whatever it may lack in romance, and to some Members, at least, it has a certain glamour of its own. The title, dear John Birch Society, is Citizen. marked Federal matching funds for medical care, there were no more than 20 States with relatively comprehensive medical care pro- grams for recipients of public assistance. In the other States the programs were consid- erably limited in scope, providing, for ex- ample, hospital care only, or there were seri- ous limitations in financial support, ranging from monthly maximums on the amount allowed for medical care to no public assist- MEIXCAL CARE PROGRAMS ance funds at all for medical care in 16 Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, in all the States.g At present, largely as the result of liberalized Federal participation in financing, action f have taken on health care in- some medical care is being provided under surance!for the aged, I have placed sub- one or more of the categorical assistance stantialil emphasis on the fact that an programs in all. but two of the 53 States adequate program to meet the needs of and territories. However, of the States our senior citizens should give top pri- which have recently initiated or expanded ority to preventive medical care, rather their medical care programs, none has a pro- than hospitalization. Medical experts agree that adequate preventive care 'Re,-d, L. S., and Clark, D. A. "Appraising would lead to sharp reduction in the oc- Public Medical Services." A. J. P. H., 31:421, currence of chronic illness and long May 1941. stays in the hospital. This can best be 2 Published and unpublished material done by a first cost program, such as I available in the Bureau of Public Assistance, have included in proposed legislation Social Security Administration, Washington, D.C: which II and nine of my colleagues intro- 2 American Public Welfare Association, duced earlier this year, which would "Role of the State Public Assistance Agency make phiysician's care readily available in Medical Care," I. General Aspects of Med- at home or in the office. ical Assistance, September 19158. Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE April 27 Mr. CLAPPER. Mr. Secretary, you said you would like to see an additional 15 million acres added to the national parks. First, where would this 15 million acres come from and how would you pay for buying it? Secretary UDALL. Well some of this land would come from what is now public lands, which would be converted into parks. Some of this land would have to be bought, as we are now proposing that we buy the Cape Cod land, the Point Reyes National Park land, the proposed national park in San Francisco, the Padre Island off the coast of Texas, and other lands of this kind. When you propose buying land east of the Mis- sissippi, it is costly. These are areas we should have set aside a generation ago and we failed to do so and we are paying for it now. The cost, I might say, is going up very rapidly. About every 10 years the cost of these lands that would make good park lands is doubling. Mr. CLAPPER. I don't believe any President has ever set aside more than about 31/2 or 4 million acres during his entire term for national parks. You really believe that it Is possible for the Kennedy administration in the next 4 to 8 years to set aside up to 15 million acres? Secretary UDALL. I think If we could lay out a proper program and aggressively persue it the way no administration has done re- cently, I think that we could make that kind of record. Let me give you an example, here, of what is happening in terms of our National Park System [referring to chart] : There were 3.5 million acres that came in prior to Teddy Roosevelt's time. During Teddy Roosevelt's administration, 1.5 mil- lion acres. Here Is Taft, 2 million acres. Woodrow Wilson, the highwater mark, over 5 million acres came in in the National Park System. Harding, very little. Coolidge and Hoover have pretty good records, 3.5 and 3 million. In Franklin Roosevelt's time, 3.5 million acres into the National Park System. But look in the postwar period, during this period of crisis that I am talking about when we refer to a population explosion. In Presi- dent Truman's administration only 73,000. Under the 8 years of President Eisenhower, 19,000 acres, You can see that In terms of the pressure of people on our remaining park resources, that this is a very serious problem and I think if as a people we determine to make a real record in terms of setting aside public lands for use by all of the people that we can make one of the finest records that has been made and what is more important we can set aside for all future generations a park system that will keep America a spacious land. Mr. ROLFSON. Mr. Secretary, there are some people who are all for you on this thing, who agree with the urgency and all the rest, but who are nevertheless expressing some concern and even some impatience perhaps that things aren't going fast enough, that perhaps you aren't moving fast enough on it. Certainly Congress is not. For example the wilderness bill that is now in the Interior Committee I understand is in great danger. This would protect some of these wilderness areas from encroachment and from destruc- tion. What are you doing to help this bill? Secretary UDALL. Well, I am doing about all I can do. I have testified for it on the Senate side. I am pushing it for every angle. This bill incidentally has had rather rough sledding in Congress. This is the third year that the wilderness bill has been before the Congress. I am hopeful the Senate will act on it and this is one of the bills that, al- though it doesn't set aside new land, it gives wilderness status to existing public lands and I think this is legislatibn that our country needs and it would accomplish one of the objectives that I have been talking about here this afternoon. Mr. RoLFSOn. But I understand there are some interests, the lumber interests and the mining interests, for example, who are bringing'great pressure to bear on the com- mittee, and there is some prospect that whatever bill does come out would be se- verely amended and watered down if there is one. Are you- Secretary UDALL. There has been tradi- tionally, going all the way back to Teddy Roosevelt's time-any time you want to set aside lands for public use there are special interests who oppose it. There are special interests opposing the wilderness bill. I don't think they conceive of it properly. I think this is in the public interest. But we are going to have to push, we are going to have to drive. But the Secretary of the Interior can't do It, the President can't do it. The President recommended tpis leg- islation. We are going to have to have some help from the people too, so I would say that the people out in the country who really believe in this legislation had better begin pushing it because we can't do it all at the Washington end. Mr. RoLFSON. Mr. Secretary, our guest next week on this program will be the Sec- retary of Agriculture. There is a long his- tory of struggle between your Department and his over-management of some 180 mil- lion acres of forest lands. We hear that this struggle might be revived now. Is this true? Secretary UDALL. I don't think that it is reviving. It has existed and I think Secre- tary Freeman and I have the best oppor- tunity that any Secretary of Agriculture and of Interior have had in the last 30 years or so to work out some solutions to partially at least resolve this dispute. Secretary Freeman and I happen to get along very well. We have had some discus- sions on this problem. Nothing would please us more, I don't think anything would please the President more, than for Secre- tary Freeman and I to stop fighting and start doing. I think this is what the Presi- dent wants and that he is the type of Presi- dent who we know if we don't solve this problem, he will solve it for us, so I think you can look for some kind of solution emerging from our discussions and I hope Secretary Freeman-I am sure he will-will indicate just as I have today that we are going to try and get agreements where the others have failed. Mr. RoLFsoN. Would you expect the agree- ments might include putting in your Park Service in the Interior Department some of the lands that are now in the Forest Service in Agriculture? Secretary UDALL. I personally would hope that this would include a sorting out of lands. After all it is not, only a matter of there being some lands that are now in the Forest Service that perhaps should be na- tional parks. We have in our Department some forest lands that perhaps should be in the National Forest System and it is a matter of deciding what the proper use is and proper administration of lands which we have that are already public lands. This has been the dispute and some Secretaries of Agriculture and Interior recently couldn't even discuss this subject without becoming so heated that the discussions were broken off. Secretary Freeman and I take a different view. As I say, I am hopeful we can resolve some of these disputes. Mr. CLAPPER. Mr. Secretary, would you fa- vor a separate Department of Natural Re- sources such as Canada has which would include the public lands and the forests both? Secretary UDALL. The Canadians interest- ingly enough have a Department of Agricul- ture, they have a Department of Forests and they have a Department of Natural Re- sources. I think that the Forestry Service, it has been in agriculture for half a century. Al-. though many times in the past it has been discussed, transferring it to the Interior Department and having a Department of Natural Resources, I am not proposing that at the present time. Perhaps it should be done, but I am not urging or suggesting that it be done. We have too many other important problems that should be discussed at the present time. But it does seem to me that the real question is not this ques- tion of jurisdiction between Secretaries, the question is, what is good for the country and what will best develop the resources of the country. This is what we should address ourselves .to rather than to personal rivalry of Secre- taries in the Cabinet. This is what it has been too often in the past. Mr. CLAPPER. I would like to ask a ques- tion about salt water, Mr. Secretary. On the ninth of March you told a news conference you would have a significant announcement to make on the progress in the program to convert salt water to fresh water. I wonder if you would want to make any announce- ment on it. Secretary UDALL. We just about have our program ready to announce. We have had to take a very hard look at it and this has in- volved getting a scientific panel to look at the program. It has also involved some very tough questions that we have had to try to find the answers to. We hope to have the new direction for our program set out shortly and I am hoping we can make some headway. This Is, I think, one of the most challenging problems that this Government faces. I think it is one of the most hopeful areas of activity. If we can produce a solution to the saline water program, it seems to me this would offer a form of international cooperation for example where we could do far more in terms of prestige than for example adven- tures in space will do. At least this is my opinion. Mr. CLAPPER. The President seemed to have the same opinion at his news conference. He said the same thing. Secretary UDALL. Yes, I believe he does. Mr. ROLFSON. Mr. Secretary, you Demo- crats have long criticized the Republicans for a giveaway program of public lands and resources. Have you done anything to re- verse this or is there any significant differ- ence in your policy from that of the pre- vious administration? Secretary UDALL. Well, I think our atti- tude generally in terms of resources is a more positive one. I think we are going to have more aggressive programs. I think Secretary Seaton in the main reversed the giveaway policies of his predecessor, Secre- tary McKay. I think there was a very defi- nite giveaway policy in the first 4 years of the Eisenhower administration and I think that Secretary Seaton in the main reversed that policy which was not one of conserving but of giving away resources. I think in a time like this with our coun- try moving in the direction that it is moving that we have to have conservation policies that are the wisest policies we can devise and we have to push them aggressively and that is what we proposed to do. Mr. RoLFSON. Can we expect under your administration a new burst of public power programs? For example, may we expect some new TVA's in some of the other great river basins? Secretary UDALL. Of course many of our river basins have been largely harnessed. I think one area where you can look for ac- tivity is for example in the Northwest. The Canadian Treaty, if it is approved, opens up a whole new area of power development. We are looking towards the development of new sources of power, major sources of hydro- electric power in that area, and we are also Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 1961 Approved For Release 20Q4/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE began over a year ago and President Eisen- hower directed it. And here the actual plan was carried out under a successor admin- istration. I certainly think the attitude of the former President, of Mr. Nixon, of these other people is indicative of the fact that we do stand together as a people and that whether what we did was right or wrong, that there is national unity on questions like these. Mr. RoLFSON. Most of our information on involvement has come out from officials that won't be quoted. Why isn't our posi- tion and our exact stand in this affair pub- licly proclaimed by the President or someone else in public? Secretary UDALL. Well, I don't know that in matters of this kind which involve very subtle and delicate questions whether the story probably will ever be told or prob- ably whether any particular person knows the whole story. Certainly in the previous administration when this particular plan was being prepared, no one knew anything about it. There has to be a certain amount of secrecy in it. Obviously our role was a very limited one and I should think because of that reason, certainly any loss of prestige which people are talking about should be a minimum one also. Mr. CLAPPER. Mr. Secretary, it is pos- sible, isn't it, that a major reorientation is taking place in our international relations, that perhaps we are going from now on to fight the Communists with some of their own methods? Do you think this Is possible? Secretary UDALL. I think certainly the President foreshadowed that in his speech to the newspaper editors last week, yes. Mr. CLAPPER. Isn't it also possible that the American people-there are some indica- tions that the American people are further ahead of the President than he may think in their desire to take some definite action against this threat? Secretary UDALL. I think one thing the President has been doing is to try to prepare the American people for this and I think what he was trying to say and did say very eloquently to the American people this past week is that we've got to be ready for new efforts, that we aredealing with very tough people and that we have to be just as tough and determined as they are. And I think the one danger in the ;past has been a certain complacency by the American people and I think the President is trying to arouse the people out of it, that is what I would say. Mr. ROLFSON. Do you think he is spelling out specifically enough to the American peo- ple what burdens he expects them to bear and what sacrifices to make? We don't really know yet what we are supposed to be prepared for, do we? Secretary UDALL. Well, I think if you lis- tened carefully you should be aware of some of the things that the President has been trying to point out that we must do and some of the efforts we must make. Cer- tainly in the past 90 days, the first 90 days of the administration, he has stepped up our major programs. We are making a greater effort today. We are trying to prepare for some of these things that we are not pre- pared for. I think one of the things we should learn as a result of this recent episode is that we weren't well enough prepared, that our methods and perhaps our determination wasn't strong enough and I certainly do not think that a new administration that Is hardly in its seat should be blamed if there was some partial failure in a situation of this kind. Mr. CLAPPER. Mr. Secretary, is there any- thing political in the fact that the President has called in former President Eisenhower for talks at Camp David, and former Vice President Nixon? What is the purpose be- hind this? Secretary UDALL. I think the purpose of this is natio>fiial unity. After all President Eisenhower and his Vice President conceived this plan, they started it, they, I suppose, in effect hand it on to the President and I think that probably his feeling is that he should consu~t; with them and let them know what happened and give them the facts as best he knows them and I think it is part of preserving) this national unity that is so important at time like this. Mr. RoLFsc e, Mr. Secretary, a good many Members of Congress who went home for the Easter vacation came back and have since been saing that they found very little enthusiasm or the New Frontier at home and Mr. Nixon, n before this consultation, too, of course, said that he found a great deal of support for he President as an individual, but virtually none for the Kennedy program. What are 3ou finding these days? Secretary DALL. I think this is a good bit exaggerated. I have been out around the country a god bit myself. I think there is strong support for the President's program. I think there is perhaps a need for people to vocalize it a little more.. In fact, I think many of the American people who were the supporters ofd the President are sort of sitting back and saying, "Well, he is doing so well, let him carry the ball." I think they are going to have to realize now that it s up to them to pitch in and to help armies grassroots support for the President's program. But I think the inter- esting thing is at the same time that the President's program is doing quite well, really. Mr. ROLFSQN. Are you satisfied with the way Congress is handling it, with the speed and all that it is going through? Secretary UDALL. Congress in some ways could move a, little faster, but I think gen- erally speaking when one compares this ses- sion of Congress with previous ones that there is a faster pace and that certainly at this stage of''. the game I feel that the Presi- dent's prograpi is doing quite well. Mr. CLAPPER. Mr. Secretary, you have been refreshingly frank in stating several times that you play, politics to the hilt, even now as Secretary Of the Interior. Some of your Republican critics say that you have been doing this by telling Members of Congress to vote the way the administration wants in order to get certain public works projects through. Is' this the way it is done? Secretary UDALL. In the first place, the statement about playing politics to the hilt was with reference to Mr. HALLECK. Mr. CLAPPE1I.. Who also does. Secretary TDALL. Yes. I do feel and I have always felt as a Congressman-and I am schooled in Capitol Hill politics-that Amer- lean politics the way both parties tradition- ally play it is a good thing and I think when one party is in power naturally the members of that part, the Congressmen, the Senators, are going td get a little preferential treat- ment. It ha,s always been that way. I hope it always is. This is one of the meanings, to me, of the American two-party system. I was perhaps a little franker than I should have fact that the number one item on our leg-? been, but I was, I think, recognizing a reality islative ca'ienclar is the Cape Cod Seashore that some politicians like to pretend doesn't bill. This is an area where there isn't any exist and that is that there is a little bit of large tract of land like this land that could old-fashioned politics and that we play It be preserved m a part of the National Park every day and I make no bones about it and System. We hope Congress will act speedily anything I can do to not only help in terms and this bill will become law. of the bills that I am interested in, out of my We have other plans forthe eastern part Department,' that anything I can do to help of the United States. I think this is where the President's program, I will do it, pro- most of the people are and I think this is viding it isll honorable and providing it is where most of our money and effort ought proper. to be spent ir. the next few years because Mr. ROLrs?rT. We have noticed you involved this - quiet crii;is that I am referring to is in a number of these bills and moves that more in the East than in the West because aren't real) involved in your Department. we still have: a little breathing time, we What about your own program? It is not still have a little room for maneuver left going through Congress very fast, is it? In the western part of the United States. The Interior program? We don't have in. the East. Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 6367 Secretary UDALL. 