GOVERNMENT

Storage

Y4

Un 36 i

fNITED STATES INFORMA TION

NOMINATIONS

AGE IN L I .

H E A R IN G S

BEFORE T H E

COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

EIGH TY -N IN TH CONGRESS

F IR S T SE SS IO N

ON T H E

NO MIN ATI ON O F U.S. IN FO RM ATIO N AG EN CY O FFIC ER S 

TO B E FO REIG N SE RV IC E O FFIC ER S

A P R IL 27 AN D MAY 18, 19G5

P ri n te d fo r th e use of th e Com m itt ee on For ei gn R el at io ns

47-580

U.S . GO VE RN MEN T PR IN TIN G O FFIC E 

WAS HI NG TO N : 196 5
COMM ITTE E ON FO RE IG N RE LA TI ON S

J. W. F U L B R IG H T , Ark an sa s, C h air m a n

\ 'YS. aU

1

JO HN SPA R K M A N , Al ab am a 

M IK E M A N SF IE LD , M on ta na

W A YN E M ORSE , Ore gon

R U S S E L L B. LO NG , Lou is iana 

A L B E R T GO RE , Te nn essee 

F R A N K J. LA U SCH E , Oliio 

F R A N K CH U RCH , Id ah o 

STU A R T SY M IN GTON , M iss ou ri 

TH OM AS J. DO DD , Co nn ec ticu t 

JO SEPH S. C L A R K , J r., P en nsy lv an ia 

CL A IB O R N E P E L L , Rh ode Is la nd 

EU G EN E M CCA RTH Y, M inne so ta

B O U R K E B. H IC K E N LO O P E R , Iowa 

G EO RG E D. A IK E N , Ver m on t 

F R A N K CA R LS O N , K an sa s 

JO HN J. W IL LIA M S, D el aw ar e 

K A R L E. M UN DT , So ut h Dak ot a 

C L IF F O R D P. CA SE, Ne w Je rs ey

Carl Ma r c y, C h ie f o f S ta ff

Da r r ell St . Cla ir e, C le rk

II
C O N T E N T S

Statement of— P a£ e

Bra ndt, Edward R., of M aryland, nominee___________________ ;----- 102 Carter, Alan, of Marylan d, nominee------------------------------------------- 72 Crockett, William J., Deputy Under Secretary of Sla te for Adminis-

’ tra tion ____________________________________________________ 2 Dunlap, Henry A., of Maryland, nominee------------------------------------- 80 Harris, Richard P., of Maryland, nominee----------------------------------- 102 Palm er, Joseph, II, Dire ctor General of the Foreign Service________ 13 Rowan, Carl T., Directo r, U.S. Information Agency______________ 10 Weld, William E., Jr., of the Distric t of Columbia, nominee------------- 65

Insertions for the record: Letter from the President to Hon . Hu bert II. Humphrey, Preside nt of the Senate, April 13, 1965___________________________________ 1 Criteria for classification______________________________________ 12 Excerpt from a bill to ame nd the Peace Corps Ac t________________ 19 Section-by-section analysis of the proposed act to amend further the Peace Corps Act and for oth er purposes_______________________ 20 * Bureau of the Budget comments regarding a pp oin tm ents---------------- 28 Comparison of provisions— Civil Service retireme nt system and Foreign Service retirement sys tem ____________________________ 32 Sta tem ent by the President, October 3, 1964_____________________ 38 Authority of sections 516 an d 517 of the Foreign Service Act of 1946, as amen ded, for appointme nt of USIA officers as Foreign Service officers a nd possible applicab ility of section 571(a)______________ 39 Agreement between USI A and Sta te De partm ent (let ter from Dean Rusk to Carl T. Rowan, September 2, 1964)___________________ 45 Examination for lat eral entry app oin tment to USIA Foreign Service Career Reserve _____________________________________________ 54 History of the latera l entry pro gra m____________________________ 59 Letter from Loy W. Henderson to Senator J. W. Fu lbrig ht________ 63 Minority views on S. 745, 88th Congress (excerpts from S. Rept. 813, Dec. 19, 1963)_____________________________________________ 69 Projection of USIA telev ision use of communication s s ate llites_____ 88 Faculty , 1961-1962 of Nation al War College_____________________ 89 Voice of America coverage of student demo nst ration ______________ 98 Letter from W. T. M. Beale, Chairma n, Board of Directors, American Foreign Service Association to Senator J. W. Fu lbrig ht__________ 111 Memorandum to Sen ator J. W. F ulb right from Dean Rusk, Secretary of Sta te and Carl T. Rowan, Director, United States Information Agency____________________________________________________ 111 Letter from Charles E. Saltzman, Henry M. Wriston, and John Hay Whitney to Sen ator J. W. Fu lbr igh t__________________________ 112

h i

UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY 

NOMINATIONS

TU ESD A Y , A P R IL 27 , 19 65

U nit ed S ta te s S en a te,

Com m it te e on F or eign R el ati ons,

IFashington, D.G.

The committee met, pursuant to recess, at 10:05 a.m., in room 4221, New Senate Office Building, Senator J. W. Fulbrigh t (chairman) 

presiding. Present: Senators Fulb righ t, Lausche, Pell, McCarthy, Hickenlooper, and Mundt.

The C h a ir m a n . The committee will come to order.

This meeting has been called today in ord er to give the members of the Committee on Foreign Relations an opportunity to discuss with officers of the executive branch the nomination of some 760 officers of 

the U.S. Inform ation Agency to be Foreign Service officers. This is one of the largest, if not the largest, group of officers ever to 

be brought into the Foreign Service at one time. This action has been taken by the executive branch of the Govern­ ment on the basis of existing legislation. At the time the Congress authorized lateral entries into the Foreign Service, however, I doubt tha t it was contemplated tha t a t any one time there would be such an 

influx of new officers at all levels. The procedure is so unusual that the President sent a special letter to the Senate no ting that the submission of this list of officers is a “sig­ nificant milestone.'’ I will insert the Pres iden t’s le tter in the record 

at this point.

(The letter referred to follows:)

T h e Wh it e H ouse, 

Washin gto n, D.C., Apr il IS, 1965.

Ho n. H ubert II . H um ph rey,

President of the Senate,

Washin gto n, D.C.

Dear Mr. Vice P resid en t: I hav e fo rw ar ded to tlie Sen at e (1 ) a li st of 055 

Fore ig n Se rvice officers who ha ve be en re co mmen de d fo r pr om ot io n by th e Se c­ re ta ry of Sta te , ba se d up on th e find ings of th e 18 th se le ctio n bo ar ds , an d (2 ) a li st of 700 care er re se rv e off icers of th e U.S. In fo rm ati on Ag ency who ha ve be en reco mmen de d by th e S ecre ta ry of S ta te fo r appoin tm en t to th e For ei gn Se rv ic e 

of th e U ni ted S ta te s un d er se ct ion 517 of th e For ei gn Se rv ic e A ct of 1940. Tho se of us wh o bear th e b ur de n of for ei gn a ff air s dec is io nm ak in g in a n une as y 

w or ld are g ra te fu l fo r th e kn ow ledg e and ad vice of th e men and wo me n of th e For ei gn Se rvice of th e U nited Sta te s. T he su bm ission of th es e pr om ot io n an d ap poin tm en t li st s en ab le s me to re it era te a ne w my confiden ce in th e pro fe ss io nal 

abil it y an d ded ic at io n of th os e wh o se rv e in th is note d G ov er nm en t in st it uti on. I am ea ge r to do so. F o r not hin g is m or e im port an t, in my ju dgm en t, th an th a t 

all officer s of th e U.S . G ov er nm en t sh ou ld be pr ou d o f th e ir re sp onsi bilitie s and 

cert ain o f th e ba ck in g of th e ir super io r offic ers.
2 UN ITED STATES INFORM AT ION AGENCY NO MINA TIO NS

I t is well k no wn to a ll t h a t I yield to n o one in t he co nc ern fo r m il it ary s tr ength 

and fu lly effecti ve de fe ns es . T hi s has been const an t and unch an gi ng fo r mor e 

th an 30 ye ar s. I co ns id er th e For ei gn Se rvice to b e a ne ce ss ar y p a rt of t he effective de fe ns e of ou r co un tr y, an d my in te re st in su st ai nin g, im prov ing, an d 

st re ngth enin g o ur d ip lo m at ic c or ps is u ns wervi ng .

Fort unate ly , we ha ve be en ab le to re ly up on th e For ei gn Se rv ice fo r wise an d 

in fo rm ed co un sel ov er th e yea rs . I t has my as su ra nce th a t it ca n re ly on my 

desi re s fo r a di pl om at ic co rp s seco nd to none. I am co nf id en t th a t th e Con gress 

sh are s th is de sire.

The di pl om at ic co rps h as se rv ed us well in th e pe ac ef ul pu rs u it s we p re fe r 

an d in th e dan ge ro us m ission s th a t are fo rc ed up cn us. In Sou th Vietnam , th e 

dangers to which ou r m il it ary me n a re ex po sed are we ll kn ow n. Rec en t ev en ts 

th ere ha ve ag ai n em ph as ized th a t th e Fore ig n Se rvice like w ise fa ce s gra ve haza rd s in th e fr ontlin es in o ur quest fo r pe ac e and freed om .

We ca n be pr ou d as A m er ic an s of th e m an ner in which th e For ei gn Se rvice 

has di sc ha rg ed its re sp onsi bilitie s unde r th e le ad ers hip of a g re at S ecre ta ry of 

Sta te .

Th e pr om otio n li st which has been fo rw ard ed th is day to th e Sen at e is re pre ­

se nta ti ve of th e ch an ge s th a t are ta kin g plac e in th e For ei gn Se rvice . All 

se ct io ns of ou r co untr y and al l se gm en ts of our so ciety a re re pre se nte d in th is 

list . The li st is ba se d solely on th e m eri t of th e in div id ual s inv olv ed. The li st 

re flec ts an up w ar d m ov em en t of mor e youth fu l officers in to se ni or po sitio ns . I 

ur ge e arl y a nd f av ora ble ac ti on o n t hes e no m in atio ns .

The s econ d li st su bm itte d to day re pre se nts anoth er signi fica nt m ile ston e in th e 

de ve lopm en t of ou r Fore ig n Se rvice. By br in gi ng in to th e For ei gn Se rv ice a 

gr ou p of care er officers of pr ov en abil it y an d ex pe rien ce in th e co nd uc t of ou r 

fo re ig n in fo rm at io n pr og ra m s, we ta ke a st ep fo rw ard to w ard th a t unity of outlook and pu rp os e which is so im port ant to th e efficie nt co nd uc t of our re la ti onsh ip s w ith t he oth er n ati ons of th e w orld.

The off icers on th is li st w er e al l ca re fu ll y selecte d under th e sa m e pr oc ed ur es 

th a t ap pl y fo r For ei gn Ser vi ce officers. T heir dut ie s, ob jectives , an d ta sk are 

clo sely in te rw ov en w ith th ose of o ur c are er For ei gn Se rvice officers. By br in gi ng 

th is g ro up in to th e F or ei gn Se rvice, w e po in t th e w ay tow ard a un ified a nd fle xib le 

care er For ei gn Se rvice of th e U ni te d S ta te s which will m ee t th e re qui re m en ts 

o th er ag en cies of th e G ov er nm en t w ith re sp on sibi lities in th e field of fo re ig n 

aff ai rs . I ask th a t th es e nom in at io ns be fa vo ra bly co ns id er ed a t th is tim e. 

Sinc erely ,

Lyndon B. J oh ns on .

The Chairman. Although members of the committee have been consulted from time to time as plans for bringing US IA officers into the 

Foreign Service were in progress, it seemed to members of the committee tha t before acting on this list of nominations we should hold 

this public hearing with departmental officers principally involved in 

making plans and bringing them to fruition.

We have with us today, therefore, the Director of the U.S. Inform ation Agency, Mr. Carl Row an; the Under Secretary of State for Administration, Mr. Crockett; and the Director General of the Foreign 

Service, Ambassador Palmer.

I understand that each witness has a separate statement to make.

Who wishes to lead off ?

Mr. Rowan. I believe Mr. Crockett will lead off, Air. Chairman.

The Chairman. Mr. Crockett, will you proceed, please?

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM J. CROCKETT, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY OF STATE FOR ADMINISTRATION

Air. Crockett. Air. Chairman, and members of the committee, my 

colleagues and I are most appreciative of this opportunity to discuss 

with you the lateral entry of a number of career officers of the U.S. 

Information Agency into the Foreign Service of the United States.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 3

The framers of the Foreign Service Act of 1946, as amended, were 

wise indeed. They, like the framers of our Constitution, gave us a 

Jiving charter tha t is broad enough and farsighted enough and flexible 

enough to stand the tests of time and to encompass the needs for change 

in the complex field of foreign affairs. It only remains for us, the 

administrators of this important and complex area of foreign affairs, 

to design the programs and enunciate the concepts, and develop the 

procedures th at will enable the act to meet our needs within the framework of its charter.

The first objective of the Foreign Service Act of 1946, as amended, 

as stated in part B, section II I, is :

The Congress hereby declares th at the objectives of the act are to develop 

and streng then the Foreign Service of the United States so a s (1) to enable the 

Fore ign Service effectively to serve abroad the intere sts of the United State s.

The act speaks of one Service serving the broad interests of the 

United States abroad. It speaks of a Foreign Service of the United 

States, not a Foreign Service of the State Department. The act pulled 

together into this first overall Foreign Service all agencies with oversea operations at tha t time, thus creating a Foreign Service of the 

United States. At t ha t time the act encompassed State, Commerce, 

Labor, Interior, and Agriculture.

The act envisaged a strong career service based upon two principles 

of entry. The first principle is entry at the bottom by written and 

oral examination.

The second principle is entry7

 a t any intermediate and senior grade 

by personnel of other U.S. Government agencies. This is called lateral 

entry. Late ral entry, like entry at the bottom, must take place as the 

result of physical and mental examinations to insure that the high 

standards established for this Service are maintained.

The act itself sets no limits on the size of the Service or the numbers 

that may be taken into the Service, or the agencies of our Government 

who may use the officers of the Service.

For example, at the present time there are 3,678 Foreign Service 

officers in the Service. Of this number—

3,495 are on duty with the State D epa rtm ent;

52 are on duty w ith the military;

22 are on duty with the U.S. Information Agency;

26 are in jobs of prim ary interest to the Commerce Department; 

3 are in jobs of primary interest to the Labor Department;

2 are in jobs of primary interest to the Department of the Interior; 

16 are in jobs of prim ary interest to the Arms Control and Disarmament Agency (A GDA);

38 are on duty with A ID ;

9 are on duty with the Peace Corps;

15 are on duty with other agencies (HE W, NASA, Treasury, and 

White House).

The Chairman. When you say “they are on duty with them,” do 

you mean they are representing them abroad?

Mr. Crockett. Or assigned to those agencies in the United States.

The Chairman. Would they be working in the Department of 

Commerce ?
4 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

INTEGRATION OF USIA OFFICERS INTO TIIE FOREIGN SERVICE

Mr. Crockett. Yes, sir, working in the Department of Commerce. 

Thus, it can be seen tha t from the standpoint of the historical usage of 

our Foreign Service officers, as well as from a budgetary point of 

view, the integration of 760 US IA officers into the Foreign Service 

of the United States is entirely consistent.

These officers of USIA will become members of the Foreign Service 

of the United States. They will be interchangeable with all other 

officers. They will be promoted, assigned, and trained along with all 

other Foreign Service officers. They will be subject to the same security standards and the same standards of discipline and conduct as 

all other officers of the Service. They will be, in fact, truly integrated 

into the Foreign Service of the United States.

PROLIFERATION OF PERSO NNEL SYSTEMS ABROAD

But, unfortunately, over the years we have lost sight of the possibilities of achieving a single unihed Foreign Service within the framework of the Foreign Service Act of 1946. We have permitted new 

and varied and often inconsistent personnel systems to arise as new 

agencies have been established or commissioned to carry out our new 

foreign policy responsibilities abroad. And as a result, today there is 

a hodgepodge of personnel systems overseas with people who work 

shoulder to shoulder having little in common but their common 

dedication to a common cause.

Some of this problem has arisen because there was no executive 

branch concept of a common personnel system broad enough and 

flexible enough to fulfill the needs of all agencies whether or not their 

programs were permanent or temporary.

Some of the problem has arisen because of the concern of the legislative branch tha t it was somehow inconsistent to give people a status 

different from the status of an agency or a program. If, for example, 

a program were to be temporary, then it has too often followed th at 

the personnel needed for tha t program were considered also to be 

temporary.

Virtually every informed observer of our oversea operations has 

decried the proliferation of the personnel situation abroad. Various 

solutions have been suggested. Some would go so f ar as to abandon 

what we now have and star t all over from scratch. But i t is our firm 

belief that the act of 1946 properly used administratively and prop ­

erly supplemented by a small amount of legislation can give us a 

personnel system that will fulfill the needs of all programs abroad.

I believe th at the concept we are discussing here today—uniform, 

unified body of personnel—will meet the concerns of all groups.

It will give us a permanent corps of capable, dedicated, and able 

people who are available for use by many agencies in the foreign 

affairs field, including USIA, without regard to the temporary or 

permanent nature of the agency or program that has need for their 

services.

These people will be pa rt of a great career system—the Foreign 

Service of the United States—ready to serve the ir country wherever 

they are sent and ready to serve in whatever agency the need may arise.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 5

This concept of unification within the Foreign Service does not in­ volve itself with the organization structures of agencies, with their statutes or with their bureaucracy. There is no attempt on the part of the State Department to take them over or to endow them with permanence, or to build a bureaucratic kingdom. I he only thing ve are trying to do is to create a unified, uniform, and broadened body of public servants who are available for duty in all agencies a personnel 

system for the foreign affairs field.

STRE NGT HEN ING TH E FOREIGN SERVICE

I believe this concept will strengthen the Foreign Service of the United States and will work in our national interest for the following 

reasons: (1) It will eliminate the insidious differences th at have existed be­ tween people who have been doing essentially the same work under the 

same conditions abroad. (2) It will broaden the base—numbers—of the Foreign Service thus giving more choice to the President and the Secretary in filling im portant positions from the career service. (3) It will give important new experiences to our officers in the field 

of information, press, and public affairs. (4) It will fur the r facilitate exchanges between the U.S. Inform ation Agency and the State Department. (5) It will increase the proficiency and the availability of the pool 

of people who are needed to man our programs abroad. (6) It is the first of several important steps th at must be taken both administratively as well as legislatively to create for our Government and for our country a greater, an enlarged, and a truly Foreign Service 

of the United States. I urge the favorable consideration of this committee for this lateral 

ent ry of USIA officers. That concludes my statement, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. On page 3,1 notice you say—

la te ra l en tr y, like en tr y a t th e bo tto m, m ust ta ke pla ce as th e re su lt of ph ys ic al and m en ta l exam in ati ons to in su re th a t th e hi gh st an d ard s fo r th is Se rv ice are 

m ai nt ai ne d.

Mr. Crockett. Yes.

The Chairman. Have these 760 men been given any physical and 

mental examination?

Mr. Rowan. Yes, Mr. Chairman, and I intend to deal with that in 

my statement.

The Chairman. Do you have a statement on that ?

Mr. Rowan. Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. Do you want to ask any questions now before we 

go on with the next witness ?

Senator H ickenlooper. Yes, I have quite a number of questions on 

this matter, Mr. Chairman. The troika situation which we face here this morning with three spokesmen makes it rath er difficult to know just to whom to address these questions. But I will start with Mr. Crockett.
6 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

DID FO REI GN SE RV ICE AC T A N T IC IP A T E W HOLE SA LE LA TE RA L E N TR IE S?

Is it your view, Mr. Crockett, that the original act ever contemplated 

the wholesale blanketing lateral entry of other agencies into the S tate 

Department or did it contemplate in the context of the law the 

occasional entry of people from other departments into the Foreign 

Service when they had met the qualifications of mental and physical 

standards of the Foreign Service ?

Mr. Crockett. Mr. Chairman-----

Senator Hickenlooper. I say “wholesale,” because 760 at one fell 

swoop, or whatever the number is, is quite an operation.

Mr. Crockett. That is right, Senator.

I think that in a literal, very literal sense, it was not envisaged that 

this number would come in perhaps a t any one time.

On the other hand, I think the framers and the people responsible 

for the act in 1946 anticipated that there wouldn’t be a proliferation 

in the foreign affairs field in the first place, that we would insure th at 

personnel of agencies with business abroad would be in the act from its 

inception ra the r than waiting as we have, in this case, for a number of 

years in bringing them in, because the act itself speaks of a foreign 

service of the United States, to accommodate the broad interests of 

the United States abroad, and I think th at within that framework this 

is a consistent use of the act.

Senator H ickenlooper. I have some recollection of this legislation 

at the time it was passed and my recollection is not quite along tha t 

line as far as the understanding is concerned.

We had had the difficulties of lateral entry into the State Department of a lot of other people from various departments or war agencies. 

They didn’t have jobs for them so they gave them lateral entry into 

the State Department lots of times. 1 think much of our trouble in 

the State Department came from people who were taken into the 

State Department and other departments, as a matter of fact, to find 

jobs for them. Tha t is not quite the case here. These people have 

jobs. But I seriously question that this was really contemplated by 

this act a t th at time, although the language may be loose enough that 

administratively it can be done. It certainly was not my understanding tha t it was ever contemplated tha t these wholesale lateral entries 

would be indulged in.

Mr. Crockett. It seems to me tha t the critical point here is the 

method tha t was used in determining the qualifications of the individuals concerned, Senator. I think tha t in this case, perhaps very 

uniquely in this case, although there is a large number at this time, the 

crite ria expressed in the act have been fulfilled in the examination of 

these people for lateral entry.

Senator Hickenlooper. Who gave the examinations ?

Mr. Crockett. Mr. Rowan has a statement on that about the whole 

process, if you would like to hear that.

Senator Hickenlooper. All righ t, we will wait until that.
UN ITED STAT ES INFORM AT ION AGENC Y NO MINA TIO NS 7

STATUS of AID AND PEACE CORPS EMPLOYEES

I)o you contemplate taking in all tlie employees of the AID pro­ gram into the Foreign Service of the United States?

Mr. Crockett. Mr. Chairman, Senator Hickenlooper, this one we have not faced up to at this time because AID itself has not fully decided within its own administrative framework what their people will be. They have very difficult internal problems in terms of per­ manent versus temp orary people, technicians versus other kinds of specialists and administrators, so that lateral entry of this kind, I think, can’t take place until an agency itself has enunciated and fulfilled some career principles of its own, and this is the reason why it is so easy, I think, for the U SIA career officers to be brought in at this time, because for a number of years they have had a career system parallel to the Foreign Service system itself and working in, and along the same lines in prepa ration for this day when there might be some kind of a career for US IA similar to the Foreign Service or within the Foreign Service, and the AID agency simply hasn’t come to tha t 

point.

Mr. Rowan. If I might make one-----

Senator Hickenlooper. May I just ask another question of Mr. Crockett, please? Do you contemplate blanketing in the Peace Corps into the Foreign Service? It is doing work allegedly entirely in the 

foreign field.

Mr. Crockett. No, sir, not at all. The Peace Corps concept, the personnel for the Peace Corps are entirely different. They want a temporary group of people who have no career status so th at there is no concept at all that they would be blanketed in. In a very real way these USIA people are not blanketed in. They come in under the prescribed provisions of lateral entry so it isn’t blanketing in. If individuals from Peace Corps wanted to join the Foreign Service and were qualified and could pass the examinations, there is no reason why they shouldn't come in through the formal lateral entry process i f we need them in jobs within the State Department. But there is no concept—certainly Mr. Shriver has an entirely different concept for the Peace Corps personnel system 

than anything similar to the Foreign Service.

A PERSONNEL SYSTEM FOR TH E FOREIGN AFFAIRS FIELD

Senator Hickenlooper. On page 7 of your statement in the middle 

para graph, you say :

T his co nc ep t of un ific at io n w ithin th e For ei gn Se rv ic e do es no t invo lve it se lf w it h th e org an iz at io n str u c tu re s of ag en cies , w ith th e ir st atu s, or w ith th eir bu re au cr ac y. T here is no att em p t on th e p a rt of th e S ta te D epart m ent to ta k e th em ov er to en do w th em w ith pe rm an en ce or to bu ild a bure aucra ti c king do m. The on ly th in g we a re tr y in g to do is to cre ate a un iform and br oa de ne d body of pu blic se rv ants who a re avai la ble fo r duty in all ag en cies , a pe rs on ne l sy stem 

fo r th e fo re ig n aff air s field .
8 UNIT ED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

It seems to me t hat is e xactly wh at y ou are doing, buildin g a bu reau ­

crati c system an d taki ng ove r this pe rm an en t agency.

Air. Crockett. No, Senator . W ha t I was try in g to express he re was 

th at we are ta lk in g about a per son nel syste m fo r the officers and employees of t he forei gn aff ars serv ice of the Un ite d State s, ju st as the 

civil service syste m is a perso nnel system f or the officers and employees 

of the dom estic agencies, an d th at fo r the peo ple wo rking in the fo reign aff airs field, I th in k we ha ve an oblig ati on in th e na tio na l int ere st 

to cre ate fo r the m a forei gn aff air s person nel system th at has no re la ­

tio nship to the agencies they wo rk fo r any more than the civil service 

system has an y r ela tio nship to the agen cies civil service personnel work 

for.

Se na tor H ickenlooper. We will get int o this a lit tle bi t later, bu t 

you mean to increa se th ei r incom e, s tep them u p a g rade o r so, increase 

th ei r retir em en t benefits and give them added benefits in the Fo reign 

Service w hic h they d on ’t now enjoy in t he In fo rm at io n Agenc y, is th at 

not co rre ct ?

Mr. Crockett. Not really, beca use—bu t it does ena ble the people 

who will work—will be wo rking side by side th ro ug ho ut the world, 

to be governe d by the same rules, the same reg ula tio ns, an d the same 

princ iples, exact ly as civil serv ice peo ple who wou ld be wo rking side 

by side on the dom estic age ncy fron t hav e the same rules, the same 

reg ula tio ns, th e same prere qu isiies . I t seems to me with ou t reference 

to w hat agency peop le ar e w orking fo r th at t hey o ught to have th e same 

basic rig ht s and privileges, and th is is wha t we are re ally ta lk in g about. 

It isn’t agency rela ted so much as it is people related.

Se na tor Hickenlooper. T hat could be achieve d by leg islation for 

the agency , couldn 't it ?

Air. Crockett. It cou ld be, bu t I do n't really see th e point of t ying 

a person nel system to an agency. It seems to me we ought to talk about 

a personnel syste m f or a who le field like the field o f fo rei gn affairs. We 

don’t tie civil service to an age ncy in the United State s, an agen cy is 

developed fo r domestic ac tiv ities and it uses the civil service system.

Se na tor H ickenlooper. Th e same argu men t would ap ply to the 

A ID person nel , w ouldn ’t it ?

Air. Crockett. Eve nt ua lly if a nd whe n they get th ei r own internal 

philo sophy developed and deter mi ne wh at they are and wh at th ei r 

people sho uld be, bu t now they are mo vin g towa rd co ntract emplo yment outside of a dire ct- hire system , to a lar ge exten t, an d so unt il the y 

know w her e th ey themselves are g oin g to go th ere isn ’t an ythi ng we can 

do at this tim e. We have to move slow ly and cautiously on this. I 

don’t, think we should move p rec ipi tou sly .

Th e Chairm an. For the r eco rd, if the Se na tor will yie ld, y ester day 

we had Air. S hr iver speaking in b eh alf of th e new a utho riz ation fo r the 

Pea ce Corps. On page 5 of his s tat em en t he says, an d I quote, “As a 

par t o f our legislative request t hi s y ear we are ask ing for t he a utho rity 

to tr an sf er all Peace Co rps peo ple now un de r the civ il serv ice syste m 

into the F or eign Servic e system .”

W ha t does he mea n by th at ?

Air. Crockett. He mea ns th e F or eign Service system.

Th e Chairm an. The same as th is ?

Air. Crockett. No, si r; pe cu lia rly designed for th e Peace Corps, 

because th e basic ph ilo sophy of the Peace Co rps is no t career. Th e
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 9

basic philosophy of the Foreign Service is career, and he wants a special Foreign Service personnel system for the Peace Corps.

The Chairman. In what way would it be special—I mean specially 

good or specially bad or specially what ?

Mr. Crockett. Especially designed for their noncareer concept of 

service, because they have-----

The Chairman. This is not for the volunteers; this is for his staff. 

They don’t think of themselves as noncareer, do they ?

Mr. Crockett. He thinks of them as being noncareer. The concept tha t I have heard expressed is th at there is a limitation of 4 or 5 years for anyone who works in the Peace Corps; tha t it is a noncareer ty pe of activity. But I am not prepared to speak to the Peace Corps 

legislation.

The Chairman. He says “into the Foreign Service system. ’ It is a most peculiar way of pu tting it if he is thinking of some unique, new organization. He says the Foreign Service system. I don't know what in the world he would mean except the one we normally call the 

Foreign Service.

Mr. Crockett. I can't explain it.

The Chairman. I can't, either.

1 thank the Senator.

Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Rowan, you had something you wanted 

to interject here?

N U M B E R OF U SIA PE R SO N N EL A FF EC TE D

Mr. Rowan. I wanted to make one clarifyin g statement, Senator, with regard to US IA, and tha t is that this is not a case of whole agency being blanketed in. Of almost 5,000 American employees, this is simply a process thro ugh which 760 who have been deemed to be qua li­ fied beyond any doubt, are being lateraled into the Foreign Service.

Senator Hickenlooper. How about the next 760 ?

Mr. Rowan. The next, well, we have no proposal, no plan to lateral 

in the next 760.

Senator Hickenlooper. Isn 't this the camel putting its head into 

the tent ?

Mr. Rowan. No, it is not, Senator. We simply looked at those officers who, by the process of examina­ tion—oral, written, physical, security examinations—by virtue of their long experience overseas—for example, the class I officers in this group, have an average experience of more than 18 years of Gov­ ernment service—that these officers were qualified to meet every condition set f orth in the Foreign Service Act of 1946, and those are the officers we seek to lateral in, not just U SIA officers in general.

The Chairman. Do you mean in that connection tha t these people have gone through the same examinations or similar ones, that the regular, now Foreign Service officers go t hrough ?

Mr. Rowan. Some of the higher-ranking officers went through simi­ lar exams, very close exams, the Board of Examiner process. I he younger officers took precisely the same examination as young officers take to enter the Foreign Service as State Department employees.

Mr. Crockett. On tha t score, as you know, the M riston program was accomplished by special legislation, because those people were not
10 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

subjected to the same examination process. But the US IA officers 

have all taken written examinations. The older officers, who did not 

come in at the FSO 8 level, the majority of them have taken written 

examinations, I understand.

Mr. Rowan. Tha t is right. This is covered fairly precisely in my 

statement, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. Would you want to give your statement ?

Go ahead and give your statement.

STATEMENT OF CARL T. ROWAN, DIRECTOR, U.S. INFORMATION 

AGENCY

Air. Rowan. Air. Chairman, members of the committee, I am pleased 

to have this opportunity to discuss the appointment of 760 of our 

career officers as Foreign Service officers in the Foreign Service of the 

United States and to urge the advice and consent of the Senate to this 

action. These appointments represent the result of careful study and 

close cooperation with the State Department. They cap 11 years of 

preparation and progress toward the full integration of USIA career 

Foreign Service officers into the Foreign Service Officer Corps of the 

United States.

With the advice and consent of this committee and the Senate of the 

United States, a major step fo rward will have been taken, in the words 

of President Johnson—

to improve the efficiency of the Fore ign Service of the United States—a service 

that is v itally necessary in an era when the burdens of world leade rship are heavy 

upon us.

SUPPOR T FOR INTE GR AT ION PROPOSAL

As I will outline in more detail later, it is my judgment tha t the 

names before you represent a corps of professionals tested by examination, and in action, and now fully qualified to add to the excellence of 

the Foreign Service of the United States. I can testify to this fact 

from close personal observation both in the field as an ambassador and 

here in W ashington as an official of the State Department and USIA. 

In this judgment, both as to the need for full Foreign Service career 

status for our officers and the quality of those before you, I am joined 

by the President, the Secretary of State, the Advisory Commission of 

the US IA and all the other top foreign affairs experts who have 

studied, planned, and participated in this step.

PRE PARA TIO N FOR LATERAL EN TR Y

While consideration and recommendations toward this goal date 

back to the establishment of U SIA as an independent agency in 1953, 

solid step-by-step preparation began in 1958 when Ambassadors George 

V. Allen and Loy Henderson moved toward the establishment of a 

USIA Foreign Service C areer Reserve program. The first appointments to this program were made in Ju ly of 1960.

In establishing and operating the Foreign Service Career Reserve 

officer system, requirements of the Foreign Service Act and State 

Department policies, procedures, administrative requirements, and 

regulations involving Foreign Service officer personnel were closely 

followed. The State Department has been a full partner from the 

beginning in establishing and maintaining the Career Reserve.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 11

A USIA Joint Board and a Joint Board of Examiners with equal 

representation from State and the Agency were established administratively with the same responsibilities and functions as those exercised 

by the Board of the Foreign Service and the Board of Examiners for 

the Foreign Service under the Foreign Service Act.

E X AM IN A T IO N S

The standards, criteria, eligibility requirements, and lateral entry 

examination for appointment to the Career Reserve have been as 

stringent as those required under the Foreign Service Act by the 

Department of State for lateral entry appointment to the Foreign 

Service officer corps. The Agency has considered for examination and 

appointment as lateral entrants to the Career Reserve only officers who 

have served with the Agency 3 years—1 years for those under age 31— 

and, in addition, has required that all candidates serve 2 years overseas 

with the Agency or related programs before appointment.

The examination process included comprehensive written and oral 

examinations and thorough reviews of security and medical records 

to determine their fitness and aptitude for the work of the Service, their 

loyalty to the Government of the U nited States, and their attachment 

to the principles of the Constitution as required by the provisions of 

the Foreign Service Act.

In short, afte r passing the examinations for appointment to the 

Career Reserve, these officers were fully qualified for Foreign Service 

officer appointment under the Foreign Service Act.

All examination panels which evaluated the written examination, 

the oral examination and made the total evaluation had equal representation from the State Department and the Agency. The application of each lateral entry candidate for the Career Reserve, and the 

results of each examination, were reviewed and certified by the full 

Joi nt Board of Examiners and each lateral entry candidate for Career 

Reserve appointment was processed throug h the Join t Board to give 

it an opportunity to monitor the selections and the examination 

process.

During 1960, 1961, 1962, and 1963, candidates in the Jun ior Officer 

program of US IA’s Foreign Service Career Reserve took written 

examinations identical with those of State Department candidates in 

the general ability, English expression, and general background sections. In addition, the U SIA candidates took a public affairs section.

Beginning with 1964, these junior officer candidates for both agencies have taken exactly the same written examination, except for those 

candidates who applied for specialized options for employment in the 

State Department. Successful candidates for USIA have had an 

oral examination and a final review by a total examination panel before 

receiving the approval of the Joint Board of Examiners. Here, too, 

there has been equal representation from both agencies in every step 

of the examining process.

Similarly all promotion panels for career reserve officers of class 

7 and above have had equal representation from State.

The State Department and USIA agreed last September tha t the 

goals of the Agency and the objective of the Herter report could be 

achieved by providing for the appointment of Foreign Service officers 

for USIA under the present authorities of the Foreign Service Act.
12 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Under this agreement the Board of Examiners for the Foreign Service determined th at the written and oral examinations—conducted by 

joint State-USIA Panels—which applicants had to pass and the security and medical standards they had to satisfy in order to be a ppointed to the Career Reserve Corps met the legal requirements of the 

Foreign Sendee Act for appointment as F oreign Service officers.

However, the Agency and the Department determined to recommend 

for appointment as Foreign Service officers only those whose perform ­

ance since appointment into the Career Reserve Corps has continued 

to be at a level of excellence expected of Foreign Service officers of 

the United States.

SE LE CTI ON PA N ELS

In order to assist myself and the Secretary of State in determining 

which career reserve officers have sustained the quality of performance considered essential in the Foreign Service Officer Corps, six 

Selection Panels were established last fall by the Department and 

US IA to review the records of Agency Foreign Service Career Reserve officers for Foreign Service officer appoinnients class by class.

Each of these Panels was made up of four outstanding Foreign 

Service officers, two from USIA and two from the Department of 

State, plus a public member. Joseph Johnson, President of the C arnegie Endowment for Internationa l Peace, for example, was the public member on the class 1 panel. These panels worked long and 

assiduously to rank our officers against the highest standards of excellence. In doing their job, I personally requested each panelist to 

judge our people with the following criteria in mind, and I quote from 

the statement I made to th em :

CR ITER IA

F ir st of all, th e good US IA officer must be a po litica l an im al ; he m us t have 

po lit ical sensitivity * * * as much as an y good po litica l officer. He should, if 

poss ible, be able to com mu nic ate with the people he is tryin g to pe rsua de in 

th ei r own lan gua ge, no t ou rs. A gro wing numb er of th e peo ple we ar e try ing 

to rea ch do spe ak En gli sh—bu t the y do th ei r th in ki ng in th eir own langua ge, 

an d it is th ei r thi nk ing we ar e seeking to influence. The good US IA officer 

sho uld have a solid un de rstand ing of U.S. objectives, policies an d prog rams — 

par ticu la rly as the y affect th e co un try in which he is wo rki ng. He should know 

no t only wha t the y ar e bu t wh y they are.

Th e good USI A officer sho uld ha ve an un de rstand in g of th e m en tality of the 

people he is try in g to influence— th ei r hopes, fe ar s, prejud ices, ta boos ; their 

pro cesses of rea sonin g and dec isio nmaking. We do no t ex pe ct e ve ry officer to be 

a trai ne d ant hro polog ist, bu t if he does no t un de rs ta nd his au dien ce he can not 

ha ve much o f an impact on it. Th e good USIA officer should ha ve a deep un derstan ding of his own co un try —our way of life, ou r cu ltu re, ou r hopes and fea rs. 

In both th e broadest and mo st na rrow sens es, he m us t be ab le to rep res ent 

Am eric a, to spe ak for us all, so th at othe rs m ay kno w w hat k ind of people we are 

an d why we do w ha t we do.

Th e good USIA officer sho uld be a spec ialis t in one or more of th e med ia of 

com municatio n, th e b asic tools of o ur tra de .

Th e good USIA officer—and his wife—sho uld ha ve a de mon str ated ab ility to 

live and work in strang e land s am ong strang e people, often with ou t the com forts 

of lif e t h a t we tak e fo r granted .

Th e good USIA officer sho uld be gen erously end owed with cou rag e—n ot only 

physica l courage, altho ug h th is is of grow ing im po rta nc e in an un sta ble world, 

bu t also mo ral an d intelle ctua l coura ge. Th is me ans t he courag e to have origina l 

ide as, even if the y ar e not alway s ac ce pt ed ; the courage to spe ak out, even if he 

will no t alw ay s pre vail. At th e sam e tim e lie m us t be ab le to wo rk with others,
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 13

and to support loyally the decisions of his Government and his immediate 

superiors. The good USIA officer must have integrity and high moral character. The good USIA officer must have self-discipline, control over his tongue and

his actions. And he must have high motivation—based on love of his country, loyalty to the service, ambition to succeed, and a stern sense of duty.

RE COM M ENDATIO N

After receiving the rank order lists submitted by the Panels, 1 per­ sonally reviewed them and decided the cutoff point below which I did not recommend anyone for appointment. My major criterion in estab­ lishing this point was to be as sure as I could be that everyone recom­ mended had shown by his record and his standing on the lists that he had met and would continue to meet the standard of excellence we expect of our Career Foreign Service officers. The Secretary of State transmitted the list to the President as pro­ vided by the Foreign Service Act and on April 13 the President nomi­ nated these 760 Agency Career Reserve officers for appointment as 

Foreign Service officers. Unfortunately, I could not, in good conscience, recommend all of our Career Reserve officers for Foreign Service officer appointment. I have asked a group of my key executives to review the tiles of those not selected. When I receive their advice, we will decide their future with the Agency as judiciously and objectively as is humanly possible. As you can see, the 760 U SIA officers nominated by the President for Foreign Service officer status, have been through a stringent and demanding selection process which fully meets all requirements for appointment. I have done my best to see tha t these are officers who will live up to the high reputation established by the Foreign Service. For the future, the new availability of the “selection out’’ and retire­ ment provisions of the Foreign Service Act will permit us to assure the 

continued excellence of our Foreig n Service officers. I hope this committee will give its full support to their confirmation by the Senate.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Rowan.

Mr. Palmer, do you have a statement ?

Mr. Palmer. I do, Mr. Chairman.

STATEMENT OE JOSEPH PALMER II , DIRECTOR GENERAL OF THE 

FOREIGN SERVICE

Mr. Palmer. As Director General of the Foreign Service, I have 

strongly favored the integration of the USIA Foreign Service career service officers into the Foreign Service Officer Corps. In my capacity as an adviser to the Secretary of State and the U nder Secretary of State for Administration, I have had no hesitation in recommending this integration program as a measure which, in my opinion, will grea tly strengthen the career Foreign Service as an in­ strument for carr ying out our foreign policy. I would like to give 

the committee the reasons for my position.

47 —58 0— 6 5 — 2
14 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

RE ASON S FOR SU PPO RTIN G IN TE GRATIO N

(1) The original purpose of the Foreign Service Act of 1946 was 

to create a Foreign Service of the United States which would meet 

the needs not just of the Department of State, but of the major civilian 

Government departments and agencies with responsibilities in the 

foreign affairs held. The integration of the US IA career reserve is, 

I believe, entirely consonant w ith the objectives of that act and constitutes an important step forward toward a more unified approach 

to the staffing o f U.S. missions overseas.

(2) No agency of the U.S. Government with responsibilities overseas is more closely identified with the work of the Foreign Service 

than is USIA. Not only does th at Agency receive its policy guidance 

from the Department of State and from the ambassador in this field, 

but, for maximum effectiveness, the implementation of its information and cultural programs must be closely meshed with the political, 

economic, labor, and other activities of our diplomatic and consular 

establishments overseas. I am convinced tha t a common personnel 

system for the two agencies will greatly facilitate the substantive 

coordination of the activities of the two agencies by removing invidious 

comparisons resulting from different systems, by promoting greater 

functional interchange amongst the career officers in the two agencies, 

and by encouraging greater unity of outlook and approach to objectives.

