APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD “The great majority of the Japanese look up to General MacArthur, and have an ex- tremely high regard for him,” young Dixon said, “They feel this way because they believe he has done a great deal for them.” “DOESN'T MAKE SENSE” On one of the burning questions of the day, he made the following comment: "I can't figure out why the Chinese Na- tionalists, who are able and willing to fight on the side of the United N tions, aren't allowed to do so. It just doesn't make sense.” PET HATE Like everyone else, fighting men have their pet hates. The major one, says Private First Class Dixon, is “the guy who started the movement to abolish the soldier's beer ration.” Soldiers in the field are rationed canned beer, where possible. It is rationed in such & conservative manner as to be considered humorous under ordinary circumstances. However, to a combat soldier, his can of beer is an almost unbelievable luxury. Recently, there was a movement afoot to stop such rationing of beer, and it was news of this movement that threw every soldier in the Pacific into a rage, Private First Class Dixon said. LOOKS TO FUTURE What are his plans for the future? Young Dixon points out that the immedl- ate future is pretty well taken care of. His leave expires January 15, and he will return to Oakland by plane, the same way he came home. He faces 9 months of hospitalization, dur- ing which he will be fitted with artificial limbs, and carefully taught how to use them. After that, he intends to return to Lowell High School, and pick up where he left off. “I haven't made up my mind what kind of a job I want to learn,” he said. “There are a lot of things I want to do, and eventually I’m going to be able to do them.” Purchasing Power of Dollar Reaches New Low EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 4, 1951 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, we hear a lot nowadays about the reduced pur- chasing power of the inflated American dollar. We are told that taxes of all kinds, and particularly war taxes, from now on will be excessively high, chiefly because of this reduced purchasing power, Because inflation, and the cer- tainty of further inflation, will be an im- portant factor in framing further tax legislation, it is vitally necessary for us to know just where the dollar stands now. With this in mind, I have prepared some figures, calculated to show truth- fully the purchasing power of the dol- lar today, as compared with its purchas- ing power in some past years. The general index of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, covering 28 commodi- ties in the spot primary markets of the United States, as of December 22, 1950, stood at 364.1, This means that on that date, it took $3.64 to buy the same amount of goods that $1 would have XCVII—App.——2 bought in August 1939, the date on which the comparison is based. Thus inflation caused the actual pur- chasing power of the dollar to drop to 27.46 cents in December 1950, as com-~- pared with August 1939. The August 1939 index stood at 75. This means that for 75 cents, the pur- chaser could have bought commodities which had a value of $1 in 1926. By means of a simple arithmetical cal- culation, with which every statistician is familiar, it appears that the 1950 dollar, compared with the 1926 dollar, has dropped to 36.6 cents. And it should be remembered that 1926 was a year of se- vere inflation. Since December 1950 a further rise in spot commodity prices has reduced the purchasing power of the dollar to a new low of almost exactly 27 cents flat. In view of this situation, one is com- pelled to wonder when the administra- tion intends to stop talking and making political gestures about inflation, and get busy applying the really effective powers it possesses, through the Treas- ury and the Federal Reserve Board, to curb the further creation of credit cur- rency, and put an end to this era of easy money. The Congressional School of Virginia EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 4, 1951 Mr. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL. Mr. Speaker, just across the Potomac River from Washington, D. C., stands a unique and very interesting coeducational insti- tution called the Congressional School. It is an outstanding example of the great American experiment that private initiative can furnish unequaled service to the public welfare. The metropolitan Washington area is indeed fortunate in having among its educational institutions this famous private school which is pro- viding the very best teaching from kin- dergarten years up through junior high school. The growth of Congressional has been truly phenomenal. Ten years ago it was realized that there existed a particular need for a superior school, where the chil- dren of many families who are required to reside in the Nation’s Capital for a short period of time—not only in the Government services but also in the Con- gress and diplomatic corps—could re- ceive specialized training. These boys and girls will some day return to the most varied types of school systems in this country and other parts of the world, and it is a vital concern to these families that the years spent in Washington shall not be a period in which their children’s education is neglected. The Congressional School was founded in an attempt to meet that challenge. How