'Well, I think our pro- gram at this stage of the game is moving about as well en most of them. Mr. ROLFSON. You have a cut of your budget request in the House. Secretary UnAaL. There was a very modest cut. Mr. RoLe'soN. That doesn't upset you? Secretary UDAC,L. No, no, we are not at all disturbed with ;he cut. In fact we are hop- ing some of it will be restored. The House traditionally cuts all. the budgets. This is traditional. We have several of our main programs that are moving quite well. I think when. this session is through that we will have a very good performance in terms of legislative bills enacted. Mr. CLAPPER.:Ar. Secretary, I would like to sit back for a minute here and listen to you expound on sorr ething a little bit philosoph- ical. What is this quiet crisis in conserva- tion that you hive been talking about? Secretary UDALL. Well, something has been happening In the United States. Something has been happening to our land and to the relationship of people to land. In this post- war period., for example, we have had a tre- mendous population explosion. We have had people have much more leisure time. You can travel easier. And this has meant that people, particularly those-and most Ameri- cans have some liking for the out of doors- that is, our national parks, our State parks, our outdoor recreation areas have felt a tremendous pressure in recent years. And the crisis is that very little is being done about it. City leaders-at the State level there has been poor leadership. Nationally we have done very little in terms of pro- viding the type of outdoor recreation facili- ties that are :needed for our people, and America traditionally it seems to me has- part of its greatness and part of its grandeur has been that ours has been a spacious land and Americans have always had a great out of doors in which to test their strength and in which to seat their understanding of themselves. I think we are seeing right before our eyes, we are making a decision by default. We are seeing the American Continent change. The bulldozers are advancing and the green face of America is disappearing and I personally t link this is a very serious crisis and I ant hopeful that this adminis- tration can do something about it. Mr. CLAPPER. One' thing you are hopeful of doing from what I have read about your program is to ;?rovide park facilities in the East for easterners. For instance the Dela- ware River projects and so on. Is this a major reorientation toward the East away from the great western parks? Secretary UD%La.. Well, of course many of the great scenic areas are located in the West and inevitably this has meant that most of our parks are in the West. Nothing would please us more---indeed we are bending our efforts toward that, to have a truly national program. I think one 6366 Approved For ADfJO0160015-1 possible to achieve a more stable and less costly peace in the Far East, I know that the President will leave no stone unturned In his efforts to achieve it. What applies to Latin America and to southeast Asia and the Far East, applies also to Europe and to Africa. We have been involved deeply in the problems of the former for a long time. In the last year or two we have become involved significantly in the problems of the latter. I shall not, today, go into the details of the situation which confronts us on these continents. Nevertheless, I would point out by way of example that the division of Berlin and Germany has not disappeared with the ad- vent of a new administration. Nor have the weaknesses in NATO dissolved merely be- cause we have installed a new President. Nor have the Eastern European nations yet obtained that degree of national freedom of action which permits a full measure of con- tact with Western Europe, a condition which must prevail if there is to be a sound peace on that Continent. I shall not go into detail, either, on the vastly complicated problems of trying to bring control over the weapons of mass destruction and a measure of reduction in the great burden of taxation on our people and all peoples which is entailed in billions upon billions of armaments expenditures. These problems were complex on the day this administration took office. They grow more complex as each day passes without the beginnings of a solution. As with Latin America and southeast Asia, the President may be expected to bring to bear new ideas on all of these problems of foreign policy which he inherits. Indeed, some ideas already have been initiated. The process of making these ideas effective, however, is, as I have already noted, at best a slow one. After years of close observation, moreover, I am personally persuaded that the machinery of this process within the executive branch of this Government has grown so cumbersome and ineffective that there is grave danger to the principle of re- sponsible leadership by the President. I would hope, therefore, that this administra- tion would proceed promptly to a thorough overhaul of the machinery of intelligence which functions in many departments and agencies in a fashion which deeply influences foreign policy and its conduct. I would hope, further, that the ma- chinery for the countless secondary decisions of policy through which the Presi- dent's ideas and primary decisions are evolved would be thoroughly overhauled and streamlined and that the preponderant re- sponsibility in these matters would be lodged where it has not been for many years-in the Office of the Secretary of State. The difficulties which we face in the world are immense. The responsibility of the President in connection with them are enormous. He carries the ultimate burden for all of us Democrats and Republicans alike. He has a right to expect general sup- port in these matters, a support which must include, may I say, constructive criticism in matters of foreign policy. I want to say that he has had that kind of support in Congress for the first 3 months that he has been in office. He has had it from Democrats and Republicans alike. I am confident that he has it and will continue to have it from the people of the United States. ON THE ANTI-CASTRO CUBAN INVASION - Mr. METCALF. Mr. President, I was among those who on Sunday watched the ABC television program, "Issues and April 27 Answers," on which the guest was See- Panel: John Rolfson, ABC Washington ret ar f t y o he Interior Udall. I did not get the impression that Sec- retary Udall, in his remarks on the anti- Castro Cuban invasion, was criticizing either President Eisenhower or Vice Pres- ident Nixon. On the contrary, in re- sponse to persistent questioning, Secre- tary Udall pointed out that the Ameri- can people are standing together behind a ' policy conceived by one administra- tion and carried out by its successor. There has been some criticism of Sec- retary Udall. Apparently it comes from those who neither saw the program nor read the transcript. Some criticism comes from those who quote the Wash- ington Post in this way: Interior Secretary Stewart L. Udall said last week's anti-Castro Cuban invasion was conceived a year ago by President Eisenhower and then Vice President Richard M. Nixon. "They started it and handed it over to Mr. Kennedy," Udall said in a television inter- view. Eisenhower directed it," he said. "An- other administration carried it out." I have read the transcript. It shows that Secretary Udall spoke in a context of national unity. Following is a pertinent answer to Mr. John Rolfson, ABC commentator, who asked: Do you think that the American people support this kind of an American involve- ment in an attack on Castro? Secretary Udall replied: Well, I don't think there is any question but that they do. The fascinating thing about this particular business is that here was a plan conceived by one Administra- tion-this from all I can find out began over a year ago and President Eisenhower directed it. And here the actual plan was carried out under a successor Administration. i certainly think the attitude of the former President, of Mr. Nixon, of these other peo- ple is indicative of the fact that we do stand together as a people and that whether what we did was right or wrong, that there is national unity on questions like these. Later in the program, Mr. Peter Clap- per, ABC Capitol Hill correspondent, asked: Mr. Secretary, is there anything political in the fact that the President has called in former President Eisenhower for talks at Camp David, and former Vice President Nixon? What is the purpose behind this? The reply from Secretary Udall: I think the purpose' of this is national unity. After all President Eisenhower and his Vice President conceived this plan, they started it, they, I suppose, in effect handed it on to the President and I think that prob- ably his feeling is that he should consult with them and let them know what hap- pened and give them the facts as best he knows them and I think it is part of pre- serving this national unity that is so Im- portant at a time like this. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- sent that the transcript of the television program, "Issues and Answers," be printed at this point in the RECORD. There being no objection, the tran- script was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: ISSUES AND ANSWERS Guest: The Honorable Stewart L. Udall, Secretary of the Interior. commentator, and Peter Clapper, ABO Capi- tol Hill correspondent. The ANNOUNCER. From Washington D C , . ., the American Broadcasting Co. brings you "Issues and Answers." Secretary of the Interior Stewart L. Udall, what are the issues? Secretary UDALL. These are times when our strength as a people and our character as a nation are very much on trial. It seems to me as Secretary of Interior and in fact it is my deep conviction that the way in which we use our national resources, the way that we develop these resources, the policies we adopt in treating our land and what comes from it, that these will have much to say about our strength in the future and indeed that our character as a people is related to our relationship with our land. The ANNOUNCER. You have heard the is- sues and now for the answers. Here to explore the issues are Peter Clap- per, ABC Capitol Hill correspondent, and John Rolfson, ABC Washington commenta- tor. To give you the answers, Secretary of the Interior Stewart L. Udall, former Congress- man from Arizona. Now with the first question for Secretary Udall, Mr. Clapper. Mr. CLAPPER. Mr. Secretary, you mentioned that our strength as a nation is on trial. In the same line as a member of the Cabinet vitally concerned with the prestige of the Presidency and the administration, what do you think of the President's prestige in view of the Cuban failure? Secretary UDALL. Well, Mr. Clapper, there is no question at all but that during this episode in the past week America's reputa- tion and prestige have been involved. It does seem to me that since we were involved only peripherally that certainly our coun- try's basic position of strength hasn't been harmed in any way. It would be my hope, however-I think there is a great lesson out of this, and a bitter lesson, too, and that is what the President has been saying since the became President and what he said during the campaign, that there are many tough decisions that face use as a people and that we must in facing these questions be able to muster the best strength our country has and provide the best leadership. I think these points have certainly been underscored in the last few days. Mr. CLAPPER. I want to give you a chance to comment on Castro's comments of today. He is making a long speech. I don't know whether it is finished yet or not. He says America put its prestige on the line and has lost it. Secretary UDALL. Of course Castro is prob- ably given more to overstatement than any- one that I know of and I am sure that he is going to have ample time in the future to regret any statements of that kind. But I certainly think one could overstate our role in what happened in the past week. I think it is easy for a person to overstate what America lost if we lost anything. i would hope that what we gain in terms of what we learn out of this would far outweigh any- thing that we might have lost in terms of prestige at the moment. Mr. ROLSSON. Well, Mr. Secretary, what about President Kennedy's standing at home? It has been disclosed now that our Government principally through the CIA gave aid and advice and equipment and transportation to the invaders. Do you think that the American people support this kind of an American involvement in an attack on Castro? Secretary UDALL. Well, I don't think there is any question but that they do. The fas- cinating thing about this particular business is that here was a plan conceived by one administration-this from all I can find out Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 Approved For COW a 22ppUp44/110~/1 CIA RDP~d~p3d68000200160015-1 6365 1961 CONGRESSIONAL FCoKU =- 5~~1A'r~ office on January 20. But -foreign policy the entire country. There was no aid pro- America is by dafinition beyond the control does n )t come to an end with one adman- gram to speak of and, may I add, no Lao- of this Nation. istrati n and begin anew with the next. tan army to speak of, to aid. But 7 years If it is to our interests-and it is--to pre- The slate is not; wiped clean every 4 years. later, by the time the Laotian crisis broke vent the spread of a divisive and hostile to- There a a continuity of the problems which in full force in the very last days of the talitarianism throughout the hemisphere, confro it the Nation from abroad and a con- Eisenhower administration, there were in there is one point at which a check may be tinuit of the responses of our Government Laos hundreds of U.S. officials of several feasible. That point 13 where a cooperative to these problems from one administration agencies and departments. We had ex- effort with others renders the soil of the to another. pended hundreds of millions of dollars on Americas infertile to the seed of totalitarian- This is not to say that a particular adman- aid, largely for military purposes. We had ism before it takes root. And in substance, istratio n will not stamp the course of foreign financed the training of thousands of that is the idea which the President ex- policy with the brand of its own ideas. Laotian soldiers. And, finally, our own pressed in such comprehensive form a few .The p ocess,? however, is a slow one. It is naval and other forces had converged in the weeks ago in his speech on an Alliance for slow tly because the problems which we general vicinity of Laos because of the Progress in the Western Hemisphere. It is face abroad are not of our exclusive creation steady advance of Communist-oriented one thing to advance this idea. It is another and, hence, are not amenable to our exclu- Laotians in the country. This vast com- to bring it to fruition--to promote that eco- r medics. And, partly, it is slow be- mitment of our resources, not unlike that nomic and social progress which alone prom- cause """tit ~~he innpact of the Ideas of a new ad- of the Communists, had little to do with ises the removal of the acids of mass dis- ministiration must permeate a large and com- either the needs or realities of the situation content from the soil of this hemisphere. plex bureaucracy within our own Govern- in Laos. It had much to do with. winning There was much to do with respect to ment before they make themselves felt in hollow propaganda victories in the cold ASocial and merica before this o is conditions Ino Latin action on the problems to which they are war. fice. After the recent develo ments in Cuba direc d. 'Co this situation, too, President Kennedy p Wean grasp the significance of this con- brought new ideas. In specifics he worked there is still much tc do. Time was short tinuit in foreign policy by reference to re- with the United Kingdom and India in an wh may be inorteation took over. Now cent vents In Cuba and in Laos. In the effort to bring about a cease-fire and the Y h eve one i stance, President Kennedy had urged neutralization of Lacs. In other words, he If the situation in Latin America is to be an alliance for progress of all the American sought to take Laos out of the cold war. altered. so that it will no longer provide an Repu tics. 'Within this concept, he presented Left to their own devices, the Laotian peo- incubus for totalitarianism then a great ef- a bro d and cohesive outline for a coopera- ple would ask for nothing more. From the fort must be made along the lines of the > 1- tive avane in. the relations of the nations point of view of the great powers this solu- liance for progress prcposal which the Presi- of the Western Hemisphere. The presenta- tion would mark a significant step toward dent has advanced and that effort must be- tion as well-received by other Republics of a more rational world situation, one which gin to take concrete form in the very near the A nericas? New vistas of common bene- anyone of them could take in the interests future. The effort, moreover, must be a cb- fit we -e opened by it. of peace with little, if any, sacrifice of rig- operative one because the stake of Latin Nevertheless, within 90 days of the Presi- nificant national interests. Americans is far greater and more direct dent' taking office we were not yet at the The initial Soviet reaction to this pro- than our own and, in great part, the situa- begin ling of this peaceful advance but posal seemed favorable enough. Neverthe- tion is amenable to change only as Latin rather face-to-face with a military crisis in less, in the working out of the details Americans are willing to change it. Butt if Cuba brought about by the launching of an through the existing channels of diplomacy, they are willing to do what must be done invas' n of anti-Castro forces. Instead of weeks of delay have ensued. for freedom and progress within their on being in a position to move forward on a All the while, professions of the desire countries, then the stake of this Nation :in new onstructive approach to all of Latin for peace in Laos have continued and all the future of this hemisphere is such that Amer ca, the administration was compelled the while, the fighting has continued in we must be prepared to join with them 'in to direct its attention to a critical juncture that country. All the while, the jockeying the effort. I know that the President is so in our relations with one nation of the for some assumed advantage has gone on by prepared. Are the rest of us also prepared? region. much the same responses with which this If we, no less than the Latin Americans, are Th Th a ation juncture was reached during it ad- situation has been dealt for years. willing to face the dimensions of the dif[ictfil- and act in concert on them, then the mini tration. But the roads leading to it The crises in Laos and d Cuba reveal vividly ties and begs many months ago. The juncture rep- the continuity of both the problems and presidentcan be 's and will ideas be of i aan All Allianciance i faor Pro Progrgress resented the culmination of an accumula- responses in foreigr. policy and the difii- action. tion of hostility on the part of Cuba to this culties of altering ether overnight. With- Cuba, the crisis in boos is ut; Nation and an accumulation of our re- out wishing to downgrade the seriousness of Not the visible ti unlike p of a vast iceberg involving the spon es to that hostility. either situation, I must emphasize, however, on the other side of the globe, in Laos, that they are but a fractional part of a mainland of western Asia. It 1s not only! in some hang similar has transpired. In fact, larger picture. Behind Cuba stands the Laos that the conditions of peace do not yet this Situation had already reached the point vast panorama of continuing difficulties and exist. We may see them, there, now in of crisis even before the new administration a continuing inadequacy of response to striking form. But if we look beneath the took office.. It had reached this stage be- them with respect to all of Latin America. tip, we will see that the difficulties which taus in preceding years a peaceful land, Yet this far more significant picture can confront us, particularly, fork out from Laos onceiremote from the rest of the world, had be overlooked in a fixation on the sensa- into Thailand and even more so into V et- beenC turned into a bone of contention in tional developments within the troubled ram. Nor do they end at the sea off sou h- the larger clash of ideologies and power else- island just 90 miles off our shores. We east .Asia. The conditions of peace in y wheli. in the world. As a result the people have managed to live with a militantly reliable sense do not exist at Formosa oiii in of L os who until recent years had scarcely hostile Cuba for 2 years. I do not believe Korea any more than in Vietnam or Laos. ever eard. a shot fired in anger found them- we could live very well for 2 days with In all of these situations, the new admiin.