COMMENTARY ON CONFERENCE REPORT ON HATCH ACT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP77M00144R001100120026-2
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: March 30, 2005
• Sequence Number: 26
• Publication Date: March 24, 1976
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100120026-2
March 24, 1976 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE' H 2355
has been cognizant of this discrimina-
tion for quite some time. A U.N. Institute
for Training and Research report in 1973
documented this ' discrimination. It
stated:
As of May $1, 1972, the overall proportion
of men to women on the professional staff
was 4 to 1, but at the directorial level, the
gap widened to 37 to 1. Of the 293 men and
eight women in the ranks from D-1 (Direc-
tor) to USO (Under .Secretary General) 30
men were at the level of Assistant of Under
Secretary General, while no woman was
higher than D-2 (Director). From "The
Situation of. Women in the United Nations".
The situation remains essentially un-
changed today. Reports were issued dur-
ing International Women's Year point-
ing out the situation and imploring
change. What was the result? The
International Women's Year Conference
adopted resolution 8 urging that some-
thing be done to end this discrimination.
Another resolution passed the U.N. on
December 8, 1975 urging that the U.N.
increase its efforts to hire women for ex-
ecutive positions. I was surprised to see
such honesty in the resolutions, 'as it
noted-
The limited progress made to date in the
recruitment and promotion of women in the
senior and policy-making. positions, and the
declining percentage of women staff mem-
bers in the Secretariet.
Yet I remain unconvinced by all these
resolutions. Simply because the situation
has not changed. I am reminded of Eliza
Doolittle in "My Fair Lady," who sang
"It's been words, words, words, and I'm
so sick of words,"-in the showstopper,
"Show Me." -
As a member of. the Foreign Operations
Subcommittee of the Appropriations
Committee, I have had a chance to take
a closer look at several of the U.N. or-
ganizations to which we.make a volun-
tary contribution. The following is a list-
ing of some of the U.N. organizations,
the number of women in executive posi-
tions, and the amount of money we vol-
untarily contributed in 1975:
VOLUNTARY U.N. ORGANIZATIONS RECEIVING
U.S. FUNDING 1975 DOLLAR AMOUNT
I. U.N. Development Program-of 41 top
positions listed in U.N.'s System of Organiza-
tion Manual, there t only one woman.-$77
million.
2. UNICEF-of the top 17 positions, there
is only one woman.-$17 million.
3. U.N. Institute for Training and Re-
search-there are no women in executive
positions.-$400,000.
4. U.N. Relief Agency for Palestine Refu-
gees-there are no -women in executive posi-
tions.-$23 million.
5. U.N. World Food Program--there are
no women in executive positions.-$i.5 mil-
lion.
I think the example of UNICEF is
particularly instructive. Of the eight
executive positions, there is only one
woman. She is not on the Executive
Board, and she is not even secretary to
the Executive Board. She is director of
the greeting card 'operation. UNICEF
may be the best in its purposes, but it is
as guilty as the rest of them in its bias
against women.
I think the United States should take
a more active role in pressuring the U.N.
to make real changes in its hiring prac-
tices. Last year, we contributed about
$125 million to these voluntary organiza-
tions, in addition to the assessed dues we
pay the U.N. We have every. right to call
against women. If t4it II. not m
quickly and decisi o iss d
cent men and. wo eey0 ust
COMMENTARY ON CONFERENCE
REPORT ON HATCH ACT
(Mr. DERWINSKI asked and was given
permission to address the House for
1 minute, to revise and extend his re-
marks and include extraneous matter.)
Mr. DERWINSKI. Mr. Speaker, those
responsible for crafting and creating leg-
islation ostensibly designed to update the
Hatch Act now. are in the unenviable
position of being left with a medley of
absurdities which boggle ,the mind of any
impartial observer. Like new authors,
they must be stealing glances at the
latest version of their handiwork to
make sure that the ink has not smudged.
In their headlong rush to perpetuate
the fallacious thesis that Federal em-
ployees somehow were being deprived of
their constitutional rights, proponents
succeeded in transforming a patently
mischievous piece of legislation into a
monumental monstrosity. There is no
other way to assets the language which
has.been incorporated into the confer-
ence committee report on H.R. 8617. In
effect, it asks us to clap our hands, if we
still believe in Peter Pan.
When this legislation was debated
earlier in the House, proponents trum-
peted the need for all Federal employees
to be free to exercise their political
rights. At the same time, they cautioned
against establishing a double standard
which they said would result if senior offi-
cials in the administration were permit-
ted tq seek elective office., If the all-for- "
one, one-for-all prnnciple was valid last
October, why has it now been abandoned
by the House managers of this bill?