well the challenge was met is best measured by the response of the public who have sent their children year after Al7 year in increasing numbers. The tre- mendous response necessitated three changes of location to larger accommo- dations, the building of additional edi- fices, and the establishment of a second school at Alexandria, Va. The school is now located on Fort Myer Hill, in Ar- lington, overlooking the Potomac and the Capital. Another indication of the school’s suc- cess is the ease with which the boys and girls of families, who have moved away have fitted into the educational systems available in their new homes. The rep- utation of Congressional has been spread in this manner over the Nation and it has become a routine matter for parents who have recently moved to Washington from thousands of miles away to call at the school to seek enrollment for their children because friends had recom- mended the school that their children had attended while they lived in the metropolitan area. Every economic group is represented and there is absolutely no distinction to be found between the children of families of means and those of modest income. These families have one great ideal in common—they sought and are obtain- ing the very best in education for their children. The Congressional School is providing the basic training in education at a vital and important period of a child’s life and at a most moderate cost in compari- son with other institutions which lack the facilities to provide comparable services. The school faculty represents an out- standing group of educators, skilled in the profession of teaching and working with children of all age groups. The grounds and buildings are beautiful and equipped with the most modern facilities. Best of all, the boys and girls who make up the student body are as attractive and happy a group as can be found in any school in America. They are re- ceiving an unusual amount of individual study and consideration and are being taught the great joy of becoming useful members of groups of their own age and abilities. Each child is studied very carefully from every standpoint—-not only in the classrooms but on the many playgrounds in an endeavor to correct any existing peculiarities or deficiencies—in the hope of bringing out hidden talents and de- veloping finer and more attractive per- sonalities. Congressional has a qualified and prominent psychologist on its staff who devotes the entire day in close coopera- tion with respective teachers. There is a modern remedial reading department which also guarantees that every child will receive a good educa- * tional foundation. This section is made up of specialized teachers that assist a child in overcoming certain reading and speech difficulties. A unique feature of the school allows every child to be placed in a group which will permit him to advance according to his own ability to acquire higher education. The institution maintains a qualified and experienced dietitian who plans and
A18 selects proper and healthful menus for ® growing child. It also features an outstanding athletic program. It is one of the few schools in the Nation made up of children below junior high scho)l level that has a tackle football team and teaches major sports both for male and female. The junior high school provides for an unusual amount of sampling in diversified sub- jects. Students enjoy French, music, art, glee club, shop, home economics, courtesy classes, and a broad athletic program of voliey ball, football, fencing, tumbling, badminton, basketball, and swimming. The Congressional School obviously exists because there is a tremendous need for a superior school and because private initiative has realized that need and is supplying the facilities that are wanted by parents who are determined that their children shall grow and develop in an atmosphere which provides for their happiness, and for directed understand- ing guidance to assure their maximum potentialities. Malcolm B. Devers is the founder and president of the school, and his wife, Mrs. Evelyn Devers, is the educational director. Important Questions of the Day EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 4, 1951 Mr. SMITH of Wiconsin. Mr. Speaker, I am including as part of my remarks @ series of questions that appeared in a recent issue of the Milwaukee Sentinel: Questions of THe Day Question. Is it true that the United States is at war? Answer. Yes; the United States is at war, fighting for the United Nations in Korea, Question. What is the United States? Answer. It is hard to say. The United States used to be an independent Nation, but now it seems to be only a fragment of the United Nations. Question. What is the United Nations? Answer. The United Nations is an expen- sive, socialistic, and impracticable acheme of world government. Question, Expensive? Who pays for it? Answer. You do, if you are an American citizen. Question. Well, if Americans pay for the United Nations, do not Americans run the United Nations? Answer. No; indeed, The United Nations rung the United States. Question. Is that not a funny situation— that we let somebody else run our affairs and we pay the bills? Answer. It is very funny. The Socialists in Europe and the Communists in Russia are laughing thelr shaggy heads off. Question. What is it going to cost us? Answer. Who knows? Except that it will