Document Type: 
Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): 
Release Decision: 
Original Classification: 
Document Page Count: 
Document Creation Date: 
December 16, 2016
Document Release Date: 
June 29, 2005
Sequence Number: 
Case Number: 
Publication Date: 
June 7, 1966
Content Type: 
PDF icon CIA-RDP67B00446R000400080016-3.pdf3.83 MB
"'"~*" 11848 Approved-For Re~I:P~Q1 iC~BO~A400080016-3 June 7, 1 ~~6 The importance of such long-range plan- ning is lIlustrated by recent proposals to tamper with the funding of this program. There_~re few activities which have proved tbei~isgiv~s; ,yvorthwhile than this rela- tiveYy sma1~ Fi~ra1 assistance provided to the local citizens. Its success is indicated by its growth since its start 1n 1954 to now when it serves more than 92,000 youngsters. Its practicality is shown by alternatives: It con- sumes afood commodity oY which some, if not all would otherwise go .into government surplus to be sold eventually at below cost. Its closeness to the people is shown by the ar- rangement in which for $103 million a year the government pays three cents per 1/Z pint of milk, while the school child pays the re- mainder, usually from two to three cents. For this investm@nt, the child receives daily the complete food represented by milk. The importance of this arrangement can only be appreciated by noting that because of the warping of tastes through fads and advertisement, many children in our more affluent families receive improper food bal- ances. But much more serious are the many case of children who come from families wl}ere adequate food is not available-chil- dren who come to school without breakfast, or children who must go home to sparse or poorly balanced evening meals. Widespread flrsti-hand acquaintance by both parents and by school administrators who are Yamiliar with the service the school milk program provides to youngsters has given. it unusual grassroots support. No one in the country, whether from rural or urban areas, whether from a dairy or non-dairy state, has a bad word to say about this program. There are Sndeed very few government proposals for which this coup be said. It is, therefo e, strange that of a.ll pro- grams this one should be selected for reduc- tion and phasing out. Can present develop- ments be considered otherwise? There is the proposal to reduce the Fiscal 1967 budget by $80 million to a mere $21 million. Since 1965 there have been efforts to tighten and limit expenditures for this program. Recent action by the House in reinstating the $103 million for Fiscal 1967 reflects .general repugnaxice at a move. to destroy this pro- gram, and I feel the Senate will fallow the lead of the House in this protest. Neverthe- less, there is the threat. The basis of this unnatural move is the argument tha$ the money should be used elsewhere. I certainly am not unaware of the unusual demand made on our economy by the war in Viet Nam. Neither am I un- sympathetic to the needs oY the impoverished segments oP our society; in fact I feel this program Ss a part of these efforts. If the distinction could be made readily between the poor and the not so poor in the class- rooms, and if those able to pay could be called to do so without psychic harm to those not able to pay, I would be more sym- pathetic to this proposal; but this cannot be done with so intimate a thing as provid- ing nourishment within the classroom to the children who need it. _ S,ook at the alternative: It is,the "means" test-children who do not have the money would not be required to pay, while those who do would be required to meet the full cost. A determination would be made with- - in the school. Under this scheme, we would oblige the child publicly to drink in his soco-0conomic status along with his mid- morning snack. Means test for providing medical. care for the aged was found com- pletely repugnant because it destroyed hu- man dignity. Wfiy, now, should this same program be imposed on children? It is small wonder that school adminis- trators woC~ld sooner discontinue the .whole milk program rather than subject the child to this humiliation, If money is the item, it should be gotten elsewhere. We spend vast amounts on .futuristic programs-in science, in exploration-all to find and de- velop our potential resources. I think these are wise investments. But I must also point out that the child is a natural resource too- the most basic, the most valuable, the most certain natural resource we have. Let's not SECRETARY RUSK SHOULD BE STRAIGHTFORWARD AND FRANK IN HIS STATEMENTS IF HE SEEKS PEACE IN VIETNAM Mr. YOUNG of Ohio. Mr, President, speaking on our involvement in a miser= able civil war and insurrection within an insurrection in Vietnam, Secretary of State Rusk has said he would go any- where