It is not too difficult to come up with
an answer. Principle was sacrificed for
political expediency. What the House
managers of this bill now are telling us
is that a little bit of selectivity is not in-
compatible with political freedom. How
else can you explain away the language
of the conference committee report
which now would deny the full range of
political activity to certain employees
of the CIA, the IRS, and the Justice De-
partment?
In view of the conference report, I
think it is appropriate to repeat the ques-
tion chorused by backers of this legisla-
tion when they objected to the so-called
double standard approach to political ac-
tivity: "What kind of equity is this?"
There can be no justification for permit-
ting one kind of Federal employee free
political rein while restricting selected
groups of Federal employees.
Let me also remind the House It was
the same backers of this legislation who
last October were voicing concern about
the "fragmented nature and coverage of
the Hatch Act." Now, if we are to believe
these same spokesmen, a little bit of po-
litical segregation is only a venial sin
which can be conveniently overlooked in
the rush to legislative enactment.
In their all-out drive to put something
into the law books, House backers of the
legislation even jettisoned the effective
date of the measure. When it left the
House, H.R. 8617 was to be applicable
for the 1976 elections. Presumably, that
effective date would give a new dimen-
sion to political freedom for Federal em-
ployees since it coincided with our Bicen-
tennial observance. Now, the House is
being asked to reverse its stand and de-
lay the effective date of the bill until
January 1, 1977. If political freedom real-
ly is the issue, can we tolerate any delay?.
But there is an even more compelling
reason for rejecting the conference re-
port, and it can be summed up in a
word-experience. Since 1939, the Hatch
Act has demonstrated its worth and pro-
vided Federal employees with the as-
surance they are rated on quality of job
performance rather than political con-
nections.
There is no conceivable way of pre-
serving an impartial Federal service, if it
is to be ravaged at will by virtually un-
restricted partisan political activity. To
invite the emasculation of a workable
merit system is to encourage a quick re-
turn to the spoils system complete with
pestilential stench.
There is widespread evidence that
neither the public nor the vast major-
ity of Federal employees want this bill
enacted into law. In the interests of good
government, this deplorable piece of leg-
islation which now encompasses the
worst of both worlds should be soundly
rejected.
PANAMA CANAL v.._._
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Alabama (Mr. EDWARDS) is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. EDWARDS of Alabama. Mr.
Speaker, negotiations between our Gov-
ernment and the Republic of Panama
over future ownership of the Panama
Canal are continuing despite a strong
sentiment among the people of this
country that the United States should
retain ownership.
Although the negotiations are taking
place at a slower pace, it is unknown at
present just how far the talks will be
carried.
I strongly oppose any change in the
ownership of this strategically-impor-
tant link between the Atlantic and the
Pacific Oceans and I have introduced
legislation calling on the Congress to
state its opposition clearly and unequivo-
cally.
As you all recall, when the Depart-
ment of State appropriation bill came
before the House last year, language was
included to prohibit the State Depart-
ment from using any funds for the pur-
pose of negotiating thee giveaway of the
canal. I supported this language and it
is unfortunate that the Senate did not
add any similar language. The House
language was watered down in confer-
ence and we finally ended up with a pro-
vision which had no binding effect.
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100120026-2
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100120026-2
112356 CONGRESSIONAL
( firmly believe that if the canal
-eases to exist as an entity of the United
3tates and is relinquished to the Repub-
^tc of Panama, it will just be a matter of
,erne before the operation of the canal
s under the influence of Fidel Castro,
upported by the Soviet Union.
Russia has constantly supported the
?t forts of Panama to gain control of the
(:'anal,, It has been reported that the
v lussians have even expressed an interest
in building a new sea-level canal or
modifying the present canal to handle
arger vessels, similar to the manner in
which the Russians did the Aswan Dam
-or the Egyptians.
Obtaining ownership and control of
the Canal from the United States has
been a long-time goal of the Russians.
John Reed, an American journalist who
covered the Russian revolution, reported
That Lenin realized the importance of
the canal and was determined to force
the United States to give up unilateral
control of the waterway.
The strategic nature of the canal to
international commerce and to the mili-
tary defense of the Western Hemisphere
are two good reasons why the United
States should never let the canal slip
from its control.
The United States completed con-
struction of the canal in 1914 after 10
long years of hard work. We took up the
i:iroject after the French had failed. The
United States paid Panama $10 million
grid agreed to pay $250,000 a year rent
forever for the area. Since then, the an-
nual payment has been raised to $2 mil-
lion a year.
