CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP82-00357R000700120001-5
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 5, 2000
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: August 25, 1966
• Content Type: REGULATION

0001-5
Approved For G091
COSPONSORS OF S. 3703, A BILL TO
PROTECT THE CONSTITUTIONAL
RIGHTS OF EMPLOYEES OF THE
EXECUTIVE BRANCH OF THE GOV-
ERNMENT AND TO PREVENT UN-
WARRANTED GOVERNMENTAL IN-
VASIONS OF THEIR PRIVACY
Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the following 33
Senators, listed in the order in which
their request to cosponsor was received,
be added as sponsors of S. 3703, a bill
introduced on August 9 to protect the
employees of the executive branch Of the
U.S. Government in the enjoyment of
their constitutional rights and to prevent
unwarranted governmental invasion of
their privacy: Mr. FONG, Mr. BAYH, Mr.
HRUSKA, Mr. SMATHERS, Mr. BURDICK, Mr.
TYDINGS, Mr. DIRKSEN, Mr. BIBLE, Mr.
RUSSELL of South Carolina, Mr. MCCAR-
THY, Mr. BENNETT, Mr. FANNIN, Mr.
YOUNG of Ohio, Mr. YARBOROUGH, Mr.
BYRD of Virginia, Mr. BARTLETT, Mr.
MUNDT, Mr..THURMOND, Mr. MCINTYRE,
Mr. SPARKMAN, Mr. CANNON, Mr. MILLER,
Mr. SIMPSON, Mr. JORDAN of North Caro-
lina, Mr. ALLOTT, Mr. MusKIE, Mr.
INOUYE, Mr. SALTONSTALL, Mr. WILLIAMS
of New Jersey, Mr. TOWER, Mr: PROUTY,
Mr. BREWSTER, and Mr. GRIFFIN.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
As I have said before, I believe the
Federal Government can achieve these
ends in a manner consistent with tra-
ditional standards of due process, fair-
ness, and equity which have always been
inherent in our system of government.
I see no need, no impending crisis, to
cause a departure from them at this
juncture in our national history. Yet,
Congress, by its silence in the face of
growing discontent on the part of the
public and of civil servants alike seems
to have sanctioned such a departure
where Federal employees are concerned.
Writers who are experts in Federal
civil service matters have recently called
attention to a general dissatisfaction
among employees and their families, to
the high turnover rate, and to personnel
recruitment problems of the Federal Gov-
ernment. Among the reasons for these
trends, according to Joseph Young and
Jerry Kluttz, is the resentment over the
"big brother" attitude of the Federal
Government toward its employees, and
over the invasions of privacy and eco-
nomic coercions currently practiced.
I ask unanimous consent that articles
by Joseph Young from the Evening Star
of August l) and the Sunday Star of Au-
gust 21; and by Jerry Kluttz, from the
Washington Post of August 21; an edi-
torial in the NAIRE 12th District Bul-
letin for ,august; and a letter from
Philip O'Rourke, 12th district governor
for the National Association of Internal
Revenue Employees be printed at this
point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the articles
were ordered to be printed in the REC-
ORD, as follows:
[From the Washington (D.C.) Evening Star,
Aug. 19,1%61
FINANCIAL AFFAIRS PROBE GROWS, MAY HIT
HUNDREDS OF THOUSANDS
(By Joseph Young)
The specter of "big brother" in government
continues to grow.
What started out as a perusal of the finan-
cial affairs of a few hundreds top government
officials or a few thousand at the most is now
developing into financial snooping into the
affairs of hundreds of thousands of federal
and postal *orkers.
It's one Of the many invasions of federal
employes' privacy such as questionnaires
they must fill out to list their race and na-
tionality, the pressure to buy saving bonds,
orders to participate in outside activities
that carry forward the Johnson administra-
tion's sociological programs, etc.
One of thi things that has government em-
ployes angriest at the moment is the finan-
cial statements they are required to fill out,
not only for themselves but for all blood rela-
tions who live under the same roof with
them.
