A1380 not care sufficiently for the safety of its em- ployees to shut down while the dangerous conditions were corrected, the authority of the State should have compelled its closing. Inspection service is of little value if its findings are not enforced. Indeed, there is a false security in such a situation; miners think their lives are being protected when such is not the fact. This tragedy makes all the more despicable Governor Green's use of the State mine in- specting force to shake down mine operators for donations to the Republican campaign in the Chicago mayoral race. No mine in- spector should be placed in the position of soliciting a favor from any mine operator. Director Medill’s State mine department can- not put itself in politics without compromis- ing the enforcement of its inspection service. Governor Green, who has flown down from Chicago, cannot bring back the lives of the entombed miners. He cannot comfort the grief-stricken survivors. But there is one thing he can do: He can find out why this mine was not closed in accordance with re- peated warnings. And he can contemplate the consequences of tying an inspection serv- ice into politics in such a way as to wink at nonenforcement of safety requirements. Governor Green shrugged off queries about the shakedown when the Post-Dispatch dis- closed it a week ago. He cannot shrug off the mass death of these miners 540 feet underground. [From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch of March 27, 1947] THE MINE DEAD SPEAK The man on whom responsibility for the horrible loss of life in the Centralia Coal Co. mine falls more heavily than on any other is Dwight H. Green, Governor of the State of Nlinois. Failure to be vigilant can be charged up to others as well—to Governor Green's direc- tor of the State department of mines, Robert M. Medill, to the operators of the coal com- pany, to Federal authorities who were legally in control of the mine. None of these other failures mitigates in the least the responsibility which is Governor Green's. On March 8, 1946—more than a year ago— Local No. 52 of the United Mine Workers at Centralia sent a letter of protest to Gov. Green. This protest was against the hagz- ardous conditions under which they were compelled to work since Governor Green's State department of mines had refused to close the mine notwithstanding the reports of explosion hagard by the mine inspector. The dead speak in this letter. They cry from behind the debris-closed walls in which many of them are still entombed. The dead cry out that they were ignored by Governor Green's State mine department. They cry out that the inspector did his duty and wrote honest reports. They cry out that if the laws were not enforced, there would be “a dust explosion at this mine just like happened in Kentucky and West Virginia.” They cry out that when they finally got an official investigating commission it con- tained a boss of the mine and that it would not permit the miners to call attention to unsafe conditions. They cry out that when the report of the commission was at last obtained it “found insufficient evidence to revoke the certificate of the mine manager and superintendent.” They cry owt that they sent Governor Green a copy of the inspector’s report, that they asked him to check it with the com- mission's report and with the Federal mine inspection report of July 1945. They cry out that they asked the governor to go to the mine and make a personal in- spection in order to see how unfair his de- partment of mines was to the miners, how its refusal to do its duty had placed their lives in grave danger. They cry out that they were writing to the governor because they did not believe he knew how unfair his mining department “is toward the men in this mine.” They cry out that they hoped for “an early personal reply from the governor stating your position in regards to the enforcement of the State mining laws.” Yet in the face of a warning like this, Dwight H. Green could be so unmoved as to do in effect absolutely nothing. Worse than that, he could permit his State mine depart- ment to become a political tool this month for the collection of funds for the Republican mayoral race in Chicago. For it became a chore of his mine inspectors to shake down mine operators for campaign contributions. In face of a record like this, he could per- mit his inspection service to be further com- promised, to be placed under obligation to mine operators! Has ever retribution for what amounts to criminal negligence followed swifter or in a more terrible form? Dwight H. Green is the first man to answer, {From the Belleville (Ill.) News-Democrat of March 28, 1947] BUNGLED STATE GOVERNMENT The appalling completeness of the break- down of governmental agencies in Illinois under the administration of Gov. Dwight H. Green steadily becomes more and more apparent. Newest evidence that this has happened turned up tn the mine tragedy at Centralia on Tuesday afternoon when scores of miners perished in a coal pit following a terrific ex- plosion. There is little doubt that this dis- aster, which was the worst in the entire his- tory of coal mining in Mlinots, could have been averted by strict enforcement of safety codes. But this was rot the case. Repeatedly the operators of that colliery had been warned of the highly hazardous conditions that pre- vailed in their mine. In fact, the violations were on such a wholesale basis as to war- rant appeals by the miners themselves for gubernatorial intervention in their behalf. This was not forthcoming. Nor was there enforcement of even the most fundamental safety regulations. The death-trap condi- tions at Centralia were not of short stand- ing. They were nothing new, for they had been allowed to continue for some years. If recommendations of the State mining inspectors are ignored and the State con- sistently refuses to take the necessary meas- ures to rectify a hazardous inferior situa- tion, there isn’t much point in conducting inspections at all. The trouble at Centralia is but another link in a long chain of evidence to support the contention that many State functions have been permitted to degenerate to im- potence. The Green administration is so thoroughly riddled with petty politics and shot with favoritism as to render State regu- lations not only worthless but a distinct Nability to the people of Illinois. Right now members of a legislative group delving into the activities of the so-called welfare department are having their eyes opened by the shockingly deplorable state of affairs existing in this State’s mental hos- pitals. The legislature may well look into the department of mines and minerals too, and others on down the line. The whitewashing Gays of Mr. Green’s clique are numbered. And high time, too. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Congress Keeps a Promise EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD G. ROHRBOUGH OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE HOUSE OI’ REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. ROHRBOUGH. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REcorp, I include an editorial from the Clarksburg Telegram, Clarksburg, W. Va., entitled ‘Congress Keeps a Prom- ise”; CONGRESS KEEPS A PROMISE The Clarksburg Telegram has been on the right side in advocating cutting down ex- penses and reduction in taxes for several years. On yesterday, as had been promised by the Republican leaders throughout the Nation, a bill reducing income-tax rates was passed by a vote of 273 to 187. Of the 273 Members, 233 Republicans were joined by 40 Democrats for the bill. Against the bill were 188 Demo- crats, 8 Republicans, and 1 American Labor Party Member from New York City. This ae Member voted against the previous tax 11), This bil) will cut taxes in the lower-income group 30 percent, and all others 20 percent. It is probably the fairest tax bill presented and passed by any legislative body in a num- ber of years. No bill can be perfect, and no bill pre- sented will ever suit everyone. But there is such a thing as having a fair, equitable, and honest tax bill. Just because a man happens to be a little prosperous and makes a little money, that is no reason why he should be robbed by the Government. But that seems to be the idea of some. It is shown we have in this country at present a real American Congress. We have men who fulfill their promises. No one can take all the credit for the passage of this important legislation, but there is enough credit for all Republicans and ull Democrats who joined in and supported this important measure. Speaker of the House JoserH Martin, formerly minority leader, has proved himself to be a leader. He had the cooperation and loyal support of a large majority of Repub- licans and on many occasions a number of Democrats. No man can be a leader unless he has the respect of both those who belong to his party and the opposition. For a num- ber of years Speaker MARTIN worked hard holding the party in line, protecting the in- terests of the American people, many times when the road was rough. But he never flinched. When Republicans had a majority in Congress, he was elected Speaker by a unanimous vote. The Republicans made no mistake in this selection. One of his important cogs in the wheel, Representative HaLLeck, of Indiana, now majority leader, has proved to be a man of sterling qualities and honor. Too much credit cannot be given to the Ways and Means Committee headed by KNurson, of Minnesota. He never weakened. He favored @ tax cut, he promised one. Not only did his committee by unanimous vote carry out the recommendation for tax reduction, but one Democrat from Texas voted with its members This will no doubt go down in history as the greatest victory of any Republican Con- gress holding power in many years. One reason is everything was against the Repub-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD licans particularly 25,000 or 30,000 agitators, trouble makers, and parasites holding high jobs who did not want to see taxes reduced as they would lose their jobs. Former heads of all the committees and those who wanted to be big boys but who had been trimmed down to proper sive gave out statements night and day in order to throw cold water on tax reduction. These boys had a lot of influence under the New Deal, but on yester- day not only were their wings clipped, but the feathers taken out as well. It will be a long time before they can fly again. Republican leaders throughout the coun- try, including the National Committee chair- man worked hard to bring about the elec- tion of these Congressmen. They openly promised the American people they would reduce taxes, cut expenses and take thou- sands of parasites holding office off the pny - roll. This promise was made in good faith. They wanted to carry it out. Now the Re- publican Congress has fulfilled its promise to the people, and it has gained the people's confidence. The noise made by some of the opposition was like a small boy beating a drum—just noise. When the counting of votes arrived. no one paid any attention to these noise makers. When a man who has given out statements for months, has made speeches in opposition to certain measures continually receives only two or three votes on his side, it is shown noise making is of no avail. Great publicity and propaganda was given in opposition to the tax bill. A common ruse was warning the President would veto the bill and the American people should say, “Veto the bill and be damned. That is your privilege. Had you carried out the policy we are carrying out, a different story may have been told. If you do not want to carry out the policy of the American people, that 1s not the fault of the American people. But a way will be found to make them carry it out. The lower House of Congress is elected every 2 years. It can veto any appropriation or bill the same as the Senate or President.” If the President does veto the bill, as some of his advisers threatened, it can be passed over his head, or the American people can be promised in 2 years a President who will stand up for them and make tax reductions retroactive January 1, 1947. This can and we think will be done. Still another ruse was used which fooled some but not many for the reason the aver- age man who works has more intelligence than a man who sits around and talks. Propa- ganda was issued to the effect this bill helps the rich man and does not help the poor man. Of course, that is not true. It helps the small taxpayers more than the large ones, Every honest taxpayer who receives a decrease in his taxes wants the other fel- low to receive a decrease also in proportion. This propaganda was spread on the air, in the preas and by speeches. But, as stated before, the American Con- gress passed the bill as promised. This will do more good to stimulate business, to keep down strikes and help the man earning a small salary and those with fair salaries more than anything that has happened in a num- ber of years. It will show also for the first time in 14 years we have an American Congress that will fulfill its promise. Many other changes will be made before the year is out to give protection to the American men and women who have suffered the past 14 years. The vote by Congress yesterday should be evidence to the spenders throughout the country that the time has come to halt. Those who pay taxes will surely eliminate the spenders from public office in the fu- ture. Col. Florence A. Blanchfield EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANCES P. BOLTON OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 27, 1947 Mrs. BOLTON. Mr. Speaker, it was my pleasure on Monday last to gather to- gether an outstanding group of people at luncheon in the Speaker’s dining room in honor of Col. Florence A. Blanchfield, whose tour of service as superintendent of the Army Nurse Corps ends on May 31 of this year. Those who came to pay their respects to a fine leader in the field of nursing included: Representative Walter An- drews, chairman, Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives; Representative Margaret Chase Smith, chairman, Subcommittee No. 9 of the Committee on Armed Services of the House of Representatives; Representative Edith Nourse Rogers, chairman of the Committee on Veterans Affairs of the House of Representatives; Representative John Rankin, ranking minority mem- ber of the Committee on Veterans’ Af- fairs of the Huuse of Representatives; Maj. Gen. Norman T. Kirk, The Surgeon General, United States Army; Maj. Gen. Willard 8. Paul, Director of Personnel and Administration Division, War De- partment General Staff; Rear Adm. C. A. Swanson, The Surgeon General, United States Navy; Brig. Gen. Raymond W. Bliss, Deputy Surgeon General, United States Army; Brig. Gen. Ira P. Swift, Chief of Military Personne] Management Group, War Department Genera! Staff; Dr. Thomas Parran, The Surgeon Gen- era], Public Health Service; Col. Howard W. Doan, Executive Officer for the Sur- geon General, United States Army; Col. Francis P. Kintz, Acting Chief of Person- nel for the Surgeon