- sely the focal point of steadily converging a militantly -hostile Latin America. istration begins with what may best', be military forces from outside. Military Yet, what has happened in Cuba under described as the response of the holding clasljes in Laos which produced the imme- Castro can occur in other Latin. American action. Such stability as exists in them] In diata} crisis involved but a handful of men. countries. The seed of Castroism is com- part, is knitted together with huge aid pro- But these clashes opened fissures with large pounded of ruthless totalitarian technique grams of one kind or another, backed With imp cations for world peace. plus messianic indigenous leadership, plus a heavy deployment of our own military The direct involvement of the Soviet support from outside this hemisphere. It forces in the general area. hese situations will remain {in- Union in Laws as a supplier of military aid is doubtful that this seed can grow except At time t come. best, the given to llaotian factions was one factor in pro- In the soil of social and economic discon- certain for , heretofore iducing the crisis and a factor of compara- tent. Unfortunately such soil covers much rerponse certain best, which some time tiveljy recent vintage. But it was preceded of Latin America, from the Caribbean to them will have to be continued for some by ? he involvement of the Chinese-sup- shores down the great spine of the Andes. time to come. It is not yet clear to what red port~d North Vietnamese Government for a It is at least conceivable that this hemi- extent these situaticris can be al ere s i costly lob time in a similar role. The sum total sphere can be insulated from a flow from direction effmore ective diplomacy durable e and ,am of t is outside Communist involvement in without of material. support to totalitarian peace by more effective but I the local Laotian situation and its progres- forces within but the 'task would be im- confident that the :President will not hesi- siveo enlargement is not measurable. But mensely difficult and costly and of only lim- tate to bring to bear new ideas to that end. our 1 own progressive involvement will give ited efficacy. It is not conceivable, however, We ;shall not know the possibilities until us some insight into the process by which that in this day and age of instant and easy idea have been tested and, I may add, that the Laotians were plucked from the ob- communications, this hemisphere can be this testing has already begun in Laos. scu sty of remote Southeast Asia and stead- isolated from the transference of totalitarian It will be a cautious process-this testing-- fly moved into a focus of worldwide sig- techniques from elsewhere. Nor can the because the President is a prudent man who nifi ance. appearance of messianic indigenous leader- has uppermost in mind the security of this hen r first visited Laos in 1953, there ship in Latin American countries be fore- nation. It will be a slow process for reasons were only two American junior officials in stalled because what is indigenous to Latin which I have already set forth. But If It is Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 6363 Number Potential replacements enrolled in col- Number Potential replacements enrolled in col- regis- Number leges of pharmacy 2 regis- Number loges-of pharmacy 2 tered replace- tered replace- pharma- ments pharma- ments casts needed For 1960 For 1961 For 1962 For 1963 casts needed For 1960 For 1961 For 1962 For 1963 engaged annu- senior senior junior sopho- engaged amm- senior senior junior sopho- as such ally, 3.5 students, students, students, more as such ally, 3.5 students, students, students, more Jan. 1, percent fall of fall of fall of students, Jan. 1, percent fall of fall of fall of students, 19601 10592 1060 3 1960 3 fail of 19661 1959 2 1960 3 1960 3 fall of 1960 3 1060 3 Alabama------------- 1,387 48.5 94 96 143 179 Nevada -------------- 251 8.8 0 0 0 0 Arizona-------------- 861 30.1 20 24 27 37 NewJersey ---------- 3,840 134.7 56 60 63 109 Arkansas- ____------- 884 30.9 21 22 29 31 New Ilampshire_-___ 332 11.6 0 0 0 0 California ---------- __ 9,439 330.4 143 225 187 199 NewMexico --------- 627 18.4 19 16 18 ,52 Colorado------------- 1,824 63.8 20 23 7 45 New York ----------- 13,094 489.8 424 493 532 677 Connecticut---______ 1,958 68.5 77 74 91 108 North Carolina------ 1,618 56.6 48 48 81 120 Delaware------------ 235 8.2 0 0 0 1) North Dakota ------- 355 12.4 54 55 65 99 District ofColumbia- 1,583 55.4 47 69 66 50 Ohio_________________ - 5,560 194.6 190 207 230 286 Florida______________ 2,976 104.2 58 63 70 202 Oklahoma ----------- 1,658 58.0 76 87 98 137 Oeorgia______________ 2,422 84.8 124 110 126 199 Oregon --------------- 1,241 43.4 38 49 40 88 Idaho________________ 437 15.3 40 32 23 40 Pennsylvania________ 9,400 329.0 334 310 372 424 Illinois_______________ 7,231 253.1 89 90 125 212 Rhode Island -------- 710 24.8 15 15 19 39 Indiana______________ 2,795 97.8 128 137 152 203 South Carolina ---- -_ 1,008 35.3 51 51 58 118 Iowa_________________ 1,507 55.9 109 90 86 126 South Dakota_______ 480 10.8 43 53 48 68 Kansas______________ 1,462 51.2 25 29 24 30 Tennessee ----------- 2,126 74.4 57 63 90 10o Kentucky ------ ----- 1,244 43.5 48 60 20 37 Texas_______________ 5,663 194.7 140 164 156 321 Louisiana ------------ 2,167 75.8 69 82 117 119 Utah-___------------ 617 21.6 47 31 43 44 Maine______________ 417 .14.6 0 0 0 0 Vermont ------------- 176 0.2 0 0 0 0 Maryland___________ 1,618 56.6 44 38 55 68 Virginia______________ 1,644 57.5 56 b9 75 84 Massachusetts_______ 4,400 154.0 170 160 168 240 Washington---------- 2,740 95.9 87 37 42 70 Michigan____________ 5,650 197.7 220 172 158 220 West Virginia________ 620 21.7 17 20 35 , 32 Minnesota ----------- 1,886 66.0 24 33 32 39 Wisconsin ----------- 2,284 79.0 68 67 82 125 Mississippi ---------- 1.,291 45.2 1 7 4 46 1 47 51 61 1 Wyoming____________ 278 9.7 28 15 23 30 Missouri------------- Montana ------------ 3,070 407 . 0 14.2 08 26 96 15 112 22 89 20 Total ---------- 116,707 4,084.7 3,645 3,691 4,091 5,624 Nebraska ------------ 920 32.2 49 14 36 54 1 ~ I Census and license data compilation, NABP proceedings, 1960, 2 AAC]' report on enrollment, fall term, 1959. 3 AACP report on enrollment, fall term, 1900. Replacements: This tabulation prepared by the National Association of Boards AMENDMENT OF SECTION 314 OF PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT OF 1944-ADDITIONAL COSPON- SOR OF BILL Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the name of the distinguished Senator from Cali- fornia [Mr. ENGLE] may be added as a cosponsor of the bill (S. 1467) to amend section 314 of the Public Health Serv- ice Act of 1944, which I introduced- for myself and other Senators-on March 29, 1961. The PRESIDING OFFICER. With- out objection, it is so ordered. AMENDMENT OF TARIFF ACT OF 1930, RELATING TO DUTY ON SHRIMPS-ADDITIONAL COSPON- SOR OF BILL Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent that the name of the junior Senator from Alas- ka [Mr. GRUENING] may be added as a cosponsor of the bill (S. 1571) to amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to impose a duty on shrimps and to provide for duty-free entry of unprocessed shrimps annually in an amount equal to imports of shrimps in 1960, which I introduced- for myself and other Senators-on April 13, 1961. The PRESIDING OFFICER. With- out objection, it is so ordered. DEPARTMENT OF URBAN AFFAIRS AND HOUSING-ADDITIONAL CO- SPONSORS OF BILL Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the junior Sen- of Pharmacy, indicates that the number of pharmacy graduates will hardly be enough to meet the replacement needs of the profession this year and next * * * but will be sufficient in 1963. The replacement need figures are based on the assumption that 3.5 percent of all pharmacists die, retire, or leave the profession each year. ator from Ohio [Mr. YOUNG] and the junior Senator from Colorado [Mr. CAR- RoLL] be listed as additional cosponsors of S. 1633, the bill to establish a Depart- ment of Urban Affairs and Housing, and that at the next printing of the bill, their names be added, The PRESIDING OFFICER. With- out objection, it is so ordered. RULES FOR SAFETY PRESCRIBED BY INTERSTATE COMMERCE COMMISSION-ADDITIONAL CO- SPONSOR OF BILL Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr, President, I ask unanimous consent that my name be added as a cosponsor on S. 1669, a bill to provide that the Interstate Commerce Commission shall prescribe rules, stand- ards, and instructions for the installa- tion, inspection, maintenance, and repair of certain parts on railroad cars, and to require carriers by railroad to maintain tracks, bridges, roadbed, and permanent structures for the support of way, track- age, and traffic in safe and suitable con- dition, and for other purposes. This bill bill was introduced on April 18 by the distinguished Chairman of the Com- merce Committee, the Senator from Washington [Mr. MAGNUSON]. -The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. IMPROVEMENT OF NATIONAL TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM-AD- DITIONAL COSPONSOR OF BILL Mr. ENGLE. Mr. President, on April 18, 1961, the distinguished senior Sena- tor from Washington [Mr. MAGNUSON] introduced S. 1670, to amend the Inter- state Commerce Act, as amended, so as to strengthen and improve the national transportation system, insure protection of the public interest, and for other pur- poses. On behalf of the Senator from Washington, I ask unanimous consent that the name of the distinguished senior Senator from New Jersey [Mr. CASE] be added as a cosponsor at the next print- ing of the bill. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. CREATION OF SELECT COMMITTEE ON CONSUMERS INTERESTS-AD- DITIONAL COSPONSOR OF RESO- LUTION Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the name of the Senator from Tennessee [Mr. KE- FAUVER] may be added as a cosponsor of the resolution (S. Res. 115) to create the Select Committee on Consumers Inter- ests, submitted by Mrs. NEUBERGER on March 24, 1961. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. STANDARDS FOR CERTAIN PARTS ON RAILROAD CARS-ADDITION- AL COSPONSORS OF BILL Under authority of the order of the Senate of April 18, 1961, the names of Senators CARROLL, SMITH of Maine, Moss, MCCARTHY, NEUBERGER, MCNAMARA, MORSE, HART, HUMPHREY, YouNG of North Dakota, COOPER, BURDICK, MCGEE, CHAVEz, and BIBLE were added as addi- tional cosponsors of the bill (S. 1669) to provide that the Interstate Commerce Commission shall prescribe rules, stand- Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 6464 I CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE ads, and instructions for .l,c i.i3talla- tion, inspection, maintenance, and repair rquire carriers by railroad to maintain tacks, bridges, roadbed, and permanent structures for the support of way, track- (uced by Mr. MAGNUSON on April 18, 1961. r i ISTABLISHMENT OF DEPARTMENT OF CONSUMERS--ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS OF BILL Under authority of the order of the Senate of April 20, 1961, the names of Mr. LONG of Missouri and Mr. CANNON were added as additional cosponsors of the bill (S. 1688) to establish a Depart- ment of Consumers in order to secure within the Federal Government effective representation of the economic interests of consumers; to coordinate the admin- istration of consumer services by trans- ferring to such Department certain func- tions of the Department of Health, Edu- cation, and Welfare, the Department of Labor, and other agencies; and for other purposes, introduced by Mr. KEFAUVER (for himself and other Senators) on April 20, 1961. AMENDMENT OF THE FEDERAL AIR- PORT ACT-ADDITIONAL COSPON- SORS OF BILL Under authority of the order of the Senate of April 24, 1.961, the names of Senators LONG of Missouri, THURMOND, SAL'rONSTALL, and MORSE were added as additional cosponsors of the bill (S. 1703) to amend the Federal Airport Act so as to extend the time for making grants under the provisions of such act, and for other purposes, introduced by Mr. MoN- RONEY (for himself and other Senators), on April 24, 1961. EMERGENCY LIVESTOCK LOANS- ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS OF BILL Under authority of the order of the Senate of April 24, 1961, the names of Senators LONG of Missouri, CHURCH, METCALF, CHAVEZ, HICKEY, JACKSON, RAN-DOLPH, ENGLE, MAGNUSON, and YAR- BOROUGH were added as additional co- sponsors of the bill (S. 1710) to amend the Act of April 6, 1949, as amended, so as to authorize the Secretary of Agri- culture to make emergency livestock loans under such act until July 14, 1963, and for Other purposes, introduced by Mr. Moss on April 24, 1961. NOTICE OF HEARING ON INTERNA- TIONAL TELECOMMUNICATION CONVENTION AND RADIO REGU- LATIONS Mr. FULBRIGI3T. Mr. President, I desire to announce that the Committee on Foreign Relations will hold a hearing at, 10 o'clock Tuesday morning, May 2, in room 4221, New Senate Office Build- ing, on the International Telecommuni- cation Convention-Executive J-and the Radio Regulations-Executive I. Persons interested in these conventions should contact the Committee clerk. NOTICE CONCERNING CERTAIN NOMINATIONS BEFORE COMMIT- TEE ON THE JUDICIARY Mr. EASTLAND. Mr. President, the following nominations have been re- ferred to and are now pending before the Committee on the Judiciary: James B. Brennan, of Wisconsin, to be U.S. attorney for the eastern district of Wisconsin, for a term of 4 years, vice Edward G. Minor; William J. Andrews, of Georgia, to be U.S. marshal, for the northern district of Georgia, for a term of 4 years, vice William C. Littlefield; Keith Hardie, of Wisconsin, to be U.S. marshal, for the western district of Wis- consin, for a term of 4 years, vice Ray H. Schoonover; Fred F. Bob, of Ohio, to be U.S. marshal, for the southern district of Ohio, for a term of 4 years, vice Howard C. Botts; and Peyton Norville, Jr., of Alabama, to be U.S. marshal., for the northern district of Alabama, for a term of 4 years, vice Pervie L. Dodd, retired. On behalf of the Committee on the Judiciary, notice is hereby given to all persons interested in these nominations to file with the Committee, in writing, on or before Thursday, May 4, 1961, any representations or objections they may wish to present concerning the above nominations, with a further statement whether it is their intention to appear at any hearings which may be scheduled. ADDRESSES, EDITORIALS, ARTI- CLES, ETC., PRINTED IN THE APPENDIX On request, and by unanimous con- sent, addresses, editorials, articles, etc., were ordered to be printed in the Ap.. pendix, as follows: By Mr. CASE of New Jersey: Statement by him on the 26th annual convention of the Catholic War Veterans of the United States of America. By Mr. CLARK: Article entitled "Human Relations Goes to Washington," written by Senator PHILIP A. HART and published. in the Committee Reporter of March 1961. By Mr. KEATING: Address on the Electoral College recently delivered by James J. Flynn, chairman of the department of social studies of the Fordham University School of Business. By Mr. YARBOROUGH: Address entitled "The Nation's Stake in Atomic Power," delivered by Representative CIIET HOLIFIELD, of California, chairman of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy, at the 1961 convention of the American Public Power Association at San Antonio, Tex., on April 25,1961. By Mr. BENNE: T: Editorial entitled "How To Catch Pneu- monia," published in the Wall Street Jour- nal of April 19, 1961, which will appear hereafter in the Appendix. Editorial entitled "When the Poor Sup- port the Rich," published in the Salt Lake Deseret News of April 21, 1961. By Mrs. NEUBERGER; Editorial entitled "Bye, Bye Blowby," pub- lished In the Washington Post and Times Herald of April 22, 1.961. Article entitled "Astor Land," written by Don Carlos Miller and published recently in American Forests magazine. April 27 By Mr. JAV ITS : Editorial entitled "One Hundred Years of the Times," published in the Watertown (N.Y.) Daily Times of April 22, 1961; letters from President Kennedy, Vice President Johnson, and Governor Rockefeller on same subject. By Mr. BARTLETT: Editorial entitled "Freedom Fight Needs Strong Alaska," published in Jessen's Weekly, April 2, 1961. By Mr. DO;DD: Editorial entitled "The Unbalanced View," published in the Pilot, the., archdiocesan newspaper: of Boston, of recent date By Mr. FONG: Article entitled "U.S. Taxes Cost Ss $230 Million," written by Frank Hewlett and published in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin of April 21, 1961. Essay entitled "Jobe for the Handtcapped- A Community Challenge," written by Kimo Douglas and winner of first prize In the 1961 essay contest, State of Hawaii. By Mr. RANDOLPH: Article from the Dominion-News, Morgan- town, W. Va., April 25, 1961, concer ing West Virginia University's rifle team victory in the national intercollegiate to m. rifle championship competition. Article from.. Washington Evening Star, April 27, 1961, "The Rambler Is Taken for a Ride," concerning Roy Swanigan, West Virginia. legislator, who has overcome a severe physical-handicap. By Mr. CHURCH: Article entitled "Stevenson Cutting Large Figure," written by Roscoe Drummond and published in the New York Herald Tribune recently. By Mr. KUCHEL: Memorandum in Bulletin No. X28 of the Press and Information Office of the Federal Republic of Germany. . Release by Public Health Servie, Depart- ment of Health, Education, and Welfare, in regard to research project on air pollution. By Mr. CARLSON : Article on Kansas, written byj John Bird and published in the Saturday Evening Post. By Mr HUMPHREY : Article entitled "Peace Corps Exciting Op- portunity for Dedicated, Committed Serv- ice," written by J. A. Reirne, president of the Communications Workers f America, and published in the CWA News for May 1961. Article written by Richard T. Greer, As- sistant Librarian of the Senate Library, and published in the Catholic Reporter of March 17, 1961. By Mr. MUNDT: Bulletin No. 12 of the Press dnd Informa- tion Office of the Federal Republic of ,peyroany. ADMINISTRATION Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD, a speech I delivered on April 24, before the Duquesne Univer- sity Law School Alumni Association, at Pittsburgh, Pa. The speech was en- titled "Foreign Policy and the New Ad- m.inistration. " There being no objection, the speech was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: FOREIGN POLICY AND THE NEW ADMIAIISTRATION (Speech delivered by Senator MANSFIELD at: Duquesne University Law Alumni Banquet? Apr. 24,, 1961, Pittsburgh, Pa.) The responsibility for the !conduct of our relations- with other nations rests only with the administration in power.! The President assumes this responsibility !when he takes Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 remaining Americans were jeopardized; if day. To some it is synonymous with be which party could do the same thing Premier Castro were to attack Guantanamo radical-and to these people a radical in better. Bay or mount military invasions against his government Is one who advocates great and The lack of coherent philosophies and Caribbean neighbors-in such cases the sweeping changes with the least possible clear-cut party traditions in our two major United States would, of course, have to in- delay. The others, the word "liberal" simply political parties has produced some very tervene directly, and presumably so would means a forward-lrxoking attitude .-A o e ican States. "" Barring such obviously dangerous, a1- though unlikely, developments the United States should not intervene. Why not? The grave political consequences; the blow to the moral standards and principles by which we live and which are a source of strength in the cold war; the fact that armed intervention without the clearest provocation would reduce our policies to a crude contest in power politics; the loss of needed allies; the perilous international complications-these are the results that would flow from such armed intervention by the United States in Cuba. Even more basic than our differences in economic system is our philosophic differ- ence with the Communists; we believe in freedom and the rule of law among individ- uals and among nations. This is the es- sence of what America stands for in the world, and it is our greatest source of strength. We must preserve it. AN ANALYSIS OF THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN MODERN LIBERALISM AND CONSERVATISM IN AMERI- CAN POLITICS Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, a week ago last Saturday the distinguished junior Senator from Utah [Mr. Moss] spoke at Fort Atkinson, Wis., and gave a scholarly and thoughtful analysis of the difference between modern liberalism and conservatism in American politics. It is such an excellent address that I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the body of the RECORD at this point. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: SPEECH OF SENATOR FRANK E. Moss, DEMO- CRAT, OF UTAH, AT ANNUAL WISCONSIN SECOND DISTRICT DINNER, FORT ATKINSON, SATURDAY, APRIL 15,. 