When President Johnson issued his code of
y
the names of all sponsors be listed. worthwhile cause, increasingly seize on ethics executive order and the Civil Service
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro teal- ommissiorj subsequently issued regulations
quickest or most scientific means to their to carry it Out, the announcement was made
pore. Without objection, it is so ends, but seldom pause to consider the that it would apply only to several hundred
ordered. effects on the individuals involved, or the top executives and perhaps several thousand
Mr. ERVIN. In addition to these co- practical operation of the system they government officials involved directly In the
sponsors, I have also received letters of propose. These are not men of malevo- awarding of contracts it was explained that
support from a number of other lence bent on consciously destroying the these financial reports were required to pre-
Senators. rights of fellow employees. They are vent any conflict of interests.
The broad geographical and political men engaged in compartmentalized But agencies have gone hog-wild, according
representation reflected in this cospon- planning of programs to prevent con- ti onar reports gathered by subcommittee the Senate Constitu
Sen.
sorship and support of S. 3703 reveals, flict of interest, promote equal oppor- SAM D .C., which hheaded by Sen.
SAM ERVI-N which has directed all de-
in my opirdon, the nt}~'~1nwide, bipartisan tunny rotect national security, insure ,partments and agencies to report to the
interest S4 pp1 lit rtt3L~ Rs 1 O0 91 iEal Cs1RQP&2 ,E~OOOi OlgI211O:{}i11X many employes are being re-
rights of employees. achieve other goals. quired to file financial statements.
Mr. President, when one-third of the
Members of the Senate cosponsor a bill
of this sort, the magnitude of the prob-
lem should no longer be ignored.
Yet the employee complaints which
continue to pour into the Constitutional
Rights Subcommittee and into other
congressional offices show that little
effort has been made to review some of
the problems.
Mr. President, all of us hope that
amendments can be drawn to clarify
even more precisely the scope of the bill
and define better the proper balance be-
tween the individual's right to privacy
about matters unrelated to his work and
the Government's need to know about
the employee's fitness for his job. We
hope, too, that if other areas of en-
croachment upon liberties come to our
attention during preliminary hearings,
they can be included in the bill. Fqr
instance, one important area of due
process protection escaped inclusion.
This is the employee's right of confron-
tation in adversary proceedings. Al-
though this right to some extent is
'accorded by judicial decision and by
regulations of some agencies in certain
matters, our subcommittee studies show
that it is not firmly grounded either as
an administrative or a statutory protec-
tion for Federal employees. Amend-
ment of the bill in this respect will be
discussed during hearings.
All 33 cosponsors of S. 3703 are agreed
on their unqualified endorsement of the
purpose of the bill-to provide additional
protection for the privacy of over two
and a half million citizens and their f am-
ilies who are associated with the Federal
Government on a regular or part-time
basis.
I believe the hearings on this bill, in
addition to showing any necessary
amendments, will also provide for a long
overdue examination of some of the
problems which have persistently be-,
deviled the Federal service for the past
15 years. The hearings, furthermore,
should allow Congress to consider the
issues raised by the excesses of newer
management devices now being used
zealously, but heedlessly, to invade em-
ployee and applicant privacy in the name
of efficiency or the Government's right
to know intimate details of the indi-
vidual's life, national origin, his habits,
and thoughts.
I want to make it clear that this bill
is not indicative of criticism of the en-
tire Federal service. Indeed, the civil
service is characterized by the highest
competency and integrity. The bill is,
rather, a proposed checkmate against
the activities of those who, in their zeal
or to further a
to increase efficienc
 19682 Approved For Release (nS/~QS1St5AARLDRR?C-%B7R0 0001-5
Although many of the big departments
and agencies have yet to be heard from such
as the Defense Department, the reports thus
far show that more than 60,000 federal
workers are being required to file financial
reports.
When the big departments are heard
from, ERVIN expects the number of employes
involved will be at least several hundred
thousand, probably more.
For example, Navy is requiring all grade 13
and above employes in many of its bureaus
to file financial reports.
Privacy attacked-The scope of the finan-
cial report requirements varies from agency
to agency, 'but most are very comprehensive.