(3) Particu larly at the senior level, the integration program will 

provide broader advancement opportunities for officers within the 

system and gre ater flexibility in the assignment process. In the staffing 

of higher level positions in Washington, the two agencies will have 

access to a larger pool of manpower, experience, and talents from 

which to draw. It is my strong hope, for example, tha t the integration will facilitate the assignment of senior Foreign Service officers 

with a political background to important policy positions within the 

Info rmation Agency and that the Department of S tate will similarly 

be able to draw from a wider selection of experienced U SIA officers 

with extensive area and functional experience overseas.

Also, in our oversea missions, I believe tha t we will benefit from 

the increased size and diversity of the manpower pool, with Foreign 

Service officers with a political background, for example, having an 

opportunity to develop competence in the information field and to 

bring to that function the benefit of the experience which they have 

gained earlier in their careers. Similarly, I believe that the wider 

availability of Foreign Service officers with an informational background will bring new insights and competence to the staffing of senior 

embassy positions.

(4) I am satisfied that the standards and procedures which have 

been adopted for the integration of US IA officers meet the high 

criteria which has been set for entry into the Foreign Service. For 

some time the two agencies have had virtually the same system for 

entry into the junior ranks throu gh the written and oral examination 

procedure.

The criteria adopted for lateral entry into the upper classes of the 

USIA Foreign Service career system are, under procedures jointly 

developed by USIA Director George Allen and Deputy Under Sec-
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 15

reta ry of State L<oy Henderson, virtually the same as those applied 

to the integration of Foreign Service officers under section 517 of 

the Foreign Service Act of 1916. I have, therefore, felt entirely assured that, in proceeding with the integration of the two career systems, we are maintain ing unimpaired those high standards set by the 

Foreign Service Act of 1946 and by the traditions of the Service 

itself.

CONCLUSION

Tn concluding this statement I would also like to say a few words 

from the background of my experience as a former ambassador in the 

Held. All of us—in Congress and in the executive branch—are deeply 

conscious, I know, of the increasing importance of the closest and most 

efficient coordination of our oversea activities in connection with the 

implementation of our policies and programs in these critical times. 

This vital objective has been the subject of a great deal of searching 

and thoughtful study by the Jackson and He rter Committees and is 

a m atter for continuing study and action within the Government.

To my mind we cannot afford to rest in our efforts to achieve the 

highest possible degree of coordination until we have exhausted all of 

the opportunities which lie before us. Not only is this important 

in an internal U.S. Government organizational sense, but I believe it 

is also essential that, in the conduct of our diplomacy, we should present an absolutely unified and disciplined external posture to the 

government to wliich we are accredited. The Prim e Minister and 

other officials of country X will respect us more if they are confident 

that in dealing with the Ambassador of the United States, they are 

dealing with the U.S. Government as a whole. The physical integ ration o f the personnel systems of the various agencies involved in oversea programs is not, of course, essential to developing a more monolithic external posture, but I would be less than frank if I did not 

record mv own feeling tha t different personnel systems and different 

terms of service for various civilian agency employees overseas inevitably complicate coordination and detract from the unified image 

which we endeavor to project. It is in this very practical sense that 

I frankly believe that the step we are now taking to integrate the 

career systems of the two agencies will vastly strengthen the hand of 

the ambassador overseas and his ability to implement our policies and 

carry out our programs with maximum effectiveness.

I realize that what I have just said has implications with respect 

to possible further integ rative programs with other U.S. civilian 

agencies and departments with oversea responsibilities. I believe 

tha t such further possible moves should be left to the future and t ha t 

each of them should be carefully examined at the a ppro priate time on 

its merits, taking into account the advantages from the point of view 

of enhancing a more unified approach to the implementation of our 

foreign policy objectives overseas, the nature and permanency of 

the agency activities, and the practical problems involved in assuring 

continuance of high career standards and principles. Whatever the 

outcome of such further examinations, however, I strongly believe 

that the integration of the US IA Foreign Service career officers into 

the Foreign Service Officer Corps stands firmly on its own merits as 

an immediately desirable measure.
16 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

I than k yo u, M r. C hairm an.

Th e C hairm an. Tha nk you, M r. P alm er.

If I un de rstand you corre ctl y, at the mom ent, at lea st, you are 

pl an ni ng only the U SIA , alt ho ug h you do no t rej ect the idea th at 

ma ny o ther services such as Pe ace Co rps and A ID m ight come in.

Mr. P almer. I M ould no t r eje ct th e idea, M r. Ch air man, t h at oth ers 

might come in. As I say, I th in k each case sho uld be viewed on its 

me rits . I do no t th in k th at th e na ture of the Peace Co rps activ itie s 

is such, unless th ei r policies change very ma rke dly , th at they would 

fit int o the caree r officer system. As was po int ed out earlier, the y 

rega rd th ei r appo int me nts as of mo re lim ite d du ratio n, an d the y 

are not t al ki ng about ca ree r ap po int me nts.

SE LE CT ION-OU T PROCESS

Th e Cha irm an. I s the selection -ou t process—w hic h th e Fo reign 

Service employs oste nsibly to impro ve and up gr ad e its own qu ality — 

is th at exclusi vely in the Fo re ig n Ser vice or do you have a sim ila r 

process in th e o ther agency ?

Mr. Rowan. We do no t have th at process in the U.S . In fo rm at io n 

Agency, Mr. Ch air man, an d ind eed one of the reasons wh y I have 

been eager to have th is process ap prov ed is th at it ■will pe rm it me 

to up gr ad e an d imp rove th e qu ality of person nel in the U S IA car eer 

Fo reign Serv ice.

Th e Chairm an. Do n't you th in k, Mr. Rowa n, one of the reasons 

why we have ha d selection-out in th e Fo reign Serv ice is th at it has 

been rega rd ed as a r at he r spec ial ki nd of service, a s disting uis hed from 

civil service. Once you go t in you were no t there fo r life, unlik e the 

civil serv ice where you are , ass um ing you did n't com mit an overt 

crime. Th ere was a fee lin g th at th is was an elite service, wh ich had 

very spe cial responsibilities in foreign countrie s represen tin g this 

country.

I f yo u ar e going to bank et in everybody, wo n’t you v ery soon have a 

dema nd to ge t rid of the selection -ou t process an d th us becom e ju st 

an othe r civil serv ice? Thi s dema nd m igh t arise fro m the size and the 

po litica l p ow er of the Service itse lf.

Is th at no t c orrect ?

Mr. P almer. I think, M r. Ch airm an , th at we are really n ot propo sing bl an ke tin g eve rybody in. W e are ta lk in g about b ring in g in only 

a selected gr ou p of officers at the officer level, -which a t th e present time 

is the only gr ou p of person nel fo r -which -we have selection-out au ­

th or ity .

Selection-o ut is par t of the te rm s of service t hat all F or eign Serv ice 

officers acc ept -when the y join the Fo re ign Service or Officer Corps, 

an d I th in k th at th e Fo reign Service officers are pr ou d of the fact 

th at we do have this a utho rit y.

The Chairm an. Th ey hav e been because t hey re ga rd themselves as 

a rat he r sp ecia l grou p.

Mr. P almer. Yes.

Th e C hairm an. But i f you are g oing to ad d thousands of them t hen 

they are go ing to be lik e the civil service.

Mr. P almer. I think, Mr. Cha irm an , we are br ingi ng in an oth er 

special gr ou p, an d I -would hope th at if there were any fu rt her inte-
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 17

grative moves with other departments, tha t it would again be done 

on a highly selective and very special group basis, the same as has 

been done in th is case, so that we would have within the system officers 

with essentially the same motivations and the same standards as those 

who are presently within it.

Mr. Rowan. Mr. Chairman, if I might add to that, we view these 

760 people as an elite service. The only thing they don't have is the 

technicality of membership in the Foreign Service and they are not 

curre ntly subject, to selection-out process, but some of them have 

served as ambassadors, are serving today in posts as Deputy Assistant Secretaries of State , so I think the other members of the Foreign 

Service themselves clearly regard these 760 officers as being pa rt of an 

elite corps eminently qualified to be molded into their operation.

Mr. Palmer. I would certainly agree with that.

The Chairman. Out of how many did jrou select the 760?

Mr. Rowan. There are 915 Foreign Service Career Reserve officers 

in the Agency.

The Chairman. And you have selected 760 out of 915?

Mr. R owan. Yes.

Actually there were 803 but there were 43 who had to be delayed 

either because of medical problems or lack of enough time in their 

particu lar job. But a t this point we are asking or we have nominated 

760 out of 915 F oreign Service Career Reserve officers. And that is 

out of a total of almost 5,000 American employees of U SIA.

M A IN T A IN IN G QU A LIT Y OF FO REI GN SE RV ICE

The Chairman. What bothers me about this is this. I have always 

regarded, as I think most of the committee has, the Foreign Service as 

being a rath er superior group of people who had taken examinations 

and preparations and the risks when they go into the Service are a 

little different from the ordinary Government employee. This addition of such a large number all of a sudden does create the impression th at it is going to be extended to include the AID and, as I have 

already stated, Mr. Shriver certainly thinks, I believe, that he is 

going to get his people in.

I don't know how many hundreds or thousands he has.

Mr. Palmer. Mr. Chairman, I wonder if I could say just another 

word in extension of w hat Mr. Rowan has just said.

At the risk of introducing a personal note, I would like to say th at 

T came into the Foreign Service 25 years ago as a junio r officer, and 

T have served abroad in manv capacities. I have had the closest 

association with the career officers in the US IA Foreign Service. 

They have served on my staff, and T am absolutely convinced in my 

own mind—or T could not have reconciled it with m y conscience to 

support this—that the group of officers th at we are bringing in are 

in every sense a carefully selected, elite group of officers of comparable 

capabilities, comparable motivations, comparable disciplines, to those 

whom we presently have within the Foreign Service. This has been 

a selective process, I think, tha t fully meets the traditions that have 

been established for selection for Foreign Service in the past.

The Chairman. Do you have the same attitude toward the AID 

people whom you have come into contact with abroad ?
18 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Mr. P almer. I do, Mr. Chairman, with respect to certain numbers 

of them.

Again, I would like to say, as I said earlier, th at I feel that if there 

is any move in this direction at some time in the future, it should be 

made on a highly selective basis to assure that we are getting officers 

of the same caliber, same qualifications, the same motivations as those 

within the career system at present.

The Chairman. You know we run into serious difficulties on this 

matter.

Last year the AID Director requested what we call selection-out 

authority in a limited way for his own people, hoping to upgrade the 

quality of his people. But the power of the Government employees 

unions, such as they are, was so great tha t they brought enough influence to bear in the House that they wouldn’t let him do it.

If we get this Foreign Service large enough, they can get a lobby 

as powerful as the present Government employees and in a very short 

time they won’t let you select them out either. You are going to have 

such a huge constituency you are not going to be able to keep the selection-out authority.

Tha t is one thin g that is very likely to happen. Because as it is, 

the Foreign Service has been reasonably small and they can’t control 

enough votes in the Congress to determine these things as the Government employees can.

Have you ever thought of t hat ? Aren't you exposing this to some 

influences that you do not now have to confront ?

You remember that incident just last year? This committee approved the efforts of the Director to improve the quality of his people 

but the House wouldn’t approve it.

Mr. Palmer. Yes; I do recall this, sir.

Mr. ( "rockett. Mr. Chairman, it seems to me that as long as the 

people themselves have the esprit de corps that they have now, and 

the basic term of reference is excellence, which it is now, the acceptance 

of selection out is a central core to their feeling of excellence and 

esprit, and we don’t face this problem. As unique as tha t may be, 

virtu ally no one in the Foreign Service has joined any union; there 

is hardly any cause for it.

The Chairman. This is accountable by the fact that they have been 

relatively few, 3,600. If you get 20,000 or 30,000 you will almost 

certainly begin to have a union, wouldn’t you?

Mr. Crockett. I don't th ink anyone is thinking in these figures, Mr. 

Chairman.

The Chairman. Why not? At 760 at a clip it won't take long.

Mr. Crockett. But there aren’t very many, there are hardly any 

other areas.

The Chairman. Don’t you thin k AID and the Peace Corps will 

want to join?

Mr. Crockett. I do not think the Peace Corps, Mr. Chairman, because their concept is entirely different in terms of service, and AID, 

as Mr. Palm er suggested, this one hasn't even been studied. It has 

taken 18 months of internal study to develop this U SIA concept, plus 

the fact t ha t U SIA themselves lived with this system in a parallel capacity for several years. I thin k this is part of the process of determining whether or not it is feasible and whether or not it is desir-
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATION S 19

able and whether or not the people themselves have the attitude for 

service.

A very interesting thing, Mr. Chairman, is the attitude of the two 

groups. I have some contact within the Foreign Service and the 

Foreign Service group itself embrace this quite enthusiastically. 

There is no undercurrent, no rumble underneath in the Foreign Service of this being an act to weaken the Service or to pull it down to 

lower standards.

I think the officers of the Foreign Service by and large look upon 

this as a logical and an im portant broadening of their responsibilities.

In US lA itself, the officers concerned are enthusiastic about it even 

though they face selection out in some cases. I thin k this has to be 

part of the decision, too. I)o the officers as a group want it and aspire 

to it and I don't know tha t this is true in AID. I don’t know whether 

their officers really want it as a part of their career. I think this 

would have to be ascertained before we ever talked about this kind 

of an operation, although in its theoretical dimensions, I think that 

we are talking about any foreign affairs program having this possibility. But tha t is really theoretical at this point.

The Chairman. It is quite a precedent.

You know how the Congress is a great place for precedents. If it 

has been done before the Senate is likely to do it again. We always 

repeat it, especially if it is a mistake. So, if th is is a mistake we are 

bound to do it again.

One last question before I turn you over to the other members. First, 

Mr. Reporter, I want to put in the record at this point an excerpt from 

the legislation offered by the Peace Corps and an explanation which the 

staff will give you. As I read it your views are quite directly contra ry to the views of Mr. Shriver as to what he hopes for. Maybe 

it is just a hope.

(The excerpt referred to follows:)

A B IL L To am en d fu rth e r th e Pea ce Co rps Act (75 S ta t. 61 2) , as am en de d, an d fo r oth er 

pu rp os es

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States

of America in Congress asembled,

Sec. 5. Section 7 of the Peace Corps Act, as amended, which relates to Peace 

Corps employees, is amended as follows :

(a) Strike out subsections (a) and (b). (b) Redesignate subsection (c) as subsection (a) and in the subsection as 

redesignated:

(1) In the introductory ph rase:

(A) Inse rt “ (1 )” immediately before "For the purpose of”.

(B) Strike out “—” immediately a fter “may”.

(2) In paragraph (1), strike out “ (1) ”.

(3) In paragraph (2) :

(A) Inse rt immediately af ter “ (2 )” in the first sentence thereof “The 

President may”.

(B) Strike out in the first sentence thereof “for the duration of operations under this Act”.

(C) Strike out in the second sentence thereof “the Foreign Service 

Act of 1946” and insert in lieu thereof “tha t Act”.

(U) In the first proviso in the second sentence thereof strike out 

“of” immediately after “the period of the appointment” and insert in 

lieu thereof “or”.

(E) Insert immediately afte r “may prescribe” in the second proviso 

thereof” : Provided further. That under such regulations as the President
20 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

may p re sc ribe pe rs on s wh o are to p er fo rin du ties o f a m ore ro uti ne n atu re 

th an a re ge ne ra lly pe rf or m ed by For ei gn Se rv ice st af f officers an d em ­

ploy ee s o f c la ss 10 m ay be appo in te d t o an u nen um er at ed c la ss o f For ei gn 

Se rv ic e st aff officers an d em ploy ee s ra nkin g below clas s 10 an d be pa id 

ba sic co m pe ns atio n a t ra te s lo w er th an th os e of cl as s 10.”

(4 ) In p ara g ra p h (3 ) :

(A ) S tr ik e ou t “s pe ci fy ” an d in sert in lie u th ere o f: “T he P re si den t 

m an y sp ec ify w hat ad dit io nal co m pe ns atio n auth ori ze d by se ct ion 207 of 

th e In dep en den t Offices A ppro pri at io ns Act, 1949, as am en de d (5 U.S.C. 

11 8h ), an d".

(B ) S tr ik e ou t “ ( c )” an d in se rt in lie u th ere of “ ( a ) ”.

(C ) S tr ik e ou t “t h a t A ct ” and in se rt in lie u th er eo f “th os e A ct s” .

(c ) R ed es ig na te su bs ec tio n (d ) as su bs ec tio n (b ) and in th a t su bs ec tio n as 

re d esig n ate d :

(1) Im m ed ia te ly a ft e r “o r ass ig ned” in sert “for th e pu rp os e of per fo rm ­

ing fu nct io ns under th is Ac t ou ts id e th e U ni te d S ta te s” .

(2 ) S tr ik e out “s ub se ction (c ) ( 2 ) ” and in sert in lieu th er eo f “sub se ct io ns 

( a ) ( 2 ) ”.

(d ) R ed es ig nat e su bs ec tio n (e ) as su bs ec tio n (c ) and in th e seco nd se nt en ce 

o f th a t su bs ec tio n as re de si gna te d str ik e out “ ( c ) ” an d in se rt in lieu th er eo f 

“ ( a ) ”.

Sec. 6. (a ) Se ctio n 5 of t h is Act sh all not become effecti ve unti l th e fi rs t da y 

of th e fo urt h pay pe riod which be gins a fte r th e d ate th is Act becom es law .

(b ) Und er su ch re gula tions as th e P re si d en t may pr es cr ibe, ea ch pe rs on em ­

ploy ed unde r au th o ri ti es re pe al ed by se ct io n 3 (a ) of th is Ac t im m ed ia te ly pri or 

to th e effective date of th a t se ct io n sh all effecti ve on th a t dat e be ap po in te d a 

For ei gn Se rv ic e Res er ve offic er or For ei gn Se rvice st af f officer or em ploy ee unde r 

th e au th o ri ty of se ct io n 7 (a ) (2 ) of th e Pea ce Corps Act, as am en de d, an d 

ap po in te d or as si gne d to an ap p ro p ri ate cl as s th e re o f: Pro vide d, ho wev er , T hat 

no pe rs on who ho ld s a care er or care er co nd itio na l ap poin tm en t im m ed ia te ly 

pri or to th e effective date of th a t se ct io n sh al l, w ithout hi s co ns en t, be so 

ap po in te d u n ti l th re e yea rs a ft e r th e effe ctiv e d ate of th a t section. E ac h officer 

or em ploy ee so ap po in te d sh al l rece iv e ba si c co m pe ns atio n a t th e ra te of hi s clas s 

de te rm in ed to be appro pri ate by th e P re si dent, ex ce pt th a t th e ra te of ba sic 

co m pe ns atio n re ce iv ed by an y officer or em ploy ee im m ed ia te ly p ri o r to th e 

effecti ve d ate of hi s For ei gn Se rvice R es er ve or st aff ap poin tm en t sh all not be 

re du ce d by t he p ro vi sion s of th is se ction.

Sectio n-by-Sec tio n Ana ly sis of th e P roposed Act To Amend F ur th er th e

P eace Corps Act and for Oth er P urposes

* * * * * * * 

Se ct io n 5.— Amen ds s ec tio n 7 o f th e a ct which re la te s to P ea ce C orps e mp loyees,

in t he fo llo wing re sp ec ts.

Su bs ec tion (a ) of th e bill re pe al s se ct io n 7 (a ) of th e ac t, which au th ori zes th e 

em ploy men t of pe rs on s und er o th er th an For ei gn Se rvice Act auth ori ti es, and section 7 (b ), whi ch au th ori ze s cert ain per so ns to be co m pe ns ated w ithout re gard to 

th e Cla ss ific at io n Act of 1949. P a ra g ra p h (2 ) of se ct ion 7 (c ) of th e ac t. which 

th e bill wou ld re de si gna te as se ction 7 (a ) an d am en d, wou ld repl ac e se ct io ns 7 

(a ) an d (b ). Rep ea l of se ctions 7 (a ) an d (b ) of th e act wou ld no t in vali date 

ac tion s ta ken there under w hile th os e se ct io ns w er e in effect.

Su bs ec tion (6 ) am en ds se ction 7 (c ) of th e Ac t. whi ch re la te s to th e us e of 

au th o ri ti es in th e For ei gn Se rvice Act of 19445, as am en de d, fo r th e appoin tm en t 

a n d /o r as si gn m en t of pe rson s, to re desi gnate th a t se ct io n as section 7 (a ) an d in 

11 ot her re sp ec ts.

Par ag ra ph s (1 ) an d (2 ) m ak e th e li m it ati o n to per fo rm in g fu nct io ns outs id e 

th e U ni ted S ta te s ap pl ic ab le on ly to p ara g ra p h (1 ) of se ction 7 (a ) of th e ac t, as 

re de si gn at ed . O th er w ise, no ch an ge s wou ld be mad e in se ction 7 ( a ) ( 1 ) , as 

re de si gn at ed . It wou ld co nt in ue to auth ori ze pri m ari ly th e em pl oy m en t or 

assig nm en t, of officers or em ploy ee s of U.S . Gov er nm en t ag en cies o th er th an th e 

Pe ac e Co rps fo r th e pu rp os e of per fo rm in g fu nc tions under th e ac t outs id e th e 

U ni te d S ta te s. T hi s au th o ri ty is usu all y us ed in co nn ec tio n w ith th e deta il 

to th e Pe ac e Cor ps fo r serv ice out si de th e U ni te d S ta te s of Pub lic H ealt h Se rvice 

officers.

Par ag ra ph (8 ) am en ds in five re sp ec ts para g ra p h (2 ) of se ction 7 (a ) of the 

ac t, as re des ig nat ed , whi ch re la te s to th e us e of For ei gn Se rv ice Ac t auth ori ti es,
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 21

in cl ud in g th e au th o ri ty to appoin t and as si gn pe rson s. U nder se ction 7 (a ) (2 ), 

as re de si gn at ed , pe rs on s ha ve rece iv ed an d wou ld co nt in ue to re ce iv e ap poin tm en ts under For ei gn Se rv ic e A ct au th o ri ti es fo r th e pu rp os e of pe rf orm in g fu nction s outs id e th e U ni ted Sta te s, ex ce pt th at, as w as mad e cle ar whe n para gra ph 

(2 ) w as en ac te d in 1961, per so ns ho ld in g an y Fore ig n Se rv ice ap poin tm en t under 

pr ed ec es so r or si m il ar au th o ri ti es ha ve been ap po in te d by tr a n sfe r under p a ra ­

gra ph (2 ) and i nit ia ll y as si gn ed to d uties w ithin th e U ni te d Sta te s. The effect of 

p ara g ra p h s (1 ) and (2 ) of se ct io n 5 (b ) of t he bill is th a t under se ction 7 (a ) (2 ), 

as re de si gn at ed , ap po in tm en ts fo r th e pu rp os e of perf orm in g fu nct io ns w ithin 

th e U ni te d S ta te s co uld be m ad e ev en if th e pe rs on ap poin te d has not pr ev io us ly 

se rv ed u nd ei' si m il ar a uth ori ti es.

Su bpa ra gr ap h (A ) am en ds th e fi rs t se nt en ce of p ara g ra p h (2 ) to ad d th e 

phra se "T he P re si dent m ay ” a t th e be gi nn in g th er eo f. T his is a te ch ni ca l 

ch an ge ne ce ss itate d by th e am en dm en ts to se ct ion 7 (a ), as re des ig nat ed , mad e 

by p ara g ra p h s (1 ) and (2 ) of se ct io n 5 (b ) of the bill.

Su bp ar ag ra ph (B ) am en ds th e fi rs t se nt en ce of p ara g ra p h (2 ) to m ak e it 

cle ar th at, as has be en Pea ce Cor ps pr ac tice , th e d u ra ti o n of For ei gn Se rvice 

Res er ve officer or St af f officer an d em ploy ee ap poin tm en ts under para g ra p h (2 ) 

may , in ac co rd an ce w ith se ct io ns 522 and 531 of th e For ei gn Se rv ic e Act of 194(5, 

as am en de d, be lim ited or te m pora ry ap po in tm en ts , an d not ap poin tm en ts fo r 

th e d u ra ti o n o f o pe ra tions u nder th e Pe ac e Corps ActSu bp ar ag ra ph (C ) am en ds th e second se nt en ce of p ara g ra p h (2 ) to ch an ge 

th e fi rs t re fe re nce to “th e F ore ig n Se rv ice Act of 1946” in th a t se nte nce to “t h a t 

A ct”. T his is a te ch ni ca l ch an ge . The fi rs t se nt en ce of p ara g ra p h (2 ) co nt ai ns 

a fu ll re fe re nc e to th e Fore ig n Se rv ice Ac t of 1946, as am en de d. T he firs t 

re fe re nc e in th e second se nte nce is th e on ly su bs eq uen t re fe re nce th ere to in 

p ara g ra p h (2 ) which does not m er el y r efe r to “ th a t Act. ”

Su bp ar ag ra ph (I )) am en ds th e fi rs t pr ov iso in p ara g ra p h (2 ) to co rr ec t a 

ty pogra phic al err o r m ad e in 1961 duri ng th e p re p ara ti o n of th e co nf er en ce com ­

m itte e p ri n t of th e Pe ac e Cor ps bill. T hi s e rr o r w as ca lled to th e ex ec ut iv e 

bra nch's att en ti o n by th e st af f of th e Hou se For ei gn A ffai rs Co mmittee .

Su bp ar agr aph (£ ') am en ds th e second se nt en ce of p ara g ra p h (2 ) to ad d a t 

th e en d th ere of a ne w pr ov iso w hi ch wou ld perm it th e ap poin tm ent of pe rs on s 

to an unen um er at ed cl as s of th e For ei gn Se rv ice St af f ra n k in g below cl as s 16, 

th e lo w es t cl as s of For ei gn Se rv ic e St af f officer s and em ploy ees. Su ch pe rs on s 

wo uld be co m pe ns ated a t per an num sa la ry ra te s lo wer th an th e fi rs t ra te pre ­

sc ribe d fo r cla ss 10 w hi ch wou ld co rr es po nd to th os e pr ov id ed fo r gra des 1, 2, 

an d 3 of th e gen er al sc he du le. T h is au th o ri ty wou ld be ex er ci se d fo r th e appoin tm en t an d co m pe ns at io n of per so ns wh o are to per fo rm duti es of a mor e 

ro uti ne n a tu re th an are genera ll y per fo rm ed by For ei gn Se rv ic e Sta ff officers 

an d em ploy ee s of cl as s 10 an d wh o, under th e civil se rv ic e sy stem , wou ld be 

ap po in te d to po si tion s clas sified a t gra des 1. 2, or 3 of th e gen er al sche du le.

Par ag ra ph (4 ) am en ds p ara g ra p h (3 ) of se ct io n 7 (a ) of th e ac t, as re de si gna ted, whi ch re la te s to th e g ra n ti n g of al lo w an ce s and dif fe re nti als un de r 

th e O ve rs ea s D iffe re ntial s an d A llo w an ce s Ac t, in th re e re sp ec ts.

Su bp ar ag ra ph (A ) am en ds p a ra g ra p h (3 ) to m ak e cle ar th a t not on ly shou ld 

th e al lo w an ce s and dif fe re nti als o r ra te s th ere of gen er al ly pai d to U.S. Gov ernm en t officers an d em ploy ee s st ati o n ed ove rs ea s not au to m ati call y be pai d to 

pe rs on s em ploy ed under th e a ct and st at io ned ov er se as as se ct io n 7 (c )(3 ) of 

th e act now prov ides, b u t th a t th e ad dit io nal co m pe ns at io n or ra te s th er eo f 

ge ne ra lly pai d to U.S. G ov er nm en t officers an d em ploy ee s st ati oned in pl ac es 

lik e A lask a, H aw ai i, or th e Com m on wea lth of P uert o Ri co sh ou ld no t au to ­

m at ic al ly be pai d to per so ns em pl oy ed o r ap poin te d by, or as si gne d by or to, 

th e Pea ce Corps an d so st at io ned .

Su bp ar ag ra ph (B ) ch an ge s an in te rn al re fe re nce in p ara g ra p h (3 ). T his 

ch an ge is nec es si ta te d by th e ch an ges in the a ct de sc ribe d above.

Su bp ar ag ra ph (C ) is a te chnic al ch an ge to co nf or m w ith th e ch an ge mad e 

by su b p ara g ra p h (A ) of p ara g ra p h (4 ) of se ct io n 5 (b ) o f th e bill.

Subs ec tion (c ) am en ds se ct io n 7 (d ) of th e ac t, which re la te s to th e pre sc ri ptio n of re gula ti ons re gard in g ad eq u ate per fo rm an ce leve ls of per so ns ap poin te d 

or as si gne d under se ct ion 7 (a ) of th e ac t, as re de si gn at ed , to re des ig nat e th a t 

se ction as se ct ion 7(b ) an d in tw o o th er re sp ec ts.

Par ag ra ph (1 ) is in te nde d to m ak e cl ea r th at, notw it hst andin g th e fa c t th a t 

unde r se ct ion 7 (a ), as re des ig nate d an d am en de d by th e bil l, us e co uld be mad e 

of Fore ig n Se rv ice Act au th o ri ti es to ap poin t or as si gn per so ns fo r th e pu rp os e 

of perf or m in g fu nct io ns bo th w it h in an d out si de th e U ni te d Sta te s, th e so-call ed
22 UNIT ED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

se lectio n- ou t au th o ri ty of section 7 (b ), as re des ig nat ed , wou ld co nt in ue to be appl ic ab le on ly to pe rs on s ap po in te d f or th e la tt e r p urpo se.

Par ag ra ph (2 ) ch an ge s an in te rn al re fe re nce in se ction 7 (b ), as re des ig nat ed . 

T his ch an ge is nec es si ta te d by th e ch an ges in th e act which wou ld be m ad e by 

se ct io ns 5 (a ) and 5 (b ) of th e bill.

Su bs ec tion (<?) am en ds se ction 7 (e ) of th e ac t, whi ch re la te s to th e ap poin tm en t of Pe ac e Cor ps em ploy ees or Pea ce Cor ps vo lu nte er s as Pea ce Cor ps re pre ­

se nt at iv es , to re des ig nate th a t se ction as se ct io n 7 (c ) and to ch an ge an in te rn al 

refe re nc e. The se c ha ng es are n ec es si ta te d by th e c ha ng es in th e act w hi ch wo uld 

l>e ma de by se ct io ns 5 ( a ) , 5 ( b ) , an d 5 (c ) of the bill.

Se ct io n 6 of th e bi ll pr ov id es fo r th e effe ctiv e d ate of se ction 5 of th e bi ll an d 

fo r th e co nt in ue d em pl oy men t of all per so ns em ploy ed under se ction 7 (a ) of th e 

act im m ed ia tely p ri o r th er eto.

Su bs ec tion (a ) pr ov id es th a t section 5 of th e bi ll sh all become e ffec tiv e on th e 

fi rs t da y of th e fo u rt h pa y pe riod after* th e d ate th e bi ll is ap pr ov ed by th e 

Pre si de nt .

Su bs ec tion (b ) pr ov id es th at, unde r su ch re gula ti ons as m ay be pr es cr ib ed , al l 

pe rs on s em ploy ed under se ct ion 7 (a ) of th e act and not ho ld in g care er or care er 

co nd itio na l ap po in tm en ts im m ed ia te ly p ri o r to th e effective d ate of it s re pea l by 

section 5 (a ) of th e bi ll wo uld as of th a t effective d ate re ce iv e For ei gn Se rv ice 

Res er ve or Sta ff ap po in tm en ts. Per so ns ho ld in g care er or care er co nd itio na l 

ap poi ntm en ts im m ed ia te ly pri or to th e effe ctiv e d ate of se ct io n 5 (a ) of th e bill 

will rece ive Fore ig n Se rvice R es er ve or Sta ff ap poin tm en ts 3 years a fte r the 

effecti ve d ate of th a t section. How ev er, su ch pe rs on s may , a t any tim e duri ng 

th is 3 -y ea r p er io d, elec t to a cc ep t a For ei gn Se rv ic e R es er ve o r Sta ff a ppoi ntm en t.

Und er th e re gula ti ons which wou ld be pr es cr ib ed by th e P re si dent o r his delegee (s ). pe rs on s no w em ploy ed under s ec tion 7 (a ) of t he act and o cc up ying P ea ce 

Corps po si tion s in vo lv in g pre dom in an tly cle ri ca l or adm in is tr ati v e s er vi ce acti vities wou ld be appoin te d For ei gn Se rv ic e Sta ff officer s an d em ploy ees of th e ap ­

p ro pri ate clas s, in cl ud in g th e unenum era te d cl as s fo r w hi ch pr ov isio n is m ad e 

in se ction 5 (b ) (3 ) (E ) of t he b ill. All o th er of s uc h pe rson s, i.e., th os e oc cu py ing 

Pea ce Crops po si tions in vo lv ing pre dom in antl y po lic ym ak ing, su pe rv isor y, or 

oth er ex ec ut iv e act iv itie s, wou ld be appoin te d For ei gn Se rv ice R es er ve officers 

of th e ap p ro p ri ate cla ss. A ppro pri ate cl as se s and bas ic co m pe ns atio n ra te s 

w ithin th os e cl as se s wou ld be det er m in ed on th e basi s of th e em ploy ee ’s ra te of 

co m pe ns atio n under th e gen er al sc he du le. W he n a p art ic u la r em ploy ee ’s ra te 

fa ll s w ithi n th e ra nge of ra te s of co m pe ns at io n of tw o For ei gn Se rv ice or tw o 

Fo re ig n Se rv ice Sta ff c lass es , he g en er al ly w ou ld b e ap po in te d to th e h ig her clas s. 

Sh ou ld a p a rt ic u la r em ploy ee ’s ra te fa ll be tw ee n th e ra te s of tw o clas ses, he ge nera ll y wou ld be ap po in te d to th e hig her clas s. In no ca se wou ld th e bas ic com ­

pe ns at io n re ce iv ed by an y officer or em ploy ee im m ed ia te ly pri or to th e effecti ve 

date of se ction 5 of th is b ill be r ed uc ed by re as on of en ac tm en t of th is section.

B E N E FIT S W H IC H WOU LD AC CR UE TO U SIA OF FICE RS

The Chairman. The question T wanted to ask von is. What is the 

practical effect of this action upon the 760 nersons? Can von describe 

briefly their benefits and so on, and could you estimate the cost? 

What does it involve by wav of material benefits to the people involved and cost to the Government ?

Air. Rowan. In practical terms, Mr. Chairman, it will mean tha t 

these 760 officers will have somewhat more liberal retirement benefits.

At the same time, however, they will face the requirement of earlier 

retirement, they will not be able to sit and rest on their laurels as long 

as some of them currently are able to do in the agency. Also they 

will face the selection-out process which they currently do not face, 

and I might add here, that not—I put this to the officers and to a man 

these people said, “We will face the risk of selection out in order to 

have the status to which we think we are entitled.”

Xow, in terms of costs, we figure tha t throughout the lifetime of 

these 760 people, the total additional cost to the U.S. Government 

will be between $8 and $9 million.
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATION S 23

The Chairman. Does tha t accrue prim arily from retirement and not 

from salary changes ?

Mr. Rowan. From retirement only. There is no automatic grade 

increase or salary increase involved in this action whatsoever, Mr. 

Chairman.

The Chairman. Senator Lausche, do you want to ask questions?

F IN A N C IA L ST AT US OF FO REI GN SE RV ICE R E TIR E M E N T FU N D

Senator L ausciie. Are you familiar with the financial status of the 

Foreign Service retirement fund ?

Mr. R owan. I have a general idea. I can't say that I have detailed 

knowledge of it, Senator Lausche.

Senator Lausciie. Testimony was given in writing by the officials 

of rhe Foreign Service th at to keep th at fund actuarial ly sound now 

will require a 30-percent contribution of each employee’s salary annually. Tha t condition has developed because of about 15 changes in 

benefits since the fund was established.

If a man is earning $15,000, 30 percent will have to be paid into the 

Service fund or $4,500. If the normal course were followed the worker 

would put in $2,250 and the Government $2,250. But it is now argued 

by the Foreign Service employees that they should put in 5 percent 

and the Government 25 percent.

„ M y query is: If we keep adding your workers, those of the Peace 

Corps, and probably others of A ID to the Foreign Service, what eventually becomes of this retirement fund tha t they all want to become 

a p art of ?

Mr. Rowan. Well, S enator Lausche, let me make it clear again here 

tha t we are here only because we thin k the case of these 760 officers 

stands on their merit and on the merit of the idea, and I come with 

no idea whatsoever that this involves the blanketing in of the Peace 

Corps, AID , or anyone else.

Now, the actuarial experts tell me that the total costs of this program 

will be between $8 and $9 million; tha t is a substantial amount of 

money but I think chickenfeed in terms of the benefits to be derived 

by the U.S. Government.

The Chairman. That is not annual cost, is it ?

Mr. Rowan. No, this is over the total lifetimes of all these 760 

people.

Senator Lausche. Do you know tha t a movement is afoot to put 

into the Foreign Service all of the civil service employees of the S tate 

Department ?

Mr. Rowan. Yes, I am aware that there is legislation pending.

Senator Lausciie. And you know also there is a movement afoot 

to put into Foreign Service coverage all of the workers of the Peace 

Corps ?

Mr. Rowan. I have heard mention of that today, Senator.

Senator Lausciie. You now come before us and you want to p ut in 

about how many ?

Mr. Rowan. 760.

Senator L ausche. Has there been some community of talk or community of purpose which has produced, at one time, all of these movements to get into the Foreign Service?
24 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Mr. Rowan. Th e action we bri ng or the request we br in g befo re 

you today, Se na tor Lausche, steins back to 11 ye ars ago.

Se na tor L ausche. I see.

Ar e there an y Fe de ral agencies th at wa nt to get the prote cti on of 

the Fo reign Service othe r th an th e three th at I have mentioned?

Mr. Rowan. I don't hav e perso nal kno wle dge of it.

Se na tor Lausche. May I ask the staff wh at abo ut A ID ? Are they 

in the Fo re ign Service ?

Mr. Marcy. No, sir.

Se na tor Lausche. If we pu t these three catego ries in th at I have 

mentioned how are you going to keep A ID ou t—a nd how are you 

going to keep oth ers out? I am no t askin g you.

Mr. Crockett. If 1 may be sli gh tly facetio us, I th in k others are 

tryin g to s tay out, not t o get in, if I rea d the union s righ t. But t he re 

is no effort, at th is time , to mak e Fo re ig n Ser vice officers ou t of any 

group except th is g roup o f 760 U S IA officers.

As fa r as the Fo reign Ser vice retir em en t fu nd is conc erned it is not 

in very much worse sha pe th an the civil service ret ire me nt fund and 

there is a F ed eral st ud y rig ht now , und er the dir ectio n of the P resid en t, 

on the whole retir em en t syste m an d the whole retirem en t pro ble m and 

the rel ations hips of the va rio us fu nd s, and wha t can be don e about 

the m, how they can be pr op erly fu nd ed to secure the prote cti on of 

the individu als and protect t he Go vernm ent, too.

RE AS ON FOR W A N T IN G FO REI GN SE RV ICE EN TR Y

Se na tor L aus che. May I hav e yo ur s um ma ry, M r. Rowan, of what 

you un de rst an d to be the reason why thes e 760 men wan t to ge t into 

the cove rage of the F oreign Se rvice ?

Mr. R owan. Yes, Se na tor Lau sche. I can spell it out in ju st a very 

few sentences.

Fir st of all, 760 officers, as a caree r, have over the years done p recisely t he same th in g oth er Fo reign Service officers are doing.

On my staff, when I was Am bassa dor to He lsink i, some of thes e 

760 officers w ork ed side by side with officers of the Fo reign Service , 

doing precisely t he same kind of w ork , w ith p recisely the same k ind of 

skill.

Now, obv iously one of the reason s they wa nt in is the plain simple 

Am erican m at te r of justice. Th ey wan t the same pay, the same pe rquisites, the sam e sta nd ards , the sam e st at us as th ei r colleagu es who 

are w ork ing in w ell over a hu nd red c ountries.

Second, t hey d o ge t th e s lig htly, so mewhat be tte r r eti remen t benefits, 

but they p ay a pe na lty for th at by ru nn in g the risk of being selected 

out ne xt ye ar.

Ma ny of these officers could be told nex t ye ar : “You are at the 

bottom of the class. Out you go," bu t this is a ris k they are wi lling 

to take.

Thi rd , they believe fervently , as I do, th at the whole ideological 

str ug gle has become such a vital par t of th e conduct of forei gn affairs , 

th at the Fo reign Service of the U ni te d St ates ought to be such th at 

th is k ind of skill is deeply interw oven wi thin the whole trai ni ng , the 

whole fab ric of ou r Fo reign Service . Th ere ou ght to be some in te rchange whe reby they can serve as po litical officers, as de pu ty c hie fs of
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS 25

missions—as indeed some are doing and will be doing—and tha t 

Foreign Service officers brought in by State can come to US IA and 

learn a little bit more about what the ideological struggle is about, and 

indeed, I have a Foreign Service officer serving as my Assistant Director for Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. My executive assistant is a Foreign Service Officer. They believe tha t this makes sense 

in terms of what is good for the country and what is good for the 

conduct of foreign policy.

Senator Lausciie. Then to summarize what you have said, they feel 

tha t they should be entitle d to the same retirement benefits, the same 

compensatory fringe benefits, and other perquisites tha t go with the 

Foreign Service, is that correct ?

Mr. Rowan. Tha t is correct.

Mr. Crockett. I think it is deeper than that. I don’t think the 

monetary benefits are really the essence of the problem. I think the 

essence of the problem is they feel they should be p art of the great 

Foreign Service of the United States; tha t there should be no difference between people, that good people of the same qualities and the 

same dedication should be part of the same system and have the same 

overall advantages and tha t there not be a feeling of second-class 

relationship between two groups of people simply because of the labels 

on the people, and I think that the spirit of the thin g is much more 

important than the dollars and cents of it.