and "negotiate with any govern- ment" in the search for peace. Recently in an address in Chicago, President John son, according to newspaper accounts, stated "we will negotiate with any gov- ernment." I hope that Secretary Rusk is not seek- ing to be evasive or "cute" in making the statements he has made. I hope that our President will clarify this statement at- tributed to him. The National Liberation Front fs the political front, or governing body, of the Vietcong. We are fighting an undeclared war in Vietnam against the Vietcong. The Vietcong does not constitute a gov- ernment. Secretary Rusk knows that. It could be argued that Prime Minister Ky and the generals who overturned the civilian government in Saigon last June do not in fact constitute a government. The facts are that Prime Minister Ky's Saigon government is not a viable gov- ernment and is in actual control of less than one-fourth of the land area of South Vietnam. Without the support of our Armed Forces he and.his military regime would not last 3 days. The Vietcong con- trol agreat area in what is termed South Vietnam. The question Secretary Rusk should answer is whether in search of peace in Vietnam are U.S. delegates willing to meet with delegates represe>,lting the National Liberation Front, or Vietcong, along with delegates representing Prime Minister Ky's regime and delegates rep- resenting the Hanoi government, of? that portion of Vietnam north of the 17th parallel? What is your answer to this question, Secretary Rusk?' In April 1965, President Johnson, at Johns Hopkins University, although de- claring that the United States would consent to unconditional discussions, stipulated we would settle for nothing less than an independent South Vietnam. He excluded negotiations with the_Viet- cong. President Johnson knew, or should have known, that in excluding the Na- tional Liberation Front, or Vietcong, that the government at Hanoi could not end the fighting in behalf of the National Liberation Front, or Vietcong, even if it had wanted to. In Asiatic capitals .the leaders there regarded this as a device for perpetuating our position in Vietnam and assuring the rule of an American puppet government in Saigon. Now, most recently, our President has stated that the presence of the National Liberation Front is not an ilisurmaunt- able obstacle and that they would have no difficulty in being represented or hav- ing their views represented. Even though this was an ambiguous acid evasive state- ment, Secretary Rusk in December 1965, according to the ?New York Times, "in- dicated that the Vietcong's political orga- nization, the National Liberation Front, would not be given any political status or influence in South Vietnam .through negotiations." Furthermore, when Secretary Rusk issues pronouncements that the United States must guarantee the independence of South Vietnam, how can he reconcile this with the position he takes when he makes the statement: We will go back to the Geneva agreements and abide by them? The Geneva agreements specifically state: The military demarcation line at the 17th parallel is provisional and should not in any way be considered as constituting a political or territorial boundary. And in those agreements it was pro- vided that elections were to be held lead- ing toward reunifying Vietnam. Very definitely all of Vietnam, not merely South Vietnam. Those are the elections which our puppet head of state, Diem, called off. Very definitely, the Geneva agreements make no guarantee of the in- tegrity of South Vietnam nor of its con- tinued existence. President Diem, installed by us as Chief of State of South Vietnam, an- nounced in mid-1955 that the elections promised at Geneva would not be held. Until 1958 the Hanoi government per- sisted in its efforts. to arrange for the promised elections, but Diem, consistent- ly backed by the United States, refused. It was at the time evident that Ho Chi Minh would win the election by an over- whelming margin. During at least the first 3 years of the post-Geneva period, there was a lull in the military struggle. Hanoi refrained from support of illsur- rectianary activity in the south. By repudiating the heart of the Geneva agreements, Diem made civil war inevit- able. When, in a civil war, a military struggle for power ends on the agreed condition that the controversies will be transferred to the political level, the side which repudiates the agreed. conditions must expect that the military struggle will be resumed. Although American support was given to Diem, the United States did not make a blank-check commitment to whatever regime happened to hold power in Sai- gon. W},}at has been referred to as "the U.S. commitment" was a limited, qualified pledge of economic support, and it was made specifically to