Employes are required to list all of their
financial holdings, including stocks and
bonds, money in the bank, including valu-
ables in safety deposit boxes. This also
holds true for their spouses' holdings as well
as that of their children and any other rela-
tives living with them such as mothers,
fathers, inlaws, etc.
In many cases, employes are asked to list
all their debts, the amount of the mortgage
on their homes, what they owe on television
sets, refrigerators, etc.
Employes in grades as low as GS-3 are
required to participate in some cases.
Smithsonian Institution requires that GS-3
must disclose their personal finances.
In some instances, agencies are using the
information to pressure employes to retire on
the grounds that "you are well off financially
and don't have to work anymore," Senator
Bevies reports.
The Post Office Department, one of the few
major departments to report to the-Senate
committee thus far, requires 10,000 regular
employees to disclose their personal finances.
How their financial status would result in a
conflict of interest is not explained by the
department, it has 513 "ethical conduct
counselors" to enforce its financial state-
ment requirement.
The State Department requires 1,500 of its
employes to bare their financial situation, in-
eluding interior decorators employed by the
department.
The Department of Health, Education and
Welfare has 9,420 of its employees disclosing
their finances, while 8,030 in Treasury must
report.
The effects on employes are humiliation
and indignation.
There already are instances of very able
employes, whose services are desperately
needed by government, resigning and taking
private industry jobs because of their re-
sentment of the financial questionnaires.
Some government ' personnel officials
gloomily predict there will be additional
losses to the government.
They also predict it will make tougher the
government's job of recruiting outstanding
college graduates and other top-flight peo-
ple for government jobs.
feel it would serve notice that employes are
"fed up" with present conditions.
All these moves were defeated by the na.
tional leaderships of the unions, who believe
such actions would do more harm than good.
The National Postal Union at its convention
voted to explore the feasibility of testing the
[From the Washington (D.C.) Sunday Star,
Aug. 21, 1966]
ADMINISTRATION HIGHHANDEDNESS BLAMED
FOR EMPLOYEE RESENTMENT
(By Joseph Young)
constitutionality of the no-strike law, but
retained the no-strike pledge in its constitu-
tion.
But the very fact that "strike" in being
mentioned shows the present low state of
morale In government.
"Economic strait-jacket"-Perhaps the big-
gest complaint among federal employes is
what they feel is the "economic straitjacket,"
imposed on them by the Johnson administra-
tion.
They bitterly resented President Johnson's
edict to Congress last year, which was pre-
pared to vote them a raise of 9 to 10 percent
over a two-year period or even full com-
parability which would have been more, that
it limit its approval to 3.6 percent or he
would veto the bill.
They equally resented the President's ac-
tion this year in flatly refusing to go along
with more than a 2.9 percent raise.. Fuel was
added to the fire when Johnson, in signing
the bill, implied that government workers
would be the culprits if any widespread in-
flation developed.
Employes and their leaders feel strongly
that they have fallen considerably behind
workers In the private sector where labor-
management contracts have exceeded 3.2 per-
cent, sometimes by a considerable margin,
Rather than causing inflation, they feel they
are the victims of it as their purchasing
power continues to shrink.
Big Brother-Government employees are
also resentful of what they believe is the
"papa-knows-best" attitude of the John-
son administration reflected in-working con-
ditions and policies.
They also resent the pressures brought to
bear to make them purchase savings bonds,
fill out applications in which they are re-
quired to list their race and nationality, etc.
Employees are very much angered over
having to disclose their complete financial
holdings and that of the Immediate members
of their families. This includes stocks and
bonds, money in the bank, property owned,
debts, mortgages, etc.
This financial report originally was sup-
posed to apply to only several hundred or
several thousand at most who were in top
jobs or in positions involving awarding of
contracts, but it Is being applied on a mass
basis.
The employees resent such questions, feel-
ing that it is a reflection on their Integrity
and honesty.
Other side of coin--On the other hand,
employees are sometimes apt to forget
.quickly.
The Johnson administration has a lot of
constructive things to its credit. It has pro-
posed pay raises every year, even though
they may have been smaller than employees
liked. This makes the Johnson administra-
tion the only administration in history-
save the Kennedy administration-which
on its own has proposed pay raises every
thing is done.