General, United States Army; Capt. Ira H. Nunn, Legis- lative Counsel for the Judge Advocate General, Navy Department; Capt. Nellie J. DeWitt, Superintendent, Navy Nurse Corps, United States Navy; Dr. Robert C. Cook, Deputy Medical Director, Vet- erans’ Administration and representing Gen. Paul Hawley; Lt. Col. Mary G. Phillips, Assistant Superintendent of the Army Nurse Corps, United States Army; Lt. Col. Ida W. Danielson, Chief of Nurse Personnel, Army Nurse Corps, United States Army; Lt. Col. Margaret Schafer, assistant personnel officer, Army Nurse Corps, United States Army; Lt. Col. Katherine Baltz, education con- sultant, Army Nurse Corps, United States Army; Mrs, Ruth Freeman, Di- rector of Nursing, National American Red Cross; Miss Matilde E. Dykstra, Deputy Director of Nursing Service, Vet- erans’ Administration, and representing Miss Dorothy Wheeler, the Director, who was ill; Miss Edith Beattie, representing the American Nurses Association; Mr. Robert J. O’Connor, Acting Chief, Legal Division, Office of the Surgeon General, A1381 United States Army; Mr. Robert Smart, of the professional staff, Committee on Armed Services, House of Representa- tives; Miss Anne Claypoole, retired, Army Nurse Corps, United States Army; and including the following Members, assigned to Subcommittee No. 9, Com- mittee on Armed Services, House of Representatives: Hon. Carl T. Durham; Hon. L. Mendel Rivers; Hon. Leon K. Gavin; Hon. Philip J. Philbin. Unfortu- nately, Congressmen William W. Black- ney, Arthur Winstead, and Resident Commissioner A. Fernos-Isern were un- able to attend. On Thursday, March 27, Congress- woman MARGARET CHASE SMITH, of Maine, chairman of subcommittee No. 9, of the Committee on Armed Services, inserted in the REcorp a very excellent history of Colonel Blanchficld and her 29 years in the service of the Army Nurse Corps. It is not my purpose to duplicate. I do. however, want to say a very personal word relative to Colonel Blanchfield. During the 8 weeks that I spent in our hospitals in England and France in 1944, I found the constant evidence of her watchfulness in everything that related to an increasingly fine service to the wounded. It is my considered opinion that perhaps her greatest contribution to the wounded was her securing the as- signment of nurses to the field and evacu- ation hospitals near the front lines. I talked to man after man who said he owed his life to the fact that right there at the front, expert nursing care was there, with the peculiar spiritual lift given by the actual presence of the nurses who had volunteered their services. Col- onel Blanchfield saw the front first hand. not only in the ETO but in the Pacific. She pursued her fine strong course of determined action to give immediate and continuing care to our wounded with a spirit of consecration that permeated every unit. Although her citation for the Dis- tinguished Service Medal appeared on the pages of the Recorp of the Seventy- ninth Congress, I want to insert it at this point that we of the Eightieth Congress may salute her as she finishes her long and valiant service in the Army Nurse Corps of the United States, and I would assure her that the Members of this House wish her well in the many years that lie ahead: CITATION FOR DISTINGUISHED SERVICE MEDAL Col. Florence A. Blanchfield demonstrated outstanding ability and devotion to duty as Superintendent of the Army Nurse Corps from June 1943 to May 1945. By her precept and example, she inspired her corps, the old- est group of militarized women in the armed forces, to establish a glowing record of achievement in caring for our wounded sol- diers on all the far-flung battle fronts. She was responsible for policies used in expand- ing the corps from a few hundred nurses to more than 62,000, displaying in this pro- cedure administrative and executive ability of the highest order. In 1943 she supervised the establishment of basic-training schools in the nine continental service commands and in all overseas theaters. In 10944 she was largely instrumental in securing full military rank for nurses. She exerted great efforts to enlist the support of civil
A1382 nurses’ organizations, inaugurated a public- relations program, and engaged in extensive morale-building activities. High moral and professional standards which she established resulted in an extremely low discharge rate for the corps. She planned and put into operation a program which took nursing teams close to the front lines for surgical auty—a new procedure which helped save lives by insuring prompt nursing care. Much of her time was spent in the field. She made an extended tour of the European theater of operations toansure superior care of cas- ualties. Colonel Blanchficld’s wise under- standing of nurses and their problems was @ major factor in the success of her organi- gation, Her contribution to the war effort merits the highest praise; her contribution to humanity, through the feats of her valiant corps, can be told adequately only by those who have suffered in battle. Treatment of Jews by Russian Communists EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JOHN McDOWELL OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. MCDOWELL. Mr. Speaker, the bloody and murderous political gang that is operating the affairs of the Russian people under the banner of the Com- munist Party have maintained for many years that they were the friends of perse- cuted Jews all around the world, and for many years they have devoted special at- tention to unfortunate Jews in an effort to convert them to the so-called Com- munist doctrine, which we of the Un- American Activities Committee know is actually a political plot to create treason in every democratic nation of the world. The real attitude of Russian Com- munists toward distressed Jews was re- vealed yesterday in a news story in the New York Times. Without further com- ment I place in the Rsecorp here the en- tire story of how Russia actually treats Jews, and I trust that all of the Jews of America will read it: VIENNA, March 29.—The arrival of 350 Aus- trian Jews from Russia yesterday gave start- ling verification of reporte of the hard fate of many Jews who fled from Hitler to Russia. The 350 were in a shocking condition. Their clothes were rags. They were half starved. Members of the group said they had been on the way from a Russian work camp at Kazakistan in Central Asia for near- ly 3 months. They said they had so little food on their trip that they would have starved if the Joint Distribution Committee in Rumania had not learned of their plight and pro- vided food. When they arrived here they were in such a weakened condition that other Jewish ref- ugees in the Rothschild Hospital refugee center gave up their dinner so the newcom- ers could eat. The Vienna municipality housed them in various former military barracks. Jewish groups here plan special programs of relief because most of them are destitute and many need a long rest or hospitalization. There have been many reports of similar conditions from Polish Jews who passed through Vienna. Refugees who spent the war period and a good part of the postwar period in Russia were said to have been housed in work camps and used for heavy manual labor. Most of them seem to pos- sess little or nothing. Many are exhausted and ill from exposure and the hard tasks assigned to them. Members of the Austrian Jewish group that arrived yesterday said they had worked in mines with former members of Hitler's elite guard. They charged that Hungarian and Austrian Jews who remain in Central Asia are forced to work in mines with German prisoners of war. Small Business Sees Democracy at Work EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JACK Z. ANDERSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. ANDERSON of California. Mr. Speaker, Members of Congress are 80 ac- customed to hearing complaints and be- ing maligned by various groups through- out the country that they have pretty well learned how to take it. However, every once in a while we find a bouquet among the brickbats, a kind word or a compliment that is welcome indeed. I am taking this occasion to call to the attention of my colleagues a rather un- usua:, but nevertheless welcome letter which was addressed to me recently by a businessman who appeared before Sub- committee No. 6 of the Armed Services Committee. In response to many complaints by small businessmen from all over the United States, the Armed Services Sub- committee on Procurement and Supply, of which I am presently chairman, has been conducting hearings on the Navy Department’s new policy of centralized procurement for ships’ service stores. The writer of the following communica- tion was one of the complaining wit- nesses and his comments should be en- couraging to all citizens who still believe in a@ system of free enterprise and demo- cratic government. Iwan Riss & Co., Chicago, March 24, 1947. Hon. Jack ANDERSON, Congressman From California, Washington, D.C. Dear Mz. ANDERSON: This is the first chance I have had to write to you and express my appreciation for your courtesies during the recent hearing before your committee rela- tive to supplying by distributors to the Ship Service Stores. 4s you know this is my first experience with Washington and I would like to express to you, as well as the members of your com- mittee, how deeply I was impressed with your knowledge of our problem. Having heard many stories about the way Congress worked, I was totally unprepared for what took place. I am sure the general public does not realize the amount of work you gentlemen do. When I stopped to consider that each of you are on several committees and that each week brings forth different problems to each committee, I began to get a small under- standing of your task. In discussing you with my friends I have discovered that most of them had the same APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD impressions I did, and I would heartily recommend that you find some way to bring businessmen to Washington to see you gen- tlemen in action. To me the most impressive thing both on the floor of the House and at the committee hearing was how you gentlemen are looking out for the welfare of the general public. I know now why our country is great and will continue strong. We have a good board of directors who are watching for our welfare constantly. Again many thanks for your courtesies and with kindest personal regards, Sincerely, Iwan Ries & Co., Sranzey B. Levz, Secretary. To Give to Labor a Sense of Dignity EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN DAVIS LODGE OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. LODGE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrec- orb, I include the following article from the New York Times magazine: TO GIVE TO LABOR A SENSE OF DIGNITY—-THAT MUST BE OUR GOAL, SAYS ERIC JOHNSTON, WHO OFFERS A PROGRAM FOR PEACE IN INDUSTRY (By Eric Johnston) America will soon begin living under new labor laws. A turbulent, dramatic, fateful decade in our industrial history is drawing to a close. One chapter ends. Another chapter begins. The last chapter opened with legislation— the Wagner Act. It was hailed by labor as @ sure-fire formula for labor peace. Even the preamble of the act said its whole point and purpose was to bring labor peace. It didn’t. The new chapter also opens with legisla- tion, But again, legislation of and by itself won't do the whole job of building indus- trial peace. It will help. It is needed. But we mustn’t deceive ourselves. If we pin too much faith on legislation to solve our industrial relations problem, we are chasing {llusion. Disillusion can follow fast. Legislation might put industrial strife to sleep for a while—a year, 2 years, perhaps more; but the awakening will be costly, the problem worse than ever, combustive from confinement, Before relying solely on law to cure our industrial ills, take a look at Britain. She tried it. We can benefit from British experience. Exactly 20 years ago Britain adopted a comprehensive new labor law. A general strike in 1926 had culminated months of industrial warfare. It tied up the whole nation. The nation’s economy was para- lyzed. The public clamored for new labor legislation, and got it. Britain passed the Trades Dispute and Trades Union Act. Then it sat back think- ing its troubles were over. The provisions of the act have familiar rings. Britain said: We must make strikes against the Government illegal. They are treason- able. No democracy can tolerate them. 80 Britain prohibited strikes against the gov- ernment. Britain said: We must do something about breaches of labor contracts. “Wildcat” and “quickie” strikes must be outlawed. Union leaders must be made responsible. So Brit-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ain provided drastic penalties for those guilty of such infringements. Britain said: There is no moral justifica- thon for secondary strikes or boycotts. Bo Britain fixed jail sentences for those guilty of such acts. Britain said: Mass picketing breeds vio- Jenoe and disrespect for law. So Britain provided jail sentences and fines for mass Picketing. She outlawed picketing homes, on the traditional Anglo-Saxon theory that a man's home is his castle, and therefore in- violate. Britain said: We must regulate the politi- cal contributions of unions. Union bosses should not be allowed to set up huge slush tunds by taxing the workers. So Britain adopted regulations. She outlawed political contributions by any union from its general fund. Britain said: Unions ought to publish fi- nancial reports. Britain so ordered. She required detailed accounting of all union funds. British labor leaders feared that new legis- lation would strangle labor unions. The great British middle class hoped devoutly that the law would bring peace in industry. British industrials believed that a new, substantial foundation.had been laid for the perpetuation of capitalism and the free- enterprise system. That was the fear, hope, and belief in Britain 20 years ago, but things turned out differently. We can learn three things from Britain's experience: (1) legislation didn’t destroy unions; (2) it didn't solve the industrial re- lations problem, and (3) now British cap- italism is dying rapidly in the strangling clutch of socialism. Let American labor take a look at lesson No. 1 from British history: If labor looks, it might stop wringing its hands about labor legislation destroying unions. Labor's tactics in opposing all legislation are not original. American industry used the same tactics when it was under fire in the 1930's. It merely opposed. It offered noth- ing. It was agin’ everything. Sane labor legislation isn't going to put labor unions out of business. No one can convince me that jurisdictional disputes benefit unions. No one can convince me that union violation of contracts doesn't give unions a black eye. No one can convince me that regular conventions, secret elections of officers and financial accounting aren't good for union prestige. Union leaders may protest publicly, but in their minds and