APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD best American Secretary of State Britain ever has had. Mr. Acheson haa repudiated the Reds’ counterproposal in this instance, to be sure, But he is the same man who only last week consented to a deal which would have given them a seat in the United Nations and For- mosa as a reward for their treachery. . If there has been any change in his atti- tude toward the over-all Communist prob- © lem in Asia, he has yet to reveal it by any positive action. The only way to save this situation is to get him out of office, and this will be done only if the American people demand it with a voice which cannot be dented, a armppemepmeamsnss sees ceneenemmmned Tie UN Should Get All in or All Out of Korea eee E..TENSION OF REMARKS HON. RUSSELL V. MACK OF WASHINGTON IN THE 4OUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. MACK of Washington. Mr, Speaker, while the so-called statesmen of the United Nations debate what should be done about Korea, American boys are being maimed for life and dying there. An editorial in the Chehalis Advocate, of Chehalis, Wash., shows how this so- called police action affects the life of one American boy—a story that could be re- peated 45,000 times for that is the num- ber of our Korean casualties. While the so-called UN statesmen de- bated, this Chehalis boy, Pfc. Clyde Ken- nison, lost his foot in Korea which caused Don Ingraham, the editor of that news- paper, very appropriately to remark edi- torially that “The United Nations either should get all in or all out of Korea im- mediately.” Editor Ingraham's editorial from the Bee Nugget follows: Pfc. Edwin C. (Clyde) Kennison, of Napa- vine, is home. Clyde hasn’t been away very long, Just a little more than a year to be exact. But a lot has happened to him since he enlisted jn the Marine Corps January 13, 1950. First, he was sent to San Diego, Calif., where he got about 6 months of recruit train- ing and that first stripe. By July he was in Korea helping the United Nations ‘police force” stem the tide of North Korean aggres- sion. Then, in August, he was tn Japan recover« ing in a base hospital from a head wound suffered in the intense fighting in South Korea. By October, Clyde was back in action in Korea, Now Clyde Kennison is home. He isn’t back with hia folks, Mr. and Mrs, Frank Woosley, of Napavine, yet, but he will be soon. Right now he’s tn the United States naval hospital at Mare Island. Last week doctors amputated his frozen left foot. They said his right foot probably would be all right although it, too, was badly frozen. Clyde Kennison has been in the service only a year. It hardly seems possible that all this could have happened to him in such a short period of time. Why, it was only & couple of years ago that he was playing foot- ball for Chehalis High School. Private First Class Kennison is a victim of policy, the policy this Nation is following in allowing its youth to be expendable. He, and thousands like him, from Lewis Counties all over America, have been sent out to fight and die in a half-way war, A war which our lead- ers do not choose to call by that name and refuse to allow to be fought in an all-out manner. We are engaged in a “police action.” The enemy is engaged in total war. The United Nations either should get all in or all out of Korea immediately. This coun- try must not allow its men to be sacrificed while statesmen debate the advisability of permitting planes to bomb Communist China or of turning Nationalist Chinese troops on Formosa loose on the enemy. Clyde Kennison has not been gone long, but he has been gone much too long to fight the type of war we are carrying on in Korea, Re Panama Canal: Modern Weapons and National Defense EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS E. MARTIN OF IOWA IN TH™ HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. MARTIN of Iowa. Mr. Speaker, in an extension of my remarks in the Recorp of March 16, 1950, I included a condensation of a book on Modern Arms and Free Men, by Dr. Vannevar Bush, as published in the February 1950 edi- tion of the Reader’s Digest. .In my re- marks I stressed the application of Dr. Bush’s ideas to the problems involved in the defense of the Panama Canal, or any other interoceanic waterway which may be constructed. Another most timely article by Dr. Bush, entitled “The Weapons We Need for Freedom,” was published in the Jan- uary 1951 issue of the Reader’s Digest. This paper is accompanied by the fol- Jowing biographical sketch of its distin- guished author: Vannevar Bush, former vice president of Massachusetts Institute of Technology and dean of its School of Engineering, is one of America’s foremost scientific military au- thorities. During World War II Dr. Bush was director of the Office of Scientific Research and Development, which coordinated the work of 30,000 scientists, engineers, and tech- nicians, and was closely associated with the atom-bomb project. He is now president of the Carnegie Institute of Washington. Dr. Bush, in the preset instance, de- velops more fully the conclusions arrived at in his February 1950 thesis, applicable not only to the problems of defense of interoceanic canals but also to defense problems generally. He emphasizes that the solutions of such questions are never static between the weapons of offense and defense, and at this time those of defense appear to be in the ascendant, with the resulting tendency toward a deadlock on Jand. This contribution should go far toward the maintenance of disciplined thinking on defense problems and the avoidance of hysteria. It emphasizes the point I have repeatedly tried to stress to the Congress, viz, that the defense of any part of the United States, including its industrial capacity, transportation sys- tems, ports, and canals, is an over-all Ad49 governmental reaponsibility of the Fed- eral Government. It depends primarily upon active defense medium of our Armed Forces and not upon inherent features of design. The full text follows: THe Weapons Wr Nesp ror FPreroom (By Vannevar Bush) The grim events in Korea have aroused the United States and the rest of the free world from a perilous quietude. While we are now appalled at the cost in lives a: treasure, the: Red aggression in that country may prove in the long run to be a godsend, for it has served inal notice that the Krem-~- lin is bent on world conquest-——-by armed force, if need be. If the free world fully heeds the notice takes account of stock, ferrets out and cor- rects errors, pushes ahead full steam on sound lines, and keeps it economic balance— we can be ready for the eventuality of all-out war. Indeed, if we are ready, there probably will be no all-out war. It is a question first whether there ia time for preparation, and second, whether we take full advantage of it. Hence we need to evaluate the means and techniques we will use if forced to fight with our full strength. On military research and development we have not done badly, but we need to do better and to do it much faster, There is # race between offensive and defensive techniques in every field, especially in that of etrategic bombing. We need to be in the lead both in means of stopping enemy bombers and in means of penetrating enemy defenses, There is a decided possibility that the de- fense may catch up, that radar warning nets, anti-aircraft artillery, grovnd-con- trolled interception utilizing jet-propelled aircraft, and ground-to-air missiles my make it increasingly impractical to penetrate to prime targetc. We must credit Russia with the ability to progress rapidly with all these. If the Red hierarchy becomes able, at some future date, to prevent the delivery of atom bombs onto its great industrial and administrative centers, the danger point will have arrived, At that time we must be able to stop their armies and to protect our own centers. The ground-to-air guided missile promises to be the key weapon in a system of defense against high-altitude bombing. Traveling at bullet speed along a radar beam, Carrying a heavy charge and a proximity fuse, such a weapon against the high-flying bomber can be deadly. It is not here yet, in quantity and tested reliability, but it ¢an be, and it offers the greatest promise of the compara. tive immunity of key centers to high-alti- tude bombing. We should not let anything atand in the way of bringing it to full frui- tion at an early date. While our means of strategic bombing have been well delevoped, neither we nor our al- lies are properly equipped with tactical air power. It is well accepted that when great armies clash on a well-defended line tactical air in quantity is essential to success, Rus- sia has profited from the many examples of this in the last war, and has bullt tactical air extensively, Our Navy and our Marines have thetr own air support for their missions. Our Army depends upon the Air Force for its tactical air support. It does not now have what it needs to do its job, in spite of the magnifi- cent effort of the Air Force in Korea, for most of that was conducted with planes not specifically designed for the purpose. We must correct this defect as rapidly as the inevitable delays of construction will allow. There is no doubt that the Air Force, now facing the facts squerely, can meet the need, and will, with full support. With our sup- port, our allies can do much, for they can build as well as we can, and less expensively,
The time may come when strategic air operations, even with the A-bomb or the possible H-bomb of the future, will not pay out, Any operation in war to be successful must do more vital damage to the syemy than it costs in men and treasure. If that day comes, and long before, we need to think of the A-bomb as a tactical weapon to stop great armies, It may even be true that we would be nearer right, al) things considered, to think In these terms today. The tactical use of the A-bomb to break up concentra- tions of tanks, artillery, and masses of men may, in the long run, be more important than ita strategical use. It would certainly be more salutary for the world. The United States, at the end of the war, succeeded the British Empire as the world's greatest sea power—greatest In terms of a type of past warfare that will not come again. It may well be that World War II was the last in which the clash of great fleets will be a determinant, or in which the operation of great aircraft carrters will be of primary importance. We must face, if we fight a major war in the not too remote future, flects of undersen craft, fast and of long endurance, armed with extraordinarily deadly weapons—torpedoes of greater range, speed, and subtlety than the world has hitherto known. We face attacks on our merchant fleet by guided bombs from the air. We face the modern submarine mine, which is ex- ceedingly difficult to sweep. Mines placed from the air, arranged so that they can te swept only with enormous effort, vastly in- crease the power of an enemy to deny us ports. Air attack on shipping has potent aids in rocket weapons and guided bombs. It fe essential to our success in war that we maintain our transport over the seas. The Navy's mission is as important as ever, and ita task is far more difficult, but this task has changed radically. We no longer build battleships to fight battleships, There is much question whether great car- riers are now worth the cost of building, Maintaining, and supporting them. The small carrier certainly has ite place, to take atr power to remote places and to fight sub- marines, and we mey come to mosquito fleets of all sorte—agile, versatile, and hard to hit by torpedo or bomb. A great part of the equipment with which we fought submarines in the past war was rendered obsolete when a torpedo appeared that could outrange underwater sound-de- tecting apparatus, and could home on its target by various means. The snorkel and the high-speed submarine, {mportant though they are, are lesser threats than this. The day of the convoy may be over, and we certainly need to develop and build in quantity cargo carriers of such s at sea as to be tmmune to submarine attacks, and means such as we used at Normendy to land cargo in spite of mines. There is no potnt tin discussing airlift when milifons of tons of cargo must be moved thousands of miles, ff tt can be done by fast cargo ships virtustly immune to submarine attack. ‘The outlook for sea warfare is not all one- sided; there are many answers to the threats, many devices already built or capable of development; many ways of going on the offensive against the submarine, and of bringing down mine-laying or bombing air- craft, many devices in fact that have not been described and will not be mentioned here, It ts against all these threats to our sea communications that the reortentation of our naval program inevitably must be directed Land warfare with mechanized ermtes, communication nets, radar-controlled guns and rocket-carrying aircraft 1s an extremely complex affair, fully as much so as war tn the air or on the sen. It demands for suc- cess, therefore, active efforts in research, de- velopment, procurement, training, and the use of the most advanced weapons, A strik- ing tNustration of this matter is that of antl~ tank defense. There has appeared a new antitank weapon of great power which can in time render the heavy tank largely obao~ lete. This is important, for the Russians are said to have 40,000 tanks, many of them heavies. Their whole doctrine of land war- fare revolves about tanks and massed artil~ lery to prepare the way. But the day ts coming when it will no longer pay to build heavy tanks, because they will be too vulnerable. And if they become practically obsolete our potential enemy will have to do a lot of reorientation and reequip- ping, which would probebly take years. The new antitank weapon ts based on the principle of the shaped charge,’ whose virtue is that it can penetrate a surprising thickness of armor—in fact, any armor a tank can carry. During World ‘Wer II the bazooka fired a rocket which carried a shaped-charge projectile, and we have since built super- bazvokas which have been useful in Korea. We also have aircraft rockets that use shaped charges. The trouble with the bazooka is that it is of short range and inaccurate. But a ehaped-charge projectile has now been built that can be fired from a high-velocity gun, which can hit a moving tank at 1,500 yards with high probability of scoring with the first shot. Moreover, this type of projectile can be combined with the inexpensive recoil- leas gun which can be carried by a jeep or used as a squad weapon. About 200 such guns can be built for the cost of 1 heavy tank, They can also be built efficiently by our allies. The race between guns and armor bas taken a sharp turn in favor of defense. There are other opportunities for the sort of ingenuity and enterprise that produced this advance in antitank artillery. Land mines and means for laying them offer de- fensive possibilities. Defense against low- flying aircraft is full of chances for progress. Such are some of the main lines of the change in weapons and techniques of war during the past 6 years. We are now awake to the threats. We must move far and fast and use to the ut- most the time that is still ours. Thus, if there comes another all-out war, can we and our allies defend the free world with confidence. Thus indeed may we hope to Prevent an all-out war from occurring at all. Fiftieth Anniversary, Division 18, AOH, Salem, Mass. EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23,1951 Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to include the following address I delivered at the fiftieth anniversary banquet, Sunday, January 21, 1951, of Division 18, Ancient Order of Hibernians: Greetings: The Irish have come a long way in the firat half of the twentieth century, both in the homeland that is called the Em- ‘A shaped charge ts a piece of high ex- plosive with a depression, usually cone- shaped, molded into its face, When the ex- pioston occurs, the depression focuses the t into a small, highly penetrating jet. The action 1s similar in some ways to that of a concave mirror in focusing the eun's Tays to produce intense heat. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD erald Tele and in the sanctuary that we love and cherish as the United States of America, Tt is no mere cotncidence that our people have fought to win and to protect freedom, not only in the two countries that rank high- est in our affections, but have also given 80 generously in life and in treasure helping other people to win their independence. For the Irish have the sublime courage born of their eturdy Christian faith which practices its belief in the dignity and equal- ity of all mankind as God ordained. We resent injustice and cruetty in any form. Perhaps that is why tt t# so diMcult for us to forget the tpaieniee and the suffer- ings that were forced upon our ancestors in the last century. In the history of the Irish you will find that they were peraecuted, time and time again, but you will never find that they were guilty of aggression against other races or creeds. They asked only to live thelr own lives in neighborliness with others. The Irish believe that their land was first peopled by Greeks and others, s thousand years before the birth of Christ. About 500 B. C., some Celtic adventurers crossed into Ireland and’ conquered the natives. They brought with them that strong sense of kin- ship that left ite mark on the Irish character. The relatives who made up the clan were considered as far more important than any state, and the men of Erin fought at the drop of 8 hat to protect the family unit from encroachment by any larger fo@n of socia] organization, Before the coming of St. Patrick, good Irishmen after death were burted upright with -faces turned toward their foes, ready for battle, Christianity had come to Ireland a few years before Patrick, but the honor of con- verting Ireland to the Talth which she has supported with complete loyalty, belongs to her patron saint. 8t. Patrick was born in England, about 389, and as the son of a Roman citizen, he was named Patricius. As he grew up he studied the Bible with such persistence that he could quote much of it from memory. After he was captured by raiders and taken to Ireland, conversion came to him. His piety was all-consuming. Every day before dawn he got up and went outdoors and raised his eyes toward heaven. There were no rain checks in his devotion. Snow, cold, or storms were never permitted to interfere with his datly prayers. Later, after much travel and study, he was made a priest. In 4382 he became a bishop and was sent back to Ireland. From the Confeasions he wrote toward the close of his Yife, we learn that on 12 different occasions he was seized by the pagan Druids and that each time he was in mortal peril. That he was saved to go on with his divine work was due to his confidence and his faith. He drew to his side countless men and women who dedicated their lives to spreading the good news that man was redeemed. His teaching was banded down from generation to generation with the result that the Irish consider it the highest of honors for their sons and daughters to take up the religious vocation. Wo other saint could match him in this, that alone he had converted a nation. In the three centuries after the coming of Christianity Ireland became famous os the island of doctors and saints. Culturally, it was more advanced than any other nation north of the Pyrenees and the Alps. There was such @ thirst for education that poor scholars whose parents could not sup- them were educated by public funde. ost students were studying for the priest- hood, for which mothers and fathers cheer- Tulty worked themecives to the bone, ha: in the knowledge that they were making the finest sacrifice of all. The high achievement of I-teh art in this pertod was the Book of Kells, the jour gospels
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD in vellum, done by Irish monks in the ninth century. Nothing in Christian illuminated manuscripts can equal this prized possession of Trinity College in Dublin, which has been called “the work of angels masquerading as men.” As early as the year 748, an Irish monk, St. Fergil, suggested the possibility of an- other world and other men under the earth, Centuries after, Magellan satled around the world, thereby vindicating the ability of the Irish to look ahead. For the rich imagina~ tion of this gifted race is not the least among its many talents. There are few children whose lives are as eager and adventurous as those of the Irish, peopling the woods and the night with won- derful creatures of their own invention. A nation of individuals, kind and hearty in the rural loveliness of their land, and so full of life that it overflows into dreams that feed the stories, the poetry and the music of the world. Brian-Boru. Emmet, Parnell, O'Connell, the martyrs of Easter Week, 1916, DeValera, Cosgrave, these are but a few in the long litany of great-souled Irish men and women who never surrendered to appeasement, Their passion for independence was twin to their supreme religious faith. Would that Ireland were a member of the United Nations, to strengthen that organiza- tion with its high principle and its unyleld- ing courage. The international airport at Shannon and the big hydroelectric plant in County Limer- ick which provides cheap light, heat, and power for homes and industries throughout the land are examples of the progressive spirit that stirs in the newly emancipated nation. You and I are proud of our forebears and the land that gave them birth. And we are proud of the outstanding contributions they have made and are making to the growth of our American civilization. For the United States was 4 natural home for the Irish, giv- ing them the opportunity to develop the talents that are the genius of the race. Wherever you scratch an American, from GI to President, you are more apt to strike a strain of rich Irish blood, for we are every- where in the land and have been there from the start, For proof, let us take a British source, which cannot be accused of favoritism to- ward the Irish, On April 2, 1784, Lord Mountjoy, speaking to the English House of Commons said, and I quote: “I am assured, from the best au- thority, that the major part of the American Army (in the Revolutionary War) was com- posed of Irish, It was their valor that de- termined the contest. America was lost to us because of the Irish immigrants.” We realize, of course, that all peoples have made a contribution to the building of Amer- ica, but on this special occasion we mean to high light the truly remarkable services rendered by the men and women of the Emerald Isle in making the American dream come true. I must admit that I was surprised and pleased to discover that of the 3,000,000 population of the Colonies in 1775 about 1,000,000 were Irish. As we go down the names on the muster rolls of Washington's Army, we find that over 38 percent were as Hibernian as those to be found here to- night. This does not include many others who were part Irish. From Concord to Korea, the honor roll of American heroes ia star-studded with names 8a Irish as the shamrock. From Commodore Barry, father of the American Navy, to “Lightning” Joe Collins, present Chief of Staff of the United States Army, they lead the parade, Reverently, because it repre- sents the summit of sacrifice, we recall the five Sullivan brothers who went down fight- ing with the cruiser Juneau in the battle of Guadalcanal. In the pages of American his- bra A you will find no greater giving than Our people have