bankrupt us. Question. Well, do we get anything out of it? Anewer. Sure; we get foreign wars to fight alone, as in Korea. ' Question. Where ts Koreas? Answer. About 7,000 miles away, on the _aoast of Asia. Question. Then why are we fighting a fore- ign war in Korea? Answer. Because the White House, the State Department, and the United Nations arranged it. Question. What does Congress think about that? Answer. Under the New Deal, Congresa has no right to think. Question, What do free American citizens think about it? Auswer. Under the New Deal, there are no free American citizens; this is a Nation of taxpayers, nothing elae. Question. Have these taxpayers anything to say about our foreign policies and our Oghting United Nations wars? Answer. Certainly not. Our State De- partment takes care of all that; and see what it is doing. It has already put us in the Korean War, and with the help of the United Nations it will never run out of foreign wars for us to fight. Question. How did the State Department get us into war in Korea? Anawer. Ask Harry Truman and Dean Acheson and Owen Lattimore. Why do you employ experts unless you want them to expert? Question. Isn’t it their business to keep us out of wars? Answer. Ask them. Question. What ts the war in Korea going to cost us, anyway? Answer. Ask Truman—or Acheson. Ap- parently it 1a going to cost us our Regular Army and Marine Corps. Then in making a@ new Army we will be in one awful fix. But why bother about that? Haven't you got Truman and Acheson—and Lattimore? Question. Apparently we are in a mess. Answer. We are. Question. Maybe we should do something about the State Department? Answer. Should we? What do you sug- iol And how about the White House, (00 The Omaibus Appropriation Bill EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JOHN J. ROONEY oF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 4, 1951 Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted me to extend remarks in the Recorn, I include a timely article by the distinguished chairman of the full House Committee on Appropriations, Hon. Crargnce Cannon, of Missouri, pub- lished in the Tax Review for December 1950, with an editorial from the Wash- ington Star commenting on the article: Tue Ansewat AGAINST INFLATION—UsE OF ConsoLipATEn APPROPRIATION MBrAsuRY, Best ‘Weapon, Must Be ContTinusp The greatest internal threat to our Govern- ment and to the mode of life it represents has been the absence of effective restraints on individual and group pressure for Gov- ernment expenditures. And the most effeo- tive weapon yet devised to combat thet threat 4e the consolidated appropriation procedure followed hy the Congress this year for the frat time. Deficit spending is a menace second only to the danger of invasion from esbroad, and Congress and the public must marshal forces to assure continued use of this most effective weapon in the arsenal against it and against the accompanying inflation which it fosters. This menace to American stability and atrength has been growing each year, par- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ttewlarly in the last two decades, as the size and scope of Government functions and ace tivities heve accelerated. When the Federal Government was small and tts activities lim- ited, the facilities of the Congress to review and determine expenditure needs of the Gov- ernment on a piecemeal basta were consid- ered sufficient. But the continued growth of the Government and the expansion of its services have been accompanied by (and have generated) a tremendous incresse in the areas of economic pressure. Government in- tervention in the economy of individuals and groups has multiplied and mushroomed Fed- eral subsidies and contributions. Govern- ment largess affecting one group has in- evitably resulted in clamor by other groups, and each class expenditure of Federal funds has generated new pressures. The only constitutional check on these importunities for spending is the constitu- tional power of the Congress to appropriate funds, but the piecemeal appropriation proc- esa used by the Congress throughout most of its history has too often broken down in the face of pyramiding demands. The individual appropriation bills were in- dividual sticks, easily broken by the concen- trated force of minority pressures. But gathered together in a single bundle, as in the consolidated appropriation measure, they have been able to withstand group raids on the Federal Treasury to a greater degree than ever before. Demands directed to spe- cific chapters can no longer be supported by glib statements that they are too small to materially affect the total, or by nebulous promises that corresponding cuts can be made in a later bill. Hach nged and demand must be weighed in the Nght of all needs and demands, and concessions in one area must be matched by simultaneous reductions in another if the over-all objective ta to be achieved. The strength thus gained by con- solidation has provided the Congress with an opportunity to appropriate adequate funds needed for the legitimate purposes of government, while resisting ever-growing demands for Federal bounty. TRIAL RUN SUCCESSFUL An increasing appreciation of the problem by the House Appropriations Committee early this year led to the adoption of the simple but effective expedient of consolidating all appropriations into a single bill, The “trial run” of the omnibus measure during the second session of the Elghty-first Congress, admittedly an experiment, can be regarded as highly successful, although there are per- haps defects which continued use of the new procedure may be expected to remedy. In general, the obvious advantages of the new technique are that the Congress and the taxpaying public were given a more compre~- hensive view of the entire budget and of its impact on the national economy; that the areas of economic pressure were disclosed and arrayed, one against the other, in a single bill that showed their relation to each other and their effect on the over-all totals; and that the Congress was able to effect not only the specific reductions deemed essen- tial to the public interest but also an over- all reduction in total expenditures. NINE SPMCIFIO ADVANTAGES The specific advantages of the consoll- dated appropriation procedure are many and important: 1, Promptnesa; The new method permits an earlier report of appropriationa to the House, All annual appropriations were re- ported to the House this year on March 21, the earliest date in the history of the Appro- priations Committee. 2. Thoroughness: It contributes to a more thorough consideration and of estimates and appropriations. Under the old system each member of the committes had to analyze in detail from two to four bille, and the committee staffs were atmi- larly bandicapped, with the result that time
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD and attention were divided proportionately. Under the new system each member of the committee and each member of the staff gives undivided attention to one chapter of the bill with the result that the bill is studied in greater detail and more thor- oughly processed than ever before. 8. Increases: Consolidation protects the bill against amendments, increasing appro- priations or adding new appropriations. For example, this is the first year the com- mittee has been able to fight off amend- ments increasing appropriations for olvil functions, the “pork barrel” section of the bill, This year the bill as messaged to the Senate carried practically no important in- creases except the committee amendments for national defense. 4. Attendance: The consideration of all appropriations in one bill tends to keep Members on the floor. Under the old sys- tem large bills were frequently passed with a scant two dozen Members present, and pro- ponents of increases in appropriations, by timing their attendance, could put through amendments which would not have been agreed to with more Members present. In fact, one of the few objections voiced against the omnibus bill is that {t irks Members by keeping them on the floor. 5. Retronchment: The plan unquestion- ably retrenches expenditures. The bill as it passed the Congress was far below the budget estimates and was many millions of dollars below what it would have been had the departmental appropriations been Teported in a dozen separate bills. As a matter of fact, the over-all economy amendment intended to decrease total au- thorizations carried by the bill would not have been possible except for the omnibus plan of consideration. And the vote in favor of the amendment would not have been so overwhelming had not this plan of operation been in use at the time. 6. Logrolling: It prevents logrolling. We had been told this was one of the defects of the new plan: that there would be more logrolling between interests wishing to trade votes in order to add amendments increas- ing appropriations. But in the practical op- eration of the plan every attempt of special interests to increase the bill was defeated, and when the last roll call came on reduc- ing the amounts appropriated tn the bill, the groups which had heen unable to secure increases which they urged for themselves said in effect, “If we cannot get an incrense, no one shall have an increase,” and instead of logrolling to increase the bill they co- Operated to reduce the bill. 7. Responsibility: The one bill visualizes at a glance the outline of national income and expenditures, and centers the attention of the country on the national fiscal pro. gram. It was the pitiless limelight of na- tional attention concentrated on these final votes that offset the pleas and importunt- ties of the pressure groups and special in- terests. The omnibus appropriation bill has made the entire country definitely deficit conscious, has contributed greatly to citi- zen understanding of the Government’s fiscal operations, and has increased citizen capacity and opportunity to influence the course of the national economy. With all appropria- tions in one bill, accompanied by the figures on Federal income, there is no escape from the responsibility for deficit spending. One of the great disadvantages of the old system, with @ dozen or more separate bills, was that each subcommittee, working in its own segregated corner of the budget, was spending in the dark. Not until the last bill was passed and sent to the President at the end of the session, frequently long after the expiration of the fiscal year, did anyone have any definite idea of how much had been appropriated for the year and what the rela- tion of the various individual bills was to the fiscal program as a whole. 