Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 23, 2016
Document Release Date: 
March 12, 2014
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
August 1, 1964
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP66B00403R000300090023-6.pdf845.11 KB
? ( ? Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/03/12 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000300090023-6 . 17132 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD? SENATE Be it enacted by Via Renate end HOUSE .cd Representatives of the Duited States at America In Congress assembled. That the Secretary of Commerce may accept reim- bursement for providing meteorological and hydrological work or services requested be States, counties, cities, or other local gov- ernment units. Reimbursement.may be so- cipted for the total or partial coat of the work or services furnished for the benefit of or in cooperation with such governmental unite: Provided. That the Secretary than require reimbursement for the total direct and in- direct costs of work or services so provided which do not have value to the public at /ems. ? Sec. 2. The Secretary of Commerce may re- mere such payment in funds or property to ? be used In providing the work or eervices, or both. All funds received in payment for work or services authorized herein shall be de- posited in a separate account In the Trese- ttry and atm!l be available to pay the costa of ouch work or services, for making refunds, or for credittng appropriations from which the cont of such work or services May have been paid: Provided, That payment for in- direct costs not paid from the appropriation bearing the cont of the work or nervices sha/1 be depositee into the Treasury as mtscellane- oes receipts. Sec 3 The Secretary of Commerce shall establish regulattons to insure that no com- mitment for work or services that are deter- mined to have no value to the public at large are made to States, counties, cities, or other local government unite where such work or services can be obtained from private orga- nizations and individuals who bare com- petency in the meteorological sciences. Mr. MANSFIELD Mr. President, that concludes the call of the calendar. I take this means of expressing my thanks and appreciation to the distinguished Senator from Arkansas, the chairman of thelForeign Relations Conaraittee (Mr. Puianucwri, for his patience and ABIENDMENT OF FOREIGN ANCE ACT OP 1961 The Senate resumed the consideration of the' bill (H.R. 114M to amend further the reigtance Act of 1961. as and for other purposes. rummoirr. Mr. President, I ully conscious of the distaste of lleagues for this misnamed . misrepresented. and misunder- stood egislation. longer than I care to remember, had the thanklesa duty of pre- this bill td,the Senate. Today. in Ti ew minutes remaining before the adjourns, / shall make the pre- sen on as short and painless as /can. I havanot forgotterethe incredibly long and arduous dehate.Which kept us in ses- sion until Just before Christmas last year. I cati?,ertly hope 1tW1 not go 'that long ? sacseearreare . The Wining Persons Act provides author- ity for the heads of executive departments to continue to credit the pay accounts of persona within the scope of the statute who are miming In eaten. interned, captured, or in a similar status and to Initiate, continue, or modify alowaruses to dependents of per- eons In a missing status. It also authorises the shipment of household effects and the transportation of dependents of persons In a missing status to such locations as may be approved by the head of the department con- cerned. With this authority the depart- ments can continue to protect the financial interests of covered persons in a variety of ways, such as by paying commercial insur- ance premiums while the person is In a miss- ing status. U allotments to dependents are not in effect when the person was placed in a missing category, the head of the depart- ment can initiate an allotment to provide for the dependents. IMPLairaTlarr ow Tim enz. The law now permits the continued credit- ing of pay for persons who are "missing. missing in action. Interned in a foreign coun- try, captured by a hostile force, or besieged by a hostile force." The Department of De- fense considers that none of these destzip- Mons amender!! Ste some categories of per- sons who should be entitled to continued pay and allowances, such as the two Air Force captains who were held by the Soviet Union after their B-47 was shot down over the Barents Sea. To cover such persons the WI would permit the continued crediting of pay and allowances to a person "who Is detained in a foreign country agairist his will." The bill also restore, to the law a provision for the filing and payment of income tax on the 15th day of the third month following termination of a missing status or after an executor, administrator, or conservator of the estate of a missing pennon has been appoint- ed. This provision was in the unginel Miss- ing Persons Act when it was approved in 1942, but it was not reemacted when the act was reactivated by the Selective Service Act of UM. Without this proniston. the Internal Revenue Service has no express authority to excuse a psmon who files a late income tax return because he was imprisoned. In a for- eign country and there la no express author- ity for granting a refund if the 3-year statute of insaltatkme for Sling such a refund expires while the person lain prison. YMCAS. nacre Enactment of this bill will not inerease ex- penditures by the Department of Defense, as the Department is now applying' the ithng Peretzle Act he' persons carrently carried as erabotaze LOWER PEND- d'OREILLE OR !CALM - PEL ?TR/BE or irrirAzol The bill (13.11.. 