OTH ER AG EN CI ES T H A T M IG H T W A N T FO REI GN SE RV ICE ST AT US

Senator L ausciie. I want to get the view of where we are heading, 

if you will give me your help on this. We have before us already the 

desire of the civil service employees of the State Department to be 

moved into the Foreign Service, the recommendation of Shriver that 

all of his employees be put in the Foreign Service, and third, your 

proposal.

Will you help me identify other Federal agencies tha t are likely to 

come before us and ask for similar consideration? How about AID ?

Air. Crockett. As I have said, I thin k this has to be far in the 

future. AID itself, and all these agencies, the first thing these agencies themselves have to do is to develop a personnel system, develop 

personnel policies t ha t put them in parallel situations so that their 

people are properly motivated, so that their systems are parallel, so 

that there can come about an integration if it is decided tha t it is in 

the best interests of the U.S. Government.

And I reject any idea tha t we are doing this because anyone seeks 

in, we are not doing it because anybody wants in. We are doing it 

because we thin k it is in the best interests of the U.S. Government. 

The Peace Corps is not going to be a part of this system, nor are the 

civil servants of the State Department. Tha t is an entirely separate 

concept from this.

Senator Lausciie. Suppose a representative of AID comes before 

us and makes the argument that Air. Rowan just made, and says: 

“We are engaged in tlie Foreign Service and we are not getting the 

same treatment from the Government th at the Foreign Service people 

are getting.” Will they, in your opinion, be able to make such an 

argument considering the position which they now occupy?
26 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Mr. Rowan. Let me say, Senator Lausche, that there is no other 

agency in the U.S. Government that can come before this committee 

and make the statements I have made today, because no other agency 

has the same kind of career reserve established throug h the same process of written, oral examinations, whose officers come with the claim 

of having had the same kind of experience overseas, working in the 

same kind of professional way.

Now, while commenting, let me make one point clear in case there 

was some confusion earlier when we were talking about benefits, I 

want to make it clear tha t these US IA officers I am referring to get 

precisely the same pay as State Department officers in the Foreign 

Service, according to their grades, so there is no question of any pay 

boost here whatsoever.

Senator L ausche. The staff has just supplied me with th e fact that 

the Agricultu re Department has workers in the Foreign Service, 

Treasury has them, and so does Commerce. If the principle applies, 

will it apply to all and will we blanket them all into the Foreign 

Service ?

Mr. Crockett. The Commerce officers are already in the Foreign 

Service, Senator. At one time Agriculture officers were in the Fo reign Service. In the act of 1946 they were a part of the Foreign 

Service of the United States. They were taken out in 1954 and made 

into a separate service.

I think that I would want to say that we—I would not want to 

say categorically tha t we—would exclude any group of officers that 

were working in the field of foreign affairs. I think tha t in the 

largest concept, tha t is what we would be hoping for provided their 

officers accepted the philosophy of the Foreign Service, and provided 

we could develop with the agencies a concept, but I think, as Ambassador Palm er said earlier, that is for the future. We have got to 

look at it agency by agency in the fullness of time, and I wouldn’t 

want to say that AID officers of a career type would no t come in at 

some time. I would say th at it has to be developed internally within 

AID, and then externally with us, to insure tha t the systems and the 

concepts are compatible.

But I think at this point in time we have reached full understanding 

with US IS. There is a community of feeling between US IS officers 

and the Foreign Service officers so there is no disruption, there is no 

upheaval, there is no problem involved for the officers concerned in 

this kind of an integration coming about.

PROPOSAL TO TRAN SFER CIVIL SERVICE EMPLO YEES OF STATE DE PARTME NT 

TO FO REIGN SERVICE

Senator L ausche. Have you, Mr. Crockett, been a particip ant in the 

discussions that are now in progress for the blanketing into the Foreign 

Service of the civil service employees of your Department?

Mr. Crockett. Yes, sir, I have, but-----

Senator Lausche. Are you subscribing to putting all of the civil 

service employees into the Foreign Service?

Mr. Crockett. When you speak of the Foreign Service, Senator, you 

have to speak of several parts of the Foreign Service.
UNIT ED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATION S 27

The Foreign Service system is composed of various kinds of officers 

and we are not speaking of making Foreign Service officers out of civil 

service officers. We are only speaking of a different category of foreign 

service. The list of 760 US IA officers is the only group at this time 

that we are talking about appointing as Foreign Service officers.

Senator Lausche. Why are you going to put those civil service 

employees of the State Department into this special category of the 

« Foreign Service ?

Mr. Crockett. Not Foreign Service officers, but in the Foreign Service personnel system, because, Senator-----

Senator Lausche. Why ?

, Mr. Crockett. Because it is simply incompatible for two systems

to work side by side in an agency l ike the State Department. From the 

days of the Hoover Commission, review after review, commission after 

commission have recommended a single personnel system for the State 

Department, and this is in fulfillment of that. But it is entirely 

separate from this tha t we are talking about today.

The integration of these 760 U SIA officers is an entirely separate 

consideration to the consideration of bringing State Department civil 

servants into the broad confines of the Foreign Service Act,

Senator Lausche. Am I wrong in the conclusion that the main reason why you want coverage under the Foreign Service is because of 

the increased benefits that will be derived from this ?

Mr. Rowan. That is not correct.

Mr. Crockett. I am sorry to say I think you are wrong.

Senator Lausche. All rig ht.

Let the record stand tha t I think the only purpose you have in mind 

is to get into the Foreign Service so tha t you will have the benefit of 

the increased rights that come in various ways.

Mr. Crockett. Senator, I really—first of all, this is really not the 

essence of our desire, and secondly, I think it is proven by the vehemence of the civil service unions in opposing the merger. If they wanted 

in, if they saw benefits, th ey would be knocking at our doors rather 

than opposing us at every step.

• Senator Lausche. I think Senator Fulbrig ht took care of that. 

When they once get in, the unions will say, “Well, they are out of our 

category now, but we will get a new union of the Foreign Service.'’ 

Then you will have the unions running the international relations of

• our country.

BUDGET BU REAU VIE WS ON MERGER

The Chairman. Senator Hickenlooper, do you have some questions ?

Senator Hickenlooper. Has the Bureau of the Budget approved 

this pro ject ?

Mr. Crockett. Yes, sir ; it has.

Senator Hickenlooper. Have they made a report ?

Mr. Rowan. The Bureau of the Budget was consulted prior to the 

President's public statement of October 3. The B ureau of the Budget 

did approve it.

Senator Hickenlooper. Under the theory you are proceeding on 

tha t you have the authority to do this under existing law, I guess it was 

not necessary to consult the Bureau of the Budget on legislation, be-
28 UN ITED STA TES INFO RM AT ION AGENC Y NO MINATIO NS

cause we are not considering legislation—we are considering confirmation.

Mr. Crocektt. But nevertheless we did consult them.

Mr. Rowan. They were consulted.

Senator H ickenlooper. I)o you have a record of their comments on 

it ?

Mr. Rowan. I don't have the record but we can get. them for the 

record. Senator.

Mr. Crockett. We will supply them.

The Chairman. Will you do that and supply it for the record ?

Mr. Rowan. Yes, sir.

(The information referred to follows:)

E xec uti ve O ffic e of t h e P resid en t,

B ure au of t h e B udget. 

Washington, D.C., May 5, 1965.

li on. Car l T. R o w an,

Director, U.S. Information Agency,

Washington, D.C.

D ear Mr. R ow an : T his le tt e r conta in s in fo rm at io n fo r th e re co rd re qu es te d 

by th e chair m an of th e Sen at e Fore ig n R ela tions Com m itt ee duri ng th e re ce nt 

hear in gs on th e co nf irm at io n of 760 U.S . In fo rm ati on Ag en cy officers no m in ated 

by th e P re si dent to be For ei gn Se rv ic e Officers.

P ri o r to th e P re si dent’s st ate m en t of Octob er 3, 1964, officials of th e D epart ­

m en t of S ta te an d U.S . In fo rm ati on Ag enc y th or oughly co nsu lted w ith th e B ure au of th e Bud ge t re gard in g th e pr op os al fo r th e ap poin tm en t of USI A car ee r 

re se rv e officers to be For ei gn Se rv ic e officers. Sinc e th e pro pos al did no t inv olve 

ex ec ut iv e br an ch re port s on pen di ng le gi slat io n, no ex er ci se of th e B u re au ’s 

le gis la tive cl ea ra nce re sp onsi bility w as re qu ired . How ev er, th e B ure au concu rr ed in th e prop os ed act io ns fr om th e st andpoin t of it s re sp onsi bi lities fo r 

ad vis in g on b udg et ar y a nd m anageri al iss ue s.

Si nc er ely,

E lm er B. Sta a ts , Deputy Director.

Senator Hickenlooper. It is my understanding that, the original 

concept of the U.S. In form ation Service or U SIA was that, it would be 

an organization strictly charged with disseminating information about 

this country abroad, and countering false information about this country from other sources. Ts that roughly correct, in your opinion, Mr. 

Rowan ?

Mr. Rowan. Tha t is correct, Senator.

Senator Hickenlooper. Have these 760 proposed transferees been 

devoting all their time to the Information Service—that is disseminating information about the United States?

Mr. Rowan. That has been the crux of their activities, Senator, to 

explain this country abroad, to disseminate inform ation about it 

abroad and to serve abroad in order to do so.

Senator H ickenlooper. When they become, on occasion, staff in our 

embassies abroad, are the ir duties and obligations to continue their 

inform ation services abroad ?

Mr. Rowan. That is correct, Senator, under the jurisdiction and 

supervision of the Ambassador.

Senator Hickenlooper. Generally speaking, the Ambassador has 

supervision and jurisdiction over all information activities in the country to which he is assigned, doesn’t he ?

Mr. Rowan. Yes, over all activities, Senator.
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS 29

AUTHORITY OF SECRETARY OF STATE OVER USIA PERSONNEL

Senator Hickenlooper. If these 760 are taken into the Foreign 

Service, then they will no longer be devoted exclusively to the information program, will they ? They will be in the Foreign Service and subject to any kind of assignment tha t the President or the Secretary of 

State sees fit to give them.

Mr. Rowan. Under the le tter of the agreement with the Secretary of 

State, Senator, it is made clear tha t the Director of US IA will continue to direct those employees, will have operational autonomy over 

those employees.

Now, it may be tha t in some instances there will be an exchange of 

employees ancl an individual who originally was hired by me, and who 

is working fo r the Secretary of State, obviously will take orders from 

the Secretary of State jus t as the State Department employees who 

are “seconded” to U SIA take orders from me. But this requirement 

to engage in information work oversea rests not with the individual but 

with my Agency. It is the Agency tha t is charged only with doing 

work tha t begins a t the water’s edge and not a p articular individual.

Senator Hickenlooper. If these 760 individuals are transferred to 

the Foreign Service you, as the Director of the Agency will still control 

their activities, is tha t correct ?

Mr. Rowan. That is correct.

Senator Hickenlooper. And the Secretary of State will, according to this und erstanding which you have, abandon or transfer to you 

his authority over these 760.

Mr. R owan. No.

Let me make it clear, because there is a technical point here. The 

Secretary of State controls the Foreign Service. We recognize tha t 

clearly in USIA, and that is why these 760 names went through the 

Secretary of State for his approval, and then to the President to be 

sent here, and the Secretary of State will retain the final authority 

given to him under the Foreign Service Act of 1946.

But he has spelled out in the letter of agreement the fact tha t in 

terms of operation, in terms of USI A’s operational autonomy tha t 

does not view this step as wiping out our autonomy or keeping us 

from directing those employees in a proper manner.

Senator Hickenlooper. By the same authority with which he made 

tha t agreement or understanding with your Agency it can be rescinded 

by a Secretary of S tate; can it not ?

Mr. R owan. It could be.

Senator Hickenlooper. If this transfer is made the Secretary of 

State could create some of these 760 as consuls general or counselors.

Mr. Rowan. Or Ambassadors; tha t is correct, but because these 

officers are under the operational control of U SIA they would not be 

pulled away from the Agency without my concurrence.

Senator Hickenlooper. Counselors of embassy, or first secretary, 

second secretary.

Mr. R owan. This is correct, with my concurrence as to their release 

for such assignments.

Senator Hickenlooper. In other words, they would be or could be at 

will taken out of the Info rmation Service for which they were hired

47-580—6! 3
30 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

and to which their primary obligations pointed when the Agency was 

set up ; is that correct ?

Mr. Rowan. This is correct, and I also th ink eminently desirable, 

Senator, because this business of dispensing information or influencing 

people involves a great deal more than simply putting out pamphlets 

or writing articles for a newspaper or giving radio broadcasts and my 

officers pick up some vitally needed skills by serving in some of these 

political jobs in the State Department.

W H O PA YS T H E SA LA RY OF T H E TRANSF ER EE S?

Senator Hickenlooper. If these "60 should be transferred to the 

Foreign Service, do you expect to go out and hire 760 more to work in 

the Information Agency not in the Foreign Service ?

Mr. Rowan. No; I do not expect to go out to hire anybody to replace any of these 760. They would still be in effect my employees. 

I would be responsible for paying for them, paying their salaries, and 

so forth, and I don’t have the kind of budget th at would permit me to 

go out and hire 10 more, let alone 760.

Senator Hickenlooper. You mean tha t you would have a separate 

budget for these 760 ?

Mr. Rowan. Yes.

Senator Hickenlooper. After they are transferre d into the Foreign 

Service?

Mr. Rowan. Tha t is correct. They would be budgeted to USIA .

Senator H ickenlooper. They would not be budgeted to the Foreign 

Service then ?

Mr. Rowan. The Foreign Service itself has no budget. The Foreign 

Service is financially supported by all the various agencies who use the 

officers of the Foreign Service of the United States, is that correct ?

Mr. Crockett. Senator, at the present time the State Department 

isn't paying for all Foreign Service officers that are Foreign Service 

officers.

Officers that are serving with other agencies at the present time are 

paid, their salaries are paid, by the other agencies.

Senator Hickenlooper. Technically, are they paid by the other 

agencies or does the other agency reimburse the State Department for 

their pay ?

Mr. Crockett. Reimbursement generally but the budget of the other 

agency bears the brunt, and if we could think of the Foreign Service, if 

we would th ink of the Foreign Service of the U nited States, as being 

similar in concept, not exactly, but similar in concept, to the civil 

service, this gives us the relationship of a body of people to agencies 

that, T think, is needed to see how this will work.

Senator Hickenlooper. It is difficult under those circumstances to 

see why there is any necessity for blanketing these people into the socalled Foreign Service. They would be a separate group but continue 

to be the same group set up to continue or to do this work.

Mr. Crockett. Because at the present time we don’t have overseas 

any uniform personnel system similar to the uniform personnel system 

on the domestic side, and what we are trying to do, and we believe that 

the Foreign Service of the United States, the act of 1946. is a basic,
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 31

good, usable foreign affairs personnel system and that, therefore, these 

employees o f USIA ought to have the advantages of that personnel 

system.

This is what it really boils down to.

ADVANTAGES GAINED BY TRAN SFE R

Senator Hickenlooper. We hear complaints periodically tha t the 

pay and allowances, the housing, and the so-called hardship differen­ tial, for instance, in AID are not the same as they are in many cases in the Foreign Service. To my knowledge, in talking to some people from time to time, that is a source of friction between the AID and Foreign Service people—the number of automobiles they have access to, the houses that they can rent, and all this, t hat and the other com­ plaints th at go into these things. It seems to me that, as I said at the outset, that this may very well be a camel getting its head under the tent. I frankly can’t see any great advantages to this, except that these 760 employees that are transferre d, want to be strictly in the Foreign Service Corps which will give them better retirement advantages, and certain other emoluments that they might not otherwise, enjoy.

Mr. Crockett. Senator, 1 think if it were only because people wanted it, we wouldn’t be up here before you, because this isn’t the major, even any large, portion of why we are doing it. We are doing it because we* think tha t the national interest is being served by this, that the people involved in this are the same kind of people, th at the selection- out. provisions alone ap plying against these 760 is worth the effort in 

getting this done in terms of national interest.

Senator H ickenlooper. Th at may be true.

Senator L ausche. Will the Senator yield for a moment?

Senator H ickenlooper. Yes.

Senator L ausche. Could we have placed in the record a t this point a tabulation in parallel columns at what age a civil service employee may retire, at what age a Foreign Service officer may retire, the retire­ ment benefits, the premiums required to be paid, the rig ht of survivor widows and survivor children. Pu t that in the record so tha t we will 

be able to see clearly what the differences are.

Mr. Crockett. Right, sir.

(The information referred to follows:)
00

to

Compariso n of provisions— Civil service retirement system 

1 and Foreign Service retirement system

Civil service

Coverage........... . .................... Automatically covers Federal and District of Colu mbia government em­ ployees generally, unless tem por ary, inter mi tte nt, or subject to another retirem ent system for Gove rnment employees.

Cur rent c on trib ut io ns .........Creditable service...................

Prior service cr edit________

Employee: 6,Mj percent of basic salary . Agency: Matching V/i percent since Jul y 1,1957. Civilian:

Credits all service as employee of th e Federal and District of Columbia Governments.No sim ilar provision; no credit in excess of calendar tim e................... .........

Military: Credits free, all honorable activ e service in U.S. Arm y, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard, and including service as commissioned officer in Public Heal th Service after June 30, 1960, and Coast and Geo­ detic Survey after Jun e 30, 1961, performed before separa tion on which annuity title based. Receipt of mi lita ry retire d pay bars credit for milita ry service unless retired pay is (a) based on disability incurred in enemy combat or caused by an ins trume nt of war in line of dut y; or (6) gr anted u nde r (reservist) provisions of chap. 67, titl e 10, United States Code. No credit for mi lita ry service performed after December 1956 if employee or his widow or child receives or is eligible to receive month ly old-age or survivors’ social secu rity benefits based on wages or self-employment income.

Cre dit for past civilian service from Aug. 1, 1920: (1) If no deductions take n, service credited with or withou t deposit, bu t annual rate of ann uity is reduced by 10 percent of unpaid deposit. (2) If deductions refunded und er civil service retirement or any other Federal retirement system, the period covered by the refund is cred­ ited toward annuity only if redep osit is made of refunded amount, plus interest.

(3) No p rovision____________________ ____________ _______________

Foreign Service

Automa tically covers all Foreign Service officers, all non-Foreign Service officers who serve at least 20 years as chiefs of missions, and all Foreign Service Staff officers and employees with 10 or more years’ continuous service in Foreign Service. (Foreign Service Staff personnel subject to civil service re tirement un til covered by Foreign Service Reserve.)

Employee: 6 ^ percent of basic salary. Agency: Matchin g 61f> per­ cent since July 1,1961. Civilian:

Credits all service as employee of the Federal and District of Columbia Governments, provided appropriate contributions made to cover service.

Special provision for tune and one-half credit for service at un- healthful posts, unless salary differential received. Military:

Credits free, all honorable active service in U.S. Arm y, Navy, Air Force, Marine Corps, or Coast Guard performed before sepa ratio n as par ticipant in system.

Same as civil service retirem ent.

No provision.

Credit for past civilian service from Ju ly 1, 1924: (1) Credited only if deposit made.

(2) If Foreign Service Reserve deductions are refunded, the period covered by the refund is credited toward annuity only if redeposit is m ade of refunded am ount, plus interest. Refunded periods under other retirement system s are sub ­ ject to deposit at Foreign Service Reserve contribution rates.

(3) If member of another Federal re tirement system moves w ith ­ out break to Foreign Service Reserve participation, the regular contributions, with interest, und er other system are transferred to Foreign Service Reserve fund a nd operate to pay up th e service involved.

UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS
An nu ity com putation ...........

Types of an nu ity ....................

General re quirem ents for an­ nu ity tit le.

Percent of salary—deposit computations: Aug. 1, 1920, to June 30, 1926, 2)4 percent. Jul y 1, 1926, to Ju ne 30, 1942, 3)4 percent. Ju ly 1, 1942, to June 30, 1948, 5 percent. July 1, 1948, to Sept. 30, 1956, 6 percent. Oct. 1, 1956, to , 6)4 percent. Credits civilian service prior to Aug. 1, 1920, and all m ilitary service, withou t deposit.

Credits free, leaves of absence witho ut pay from covered emp loyment while receiving disa bility compensation (Federal Employees’ Compensation Act) or while performing milita ry service (not exceeding 5 years); other leave witho ut pay up to 6 months in an y calendar year. General formula:

1)4 percent (or $25 plus 1 percent) of “ high-5” average salary m ultiplied by 5 years of service; plu s 1% percent (or $25 plus 1 percent) of “ high-5” average salary multiplied by years of service between 5 and 10; plus 2 percent (or $25 plus 1 percent) of “high-5” average salary m ultiplied by years of service over 10. Maximum basic annu ity —80 percent of “higli-5” average salary ______ Special credit:

Dedu ctions taken after completion of service producing 80 percent maxi­ mu m annu ity form a special credit. “E xcess” deductions, with 3 per­ cent interest t o retirement or death date, are applied: (1) To pay any unpaid deposit or redeposit for past service. (2) Any balance, or full sum if no deposit owing, refun dable upon sepa ratio n or m ay be applied as volu ntary contribution to pur­ chase additiona l annu ity. Minimum disability an nui ty: No t less th an smaller of: (a) 40 percent of “ high-5” average salary, or (ft) amoun t obtained under general formula after increasing actu al service by time between separation d ate and date employee will at tai n age 60. Increase und er minimum disab ility formula cannot increase annuity to any survivor.

Special formula (retirem ent after 20 or more years’ hazardous law-enforce­ me nt service):

2 percent of “high-5” average sala ry m ulti plied by all years of service, with maximum on basic an nu ity 80 percent of “high-5” average salary. Single life—Available to all re tiring employees...................................................... Red uced an nu ity with benefit to widow or widower.

—Available to all retiring mar ried employees. An nu ity reduc tion: 2)4 percent of 1st $3,600, plus 10 |X*rcent of amoun t over $3,600, of sum elected as base for surviv or’s annu ity . Survivor receives 55 percent of base am oun t elected. Redu ced an nu ity with benefit to person nam ed.

—Available to any retiring unm arri ed employee determined to be in good hea lth. Only person with insurable inte res t” may be named as survivor. An nuity reduction: 10 percent of annu ity , plus 5 percent for each full 5 years the nam ed surv ivor is younger than re tiree, total not to exceed 40 percent. Survivor receives 50 percent of retiree’s reduced rate. At least 5 years’ civilian service, inclu ding 1 yea r’s covered emp loym ent out of last 2, unless separation is by death or for disab ility retirem ent.

Percent of salary

—deposit computations: July 1, 1924, to Oct. 15, 1960, 5 percent. Oct. 16,1960, to , 6)4 percent.

Credits civilian service prior to July 1, 1924, a nd all m ilitary service, witho ut deposit. Same as civil service retirement, except no 5-year limit on credit while serving in military.

General formula:

2 perc ent of “high-5” average salary m ultiplied by years of service not exceeding 35.

Maximum basic a nnuity—70 percent of “higli-5” average. Special credit: None provided.

Minim um disability ann uity : Actual service, if less, extended to 20 years, bu t time added to actu al service m ay not exceed difference between age at retire­ me nt and mandatory retirem ent age for class of position. No such limitation.

No provision; general formula only.

Same as civil service retire ment.

Do.

An nu ity reductions: 2)4 percent of 1st $2,400, plus 10 percent of amo unt over $2,400, of sum elected as base for su rviv or’s annuit y. Survivor receives 50 percent of base am oun t elected. Same as civil service retirement, except no “insurable intere st” re­ quirement.

Same as civil service retirement.

UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

At least 5 years’ pa id up civilian service. Qo

W

4
<

Comparison of provisions— Civil service retireme nt system 1 and Foreign Service retirement system— Co nti nued

Civil service

CO

Foreign Service

Mandatory (age) retirem ent.. At or after age 70 with at least 15 yea rs’ service. President m ay grant exemp­ tion if deemed in publi c inter est. Pre sident ’s exemption autho rity dele­ gated to Civil Service Comm ission in respect to non-Preside ntial appointees. Certain Alaska Railroad and Pan ama Can al Governm ent employees sub ­ ject to m and ato ry retirement at or after age 62 with at least 15 years Alaskan or P anam a service. Generally at age 60, but with special tr ansiti onal provisions for higher ages for certain FS Stall personnel and with age 65 specified for career ministers an d ambassadors. Secretary m ay gr ant exemption for u p to 5 years if in public interest. Chiefs of Missions an d other officials appointed b y Preside nt with Senate confirmation, no t su b­ ject to manda tory retirem ent while so serving.

Volun tary retirem ent (im­ med iate annuity). M in im um M in im um years age service Other condition 62 5 None.

60 30 None.

>55 30 None.

* Any 25 Invo lving separation. 150 20 Do.

50 *20 Agency he ad’s consent.

M in im um M in im u m years Other condit ion

age service 60 5 None.

50 20 None.

57 10 Foreign Service Stall, 57 or older on Oct. 16, 1960.

Disab ility retirem ent (im­ med iate annuity). After 5 ye ars’ civilian service: To tal disability for position held; not due to vicious habits or willful misconduct within 5 years preceding onset of dis­ ability. Annua l medical exam inatio n until age 60 unless disability rated perm anen t.

An nuity continues for life unless retiree found recovered or restored to earning capa city before age 60. Earnin g capacity deemed restored if in each of 2 succeeding calendar years in­ come from wages or self-employment is 80 percent or m ore of curre nt rate of pay for position from which retired. An nuity of retiree found recovered or restored to earning capacity stop s (1) on reem ployment in Governm ent, (2) 1 year from date of medical exam inatio n showing recovery, or (3) 1 year from end of calendar year in which earning capacity was restored. No rein statement right, bu t agencies are urged to app ly a policy of rehiring former disability retirees.

Recovered disa bility retiree not reemployed in covered position receives (1) immediate annu ity as though involuntarily separated , if 50-20 age-service or 25-year service requirem ent met, or (2) deferred an nu ity at age 62; or

Terminated disability a nnuity may be reinsta ted if no covered reemploym ent and before age 62 (1) disability recurs or (2) income for a full year falls below 80 percent of current pa y for position from which retired.

After 5 years’ civilian service: Total disability for position held; not due to vicious habits or willful misconduct.

Ann ual exa mination until m and atory retirem ent age for class, unless disa bility rate d perm anen t. An nuity co ntinues for life unless retiree found recovered before man datory retirement age for class. No provision.

An nui ty of retiree found recovered stops (1) upon reinstatement or reappo intm ent in Foreign Service, or (2) 6 months from date of medical exam inatio n showing recovery.

Recovered disa bility retiree entitle d to rein statement in Foreign Service upon application to Secretary of State within 1 year from recovery date. Recovered disability retiree not reinstated or reappointed to Foreign Service receives: (1) immediate non disa bility annuity if 50-20 age- service conditions met, (2) deferred annu ity a t age 60, or (3) refun d of unexpended balance of contributions, if elected. No provision.

UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

• Annuity reduced Ha percent for each of 1st 60 mo nths under age 60 (1 per­ cent a year), plus H percent for each additional month, if any, under age 60 (2 percent a year). 2 Special provision for h azardous-duty law enforcers; 20 years’ law-enforce­ me nt service required.

4
Re fund...................................

De ath benefits........................

Employee sepa rated after 5 or more years’ civilian service and before eligible for Immediate re tirement entitled to full annuity at age 62. Choice of refund of contributions in lieu of deferred annu ity , if separation occurs and refund claim filed at least 31 days before commencing date of ann uity. Refund cancels annuity right unless there is a return to covered employment___ Available upon separation from Gove rnment service or transfer to employm ent subje ct to another Federal retirement system provided separation or tra ns­ fer occurs an d refund is claimed a t least 31 days before beginning d ate of any annuity for which eligible. Refund only benefit due employee separated or transferred to noncovered position a fter less than 6 years’ civilian service. Autom atic survivor annuitites

— Eligibles: Widow: Surviving wife m arried to employee at least 2 years next prio r to death, or m other of issue by the ir marriage. Dependent widower: Surv iving husb and

— (1) mar ried to employee at least 2 years next prior to dea th, or father of issue by their marriage; (2) incapable of self-support due to disability: and (3) dependent on employee for more than of supp ort. Child: Unmarried child, und er age 18 or incapable of self-support due to disability incurred before age 18 includes adopte d child and stepchild or recognized natu ral child who receives more than its sup port from and lived with employee in regular parent-child relationship. If wife or husban d survives employee, a child qualifies only if it received more than of supp ort from the employee. Basis for annuity: Death during covered emp loyment after at least 5 ye ars’ civilian service provides automatic a imuity to all types of eligibles. De ath after retirem ent provides basis for autom atic ann uity to child eligi­ bles only. Ann uities provided: To widow or dependent widower of employee: 55 percent of em ployee’s aim uity computed on “high-5” salary and actual service under general (or special law-enforcer) formula. To each child (if spouse also survives): Lea st of:

(1) $600; (2) $1,800, divided b y num ber of children; (3) 40 percent of employee’s “h igh-5” salary, divided b y num ber of children.

To each child (if no spouse survives): Least of:

(1) $720; (2) $2,160, divided b y numb er of children; (3) 50 percent of employee’s “h igh-5” salary, divided by n umber of children.

Employee separated after 5 or more years’ civilian service an d before eligible for imm edia te retirem ent en title d to full annuity at age 60. Choice of refund of contr ibutions iu lieu of deferred ann uity.

Same as civil service retirem ent.

Available upon separation from Foreign Service or transfer to em ploy­ ment subject to another Federal retirement system before eligible to retire.

Same as civil service retirement.

Do.

Do.

Death after retirem ent—retiree’s spouse receives annu ity only if nam ed und er reduced a nn uity election a t r etirement.

To widow or dependent widower of employee: 50 percent of em­ ployee’s annuity computed und er min imu m disa bility annu ity formula.

Same as civil service retirem ent.

Do.

UNIT ED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

CO

C/I
CO

05

Comparison of provisions— Civil service retirement system 

1 and Foreign Service retirement system— Co ntinued

Civil service

Reem ployment of annuitants .

Elective surv ivor annuities:

To widow or widower designated at time of retireme nt: 55 percent of amoun t elected by retiree as base for spouse’s survivor ann uity. To person nam ed: 55 percent of retiree’s reduced ra te. Du ration of survivor annuities:

To spouse: Commences day after death of employee or retiree. Term­ inates at end of month preceding dea th or remarriage, and in case of dependent widower, on his becoming capable of self-support. To child: Commences day after dea th of employee or retiree. Termi­ nate s at end of month preceding death , marriage, age 18 (or if attend­ ing school age 21), or (if over 18) recovery of capability of self-support. To person named: Commences day after dea th of retiree. Termi­ nates at end of m onth preceding death. Lum p su m benefits: Accumulated contribu tions payable immediately in lum p sum und er specified order of precedence if deceased employee has less th an 5 years’ civilian service, or if service exceeds 5 years but leaves no survivor eligible for a nnuity. Also payable where deferred annu ity eligible dies before retirem ent age. balance of con tributions not returned in form of an nu ity are payable in lum p sum upon term ination of all righ ts to retirem ent and survivor annuity . Accrued an nuity remaining unp aid at death of retiree or surv ivor is payable und er a specified order of precedence. Reem ployment outside Governm ent: Annui ty continues _______ ____ _____ Reem ployment in Government: An nuity c ontinues, no re tire ment deductions are tak en, a nd salary of re­ emp loym ent position is reduced by amoun t of annuity received, in all cases except those of disab ility retirees found recovered or restored to earning capa city and retirees receiving annuities based on inv olu nta ry sepa ration. If final period of reem ploy men t service consists of at least 1 year of contin­ uous fu ll-time service (other than service unde r another retire ment sys­ tem for Federal or District of Columbia employees, or as President or a judge of the United Sta tes), retiree is eligible at separation for suppleme n­ tal annu ity computed on reemploym ent service and salary. If 5 or more year s’ continuous full-time service performed as described, retiree may at sepa ratio n elect to deposit for the service and qualify for complete recomp utation as thoug h retirin g for the 1st time. Recovered or restored disability retiree a nd involun tary-sep aration retiree may resume covered employm ent. Reemployment term inates ann uity, deductions are resumed, and an nu ity righ ts are completely redeter­ mined upon sub sequent separation.

Foreign Service

Same as civil service retireme nt, except amoun t is 50 percent of sum elected by retiree as base for spouse’s survivor an nuity.

To spouse: Commences day after dea th of employee or retiree. Terminates upon deat h and, in case of dep endent widower, on his becoming capable of self-support. To child: Commences 1st of month following dea th of employee or, retiree. Terminates upon death, marriage, att ain me nt of age 18 or (if over 18) upon becoming capable of self-support. To person nam ed: Commences 1st of month following death of retiree. Terminates upon death.Same as civil service retirement.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Reemployment in Gove rnment (except Foreign Service): Receives full salary of reem ploy ment position plus so much of an nu ity which, when added to salary, does n ot exceed the base salary received at time of retire ment from Foreign Service. If covered by another Federal retirem ent system, retiree may con tribute and earn annuity und er other system . No provision.

UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

An nu ity of retiree recalled to Foreign Service is term inated; deductions resume and his annuity is compu ted anew when he sub sequently separates from Foreign Service.

«
Add itio nal an nu ity by volun ta ry deposits.

Disabi lity an nu ity is suspended and resumed at same rate, in case of tem por ary reemploym ent of dis ability retiree und er age 60 who has n ot been found recovered or r estored to earning capacity. An nuity continues, no retirem ent deductions are tak en, and salary is re­ duce d by annu ity received, in case of temporary or inter mitte nt reem­ ployme nt of involuntary -sep aration retiree. An nuity is no t increased by reem ploy ment. Dur ing covered employment, volunt ary deposits in multiple s of $25 (up to 10 percent of basic salary received since Aug. 1,1920) m ay be made t o purchase add itional annuity a t retirement.

Inte rest, 3 percent compounded annua lly________________________________ Amount of addition al a nn uity is $7 for each $100 in volun tary ac coun t, w ith $7 increased by 20 cents for each full year employee is over age 55 at retirem ent. Survivor a nnuity may be elected. Survivor reduction is 10 percent of addi­ tional a nn uity, plus 5 percent for each full 5 years nam ed survivor is young er, the to tal red uction not to exceed 40 percent. Survivor receives 50 percent of retiree’s reduced ra te for life.

Refundable to depositor at any time prior to his receipt of additional a nnuity.. Refundable as lum p-su m dea th benefit in case of death in service___________

No provision.

Do.

During covered employ men t, voluntary deposits in multiple s of 1 percent (maximum 10 percent of current basic salary) m ay be m ade based generally on salary received since Jul y 1, 1939, to purchase additional an nu ity a t re tirement. Same as civil service re tirement.

Amount of additional an nu ity is calculated on actuarial basis, under mo rtality tables prescribed by Secretary of the Treasury from tim e to time. Amount varies according to age at retirement, age of beneficiary, and whether guarante ed return of unexpend ed princ i­ pal is elected.

Refundable to depositor upon reti rem ent or other separation. Same as civil service retirement.

• Omits special provisions for Members of Congress and congressional employees.

UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

CO

- I
38 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Mr. Rowan. Mr. Chairman, I might say th at, in terms of what is 

to be gained by this, in the President’s statement of October 3 lie 

listed five points, which he deemed to be advantageous to the Government of the United States. I must say 1 think that these sum up 

pretty well the reasons why we want to have this action approved.

(The statement referred to follows:)

T h e W h it e H ouse, Oc tober 3, 1964.

Sta te m e n t by t h e P res id en t

I am pleased to announce an action taken by the Secretary of State and the Director of the U.S. Inform ation Agency which will do much to provide the United 

States with a more flexible and effective Foreign Service.

Under the new arrangement, the vast majority of USIA career Foreign Service officers will become an integral part of the Foreign Service. Affected will be 

almost 900 officers now working for the Information Agency. The arrangement 

wi ll:

(1) Provide a single pool of carefully selected, highly trained talen t from 

which both agencies may draw to fill key posts.

(2) Increase substantially the efficiency and the flexibility of those personnel available to represent the United States abroad.

(3) Permit a greater exchange of personnel between State and USIA, 

thus insuring tha t our officers acquire the wide range of experience and 

contacts so vitally necessary to the effective conduct of foreign policy.

(4) Meet recommendations of the Her ter committee, the Advisory Commission on Information, and various other study groups that USIA career 

officers be given the same rights and perquisites and be subjected to the 

same stringent judgment of performance as personnel already in the Foreign 

Service.

(5) Increase greatly the already high level of cooperation and joint planning between State and USIA.

In my opinion, this action, which I wholeheartedly endorse, is a major step 

forward in our constant efforts to improve the efficiency of the Foreign Service 

of the United States—a Service tha t is vitally necessary in an era when the 

burdens of world leadership are heavy upon us.

A U TH O R IT Y OF SE CTI ON 57 1

Senator Hickenlooper. There is one other question involving section 571 which limits the assignment of Foreign Service officers to 

US IA or to any other Government agency except the Department of 

State to 4 years.

Will you run afoul of th at section of the law ? If you blanket these 

people into the Foreign Service and assign them to US IA for 4 years 

and then they would have to be assigned someplace else unless the 

President or the Secretary, whoever has tha t authority, extends the 

assignment for another 4 years.

I am referring to section 571 of the act.

Mr. Rowan. Senator, I believe tha t this section was designed to 

cover domestic service or service in the United States, and tha t at 

USIA, we are under the same regulation as the State Department, as 

I understand it, we have an 8-year domestic assignment lim itation for 

our Foreign Service people.

Senator Hickenlooper. I th ink you have 4 years and 4.

Mr. Rowan. Fou r and four.

Senator Hickenlooper. If the discretion is exercised.

Can we clear tha t point up ? If these people go into th e Foreign 

Service and they are limited to a 4-year assignment to USIA, then
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATION S 39

they would run afoul of the law at the end of the 4 years unless the 

discretion was exercised to continue for another 4 years.

Mr. Rowan. The lawyers, our lawyers, those a t State, those at the Bureau of the Budget, in going th rough this, say there is no legal bar whatsoever to these officers being members of the Foreign Service and continuing, on an unlimited basis, their service in the U.S. Information 

Agency.

Senator Hickenlooper. Could we have a comment submitted for 

the record on that point citing the law ?

Mr. Rowan. Yes, we can.

Senator Hickenlooper. With special reference to section 571?

Mr. Rowan. Yes, we can.

(The information referred to follows:)

Authority of Sections 516 and 517 of the Foreign Service Act of 1946, as

Amended, for Appointment of USIA Officers as Foreign Service Officers

and P ossible Applicability of Section 57 1(a)

Questions were rais ed in the course of th e Senate Fore ign Relations Committee hea ring on the nomination by the President of 760 U.S. Inform ation Agency officers to he Foreign Service officers of the United States, regard ing the legal autho rity for such appo intm ents and the possible applicab ility of section 571(a) of the Fore ign Service Act to the assignment of such officers for duty in the 

U.S. Inform ation Agency. I. The sta tutory au tho rity for the appo intm ent by the President, by and with the advice a nd consent of the Senate, of qualified Agency Fore ign Service Career Reserve officers a s Foreign Service officers of the United States is contained in sections 516 a nd 517 of the Foreign Service Act of 1946, a s amended (22 U.S.C. 

911 an d 912) (see tex t a tta ch ed ). Section 516 authorizes the ini tia l appo intm ent of junio r officers to class 7 or 8, while section 517 authorizes the appointment as Foreign Service officer, class 1 to 7 inclusive, of persons who have passed comprehensive examin atio ns pre­ scribed by the Board of Examiners for the Fore ign Service: who have served in a position of respo nsibility in “a Government agency, or agencies” for at lea st 4 years if under age 31, or 3 yea rs if age 31 or ove r; and othe rwise meet 

the sta nd ards of the Service. These sections authorize entry into the Foreign Service Officer Corps of q uali­ fied personnel from any U.S. Government agency. The Foreign Service Act sets no limits on the numbers th at may be so taken into the corps. The Agency’s C areer Reserve officers (in all classes) whose names are before the Senate fo r confirmation for appointment as Foreign Service officers have 

qualified und er the crite ria of sections 516 or 517 for such appointment to an 

app ropriate clas s of the Foreign Service Officer Corps. Such officers will continue to serve in the Agency. II. With reg ard to the question raised regarding section 571(a), th at section 

rea ds a s follows : “Any officer or employee of the Service may, in the discretion of the Secretary, be assigned or detailed for duty in any Government agency, or in any intern a­ tion al organization, intern ational commission, or intern ational body, such an assignment or combination of assignm ents to be for a period of not more tha n fou r years, except that under special circumstances the Secretary may extend this four-year period for not more than fou r additional yea rs : Provided, That 

in individual case s when personally approved by the Secretary fu rthe r extension 

may be made.” The purpose of the section is to lim it assignments or details of Fore ign Service personnel within the United Sta tes to a maximum of 8 years, except th at under special circumstanc es the Secreta ry of State may extend such assignment or detail upon his personal approval. Section 571 (a) does not have any applica­ tion to assignments or details to posts abro ad whethe r or not such assig nments or details are for the purpose of car ryi ng out functio ns of the Department of State, the U.S. Inform atio n Agency, or of any other agency.
40 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

This inte ntion is clea rly evident from congressional reports accompanying the 

original Foreign Service Act of 1946 as well as reports issued with regard to 

subsequent amendm ents to section 571 of that act.

For example, the report of the Committee on Foreign Affairs to accompany 

H.R. 6967 (subsequently enacted as the Fore ign Service Act of 1946) includes 

the following with regar d to section 571:

“Indeed, statute fixes the maximum period of a Washington assignment as 

four ye ars * * (H. Rept. 2508.)

The rep ort of the Committee on Foreign Affairs to accompany H.R. 4941 

(II. Rept. 229. Mar. IS, 1955) to amend the Foreign Service Act includ es the 

following comment on a proposed amendment to section 571(a) of the act to 

extend the maximum permissible perio d of domestic assignment from 4 to 8 

yea rs :

“Section 6 will authorize the Secretary of State, in special circumstances, to 

perm it Fore ign Service personnel assigned to home duty in the Departme nt of 

Sta te or to duty in ano ther Government agency to extend the existing four-year 

limit on such service for an additional four years.”