The cost to the United States of build-
ing iihe canal was $380 million.
A revolutionary coup headed by Brig.
Gen. Omar Torrijos of the National
Guard has been in control of Panama
Once President Arnolfo Arias was over-
thrown in 1968, 11 days after he was
elected. This military regimi of Panama
has been friendly with Communist coun-
tries and has been agitating for control
of the canal.
Panamanians are divided on the canal
issue and militant factions have threat-
ened bloodshed if the canal is not re-
linquished. Our two countries have been
Involved in negotiations and debate for
years.
.( to not like the direction in which we
are going on this issue. Unless we can
reverse the trend of recent years, one
day we may be asking the Russians for
permission to use the canal. This is un-
thinkable and I strongly --rge each of
y?ou to do everything possible to keep
i, situation from occurring.
1`ue SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from New York (Mr. KEnse) is ree-
oenized for 60 minutes.
Tr. KEMP addressed the House, His
re marks will appear hereafter in the Ex-
'^teasions of Remarks.]
Jute SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
ii:evious order of the House, the gentle-
man from Illinois (Mr. AmvuNzio) Is rec-
ogilized for 5 minutes.
RECORD - HOUSE March .2 , 19'7
(Mr. ANNUNZIO addressed the Douse.
His remarks will appear hereafter in the
Extensions of Remarks.]
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Texas (Mr. GONZALEZ) is rec-
ognized fpr 5 minutes.
[Mr. GONZALEZ addressed the House.
His remarks will appear hereafter n the
Extensions of Remarks.]
DEATH PENALTY: ALIVE AND
WELL?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Connecticut (Mr. COT-Ell) IS
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. COTTER. Mr Speaker, one of the
ablest reporters that I know, Bob Waters,
has written a thoughtful and provoca-
tive article on the death penalty
I urge my colleagues to take a few min-
utes from their busy schedules :ri read
this excellent article:
DEATH PENALTY: ALIVE AND W: ',:.?
(By Robert Waters)
WASHINGTON.--One of the olde.t news
business cliches is the one where '.-eporters
tell each other: No story ever ends,
So it comes as no surprise to read that
the U.S. Supreme Court, in Its majestic wis-
dom, is on the verge of deciding th = consti-
tutionality of the death penalty-a:;ain.
The high court's 1972 decista,n, long
awaited as-tbe final word on this emotional
Issue, was something of a dud.
The court, you nay remember, vent off
in all directions at once and came up with
a 5-4 ruling that removed the shadow of
death from several hundred men on death
row-but settled nothing.
Primarily on the strength of a dissent by
Chief Justice Warren Burger. Connecticut
and 33 other states passed new cal ttal pun-
ishment laws to overcome the cour :"s major-
ity ruling that capital punlshme;it, as it
then existed, was unconstitutional because
it wasn't even-handed and fair.
Burger said the opinion implied that the
states could pass new death pes .lty laws
provided that the legal killing wasn't ca-
pricious and arbitrary.
How is the court going to rule Lists time?
The guess from this corner is tl st capital
punishment is alive and well ano will stay
that way.
The high court may t.-.;'y to apt a out the
conditions a little ;:uore carefully than some
of the state statutes have them it. present.
But it seems quite doubtful that the justices
are prepared to ruse that the death penalty
is "cruel and unusual punlshmen,."
This guess is predicated not ea the fact
thatthe court has become more c,aservative
since 1972.
The most compe-Ring argument will prob-
ably turn out to boo the skyrocket s_g murder
Nate.
A re-cent Saga .t r,i'cute study :;+r the New
York City police department giv-: s a strong
hint of the way tLings-are going. The study,
in brief, found that killings in "crimes of
passion" are declining while murders where
the killer and thi, victim were stangers are
going up-perhaps as much as o'r per cent
of the total homicides.
This is the worst kind of bad r.rcve for the
anti-capital punishment crowd.
ache ban-the-d,-ato-penalty n-vement is
fueled In good part by the truisan that most
murderers didn't plan to kill tissir victims.
It just happened A spouse kill ; his or her
mate his a fit of le ainuel?r or anger A drunken
boy friend is rejec~ed and decides to ge-:
even. This pattern is familiar to nearly ever;
police department In the land.
But any study that shows this type of
killing on the decline-while "deliberate"
murders show a dramatic upsurge- brings is
back to a pretty basic question:
How much value does society place on ti c
life of the victim?
Leaving aside completely any dis-rus:>ion ,f
whether the death penalty will deter tie
crime of murder, antioapital punishment ai-
vocates must decide whether their own lives --
or anyone else's--are to be valued less than
the life of a deliberate murderer.