Employe. unrest and frustration was dis-
cussed two weeks ago in three of these col-
umns. It resulted in an outpouring of
varied reactions from Federal employes as
well as the public they serve.
Among the words used by readers to de-
scribe the Columns included "nonsense, ridic-
ulous, grave, most serious, prompt action
needed, pro-management, anti-management,
pro-union, anti-union."
A majority of those who commented pooh-
poohed the report. They had seen no evi-
dence of employe unrest and they doubted
if it existed anywhere. Events since that
time have effectively answered them. Events
such as:
The convention here last week of the in-
dependent National Postal Union which di-
rected its ofcers to investigate the feasibility
of testing the constitutionality of the law
that Outlaws strikes in Government. The
convention voted down tougher proposals
aimed at the no-strike laws.
AFL-CIO's Postal Clerks, like the NPU,
voted dowli proposals to eliminate the no-
strike clatg;e from the union constitution-
The Clerks did adopt a resolution aimed at
creating an "agency shop" in the postal
service. Under it, all postal clerks would be
required to pay dues to the Clerks, whether
or not they were members of it. Some peo-
ple regard sthis as the first move toward the
closed shop in Government.
AFL-CIO's Letter Carriers rejected a reso-
lution to stage nationwide street demonstra-
tions in front of post offices to get their
grievances before the public.
Earlier. Carriers Vice President James H.
Rademacher urged members to work by the
rules; that is, to do only the amount of work
required by the rules. He said carriers fre-
quently produced 40 per cent more than the
rules require. If carriers worked by the rtlles,
the effect eou~d be a slowdown in mail de-
liveries. British postal employes used a simi-
lar device to force attention to their prob-
lems a couple of years ago.
The National Association of Postal Super-
visors has directed its officers to seek exclu-
sive union: recognition through either Con-
gress or the Federal courts. It believes full
1( ,I1 would bring benefits to Its mem-
bers. e, Post Office Department has re-
There is an air of discontent and restless- year. And in 1964 Johnson put his reputa-
nces among government employes these days. tion on the line to successfully resurrect the
It stems from a number of things, but the pay bill that had been killed by the House.
general dissatisfaction comes from what is The Johnson administration also initiated
felt to be the high-handedness of the John- the new progressive moving expenses law,
son administration in dealing with govern- the 55-30 and 60-20 full retirement annuity
bent workers. law, greater promotion rights for women
The unrest and resentment is manifested and minority groups, etc. The President
by the drive by some delegates at the various also has strongly supported the government's
postal and federal employe union conven- labor-management law. -
tions to scrap the no-strike pledges in their Consequently, the situation isn't one-sided
constitutions. by any means. But the administration of
Of course, this in itself would be meaning- late has taken a cavalier attitude toward its
less, since the law s ecificall prohibits employees and the employees resent it. Some
strikes a~[>~1rc4lteecbei~Rrllyeel~pet$t?00~+i
menta to make reports about personal activi- newspaper's conviction that the bill removes the employee `should be questioned by hie
ties and undertakings not related to jobs. ;many of the real and imaginary restraints in superiors about a matter which could lead
(6) Attempts to forbid patronizing any buss- Federal employment, thus affording the Fed- to disciplinary action.
nessea or establishments. (7) Interroga- seal Government the realiatio opportunity The bill is considered by some to be bold
Lions, examl~l~g~~~~1fiS~~1~~~,v20~~~~E~~4~ ~(~~~~7~~'~~'~~tFes because it would make &
No. 142-~
 1~~$Approved For Releases? QO/0~/01SSI01'~TALPRECORDROOSEI~E 01-5
federal official who violated the provisions
sub]cct to criminal prosecution. Violators
could. be fined X1,000 and sentenced to a
year in prison.
The co-sponsors of the bill include 12
Democrats and eight Republicans, The
Democrats are Sens. BIBLE of Nevada, Rvs-
6ELL of South Carolina, McCARTHY of Min-
nesota, Youxc of Ohio, BYRD of Virginia,
YARIIOROIIGH Of TEXRS, BARTLETT Of Alaska,
McINTYRE of New Hampshire, SPARKMAN of
Alabflma, CANNON Of NeVflda, INOUYE Of Ha-
walf and JORDAN of North Carolina.