Diem's government. It was not in any sense a pledge of military support. The corner- stone of our Vietnam involvement, Presi- dent Eisenhower's letter to Diem in October 1954, was simply an undertaking "to examine" with Diem "how an in- telligent program of American aid given directly to your government can assist Vietnam-in developing and maintain- ing a strong, viable state, capable of resisting attempted subversion or aggres- sion through military means." A criti- Approved For Release 2005/07/13 :CIA-RDP67B00446R000400080016-3 ~Iune 7, 1966 Approved For Release 2005/07/13 :CIA-RDP67B00446R000400080016-3 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE 1188 7 ESTABLISHMENT OF LINCOLN TRAIL MEMORIAL PARKWAY IN STATES OF KENTUCKY, INDIANA, AND ILLINOIS-AMENDMENTS AMENDMENT NC1. b86 Mr. DOUGLAS submitted amendments, intended to be proposed by him; to the bill (S. 1226) to provide for the establish- ment and administration of the Lincoln Trail Memorial Parkway in the States of Kentucky, Indiana, and Illinois, and for other purposes, which was referred to the Committee on Interior and Insular Af- fairs and ordered to be printed. 7ESTABLISI3MFrNT OF THE PLYM- OUTH ROCK NATIONAL ~MO- RIAL Mr, KENNEDY of Massachusetts. Mr. :President, I introduce, far appropriate :reference, a bill to provide for the estab- :kishment of the Plymouth Rock National :Memorial, s,nd for other purposes. I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD a statement prepared by me :relating to the bill. The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- pore. The bill will be received and ap- propriately referred; and, without objec- tion, the statement will be printed in the. .RECORD. The bill (S. 3477) to provide for the establishment of the Plymouth Rock Na- ~taanal Memorial, and for_,ather purposes, :introduced by Mr. KENNEDY Of MaSSa- chusetts, was received, read twice by its title, and referred to the Committee on :[nterior and Insular Affairs. The statement Presented by Mr. KEN- NEDY of Massachusetts is as follows: iTATEMENT EY SENATOR EDWARD bf. KENNEDY TO DESIGNATE PLYMOR7TFI ROCFi A9 A NA- TIONAL MEMORIAL In 1970, America will celebrate the three ' :hundred and fiftieth anniversary of the land- Ang of the Pilg4ima at Plymouth Roak. Pl- ~though Americans honor the deeds of these :hardy Pilgrims who landed in 1620, we have Aso far neglected to include the site of their :[ending in the national park system. Because I believe the historic Plymouth :flock site should bereserved as an inspira- tion for all Americans, I want to introduce a 'bill designating Plymouth Rock as a national :memorial The dlvere~ity of religious belief we enjoy today In America. has been a natural devei- opment of the Pilgrims' own search far a sand in which to practice their religion. The origin of our American constitutional :Loan of government can be traced to thePil- grims' Mayflower Compact whereby the Pil- grims established one of the world's first Civil governments by consent of the gov- erned.. Finally, the fortitude the Pilgrims demon- vstrated in the face of unimagined adversity in founding their settlement has continually inspired Americans encountering difliculty in advancing their ideals. The area Gf the memorial which would be authorized by this legislation would be lim- lted, for size is not important in honoring this national heritage. Last summer, I :asked the National Park Service to survey 'the location and recommend a suitable park area. 'The s>ubsequent Park Service report will be released shortly, and it will be used as a basis for determining the precise bound- aries. In 1835, the astute French commentator Alexis de Tocqueville noted regarding Plymouth .Rock: "Here is a, stone which' the feet of a few outcasts pressed far an instant; and the stone becomes famous; it is treasured by a great nation; its very dust is shared as a relic." The affection Americans feel for the cour- age and vision of the Pilgrims has not dimmed with the passage of time. It there- fore seems mast appropriate that Plymouth Rook be dee>ignated a national memorial. ~ TAX INCREASE DEAD FOR THIS YEAR-L.B.J. VINDICATED Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr, President, yes- terday's announcement that unemploy- ment increased more rapidly last month than in any month in 2 years, and that it is back up to 4 percent should ring the death knell on any remaining pros- pect for a tax increase this year. A few weeks ago the New York Times reported that at a meeting of the Na- tion's leading economists overwhelming favor was expressed for a prompt tax in- crease to take the steam out of inflation. But almost every economic develop- ment since that time has shown how wrung this economic advice was and how right the President has been to resist it. Since the