This question. goes far beyond the "eye for
an eye" concept of punishment and poses ?or
all mankind the question of misplaced com-
passion.
In his book, "Punishing Crlininsls, Ernst
van den Haag, brings his reader face-to-face
with a most disturbing thought:
A complete abolition of the death pena~ty
can be seen as a symbolic "loss of nerr-e:
social authority no longer willing to pass an
irrevocable judgement on anyone. Murder is
no longer thought grave enough to take he
murderer's life . .
All but the most callous who have ever
witnessed an electrocution, or a hanging or
any other form of legal killing, will tell ;,on
they came away from the experience witia a
profoundsense of shock,
This revulsion has also aided the anti-
capital punishment cause. It is most com-
pelling to listen to the argument that society
cheapens its own regard for human life when
it passes laws permitting the death pen?+1ty.
But, in the end, this argument must turn
itself around to face Haag's question: Was
the life of the victim less important than
the life of his deliberate murderer?
Taking the murderer's life certainly u on't
restore the victim's. And the arguments over
the deterrent question can be endless.
But it is just possible that the Supreme
Court, which can read statistics as well as
anyone else, can figure out what is happen-
inE-: Victims are dying, murderers arent.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
previous order of the House, the gentle-
woman from New York (Ms. Hoavzrw&IV)
is recognized for 30 minutes,
[Ms. HOLTZMAN addressed the
House. Her remarks will appear here-
after in the Extensions of Remarks.]
CONGRESSIONAL SCIENCE AND
ENGINEERING PROGRAMS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
previous order of the House, the gentle-
nian from Illinois (Mr. PRII;E? is r?cog-
nized for 5 minutes,
Mr. PRICE. Mr. Speaker, I we?.com.e
this opportunity to join in sponsoring a
resolution expressing the appreciation
of Congress to a number of profesionai
societies which have instituted thr con-
gressional science and engineerin?' pro-
crams. These programs are designed to
bring scientists and engineers into the
congressional process, allowing thorn to
learn the public policymaking process,
and at the some time contribute their
skills and experience to the decisioi.imak-
ing process.
I have the honor of being the chair-
man of the House Armed Services Com-
mittee and the R. & D. ,subcominittee,
and on this committee we are faced with
making policy decisions on a multitude
of technological programs. Over ore-half
of all the federally supported R & D.
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100120026-2
 THE WASI I =1XFjp tease 2005/04/13 : C I ?7 11A~j1I4 0~ 1~01?~ ??
Close Senate Vote Seen
Hatch Act Accord Is Reached
By Helen Dewar
Washington Post Staff Writer
13ouse. ,and_ Senate con-
ferees resolved differences
yesterday over a veto--threat.
ened bill to let federajM-)vork-
ers engage in_ jZ U. a poli-
tics after scuttling a Senate
amendment to make it eas-
ier for Congress to raiseled-
eral workers salaries.
The compromise_sion
of prob-1;04--Hatch Act revi-
sions is .expected to .be ap-
proved soon by the House
and Sdhate but not-by the
twothirds. majority `o,# both
houses necessary_.__tp -:ovcr-
ri.d,e an expected veto from
President Ford.
HATCH, From Al
idential recommendations.
Currently they are linked,
making members skittish
about approving big pay
raises for workers that also
increase their own salaries.
The conferees agreed to
drop the Senate provision
when House members noted
that it violated House rules
against non-germane amend-
ments. Separate bills to do
the same thing are pending
in the House but are bottled
up in the House Post Office
and Civil Service Commit-
tee.
The conferees also re-
stored House provisions for
an independent board that
the Senate had rejected.
The board would supersede
the Civil Service Commis-
sion in judging infractions
of the new law, including its
rules against political coer-
cion of workers by their
bosses. The CSC would re-
tain investigatory powers.
Senate Post Office and
The Senate is the main
stumbling block and the
conferees, by rejecting key
elements of the upper
house's handiwork on the
bill, appeared to have done
nothing to improve chances
of getting a veto-proof mar-
gin in that body.
. The 228-to-119 House vote
laa _.y-ear, co:XiSMrably
above, two-thirds. But the 47-
to--32-Senate vote earlier this
QI th. fell far short of the
veto-override mark.
-Points at issue in the con-
ference were peripheral to
the central issue of lifting
the Hatch Act's nearly 40-
year ban on partisan poli-
ticking by federal workers
Civil Service Committee
Chairman Gall McGee (D-
Wyo.) agreed to the House
position, saying the CSC
should not be "both prosecu-
tor and judge."