19973) to provide for the disposition of judgment funds on deposit to the credit of the Lower Pend &Oreille Or Kalispel Tribe of Indians was con- sidered, ordered to a third reading, read the third time. and passed. ? - AUTHORITr_ TO USE CERTAIN FUNDS?FOR' SPECIAL blEl*CIRO. LOGICAL SERVICES ? ? The bill (13: 9/9) to authorizeihe Sec- , rotary of Commente to utilize' funds' re- , delved from State and local governinents ? for special metecrOlogical *Janice.* was' ooneidetett altered to be engtoised for s ,? third readtneread4he thtrdttinle, and passed, as follows: A' this .? this year. r, ? ? Soma years ago *true Minister Nelms of India took the sitting Chinese Oreign liginiSter Chou En441 to the site of At new dant. "It is initliese templea;that worship." said Nehrui And so indeediie did. is does virtualig every other:164er of thethird world, at lAsia, Africa, and Latin erica. MAO. like Nehrttlim. self, hisi done far, more than *middy in the, pie of economic developteast: they hat gone out of the temple to build August' .1 dams and schools-and factories, to- begin the vast enterprise of bringing their long ' quiescent lands into the dynamic life of the 20th centurY. Clearly, the aspiration to economic development is one of the powerful moti- vating forces in the world. It eras. promise and substance and lope to the nationalism of the emerging nations: It , has created new ferment in the world; new hopes and new dangers which the; advanced nations. Communist as weltate.C.:j free, have tried to inftuence through military, economic., and technical as.' sistance programs of unprecedented magnitude. The aspirations of the Poor =trona; are the occasion but not really the res,: son for the American foreign aid pro- gram. The reason for our aid?I think ' we must admit?lies in our own aspire- tions rather than those of the red Is- lents, or, more precisely, in the profound effects which their aspirations have on - our own prospects for peace and security. .1 Looked at in this way, foreign aid Is ? not a special undertaking like an earth- quake or famine relief program, but an; Instrument of policy?a normal instru- ment of policy like diplomacy, military power or intelligence, each of which is:?;;,-.; designed to achieve certain objectives which cannot readily be obtained Ire' other means. I should like in these brief remarks to over a few suggestions as to why foreign aid is a necessary hiEtr12,,.'r: merit of American foreign policy, ar,to.,,_ the kind of instrument it is and the kind'. of objectives it is likely to help attain. / ? The subject Is not one which the See ate has neglected. Unlike certain o programs?some of at least equal portance and some of vastly greater mas ,nitude?foreigif 'aid :has inspired many' hours of colloquy and debate, including" 3 full. weeks of most enlightening, I. discussion only a few months ago. There, ' is therefore little to be said about for.; eign aid'tliat has not been said before:" but the case for the aid program 134au less valid ? for being familiar. It is.,?inA`-?; deed, as strong a case today as i1iwaii4 when General Marshall spoke at.;illar- yard in 1947, and In some rest** the prospects of our aid achieving its *Wee. . thea are decidedly better today, after 17' years' experience, than they were when 4 aid was. e new 'and untested inst,iiimeritt; of policy. ..: Of the 'bill itself little need be sal& Its content Is 'spelled out in the repsrt.- of the Foreign. Relations Committee and ' ? kin szis ciSelanrillar. AU goals mitt.] ediy new. -about this year's fozeignl,iild ;bill. is the amounts preposed to be. aU- .th?r*b1ch are greatly reduced*. low the levels Of previous years. It raiki be that the 'reductions have.,bem4045 great: It May be that the pregramM. tw :tunctioni roarer effectively on a sell& lealear In any . case proposed 'intleirization cammot thee reduced without aid preplan- is an instrument of Antal can foreign Polk?. .., ..; ? 'The President has Indicated. regards this year's foreign aid reagent the. Minimum consistent with tboUl Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/03/12 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000300090023-6 -4.. 1964 Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/03/12 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000300090023-6 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --'SENATE 17133 tenanee of a reasonably effective pro- gram. In reducing the authorization request to a total of $3.5 billion the ad- ministration has accommodated itself to the doubts and criticisms of the foreign aid program which has been expressed in the Congress in recent years. I strongly recommend that the Senate now respond by authorizing and then ap- propriating the full amount approved by the Foreign Relations Committee, which is only slightly below the amount re- quested by the President. Before commenting on aid as a broad instrument of American policy, I would like to point to certain very important improvements which have been made in the aid program in response to the wishes of Congress. First. American economic and mili- tary assistance, once quite diffuse, has become highly concentrated. Two- thirds of all development lending funds in fiscal year 1965 will go to seven coun- tries which have demonstrated their ability to make effective use of develop- ment capital: Chile, Colombia, Nigeria, Turkey, Pakistan, India, and Tunisia. Two-thirds of all