Nation's top economists, in- cluding William McChesney Martin., Chairman of the Federal, Reserve Board, Paul Samuelson, former president of the American Economic Association and as highly respected an economist as we have in this country, and Walter Heller, the remarkably able Chairman of the Coun- cil 9f Economic Advisers under President Kenxledy-and clearly entitled to be called the father of the new economics- since all these brilliant economists told us we must have a big across-the-board tax increase and promptly, it may be that Congress should take a long hard look at the prime assumption behind the recamnGiendation of these leading econ- Ori1tStS. That assumption is that forecasting the Nation's economic future has become a reasonably exact science-even in the short run. Since the future can be fore- cast reasonably accurately-the assump- tion Boos-Congress should pass legisla- tion to enable the President and Con- gress to act swiftly to increase or de- crease taxes to slow dawn inflation or speed up lagging economic growth. Incidentally, this recommendation was the heart of a recent a~ecommendation by the Joint Congressional Economic Committee. As one who dissented from that economic recommendation, I call 'the attention of Membel?s of Congress to how iii such a convenience would have served the country, if it had been avail- able and used, let us say, in April of tTois year. If the President and Congress had in- creased taxes at that time, it is likely that the 4-percent unemployment of last month might very well have been sub- stantially higher. Furthermore, the business confusion, the taxpayer irrita- tion, the loss of confidence fn Goverfl- ment and in the economy could have been substantial. What developments in the past month should teach us is that even the very best of America's economic brains-and that best is very good indeed-are not capable of predicting the shortrun eco- nomic future. Under these circumstances, shortr>m changes in the tax rates to cope with an immediate expected rise or fall in economic activity are not practical, in view of the present developing but still far-from-perfected level of economic forecasting. SENATOR INOUYE SPEAKS OUT FqR SCHOOL MILK BILL Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, on May 12 the Holland subcommittee of the Senate Agriculture Committee held hear- ings on my proposal to make the school milk pragrarn permanent and increase Federal funding for the program. As we all know, the administration has pro- posed to cut this program by 80 percent so that it will take care of only the needy and children in schools without a lunch program. This would reduce program participation from 18 million children to 3 million children. Today I draw the Senate's attention. to a statement made in support of this leg- islation by the distinguished Senator from Hawaii [Mr, INOaYE7, who is a co- sponsor of the proposal. The statement points out the difficulties in applying a means test to program participants in these well written words: Children who do not have the money would not be required to pay, while those who do would be required to meet the full costa. A determination would be made within the school. Under this scheme, we would oblige the child publicly to drink in his socfo- ebonomic status along with his mid-morning snack. Means test for providing medicos care for the aged was found completely repug- nant because it destroyed human dignity. Why, now, should this same program be im- posed on our childrenT Mr. President, I ask unanimous ran- sent that the entire statement of the Sen- ator from Hawaii be printed in the RECORD at this point. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed fn the RECORD, aS fO110WS: STATEMENT OF HON. DANIEL K. INOUYE, A UNITED STATES SENATOR FROM THE STATE-OF HAWAII Mr. Chairman, I would like to speak' in savor of S. 2921 because I believe our school milk program requires stability and perma- nence. This legislation would provide these essentials by fixing increments to growth needs over a period of years. Approved For Release 2005/07/13 :CIA-RDP67B00446R000400080016-3 ~ne ~, 1966 p`pproved F~-~~~/'I~~$D~6~~~4~6R000400080016-3 1 1'fi t' n was that even this eco- have shown that-the passion for national encxGROUxD 1 ca to ca qua nomic aid was to be subject to Diem's identity, perhaps one should say national National Railroad Adjustment Board carrying through reforms responsive to survival, is the only ideology that may be The National Railroad Adjustment Board the aspirations of the Vietnamese people. left to a growing number of Vietnamese." was established in 1934 under the Railway Except for 'i~x?esident Eisenhower's U Thant argues that escalation of this ing so tailed minored pates between indi- letter, the only otf~er