been conspicuous, not only in defense of the United States, but as builders of its railroads, its schools, its fac- tories, and its political institutions. The freedom of the new land was made to order for the individualism of the Irish spirit and its ability to harmonize it with social order through the instrument of self- government, Up New Hampshire way they tell this story, which is an example of the confident hopes and plans of the Irish for their future in the New World. It seems that Margery Browne, from County Cork, was asked by a fellow pas- senger on the boat what she intended to do when she reached the Colonies. Without a moment's hesitation she replied: “Raise governors for thim, to be sure.” Margery was as good as her word. She married John Sullivan, @ schoolmaster, for- merly of Limerick. In her old age, Margery Browne Sullivan used to say she had known what it was to do a man’s work in the fields, “carrying in my arms the Governor of Mas- sachusetts, with the Governor of New Hamp- shire tagging at my skirts.” Her son John grew up to become a cele- brated general who, when the war was over, also knew how to maneuver his way in politi- cal campaigns. He became Governor of New Hampshire in 1786. His brother James, not to be outdone, became Governor of Massa- chusetts {n 1807. As political organizers, our people stand in a class by themselves, It is taken for granted that no one but an Irishman need apply for the position as chairman of the Democratic National Committee. In time the Republican Party will match this wisdom, and then their fortunes will undoubtedly improve. As labor leaders, and as manufacturers, a8 judges, artists, and scientists, the ability of the race makes its presence and its creative power felt in the multiple human endeavors that fill the American scene. In New England, we can point to tremen- dous progress during the past 50 years. The active and inspiring teamwork of clergy and laity has accomplished wonders. Schools and colleges and hospitals dot the region as living testimony to the culture and good works without which our people would not regard thelr lives as meaningful. What a noble Irishwoman—Charlotte Grace O’Brien—thought of her people was described by her in these words written in 1905: “What nation has for ages made the grest- est personal sacrifice for its religious life? The Irish. What nation has maintained purity of marriage? The Irish. What na- tion has humbly sanctified its family life through prayer and religion? The Irish. What nation has more tenderly regarded its duties to the ties of family love than these poor Irish?" From this tribute she goes on through the Gospel Beatitudes to prove that the happy and friendly people from the green isle are blessed tn the very ways that were pointed out by our Lord. Because we are Hibernians, we treasure this legacy from the old country, and it is our purpose to keep these values alive in the new world. As a man honors his father and his mother, so do we honor the land of our forefathers, whence we draw the life and the faith and the freedoms that we enjoy today. There will always be a soft spot in our hearts for the “old sod,” a pride and affece tion that we will transmit to the genera- tions that will follow us. In gratitude we will work, as we have always worked, to bring about the unifica- tion of Ireland, and for the day when it will A351 win its rightful place in the councils of the United Nations. Civilization falters, but it does not fall. The history of Ireland is proof that no tyranny can crush o brave people. Centuries have come and gone since that golden age when she was the light of the world, teach- ing mankind the truths of this life and the faith in that eternal life for which this jour- ney is but the preparation, Through count- leas decades her people suffered oppression that would have crushed a less hardy race. But the miracle of it is that the faith grew stronger with every indignity that it had to bear. Today most of Ireland ia free and inde- pendent. . And the complete redemption of all her counties is not far distant, How Fair Is the Draft? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. AUGUSTINE B. KELLEY OF PENNSYLVANIA , IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. KELLEY of Pennsylvania. Mr. Speaker, under permission to extend my remarks, I am including an article en- titled “How Fair Is the Draft?” culled from the pages of Nation’s Business of January 1951. Today, with so much agitation over the question of drafting 18-year-old boys, it is well to have an enlightened statement such as this. It proves the short-sight- edness of our military leaders in their attempt to get a 3,500,000 armed force. I suggest that the proponents of the 18- year-old draft approach the President's Committee on National Employ-the- Physically-Handicapped Week and the Vocational Rehabilitation Office for in- formation on what can be done by han- dicapped people. It seems that our friends in the armed services are behind the times. Perfect physical specimens are needed where combat or arduous work are required, but not for the vast number of sedentary occupations in the Army. How Fam Is tHe Drarr? (By Stanley Frank) We can't say we haven't been warned. Complacency verging on arrogance cost us irretrievable lives and time during the last war and a hang-over of the same attitude is setti' g us up for another crisis all over again, President Truman had good firepower but erratic alm on October 25 when he called the high rejection rate of men found physically or mentally unfit in the draft “a disgrace to the richest Nation in the world.” The Pres- ident, referring to World War II statistics, mentioned a rejection rate of 84 percent— actually, it was 35.8 percent—but newspapers carrying his speech told a more alarming story. Reports from local selective-service boards throughout the country revealed that 45 to 80 percent of the men called up since Korea had been turned down by the Army. The implication was clear: The draft was in trou- ble. The United States, committed by act of Congress and the North Atlantic Pact to & Defense Establishment of 3,000,000 men by June 1951, would fall far short of ite objece tive, Something, obviously, is wrong. Amere icans are the best fed, clothed, and housed,
A352. the most thoroughly dostored and ecrubbed people on the face of the earth. There is 6 direct correlation between a high staxdard of living and physical vigor and mental atae bility, but the figures don't add up. By our own admission, one young man in every three 1s 9 pantywaist or a psychonewrotic. We must be better than the figures aay we are. If we were not, we would have been Heked decisively in two bloody wars. We are not as , however, as the big wheels in the Pentagon think we are. A military axiom holds that a nation, or a coalition, faces certain defeat when one third of its forces in the field is eliminated by casualties. The United States is undermining its secur- ity by eliminating one third of its available manpower before uniforms are issued. That policy inevitably will catch up with us when, for the first time in our history, we and our allles are opposed by an enemy numerically atronger. It will be too late then to correct mistakes, Second chances are buried in the rubble that mounts with the increasing fury of all-out-war. ‘Who says one third of our young men are unfit to serve in the Armed Forces? The answer will come as a surprise to most citi- gens. The Armed Forces, which arbitrarily establish their own criteria, say so. The Army, Navy, and Afr Force which, like all military organizations from time immemo-~ rial, complain—perhaps justifiably—that they do not have enough of everything they need, say they cannot use one youth in every three. And what is the basis for this strange contention? Now we are getting to the heart of the matter and the answer no longer can remain unchallenged. The Armed Forces of the United States insist on regarding every re- cruit as @ potential combat man. It is o concept as archaic as a cavalry charge with drawn sabers and as unrealistic as an um- brella in an air raid, yet our military leaders continue to adhere to it despite the expe- rience of disastrous consequences. Their own elaborate tables of organization prove that the idea of training every volunteer and conscript for front-line fighting is utter nonsense, The old saw to the effect that 20 men are needed behind the guy with the rifle is not a rule of thumb. Less than 5 percent of all the men in the Armed Forces in the last war saw, much less engaged, the enemy in combat. No more than 15 percent ever heard a shot fired in anger. Even in an infantry division fewer than half the troops are assigned to rifle companies, The over- whelming bulk of men in every army, navy, and air force, especially the American, !s occupied with logistics and the technical aspects of modern war, a trend highlighted in startling fashion by comparisons of World Wars I and II. The total United States Army mobilized in April 1945 was more than twice as large as that mobilized in Novem- ber 1918, but the strength of combatant ground forces was just about the same. Another lucid example of the same sort of thing, but on a lower level, comes from Gen, Mark W. Olark, the Army field forces chief. The general has estimated that an infantry division of 19,000 men under the present set-up probably would call for 60,000 to handle the rear area service activities, The Red army has only five to six thousand backers-up per combat division. What were all noncombatant GI's doing during the last war? They were hauling supplies, driving and maintaining vehicles, handling communications, sorting ‘mail, making propaganda, guarding installations and supply lines, cooking chow, adminis- tering liberated and conquered territory, planning future operations, and keeping reo- orda in triplicate for still othera to fle. The maillion and one details that, while not so aangerous, were just as necessary to supply and maintain riflemen, tanks, ships, and planes, employed 95 percent of the men in uniform. Few of those rear-echelon jobs required top physical condition, and every military organization in the world except the United States, has recognized that fact. The United Btates alone accepts only first-rate physical specimens, regardless of their eventual as- signments. The result, of course, is that such men are diverted from the front lines, where strength and stamina are needed, to duties that can be discharged satisfactorily by the majority of men who are rejected. No other nation is deluded by what Maj. Gen. Lewis B. Hershey, Director of Selective Service, calls a philosophy of abundance—a polite way of saying the United States is dis- sipating its manpower with an overconfidence that smacks of insolence. Every other coun- try, friendly or hostile, has three to seven classifications for conscripts according to physical capabilities. They operate on the theory that a job can be found in the service for any man of military age who is gainfully employed in civilian life. The United States takes men who qualify only for combat and discards the millions who can be competent clerks, truck drivers, mechanics, guards, cooks, and technical specialists. Despite the manpower shortage, there still is not a general limited-service classification for draftees in the Army, the only branch now drawing on selective service to meet ite authorized strength. The Navy and Air Force are getting enough volunteers to All their needs, although they shortly will feel the pinch of expansion. The tragic lessons of the last war have been forgotten or ig- nored. We were at war for nearly 2 years in 1948 before all three branches agreed, re~ luctantly, to accept men who did not meas- ure up to their physical and mental standards for combat. It was a short-sighted policy that eventually cost lives and unquestion- ably delayed the successful prosecution of the war. As early as September 1942 the Army Ground Forces were short $30,000 men; the Bervices of Supply, 84,000; the Air Force, 108,000; and the mushrooming Navy was severely strapped, In June 1948 the man- power situation was so acute that 500,000 men were dropped from the proposed strength of the Army. Only then did our military authorities scrape the bottom of the barrel—-as they condescendingly called it— but it already was too late. Three months after the invasion of Normandy, rear eche- lons were combed frantically and their rugged men in desk and administrative jobs were rushed to the front. GI’s were sent into combat with insufficient training; a calculated risk—a euphemism for lines stretched to the breaking point—led to the Battle of the Bulge and the largest number of casualties suffered by American forces in any 10-day period of the war. It would be fine if every young American in uniform could tear down a brick wall with his bere hands after a 20-mile march with a full pack. It would be even more wonderful if no young American had to wear a uniform at all, but such wishful thinking is as dan- gerous as the first hypothesis. We cannot afford the luxury of either one. The facts in the case are uncompromising and ines- capable. . To maintain a defense establishment of 8,000,000 men, 800,000 new men a year are needed to fill the gaps left by completed tours of duty. During the 1940's, aome 1,200,000 men reached the draft age every year, The United States then was cashing in on the prosperity of the 1920's, which, as always is the case in good times, produced a high birth rate. But this year, and every year until 1957~-the most critical period of our relations with Russia, to military and diplomatic authorities—fewer than 1,- 000,000 men will turn 18, We now are get- ting into the depression babies of the 1930's, when the birth rate fell to an all-time low. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD You can’t beat the percentages. If ond third of the 1,000,000 youths reaching mill- tary age are rejected, the United States will not have the 800,000 recruits needed every year to keep its Armed Forces at the mini. mum level needed for the Nation’s security— and the situation will get progressively worse, of course. And that does not take into account the indeterminate, but large, number of talented young men who must be deferred for scien- tific and cultural study in college. We need them as much as combat troops to remain vibrant and progressive. A blanket defer- ment cannot be given, however, to every boy who wants to go to college. That will arouse justified criticism of a “poor man’s draft.” In these days of rising tuitions and increas- ing strains on self-sacrificing parents, col- lege is, more than ever, an economic hard- ship. To excuse from military service every boy who can buy safety behind ivy will lead inevitably to the widespread abuses of the Civil War, when northern conscripts hired stand-ins for $300. A committee of educators and professional men appointed by Hershey to make a 2-year study of the problem recently submitted 6 plan that proposes to give all high-school graduates aptitude tests and grant educa- tional deferments to those in the upper 25 percent. If a boy cannot pay for college, he would be provided with a Federal acholar- ship. If boys so deferred do not maintain high grades in college the draft would get them. There is another condition, After com- pleting their educations, the bright boys must go into work that is “essential to the national healtn, safety, or interest.” Doc- tors, teachers, physicists, chemists, and engi- neers fall into that category, along with economists, political scientists, and trained specialists in Slavic and Oriental cultures, But there is to be no deferment for dilet- tantes. A quick estimate of the physical and aca- demic deferments leaves a manpower deficit of at least 250,000 annually. Those are the harsh facts. What js the solution? Reduce the strength of the Armed Forces? That’s unthinkable in the present political climate, Expand the 19-to-26 age limit of the draft? The net will catch only veterans of World War II, who already have discharged honorably their ob- ligation to the country. It is unfair to ex- pose these men to double jeopardy. Upraot- ing them again will dislocate severely the Nation's economy, to say nothing of the emo- tional strains married men and their fami- les will suffer. Lower the draft age to 18? That will solve nothing after the firat year, There is an easy, effective, and equitable solution. The chief drain on our military manpower pool is the rejection rate for phys- ical and mental deficiencies, (Forget the 45 to 80 percent rates reported after the Korean campaign atepped up selective-service quotas, Half the men in the 19-26 age group were rejected during World War Il. Exemptions for military service already rendered and en- listments accepted, not included in the sta- tistics, threw the figures of jast summer com- pletely out of line.) Since the standards are substantially the same as in the last war, it ts reasonable to assume that about 36 percent of the men coming up will be declared unfit again, We cannot afford to eliminate ane young man in every three. We need not lose more than 300,000 men a year if a reform, dictated by logic and necessity, is adopted. The physical standards for induction must be lowered. It can be done without trnpatr- ing the efficiency of the Armed Forces by the simple expedient of junking the outmotied notion that every conscript must qualify for" combat.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Dr. Henry H. Kessler, who was in charg of the rehabilitation program at Mare sland in California during the war, believes 75 percent of the men rejected can be used for general—not limited—service if the present physical standards are lowered. can accomplished without fuss or bother,” Dr. Kessler says, “in 6 to 8 weeks during regular boot training.” Dr. Howard W. Rush, chief of the Con- valescent Service during World War II, men- tioned on July 22, 1950, some specific jobs industry has found for the physically handi- capped. ten arn proved invaluable in the construction Plane wings; paraplegics Produced precision instruments; the blind proved that many assembly lines are oper- ated as well by touch as by sight; the deaf show-7d that inability to hear can be mini- mized by written instruction, and cripples of every sort more than pulled their weight.” Look at some of the more common reasons for disqualification the Army stil] is apply- ing in the current draft. A man is rejected if his feet are not good enough for marching. No consideration is given to the proposition that the men can he used tn a deck job that involves walking only to the nearest filing cabinet, meas hall, and washroom. The min- imum height requirement for the Armed Forces is 5 feet, 2 inches and the maximum is 6 feet 6. Lack of height is a definite asset to @ mechanic in the cramped quarters of a tank, a jeep motor, or the fuselage of a plane. Excessive height can facilitate the handling of supplies in a quartermaster depot. Men with perforated eardrums are re« jected because poison gas is fatal to them. Gas has not been used as a weapon since World War I. Men who cannot see at 20 feet what normal vision sees at 400 feet are rejected, Sounds reasonable until you con- sider that visibility of 24 inches is all that is required to operate a typewriter. The thousands of professional athletes who were classified IV-F during the war and continued making muscles provoked so much criticism among servicemen and their families that the Army made an official study of such exemptions. It was found that the Majority of them were deferred for trick knees. “Those fellows would be a liability on the battlefield if they threw their knees out of joint,” an Army spokesman commented. “Buppose they popped a cartilage in the Pentagon?” I asked. The man changed the subject. The United States would have no man- power crises, no agonizing shortages of com- bat troops, if an effort were made to use, rather than discard, every youth regardless of physical handicaps. Like all generalisa- tions, this one must be modified. Although apastics and paraplegics can work in offices and release men for more rigorous duty, the problem of transporting and caring for them might tie up more fit personnel than Were replaced. Men who must have special diets for organic gastric ailments also might com~ Plicate Army routine. Severe heart cases and a few other categories would have to be deferred, But as a basic proposition, every man of military age—the one material re- source We cannot roll off assembly lines, for all our productive genius—able to live a normal life in civilian society should have & place in the Armed Forces. Military people will howl. They will argue that establishing several classifications for physical capabilities demands as many dif- ferent training programs. So what? Other countries do it, Sure, it means a lot of staff work, So what? For that matter, it is & palpabie waste of time and money to give everyone under arms the intense training for combat only 6 percent needs, Further, setting up limited-service eomponents to take care of supply, housekeeping, and book- keeping chores will enable the brass to train XCVII—App.