con- science they know we need legislation to cure these and similar abuses. Elimination of abuses will help union growth in America. That's what will hap- pen in America. Now take a look at lesson No. 2 from Britain. Legislation didn't solve Britain's industrial relations problem. British management never did grasp the core of the problem: that good industrial re- lations means individuals getting along to- @ether on the job. An act of Parliament didn’t change the workers’ attitude. It didn't bring the boss and the worker any closer together. It didn’t make the worker feel he had a stake in the enterprise or in the system. He believed the boss was still his enemy. We can't afford to make that same mistake in America, and I don't think we will make it. The basic approach to good employer-em- ployee relations lies within this phrase: “The Gignity of man.” America was founded on that concept. It was the first State to spell out and give to the world the philosophy that man has certain inalienable rights which the State can't give him or take away from him. The machine age and mass production, in their very nature, subordinated the indi- vidual. No one is particularly to blame for that. We've been so busy perfecting the techniques of the machine age that we've lost sight of the individuals who run the machines. Figures from a recent Roper poll on this point are shocking. They show roughly 50 percent of workers in American industry have no interest in their jobs. They are frustrated and unhappy—not from poor wages or lack of security, but from hating what they do on the job. From 7 a. m. to 8:80 p. m., they hate what they have todo. For them life be- gins at 8:30. Contrast this with the nearly 90 percent of American professional men and executives who, the poll shows, like their work, and the roughly 80 percent of American farmers who are interested in their work. Admittedly, there will always be a per- centage of frustrated individuals, no matter what anybody does. But the percentage of job-bored workers in mass production indus- tries as shown in the poll is far too high. We've got to find and develop compensations for the lack of interest in a noncreative oc- cupation which afflicts the factory worker. There is no easy-to-follow blueprint from which to build better relations and job satisfaction. But finding an answer takes precedent over new products and new markets. We must sharpen the accent on the worker as a person, not a hand. We must distinguish between man the tool and man the individual. What I am stressing is this: We must see to it that the individual has a stake and a status in our industrial society. Now let’s look at lesson No. 3 from Britain. Twenty years after Britain passed its cor- rective legislation, it got socialism. It's true, Britain's legislation made unions and their leaders socially and financially re- sponsible, but it did not give them a new sense of responsibility toward British capi- talism. In fact, the exact opposite was true. Union support for socialism was intensified. One of the best-selling Socialist penny pamphlets of the period was How to Get Rid of Your Boss for a Penny. And the workers and the unions did just that. British management ignored two signifi- cant, vital facts of modern economic life. They didn't appreciate that free unions, like free business in a free-enterprise sys- tem, are dynamic forces. Nor did they ap- preciate that either unions will have a stake and a status in the existing system or they will try to build one in which they do. Because they didn’t meet these issues squarely, the struggie and friction in indus- try were merely transferred from the eco- nomic to the political prise ring. British management wanted capitalism. British workers preferred socialism, The workers, being in the majority, repealed capitalism. British experience convinces me that it is fatal to depend entirely on legislation. The heady wine that law will give us unity and harmony in industry can produce a ter- rific hang-over. So let’s not rest our case on legislation we are about to get. We must look beyond that. What, then, is the answer? In the final analysis, the primary burden of providing an answer rests squarely on the shoulders of management and labor. They live with the problem; they know the prob- lem; they are the best qualified to solve it. This leads me to make a suggestion. What I propose is not new—but if it works it will be new. What I propose is a permanent council of management and labor, appointed by the President of the United States. The council would confer regularly with the Secretaries of Labor and Commerce and with the chair- man of the Senate and House Labor Com- mittees. It would make an annual report to the President on the state of the Nation's industrial relations. Tais would be compa- A1383 rable to the President's Council of Economic Advisers who report to him annually on the Nation's economic health. The reasons for such a council or varia- tion of such a council are obvious. Manage- ment and labor would be on the spot. They would have to fish or cut bait. The public would look to them to be continuously grap- pling with the never ending, constantly changing employer-employee relations. I know this has been tried before, and it failed. But is it too much for the public to ask management and labor to try it again and give America peace tn industry? I know of no other approach. For the past 8 months I have been chairman of a committee of businessmen and distin- guished labor economists brought together by the Committee for Economic Develop- ment to study and report on this vast, per- plexing problem. They recommended some new legislation, but their over-all conclusion was this: that we must have a permanent management-labor council. It was agreed by all that this was the approach most likely to succeed in our free society. If such a council can succeed anywhere in the world it ean succeed here. This is the only country in the world where labor sup- ports capitalism. All opinion polls make this unmistakably clear. A large percent- age of the workers may have a dul) out- look on their mass production jobs, but they have a bright outlook on our capitalist system. In fact, a marvel of today’s industrial world is that while capitalism is sick or dying else- where, it is stronger in America than ever before, The reason isn't hard to find. Amer- ican capitalism is unlike the Old World style of capitalism, as much so as our standard of living ts unlike the old world standard. It’s a partnership capitalism, a people's cap- italism. They benefit from it, and so they support it. The virtue and strength of the American brand of capitalism are more readily seen by contrast. One of the myths of the day is that the American economic system has con- gealed, and that communism is the great experiment. That myth ts exploding every Gay. Communism is as old as despotism. America is still the great experiment. The great human experiment of the last few centuries was launched on this con- tinent 170 years ago. It raised man, the cit- izen, to new heights of dignity. Consistent experiment ever since has increased his eco- nomic welfare and his political privileges. Socially, we are still in the test-tube stuge. The way must be found to dignify man, the worker, a8 we have dignified man, the cit- igen. When we have found that way, we will have found the key to industrial peace. Control! of Grazing on the Public Domain EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. JOHN McDOWELL OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. McDOWELL. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rsc- orp, I include the following letter: CoMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA, PENNSYLVANIA GAME COMMISSION, Harrisburg, March 28, 1947. Hon. JoHN MCDowErLL, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. Dean ConoressMAN McDowEt.: The public lands of the country are again the focal point for a frontal attack, This time it is
A1384 the control of grazing on public domain and national forest lands. The stockmen of the West are again re- belling against Federal efforts to prevent overgrazing. If the agencies now in charge fail in their duty these lands will be ruined. Then the very people who now benefit great- ly will lose; the public watersheds will suffer irreparable damage; and the wildlife re- sources will be literally starved out. The livestock interests are promoting measures in Congress to raid the Nation’s public lands (which they now use at very reasonable fees) by transferring them to private ownership—practically as a gift. If this should be done history would merely re- peat itself; abuse and final abandonment would ensue. Ultimately the Government would have to finance the costly job of trying to rehabilitate millions of acres of abandoned lands. All conservationists are opposed to allow- ing private interests to raid public lands, regardless of their location or use. We therefore unhesitatingly join with conserva- tion groups everywhere in urging you to use your best efforts to help defeat all such proposals coming before Congress. Very truly yours, PENNSYLVANIA GAME Commission, By SrrH Gorpon, Ezecutive Director. Government Control of Sources of Information EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. KARL E. MUNDT OF NORTH DAKOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr.MUNDT. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted me by the House, I am includ- ing these remarks in an article of mine which appears in the current issue of the Annals of the American Academy of Political and Social Science. This article deals with one of the contemporaneous trends which is plaguing the world and perplexing America. GOVERNMENT CONTROL or SOURCES OF INFOR- MATION (By Kart E. Munpr) Never before in history has the censorship of peacetime news been so tight as it now is in certain areas of the world, and never be- fore has Government control of the sources of information been used so vigorously and so effectively as a propaganda weapon at home and as a means of psychological warfare abroad as is the case in this fretful period following World War II. To control the ac- tions of people, their thinking 1s directed by carefully selecting the passing events about which they are permitted to read or hear; and when an undesirable fact can no longer be withheld, it is so colored and slanted as to pervert its true significance. Governments control the sources of infor- mation by a fourfold operation which in- volves censorship and direction of the press, the radio, the public platform, and the book and magazine literature, including textbooks and fiction. To these avenues of communica- tion are usually added such cultural activi- ties as the stage, the screen, the opera, and painting and sculpturing. In fact, the mod- ern totalitarian state overlooks nothing in its determination to subdue and seduce a people by controlling its sources of informa- jon. FREEDOM MAY BE LOST We who live in the United States with its unchallenged and, I hope, unchallengeable rights of free press, free speech, and free as- sembly have difficulty in understanding the tremendous power of a propaganda machine which censors all undesired information and feeds the populace a steady stream of adroitly prepared information. Such information comes slowly but surely to dominate the thinking of an entire nation. Most of us accept our American freedoms with complacency, feeling that of course “it can’t happen here,” and worry very little about the small clouds of propaganda and censorship which occasionally appear on the American horizon. Yet practically all the countries which are now completely entangled in the black web of controlled information were once free from it. They all demon- strated, long before the final iron curtain was rung down between them and the outside world, that their statesmen, their educators, and their comon people had become apathetic regarding the value of free expression. Even in the United States, our free way of life en- joys no sacred immunity: we too can slip into the dungeon of controlled thought and action if we are not alert to its hazards both at home and abroad and if we fail to recognize and cry out against the first faint tendencies in that direction. IMPLICATIONS OF CONTROL Just one year ago, as a member of a Special Subcommittee of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, I was sent abroad to spend over two months making economic and politi- Cal studies in twenty countries in Europe, Africa, and Asia. It was then that I became fully aware of the vast area of the world now living under governments which control all the sources of information, and appreciated the effectiveness of such control in directing the actions and attitudes of people living in this modern age. To be sure, I had been dimly aware that certain great nations were controlled by what, for want of a better term, we call “totalitarian governments,” and that because of censorship it was difficult for Americans to get a true picture of conditions there, I had also realized vaguely that the- peoples of those countries found it impossible to un- derstand American opinion because the com- bined devices of censorship and propaganda kept them effectively blacked out from the rest of the world, I had known that there really was an “iron curtain” dividing our “one world” into two great areas, so that neither half could learn the true facts about the other. But I had hoped it was a curtain of meshed screen through which at least some honest information could trickle, rather than a curtain of sheet metal stub- bornly shutting out all light. Somehow, I had hoped that with the de- feat of Hitler's regime of poison propaganda and’ callous censorship, of Mussolini’s gov- ernmental madhouse and of Japan’s closed- shop government with its Thought Police system, the world might again enjoy some- thing resembling the free flow of informa- tion, the exchange of students and scholars, the simulus of unrestricted visits by tour- ists, artists, and scientists, and all the other benefits which can stem from hands and minds and hearts which reach and touch across the seas. I now know that under prevailing conditions this great objective is still far from realization. Government con- trol of the sources of information not only interferes with our enlightenment; in this second year of the atomic age it has become a frightening barrier to enduring peace. As the one who in the United States House of Representatives had authored and intro- duced House Resolution 215, the resolution whose passage by both Houses of Congress prepared the way for the United Nations Edu- cational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisa- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tion, I had held high hopes that bringing the educational and cultural leaders of all na- tions around the conference table would en- able the world to evolve certain basic con- cepts of international good behavior which would help mightily to preserve the peace. I believed that only as the values and virtues