undertaking. which war on our part must cease. vidual employees ana the carriers. Minor the administration cites as a proof of a Mr. President, without further delay disputes arise out of grievances or interpre- Vietnam commitment is the treaty 4f the we should request that negotiations be tation or application of agreements concern- Southeast Asia Treaty Organization. conducted under the auspices of the ing rates of pay, rules, or working conditions. But this treaty involves no American United Nations, Or iri the alternatlVe, The Board is divided into First, Second, pledge to the South Vietnamese Govern- .and probably the more desirable course, be is d I nd Fourth Divisions, with its 3s mein- ment, which was not and could not be a under the observation and by arrange- resentasivesr of nmanagement~r d vided rbe- signatory. ment of the International Control Com- Let us hope that our President, within mission-Poland, India, and C&nada- tween the divisions. Jurisdiction of divisions !s broken down by employee classifications. the near future, will publicly state that and that our delegates participate iri The Board handles thousands of disputes we are willing to negotiate for peace and these negotiations for acease-fire and annually under a procedure which has been a cease-fire in Vietnam with representa- peace along with delegates and repre- characterized by tae courts as arbitration. fives of the Vietcong, or National Libera- sentatives of the South Vietnamese Gov- if tae labor and management representatives tion Front, along with representatives of ernment, of the National Liberation cannot agree, there is provision for selection the Government of South Vietnam of Front, or Vietcong, and of the Hanoi of a neutral person by the parties or by the which Ky is at this moment Prime Min- government to try to achieve acease- National MeaiatiGn Board to serve as a referee. aster and with delegates of the Hanoi fire aril reach an armistice agreement The Board procedure for handling disputes government of North Vietnam. and then commence the orderly With- has worked expeditiously in the Second and U Thant, Secretary General of the drawal of our Armed Forces first to bases Fourth Divisions. For example, the Fourth United Nations, has won high respect by on the Vietnam coast and then home. Division handles an average of los cases a reaSOri Of h1S accurate StatemeritS. He year, remaining virtually current with no Says that our intervention in Vietnam, backlog at all. The Second Division, which instead of being "a fight for democracy" THE CALENDAR handles an average of 247 cases a year, has a backlog of little over 1 year's work. is fast becoming a struggle for "the Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi- However, this is not the case in the First - identity and survival of Vietnam." dent, there are a number of unobjected- and Third Divisions. The Third Division, President Johnson and State Secretary to measures an the calendar which I be- which handles an average of 7s5 cases a year, Rusk would be well advised if they re- lieve could be passed by the Senate at has a backlog of about 31/Z years work ana spanded to U Thant's plea in a speech at this time. I ask unanimous consent that the First Division, which has never been cur- Atlantic City for a scaling down of the the Senate proceed to the consideration rent in lets work, has a backlog of approxi- - war on both sides, and the beginning of of Calendar Nos. 1167, 1168, and 11s9, in mately 7 /z years work. In summary, under existing procedures pre- talks by all parties, including representa- that order. scribed In the Railway Labor Act, railroad fives of the National Liberation Front, The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem- employees who have grievances sometimes ? or Vietcong. Twenty years of alien in- pore. Without objection, it is so or- have to wait as long as to years or more be- tervention in armed conflict in Vietnam dered, fare a decision is finally rendered on their resulting in the deaths of thousands of claim. In addition, in some instances, after Vietnamese men, women, and children an employee has obtained an award, the car- RAILWAY LABOR ACT rier concerned refuses to pay the award. The COUld not do Other than profoundly AMENDMENTS employee is then forced to forgo the award or affect Vietnamese political life and make go to court where he is required to try his the lives of 32 million or more men, The bill (H.R. 706) to amend the Rail- case again with the delays and uncertainties women, and children well-nigh unbear- way Labor Act in order to provide for es- normally attendant upon litigation. able. tablishment of special adjustment boards During the House and Senate hearings, The Vietnamese were crushed under upon the request either of