——-23 more thoroughly the men who do the actual fighting. d Apart from military expediency, there is an equally strong recommendation for se< lective service that combines less selectivity the are ahaa Civilian confidence in aa a democratic, im) tal will get a boost. partial process There will be less uncertainty, leas finag- ling for occupational deferments if every young man knows he has an unpleasant, but necessary, Obligation to perform, As Gen- eral Hershey says, “I haven't seen a draft questionnaire yet in which the guy said he shot people for a living.” There will be less griping in the Armed Forces if everyone knows he is in the same boat with all other members of his generation. History has conferred few favors on a generation born in depression, weaned on upheaval, and maturing now in the shadow of another war. It’s tough to be 19 in the sixth decade of the twentieth century, but the very law that imposes sacrifices on a boy contains certain key words which are his only bope for the future. The law, en- acted on June 24, 1948, reads: “The Oongress hereby declares that an adequate armed strength must be achieved and maintained to insure the security of this Nation. “The Congress further declares that in a free society the obligations and privileges of serving in the Armed Forces and the Reserve components thereof should be shared gen- erally, in accordance with # syatem of selec- tion which is fair and just, and which is consistent with the maintenance of an effec- tive national economy.” The key words are, of course, “security,” “free society,” “obligations and privileges,” and “fair and just.” Communism and American Labor Unions EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WARREN G, MAGNUSON OF WASHINGTON IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, January 11 (legislative day of Monday, January 8), 1951 Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, on August 25, 1950, a very distinguished citi- zen of my home city, Mr. Dave Beck, executive vice president of the Interna- tional Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chaf- feurs, Warehousemen, and Helpers of America, made an address on the sub- ject Communism and American Labor Unions, before the Commonwealth Club of California, in San Francisco. I am informed by the Public Printer that the manuscript is estimated to make ap- proximately three pages of the Recorp at a cost of $246, I ask unanimous consent that the ad- dress be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Communism AND Amrnrcan Lapon Unrons-— Hononaste Deatinc Berween Lasor snp Inoustry THE SoLuTION (By Dave Beck, executive vice president, In- ternational Brotherhood of Teamsters, Chauffeurs, Warehousemen, and Helpers of America) Mr. Chairman, members of the Common- wealth Club of Ban Francisco, I am de- lighted to discuse with you today the subject A353 of communiam and American labor unions. Communiam %&# not solely the problem of labor, however. As you know in the State of California, it is also a problem within our universities and in many other segments of our social and economic life. All of us are deeply interested in meeting the problem posed by communism in Amer- ica, and throughout the world. to do this, however, we must first understand the reasons for the spread of communistic doctrine, how it is propagated, and to whom it makes its appeal. It will not help us to shift the responsibility, for personal advan- tage, to the shoulders of either Jabor or industry. The organization with which I am identi- fied, and which I have served for so many years, is the largest labor union in the world, It has a membership of more than a million men and women. It is made up largely, tf not entirely, of people who ere classified as unskilled. Yet we have no problem what- ever with communism. There must be a reason for this fact. It is because for more than 80 years in the history of our international union, its basic constitution—the law of the uniton—pro- vided that a Communist shall not be eligible to membership. At our last national con- vention, here in San Prancisco in 1947, we further clarified and broadened that pro- vision by barring from membership all who ere affiliated or associated with subversive organizations or groups of any kind, or who e@dvocate any subversive philosophy. Since we are a voluntary organization, we do not require positive proof that a man is &® member of the Communist Party; we must simply satisfy ourselves that he advocates the philosophy of comimunism. If he does this, then for all practical purposes, he is a Communist, and we do not waste time in throwing him out. There can be no compromise between Americanism and communiam. Any at- tempt at compromise ia an admission of defeat. Surely we have had enough of ap- peasement, of attempting to compose dif- ferences with those whom we know to be sworn enemies of our way of life. I believe that the greatest result that can come out of the situation in Asia is that we will bring sharply home to the attention of our peo- ple this outstanding fact: That just as we must carry life insurance for the protection of our families, and fire ce on our homes and businesses, so must we carry na- tional insurance in the form of adequate military preparedness for our Government and our free tnstitutions and ideals. More than 5 years previous to the last World War, in many talks which I made be- fore business and professional groups and service clubs, I advocated as strongly as my ability would permit, that we maintain our Army and our Navy and our Air Force at the highest possible degree of strength and effi- ciency, regardless of the cost. There is not ® man or woman in front of me today—not one—who if confronted with the choice of losing the life of his son or contributing his entire fortune, would hesitate for an in- stant. Of course, be would sacrifice every- thing of material value he possesses for his loved ones. Yet, we hesitated then as a Na- tion to prepare to defend our rights and our way of life, with the result that untold thou- sands of our boys did not come back from that war, or returned maimed and broken in body. . 80 long as communism spreads its fangs across the world, we must be ready, we must be prepared to hurl the vicious beast back from our shores. We must demand in these hours of na- tional peril that men in positions of trust tell us truthfully where they stand on the question of communism. I have no time whatever for men in politios, or in labor, or in business, or on the faculty of any of our
A354 univerdities, who refuse to take a poaitive stand on thie question of communiem. Tt ig a lot of tommyrot for members of university faculties to talk about interfer- ence with their academic freedom, while young Americans are making the great sac- rifice on the battlefields of Korea to defeat communism and to defend free America. We ere in an era of national emergency which has endured for a long, long time. World ‘War IT has not been officially ended. Thou- @ands of men who gave up their peacetime ambitions for a period of years, who gambled their ltves on the battlefields of Europe and in the South Pacific, are again being called into military service, while some of our the- orists—exponents of what they pretend to call their constitutional righte-—refuse to stand and be counted as Americans. They forget that the soldier, both in peace and war, lives under military law, not civil law. They blandly suppose that their rights would survive if communism should sweep this country. How wrong they are. American rights and all the liberty our forefathers fought to give us would be destroyed in- stantly and without trace if we were to prove unworthy to survive tn this present conflict. It was my privilege to travel to Europe & year ago and to speak as a representative of the American Federation of Labor before the British Trades Union Congress, and to visit some of the countries on the eastern side of the Atlantic. I had a private audience with the Pope at his summer palace near Rome. We discussed the problem of communism. [I also conferred at some length on the same subject with Bishop O'Connor, who heads the North American University in Rome, one of the outstanding schools for the develop- ment of young men for the priesthood. Both the Pope and Bishop O'Connor stated that it was where the common people were struggling against direst poverty thet com- munism made its greatest advances. Later we drove through the streets of Rome on a hot afternoon, just as the day was com~- ing to a close, and we could look into the houses and see where 15 to 20 Mved in ab- solute squalor in a single room, Down in Naples, as well as elsewhere in Europe where communism seemed to thrive, we found the same appalling conditions, and we could then understand something of the problem of communism and how it could appeal to those people. There indeed was a fertile breeding Place for ideas which appeal to desperate men, to men who have lost their hope and their faith in themselves and in the future. But these facts do not excuse men and women in American labor for tolerating communism. There is no such fertile ground here for the propagation of the Moscow doc- trine. The problem of communism in America is one which labor and capital must solve joint- ly. We sre making definite and steady prog- ress in this country toward the solution of the other probiems of capital and labor. There ig a constantly improving standard of living here. If we want the truth, and I am sure that we do want the truth, we must not judge men and women in any phase of our social, economic, and business life by the actions of an individual, or of a few misguided ine dividuals. We must judge industry as well as labor by the character and the conduct of the overwhelming majority. I can say to you positively, because I know whereof I apeak: the working men and women of America want no part of communism what- ever, My friends, the strongest bulwark to re- etrain the sweep of communism must come from within labor. You cannot find Com- munists in the membership of the Kiwanis Olub, or the Rotary Club, or the Lion's Club, or the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco, Why? Because you people and others in sixailar organizations are financially success- ful. ‘You enjoy a standard of living, you and your families and your associates, that does not permit the seeds of communiam to take root. You and your families and your friends may not be wealthy but you are & Jong, long way from poverty. We must recognize the fact, both in labor and elsewhere in America, that many of the evils, which once were destructive of our standards of living, and which made possible the fetid breeding grounds for communism, are no longer tolerated. As we right the old wrongs and as we banish forever the ancient evils of squalor and poverty and substandard living, we will sound the death knell of communism in this country. I do not want to be misunderstood. I do not lay the responsibility for communism end its growth in the lap of industry, be- cause I know that men in labor, men in high place in labor, also have tolerated commu- nism and have courted it. Nelther do I con- demn those who change thelr minds, and abandon that false philosophy, or any other evil doctrine. We are all members of this human family and we can all err. Yes; there have bean men in high places in labor who put their arms around the Com- munists and welcomed them, back in 1934, and even in later years. There was Philip Murray, for instance, president of the Con- gress of Industrial Organizations, and Walter Reuther, of the Auto Workers. There were also many others whom I could name. They tolerated the Communists in their ranks, they invited them in, and they worked with them and trusted them. There was also John L. Lewis, with whose philosophy and actions J do not agree in many, many instances. Lewis definitely is not a Communist, but he, too, tolerated them and their leaders. Why did these men fn labor consort with Communists? Because they believed they could use Communists in labor to accomplish their objectives more easily. But they were in error. They made a se- rious mistake, and they are still trying to core rect it and to live it down. They discovered, as will anyone who makes the experiment, that the Communists, as quickly as they could do so, using any and all methods, no matter how reprehensible, tried to take over their union organizations. That is the ob- jective of Communists when they infiltrate labor unions and organizations of university professors and any other group in our social and economic life. The Communists cared nothing for the American toller or his union; they sought places of authority so that they could promote the Communist party line. The Communists have no loyalty to America or Americans; their hearts and their loyalties are with the Kremlin. They will destroy a union or any other group if !t will serve the ends of Russia. Their very thoughts are subservient to the Soviet dictators, The chief goal of the Communist is rev- olution—vyiolent and bloody revolution. He wants chaos and disorder and ruin for our country, for it ig through such catastrophe that he hopes to take over and to rule America with an iron hand, destroying every trace of our democratic institutions, and blotting out our rights and liberties. Our American system of free enterprise is his especial enemy. We of American labor believe in our free- enterprise system. We do not believe in it simply because it benefits those who have money invested {n business upon which they may make profits, Not at all. We believe in free enterprise because we know that it has preserved our liberty and at the same time has given us the highest standard of living and opportunity the world has ever known. Free enterprise, as opposed to communism and socialism, is in the interest of the vast, overwhelming majority of the people who ‘APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD toil for their ving, both here and in other countries. 1 believe in free enterprise be- cause it inspires initiative within men and women, It provides them with opportunities to rise above their environment and to at- tain any high place which their ability and intelligence will permit them to achieve. I contend that no system in the history of the world has ever made possible such pro- gress for the working men and women, as free enterprise has accomplished for the American people. I have traveled somewhat around over the world and I do not know of a single, solitary country where the workingman lives under as fine conditions as he does in this land of free enterprise. Certainly no honest, intelligent man can think that communism offers more. I have never known of s Communist, nor one who advocated communism—and I have watched them in action for more than 30 years—I have never known of one Commu- nist who, of his own volition, has left this country to live in Russia. They fight depor- tation to Russia with all their might, and if they go to Russia, they Aght Just as hard to get back to this country. In days long gone by, in Seattle in 1918, there was a general strike, I think that I headed the only labor organization in Se- attle which voted against that general strike. I Mstened then in the Central Labor Council to men espousing the cause and extolling the wonders of Russia. To hear them talk, you could put them off the boat blindfolded at Vladivostok and they could walk from one end of Russia to the other without bumping into a single ob- stacle. But not one of them went to Russia and stayed there. Why? Because no work- ing man anywhere in the world can earn for himself and his family the benefits and se- curity that he can recelve as a matter of course under our system of free enterprise. Among the men and women in this room today, successful men and women, the over- whelming majority were not born to wealth and position. They fought and they earned their way up to the places they now hold. The tragedy is that so many have forgotten the adversities and misfortunes they endured and overcame in the early days. I represent an organization which, I be- Heve, has as good wages, hours, and working conditions as any labor group in the world. ‘We accomplish this by working with indus- try and within the framework of this Gov- ernment, and by no other method. I disagree with employers in many parts of the country almost every day, and un- doubtedly I shall continue to disagree with them, but I will disagree with them within the framework of our American law and Constitution and in an effort to take from industry what I honestly believe the men and women of labor are entitled to receive. That, in my Judgment, is the only way we can stop the spread of: communism. We can go back into the history of any industry and where we find the greatest number of Communists today we also will discover that in the daya gone by the most intolerable conditions existed. Yet, com- munism is not the solution for these people. Yes; we are making progress, There was a time when, in the midst of depression, there was nothing for thousands upon thou- sands of hungry men and women to do but get into the bread lines, or go to the soup kitchens. Those who have lived in San Fran- olsco since 1926 have had the experience of seeing hundreds and hundreds of men and women in the bread lines. Does anyone think we can send men and women into the bread lines without giving tremendous im- petus to the spread of communism? We must take steps to Keep men and women out of the bread lines in times of business depression. It is futile to expect all of the working people to accumulate financial resources on their own initiative
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD sufficient to provide insurance or some other form of protection to save them from destle tution in such times of business distress, It therefore devolves upon this social and eco- nomic structure of ours to find the way to solve this problem. I advocate that during the period of our working lifetimes, we set aside from our own earninge—not from the earnings of others but from our own—and out ef the develop- ment of the resources and industry of this country sufficient reserve savings to prevent bread lines and poverty. Perhaps you will criticize this idea. If a0, what do you sug- gest to solve the problem? For it is our problem, and it must be solved if we are to stop communism in this country. It is possible, perhaps, that we may go too far in the direction of social welfare, but I say to you: As surely as you are in front of me today, we must continue social security, for if we do not we will one day stagger this Nation's industry under a pen- sion load which it cannot possibly carry. We must take steps now to provide for future needs. You may argue whether or not there should be investment of security funds as we go along, so that money will be avatl- able out of earnings to meet future emer- gencies, but no one can possibly disagree when I say that we must solve the problem of destitution and poverty among our people. Otherwise this great structure of business will not remain as you and I want it. If, however, we follow the policy of preparing now to meet future needs of our people, we will never have much of a problem from communism in America. We dare not try to compromise with com- munism, for there can be no compromise. Phil Murray learned, Walter Reuther learned, and John L. Lewis learned by bitter experi- ence that compromise with communism ts disastrous. Neither can we compromise with a Russian Government which follows and ad- vocates the philosophy of communism. I detest communism as much as any man in America, We must stop !t inside labor because, as I said a few minutes ago, that is the only place where it can possibly find an opportunity to grow; that is the only place where destitute, poverty-ridden people may ever be found. It is true that some of the working people have made mistakes. They are not, in many instances, well educated. Add poverty to their other handicaps and we will have ground for communism to take root. I gay to the leaders of industry and busi- ness: Associate yourself with men of char- acter, ability, and courage within the Ameri~- can labor movement and help to find the solution to these problems which cause un- rest aid which threaten to tear the very structure of our Government to pieces. To- gether we can find the causes, and the answers. No man in labor today, who is worth any~ thing to his membership, advocates the strike as the first step toward the solution of any dispute he may have with any employer. A 16-year old boy may be eble to organize a strike, and if all labor respects the picket line, he may accomplish his objectives even though they may be absolutely wrong. That is not the road to industrial peace or to the proper solution of our problems, for wrong methods will not stand the test of time. We need more men in the labor movement who have the courage to say “No” when that is the unpopular thing to say. We can find any number of men who are willing to say “Yes” if that seems popular. We need courageous men i2 our universities, on our boards of regents, directing the affairs of in- dustry I repeat: We need them in the labor movement, ‘What shall we say of the man in industry who goes along for # period of time, dealing with honorable men and women in labor but who, when he sees that.they are on the road to a solution of their common problems, double-crosses them and enters into an agreement, or creates a situation which strengthens and promotes communism? I have had that experience. I have worked with industry and helped to force the Com- munists into @ corner and then I have dis- covered men in industry who were willing to take advantage of the opportunity to con- tinue contractual relations with Communists and thereby give them 4 breathing spell in which to regain their strength. That kind of dealing will not stand the test of time. Such leaders of industry will wake up some day to find that the leaders of labor, who proved they had the courage to stand up against almost unbearable preasure, have lost confidence in them and are un- Willing to trust them again. I have had some experience in saying “No,” when it was extremely unpopular. I sald it across the bay in Oakland a few years ago when a general strike was threatened. I told our people in Oakland that I did not care if we lost every member in the bay srea, we would rather lose them than participate in 5 genera) strike, for all general strikes are revo- lutionary 1n character and philosophy. I say this not only to the Commonwealth Club, but I also say it to my own people. A gen- eral strike ig revolution, and nothing but revolution. My friends, when we in labor educate our people to practice honorable procedures, and when our people display the courage to stand up and be counted against communism, we do not like it when men associated with in- dustry walk away from us when by so doing they can save themselves a few paltry dollars, Double-crossing will not stop communism in labor or anywhere else. Yes; we in labor have had associates who forgot and disregarded their duty and their obligations to God and man. Industry has had them, too. There have been men in both labor and industry who transgressed the law, who entered into racketeering schemes and combinations. I remember not too many years ago when a New York labor leader was sent up the river to Sing Sing. I also re- member that the man right across the corrt- dor from him was Mr, Whitney of the New York Stock Exchange. It is netther fair, nor just, nor even intelligent, to hold all men in labor and in industry and business guilty and to condem them all because a few have fallen by the wayside. Ido not condemn the banking business because a banker occa- sionally forgets his trust. Nor should you condemn labor because, now and then, a labor leader proves faithless and foresworn. How to meet the threat of communism concerns not only the people of America; it concerns all free peoples. Here in America the solution lies with those of us who are charged with the responsibility of striving and working together intelligently in this American system of free enterprise, under the finest government in all the world. First, we must learn to understand each other. Those of us who direct the affairs of labor—to use the vernacular of the street— must have the guts to stand up within the ranks of labor for what we know to be right. Leaders of industry must also have that same qualification. Industry cannot meet the issue by at- tempting to destroy the leadership of labor, for instance, by propagandizing the salaries which labor's leaders receive. That will not stop communism; that may bulld a Franken- stein to destroy us all. If we believe in the philosophy of free American enterprise, and I believe in it— no man in this room believes in free enter- prise more completely and sincerely than I do—then we must realize that If labor is to be represented ably and intelligently at the conference table, if it 1s to have leadership of high competence, based upon character, experience and brains, then, under our sys- A355 tem of free enterprise, labor has the right— yes, the duty~-to pay its representatives in accord with the same standards that itn- dustry has set for itself. I know an attorney in San Francisco, whose law firm receives a retainer fee of $260,000 a year to represent the interest of employers. Would any sane, fair-minded man insist that labor send a truck driver, earning $60 or $70 a week, un- trained and inexperienced and with Little knowledge of economics, or labor, or tndus- trial problems, to sit acrogs the conference table from this attorney? Would you think that fair? Does anyone believe that would solve our problems in America? No, it cannot. There are a great many men tn labor who could command much larger salaries if they were working for industry. Through the years industry hes watched the leaders of labor carefully. Often, when it has found men of outstanding ability, it has offered them many times more than labor could afford to pay, and put them to work for in- dustry. I offer no objection, for under our system it ts each man’s individual right to sell his services where and at @ price that his own judgment dictates is to his best advan- tage and the advantage of his family. What I am trying to emphasize is this: do not tear down the outstanding leadership of labor which, under the test of time and in the crucible of action, has measured up to our American ideals. Do not tear such men down, for if you do, the consequences will come home some day to haunt you. I wish that we had thousands of trained young men within the ranks of labor, not only in this country but throughout the world, striving for positions of leadership, of whom there was not the slightest question as to integrity, citizenship, and belief in our economic system and our form of govern- ment. We never have trouble with that type of leadership in labor. Our trouble comes in labor from the men and women in posi- tions of leadership who endorse communism, or through ignorance tolerate it. Commu- nists believe the oath that they may take in & courtroom is not worth a snap of the fingers. They will place their right hand on the Holy Bible and swear to tell the truth, but since they do not believe in God, their oath is meaningless. I am reminded of the university professor who says he is not s Communist, but who objects to taking an oath to that effect. My friends, I advocated within the American labor movement, within our own national convention, long years ago, that we stand up proudly and take the oath, For we are not Communists. It is my opinion that a certain large per- centage of those who object to taking the anti-Communist oath, or to signing such an obligation—and I want to make it plain that I am not referring alone to your problem in the Qalifornia academic world—are more afraid of prosecution for perjury than of ad- mitting they are Communists. I do not know what makes Communists among fac- ulty members in our universtties. It is over my head. But I want to make this state- ment: All crackpots are not in labor, there are a lot of them in the universities. I had some small part, let me assure you, not only in getting rid of Communists at the University of Washington, but alao along with my associates on the board of regents and in the president's office in initiating that action, and the Communists do not like !t. I wish that I could say over the radio what I think about them. My friends, we can solve the problem of communism in American labor only through honorable dealing between labor and in- dustry. Labor must come to realize that the man or woman who invests in business does not always find success and profits easy to ob- tain. I know there are many instances