1961 Mr. Chairman, distinguished guests, thank you for your warm welcome to Wisconsin. I return it_in kind. All Democrats feel warmly toward Wisconsin these days because we re- member it was your fine State which gave Senator Kennedy one of his early primary victories, which started him on the road to the Presidency. And putting Jack Kennedy in the White House will, I am convinced, prove to be one of the great events of our times. After I had accepted this invitation to speak in the Second Congressional District, I was delighted to learn that I was coming to the heartland of Wisconsin democracy and leadership. I understand the district is not only the home of your distinguished young Congressman, Bob Kastenmeier-who incidentally has become a real influence in the House of Representatives in only one short term, but is also the home of your great Governor, Gaylord Nelson, and of my esteemed Senate colleague, Bill Proxmire, who is showing himself to be cast in the image of Wisconsin's famous Liberal, Bob LaFollette. Because I am speaking tonight in the shadow of these outstanding Wisconsin Liberals, I have, with some trepidation, chosen as the subject of my talk "The Con- science of a Liberal." I say "trepidation," becuse the very word "liberal" is one of the most misunderstood and misused words in our vocabulary to- Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 old problems. ""? UO1O1~~~+ +us soucnstone in the 1850's. Theodore Roosevelt bolted the Similarly, the word "conservative" has Republicans as a Progressive and found his many connotations. It all depends on what inspiration in the Federalists who were Jef- you want to conserve. The American Con- ferson's opponents. servative today, by his own admission, wants "This kind of turnabout is traditional to return to the forms and usages of the ` American procedure," Cushing Strout ob- past, even those of the 18th and 19th cen- served in the Virginia Quarterly Review in tury. To some this attitude can only be the summer of 1955. "Although it drives labeled by the word "reactionary." the tidy-minded to despair," he continued, It is with a clear recognition of this prob- "it is powerful testimony to the ingenuity lem of labels-of the fact that the very terms of our political leaders, the vitality of our I shall be using are equally as controversial tradition, and the moderation of our poli- as the ideologies they represent-that I ap- tics." proach this discussion. For the purpose of this discussion, I do The recapitulations which followed the not propose to define conservatism and lib- Republican nominating convention last eralism in neat, one-sentence statements. summer, and the Monday-morning quarter- No dictionary definition could ever be ade- backing which has gone on ever since elec- quate, for one thing, and for another, as I tion day, stirred up a lively discussion of have pointed out, the words mean different conservatism and liberalism and their ise, things to different people. I shall there- pact on the results. That impact, of course, fore take the essence of brief statements of is hard to calculate. The influence of faith from two Liberals, the late President specific issues can be pretty well weighed, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Gov. Adlai Stev- partly because the number of people affected enson, and two Conservatives, former Pres- by that issue can themselves be counted. ident Herbert Hoover and Senator Barr But the influence of a philosophy is less Goldwater. y tangible. The statements cover a 25-year period of So it has always been with American poll- time. Each spokesman has combined the tics. Political history in this country has result of his practical never been shaped by abstract doctrines or political experience theoretical dogmas. Original political theory with an awareness of the implications in here, as in the mother country of England, his own position, and each is an accepted has developed chiefly in time of national representative of his philosophy. trouble when thinking men, seeking to solve In his volume "20th Century Political urgent problems, have been forced to reex- Thought," Joseph S. Roucek says of President Hoover: basic principles. : For exam le, when we were hammering "Herbert Hoover speaks for many modern p American conservatives when he identifies out our American democracy, we produced statesmen like Adams, Madison, Hamilton, the extension of governmental economic conf and Jefferson, who were also political phi- trols with the regimentation characteristic of losophers. foreign dictatorships, and when he ascribes Then, the debate between the North and South in the mid-19th century produced Webster and Calhoun. And the problems of the first half of the 20th century gave us Woodrow Wilson and Robert Taft, two very practical political theorists. Today, as we try to cope with grave situa- tions both at home and abroad, it has again become evident that we must go back to first principles, and examine the problems of the sixties in the light of today. Russell Kirk has said that "doubt and violence are the parents of political specula- tion," while "prescription, legal precedence, and muddling through suffice for ages or na- tions that experience no serious threat to things established." "Prescription, legal precedence, and mud- dling through" have carried us just about as far as they can in today's world, and the time has come for some good, stiff thinking our people, extinguish equality of oppor- I welcome, therefore, the upsurge of interest tunity, and dry up the spirit of liberty and in Conservative and Liberal philosophies the forces which make progress." which this election, engendered and trust Let us now hear the liberal case as pre- that it has laid the brickwork for a debate sented by Franklin Roosevelt: on fundamental principles. "One great difference which has charac- My discussion here today of political phi- terized this division (between the liberal losophy is not essentially partisan. Both and the conservative groups) has been that major political parties have liberals and the Liberal Party-no matter what its par- conservatives in their ranks. Perhaps it ticular name was at the time-believed in would make the choice at the polls easier the wisdom and efficacy of the will of the if all liberals were lumped together in one great majority of the people, as distinguished party and all conservatives amalgamated from the judgment of a small minority of firmly in the other one. But I doubt that either education or wealth. this day will ever dawn. Republican and "The other great difference between the Democratic Parties are both sturdy institu- two parties has been this: the Liberal Party tions which show little interest in being is a party which believes that, as new condi- dissected, and reassembled. tions and problems arise beyond the power One of the best arguments for continued of men and women to meet as individuals, representation of a wide range of political it becomes the duty of the Government it- ideologies in each party is that a change self to find new remedies with which to meet of party control doesn't produce revolution- them. The Liberal Party insists that the ary shifts in policy. One of the major issues Government has the definite duty to use all in our recent political campaign seemed to its power and resources to meet new social Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 our high-living standards to the American system of free enterprise he combines al- most all of the favorite conservative themes: We must cling to the Bill of Rights; any necessary alterations must be made only by formal constitutional amendment; govern- ments have an insatiable appetite for power; society cannot remain partly regimented and partly free, and even partial regimentation will eventually destroy democracy. To at- tempt to solve the problem of distribution of a hard-won plenty by restrictions will abolish the plenty." Moreover, the conduct of business by Gov- ernment would only give us the least effi- ciency. President Hoover states: "It would increase rather than decrease abuse and cor- ruption, stifle initiative and invention, un- dermine the development of leadership, cripple the mental and spiritual energies of Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 6429 d; CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 191 managers. But, they must know the on unpaid balances, the average borrow- Federal officials dealing with the Cuban er or user of credit is Completely con- problem today. Any policy, any action to truth. be taken in the future must be rased on an The purpose of the Douglas bill is to fused and quite often misled. He often accurate assessment of the situ l ate. bring the true price of credit out from falls into a cleverly camouflaged trap There are certain developments that would under the disguises and camouflage un- from which, without ruin and degrada- force the United states to act;! and such nd his family cannot escape. action would be fully tinderstcjod by the h e a der which it often hides. Some of these tion, . If were to set largap missile bases or mf ove instancen with before the Presiclont, there Senate 1a billw, world Russians might add, are very interesting-and, 1. Second. Mr. Y miFhi; add, quite misleading. pending a dangerous degree of military support; if For example, sometimes the consumer which if enacted and sagned, would sub., :Ives of the is quoted a price of so many dollars stantially increase the existing legal in., Aremmainingericans P. were ere killed and were j the e Iveizof i down, and so much more per month. tercet rates that may be charged by Premier Castro were to attack uantanamo Immediately, the question arises: For small loan companies to a point, I am Bay o:r mount military Invasions against his how many months? Many advertise- told, making the rates in Ohio the high-- Caribbean neighbors-in. such ! cases the ments fail to say. There is no statement est in the Nation. Under the guise of United States would, of course, hive to inter-~ so w of the price of credit. The true annual lowering interest rates on the first brack?- vehe dllrriemb rsand presu able zati Would rate, which may vary from as low as 6 et of loans of $150 or less, the bill would or of th states. percent to more than 100 percent, is substantially increase the existing high Amer"-can Barring each obviously dangerous, a1- never disclosed. The whole truth is not rates on unpaid balances of larger though unlikely, developments the United being told. amounts. As an example, the bill would States should not intervene. Why not? The Another disguise is quoting the price of increase the rates on the amounts in ex- grave political consequences; they blow to, the credit as a monthly rate. The true an- cess of $300 but less than $500 from the moral standards and principles by which we nual rate is 12 times the monthly rate. present 8 percent per annum to 32 per- live and which are a source of strength in A. monthly rate of only 5 percent thus cent per annum. This is an increase of the cold war; the fact that armed interven- t'llrns out to be a true annual rate of 400 percent. The bill also raises the stat- tion without the clearest aprovoca ion would 60 percent. utory ceiling on small loans to $2,000. preduce our policies to ower polities; the loss a needed allies; the Then, there is the discount disguise. I am hopeful that the Ohio Legislature perilous international co need'tions-these Suppose you borrow $100, agree to pay it will finally defeat the proposal. It has are the results that would flow from such off in monthly installments, and pay the been estimated that if the bill is enacted armed intervention by the United States in lender $6 in advance. This looks like a it will result in draining from $10 to $15 Cuba. 6-percent loan. Often, it is advertised as million annually from the purchasing Even more basic than our differences in power of the citizens of Ohio. economic system is our philosppphie differ- use o of In only fa an naverage average of of you about $50 have overe pShould the bill be enacted however, ence with the Communists: vie believe in us and I hope it will not be, the citizens of freedom and the rule of law among individ- the course of a full year, because you have uals and among nations. This Is the essence paid off half the $100 in 6 months. The Ohio should be told in simple language of what America stands for in the world, true annual interest rate therefore is the exact interest rate they will be and. it is our greatest source of strength. We nearly double the advertised 6 percent- forced to pay. Mr. Pl?esident, the Doug- must preserve it. the to be accurate, it is about 111/2 percent. las bill will require that and I support WesThe +herhe a Hemisphere onof he tUnited hreatened tates in the is for Some of the case histories brought be- it wholeheartedly. first time in a century. It car. only be de- creative policy-one ositive d b , y a p fore the Senate committee last year were fende startling. In one instance, a man par- CUBAN POLICY that builds. Of course, we are strong enough a listed cash to crush the Castro regime, but to do so by chased an automobile for price of $550. This is what it said at one Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, the force would lose us far more than we could corner of the bill of sale. In another lead editorial in today's issue of the New gain. It is hard to be patient under such corner, it stated: York Times was a very wise and thought- provocation and defeat as we ! have experl- Balance including finance and insurance ful one on our policy in Cuba. It con- enced. Yet it 1s the mark of true strength charges to be paid in 16 payments of $60. Ceres not only what has happened, but to take both defeat and victory in one's stride. That comes out to $960, yet the so- what Senators, Representatives, and the President of the United States should The chief danger to the United States and the rest of Latin America is not Cuba by called cash price was $550. think about in the future. I ask unani- here.elf, but Cuba as it possible model for Almost everyone learned how to com- mows consent that the editorial be other revolutions, and Cuba as a base for puts true annual interest when in either printed at this point in the RECORD. the spread of anti-Yankee orl communistic grade school or high school. A study There being no objection, the editorial doctrines. How to counter theIcreeping sub- :made by the Library of Congress last year was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, version of the totalitarians is the great prob- as follows: Iem for the free world, as President Kennedy some a 20 that a random books sampling use Of has recognized. It cannot be done by adopt- current A POLICY ON CusA ing their methods. That world be to sur- still~ e0 teach inmetit books simple annual ratl teWh e the e a majority next in Cuba? The Cuban exiles render. rate. Where the great majority the have been defeated militarily and the United Defend the security of the United States. American people are familiar with h this States, which supported them, has suffered Continue by all legal means to encourage method of computing interest, it seems a political defeat. However, history is not the anti-Batista, all anti legal Castro Cuban a exiles ge difficult, to justify the retention of all of like a boxing match or a baseball game. It their determination to est O a free and the confusing and misleading methods flows like a river. The United States and democratic regime with social Justice. They that are currently being used. Cuba are too much intertwined by history, mu not be abandoned. The Douglas bill requires that the geography, economics and strategy to he must no ,be prove, a deeds and not just cold war. All caught the e in the forces words ,mathatnds we for soarecial determ redoi ed to support truth, the understandable truth, be told vast storseparated. m of Cuba the has ! about the price of credit. Surely, this is unleashed by the Cuban revolution are still the demands nd we are r not s merely throughout, most reasonable. I Urge Senators to operating. LCadre Amer sfor so ; that tt that will oppose rely anng! Support this measure. Therefore, something has to happen, and dictator ips as we doI 'Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, I am the instinct is to say: something has to be rea.ctiona;ry military , communistic bile orships; that', pleased to join with the distinguished done. The first thing to recognize is that leftwing ask partnership Senator from Illinois [Mr. Charge as a There must be no repetition of the incredibly subservience. This is the only kind of inter- Coauthor of the Finance DOUGLAS] Dis- inefficient Intelligence analysis of the Cuban vention that can permanently succeed in' closure Act. I am prompted to do so situation. which preceded last week's fiasco. Latin America. for two reasons: To those who knew the situation in Cuba ROXMJiRE ? I should like to:! briefly XMI that shoul: m First. The public, who are the users of and knew the formidable strength of the Mr. edito credit facilities offered by the various leaders and their regime, the outcome of read P There are cfroain developments that would', finance companies and institutions, have such an invasion attempt was Inevitable. And even had it succeeded, the CIA con- farce the United States to act' and such! a right to know, in terms of simple an- cept of putting in a rightwing government action would be fully and rstood by thel noel interest rates, what they are re- that would have been branded as a Yankee world at large. If the Russians, for instance, witl quired to pay for such services. Regret- creation was dreadfully wrong. It is ob- were to set up missile bases r move in tably, because of the complexity in stat- vious that the first step must be to reor- a dangerous degree of military support, ing interest rates on a monthly basis and ganize the personnel and methods of the Americans were killed and the lives of the Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 Approved ONGRESSIONALIRECORD RDSSENATE 468000200160015-1 April 27 At the same time, they are appre- hensive lest we be connected with any bungling. Published press reports alone provide a damning indictment of the entangle- ments, the timing, and the fumbles in the recent invasion of Cuba. Let me cite a few: First. The Cuban Revolutionary Coun- cil was not aware of the time and date of invasion. In fact, the Council's Minister of Defense, Dr. de Varona, was conferring with his Naval staff over in- vasion plans when he was told the in- vasion had already taken place. Second. When Cuban naval officers commanding the landing craft were given their destination once at sea, they nearly mutinied. They knew the troops would be landed in mangrove swamps, waist deep in water. Third. When they did land, Castro tanks and heavy weapons were waiting- obviously aware of the landing point. Fourth. An air umbrella which Cuban exile flyers promised the invasion force never materialized because aircraft they anticipated, at the fields where 150 pilots waited, never arrived. Fifth. Help from the anti-Castro un- derground in Cuba failed because the underground was crippled badly a whole month earlier. Most of its top leaders, including Gonzales Corzo, the anti-Cas- tro military coordinator for all Cuba, were arrested by Communist secret po- lice during a meeting in Havana March 17. Castro forces also moved rapidly at the time of invasion to round up other underground and sabotage units. Right now we are having a lot of glori- fied self-recrimination. I suggest we stop trying to fix any blame. Let us, in- stead, learn what lessons we can, act swiftly and decisively to prevent any repetitions, and then move ahead in our fight for freedom. The President has made a commend- able beginning by naming Gen. Maxwell Taylor and his small committee to re- view America's capabilities. The group is small enough to act quickly, and yet represents a divergence of background, which is healthy. Communism has established a strong base in Cuba. So long as Cuba is controlled by a hysteri- cal demagog, it poses a direct threat to our shores. Additionally, it is fast becoming a nesting place for Red spies and firebrands infiltrating throughout Latin America. Must we wait for all other Latin American nations to awaken to this peril? Or, should we act unilaterally in our own interest? And if so, how? This is one question which this commit- tee and the Nation must resolve shortly. I pray the committee recommendations and the decisions will both be prompt and correct. For myself, I do not propose the use of American military force in Cuba at this moment. I do propose a continua- tion of the firmness evidenced after the ill-fated invasion. I conclude with just one thought. When we speak with strength, we must be prepared to act with strength. When we act with strength, we must act de- cisively. We must be prepared to com- mit every resource, if need be, with but one thought-and that is to win. OIL DEPLETION ALLOWANCE Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, big oil has scored again in this administra- tion by winning conspicuous omission for its fat 271/2 percent depletion loop- hole from the President's recent tax message. This is another reminder to those naive enough to need one that the one big private interest that can throw its weight around in this administration is oil. Oil has become the special interest Achilles' heel of an administration that otherwise has a splendid public interest record. Undoubtedly, the most notorious loop- hole in our Federal tax structure is the provision that singles out oil for a fat 271/2 percent of gross income exclusion from income taxes on grounds of deple- tion. Most minerals enjoy only a 15 percent depletion allowance at most. Recommendations to bring oil down to this more moderate level would restore hundreds of millions of dollars of reve- nue to the Treasury. For years this special consideration for oil has been the target of those who have sought greater equity in the tax structure. The administration has just made a series of far-reaching recom- mendations that have as their express purpose greater tax equity. But was the oil depletion allowance included? No. Dividends, foreign earnings, and expense accounts are hit hard and directly. But oil continues its political charmed life and escapes once again. In fact, oil de- pletion is the one ripe and obvious tax loophole to escape the President's recommendation. Unfortunately, this exception for oil is becoming a steady pattern. The ad- ministration's nominations for top office were excellent, public-interest selec- tions-with a single exception. Big oil succeeded in placing their men in the two critical positions in our Government that can benefit the industry. The nomination of oilman John Con- nally as Secretary of the Navy has placed an executor of the will of one of the richest oil fortunes in the world as the man who will buy the oil for all the Armed Forces and who determines the Navy's critical research program in oil's dangerous competitive fuel-atomic energy. The nomination of John Kelly as Assistant Secretary of the Interior for Minerals was even more incredible. It has placed a man who still holds millions in oil interests at the head of the OR Import Administration, the Office of Oil and Gas, and virtually every significant program of the Federal Government affecting the industry. Consider that the oil-gas industry alone of all American industries has won such control over the body that regulates it-the Federal Power Commission-that for years the FPC has refused to follow the direct order of the Supreme Court to regulate the price of natural gas at the wellhead, and still does. Also the oil-gas industry alone enjoys the exceptional privilege of approval of their rate increase requests before the regulatory body considers them. Of course the request may later be denied and refunds required, but meanwhile the public, not the industry, has suffered the full weight of the years of delay now required to complete an FPC hearing. PEACE CORPS ASSISTANCE TO TANGANYIKA Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, the Peace Corps has just announced its first pilot project-it will send 28 American engineers and surveyors to Tanganyika to assist the government of that country in the development of an adequate road system. While I was on a visit to Africa last year on a study mission with several Members of the Senate, we stopped in Tanganyika. It is a new country. Like the United States did in its early stages, Tanganyika needs a system of feeder roads running into the interior of the country to enable the small farmer and rancher to bring his produce and his herds to the main market centers. Those roads do not exist now. Con- struction cannot proceed until critical surveys have been made. Sir Ernest Vasey, Minister of Finance for Tanganyika, has pointed out that the government can only train two land sur- veyors in the next 5 years. They will be hopelessly inadequate, he explained, for the basic planning needed in many of the road development schemes. The request for 20 surveyors, 4 geol- ogists, and 4 civil engineers came di- rect from the Government of Tan- ganyika. I think it is indicative of the kind of response the Peace Corps has in- voked in newly developing regions of the world. Peace Corpsmen who go to Tanganyika will not be advisers, working at a high level. They will be doers-they will be working on the job, actually doing the surveying in the interior of the country. But they will also be teachers. The Government of Tanganyika will assign young Tanganyikans to each Peace Corps team to learn methods of surveying. When the Americans return home, they will leave behind a cadre of local people who will be able to carry on the work. Mr. President, this is the kind of hard- headed, realistic approach which is ur- gently needed in tackling barriers to de- velopment in new countries. It is assist- ance, but it is more than assistance-it is cooperation and education and con- crete progress all rolled into one project. Most importantly, it is on the people- to-people level that will give Tangan- yikans the opportunity to learn from, and to share with, Americans who are vitally interested in them and who will represent the very best our country can produce. The eyes of our Nation, and of the world, will be on the 28 Americans who are selected for this project. Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 6375 while at the same time reducing defense expenditures below the levels that would otherwise be faced. Over the years, we will continue to make major changes in the pattern of defense spending. We cannot :afford to modify these decisions to accommodate local or private interests, no matter how legitimate, But we have an obligation to take steps to mitigate their consequences for the people affected. At this point I want to mention two com- mon assumptions which are, in my judg- ment wholly fallacious. First is the assumption that our economy is not strong enough to maintain large de- fense expenditures over a protracted period. I have no doubt that, if required, we can continue to sustain defense expenditures at their present levels, or, indeed, at increased levels, if this should be necessary. We can and must expend whatever is needed to pro- tect the lives and substance of our people. Second is the assumption that our econ- omy is dependent upon large defense ex- penditures. I am equally certain that this assumption is false. We all earnestly hope that the day will come when we can sub- stantially reduce the portion of our national wealth devoted to the production of instru- ments of war. I am confident that when that clay arrives, far-sighted planning will permit that portion of our wealth now com- mitted to national defense- to be shifted to the improvement of the well-being of our people without serious disturbance of our economic life. The future is, of course, uncertain. But of one thing I am sure-whatever the future may bring, our economy is strong and re- silient enough to meet any challenge that may arise. Defense spending represents more than one-half of the Federal budget, and nearly 10 percent of the gross national product. Aside from the 21/2 million men in uniform and the more than 1 million civilian em- ployees of the Department, there are 3 to 4 million people in the United States who sup- port themselves and their dependents on the paychecks of private defense contractors. The scale of defense spending is multiplied in importance by the shifts in where and how the money is spent. As one weapons system is- phased out and another one developed, defense business moves not only from one contractor to an- other, but from industry to industry and from State to State. The shift from manned bombers to mis- siles has meant that an increasing volume of defense production has been moving to the electronics industry and away from the old aircraft plants. Similarly, although we are accelerating the procurement of Polaris submarines and increasing the share of the defense dollars being allotted to shipbuild- ing, a major part of that work is going out- side the shipyard into nuclear power plants and electronics companies. These specific shifts in our defense plans, however, tend to obscure an even more im- portant development-the rate at which shifts in defense planning are increasing, both in size and frequency. The rate of change is largely a function of our rapidly advancing technology and the growing uncertainty about what research and development will produce. The uncer- tainties that surround all of us are com- pounded for the defense planners by uncer- tainties about how the technology of our potential enemies may develop-and indeed, about how it has already developed. We must try to match our defense systems still in the development stage to enemy missile systems on the drawing board. As our choices become more complex, their consequences extend farther and farther into the web of our economy. The shift from the longbow to the crossbow involved only the prime contractors. In the typical weapons system today, there may be as many as six or eight layers of subcontractors. The difficulties of rational planning are enormous. But we must meet them with a corresponding effort. There are a number of steps we can take, some of them within the Department of Defense, and some of them involving the country as a whole. Within the Department, our planning must extend further into the future in order to provide a leadtime sufficient to permit adjustment to the future consequences of present decisions. Our choice of weapons must reflect the most imaginative explora- tion of all the choices available to us. Our budgeting procedures must be revised to show us all the costs of alternative weapons systems, not only for research and develop- ment, and for initial construction, but for operation and maintenance as well. We must be bold enough to grasp distant opportunities, but we must be prudent enough to hedge our bets. Where we can, with reasonable assurance of success, buy time by committing ourselves now to long- lead items, or to production facilities, we must do so. We are proposing to contract now for facilities to double our Minuteman production capacity, thereby providing in- surance against a future requirement. This kind of planning - will enable us to predict a little better the pattern of defense spending, but it will not avoid shifts in the spending pattern. The purpose of our plan- ning is not to produce a Maginot Line, even in outer space. It is rather to maintain the kind of alert, flexible posture that can re- spond immediately to new developments in technology at home, or to new insights into the plans and capabilities of our potential enemies abroad. We can continue to expect, therefore, that there will be major shifts in our defense program from year to year, and perhaps more often. Indeed, I think there would-be real cause for concern on your part if you saw that our defense program over the next 4 years was following precisely the pattern that has just been set for it. Given the inevitability of frequent and major changes, our defense planning must extend beyond the Defense Establishment, to help the American economy absorb the Impact of these changes without breaking stride. All the major problems that chal- lenge the flexibility and resiliency of the total economy find a focus in defense con- tracting-automation, rapid shifts in de- mand, jurisdictional conflicts between craft and industrial unions, and the like. We, in the Department of Defense, have already taken the first step in the direction of a working partnership with other agencies of government and with private groups to attack this congerie of problems. It has traditionally been the policy of the Depart- ment of Defense not to begin planning for shifts in resources within the United States, base closings, plant sales, and the like, until the last possible moment before the change is actually due to take place. The basis of the previous policy has been the fear that decisions taken upon sound military grounds may be upset by the pres- sures of local and private interests. I expect to make it clear that our decisions, once taken, will not be subject to reversal, ex- cept for changes in the facts on which they were based originally. Once our position has been made clear, however, I anticipate that we and the com- munities affected by these decisions will join together to use the time between the an- nouncement and the action to develop plans to reduce the impact of the change. We have organized a special unit just for this purpose in the Office of the Assistant Secretary for Installations and Logistics. This unit will not only draw on theresources of the Department of Defense; it will seek help for those affected from the Departments of Labor and Commerce, the General Serv- ices Administration, the Civil Service Com- mission, and the Small Business Adminis- tration. The help that we can offer includes finding jobs for displaced Government employees in other instal:.ations, arranging for surveys of business opportunities in communities that are losing payrolls, and providing a variety of technical services. But more important than any of these is the encouragement we can givei, these com- munities tc help themselves, not only by advance planning, but simply by spreading accurate, advance information to everyone concerned, spiking rumors and deflating ex- aggerations. Any decision that comes out of Wash- ington and falls on a particular commu- nity a long way off, is likely to be fright- ening until it is explained and understood. We propose to take enough time to try to explain it. With your help, I think we cannot only explain the move but develop an orderly adjustment to it. If change is the law of the universe, it is a law enforced with par titular strin- gency in military planning. The penalties for failure to observe it are unavoidable and harsh. The President's defense program is designed to improve the capacity of the military establishment to adju 't to chang- ing military needs. It is also designed to reduce the impact of these changes on the economy as a whole. SPECIAL REPORT ON CUBA received so much mail, so many ques- tions have been - asked, so many sugges- tions on the Cuban situation have been made, that I feel it is proper for me to make some remarks at this';ime. The gravity and importance of what I want to say is such that I wa t to be ab- solutely certain of two thing : First, that I cover a number of points in as short a time as possible. Second, that the language I use is carefully considered so it will not be mis- construed. I cannot say too strongly r too often that the American people mist and will unite behind any action necessary to preserve our freedoms.-and to help oth- ers preserve theirs. There is no time or place for partisanship. This s a time of national emergency. From ll reports, the American people are fa ahead of many in Washington in relining that we are at war with communism. This war, hot or cold, shooting or silent, at home or in far off lands, has taken and will continue to take- many strange forms. It is truly total war. Economics, propaganda, politics, and diplomacy are just as important tools of this total war as armed might, which is becoming more and more of a last resort. We traditionally abhor he use of armed might. We do not life to extend our influence through a gun barrel. But, we also ascribe to the slo an "Don't tread on me," and the American people are sick and tired of being made to look ridiculous by a bearded fanatic who has created a Communist stronghold just 90 miles from our backyards. In short, the American people are ready to accept constructive nd forceful leadership. They are preps ed not only for strong words, but for str ng deeds if Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 1961 ApRr?Md1fL9? " 0ffiRW _CAlf P6f00346R00020016001 A2931 The Agricultural Situation Is a It breaks down to this: If American ship, we propose a program that will end the Man -Sided Thing farmers are given some assurance of rela- current paradox in which productive success y -Sided tively favorable prices and incomes in the has led to economic distress. This happens, 1960's, and if we provide a sound program in-a large measure, because of the inelasticity EXTENSION OF REMARKS for adjusting our production to that which of the human stomach, hence the Inelasticity of can be used, we will have a highly produc- of the demand for food. A little too much tive and flexible agricultural plant-one in the way of food supplies leads to dramatic HON. LESTER R. JOHNSON capable of responding to any foreseeable farm price declines-hence to a farm income food production emergency. This Is the kind problem. And a little too little in the way of of WISCONSIN of an agriculture we want. food supplies leads to skyrocketing food IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES But, in the absence of such a program, prices and a real income squeeze on con- Wednesday, April 26, 1961 results could be disastrous. What are the sumers-this is the food problem so often potential consequences? encountered in wartime. Mr. JOHNSON of Wisconsin. Mr. Farmers could, in the absence of such a speaker, the urgent need for enactment program, use their productive capacity in- In fact, discriminately. In that event, If support paradoxical it may seem, these 7.)f long-range and forward-looking farm the gyrations and this ti instability a ity can same both . _egiS1at10ri was emphasized b Agricul- PI 'ograms were continued, the burden on the prod by Federal budget would become intolerable, The inst and con caddy to the the same tim ime, rural Secretary Orville Freeman when and the stockpiles of surplus completely un- and r The risk kability adds to the risk . farming, le testified before the House Agricul- manageable. Or-and more likely-the pub- a always noreases costs. And the -lure Committee April 24 on the pro- lie would refuse to continue such supports, make for an uncertainties of inefficient ups and uowve nosed Agricultural Act of 1961. He cited and prices and incomes would be driven plant the i farmerhas, use and of the pros must -he current technological explosion in down so low that results could be catastroph- me has, which he must ic. Millions of farmers, their incomes de- maintain whether prices are good or bad. agriculture and the magnitude of the This, too, increases costs. =torage problem as two of the reasons pressed below subsistence level, would swell the ranks of the unemployed, would crowd This leads to my final l point with regard vhy this bill should be enacted into already crowded areas of our cities, seeking on to the both farmer technological and exp ume and its If we osion effect ~,w as soon as possible. Under leave to jobs. And many of them would be neither gram that Only d In -xtend my remarks, I would like to in- trained for jobs or adjusted to city life. The adjusting seffect a program that succeeds in -lude this portion of his testimony in the economic problem would be complicated by use and that at tdat t the e to that which visaa MCORD: the social problem. same time provdes a 'ECHNOLOGICAL EXPLOSION HAS INTENSIFIED This is not all. I should like to point out fair income for the farmer, only if we thus THE FARM PROBLEM here how such a development would in the Promote economic and price stability in lia UHOENCY OF THIS LEGISLATION IS FURTHER prices to its unfortunate results. Further nological improvements in production be EMPHASIZED BY THE CURRENT TECHNOLOGICAL rlenlir, '- a,~.,......... F,... . - expected to remit in EXPLOSION IN AGRICULTURE lead to a corporate type agriculture Con- of prices to consumers while maintaining The magnitude of the technological revo- trolled by outside capital. Hired labor would farm incomes. Without such a program the -ition in agriculture is too little recognized, Increasingly replace work done by the farm farmer must pay the cost of risk, and of aid its consequences-in the present and operator, and the costs of management, su- inefficient use of his productive plant, as 1r the future-are not sufficiently realized pervision and labor would go up. For one I have described. Without it he must main- - understood. of the major reasons why the American fam- twin greater financial liquidity than would Agricultural efficiency and productivity ily farm has become the most efficient agri- otherwise be the case; he must pay more for nvt advanced so- rapidly during the past cultural producer in history is that the credit; he is forced to use older and less acade that agriculture has tripled its out- owner-operator is on hand, to do the work efficient methods than he would otherwise tit per hour of labor while industry's out- and to supervise the work. Neither collective use. Kit has only doubled. Output in agricul- farms nor large corporate landowners are able Supply adjustment programs that serve are increased much more rapidly than the to mtach the efficiency that results. to reduce and minimize the extreme and 3mmercial market increased. During the If low incomes squeeze out all but a few uncertain price fluctuations in agriculture 050's farm output increased by 28 percent corporate-type farms, there would doubtless would reduce the costs borne by the farmer. bile population Increased only 19 percent. result the kind of supply control that would They would mean a gain in production ef- nee the domestic demand for food is tied result in high prices, without regard for the ficiency, and this in time would mean a bsely to population changes this means public interest, or the consumer interest, or reduction of the per unit cost of produc- ?at supplies have outrun demand. Sup- interest in our programs to expand the use tion. This would really set the stage for ies have pressed against population needs of food abroad in the interest of peace and both the maintenance of farm incomes and _ the United States and given rise to a con- economic progress. an eventual orderly lowering of prices to ant downward pressure on farm prices. We deplore the collectivization of farms consumers, consistent with the march of This increase in output has been accom- in a part of the world, and we would en- technological advance. ished with the use of only 2 percent more courage land reform in those other areas The urgency of this legislation is demand- sources than were used 10 years ago. The where huge landholdings have-like the ed by the magnitude of the storage prob- mposition of these resources has changed Communist collective farms-proved so in- lem. _arply, with about one-third less labor and ferior to our family farm economy. How The cost of the storage is so great that percent less cropland. But the use of ma- ironic it would be if we allowed that family we cannot expect it to be long continued. .finery, fertilizers, pesticides, and other farm economy, that has proved its superior- This is an immediate and pressing burden. archased inputs has risen sharply. Overall ity socially as well as economically, to be Eight years ago, agriculture's house was in 3ciency, in terms of output per unit of destroyed for want of the tools it needs to order. Commodity carryovers were at rea- put has gone up by 25 percent. These meet conditions of today. sonable levels. Producers had no burden- anges in resource needs have had a sharp The family farm in this Nation has reached some surpluses hanging over their heads. .pact on declining farm employment, in- a pinnacle of success in Its primary func- These were the quantities, held In public eased capital requirements, and the de- tion, the production of an abundance of food and private hands, of principal crops car- sasing opportunity for young people to and fiber to meet human needs. It has ried over into the marketing year of 1952 ter farming. made this abundance available to the con- 53: This technological revolution in agricul- sumers of this nation at a lower real cost Feed grains: 20.1 million tons which was m7e has only just begun. Only a few of than ever before in history. The consumer 18 percent of the amount used in that year. r farmers are using all of the new tech- now spends about 20 percent of his dispos- Wheat: 256 million bushels, or 26 percent logy to the best advantage. Economists able- personal income for food, as compared of the amount used in that year. the Department of Agriculture recently with more than a fourth in 1947. The con- Cotton: 2.8 million bales, or 22 percent of =imated that a population of 230 million sumer in America works fewer hours to feed the amount used In that year. ople in 1975 could be provided better hiimself and his family than in any other The coming marketing year confronts us its, and our export markets readily satis- country. The American public should pay with a different picture: - _1, from a crop