representa- witnesses for the unions ana management French colonialism. After the battle at fives of employees or of carriers t0 re- placed'the blame for the backlog in the First Dienbienphu, the French gave up the solve disputes otherwise referable to the ana Third Divisions an the failure of the struggle to maintain their huge colonial National Railroad Adjustment Board, other side to reach an agreement on the dis- empire in Indochina and withdrew some and to make all awards of such Board position of claims. Regardless of the merits of the contentions by either side, it is obvi- 200,000 officers and men of their armed final was considered, ordered to a third ous that the National Railroad Adjustment forces and disbanded the thousands of reading, read the third time, &rid passed. Board in the operation of the First an{1 Third Vietnamese men enrolled as collabora- Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I Divisions has failed. The committee there- tors against the Vietminh, or forces of move that the vote by which the bill was fore believes that a change in existing proce- national liberation. They did not lose passed be reconsidered. dare is essential. The committee believes face. France, although no longer a Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi- that the procedure for special boards of ad- stanch ally of the United States, has dent, I move to lay that motion on the justment provided for in x.R, 7os will re- move the backlog of cases and provide an really become a greater and stronger ila- table. expeditious means of handling future cases. Lion since withdrawal from Vietnam and The motion to lay on the table was when either party requests a special ad- from another war of liberation in Algeria. agreed to. justment board, the committee contemplates The Geneva accords provided for elec- Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr, Presi- that a number of disputes will be referred to Lions,which our puppet in Saigon, Diem, dent, I ask unanimous consent to have that board. The committee believes it would refused to honor. Then the.Vietnamese printed in the R,ECOeD an excerpt from only result in a proliferation of special boards from the north who had fought as allies the report (No. 1201), explaining the to request a special boas for each claim and collaborators alongside the French purposes of the bill. presented by an employee. colonial oppressors migrated to the south There being no objection, the excerpt Carrier witnesses testified that many of the claims presented by employees and disputes by the thousands, and many thousands of was ordered to be printed in the RECOen, referred to the Board are frivolous or at least - those in the south who had fought for as follows: without merit. Although the committee is national liberation migrated to areas PURPOSE OF THE BILL not prejudging any claims, it believes that north of the 17th parallel. The principal purpose of the bill is to claims should be carefully screened by the U Thant has Stated clearly that 20 eliminate the large backlog of undecided party submitting it. The committee believes years of outside intervention and the claims of railroad employees pending before fullt t onsidered be b th the carrierdand em- presence Of a sUCCeSSiOri of foreign the National Railroad Adjustment Board, to Y Y expedite disposition of grievances and dis- ployee representative in an attempt to re- armies has so profoundly affected _Viet- pates over the interpretation and applied- solve the dispute before submission to the to present the conflict there as a contest portunity for limited judicial review of between Communism and democracy. awards of the Board to employees and Section 3, First, (m) of the Railway Labor Act provides that awards of the National Approved For Release 2005/07/13 :CIA-RDP67B00446R000400080016-3 11850 Approved For F~e~~e~?~(~Q~/~7/13 : RECORD67B ENATE00400080016-3June 'I', 19 u~ Railroad Adjustment Board shall be final "except insofar as they shall contain a money award." There is no means specified in the law, oi;her than resort to courts, whereby any award of the Board may be :enforced. Un- der section 3, First, (p) of th`e-act; provision is made for court enforcement of awards ren- dered in favor of employees. Such an em- ployee may bring action in the U.S. district court to enforce said award. The findings and orders of the Board shall be prima facie evidence of the facts as stated in the award. There is no other prov151on for judicial review of decisions of the National Railroad Adjust- ment Board. This results in the incongruous situation that if an employee receives an award in his favor from the Board, the railroad affected may obtain judicial review of that award by declining to comply ,with it. If, however, an employee fails to