A356 where the owners or managers of business, from time to time, sweat blood simply to meet the payroll. All men in business and industry are not roliing in wealth. Labor must realize that fact. We have a right, under our system of enterprise, to earn & bona fide, legitimate, and reasonable return upon capital investment, tf we have the brains and ability to do so. I also believe the owners of industry have a right to plow back into their bueiness sufficient money for expansion and growth, so that more jobs can be created and greater production made pos- sible, for out of such expansion and em- ployment comes the wealth of our country and the ever-improving standard of living for all of our people. Neither labor nor industry has a right to enter into collusive action or conspiracy, for that will not stand the test of time. It contradicts the right of the great con- suming public. In this system of ours free and open un- regulated competition no longer exists in many fields of endeavor. A man cannot invest his money in a new railroad, an air transportation company, or a trucking com- pany and teke his own chance, in open com- petition, of making a reasonable profit. He must first obtain a certificate of public con- venience and necessity, or some other form of regulatory permit which tends to control competition, That is a development which has come about over a long period of time. I say to you in conclusion, the greatest government ever founded in all the world is our American Government. Above every- thing else, above the rights of Jabor, or the rights of capital, or the rights of the indi- vidual, is our duty to our Government. We must always subordinate our interests to its welfare, Finally, if you want to solve the problem of communism in American labor unions, I beg of you to recognize character and ability and honorable dealing wherever you find it—in government, in industry, or in labor, Thank you, Address of Hon. James C. Davis, of Georgia EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN BELL WILLIAMS OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. WILLIAMS of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, we are all concerned over the current threat of war facing our coun- try as well as its attendant domestic problems. We have all, 1 am sure, given extensive thought to the proper courses, both domestic and interna- tional, which should be followed in or« der to preserve our American heritage. On the evening of January 20, 1951, our distinguished colleague, Hon. James C, Davis, of Georgia, was invited to speak before the Atlanta Claims Commission at its annual banquet held in the Ansley Hotel in Atlanta. Congressman Davis’ speech was, in my opinion, an example of the brilliant statesmanship which has characterized his three terms of service in the House, and deserves the atten- tion of every conscientious and patri- otic-minded American. Under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I wish to include the text of Congress- man Davis’ address: Three of the greatest problems Americans have ever faced lie immediately before us, They are: First, how can we have peace? Second, how can we preserve our institue tions of individual liberty and free enter- rise? P Third, how will we pay the tremendous costs involved in these efforts? I believe strongly in the principle that where there is a will, there is a way. I fur- ther believe that there is a will in the hearts and minds of Americans, to avoid the awful catastrophe of a third world war; that there is a will and a determination to preserve our institutions of individual liberty and free enterprise; and finally, that there is a will to face up to the realities, and to pay the costs involved in these processes, huge and staggering though they may he. That being the case, our questions, then, are not “Can these things be done?”’, but, “How will we do them?” Iam convinced that there still is enough American ingenuity and resourcefulness, that there are in this country still enough clear-thinking, energetic Americans, who can add two and two and get four for an answer, to work out plans to pull out of the difficul- ties which surround us, and do the hard work necessary to carry these plans through to completion. I think there can be no question that we are engaged in a struggle for survival. We need then, to know, as best we can determine, exactly what contronts us, We cannot close our eyes 10 unpleasant facts, nor gloss over realities, These are some of the facts we face today: Our outstanding national debt is approxi- mately $257,000,000,000, dangerously near the $275,000,000,000 debt limit we have set for ourselves, The purchasing power of the dol- lar is now 57.3 cents, if we take the years 1935 to 1939 as being a period in which the dollar averaged 100 cents purchasing power, Where mistakes have been made, they should be acknowledged and not white- washed. Many have been made. It was a mistake to disarm and to disband our forces. We made many unwise, even foolish, con- cessions to Soviet Russia, which are now rising up to plague us. One such mistake was to place Russia in charge of Korea north of the thirty-eighth parallel, I believe 1t was a most serious mis- take to make any concessions whatever to Russia to induce her to enter the war against Japan, That war had been won. Japan was at our mercy, We needed no assistance from Russia there. For no good reason we invited Russia to come over and share in the victory. We placed in the hands of her leaders the means to make for us the trouble in Korea, and in the Pacific area, which is now costing us 8o many American casualties and so much of our treasure. We committed serious errors in making unwise and unnecessary concessions to Rus- sia in Europe. Bungling decisions placed Eastern Germany under exclusive Russian domination, Further bungling placed Rus- sta in the position where she can close up rail, highway, and canal transportation into Berlin at will, can stop the shipment of food and supplies into Berlin by all these means of transportation, and even make it neces- sary for us to transport coal into Berlin by air Plans to build up naval strength were dis- carded, and construction of a super aircraft carrier was canceled after the kee] had been laid. This carrier was authorized by Con- gress and the money appropriated to build 4t. Construction of this super aircraft car- rier has been reordered. Now it will cost many millions more, and will be delayed APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD approximately a year and a half longer than would have been the case had the con- struction order not been canceled. It was a mistake to dilly-dally with the question of price and wage controls until rising prices and inflation have already add- ed some 83,000,000,000 to the cost of our defense activities. It is said that since June 25 rising prices have cost us equipment for 10 infantry divisions, 300 B-36 bombers, 2,250 F-80 jet fighter planes, and tanks for 10 armored divisions. Since that time lead has increased in price 48 percent, tin 82 per« cent, cotton 20 percent, hides 40 percent, shellac 30 percent, rubber 100 percent. All this is costing the taxpayer additional money-—~money which could have been saved if prices and wages had been pegged down at the June 25 level, and held there. I and many others urged this action when Con- gress was considering price- and wage-con- trol legislation. But the President said price and wage controls were not needed, and pur- suant to that statement Congress passed a law which did not roll back prices at all, but simply laid the matter in the lap of the President, and authorized him to impose selective controls, when and if he deemed them to be necessary. He has not seen fit to impose them up to this time, although some $3,000,000,000 has been added to the defense costs up to December because of rising prices. There has been much waste and extrava- gance in the operation of our Government. Last year I served upon a subcommittee which investigated overstafing in Govern- ment agencies. We found in that investiga- tion many instances of hiring employees who were not needed. We found, for instance, that one agency maintained a purchasing department employing 197 persons, to procs ess purchase orders, Fifty percent of the orders issued were for less than 820 each, and the average workload was 2.4 orders per day, for the 197 persons, and half of those orders were for items costing less than $20. In one branch of the agency the average number of orders issued per person was less than 1 per day, to be exact, 0.9 of 1 order per day, or am average of 9 orders in 10 days. This was the average for the fiscal year 1949. We found in another agency that in some sections employees went for days, and some~- times weeks, with no work whatever to do. They were instructed to charge up the time on the work sheet to the last project on which they actually worked, even though that project might have been completed days, and even weeks, in the past. In still another agency, we found that it cost an average of $13.78 to issue a purchase order, and the orders were issued for items costing as little as 32 cents. One branch of the agency had an order issued to purchase a copy of Esquire magazine costing 50 cents. We face the fact that American prestige has fallen greatly in world opinion, and un- doubtedly has reached Its lowest point within the past 50 and possibly within the last 100 years. In 18 of the past 20 years the Federal Government has operated on a deficit basis, In only 2 of the past 20 years has the Fed- eral Government operated within its income. They were 1947 and 1948. Our national debt has reached the figure of $257,000,000,000, This national debt is nearly twice the total assessed value of all real and personal prop- erty in the United States in 1940 as shown by the United States census for that year; 1940 was the last such calculation. The exact figure was $143,281,928,000. Our na- tionel debt is nearly twice that sum. It is not my purpose, however, to enu- merate the mistakes we have made. I am not referring to those I have mentioned merely to criticize, I mention them because they are a part of the background of our present condition. Sensible people profit by thelr mistakes, If we are sensible, and see
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ship fidence of the people; end unity which will throw the unified efforts of the people squarely behind our leaders. The President cals for untty, and we have never needed unity more than we need ft now. Yet be continues to obstract unity by insist- ing wpom his so-called civil rights measures and other radical legislative proposals which originated through efforts to eater to minor- bills, the Brannan farm plan, socialized medi- cine, repeal of the Taft-Hartley luw, and all the other of the so-called civil rights bill and the so-called fair deal pro- gram, In a backhanded effort in behalf of unity, the President left out some of these items in his state of the Union address to Congress on January 8. Yet in the budget message, delivered a week later on January 15, the President renewed his demand for FEPC legistation. He reiter- ated hie call for compulsory health insur- anee, which ts the entering wedge to soctal- ized medicine, for the principles of the Brannan farm plan, and for other portions of the so-called fair deal program which Con- gress has refused to enact imto law. ‘Theee proposals do not contribute to unity. They create discord and disunity, and make it harder to perform tasks which are already dificult. Rumors are rife that many of the lame- duck New Dealers, who were defeated for House and Senate posts in the 1950 elections wifl be placed in Federal jobs by the Prest- dent. Rumors are also rife that while no effort will be made at present to repeal the Taft-Hartley law, efforts will be mede to nul- lify many of its provisions by Executive order, and by writing provisions into Government contracts to accomplish the same purpose. I venture the prediction also that although refused last year to enact an FEPO bil, as it has consistently refused to do tn the past, Mr. Truman will shortly flout the will of Congress and set up an FEPC com- mission by Executive order, and thus through Exeeutive order place into effect provisions which Congress has over and over refused to enact. Unity is needed In our defense efforts. But, unity does not consist of an unquestioning biind acceptance, without study and without examination, of every comelusion and policy advanced by the executive department. That kind of unity fe the unity of dicta- torship. The greet superiority of our form of government ts in large measure due to the fact that the citimens have # voice in our Government, can participate in shaping its policies, and thus have real unity. Por the tmmediate future our task is to map out a program to win this battle for survival. For our own preservation, we are going to have to map out a program of action after mature consideration. When the program has been decided upon, we are el going to have to support tt to the Umit of our ability. Taking up the first question, how to avotd a third world war, the broad over-all plan is to build up military strength as quickly as possible. Such s program appeating on its face easy to a , in fect involves many complexities, and is fraught with many dangers. To begin with, it involves a stag- germg cost. Secondly, it brings a threat of yunawsy inflation. In building up mili- tary strength quickly we will have to feet our way at first. We could easily make grave and sertous mistakes, mistakes which can be Good men, mon of ability, differ in their views regarding methods of building up mii. itary strongth and regarding disposition of that strength. Diverse views are held, ae to whether we should strengthen Korea, or strengthen onr forces tn Burope, or build up our strength and keep it in America; as to whether we should reduce the Graft age to 18 years, or keep the prevent minimum of 19 years. Reasons can be advanced to support each ond all of these proposals. Much discue- ston has been had pro and con regarding them. Arrival at the correct answers In- volves questions both of foreign policy and domestic podicy We found ourselves, through the action of President Truman, very suddenly involved in the Korean conflict. We have found that it was much easier to get in this con- Hiict than to get out of it, Our soldiers, comprising the great bulk of the so-called United Nations forces, have faced heavy fighting, cruel hardships, and mounting casualties. With the entry of China into this conflict we are greatly outnumbered. We cannot afford to win that conflict on the basis of equal castalttes. That would be no victory for us. We cannot afford to win tt by exact ing two Communist casualties for ome of ours. It would be too costly for us to win it even on a casualty ratto of four to one. We cannot efford a victory at that price. Apparently it is a part of Russia's plan to mancuver us into fringe wars with Rus- sian satelHtes, wars which will destroy our Manpower and use up our resources without Soviet Russia being called upon to fire a shot or send a single soldier into hattle. Por practical purposes we are at war with China now. There are three possible courses open to us, ang necessity requires that we make an elec- tion whieh one or more of these courses we will follow. They are: First, reinforce our forces in Korea with enough manpower and equipment to drive the Communists out of Korea. This possi- bility can be written off. We do not have the personnel and equipment required. Second, withdraw entirely from Korea to Japan and abandon Korea to the Chinese and North Korean Communists; or Third, withdraw to the Pusan area and hold a beachhead there while giving asstst- ance to Chiang Kai-shek and his Chinese Nationalists so that they can fight the Com- munists in Korea and on the matniand of China. I believe the last is our best course. I be- lieve we should adopt it, and as soon as Chiang Kai-ehek’s forces can be placed imto the fleld in Koren I believe American troops should be withdrawn from Korea and let the Chinese Nationalists fight the Chinese Com- munists. While this is being done, I favor butiding up our military strength in the United States to a minimum of 3,000,000 personnel, and adequately equipping them with modern, effective planes, ships, guns, tanks, radar, rockets, and other necessary equipment. Constitutional provisions and require- ments should be strictly followed and ed- hered to in every stage, and at every step in our dealing with member nations of the At- lantic Pact, and with other foreign govern- ments. Qur Constitution provides that Congress haa the power to deciar war, and to provide for the defense and general welfare of the country. It provides that the President ta the Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces when they sre called into service. The President has recently asserted in substance that be has the power to send troons to Europe, without the consent of Congress: that he is willing to consult with Congres, but doses not have to accept the opinion ASST of Congress. What he meena by that I do not know. What he intends to do I do not know. But these important decisions enould be the result of joint action by the President and Congress. Whatever may be the tendency of the President, however, it is the duty of the Members of Congress, who are the direct representatives of the people, to stand their group, to instst om stri¢t recognition of con- stitutional provisions, and to yield to no attempts or efforts to usurp legistative func- tions etther by the President, the miHtary, or anyone else. Congress holds the purse strings, and can make tte influence felt in al! these matters, tf it has the will to do so. With reference to our obligations to other nations, the duty reste upon the other mem~- ber nations of the Atlantic Pact equally to bestir themselves, to also speedily increase their military strength, to also build up thetr personnel and equipment, and to recognize the fact that the protection of Europe from Communist Ruseta ts their primary respon~ sibility, and not the primary responstbility or obligation of the United States. The other Atlantic Pact nations have not only up to this time demonstrated a willing- ness to accept their part of the responstbil- ity, and carry thelr share of the burden. They must accept that responsibility, and carry that share of the burden. Their proper relation to us tg that of allies, not wards. For the time being, we have no more troops to send them, and we will not have troops to send them until such troops have been inducted and properly trained. The time and circumstances of sending any more troops to Europe must be determined, toa great extent, by the action of the Atian- tic Pact nations themselves from this time on. It should be our policy, and should be made distinct and clear to the Atlantic Pact nations, that America will not defend a na- tion which -:tll not defend itself; that these nations mint prepare themselves to the limit of thoi ability with their own man- power and their own resources. We have demonstrated our willingness to aseist these nations by the billions of dol- lars we have poured into their countries in recent years. However, we cannot hone to send to Europe enough American soldiers to match the militons of men kept under arms by Russia and her satellites. In the President's budget message sent to Congress Monday, he called for unity, for o spirit af dedication on the part of everyone, for more years of military service, for longer and harder hours of work, and for heavier taxes. If the people reepond to these requests for unity and sacrifice, and I have no doubt that they will respond, it is not asking too much of the Government to cooperate in bringing about this unity; and to cooperate in every possible way to lighten the burdens which will fall upon the peopie through increased railitary service, harder work, and beavier taxes. We are called upon to burden ourselves with heavier taxes to raise additional sums estimated ali the way from sixteen billion to twenty-five billion dollars per year. This ig going to bring indescribable sacrifice to many of use. We are also called upon to fu - nish sons, husbands, and fathers for the military forces. This will mean separation of families, readjustment of life, and sub- stantial hardship through disruption of bust- ness and other activities, for those who will eventually came back and pick up civilian life where they left it. Some wil] not come baek. For them it will mean death, and to their families grief and despair. Those who are to r-ake all these sacrifices have the right to call for efficienty, good faith, economy, and the complete disregard of political considerations upon the part of the Government.