Having restored. the inde-
pendent board, the confer-
ees modified Senate amend-
ments tightening punish-
ment provisions, including
dropping a provision for dis-
missal of any employee
found guilty of two viola-
tions of the law.
They also dropped a
house proposal that federal
in their off-duty hours,
which both houses had ap-
proved. The chief differ-
ences involved creation of
an independent board to
judge violations, leaves of
absence for workers who
run for office, exemptions
for "sensitive" positions and
the politically ticklish ques-
tion of divorcing bureau-
cratic and congressional pay
increases.
On the salary issue, the
Senate amended the House
bill to separate congres-
sional pay raises from salary
increases for rank-and-ifle
federal workers when pro-
posed increases exceed pres-
See HATCH, A4, Col. 5
workers be required to'take
leave without pay when run-
ning for full-time 'elective
office. Rep, Herbert E. Har-
ris (D-Va.), a House con-
feree, contended that such a
requirement would 'be a
"practical prohibition"
against running for office
by most workers.
The conferees also agreed
to pQ tpone "t' e ffeetive
da. of.., fife., law to Jan. 1,
1977, and to hart CIA .cm-
1oYees 'arid those o nig
sensitive" osftl( ilsii the
Dcllartiicril _~lf dllit!.Zand
Internal Revenue Service
fxnmeolttlss, The Senate
had voted to ban a 1T em ploy-
ecs in these agencies from
politics lint the -" conferees
ag_rged tnpermit suEi'activ-
ity .
by those emmtoyees
listed by their agency Beads
as holding iionsensitive Posi-
tions '
Either house can reject
the conference recommenda-
tions but McGee and Rep.
David N. Henderson (D-
N.C.), chairman of the
House Committee, said they
expected passage.
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100120026-2
 NEW YOR pcFor Release 391kSJOA/13
FORD IS SUSTAINED
IN HATCH, ACT VETO
Bill to Give U.S. Aides Role
in Politics Dies in House
By RICHARD L. MADDEN
Special to The Ne a York Times
WASHINGTON, April 29-A
Congressional effort to allow
2.8 million Federal Civil Service
employees to take part in poli-
tical campaigns ended today
when the House sustained Pres-
ident Ford's veto of a bill revis-
ing the 37-year-old Hatch Act.
The vote was 243 to 160,
P)7W0144RQp XVj120026-2
would have been effective Jan.
Under the Hatch Act, named
for Senator Carl Hatch of New
Mexico and enacted in 1939
after the number of Federal
workers increased sharply in
the New Deal, Federal employ-
ers have to quit their jobs
if they wish to participate in
politics.
In vetoing the measure April
12, Mr. Ford said, "The public
business of our Government
must be conducted without the
taint of partisan politics." Some
Republicans also opposed the
bill in the belief that many
Federal workers had been hired
in Democratic Administrations
and might be -likely to aid
Democratic candidates.
Representative William Clay,
Democrat of Missori
th
Bill's
,
e
or 26 short of The two-thirds i
floor manager, argued that Fe-
needed to override. It was thel deral workers should have the
third consecutive time this year same political rights as other
that Congress, with its heavy citizens. He maintained that
Democratic majorities, had the measure contained safe-
failed to override a veto. guards to prevent them from
But Democratic leaders had abusing their offices or being
had little hope of overriding coerced by superiors to support
this latest veto because neither candidates.
the House nor Senate had "We don't need it, and we
passed the bill by a two-thirds don't need to make ward hee-
vote. lers out of bureaucrats," coun-
Except for a letter-writing tered Representative Robert H.
effort by some labor groups Mitchell, Republican of Illinois.
urging representatives to over- Representatives of districts
ride, there was little evidence in suburban Virginia and Mary-
that the Administration or the land, where many Federal
Democratic leadership had en workers live, 'were divided,
gaged in any intensive lobbying with some urging an override
on the issue. and others urging that the veto
Voting to override were 221 be sustained.
Democrats and 22 Republicans; Representative Joseph L.
47 Democrats and 113 Republi- Fisher, Democrat of suburban
cans were opposed. ~ Virginia, acknowledged that
The measure, regarded as; the bill probably would help
dead for this session, would his campaign, but said that
have allowed most Federal civi-I many of the civil servants in
lian workers, including those his district opposed it. "They
of the Postal Service, to run view it as something forced
for political office, make finan-! on them they don't want," he
cial contributions and actively said in urging support of the
participate . in campaigns. It veto.
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP77M00144RO01100120026-2