acreage no larger than that tribute to the farmer for his contribution Feed grain stocks will be around 84 million use just prior to the start of the Conser- - to our standard of living. Even Khrushchev tons, or half of a year's needs. Over 85 per- ion Reserve program, simply by using pays that tribute. A little over a week ago cent will be Government owned or under ssently-known methods of production on he was quoted as saying that the Soviet CCC loans. ast farms. If all farm production in 1975 triumph in space "must not detract the Wheat stocks next July 1 will amount to se to be carried on with only the best attention of the Soviet people from other about 11/2 billion bushels, or more than a -hniques in use in the late 1950's, not all targets, and these Include catching up with year's expected domestic and export needs. the cropland acreage now in use would the United States in the standard of living." About 90 percent will be under CCC loan or in needed for food and fiber production. To insure our continued superiority in this CCC Inventory. Cotton stocks, at 7%Z million * * ? field In which we have unquestioned leader- bales, largely In private hands, will be down Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 _ - - - Approved For Release 200 OQ lg :, (Z[A-fZDP,6AP.Q 46PARkWA X015-1 sharply from recent highs, but almost 3 times as large as in 1952. The growth of feed grain and wheat stocks did not occur overnight. Feed grain stocks have increased in every year since 1952, as a result of excessive pro- duction. Wheat stocks have increased in 6 years out of 9. How can we convey the magnitude of the storage problem? Taxpayers should know that Government costs of carrying and handling commodity stocks have risen from $238 million in fiscal 1953 to $1 billion in the current fiscal year. These costs include storage, transportation, and interest. The CCC investment in price support at the end of this fiscal year will be about $8.5 billion. Wheat and feed grains will account for 87 percent of this. We must face the problem of working down these large stocks. As long as they exist, they pose a threat to markets and to price stability that extends beyond these com- modities to the livestock industry. We cannot reduce stocks as long as the supplies that come out of inventories are more than replaced from excess current pro- duction. Each recent year has added an average of 7 million tons of feed grains to stocks. Annual additions of wheat have been about 130 million bushels. We cannot expect to reduce CCC inventories until we have the legislation and programs that will effectively adjust production below total annual needs. This is ay major goal of legis- lation-here proposed. ~J ~ More About the CIA the Press EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. WILLIAM FITTS RYAN OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 27, 1961 Mr. RYAN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the RECORD, I include the following article from the New York Post for Tuesday, April 25, 1961, by the able Washington column- ist, Mr. William V. Shannon. I am bringing this item to the attention of my colleagues in another effort to point out that we are getting our information on this super secret organization only from the press. From the press we learn of the ineptness of the CIA in the Cuban invasion. We were given no advance notice that our Government was involved in the plan. Mr. Shannon's article again points up the need for this body to exercise some direct control over what has become something of an autonomy- an overseer of our foreign policy-inside the executive branch: CIA KEPT ITS SECRET-EVEN FROM THE REBELS (By William V. Shannon) - WASHINGTON, April 25.-The strange story of how the Central Intelligence Agency mis- managed last week's misadventure in Cuba can now be pieced. According to information from exile Cuban sources which has been reluctantly con- firmed by Administration officials, the lead- ers of the Cuban Revolutionary Council had no part in directing the actual military op- eration and no opportunity to- coordinate with the Cuban underground. The CIA held the six leading members of the Council incommunicado near an. aban- doned airfield somewhere in Florida while the "invasion" was underway. They were not permitted to join the rebel forces or speak in their own name. Statements were issued in their behalf of which they had no knowledge. Only after it was clear the invasion was going to fail were they consulted by top- ranking U.S. officials. HIrD 3 DAYS The story began on Sunday, April 15, when members of the revolutionary council in New York received word that they should go to Philadelphia. They were then flown from Philadelphia to an abandoned airbase some- where in Florida. They were quartered in an o'd, rambling house in a deserted area. Armed guards were posted outside. Provisional president Jose Miro Cardona, defense minister Antonio de Varona, and Manuel Ray were among the six civilian exile leaders kept incommunicado in this house for the next 3 days. The reason for holding them in this fashion was apparently a desire on the part of U.S. intelligence officials to maintain tight security. OFF GUARD The Cuban exile leaders first heard of the invasion from radio news bulletins on Mon- day. The timing of the operation caught at least some of them off guard. It provided no opportunity to work out plans with the underground inside Cuba to set off sabotage and diversionary incidents. The coordinator of the Cuban underground had a few days earlier journeyed from the island to Miami in order to make such plans. The invasion caught him flatfooted and as a result, there was no sabotage or uprising. Some of the Cuban exiles blame the CIA for this failure. The CIA explanation is that it did not wholly truss the underground and chose not to rely upon it. On Tuesday, the exile leaders were briefed. on the military situation in Cuba by a U.S. Army colonel. They grew restive, clamored for more information, and demanded to be allowed to confer with their supporters. At 1 a.m. Wednesday morning, Adolph A. Berle, coordinator of the State Department task force on Latin America, was routed from his bed in Washington by an urgent call from the White House and directed to fly to Florida. He was told the invasion seemed definitely to have failed. He ar- rived at the guarded house in Florida shortly after daybreak and spent the morning can- vassing the situation with the Cuban exiles. COMPLETE DISASTER That afternoon, he flew with them back to Washington where the group met twice, once in the late afternoon and again early in the evening, with President Kennedy. The President meanwhile was working be- tween conference on an entirely new draft of the speech he made the next day to the American Society of Newspaper editors. After conferring briefly with him a third time the next morning, the Cuban exiles were released from the CIA's protective cus- tody and allowed to go their own ways. The only member of the revolutionary council to participate in the invasion was Capt. Manuel Artime, the youthful ex-Castro follower whom the CIA had developed as a protege. He broadcast appeals to the Cubans to overthrow Castro, speaking from a ship off shore. This ship was subsequently sunk by Castro's planes and Artime's whereabouts are now unknown. The landing itself was apparently a dis- aster from first to last. There was only one landing, not several. It took place on a mile-long strip of the coast of Cochinas Bay. April 27 Three roads lead inland but Castro's forces succeeded in blocking them all. The United States provided air cover against the attacks by propeller planes, not jets, used by Castro's air farce. The rebels captured an airstrip near he coast, but the plan to use it t bring in supplies went wrong because Oas- tro's men had rendered the strip useless' by heaps:lg mounds of gravel on the runway. Abcut 1,200 or 1,300 men were landed, More than one-third were captured by Cas- tro's troops and most of the rest were killed., Castro's forces apparently did not fight with any great distinction but they had so many natural advantages of position and terr;air they were able to crush the landings in less than 3 days. Very few, if any rebels made their escape to the Escambray Moun. tains, FOUR BIG MIS'T'AKES The CIA is known sarcastically in Miam as the Cuban Invasion Authority. 1t'hs more liberal wing of the Cuban exile move. ment is convinced the disaster took plats because the CIA, overestimated Castro' weak:aess, refused to cooperate wholehe ,rt. edly with the undergrou d, put too mtlcl reliance on sheer military force-and the-t did not provide enough of that. The Cuban exiles believe that the CIA' treatment of them: during the invasion as s, many puppets was the natural outcome o this basically contemptuous, paternallsti. approach. U.S. officials deny that all of ; th Cuban complaints are justified but they pon cede that the CIA's attitude contributes heavily to the making of the fiasco. Controversial Committee EXTENSION OF, REMARKS OF I HON. CLYDE DOYLE OF CALIFO$NJA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 20, 1961 Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, by reasso of unanimous consent heretofore gratite me so to do, I wish to call to your at tent [on, and the attention of my oche: distinguished colleagues, an editorial',ap pearing in the Christian Science Monitc on Wednesday, March 1, 1961, entitle "Controversial Committee": CONTROVERSIAL COMMITTEE The life of the House Un-American Ac,tiv ties Committee continues to be a stormy', on Riots have attended some of its hearings an new efforts have been launched in Congre to curb it. Yet a great many Americans, fe its work is necessary to keep the N8tic ales: as to Communist infiltration. And tl Supreme Court, in a narrowly split deci'sio has just upheld Jail terms for two witness who refused to answer the committee's que tions. The chief significance of these cases is their confirmation of the Barenblatt feet sion in 1959. That ruling signaled a halt the Court's trend following the MCC4rtl era. In the Watkins case and some othe it had castigated the abuse of investigstil committees' power and set up stern limb But then in the, Barenblatt case and'' nc in t:ae Wilkinson and Barden cases, the you has supported wide authority for such is quiries. The majority, speaking through Mr. Ju tice Stewart, specificallyd, declares it is Ina Ing no judgment as to the wisdom of "t: creation or continuance' of this committee Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 A2926 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX April 27 Further, he said, Communists should look toward the formation of a super peace or- ganization "possibly of the type of the Brit- ish Peace Council" which "is linked with peace movements in all other countries through its association with the World Council of Peace." (WPC has been cited as a Communist world front organization.) An analysis of Gus Hall's lengthy policy statement shows that we can expect these main features of the attack: They will charge that the system of U.S. oversea bases is "needless and useless for the defense of the United States and a waste of the taxpayers money." They will praise the policy of peaceful coexistence, and propose plans "for the use of the billions being squandered on arms for houses, hospitals, schools, roads, and other social service and social welfare needs." They will demand universal disarmament as a panacea to end the threat of war. And they will continue a day-to-day harassment of the "big brass" for stepping up the arma- ments race and for "provocative warlike moves" in regard to Cuba and other countries. Above all they will carry on a running attack, charging that the "monopolies, the Pentagon, and their political henchmen are sacrificing the national interest, hurting our national prestige, degrading our democratic heritage, undermining the security and lib- erty of every American, and jeopardizing the very existence of the American people." While this is going on inside the United States, similar campaigns will be launched in other countries of the free world. For this drive is worldwide. It is based upon an agreement made by 81 of the world's 87 Communist Parties in Moscow last fall, an agreement which Gus Hall quoted as his guide in launching such activities here. Communists obviously are aiming to whip up public mob hysteria against the U.S. defense establishment both here and abroad, thus gain their real goals of weakening U.S. ability to defend herself and her allies against the rising tide of Communist "peaceful" ag- gression. What can be done? Counteraction must take into account the fact that the vast ma- jority of people in peace groups think of themselves as non-Communists and even as being opposed to Communist tyranny. For this reason, counteraction must avoid attacks against individuals, and must avoid any blanket statements about a particular peace group or about the peace movement in general. What veterans can do, however, is to in- form fellow citizens in peace groups, in unions, in fraternal, women's and youth groups correctly and repeatedly on issues of vital importance to our national security. All of the people in peace groups which Communist hope to exploit for their own ends must be made aware how Communists are working to use their idealistic views to speed the destruction of free institutions and the means to defend them. Only by a constant flow of information on the role of the defense establishment in de- fending free institutions and in furthering man's hope to live in a world at peace can Communist agitation be counteracted and defeated. What Communists are trying to do, in ef- fect, is to use a chain forged in Moscow to harness American peace groups to haul the Communist chariot ahead. You have it in your power to break that chain. HOW REDS ARE MOVING IN LATIN AMERICA In an unimpressive building in Mexico City on March 5, Red Chinese Delegate Chou Erh-fu wound up a ringing speech that had been punctuated by shouted slogans of, "Long Live China" and "Long Live Mao Tse- tung." The audience was made up mostly of Latin Americans, including a large delega- tion from Fidel Castro's Cuba, attending the Latin American Conference for National Sovereignty, Economic Emancipation and Peace. The conference was called by former Mexi- can President Lazaro Cardenas, a 1959 visi- tor to Peiping and a top member of the Executive Bureau of the World Peace Council which is run by the Chinest and Soviet Communists. As was expected, the meeting ended with a string of resolutions condemning alleged U.S. aggression in Cuba, seeking repeal of hemisphere treaties for mutual defense and cooperation, opposing U.S. military missions to Latin America, opposing all U.S. aid, and supporting efforts to "liberate" territories held by Western countries in Latin America. The real importance of the meeting is the fact that it was held in the first place. It was at an Afro-Asian Solidarity Congress in.Cairo in December 1957 that campaigns were launched which have brought us the Congo and the turbulence in Africa. We can expect that the meeting in Mex- ico City means the launching of an intensi- fied effort by Communists to create chaos in Latin America, to break up the unity of the Western Hemisphere, and to further isolate and weaken the United States. Action to counter such a Communist campaign can be taken by trade unions, by other private organizations which have regular relationships with friends in Latin America. The most effective action, how- ever, can only be taken throught the offices of the U.S. Government. In the case of Africa there was a time lag of about 2 years between the Afro-Asian Solidarity Congress and the outbreak of chaos. There are some signs in Latin America that we might not have that much time left there in which to act. EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, April 25, 1961 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, I com- mend to the attention of our colleagues the following article which appeared in the April 3, 1961, issue of the New Re- public. Mr. T. K. Quinn here concludes his enlightening discussion of the price- fixing case involving the electrical man- ufacturing companies. On March 23, 1961, and April 26, 1961, I inserted arti- cles by Mr. Quinn on this same subject. The importance of the matter commends it to our attention: THE DILEMMA OF BUSINESS The decision, the jail sentences, the fines, and the disillusionment following the elec- trical machinery price collusion case in Philadelphia could mark the beginning of a new understanding of the economic and po- litical issues involved if the actual condf tions are frankly faced. This is much more vital than the passing, publicized settle- ments and new Federal lawsuits against the price fixers promised by the Attorney Gen- eral. We are obliged to begin, as Judge Ganey said in Philadelphia, with the conclusion that the chief officers of 21 corporations had guilty knowledge of "the vast conspiracy." After all, price control is a common prac- tice in many industries. General Electric, the principal offender, has a long record of antitrust violations dating back 50 years. On an average of once every 2 years for half a century the company has had some gov- ernmental action brought against it. The policy of violation is well established. Similar indictments, although not so regu- lar or quite so often, have been brought against such other giants as General Mo- tors, Du Pont, A.T. & T., Westinghouse. There have been a number of convictions despite almost insurmountable obstacles the prosecution must overcome. The plain fact is that the big corporations are caught in an impossible dilemma. On the one hand, they know from experience that unrestricted price competition is de- structive and that if it actually prevailed markets could be disrupted, profits reduced or eliminated, and industrial instability re- sult. They could, of course, crush smaller concerns because of their capital advantages but would in time be themselves broken up. When giants fight there is bloodshed. Adam Smith is outdated in this modern age largely because fixed overhead has be- come a principal factor in total cost, and because corporations have swollen so big as to make our whole society dependent upon them. They simply refuse to take price chances wherever they can be avoided, often regardless of the law. On the other hand, anything less than seemingly enthusiastic support of competi- tion as a constructive force would be inevit- ably interpreted as an attack against free enterprise, so faithfully advocated . and guarded by its honest believers and practi- tioners as well as by those who, being in posi- tions of capital and market advantage, insist upon the license to charge and do as they please, free from all governmental interfer- ence or public controls of any kind, and regardless of inflation or any other harmful effects. What they really want are easy profits, assured, continuing and increasing. So big business, preaching one thing and practicing its opposite, is obliged to pretend that it favors competition and the antitrust laws while it secretly opposes them, estab- lishes uniform and administered prices, sets up barriers against the entry of new com- panies into its fields, stalls costly technolog- ical innovation and curtails production. Thus. otherwise respectable businessmen- the conforming bureaucrats in big corpora- tions-become the carriers of misrepresenta- tion and falsehoods and degrade themselves. They are victims of a dilemma most of them don't understand. In about one-third of the national econ- omy-an area that includes automobiles, steel, cigarettes, cement, oil products, chem- icals, roofing materials, electric light bulbs and machinery-price competition has been eliminated by mutual understanding, legally or illegally, among the corporations repre- sented. They have taken the position, in practice, that prices should be substantially uniform and profits so made secure. Now, if the American public is ready to accept this condition then the only re- maining question is who should fix the prices and what standards should be adopted. Shall we permit these and other private collusive interests themselves to de- cide what their "take" is to be? If so, then the laboring man should also be permitted to set his own wages. Before pursuing this absurdity further, let us quickly say that obviously the public interest must come first, and it becomes the duty and responsibility of the people, acting through government, to set the prices which would otherwise be under private collusive control. The situation is not changed in the least by resorting to name calling-i.e. "socialism." We would simply be recogniz- Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX A2925 offer economic aid to Cuba providing the Government of Cuba will cease its build-up of Soviet armaments in this hemisphere, and Third. The American people are eager to extend the helping hand of a good neighbor and accept the Cuban people as :full partners in the inter-American society of nations, providing the Gov- ernment of Cuba will stop to serve as a base for Soviet penetration into this hemisphere. I am suggesting that there is roomfor exploration of alternative accommoda- tions. I am not suggesting, however, that this Nation can stand quietly by while Cuba builds up a base hostile to our way of life and dedicated to support Soviet Union penetration into this hemi- sphere. What I am, saying is that we should give Castro one more opportunity to demonstrate to the world and to the United States that he is not a tool of Soviet subversion, If he is willing to do this, he has nothing to fear from the United States. President Kennedy, in his inspira- tional inaugural address, addressed him- self most eloquently to the problem which faces us today. He said: Finally, to those nations who would make themselves our adversary, we offer not a pledge but a request: that both sides begin anew the quest for peace, before the dark powers of destruction unleashed by science engulf all humanity in planned or accidental self-destruction. The question then is, Should we make one more try to find an acceptable rap- prochement with Cuba? If we succeed in this try, we will have demonstrated to the world our own greatness and a leadership truly worthy of the New Frontier. If we fail, then we will have shown the world that Castro is,. in fact, a madman condemned to his own destruction. Mr. Speaker, before we support an- other invasion of Cuba, an invasion which ultimately can be expected to in- volve our own military forces, let us pause to ponder the words of our great President : So let us begin anew--remembering on both sides that civility is not a sign of weakness, and sincerity is always subject to proof. Let us never negotiate out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate. EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. ROBERT H. MICHEL OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF :REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 27, 1961 Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks I would like to insert the following editorial by Mr. C. L.. Dancey of the Peoria Journal Star in the Appendix of the RECORD: LIBERALISM Is AMERICAN TRADITION (By C. L. Dancey) Dear anti-Communist friends, Sunday, we urged you not to hunt subversives, since that is a very difficult task even for professionals and is no place for us amateurs. Today we'd like to talk about liberals, the people that we believe some of you confuse with the real enemy. Liberals should not be confused with Com-. munists. (The Reds aren't liberal at all.) A genuine liberal has a liberal or generous and open-minded approach to all problems. He is opposed to prejudice or discrimination on the bass of race, religion, color, eco- nomic status, or social status. He believes that every person involved in a crime is entitled to the benefit of the doubt; until proven guilty by processes assuring him every :right and safeguard under our great liberal. Constitution. And he further believes that the convicted criminal should be treated with no thought of punishment but in a manner best calculated to salvage and rehabilitate that human being. These are all noble sentiments. You have no quarrel with liberals. However, there are also some mixed up folks who call themselves liberals, usually loudly. And this is where the confusion comes in. You might say they usually exhibit a vio?? lent underdog complex and. a "McCarthy syndrome." These are the folks not satisfied and not emotionally cut out to be liberals, so in- stead of no prejudice they specialize in re- versing the historic prejudices. They are usually violently prejudiced up the social or economic scale, instead of down. Sometimes, instead of maintaining an absence of prejudice and a liberal view even on matters of race and religion, they develop a passionate prejudice on behalf of minority groups against majorities. (NOTE.