A858 It is not necessary that the entire cost of financing this increased’ military program be provided by higher taxes. A considerable of the cost of this program can be provided by cutting out unnecessary spend- ing and by economy and efficiency in Gov- ernment. Federal emp! t increased from 1,01¢,- 000 in 1940 to 2,111,000 in 1950. There has been, and is now, considerable opportunity for economy in Goverfiment in cutting off unecessary employees. I have already given you instances of useless and unnecessary employees on the Federal payroll. Within the last few days experts in Fed- eral employment and Federal fiscal affairs have pointed out where it is possible for the Government to save $7,600,000,000 per year. That statement ts not a generality. They point out where the dollars can be saved, namely 43,600,000,000 through elimination of unnecessary nondefense spending, $500,000,- 000 through reduction of civilian employees, and a reduction of $3,500,000,000 in appro- priations for foreign economic aid, which is being largely replaced by military aid, and which is due to expire a year from now at all events Such 2@ saving of #7,600,000,000 will tremendously lighten the heavy burden of additional taxes we are being called upon to pay. tf it is practical and feasible through economy and efficiency to save this money, it would be criminal not to do it. At all times, but especially in this time of sacrifice, in this time of emergency, the Gov- ernment owes a duty to the citizen to operate efficiently, economically, and without regard to political considerations. The proposed saving of $7,600,000,000 is more than 10 percent of the entire proposed Federal budget for 1952. This budget of course will not be distributed upon the popu- lation on a per capita basis. If that could be done, the share of each man, woman, and child in this country of the Federal Gov- ernment's 1952 budget would be $477, or for the average family of four persons, $1,908. If we save $7,600,000,000 by eliminating items which can be cut out, on the same basis the saving per family would be $188, which would cut the burden per family down from $1,908 to $1,720. ‘While some persons will pay more and some leas than the figures above mentioned, this does give an idea of how the cost will fall on an average basis, Certainly every effort should be made to reduce this budget one-tenth. It should be reduced even more, if possible. When the load of taxation is approaching the limit, every dollar which can be taken off 1s wel- come relief. Every dollar taken off means an appreciable lightening of the burden. To accomplish this purpose, all nondefenge spending must be reviewed and re-reviewed for the purpose of cutting it to the bone. When General Eisenhower returns from Europe and makes his report upon the atti- tude of the Atlantic Pact nations, we will have reliable information from which we can determine what we may count upon from them in the way of military personnel and other resources. When this information is et hand, we will be in position to decide whether to send more troops to Europe, and if so how many, and when they should he sent, Our security, I “believe, requires that 9 practical, workable system of universal mili. tary training be installed. It is possible to provide, and a plan of universal military training should be provided, which will ft in with the educational plans and needs of our youth. Universal military training can be provided which will not conflict with educational programs, but which, on the con- trary, will ald the youth of our country to obtain high-school education, as well aa a college education for qualified and ambitious youths, In conclusion, the situation today as I see it, stated briefly, is this: First. We can have peace. Our greatest hope for peace Hes in quickly building up our military strength. Second. We can preserve individual liberty and free enterprise. To do this we must pre- vent disastrous inflation. Runaway inflation would bring with it such regimentation that free enterprise would be destroyed. Pay- ment for our military program on & pay-as- you-go plan will go far toward preventing disastrous inflation. Price and wage con- trols will help this effort. Third. The cost of this program must be met by greatly increased taxes, by strict economy, and efficiency in Government, and by discontinuing all unnecessary nondefense spending, Inaugural Address of James F. Byrnes as Governor of South Carolina in Colum- bia, S. C., January 16, 1951 EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. L. MENDEL RIVERS OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23,1951 Mr. RIVERS. Mr. Speaker, Tuesday last South Carolina inaugurated a new Governor—our former Member of the House, Member of the Senate, Justice of the Supreme Court, and assistant to the President of the United States—the Honorable James Francis Byrnes, a na- tive of my city of Charleston, S.C. Distinguished men from every walk of life journeyed to Columbia, 8. C., to wit- ness this ceremony. So astronomically stupendous was the crowd that it was impossible to estimate the actual num- r, Many people in this Nation were dis- appointed because they expected our Governor to enter into a tirade designed to further add to the disunity of our people. Many were hopeful that he would add to the petty bickering which has rent and torn our Democratic Party in the past few years. Mr. Speaker, he surprised them all. Our distinguished new Governor said what we South Carolinians knew he would say. He addressed his remarks to the protection of democracy in South Carolina, the Nation, and the world. He gave notice to all people that South Carolina would defend demecracy in South Carolina and in the Nation. He rose to the true heights of his national and international figure. Mr, Speaker, Governor Byrnes dem- onstrated his place among the statesmen of the world, In the days that lie ahead this Nation will hear more of Gov. James Francis Byrnes, He is a man who is not afraid to speak. Ho is a man who will speak, This Nation, Mr. Speaker, will be @ greater nation because Governor Byrnes now commands a forum which few men in this Nation can hope to en- joy. His address was as follows: The large percentage of votes received by me in the Democratic primary last summer, together with the many evidences of good will received since then, have made me very APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD grateful, very humble, and somewhat em- barrassed, I am embarrassed because I real- ize fully my inability to accomplish tn the administration of State affairs what is ex- pected of me. Even so it is my purpose and my determination to give to this State and its people the best there is in me, Within the next few days I shall send to the legislature specific recommendations on &@ number of subjects. At this time I refer generally to a few. I recommend that the legislature submit to the people at the next general election a proposal for a constitutional convention to draft a new constitution. I recommend that the legislature ratify the three amendments to the constitution ap- proved at the recent election, including the amendment repealing the provision requir- ing paymeni of a poll tax ag a requisite for suffrage. My investigation of the State government confirms an opinion I have long held, based on knowledge of the Federal Government, that the nearest approach to immortality on earth is a Government bureau. ‘ A beginning has been made to effect the purposes of our Reorganization Act but we still have in the executive department more than 60 independent agencies and commis- sions, JI urge that many of these be consoli- dated, and some abolished. We are a law-abiding people. Criminal statistics show that in proportion to our population, we have fewer violators of the law than most States. However, we do have &@ few people who want to take the law into their own hands and regulate the morals and habits of others. If a man violates the law he should be ar- rested by local officers. If they fail to act and complaint is made to the State law enforcement division, the offender will be ar- rested. If a man does not violate the law, no group of men has the right to assault him or to threaten and intimidate him. I recommend that the legislature enact a law similar to the Alabama statute prohibit- ing persons over 16 years of age parading on the streets or highways while masked, and also to prohibit such persons entering upon the premises of a citizen to threaten or intimidate him. In this State there can be but one gov- ernment, a government of the people under law. There can be but one governor, elect- ed by the people, whose duty it is to see that the law is enforced. I am going to be that governor. I do not need the assistance of the Ku Klux Klan nor do I want inter- ference by the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. If we demand respect for State rights, we must discharge State responsibilities, <A primary responsibility of a State is the edu- cation of its children, We have made great progress in that field. We spend for educa- tion more money in proportion to the in« come of the State than 1s spent on an aver- age nationally. While we have done much, we must do more. It must be our goal to provide for every child in this State, white cr colored, at least & grade school education. We must grant an increase in the pay for school teachers, and we must improve our school transportation system. We will never be able to give the boys and girls in the rural sections of the State the school buildings and equipment to which they are entitled as long as these facilities are furnished only by taxes on the real property of s school district. Funds spent for school buildings by local governments should be supplemented by a State building program. This program will involve the issuance over a period of 20 years of bonds to provide $76,000,000 for school construction. I shall submit a special mes- sage to the general assembly on this subject.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Preference in construction should be given. where the need is greatest. Fifty percent of the bullding program should be for schools for colored children. Construction should begin as soon as the national emergency permits. One cannot speak frankly on this subject without mentioning the race problem. It is our duty to provide for the races sub- stantial equality in school facilities. We should do tt because it ts right. For me that is sufficient reason. If any person wants an additional reason, I say it ts wise. Our Constitution provides there shall be separate schools for white and colored children. More than half a century ago the United States Supreme Court held that such a provision was not in conflict with the United States Constitution provided the facilities for the races were equal. Last spring the Democratic administration in Washington caused the United States At- torney General to intervene in several cases and urge on behalf of the United States Gov- ernment that the Court repudiate this de- cision and declare unconstitutional any law requiring separation of the races. The Su- preme Court did not pass upon the question, Cases are now pending in the lower courts in this and in other States which will go to the Supreme Court, in which the complain- ants follow the lead of tho President and ask the Court to abolish segregation in all schools. We must assume the administra- tion will again urge the Court to repudiate what is now the law of the land. I am hopeful that the Supreme Court will deny this appeal. The Court appreciates the necessity for continuity of law and the evil results that flow from uncertainty as to the law. I am hopeful, too, that if in a given case there is shown an honest effort to pro- vide substantial equality of facilities, 1t will favorably influence the opinion of the Court, This ts not a local problem. The races are separated in the schools of at least 17 States of the Union, as well as the District of Co- lumbia, under the jurisdiction of the Con- TBs. 8 What the leaders of the administration do not realize is that if they succeed in abol- ishing segregation they will thereby endanger the public-school system in many States. The overwhelming majority of colored peo- ple in this State do not want to force their children into white schools. Just as the Negro preachers do not want their congre- gations to leave them and attend the churches of white people, the Negro teach- ers do not want their pupils to leave them and attend schools for white children. Except for the professional agitators, what the colored people want, and what they are entitled to, Js equal facilities in their schools. We must see that they get them. Our hope must be that in this perilous pe- riod the natlonal administration will not urge either political proposals or socialistic programs which are certain to divide our people. But let there be no misunderstand- ing. While we will continue to oppose such proposals, the governor of South Carolina and the people of South Carolina will loyally support the foreign policy of the Government of the United States. In these days when the free world is threatened by a fanatical ideology, bent on world conquest, our duty to this Republic and to the world must be met with a display of unity. This is not only our duty; it is r at opportunity. ovThe last vestige of isolation left the shores of America on the wings of the plane that carried the first atomic bomb to Hiroshima. That bomb brought an end to the war with Japan. The ending of that war brought to us the leadership of the free peoples of the world. Now when freedom is threatened, free men and women must stand together, We in America must give to them the lead- ership expected of ug because we love peace and have the power to defend it, In the defense of our common Hberty, there is not place for political partisanship. At the water's edge, let us stand together. A united America is civilization’s last clear chance for survival. A divided America is the greatest temptation to Soviet conquest. We cannot meet the perils of this day with a Republican policy or a Democratic policy. We must have an American policy. The President of the United States is re- sponsible for the conduct of our foreign af- fairs. He cannot abdicate his responsibil- ity. But in the exercise of that difficult task he needs and should have the cooperation of all loyal Americans, regardless of their views on domestic questions. If we are to have a bipartisan policy, the President should consult the leaders of the minority political party before and not after basic decisions of policy are made. Once de- Cieions are made, consultation is a sham. A nonpartisan or bipartisan policy does not call for the suppression of honest debate and discussion. Neither the executive nor the legislative branch of Government has a monopoly of wisdom and virtue Responsible leaders can and should be as- sisted by constructive discussion of our for- eign policies, but that discussion should be dispassionate and dignified—not demagogic and destructive. But these are not ordinary times and we should welgh our words. In the United Nations Charter we pledged ourselves to resist aggression. When the Communists in North Korea invaded the South Korean Republic we redeemed that pledge. We have borhe the brunt of that fight. We were disappointed that the nations which voted with us to condemn the ag- gression did not contribute more troops to fight the invaders. But we discharged our duty. The North Korean aggressors were driven back and rendered powerless. Then when the people of America were made happy by the hope that our boys would be on their way home by Chrisimas, we were confronted with another and totally different war of aggression. Communist China at- tacked the forces of the United Nations. They have now invaded South Korea. The greatly outnumbered soldiers of the United Nations, fighting as valiantly as have any soldiers in the history of the world, are forced to retreat. No army has ever fought with such crip- pling limitations. Our Air Force controls the sky but cannot attack the supply bases of the enemy in Manchuria. In effect, our right arm is tied as the enemy advances. The United States has called on the United Nations to declare Communist China guilty of aggreasion, The governments that did not hesitate promptly to brand North Korea as an aggressor hesitate now to declare Com- munist China an aggressor. As Chinese Communists dally Kill the soldiers of the United Nations, the govern- ments for which they die are fearful of offending China and the Soviets. If the United Nations is unwilling prompt- ly to declare China an aggressor, authorize our Air Force to attack the supply bases of the enemy, and join in blockading China, then our forces should be withdrawn from Korea. I am aware that some of our allies fear if China is declared an aggressor and the Air Force authorized to bomb supply bases in Manchuria, it may provoke Russia to war. That is the counsel of fear which I reject. If Rusaia is ready and willing to make war on the United Nations, she will want no such excuse. But if the time is approaching when Ruse sla will be ready to go to war, then it ts not wise to have our Army divided between Korea and Europe. To my mind western H Europe ts an indispensable first line in the defense of civilization. We should concen- trate our forces in Europe. It ts sald that Western European govern+ ments have not raised armies for thelr own defense. In view of our record, we should not complain. In March 1948, after Ceecho- slovakia had fallen, I made a speech at the South Carolina Military Academy urging that it was so clear the Soviets planned domina- tion of the world, we should cease all non-’ defense expenditures ond fmmediately draft men to increase our military forces. Many others made similar pleas. Little was done. On the home front similar delay in freez- ing prices and wages will hamper the Gov- ernment and punish the peuple. In the last war when I was appointed Director of Economic Stabilization I found that the failure to freeze prices and wages at the outset threatened the economy. Upon my recommendation President Roosevelt issued the hold-the-line order. That Mine was held. Every day it is now delayed, there will be more inequities, higher prices, and addi- tional cost to the taxpayer. It took Korea to waken us from our slumbers. Now we must rouse our friends in Europe. We must impress upon them that the time has come to stop talking and begin acting. Since last September we have been dis- cussing with France and Britain what Mm- tations should be placed on military forces recruited in Western Germany. That time should haye been spent encouruging Western Germany to raise an army. The German Republic that we sponsored should be treated on terms of equality. Only in this way can we expect men to have their hearts in a cause. More than a mil- Non of the German prisoners taken to Rus- sia have never been returned. They con- stitute a million reasons why the people of Western Germany, if treated fairly, will fight with us. And they know how to fight. Since 1945, France has used its influence to prevent Britain and the United States from sending an Ambassador to Spain. We should send Spain more than an Ambaassa-. dor. We should send military supplies as rapidly as possible. Spain has more divi- sions of trained soldiers than any of the Western European governments. We should seek the friendship of Tito and furnish military supplies to Yugoslavia. Tito has trained soldiers. They are brave soldiers. We should impress upon Britain, France, and all of Western Europe that we want the American esoaldiers who fight in Europe to have the help of the soldiers of every nu- tion willing to oppose aggression by the atheistic Communisis of Russia. whe argument that additional troops should not be sent to Europe cannot be ige- nored. It cannot be answered by the state- ment that we must comply with our obliga tions. The Atlantic Treaty and the United Nations do not require us to act except in case Of aggression. But there is a require- ment more urgent than these—the require- ment of self-defense. Self-preservation de- mands that we act before the Soviets strike, If we wait until the Soviet troops invade Western Europe, it will be too late for us to send an army to Europe to be integrated with an army of Western Europe under the command of General Eisenhower. The people of America have confidence in the intelligence and the integrity of Gen- eral Eisenhower. If after investigation he is satisfied that the governments of Western Europe are ready and willing to make sac- rifices and put armies into the field to de- fend their own freedom, the American people will accept his recommendation. T hope Congress will then adopt an affirm- ative proposal that the United States should
A360 furnish its proportion of that army of free- dom. Congressional approval will restore unity, It will put an end to debate at home, It will put at rest one of the greatest fears in the minds and hearts of the people of Western Europe—the fear of a divided America. I have no fear of what Congress wil do. The people of America do not want to sit on the side lines and permit Stalin to take control of all Europe. They know that when the Soviets reach the shores of the Atlantic, their atomic bombs will be 2,000 miles nearer our shores. ‘They know, too, that if we abandon Europe to the Soviets, we will abandon the air bases now ayailable to us, from which, in case of aggression, we can send planes to drop bombs on Russia, No man knows what the Kremlin will do. But I know that the Soviet leaders under- stand only the language of force. A firm stand by a united people may de- ter them from war. A timid course by 4 divided people will certainly encourage them to make war. Such a war would threaten the destruction of every vestige of our freedom—religious, economic, and political. I pray 1t will never come. But should 15 come, the Nation may rely upon it that the people of South Caro- lina will do their full part, fighting for God and for country. Secretary of Defense General Marshall States His Basis for Draft of 18-Year- Olds EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLYDE DOYLE OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23,1951 Mr, DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, this morn- ing, aS a member of the House Armed Services Committee, I heard the distin- guished General Marshall, Secretary of Defense, who has again answered the call of our beloved Nation, testify and answer questions for 24 hours. The text of his prepared testimony as given to us in this public or open meet- ing of the committee is so important to all America and comes in connection with the study by the committee of H. R. 1752, which is proposed as an amend- ment to the Selective Service Act of 1948 (62 Stat. 604 as amended). It is commonly called the universal military training bill, T am sure having the full text of his testimony to read and digest will be of great value to all my colleagues as well as others also vitally concerned. It con- cerns the destiny of every moment of American life. Statement or Genera, MansHALL Burorz House Armrxp Seavicers Commitrzz, Tuzs- DAY, JANUARY 238, 1051 Today no voice is listened to in our troubled world unless it has adequate steel to support it. The most effective contribution we can make to our own security and the preserva- tion of peace js to provide clearcut unequivs ocal proof that we can, first, attain, and sec. ond, maintain, the military strength we need &s long as world peace remains insecure. The practical solution to both our imme- diate and our long-range problems Hes in the adoption of a syatem of universal mili- tary service and training. The bill we have submitted to your committee would give us the authority to create the strength that is needed today. It would give us the authority to provide, for the frst time, the assurance that our long-term requirements could be met on an adequate basis. The first part of our job, that of building up our forces to the level made necessary by the existing crisis, must be carried for- ward rapidly. The Joint Chiefs of Staff have set 3,462,000 men as the goal we must reach by June 80. This is roughly 1,000,000 beyond our present strength, but we will have to increase our forces beyond this strength if the situation worsens. The second part of our job, that of pro- viding now for the maintenance of a strong military posture on an enduring basis, is equally imperative. In the past it has been our habit after victory to emasculate our military power and leave ourselves impotent