of enduring peace are implanted in the hearts and minds of people everywhere can we create ties strong enough to hold in check the hounds of war. UNESCO has now become a functioning reality, it is an operating branch of the United Nations, it has adopted a working and workable constitution. But up to the time this article is written, Russia has refused to participate. Thus in our struggle to reduce suspicion and prejudice throughout the world we run into the same obstacle that bars the way to peace—government control of sources of information. While the methods by which the Com- munist rulers of Russia propagandize their people are not much different from.or worse than those now employed in Bulgaria, Al- bania, Yugoslavia, and other totalitarian countries, this article will deal with their op- eration in Russia alone. Russia is much more important than any of the other iron curtain countries today, and without her aid, encouragement, and sometimes insist- ence, the other blackouts of information would quickly be raised. OBSERVATIONS IN RUSSIA Our congressional subcommittee of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs spent @ little over a month behind the iron cur- tain. During that time we traveled in our own plane across more than 3,000 miles of Russian territory, stopping where we de- sired and visiting whom we pleased. We were granted unusual latitude in this re- gard because we were designated as the official committee to make to Congress a re- port on economic conditions which would in large part determine whether Russia should receive relief aid from the United States and from the United Nations Relief and Rehabilitation Administration. We not only conferred with the men of the Eremlin but talked with factory workers and peasants, with store clerks and housewives, with shop- keepers, and with minor officials of various cities and of the state. We visited schools, hospitals, museums, theaters, motion pic- ture houses, and art exhibits. We brought back several hundred pages of typewritten notes, which came through without censor- ship because they were brought out in a State Department dispatch case of the United States Government. In our official report? the following state- ments appear: “The present leaders-of Russia are a grou}: of exceedingly able and extremely self-con- fident men, who evidence no disposition whatsoever to depart in any degree from the established communistic system. They are concerning themselves first of all with keep- ing an iron control over the populace lest the first symptoms of possible discontent should grow, increased by contacts their armies have had with the easier ways of liv- ing in the capitalistic countries. * * * Russia today is definitely being operated as 2 tightly policed state. Freedom as we under- stand it does not exist in the U. 8.8. R. In complete opposition to the concept of freedom dedicated, as ours is, to the theory that the in- dividual is of importance, that his rights as an individual shall be protected against interference even from his government, and that he shall have the right to criticize and oppose the administration in power, the pres- ent ‘Russian phenomenon’ controls all things with an iron hand through the 1 European Btudy Trip Report to 78th Cong., ist sess., United States Government Print- ing Office, Public Document No. 89214.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD NKVD.’ In the U. 8. 6. R., no newspaper writer, no radio commentator, and no speaker from a public platform is permitted to criti- cize the government. A state police system known as the NKVD- operates throughout the empire to arrest and deal with anybody who engages in criticisms of the rules of Russia.” It is virtually impossible to exaggerate the cluse control which the Russian state, under the direction of its “Politburo,” exercises upon the thought and actions of the 185,- 000,000 Russian people who do not belong to the Communist Party. Every act of the 185,000,000 is determined by the tightly or- ganized group of 5,000,000 men and women who comprise the Communist Party member- ship in Russia, Time reporta the following recent state- ment by Andrei Zhadanov, secretary of the Cer tral Committee of the Communist Party in Russia: “Our literature is not a private enterprise. * * * We demand that our comrad¢s, us leaders of literature and as authors, should be guided by that without which the Soviet system cannot live—Poli- tics." Zhadanov ts currently engaged in spearheading a 4-month campaign to clean up Russia's intellectual front. The maga- zine Leningrad has been suspended, 2 mil- lion-ruble movie, The Monogrammed Diary, was spirited away without a trace after one viewing by the Cinema Ministry, and the distinguished composer Dimitri Shostakov- ich’s Ninth Symphony was criticized as be- ing hopelessly lacking in warmth of ideo- logical conviction.® APPLICATION TO THE UNITED STATES By observing and evaluating the results of government censorship and propaganda in other countries, we freedom-loving Amer- icans—especially educators, legislators, and students—should become more determined to keep this Republic free from the oppres- sion and restraints which inevitably accom- pany such controls. As one who has observed freedom of expression both as a Member of Congress for 8 years and as a teacher in college and high school for 14 years previ- ously, I am firm in my conviction that only through such freedoms as we enjoy for our sources of information can representative government succeed. Wartime controls appear to be an essential concomitant of war; but as long as they cease with the end of the war the irritations they caused and the excesses to which they led may do as much to strengthen our desire for free sources of information after the con- trols are removed as they did to bewilder and plague us while they lasted. Certainly in peacetime America there is virtually no Government control of the pub- lic press. Likewise, there is no Government control of American textbooks or of the read- ing material available to adults. Insofar as the Federal Government and the State gov- ernments are concerned, there is equally complete freedom on the public platform for speakers to voice anything but treason in proclaiming their pet theories, nostrums, or * Russia’s NEVD is ita state police force, organized and operating almost exactly like Hitler's Gestapo and the Thought Police of Japan. Recently the NKVD has been re- named the MVD, but its Gestapo-like func- tions have not changed. *The group of 14 top Communists who, with Premier Stalin, determine all Russian policies. ‘Time, October 14, 1946, p. 35. ‘Por more detailed information on how The Great Globe Itself by William C. Bullitt, both published by Charles Scribner & Sons, New York. creeds. Unfortunately, on rare occasions we hear of a mayor or a police chief or @ school board which denies use of a public platform to some of a quack social, economic, religious, or political doctrine. Buch mis- guided seal to protect the public from hear- ing unorthodox or “un-American” doctrines usually results in magnifying the importance . of the man and his message rather than in reducing his influence; but it reveals that there are mentalities even in freedom-loving America who would resort to Government control of the sources of information if they had sufficient authority to do so, It is tempt- ingly easy to favor free speech for those with whom we agree; it is less easy to protect it for those voicing doctrines repugnant to our ears. Unless we do the latter, however, the former soon becomes a right without signifi- cance or substance. Even the worst dictators of Europe authorise full “freedom of speech” for those who enunciate the party line or who conform to the status quo. RADIO REGULATION Except fo: these occasional excesses of per- sonal authority by shortsighted city officials or organizations which make mistuken at- tempts to “protect our freedoms by denying them,” Americans today are remarkably free from governmental! control over their sources of information except in the field of radio. Since, for technical reasons, only confusion can result from a complete absence of con- trol of the number, the nature, and the size of broadcasting stations, the Federal Com- munications Commission was established, with authority to evaluate the work of radio stations on the basis of their “public inter- est, convenience, or necessity.” Since 1927 every person desiring to operate a radio sta- tion nas been obliged to obtain the consent of, and secure a license from, the Commis- sion. Every 3 years he must prove his fitness to have his license renewed. Hence each radio station has a sword of Damocles hang- ing over its head; it constantly fears that some program or speaker may cause it to lose favor with the Federal Communications Commission. Some radio chains have in- vested millions of dollars with no assurance that they can continue to exist unless they court the favor of the FCC. All government commissions love author- ity and thrive on power. The FCC accord- ingly has interpreted its authority (and the United States Supreme Court a few years ago upheld that interpretation)* to include the power "to determine the composition of that traffic’; in other words, it has arrogated to itself the right to consider the composition of radio programs as one of the factors deter- mining whether it shall grant a new license or renew an old one. Thus, the power of censorship has clearly been placed in the hands of a Government agency, the Federal Communications Com- mission, insofar as American radio is con- cerned. Whether that power is positively exercised or simply used as 2, threat to en- force compliance with what the FCC con- siders “proper radio-program traffic,” it is clear that the American freedoms enjoyed in the realms of the press, the platform, and the schools do not exist in the field of radio. It is to this fret but significant departure from our rule of freedom that enlightened citizens, educators, and legislators in Con- gress should devote their active, prompt, and effective attention. Some of the more public-spirited members of the Federal Communications Commission have recognized the evils of our present sys- tem for licensing broadcasting stations. Commissioner Craven, for example, put it this way: *U. 8. Supreme Court Report (October term, 1942), vol. 319, p. 190. A1385 “Freedom of speech and freedom of the prese are, in simple terms, merely freedom from fear of Government reprisals or pres- sures for what is said or printed or for what is not said or printed. * * °* The real freedom of the press guaranteed by the Bill of Rights is freedom in the true sense to criticize the Government without fear of reprisals. If the Bill of Rights is to mean anything for radio, it should mean freedom from governmental reprisals or pressures administered by the radio licensing author- ity, namely, the Federal Communications Commission.” Commissioner Craven was eternally correct in that statement. As any student of radio programs or anyone conversant with the radio industry knows, however, such freedom as that envisaged by the Bill of Rights does not exist in the realm of radio tcday. We have already had some ugly instances where- in radio newscasters and commentators ex- pressing views distasteful to the administra- tion in Washington were “pressured” off the alr by not-so-vague hints that unless their critical comment was softened or stopped, the Federal Communications Commission ‘might be very loath to renew broadcasting licenses for the recalcitrant stations. THE REMEDY What is the remedy for this first faint sign of controlled information as it exists in the Government-radio relationship today? Since technical conditions make the limiting and licensing of radio outlets essential, the li- censing should be done by a revamped Fed- eral Communications Commission composed of representatives selected equally from both major political parties. A six-member FCC could, for example, “take politics out of radio" if three were selected from the Demo- cratic Party and three from the Republican Party, provided the party leaders in each case were permitted to nominate their own choices for this important position. Simply making it mandatory that three members of each party must be chosen would be inef- fective if the appointments could be made by the President from those who are reg- istered as Democrats or Republicans but whose fidelity to the party may be suspect.. lf the President were required to appoint the members nominated from each party by the respective party leaders themselves, there would be no possibility of packing the su- preme court of radio. Furthermore, the terms of the members of the FCC should be comparatively short, with expirations so occurring that some ex- perienced members would always remain on the Commission and that the equality of representation between the two parties would always be maintained. Since all ac- tions of the Commission would thus require a bipartisan vote, radio would be freed from the present threats to its liberty of action. While not pertinent to this discussion, which is limited to governmental controls of sources of information, it should not go un- noticed that freedom of speech on the radio is also imperiled by the fact that rich adver- tisers or sponsors can buy up important wave lengths on large radio chains and thus sub- sidize opinion which they desire to dissem- inate. Action can and should be taken to en- sure that the radio diet of the listening pub- lic is not too heavily seasoned in conformity with the tastes of the fattest purses of the Jand. Competition in the field of newspa- pers and magazines is a check against such mental malnutrition; since adequate com- petition in radio is technically impossible at the present time, other safeguards must be found, BUMMARY In conclusion, it is relevant to point out that our present comparative freedom from