-This is understandable, and in some circumstances commendable, but it certainly is not liberal.) Finally some of them are so thin-skinned and jittery about their supposed liberal be- liefs that they are scared to death they will be linked with Communist philosophies, so they strike out with passion and prejudice at the very idea of people being curious about Communist activities. They are afraid of where it will lead, and history has given them some cause for this. That's why they aren't the least bit lib- eral toward anti-Communists. The word knocks them off balance. So remember that the liberal tradition is part of America from the days of the Found- ing Fathers, and is part of the true charac- ter of our Nation. Be liberal yourselves. Study with objec- tivity, not emotion. Study with an open mind, not prejudice. If you still have outspoken enemies, ignore those who are mixed up liberals. Don't confuse any special personal enemies with the great enemy of us all. Don't be dis- tracted by jittery people. The more you learn to know your enemy and his real nature, the less time you'll have to waste on these other folks. C. L. Dancey. A Realistic Approach to Our Educational Problems EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. HAROLD R. COLLIER OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, April 12, 1961 Mr. COLLIER. Mr. Speaker, a joint resolution adopted by the 72d General Assembly of the State of Illinois might be of keen interest to the Members of the House deliberating on the proposed Federal aid-to-education legislation. It is interesting to note that the resolution was originally offered by 29 :members of the Illinois Legislature who are closest to the problems in education in my State. I submit that this resolution, as placed in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of April 17 by Congressman ROLAND LIBQNATI, is a realistic approach to the real problem which faces the parents and taxpayers, not only in Illinois, but across the other 49 States. Editorials Appearing in the V 'W Ameri- can Securlity Reporter for March 1961 EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. CLYDE DOYLE OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 20, 1P61 Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker,I by reason of unanimous consent heretofore grant- ed me so to do, I wish to call to your at- tention, and the attention of my other distinguished colleagues, two articles ap- pearing in the March :1961, is ues of the VFW American Security Rep;rter, pub- lished monthly by the Veterans of For- eign Wars of the United States. Mr. Speaker, it is my own personal experience over a long ter of years that the Veterans of Foreign Tars is one of several national organizations of dis- tinguished veterans of wars in which the United States has been involved which is doing a vigorous and valiant and nec- essary patriotic service to the cause of our national security.. The! editorials follow: COMMUNDSTs ANNOUNCE OPEN WARFARE The Communist Party, U.S. ., has now disclosed openly that destruction of the U.S. defense establishment is a major ob- jective of its "peace policy." General Secretary Gus Hall rolled out the broad outlines of the campaign) at a meet- ing of the party's 60-member National Com- mittee in New York January 2b. He said that Communists' biggest job in the immediate future is to agitate both in- side and outside of established eace organ- izations to destroy public confl.cence in the U.S. defense establishment. He declared: "It is our task to reveal to every American that big business and big brags are today the chief force for war. We must make clear that :,heir talk of defending freedom is a fraud." Moreover, he said, Communists must step- up their work inside peace organizations and work to "widen the struggle for peace, to raise its level, to involve far greater num- bers, to make it an issue in every!icommunity, every people's organization, every labor union, every church, every house, every street, every point of gathering of our peo- ple. It is imperative to bring everyone- men., women, youth and, yes, even children- into the struggle. The fight for peace is basic to the cause of progress and socialism." He indicated that this would mean many more "mass marches, demonstrations, peace walks, picket lines, postcard campaigns, let- ters to Congressmen and Senators, delega- tions, meetings, and many others: Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 1A2924 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX quate. It was no match for the defend- ing forces available to Castro. The invasion failed also because it was ill conceived, poorly planned, and lacked necessary military capability. It is diffi- cult to believe that the Pentagon was very pleased with the operations. I am inclined to think that our military lead- ers were skeptical onlookers, thoroughly amazed at the ineptness of amateurs playing at war. It would appear that on the American side, the invasion was encouraged essentially by a group of en- thusiasts who really believed that Cubans by the thousands would leap to arms in support of the counterrevolution. They were wrong and our position must be reoriented. , But most important, the counterrevo- lution failed because it had no roots in the people of Cuba. It failed because it had no appeal for the farmer and the worker. It failed because it appealed mainly to the dispossessed-those who had and lost. Unfortunately, there were many, many more of those who had nothing and were promised much. There is strong evidence today that the recent invasion of Cuba was only a probing action, that there will be other invasions of Cuba, supported and encour- aged presumably by the United States. Before we support other invasions of Cuba, let me caution the sponsors of future invasions to read carefully the lessons on revolution written by Che Guevara in his manual on guerilla fight- ing in the Castro uprising. Whatever Americans may think of Castro, he is nonetheless a living example of a suc- cess revolutionist. He understood and still thoroughly understands the Cuban farmer and worker. He won in Cuba, because he fanned the burning desire .of the peons for land and reform. He has maintained himself in Cuba, because he fans the great pride of Cubans in Cuba and in themselves. Unless the archi- tects of future invasions ignite a similar spark in the hearts of the Cuban farm- ers and workers or crush them outright with overwhelming military power, it is doubtful that these recent guerilla fight- ers will desert the Castro revolution. So much for the invasion which failed. We have also failed to starve Castro into submission. The sugar embargo has failed and so have our efforts to isolate Cuba. As a matter of fact, these efforts have aroused sympathies for the Cubans throughout South America and in many parts of the world. The great Yankee democracy is pictured as a heartless co- lossus crushing the little people of Cuba. But why are we so overwrought about Cuba? Historically, the United States has al- ways feared the presence of an alien force on Cuba. In the Castro regime we have a hostile government which has ac- cepted foreign military and economic assistance of great potential danger to the United States. Cuba is being built up not only as a hostile military base, but a stepping stone for international communism-a friendly door inviting Soviet penetration into this hemisphere. This we cannot permit. What frustrates us in Cuba is that we are unable to come to grips with the real culprit, the Soviet Union. The United States has every right, un- der international law and under the inter-American treaty arrangements, to defend itself and the hemisphere from external attack, direct or indirect, when- ever such an attack has occurred or is being prepared. It has no right, how- ever, under international or domestic law, and no moral justification for taking action but pretending that it is not do- ing so. Moreover, as long as the pretense ex- ists, any such action must be covert, in- effective, and doomed to failure. We thereby compound cynicism with defeat. Before we took action in Cuba or sup- ported others, in so doing we should have ascertained whether we had full legal and moral justification for what we did. Our experts in international law know that frequently there is a legitimate con- flict of legal principles which creates doubt as to our legal rights. However, we have the right and duty to apply those principles which sanction actions essential to protect ourselves and to oppose aggression if such a threat in fact exists. If the facts did not justify such action, we had no course but to with- hold action. We have always stood before the world as the defenders of international law. We therefore cannot afford to be vulner- able to a charge of violating it. Nevertheless, the conclusion seems to be that we must destroy Castro and his regime. We could crush him with our military power like an elephant might crush a mouse, but we dare not. And so we have decided to sympathize with, support, and encourage a counterrevolu- tion in Cuba. In the light, of this decision, other in- vasions of Cuba are coming. Who will be the invaders? Reliable sources have suggested that they will be Social Demo- crats, Each one of us will have his own views of what is a Social Democrat, but it is reasonable to assume that the United States will support Cuban patriots with liberal views. The invaders can be ex- pected to support progressive social and land reform programs. The funda- mental political objective of the invaders will be to reestablish freedom and de- mocracy in Cuba. The last invasion failed to communi- cate its objectives to the people of Cuba; and future invasions, I regret to observe, will have the same difficulties. For in a popularity contest in Cuba, Castro is the hero. It was Castro who seized the sugar lands. It was Castro who seized the banks and factories from foreigners and wealthy Cubans. It has been Castro who has seized the imagination of the Cuban people. As Americans, we hope patriots will find a way to ignite the spark of desire for freedom which could destroy Castro, but I doubt that the peons and the bearded ones can really understand the noble intricacies of a social democratic counterrevolution. I must reluctantly conclude that in any future invasion as Avril 27 in the past one, they will remain loyal to Castro. It has been reported that during the last invasion, great masses of people were armed and ready to fight off the invaders. Accordingly, if an invasion of Cuba by "Social Democrats" or any other group is to succeed, it seems quite certain that U. S. military forces will have to play a determining role. The invaders must be strong enough militarily to destroy sizable Castro forces on the beaches and in the in- terior. This will require the recruit- ment, training, and equipping of major rebel invasion units. It will require naval and air support. Bluntly, it will require at least limited military inter- vention by the United States. This course will lead us to horrible bloodshed and slaughter. We might get some other South or Central American country or countries to do the recruiting, training, and equip- ping for us, but this is a doubtful ex- pedient. It would certainly entail the possibility of the inherent danger that the countries of South America might choose up sides. Is there then an alternative, or must we take the calculated risk of support- ing with military power a counterrevo- lution against Cuba? There must be an alternative. If negotiations, cease fire, and a neu- tralist government are preferable to war in Laos; if endless meetings and dis- cussions on control of nuclear weapons are more acceptable than unilateral nu- clear testing; if insults and abuse can be endured better in the United Nations than a clash in the Congo, then surely reason dictates, even though emotions cry otherwise, that the United States is big enough to talk to Cuba. "It's too late for that now," the cry echoes every time negotiations are sug- gested. Yet, if this is a sincere statement, then one ventures hopefully that there might have been a time in the past when the United States might have negotiated with Castro. And, if we could have negotiated in the past, then why not now? How will we know whether some acceptable rapproche- ment is not possible unless we try? I am inclined to think that this country might well exercise a little re- straint and patience with Cuba. Gov- ernments and regimes have come and gone in Central and South America. We have weathered storms before. Castro may be an unpleasant irritant, a thorn in our side, but I certainly hope no one believes Cuba is a serious challenge to the United States. I suggest that: First, The American people can ac- cept the land reform program and the social and economic changes inau- gurated in Cuba, providing the Govern- ment of Cuba will undertake to reim- burse the original owners for the prop- erties taken from them. Second. The American people are ready to consider the reestablishment of normal trade and commercial relations between our two countries, and even to Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 1961 overly timid in credit. Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD APPENDIX, A2923 following them, witness recent Presi- dential messages and legislation-the tax recommendations, area redevelop- ment bill, the housing message, and the like. Lesson: Government regimentation, Federal bureaucratic planning, taxing, and control is no match for free private enterprise and people left alone by Government. When will our people wake up to the dangers which our Nation faces and re- member the lessons learned by our leav- ing the Old World, our revolution and formulation of our form of limited con- stitutional Government? (ermany has continued to guard against inflation 1'as successfully, in. fact, as any industrial country) and has kept a tight rein on the expansion of credit. The report called for easy money and said that a rate of interest high enough to stimu- late any large volume of personal savings would seriously curtail investment. Germany has kept a high rate of interest. The report said that tax concessions gr$nted to industry, such as depreciation allowances, were being abused and that in anti case they represented only an expendi- ture of tax funds which would otherwise hajve been collected by the Government. Ac- cordingly, the report said, a compulsory investment program would be more effective. U$Ider the recommended program, all indus- tries were to be assessed for the fund and the government was to distribute the money t4 industries where there was a crying need for expansion. The Government did nothing of the kind. The key bottleneck in German industrial expansion, the report said, was an inadequate supply of coal. it recommended vast Gov- ernment programs for stimulating the pro- duction of coal. Little was done along this line. Coal has become a drug on the market and the prob- lem has been how to dispose of the sur- plus. The report proclaimed that "the nostalgic )ropes * * * looking toward a revival of the 19th century role of the capital market are {loomed 'to disappointment. The capital knarket plays no such role in any modern country and there is no prospect that It will." I The capital market is still functioning much as it always did, here as in Germany, ,in spite of persistent attempts to dislodge I it. Finally, the report drew a distinction be- tween Germany, squeezed between too great a demand for imports and not enough ex- ports, and the United States, "where there has never been any fear of a squeeze or an external, drain." Today.. having disregarded all of Mr. Hel- ler's recommendations, Germany has turned the tables on us. It has built up an enor- mous trade surplus, accumulated nearly $8 billion in reserves, and the squeeze is on the United States-to such an extent, indeed, that we are begging Germany to help us out. What actually happened just couldn't hap- pen, according to Mr. Heller and others. They go on pretending that the United States must take the same medicine they pre- scribed for Germany even though Germany recovered precisely because it poured the nasty stuff down the drain. Now, what are the dangers and les- sons? First. Danger: Security classification by the State Department which with- holds information from our people. Lesson: Public knowledge and discus- sion will show up the fallacies of regi- mented bureaucratic thinking, foreign to a free enterprise constitutional Govern- merit society. Second. Danger: The gentleman whose views are so thoroughly discredited, Mr. Heller, is now the top economic adviser to the President. Lesson: A President can surround himself with fuzzy thinkers. Third. Danger: While Germany disre- garded these fallacious economic theories, of no need to worry over in- flation, easy money, Government aid to industry, misunderstanding the capital EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JOHN J. FLYNT, JR. OF GEORGIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 27, 1961 Mr. FLYNT. Mr. Speaker, on Mon- day and Tuesday, April 24 and 25, 1961, Quimby Melton, Sr., publisher of the Griffin Daily News, Griffin, Ga., initiated a campaign entitled "Confidence in Uncle Sam: Unlimited." I personally endorse the thoughts of this patriotic American, and it is with personal pleas- ure that I include an editorial written by Mr. Melton, which appeared in the Griffin Daily News issue of Tuesday, April 15, 1961: CONFIDENCE IN UNCLE SAM UNLIMrrED The suggestion made Monday, in this column, that every family in Griffin and Spalding County show their confidence in Uncle Sam, by buying a U.S, savings bond, is beginning to "snowball," There are indi- cations that this suggestion may catch on as a nationwide campaign. Today, the city commission has issued a proclamation calling May a month for show- ing "Confidence in Uncle Sam: Unlimited." In this proclamation the city fathers urge everyone to buy a bond during the month of May. If every family in Spalding does this it will mean $150,000 they are investing in a fund to help preserve democracy and free- dom in this Nation. Numerous persons have called, not only lo- cally, but several from out of the county, approving the plan. Today we are featuring the proclamation of the city commission in another story. Tomorrow we will comment on what folks are saying in support of this campaign. It all started when we were impressed by the statement of President Kennedy, that he was determined that our freedoms should not be curtailed by communistic aggression. We asked ourselves, "What can I do to help?" Then came up with this idea of buying a bond-taking stock, as it were, in the "Confidence in Uncle Sam Unlimited" organization. To fill out the column today, we'll just recount a conversation with two men. One, a businessman, said, "I'm going to buy a bond for each of my three grandchildren. I want to do my part to help guarantee that they never live under the rule of a totalitar?? fan dictator." The second man, a large property owner and a man who owns many gilt-edge stocks and bonds, said: "I have never bought a Savings Bond. For I can earn more interest with my money by other investments. But this can be called. a national emergency. I'm going to buy at least $1,000 worth of bonds, not as an in!'est- merlt, but as a contribution to my Govern- ment. I realize, looking at this from a hard- boiled business viewpoint, that if the Com- munists take over, all the property I! own and all the stocks and bonds in my safety deposit box will not be worth a dime.?' There you have two viewpoints. The businessman, who wants to j help guarantee that his grandchildren will enjoy the same freedoms as he enjoys; and the hard-boiled investor, who wants to guard the value of his property, stocks and bonds. Few of ue; can buy $1,000 bonds--but each faintly can well afford to put $18.75 into one bond and have a part in saving this Nation of ours from Communist domination. Come on Gritz and Spalding County-- let's all buy bonds. Another Try at Cuba EXTENSION OF REMARK HON. FRANK KOWALSKI OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF- REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 27, 1961 Mr. KOWALSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ap- plaud the leaders of the Democratic and Republican Parties for supporting Presi- dent Kennedy's foreign policy at this crucial time. There can be only one foreign policy of the United States, and the President is solely responsible for its execution. Certainly history has shown that once a decision is made the people of this great democracy have never flinched. from the consequences of that decision. Past events, however, have also dem- onstrated that the American people do not have closed minds. They peek in- formation and even welcome debate. They are eager to explore alte~'natives. They have faced up to war, but over- whelmingly they desire peace. Because we are an intelligent people, I believe, Mr. Speaker, there Is room and indeed a need for an objective appraisal of the Cuban situation. The invasion of Cuba was a horrible fiasco. The American people join with those who grieve for the young Cubans, so uselessly sacrificed on the beaches of their beloved land. Furthermore, it is no secret that many Americans., have lost confidence in those who conceived and led this unfortunate invasion. Most sig- nificantly, the American people) are deep- ly disturbed by the terrible blow which the invasion. debacle has dealt; the pres- tige of the United States. It matters little whether the United States did or did not finance,' organize, and arm the invasion forces. The cold fact is tha+; the world believes we did. And so, Mr. Speaker, we cannot escape the indictment that the failure of the anti.