military assistance will go to 11 countries along the periphery of the Soviet Union and Communist China. More than four-fifths of supporting as- sistance funds will go to four countries: Vietnam, Korea, Laos, and Jordan. Se- lectivity is high and becoming higher: 17 nations which once received economic assistance from the United States no longer receive it and another 14 countries are approaching the point where they will no longer need soft loans and grants. Second. The disproportion between American aid programs and those of other prosperous free world nations is being steadily reduced. In April 1963 the Development Assistance Committee con- cluded an agreement on liberalizing aid terms which is having a constructive ef- fect. France, which already contributes a higher proportion of its gross national produet to foreign aid than does the United States, has indicated its inten- tion of sustaining a high level of aid. Britain and Canada have committed themselves to larger aid programs on liberalized lending terms. Germany's aid program has grown progressively larger and its lending terms more generous. , Third. The President's request for $3.5 billion for fiscal year 1965 is the second smallest since the beginning of the Mar- shall plan in 1948 and, in proportion to the Nation's growing resources, this year's request is by far the smallest bur- den since foreign aid began. In 1949 the amounts appropriated by Congress for military and economic assistance were 11.5 percent of the Federal budget and 2 percent of the Nation's gross national product. The current request is for less than 4 percent of the budget and only 0.6 percent of the gross national product. As the Secretary of State pointed out in his statement before the Foreign Rela- tions Committee, certain facts about for- eign aid indicate that the program is sound and markedly improved along lines recommended by Congress; with two-thirds of development lending going to 7 countries and two-thirds of military assistance going to 11 countries, the program is highly concentrated; three-fifths of all economic assistance is now in the form of dollar repayable loans; 80 percent of all foreign aid funds is spent in the United States, with the result that the adverse effect of foreign aid on the Nation's balance-of-payments is negligible; criteria of development lending and self-help have been improved with experience; allied countries are mounting larger aid programs on more liberal terms; the program is a diminish- ing burden on the Nation's resources, the smallest by far since foreign aid became an established instrument of American foreign policy at the end of World War II. Much of the controversy which has at- tended the annual debate of Congress on foreign aid is rooted, I suspect, in our reluctance to regard foreign aid as a normal instrument of American foreign policy like diplomacy and military power. Foreign aid has been described as every- thing from a sacred mission to a crimi- nal lunacy, but the Nation has yet to form a consensus on the significance of foreign aid as it has worked out in prac- tice, that is to say, as a perfectly rational tool of policy, no better or worse than any other in moral terms, one which has sometimes succeeded and sometimes failed and one which should be used or not used in any particular situation de- pending upon the objectives at stake and the prospects for success or failure under the circumstances of the case. Through the years we have treated aid as something abnormal, presumably be- cause it represents a use of national re- sources for a purpose other than our own direct consumption. This indeed is the basis of virtually all criticism of the aid program: that it diverts resources from the immediate needs of our own society. And so indeed it does, but the point which is overlooked by the opponents of aid is that it is only one of a number of national programs which divert resources from the needs of our people and in fact one of the least costly. I share the concern of my colleagues who deplore the diversion of the Nation's resources. This country has great and growing problems ranging from public transportation to public education which are not now being solved and which can only be solved by costly public programs. The diversion of public funds to foreign commitments is therefore a matter of wholly justifiable regret. It is, however, an impenetrable mystery to me why it is that our fears of extravagance and waste are so overwhelmingly focused on foreign aid rather than on other, more costly programs. It is an impenetrable mystery to me why it is that in 1963 the Senate authorized a $3.6 billion aid program only after 3 weeks of rancorous debate and immediately thereafter approved a space budget of over $5 billion with only per- functory debate. This, of course, is to say nothing of our annual military budg- ets of over $50 billion, which have re- cently been approved with no more than a few judicious queries by the Senators from South Dakota [Mr. McGovErm] and Wisconsin [Mr. NELsoN]. Unless it is believed that the defense and space programs are models of econ- omy while foreign aid is by some mystery of its own nature scandalously extrava- gant, we can only conclude that the op- position to foreign aid is not primarily economic but political, that it is not the diversion and possible waste of national resources that troubles the opponents of aid but aid itself as an instrument of national policy. The issue, it seems clear, is not one of economy?if only because there is relatively little to be wasted in the