The report of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs on H.R. 7885, the 

Foreign Assistance Act of 1963 (H. Rept. 646 of Aug. 8, 1963) includes the following comment on section 403 (a) of the bill which amended section 571 (a) of the 

Foreign Service Act to extend the maximum permissible period of domestic 

assignment beyond 8 yea rs :

“The amendment is intended to provide the Secretary with a small element of 

flexibility in these few insta nces when it will be to the advantage of the D epa rtment to ret ain an individual on assignmen t in the United Sta tes beyond eight 

years.”

A comm ittee print entitled “Proposed amen dments to the Foreign Service Act 

of 1946. as amended, subm itted by the Dep artm ent of Sta te” for the use of the 

Committee on Foreign Affairs dated March 22. 1963, includ es the following 

explana tion of the proposed amendment to section 571 to authorize the Secretary 

under special circumstances to extend domestic Foreign Service assignments 

beyond 8 y ears :

“Under existing provisions such an assignment to the United Sta tes as opposed 

to an assignm ent to a Foreign Service post abroad is limited to a period of not 

to exceed 4 yea rs which may, und er special circumstances, be extended by the 

Secretary for a period of not more than 4 additio nal years. The Secretary 

needs broad discretion ary authority with respect to the utilization of Foreign 

Service personnel. The proposed ame ndment will authorize the Secretary to 

approve in individual cases the extension of such assignments beyond the 

maxim um period of 8 years when he determines it is in the best intere st of the 

Government to do so.”

Thus, section 571(a) does not restr ict the duration which Foreign Service 

officers may serve in the U.S. Inform ation Agency. It does, however, limit the 

duratio n of any statesid e assignm ent of a Foreign Service officer serving in 

USIA, o r indeed, in any o ther de partm ent or agency.

ADM IS SI O N TO CL AS S 7 OR 8

“Sec. 516. (a) No person shall be eligible for appointment, as a Foreign Service officer of class 8 unless he has passed such written , oral, physical, and other 

examinations as the Board of Examiners for the Foreign Service may presc ribe 

to determin e his fitness and aptitude for th e work of th e Service and h as demonstr ate d his loyalty to the Government of the United States and his attachm ent 

to the principles of the Constitution. The Secretary shall furnish the President 

with the names of those persons who have passed such examinations and are 

eligible for appointm ent as Foreign Service officers of class 8.

“ (b) The Sec retary may furnis h the President with the name s of those persons who have passed such exa minations and are eligible for appointment as 

Foreign Service officers of class 8, whom he recommends for appointment directly 

to class 7 when in his opinion, their age, experience, or other qualification s make 

such an appo intm ent app rop riate.”

ADM IS SI ON TO CLA SS ES 1 TO 7, IN CLU SI VE

“Sec. 517. A person who has not been appo inted as a Foreign Service officer 

in accordance with section 516 of th is Act shall not be eligible for appointment 

as a Fore ign Service officer of classes 1 to 7. inclusive, unless he has passed comprehensive mental and physical exa minations presc ribed by the Boa rd of Ex-
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 41

aminers for the Fore ign Service to determine his fitn ess and aptitude for the 

work of the Service; dem onstrat ed his loyalty to the Government of the United 

Sta tes and his att achm ent to the principles of the Constitu tion, and rend ered at 

lea st four yea rs of actual service prior to the appointment in a position of 

responsibility in the serv ice of a Government agency, or agencies, except that, 

if he has reached the age of thirty-one years, the requirement as to service may 

he reduced to three years. The Secretary shall furni sh the President with the 

names of those persons who shall have passed such examinations and are 

eligible for appointment as Foreign Service officers of classes 1 to 7, inclusive. 

The Secretary shall, taking into consideration the age, qualifications, and experience of each can did ate for appointment, recommend the class to which he 

sha ll be appointed in accordance with the provisions of thi s section.”

IS T H E R E A SURPL US OF FO REIG N SE RV ICE OFF IC ER S?

Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Crockett, this question probably should 

be addressed more specifically to you. Is there not now a surplus of 

foreign officers over and above the positions in the table of organization of the Department of State and of the various Foreign Service 

posts ?

Mr. Crockett. No, sir: tha t is not true. There are more than 200 

vacancies that I know of that we are searching fo r officers to till. We 

are looking for good people. We have ability to take in good people 

when we find them. We are takin g in people righ t along when they 

are qualified, so that this is not a true statement, sir.

Senator Hickenlooper. Mr. Rowan, if this transfer should go 

through, or i f these confirmations should go through, will all the positions now filled by US IA personnel abroad be filled by these people 

who are confirmed or will people who did not make the dean’s list 

here, serve in these places ?

Mr. Rowan. These people do not constitute a large enough corps 

to fill all my posts abroad. They will fill some of them. There will be 

other individuals, for example; T have a Foreign Service limited reserve of people who were not eligible for this process, they will fill 

some of the posts overseas.

Now, as for the 100-odd people who did not make the list, were 

not recommended or nominated here, I have named a committee of top 

officers in the Agency to go over this list, man by man and make recommendations to me as to what should be done with these individuals. 

Some will be let go completely. Others are in a category where because they have a specific or a limited skill are quite valuable to the 

Agency in some of its operations but were not deemed officers of broad 

enough scope to be recommended here as Foreign Service officers, 

they probably will be retained in another category.

Senator Hickenlooper. Won’t they be unhappy because they are not 

in the Foreign Service and they do not have quite the same status and 

so on ?.

Mr. Rowan. To be perfectly frank, Senator, there may be quite a 

few people in the hund red or so who did not make the list who are 

and will be unhappy but I recommended only those whom I thought I 

could recommend in good conscience and consonant with my duty to 

the Government.

Senator H ickenlooper. Did you make any solicitation or circularization of the people in your Agency on this proposition to see who 

would like to be tran sferred ?

Mr. R owan. No, we did not in tha t context, Senator. This has been 

a question for quite a number of years. The Advisory Commission to
42 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

the Agency lias recommended Foreign Service status for quite a few 

years, so I was aware tha t this was something tha t was acceptable.

Wha t I did do was to p ut this proposal to a meeting of most of my 

top career officers in Washington, and I explained to them, for example, th at there were some risks involved, that I wanted selection out 

in the Agency because it would improve the caliber of personnel, the 

performance of the Agency, and that they ran the risk of being selected 

out. We have not had, to my knowledge, a single individual, a single 

one of these 760 say he is not willing to run that risk because each of 

these men thinks he is qualified, that he is part of an elite corps.

RE COM M EN DATI ON OF ADVIS ORY COM M IS SI O N

Senator Hickenlooper. Among the recommendations of the report 

of the U.S. Advisory Commission on Information, I find this sentence 

in the last paragraph of page 2 which reads as follows:

Although this Commission would have pre ferred sep ara te legislation as a 

first step tow ard eventual amalgam ation, it is hoped th at the impleme ntation of 

this agreement will be conducted with care, fairness, and patienc e on both sides 

and with due regard for the equities of the officers whose records are being 

reviewed prior to official acceptance into the Foreign Service of th e United States.

Then the following sentence:

The Commission also hopes thi s can be done without USIA’s suffering the loss 

of its inde pen den ce; th at is, its role and voice as an independ ent agency of 

government.

That is not the clearest statement in the world but I would get 

from reading it they said you h ad better move cautiously on this and I 

would not anticipate or I would not guess, at least, that they anticipated 

any wholesale blanketing in of hundreds of people into the Foreign 

Service, but a selective action here of a few at a time, if they proved 

worthy.

Mr. Rowan. No, that is not what they meant at all, Senator Hickenlooper. The members of the Commission have discussed this with me. 

They do indeed want the wholesale en masse lateraling into the Fo reign Service.

Senator Hickenlooper. Where do they say that ?

Mr. Rowan. They don’t say tha t here, but they have made this 

point to me before and when they say that they would have preferred 

separate legislation, what they wanted at one point was legislation 

to create a separate Foreign Service within the U.S. Information 

Agency.

Now, after studying it carefully and other top officers in the Agency 

came to the conclusion that while it would have made my independence 

much more manifest, that it was actually not in the interests of this 

country to have two foreign services, so I took the route of trying to 

get my officers who were qualified into the Foreign Service of the 

United States, and I might mention that we have indeed implemented 

the agreement with care, fairness, and patience, and with regard to 

their last sentence, I will make it abundantly clear tha t I am not here 

today to give up one iota of the independence of the U.S. Information 

Agency.

So, neither the Commission nor this committee need have any fear 

on that point.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATION S 43

EFFE C T ON USI A AUTO NOM Y

Senator Hickenlooper. This is the point where I have trouble. 

Tf you are going to keep it completely an independent, agency, why 

blanket your personnel into the Foreign Service?

Mr. Rowan. Because this is not a State Department Foreign Service. 

This is Foreign Service of the United States, and to have these U SIA 

officers in tha t Foreign Service does not, in my view, diminish my 

independence one whit. Those officers who work for me still take 

orders from me. I still report to the President of the United States, 

and I don’t see this as diminishing our independence at all.

Mr. Crockett. Senator, I think this is one of the conceptual breakthroughs, you might say, from what the act of 1946 did and what we 

are doing now.

The act, of 1946, the concept at tha t time, was tha t the State Departmen t had to run everything, and these agencies even though 

operating abroad were made a part of the State Department responsibility.

Wh at we have done here is to separate out agency responsibilities 

from a personnel system, and the personnel system is broader than the 

agencies themselves and, therefore, the people in th e personnel system 

can be, used by the agencies w ithout diminishing their responsibility 

or independence, exactly the same as civil service people in the United 

States can be used by many agencies without diminishing an agency’s 

independence of action and responsibility.

And this is a very, very real similarity between the two concepts.

Senator H ickenlooper. We have had those discussions in years past 

on how far the State D epartment should go as an op erating agency or 

whether it should remain really a foreign affairs agency from a diplomatic and international standpoint.

I will let some of the others question.

Senator Lausche. May I ask what tha t document is th at you were 

reading from ?

The Chairman. It is the report of the Advisory Commission.

Senator L ausche. Filed when?

Senator Hickenlooper. This was printed in 1965, filed April 12, 

1965.

The Chairman. Do you want to ask questions, Senator Pell ?

Senator P ell. I had one question or comment, I guess, basically.

I have seen the State Department Foreign Service organized and 

reorganized and the omelets made and unscrambled. I have seen the 

original nonexecution of the W ar Manpower Act reduced to Wristonization afterward. Now I am very sympathetic to the Department’s 

efforts to unscramble the omelet of Wristonization, and get people back 

into the staff jobs—the career vice consuls and consuls who entered the 

Department and did not want to be in the Foreign Service, thus making more elite and smaller and centralizing the Foreign Service. It 

would seem to me th at that unscrambling program is completely contradictor}' to this program which is once again to dilute and enlarge 

the Foreign Service, and in tha t connection I would like to ask this 

specific question.
44 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

LA TE RA L E N TR Y OT EX TO USI A NO W

Is it not true tha t any man in the Information Service now who 

wants to be in the Foreign Service career service and is competent 

enough to pass the examination for lateral entry is presently eligible 

to take them ?

Mr. Crockett. That is true, Senator.

The difference here, though, is that lateral entry in its pre-U SIA- •

State agreement concept was lateral entry into the narrower confines of the Foreign Service that gave most of its effort to the State 

Department, and what we are t rying to develop and what we are try ­

ing to bring about is the fullness of the Foreign Service Act which •

says we have a Foreign Service of the United States, fulfilling the 

broad interests of the United States abroad, and I believe the USIA 

interests are pa rt of our broad interests abroad.

I believe that the professionalism required of those officers is similar 

to the professionalism of the Foreign Service, very akin to it, with the 

same qualities of conduct and suitability and, therefore, it seems to 

me what we are doing here is broadening the elite base of the political 

and economic and information base of the Foreign Service and it is, 

therefore, not inconsistent with what we are doing at you might 

say the staff level of putting some of those people back in a rejuvenated 

staff corps capacity so I don’t think of this as being inconsistent. I 

thin k really it. is consistent in terms of the professionalism of the 

other service.

Senator Pell. I would be very interested in the comments of Mr.

Palmer, the Director General of the Foreign Service.

Mr. P almer. I would agree entirely with what Mr. Crockett has 

just said on this, Senator. Tt seems to me it becomes more and more 

apparent tha t in the conduct of our foreign affairs tha t all of these 

things, all of the functions, or a great many of them, tha t we are 

performing overseas become very closely enmeshed and tha t for 

the maximum effectiveness in carrying out our policies and our programs we must assure, as I think the Jackson subcommittee reports 

have made very, very clear, the very closest coordination.

Now, I don t know of any two agencies whose work in the foreign 

affaire field is closer than those of the State Department and USIA .

The US IA officer must be completely well-versed in the political aspects, the economic aspects, the labor aspects of the area in which he 

is working. He cannot do his job in isolation. He has to do it in 

the very closest cooperation with the man in the Political Section, 

the Economic Section, the Labor Section.

Senator Pell. Excuse me for breaking in but wasn't it originally 

so? When you look back at the arguments about 15 years ago where 

they first appeared as a separate service they are exactly opposite to 

what you are saying—not exactly opposite. There were good reasons and probably those of us who will be around here a few years 

from now will see the swing in the other direction.

Mr. P almer. I am not sure, I think 15 years ago tha t we hadn't 

had the experience tha t we have since gained. I would like to say 

again, speaking from my experience as ambassador in the field and having worked with a USIA staff, I saw no difference really in the pro-
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 45

fessional functions that my U SIA staff had to discharge as compared 

with those which the embassy staff had to discharge.

Senator Pell. Why not urge them to take the lateral entry examinations ?

Mr. P almer. Well, this course o f action is, o f course, open to them. 

But I think that we are not looking at this problem, Senator, from 

the point of view of the individual officers. What we are looking at 

is in an institutional sense—whether or not the officers who perform 

these functions do not properly belong in the Foreign Service.

Mr. Rowan. Senator, let me make it clear that these officers did take 

oral, written, and other examinations which were certified bv the 

Board of Examiners as meeting all the requirements for the Foreign 

Service Act of 1946.

Senator P ell. Thank you very much, sir.

Mr. Crockett. It seems to me that it ought to be kept in mind that 

15 years ago or whenever it was U SIA was taken out, this was more 

of an organizational fight or concern and this has been answered in 

this agreement.

AGREE M ENT BETW EEN U SIA AN D ST AT E DEPA RTM EN T

The Chairman. While you have that, I wonder if that agreement 

between State and US IA cottld be put in the record ?

Mr. Crocketi'. Yes.

The Chairman. Will you supply tha t for the record ?

Mr. Rowan. Yes, indeed, sir.

(The inform ation referred to follows:)

T he Secretary of State. 

Washington, September 2, 196.'/. Hon. Carl T. Rowan,

Director, U.S. Information Agency.

Dear Carl: The Herter report recommended that USIA officers be given 

separate career status (recommendation No. 4) and tha t there should be 

developed a family of “Compatible services.” Their recommendation No. 6 

further stated tha t in the administration of these services there should be :

“a. substantial uniformity in personnel policies and equality in conditions of 

service;

“b. joint conduct of personnel operations wherever d esirable ;

“c. systematic interchange of personnel and provision for lateral tran sfer: 

and

“d. consideration of senior personnel of all three services in filling top executive posts in foreign affairs.”

The report addressed itself to matters of personnel coordination (recommendation No. 7), manpower planning (recommendation No. 12), recruitment of 

junior officers (recommendations Nos. 14, 15. 16, and 17). career development 

plans (recommendation No. 19), management by career lines (recommendation 

No. 20), promotion by specialized requirements (recommendation No. 23), rank 

of Career Minister and Ambassador to be available to USIA officers (recommendation No. 23), an improved system of performance evaluation (recommendation 

No. 25), a “pool of talent” available to all agencies for key executive jobs 

(recommendation No. 26), selection out (recommendation No. 27), and placing 

N^^29)°^C er S Un<^

e r foreign Service retirement system (recommendation

I am pleased to find tha t both of our agencies are in general agreement with 

the basic philosophy of most of these recommendations and that with the cooperation and help of your staff, we have already made considerable progress toward their implementation. I believe this experience has enabled us to visualize 

now how an integrated service could be achieved.
46 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

In considering the question of how we can best accommodate the caree r needs 

of USIA, I am convinced that the Fore ign Service Act of 1946 is sufficiently broad 

to accomplish this purpose. I am also fully convinced that the needs of USIA, the 

requirements of the Department of State and the total best intere st of the Governm ent as a whole will be be3t served by m aking USIA officers full caree r members of the Foreign Service.

I recognize t hat the effective o pera tion of your Agency req uires th at you retain 

ultimate control and operational autonomy over personnel required to staff 

your Agency. I am confident th at the integr ation of your career personnel into 

the Foreign Service can be accomplished in such a way as not to int erf ere with 

your control or operational autonomy, nor to abrogate any of my responsibilities 

under the Foreign Service Act.

Considerable progress has alre ady been made in working toward uniform policies and regulations, there by elim inating burea ucratic barriers and differences 

that needlessly sep ara te our respective Foreign Service personnel. I urge that 

this join t effort continue to receive our mu tual support. In extending the benefits of Foreign Service officer appointments to Foreign Service Career Reserve 

officers of USIA, we must recognize th at it is essential to maintain policies and 

procedures th at will apply uniformly to all Fore ign Service officers. I believe 

this can be achieved without depriving either agency of the flexibility it needs 

in performing its pa rticular mission.

Within a framework which provides for the establishment of uniform policies and procedures and. at the same time, operationa l autonomy, certain specific 

arrang ements should be developed by our respectiv e staffs. I would like to 

propose th e following key actions th at I consider b as ic:

(1) There will be estab lished within the Foreign Service of the United States 

a career specializatio n field for USIA officers who will be adm inistratively 

designated as Fore ign Inform atio n officers. These Foreign Inform atio n officers 

will include present and futur e USIA staff members appointed latera lly, all 

futur e jun ior officers and other lateral entry candidates appo inted for the 

Agency.

(2) Since USIA Care er Reserve officers were given comprehensive mental 

examinations by joint State-USIA boards prior to their appointments, and since 

this join tly developed examination was based on the same legal requirem ents 

and was designed to meet those sta ndard s and crite ria set for th in section 517 

of the Foreign Service Act of 1946, as amended, I am of the opinion that the 

USIA Career R eserve officers m et the require ments of section 517 of the Foreign 

Service Act of 1946, as amended, at the time they took this examination . Since, 

however, these exam inations were given some time ago, I am of the opinion that 

the perform ance of each USIA Career Reserve officer should be intensively 

reviewed to ass ure that, since becoming a caree r officer, he has mainta ined the 

high sta ndard s required of Foreign Service officers. I therefo re propose the 

following pro cedu res:

(a) I will advise the Board of Examin ers, pu rsu ant to the authority vested 

in me by section 212 of the act, to in stitu te procedures for the lateral entry of 

USIA Career Reserve officers into the Fore ign Service.

(b) I shall fu rthe r advise the Boa rd of Exa min ers th at the comprehensive 

mental examin atio n requ ired by section 517 shall consist of two pa rts: (i) an 

oral examination and (ii) a detailed exa mination of the officer’s record to ascertain the officer’s qualifications for appointment.

(c) With respect to USIA officers with currently valid career reserve appointments, I will authorize the Boa rd of Exa min ers to accept for the purposes 

of section (b) the examination which the y passed in qualifying for their USIA 

Career Reserve appointments. My staff will cooperate in the convening of joint 

State-USIA pa nels u nder the aegis of t he Direc tor General of the F oreign Service 

and yourself to examine the records of these officers and to submit to you a rank 

ordei-

 lis ting by class. From such ran kin g you will make your recom mendations 

for la ter al entry (an d promotions if you so d es ire) .

(d) I will tra nsmit to the Pre sid ent for approval and forwarding to the Senate for confirmatio n a list of those officers upon whom we jointly agree.

(e) In the futur e, any applicants for lateral entry appo intment with USIA 

shall be exam ined f or necessary qualifications und er regu lations then applicable 

to later al entry applicants und er board of examiners procedures.

(3) Foreign Service officers adminis tratively designated as Fore ign Information officers will be USIA employees and will be und er the adm inistrative 

control of USIA unless by mutual agreem ent they may, in individual cases, be 

relea sed for permanen t assignment to State. Such officers will, of course, con-
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS 47

tinu e to be available for assignmen t to positions in the Depar tment in accordance 

with the present agreeme nt to increase the inte rchange of officers between Sta te 

and USIA on a reim bursable basis. (4) In the future , USIA will have ade qua te rep res entation on the annual 

Foreign Service Selection Boards convened to recommend promotions and selection out of all Foreign Service officers. The policies and prec epts governing the 

Selection Board process will be uniformly applied and adm inistere d to all cat egories of Foreign Service officers, with appro priate recognition th at the information al spec ialtie s provide the same opportu nity for advancement to the top 

as others. (5) There will be established a joint State-USIA Senior Officer Assignment 

Board to recommend the assig nment of personnel to senior positions in both our 

agencies. You and I will, of course, continue to have final authority over the 

assignment of any officer to or from positions in our respective agencies.

(6) A representative of USIA will a tte nd meetings of the Board of the Fo reign 

Service, as authorized in section 211 of the Fore ign Service Act of 1946 pending 

statutory autho rity for full USIA membership.

(7) There will be adequa te USIA representation on the Boa rd of Examiners, 

which will establish joi nt State-USIA panels to examine and recommend on the 

future selection of lateral en try candidates and jun ior Foreign Service officers.

(8) Our two agencies will develop compatible manpower planning and career 

managem ent systems responsive to their respective needs.

(9) A procedure will be developed for encouraging rot ational assignments between our agencies, inclu ding a fixed annual minimum quota of such exchanges.

(10) Common st andards of discipline, security, and sui tab ility will be applied 

to all Foreign Service officers re gardless of which agency ma intain s adminis trative control over them.

(11) Procedures will be developed fo r assu ring that, s ubject to the operational 

requ irem ents of each agency, compatible policies and procedures are followed 

with respect to officer orientatio n, trainin g, efficiency rating form s an d procedures, 

inspection of operations and personnel, specialization concepts, tours of duty, 

etc.

(12) USIA will assum e financia l resp onsibility for all FSO ’s designated as 

Fore ign info rmation officers.

I know7

 t hat our staffs have, pa rticular ly in recent months, made m ajor efforts 

to collab orate and coordinate in the development of policies and re gulatio ns applicable to our operations. I w ould like to see fu rthe r steps taken in thi s regard so 

th at both you and I can be assure d th at the best intere sts of the Government 

are served. I hope th at no efforts will be spared to develop uniform policies, 

procedures, and regulations, particular ly in those are as dealing with personnel 

prerogatives, perquisites, and systems, as well as those are as cited above.

If you agree with the prop osals set for th in this letter, I would app reciate it 

if you would sign below. We may then consider these proposals as binding, 

revisable solely thro ugh the m utu al agre ement of the Secretary of Sta te and the 

Dire ctor of the U.S. Inform ation Agency.

Sincerely yours,

D ean R u s k .

Appro ve:

Car l T. R ow7a n .

September 23, 1964.

The Chairman. Senator Mundt ?

NO SALARY CHANGES INVOLVED

Senator Mundt. Mr. Crockett, will these transfers be made on the 

basis of the same dollar income th at the people are now getting?

Mr. Crockett. Yes, sir. Their salary scale right now is part of the 

Foreign Service salary scale so there is no difference.

Senator Mundt. You were talking in response to a question bv Senator Lausche about a plan to integrate the civil service employees with 

the Foreign Service employees.

Does that also envision a tran sfe r at a dollar level or are you giving 

recocnition to the length of service, seniority ?
48 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Mr. Crockett. That would be done at the same equivalent, equivalent dollar level of what they are now earning.

Senator Mundt. Is it not true tha t if you shift from civil service to 

Foreign Service at the equivalent dollar level that you are going to put 

your pay scale out of harmony because they move up in dollar income 

at different rates in terms of length of service? It is very conceivable 

if you do it at dollar levels in the civil service you are going to have 

either civil service employees drawing disproportionate salaries in 

terms of length of service or else your Foreign Service people are going 

to find out there is disharmony in tha t connection.

Mr. Crockett. I don’t believe so.

Senator Mundt. There is a different basis for developing the dollar 

income.

Mr. Crockett. But in general the two are favorable—fairly compatible in terms of the grade of job that civil service personnel are in. 

They equate fairly logically to the Foreign Service pay system.

Senator Mundt. I think you ought to examine tha t pretty carefully.

Mr. Crockett. All right, sir, we will do that.

Senator Mundt. If it occurred there would be quite a disparity developed in the consequences in doing so on a dollar value, because they 

move forward in a different manner in civil service from that in the 

Foreign Service. That is not involved in the present program but it is 

anticipated in the proposed one.

Mr. Crockett. Yes; I am glad you mentioned that.

EFFE C T ON RO TA TION FO LI CY

Senator Mundt. Would this present tran sfer have any relevancy— 

more or less in line with what Senator Hickenlooper was discussing— 

about how long a USIA employee could stay in a certain assignment in 

a specific foreign country which would involve the rotation program 

that Foreign Service follows?

Mr. Rowan. There is really no limitation, Senator Mundt, as to how 

long we can keep an officer in a particular capital. We operate on the 

basis of trying to keep them there long enough to have the Government 

get advantage of the experience they pick up, but we also try not to let 

an officer make a particular place a home. But to my knowledge there 

is no legal requirement as to how long we may keep a pa rticular officer 

at a specific post.

Senator Mundt. What has been your policy of how long you keep 

the average officer in a specific foreign assignment ?

Mr. Rowan. I am told that in most cases our principal officers 

roun d-trip and take a second tour, except a t hardship posts, so there 

would be generally speaking 4 years. Some posts we have are 3 year, 

two posts, and we have some officers who spend 6 years.

Senator Mundt. Do I understand then tha t the customary policy 

is to keep a U SIA employee at a designated post for 3 years? Sometimes it is 6 years but normally it is 3 ?

Mr. R owan. At 2-year posts he may stay only 2 years, but in most 

cases we have him go back for a second 2-year term of duty so he would 

stay 4 years. There are some posts where the normal tour of duty 

is 3 years, and not as frequently as in the other case but in quite a num-
UNIT ED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS 49

ber of instances we ask tha t officer to go back for a second term so 

he stays 6 years in that country.

T would just guess that it would probably average out at about 4 

years.

Mr. Crockett. Their policy, I believe is, about like ours. We try 

to keep them fairly uniform, State and USIA officers.

LANGUAGE PROFICIENCY OF USIA OFFICERS AND ROTATION POLICY

Senator Mundt. It seems to me USIA employees have an extra need 

for a language requirement in a country in which they serve in contrast 

to people in the embassy because they are contact people. If they are 

doing thei r job well at all they have to have contact and they have to 

have contacts in understandable language. I am wondering whether 

your people have enough proficiency in a multiplicity of languages so 

you can shift them every 3 years and still assign them to areas where 

they can speak and understand the language.

Mr. Rowan. We concentrate very heavily on languages. Indeed 

in speaking to the panels th at judged these officers, Senator, one of the 

things I emphasized tha t the panel should take into consideration is 

the ability of these officers to speak foreign languages, and this is 

another area where we do cooperate administratively and otherwise 

with State. We at any given point will have a considerable number of 

officers in the Foreign Service Instit ute learning the various languages 

that are so vitally needed in their professions.

Mr. Crockett. But I can assure you tha t the question you raise 

is a very difficult one to answer, and we face it all the time in the 

assignment of our people, too.

You teach an officer a difficult language, and for various reasons 

he can’t stay but 3 or 4 years in tha t post. There are some languages 

that have secondary carryover value, French and German, and Russian to some extent. There are some languages that have very little 

carryover value where you can only use them in one country, and this 

creates a problem. It gets very complex. We try to give language 

training prio r to post assignment as U SIA does so officers do have 

a basic language ability.

Senator Mundt. This is precisely why, Mr. Crockett, I question 

the productivity and efficacy of a policy which transfers more or less 

arbitrarily a t the end of 3 years or 4 years a U SIA employee who had 

learned one of these exotic languages so as to become proficient in it 

to an area where tha t knowledge is of no avail to him and he is 

probably replaced by somebody who doesn’t have the same proficiency 

in that same language.

Mr. Crockett. That is right.

But there are other problems, too, you know. An officer can live 

too long in a post and then there is the slanted point of view which 

has to be kept, in mind. Then there is just the basic problem of health 

and hardship. You can’t keep an officer in these places too long. You 

have to shift him occasionally to correct his point of view and to give 

him and his family an oppo rtunity to serve in a different pa rt of the 

world.

But we appreciate this fact that you mentioned. We tr y very hard 

to keep officers in these posts to the maximum extent we can, to serve
50 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

our int ere sts an d get the most out of lan gu ag e trai ni ng and the most 

out of their con tacts. Th e th in g I hav e spoken about most often to 

my own peo ple is th at no to ur s hould be related to a per iod of time .

Th e to ur ought to be det erm ine d in ter ms of an ind ivi dual officer 

doing an individu al job at an in dividu al pos t and, the ref ore, it is n ot 

a mark on the calen dar. I t is when th e optim um is reache d th at we 

have to think a bo ut tran sf er ring an officer.

Se na tor Mund t. I agree th orou gh ly an d en thu sia stically with th at 

last po int you have enu nci ated bu t it seems to me th at the calen da r 

plays an un du e w eig ht in yo ur tr an sfer s. I like th at othe r p oint co mpletely . I t m ight well be th at a m an ’s prod uc tiv ity at th e end of 6 

years might be demo nstrably poo r, wh ere as an othe r man m ig ht serve 

i0 years. I w ould like to see more em phasi s placed on th e pro du ctivity 

an d less emp hasis on th e ca len dar .

Mr. Crockett. Yes, sir.

Mr. Rowan. I might say, in the case of U SIA , we m ake exceptio ns 

fro m o ur ge ne ral tour o f d uty p olicy wh ere difficult lan guages are co ncern ed. Japa ne se, fo r example, we have p eop le who s erved in J ap an 

5 , 6, or m ore years , sim ply because t he y are prof ici ent i n the la nguage, 

an d are very difficult, in some cases alm ost impossible, t o replace. 

OPE RAT ION OF SE LE CT IO N-OU T PROCESS

Se na tor Mundt. One othe r qu es tion : I ga th er fro m the empha sis 

you place on selection-out pr og ram—w hen y ou say fo r the fu tu re the 

new av ailabilit y to s electio n-out an d retir em en t prov isions of th e F oreign Ser vice Act will con tinu e to ass ure the continued excellence of a 

Fo reign Service officer—th at is one of the big advanta ges th at you 

envision from this tra n sfe r; is th at i t ?

Mr. R owan. Yes, it is. I t is a ve ry big ad vanta ge.

Se na tor Mundt. You m ay have discussed th is be fore I came in, but 

giv e us in cap sule form how you op erate th is selection-ou t prog ram ?

Mr. Crockett. Th e selection-out pr og ram is a human in sti tutio n, 

there fore, it has all t he weaknesse s of a huma n insti tutio n. I wish it 

were less hu man and more exact, b ecau se b ein g hu ma n, it is a v ery difficu lt th ing. Bu t we t ry to make it a s ex act as possible.

I t is based, first of all, upon efficiency ratin gs. Efficiency ra tin gs 

develop ed bv su pervisor s, concurre d in bv th e second level above a man, 

an d then often for tified by efficiency ra ting s by inspec tors who have 

no o pe ratio na l re spo nsi bility.

SE LEC TI ON PANELS

Ea ch y ea r selection pan els are conv ened. Un de r the prese nt system 

we judg e a ma n two d iffere nt w ay s: I f a man is, let us say t ha t a m an 

is, a class 3 officer, p oli tic al, we convene a selec tion pan el of pol itic al 

officers wi th one outsider, who will look at all the class 3 political 

officers. Th ey look at these officers a nd rank them from the top . Xo. 1 

officer of th e class t o the las t officer in the class. Th is is wh at we call 

the fun ctiona l pa nel.

If an officer is thrown into the political grou p an d the y see th at he 

has some economic experience, th at maybe he doesn’t ra nk very well 

on the po litica l functio n, they have the option then of puttin g him
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATION S 51

over into the class 3 economic panel to see how the economic panel 

would rank him, to give him the break.

The panels are first organized, as I say, by function—political, economic, administrative, consular, informational.

Then the top group of each one of the functional panels, 25 percent 

of the top and 25 percent below officers are put together in a total 

officer group for that class. All of these officers then are intermingled 

for a separate and distinct selection panel to look at them, to compare 

political with economic, and all of them together on an integrated 

basis.

So, t ha t there are two cuts, two processes, where we look at them 

as specialists within their specialty, and then we look at them across 

the board in terms of the general officers.

The top group, integrated as they are, recommended for promotion 

and the general cutoff line is recommended for promotion.

I, as Deputy Under Secretary, can take names off of tha t list. I 

cannot put names on. Then this general board recommends or cites 

to us the names of all officers who are in the bottom 10 percent of their 

class. These officers are not automatically selected out, but they are 

recommended for selection out on the standing that they have in 

their class.

Then the present rules say that an officer who has been in the bottom 

10 percent of his class for two times while he is in tha t same class, 

is subject to selection out, not selected out, but subject to selection out.

This means tha t over a 5-year or 7-year period an officer may be 

in the bottom 25 percent, but above the 10-percent level, but if he 

drops in the lO-percent, level, he gets a warning letter, maybe he gets 

his performance up to a 50-percent level one year and the next year 

he drops down and perhaps the following year he is in the 10-percent 

level. The second time he gets in tha t 10-percent level he is subject to 

selection out.

This means th at a board composed of myself, the Director General 

of the Foreign Service, and the Director of the Personnel review his 

case in depth. We review his whole history as a Foreign Service 

officer, what happened to him, when and where and how, and we try 

to make a judgment at that time whether or not the officer has had a 

bad experience from his supervisor, whether there was a supervisor 

that he was out of harmony with, whether there was a personality 

clash, whether there were family problems, whether there were any 

particu lar personal reasons or reasons out of control of the officer 

that made him fall under this class.

We often say well, let’s let another year pass before we actually select out the officer. There are some men that we then give letters of 

selection-out to.

Also there is selection-out, another process of selection-out which 

is based on length of time in class. If an officer stays in class a certain 

number of years without promotion he is automatically selected out. 

SELECTION-OUT IS A RELATIVE SYSTEM

The thing tha t most people don’t understand about the selection-out 

system of the Foreign Service is tha t it is a relative system. It has 

nothing to do with perform ance basically; it has nothing to do with 

marginal performance. It is a relative system.
52 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Th ere m ust be so m uch selec tion -out every y ear i f it is g oin g to wor k 

pr op erly, and wh at we do is say th at the people at th e bottom of the 

list s do n't have to be margi na l in th ei r performance. Th ey can even 

be go od in t hei r perform ance, b ut because th ey are rel ati ve ly less good, 

rel ati ve ly less high stan di ng th an the othe r mem bers of th eir class, 

they are selected out. Thi s is necessa ry in orde r to keep up the compe tition of the Servic e.

It is n ecessary to ins ure th at the people who are retained in it have 

the po tential fo r grow th an d hav e the po tential fo r going forw ard. 

I t is necessa ry in orde r to get yo ung people into the Service , because 

we have a very stab le S erv ice, run ni ng at the ra te of a roun d 3,300, 3,500 

officers, so it isn ’t an ever- inc rea sin g Service , and the only way we can 

br in g young people in is th ro ug h at tritio n and at tr itio n is forced by 

selection out, and by ret ire men t. So the rel ati ve con cept of selection 

ou t is som eth ing most peo ple do n’t un de rst an d. Whe n we say, “Mr. 

X is a good officer, he ha s done his job satis factor ily ,” th at may be 

abs olutely tru e bu t it is no t sufficient to retain him in the Fo reign 

Ser vice un de r the present concept o f up or out, eve r mo vin g up wa rd, 

eve r h av ing a n ab ility to ta ke jobs of inc rea sin g importance.

Th eoret ica lly every officer i n the Ser vice has t o be a po tential DCM 

or Am bassa dor or he is not really of Fo reign Ser vice officer c alib er.

Th is, in essence, is t he Fo re ig n Serv ice selection-out system.

PERCENT SELECTED OUT

Se na tor Mund t. You r goal is to tak e out 10 pe rcen t each year?

Mr. Crockett. No rm all y— we don’t ever get to th e 10-perc ent goal 

because a great ma ny of th e peo ple are saved fo r ad minist rativ e reasons—bu t the 10 perc ent, those in the bottom 10 pe rcen t of each class 

are reviewed as se lection -out pos sibilities.

Now, i t mi gh t be that a man may resign the first tim e he gets to the 

bottom . Or he m ay decide to leave the Service vo luntarily , or he may 

pull up h is bootstraps. I f it is som eth ing , a problem wi th him self, if 

he ha d a he alt h problem, or some thing was bo thering him and was 

cor rec ted , and he pu lls up his bo ots tra ps, and he gets going, then he 

may not ever be in the bottom 10 perce nt aga in, so we nev er achieve 

10 percent .

Se na tor Mundt. W ha t do yo ur sta tis tic s show? W ha t is your 

avera ge selection-out pe rce nta ge ?

Mr. Crockett. Sir ?

Se na tor Mundt. W ha t is yo ur avera ge his tor ic selection-ou t 

perce nta ge ?

Mr. Crockett. It runs about 3 per cent ins tea d of 10 percen t, the 

actua l selecti on-out figure runs about 3 percen t. Aroun d a hu nd red 

is the avera ge numb er th at we actuall y select out each year.

Now, one of the in teresting th ings th at sta tis tic s show, however, is 

th at man y of those who find them selv es in the bottom 25 perce nt of 

th eir class, ma ny of tho se peo ple retir e vo luntarily , because as the y 

see th ei r sta nd in g in class, th ey see the y are n ot me asuring up to whe re 

the y are g oin g to ha ve to be to ge t ahe ad, a nd so the s ystem encourag es 

thi s kind of self-discipline in ter ms of lea vin g the Service.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATION S 53

TH E SPECIALIST AND TH E SELECTION-OUT PROCESS

Senator Mundt. It seems to me th at you build a very strong case 

for this selection-out program insofar as the 25 percent at the top and 

your 10 percent a t the bottom are concerned. I thin k it is a little less 

desirable and defensible from the standpoint of saying to a man who 

had been a very fine Foreign Service officer in a specific category, a 

very good economic officer or been a very good US IA officer—that 

maybe he wouldn’t be a good ambassador sometime, so you boot him 

out, because, in the military term, it is an up-or-out program. That, 

it seems to me, is a little harder to justify, because you need proficiency 

and capability and experience at various different levels and in various types of jobs in the Foreign Service.

If he falls down in the category in which he serves, that bottom 10 

percent, I think it is quite proper that you should give him a second 

chance, and if he comes back a second time, make way for some young 

person with more capability.

But it gets to be a kind of a cruel process, it seems to me, for a man 

who has developed specific skills for his specific job and does well, and 

his performance record is excellent, and you decide properly tha t t hat 

is about as high as he is going to go. But he is a mighty fine fellow in 

tha t slot.

Mr. Crockett. Let me tell vou, Senator, this concerns us, too. First

of a

n-----.

The Chairman. I wonder if I could interject ?

It is 12: 30, and I have to go. I wonder if we couldn’t pursue this 

subject when it is up for discussion rath er than now. Tha t is not 

really what we are talking about now.

Do you have any more so I can have one more question ?

Senator Mundt. Let him answer tha t question.

Mr. Crockett. This is the reason we pu t the functional panels into 

the selection-out system, to see where these specialists rank in their 

own group. I think in years to come this will give us a new dimension 

to the Sendee. It is also one of the reasons why we are reestablishing 

some of the Staff Corps, but as I say I will be glad to discuss this 

later.

Senator Mundt. I would like to point out to the chairman this is 

very closely related to the problem at hand because what this whole 

tran sfer is doing is putting 760 people into a selection-out program 

that they are not now in, isn’t tha t correct ?

Mr. Crockett. That is correct.

Mr. Rowan. That is correct.

Senator Mundt. So it is very closely related to the desirability or 

undesirability of confirmation.

I will desist.

The Chairman. Do you have any questions ?

E X A M IN A T IO N S G IV EN

Senator McCarthy. I have one or two questions.

Have the 760 who will be included as Foreign Service officers if 

this is approved been subject to oral or written examination ?
54 UN ITED STA TES INF OR MA TIO N AGENCY NO MINATIO NS

Mr. Rowan. Yes, they have been.

Senator McCarthy. Who prepared the written examination, your 

Agency or did this come out of the State Department ?

Mr. Rowan. Both. Both.

Senator McCarthy. What is the nature of the examination? Is it 

primarily an information or essay type of examination ?

Mr. Rowan. This examination is divided into three sections: one 

on the United States, two, on foreign policy, and three, on a USIS 

country program.

Senator McCarthy. This is the particular country in which he has 

specialized. Did the 760 all take the same examination ?

Mr. Rowan. They would all take the same examination. This would 

not be with regard to a specific country but it would be with regard 

to their general knowledge of how to go about effecting a US IS 

program.

Senator McCarthy. I won’t press it.

Could I have copies of the typical examinations ?

Mr. Rowan. Yes, I am sure you could get those copies.

(The information referre d to follows:)

Exam inat ion for Lateral E ntry Appo intment to US IA F oreign Service Career

Reserve

Each candidate for late ral entry appointment to the Agency’s Foreign Service 

Career Reserve was required to take a 3%-hour written examination. The 

examination included questions on (1) the United States—arts, culture, and 

science; institutions and Government; society and economics; (2) foreign 

policy—the Communist thre at; the formulation of policy, economic policy; and 

(3) the development of a USIS country program. A copy of the examination 

given in I960 is attached.

The following instructions quoted from page 2 of the examination describes 

the purpose of the examination and the kind of response expected:

"Many, but certainly not all, of the statements contained in the following 

examination have been selected from those directed at our representatives overseas by individuals who may be deliberately try ing to embarrass our country and 

its programs. The statements do not purport to be statements of this country’s 

position nor of the approach of this Agency to the inferred ideologies. They 

are intended only as a mental exercise to assist the examiners in attempting 

to ascertain how clearly each candidate can organize his thoughts and succinctly 

express those thoughts in a restricted time. The questions are so put tha t they 

do not draw on any given set of facts but allow each individual to choose the 

facts he can muster. Each candidate is free to take any position in relationship 

to the one presented by a question-statement but he must be prepared to defend 

this position logically.”