-Castro counterrevolution was an American failure. But why did the invasion fail? As a military action, it was doomed to failure from the beginning because the invasion force was militarily inade- Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX A2921 parts of the country came complaints against the electoral college. Every 4 years, the months after the presidential election, becomes open season on the machinery for choosing the Chief Executive. Senator MIKE MANSFIELD is the spearhead of the current attack on the electoral col- lege. He argues that the college is anti- quated and that only the popular vote should decide our choice for President and Vice President. This position, so soon after one of the closest elections in our history, only helps to confuse the issue for the aver- age citizen. The members of the Constitutional Con- vention in 1787 found the decision on the mode of choosing a President one of their most difficult. James Wilson, a delegate, stated it this way: "The subject has greatly divided this House. It Is In truth the most difficult of all on which we have to decide." The final decision to permit, the State legislatures to choose the method of picking their electors for the President and Vice President was based on the thesis that the right of appointment was not to be exclu- sively vested in the people. What was the intention of the delegates to the Constitutional Convention in decid- ing on this method of electing a President? One suggestion is that they wanted to keep the people from all participation in choos- ing the Chief Executive. Another sugges- tion is that they wanted the electors to be completely free agents without any control by the people. The Founding Fathers would have denied both of these suggestions. James Madison constantly stated "the Presi- dent is to be elected by the people." Ed- mund Randolph said "the electors must be elected by the people at large." Such state- ments clearly refute the view of those who argue that the Founding Fathers feared the people and distrusted their judgment. It has never been quite understood that under the Constitution State legislatures have the uncontrolled and unrestricted power to fix the manner of appointing the presidential electors. With this great power at their disposal State legislatures have nevertheless, under a kind of moral persua- sion, given up their prerogative of changing the present system. By the adoption of similar laws in each State there has devel- oped a uniform method of appointment. The method of choosing electors in pres- ent use is called the general ticket-plurality system. In the election just completed there were 537 electors to be voted on. The breakdown of the number is arrived at by assigning 100 electors to the States on the principle of equality, each State being en- titled to 2. The remaining 437 electors (to be reduced to 435 as the result of the census of 1960) are distributed according to the principle of population, each State being assigned as many electors as it has Congressmen. To be elected a presidential candidate must capture a majority of the total electoral vote. In the election just completed an electoral vote of 269 was needed for a nominee's victory. The Constitution says that electors may be chosen, "in such manner as the [State] legislature may direct." Under the present general ticket-plurality system a citizen. en- ters his voting booth to choose a nominee for President. In fact he is voting for every elector to which his own State is entitled. For example, if you voted in New York State on November 8, you would have faced a vot- ing machine listing the names of Kennedy- Johnson and Nixon-Lodge yet as you pulled the lever for either team you would have been voting, not for your candidates, but for a list of 45 electors previously approved by his political party. As a result of this system the candidate who wins the largest popular vote in the State receives all of the electoral vote of that State. This makes possible the situa- tion in which the candidate with the total popular vote of the country could lose the electoral vote and the election. An extreme example might be as follows: Alabama________________ California _____________ Massachusetts--------___ ---------------- Montana New York __-_-______..__ Ohio ---------- .. ----- Pennsylvania ---------- Nortli Carolina ------- .___ Texas ---------------- Wisconein------- ________ Popu- lar vote Elec- toral vote Thou- sands 25 2,100 1,100 DO 3,100 1,000 1,000 80 600 401 II' 4 _ Popu- lar vote Elec- toral vote Thou- sands 200 2,000 1,000 100 3,000 2,000 2,000 700 400 400 11 0 0 4 0 2.5 32 14 0 0 The Constitution makes electors free agents who may vote for any qualified man or woman that they feel should be President and Vice President. Our Founding Fathers did not fully recognize the possibility of political parties and thought of the electors as free agents. This myth persists. For example, as late as 1952 in Ray v. Blair (343 U.S. 214,) the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that a California law requiring an elector to sign an affidavit to support the candidates nomi- nated at the national conventions was un- constitutional. Custom and party pressure almost invariably make electoral delegations vote as a unit. The last exception to this occurred in Alabama in 1956 when 1 of the 11 Democratic electors did not cast his ballot for Stevenson. Some of those who have agreed that the above system has outlived its usefulness re- fuse to support the thesis that some system not using the electoral college should be devised. A method called the single-mem- ber district system has been suggested as a more democratic way of choosing electors. In this method the candidate receiving the largest popular vote in each congressional district would get the electoral vote for that district. The candidate receiving the great- est popular vote in any given State would garner the two additional electoral votes for the State. For example: Candidate A: Won 23 congressional districts-23 elec- toral votes. Popular vote-3,240,600-2 electoral votes. Total electoral votes: 25. Candidate B: Won 20 congressional districts-20 elec- toral votes. Popular vote-2,301,306-No electoral votes. Total electoral votes: 20. While the single-member district system has gained some momentum, the most ef- fective argument against it is that it would inevitably degenerate into a gerrymandering system. A gerrymander is an artificial ar- rangement of districts designed to give the political party making it (that is the party in power) a guarantee of electing its can- didate to a representative or electoral body. With all the undemocratic overtones to "gerrymandering" it would seem that the single-member district system would be a weak solution to the electoral problem. However, it is generally agreed that this system is superior to the present general ticket-plurality system. Following the election of 1948, Senator Henry Cabot Lodge and Congressman Ed- ward Gossett introduced a resolution for a constitutional amendment. It was approved by the Senate, but later failed in the House. This resolution would have translated popu- lar votes into electoral votes, and alloted a State's electoral quota among the candi- dates in proportion to the statewide popular, votes polled. All that would be necessary to win would be a 40-percent plurality which would practically obviate the chance of an election being thrown Into the House. This proposed amendment would have operated as follows: NEW YORK Present System: Candidate A, 3,260,362-45 electoral votes. Candidate B, 2,167,367-No electoral votes. Lodge-Gossett resolution: Candidate A, 3,260,987-22.6 electoral votes. Candidate B, 1,999,999-22.4 electoral votes. The strong argument against a change by means of the Lodge-Gossett resolution is that both State and National Legislatures presently overrepresent rural interests. The present electoral college system, conversely, is the only way to assure that presidential candidates will listen to the ? demands of urban majorities and minorities in America. The chief interest of southern sponsors of electoral reform is to diminish the alleged power of urban minorities, particularly the northern Negro, in national politics. It is to be noted that all suggestions for change mentioned in this article are alike in that they modify the electoral college. If the change is to come it must be by amendment, for State reform is unlikely especially in the big industrial States. The same considerations of interest and pride, chiefly the increased weight accruing from an undecided block of electoral votes, which originally induced one after another of them to give up the earlier district system plan can be counted upon to frustrate any at- tempt, within their own boundaries, to re- vive it or anything resembling it. One thing Is certain. The elimination of the electoral college system is practically an impossibility. The use of the popular vote as the sole determinant is not practical. Our representative system is based on a com- promise between population and regional needs. From a practical point of view, since the polls closed on November 8 some Republican leaders thought that there should be a re- count in 11 States. Some of these recounts were started. A recount in all 11 would have provoked considerable uncertainty and political passion. But, If the Presidency depended on a ma- jority of the popular vote in the entire Nation, we would then have a recount of the votes. in all 50 States. This would open the door to extensive opportunities for fraud in every area where one party had decisive control of the election machinery. The electoral college system, if it does nothing else, restricts the area of argument to a limited number of States. It does not put the whole country at the mercy of political machines determined to grab everything in sight. No one really questions that the electoral college system is cumbersome and anachro- nostic. But it is still very much a question as to whether the change should be made now. The real issue has been posed by Presi- dent John F. Kennedy: "If we are consider- ing a radical shift in the balance of power in the United States, it should not be under- taken lightly." The cure is often worse than the disease. Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 bved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 A2922 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX he Ad Hoc Committee on Cuba T_~"EXT,NSION OF REMARKS HON. CLEMENT J. ZABLOCKI OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 27, 1961 Mr. ZABLOCKI. Mr. Speaker, on February 2, under leave to extend my re- marks, I included in the RECORD an ex- change of correspondence with the ad hoc committee, composed of Milwaukee, Wis., residents, who were critical of our Federal Government for its alleged fail- ure to take any steps to seek peace in Laos. The other day, I received another open letter from the ad hoc committee. In this letter, the committee has in effect urged the Government to give the Coln- munists a free hand in Cuba. Under leave to extend. my remarks, I would like to place in the RECORD the text of the ad hoc committee's letter, as well as my reply to them. The two let- ters follow. AN OPEN LETTER To President John F, Kennedy, Secretary of State Dean Rusk, Ambassador Adlai Stevenson, Senators Alexander Wiley, 'William Proxmire, Congressmen Henry Reuss, Clement Zablocki, Robert Kas- tenmeier, editors of the Milwaukee Journal, and the Milwaukee Sentinel: We strongly support the declaration of President John Kennedy at his news con- ference on April 12, 1961: "There will not under any conditions be an intervention in Cuba by U.S. Armed Forces. This Government will do everything it pos- sibly can, and I think it can meet its ro- sponr,ibilities, to make sure that there are no Americans involved in any action Inside Cuba. I wish to make clear also, that we would be opposed to the use of our territory for mounting an offensive against any for- eign government." We affirm this stand because: 1. We see in armed Invention the risk of orld war III. 2. We do not wish to adopt the methods of he Soviet action in Hungary or the British- reneh action in Suez. 3. We have faith that there can be nego- iated solutions to international disputes. 4. We believe that intervention would for- eit the confidence and friendship of the entral and South American Nations. While many of us may look upon the astro regime with disfavor, puzzlement, nd disappointment, we are no less concerned ith the folly of our Cuban policy which ow causes the American people so much f nguish. Now is the time for open dis- ssion. It is our conviction that an in- f public opinion will. make its influence f It upon those who are in positions of 1 adership. There are questions deserving serious and I amediate attention. For example: (1) hat are the minimum conditions for re- e tablishment of diplomatic relations with C ba? (2) What should be our attitude t ward social and economic upheavals In C ntral and South America? (3) In what s ecific ways does the social revolution in C ba threaten the fundamental interests of t e American people as a whole? (4) Is t ere anything in American policy toward C ba which has contributed to her depend- e as on the Soviet bloc? (5) What are our o ligations under the Charter of the Organi- ze ion of American States? We think that James Reston, political, analyst of tae New York Times, has clearly stated the principle involved: "`Everywhere in. the world the United States is trying to defend or establish a simple overriding principle: That force shall not be used, directly or indirectly, to achieve political ends, and that all international dis- putes shall be settled by negotiation. This is the principle we are trying to sustain in Laos, where we are arguing against the ship- ment of Soviet arms for use against a gov- ernment we support. This is the principle we supported even against the British and French in the Suez war. This is the prin- ciple we are trying to defend in the Congo in Indonesia, in the Middle East, In Algeria, and in Berlin. Surely that same principle applies in our relations with Cuba and the other Central and South American nations. People striving for economic betterment, political free torn, and national independ- ence, sometimes use methods we abhor or go to extremes we deem unwise. Even in such cases we must uphold the principle of nonintervention. Our claim to moral lead- ership demands it. Intervention points to disaster. Sincerely yours, The ad hoc committee: Rev. Roy Agte, W. Robert Brazelton, Louis Becker, Dr. Neal Billings, William Brown, Dr. Gladys Calbick, Dr. Martin Cohn- staedt, Wilma Ehrlich, Jack Eisen- drath, Rev. Roger Eldridge, Dr. Hugo Engleman, Donald Esker, Mrs. Maxine Franz, Richard Franz, Wayne Gourley, Dr. Alan Grossberg, Mrs. Ruth Gross- berg, Mrs. Leon M. Hamlet, Dr. Dor- othea HL;rvey, Rev. Herbert J. Huebsch- mann, Edward-Jamosky, Harvey Kitz- man, Dr. David Luce, Dr. Willie Mae Gillis, Mrs. Virginia Parkman, Mrs. Louise W. Peck, Dr. Sidney M. Peck, Mrs. Annette Roberts, Mort Ryweck, Dr. Gordon Shipman, Dr. James W. Skelton, Rev. Kenneth L. Smith, Max Taglin, Mrs. Thelma Taglin, Corneff Taylor, Arthur Thrall, Nick Topping, Frieda Voigt, Rev. Lucius Walker, Theodore Warshafsky, Jack Weiner, John Werner, Rev. Herbert Zebarth, Leonard Zubrensky. CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES, HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C., April 26, 1961. Dr. S. M. PECK, Milwaukee, Wis. DEAR DR. Pseaa : This will acknowledge your open letter of April 25, outlining your ad hoc committee's views on the situation in Cuba. I have noted your views and I wish to re- assure you that, as In the past, I will con- tinue to support efforts made by our Gov- ernment to restive International problems through peaceful negotiation. However, we can only expecr constructive results from such negotiations if we negotiate from a po- sition of strength, not of weakness. I must add thet I am amazed at your com- mittee's apparently unshakable faith in the peaceful intentions of the commies and their willingness to reach negotiated settle- ments. It would. seem to me that your belief in the sincerity of Communist statements and pledges should be wearing thin. What do you find in the record of the past 15 years-and in the record of recent devel- opments in Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, and other areas-to sustain your faith? I would be interested in receiving your reply. There, is one last comment that I would like to make: Apparently history has failed to persuade you about the true nature and the real objectives of communism. You are, of course, puzzled and disappointed with Castro; according to your letter, many mem- bers of your committee even look upon April 27 him with disfavor. But the last paragraph of your letter indicates to me that you still consider Mr. Castor, and others in his category as basically well-meaning agrarian reformers, social reformers, or political re- formirs who-on occasion-may go to ex- tremias which you consider unwise. Your advice In. those instances is that we should sit tilht and do nothing. I CO not believe that we should try to run he affa(rs of any nation other than our cwn., or $tempt to rule the world. At the same time, we should not sit back and watcl. the Communists swallow up the free world bit by bit until they accomplish their objec;:ive--world domination. As a free nation, as a responsible world power, and as lea: lei in the free world, the United States has a responsibility to Its neighbors which goes beyond sitting back and engaging In intellrctually stimulating discussions, or in passing resolutions, or in composing open letters, I am confident that the vast ma.. jority of the American people are conscious of that responsibility and are determined to live up to it. Yours sincerely, CLEMENT J. ZABLOCAI, Congressman, Fourth District. EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. BRUCE ALGER OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, April 27, 1961 Mr. ALGER. Mr. Speaker, there are many Dangers and lessons in the article here presented-Human Events, April 21, 1961: GERMAMY IGNORED ECONOMIST HELLER, AND PROSPERED Imposing evidence has only recently come to light to show that leading New Deal economsts, including Prof. Walter W. Heller, are capable of giving some mighty bad ad- vice. This is important because Mr. Heller Is now Chairman of President Kennedy's Council of Economic Advisers. The State Department has declassified a 1951 rer ort in which Mr. Heller, Prof. Alvin Hansen, and several others solemnly warned that the German economy could not possibly improve without a thorough immersion in Keynesi