foreign aid program and because so much in fact is wasted elsewhere with- out giving us undue concern?but rather one of the purpose and effectiveness of aid as an instrument of national policy. The objective of American aid pro- grams is to contribute to the develop- ment of a world environment in which free societies, notably our own, can sur- vive and prosper in peace and reasonable security. The apparently unanswered question in our continuing public de- bate about aid is not one of economy but whether in fact our aid programs do con- tribute to the realization of this objec- tive. As Prof, Edward S. Mason of Har- vard has put it: If there Is some reasonable expectation that economic development assistance can make a significant contribution to the peace and security of the West, it is surprising how small a financial sacrifice the countries con- cerned are willing to make to this end. ? ? * If economic aid is considered to be an in- strument of foreign policy, it seems really a rather small instrument to deal with such a very large problem. Foreign aid must be judged by the political criterion of whether it does or does not contribute to the security of the United States. I think it is clear beyond any doubt that it has contributed to our national security. Are we not more secure, to take one example among many, then we would otherwise be for having helped democratic India to make a modest success of her economic de- velopment program? Is the Western Hemisphere not more secure against Communist subversion as a result of even the limited accomplishments of the Al- liance for Progress than it would be if we had left our Latin American neigh- bors to fend for themselves? Are our interests in Africa not more secure for having helped finance the United Na- tions Congo operation than they would be if we had left the Congo to chaos? And who would question the effectiveness of the Marshall plan not only in bol- stering our security but in preventing an irremediable disaster for the West? It seems clear? As Herbert Feis has put it--* that as a nation, we invest, lend, give, in- struct, rescue, and resuscitate needy peo- ples in the belief that it will advantage our national security and reputation as well as our souls. To acknowledge the importance and validity of foreign aid as an instrument of American foreign policy is not to as- sert its supreme importance or universal validity. It is in fact a limited instru- ment and must be appreciated as such if it is to be appreciated at all. It is a mod- Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/03/12 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000300090023-6 Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/03/12 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000300090023-6 ; 17131 CONGRESSIONAL 'RECORD :-SENATE! est element of our overall policy and a -marginal factor in the economics of the recipient countries. Its success or fail- ure thus depends on a great deal more than the amounts that are provided and the efficiency with which they are dis- pensed and put to use. Foreign aid is inseparable from the political, commer- cial, and defense policies of the donor and from the overall defense and social and economic development programs of the recipient. Only if we view our aid programs in their total context can we free ourselves of both excessive hopes and unwarranted disappointments. We must not judge our aid program by Impossible standards of achievement. It is not going to eliminate poverty and un- rest and instability in the world. Even if it were magnified beyond any level which now seems feasible, our aid would not eliminate these problems because it is simply beyond our means?material, moral, and political?to elevate two- thirds of the human race from poverty to abundance. But it does not follow from the fact that we cannot solve a problem that we should do nothing to try to alleviate it. An imperfect instrument is better than no instrument and modest progress is patently better than no progress at all. It is by the criterion of modest progress that we must evaluate foreign aid. Just as it makes no sense to think of disband- ing our Armed Forces because they may not always secure the Nation against military dangers, it makes no sense to talk of terminating our foreign aid pro- gram because it serves only to alleviate rather than resolve worldwide problems of development and defense. Fire de- partments do not prevent losses from fires; the police do not prevent all crime; but who would suggest that we do with- out them? ? Nor should we underestimate the im- portance of modest progress. It is fre- quently pointed out, for example, that even if the development programs of the poor nations are quite successful in, say, the next 20 years, the disparity between their living standards and those of the advanced nations is likely to become greater, not less, than it is now. This is probably true, but it tells us nothing of the probable effects of economic prog- ress. A marked increase in the affluence of an already affluent America is likely to have only minor political consequen- ces, but even small advances in diet and housing and education in a poor country can make a vital difference between hope and despair, between stability and dis- order, between democracy and dictator- ship. Thus? As Herbert Fels puts it? one may anticipate that the disparity in human condition and experience will lessen, although differences in money income will grow greater. Foreign aid, as I have suggested, can contribute to the development of a secure