This essay-type examination was developed by the Joint Board of Examiners 

for USIA Foreign Service Career officers. This Board had the same responsibilities with respect to the Career Reserve Officer Corps as the Board of Examiners for the Foreign Service has with respect to Foreign Service officers and 

consisted of two senior Agency officers designated by the Director and two 

senior officers of the Department designated by the Secretary.

The results of the written examination were evaluated by a panel of examiners 

which had equal representation from the Department and the Agency. This 

evaluation of the written examination, along with the results of the oral 

examination, the physical and security certifications, and the personnel file of 

each candidate were carefully reviewed and given a total evaluation by a panel 

of examiners. These total evaluation panels made recommendations to the 

Joint Board of Examiners as to the eligibility of each candidate for appointment.

The Joint Board of Examiners, after reviewing each step in the selection 

process, certified those candidates it found eligible for appointment. The Director personally approved all appointments to the Career Reserve.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 55

U.S. INFORMATIO N AGENCY

J oi nt Board of E xa m in er s for I nform ation Agency F oreig n Servic e Career

Offi ce rs

E xa mi na ti on for L atera l E ntry as a F oreig n Servic e Career Reser ve

Off ic er , J an ua ry 9, I96 0

Instr uc tio ns to c andidat e.—You ar e allowed 3% hou rs to complete th e follow ing 

exam inat ion. You should probably allow abo ut 15 min utes to read the entire exa min atio n thr oug h before star tin g it, and ano the r 15 min utes a t the end of 

the examin atio n for final review . Thi s will leave app roxima tely 3 hou rs for 

the exa min atio n itself . This exa min atio n is divided into thr ee sections (I , II, and I I I ). The first 

two sections (I and I I ) ar e divide d into thr ee p ar ts (A, B, and C) . You should 

plan to allow 1 h our on each of the sections, divid ing th at h our in to a ppro xim atel y 

20 min utes fo r e ach of t he three pa rts (A, B, an d C ). Note th at pa rts A. B, and C ar e in turn divided into five diff eren t questions, 

but also note th at o f thes e five you are ask ed to choose only one f or answ ering . The items listed in secti on II I are not indi vidual ques tions bu t ra th er ar e the 

outline to be followed in composing and writin g your ans we r to the entire question on a cou ntry program. Many, but cer tainly not all. of the statem ent s cont ained in the following 

examin atio n have been selec ted from those dire cted a t our representativ es 

overseas by indi viduals who may be deli beratel y trying to em bar ras s our country and its programs. The sta tem ents do not pur port to be sta tem ent s of this 

cou ntr y’s positio n nor of th e approac h of th is Agency to the inf erre d ideologies. 

They ar e intende d only as a me nta l ex ercise to a ssi st the exa min ers in a ttem pting to asc ert ain how c lear ly each can did ate ca n organize his thou ghts and succinc tly 

expr ess those though ts in a res tricte d time. The ques tions are so pu t th at they 

do not dra w on any given set of fac ts bu t allow each ind ivid ual to choose the 

fac ts he can muster. Each can did ate is f ree to tak e any position in rela tion ship 

to the one pres ented by a que stio n-state ment bu t he must be prepar ed to defend 

thi s position logically. Re tur n th is list of exa minat ion questions to the mon itor when you have complete d the exam inati on. Do not wr ite or type you r nam e on the shee ts of your exa min atio n paper.

COMMENCE EXAM INATION

I. The Unite d Sta tes

A. Arts, cult ure, and science (choo se one ) :

1. Though few in number, the Pu rit an s have had a significa nt influence 

on U.S. c ulture. Discuss. 2. When you are overs eas, you may be told th at the people of the United 

Sta tes are m ate ria lis tic a nd the refo re have no tru e culture . How would you 

ans we r t hi s?

3. Discu ss the influence of the fro nti er on the course of U.S. his tory and 

the sha ping of the Ame rican char acter.

4. Becau se of i ts pra gm atic trad itio n, the United Sta tes has produced more 

techno logy t han it has pu re science. Discuss.

5. Pro ud as the people of the Unite d Sta tes are of their cultu re, they 

recognize the sign ifica nt contributio ns to it received from their many 

motherlands . Discuss.

B. Insti tut ion s a nd Governm ent (choose one) :

1. What is the fun dame nta l law of the United Sta tes and how is it 

modified ?

2. Discu ss the legal rela tionsh ip of the Sta tes with the Feder al Govern ­

ment.

3. Compare the B ritish and United States gove rnme ntal systems.

4. Describe the natio nal election process in the United Sta tes in term s under standabl e to a foreign audien ce.

5. The people of the United States have always tak en pride in the fac t 

th at th eir gove rnme ntal proce ss origin ated in an d gre w from the town me eting 

where every citizen pa rticip ate d in the delib erati ons. I t is now sometimes 

charg ed, however, th at in spit e of thi s origin of the coun try ’s demo cratic
56 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

institutions, corruption has been more prevalent in municipal than in U.S. 

national politics. Discuss.

C. Society and economics (choose one) :

1. The capitalist society is very different in the mid-20th century United 

States from what Marx pictured. Discuss.

2. The United States has more built-in social benefits for its citizens than 

many of the so-called socialistic countries. Discuss.

3. The strength of U.S. labor lies in the fact tha t i t has stuck to economic 

objectives. Discuss.

4. The racial problem in the United States is primarily economic. Discuss.

5. The leveling of social classes in the United States has resulted in a 

lowering of educational standards. Discuss.

II. Foreign policy

A. The Communist threat (choose one) :

1. Though communism describes itself as an international movement, it 

finds some of its greatest support in ultranationalistic groups. Discuss.

2. Discuss the various target groups th e Communists concentrate on in an 

underdeveloped country and the themes they use.

3. Discuss dialectical materialism.

4. Discuss what you would suppose to be the Communist short- and longrange objectives in a given country or area.

5. Describe the principal Communist assets and liabilities in the ideological 

conflict.

B. The formulation of policy (choose one) :

1. Discuss the relationship between th e President, the Operations Coordinating Board, the National Security Council, the Congress, military services, 

and other groups in the formulation of foreign policy.

2. The expression of foreign policy in the United States is not only what 

the Executive and the State Department says, but also the myriad expressions of opinion of the Congress, the press, and private but powerful sections 

of U.S. society. Discuss.

3. Now tha t the United States is a world power, its policies must necessarily be conservative and cautious—the policies of a “have” rather than a 

“have not” nation. Discuss.

4. Our relations with Europe are often in conflict with our relationships 

in the newly developing areas. Discuss.

5. Clausewitz said tha t war was an extension of diplomacy—is this still 

true? Discuss.

C. Economic policy (choose one) :

1. Discuss technical assistance versus economic aid.

2. Discuss the relationship of economic aid to military security.

3. Discuss economic aid in relationship to political objectives.

4. In many countries economic stability and political liberty seem to be 

supported by conflicting elements. Discuss.

5. The motives of the labor movement in the United States are not the same 

as the motives of the labor movement in many other countries with which we 

have important relations. Discuss.

III. A USIS country program

A. Pick a country. If you have served in this country, identify the period and 

the official position which you occupied.

B. Write for 15 minutes using what facts you can about its history, culture, 

government, institutions, economy, etc., emphasizing those aspects which you consider significant from a USIA point of view.

C. Fifteen min utes: Describe the problems the United States faces in the country, and the roles of the various parts of the country team.

D. Thirty minutes. The USIS plan.

1. Objectives and why.

2. Audiences and why.

3. Projects—How and why.

4. Programing (what and how).

5. Coordination and support from country team and Washington.

6. Evaluation.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 57

FIN A L IN ST R U C T IO N S TO T H E CA ND ID AT E

1. Tear out the last sheet of this examination question booklet—type or print 

the informa tion required by the form an d s taple this to the front of yo ur examin ation paper.

2. Place y our examination pap er in the large envelope provided and seal. Do 

not put your set of examination questions in the envelope with y our exam ination.

3. Turn in the sealed envelope contain ing your examination pap er and your 

set of examination questions to the officer monitoring the examination .

IM PO R TA N T

Do not write or type your name on the sheets of your examin atio n paper. 

Place your name only on the form tak en from this booklet and attach it to 

your examination pa per as directed above.

Examination papers o f:

Full n am e:

Official tit le :

Class and gra de :

Pos t of assignm ent (city and co untry) :

D at e:

In stru ctio ns : Type or print the above information, then staple to the face of 

your ex amination paper.

Senator McCarthy. And if you have examples of what you considered as adequate answers to your questions ?

Mr. Rowan. You say what we considered adequate answers? 

Senator McCarthy. Or what might have been submitted if they 

are not private.

EVA LU A TIN G T H E W IV ES

On page 6, Mr. Rowan, you note tha t a good US IA officer and his 

wife should have certain qualities. Do you have any formal system 

of evaluating the wives or the spouses?

Mr. Rowan. As I recall, the normal efficiency rating has a section 

in which th e ra ting officer does indeed make comments about the wife, 

about her effectiveness.

Senator McCarthy. I s this a matter of public record or record 

within the agency ?

Mr. Rowan. This is a record within the agency, which is viewable, 

not to the public but only authorized officials. It is in his personal 

file.

Senator McCarthy. In 1962, I think, we raised this question about 

the Navy. They had a form in which they have senior officers evaluate junio r officers and the wives of junior officers. There was some 

protest tha t this involved a violation of privacy which was of some 

concern to me.

I wouldn't want to make it a public record, but I would like to find 

out the extent to which you evaluate the wives of service officers ?

Mr. Rowan. I think in every evaluation of one of our officers the 

evaluator makes comments about the wife, and I don’t think any of 

our officers think it an invasion of privacy because they know, as I 

know from experience overseas, that often the wife can be a very 

effective or very ineffective par t of the whole Embassy team.

Senator McCarthy. I can understand tha t to be true. It is a question of what you p ut in the record that concerns me. I am sure tha t 

the wives are always evaluated unde r any circumstances.
58 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

But, in the case of the Navy examination it was my feeling that the 

record was somewhat too formal.

Mr. Crockett. We don’t have any process that formal. It is just, 

one of the blocks, one of the questions on the whole general-----

Senator McCarthy. What do you sa y: “W hat do you think of his 

wife” ?

Mr. Crockett. No, there is a question, I think there is one block 

with the instructions: “Describe any factors of wife or family that 

would be pertinent to the consideration of the officer’s performance 

or service abroad.”

Mr. Rowan. It may relate, for example, to a comment about her 

effectiveness in terms of representation, and if the ratin g officer thinks 

she has been particularly skillful and helpful in terms of making 

friends.

Senator McCarthy. I think you ought to take it into account. It 

is the question of how you make the measurements and how you record 

them.

Mr. Crockett. I suspect we have been overly generous in the past.

Senator McCarthy. That has been of concern to me.

Mr. Crockett. One public member reading our efficiency ratin g 

files of our officers sai d: “To read these files of these officers makes me 

think th at the whole Foreign Service is married to the same woman.”

Senator McCarthy. I remember in the case of the Navy the fear 

was that the senior officers would probably have their wives evaluate 

the wives of the junior officers and the evaluation might not, under 

those circumstances, be altogether objective.

That is all.

Senator Mundt. Does it follow in this process that you downgrade 

a foreign officer if his wife dies and he becomes a widower and he goes 

down to th at low 10 percent ?

Senator McCarthy. It depends on how important his wife was in 

the whole complex.

USI A E X A M IN A T IO N S

The Chairman. I want to pursue that question first asked by Senator McCarthy about those examinations.

Do I understand each of these 760 were given examinations by you 

at the time you recommended them or were these examinations given 

when they first entered U SIA and accepted as evidence of their having 

passed the examination.

Mr. R owan. These were former examinations.

They were not given at this specific time. They were given in some 

cases a year ago, in some cases 2 years ago, in the case of other officers 

4 years ago, whenever they made application to enter the Service.

The Chairman. In olher words, these 760 have not been examined 

in view of this p articular move of admission into the Foreign Service, 

have they?

Mr. Rowan. With regard to this particular move the only examination was tha t select panels went over the record of every one of 

these 760 officers and made judgments with regard to his perfo rmance as a member of the career Reserve.

They took the ir written and oral examinations earlier by way of 

getting into the career Reserve.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 59

The Chairman. But, tha t examination was not given with a view 

to admission to the Foreign Service. It was given with a view to 

admission to the US IA Reserve.

Mr. Crockett. Well, Ambassador Allen, when he was Director of 

US IA and Loy Henderson when he was Deputy Under Secretary 

collaborated in that examination process in setting up the US IS 

Career Reserve and they set it up under the Board of Examiners 

auspices so it would qualify as a dual-examination procedure if and 

when this ever came about. I mean there was some foresight and 

deliberation at that time tha t this might be-----

The Chairman. I just wanted the record to be clear that these 

people have not been given an examination for admission into the 

Foreign Service. You accepted that examination and all you did 

with reference to this particu lar action was to have a panel review 

their record as Reserve officers in USIA .

1 on did do that with a specific view, to this action being taken, is 

tha t right ?

Mr. Rowan. Yes. In order that the record be perfectly clear let 

me state first of all that the examination taken, as arranged by Mr. 

Allen and Mr. Henderson, was carried out with the clear view that 

these officers were moving toward membership in the Foreign Service, 

so this was envisioned.

Now, I might add that of these 760 officers, 231 of them came in 

through the junior officer examination program, and can be said to 

have taken precisely the same examination as other officers already 

in the Foreign Service.

The Chairman. I jus t wanted to clear that up so that the record 

would show it.

You did examine the ir records specifically with a view to recommending their admission into the Foreign Service.

Mr. Rowan. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. Th at was done by panels tha t you have already 

described—USIA and State?

Mr. Rowan. That is correct, and a public member.

The Chairman. And a public member. OK.

Anything fur the r you wish to volunteer?

Mr. R owan. No.

HIST OR Y OF LATERAL EN TR Y PROGRAM

The Chairman. I will insert in the record a history of the lateral 

entry program, by William E. Woodyear, personnel management 

specialist, Legislation, Department of State.

(This history referred to follows:)

History of th e Lateral E ntry Program

(By William E. Woodyear. personnel management specialist (legislation), 

Department of State)

Although provision for a continuing lateral entry program was first provided 

by section 517 of the Foreign Service Act of 1946, the Foreign Service Officer 

Corps was established by the integration—or late ral entry —of officers below 

the minister level from the diplomatic and consular services by the Rogers Act 

of 1924. For the next 15 years it remained a relatively closed career system with 

only limited provision for trans fer (or lateral entry ) of officers from the Department of State.
60 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Reorganization Plan No. 2. which become effective July 1, 1939, tra nsferre d the Fore ign Agricultura l Service and the Foreign Commerce Service to the Fore ign Service, and the officers affected “acquired status as Foreign Service officers w ithout having to undergo an examination or incur any loss in salar y.” Thus the F oreign Service acquired broade r responsibilities, more nearly app roxi­ mating the “Foreign Service of the United States,” as it was designated in the Rogers Act and which concept is continued in the Foreign Service Act of 1946. It, also, acquired a significan t number of new officers, the “infusion of new blood ’ frequently referred to in subse quen t studies. As we emerged from World Wa r II, it became increasingly evident th at a major change had taken place in the field of intern ational relations and in the role th at the United State s must assum e in world affairs. However, during the war, the number of Foreign Service officers h ad act ually declined. In an effort to overcome this deficit and to meet the growing demand for qualified personnel, partic ula rly those with specialized competence, the Manpower Act of 1946 auth orized the appointme nt of 250 officers at classes thro ugh 0- 1 within 2 years provided they h ad had specified m ilit ary or m erc han t m arine experience, or since December 7,1941, ha d w’orked for a t least 2 ye ars in a position of respon­ sibility in the Fed era l Government. One hundred and sixty-one officers were apiiointed under this au tho rity following a very carefu l screening process. Later in the same year—1946—section 517 of the Foreign Service Act au thor­ ized a contin uing use of latera l entry to meet the special needs of the Service. Because of a persistently expressed fear th at extensive lateral entry would undermine the career service, th e use of this autho rity w as so severely res tric ted th at only 51 later al appointments were made between 1946 and 1954. This ex­ ceptionally small res ult was obtained in spite of the appointment of numerous Staff officers and of the De partm ent’s efforts to achieve a limited integratio n of personnel under the 1951 directive issued by the Secretary following an analysis 

of the Rowe-Ramspeck-DeCourcy report. The energetic impleme ntation of the Wriston program , beginning in 1954, resu lted in th e l ateral entry of some 1,670 Foreign Service R eserve and Staff and civil service officers into the Fore ign Service officer group. This program sig­ nificantly increased the responsibility of the caree r Fore ign Service Officer Corps by adding significantly to the nu mber and kinds of positions it would staff both in Wash ington and at posts oversea. It, also, brought a significant in­ fusio n of “new blood,” by the integratio n of officers with specialized experience in economics, public and cultu ral affairs, and in con sular and adm inistrative work. It is to be noted th at all of the appo intments made und er this program were executed only after an examination by the Boa rd of Examiners for the 

Fore ign Service. La ter al entry has continued at a res tricte d rate since completion of the Wristo n program, but a t a ra te in excess of th at achieved between 1946 to 1954— i.e.. 300 officers were inte gra ted from 1958 through 1964. It will be noted t ha t in each of th e two major programs for infusion of outside blood into the Foreign Service Officer Corps, the process has resulted both in add itio nal responsibilities for the Service and the lateral entry of officers wi th specialized qualification s in the fields to be staffed. This is in keeping with the recommendations of t he several stud y groups which have examined the very significant personnel problem confronting the Departme nt—and the other for­ eign affairs agencies—since the end of World War II. Throughout this period there has been a continued, although incre asingly diminishing opposition to lateral entry based on a belief th at i t is in v iolation of the career concept of the Service and that it reduces promotional oppo rtunities for officers who come in thr ough jun ior entrance examination . However, except in those instances where significantly increased function s were assumed, or in order to meet essential needs for persons at higher levels, the Departme nt has consistently staffed the For eign Service Officer Corps prima rily by the rec ruitment of junior officers. Experience has clearly dem onstrated th at many officers o f exceptionally high caliber have come into the Service by lateral entry. Conversely, officers who fail to meet or maintain the high sta ndard s requ ired of Fore ign Service officers are. in time separated th rou gh the selection-out procedure. The re has been rather general agreeme nt in the seve ral stud ies made of the need for accelerated reform in personnel managem ent fo r employees engaged in foreign affairs activities and for the need for continued recruitment into the career service of officers above th e junio r level. The need for l ateral recruitment
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 61

of officers with specialized competence in fields such as economics has been pa r­ ticularly stressed. The following studies are among the most significant conducted since World W ar II. A rep ort by the Burea u of the Budget in 1945 stre ssed the need for fu rth er study of the problem s re sul ting from adm inistration of the two personnel systems by the Dep artm ent—the civil service and the Foreign Service systems. It fu rthe r recommended th at “Re cruitment for foreign duty should not be limited to younger people entering at the bottom, but should encompass, on a continuing basis, a sub sta ntial num ber of persons entering at oth er grades appro priate to 

the ir experience a nd ability.” In 1946, the Congress recognized the need for lateral entry—both on an im­ mediate and continuing basis—by enactment of the Manpower Act a nd of sectio n 

517 of the Foreign Service Act. The Hoover Commission, in its 1949 repor t on “Fore ign Affairs,” recommended th at “The personnel of the permanen t Sta te Department esta blishment in Wash­ ington and the personnel of the Foreign Service above certa in levels should be ama lgamated over a sho rt period of yea rs into a single foreign a ffairs service obli­ gated to serve at home and oversea s a nd con stituting a safe gua rded caree r group adm inistere d sep arately fro m the general civil service.” In essence this proposal envisaged an expansion and modification of the Fore ign Service system to accom­ mod ate both domestic a nd oversea employees. It was proposed th at civil service 

employees of the Depar tment “enter-

 the consolidated service on application and 

oral examin atio n.” Thus, again, it was proposed th at with the expa nsion of responsibility of the Foreign Service, those employees engaged in the activities tra nsferre d would l>e permitte d lat eral entry into the expanded service on the 

bas is of ap pro priate oral ex amination. The Dep artm ent hesitate d to make the extensive changes recommended by the Hoover Commission witho ut fu rthe r study. Consequently, the Secretary estab­ lished the Rowe-Ramspeck-DeCourcy Committee to adv ise him on the ad visability of making fun dam ental changes. The rep ort of this Committee, submitted in August 1950, recommended far-reach ing changes in the personnel system, includ­ ing the amalgam ation of domestic and Fore ign Service personnel into a single system. It recommended only two car eer categ ories : the foreign affairs officer group, and the foreign aff air s clerical and technical group. It specifically recog­ nized the need for continued lat eral entry into the middle and high er grades of the officer group as required to meet the u rge nt needs of t he D epartmen t. Although it gave caref ul conside ration to the recom mendations of both the Hoover Commission and the Rowe-Ramspeck-DeCourcy Committee, the De part­ ment hesitated to m ake the exten sive changes recommended by e ither group. In March of 1951, th e S ecr etary issued a directive to the Deputy U nder Secreta ry for Adm inistration to impleme nt a much more res tricte d integration program tha n had been recommended by e ith er of the se study groups. It w as sta ted th at imple­ mentation of tliis limited approach would provide a basis for subseque nt de­ terminatio ns as to how fa r it was pra ctical or desirab le to go. Actual progress 

und er th e directive was extrem ely limited. In view of the failu re of the Departme nt to fully implement the recommenda­ tions of either the Hoover Commission or the Rowe-Ramspeck-DeCourcy Com­ mittee, or even the limited 1951 directive, Secreta ry Dulles in 1954 a ppointed a comm ittee headed by Dr. He nry M. Wriston, president of Brown University, to recommend “mea sures necessary to streng then the effectiveness of the profes­ sional service to a sta nd ard consistent with the vastly increas ing responsibili­ ties in the field of foreign policy which have devolved upon the Pre sident and the Secreta ry.” The Wristo n report, submitted in Jun e 1954, was adopted by the Secretary and vigorously implemented. The res ultant prog ram resulte d in the integratio n of officer pe rson nel in the Department and the Fore ign Service, where their official functio ns converged, into a single adminis trative system— the Foreign Service Officer Corps. In justifyin g the need for extensive lat eral entry, the Committee’s rep ort—“T oward a Stronger Foreign Service”—sta tes: “The grow th-from-the-roots tra ditio n has its merits and the Committee, being min dful of the long-term interests of the Fore ign Service, believes it should be preserved and gre atly strengthen ed. But the present emergency cannot wa it 

upon a leisurely process. “The quickest and sur est way of stre ngthen ing th e Fore ign Service is a direct infu sion of needed talents from outside, especially in the middle and upper officer grades, where the shortage of professional specialtie s is m ost acu te.”

4 7 -5 8 0—G5 5
62 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

The studies discussed above were concerned primarily with the personnel 

problems of the Department of State and the Foreign Service. A study published by the Brookings Institution in 1951—“The Administration of Foreign 

Affairs and Oversea Operations”—had pointed up the need for a broader study. 

A White House personnel task force, under the direction of Mr. Philip Young, 

the President’s adviser on personnel management, undertook to explore this 

broader field. The task force paralleled the conclusions reached by the RoweRamspeck-DeCourcy Committee. It apparently received only limited distribution and there is no indication that any official action was taken on it.

At the request of Secretary Rusk, a Committee on Foreign Affairs Personnel 

was established late in 1961 under the auspices of the Carnegie Endowment for 

International Peace. This Committee was chaired by former Secretary of State 

Christian A. Herter, and included a number of distinguished private citizens, 

including Mr. George V. Allen, president, Tobacco Institute, Inc.; Mr. Carlisle H. 

Humelsine, president, Colonial Williamsburg, Inc., and former Deputy Under 

Secretary of State for Adm inistration; and Mr. James Rowe, attorney and former Chairman of the Rowe-Ramspeck-DeCourcy Committee. The Committee 

directed its attention to the personnel problems of the U.S. Information Agency 

and the Agency for International Development as well as to those of the Department of State.

The Committee proposed the establishment within the Foreign Service of the 

United States, of three categories of U.S. citizen personnel for each agency: 

officers (in the professional sense), staff officers and employees, and Reserve 

officers and employees. It proposed that present civil service employees of th e 

three agencies he brought within this system. With regard to the continued 

use of latera l entry, the Committee recommended that—

“Recruitment of junior officers should be supplemented by a positive program 

to seek out and bring into the care er service at intermediate and higher levels 

experienced persons of high quality, particula rly to meet specialized needs, subject to rigorous competitive examination.”

In this summary presentation of a four-decade development of the Foreign 

Service Officer Corps the following significant factors regarding the controversial concept of lateral entry into the corps should not be lost sight of:

(1) The four major “lateral entry” activities tha t have marked the development of the Foreign Service Officer Corps—its creation by an integration of the 

diplomatic and consular services; the integration of the foreign agriculture 

and commerce services; the lateral entry actions under the Manpower Act of 

1946; and the Wriston program—have not destroyed the career nature of the 

corps, but have provided much needed personnel to meet the increasing demands 

placed upon it ;

(2) Studies made over the past two decades have placed continued—perhaps 

intensified—emphasis on the need for continued late ral entry into the corps.

i(3) There has been clearly established, the need for significant uniformity 

in the personnel systems for those agencies engaged primarily in foreign affairs, 

and particula rly in both the latera l recruitment of personnel by the agencies 

and the later al movement of personnel between them.

The Chairman. The committee is adjourned.

(Whereupon, at 12:35 p.m., the committee adjourned, subject to 

call of the Chair.)
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY 

NOMINATIONS

TUESDAY, MAY 18, 1965

U nit ed S ta te s S en a te, 

C om m it tee on F or eign R el ati ons,

Washington^ D.G.

The committee met, pursu ant to notice, at 10:10 a.m. in room S-116, 

Capitol, Senator J. W. F ulb rig ht (chairm an) presiding.

Present: Senators Fulbright, Lausche, Symington, Pell, McCarthy, 

Hickenlooper, Aiken, and Carlson.

The Chairman. The committee will come to order.

Some of the members are on their way and will be here in a moment.

On Ap ril 27,1965, the committee received testimony from the Director of the U.S. Info rmation Agency, Mr. Carl Rowan, Deputy Under 

Secretary of State for Administration; Mr. W illiam J. Crockett; and 

the Director General of the Foreign Service, Ambassador Joseph 

Palmer. These gentlemen testified in support of the President’s nomination of 760 U.S. Informa tion Agency officers to become officers in 

the Foreign Service of the United States. These nominations are 

now pending before the Committee on Foreign Relations.

Several members of the committee expressed the desire to meet with 

some of the US IA officers nominated for the Foreign Service, and 

for that purpose we have invited five of these nominees to meet with 

the committee today.

In the meantime the committee has received a letter from Mr. Loy 

Henderson, formerly Deputy Under Secretary of State for Administration, which supports the President’s nominations. It will be 

inserted in the record at this point.

(The letter refe rred to follows:)

T h e A m er ic a n U n iv e r sit y ,

Sch oo l of I n tern a tio na l S er vi ce ,

Washington, D.C., May 12, 1965.

Hon. J. W. F u lb r ig h t,

Chairman, Foreign Relations Committee,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

D ea r Sen at or F u lb r ig h t : In my present capacity as retired Foreign Service 

officer and former Deputy Under Secretary of State for Administration, I am just as enthusiastic in my support of the appointment of USIA career officers as Foreign Service Officers as I was in 1957 when I testified before th e Congress in behalf of career officer legislation for USIA. At th at time I sa id : “I would say tha t if the USIA builds up the kind of service which is envisioned, and if it continues as it plans to do, to bring officers into the service, to treat them while they a re in th e service with regard to promotion, to assignment, and so forth, similar to Foreign Service officers of comparable age and ability * * * 

it would be much easier to combine the two services than it is now.”

63
64 UNIT ED STATES INFORMAT ION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

An im portant step to build the kind of service which I had envisioned in 

1957 was tak en 6 ye ars ago w hen George V. Allen, t hen D irector of USIA, and I 

decided to provide USIA with a caree r officer category as n ear ly like the Foreign 

Service Officer Corps of the Depar tment as possible.

Ambassador Allen and I did our best to make sure th at in establishing a career 

rese rve officers corps, the requirements of the Fore ign Service Act for Foreign 

Service officer appointment, and State Departme nt policies, procedures, administra tiv e requiremen ts and regulations involving Fore ign Service officer personnel 

managem ent were closely followed.

I can tes tify on the basis of personal experience th at the State Departme nt 

has been a full pa rtn er from the beginning in establishing and maintaining the 

caree r reserve of th e USIA. The USIA, in building up its caree r rese rve service, 

has consistently followed a policy of appointing to it only those officers who 

have successfully completed exa min ations th at were sim ilar to, and no less 

string ent than, those required of Fore ign Service officers. Furtherm ore , it has 

subjected these officers to tre atm ent with regard to assignment, training, eva luation, and promotion sim ilar to t hat w hich is extended to Fore ign Service officers.

In my opinion the USIA caree r reserve officers, whose names are now placed 

in nomination, have met the conditions which I had in mind in 1957 as being 

essential for their appo intm ent as Fore ign Service officers. I have personally 

known and have worked w’ith many of them during yea rs gone by. It is my 

sincere belief th at it would be in the intere st of the Foreign Service, of the 

USIA, and of the United Sta tes itself, for these officers whose activities are so 

closely inte rtw ined with the activ ities of the officers of the tra ditio na l Foreign 

Service to be merged into the Foreign Service.

Respectfu lly,

Loy W. Henderson.

The Chairman. The members have short biographical sketches of 

the nominees before them.

The first officer this morning is Mr. William E. Weld, Jr., of the 

District of Columbia. How are you, Mr. Weld?

(Mr. Weld’s biographical sketch follows:)

Biographic Sketc h

Nam e: William E. Weld, Jr .

Ma rita l st atu s: Married.

Number of de pen den ts: Five.

Class: FSCR-1.

Date of b ir th : May 24, 1913.

Place of b ir th : Landour, India.

Legal res ide nce: District of Columbia.

Ed uc ation:

Ham ilton College, B.A., 1935.

Columbia University, M.A., 1942; Ph. D., 1950.

Nav al School of Military Government, 1943.

University of P aris, 1948-49.

Language s : French S-4, R -4 (T 7/59).

Entrance into Foreign Service: November 8,1950.

Last pro mo tion: December 24, 1961.

Ex perie nce:

1935-38: Instr uc tor English, Athens College, Athens, Greece.

1938-39: Assistant secre tar y of admissions, Ham ilton College, New York.

1941- 42 : Assistant in English, Columbia University.

1942- 45 : U.S. Naval Reserve, ensign to lieutenant.

1P46-47 : instr uc tor in En glish, H amilton College, New York.

194S-49: William Ba yard Cu ttin g fellow, Columbia University (in P aris). 

1950-55: Cultural affairs officer, Athens, Greece.

1955-59: Cu ltural affa irs officer, Paris, France.

1959-61: Deputy public af fairs officer, London, England.

1961-65 : Public affairs officer, Raba t, Morocco.

1965- : Deputy assis tant dir ector for Africa (Washington, D.C.).
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS 65

STATEMENT OF WILLIAM E. WELD, JR., OF THE DISTRICT OF 

COLUMBIA, NOMINEE TO BE FORE IGN SERVICE OFFICER

Mr. Weld. Senator, how are you.

The Chairman. Mr. Weld, how long have you been in the service in 

the U SIA ?

Mr. Weld. Since November of 1950.

The Chairman. You have been a cultu ral affairs and public affairs 

officer.

Mr. Weld. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. Could you very briefly state the nature of your 

duties in this position?

Mr. Weld. As a cultural officer and as a public affairs officer?

The Chairman. Yes, just very briefly for the record.

Mr. Weld. As a cultural officer I supervised: The exchange of p ersons, activities of our libraries, and use of b^oks in our program ; 

organization of concerts, lectures, and exhibits, and cultural presentations. As a public affairs officer, in addition to the general supervision of these activities, administration of the programs as a w 

and supervision of the so-called informational activities whiph inc" 

our relations with the press, with publications, with radio, with fi 

and with television.

The Chairman. I notice you served in Greece, France, England, 

Morocco, before coming here, is tha t correct ?

Mr. Weed. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. Are your offices in the embassies ?

Mr. Weld. It varies from post to post. In Morocco they were not 

in the embassy. In P ari s they were in an annex of the embassy. In 

London they were in the embassy, and in Greece they were not in the 

embassy.

The Chairman. That is, physically they were not, but the nature 

of your duties is indistinguishable, is it not, from that of members 

of the Foreign Service?

Mr. Weld. No, they are not indistinguishable from them. They 

complement and supplement the work of those in th e Foreign Service.

The Chairman. Maybe I phrased it wrongly. They are intimately 

related to the operation of the embassy itself.

Mr. Weld. Yes, sir, that is true.

lole

ude

ms,

AF RI CA N PROGR AMS

The Chairman. I notice you have just been designated as Deputy 

Assistant Director for Africa, is that correct?

Mr. Weld. Yes.

The Chairman. Could you say a few words about your duties in 

this respect? What programs in Africa do you consider of most 

importance from your point of view.

Mr. Weld. As Deputy Assistant Director for Africa, I assist the 

Director in supervising th e operation of our programs in all 34 countries in Africa in which we have programs. This includes assistance
66 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

in the establishing of policy for our programs there and for the administration of them.

Our most important programs in Africa are in the Congo and in 

Nigeria and in Algeria and probably in Morocco.

The Chairman. I s it feasible to give us an idea of th e objective of 

this program? What do you seek to achieve in your work in these 

areas ?

Mr. AVeld. The general objective of all US IA programs in all countries is the same, tha t is to promote American policy in those countries. 

The individual objectives vary from country to country, depending 

upon exactly what U.S. objectives are for tha t particu lar country.

The Chairman. Do you have any part in the formulation of the 

policy; th at is, are you consulted by the Ambassador and others as to 

deciding what is the prop er objective in the respective countries?

Mr. Weld. Yes, sir, very closely. In fact in each country US IA 

establishes a country plan of it s own. The U SIA country plan stems 

from the national policy pap er of tha t particu lar country. With 

tha t as a star ting point, US IA then devises what it believes are the 

psychological objectives which US IA can help to accomplish. This 

is then cleared and approved by the country team and the Ambassador.

The Chairman. Are you a part of the country team ?

Mr. AVeld. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. This is the sort of thing I had in mind a moment 

ago about the nature of your duties. It seems to me they are essentially on all fours, although dealing with different aspects of the 

problem, with th at of a Foreign Service officer.

Mr. Weld. Yes; I thin k th at is correct.

SELECTION OUT

The Chairman. What are your views on the selection out program ? 

Do you feel that is a desirable or undesirable program ?

Mr. W eld. I think it is desirable.

The Chairman. And you have no reservations about becoming subject to it?

Mr. Weld. No, sir.

The Chairman. No fears, apprehensions, is t hat correct?

Mr. Weld. Yes.

The Chairman. Are you assigned in the various embassies of various countries on the same basis as a Foreign Service officer ? You have 

no choice, fo r example, where you serve?

Mr. Weld. Yes.

The Chairman. You are assigned, are you not?

Mr. Weld. Yes; I am assigned.

The Chairman. You have no reservations about serving wherever 

they ask you to.

Mr. Weld. No, sir.

The Chairman. I s th at correct ?

Air. Weld. That is correct.

The Chairman. Do you speak any foreign languages ?

Air. Weed. French.

The Chairman. In the places you have been assigned, French is 

more or less the second language, is th at correct ?
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATION S 67

Mr. Weld. It was essential in Rabat and certainly essential in 

France, and it was very useful in Greece.

The Chairman. In Greece it is very useful in diplomacy.

Mr. Weld. Yes.

advantages in transferring

The Chairman. Wh at do you thin k of the advantages of being transferred to Foreign Service as regards pay, benefits, and so on? 

Is there any particu lar advantage to you ?

Mr. Weld. I have not made a study of what the advantages are to me in a material way. As a m atter of fact, i t may have one possible disadvantage for me personally. I have a child "who will not be in college by the time I am 60, and I understand that I must retire at 60 if I become a Foreign Service officer; but I have been told that there will be certain retirement benefits which are better than those I now receive if I become a Foreign Service officer.

The Chairman. What, if anything, do you give up in the nature of 

benefits of any kind if you apply for Foreign Service status.

Mr. Weld. I believe, as I have just indicated, the rig ht to work 

beyond 60 is the only one.

The Chairman. That is the only one you can think of.

Mr. Weld. I believe so. I have not made a careful study of this 

as to how it affects me personally. The Chairman. If you become a Foreign Service officer, would 

you still be under the direction of Mr. Rowan?

Mr. Weld. I believe that the arrangement is t hat Mr. Rowan re­ tains operational administrative authority over the people who work for the U.S. Information Agency, but in*the field it has always been that an information officer like everybody else reports to the ambassador and works as a part of the country team.

examinations

The Chairman. Did you take an examination when you became a 

USIA officer ?

Mr. Weld. No ; not when I became a US IA officer.

The Chairman. Did you at any time ?

Mr. Weld. I took an examination when I became a Foreign Service 

Reserve career officer, career reserve officer.

The Chairman. Was tha t a very difficult examination ?

Mr. Weld. I thought it was fairly comprehensive. I do not think 

it was extravagantly difficult.

The Chairman. Is it comparable as fa r as you know to the foreign 

service examinations?

Mr. Weld. As far as I know, but I really do not know, Senator 

F ulbright.

The Chairman. You do not know.

Mr. Weld. No, sir.

The Chairman. Do you re gard yourself as potentially interchangeable with the Foreign Service officers in the State Department or AID ?

Mr. Weld. Yes; I do.

The Chairman. You do presently.

Senator Lausche, do you have any questions?
68 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Senator Lausciie. The handicap th at will come to you, as you have 

mentioned, is tha t under the Foreign Service retirement provisions 

you will have to retire at 60 ?

Mr. Weld. I believe so.

Senator Lausciie. How old are you now ?

Mr. Weld. Fifty-one.

Senator L ausciie. If you were continued under the civil service retirement, how long would you be permitted to work ?

Mr. Weld. I believe it is 62.

ST ATU S OF FO RE IG N SE RV IC E R E TIR E M E N T FU N D

Senator Lausciie. But you do understand tha t the benefits under 

the Foreign Service retirement are better and compensatory to a 

greater degree than they are under the civil service retirement fund.

Mr. Weld. I understand they are better. I have not calculated to 

know whether they more than compensate for the shorter period of 

activity duty.

Senator Lausche. Are you f amiliar with the fact tha t the Foreign 

Service fund now has a debt against the Government of $285 million 

tha t has not been paid into the fund by the Government ?

Mr. Weld. No, sir; I am not.

Senator Lausche. Has anyone told you tha t even though the U.S. 

Government paid the $285 million into the fund, th at to keep the Foreign Service retirement structure actuarially sound will require contributions of sums equal to 29.7 percent of the payroll of each worker?

Mr. Weld. No.

Senator Lausche. Have you been told tha t if the normal program 

is followed of the worker paying in one-half and the Government the 

other half, that in this instance the worker would have to pay 14.85 

percent of his salary into the fund ?

Mr. Weld. No, sir. These things may have indeed been in some of 

the documents I have received, bu t I have not digested them.

Senator Lausciie. Has anything been said to you that, though 29.7 

percent of the worker's income will have to be paid into the fund, 

you need not worry about that because the Government will put up 

23.2 percent of it, and the worker only 6.5 percent ?

Mr. Weld. No, si r; I do not recall anyth ing like that.

Senator L ausciie. You have he ard no discussion of that.

Mr. Weld. All I have heard is—as I say, I have not examined my 

own case individually in detail. I have heard some stories th at in order to meet any obligations unde r this, I might have to pay a lump 

sum to compensate for what the Government would have p ut into my 

retirement allocation had it been doing so since the beginning of my 

service in the Foreign service.

Senator L ausciie. What is the lump sum tha t you will have to pay 

in ?

Mr. Weld. I have no idea.

Senator Lausciie. Have you been told that it will have to be 1 6^ 

or 13.8 percent ?

Mr. Weld. No, si r; I have not been told that.

Senator Lausciie. Some mention has been made that in order to 

get the increased benefits, you will have to make a lump-sum payment 

into the new fund.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATION S 69

Mr. Weld. I have heard this, but I cannot document where I heard 

it, no, sir.

Senator Lausche. Has any indication been given to you tha t the 

Foreign Service retirement fund—because of liberalizations th at were granted throughout the years numbering 11—is now in the condition 

which I described to you? Tha t to keep it actuarially sound will 

require 29.7 percent contributions?

Mr. Weld. No, si r; I do not recall being told that.

Senator Lausche. Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent tha t 

there be printed in the record an itemization of these liberalizations 

as they are set fo rth in the dissenting opinion filed in connection with 

S. 745 which was pending before the 88th Congress.

The Chairman. With out objection.

(The document referre d to follows:)

Senate Report S13, December 19, 1963, on S. 745, a Bill To Provide for Adjustments in Annuities under the Foreign Service Retirement and Disability

System

M IN O R IT Y V IE W S

[Excerpt]

Some of the liberalizations that the Congress adopted are as follo ws: (1) In 1939, officers who had served 30 years could retire at age 60 on a 

reduced annuity. (2) In 1939, survivor annuities for wives were first provided. (3) In 1941, the act was changed to permit retirement with 30 years of 

service a t age 50. (4) In 1946, voluntary retirement at age 50 with 20 years of service was 

permitted. (5) In 1946, disability retirement was liberalized so t ha t when a partici­ pant in the system becomes disabled, if he has at least 5 years of service, his annuity is figured on the basis of a minimum of 20 years of service. (6) Also in 1946, the act was amended to provide that an annuity would be based on the officer’s 5-year average salary next preceding retirement, 

rat her th an the 10 years nex t preceding retirement. (7) In 1955, it was changed to the best 5-year average, rather than the 

5 years next preceding retirement. (8) In 1956, the limitation on years of service on which an annuity could be based was raised from 30 to 35 years, thus allowing 70 percent of the 

highest 5-year average salary as an annuity. (9) In 1960, the retirement system was changed to provide tha t Foreign Service Staff personnel, aft er they have served 10 years in the Foreign Service, become participants in the Foreign Service retirement system. During the first 10 years of their service they are subject to the Civil Service 

Retirem ent Act. (10) In 1960, survivor annuities for children were also granted. (11) And. in 1960, the act was amended to provide for recomputation of annuities of those who had retired prior to 1956 to allow those with more than 30 years to be given added credit for the difference up to 35 years.