before the world— impotent to defend the peaceful principles that have always been in our American tradi- tion. If we give the other nations of the world any basis for believing that we may again weary of the need for keeping our strength at a high level, the inevitable result will be to encourage those who plot against us and discourage all of those who have made com- mon cause with us. It is the terrible and continuing threat of aggression that makes universal service and training the imperative response of our de- mocratic Nation today. Without such a program we would risk again having our defenses reduced in periods of complacency to a level far below our needs and then be obliged to race uphill again in turbulent, wasteful rearmament in the emo- tional resurgence after danger again becomes glaringly apparent. There have been too many such occasions in the past. That mistake we must now correct, and at the same time set our guard against its repe- tition. There must be no repetition of past invitations to disaster. The speed and destructiveness of present methods of warfare makes it imperative that we place our security on a firm base. We should proceed with the development of our military strength in personnel on the same basis that we are arranging for matériel, to make possible a tremendously rapid expan- sion of our military forces in an effective manner whenever that becomes neceszary. The program we have developed is within our capacity -to support through the years of tension that we may have to endure. It will permit us to meet our urgent immediate military necessities and also will set us on @ course for the first time in our history that will give us a reasonable prospect of an en- during posture of military strength, and without bankrupting us in the process. Under its provisions no man physically able to share in the common military de- fense will be free to stand aside and ignore his obligation as a citizen. The period for entering upon service and training would be the year between a man's eighteenth and nineteenth birthdays. This age is recom- mended because it represents the judgment ef educators, industrialists, and others who are expert in their field, that this is the period in a man's life when there would be least dislocation if he is called up for service and training. Few men of 18 are married or have children; fewer probably have en- tered college or started on their life work. From the standpoint of the men and from the standpoint of the community—industry, agriculture, education, science, and family responsibilities, this appears to be the logical year in which the national obligation for military service should be fulfilled. From my own experience I can state that men of 18 are among our best soldiers, They APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD are brave; they are strong; they perform their duties with patriotic dedication and under- standing. Thousands of them volunteer each year because of their eagerness to participate in the great mission of national defense. Then, also, when these young men come out of the Armed Forces, they are much better equipped, I am sure, to enter upon useful lives as good citizens in every field of civil- fan endeavor. I do not present this as @ reason for calling them into service; it is cited as an objective fact well supported by the records of the millions of young veterans who are now making a tremendous contribu- tion to our national life, It is our desire, it is our intention that none of the men between the ages of 18 and 19 who are inducted at the start of the universal military service and training pro- gram would be sent into combat areas until they have passed their nineteenth birthday. I shall not go into the details of these plans, They will be outlined fully by Secretary Rosenberg and the military authorities, When you hear them, I think you will be satisfied that it is unlikely, barring a dire emergency, that anyone will be sent into combat before he is 19. But I must say in this connection that I very much hope you will not impose a legal limitation barring the assignment of such men to combat duty. No one can foretell the character ani degree of hostile action that might be launched against us, except that certainly it would be in a manner to gain the tremendous advantage of surprise, and certainly 1t would be utterly ruthless in conception and execution. In .uch a dire emergency we should be free to act instantly and as effectively as possible, that is, without strings attached. We must not be handi- capped by limitations of virtually any kind at such a moment when our national exist- ence is at stake. There is one other phase of our proposal which I should like to bring especially to your attention. It is the recommendation to extend the period of service for men inducted through selective service from 21 months to 27. From a purely military point of view, it would have been desirable to request an even longer period of service than 27 months. Our forces need many specialists and technicians today, and it takes a long time to make them expert in their work. To return most of these men to civil life just as they reach the period of greatest value to the Government is a defi- nite and really severe handicap to the effi- ciency of the milttary effort. We realize that we cannot well insist on holding men simply because it is desirable from a military viewpoint, or because it would result in a considerable saving of tax funds by obtaining this increased return on the training investment. The important consideration is that the 27-month period represents the minimum term we consider consistent with the urgent needs of an effi- clent military organization in the present period of world tension. ‘Je feel that the 27-months period should apply until the continued operation of universal military service and training has enabled us to reduce our forces on active duty and to transfer a larger share of responsibility to the Reserve. The bill allows for this flexibility. It authorizes the President to reduce the period of service whenever the national security permits. He could eventually withdraw the service requirement entirely, but the obliga- tioy for training would remain, so that young men would always be coming forward to build up a vigorous, strong Reserve. Such a system would give us, I feel, the kind of basic protection we need to keep us strong with minimum drain on our productive energies, Universal military service and training is in the best democratic tradition. It is within our capacity to support through the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD years. It will permit us to build up our strength quickly in the present emergency. It will provide @ system for procuring and maintaining & reserve of trained manpower. It will give us the enduring system of national defense that our country has always needed—a posture of strength to aggression, a reserve of power to marshal in an emergency. Why Americans Don’t Vote EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JACOB K. JAVITS OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, January 8, 1951 Mr. JAVITS. Mr. Speaker, I have in- troduced a new resolution for the ap- pointment of a special committee of the House of Representatives to make a study of the problems involved in non- voting, having sponsored a similar reso- lution in the Eighty~first Congress. It should be noted that 1950 made an off-year voting record with 42,324,232 votes cast, which was still only 60.5 per- cent of the estimated eligible voters and 43.7 percent of the potential voters—over 21 years old. In connection with the introduction of this resolution I am also releasing an analysis of over 600 responses received in answer to an article which appeared last fall in This Week, a Sunday supple- ment magazine, which asked the follow- ing question: “Why don't you always vote?” It is estimated that over 9,500,- 000 people had an opportunity to read this article. The replies came from all over the country and have been analyzed by the Legislative Reference Service of the Library of Congress. Nonvoters, based upon these replies, are found in six catego-ies in order of size, as follows: First, lack of reliable information on candidates, 37 percent; second, voter has little choice in selecting a candidate, 25 percent; third, voting is too difficult, 14 percent; fourth, legal restrictions, 12 percent; fifth, political corruption, 7 per- cent; and, sixth, miscellaneous, 5 percent. A typical reply from those who did not consider themselves well enough in- formed about the candidates to make an. intelligent choice said, “The majority of people who do not vote have decided they do not know enough about the candi- dates running to vote for them.” The second group which was critical of the way the candidates were chosen was typified by the following reply from 4 businessman of Los Angeles, Calif.: I believe one reason for the low vote is that we are only rarely given a clear choice, The Republican and Demooratic parties uo- der our present setup are largely tweedle- dum and tweediedee. Among the 14 percent who complained about voting processes being too anti- quated and cumbersome, a New York City woman said that she had to spend a full hour in order to register to vote. Others complained that the ballot was too long and in the case of amendments to a State constitution or city charter too complicated for the ordinary voter. One California voter sent a sample ballot with sample literature all in fine print which would have taken an hour to read alone. Among the fourth group of involuntary nonvoters the breakdown was as follows: Percent 1. Por nonpayment of the poll tax..... 3 2. Failure to establish residence within the time limit to vote.....----..--- 3 3, Unable to get time off from work to a vote ...00. 2-222. 4. Away from home on election day.... 2 5. Unable to vote because of residence 12 Among the fifth group of those who did not vote because of political cor- ruption a number of correspondents blamed lobbying, gangsters, and racke- teers, In the miscellaneous sixth group most of those who wrote said they were unwilling to give vital statistics like their age to the registrar of elections or were afraid to get on the jury list by register- ing to vote. The survey showed strong opposition to compulsory voting, generally on the ground that it would interfere with a free and considered decision. Ten per- cent of those who wrote suggested ways to improve voter participation. Eight different methods and the percentages of those making suggestions proposing them are listed as follows: Percent 1. Use modern promotion methods_._._- 22 2. Make the act of voting easler.......-- 21 3. Relax absentee voting laws......--.- 15 4. Enact a compulsory vote law..--..---- 18 6. Supply unbiased, concise and clear in- formation on candidates and issues. 14 6. Allow a tax exemption for voting--... 6 7. Let election day be a national holiday. 6 8. Relax residence requirements......... 2 Several vote-promoting schemes were proposed by the respondents; however, three striking ones are given heie: A lady in Ironwood, Mich., suggests that spot announcements urging people to vote be broadcast over the radio—‘per- baps as often as every 15 minutes”"—on election day. A pipefitter in Bensenville, I., pro- poses a national lottery for the twofold purpose of paying the national debt and encouraging voting. His idea is that a citizen would not be eligible for a lottery ticket unless he could furnish evidence that he had voted. . Since gambling seems to be an inherent part of the makeup of most people, such a lottery would draw on such instincts, forcing the people at the same time to vote. A Chicago lawyer suggests that the Congress authorize and direct the Post- master General to place in each mail box, the day before election, a reminder to vote, reading somewhat as follows: Tomorrow Is Exxcriow Dar I am directed by the Congress of the United State to notify you of this election and earnestly urge you to exercise your precious right of citizenship by voting. "These responses also brought out what was being done in individual commu- nities to stimulate voting. For instance, & woman in Los Angeles forwarded a A361 printed card reminding her to vote. This card was sent, together with her monthly statement, by a public-spirited firm in thet city. In Edina, Minn., $3,000 handbills, reminding citizens to vote, were published and distributed, as an exercise of good citizenship, by eleventh grade students of the Edina-~ Morningside High School. A transporte- tion union devoted the November issue of its monthly trade journal, the Motor- man, Conductor, and Motor Coach Operator, to the importance of voting. A copy of this issue was mailed to Rep- resentative Javits. In one case, a veterans’ chapter memo- rialized the Illinois delegation in the Congress to support my resolution to authorize the Speaker of the House to appoint a select committee to investigate the reasons for nonvoting in the United States. Other individuals and groups sent manuscripts, literature, and pam- phiets. Even a card game, called Good- deal was invented to stimulate an interest in politics and voting. A survey of State governors which I made on this resolution in 1950 showed strong sentiment in favor of an investi- gation by the Congress of why more Americans do not vote. Iam going to work hard for passage of my resolution at this session and I have received encouragement from the leadership on both sides of the aisle as well as many Members since my resolu- tion was introduced and the active dis- cussion on the subject, which it has touched off, began. The United States is facing the most critical decisions in its history. We need the most voters to participate in making these decisions and we also need to show the best ex- ample of widespread public participa- tion in making them to free peoples everywhere. Is It To Be One-Man Rale? EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW TORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 17, 1951 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend, heretofore grant- ed, I am inserting in today’s Recorp an article entitled “No One-Man Rule,” which appeared in the Wall Street Jour- nal of January 23, 1951: No Ont-Man Roce—Ir Wourn Be Impropvent ror Persmenr To Act UNTLATERALLY In His Rote as COMMANDER IN CHIEF oF ARMED Forces (By W.illam Henry Chamberlin) No sentiment in President Truman's State of the Union message to Congress sroused heartier applause than the declaration that we do not have and never will have a dicta- torship in this country. That word never has sounded well in American ears. And now it is loaded with the odium of the tre- mendous crimes against humanity associated with the Nazi and Communist regimes. Unfortunately the President's assertion that he possesses the right to send addi- tional American troops to Surope without
A362 consulting Congress has raised a specter of dictatorship and introduced an unnecessary ¢lement of doubt and division into the con- duot of our foreign affairs, What is of pri- mary importance in this matter is not what the President may have a right to do, but what is wise and expedient for him to do. HIGHLY IMPAUDENT TO ACT ALONE Assuming that the President, as Com- mander in Chief, possesses the constitu- tional power to send troops where he may see fit, it would still be highly imprudent for him to make an important policy de- eiston, such as the commitment of consid- erable American forces to Europe, without assuring himself of the backing of the ma- jority of the American people. Under our representative form of government, the only effective means of testing public senti- ment is full, frank debate in Congress, with Government executive agencies making available all the information that can be revealed, subject to reasonable require- ments of military and diplomatic secrecy. Historically the President’s powers as Commander in Chief are broad and have never been successfully challenged in the courts or by the more formidable process of impeachment. Nor has Congress ever at- tempted to thwart a Presidential decision by exercising its constitutional right to re- fuse appropriations which would be needed to uphold this decision. However, the widest authority may be dangerously stretched by abuse. Some of the precedents tnvoked by the extreme up- holders of Presidential power are legalistic, in the narrow sense of the word, rather than convincing in terms of broad policy. There is no real analogy between Thomas Jefferson’s action in ordering a few American naval vessels to take punitive action against Barbary pirates and President Roosevelt's inauguration of an undeclared naval war with Germany in the autumn of 1941. The first action involved no risk of involvement in a major war; the second did. POLICE ACTION IN CENTRAL AMERICA It was an old practice, now happily abandoned in the interest of better inter- American relations, to land detachments of American troops, usually Marines, when riot or insurrection created danger to American and other foreign lives and property in some of the leas stable states of the Caribbean area. But such police action, which seldom involved any serious casualties, is sharply differentiated in fact, if not in law, from the sending of @ substantia! American Army to fight in Korea. After the United Nations itself, by its scuttle-and-run policy in the face of Red Chinese aggression, has destroyed the theory of collective security, there should never in the future be any question of sending Amer- ican troops into combat as champions of some United Nations decision. And the North Atlantic Pact does not carry any auto- matio obligation for this country to station any specific number of troops in the Euro- pean theater. When ratification of the pact was being discussed in the Senate, Senator Hicuxn.oorer put the following question to flecretary of State Acheson: “Are we going to be expecte.” to send sub- etantial numbers of troops over there as a more or less permanent contribution to the development of these countries’ capacity to resist?” Secretary Acheson replied: “The answer to that question, Senator, is a clear and abso- lute ‘No’.” FREE AND FRANK DISCUSSION It may, of course, be argued that the heightened tempo of Soviet aggression, as reflected in the shooting hostilities in the Far East, calla for «a reexamination and raising of American commitments under the pact. But a new policy, such as General Eisenhower may recommend on his return from Europe, should not be slipped over by Executive order. There should be free and frank discussion in the Senate and in the House, The risks of sending more troops to Europe, and of not gending troops to Europe, should be weighed and balanced in the light of the most authoritative available testimony on all the factors involved, military, political, and economic. A decision to take an active part in the land defense of Western Europe will have far more authority for the American people and far more deterrent effect on any Soviet schemes for following up its 1950 moves in Asia with 1951 moves in Europe if it is approved, after free and fair debate, by both Houses of Congress. If it cannot command such approval, the decision should not be taken. . Rigid lines have not formed on this issue of defending Hurope. Senator Tarr has been made & scapegoat in some circles for what is regarded ag the dreadful sin of isolationism. But in his long foreign-policy speech in the Senate Mr. Tarr recognized an obligation to go to war with the Soviet Union if Europe is attacked and recommended a more militant policy toward Communist China than the administration has actually followed. He suggested a large number of spots far from America’s continental borders where Amerti- can sea and air power should be exercised in case of necessity and showed an open mind about “committing some limited number of American divistons’ in Europe, Senator Tarr also declared: “The threat of communism is real. * * * America must be the leader in the battle to prevent the spread of communism and pre- serve the liberty of the world.” SPECIAL OBLIGATION TO ACT TOGETHER There is plenty of room for differences of opinion between the two main parties (and between groups within these parties) on is- sues of domestic policy. But in this critical period, for which no time limit can be set, Members of Congress and representatives of the executive branch of the Government should feel a special obligation to think and speak and vote with America's security and independence as the overruling considera- tion. No individual and no group can afford to make capital out of national peril. Every step in foreign policy should be judged, ap- proved, or disapproved not because it is of Democratic or Republican origin, not because it may be labeled interventionist or isola- tionist, not because it can be tagged with some doctrinaire formula, but solely by its impact on the national safety and interest of the United States. Dr. Townsend’s Pension Plan Is Needed More Today Than at Any Time in Our History EXTENSION OF REMARKS F HON. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL. Mr. Speaker, today those saboteurs of our home front, namely, the enemies of the elderly people and of their children, are exulting over the Social Security Act which Congress passed last year. They like to put tongue in cheek and say with mock satisfaction that so many more APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD citizens are covered under this new measure than ever before. They like to emphasize their belief that, now social security has been so per- fected, it has completely abolished the need for further pension agitation in Congress. They say that, with their heroic efforts in behalf of security for the aged, there is no justification for the continued existence of sincere, patriotic groups which advocate real old-age pen- sions for all. They take special delight in ridicul- ing the earnest, dogged attempts, to get universal justice for elderly people, of men like Dr. Francis E. Townsend, founder of the Townsend old-age insur- ance plan, and will tell you that the Government now has arrived at all his goals by the new improved Social Se- curity Act of 1950. Actually, there could be nothing further from the truth. We are still just as far from adequate old-age pensions for all as we were 50 years ago. The only thing which the new Social Security Act has demonstrated is that it was designed to help many who do not need it. I can point to several of my acquaintances who are now drawing re- tirement under the new provisions but who have privately told me they could get along without it. That leaves us, then, just as far from the original premise of bringing all Americans under a fair pension plan as we ever were. I presume the main reason the Town- send plan has come in for attacks is that it is designed to help the American people. The man who advocates any- thing like that takes his life in his hands these days. It just is not the smart thing Oo do. However, there is greater need for the Townsend plan today than ever before in history. There is more hardship and discomfort among elderly people today for want of sufficient wherewithal. I know because I receive thousands of let- ters from those living in my district, Group pension systems have sprung up by the dozens, embracing the member- ships of powerful groups which are suffi- ciently vociferous to gain the ear of Washington. These groups had laudable and worthy objectives to blanket their members into lush pension programs. John L, Lewis presented a fearful enough mien to ac- complish such a deed for his United Mine Workers. So have many others. The fact remains, however, that jus- tice has never been done to the great mass of the American people and the majority of them are still far away from suitable treatment in the all-important matter of old-age retirement, The stock comeback to this one is, let their children take care of these unfor- tunates or send them to the poorhouse. Well, their chilren cannot even take care of their own families, and we are paying welfare institutions nearly as much to feed and house these senior citizens as it would cost to pay them a direct pension. I realize the accent is off our domestic front and is concentrated almost wholly upon the subject of national defense.