world environment for the free societies only as part of a grand strategy for se- curity and peace. No matter how well conceived and administered, foreign aid can be of little value if our diplomacy is clumsy or if our defenses are neglected. It can contribute little to our security if the problems of our own country?prob- lems of education and employment, of slums and crime and the physical de- terioration of our cities?are left unre- solved to destroy the magnetism of our own example as a free society. And finally, if it is to contribute to our secu- rity, foreign aid must be related not only to our short-term strategy for the con- tainment of Communist expansion, but also to our long-term strategy for allevi- atirig the cold war and developing peace- ful and stable relations between the Com- munist nations and the free nations. In the context of the cold war the ob- jective of our aid programs is to help build stable and viable nations in Asia, Africa, and Latin America, nations with the capacity to resist Communist aggres- sion and subversion and with reasonable prospects for both democracy and eco- nomic development. Our aim is not to build nations which will be profusely grateful to the United States, never an- noy or displease us, and follow us loyally on all international questions. If these were our objectives, a more effective pro- gram would be the immediate termina- tion of our aid program and the use of all its funds and a great deal more for the training and equipment of mass armies of occupation. Ingratitude is disagreeable but not dangerous and slavish compliance is a characteristic for which a free society has no use, either in itself or in its asso- ciates. The fact remains, nonetheless, that the United States should and must expect the recipients of its aid to meet certain basic criteria in their interna- tional behavior. First and foremost, we have the right to expect the recipients of our aid to act vigorously and effec- tively to preserve their own independence against Communist incursions. In addition, we have the right?as Feis expresses it,? to expect and ask that any nation to which we give substantial help will not do the United States serious harm; that it will stand with us in any critical issues if it wishes our help in the future. Our foreign aid program must also be an integral part of a global strategy of peace. Its broad objective, I have sug- gested, is to help create a world environ- ment in which free and self-governing societies can survive and prosper in peace and reasonable security. Such a world environment requires the abatement of both the national and ideological differ- ences that divide the Communist nations from the free nations and the pro- found social and economic disparities be- tween the rich nations and the poor na- tions. If our aid program is to be true to its own objective, therefore, it must be part of an overall strategy aimed at both the development of the poor nations and the relaxation of the cold war. Our long-term objective must be the gradual development of an attitude of mutual toleration on the part of all countries for all other countries. They may or may not be friends, but they still can and should cooperate to their respective ad- vantages regardless of ideology and wealth. ' August 1 Looked at in this way, our foreign aid program can be described as an instru- ment of policy designed in the short run to help wage the cold war and in the long run to help end it. As important as it is in the immediate future to help the less developed nations resist the incur- sions of an expansive communism, it is equally important that they be prepared to play a constructive role in encouraging the development of peaceful and stable relations among the nuclear powers. There is no contradiction between the short-term goal of strengthening our po- sition in the cold war through our aid programs and the long-term goal of end- ing the cold war. By drawing the less developed countries into a free and de- veloping concert of nations, we can fore- close the Communist hope of gaining control or predominant influence over Asia, Africa, and Latin America just as the Western Alliance has foreclosed Communist ambitions in Europe. When this is done, when the Communist pow- ers, are confronted on every side with virtually insuperable obstacles to expan- sion, it will then be possible to offer them an end of the cold war by making it clear that we have no hostile designs against them, that they can have secure and un- troubled national existences within their own frontiers so long as they remain within their own frontiers, and that we are prepared to welcome them as asso- ciates in a peaceful and cooperative community of nations. The objective is admittedly ideal. It may perhaps be unattainable but I do not think it is unapproachable. An ob- jective does not have to be within our reach to be worth pursuing. Ideals? Said Carl Schuri? are like stars; you will not succeed in touch- ing them with your hands. But like the seafaring man on the desert of waters, you choose them as your guides, and following them you will reach your destiny. Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- sent that there be printed at this point In the RECORD a letter sent to me by David Bell, the Administrator of the Agency for International Development, and an at- tached preliminary report on the amount of unobliga.ted balances .as of June 30, 1964, for the military and eco- nomic assistance programs. The report shows a total unutilized balance of $22 million as of June 30, 1964, the lowest at the end of a fiscal year in the history of the program. There being no objection, the letter and report were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows: DEPARTMENT OF STATE, AGENCY FOR INTERNATIONAL DEVELOPMENT, Washington, D.C., July 8, 1964. Hon. J. W. FIILBRIGHT, Chairman, Commitee on Foreign Relations, U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C. DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: You will be inter- ested, I believe, in the attached preliminary report showing the amount of unobligated- unreserved balances, as of June 30, 1964, for the military and economic programs under title I of the Foreign Assistance Appropria- tion Act of fiscal year 1964. These are not final figures. They are based on "flash" re- ports from our field missions and preclosing trial balances in our Washington accounts. Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/03/12 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000300090023-6 1964 Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/03/12 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000300090023-6 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE Later changes in these figures, however; are not expected to be large. You will note from the attached table that $15.2 million of available military and eco- nomic funds were unutilized as of June 30, 1964. In addition, $6.8 million of principal repayments and interest had accrued in the development loan accounts but were not legally available for obligation during the fiscal year. The total of $22 million is the lowest unutilized balance at the end of a fiscal year in the history of the program. These low figures are evidence of the fact that fiscal year 1964 was an unusual year in terms of demands placed upon the foreign assistance program. Normally we would ex- pect to have an appreciable balance left in the contingency fund. This year, however, it was necessary to use the entire contin- gency fund to meet exceptional requirements for military aid and to deal with the changed situation arising in Brazil this spring. If there is any additional information that we can furnish in this regard, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerely yours, DAVID E. BELL. MUTUAL DEFENSE AND DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMS-UNOBLIGATED/UNRESERVED BALANCES I Fiscal yearend balances compared, fiscal year 1964 2 and fiscal year 1963, as of June 30, 1964 [In millions of dollars] \ ' " June 30, 1964, preliminary June 30, 1963, actual, Avail- able Not avail- able for oblige- tion' - Total Avail- able Not avail- able for oblige- tion 3 Total Economic assistance: Development loans ' Affiance for Progress loans Technical cooperation/development grants Affiance TC/grants Inter-American social and economic program_ _ Supporting assistance International organizations Contingency fund Administrative expenses, AID Administrative expenses, State Survey of investment opportunities American schools and hospitals abroad: Regular program Foreign currency program Total, economic Military assistance Total, military and economic (I) (I) 6. 0 .1 . 2 4. 0 .8 1.3 . 5 1. 2 .1 4. 6 2. 2 ' 4. 6 2. 2 6.0 .1 .2 4.0 .8 1.3 . 6 1. 2 . 1 96. 2 92.0 47.3 2.7 1.6 6.0 .3 127: 1 2. 0 (4)(4) L 1 .1 24 120. 2 92.0 47.3 2.7 1.6 6. 0 . 3 127. 1 2.0 1. 1 .1 14.2 1.0 ? 6.8 21.0 1.0 376.4 22.3 24 400.4 22.3 15.2 6.8 22.0 398.7 24 422. 7 I Excludes nonbudgetary accounts-investment guarantees, excess property revolving fund, and MAP credit sales account. Preliminary data based on preclosing trial balance. Represents funds not legally available for obligation during the fiscal year. 4 Less than $50,000,000. Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, will the distinguished majority leader yield me 20 seconds? Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield. Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, because of the schedule of the Senate, I shall postpone until Monday my reply to the speech of the distinguished Senator from Arkansas, in which he supports the for- eign aid program. I shall oppose the bill and offer a series of amendments start- ing on Monday. PROGRESS OF LEGISLATION Mr. MANSFIELD, Mr. President, it is the intention of the leadership to move shortly that the Senate adjourn until 12 o'clock noon on Monday next. Before doing so, I should like to make the fol- lowing statement: Since the reconvening of the Senate on July 20, after the Republican conven- tion, the Senate has passed a number of major bills, including a score of Presi- dential recommendations. Most of these bills, if not all, have been passed by bi- partisan effort. Therefore, credit is due both parties. Among the major achieve- ments are the following: An across-the-board increase for mili- tary personnel, through the efforts of Senators RUSSELL, SALTONSTALL, STENNIS, and the other Members of this body, be- cause, as I recall, the bill was passed unanimously. A bill to clarify the complicated dual compensation laws, which was so capably handled by the distinguished Senator from Texas [Mr. YARBOROUGH] , and later by the distinguished Senator from South Carolina [Mr. JOHNSTON]. In this re- spect, my distinguished colleague from Montana [Mr. METCALF] and the distin- guished Senator from Delaware [Mr. WILLIAms] raised questions which helped to sharpen the issue and, as a result, en- abled the Senate to pass a better bill. A bill to prohibit futures trading in potatoes on commodity exchanges, which was passed largely through the efforts of the distinguished Senator