The Chairman. Senator Aiken.

DIPLOMATIC STATUS

Senator Aiken. Mr. Weld, will transfer to the Foreign Service 

result in bestowing any diplomatic ra nk upon you ?

Mr. Weld. In the posts where I have been, I have always had the 

diplomatic ran k of an attache.

Senator Aiken. Yes. But in general with these employees beingtransferred, would most of them be beneficiaries of a diplomatic rank?

Mr. Weld. Yes; I assume that they would be.
70 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Senator Aiken. And would th ere be any privileges or immunities 

which they do not now receive ?

Mr. Weld. Yes.

Senator Aiken. What would those be ?

Mr. Weld. The most recent situation I can cite is in Rabat where a 

number of my colleagues in the Information Service, although they 

were accorded diplomatic status by the Department, were not by the 

Moroccan Government, and they ran into problems of entry privileges 

and th at kind of thing.

Senator Aiken. I suppose they had cost of living allowance, did 

they, in Rabat ?

Mr. Weld. Y es.

Senator Aike n. How long have you been a resident of the District 

of Columbia ?

Mr. Weld. Ju st a month.

Senator Aiken. Where were you from originally before then?

Mr. Weld. I come from upstate New York.

Senator Aike n. New York?

Mr. Weld. Upstate New York, yes.

Senator Aiken. Hamilton ?

Mr. Weld. Yes.

Senator Aiken. Have you voted in Hamilton? Were you a voter 

there ?

Mr. W eld. No : I have not had a residence in New York for some 

years now since I have been overseas.

Senator Aike n. Do you pay taxes in the States of New York?

Mr. Weld. I have not since I have been overseas. Before tha t I 

did.

Senator Aiken. And th at has been since when ?

Mr. Weld. Since 1951.

Senator Aiken. Previous to th at you were overseas, too.

Do you belong to any organizations ?

Mr. Weld. No.

Senator Aiken. Tha t is all.

The Chairman. Senator Symington, do you have any questions?

Senator Symington. No, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. Senator Carlson.

PROSPECTS FOR FU TU RE AS SIGNM EN TS

Senator Carlson. Jus t one or two. I regret I was not here. Pro bably the chairman asked you this question. Assuming that this is 

confirmed, your tran sfer from the US IA to the Foreign Sendee, as 

a Foreign Sendee Officer do you have an assignment? Do you know 

where you are to go next ?

Mr. Weld. Right now ?

Senator Carlson. Yes. You are, of course, in Washington, now.

Mr. W eld. Yes. No; I do not know. I just arrived in Washington. I do not know where I will go next.

Senator Carlson. But und er the language in recent legislation, you 

could as a Foreign Service officer spend considerable time in Washington and still be a Foreign Service officer.

Mr. Weld. Yes, sir.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATION S 71

Senator Carlson. There has been some question in my mind about 

tha t legislation, but I know they have considered it, so there is no 

use ta lking about it. But I just wondered if you expected a foreign 

assignment or if you were coming in here to take recognition as a 

Foreign Service officer to serve in the United States. I was just 

wondering about it. You do not know ?

Mr. Weld. No, sir. I have served overseas all my career. I have 

served abroad, been brou ght back to Washington, and I expect to 

serve here for several years. I may be assigned abroad again, too.

Senator Carlson. Th at is all, Mr. Chairman.

PAY AND RETIR EMENT

Senator Lausche. Ju st one more question. Persons occupying positions such as you have receive what pay now ?

Mr. Weld. It depends upon their classification, the ir Foreign S ervice classification.

Senator Lausche. What is the pay for the classification tha t you 

are in?

Mr. Weld. $24,500.

Senator L ausche. If you were required to pay 14.85 percent of that 

salary into the retirem ent fund, can you tell me what your reaction 

would be? This 14.85 percent is one-half of the 29.7 tha t now would 

have to be paid in to keep the fund actuarially sound.

Mr. Weld. If I were convinced the retirem ent benefits were worth 

it, I would pay it gladly.

Senator Lausche. If it were what ?

Mr. Weld. If I were convinced tha t the retirement benefits were 

worth it, I would pay it gladly.

Senator Lausche. The retirement benefits have been improved, but 

the fund has been rendered defunct because the contributions of the 

workers has not been increased. Thus you now have a fund, as I stated, which requires, 29.7 percent of your salary of $24,500. You 

would have to pay in $7,350. If you paid half of it, you would have to 

pay in $3,675 a year. Th at is quite some amount.

Senator Aiken. You did not do tha t with modern arithmetic 

methods.

Senator Lausche. There is no question about this fund being deficient in the amount which I have mentioned, because that is the word 

of the fiscal officers in the Adm inistrato r’s Office.

I think that is all.

The Chairman. You say you get $24,500 now. What did you get 

as public affairs officer in Rab at during 1961-65? Was it tha t much ?

Mr. Weld. Well, it goes by your classification.

The Chairman. Whether they are here or abroad ?

Mr. W eld. Yes.

The Chairman. Being Deputy Director, did not change your 

salary?

Mr. Weld. No, sir.

Senator Aiken. Wh at was the cost-of-living allowance which you 

received ?

Mr. Weld. There was none. I had a rental allowance but no costof-living allowance in Rabat.
72 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

The Chairman. Any further questions ?

Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask Mr. Weld: 

Wha t is your classification ?

Mr. Weed. FSC R-1.

Senator Symington. Thank you.

The Chairman. That is the highest. Thank you very much, Mr. 

Weld.

Mr. Weld. Thank you, Senator Fulbright.

The Chairman. Next is Air. Alan Carter of Maryland.

I may say fo r the record tha t Mr. Car ter and Mr. Weld are the only 

two class l's on this list.

Mr. Carter, how long have you been in the USIA?

(Air. Carter’s biographical sketch follows:)

B io graph ic S k etc h

Na me : Alan Carter.

Marita l st atu s: Married.

Number of de pendents: Two.

Class: FSCR-2.

Date of birth : April 16. 1923.

Place of b ir th : Rochester, N.Y.

Legal res ide nce: Maryland.

Ed ucati on :

1940- 41. George Washington University.

1941- 43. University of Michigan.

1946. University of Michigan (B.A. in political science).

Lan guages: None.

Entrance into Fore ign Service: November 4, 1955.

Last pro mo tion: Janu ary 19, 1964.

Experience:

1943-46. U.S. Navy.

1946- 47. WSAY, Rochester, N.Y., staff announcer.

1947- 48. WGVA, Geneva, N.Y., featu red announcer.

1948- 49. WPT R, Albany, N.Y., s taff announcer.

1949- 50. WPAT, Paterson, N.J., spec ial even ts director.

1950- 51. WNYC, New York City, program director.

1951- 52. WNBC, NBC, New York City, broadcasting .

1952- 53. Tex as Home Modernizers, Dallas, Tex., contractor.

1954. San Antonio Council for Educa tional TV, Texas, campaign director, 

sales promotion.

1955. KOCY, Oklahoma City, program director.

November 4, 1955. Agency ra dio officer.

December S, 1955. Kar ac hi : Radio officer.

Janu ary 12, 1958. New Delhi: Inform ation officer.

March 20. 1960. New De lhi: Press officer.

July 6, 1962. Agency: Special Assistan t to Deputy Director.

July 1, 1963. Agency: Dire ctor, Television Service.

STATEMENT OF ALAN CARTER, OF MARYLAND, NOMINEE TO BE 

FOREIGN SERVICE OFFICER

Air. Carter. 9.5 years, Air. Chairman.

The Chairman. Wh at are your particula r duties in this Agency? 

Air. Carter. I am currently the Director of the Television Service 

of the Agency.

generalist or specialist

The Chairman. Has tha t been you area of activity since you have 

been in ?

Mr. Carter. No, it has not, sir. I have had varied activities. I 

spent 2 years in my first tour of duty in Pakistan as radio officer. Aly
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS 73

first tour of duty following that in In dia was as inform ation officer for 

the economic aid program. My second tour in Ind ia was as press 

attache.

I came back to Wash ington originally assigned as the special assistant to the Deputy Director of the Agency and then 2 years ago was 

put into my present position.

The Chairman. You are a specialist in radio and television activities.

Mr. Carter. No, I am really not.

The Chairman. Oh, you are not ?

Mr. Carter. I am a general Foreign Service officer currently holding th e television job.

The Chairman. Describe just briefly the nature of your duties as a 

television officer, Director of Television Service.

Mr. Carter. Our function there is to utilize the foreign television 

systems abroad for programs which will advance the foreign policy 

objectives of the United States. We do th at by prim arily producing 

in our own studio facilities here in Washington programing designed 

either for worldwide distribution or designed for special countries, 

individual countries I should say, or countries which are grouped 

together primarily on an linguistic basis. But all of these programs 

are primarily designed for advancing foreign policy objectives.

The Chairman. I may be confused by this biographical sketch, but 

according to this, beginning in 1946 you were a staff announcer in 

Rochester. In 1947 you were a featured announcer in New York, 

Geneva, N.Y., and then in Albany, N.Y., you were a staff announcer. 

I mean looking at this, much of your career has been spent in radio 

and television. That is why I wondered if you would not consider 

yourself a specialist in radio.

Mr. Carter. Actually, Senator Fulbrig ht, the best way I think to 

explain th at is the first 10 years a fter graduatin g from the University 

of Michigan, were spent in radio broadcasting, much of it in educational broadcasting in New York and elsewhere.

When I joined the Agency’s Foreign Service, I was first assigned 

as a radio officer, and then asked for a development plan tha t would 

permit me to become more of a generalist. You will note, sir, tha t 

I did go from radio into the general inform ation field, and in fact, 

my current appointment to head the television service was made, as 

I understand it—I was appointed there by Air. Alurrow, primarily 

because they felt that someone with general Foreign Service experience would be able generally to guide the program content of the 

programing.

E X A M IN A T IO N

The Chairman. When you came into the service, did you take an 

examination ?

Air. Carter. The examination I first took on joining the service 

was only an oral interview by a panel of Foreign Service officers of 

the Agency. Of course I did later take the Foreign Service Career 

Reserve examination which was both w ritten and oral, conducted both 

by State Department officers and US IA officers.

The Chairman. Wh at did you do with Texas Home Alodernizers 

in Dallas? What was tha t? Did that have anything to do with 

broadcasting ?
74 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Mr. Carter. Not at all, sir. At th at point I left New York City to 

free lance, and I was doing public relations work with tha t particular 

organization.

The Chairman. In the field of television and radio?

Mr. Carter. No ; just general public relations, sir.

The Chairman. Do you speak any foreign language ?

Mr. Carter. I do not.

The Chairman. Have you served abroad where?

Mr. Carter. Pakistan and India.

The Chairman. Pakistan and India. Do you know whether or 

not the present career Foreign Service has specialists in, say the 

field of radio and television?

Mr. Carter. There are indeed specialists normally falling under 

the limited reserve or the Foreign Service Staff Corps as opposed to 

the Foreign Service Career Reserve.

The Chairman. Would you be prepared to serve in the non-English 

speaking world if you become a member of the Foreign Service ?

Mr. Carter. I would indeed, sir.

The Chairman. Senator Lausche.

Senator Lausche. When did you join the Service ?

Mr. Carter. In 1955, Senator Lausche.

Senator Lausche. And how old are you ?

Mr. Carter. Forty-two.

Senator Lausche. You have been in for 9 years.

Mr. Carter. That is right, sir.

Senator Lausche. Have you served abroad ?

Mr. Carter. Yes, for a total of about 6y2 years. I came back to 

Washington 3 years ago.

Senator Lausche. With respect to your salary, if you are sent 

abroad into areas which are supposed to be dangerous to health, do 

you get additional compensation unde r the Foreign Service as distinguished from what you are getting now ?

Air. Carter. Yes, I do. Fo r example, in Ind ia we received a socalled h ardship allowance of 10 percent based on climate and health 

factors.

Senator Lausche. That is in the position which you now occupy.

Mr. Carter. No. When I was overseas.

Senator Lausche. So from that standpoint, there would be no difference, is that correct ?

Mr. Carter. That is correct.

STATUS OF FOREIGN SERVICE RETIREM ENT FUND

Senator Lausche. Have you discussed the plight of the Foreign 

Service retirement fund at all ?

Air. Carter. AVe have had some discussions on it, Senator Lausche. 

I understand tha t both the Foreign Service retirement and the civil 

service retirement program, under which I am now, are both operating 

at a deficit.

Senator Lausche. It is true tha t to the civil service retirement fund 

there is due $35 billion from the Government, but with the payment of 

tha t sum th e fund is sound. The Foreign Service retirem ent fund, 

even though the Government pays the $285 million which it owes, and
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 75

pays it today, will require, as I have said, a 29.7 percent contribution 

to keep it sound.

Were you 760 all called together to discuss the subject of what your 

increased benefits will be as distinguished from what you now get?

Air. Carter. No, I do not recall any meeting on that.

Senator Lausche. Were you called together in groups ?

Mr. Carter. No, just this group did have one meeting in which we 

discussed generally the status of the whole transfe r over.

Senator Lausche. Do you know whether there was any mass meeting 

of the 760 so t ha t they exchanged views to find out exactly what is 

happening to them?

Mr. Carter. I know of no such meeting, Senator Lausche.

Senator Lausche. Do you know this to be the fact, an unbelieveable 

situation prevails in the fund illustrated by the fact that into it 

now on the basis of a 13-percent contribution—th at is the present 

law, 6y2 percent by the Government and 6y2 percent by the worker— 

the fund received $6 million in 1962 and paid out $5.5 million? All 

that it received to meet future obligations was $500,000. Fu rth ermore, an actuaria l projection of funds, known obligations, and anticipated receipts reveals tha t unless measures are taken to improve the 

financing of the fund, it will be depleted by 1977. Has anybody 

told you that?

Air. Carter. No, sir.

Senator Lausche. These are not our facts. They are in the report, 

and are the word t ha t we received from the fund.

I am going to take a b it of time. Some of the liberalizations that 

the Congress adopted a,re as follows: In 1939, officers who had served 

30 years could retire at the age of 60 on a reduced annuity. In 1939, 

survivor annuities were provided for wives for the first time. In 

1941 the act was changed to permit retirement with 20 years of service at the age of 50. Of course, when that was done, it was a terrific 

blow at the actuarial soundness of the fund.

In 1946 disability retirem ent was liberalized so tha t when a pa rticipant in the system became disabled, if he had at least 5 years of 

service, his annuity was figured on the basis of 20 years of service; 

that is, if he became disabled after 5 years, they gave him credit for 

20 years of service instead of the 5 tha t he actually served.

In 1946 the act was amended to provide th at annuity would be based 

on the officer’s 5-year average salary next preceding retirement rather 

than on the 10 years next preceding retirement. Up until 1946 they 

took the average of 10 years and based the retirement on that. But 

someone got the bill throu gh to take the last 5 years instead of the 

last 10, and tha t struck another blow.

I am not going to read any further , but it is only a government 

that could run a business this way. No private individual would 

ever think of runn ing it like this.

Tha t is all.

The Chairman. Senator Aiken.

Senator Aiken. Do you know how your retirement system compares with the retirement system for Members of Congress?

Air. Carter. No; I do not, sir.

Senator Aiken. I do not either. I have no questions. I am a b it 

curious: Are you acquainted with Vermont?
76 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Mr. Carter. No; I am not, Senator. I am familiar with it.

Senator Aiken. We will try not to hold tha t against you. I was 

going to ask you if you were acquainted with the director of the 

Vermont Symphony Orchestra, Mr. Carter, the same spelling.

Mr. Carter. No relationship at all.

Senator Aiken. He is a good man I understand, very good.

That is all.

The Chairman. Senator Pell.

Senator Pell. Thank you, sir.

Mr. Carter, I came in late. I want to express my joy at seeing iny 

old friend ‘‘Bill” Weld here. I know he will do very well in his new 

capacity.

W IT N ESSES AR E REPR ESE NTATIV E OF GR OU P OF "GO

Mr. Carter, I have a couple of questions. Did you take the lateral 

entry exam or not?

Mr. Carter. No; I took the Foreign Service Career Reserve officers 

examination.

Senator Pell. Several years back ?

Mr. Carter. About 1960.

Senator Pell. You are the first batch of this 760 who they are thin king of integra ting into the Foreign Service now.

Mr. Carter. That is correct.

Senator P ell. They will be promoted in relays like this group.

Mr. Carter. No; my understanding of it is that the program will be 

a transfer of all 760.

Senator Pell. Why are you coming up first as a separate little 

group ?

Mr. Carter. I believe it was requested by the committee.

The Chairman. Members requested that a sample be sent up, just 

picked by lot, so to speak.

Senator Pell. This is a random sampling.

The Chairman. Mr. Rowan sent up a few to show us what they 

were like and so on, that is all.

Senator P ell. Presumably he is most highly qualified.

The Chairman. Well, he and Mr. Weld are the only two class 1 

officers who are in the United States at this time.

Mr. Marcy just picked some arbitra rily from the list as a sample, 

that is all.

Senator Pell. Thank you, sir.

As you know, a class 1 F oreign Service officer is supposed to be able 

to be an ambassador anywhere in the globe at this point. In fac t some 

class 2 officers are Ambassadors. I would like the record to show my 

own views tha t a Foreign Service officer of any class should be fluent 

in not one but two languages and should have more of a general background than would be indicated by the biographical sketch of Mr. 

Carter that is here. I recognize tha t is not the view of USIA.

Tha t is all I have to say.

The Chairman. I would ask you about the selection-out program. 

Do you have any feeling about tha t? Are you perfectly willing to 

abide by it ?
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATION S 77

Mr. Carter. I have no concern about i t; no, sir.

The Chairman. Would this have any effect upon your gross or 

net salary?

Mr. Carter. None.

PREFE RENCE FOR TI IE FOREIGN SERVICE

The Chairman. Ju st briefly, do you p refer to be a Foreign Service 

officer to a Reserve officer, and why ?

Mr. Carter. My preference is really one of what I thin k to be the 

professional necessity, Senator Fulbrigh t, of Foreign Service.

The Chairman. Wh at is that ?

Mr. Carter. Namely, that I thin k diplomacy in the 20th century 

consists of several factors—political, psychological, economic. I think 

tha t the three of them have to be working in tandem, working as a 

unit. They are all integral components of the basic function of foreign 

policy. Therefore, I believe tha t all officers of the U.S. Government 

who are serving abroad as Foreign Service officers should come under 

one system and work within the same set of precepts tha t one system 

would impose on all.

The Chairman. In this organization, specialists are not needed and 

required, are they not ?

Mr. Carter. Yes; they are, sir.

The Chairman. Any thing fu rth er ?

Senator Carlson. Ju st this one thoug ht: I would like to follow the 

chairman's thought there. I was interested in your response to his 

list question about the need for Foreign Service officers in all these 

foreign fields. Does tha t mean we are going to put Peace Corps and 

US IA and AID people all in the Foreign Service?

Mr. Carter. As I understand it, Senator, the Peace Corps is not 

involved in this nor is AID. This is purely USIA. I was using the 

terms “political” and “economic.” Of course those are traditionally 

within the Foreign Service that now exists. I was only trying to 

imply tha t I thin k there is now this additional dimension of the 

so-called psychological sphere of diplomacy which would be blanketed 

in with those two.

Senator Carlson. That is all, Mr. Chairman.

Senator Lausciie. Yes; but, Senator Carlson, we have the Peace 

Corps request that we embody their members into the Foreign Service, 

and we also have pending in the House a bill to put into the b ankrupt 

Foreign Service fund the civil service employees of the State Dep artment.

The Chairman. Senator Pell.

Senator Pell. As I u nderstand it, you feel th at you can more fully 

fulfill your capabilities and perfo rm your job as a Foreign Service 

officer than in the Foreign Service Career Reserve, is tha t correct?

Mr. Carter. No; I would rather assert that by having all of the 

means and mechanisms of diplomacy today under one roof rather than 

say I could perform myself better under one system as preferred to 

the other, Senator Pell.

47-5 80— 65------6
78 UNIT ED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

WHY NOT EARLIER LATERAL ENT RY?

Senator Pell. Why did you not take the lateral entry exam which 

was perfectly possible ?

Mr. Carter. Primarily because when I joined the Agency I did it 

with the career aspiration of working in the psychological and info rmation realm of diplomacy, and I still see this as the basic part of my 

duties.

Senator Pell. Basically then when you came into the Service you 

found yourself interested in psychological warfare, propaganda. 

But if you come into the Foreign Service this way, you will then 

become a general ist. Is this w hat you want to become ?

Mr. Carter. To begin with, I feel I am already a generalist in terms 

of the program of the U.S. Info rmation Agency. In direct response 

to your question, Senator Pell, yes, I think that I would like to become 

a generalist; whether or not th at develops or not, I do not know. But 

I think tha t the interchangeability of the officers of the present Fo reign Service with our Foreign Service Career Reserve, which would 

evolve from this integration program, is much to the benefit of the 

Foreign Service functions.

Senator P ell. What I cannot get through my head is this. I know 

tha t some of your officers have taken the lateral entry exam and have 

become generalists, b ut not en masse—not 700-plus. I wondered what 

inhibited you from taking the lateral entry exam in the last 4 years.

Mr. Carter. Nothing inhibited me, sir, except my own particular 

desire to continue working w ith the program of the U.S. Information 

Agency.

Senator P ell. But you cannot both want to be a generalist and 

continue doing information work.

Mr. Carter. I am afraid I do, Senator Pell.

Senator Pell. Right, and there is another point that the record 

should show, too. I would very much doubt th at anybody could pass 

a lateral entry exam to class 1 without a fluent knowledge of at least 

one language and probably two.

Mr. Carter. I quite agree with the lack of language. I would 

hope, however, before my next overseas assignment, to be given language training.

Senator P ell. Thank you, sir.

Senator L ausche. Tha t is, you hope to make up the language tr ain ­

ing between now and when ?

Mr. Carter. Between now and my next assignment abroad.

IN TE GRA TI NG of functions

Senator L ausche. You state tha t your primary reason fo r wanting 

these 760 brought into the Foreign Service is tha t there should be 

equal treatment of all performing similar services and subjecting to 

the same tests in procuring employment, is that correct ?

Mr. Carter. More that I believe tha t all of these basic functions of 

foreign diplomacy, foreign policy and diplomacy, should be brought 

together. In order to brin g them together there would then be the
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 79

common set of disciplines, but tha t is more secondary. That is the equal treatment is more secondary, in my mind at least, to the basic 

integrating of the functions.

Senator Lausche. But they are not being brought together. Mr. 

Rowan will still be the administrator of your divisions.

Mr. Carter. That is correct.

Senate Lausche. It will still be a separate agency of the Government.

Mr. Carter. Th at is correct, Senator.

Senator Lausche. So tha t from that standpoint your position is 

not sound. They are not being brought together.

Mr. Carter. But there would be a greater interchangeability as I 

understand it.

Senator Lausche. Would you still be for this proposal if your bene­ fits now were greater than they will be under the Foreign Service fund 

into which you are being moved ?

Mr. Carter. I would be less than human if I did not say it would 

depend on how much greater, but basically, yes, I would.

Senator L ausche. Even though your emoluments were reduced, you 

would still be for it.

Mr. Carter. If it were not a significant reduction, yes.

Senator Lausche. All righ t, good enough. Th at is all.

The Chairman. In the Agency, you are Director of the Television Service. Have you any arrangements, any experience in the use of 

COMSAT in this operation?

Mr. Carter. Yes, Senator Fulbright, we have been doing some facil- itative work with some of the European networks in our own studios transmitting via Early B ird, and we do propose to use it in our future 

programing.

The Chairman. I believe that is all.

Senator Carlson. This certainly does not apply to Mr. Carter or any of the fine folks here this morning, but I have been concerned about what we are doing to the Foreign Service by expanding into all these fields. You know a Foreign Service officer has great standing, and you are not going to detract from it. But if we expand this to a com­ plete service system for all foreign officers, it occurs to me that we are going to lower the prestige of the Foreign Service. That is the thing 

that really concerns me. This does not apply to you folks here this morning, but I am really concerned about it. We are going to pu t all these people to work over­ seas, and we are gra dually moving th at way. I ju st do not th ink it is a good thing. I want the record to show my views on it. It certainly 

does not apply to you personally.

The Chairman. Tha nk you very much, Mr. Carter.

Mr. Carter. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. The next witness is Mr. H enry A. Dunlap. He is 

a class 2 FSCR. Mr. Dunlap, could you state for the record briefly your experience, when you came in, what your particular duties have been ? (Mr. Dunlap’s biographical sketch follows:)
80 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

B io gra phic Sk etc h

N a m e : H en ry A. D un la p.

M ari ta l s ta tu s : M ar ried .

N um be r o f d ep en de nt s : Four.

C la ss : FSCR-2 .

D ate of b ir th : A pr il 7,1 917.

P la ce of b ir th : De pew, N.Y.

Leg al r esid en ce: M ar yl an d.

E d u c a ti o n :

C an is iu s Colleg e— 1939 (B .S . his to ry a nd politica l sc ie nc e) .

U niv er si ty o f B uffalo— 1941 (B LS l ib ra ry s ci en ce ).

L anguages: Ger m an S-3, I t- 3 (s elf -a ppra is ed).

D ate o f e ntr y in For ei gn Se rv ic e : A pr il 1 8.1 946 .

D at e of la st pr om otio n : D ec em be r 2 5,1 960.

E x p eri e n ce:

19 35 -39: Stu den t li b ra ry assis ta n t. C an is iu s Colleg e, Bu ffa lo. N.Y. 

1939-39 ( 5 m on th s) : H ea d, bo ok dep ar tm en t, C at ho lic Union St or e, 

Buffalo, N .Y.

193 9-4 3 : L ib ra ri an, G ro sv en or L ib ra ry , B uf falo , N.Y.

19 43 -4 5: U.S . A rm y.

194 5- 4 6 : Ch ief, R ep ort s C ontrol Se cti on , OM GUS, H oe ch stad , Ber lin.

1946- 4 9 : Chief L ib ra ri an, OM GU S, Ber lin.

19 49 -51: L ib ra ri an-A rc hiv is t, IIIC OG, Bon n and F ra n k fu rt .

19 51 - 52 : D ep ut y Sta ff S ec re ta ry , HIC OG , F ra n k fu rt .

19 52 - 54 : C ult ura l officer, HIC OG. B ad G od esberg.

A ug us t 19 54 -J ul y 19 57 : Chi ef , B ib liog ra ph ic Divisi on . USI A. W as hi ng to n. 

Ju ly 19 57 -D ec em be r 19 59: Pub lic aff air s officer. Ac cra. G ha na .

D ec em be r 19 59 -A ug us t 19 60 : For ei gn aff air s officer, USI A, W as hi ng to n. 

A ug ust 19 60 -A ug us t 19 61 : P ro gra m coord in at or (A fr ic a), USI A, W as hin gt on .

A ug us t 19 61 -J un e 1962 : N ational W ar Colleg e, W as hi ng to n.

Ju n e 1962-p re se nt: Ch ief , A fr ic an D iv isio n (I B S ), USI A, W as hi ng to n.

STATEMENT 0E HEN EY A. DUNLAP, OF MAEYLAND, NOMINEE TO 

BE FOEEIGrN SEEV ICE OFFICEE

Mr. Dunlap. I came into the U.S. Information Agency in 1953. I 

had been previously with the Department of State, and prior to that 

with the Department of the A rmy. In 1953 and 1954 I was in charge 

of the inform ation center program in Germany, and I returned from 

Germany to become Chief of the Bibliographic Division of the In ­

formation Center Service of US IA, and’ in 1957 I was assigned to 

Ghana as public affairs officer.

I served in Ghana from 1957 to 1959, a t which time I returned to 

Washington to become program coordinator for the African Area 

Office. In 1961 and 1962 I attended the National War College, and 

from August, of 1962 until the present time I have been Chief of the 

African Division of the Voice of America.

The Chairman. Do you have any language ?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir; I have modest French and fairly good 

German.

R E SPO N SIB IL IT IE S OF VOA ’s AFR IC AN DIV IS IO N

The Chairman. Wh at are your responsibilities as Chief of the 

Voice of America, African Division ? Wha t do you do ?

Mr. Dunlap. I supervise a staff of 70 people in Washington and 

about. 30 stationed in Africa engaged in preparing broadcasts to Africa 

in English, French, Arabic, and Swahili. We also prepare programs 

in those languages and other languages on tape which we send to our
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS 81

US IS posts in Africa f or them to make available to the local national 

radio stations to play over their stations.

The Chairman. What is the nature of these broadcasts you make? 

Is it news or what ?

Mr. Dunlap. All of the broadcast programs in the four languages. 

Senator, consist of 50 percent news and 50 percent of what we call 

feature and similar material, some music, nonnews material.

The Chairman. In preparing the news, what is your approach to 

this? How do you prepa re it? How do you select it? What are the 

guiding principles in the selection and deciding what news you 

publicize ?

Mr. Dunlap. I think there are several guidelines, Mr. Chairman. 

We try to select the most significant and most important items of 

United States and -world news, and in addition in the case of Africa, 

we also include a small number of items pertaining to developments on 

the continent of Africa.

The Chairman. When you say Africa, that is a very big place. Are 

there any particu lar countries that you concentrate on? Do you 

blanket the whole continent?

Mr. Dunlap. Well, it depends on the language that we are broadcasting in, Mr. Chairman. We have Arabic to Africa which is concerned in the main with the northern rim from Mauritania over to 

Libya and down into the Sudan. There are 21 French-speaking countries, and they are scattered all over the continent. The English-speaking countries are also scattered.

WHO LI ST EN S TO THE BROADCASTS?

The Chairman. Are these shortwave broadcasts tha t we are tal king about now ?

Mr. Dunlap. All of our broadcasts are shortwave except tha t one 

of our French ha lf hour broadcasts is relayed from Munich on mediumwave into north Africa.

The Chairman. It is all shortwave except one.

Mr. D unlap. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. Do you have any idea of how many shortwave 

receivers there are in these various parts of Africa ?

Mr. Dunlap. We have some estimates. I cannot recall them offhand, but we do have some estimates. They are difficult to arrive at 

because in many countries the estimate comes from the tax office which 

collects the fee to be paid on radios. In many countries this is a minimum figure because as many people as possible avoid paying the fee 

to use the radios.

AVe do not know how many are perhaps smuggled into countries or 

in use back in the bush. We simply do not have very accurate figures.

The Chairman. There is no way of determining whether anybody 

listens to these programs or not, is there ?

Air. Dunlap. Oh,y es; Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. How’ do you determine tha t ?

Mr. Dunlap. We receive listener mail, and our U SIS posts and our 

embassies oversea report examples of conversations with the local 

people. Many times the members of the Cabinet, middle-level Government officials, who indicate, they just do not say, they listen to YOA,
82 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

but if you ask them a couple of questions, you are able to verify the 

fact tha t they actually did listen to a particu lar program at a pa rticular time.

RESPONSIBILITY FOR CONTENTS OF AFRICAN PROGRAM

The Chairman. I s your principal responsibility the preparation 

of the material that is broadcast ?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir. I would say that my reason for being in the 

position I am in is because I have served in Africa and worked on 

Afri can matters, and I think my main purpose was to insure that the 

natu re of the material and the way it was presented would be in such a 

manner as to be acceptable and informative to Afri can listeners.

The Chairman. So you do have the responsibility of determining 

what kind of material and what kind of feature articles are broadcast.

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. I s th at your responsibility ?

Mr. Dunlap. That is true, sir.

The Chairman. With whom do you confer? Do you do it solely 

on your own? In other words, do you have any consultations with 

the State Departm ent on this matter ?

Mr. Dunlap. We seldom confer directly with the Department of 

State, but we do confer with the African area office of the Agency, 

which is represented here today by Mr. Weld, and with the Policy 

Office of the Agency, and our own Policy Office in the Voice of 

America.

The Chairman. Is th ere any coordination between say the African 

desk in the State Department and you on this ma tter ?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir ; and this is done mainly through our Agency’s 

African area office, seldom direct.

The Chairman. It would be through Mr. Weld, instead of you.

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, si r; that is correct.

INTER EST IN TRANSFERRING TO FOREIGN SERVICE

The Chairman. Do you have any particular interest in being a 

Foreign Service officer ?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir. I think my interest is a dual one. I think 

that the Foreign Service of the United States is a highly qualified, 

excellent organization, and I think tha t it is a matter of, as has been 

mentioned here, personal prestige, and the fact that we do work in the 

field in areas of responsibility side by side with Foreign Service officers 

in our embassies. But I th ink what may be of more significance is the 

fact that overseas the foreign governments with which we deal tend 

to look on our staffs within a framework of a certain type of operation.

Fo r example, if they look at the diplomatic list in a given country 

and they say, “ Here is Mr. So and So, what is his profession, what 

kind of a person is he, w hat is his responsibility,” I think that if we 

in this group of 760 officers become Foreign Service officers, we will 

be more readily identified by the people with whom we will be working 

for the next many years overseas.

The Chairman. How many of the USIA officers are overseas, and 

how many here, do you know? I do not know 'whether the record
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS 8 3

shows that or not. You said you had 70 here and 30 in A frica under 

you.

Mr. Dunlap. Some of those in Africa are A frica n personnel.

The Chairman. Africans ?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes.

The Chairman. Is the m ajority of the US IA employees or officers 

here in Washington ?

Mr. Dunlap. No ; I believe the majority, sir, is overseas.

The Chairman. Senator Lausche, do you have any questions ?

Senator Lausche. No questions.

The Chairman. Senator Hickenlooper.

Senator Hickenlooper. Wha t wavelength do other countries broad ­

cast their information on—the Egyptians, the Russians, the Cubans, 

and so on ?

Mr. Dunlap. The Egyptians and the Russians, for example, use both shortwave and medium wave. In the case of Egypt, of course, they are broadcasting from the ir own home country. They have no problem of arranging to get sites for relay stations and things of that type, and they use both languages, both types rather, of transmission. The medium wave; as you probably know, does not ordinarily reach' quite as far as shortwave can w ith adequate power. The Soviet Union employs both shortwave and medium wave. Again they are situated on the continent of Europe and have certain placement advantages 

which we do not have. We do, in the Voice of America, use medium wave. I believe medium-wave transmissions are used into Latin America. I did men­ tion earlier than one of our French programs is broadcast into North 

Africa by medium wave from our relay station in Munich. The Cubans use medium wave at home I know, and they also use 

shortwave beam to L atin America.

W HAT IS BROADCAST TO AFRICA ?

Senator Hickenlooper. Can you give us an idea of the general type 

of programs that you beam to these countries? Perhaps you have 

answered th at question.

The Chairman. Xo; I do not believe so, except that generally he has 

testified that 50 percent is news and the remainder is features and other nonnews things, like music. I did not go into the details as to 

the nature of the feature articles.

Senator H ickenlooper. What percentage of political discussion do 

you send out of the Voice of America ?

Mr. Dunlap. I would say in the case of the Afri can broadcasts, 

identifiable political subjects, perhaps 20 or 25 percent.

Senator Hickenlooper. Take the charges which are made by some 

of our critics such as the Soviet Union, the Iron Curtain countries, and countries like Egypt—do you attempt to take these charges which they make against us, I understand continuously, and refute them?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir. We do not try to refute every charge they 

make, and we do not necessarily try to answer in the afternoon a charge they make in the morning. But when we have an opportunity, as they say in the radio and the news business, a peg to work from, a
84 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

peg to hang a reply or re futation on, we take, I would say, just about 

every opportunity we can to do so.

STRE NG TH OF SIG NAL

Senator Hickenlooper. The question of our broadcasts and their 

reception has been a subject that I have been somewhat interested 

in over the years. So often in the countries I go into, they will say, 

“Well, the Russian broadcasts boom in here, and we hardly ever hear 

the Voice of America at all. We do not get it very much. But the 

Rusians come up like thu nder out of China across tlie bay, and others 

come in also.”

I may have gained the wrong impression, hut that seems to be so 

consistent in foreign countries, that the Voice of America is not only 

not very effective but also not very creative or not much propaganda. 

It is sort of soft, whereas the other people are just cutting our throats 

all the time.

As I say, tha t may not be the proper impression, I do not know.

Mr. Dunlop. With regard to Africa, and discussing first of all the 

strength of the signal, up until about a year or a year and a half ago, 

your comment, Senator, would have had considerable validity. I 

thin k I could sum it up now by saying tha t the Chinese Communists 

and the Soviet Union are booming into Africa, and than k heaven so 

are we, because we have expanded and added new facilities.

Senator Hickenlooper. What is the reason why the last year or 

year and a half this should increase? You have been at this business 

for 10 or 15 years.

Mr. Dunlap. Well, in the case of Africa, Senator, we just completed about a year and a half ago a trans mitter complex which was 

building, I believe, for fou r and a half years. It took a long time 

to complete. This is now relaying into Africa with considerable 

power and clarity.

CO PIE S OF BROADCASTS

Senator H ickenlooper. To your knowledge, do you keep copies of 

all the broadcasts tha t are made, propaganda or other, on the Voice 

of America ?

Mr. Dunlap. We keep in the building in which we are located, we 

keep for a. period I believe of 3 months the scripts of the broadcasts 

and the tapes, and afte r tha t 3-month period, the scripts are sent to 

some location somewhere in Virg inia because the volume of this stuff 

is tremendous.

The scripts are moved out, and the tapes are recorded on tiny 33 ^ 

r.p.m. discs, and those discs I believe we have from the very first time 

this practice was begun many years ago, so that you can always—you 

may not be able to quickly get a script of a program, but you can get a 

disc, and you can hear the program as it was broadcast.

Senator Hickenlooper. And in the particular language th at it was 

broadcast in.

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. All of them ?
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATION S 85

Mr. Dunlap. I think, unless some have been lost. I thin k all of 

them.

The Chairman. How many would tha t be ?

Mr. Dunlap. Millions.

The Chairman. Many millions ?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir.

limitations on material broadcast

Senator Hickenlooper. Do you have a series of regulations describing exactly what you can go into and what subjects you must not 

touch on these broadcasts?

Mr. Dunlap. No, sir.

Senator Hickenlooper. That is, are you restricted in any way by 

regulation that there are certain subjects such as “Do not be too tough 

on the Communists,” or something of tha t kind?

Mr. Dunlvp. No, certainly not. I think mainly commonsense regulations, what makes good sense. Our main concern is to try to be factual and honest and straightforward. I know of no instance when we have ever been told or even hinted tha t we not do something or 

that we do something specific.

Senator Hickenlooper. Then you do not necessarily have a set of 

limitations within the boundaries of which you keep in these broa dcasts on political and social subjects.

Mr. Dunlap. Nothing of the kind you describe; no, sir.

Senator Hickenlooper. We get some interesting rumors once in a 

while about some of the directives that are supposed to be given occasionally on certain subjects. That is the reason I asked that.

That is all.

Senator Lausche. How did it happen that in the few days before 

the Diem overthrow there was such a flood of broadcasts into South Vietnam quoting American newspaper opinions of the bad character 

of Diem?

Mr. Dunlap. It is a fairly standard practice of the “Voice of 

America,” Senator Lausche, in a matter such as this to reflect the 

opinions of the Government of the United States as well as the public opinion and, at that particula r time, I can only think that we were 

doing as we do at all times constantly broadcasts of round ups of 

American editorial opinion on all kinds of im portant subjects.

Senator Lausche. Are you presently booming into the Dominican 

Republic what the columnists and the newspapers are saying about 

the Ju nta government as being bad or the rebels as being good ?

Mr. Dunlap. I cannot answer tha t specifically, Senator, but I-----

PURPOSE OF “voice OF AMERICA”

Senator Lausche. What is the purpose of the “Voice of America” 

then? Is it to merely tell the people of the world what is going on 

within our own country and what is being said ?

Mr. Dunlap. I think the purpose is the same as the rest of the 

Agency, sir, to present to foreigners inform ation so that they can
86 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

understand our foreign policy and our way of life and the way we 

do things and, on a matter such as you bring up, there can be two 

divergent views. One is the Government of the United States, and 

these views are official and are represented as such, and then if there 

is dissent within the country and the press, we also report that.

Senator Lausche. Are you reporting now th at students are s itting 

down against our participation in the Dominican Republic and South 

Vietnam ?

Mr. Dunlap. I believe it is being reported; yes, sir.

Senator Lausciie. All of tha t is being reported. And what is the 

purpose ? How does it serve the interests of our country ?

Mr. D unlap. I would say th at it serves the interests of our country 

to the extent that the people who hear this know tha t we are a country 

tha t is willing to let people know what goes on.

Senator L ausche. That is, it serves our country in telling the people 

of the world that the righ t of free speech is unlimited in the United 

States. But should there not be some self-imposed restriction when 

it may be and probably is th at you are reporting what is the view of 

an irresponsible minority ? That is the question.

Mr. Dunlap. Well, I think tha t there undoubtedly is a self-imposed 

restriction, and when we broadcast developments which might be 

interpreted as unpleasant or unwise, I do not thin k we necessarily 

blow them up into huge things. It may well be, Senator, that the 

question of the students demonstrating and mistreating official representatives of the U.S. Government was mentioned merely in the news.

Senator Lausche. Did you repo rt the incident of that group of 

long-haired, pale-faced, greasy-haired gang that was lying in front of 

the White House here about a month ago? Was that told to the 

people throu gh the “Voice of America” ?

Mr. Dunlap. If so, it would have been told, sir, only in the news— 

just mentioned th at there were people demonstrating.

Senator Lausche. In front of the White House ?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir.

Senator Lausche. Do you know who was responsible for the 

broadcasts that President Kennedy was killed, quoting the best I can, 

“in Dallas, a hotbed of reactionary Americans” ?

Mr. Dunlap. Xo, si r: I do not.

Senator Lausche. It was so broadcast, was it not, and then 

canceled ?