The Republicans are FONG of Hawaii, BEN-
NETT Of lTtflh, FANNIN Of Arizana, MUNDT
of South Dakota, THURMOND of South Caro-
lina, SIMPSON of Wyoming, HausE:A of Ne-
braska and ALLOTT of Colorado.
The unions which have announced their
support are the American Federation of Gov-
ernment Employees (AFL-GIO), the National
Association of Government Employees, the
National Association of Government Engi-
neers and the National Association of Inter-
nal Revenue Employees.
Some postal employees organizations are
expected to support the bill.
A provision of the bill which has attracted
a great deal of attention is one which would
prohibit the use of questionnaires which ask
employees to list their race or national origin.
The questionnaires ask an employee to in-
dicate whether he is an American Indian,
Oriental, Negro, Spanish-American or "none
of these." Officials have described the ques-
tionnaires as a method for determining
whether there is racial discrimination in gov-
ernment employment practices.
ERVIN argues that under the Civil Service
System an individual's race or national origin
"should have nothing to do with his ability
or qualification" for his job.
"In fact," ERVIN has said, "it is nobody's
business. Nor is it healthy for our society
to divide it up into four minority groups
and 'all others.' "
Some civil rights proponents have been
uncertain whether they should oppose the
questionnaires. ERVIN has received letters
from many minority group members who say
they resent being asked about their race.
Senator FONG, the first co-sponsor of
ERVIN'9 bill, pointed out in a speech 111 the
Senate that the bill would not prevent agen-
cies from gathering racial statistics on their
employees. Supervisors, he said, could sim-
ply take their own head counts. The bill
would only prohibit asking an individual
about his race.
Similarly, the bill would prevent psycho-
logical investigations in which an employee
or prospective employee is asked questions
about his sex life or his religious views.
The bill would also prohibit:
Requirements that rank-and-file em-
ployees disclose then' financial assets and
liabilities.
lash an annual or biannual national
housing goal, the name of the senior
Senator from Pennsylvania [Mr. C1.AaxJ
be added as a cosponsor.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. Without objection, fi is so ordered.
ADDITIONAL COSPONSOR OF
AMI~IDMENT NO. 736
Mr. DAVITS. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the name of the
Senator from Indiana [Mr. Hee1'xE] be
added as a cosponsor of the amendment
(No. 736) which I submitted to Senate
bill 2874, the International Education
bill.
The ACTL'VG PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. Without objection, ft is so ordered.
NOTICE OF RECEIPT OF NOMINA-
TIONS BY COMMITTEE ON FOR-
EIGN RELATIONS
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, as
chairman of the Committee on Foreign
Relations, Z desire to announce that to-
day the Senate received the nominations
of Miss Carol C. Laise, of the District oY
Columbia, a Foreir n Service officer of
class 1, to be Ambassador Extraordinary
and Plenipotentiary of the United States
of America to the Kingdom of Nepal; Leo
G. Cyr, of Maine, a Foreil;n Service of-
ficer of class 1, to be Ambassador Ex-
traordinary and Plenipotentiary of the
United States of America to the Republic
of Rwanda; and, John M. McSweeney, of
Nebraska, a Foreign Service officer of
class 1, to be Envoy Extraordinary and
Minister Plenipotentiary of the United
States of America to Bulgaria.
In accordance with the Committee rule,
these pending norninatioias may not be
considered prior to the expiration or 6
days of their receipt in the Senate.
UNANIMOUS CONSENT TO FILE A
REPORT
Mr. MONRONEY. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that the Com-
mittee on Post Office and Civil Service
may have until midnight tomorrow to
file a report on H.R. 14904.
The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem-
pore. Is there objection? The Chair
hears none, and it is so ordered.
Requirements that employees take part in FAIR LABOR 6TANDARD5 AMENDMENTS OF 1966-
community activities unrelated to their jobs. AMENDMEN^rs
Coorcion by federal officials in an effort
to get employees to make contributions or
purchase savings bonds.