8. Duplicationg: The handling of all ap- Propriations in the omnibus bill provides for elimination of confilcts, duplications, and Overlapping expenditures. The consolida- tion in one bill supplies opportunity and facilities for identification of all sources of funds allocated to individual agencies, some of them difficult of ready determination. It Was sometimes necessary to trace appropria- tions through a dozen or more ttems in a number of different bills under the old sys- tem. And as a result, inevitably there were from time to time provisions for expendi- tures which would not have been made had the subcommittee in charge of one bill had jurisdiction of all the items which appro- priated money for the activity. 9. Riders: It discourages the practice of attaching irrelevant riders either in commit- tee or by amendment from the floor. Too frequently legislation has beon tacked on the several appropriation bills under the guise of limitations or by the admission of germane amendments. In the general attention focused on the bill all such attempts were turned back and the bill was passed singu- larly free of these impositions on the budget system and covert infringements on the jurisdiction of the Congress’ legislative com- mittees. NO BACKWARD STEP As against these advantages, no construc- tive criticism has been lodged against the adoption or continuation of the omnibus appropriation bill procedure. It has vindle cated every promise, justified every expecta- tion. And no cogent reason has been ad- vanced for a return to the old system. In- deed, it is inconceivable that the Congress should consider taking a backward step re- verting to multiple supply bills. They are the quill pen and the three-legged stool in an adding-machine age. They are the ox- cart and the kyak in a4 jet-plane ora. Not one of the general objections men- tioned in opposition to the omnibus bill presents any substantial reason for return- ing to the old practice from which the House has been struggling to free itself and the country for the past 30 years. The claim that the Senate must mark time until the bill comes over from the House is unfounded. On the contrary, the Senate under the new system may begin work on any of the annual appropriations within a week or two after the session opens and much sooner than before. During the recently concluded ses- sion, the Senate had practically completed hearings on all chapters of the omnibus bill by the time the measure had passed the House. Under the new procedure, the com- mittees of the two Houses are in effect site ting simultaneously, thereby saving time formerly lost in waiting for individual bills. It has been contended also that it took too long to pass the bill, but the facts do not support the charge. Of course, much of the delay was avoidable. The bill was reported March 21, but could not be called up in the House until April 3. This de- layed the measure past the Easter holidays and it was not sent to the Senate until May 10. But even with the delays, the total number of days, in whole or in part, con- sumed by the House in considering the bill was 21 days, compared with 37 days in 1988, 81 days in 1939, and 20 days in 1948. With ordinary good management in the subcom- mittees, the committee, and the House, the omnibus bill can be messaged to the Senate each year before Easter, with time to spare, and can be passed in the Senate and sent to the President in ample time to meet the deadline at the end of the fiscal year— greatly facilitating early adjournment. A further criticism is that there has been lack of interest in the bill and that it has* been difficult to keep a quorum on the floor. That is an old complaint. When efforts were being made to secure the consent of Speaker Joe Cannon to the erection of the first House Ald Office Bullding, he insisted that once offices and committee rooms were provided for Members, it would be impossible to keep a quorum on the floor. His predictions have been frequently vindicated, especially dur- ing general debate on the individual appro- priation bills when Members burdened with committee hearings and departmental work have waited for the bells to answer roll call. The adoption of the consolidated bill has effected no difference per se in this respect. However, under the old system, general debate was not confined to the bill before the House and Members usually talked on subjects foreign to the pending measure. And those interested in the appropriations had no reason to neglect other business when the debate was on other and unrelated mat- ters. But under the omnibus bill all debate 4s confined to the bill before the House and attendance is correspondingly heavier, For every instance cited to indicate a light at- tendance on the floor during debate on the omnibus bill, more instances can be given showing a still lighter attendance during consideration of the individual bills under the old system, But the most untenable of all the objec- tions to the omnibus bill is that it is un- wieldy. The experience of every major na- tion in the world and every State in the Union belies such a proposed criticism. Eng- land, France, Sweden, and other leading na~ tions have for centuries considered their budgets in one-package bills. Every State in the Union submits its annual budget in an omnibus bill. The United States is the notable exception to the rule. In any na- tion or any State the suggestion today that it abandon its time-tried method