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Would it not, however, be a vital step in the direction of the sound economy we must attain to take these respectable mil- Hons of our population out of the pauper class by approving the Townsend plan now? After all, they are the parents of all our taxpayers and the grandparents of our fighting men. We will be ignoring the Biblical exhortation, honor thy father and thy mother, if we fail to help them, And we will deprive the Govern- ment of a vast new source of income taxes, which these older people will gladly pay to carry on our national-defense program, unless we come to their rescue. Clipping Coupons EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 17, 1951 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend heretofore granted, IT am inserting in the Recorp an article which appeared in the Wall Street Jour- nal of January 23, 1951, entitled “Clip- ping Coupons”: CLIPPING COUPONS The going currency among the grammar school set along our street has been a popular cigarette coupon. The other day we dis- covered that one bright youngster—who doubtiess will end up in Washington—had scissored all the coupons in two in order to ease 8 shortage of currency. For a while he persuaded his hapless con- temporaries to accept the new halves at face value and so managed to add considerable to his collection of cigar boxes, marbles, and other articles of wealth. Now we are be- ginning to see signs that it takes two halves to get what one once would, although since there is considerable haggling over sales it’s difficult for us to fathom the exact price scale. But on the whole our street's population has adjusted pretty well. We've noticed that adults also sometimes get confused by this two-for-one business. Recently a distinguished officer of the Government spoke proudly of the fact that the Nation's gross national product—the value of all goods and services—had risen from €108,000,000,000 back in 1929 to about 8280,000,000,000 in 1980. All this, of course, under an administration which if left undis- turbed will soon give us a gross national product of 8300,000,000,000. Well, without s doubt this country has sued tremendously since 1929. Indus- try and agriculture today produce much more of the good things than they did 20 years ago, but the figures which the good gentle- man used are just about as meaningless as the cigarette coupon statistics along our atreet, Just this week the Commerce Department mathematicians tried to straighten it out by adjusting the dollar figures to o standard 1999 dollar. The result gives quite a different pioture. For instance, using that unadjusted dollar figure it looks as though the country has increased ite gross national product by 166 percent since 1929. Actually, the Commerce Department figures that the real increase since 1929 has been only about 75 percent, & gain that is satisfactory enovgh but hardly 80 phenomenal as some folks would have us believe. The Commerce Department frankly notes that there has been a 650 percent decline in the value of a dollar bill. So what about that promised §$300,000,000,- 000 gross national product? We suggest that it will be just as easy—and Just as meaning- lese—for the Government to promise us a $600.000,009,000 gross national product. All that’s needed is to cut the dollar bill in half again and the happy day will be here. And if the people in Washington need any help, which we doubt, we know just the youngster who will show them how. The House Abdicates EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23,1951 Mr. SHAFER, Mr. Speaker, under permission to extend my remarks I in- clude the following editorial from the January 22 issue of the Chicago Tribune and commend it to those Members of the House, especially Republicans, who last Friday supported the McCormack resolu- tion calling upon the United Nations to brand the Chinese Communists aggres- sors in the Korean War: THE House ABDICATES The House of Representatives on Friday approved a resolution calling upon the United Nations immediately to declare the Chinese Communists authorities an aggressor in Korea. It is impossible to imagine a more subver- sive resolution than this one. The only Members who emerged from the incident with honor were the few Republicans— among them Woop of Idaho, Horrman and Suarer of Michigan, and Smitn of Wiscon- sin—who protested against the folly. In contrast, Representative Joz MartTIn, of Massachusetts, the minority leader, joined in sponsoring the resolution and allowed it to come to a vote without consideration in committee or party conference, without seri- ous debate, and at a session from which many Members were absent because they had been led to believe that nothing of consequence was coming up. This resolution was subversive because it was directed against the Constitution of the United States. The Constitution says that only Congress may declare war. That implies & responsibility on the part of Congressmen to weigh the facts and the circumstances for themselves in the light of this country’s in- terests and welfare. The House, instead, voted to delegate its responsibility to the pollygiot collection of foreigners who con- stitute UN and who will not send their sons to fight in China, as we know fram the ex- perience in Korea, even if sanctions are voted. Nevertheless, the House says, this outfit should be encouraged to commit the young men of America to an expanded war tn Asia. Common prudence, reinforced by the ap- palling failure of the theory of collective se- curity in Korea, should have warned against adopting the resolution. If there is one les- gon which the Korean experience should have taught Congress, it is hereafter to follow our own constitutional plan and let neither UN nor the President usurp the power of Congress. The snap vote in the House shows that one branch of Congress is willing to leave the | A363 fateful decision of war in China to UN. In the Senafe, a substantial number of the Members (we hope not a majority) have shown by thelr speeches againat the Wherry resolution that they are willing to leave the decision of participation in another European war to Mr. Truman. The arguments for and against war with China can be discussed at another time. The important thing to bear in mind now 1s that decisions for or agains: war in China, Europe, or anywhere else, should be made by Congress and only by Congress. It is sheer folly to leave the determination to UN whose mem- bers do not intend to engage in the war if they declare it although some of them may be quite willing, for their own purposes, to commit us to it. It is just as great folly to leave the decision to Mr. Truman who has shown repeated evidences of having lost whatever capacity for sound judgment he may once have had. The House Committee on Un-American Activities has never had before it a clearer case of subverting the Constitution than was provided by the House itself in voting the China resolution, The United States Marine Corps REMARKS HON. MIKE MANSFIELD OF MONTANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 2¢, 1951 Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. Speaker, a number of members of the House of Representatives are today introducing a bill to fix the personnel strength of the United States Marine Corps and to make the Commandant of the Marine Corps a permanent member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. We are being joined, in the in- troduction of this bill, by our distin- guished colleague the senior Senator from TJinois {Mr. DovGias) and upward of 40 other Senators. The introduction of this measure is not something new. On June 30, 1948, and September 8, 1950, bills similar to this one were introduced by myself and certain of my colleagues in both the House and Senate. Furthermore, the House Armed Services Committee has recommended in its B-36 report tat the Commandant of the Corps be made a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This action was unanimous. In addi- tion, the distinguished chairman of that committee, the Honorable Cari Vinson, of Georgia, stated on August 28, 1950, that he had set a goal for Marine Corps combat strength at 4 fully equipped war-size divisions and 26 air squadrons. Mr. Speaker, we need a ready striking force, we need a force in being to les- sen the drain on our reserves in the early stages of an outbreak, and we need a hard core of highly trained, effi- cient, and dependable combat troops, This means, in my opinion, that the Marine Corps must be expanded and the Commandant placed on the Joint Chiefs of Stall. This bill proposes to do just at. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted to me, I am inserting at this point in my
A364 remarks, a copy of the bill being intro- duced today, a copy of a letter’ sent out to all Members of the House by my col- league, Mr. Jackson of California, and myself, and a copy of my remarks made . in the House on September 8, 1950: A bill to fix the personnel strength of the United States Marine Corps, and to make the Commandant of the Marine Corps a permanent member of the Joint Chiefs of Btaft Be it enacted, etc., That the first sentence of section 206 (c) of the National Security Act of 19¢7 is hereby amended to read as fol- lows: “The United States Marine Corps, within the Department of the Navy, shall in- clude four full-strength combat divisions, four full-strength alr wings, and such other land combat, aviation, and other services as may be organic therein, and the personnel strength of the Regular Marine Corps shall be maintained at not less than 400,000.” 8c. 2. The Commandant of the Marine Corps shall be a permanent member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. — ConGress OF THE UNITED STATES, House or REPRESENTATIVES, Washington, D.C. Dear Couizacus: We are enclosing the draft of a proposed bill which we deem of such urgency and importance to our national security that we are inviting you to join us in its introduction. We recognize that, as former marines, we will be suspected of be- ing a little prejudiced in our proposal. We freely admit the charge. However, the Con- gress has consistently over a period of years endeavored to insure our country having at its disposal the services of an effective, com- batant Marine Corps. Notwithstanding the Congress’ intention which has been expressed in many ways, there have been continuing efforts on the part of certain of the other services to de- stroy the Marine Corps as an effective com- batant force. The situation has now reached such a critical state that only through a clear and unequivocable directive from the Con- gress can we be certain that its desires, which are the desires of the American people, will be followed. The Marine Corps, propor- tionately, has never been a large organiza. tion. It has always been a most economical and efficient part of our fighting forces. There is every reason to believe that more than ever we need the combat ability which the Marine Corps has again demonstrated in Korea. The reasons why this legislation is impera- tive at the present time are manyfold. Bast- cally, it stems from the fact that while the other services are expanding tremendously in organizational structure, the Marine Corps is being held practically to the same level that it had at the start of Korean hostilities, The Army is being authorized a large number of combatant divisions, approximately 28 in number. The Air Force, which was only re- cently operating with 48 groups, is now being authorized well over a hundred. The Navy is expanding and breaking !ts combatant ves- gels out of lay-up at an extremely rapid rate. The United States Marine Corps which had two divisions at the start of the Korean war is being permitted to organize only one ad- Gitional combat team. Its proven close-air~ support squadrons are not even being ex- panded to the 24 squadrons which are re- quired for the 2 divisions. They are being held at 21 squadrons. This ia not happenstance, it merely is an implementation of the philosophy which certain of the other services have been preaching for a long time. It is our frm conviction, as stated above, that this is not what the Congress has intended, and we in- tend to push vigorously for this legislation which we hope we can join in introducing. You will note that there are two sections of the bill, The first provides that the Com- mandant of the Marine Corps will be a mem- ber of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. This will place two voices trained in naval and am- phibious matters in an organization which ig now dominated by services that have lttle knowledge of, or interest in, the problem of naval warfare, Second, it will bring to the Joint Chiefs of Staff the voice of an expert in amphibious matters which, notwithstand- ing statements made by the other services ar to its obsolescence, has proven again in Korea to be a vital part of modern warfare. Third, it will permit a Marine voice in the highest military councils of our country which should obviate the necessity of con- stant congressional intervention to preserve the Marine Corps. The second section provides that the Ma- rine Corps shall be maintained at not less than 4 divisions of ground troops with neo- essary supporting ground forces and 4 wings or 48 squadrons of Marine aviation. In or- der to make certain that the Marine Corps does not become too large or in effect a second land army, the total number of of- ficers and men that can be in the Marine Corps at any one time is limited to 400,000. This is 85,000 less than their maximum strength in World War II. It ts probable that they could maintain five divisions out of this total if so authorized by the Congress. If this bill is enacted, we are convinced that it will insure a strong nucleus of ready troops, capable of performing in the Marine tradition. The military value to our coun- try cannot be overestimated and it should result in 8 more economical Military Estab- lishment. We sincerely trust that you will join us, and many other Representatives have al- ready indicated that they will support this legislation. Faithfully yours, MIKE MANSFIELD, Donan L. JACKSON, Members of Congres3. — H. R. 9628 (Extension of remarks of Hon. MIKE MANS- FIELD, of Montana, in the House of Repre- sentatives, Friday, September 1, 1950) Mr, MANSFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I am today, in conjunction with my distinguished colleague, the Senator from Illinois, the Honorable PavL Dovaras, who will introduce a similar bill in the Senate, introducing H. R. 9623, a bill to create, and assign auties to, the Office of Assistant Secretary of the Navy for the Ma- rine Corps, to fix the personnel strength of the United States Marine Corps, and to make the Commandant of the Marine Corps 4 per- manent member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Under unanimous consent, I am inserting at this point in my remarks a copy of H. R. 9623, which reads as follows: “A bill to create, and assign duties to, the office of Assistant Secretary of the Navy for the Marine Corps, to fix the personnel atrength of the United States Marine Corps, and to make the Commandant of the Ma- rine Corps a permanent member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff “Be it enacted, etc. That there shall be in the Department of the Navy an Assistant Secretary of the Navy for the Marine Corps who shall be appointed by the President, by and with the advice and consent of the Sen- ate, and shall receive the same compensation as the other Assistant Secretaries of the Navy. The Assistant Secretary of the Navy for the Marine Corps shall, under the direction of the Secretary of the Navy, be charged with the supervision of the United States Marine Corpse and the coordination of ita activities with other governmental agencies, and, in addition, such other duties as may be as- aigned to him by the Secretary of the Navy. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD “geo. 2. The first sentence of section 208 (c) ef the National Security Act of 1947 ts here- ley amended to read as follows: ‘The United States Marine Corps, within the Department of the Navy, shall include four full-strength combat divisions, four full-strength air wings, and such other land combat, avia- tion, and other services as may be organic therein, and the personnel strength of the Regular Marine Corps shall be maintained at not less than 300,000.’ “Sxc. 3. The Commandant of the Marine Corps shall be a permanent member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.” On June 380, 1949, I introduced a bill to create the office of Assistant Secretary of the Navy for the Marine Corps and to fx the personnel strength of the corps at not less than 6 percent of the combined personnel strength of the Army, Navy, and Air Force, In this effort, I was joined by 55 other Con- gressmen and 4 Senators. No action has been taken on this bill but, in the meantime, the House Armed 6ervices Committee in its report on the B-36 investi- gation, recommended unanimously that the Commandant of the Marine Corps be made a permanent member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff so that the type of warfare the Marines were 80 skilled in—amphibious landings and close infantry-air support—could be given due consideration by all the Armed Forces. On August 7, 1950, I urzed, on the floor of the House, that the Marine Corps have a permanent strength of 300,000 men, which would include 4 combat divisions and 4 air wings and that the Commandant be given 8 place on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Chairman Cari VINSON, of the Armed Serv- ices Committee, on Augttst 28, 1950, stated that he had set a new higher goal for Ma- rine Corps combat strength—four fully equipped war-size divisions and 26 air squad- rons, Mr. Speaker, I am in full accord with the Committee on Armed Services in its unani- mous recommendation that the Comman- dant of the Marine Corps be made a perma- nent member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. I am also in full accord with the statement made by the distinguished chairman of that committee that the Marine Corps should have four fully equipped war-size divisions. I do believe, however, that we should go fur- ther and enact permanent legislation to this effect and, at the same time, increase marine air strength to four full-strength atr wings. To do this, in my opinion, it is necessary that the personnel strength of the Corps shall be maintained at not less than 300,000. It is not necessary for me to go into detall concerning the difficulties in which the Ma- rine Corps has found itself since the physical ending of World War II. I do not agree with General Eisenhower's contention, according to the ConGRESSIONAL Recorp of July 12, 1949, in which he states: “I therefore recommend that Marine units not exceed a regiment tn size.” Neither do I agree with General Spaatz, former commanding general, Army Air Forces, when he wrote: “I recommend, therefore, that the size of the Marine Corps be limited to small, read- fly available and lightly armed units, no larger than a regiment, to protect United States interests ashore in foreign countries and to provide interior guard of naval ships and naval shore establishments.” General Spaatz changed his mind though, because on July 17, 1950, he wrote in News- week as follows: “Two or three Marine divisions, stationed at strategic locations, ready for quick move- ment to any part of the world, also are essential.’ According to the Washington Btar of Au- gust 18, 1960, the Marines were sent to Korea at the express desire of General MacArthur, It may be well to recall that according to the July 8 issue of Armed Forces, MacArthur, while Chief of Staff of the Army in the early
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 1930's, was a leading advocate of the con- solidation of the Army and Marine Corps. Mr. Speaker, J am inserting at this point in my remarks articles from the Washing- ton Post under date of August 28, 1950, and the Army-Navy-Air Force Register under date of August 12, 1950. “[From the Washington Post of August 26, 1860] “Vinsox Sars New Maging Goat; ¢ Divisions, 26 Ate Squanzons “Chairman Vinson (Democrat, Georgia), of the House Armed Services Committee, yesterday set a new higher goal for Marine Corps combat strength—4 fully equipped war-size divisions and 26 alr squadrons, “We aim to get the money for that farce, Vussom said. “The new target is up by two combat divi- sions and eight air squadrons from an eeti- mate advanced by Vinson only August 6. “He predicted then that Congress will be asked in January for more money for de- fense, including 6500,000,000 for the Marines. “That sum was expected to permit the corps to increase ita strength to 174,000 men and to have 2 fully equipped divisions and 18 air squadrons. “It now has two divisions, organizationally. However, both were considerably under bat- tie strength when the Korean War started. The size of Marine divisions fluctuates be- tween a peacetime strength sometimes as low as 8,000 to 10,000 men and the huge units of World War II days when more than 20,000 men were in combat divisions. “The manpower strength of the Marine Corps then was about 65,000 men and 7,000 Officers, with about 16 air squadrons. “When defense officials went to Capitol Hill last month to support their request for an emergency military appropriation, the Marine Corps’ portion of the proposed new funds was §128,395,000. This was in addi- tion to the $200,923,000 asked for in the regular 1951 fiscal year budget, or & new total of $329,318,000. “The testimony given at that time indl- cated a manpower increase of almost 80,000 above the present level, or a new total of about 142,000. “Just what the proposal for 2 more di- visions may do to the 174,000-man enroll- ment goal mentioned by Vinson August 6 was not made clear. The amount it would cost was not stated. “Along with his report of new plans for the Marine Corps, Vinson disclosed he intends to see President Truman to urge this coun- try to step up its tank production by hun- dreds of millions of dollars. “He said he has written Mr. Truman, Sec- retary of Defense Johnson, and top military leaders that the Armed Services Committee is much concerned over the present tank- procurement program.” “[From the Army-Navy-Air Force Register of August 12, 1950} “Four Magine Divisions “The calling to active duty this week of Marine Corps volunteer reservists, most of them battle-trained in World War IT, to aug- ment the Marine fighting strength should be a lesson to the American people that never again must this famous fighting organization be permitted to be reduced to leas than four full divisions plus four Marine air wings. “The Marine Corps mobilization announce- ment this week marked the nm anniver- sary of the corps’ first assault landing against the Japanese at Guadalcanal and the fret major offensive by American ground troops in World War It. From that time on the Marines and Army troops made their assault landings at Tarawa, Okinawa, and Iwo Jimo, wll island stepping stones toward the ulti- mate goal in Pacific war—Japan. “AN elements of the Armed Forces have acquitted themselves with g.eat distinction in the fighting in Korea. It must be noted, however, with a special interest, the role the United States Marine Corps js playing. “The Marines committed to Korea cannot compare numerically with the Army and Air Force units in that theater. However, the Marine team hit the beach fully combat- loaded under officers 85 percent of whom had World War II experience. Reports from the Korea fighting indicate that the Marines, ‘Within thetr limitation in force, Justified the faith of the American people in this tradi- tional fighting organization of our Armed Forces. “More than 2 years ago the Marines were fighting desperately to defeat a plan that would have limited largest elements in the Marine Corps to a battalion. At that time the Marine Corps pointed out that no com- prehensive training or cohesive operation emuhd be carried out under & structure of less them @tvistomal organisation. After a strenu- ous fight they were permitted to retain two divisions and two air wings in a reduced- personnel status. “The Marine theory tn this discussion fs more than justified. “The Register belteves that marine strength should be brought to, and main- tained at four marine divisions and four marine air wings. “Strategic and tactical evaluations indi- cate that the type of incident in Korea may break out at any time in any part of the world. The need for fast, mobile, self-con- tained units is evident. The cost of main- taining these divisions and atr wings would be negligible compared to the risk under- taken in lives and money in not having them available. “The other day in the House of Representa- tives, Representative Mrkr MANBFIELD, Demo- crat, Montana, told his colleagues that the Marine Corps should be raised to a strength of 800,000 men. He also said that the Com- mandant of the Marine Corps should be made @ member of the Jcint Chiefs of Staff instead of depending upon Navy representation. Ma- rines are now fighting in Korea, and with the certainty that thousands of other marines will be sent to Korea within the next several months, it seems logical and proper that the Commandant of the Marine Corps should be- cu ne a member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. If Marine Corps personnel is to be employed iu operations, it is only proper that the Com- mandant of the corps should have a part in planning their employment in the national- defense scheme. “A former marine, Representative Mans- FIELD declared that ‘the attempts which have been made to whittle the corps down to a guard unit must be stopped once and for all.’ “There are & great number of Americans who agree with the former marine from Montana.” Mr. Speaker, tt ts my hope that the Armed Services Committee will give full considera- tion to the bill introduced by Benator Pau Dovcias and myself beceuse we feel that the issue is important and that the Marine Corps be given the recognition and the security it has so justly earned throughout the history of our country. H.R.1 Se anamnamamemaoaed EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDITH NOURSE ROGERS OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 24, 1951 Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- A365 marks in the Recogp, I include the following letter: Dwasten American VeTaxans, Washington, D.C., January 22, 1951. The Honorable Eprrx Nourse Rocers, House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. Deax Concarsswoman: The House Rules Committee has granted an open rule on H. R. 1, & bill to authorize the payment by the Administrator of Veterans’ Affairs of a gratu- itous indemnity to survivors of members of the Armed Forces who die in active service. It is our understanding that this will come up on the ficoor of the House for debate on Wednesday, January 24, 1951. We of the Disabled American Veterans are hopeful this bill will pasa the House as it was reported by the House Veterans’ Affairs Committee, From our study and research we are con- vinced this is the most constructive single piece of legislation to come before the House in many years. The provisions of H. R. 1 are retroactive to June 27, 1950. This will insure that the designated beneficiaries of every man killed in the Korean confilct will receive 610,000, payable in equal monthly installments. This retroactive feature of the bill would include the dependents of the Pennsylvania and Tennessee National Guard men killed in Fed- eral service soon after the outbreak of the Korean undeclared war. The Disabled American Veterans is par- ticularly gratified with the provisions of H. R. 1 granting a continuing gratuitous indemnity for veterans having a total service- connected disability rating, and with the provision granting Government insurance to veterans who are “insurable by commercial standards because of service disability. The inequities inherent in the present vet- erans’ insurance laws are well Known. They are best pointed up by the example set forth in paragraph 2, page 4, of House Report No. 6, Highty-second Congress, which accom- panies H. R. 1. Another tmportant feature of H. R. 1 is the tremendous administrative saving which can be accomplished if this bill is enacted, If such a law had been in force fram 1940 to 1949, it has been conservatively estimated there would have resulted a saving to the Government in excess of 587,000,000 in ad- ministrative costs. In a time of national emergency, the saving in man-hours and money cannot be minimised. The Disabled American Veterans urges your consideration and support of this meritori- ous legislation. We are convinced that its passage, as reported by the Veterans’ Affairs Committee, will mark a milestone in pro- gressive, beneficial legislation for the de- pendents of deceased service personnel, as well as the service-connected disabled vet- eran. Very sincerely yours, F. M. Suiirvan, National Legislative Director. Reds Can Land Atom Bomb on Long Island EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LEONARD W. HALL OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 24, 1951 Mr, LEONARD W. HALL. Mr. Speak- er, I greatly appreciate the privilege of being permitted to include for the Rec. orp an editorial appearing in Newsday,
A366 published at Garden City, L. I, under date of Tuesday, January 23. This editorial is one that should at- tract the notice and earnest considera- tion of the membership of the Congress. Its heading, “No time to hide,” is par- ticularly in point and constructively criticizes weaknesses in our coastal de- fense set-up that are intolerable and challenge most earnest policy thinking and action. Also what is called for and demanded is an immediate re-evaluation of our present protective measures through the prompt revitalization of our United States Coast Guard. A copy of Newsday was delivered to each Member of Congress and also to each Senator. The story, with photo- graphs, describes the simulated landing and planting of an A-bomb right in the heart of New York City. I should like to read a few paragraphs from the editorial and then I will insert its entire content. They are as follows: Today's Newsday is sensational, We in- tend it to be. Enactment of a Long Island invasion by saboteurs bringing ashore an atom bomb waa more than a newspaper stunt, although we think it is a good one. Our purpose was to dramatize, prove, and warn readers and law- makers of the ease with which the Job can be done. It would be just as easy for agents of an enemy power. They too know the unguarded beaches of Long Island and the rest of the United States. It would be simple to reach New York City, Chicago, Detroit, St. Louis, or Dallas, and plant real atom bombs just as Newsday’s agents planted their sim- wiated one in Times Square. Nazi saboteurs who landed at Amagansett in 1942 intended to go to the Ohio River. Their teammates landed on the Florida coast south of Jacksonville. The Newsday sabo- teurs merely duplicated the Amagansett landing. They could have continued by train, plane, or bus to Fittsburgh or any city between here and the west coast. They could have left thelr bomb at any chosen target. It is easy because we have no shore patrol on guard against surreptitious landings. No established or planned radar screen against air attack hinders them. Neither does the United States Coast Guard. For despite the declared national emergency, the Coast Guard is charged only with search and res- cue, plus a few port security duties. It still operates in peacetime status for the Treas- ury Department. It awaits an executive order to put it under the direction of the Navy. Franklin Roosevelt iasued such an order before Pearl Harbor. Truman rescinded it on January 1, 1946. Since then the Coast Guard’s authorized manpower has dwindled to one-sixth its full strength. Its improved equipment has been acquired only for search and rescue work. Last October Harry Tru- man tossed tt $21,000,000, authorized an in- crease of only 5,000 personnel, and charged it with keeping the security of all vessels, harbors, ports, and water-front facilities in the United States. It is a fact, leaving aside a small ap- propriation of $23,000,000 for port secu- rity work, that not a dollar has been recommended by the administration for the revitalization of our Coast Guard, Not a dollar is presently available to permit the Coast Guard to get an organ- ization going structured along lines sim- jlar to what we had in World War II and for an organization to give us complete and practical integration of the Coast Guard into our civil-defense set-up, I have yet to hear of a single, solitary plan to accomplish the beginning of such an organization. Certainly if anything along these lines is afoot or undergoing study, the administration should appoint an expediter and get things going. There are vital warnings and impli- cations inherent in this object lesson that challenge and demand immediate and strong administration action. I want to reemphasize that in the billions that have been urgently recommended for defense the administration has seemingly been perfectly willing to keep the Coast Guard in a normal peacetime status, This is not a time of normalcy. The administration, for incomprehensi- ble reasons—and while daily advising the country of the acute dangers i is facing—is doing nothing by way of con- crete action in giving the Coast Guard the security duties that this great organ- ization can so well perform. Certainly we all know of the outstanding record of the Coast Guard in World War II. If we are to set up proper precaution measures against potential disaster the Coast Guard must be immediately revi- talized and take its proper place in our coastal-defense set-up. The editorial, in full, follows: No Time to Hing Today's Newsday is sensational. tend it to be. Enactment of a Long Island “invasion” by “saboteurs” bringing ashore an “atom bomb” was more than a newspaper stunt, although we think it a good one. Our purpose was to dramatize, prove, and warn readers and lawmakers of the ease with which the job can be done, It would be just as easy for agents of an enemy power. They, too, know the unguarded beaches of Long Island and the rest of the United States. It would be simple to reach New York City, Chicago, De- troit, St. Louis, or Dallas, and ‘plant real atom bombs just as Newsday's agents planted their simulated one in Times Square, Nazi saboteurs who landed at Amagansett in 1942 intended to go to the Ohio River, Their teammates landed on the Florida coast south of Jacksonville. The Newsday ‘“‘sabo- teurs” merely duplicated the Amagansett landing. They could have continued by train, plane, or bus to Pittsburgh or any city between here and the West coast. They could have let their “bomb” at any chosen target. It is easy because we have no shore patrol on guard against surreptitious landings. No established or planned radar screen against air attack hinders them, Neither does the United States Coast Guard. For despite the declared national emergency, the Coast Guard 1s charged only with search and res- cue, plus a few port-security duties. It still operates in peacetime status for the Treas- ury Department. It awaits an Executive order to put it under the direction of the Navy. Franklin Roosevelt issued such an order before Pearl Harbor. Truman rescinded it on January 1, 1046. Since then the Coast Guard's authorized manpower has dwindled to one-sixth its full strength. Its improved equipment has been acquired only for search and rescue work. Last October Harry Tru- man tossed it $21,000,000, authorized an in- crease of only 6,000 personnel, and charged it with keeping the security of all “veasels, harbors, ports, and waterfront facilities in the United States.” COAST GUARD TRADITION Ironically the Coast Guard 1s 6 months be- hind other services in living up to its proud motto, “Semper Paratus”—Always Prepared, We in- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD It can't be ready for this emergency until the President wakes up, or until Congress legisiates it back to wartime strength of nearly 200,000, with suitable appropriations under the Navy. Since Alexander Hamilton founded {t in 1790, the Coast Guard has built a tradition comparable to that of the Marines. Its cut- ters raided France in 1797-1801. It sent the first United States ship to Alaska after the Territory’s purchase—and has performed Alaskan duty ever since. Jt fought Seminole Indians in the Everglades of Florida. It pioneered (1904) in ship-to-shore radio. After the Titanic disaster it Joined the Inter- national Ice Patrol, watchful for floating ice- bergs in the sea lanes. In World War I the Coast Guard went on patrol and convoy duty; in World War IZ it again distinguished itself when it helped evacuate Singapore, landed marines at Guadalcanal and troops in Nerth Africa and Normandy. It chased and sank subs off the Atlantic coast. Its loran stations guided planes that bombed Japan. Like the Marine Corps, the Coast Guard is an established and valuable arm of defense. It only awaits re- building for its specialized duty. DESTRUCTION NEED NOT BE AIRBORNE Defense planning emphasizes protection of the United States from air attack. Civil defense concentrates heavily on postdisaster activities. Newsday's invasion story dem- onstrates a blind spot in this thinking. Not only must the Coast Guard be restored to patrol the beaches. There must be exten- sive, organized assistance from civil-defense volunteers. Every precaution must be set against disaster before it strikes. When the Coast Guard was at full strength, it took 24,000 officers and enlisted men to maintain patrols of 8,700 miles of United States waterfront. But we have 40,000 miles of coastline to watch—and only about 28,000 Coast Guard men in all. Next Saturday noon, New York City will try out its new air-raid alarm. But mass slaughter and destruction endanger every United States city through these unguarded beaches of entry. There will be no time to hide from an atom bomb brought in by sea and planted. Will Congress demand that the President order the Coast Guard back to wartime Navy duty? Increase in Personnel Strength of the Marine Corps EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JAMES T. PATTERSON OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 24, 1951 Mr. PATTERSON. Mr. Speaker, one of the most ridiculous incongruities in the military picture today is the instance of suppressed Marine strength in the face of the tremendous military poten- tial demonstrated day after day by the Marines in Korea. The stepchild of the military depart- ment, the Marine Corps, lacks a direct voice on the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The “policemen” of our fighting forces have not the authority to attain a personnel status even approaching World War II strength. Unfortunately, the dominant services are unwilling to take on as an equal partner the ancient and honorable branch of the service which has per-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD formed with distinction since the found- ing of the Republic. National security demands that Con- gress must take suitable action in view of the reluctance of the Defense Depart- ment to accomplish this desirable result, Therefore, I am introducing legislation authorizing four full-strength combat divisions, four full-strength air wings, and such other land, combat, aviation, and other services as may be organic therein, for the Marine Corps. The bill additionally provides that the personnel strength of the Regular Marine Corps shall be maintained at not less than 400,000, and that the Commandant of the Marine Corps shall be a permanent member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. The personnel status envisioned in this measure will be filled to capacity in a@ short time if enlistments are allowed to the Marine Corps. Never in history has it been necessary for us to draft young men for service in the Marine Corps, and this increase in authorized strength should bring about no excep- on. Address of Hon. James A. Farley EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FOSTER FURCOLO OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 24, 1951 Mr. FURCOLO. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the ReEc- ond, I include the following address by Hon. James A. Farley, chairman of the board, the Coca-Cola Export Corp., over radio station WSPR, 5:15 p. m., under auspices of Polish American Congress, Inc., Western Massachusetts Branch, Springfield, Mass., Sunday, January 21, 1951: Poland is the largest and most populous country in Central-Hastern Europe. In the course of 10 centuries of their recorded his- tory, the Poles were time and again forced to resort to arms in order to throw back into Asia the Mongol, Tartar, Turkish, and Rus- sian invaders. As a result of these success- ful endeavors, Poland gained the proud title of “Defender of Christianity.” Even in 1920, shortly after the First World War, when the Soviet armies were surging westward to join hands with the Red revolutionaries in Ger- many, tt was the Polish Army which de- feated them at the Vistula River, right at the gates of the capital, Warsaw, threw the Russians back within their own frontiers and averted for 26 years the sorry spectacle which we are witnessing now. In 1945, there was no Polish Army on the Vistula and consequently the invaders from Asia established them~- selves in the heart of Europe. When in 1945, the Red army entered Poland, following the withdrawal of the defeated German Army, the Reds brought with them a government prefabricated in Moecow, and by the sheer force of thelr bayonets enthroned that government in ‘Warsaw as the legitimate government of the Polish Republic. The same group of men with some variances is still in power in Warsaw and te Poland In the United Rations and at the diplomatic outposts abroad, At the moment of their Inaugura- tion these men were entirely unknown to the Polish people. Long-time agents of the Communist Internationale, trained and edu- cated in Moscow, they had no emotional ties with Poland and many of them were foreign- born. They operated under aliases and even the name of the acting president of the Ropublic, Boleslaw Bierut, is a pseudonym composed of several aliases which he used in his career as Moscow's undercover agent in various European countries. It 1s of vital importance for the free Poles in this country and for the millions of loyal Americans of Polish descent that the American people do not confuse the Warsaw regime and its representatives abroad with the unfortunate Polish nation suffering in Communist slay- ery. Those servants of Moscow who under assumed Polish names follow the Soviet line in the United Nations, throwing insult after insult upon the great American Republic, do not speak for the people of Poland. The true Poles, in spite of years of slavery, feel toward you as the Polish Brig. Gen. Casimir Pulaski felt when he died for your inde- pendence at Savannah, Ga., in 1779. That government of traitors and foreign agents is already in the saddle in Warsaw for over 6 years. It maintains itself in power by the ruthless application of police-state methods. The people live in an atmosphere of fear and terror. ‘The secret police, known as the UB, trained by the Russians and manned in key positions by Russian ex- perts, controls every aspect of life. Using blackmail and torture the UB recruited a network of informers, who are busy even in famflly circles, spying on their next of kin and denouncing them to the police for even the slightest sign of opposition to the Communist rule. Old established principles of Judiciary and court procedure have been thrown overboard. Warrants of search and arrest are no longer required. Police invade homes at any time of day or night, abducting innocent persons suspected of disloyalty to thelr Soviet overlords. That’s what Winston Churchill and Dean Acheson had in mind when they spoke about the “knock on the door at midnight.” It is almost impossible for the free Americans to imagine this awful feeling of uncertainty which grips the hearts of the people tn the Soviet-dominated coun- tries when they hear a knock on the door; this atmosphere of fear; these mutual suspicions. Today, more than 5 years after the cessa- tion of hostilities, military courts are func- tioning in all major Polish cities, trying civilians accused of opposing or even criti- cizing the Warsaw or Moscow regimes. Hardly a aingle day passes without scores of Polish patriots being sentenced to long pris- on terms, deported to Russia, or executed, In addition to the overcrowded prisons and dungeons of the secret police, where people are kept for months and years without a warrant of arrest, and where those infamous “confessions” are wrung out of the defend- ants by means of torture or by scientific methods which weaken the will of the indi- vidual, the Communists are beginning to es- tablish slave-labor camps, which in the 8o~ viet Union constitute the basic labor force. In the economic sphere Poland has al- ready assumed the aspects of a welfare state carried to the extreme. Industrial estab- ishments employing more than 50 workers have been taken over by the Government, practically without compensation for the in- dividual owners. Smaller industries are now in the process of being nationalized. Whole- sale and foreign trade are entirely in the hands of the state. Private retailern are gradually squeezed out of business by means of tax discrimination and unheard of chi- canertes; large estates are administered by the state, while the small farmers are by ever-increasing pressure forced to join their holdings into Soviet-style collective farms. I am giad to say that bere the Communists encounter splendid resistance, and the farmt collectiyization program is progressing very slowly. The free professions, doctors and lewyers, are losing their rights to private practice and gradually assume the character of Government employees. The engineers, technicians, and industrial workers are no longer permitted to choose freely thelr place and type of work. They are assigned by the state management to certain areas and cer- tain factories. Labor untons are a tool in the hands of the Government and serve aa propaganda machinery for health-ruining work contests of the type known in Russta os the Stakhanoy production races. Strikes are outlawed. The penalty for the strikers is death from the hands of the hastily sum- moned battalions of the Internal Security Corps, a highly mobile uniformed striking force of the regime reminiscent of the ges- tapo elite guards of the Nazt regime or the uniformed special MVD troops of the Soviet Ministry of the Interior. The Communist welfare state eliminates all means of independent earnings and turns all citizens into Government employoes. Thus, the Government controls the purse of each citizen and through ft his political loy- alty. In case of unrest or dissatisfaction with the Government among certain classes of population, among workers in a particu- lar factory, or among certain professions, one stroke of a pen can drop the troublesome group from the Government's payroll and doom them to starvation, as there is no pos- sibility of independent earnings. Private enterprise is dead in Poland, and freedom died with it. The year 1950 marked a beginning of a 6-year economic plan in Poland, a plan which puts emphasis on the development of heavy metallurgical industry at the expense of con- sumers’ industries and out of el! proportions to the actual needs of the country’s econ~ omy. The results of the new scheme will be disastrous from the viewpoint of the popu- lation’s standard of living, but will ald sub- stantially the armament tndustry of the Soviet Union. The plan obviously fits the grand design of the Soviets in regard to the economies of the satellite countries. This design can be characterized in two sen- tences—colonial exploitation of the subju- gated nations and preparation for war. The Communists do not limit themselves to the political and economic fields of opera- tion. They have also invaded the realm of the spirit, and {t is here where a silent but inexorable struggle is in progress between the apostles of hate and destruction and the Polish people who for centuries carried on the eastern approaches to Europe the torch of western Christian civilization. In that struggle for the soul of the people, especially the younger generation, the Communists are using all modern means of propaganda, in- cluding radio, press, books, pamphlets, thea- ter, and moving pictures. From kindergar- tens to universities the young people are sub- jected to a constant barrage of Communist slogans, repeated parrotlike a hundred times a day. Textbooks have been rewritten, his~ tory changed, the past distorted, the present imbued with idolatry of the Soviet Union, the future—well, you can tmagine the Com- munist vision of the future—universal peace with Josef Stalin as leader of mankind. The Soviet empire, which stretches from Viadivostok to the River Elbe, is a huge fac- tory of human robots, men with push-button brains, centrally operated by the Politburo of the All-Union Bolshevik Party in Moscow. You have had many opportunities to observe this new creature, the Soviet man. For 5 years now the delegates of Russia in the United Nations have been making the same speeches, repeating the same slogans, in- sults, waving the withered olive branch or saber rattling in tuno with the switchboard Operator in the Kremlin. Their mindg