A1386 Government control of the sources of in- formation in America is not necessarily permanent, Other countries have had such freedoms and lost them. Some lost them abruptly. Some lost them by the slow proc- esses of attrition and neglect. We who work in the field of free expression in America have & responsibility to our craft. We should ex- pose propaganda for what it is, wherever and whenever it raises its ugly head. We should oppose censorship in peacetime no matter by whom it is tried or for what purpose. While we should caution our associates not to abuse our inherited freedoms, we should resist to the utmost any attempt of Government at any level to substitute political control for self-restraint. Free men and women cannot protect their liberties without access to free sources of information, and an enduring peace cannot provide security for all human- ity until and unless all the world is finally freed from the shackles of propaganda and censorship imposed by the self-seeking rulers of unenlightened peoples. Theory and Composition of Our Armed Forces EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHAN GURNEY OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 31 (legislative day of Monday, March 24), 1947 Mr. GURNEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrcorp an editorial on the subject Theory and Composition of Our Armed Forces, published in the March-April 1947 issue of the Army Ord- nance Magazine. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: MONTH BY MONTH Col. Hznry Cazor Lopes, United States Sen- ator from Massachusetts, has raised a series of questions about the theory and composi- tion of our armed forces. He is without doubt the best qualified Member of the United States Senate to propound such ques- tions and to assay the answers. He has come closest of anyone thus far in getting down to brass tacks—with or without the ad- vice and consent of the brass hats—as to the basic principles and policies which must un- derlie our national-security policy, already dangerously delayed. But the delay will be less costly if, in the long run, we make haste slowly and give utmost attention publicly and officially to the correctness of the con- clusions rather than the speed with which they were reached. The Senator, whose military record in peace and in war is of outstanding charac- ter, addressed his questions to Dr. Karl T. Compton, distinguished scientist and edu- cator, who is chairman of the President's Advisory Commission on Universal Train- ing. Here are the questions propounded by Senator Lopcr: “1, Is the Government of the United States, acting through its legislative and executive branches, organizing the total human and material resources of the Nation to provide national security against total war? “2. Does the Government of the United 68tates possess conclusions which are at one and the same time authoritative, impartial, comprehensive, and up to date regarding the effect of modern science on national security in the light of the facts of the world situa- tion and of the capacity of our economy? “8. Are these conclusions sufficiently firm to enable the American people to tell what are the just demands to be made on their money and their manpower? . “4. Do these conclusions include definite information on the following points? (a) The effect of recent scientific developments and future scientific probabilities on the nature of air, ground, and sea warfare. (b) The most effective method for allocating manpower as between industry, labor, agriculture, es- sential scientific research, and other civilian occupations on the one hand, and the armed services on the other. (c) The method for allocating manpower among air, ground, and sea forces. (d) The length of service for air, ground, and sea forces. (e) The most effective way to procure needed manpower. (f) The probable importance of fifth-column activity and biological warfare in any future war. (g) The need for underground installa- tions. “5, What is the present ability of the United States: (a) To hold strategic air, ground, and sea bases’ (b) To provide im- mediate defense against air and surface at- tacks? (c) To undertake counteroffensive action on all types? (d) To discharge our immediate responsibilities, viz.; the occupa- tion of Germany and Japan, the provision of military forces for the United Nations, the support of American foreign policy in north China and Trieste, and the mainte- nance of communications to overseas bases? (e) To mobilize rapidly? (f) To eliminate efficiently the deadwood in the personnel of the Regular air, ground, and sea services? (g) To get quick decisions on matters affect- ing the air, ground, and sea services? “6. What is the present degree of Ameri- can supremacy in scientific research and development?” In reply, Dr. Compton said that the Com- mission under his chairmanship is consider- ing and attempting to secure authoritative information on most of the subjects raised by the Senator since they are inherent in the general problem. In accepting the Pres- idential assignment last November, Dr. Compton himself went on record with this very cogent observation: “I believe that there are other very im- portant aspects of national security in addi- tion to a reservoir of citizens with military training. These include, of course, our Regular Army, Navy, and Air Force, together with the Nationa] Guard. I think it is especially important that we establish a highly mobile striking force equipment with the most powerful weapons which can be d:vised and highly trained on the technical side to use these weapons and prepared on minimum notice to trike any place in the world where aggression against us breaks out. “I, also, am convinced that our security demands an exceedingly active, forward- looking, and continuing program of research and dev ‘opment on new weapons. If the past war taught us anything about military tactics, it was to the effect that no new war will be fought by the old weapons and devices. Our security demands that we be in the forefront of new weapon development. “It seems to me that the most important problem of national securit, is to determine as best we can the relative emphasis which should be devoted to the factors mentioned above in order that our country may have the maximum military rtrength in return for the amourt of money from our national budget which Congress and the country will make availabl« for military-seourity purposes. “Therefore, before advocating an all-out program for universal military training I think we should have some sound basis on which to judge whether the proposed mili- tary-training program fits in proper propor- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tion into the larger program. For example, if the money necessary to operate universal military training were so great as to prevent proper strength of our permanent armed forces or prevent the establishment of a mobile striking force or curtail the program of research and development on new weapons, then I would feel that the universal military training program is an unwise in- vestmernt of public funds and effort.” Here we have from two eminently quali- fled experts the closest approach yet attained toward a sound preparedness policy in the light of our experiences, our successes and failures, and our national and international obligations growing out of World War II. At long last the problem of maintaining our armed forces is to be viewed as an integrated and not a piecemeal undertak- ing. Throughout these studies it should be made abundantly evident to all our people that science and industry are equally if not more important segments of our national security than manpower. Indeed, a reading of the war record prompts the belief that the development of small strategic and tactical forces—small in man- power, that is—is far more advantageous than the doctrine of the big battalions and that, coordinately, a dollar spent on research and development of the new weapons will be worth many spent on universal military training. This is particularly true in this atomic age when new inventions and dis- coveries are crowding one upon another. Since cost to the taxpayer must be an important consideration for years to come, an equally cogent observation is that the preservation of the national economy must not be overlooked in framing the over-all] security policy. Taking a leaf from the book of the Right Honorable Winston Churchill, those who decide upon our over-all national security policy should not even un- wittingly sit in at the dismemberment of the American economic system which outpro- duced in men and munitions the Socialist and Communist economies of our principal allies. Senator Lopar has expressed the attitude of countless numbers of his fellow country- men. His logic is sound and his expres- sion of it timely. This and the findings of Dr. Compton’s commission bid fair to be the closest approaches yet made toward a policy of national security which will take into consideration all and not merely a few of the essential factors. It is to be hoped that munition power through long-range programs of scientific re- search and development will come out of it all on at least equal terms with manpower. To do less will be to blind ourselves to one of the gravest and most costly lessons of World War II. Keeping the Record Straight EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, is it not about time that the administra- tion stops shipping war materials to Rus- sia? Has this administration learned nothing from the ghastly consequences of arming Japan? How reassuring js the conduct of Russia in these perilous and decisive hours in our peace negotiations?
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Under leave to extend my-remarks, I am inserting the following article by Marquis Childs which sopeared March 28, 1947, in the Washington Post ' Canina (By Marquis Childs) MATTER OF RECORD In the ent over the proposed pro- gram for and Turkey, a lot is made of the fact that the United States bypassed the United Nations. Those opposing the pro- gram try to make it sound as though this country had deliberately set out to knife the UN. A little tact might have prevented this phase of the argument. In early confer- ences on the proposal, Senator ArgtHur H. VaNpswperc argued that we could do two things: 1. Notify the UN what we intended to do and why we were going to do it; and 2. Ask the UN to keep jurisdiction over the border dispute while we supplied aid for the rehabilitation of Greece. Those steps, it seems to me, should have been taken. We would now be on sounder But when it comes to giving the UN the cold shoulder, it would be well to look at the record before too much blame is heaped on the United States. The record shows that the Soviet Union has ignored or turned down most of the UN's specialized agencies. These are the agencies intended to implement the decisions taken in the UN Assembly and the Beonomic and Social Council. This briefly, ds the record: World Bank and International Monetary Pund: Russia accepted invitation to Bretton Woods Conference in 1944 and took active part. In reply to a question whether she intended to become a member of the fund, Russia replied the following year that the decision was under consideration. Through 1946 a place was left open for the Soviet Union and, in August of that year, Moscow was asked whetber or not a Russian delegate would like to sit in on the board meetings as an observer. No reply was received. United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organisation: While Russia origi- nally agreed to discuss such an Organisation, she turned down an invitation to attend a conference called to implement it. When the executive committee was set up, a place was left for the USSR. Last July the cum- mittee met, with Russia not present. An agreement between UN and UNESCO was ratified last December, with the Soviets not voting. Food and Agriculture Organization: Russia attended original conference at Hot Springs and approved the plan of organization. By May of 1945, 22 countries had accepted. In October of that year the Soviets said further study of the Organization was required, and after that nothing was heard from Moscow. International Civil Aeronautics Organisza- tion: A seat was held for Russia but, in spite of repeated coaxing, the Soviets declined. International Labor Organization: Russia was at one point listed as a member of this League of Nations inheritance, but withdrew in 1940. The USSR was invited to the con- ference in Paris, but declined. International Refugee Organization: Rus- ala voted against constituting IRO when the constitution was adopted by the general as- sembly. The Soviets have taken the stand, v! 'y opposed by Mrs. Eleanor Roose- velt as a United States delegate, that refugees should be compelled to return to the nations : Asin the case meetings of an interim commission. But if and when who is ratified, it will be the first specialized agency Russia has joined. As the record shows, repeated efforts were made without success to draw the Soviet Union into this specialized work of the UN. Soviet refusal to join tin has held up UN organization on several fronts. Acting Bemwetary cf State Dean Acheson was asked why we did not continue to sup- port UNEBA. the UN relief organisation, which might then have been used to aid Greece. He replied that polit: in the UN had blocked earlier efforts to get larger re- Nef supplies to Greece. As a debating society between two rival teams, the UN cannot be very effective. Too often. that is what it seems to be at the level of the assembly anc the security council. To walt for lengthy debate to decide whether UN relief would go to Greece would be to wait for Greece's downfall. We must take some biame for UN's feebleness, but those Americans who would put all blame on us at this point reveal merely their own prejudice. Mr. Bullitt’s Warning EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. CARL T. DURHAM OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. DURHAM. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rac- orp, I include the following editorial from the High Point (N. C.) Enterprise: A WARNING William C. Bullitt was the United States’ first Ambassador to Russia following this Nation’s recognition of the Soviet Union. He went to Moscow as one anxious to cement real friendship between Russia and this coun- try—so anxious that at the time some de- nounced him as a dangerous radical. He served between 3 and 4 years. He has kept in constant touch with Russia—insofar as that is possible for one outside the tron cur- tain--and with the relations between the two countries ever since. He should be an authority on Russia and its attitude toward the outside world in general and the United States in particular. Yesterday Mr. Bullitt, during prolonged testimony before a committee of Congress, expressed the emphatic opinion that Russia plans an ultimate attack on the United States—in accord with the Communist Party doctrine that communism cannot live in a world with democratic and capitalistic coun- tries. He voiced his belief that if Russia had had the atomic bomb and we had not, al- ready it would have launched an attack. He declared, as many another has during the last 2 years, that through the infiltration of Communists into the Government and or- ganisations of the United States—some ad- mitting that they are Comzaunists but many others lying about it in accordance with the dictates of Moscow—Russia is doing its ut- moat to weaken the Government and morale of the United States. Does anyone believe that Mr. Bullitt ts a crackpot whose warnings are to be dis- missed witbout serious consideration? Is it not obvious that the Communists are already boring from within, seeking to stir up strife, using whatever organizations it can influence and whatever posts its fellow trav- elers can acquire for its own subversive ends? Mr. Bullitt said that the American Com- munist Party and its counterparts in other nations is used by Russia as a fifth column “just in the way Hitler used them—only much more effectively.” “The existence of a fifth column of a national Communist Party in the United A1387 States is even a greater threat than was Hitler's fifth column,” he added. “Its aim is to weaken the American Government for the ultimate assault which the Soviet Union intends to make on the United States. We know there is a group of men so important to the Soviet Union that they are not allowed to reveal that they are members of the party. I do not believe that we have sufficient infor- mation on all these groups to put our hands on them effectively.” All that comes, please remember, from the maan who took the lead in an effort to make friends with Russia, following his appoint- ment by President Roosevelt—from a man whose greatest efforts have been to study Rus- sia and its government. Are we to say that this man is a scatter- brained alarmist? Or are we to heed Mr. Bullitt when he urges the United States demand that Stalin call @ halt, mean it, and prove it before Russia is ready for its “ultimate attack”—and when he urges that we rid our Nation of the Com- munist rate boring from within? It is upon the answer to such questions that our Nation's future—and that of the world—in large measure depends. Resolution of Rochester Diecesan Holy Name Union EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KENNETH B. KEATING OF NEW yYorK IN THE HOUSE @F REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, on March 3 I called the attention of the Members of the House to the grave in- justice practiced upon Archbishop Aloysius Stepinac of Zagreb. Every Member should read his stir- ring words uttered in his own defense at the travesty of justice called his trial. I have now received from the Roches- ter Diocesan Holy Name Union of Roch- ester, N. Y., a resolution adopted by that organization, protesting against the despotism now rampant in the world, so poignantly symbolized by the Stepinac incident. Because this resolution bespeaks an acute awareness on the part of an im- portant segment of my constituency of the problems which face our Christian country and its leaders today, and be- cause Holy Week is the period in par- ticular when we should turn our thoughts toward the suffering in body and mind of our brethren in foreign lands, sons with us of one Father. under leave to extend my remarks I include this resolution: RocwHxstErR Diocesan Hourxy Name UNION, Rochester, N. Y., March 20, 1947. Hon. Ksnners B. Kzgarrn, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. Deak Sm: The following resolution was adopted at a meeting of the Rochester Diocesan Holy Name Union: “We wish to register a vigorous protest against the despotic violation of human rights now being practiced in that area of eastern Europe figuratively described as ‘pehing the iron curtain.’ “As American citizens devoted to respect for the dignity of human rights, we appeul
A1388 in bebalf of those victims of tyranny whose tragic fate is symbolized by the unjust im- prisonment of Archbishop Aloysius Stepinac, of Zagreb. “In the face of such tyrannous violation of the American doctrine of four freedoms, we Americans must not remain silent nor rest until all men everywhere enjoy true liberty in fact as well as in theory. “We respectfully call upon all political leaders in the United States to raise their voices clearly and continuously in behalf of those millions in eastern Europe now trapped in the bondage of tyranny and weighed down with the fetters of despotism. “We urge our statesmen, the heirs of Wash- ington and Lincoln, to unite in a moral pro- test against the reign of terror now raging behind the iron curtain. “If we Americans are sincerely dedicated to a world of four freedoms we must not turn our backs on the plight of those millions now crushed by ruthless oppression.” Very sincerely yours, Lewis A. ScHuR, President, Rochester Deanery. What Should American Policy Be in the Middle East Crisis? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN DAVIS LODGE OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. LODGE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following radio address made by me on March 18, 1947: My fellow Americans, this is, of course, a very broa subject and I feel that a detailed answer cannot be made until the administra- tion has provided more information particu- larly with respect to those aspects of the President's message which dea] with innova- tions in our foreign policy. In the meantime, however, I think certain comments in broad outline are clearly indicated. We are faced with a grim choice. I believe that the Presi- dent has chosen the lesser of two evils. Nevertheless, if we are to assume the vastly increased responsibilities which the President suggests, we must not only define these re- sponsibilities but undertake them for the purposes proclaimed by the President. He said to the Congress: “I believe that it must be the policy of the United States to support free peoples who are resisting attempted sub- jugation by armed minorities or by outside pressures.” It Was on this basis that he requested the cooperation of Congress. It is on this basis that I believe cooperation should be given. . In the meantime, it is to be hoped that the administration will lay all the facts before the Congress in order that the details of this crisis may be exposed to public view. It is also vital that the administration ad- here strictly to its own policy. In other words, we should not on the one hand add to the already heavy tax burden of the Ameri- can people while on the other hand we are increasing that burden by making concessions to the very forces with which we appear to be in continual disagreement. We have seen in the course of the last 80 years that the world’s wars are a matter for our deep conoern. Our generation has lived in an almost continuous state of emergency in \thich the alarms outside our frontiers have had a tremendous impact upon the lives of our people. We have tried to learn our lesson. In the brief months which have elapsed since the termination of World War It we have talked of one world as enthu- siastically as we once spoke of the Monroe Doctrine. The Monroe Doctrine proclaimed our interest in what might become of South America then 80 days distant. The Presi- dent's proclamation declares our interest in what may happen in Greece now 380 hours distant. Self preservation demands that we face the issue as presented to us and that we realize that the President’s pronounce- ment is based on the advice of our high military authorities. It is time that we became aware of.a few basic facts and thereby bring our under- standing of our predicament in line with the preternatural power of the atom bomb. First: Let us recognize once and for all that there is no sharp dividing line between war and peace. Wars are but extensions of peacetime conflicts—the final confession of man’s inability to solve his differences by peaceful means. Accordingly, if we were justified in participating in the world’s wars. we are at least as justified in participating in the world’s peacetime conflicts. Second: We must abandon the idea that we can op- pose the disruptive forces now at large in the world without interfering in the internal affairs of other countries. We must inter- fere. We must interfere in order to bring relief and economic aid to those who need it rather than to those who do not and who use it to destroy the very principles which are stil] widely cherished. We must inter- fere in order that these nations shall not be a constant drain on our resources. We must interfere in order that we may rehabilitate rather than pauperize these destitute human beings. We must interfere in order to pro- tect the Amertcan people from the use of their money in the cause of communism. More than $2,000,000,000 in relief and eco- nomic aid have been expended since the war’s end and largely through UNRRA. This money did much to strengthen the anti- freedom forces, It helped the:very forces to which we are opposed. It assisted Com- munist and terrorist minorities to tmpose their will on freedom-loving majorities. I am relieved that the administration has at last seen the error of its ways. Iam happy that it has abandoned a policy of appease- ment, There is no question that the betrayal of Poland at Yalta, the help we have furnished to Tito, the hands-off policy in China, the uncontrolled expenditures of millions of the American taxpayers’ dollars, as well as many other incidents in the administration’s con- fused approach to postwar problems, have contributed to our present predicament. Had the administration been more decisive and clear-headed, we might not now be con- fronted with this grave crisis. Let us hope that the discords and confusions of the past can provide the harmonies of the future. Let us face the actualities as they are pre- sented to us by our President. We must do more than use the power of money. We have been asked to “authorize the detail of Amer- ican civilian and military personnel to Greece and Turkey at the request of those countries and for the purpose of supervising the use of such financial and material assistance as may be furnished.” This means involve- ment. In order to bring this about, in order to shoulder these responsibilities, we must do more than simply export American dol- lars to relieve human distress. True charity means more than the writing of a check. True participation means more than finan- cial and economic ald, Now, that does not mean that we should be warmongers. In a nation of our demon- strated power, in a people of our mighty achievements, a show of truculence would be as unfitting as it is unnecessary. It does mean, however, that we should stop apolo- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD gizing for our share in the recent war. It does mean that we must renounce the hope that we can prevent World War III by meth- ods which failed to prevent World War II. It does mean that we should place our faith in the force of principle rather than in the power of appeasement. It does mean that we must bolster these principles, not only by our industrial and military might but by a dynamic concept of our own convictions. It is my profound belief that a peaceful ac- commodation can more easily be predicated on American strength than on American weakness. We can perhaps indulge the hope that self- assurance and firmness now will reveal the essential debility of communism. To quote from Abraham Lincoln: “In our intercourse with other nations it behooves us to be at once compromising and stern. If interna- tional understanding can be perpetuated by giving a little more and taking a little less. why then let us give a little more and take & little less, But never must we do all the giving. Rather in the case of a long threat- ening misunderstanding let us prepare for the worst and work for the best.” We can work for the best through the good offices of the United Nations and we can best prepare for the worst by an abiding sense that until the United Nations has gathered vital momentum the choice for the world lies between a Pax Sovietica and a Pax Americana. This is the issue. This is the salient fact. This is the essential challenge of the hour. Are we prepared to nullify the tragic sacri- fices so gallantly made in World War II? Are we now ready to consign the rest of the world and ourselves along with it to the ash-heap of a totalitarian subjugation which differs but little from that which recently engulfed millions of lives? “There is a tide in the affairs of men which taken at the flood leads on to fortune.” Make no mistake about it. This is it. This is the tide. It is at the flood. The rest is up to us. MopgrATor. Congressman Loner, one ques- tion that has been asked in Congress and elsewhere, and has been worrying many peo- ple, is that of the United Nations. By going into Greece alone, in a situation affecting, as the President said, international peace, are we by-passing the United Nations? Would you care to comment on that? Mr. Lopox. The United States, in taking the action recommended by the President, is not undermining the United Nations. On the contrary, it proposes to take action in defense of the charter which the United Nations is incapable of taking in time. The United Na- tions already has a committee making an on- the-spot investigation. But, as is wel’ stated by the New York Times “it will be poor service to the United Nations if Greece has been en- gulfed by a Communist tide by the time the committee makes its report.” Furthermore, the United Nations has neither the money nor the power to act. Moreover, it is almost certain that if the United Nations had the money and the power the Soviet Union would veto such action. It 1s also to be noted that the United Na- tions has not yet arrived at agreements with member nations with respect to military par- ticipation. In spite of all this, I think it highly im- portant that we reaffirm our loyalty as a member of the United Nationa by stating our position to the United Nations through the secretary-general and request Mr. Austin to explain our proposals to that body, In that fashion we would do much for the moral au- thority and prestige of the United Nations by giving a clear indication that we have no intention of evading our obligation to consult with them. Mankind's aspirations for a peaceful world demand that the United Na- tions receive encouragement while the Greeks and the Turks receive our aid.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Hamstringing USES EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JOHN J. ROONEY OF wEW YoRK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. ROONEY. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orp, I include the following article by Thomas L. Stokes, from the Washington Daily News of March 81, 1947: Hamsraincinc USES (By Thomas L. Stokes) In the numerous drastic economies which the House voted a few days ago in the Labor Department’s appropriation for next year it carved the United States Employment Serv- ioe down to such a skeleton that it will be incapable of maintaining a national employ- ment system. That was the purpose for which it was created, back in 1938, in the midst of de- pression. In the Wagner-Peyser Act, Con- greas recognized unemployment as a na- tional problem by setting up USES to co- operate with State employment services in finding jobs. In the years since, USES has justified itself for its services, in cooperation with the States, to industry, labor and, more recently, to veterans. It functioned so effectively, built up standards and procedures for job placement so well, that when the war came it was assigned the task of channeling mil- lions of workers into war industry, a big job which it did most capably. Because of the emergency, USES was given temporary can- trol and direction of State employment sys- tems. The system, in short, was federalized. After the war Congress restored the Federal-State cooperative system, turning control of State employment services back to the States. USES, though, was to con- tinue its functions of coordinating and as- sisting the States as provided by law. That is, until the House last week knocked ite appropriation to $900,000, a 74-percent cut below President Truman's budget recom- mendation, That will require the agency to reduce its staff from 875 to 202 and to close all of ite regional offices with the possible exception of one on the Pacific Coast. About all it would be able to do would be to serve as a fiscal agent to review State budget re- quests for funds appropriated for mainte- nance of State systems and to audit accounts. Protests are coming in from certain types of business that require seasonal labor, par- ticularly canners, which indicates the need of a national clearing house for transient labor. But, further than this, the USES also serves all sorts of business and industry of stable employment. The search for skilled help and the search of skilled help for jobs know no State lines. During the war, USES compiled a job dic- tionary which listed some 30,000 job classi- fications and kept this constantly up to date, 80 that the call from one locality for certain types of skills could be met from another locality through the clearing house. This sort of service would have to be stopped under the appropriations cut. Congress would be taking quite a respon- sibility in doing away with it—with at least the prospect of a recession being forecast by economists. This will be one concern that will face the Senate when it considers the Labor Department bill, States are unable individually to perform this clearing-house function adequately. But that is only one function that would be affected. Another is a Job-occupational analysis carried on in cooperation with in- dustry that industry has found valuable. Still another is a job-placement program just started in connection with colleges and universities for GI students who will gradu- ~ ate as specialists of one sort or another. This ts a service USES provides, among others, for the Veterans’ Employment Serv- ice, the appropriation of which was itself cut 34 percent to $1,756,800, so that the staff of that Service also will be reduced here to only a handful. What its seen, if the House action is up- held by the Senate, is a alow deterioration of the national employment system, for the TSES also helped, by its surveys and its surveillance, to keep up standards in States to protect labor. There is a tendency in States, under pressure of special interests, tu whittle down standards. Playing Politics With Food EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALTER H. JUDD OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following article by R. H. Markham, from the Christian Science Monitor of March 28, 1947: PLAYING POLITICS WITH FOOD (By R. H. Markham) Representatives of the Communist-domi- nated v Government have asked America for food through the International Emergency Food Council. They say that no fewer than 5,000,000 persons in western Yugoslavia are about to undergo the worst crisis of the last two critical years. . The United States Government refused the request because of more urgent needs else- where, and the Yugoslav Ambassador in Washington has again pressed the appeal. I believe that Americans should do every- thing possible to help all hungry men, women, and children. But I would also urge that they form a clear picture of the condi- tions that have deprived Marshal Tito's coun- trymen of food. Americans are asked to feed Yugoslavs because Tito’s policies have made them hungry. The famine ts largely political, not meteorological. Yugoslavia, since its establishment in 1918, has been a food-exporting country. It pro- duces large quantities of wheat, corn, pota- toes, pork, and poultry, considerable cheese, and fruit. It is an abounding land. Prac- tically the only staple food it ever imported was rice, and that in small quantities—never as much as 25,000 tons in a year. It ex- ported eggs, livestock, wheat, and corn, some- times a tenth of the whole corn crop. Yugo- slavia's food and timber exports always ex- ceeded its importation of manufactured articles, giving it a favorable trade balance. Yugoslavia’s arable land, covering about a third of the surface of the country, was un- evenly distributed. Large regions in Bosnia, a, Dalmatia and Montenegro are “passive,” while Slavonia and Voivodina (northeast Yugoslavia) are extremely pro- ductive. Serbia produces more food than it consumes and Macedonia is normally self- supporting. Each year, without exception, food must be sent from the “active” to the “passive” areas. After this annual equaliza- tion, much is left over for export. the recent war, parte of Yugoslavia were badly devastated, but they were the “passive areas.” The fertile valleys of the A1389 Save, Drave, Tisza, and Danube were not ravaged to any large extent. Serbia remained largely intact and with considerable food reserves. Macedonia underwent little demo- ition. The principal logs in the agricultural area was of livestock. Also, there has been no extreme general drought in Yugoslavia. Weather conditions have been fair tn most of the productive regions. In addition, the war ended in Serbia by Christmas 1944, in the rich Banat a little later, and in the whole of Yugoslavia by May 1945. Most spring planting in 1946, all fall planting of that year and all planting during 1946 could proceed without external interference. Most of Yugoslavia has had 2 years in which to replenish its food supply. Another favorable element in the situation is the fact that practically all Yugoslav agri- culture is small-scale farming. The whoie village family is ordinarily engaged in pro- duction and they work with simple tools, such as hoes and sickles. War does not radi- cally dorange such farming. It's fairly easy to get out the old hoe and scythe. The main cause of the present food defi- ciency is Tito’s antipeasant policy. He, not the weather man, produced the atmosphere that dried up the fields. The Serbian peas- ant leader, Dragoleub Yovanovitch, has called Tito’s agrarian policy a “stab in the back for the peasants.” Many Yugoslav peasants have been treated as “enemies of the people.” The regime confiscated large areas of excellent Danubian farm land— formerly belanging to non-Slavs—and set up state farms or Sovhozi. It also brought in colonists, whose only qualification was that they had become Communists. It imposed a rigid food col- lection upon the Serb peasants. It sup- pressed all genuine Peasant Party activity. It kept Croatian peasant leaders in prison. It launched a crusade against the Serb peas- ant leaders, resulting in brutal physical at- tacks. It set up Communist-dominated ad- ministrations in the villages, causing distrust and deep enmity. It shattered confidence in private ownership of land and ownership of crops. ; As a result of all this, some flelds weren’t planted, others were poorly tended and pro- duction fell, while part of what was raised was hidden. Yugoslavia has millions of acres as fertile and well watered as those in the Mississippi Valley. At least 90 percent of them are normally planted to cereals. Its peasants are among the most enterprising and indus- trious on earth. It has received more than 400,000,000 worth of aid from UNRRA, equal to about two annual state budgets. The great Yugoslav rivers have flowed without diminution, fair rains have fallen, peasants have stood ready with hoe and plow. Yet Ohio, Iowa, Kansas, and Canada are called upon to help feed a third of the Yugolslavs (5,000,000) . The main reason is Tito’s antipeasant pol- icy. He is making humble women and chil- dren pay for his Communist crusade. His might was built from the hunger of “the weary and heavy laden.” The people are the victims of Tito’s people's government. Incentive EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ANGIER L. GOODWIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday. March 31, 1947 Mr. GOODWIN. Mr. Speaker, an edi- torial in the Melrose (Mass.) Free Press
A1390 of March 27, 1947, a splendid weekly pub- lished in my own home city seems to me worthy of a wider reading and I there- fore call it to the attention of my col- leagues by appending it hereto under leave to extend my remarks: INCENTIVE It becomes increasingly apparent that all too few present-day Americans realize the dynamic force of incentive, and the tremen- dous part it has played in creating here the greatest productive economy and the finest social system in world history. Now, there is nothing mysterious about incentive—it is quite easy to understand and from that understanding to appreciate why it contributes so much to human welfare wherever it is allowed to operate. When in- centive is in action, the more work one does, or the better work one does, the greater the reward one receives. It's just as simple as that. Even Josef Stalin recognizes the value of incentive. When he became Dictator of Russia, practically the first thing he did, was to proclaim that the worker who worked harder or better was to have better food, better clothing, a better home to live in, etc., than his less industrious and less skillful fellow worker. But there is a force at work in America which deliberately or mistakenly is trying to destroy incentive, working through our Federal Government. When the Govern- ment, through taxation withholds or with- draws money from a worker, even though such levies are used to provide him with goods and services, there is less incentive left to induce him to do more or better work. The reasons for this are obvious. The goods and services thus provided by Government are available to him without any need for more or better work on his part; and in many cases those goods and services are not what he would choose if he had freedom of choice. Money deducted from wages and taken from employers for such things as social security and unemployment benefits, may contribute to a worker’s welfare and secur- ity, but it does take away considerable of his incentive to do more and better work. It follows, therefore, that if the Federal Government should undertake to give addi- tional goods and services, such as is con- templated under the proposed free medical and hospitalization legislation, it will be forced to take more money out of the pay envelopes of the workers and from employ- ers. And in rendering these additional serv- ices, the workers’ incentive to do more or better work will be further decreased. The reward for doing more or better work cannot be greater than the value added to the work. When a man whose work was worth $60 a week begins to produce work worth $75 a week, unfortunately under the present set-up, he cannot be given a fair share of the additional $15. The tax collector is on hand to take a slice of that $15. While it is true that he gets some benefits for those tax deductions, he would still get them even if he didn't work the extra $15 worth. Thus incentive is at least partially destroyed. The danger inherent in this is that there is a point at which deductions from wages would become so great that incentive would be wiped out. There lies the fundamental defect of all public services paid out of taxes or by any kind of compulsory levy. These taxes or levies purchase for the worker serv- ices and things that he may wish to have, or that may be good for him, but they de- crease the amount of money which he other- wise would have available to spend on the things he personally wants. Only money which the worker can earn to spend personally is an incentive to him to work harder or better. No one ever heard of anyone working harder or better in order to be able to pay more taxes. Yes, defi- nitely, there is a limit to how much of the worker’s wages can be withdrawn in taxes and levies, without completely destroying his in- centive to do more and better work. And if we ever reach that limit when incentive is a “dead pigeon,” it will mean economic and social suicide for America. Relief of Starvation in Moldavia EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN DAVIS LODGE OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. LODGE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following letters: Magcw 11, 1947. Hon. Wrm11aM L. CLAYTON, Under Secretary for Economie Affairs, State Department, Washington, D.C. Dagar Mpg. SECRETARY: It is my understand- ing that last month the President of the United States gave instructions that 7,000 tons of food en route to the United States Army overseas be diverted to Rumania for distribution without charge, in order to re- lieve starvation in Moldavia. In this connection, I shall appreciate it very much if you will be so kind as to an- swer the following questions: 1. To what funds will the purchase of this food be charged? 2. What is the amount of the funds so used? 8. From what source did the State De- partment learn of the Moldavian famine? 4. Have representatives of the United States Embassy in Bucharest checked Moldavian famine conditions on the spot? 5. Will the State Department show the Committee on Foreign Affairs such Bucharest Embassy reports as pertain to the Moldavian famine? 6. Will the distribution of American food within Moldavia be supervised by American personnel? 7. Will the Rumanian Red Cross be charged with a part of the distribution of such food? 8. Is the Rumanian Red Cross free from the control of the Rumanian Government? 9. Approximately how much food was ex- ported to the Soviet Union from Rumania in 1946? If the approximate amount is un- known, is it your opinion that the amount withdrawn has made an appreciable drain on Rumanian food resources? 10. Approximately how much local food has been consumed by the Soviet armies garrisoning Rumania in 1946? Has this requisitioning of food been ea considerable drain on Rumanian food resources? 11. Is Soviet Russia at the present time helping to relieve Moldavian famine con- ditions? I thank you in advance, Mr. Secretary, for your courteous attention to this matter. With kind personal regards, Sincerely yours, Joun Davis Lopas. Mascm 19, 1047, The Honorable Jon Davis Longs, House of Representatives. My Drar Mx. Lopas: In response to your letter of March 11, I am herein answering APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the questions which you have asked con- cerning the shipment of 7,000 tons of relief food to Rumania, as recently directed by the President. Nos. 1 and 2: The 7,000 tons of food con- sisted of 4,500 tons of 10-in-1 rations and 2,600 tons of dried beans originally consigned to the United States Army for feeding dis- placed persons in Austria. This food was originally bought and paid for by the United States Army out of their civilian relief ap- propriation. When the ship was diverted, however, the American Red Cross assumed financial responsibility up to $3,600,000, to cover the cost of procurement of additional food plus the handling, transportation, and shipping charges as a replacement to the dis- placed-persons program. Nos. 8 and 4: Reports on the crop failures this year throughout the lower Danube Basin, and specifically in Moldavia, have been received from many sources including our mission staff, special representatives of the Department of Agriculture, officials of the International Emergency Food Council, and officials of the American military mis- sion in Rumania. The urgency of the situa- tion was recently reported in personal cables from General Schuyler, United States military representative; Allied Control Com- mission, Rumania; the American Red Cross representative in Rumania, Mr. Sigerist; and from the United States representative in Rumania, Mr. Berry. No. 5: Although a number of the cabies referred to above are now classified, the De- partment will be glad to make available, at the request of the Committee on Foreign Affairs, any pertinent information on the Moldavia famine which is unclassified, to- gether with paraphrased summaries of the cables in question. No. 6: Distribution of the relief supplies within Moldavia are under the direct super- vision of the American Red Cross. They are being assisted in the supervision responsi- bility by members of the staff of the Amer!