from Maine [Mr. Musical and the distinguished Senator from Vermont [Mr. AIKEN] , the senior Republican in this body. The antipoverty bill, to which much credit is due Senators MCNAMARA, JAVITS, KEATING, FULBRIGHT, WILLIAMS of New Jersey, and many other Senators, who put their shoulders to the wheel in sup- port of the measure. A military construction bill, which was cleared for White House action due pri- marily to the intensive efforts of the dis- tinguished Senator from Georgia [Mr. RUSSELL], the distinguished Senator 17135 from- Mississippi [Mr. STENNIS] ; and the ranking Republican on the Armed Serv- ices Committee, the distinguished Sena- tor from Massachusetts [Mr. SALTON- STALL ] . The appropriation bills cleared by this body in the past 10 days were as follows: The defense appropriation bill, under the leadership of the distinguished Sena- tor from Georgia [Mr. RUSSELL], and ably assisted by the distinguished Sena- tor from Mississippi [Mr. STENNIS] , the distinguished Senator from Missouri [Mr. SYMINGTON] , and the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. SAL- TONSTALL ] ; the legislative appropriation bill, under the managerial skill of the distinguished Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. MONRONEY ] , the distinguished chairman of the Appropriations Com- mittee [Mr. HAYDEN] , and the ranking Republican, the distinguished Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. SALTONSTALL ] ; the District of Columbia appropriation bill, which was passed yesterday and was managed so superbly by the distin- guished Senator from West Virginia [Mr. BYRD] ; the conference report on the Treasury-Post Office appropriation, which was cleared for the President, and was ably steered by the distinguished Senator from Virginia [Mr. ROBERTSON] . That bill, as the distinguished Senator from Wyoming [Mr. SimPsoN] is aware, contains an appropriation of $600,000 for the minting of 45 million silver dollars. This is good news for our States. Also, a veterans housing bill to which great credit should go to the 'distin- guished Senator from Alabama [Mr. SPARKMAN] , a bill supported by all Mem- bers of the Senate. The ratification of five important treaties. An extensive housing bill, through the great efforts and skill of the distin- guished Senator from Alabama [Mr. SPARKMAN] and who was ably assisted by the distinguished Senator from New Jersey [Mr. WILLIAMS], the distinguished Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. CLARK], the distinguished Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. MCINTYRE] , the distin- guished Senator from New York [Mr. ? JAvIrs], and through the cooperation of the distinguished Senator from Texas [Mr. TowER], whose opposition was most constructive and whose suggestions helped make it possible to have a better bill. The establishment of a Commission on Automation and Technology, so much needed in our times, and for which the Senate is indebted to the distinguished Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. CLARK], the distinguished Senator from West Virginia [Mr. RANDOLPH] , the distin- guished Senator from Oregon [Mr. MoEsE], and the distinguished Senator from New York [Mr. JAvirs], the latter two of whom submitted the original resolution on automation. A $2.3 billion highway authorization bill, cleared largely through the efforts of the distinguished Senator from West Virginia [Mr. RANDOLPH] , the distin- guished Senator from Michigan [Mr. McNANAEA], and the ranking minority member of the Committee on Public Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/03/12 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000300090023-6 Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/03/12 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000300090023-6 11136 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE Works, the distinguished Senator from Kentucky [Mr. COOPER]. A bill to implement the International Coffee Agreement, which was passed largely through the efforts of Senators SMATHERS, A/KEN, and MORSE, but also through the efforts of Senator DOUGLAS and Senator CARLSON whose sincere and constructive opposition contributed so greatly in making in outstanding legis- lative history and which put the State Department on notice that the Senate will watch this quota system most care- fully especially as it relates to an in-, crease in coffee prices. The passage this morning of the Hill- Burton Hospital Construction Act, under the superb leadership of the distin- guished Senator from Alabama, who is a perennial in this respect. The passage of the National Defense Education Act, under the excellent and outstanding floor managership of the distinguished senior Senator from Oregon [Mr. Moms], ably abetted and supported by the distinguished Senator from Vermont [Mr. PROUTY]. In praising the Senate as a whole and attempting to single out some members for their skill, effort, and cooperation in connection with specific pieces of legisla- tion, some will always be inadvertently omitted from the list, but One who could never be forgotten is the distinguished minority leader [Mr. DIRKSEN] ; I must say that the effort that brought about these achievements could never have been accomplished without the leader- ship, counsel, spirit of cooperation, and duty always manifested by him. Next week, we hope to conclude action on the independent offices bill, perhaps - the public works bill, and also the agri- cultural appropriations bill. It is anticipated that we will bring up legislation having to do with nurses training, and also the interest equaliza- tion bill. Let me say to all Senators on both sides of the aisle that we have made great progress, I wish to personally thank each Sena- tor for his valuable contribution in as- sisting the leadership to get these meas- ures through so expeditiously. Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, will the Senator from Montana yield? Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield. Mr. MORSE. The majority leader, as usual, has been very gracious in expres- sing appreciation to those who have helped to put through the legislative program. All Senators know?and I would have the country know?that if it were not for the able leadership of the majority leader, his ability to handle men, his deftness in carrying out a very difficult assignment, none of these pieces of legis- lation would have been enacted. The en- tire Senate and the entire country owe the Senator from Montana a great debt of gratitude for his statesmanship. Mr. MANSFIELD. I am indebted to the Senator from Oregon for his kind re- marks. CO1FEE PRICES ALREADY GOING UP AFTER ENACTMENT OF H.R. 8864, THE INTERNATIONAL COe'rEE AGREEMENT YESTERDAY Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, I ap- preciate the gracious references of the Senator from Montana about the efforts of the Senator from Kansas and the Sen- ator from Illinois in opposing the coffee bill yesterday. I especially appreciate his statement that Senators should keep close watch on what will happen after passage of the bill. Mr. President, I hold in My hand a copy of the New York Times for this morning, which on page ?32 gives the movement of fixture prices in coffee on Friday as compared with Thursday. I should like to read two of these fu- tures. When the market closed on Thursday, March futures for 1965, on B grade coffee stood at 47.23 cents per pound. When the market closed last night, after we had passed the bill, it stood at 47.74 cents per pound?an increase of 0.51 cents per pound-, or approximately one-half cent. May futures which had been 47.11 cents per pound on Thursday, after the . market closed last night was 47.68 cents per pound, or an increase of 0.57 cents per pound, or slightly over one-half a, cent. Each cent of increase in the price of coffee means from $30 to $35 million to the American consumers. The increase yesterday, which will probably be reflect- ed in subsequent increases, amounted to $15 to $17 million. This is precisely what the Senator from Kansas and the Senator from Illi- nois had prophesied would happen. This- increase was undoubtedly due to the pas- sage of the bill yesterday. So far as I know, there was no change in weather forecasts for Brazil or for anywhere in Latin America to justify any expectation that the supply of coffee would diminish. There was no information to indicate that there had been any expected in- crease in demand. What happened was that, we had passed the coffee bill. The news reached New York and the specula- tors decided that this meant prices next year would be higher than this year. Mr. President, this is only the begin- ning. This is merely the first installment August 1, 1964 on the bill. This is merely the reaction In the first hours after our action yes- terday. The Coffee Council is meeting now, as I understand, in London, and will meet again next week to make its final deci- sion on quotas. It will be very interest- ing to see what they do. Yesterday's trading indicates that the Senator from Kansas and the Senator from Illinois were correct as to the effect of this pact upon the future course of coffee prices. The chickens are coming home to roost, but they are not coming home to those who supported this measure; they are coming home to the American people. They are coming home to the families of the plainsmen out West who drink their cups of coffee to brace themselves against the asperities of the weather. They are coming home to the people who live in the small towns and in the big cities. They are coming home in the form of an increased price of coffee. It is my intention, in conformity with the excellent admonition of the Senator from Montana, to try to keep watch from time to time on what happens to coffee prices. I can say that they began yesterday afternoon, just as I expected them to begin?with an increase. Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. President, let me say to the Senator from Illinois that I concur with him in his remarks, and I trust that a check on these coffee prices Will be made and a record kept. Mr. President, I rise to commend the majority leader for his fairness, his un- derstanding, and his generosity with respect to the accomplishments of this body in the past few weeks. The majority leader is always fair and just. He conducts himself with impec- cable Integrity. Hisremarks as to the work of the minority leader and the cooperation given on this side of the aisle are another indication of that integrity, and I thank him wholeheartedly. Mr. MANS.ri.e;LD. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Wyoming most sincerely for his comments. ADJOURNMENT UNTIL MONDAY Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, if there is no further business to come be- fore the Senate, I move that the Senate stand in adjournment until 12 o'clock noon on Monday. The motion was agreed to; and (at 12 o'clock and 8 minutes p.m.) the Sen- ate adjourned until Monday, August 3, 1964, at 12 o'clock meridan. Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/03/12 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000300090023-6