of con- sidering its fiscal program in one bill and resort to the piecemeal expedient of sepa- rate bills would be regarded as absurd. None of them find it unwieldy—whatever that means. And the House did not find it un- wieldy this time. No one finds it unwieldy except those who oppose sanity and caution in formulating the greatest fiscal program on earth. SOME IMPROVEMENTS NEEDED What, specifically, were the results of the use of the omnibus bill procedure in the Eighty-first Congress? There were many, but three appear to be outstanding: 1. Legislators aware of the prospect of a large annual defiicit ina period of economic prosperity succeeded in whittling more than $2,000,000,000 from budget requests; 2. The conso}idation of all supply bills per- mitted the over-all cut of $550,000,000 that the Congress felt was required by the fiscal situation; and 3. The fiscal unity achieved by the omnibus bill facilitated the transposition from 8 peacetime to a defense economy after the start of the Korean incident; instead of hav- ing money already appropriated, allocated, and spent under Individual supply bills, the Congress found it possible to readjust the en- tire budget to meet the new emergency. What improvements can he made in the consolidated appropriation method? Cer- tainly, continued use of the new technique by the Congress will smooth out the grow- ing pains and speed the handling of the omnibus measure. Members of the House and Senate will have every opportunity to propose specific suggestions for improved ef- ficiency and effectiveness contributing to na- tional economy and solvency. An additional improvement can be antic- ipated as a result of the enactment of the Budgeting and Accounting Act of 1950, which presages greater clarity and uniformity in Government accounting procedures, In the report of the House Appropriattons Commit- tee on the 1950 omnibus bill, it was noted that the Congress would be able to appro- priate more intelligently and provide funds more nearly in line with actual requirements if it had access to more accurate and under- standable accounting data. It is expected
A20 that part of the improvement anticipated un- der the new statute will relate to accounting entering into the appropriation process. The consolidated approach has been op- flosed, not so much because it failed as be< cause it was successful. Its success has been attested by untenable criticisms on the part of the Washington bureaus on which the bill economizes and the lobbying interesta which found it harder to slip through appro; - tions they want and more difficult to defeat appropriations which they are paid to op- The future of the consolidated appropria- tion method may well lie in the support of an informed public opinion, aware that the new wespon is essential in the fight against inflationary spending. The need is presst: under any circumstance, but with the Un States facing years of heavy spending under the stepped-up military preparedness pro- gram, the need becomes one of the greatest urgency. The added fiscal control resulting from consolidation of appropriatians can play an important part in preserving the strength of the Nation and the peace of the world. Mr. Speaker, the following editorial from the Washington Star is an interest- ing commentary on the article: Cuan on Nongssenria, SPENDING Chairman Cannon, of the House Appro- priations Committee, has made a good de- fense of the single-package appropriation bill in an article for Tax Review, published by the Tax Foundation of New York. No de- fense of the plan should be necessary, of course, for any appropriating system that lops $2,000,000,000 off the Federal budget without damaging national security and that effects further reductions by nondefense agencies in times like these ought to recelve unanimous acclaim. Yet there has been oc- casional sniping at the omnibus plan, de- spite its manifest accomplishments, Mr. Cannon is right in his belief that much of the opposition arises because of the dem- onstrated success of one-shot appropria- tions. By lumping 11 major departmental appropriation bills into one measure, the chances for behind-the-scenes logrolling by pressure groups in or outside the Govern- ment are reduced. These groups generally met defeat when they tried to prevent cer- tain budget cute from booming law. The money was saved and the coun’ry is the bet- ter off administratively and economically by reason of the savings. The need for a road block on nonessential spending is more acute today than it was when Congress last year began consideration of the budget requests. No method or de- vice for holding nondefense appropriations to a minimum should be overlooked by the mew Congress. Certainly the omnibue ap- Ppropriation bill is a device that has proved itself under test and that has earned the right to show what it can do in time of national emergency. General Walker Never Died EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLYDE R. HOEY OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, January § (legislative day of Wednesday, January 3), 1951 Mr, HOEY. Mr, President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix of the Recorp a poem en- titled “General Walker Neyer Died,” written by Mr. Charles W. Loveland, of Shelby, N. C., and which appeared in a revent issue of the Shelby Daily Star. This poem pays high tribute to a