ERVIN says that an individual employee is
often powerless against invasions of his pri-
vacy because "he knows he may be dis-
charged or denied employment or a promo-
tion" ii he fails to cooperate. Supporters
of the bill say it could also affect people not
employed by the government since some
businesses tend to model their personnel
practices after those of the government.
AMENDbIENT NO. 774
Mr. SMATHERS. Mr. President, I
submit an amendment which I intend to
propose to H.R.13712, the proposed Fair
Labor Standards Amendments of 1966.
My amendment would prohibit em-
ployment discrimination against individ-
uals 45 or over on the basis of age.
I offered a similar amendment when
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 was before
ERVIN is chairman of the Senate Subcom- the Senate. Unfortunately, the parlia-
mittee on Constitutional Rights. It Ss plan- meritary Situatl0n in Which we found
ning Hearings on the privacy bill. ~ ourselves was not favorable to the adop-
tion of my amendment, and it was
~ofoo+a.~ rto.,o,.+I,nlcnc. r .,.., ......,....,..,.a
Au~~ust ~5, 1966
this proposal again in the hope that more
Senators will be able to go along with
me than felt at liberty to do within the
narrow -confines of the parliamentary
situation which obtained at that time.
Since the enactment of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, discrimination on the
basis of lace, religion, sex, and national
origin h&s been prohibited. As an or~gi-
nal proposition, we might well hesitate
to interfere with the freedom of em-
ployers to choose their own employees.
But since Congress passed that act, the
Nation has "crossed the Rubicon" on this
issue, and it has been made the official
policy of our Nation that substantial
pressures are to be brought to bear upon
employers to prevent their discriminat-
ing on various grounds against Ameri-
cans who fall into certain categories. It
is unfair to those over 45 who suffer em-
ployment discrimination because of their
ages to refuse to accord them the same
protection. which. is now accorded mil-
lions of .others who face the possibility
of discrimination.
While we were unsuccessful in amend-
ing the Civil Rights Act as I proposed, it
was possible to include fn that act a di-
rection to the Secretary oP Labor to
study age discrimination in employment
and to report to Congress on it. The
Secretary carried out that mandate and
submitted to Congress a comprehensive
report on this subject on June 30, 1965.
In connection with his preparation of
that report, the Secretary of Labor made
a special study of age limitations in
hiring. Among the major conclusions
drawn by the Secretary from that study
were the. following, quoted verbatim from
the report:
1. The setting of specific age limits beyond
which an employer will not consider a worker
for a vacant job, regardless of ability, has
become a characteristic practice in those
States which do not prohibit such action,
to the extent and with the result that in
these States:
Over half of all employers are presently
applying such limitations, using age limits
typically set at from 45 to 55;
Approximately half of all job openings
which develop in the private economy each
year are Closed to applicants over 55 years of
age, and a quarter of them are closed to ap-
plicants over 45.
2. The establLshing by employers of stated
age limitations (or, on the other hand, of
stated policies against any age limitations)
has a direct and marked effect upon the
actual employment of older workers, with the
result that-
The proportion of older workers hired by
firms with stated upper age limits Ss half
the porportion of older workers hired . by
firms with stated policies of ruling out age
limits.
The proportion of older workers hired by
firms with. no stated policy regarding age
limitatiotls is significantly smaller than the
proportion of older workers hired by firms
with stated policies of ruling out- age limits,
especially with respect to workers 55 and
over.
3. An uiuneasured but sigziiflcant propor-
tion of the age limitations presently in effect
are arbitrary in the eense that they have
been established without any determination
of their actual relevance to job requirements,
and are defended on grounds apparently dif-
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, I wanted to vote for it, and would have 4, Th ompetence and work performance
ask Uri~~~/~Q~l~t }~ R~e2~~2flt~0/~9~'F~ ~~A~~~B~i@8~3i~Ri~0~~01~,~rkers are, by any general measures,
net print of my bill, S. 3714, to estab- had been more favorable. I am offering at least equal to those of younger workers.