Mr. Dunlap. I cannot answer that, sir. I was in Africa at the time.

Senator Hickenlooper. Did you hear any of those broadcasts in 

Africa ?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir.

Senator Symington. I would like to ask a question, Mr. Chairman.

The Chairman. Yes.

US E OF COMSAT FA CILITIES

Senator Symington. Mr. Carter mentioned that you planned to 

use the COMSAT satellite in U SIA : is th at correct ?

Mr. Dunlap. I believe tha t we have access to it, Senator.

Senator Symington. Mr. Chairman, if it is in order, I would like 

to have this question answered. What is the nature of your arrangement with COMSAT. Mr. Carter?
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATION S 87

Mr. Carter. We have no arrangement of any official nature at all 

with COMSAT.

Senator Symington. But you have to have an arrangement before 

you can use it.

Mr. Carter. Only as an authorized user as with any of the American networks.

Senator Symington. Would you pay for the use ?

Mr. Carter. Yes; we would.

Senator Symington. Wh at would you pay, the going commercial 

rates ?

Mr. Carter. As you know, the rates for COMSAT have not yet been 

established. Whatever they are-----

Senator Symington. I am just asking if von have any arrangement. 

COMSAT is h alf a Government agency and half a priv ate agency. I have been involved in setting it up a little as f ar as the committee is concerned incident to its operation. Would you pay the regular rates, 

of say ABC or NBC, or would you get a special rate because of the 

Government interest in it ?

Mr. Carter. As things stand now, Senator Symington, we would 

pay the regular rate. We would hope somewhere along the line to get 

some help in getting some special rates.

Senator Symington. Are you negotiating that ?

Mr. Carter. No; we are not.

Senator Symington. Y ou are not. Of course if you do not negotiate 

it f airly soon, then you will not have an opportunity of ge tting a special rate.

Mr. Carter. I understand that.

Senator Symington. What are you doing about it ?

Mr. Carter. I understand it, we are waiting first for the actual 

rates to be established before the FCC—and if I am not mistaken, the original legislation does designate us as an authorized user, and there was some legislative intent I believe indicating that we should be given 

preferential rates.

Senator Symington. Does the legislation at any time say t hat you 

should be given special rates?

Mr. Carter. No; it does not.

Senator Symington. I s there any legislative history that implies 

it should be given?

Mr. Carter. Yes ; there is.

Senator Symington. Would you furnish that for the record at this 

point in the hearings?

Mr. Carter. Yes, sir.

(The information referred to was subsequently furnished directly to 

Senator Symington.)

Senator Symington. What are your plans for using this satellite?

Mr. Carter. Actually, Senator Symington, we will make our first 

official use with our own prog raming this coming Monday in a 30- 

mmute conversation with the Vice President beamed to the European countries. Thereafter we would hope to use Government officials and 

specific national events that would be of importance abroad.

Senator Symington. Would you do that in English?

Mr. Carter. It depends on what the recipient country was. If 

it was for all of Europe, it would have to go originally in English 

and rely on the translation facilities in Europe.
88 UNITED STATES INFORMAT ION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Senator Symington. Would you translate over here, or would you 

let them translate over there ?

Mr. Carter. It could be done both ways.

Senator Symington. Wh at do you plan about it?

Mr. Carter. Are you talk ing about this coining Monday’s transmission ?

Senator Symington. Yes.

Mr. Carter. Xo, that one will transmit only in English. It will be 

translated by the European countries.

Senator Symington. This Telstar appears to be pretty effective. 

Have you any overall broad policy of your plans to use the Early 

Bird or the COMSAT facilities in general ?

Mr. Carter. Yes, we do.

Senator Symington. I s that in writing?

Mr. Carter. I am just about completing it, will by tomorrow, a 5- 

year projection.

Senator S ymington. Will you file for the record a t th is point what 

your plans are with respect to th at?

Mr. Carter. I will be very glad to.

(The information referred to follows:)

Following is a memorandum prepare d by our telev ision service projecting a 

reasonable estimate of USIA ’s telev ision use of communication satellites for the 

next 5 fiscal years.

“In con stru ctin g our 5-year projected use of Early Bird and subsequent 

COMSAT transmissio n facilitie s, we have not been able to include actua l tra ns ­

mission costs since they are as yet unknown. Hence all of the costs reflected 

below are prod uctio n costs only. Our financial cap ability to tra nsmit the program s described depends almo st exclu sively on the facilities charges for the use 

of the satellite.

“Fiscal year 1966.—We would hope to use Early Bird transm issions to Europe 

at the ra te of one 15-minute tran smission every 3 months. Since these program s will likely be in the category of fac ilitative and cooperative efforts with 

European correspondents in the United States, we are e stim atin g the production 

costs at only .$3,000 per program. Over and above this, we would program any 

sub stantive U.S. policy statem ent or national event so impor tant in natur e that 

transm ission of the statem ent or event by Early Bird is in the best intere sts of 

the United States.

“Fisca l year 1961.—Beginning in 1907, we are proposing reg ular correspondent 

reports to Europe to at least two European countries (each program beamed 

to a pa rti cu lar cou ntry). We are anticipating a tota l prod uction cost of 

$00,000.

“Assuming facilities in fiscal ye ar 1907 for Latin America and the Fa r East, 

we are proposing to tra nsmit our weekly report to the TBS network in Japan 

and our semiweekly to the MBS network of Japa n via satel lite; and we hope 

to ins titute “This Week—U.S.” transm ission to Latin America beginning in the 

las t 3 months of fiscal year 1907. The Latin America project w ould be reg ularized to a weekly transmissio n fro m fiscal year 1908 onward.

“Our prod uction costs in fiscal year 1907 for Far East programin g would be 

$54,000, and for Latin America $05,000.

“Fiscal year 1968 to fiscal year 1910.—European programin g would increase to 

a total of 48 programs per year, wi th an estimated production cost of $120,000.

“The continuation of our Latin American project (a weekly transm ission) 

would cost $202,000.

“Our costs for prog raming to the Far Ea st would rem ain at approximately 

$54,000.

“All of the foregoing assumes :

“ (1) The a ctual availability of these facilities ;

“ (2) A significant number of ground receiving sta tions to Latin America 

to warrant satellite communications ;

“ (3) A reasonable enough ra te for use of facilitie s. As indicated at the 

outset, it is possible th at unless USIA receives a special ra te from COMSAT 

we will not be able to m ake full use of existing facilitie s.
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATION S 89

“Finally, the programs which we have already projected are for regularly scheduled transmissions. We anticipa te an app roxima te productio n expendi- ture per fiscal year, beginning in fiscal year 1967, of $25,000 for special events 

and statem ents of pa rticular nation al importance.”

Senator Symington. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have no fu rther questions.

The Chairman. Senator McCarthy.

NA TION AL WAR COLLEGE ATTENDANCE

Senator McCarthy. Fo r a 9- or 10-montli period Mr. Dunlap 

attended the War College. "What was tha t partic ipation ?

Mr. Dunlap. The National War College? I was a student along 

with 135 others, 3 from the U.S. Info rmation Agency, regular students. I do not know the other numbers, but roughly Army, Navy, A ir Force in equal proportions, a relatively large number from the State Department, and the Coast Guard and Marine Corps.

Senator McCarthy. I s it more or less stan dard procedure in 

US IA to have its officers go to the W ar College?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir; we have three people go to the National 

Wa r College, and then we have varying numbers at the Army War College and the Navy. We participate in the senior seminar in the 

State Departm ent as well.

Senator McCarthy. What courses do you pursue there ? In what 

seminars do you participate ?

Mr. Dunlap. The real purpose of the course is to learn how to 

develop and to par tici pate in the formulation, of national security 

policies for the United States.

Senator McCarthy. Are they developed at the National War 

College?

Mr. Dunlap. Sample ones are developed, yes.

Senator McCarthy. At the W ar College ?

ATr. Dunlap. Yes.

Senator McCarthy. Who are some of the professors, do you know ?

Mr. Dunlap. There was the head of the—it is divided into dep artments. The Political Affairs Department head is tradition ally an ambassador. In my case it was Ambassador Beaulac who had had a long and excellent career in Latin America. The Army, Navy, and Air Force have representative department heads, and there were 

when I was there-----

Senator McCarthy. If you have a record of the people who directed you, I would like to have it fo r the record.

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir.

(The information referred to follows:)

F aculty. 1961-62

Agnew, Richard II., Colonel, U.S. Army, 019956

Date of ra nk : 29 Ju n 1951.

Date of birth : 30 .Tun 1910.

Wife’s maiden nam e: E sth er Drake.

Ch ild ren: 3; grandc hildren : 3. Per manen t add re ss: 2357 S. Arlington Ridge Rd., Arlington 2, Va. Major assig nments durin g Government or military service : Co CoF 38th Inf, Aug 35-Ja n 37; Adj 1st Bn 57th In f (P S) , May 37-A pr 38; Sig O. N. Sector Luzon PI, Apr 38-Ju n 40; CO Co B 13th Inf, Aug 40-Nov 41; Bn Cdr, 13th Inf,
90 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Dec. 41-A pr 42; Ex Off, 13th Inf, Apr-Aug 42; Bn Cdr, 335tli Inf. Aug 42-Jan 

43; Ex Off, 335tli Inf, Jan-Apr 43; G2 Americal Div, Apr 43-Ja n 45; Ex Off G2 

China Th, Jan-Apr 45; G2, Tac Hq, China Th. Apr-Aug 45; G5 (Recovery 

Pe rs), China Th, Aug-Nov 45; PMS&T Western Kentucky Sta te College, J an 46- 

Aug 4 8; Dep G-l. 2d Army, Jun 49-Feb 50; Bn Cdr, 35Otli Inf. Austria, Ju l 50- 

Ju l 51; Dep Cindt Vienna Inter-allied Command, Ju l 51-Jul 53; CO, 86th Inf, 

Ju l 53-Ju n 54; Dep Div Chf, ACSI, Ju n 55-Jun 56; JIG , Ju n 56-A pr 58; Dep 

Asst Chf Of Stf, G3, 8th Army, Jun 58-May 59; Faculty, NWC, 1959-

Battle campaigns : WW II—3 cam paigns, Pacific.

Decorations: Legion of Me rit; Bronze Star, w/V & 1 OLC; Special Bre ast 

Order Yuan Hui (China).

Joint and combined opera tions: Chief Umpire, Combined Maneuvers in 

Austria, 1952-53 ; Deputy Comd’t VIAC 1951-53.

Schools att ended: Hastings College (1931) ; USMA (1935) ; C&GSC (1942) ; 

Sr Course, Amphibious Warf are Sch, USMC (1949) ; AFSC (1950) ; NWC 

(1955).

Degrees or specialty ratings : BS (USMA) ; Combat Infantryma n.

Clubs or societies: Honorary Member of the American Medical Assn (Vienna 

Chapter) ; Army Athletic Assn.

Beightol, Willis E., Colonel, U.S. Aik F orce, 344SA

Date of ran k : 30 May 1950.

Date of Birth : 2 July 1917.

Wife’s maiden na me: A. Je an Addis.

Children : 3.

Per manen t ad dr es s: 137 Wa shington Avenue, Mt. Clemens, Michigan.

Major assignments during Government or military service : Sqd Off asgmts & 

pu rsu it pilot, Feb 39-42; B-17 In str pilot, Feb-Aug 42; Ops Stf Off 2nd Bomb 

Wg (Div) , Aug 42-Nov 43, Ops Stf Off (A-3) 73rd Bomb Wg. Ja n 44—May 46: 

Stu, Mich Sta te Univ, Sep 46-J un 49; Stf Off, Ops Div, Hq SAC. J ul 49-May 51; 

Dep Dir, 15 AF, Ju n- Ju l 51; Dir /Op s, FEA F, Bomber Comd, Jul-D ec 51; D ir/ 

Ops, 14th Air Div, Feb 52-Ju l 54; Stu, Air Wa r College, Aug 54—Ju n 55: Ch of 

Safety, Hq MATS, Aug 55-Feb 58; Spec Asst, Dir/Ops, Hq USAF. Mar 58-Aug 

58: Stu, NWC, Aug 58-Jun 59; Dep Asst to Inspector Gen, Ju l 59-Feb 61; 

Faculty, NWC, Feb 61-

Battle c am paign s: WW II —2 campaigns, Europe ; 2 campaigns, P acific; 1 campaign, Korea.

Decoratio ns: Legion of Me rit; Distinguish ed Flying Cross; Bronze Sta r; Air 

Medal (3OLC) ; Purple H eart ; Commendation Ribbon.

Schools att ended: Webster City, Iowa, Jr College (1937) ; Air Corps Flying 

School (1939) ; Michigan Sta te U (1949) ; AWC (1955) ; NWC (1959).

Degrees or specialty ratin gs : BS (Michigan Sta te U) ; Command Pilot.

Clay, Donald N.. Captain, U.S. Navy, 75012

Date of ran k : 1 Jan 1954.

Date of birth : 30 Jul 1913.

Wife’s maiden na me: Marion Ca thle en Keleher.

Ch ild ren: 2.

Per manen t ad dr es s: 2702 George Mason Place, Alexandria, Virginia.

Major assignmen ts during G overnment or milita ry service: CO USS GAMBLE: 

(DM) & COMINDIV II, Ju l 44-Apr 45; CO USS ADAMS (DM) & CTG 52.2, 

May 45-Nov 45; Ops Off CTG 52.3, Nov 45-M ar 46; Ops Off Stf COMINPAC, 

Mar 46-M ar 47; Chf Fuze Rsch Sect BUORD, Wash DC, Apr 47-Nov 49; Plans 

Div. Stf CINCPACFLT, Ja n 50-M ay 52; Ex Off USS ROC HESTER (CA), Jul 

52-Jul 53; St. NAVWARCOL, Aug 53-Ju l 54; Fac ulty NAVWARCOL, Jul 54- 

Jun 56; CO USS WASHBURN (AK A), Jun 56-Oct 57; Indu str ial Control Off 

(Plann ing ) Nav Wpns Pla nt, Wa sh DC, Oct 57-Oct 59; COMPHIBRON SIX, 

Nov 59-Oct 60; Fac ulty NWC, Nov 60-.

Battle cam paigns: WW II —3 combat ops, Pacific; Korea, 3 combat ops.

Decorations : Bronze Star w /2 gold stars.

Joint and combined opera tions: Pacific Theater, Iwo, Ok ina wa; 6th Flee t

Med iterranean.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 91

Schools att en de d: USNA (1935); US Naval Post Gra dua te Sell (19 44); US Naval W ar College (1954) ; AMP, Ha rvard Bu siness Sell (1959). Degrees or specialty ra tin gs : BS (USNA) ; ORDENG (BU WE PS) . Clubs or societies: Army-Navy Club; HBS Alumni Assn; Amer Soc In ti Law. Outstanding items of intere st not covered above: Specialized in Game Theory 

and Wa r Gaming a t the Naval Wa r College.

Decker, Donald J., Colonel, U.S. Marine Corps, 05222

Date of ran k : 1 J an 1951.

Date of birth : 3 Sep 1908.

Wife’s maiden na m e: Marion Gobi.

Ch ild ren: 2. Permanen t ad dr es s: 0012 Brookside Drive, Kenwood, Chevy Chase 15, Md. Major assignm ents during Government or militar y service: G-3, Marine Forces. Hawaiian Sea Fro ntier, 1941-1942; Exec Off, Oth Def Bn, Midway, 1943- 1944; Office, Base Dev Plans, Joint Staff, CINC Pacific Ocean Area, 1944-1947 : Oth Fleet Marine Bn (FM F) and 2nd Marine Div (FMF), 1948-1950: Naval War College (Stra teg y and Tactics) , 1950-1951; Strategic Plans Div (NA TO), OPNAV-60, 1951-1953; Joint Staff (Middle East Plan s), CINCNELM, London, 1953-1950; JCS Rep, Bag hdad Pa ct Planning, Bag hdad 1950; Jo int Staff JCS (Middle Ea st Pla ns Gp ), 1956-1958; Faculty, NWC, 1958-.

De coration s: Bronze Star. Joint and combined operations : 6th Fle et Amphibious Exercises. Medite rranea n ; Fleet Exercises, Vieques; Joint and Combined Operational Planning, Middle 

East, Joint Logistic Pla nning, Pacific. Schools att ended: Cornell University (1931) ; Base Def Wpns School (1938) ; Amphibious Warfare School (1947) ; Naval War College (1951) ; American 

U niversity (1956-1961). Degrees or specialty rating s: BS (Cornell Univ) ; MA (American U). Pu blica tio ns: “Scientists and Engineers For The Armed Forces.” a cha pter in “The Challenge to Science Edu cation,” Philosophical Lib rary , 1959.

Dillon, Thomas P., Department of State

Date of bir th : 28 Jun 1916. Wife’s maiden name : Ed ith Gibb McLane.

Ch ild ren : 4. Permane nt ad dr es s: % Dep artm ent of State, Wash ington, D.C. Major assig nments during Government or milita ry serv ice: Appointed Fgn Svc Off. Mar 1941; Vice Consul. Toronto, 1941: Spec study (Russian) Ha rva rd, 1942; Third Secy, Amer Embasy Moscow. 1942-45 with temp details at Kuib y­ shev and Vladivostok; San Francisco Conf, 1945; Second Secy, Amer Embassy Warsaw, 1945-48 an d at Bern 1948-50; Ea st European Div. Dept of State, 1950- 53; Dep Chf of Mission, Reykjavik, Iceland, 1953-55; Stu, NWC, 1955-56; Consul, Hong Kong, 1956-59; Counselor, Prag ue, 1959-Jul 61; Faculty , NWC, 

Sep 1961- Schools att ended: Univ of Pit tsburg h (1938) ; Ha rvard Univ (1942). Degrees: BA, MA (U of Pi ttsburgh) ; MA (H arv ard U ).

Drake, Francis R., Captain, U.S. Navy, 75768

Date of ran k : 1 J ul 1954.

Date of birth : 29 Jun 1909. Wife 's maiden na m e: Lisa Roberta Pace. Permanen t add re ss : 4600 32nd Road North, Arlington 7, Virginia. Major assignments durin g Government or milita ry service: Comd Ptl Sqdn Twelve, 1943-44; Comd USS SUISUN A VP-53, 1946-47; Bureau of Aeronautics, 1948-51: XO USS WASP CV-18, 1951-52; Comd Helicopter Tng Unit One, 1953- 54; NWC 1954-55; ACOS COMSTRIKFORSOUTH, 1955-57; Chief of Staff, Chief of Naval Air Advanced Tng, 1957-59; Cmd F leet Air Wg Six, 1959-60. Ba ttle cam paig ns: WW II —3 campaigns, Pacific. De coration s: Air Medal. Pre sid ential Un it Citation. Schools attended : USNA (1933) ; NWC (1955). Degrees or specialty ra tin gs : BS (USNA) ; Naval Aviator.
92 UNITED STATES INFORMAT ION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

F uller, Benton F., J r., Lieutenant Colonel, U.S. Air Force, 2786A

Date of ran k : 21 Dec 1949.

Date of bir th : 29 J an 1910.

Wife's maiden na me: Mary F. Bren nan.

Ch ild ren: 1.

Permanen t address : 3814 North Vernon St., Arlington, Virginia.

Major assig nments during Governm ent or military service: Chief, Personnel 

Services Branch Flying Tng Command, Randolph AFB, Aug 1945-Mar 1947; Air 

Forc e Member, Joint Secre tariat, Hq CinC Pac, 1947-1949; Graduate Study and *

Rsch, Yale Univ, 1949-1950; Exec Oft, USAFIT, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio,

Sep 1951-Jul 1955; Faculty, NWC, Ju l 1955-1959; Prof essional Education Div,

Hq USAF, 1959-1960; F acu lty, NWC, I960-.

Dec oration s: USAF Commendation Ribbon (w/2 OLC ).

Joint and combined opera tions: Air Force Member, Jo int Secre tariat, Head- e

quarters , CinC Pac, 1947-1949.

Schools attended: Sou theaste rn Sta te College, Duran t, Okla, (1930) ; Columbia University (1935) ; Yale U niversity (1951).

Degrees or specialty ra tin gs : PhD (Yale) ; MA (Columbia U) ; BA (So uth ­

eas tern State).

Pu blica tio ns: Doctor’s D isse rtation: Professional Edu cation of U SAF Officers ;

Ha ndbook; “Counseling Handbook for Teachers,” Okla Sta te Pu blication; va rious articles in Edu cational Jou rna ls.

Clubs or so cieties: Kappa De lta P i; P hi Delta Kappa.

Outstanding items of inter est not covered above: Civilian Educa tion al Exper ience ; Yale University Fello ws hip ; High School Supervisor, Oklahoma Dept of 

Education: Profess or of Guidance and Educatio n, Okla Sta te College, American Asso of School Administrat ors.

FIeflebower, Roy C., Colonel, U.S. Air Force, 1416A

Date of rank : 9 J an 1948.

Date of b irth : 7 Jun 1915.

Wife's maiden na me: J ean Lois Potter.

Ch ild ren: 4.

Permanent ad dr es s: Houston, Texas.

Major assignments during Government or military service: Ins tr., Dept of 

Tactics, USMA, 1942-44; CO, 527th & 1125th, Armored FA Bn, Italy, 1944-45;

Asst G-3 and Secv, Gen Stf, US Forces, China Theater. 1946: Exec to CG, China 

The ater, 1946; Stra tegic Plans Section, WDGS, 1946-47; Transfe rred to Air 

Forc e 1947; AF Member, Na tional Security Council Stf, 1947-48; Exec, 49th 

F tr B inr Wg. Japan, 1949-50: Actg Dir of P lans, FEAF. Japan, 1950; Mbr Joint 

Strategic Pla ns & Ops Gp. FEC. Japan, 1952-52, Chf, Air Standa rdization s Gp,

Dir of Reqmts, DCS/O, Hq, USAF, 1952-55; Cdr, 3750th Tech Sell, USAF,

Shep pard AFB, Texas, 1956-60; Fac ulty, NWC, I960-.

Ba ttle cam paig ns: WW II —2 campaigns.

Dec oration s: Legion of Merit w/ 2 OLC; BSM w /“V” ; Chinese Yun Hui.

Schools attended: USMA (1938) ; A ir War College (1949) ; NWC (1956). *

Degrees: BS (USMA).

Outstan ding items of interest not covered above : Atzd USAF Missile Insignia.

Hoska, Lukas E., Jr., Colonel, U.S. Army, 020717

Date of ran k : 29 Jun 1951.

Date of birth : 9 May 1913.

Wife’s maiden n am e: Florence Eliz abe th Knettle.

Ch ild ren: 4.

Permane nt ad dr es s: c/o Mrs. E. S. Hill. 3308 N. 31st St., Tacoma, Wash. 

Major assig nments during Government or military s ervice: Btry Off, B try CO, 

Bn XO & Bn CO, Fid Arty in US, Sep 37-Dec 42; CO 674th Glider FA Bn, Cp 

Mackall. New Guinea, Leyte, Luzon, Ja n 43-Mav 45; XO, 11th Abn Div Arty, 

Luzon, Okinawa, Jap an, Jun-N ov 45, Mar-Dec. 46, Apr-Jun 47; CO 11th Abn 

Div Artv, Dec 45-Feb 46, Ja n- M ar 47; Ops Off. Chf Mgmt Sec, Contr Off, Sv 

Sup & Proc Div, DA, 48-50; Ch Pro j Br, Asst Ch Con Off, G-4, DA. 1950; Asst 

Secy, Gen Stf, DA, 1951-52: Army Lang Sch. Presidio of Monterey, Jul -Dec 52; 

Strat Intel Sch, Fe b-Jun 53; Army Attach^, Switzerla nd, Ju n 53-J ul 55; Asst
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 93

DCS fo r Pr og , H q USA REUR, Ger man y, Ju l 55-J un 56 ; St n, NW C, Au g 56 -J u n 57 ; XO 35 th A rty Bd e, A ir De f, Ju l 57 -J u n 59 ; CO 35 tli A rty Bd e, Ju l- A ug 59 ; Fe llo w, Cen fo r In te rn a l Aff, H a rv a rd Un iv, Sep 5 9 -J u l 60 ; F acu lt y NW C, 

I9 60 -. B att le C am pa ig ns : W W I I —3 c am pa ig ns , 1 A rr ow hea d P ac ific. D ecora ti ons: Silve r S ta r w /1 O L C ; Le gion of M er it, Bro nz e S ta r w /1 O L C ; A ir M edal; Comm R ib bo n w /M ed al P e n d a n t; P urp le H e a r t; D is ting uis hed 

U ni t C itat io n ; P hil ip pin e P re si d en ti al U nit C itat io n. Jo in t and co mbine d opera ti ons: Am ph Ldg. B ito Be ach, L ey te ; Am ph Aslt , N asi g b u ; Ah n Aslt , A p p a ri; Abn Ld g, A tz u g i; Ex B ea r Cl aw , E u r T h tr Arm y 

CofS. Sc hools att en d ed : W hitem an Col (19 33) ; USMA (19 37) ; Syr ac us e U (19 48 ) ; U of M d (19 49-52 , 19 57 -59) ; H arv ard U (19 60) ; A L S (F r) (1952) ; SI S, A ttac h^ 

Cse (19 53) ; NW C (1 95 7) . Deg rees or sp ec ia lty ra ti n g s: BS (U SM A) ; MSP A (S yra cu se U) ; MA (U of 

Md) ; G li deri st ; P ara ch u ti st. Cl ub s or so cie ti es: P h i K ap pa P h i; P i Sigm a A lp h a ; P h i Alpha T h e ta ; A m er Soc f o r Pub Ad m ; A m er A ca d of Po l & Soc S c i; Fed of A m er S c i; As sn US Arm y. 

H ug hes, J oh n S., Colo nel, U.S . Arm y, 03427 1

D ate of r ank : 15 J u l 1955.

D at e of b ir th : 11 A pr 1917.

W ife’s m ai de n n a m e : H el en H ew es R in ge r.

C h il d re n : 6.

P erm anent addre ss : 4506 F or d Stree t, F t W orth, Te xa s. M aj or as si gn m en ts d u ri n g Gov er nm en t or m il it ary se rv ic e : Fac ulty, T he F ie ld A rty Sell, Ja n 41-A pr 43; XO & CO, 69 1st Fie ld A rt y Bn , A pr 43 -O ct 44 ; CO, 24 1st FA Bn , Oc t 44—Ju l 45; A sst G-3, X X Co rps, Ju l 45- Sep 45 ; CO, Sp ec ial Tr oo ps, 9t h In f Div, Dec 4 5 -J an 47; Fac ulty, The A rt il le ry Schoo l, J a n 47- Sep 50 ; Co mm and and G en er al St af f Colleg e, Sep 5 9 -J u n 51 ; Orgn and Tng Div, SH APE , P ari s, Fra nce, Ju n 51 -A ug 54 ; Arm ed For ce s Sta ff Colleg e, Au g 5 4 -J an 55 ; Office, A ss t Secy of Def, In te rn ati o n al Sec ur ity Affai rs, Ja n 5 5 -J an 56 ; XO to th e A ss t Sec y of Def, In te rn ati o n al Sec urity Affai rs, J a n 5 6-J ul 58; St u, NW C, Au g 58-J un 59 ; A rt y Off, E ig hth US Arm y, Ju l 59 -J u n 60 ; F acult y, NW C, 

Ju l 60-.

B att le c am pa ig ns : W W II-—4 ca m pa ig ns , Eur op e.

D ecora ti ons: Le gion o f M e rit ; B ro nz e Sta r. Jo in t an d co mbine d o pera ti ons: E xer ci se PO R TR EX (19 49 -50) ; Su pr em e H q 

Allied P ow er s Eur op e, (1 95 1- 54 ). Sc hools att en d ed : No. Tex as A gri cult ura l College (19 38) ; Univ of O kl ah om a 

(19 39) ; C&GSC (19 51) ; A FS C (19 55) ; N WC (195 9).

K in g, E d R., Captain , U.S . Navy, 7708 0

D at e of r a n k : 1 Ju n 1955.

D at e of b ir th : 2 Ja n 1913.

W ife’s m ai de n n a m e : B ula Lee.

C h il d re n ; 3.

Per m anent a d d re s s: 811 N. G re en br ie r Str ee t, A rlin gt on , Va. M aj or as si gm en ts d uri ng Gov er nm en t or m il it ary se rv ic e: US S W es t Virgi ni a

(B B -4 8), Ju n 36 -D ec 41; US S B ancro ft (D D -5 98 ), Fe b 42-M ar 4 3; US S B la ck

(D D 66 6), M ar 43 -A pr 44; Co mm and, USS Bla ck (D D 66 6), Apr 44 -N ov 45 ; 

Rsc h & De velop , N av al Pro vin g Gro un ds , De c 45 -J an 48 ; US S H unti ngto n (C L - 

10 7), Fe b 48 -M ar 49; Co mman d, US S M as se y (D D -7 78), M ar 4 9-J uI 51 ; Rsc h & 

Develop , Nav y Dep t, A ug 51- A pr 53 ; Co mm and, US S John 8. M cC ain (D L -3 ), 

May 53-J ul 55 ; St u, NW C, Au g 55-J un 56 ; Off of CNO , Nav y Me mb er, JL PC , 

Ju l 56-J un 58 ; Co mman d, US S Tru ck ee (A O-1 47 ), Ju l 5 8 -J u l 59 ; Com man d. 

CO MDE SR ON 22, Au g 5 9 -J u l 60 ; Fac ulty, NW C, Ju l 60 -.

B att le ca m paig ns: W W I I—7 ca m pa igns , Pac ific ; 3 ca m pa ig ns , Kor ea .

D ec or at io ns : L egion of M eri t; Bro nz e S ta r w /2 S ta rs . Jo in t and co mbine d o pera ti ons: Pac ific T h eatr e; US 6th F le et M edit er ra nea n.

Scho ols a tt ended : USN A (19 36) ; N WC (195 6).

D eg re es : BS (U SN A ).

P u b li cati o n s: “Ship han dling,” D. Van N ost ra nd .

47-58 0—65------7
94 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

K n ie rim , Charles F., Colo nel, U.S. Air F orce, 3378A

D at e of r a n k : 1 Ju n 1952.

D at e of b ir th : 5 Ju l 1914.

W ife’s m ai de n n a m e : M ar y R uth R ag sd al e.

C h il d re n : 2.

P erm anent a d d re s s: 313 H en ry A ve., N at ch itoc he s, L ou isia na .

M aj or as si gn m en ts duri ng G ov er nm en t or m il it ary se rv ic e: Sq Op s & Sq Cd r,

Pho to M ap pi ng Sq, Au g 42 -M ay 45; In A fr ic a Middle E ast T h eate r fr om Ja n 44 -

Fe b 45 ; Pho to M ap ping Ops, S tf Off U SSTA F & USA FE , May 4 5 -J u l 46; Gp c

Ops Off, Au g 46 -A pr 48 ; A sst & D iv Op s Off, May 48 -A ug 49 ; S tf Pla nnin g

Off & Chf Re con B r, D/O , US AF , Se p 4 9 -J u l 52 ; St u, AF SC , Aug 52-F eb 53 ;

De p Recon W g Cd r, Korea , M ar 53-M ar 54 ; Cdr Photo M ap ping Gp, A pr 54 - 

Ju l 56 ; Stu NW C, Au g 56-J un 57 ; Dep & Cdr Abn E arl y W ar nin g & Con Wg,

Ju l 57 -O ct 60; Fac ulty, NWC, Oc t 60 -.

B att le c am pa ig ns : 3 rd K or ea n W in te r. K or ea n Su mm er —F al l.

D ecora ti ons: Le gion of M erit, Com m en da tion Me dal, A ir For ce Com m en da tio n 

Me dal.

Jo in t a nd com bine d ope ra tion s : K or ea .

Schools a tt en d ed : Lou isia na N or m al Co lle ge (19 33) ; P ilot Tng (19 42) ; Ar med 

For ce s St af f Co llege (1953) ; N WC (195 7) .

Sp ec ialty ra ti n g s : Co mman d Pilot .

Ku h n , W illiam A., Colon el, U.S. Arm y, 031419

D at e of r a n k : 1 Dec 1952.

D at e of b ir th : 20 O ct 1911.

W ife’s m ai de n n a m e : Ma rgo Ro we ll.

C h il d re n : 1.

P erm am en t ad d re ss: % TAG US Arm y.

M aj or as si gn m en ts duri ng G ov er nm en t or m il it ary se rv ic e: CO, Cav Unit, Fe b 

41-J u n 42 ; CO B n & Reg t Ex Off, 507 P rc h t Reg t, Au g 42-Ma y 45; R eg t Ex Off,

327 Glid er Reg t, Ju n-D ec 45 ; G-3 82d Abn Div , Feb -A ug 46 ; F acult y C&GSC,

•Jul 47 -Jul 50 ; Mem ber Arm y Ab n Bd , Au g 50 -Jan 51 ; Chief Tng Br, Hq Allied 

Fo rc es So E ur, Aug 51-J ul 54 ; Div Ch ief, G-3 D ep t Ar my , Au g 54-A ug 55 ; 327 

Ab n B att le Gp CO, 101 Abn Div, Aug 56-Dec 57 ; G-3 Adv , Im peri al Ir an ia n 

Army , Ja n 58 -A ug 58 ; De p Chief M ission & C hief Arm y Ad v Gp, Armish- MAA G 

Ir an , Se p 58-A pr 6 0; Fac ul ty , NW C, I9 60 -.

B att le c am p a ig n s: W W II — 1 ca m pa ig ns , Eur op e.

D ec ora tions: Le gion of M eri t; B ro nz e S ta r w /V & 1 OLC ; Arm y Comm . Rib ­

bon w /1 O L C ; P urp le H eart w /1 O L C ; P re si denti al U nit C it a ti o n ; Lu xe mbo ur g 

Cr oix de G ue rr e w /P alm ; Fre nc h C ro ix de G uer re w /P a lm ; Fre nc h F o u rr a g e re ;

Fre nc h P ara ch u te B re ve t.

Jo in t and co mbine d o p era ti o n s: Ab n Op s WW I I ; Com b Ops, Allied For ce s So 

E u r; Comb US- Can Ex Sw ee tb rier .

Schools a tt en d ed : U of Md ; G eo W as h U ; C&GSC (19 46) AG SC (1 95 1) ) : NW C 

(195 6).

Spe cial ty r a tin g s : M as te r P a ra c h u tis t; G lid er is t. •

Publ ic at io ns : M ilitar y R eview , ‘‘The I n fa n tr y .”

O uts ta ndin g item s of in te re st n ot c ov er ed ab o v e: C om manded US A rm y Troop s 

in L ittle Ro ck Affair.

McAlliste r, Lest er B., J r., Doctor, Beloit College

D at e of b ir th : 21 Fe b 1921.

W ife’s m ai de n n a m e : E la in e Sch ne id er .

C h il d re n : 1

Per m anent ad d re ss: 1716 Oak wo od A ve nu e, Belo it, W isc on sin .

M aj or as si gn m en ts duri ng G ove rn m en t or m il it ary serv ic e: Arm y A ir Co rps,

Ju n 42 -Jun e 46 ; C ry pt og ra ph ic Securi ty Officer an d AAC S D et ac hm en t Co mdr 

in Congo, Alg er ia , Eg yp t, Ir aq , Ir a n , Pal est in e, an d Tur ke y w ith A rm y A irw ay s 

Com m un ications Sy stem in A fric a an d Middle E ast , Se p 42-F eb 45; Fac ul ty ,

NW C, Ju l 61 -.

Schools att en d ed : Coe College (19 42 ) ; N orthw es te rn Univ (19 47) ; Univ of 

Oregon (195 3) .

D eg re es : BA (Coe C olleg e) ; MA (N ort hw est ern U n iv ); PhD (U niv of 

O re go n) .
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 95

Pub lica tions: “Money & Banking Theories of Albert Gallatin," Jou rna l of

Finance. Clubs or soc ieties: Amer Economics As sn ; Midwest Economics Assn; Amer 

Assn of Univ Professors. Outstan ding items of inter est not covered above: At various times, held fol­ lowing Fellowships: Carnegie Corp; Ford Found.; Lilly Endowment, Inc; Danfo rth Found. Con sultant in Economics to Educational Policies Commission; Pro f of Economics and Chrmn of Economics Dept, Beloit College; Fea tured on the “Meet the Professor’’ Television Prog ram, Mar 61 ; was one of twelve proo fessors selected from various disciplines and universities across the country to appear on a three month series on the ABC—TV Network.

McCiiristy, Albert J., Jr., Colonel, U.S. Air Force, 3648A

• Date of ran k : 19 Jan 1951.

Date of birth : 21 May 1915. Wife’s maiden n am e: Edna Marion Brister.

Ch ild ren: 2. Per manen t ad dr es s: 234 So. Hampton Rd., Dallas, Texas. Major assignments during Government or milita ry service: Reconnaissance Sqdn CO, 41-44; 14th Air Force Reconnaissance Staff Off, 44-45; Reconnais­ sance Staff Off, Tac tical Air Command, 45-46; Ilep for Plans, Caribbean Air Command, 46-48; Chief, Pro gra ms and Manpower Allocations Div, Dir of Man­ power and Orgn, USAF, 49-5 2; DCS Ops. Air Photographic and Charting Serv­ ice, 53-55; Stu, NWC, 57; Dep CO, (56 Reconnaissance Wng. CO, I ’liaisbourg AFB, 

58-60; Faculty, NWC, I960-. Ba ttle camp aigns: Ind ia—Burma, 1 campaign ; Eas t China—1 campaign, South China—1 c ampaign; North China—1 campaign; Atlantic C oastal Subm arine P atrol—1 campaign. Decorations: Distinguish ed Flying Cross; Air Medal; Air Force Commendation Medal. Jo int and combined operations : Evacuatio n of American Citiz ens from Bogota, Colombia, 47; Air Lift Pla ner . Ecua dorean Earthquake Relief, UN, 48. Schools attended: How ard Payne College (1937) : Texas Technological College (1939) ; George Washington University (19(51) ; NWC (1957). Degrees or specialty ratin gs : AB (Howard Payne C<) ; Command Pilot.

Clubs or societies : Pi Kappa Delta.

McDonald, William E., Colonel, U.S. Air Force, 1356A

Date of ran k : 29 Mar 1944.

Date of b ir th : 14 Jan 1912.

Wife 's maiden nam e: Irene Sterling.

* Ch ild ren: 2.

Permane nt ad dr es s: Peabody, Kansas. Major assignments during Government or milita ry service: Sqdn CO, 19tli Bomb Gp, S3, 19th Gp. Dec 1941-Nov 1942; Staff. 5th AF. 1942-1943; Dir of Tng, 2nd AF, 1943-1944; Staff. ANSCOL, 1945-1946; CO. 97th Bomb Gp. 194(5-1947: DCS/O. Hq, USAF, Sep 1947-Nov 1950: Air Attache, Singapore, 1950-1954; Stu ­ dent, NWC. 1954-1955; Director, Inspection Services, Inspector General, Hq, USAF, 1955-1959; Faculty, NWC, Apr 1959-. Battle campaigns: WW II —2 compaigns, Philippines. Decorations : Silver S ta r; P urple H eart ; A ir Medal. Schools attended: USMA (1937); Army Navy Staff College (1945); The 

National W ar College (1955).

Degrees: BS (USMA).

Clubs o r so cieties: Phi Pi Phi.

More, Bolard, Department of State

Date of b irth : 20 Aug 1907.

Wife’s maiden n am e: Elisab eth L. Love. Permanen t address : c/o Depar tment of State, Wash ington, D.C. Major assignments during Government or milita ry service : Vice Consul in Dominican Republic and Hait i, 1931-1934: Vice Consul, Madrid, Spain, Feb 1935-Nov 1936; Vice Consul, Barcelona, Spain, Dec 1936-Aug 1938; Vice Consul, Lagos, Nigeria, Nov 1938-May 1941; Vice Consul, Zurich, Switzerland,
96 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Sep 1941-Aug 1947; Consul and 2nd Sec or 1st Sec of Legation Tangier,

Morocco, Sep 1947-Oct 1950; Consul Benghazi, Libya, Nov 1950-Nov 1953, also 

1st Sec of Legation from Dec 1951; Consul Sydney, Austra lia, Feb 1945-Mar 

1956; Off in Chg Non-Self-Governing Territories Aff, Dept of State, Jun 1956- 

Ju n 1959; Consul General Yaounde, Cameroun, Ju l 1959-Mar 1960, also Counselo r of Embassy and Chg d’Affairs, a.i. from Jan 1960; Fac ulty NWC, Jul y 

1960- .

Schools attended: Prince ton Univ. (1925-26 & 1927-29); Allegheny College 

(1929-30).

Degrees : AB (Allegheny College). *

Clubs or societies: African Studies As sn ; Amer. For Service As sn; DACOR.

Outstan ding items of inter est not covered above: Adviser US Del 11th & 13th 

UN Gen Assembly, 1956 & 1958; Adviser US Del South Pacific Commission 

Review Conference, Canberra, 1957; Adviser & Acting Commissioner, Caribbean 

Commission Meetings Curacao and T rinidad, 1957 & 1958. *

Morton, William B., Captain, U.S. Navy, 85356

Date of r an k : 1 Ju l 1959.

Date of b ir th : 3 Sep 1916.

Wife’s maiden n am e: M ary Willis Lively.

Ch ild ren: 1.

Permane nt address : 2010 Quarrier St., Charleston, West Virginia.

Major assignments during Government or militar y service : USS JfiZwaukee, Jun 40-Sep 42; NA Fligh t Tng. Sep 42-Oct 43; XO and CO VC-81,

Oct 43-Mar 45; CO VF 41, Apr 45-Ju n 45; Staff Com First Ca rrie r Task 

Force, Ju l 45-Dec 45; Nav al Air Tng Command, Ja n 46-A pr 58; CO VA-75,

May 48-Dec 49; Staff Com Air Force Atlantic Fleet, Ja n 50-M ar 52; NAS 

Alameda, Apr 52-M ar 54; Com Ca rrier Air Gp One, Apr 54—Aug 55; OPNAV 

(OP-542), Aug 55-Aug 57; Stu den t NWC Aug 57-Jun 58: XO USS Randolph,

Ju l 58-Aug 59; OPNAV (OP-93D), Sep 59-Sep 60; Faculty , NWC, Oct 60-.