great American who died in the heroic dis- charge of his duty. There being no objection, the poem was ordered to be printed in the Recorn, as follows: Grormnat Warere Nevex Diep They put him on a transport fiying eastward to the States, With military honors due the greatest of the greats; But strange things sometimes happen shaped by mystic hands unknown, So it was in mid-Pacific with the distance halfway flown. In his fiag-draped, measured coffin General Walton Walker lay, Heading for his land of freedom, back to home in U. B. A. Like a steady heartbeat pounding was the motor’s constant roar Bringing back a tested soldier from the bat- tlefields of war. Then, the engines throbbed more loudly and the casket seemed to move As the lid, though fastened tightly, parted from tts molded groove, All the guard, in solemn silence, sat alert at death's command And a figure, etanch and somber, rose in strong, determined stand. Now, they say the general’s buried in the land he held so dear, But the men who flew that run with him have feelings quaint and queer; One said he dreamed the general rose to toss hia shroud aside, And someone else proclaimed he dreamed the general had not died. Oh, they didn't bury Walker as was stated In the press For in bitter cold Korea still he stands in battle dress And wherever men are dying, comrades see him in the fight— His spirit couldn’t leave his men upon a one-way filght! —Charles W. Loveland. Getting Fire Losses Under Control ee EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ROBERT L. F. SIKES OF FLORIDA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 3, 1951 Mr. SIKES. Mr, Speaker, I am very glad to present for the information of the House an important editorial from the Forest Farmer of October 1950, by Herman Work. It is entitled “Getting Fire Losses Under Control.” I recom- mend it for the valuable information which it contains, Gerrmo Fme Losszs Unvre Conrro. (By Herman Work) The far-sighted editor, in the August issue of the Forest Farmer, called on all his read- rials required for war. With foresight sharp- ened by our experience in War I, owners, operators, and all concerned have the strong- est reason: to plan now for handling the woods work in ways that will produce the goods with the least possible e to the great resource on which we all depend for the long future, as well as for today. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD It 4s no news to Americans that war calis for the best we have, and lots of it. It ts painfully true also that war ts by nature @& most wasteful business. Emergency con- di‘ions do not encourage careful use of ma- terial. Then, too, in war, time is what must be saved. Indeed, when priceless men are being spent in combat, a new scale of values is created for temporary use, « scale in which our le have learned to use material lavishly to save lives, by gaining victory as quickly as possible. The quick victory 1s the economical one, on every count, includ- ing the vital one of saving our selected men. CUTTING TO BAVE AND SAVING TO CUT The August editorial stressed the need for planning production in the woods, to assure future supplies. That, of course, is essential. But there is another way we can provide for our future. And it is something to which almost everyone in the country will lend a hand, and gladly, when all under- stand the problem. It has been said many times that we have burned up more timber than we have used, in this new land of ours. The era of fires has been destructive over many generations, because lt has cut off untold millions of little trees that never had a chance to grow into useful sizes. Since moet of the trees that perished were too small for sawlogs, most people took the loss lightly. There has been a vast change in attitude, however, as we have approached the end of the virgin stands. This change has come slower in the South than elsewhere, partly because much of the southern lumber has had to seck distant markets and the poorer grades could not stand the shipping charges over long hauls. Now, new industries in the South have created large home markets for trees of small size and ordinary quality. FIGURES SHOW SOUTH LAGS A recent Amertcan Forest Products In- dustries compilation of official figures shows that 669,000,000 acres have been covered by some form of organized protection against fire. Of the 82,000,000 acres now lacking pro- tection, 76,000,000 acres are in the Southern States. I: also shows that of the total area burned in 1949, 82 percent was on unpro- tected land, mostly in the South. Could anything be plainer than that? COMPLETE COVERAGE AND LOW LOSSES GO HAND IN HAND The last five States, in the table which follows, like most of the others not named, have some degree of protection for all their forest lands. Where the entire area ts under guard, the losses on protected land are lower than in the States that have been unable as yet to provide complete coverage. The United States average of 0.46 percent burn on 569,000,000 acres can be reduced to 0.12 percent or 0.14 percent, like Washington and Virginia, respectively. Newest figures on fire protection in the South 03 Arkansas 34 Florids 211 Ge . 622 05 nt 05 fantasti 8 m6 2 Missouri... . 8, 064 1.47 & 1 Li gkiabana 6,620 1.57 ith Carotina. 0 1.06 Tannorses. 6, 780 138 Texas...... 8, 418 17 Virginfa.........-. 0 4 | Total above.........-.--