receive an award in his savor, there is no means by which judicial review might be obtained. The committee believes that this result is unfair to em- ployees and that an equal opportunity for judicial review should be provided under the act. Also, because the National Railroad Adjustment Board has been characterized as an arbitration tribunal by the courts, the grounds for review should be limited. to those grounds commonly provided for review of arbitration awards. H.R. 706 provides an equal opportunity for judicial review and limits that review "for failure of the division to comply with the requirements of this Act, for failure of the order to conform, or con- fine itself to matters within the scope of the division's jurisdiction or for fraud or corrup- tion by a member of the division making the order". The committee gave consideration to a proposal that the bill be amended to include as a ground for setting aside an award "ar- bitrariness or capriciousness" on the part of the Board. The committee declined to adopt such an amendment out of concern that such a provision might be regarded as an invita- tion to the courts to treat any award with which the couri- disagreed as being arbitrary or capricious. This was done on the as- aumptlon that a Federal court would have the power to decline to enforce an award which was actually and indisputedly with- out foundation in reason or fact, and the committee intends that, under this bill, the courts will have that power. The limited grounds for judicial review provided in H.R. 708 are the same grounds that are provided in section 9 of the Railway Labor Act and also Public Law $8-108, which provided arbitra- tion for the so-called work rules dispute. HOUSE HEARINGa AND PASSAGE 6F H.R. 706 Hearings on these amendments to the Rail- way Labor Act were held in the House for 4 days during the 86th Congress and 3 days during the 89th Congress. H.R. 708 was re- ported from the House Interstate and Foreign Commerce Committee on October 1, 19G5. The bill passed the House without amend- ment by a vote of 380 to 0 on February 9, 1966. SURVEY OF FISIiING RESOURCES The Senate proceeded to consider the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 20) to author- ize and direct the Bureau of Commercial Fisheries to conduct a survey of the ma- rine and fresh water commercial fishery re"sources of the United States, its terri- tories, and possessions which had been reported from the Committee on Com- merce with an amendment to strike out all after the resolving clause and insert: That the Secretary of the Interior is hereby authorized and directed to conduct a survey of the Character, extent, and condition of the coastal and fresh water commercial fishery resources, including both~thc~se resources now being utilized by United States and foreign fishermen and thaw. potential resources which are latent and unused, of the United States, its territories and possessions, includ- ing coastal and distant water fishery re- sources in which the United States has an interest or right. SEC. 2. The Secretary of the Interior is di- rected to submit through the President a report to the Congress as soon as practicable, but not later than January 1, 1988, concern- ing the results of the survey authorized and directed in the preceding section. SEC. 3. There is authorized to be appropri- ated, out of moneys in the Treasury not otherwise. appropriated, such funds as may be necessary far the purpose of carrying out the provisions of this joint resolution, but not to exceed ffi200,000. The amendment 'was agreed to. The joint resolution was ordered to be engrossed far a third reading, was read the third time, anti passed. The preamble eras ordered to be stricken and the following inserted: Whereas the United States has the richest and most extensive coastal and inland fishery resources of any nation brit has failed to de- velop, to utilize., and to conserve her fishery resources to the fullest extent; and Whereas the fishery resources of the United States and of waters continguous to the United States have, by their variety and abundance, attracted- the fishing fleets of many Europeaai and Asiatic nations and en- couraged them to send fishing vessels to those waters which are more numerous, larger, and superior in capacity and equlpmezlt to those of the United States and with such enter- prise and capabilities as to threaten these resources with depletion or extinction; and Whereas the 1958 Cseneva Convention on Fishing and Conservation of the Living Re- sources of the High Seas came into force and effect on March 20, 1966, and the Convention far the first time under international law recognizes the dominant and special interest and rights of a coastal nation to adapt regu- lations to conserve fishery resources adjacent to its coast under conservation programs based on scientific studies of the resource; and Whereas additional biological data must be gathered and scientific resource studies be completed to provide for an effective im- plementation of ottr recently acquired rights to conserve our coastal fishery resources un- der the 1958 Convention: Therefore be it The title was amended, so as to read: "Joint resolution to authorize and direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a survey of the coastal .and fresh water commercial fishery resources of the United States, its territories, and posses- sions." Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi- dent, Iask unanimous consent to have printed in the RECORD an excerpt from the report (Na. 1202) ,explaining the pur- poses of the joint resolution. There being no objection, the excerpt was ordered to be printed in the RECOaD, as follows: PIIRPOSE OF TIIE RESOLUTION The purpose of the resolution is to direct the Secretary of the Interior to conduct a survey of the U.S. coastal and inland fishery resources. LEGISLATIVE IiLSTORY The legislation: is similar to a resolution enacted in May of 1944, which authorized a survey of the fishery resources of the Unit- ed States and which resulted in the publi- cation of Senate Document 61, 79th Con- gress, 1st session, entitled "Fishery Resources of the United States^, The resolution is also similar to Senate Joint Resolution 174 of the 88th Congress which passed the Senate late in the session without any action being taken by rile House of Representatives. Senate Joint Resolution 29 was introduced on January 19, 1965. Hearings-were held April 19, 19G8, with tetati- mony in support of the measure received from Dr. Stanley A. Cain, Assistant Secretary far Fish and Wildlife and Parks, U.S. Depart- ment of the Interior and by Donald L. rJic- Kernan, Director, Bureau of Commerc;fal Fisheries, U.S. Department of the Inter:or. The resolution Is also supported by other Government agencies including the Depart- ment of State and?i~y numerous national fish- ery organizations such as the National Fish- eries Institute, the National Canners Asso- ciation, Tuna Rtuearch Foundation, National Shrimp Congress, the Atlantic States Mar:tne Fisheries Commission, and the Pacific Marine Fisheries Commission. THE AMENDMENT The catnmittee amendment focuses i;he survey on the extent and condition of i;he inland .and coastal fishery resources of t;he United States. Tkte Secretary of the Interior under rho resolution as introduced was ~di- rected to study an extensive number of broad areas of Interest to the fishing industry such as processing techniques, marketing prfrb- lems, and the radiation-pasteurization of fishery products. The amount of money au- thorized and time permitted were not suffi- cient to permit a meaningful study of all the problems of the fishing industry. The ptir- pose of the amendment is to concentrate the effort on one of the most fundamental prob- lems, namely a lack of sufficient information abotit -the resource particularly the enormous underutilized coastal fishery resources which are currently being threatened by foreign fleets. NEED FOR TIIE LEGISLATION A comprehensive survey of the inland and coastal fishery resources of the United States will meet two important needs. The study will encourage the domestic use of the enor- mous underutilized marine resources of the United States and will provide scientific data necessary to regulate and conserve the coas~tai fishery resources under the 1958 Geneva Convention oti Fishing and Conservation of the Living Resources of the High Seas. During the past 30 years world fishery pro- duction has about tripled. During rite safne period, the U.S. production has remained at the. same level-5 billion pounds--with ap- proximately 90 percent taken from coasl;al waters and 10 percent taken by the U.S.-flag fishing vessels off foreign coasts. The poten- tial annual catch of fishery resources in the U.S. coastal waters has been recently esti- mated to be approximately flue times the present domestic catch.- These unutilized marine resources are? being increasingly ex- ploited off our coasts by foreign fishing ves- sels, primarily Russian and Japanese. Dur- ing the past 5 years, foreign fleets have been attracted to our coastal waters by .the avaal- ability of enormous unutilized marine re- sources. In the summer of 1965 no less thrin 1,000 large foreign fishing vessels were en- gaged in harvesting fishery resources within 50 miles of our coast. Ten years ago, the for- eign catch in the North Pacific coastal waters was negligible. In 1965, over 2 billion, pounds were taken by Russia and Japan in the East- ern Bering Sea and the Gulf of Alaska. If the U.S, fishing industry and fishermen h