Battle campaigns : WW II —Convoy/Esc ort Patro l Atlantic—4 campaigns,

Pacific.

De coration s: Navy Cr os s; Distinguish ed Flying Cr os s; Bronze S ta r;

Air Me dal; P urple Heart.

Joint and combined op erations : Inva sions Leyte, Mindoro, Lingayen, Iwo 

Jima.

Schools attended: USNA (1940) ; NWC (1958).

Degrees or specialty rat ing s : BS (USNA) ; Naval Aviator.

Parker, Alton E., Captain, U.S. Navy, 71514 

Date of r an k : 1 Ja n 1951.

Date of birth : 20 Oct 1908. *

Wife’s maiden n am e: Virginia B lack burn Carroll.

Children: 1.

Permane nt add res s: 1111 Army-Navy Drive, Arlington, Virginia.

Major assignments during Government or milita ry service : Eng Off, USS 

Minneapolis (CA), Dec. 41-Mar 44; CO, USS Mannert L. Abele, (DD), *

Apr 44-Jun 45; Asst Supv Shipbuilding, Bath, Maine, Ju l 45-Jun 46; Dept 

Marine Eng Naval Academy, Ju l 46-.Tune 48; Exec Off, USS Rochester, Ju l 

48-J ul 49; Bu r of Naval Personnel, Aug 49-Sep 50, Cdr Destroyer Div 222,

Oct 50-F eb 52; Chief of Staff to Commander Carrie r Div 16, Feb 52-Aug 53;

NWC, Aug 53-June 54; Jo int Chiefs of Staffff, Jul y 54-Sep 56; CO, USS Tidewater (AD31), Oct 56-Oct 57; Cdr Destroyer Spd 4, Nov 57-Dec 58; Faculty,

NWC, 59 -.

Ba ttle campaigns : WW II —12 campaigns, Pacific.

De coration s: Navy C ross; Silv er Star.

Joint and combined op erations : Solomon Is la nd s; Marshall Isla nd s; Iwo 

J im a; Okinawa.

Schools attended: USNA (1932) ; NWC (1954).

Degrees : BS (USNA).
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 97

Rich, Samuel G., Doctor, University of Utah

Da te of b irth : 7 Dec 1918. Wife’s maiden n am e: Ru th Summerliays.

Ch ild ren: 2. Per manen t a dd re ss : 2760 N. Quincy Street, Arlington, Virginia. Major assignm ents: U.S. Vice Consul, Valencia, Spain, 1942-46; Presently Directo r, In sti tute of Internationa l Studies, Univ of Utah; Faculty, NWC, 

July 1961- . Schools att ended: University of Utah (1940); Stanfo rd (194 2); Univ of Mexico (1941) ; Columbia Univ (1951) ; P rinceton Univ (1952). De gre es: BA (U of U tah ) ; MA, PhD (St anford U). Publication s: Co-author: (1) “Fun dam entals of Pol itic al Science,” (2) “Introduction to Internationa l Relations” ; Author, “The Movement for World Government” ; V arious art icl es for Antioch Review, Politic al Science Qua rterly, 

etc.Clubs or soc ieties: B eta Theta P i; Am Pol Science Assn; Council on Fore ign 

Re lat ions; Inter natio nal Stud ies Assn.

Trager, Frank N., Doctor, New York University

Date of b ir th : 9 Oct 1905. Wife’s maiden n am e: Helen Gilbson. Permane nt ad dr es s: New York Univ, Wash Square, New York 3, N.Y. Major assig nm ents: In st r in Philosophy, Johns Hopkins Univ, 1928-34; from 1935-53, Govt & non-profit private agencies inclu ding Dir “Point Four,” Burma (1951-53) ; since 1954, Prof of Intern ati onal Aff, NYU, Dir, Burma Rsch Proj, Actg Dir, Ctr for Intern atl Aff & Dev, Chmn, Conf on African Resources Steering Com; Con sultant Ran d Corp & Dir Southea st Asia Proj, 1956-57; Visiting Prof of Politic al Science, Yale Univ, 1960-61; Fac ulty NWC, 

1961. Schools att ended: College of the City of New York (1922) ; New York Univ 

(1923-25, 1926-28, 47-51). De grees: BS, AM, P hD (New York U niv). Pub lica tions: Editor & Coauthor of “Burma,” (HR AF 3v. 1956), “Marxism in Sou theast Asia,” (Stan ford U P ress 1959, Rand Corp) & 3 other monographs on Burm a. Auth or “Building a Welfare Sta te in Burma,” (NY 1958). Chap­ ters in Annual Review of United Natio ns, 1955-57, (NY Univ Press). Articles in Journal of Asian Studies, Pacific Affairs, Fa r Ea ste rn Survey. Foreign Affairs, New Leader, Cu rre nt History, New York Times, The Guardian, 

America, etc. Clubs or soc ieties: American Political Science As sn ; Assoc for Asian Stud ies; Council on Foreign R el; In stitu te fo r Inter natio nal Labor Rsch. Outstan ding items of interest not covered above: Bu tle r Fellow in Philos­ ophy, NY Univ, 1927-28; Scholar in Philosophy, JH Univ, 1928-31; Fellow, Ctr for International Studies, MIT 1953-54; Carnegie Fellow, Council on Foreign Relations 1957-58; Member various Study Groups of Council 1955-61; 

Member, The American Assembly, Spring 57.

Senator McCarthy. You are handling the A frican Division a t the 

present time ?

Mr. Dunlap. Of the Voice of America; yes, sir.

Senator McCarthy. Have you broadcast anything regarding the 

barter arrangement for th e exchange of surplus wheat for industrial diamonds in the Congo and for uranium with South Africa? Are 

you familiar with th at ?

Mr. Dunlap. I am not familiar with such transactions. I do not 

think we have broadcast tha t.

Senator McCarthy. Thank you very’ much. I have no other questions.
98 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Dunlap.

SAFE GUARDIN G AM ERICA ’S IMA GE ABROAD

Senator Lausche. I would like to ask another question. The President recently made an appeal to the country concerning the badness of 

the image that is lieing created around the world, and I understand it, 

although I did not get copies, tha t papers have been sent to some 

Members of the Congress showing the use that the foreign countries are 

making of the bad image. In the face of that, do you broadcast general demonstrations of the type that I mentioned, without giving any 

regard to the image that is being made of our character?

You said that there are no limitations imposed upon the men who 

make the broadcasts.

Mr. Dunlap. I think, Senator, the answer to this question is that 

we may note such things as the demonstration to which you referred. 

It may be mentioned in the news. But we do not make in the nonnews portion of our programs—we certainly do not give a 12-minute 

flamboyant discussion of what a grand thing this was. We do not.

Senator Lauscite. What is the nonnews of your program ? Is that 

cultural presentation?

Mr. Dunlap. It is cultural, educational, scientific, political developments in the United States, and perhaps in Africa.

Senator Lausciie. Can you submit transcripts of the news reports 

that you have made of these sitdowns in front of the White House and 

other demonstrations tha t have been in progress, particula rly by the 

Student Association for Non-Violence—I think tha t is its name or 

something like that?

How big a task would it be to gather the reports th at you have made 

about these protests against the position of President Johnson and 

the Congress?

Mr. Dunlap. It would lie easier for us, Senator, if we had a time 

span, if you could say 2 weeks or something like that.

Senator Lausciie. It should go back I would say a month, at least 

to include this White House demonstration, up to that time.

Mr. Dunlap. We can do that.

(The information referred to fo llows:)

We have checked carefully all of our Voice of America output for the period 

April 17 to May 17. This period did include the White House studen t demonstrati on referred to by Senator Lausche.

We found only a single reference to the demonstrations referred to by the 

Senator. On Sunday morning, April 18, ou r English language “Breakfast Show,” 

which can be hea rd in Africa, the Middle Ea st and southeast Asia, car ried the 

following item in a news cast:

“Here in Washington, more tha n 14,000 youngsters—-mostly university students—marched outside the White House yes terd ay to pro test American policies 

in s outheast Asia. Spokesman for the group said it was left-wing radical but not 

Marxist.

“While the demonstration was underway , a delegation from the University of 

Wisconsin presented a petition at the White House expressing supp ort for U.S. 

policy in Vietnam. It was signed by 6,000 stu den ts and faculty members.”

No other reference to th is o r any other stud ent demo nstration was made in any 

of our direct bro adc asts to Africa (in English. French, Arabic, or Swa hili) or. 

indeed, to any other pa rt of the world. The above item is the only one used in 

any of the VOA’s output.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 99

Sena tor Lausche. Th at is all.

The Chairman. Tha nk yon very much, Mr. Dunlap.

Senator Hickenlooper. May I just ask one more question ?

Do you operate RIAS in Berlin ?

Mr. Dunlap. No, sir.

Senator Hickenlooper. Who operates that, do you know ?

Mr. Dunlap. I am speaking now of the African Division. The 

Voice of America has some relationship with RIA S, the specifics of 

which I do not really know, Senator. We do contribute toward their 

programing, and I think we provide the actual director of the station. 

Senator H ickenlooper. It is not in your department.

Mr. Dunlap. It is not under my jurisdiction.

Senator Hickenlooper. I will not pursue that.

NA TU RE OF BROADCASTS TO AFRICA

Senator Lausche. What are you booming into Africa? Tell me 

that, will you please, because “boom” means th at you are doing good 

for our country. What are you booming in there ?

Mr. Dunlap. We are booming in, Senator, the progress that is being 

made in the field of civil rights, the efforts tha t are being made to 

improve the lot of Americans in such things as the poverty program, 

the booming in of our explanations to the best of our ability of the 

actions of the United States in Vietnam, in Santo Domingo. We are 

carr ying in the feature material developments in the United States in 

the field of education.

In my particular area there are many Africans studying in the 

United States. We interview African students, and there are many 

highly successful ones, and in their own words they tell our African 

listeners of their experiences in the United States and their gaining of 

knowledge. When the occasion presents itself, as it often does, we 

carry in English the direct words of the President, of the Secretary 

of State, of key officials as well as private figures in the United States, 

and then of course we also carry these things in translations in the 

other three languages in which we broadcast.

Senator Lausche. Th at sounds excellent to me, but of course I see 

tha t you are trying to demonstrate free speech and that you have to 

tell them all th at is going on. As a part of tha t policy you also carry 

into A frica, I suppose, the sitdown protests and the other demonstrations that have been had.

Mr. Dunlap. But this, Senator, is mainly in a short form and in the 

news. Were we to ignore anything like that, I think our news might 

become suspect.

Senator Lausche. Yes, I see. All right. Let me see those reports.

HO W ARE CIVIL RIG HTS STORIES TREA TED?

Senator H ickenlooper. Mr. Chairman, may 1 just pursue a couple 

of questions here ? In connection with what you say you are p utting 

into Africa on the civil rights business, I presume that it carries with 

it the connotation of the struggle of the Negro for votes and the voting righ ts in certain States.
100 UNIT ED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Mr. Dunlap. Yes.

Senator Hickenlooper. Do you also carry with it an equal amount 

of emphasis on the fact tha t in almost all the States of the Union the 

Negro has no trouble whatsoever to vote? In fact he is solicited to 

vote. Do you carry that with equal emphasis? Or do you emphasize 

only the few cases in the hundred and some counties perhaps in the 

United States out of several thousand where there is manifest 

discrimination? *

Mr. Dunlap. I think we try to balance the method t ha t is carried.

Senator Hickenlooper. Do you po int out that in most of the States 

in the Union there is no prohibition or inhibition against the Negro 

voting ? *

Mr. Dunlap. I believe we do, yes, sir.

Senator Hickenlooper. I think you should be pretty sure about 

tha t since you have charge of the African Division.

Do you point out the number of Negro millionaires in the United 

States? Do you point out the number of automobiles owned by Negroes? Do you point out the number of college graduates?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes.

Senator Hickenlooper. Do you point out the number of public 

officials tha t are Negroes in the United States ?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes.

Senator Hickenlooper. Do you emphasize th at, or do you just give 

tha t sort of a lick and promise and emphasize the most unfortunate 

and seamy side of this thing ?

Mr. Dunlap. No, no, we indicate the progress tha t has been made 

in all these areas.

Senator H ickenlooper. Again I go on rumor. I am not going on 

what I know to be facts, but I get rumors to the effect tha t the progress 

of the Negro in the United States is just given a lick and a promise and 

not much emphasis. The very unfortunate situations that do exist 

in a few areas in this country are emphasized. The picture is created 

tha t that is the situation all over the United States.

Mr. Dunlap. Tha t is not correct.

Senator Hickenlooper. This creates a most unfair, and I am still 

repeating rumor, a most unfair picture of the United States as a 

whole.

Mr. Dunlap. As far as the output of my own African Division is ,

concerned, Senator, I can only say that this is a rumor, and we are 

trying to do exactly the things you enumerated, and even some others.

TR EA TM EN T OF POVERTY PROGRAM

Senator Hickenlooper. On the poverty program, do you create 

the impression th at everybody in the U nited States is poverty stricken 

and starving to death ?

Mr. Dunlap. No.

Senator H ickenlooper. Or do you emphasize the fact th at we have 

so fa r as the rest of the world is concerned overwhelming superiority 

in the standard of living, income, and everything else in the United 

States ?

Mr. Dunlap. The poverty program, Senator, for my listeners is a 

particula rly difficult one to handle, and we do handle it. But we have
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATION S 101

to remember, for example, tha t we do not frequently mention the

figure of $3,000 which is supposed to be the-----

Senator Hickenlooper. Why is it supposed to be ? I know literally 

thousands of people tha t do not get much more tha n $3,000, and they do not know they are poverty stricken until somebody comes around with a Government check and tells them tha t they are, and then they 

say “OK, we will take it.” A lot of them have educated the ir children, paid for their homes in small towns, and so on with that income. I have never been able to see where that $3,000 is supposed to be the breaking point of poverty.

Mr. Dunlap. I do not know who decided it, but the figure is one we do not dare use because most of our listeners come from countries where $50 to $100 to $150 a year is the average annual income, and you might expect a great influx of visitors. So in handling this, we 

stress rath er-----

Senator Hickenlooper. The whole point is this, I thin k Senator 

Lausche touched on i t : are we actually creating an adverse picture of the United States over the world by the emphasis which we p ut on the few situations in the United States which we would like to see corrected and which are not good ? Are we creating th at as the image of the whole United States, which is a country tha t has gone higher 

than any other country in the world ever has.

Mr. Dunlap. And I hope we continue to do so.

Senator Hickenlooper. I do, too.

Mr. Dunlap. No; I thin k the Voice of America and the U.S. In ­ formation Agency are not the only sources of information about the United States, and I do not wish that they should be, but I think t hat some of the things that you have referred to are created by people representing operations which are not controllable by us, and I would 

not w'ant to try to control them.

Senator Lausciie. Senator, will you yield for a minute ?

Senator Hickenlooper. Yes.

Senator Lausche. You said that distress is created for you if you 

were to tell the African people, where in some nations they have about a $40 a year income, th at in the U nited States a citizen with $3,000 is 

considered to be in poverty, is tha t correct ?

Mr. Dunlap. Yes, sir.

Senator Lausche. In other words, you do not dare tell that in the United States we consider $3,000 as a poverty stricken income to people who have an annual income of $40 to $50, is th at right ?

Mr. Dunlap. I think the answer to that is that the $3,000 is not 

understood by the African listener.

Senator Lausche. Th at is all.

The Chairman. Any other questions ? Thank you very much, Mr. Dunlap. We have two more witnesses. Mr. Diehard Harris ? Mr. Harris, we are very glad to have you 

here.

(Mr. Harris’ biographical sketch follow s:)

Biographic Sketch

N am e: Ri ch ard P. H ar ris.

M ar ita l st atu s: Marrie d.

Nu mb er o f de pendents : Fiv e.

C la ss : FSCR -3.

47 -5 80—65 ----- S
102 UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Da te of b ir th : June 18,1922.

Place of birth : Kaifeng, China.

Legal resi dence: Maryland.

Ed uc ation:

1940-44: Baylor University, Waco Tex. (B.A., psychology).

1946-49: University of Californ ia, Berkeley, Calif. (M.A., education al 

psychology).

1951: Clare mont College, Clarem ont, Calif.

1954-55: Georgetown University, Washington, D.C. School of Linguistics.

Languag es : Chinese Mandarin S-2 +, R -l —T9/61.

En trance into Foreign Service : F ebruary 26,1956.

La st promotion : J an ua ry 20, 1963.

Ex perie nce:

1944^46: U.S. Navy, h osp ital corpsman.

1946-49: Teacher, Vallego, Calif, (also other part-tim e jobs while attending gra duate schools).

1949-52: Educational psychologist, Alemada County Schools, California. 

1952-53: Chief Evaluatio n Branch, Civil Inform atio n and Edu cation Section, U.S. Command, Ja pa n a nd Korea.

1954- 55: Research sci entist in psychological war rese arch, Human Resources R esearch Office, George Washington University.

1955- 56: Intelligence resear ch officer, USIA, Washington, D.C.

1956- 61: Research officer, USIS , Hong Kong.

1961-64: Prog ram Officer, USIS, Tokyo.

1964- : Tra ining officer, Office of Personnel and Tra inin g, USIA,

Washington.

STATEMENT OF RICHARD P. HAR RIS, OF MARYLAND, NOMINEE 

TO BE FORE IGN SERVICE OFFICER

Mr. H arris. Thank you.

The Chairman. The question we are considering is whether or not 

you should be a Foreign Service officer. Would you consider yourself 

a specialist?

Mr. Harris. Well, sir, this is a question tha t is difficult to answer. 

I came into the Agency as a research officer, was assigned first to the 

Agency and later to Hong Kong. I have been tryin g to break out of 

that mold. Even at my first post I directed the China reporting pro ­

gram, and so I consider myself something of a generalist also.

The Chairman. I notice you speak Chinese Mandarin. You were 

born in China, is that ri ght ?

Mr. H arris. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. Did you learn it as a child ?

Mr. Harris. No, sir; I had to learn it as an adult. I grew up in 

China. My years of China during my high school were in various 

dialect districts, and also par tial ly in Korea, so I did not have an opportu nity to learn Mandarin at th at time.

The Chairman. Were your parents missionaries by any chance?

Mr. H arris. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. And how long did you live in China ?

Mr. Harris. I lived in China—I was bom there, came away when 

I was 3 years old, went back when I was 13 and stayed until age 18. 

Tha t is 8 years. Subsequently I lived in Hong Kong, which is on the 

periphery of China, for about 6 years.

The Chairman. What are your duties ? Are they prim arily dealing 

with language for broadcasts?

Mr. H arris. No, sir. I am in the Trainin g Division, and I direct a 

foreign national training program the main part of which is a study
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATION S 103

tour in which we bring our foreign national employees back from the 

posts abroad. These are highly selected employees sent for a study tou r 

of th e United States.

The State Department recently star ted a similar program . We have 

had this program fo r about 15 years.

REASON FOR TRANSFE R TO FOR EIG N SERV ICE

The Chairman. Why do you thin k it is important tha t you be a 

member of the Foreig n Service ?

Mr. Harris. Well, sir, you know it is easy to rationalize in answering this question. I have a broth er who is a Foreign Service officer, 

FSO , with the State Department, and I think we are about equivalently 

qualified. He has a diplomatic passport. I do not. I have served in 

Asian countries where there is a tremendous sensitivity to such matters 

as whether or not someone is on the diplomatic list, whether he is an 

FSO or in some other category. They really cannot possibly understand what this FSC R business is.

I would like to have versatility of experience which would be a fforded by belonging to the FSO category, and I also, very frankly, 

would like to have the status.

The Chairman. As an officer of training personnel in Washington, 

it does not really make much difference. Do you think that is a great 

enhancement of your statu s in Washington ?

Mr. Harris. Sir, this is an interim, albeit a very necessary one. I 

will learn a great deal about this country during 3 years I will be here, 

but I certainly plan to go back abroad.

The Chairman. You anticipate assignment abroad.

Mr. Harris. Very definitely.

The Chairman. What capacity do you have in mind ?

Mr. Harris. I would like to go back in some p rogram such as the 

China reporting program which I have worked on before, as a Deputy 

PAO or public affairs officer.

The Chairman. Do you anticipate tha t you would have more to do 

with what we call policy matters and so on if you are in the F oreign 

Service ?

Mr. Harris. This would afford me such an opportunity. It would 

actually, I think, make it easier for me to, perhaps, serve in a political 

section for a period.

The Chairman. I s tha t what you would like to do ?

Mr. Harris. This is one of the things. I would like the experience. 

I would not like this as a permanent assignment, but I th ink it would 

be a very useful experience to have such an experience in the understand ing of a country. An assignment to this office affords one an intensive look at the political situation.

The Chairman. I s it correct to say tha t you thin k the principal 

importance is a question of morale, I mean th at it would improve the 

morale and spirit of you and your fellow officers ?

Mr. Harris. And the flexibility of the Foreign Service itself.

The Chairman. I was just wondering why it is important and significant that you be a Foreign Service officer. You have no concern 

about this question of selection-out. You are willing to take your 

chances on it.
104 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

Mr. Harris. I am willing to compete. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. Tha t has been raised as a possible question. But 

you have no objection to that. There will be no move when you get 

in there for your colleagues and you to say, “We do not like that. We 

want to go back to civil service.”

Mr. H arris. If there is such a move, it will not be supported by me.

The Chairman. Senator Lausche.

Senator Lausche. No questions. How long have you been in the &

service ?

Mr. Harris. About 9 ^ years.

Senator Lausche. That is all.

The Chairman. Senator Hickenlooper. *

Senator Hickenlooper. If you should be admitted to the Foreign 

Service, what would your class be ?

Mr. Harris. The same as I am as an FSCR .

Senator H ickenlooper. That is a 3 ?

Mr. Harris. That is a 3.

Senator Hickenlooper. That is a 3 now.

Mr. Harris. Yes, sir. I would be an FSO-3.

R E SPO N SIB IL IT IE S OF W IT N E SS

Senator Hickenlooper. Have you had any responsibility in preparation or dissemination of news in our propaganda agency ?

Mr. Harris. You mean here in Washington or abroad ?

Senator H ickenlooper. Any place.

Mr. H arris. Yes, sir. As the head of the China rep orting program.

We were developing news articles, research materials, books, pamphlets with regard to Communist China, which were disseminated all 

over the world.

The Chairman. In tha t connection you were in Hong K ong from 

1956 to 1961.

Mr. Harris. Yes, sir.

The Chairman. And Tokyo 1961-64.

Mr. H arris. Right. «

The Chairman. During tha t period this was your princ ipal preoccupation.

Mr. Harris. Wh at are you referrin g to ?

The Chairman. What you just said, developing material on Com- *

munist China.

Mr. H arris. No ; in Tokyo I had quite a different function there. I 

was the head of a unit called plans, research, and evaluation, and we 

helped to develop country plans, wrote up assessment reports. We 

studied the mass media of Japan a nd came up with recommendations 

with regard to what could be done.

The Chairman. Senator McCarthy.

DUTIE S AS IN T E L L IG E N C E RE SE AR CH OFF IC ER

Senator McCarthy. Mr. H arris, what does an intelligence research 

officer do in USIA ?

Mr. Harris. An intelligence research officer ?

Senator McCarthy. Yes; you are listed as such in 1955.
UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 105

Mr. Harris. I was originally in intelligence research. I believe, if 

I am n ot mistaken, th at category only applies to Washington. In the 

field we were only called research officers. The intelligence research 

officer in Washington receives inform ation from the various posts 

abroad plus tha t of other agencies, distilling out of that, portions of information which has utility for our own policy p lanning and our own 

operations.

Senator McCarthy. In other words, the word “intelligence” here 

li does not have the ordinarily accepted Washington meaning.

Mr. Harris. It is pa rt of the intelligence processing, one migh t say.

Senator McCarthy. This is the sort of thing the CIA does when it 

evaluates information from sources.

Mr. Harris. Tha t is right, it is an evaluation function.

Senator McCarthy. To what end do you evaluate this? Do you 

carry on this intelligence work ?

Mr. Harris. Well, sir, it is helpful in planning the operations. It 

is helpful to know the situation for planning with regard to a foreign 

country. Also we have these opinion polls, as you know, conducted 

throu ghou t the world.

Senator McCarthy. Do you run those for the CIA, or do you run 

your own ?

Mr. H arris. Absolutely not, sir. We run those only for U.S. In formation Agency. These are made available to all agencies, of course.

Senator McCarthy. These polls are to see how popular partic ular 

governments are, how popular the United States is, and what the 

Hooper ratin g is.

Mr. Harris. Yes; and what public feeling is on various issues.

Senator Hickenlooper. It seems we have had difficulty getting 

hold of some of those.

Mr. Harris. All of these are made available. Actually past polls 

are made available, I believe, by the Agency to some public organization. I do not recall the name of it. But afte r a certain number of 

years have elapsed, say 3 years—this is not necessarily the correct time 

period—I do know that they are made available for anyone’s review. 

w

Senator McCarthy. All the polls you take ?

Mr. Harris. All except certain classified sections. All polls I believe, but there are certain polls in which we have classified areas.

Senator Hickenlooper. Would that include the polls tha t make us 

* look bad ?

Mr. H arris. No, sir.

Senator Hickenlooper. Th at is those that are not released.

Mr. Harris. Could I have your question again ?

Senator Hickenlooper. I understood you to say that all of them 

were transferred except certain ones which had certain significance. 

I ask, the ones that were not released, would they be the ones tha t make 

us look bad ?

Mr. H arris. I do not th ink so. In fact, I know that this is not true.

The Chairman. Any furth er questions ?

Senator McCarthy. No ; I think not.

The Chairman. Thank you very much.

The next witness is Mr. Edw ard R. B rand t, FSR-5 . I believe, according to the biographical material here, you are now a personnel 

management specialist.
108 UNITED STATES INFORMAT ION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

the Foreign Service officers who are already in the Foreign Service 

if you dilute it with thousands of others? Is this going to have any 

effect upon their morale ?

Mr. Brandt. Well, sir, Mr. Crockett and Mr. Palmer are both Fo reign Service officers of the Department of State and they played a 

key role in developing this agreement, so therefore I assume that they 

feel it is good.

The Chairman. What do you thin k ?

Mr. Brandt. I think so. We work overseas with Foreign Service 4

officers who are assigned to State Departments positions. I do not 

think there would be any difficulties.

0

EXPERIENCE OF WIT NESS

The Chairman. What did you do in Bonn ?

Mr. Brandt. I was press analyst. This involved a staff of three or 

four German employees who were working with me reviewing the 

contents of some 35 daily German newspapers and preparing a summary of about 10 pages or so of the news content, features, and the 

editorial opinions of these pap ers for use by the embassy staff.

The Chairman. Embassy staff.

Mr. Brandt. That is right.

The Chairman. But also for the USIA .

Mr. Brandt. Including the US IA —and including both the State 

Department and US IA in Washington.

The Chairman. Tha t is done in every country I take it.

Mr. Brandt. To some extent, although because of the size of the program in Germany at tha t time, I think it was a more extensive function there than it is in most other countries.

The Chairman. Did you do the same thing in Dacca?

Mr. Brandt. No, sir. I was in charge—I was supposed to supervise 

six branch centers tha t we had outside Dacca. These were operated 

by anywhere from three to five Pakistani employees, and I was responsible for supervising them, for assisting in developing suitable programs, lectures, scheduling films, exhibits, and so on.

The Chairman. I s our program in a place like Dacca comparable to v

that of the Russians ?

Mr. Brandt. There was very little evidence of Russian activity in 

east P akistan at tha t time. *

The Chairman. Did they have any personnel there ?

Mr. Brandt. No, sir.

The Chairman. How many did we have ?

Mr. Brandt. We had nine American officers and a secretary assigned to east Pakistan.

The Chairman. In Bonn how many did we have?

Mr. Brandt. I think a t th at time there were approximately 30 to 35 

American employees in Bonn. I thin k this has been reduced somewhat since then.

The Chairman. I s tha t all U SIA ?

Mr. Brandt. It was the total US IA operation in Bonn.

The Chairman. Americans.

Mr. Brandt. That was only Americans.
UNIT ED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATION S 109

The Chairman. How many Germans ?

Mr. Brandt. I do not know the exact figure, sir, but I am sure that 

there were several times as many German employees as there were 

American employees.

The Chairman. Several times ?

Mr. Brandt. Righ t.

EFFORTS OF OTHER COUNTRIES

The Chairman. Do the Russians have a similar setup in Germany ?

Mr. Brandt. I think the Russian Embassy was involved in certain 

kinds of information operations. They had a press attache. I was not 

too familiar with the specifics of what they did.

The Chairman. They do not have an independent USIA.

Mr. Brandt. Not to my knowledge, sir.

The Chairman. I do not know that this is too important, b ut I was 

wondering how other countries do it. Take the English. Do the 

British have any comparable operation to USIA ?

Mr. Brandt. They do, sir. They have the British Info rma tion 

Service.

The Chairman. Is it large?

Mr. Brandt. I think it is fairly large. Obviously since Britain is 

a somewhat smaller country with a somewhat smaller total foreign 

service, it is not wholly comparable to ours in numbers, but it is a 

fairly significant program.

The Chairman. Coming back to the Russians, if we approve this 

and make you a Foreign Service officer, would this be consistent with 

the way the Russians operate this same activity ?

Mr. Brandt. In what respect, sir ?

The Chairman. Instead of having a separate US IA as we now 

have, we make you all Foreign Service officers. You would be indistinguishable from any other Foreign Service officer.

Mr. Brandt. To the best of my knowledge most other foreign services, including the Russians, have the inform ation program as an integral part of their foreign service in the ir embassy operations. I 

thin k we and the British are the exceptions.

The Chairman. In other words, we w’ould be g etting in line with 

what the Russians are doing.

Mr. Brandt. I assume so, sir, in that respect.

The Chairman. Do they rely very much upon this approach, the 

Voice of America approach, in broadcasting? Do they have a very 

large program ?

Mr. Brandt. Yes, sir ; Radio Moscow is very active.

The Chairman. I s it comparable to ours, do you think, in size, aside 

from in quality ?

Mr. Brandt. I am not an expert in radio but I believe they do as 

much—or more—broadcasting abroad as we do.

The Chairman. I thought they relied prim arily for their foreign 

activities on local domestic political parties, that is the Communist 

Parties, in these countries and not so much upon broadcasts.

Mr. Brandt. They do also rely very heavily upon local parties and 

front organizations and so forth.
110 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATIONS

The Chairman. I was just wondering whether or not, in trying to 

keep with the question we have before us, would this move be in our 

interests to merge the two? In effect, th at is what it does—and have 

our inform ation as a part of the Foreign Service.

Mr. Brandt. I would think so, sir.

The Chairman. Other countries do. Maybe that is in its favor. I 

do not know. Maybe you ought to go out and organize some local 

American parties.

Mr. Brandt. I am not sure how effective that would be.

The Chairman. Mr. Lausche, any questions ?

status of retired personnel

Senator L ausciie. Can you answer whether there are retirees from 

the U.S. Information Agency at present ? Are there former workers 

who have already retired ?

All-. Brandt. We have people who have retired after service with 

the U SI A; yes, sir.

Senator Lausche. Retired on account of age or disability.

Mr. Brandt. Yes, sir.

Senator Lausche. And qualified for civil service retirement payments.

Mr. Brandt. That is right, sir.

Senator Lausche. Maybe you cannot answer this. If you are now 

put into the more liberal Foreign Service retirement fund, do you 

thin k tha t they later may come before the Congress and say, “I f in 

principle these persons are entitled to increased benefits under the Fo reign Service retirement fund, then we who already retire d should be 

put under i t? ”

Mr. Brandt. I do not think so, sir, because there are a great many 

Foreign Service employees of USI A and the other foreign affairs 

agencies who are not now under the Foreign Service retirement system.

Senator Lausche. I differ with you as to what will happen. This 

is going to open up a Pandora’s box. I want to read this question. 

This is a forum meeting held with the Civil Service employees of the 

State Department, and I am surprised tha t a similar meeting was not 

held with the 760 of you.

Under the Hays bill there is some question as to whether they will 

immediately put all of the civil service employees under the Foreign 

Service retirem ent benefits. But at the meeting, this question was 

asked:

There are six questions regarding th e retirement system. Under what retirement system would these employees be covered? What retirement system would 

foreign affairs officers come under? What retirement plan for officers not hoping 

to go overseas?

Crockett answ ered:

On retirement I think tha t most of us feel tha t if civil service people come 

into the foreign affairs personnel system, they ought to have the same kind 

of retirement as the Foreign Service.

I read tha t for your benefit, Senator Hickenlooper.

Mr. Brandt. I believe the Presiden t’s Cabinet Committee is looking 

at this whole area of retirement.
UNITED STATES INFORMAT ION AGENCY NOMINATIONS 111

Senator Lausche. He goes on to say tha t the Presiden t’s Cabinet 

is studying the matter and it will make a recommendation as to 

whether all should be placed under the benefits of the Foreign Service 

retirement fund.

You cannot answer my question. I am speaking to Senator Hickenlooper and the Chairman.

The Chairman. Do you have any more questions ?

Senator H ickenlooper. Your service in Europe or at any time, did 

you have any connection with the Radio Free Europe program?

Mr. Brandt. No, sir.

Senator H ickenlooper. Or with RIAS in Berlin ?

Mr. Brandt. No, sir.

Senator H ickenlooper. I think tha t is all.

The Chairman. Tha nk you very much, Mr. Brand t.

Tomorrow morning we will hear from Ambassador Lodge.

(Whereupon, at 12:05 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene 

at 10 a.m., Wednesday, May 19,1965.)

(Subsequently, the committee received the following additional 

communications:)

American Foreign Service Association,

Washington, D.C., Mag 2%, 1965.

Hon. J. W. Fulbright,

Chairman, Senate Foreign Relations Committee,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

Dear Mr. Chairman : The board of directors of the American Foreign Service 

Association desires to record with your committee its support of President 

Johnson’s nomination of 760 career reserve officers of the U.S. Information 

Agency for appointment as Foreign Service officers of the United States. The 

board believes tha t the best interests of the Foreign Service of the United States 

will be served by Senate confirmation of these nominations.

The board views the proposed integration of these career officers as being 

in accordance with the basic concept, incorporated in the Foreign Service Act 

of 1946, as amended, tha t the Foreign Service of the United States should 

always be able to fulfill the changing requirements and demands imposed on 

those departments and agencies engaged in the conduct of foreign affairs.

While the board anticipates tha t anomalous situations may arise as a consequence of the proposed action, it expects tha t any such situations will be 

resolved fairly and satisfactorily in the best traditions of the Service.

Sincerely yours,

W. T. M. Beale, 

Chairman, Board of Directors.

May 21,1965.

Memorandum fo r: The Honorable J. W. Fulbright, U.S. Senate.

In reviewing the sessions of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee where 

there was discussion of Presiden t Johnson’s nomination of 760 USIA officers 

for membership in the Foreign Service, we conclude th at there are a few points 

on which some misunderstanding may exist. We submit this memorandum to 

you and other members of the committee by way of clarification :

1. Some committee members seem to have concluded that some of the 760 

officers have not taken examinations qualifying them for entry into the Foreign 

Service. The fact is tha t while some of the 760 did not take examinations to 

qualify for initial entry into USIA, all of the officers have subsequently taken 

written and oral examinations, jointly conducted by State and USIA, for entry 

into USIA’s career reserve. These examinations have been approved by the 

Foreign Service Board of Examiners as meeting the requirement for late ral 

entry into the Foreign Service.

W’e want to reiterate that, in addition, blue-ribbon panels were named last 

October to examine the performance of each of these officers since he became
112 UNITED STATES INFORMATION AGENCY NOMINATION S

a member of USIA’s career reserve, and only those officers whose performances 

have met the highest standard were submitted to the President for nomination 

to membership in the Foreign Service.

2. Another area of confusion arises from the fact that some of the officers 

nominated now hold assignments in such specific media as television and radio. 

The question arises as to whether they have the broad ability expected of Foreign Service officers. We emphasize that each of these officers has performed, 

and is expected to perform, across the broad spectrum of foreign affairs. All 

of them will serve the greater par t of their career overseas. USIA officers who 

were deemed to be specialists in a narrow sense have not been recommended fo r 

appointment as Foreign Service officers.

3. The hearings also indicate some feeling tha t passage of the Hays bill will 

solve the tota l problem, so confirmation of these 760 officers might well be delayed 

until a decision is made with regard to the Hays bill. The fact is th at the Hays 

bill has no bearing whatsoever on these 760 officers. The Hays bill proposes to 

convert civil service officials in State and USIA whose work is in the field of 

foreign policy into “foreign affairs officers,” but i t is not designed to give anyone 

the status of Foreign Service officer.

4. Another apparent misunderstanding is that the confirmation of these 760 

officers might be followed by the submission of hundreds more names from USIA 

and elsewhere, resulting in an undesirable and almost uncontrollable growth 

of the Foreign Service. We want to emphasize tha t the names now before the 

committee are the result of a well-coordinated, closely controlled program begun 

7 years ago to qualify for admission to the Foreign Service those USIA officers 

who by years of oversea duty and demonstrated ability and integrity clearly 

deserve full-fledged sta tus in the Foreign Service of the United States. Further 

submission of USIA officers will be limited to the normal intake through the 

regular Foreign Service junior officer examination and the occasional individual 

late ral entra nt. So approval of these officers does not mean tha t the door has 

been opened to a “dilution” of the Foreign Service.

These 760 officers are clearly the “elite” of an agency th at deals with ideas and 

ideologies, which wTe all recognize to be a powerful force in the world affairs 

today. It is our belief that the Senate confirmation of their nomination as 

Foreign Service officers will serve the national interest in tha t it will improve 

the personnel situation in USIA at the same time it gives the Foreign Service 

the broader base that is so vitally needed.

Dean Rusk,

Secretary of State.

Carl T. Rowan,

Director, TJ.S. Information Agency.

New York, N.Y., May 18,1965.

Senator J. William F ulbright,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.

Dear Bill : Enclosed is a lette r to you from Dr. Henry M. Wriston, Ambassador 

John Hay Whitney, and myself in support of H.R. 6277 which has been introduced 

by Representative Wayne L. Hays in the House of Representatives.

Yours sincerely,

Charles E. Saltzman. 

New York, N.Y., May 18, 1965.

■Senator J. William Fulbright,

Chairman, Committee on Foreign Relations,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.

Dear Senator F ulbright : The undersigned were members of the Secretary of 

State ’s Public Committee on Personnel in 1954-55. We were, respectively, Chairman. Vice Chairman, and member who had earlier been Assistant Secretary of 

State and was subsequently Under Secretary of State for Administration whose 

mission was to set in motion the implementation of the orders of the Secretary, 

issued as a result of our report.

We have read with care President Johnson’s letter to the President of the 

■Senate and Speaker of the House, his letter to the Secretary of State, and his 

Executive order, all dated May 6,1965.

The Committee upon which we served was unanimous in all its recommendations. Their basic purpose was to bring all who served under the Secretary of 

State within his effective, and flexible, control. We were not authorized to
UNITED STATES INFORMATIO N AGENCY NOMINATION S 113

proposed legislation, but bad that lain within our terms of reference we would 

have been happy to have proposed provisions substantially like those of the 

present H.R. 6277.

It is our considered opinion tha t the Foreign Service is the first line of the 

national defense. It is manifest tha t its present duties involve a fa r wider 

range of activities than was foreseen when the Rogers Act of 1924 and the 

Foreign Service Act of 1946 were adopted. This was made explicit by the 

Herter Commission. Clinging nostalgically to the more limited duties and responsibilities of the past constitutes no adequate program for the future. Since

I the Secretary of State is directly answerable to the President for the conduct

of the Department and the Foreign Service, it follows, inescapably, that all 

i who serve abroad or in the Department of State should belong to one service,

with a unified personnel system over which the Secretary should have effective

control.

Under modern conditions other departments and agencies are involved in 

foreign affairs and have personnel capable of performing many of the duties 

of Foreign Service officers. The exchange of personnel with the Department of 

State in recent years and the steady strengthening of the concept of the “country 

team’’ have amply demonstrated this fact. The action of President Johnson in 

sending to the Senate for its advice and consent a list of 760 USIA career 

officers for appointment as Foreign Service officers was a constructive step; 

the proposed legislation opens the way for further desirable action along the 

same lines.

Some officers who, for any one of a number of reasons, can no longer best 

serve the United States as Foreign Service officers are fully capable of useful 

employment in other departments and agencies of the Government. The proposed legislation will facilitate such transfer.

In the light of the very large number of Foreign Service officers, i t appears 

to us wise tha t grades 8 through 4 should be appointed by the President, or the 

Secretary of State if so directed by the President. Members of classes 3, 2, 1, 

as well as career ministers and career ambassadors are all involved in policymaking and should, therefore, be submitted to the Senate for its advice and 

consent.

We have only two suggestions relative to the substance of the President’s 

letter to the presiding officers of the Congress. It should be made crystal clear 

tha t there is no conflict between paragraph (d) on page 2 and the last sentence 

of paragraph (2) on the same page. It should also be made explicit tha t the 

provision of paragraph (3) will not result in a Foreign Service officer spending 

nearly the whole of his career in Washington. Before 1954 it was possible for a 

Foreign Service officer to be kept abroad through all but 3 years of his entire 

service. It was also possible for an individual to serve many years as the 

desk officer of an important country without ever visiting it or reading its language, and remain virtually immune from control by the Secretary of State. 

The purpose of this bill can be defeated unless the furthe r and future appointment of civil service personnel to the Department of State is specifically excluded. The ultimate simplification of the personnel stru cture requires phasing 

out “foreign affairs officers” as rapidly as feasible.

« The foreign service of nearly every major nation has had to be revised to

accommodate its structure and personnel to the conditions prevailing in the 

second half of the 20th century. We wish strongly to endorse the proposed legislation as a means to tha t end.

To expedite dispatch of th is letter Messrs. Whitney and Wriston have autho rized Mr. Saltzman to attach their names to this letter, which has been cleared in 

telephone conferences, and to forward it to the committee chairman to whom it 

is addressed.

Charles E. Saltzman. 

Henry M. Wriston.

John Hay Whitney.

o
I

4i*