- can representative and by members of the staff of General Schuyler. I am attaching copies of (a) the President’s statement of February 17, which outlines the specific terms required of the Rumanians concerning the handling of the relief supplies, and (b) cables which describe in detail the actual receipt and delivery of the supplies within Rumania. No. 7: The Rumanian Red Cross is charged With the actual distribution responsibility under the supervision of the American Red Cross. No. 8: The Rumanian Red Cross is free from the control of the Rumanian Government. The American Red Cross, however, required a guarantee from the Rumanian Government concerning specific and direct aid in handling shipments. A paraphrased copy of the cable concerning these requirements is attached. Evidence that the Rumanian Government has actually fulfilled these specific requirements is outlined in a cable from General Schuyler, & copy of which is attached, and referred to in No. 6 above. No. 9: Although the quantity of food ex- ported from Rumania to the U. 8. 8. R. in 1946 is not known here, there is no doubt that considerable shipments were made from grain produced in the 1945 crop year. Corn production in Rumanie in this crop year, however, was so greatly reduced by the drought, which was general throughout the lower Danube basin, that shipments to Rus- sia and other areas were immediately cur- tailed. ‘You will notice that one of the con- ditions on which supplies are being shipped from the United Btates is that no food shall be exported from Rumania to Russia or any other area as payment on reparations, against loans, or for any other reason so long as this emergency exists.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD No. 10: We have no direct knowledge of the amount of food consumed by Soviet armies garrisoning Rumania in 1646. Such a reduction In stocks from the previous crop year placed Rumania in a very difficult posi- tion to face the type of crop fallure expert- enced there in this crop season. No. 11: The U. 8. 8. R. is not helping to relieve the Moldavian famine conditions and, as a matter, of fact, is not in a position to help. The same drought which has caused such devastation in Moldavia has also been experienced over a large part of the best grain producing area of Russia. Should you require any additional in- formation concerning this transaction I shall be glad to furnish it. Sincerely yours, W. L, Cuaron, Under Secretary for Economic Affairs. Dangers and Remedies in the Greece Pre- posals EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALTER H. JUDD OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 31, 1947 Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following article by Erwin D. Canham, from the Christian Science Monitor of March 20, 1947: DANGERS AND REMEDIES IN THE GREECE PROPOSALS (By Erwin D. Canham) This is an important week in postwar his- tory. We remain in the very midst of a ma- jor crisis. The issue its still this: Are we moving toward or away from conflict with Soviet Russia? Will our newly stiffened at- titude warn and sober the Russians, or will it intensify the tendency of the world to solidify into two armed camps? Our new policy includes three dangers. These have come to light; they are much criticised in European capitals which might otherwise be friendly, and they are being discussed in the congressional hearing. It is important that Washington should clarify American policy on these three points so that the world can no longer misunderstand our intentions. The first danger is that the United States is deliberately bypassing the United Na- tions and thus has dealt it a severe blow. It is now pretty well agreed that President Truman's statement was not well drafted on this point. It is perfectly clear that the United Nations could not have done—at present—the job that is needed in Greece. But an act of faith by the United States in support of the United Nations is gravely needed. That is the purpose of Mr. Austin’s speech before the United Nations Security Council today. The second danger is that the United States, in setting up barriers against Com- munist penetration in Greece or elsewhere, will be in the position of defending inde- fenaidle reaction. It is not clear that Wash- ington, and the State Department in par- ticular, adequately appreciate this danger. Some of the statements from State Depart- ment sources have gone very far indeed in the defense of ultra-reaction in Greece. Therefore, we must make clear to the world that we wish to support genuine democracy, not simply the neo-Fascist re- gimes which have sprung up in some of these border areas. We are not seeking to defend broken-dow: monarchy, nor corrupt vested interests. The sooner our hands are clean on this score in Greece, the better. There could be no sounder basis for our policy there than the report just published by the n'ted Nation’s Food and Agricul- ture Organization. This group, headed by President Harris of the Utah State College of Agriculture, and whose vice chairman was Panos D. Caldis, an executive of the Cali- fornia Packing Corp., has clearly exposed the corruption and vested interests in Greece, and has drafted a practical program of aid. It fs to be hoped that this committee, as well as Paul Porter's group, and Mark Etheridge, the Louisville publisher who was sent by the President to Greece, will have a large hand in drafting the final American program. If they do, perhaps we can purge ourselves of the charge of supporting smal). corrupt, reactionary elements. The third danger in the Truman pro- posals—and, you will note, these are all dangers which can be removed by decisive action—is that the United States will stand to the other nations of the world in a posi- tion of dollar diplomacy, of imperialism. Our proposal of a loan and of military aid has struck mucl. of Europe as a repetition of our dominating attitude toward Central America back in the twenties. This is a misunderstandiag, but a natural misunderstanding, of what President Tru- man said and meant. We do not have to put ourselves in the position of imperialism to do the job that is necessary to stem the tides o’ Russian expansion. But as long as we seem to act unilaterally, without the instrumentality of the United Nations, we will be in a vulnerable position. We must clean our hands of that charge, too, be- cause it is highly important that we should not lose the confidence and support of the nations which occupy the vast borderland between ourselves and Ruasia. The French, wavering between Communist and democratic forces, 7ill be repelled by dollar diplomacy and imperialism. An im- portant part of liberal British opinion is al- ready deeply alarmed by American leadership which appears to be ruthlessly imperialist. Our moral force in the world is in grave dan- ger tonight because of the position we have put ourselves in. But, as the hearings in Washington are bringing out, many Americans in and out of Congress are aware of these dangers. Presi- dent Truman himself is far from being an imperialist : r dollar diplomatist, and his sup- port of the United Nations is deep and sound. The same is true of Secretary Marshall. But they have to a degree put themselves in the position of saying things which neither they nor the great majority of the Americar peo- ple really believe. America wants one thing: Peace. Not peace at any price, however, but peace in terms of a stable world where individuals and nations have a chance to work out their own problems in freedom. We tried a year of semi-appeasement with Russia, and the Communist aggressions continued without stint. Now we are trying extreme firmness. That is a language the Russians apparently understand. During the days of appeasement, as the publication of the Yalta texts this week in- dicates, we paid a big price to get what we called big power unity. Big power unity is still a desperately needed thing. It is the alternative to two armed camps. And we must seek unity again, this time on a basis of realistic principles to which we ourselves must be true. In resisting communism, we must not fall into the pit of reactionary fasctem, whether political, clerical, or eco- nomic, A1391 EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN J. WILLIAMS OF DELAWARE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 31 (legislative day cj Monday, March 24), 1947 Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Reconp a letter writ- ten to me by the Nationa] Association of Commodity Exchanges and Allied Trades, Inc., Chicago, Il., and aiso their analysis of the current grain situation. It is a comprehensive and factual] analy- sis of the grain situation in the United States today. It emphasizes the fact that under the present procedure of operation the Federal Government is endangering the security of our own people by reduc- ing grain reserves to a dangerously low level which unfavorable weather condi- tions would make disastrous. Also, the indefinite and unpredictable Government buying policies are conducive to a cha- otic market condition with all of its dis- astrous implications. These conditions should be corrected at once. An estimate from the Government Printing Office indicates that the manu- script herewith submitted will exceed by about three-fourths of a page the two pages of the Recorp allowed under the rule without a statement of cost. I am informed that the cost will be approxi- mately $195.25. There being no objection, the letter and analysis were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CommonitTy EXCHANGES AND ALLIED Trapgs, INCc., Chtoago, IU., March 29, 1947. Hon. Jonn J. WILLIAMS, United States Senator From Delaware, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. Dear Senator WILLIAMS: We have noted with a great deal of interest, and with ap- proval, your statement or. the floor of the Senate regarding current conditions in the commodity markets. You properly attribute current fluctuations in the grain market to heavy Government buying. You are aiso eminently correct in the conclusion that this is “not the first time that Government pur- chases have demoralized our commodity mar- kets.” In view of your correct analysis of a tech- nical corner in the grain market by the Gov- ernment and your long experience in the grain business, it occurs to us that you will like to have some pertinent observations from the commodity trades. At the outset, we agree wholeheartediy that a congressional investigation of pres- ent conditions in the grain market is most desirable. You cite the confused public thinking and charges that current high prices result from the abandonment of OPA as reasons for such an inquiry. We believe that it ia aleo essential that responsible Fed- eral officials be called upon to explain why they seek to mislead the public in the belief that speoulation rather than Government sctaping of the bin fs responsible for current high prices and the extent t) which our country is lending support to proposals tor world regimentation of agrict iture.
A1392 Certainly there ts some reason for the too frequent attempts to discredit the commod- ity trades in the eyes of the public, even to the point of deliberately ignoring services rendered. For example, w'thout the sound operation of the futures market, the Govern- ment would have been totally unable to buy cash wheat to meet export goals under pres- ent market conditioas. We believe strongly that an unbiased in- vestigation of conditions in the grain mar- ket will spotlight the following conditions: 1. That high prices are the premium the American consumer must pay for our foreign economic operations. It is the nor- mal operation of the law of supply and de- mand. Federal officials should not attempt to discredit the commodity trades by the questionable tactics of sidestepping direct responsibility for the present high prices. The public should also be advised by the Government as regards any risks involved to our food supply during periods of thin reserves, 2. That the Government be required to formulate definite buying policies to meet export demands. Conflicting statements and shifting programs have caused Govern- ment intention to continually hang over the grain market like the proverbial sword of Damocles. 8. That humanitarian and economic op- erations abroad be clearly distinguished from agricultural support programs. There is widespread fear that Government hu- manitarian activities have been integrated with support activities to avoid the prob- lems of surpluses. Such fears should be promptly dispelled. Since the end of the war, economists have been predicting that agricultural prices would be the first to drop and lead the postwar leveling off in prices. Due to con- stant upward revision of export goals the trend of agricultural prices has not fol- lowed these forecasts. In this connection, the Production and Marketing Administration of the Department of Agriculture, under date of March 5, with reference to the export program for all grains said: “The program originally called for the ex- portation of 400,000,000 bushels of grain and grain products during the period July 1946 to June 1947. As previously announced, the targets have been raised in view of the con- tinuing great need for United States grain abroad, and the higher rates of shipment which have been roached. The effort now is to reach the 400,000,000-bushel total] as soon as possible, and to exceed it as much as possible during the rest of the year.” We started the crop season on July 1, 1946, with production and carry-over of about 1,260,000,000 bushels of wheat. On the as- sumption that we shall consume at home slightly less than 800,000,000 bushels it is quite apparent that there were 450,000,000 bushels for export and for our next carry- over. At the present time, the Government hopes to ship 350,000,000 bushels before the next harvest. This would cut our reserve at the end of the season to about 100,000,000 bushels, or about the same as we carried into the present crop. This situation has already had a very marked influence on price levels. When it is considered that a normal annual carry- over stock for the past 10 years was 235,000,- 000 bushels, it is immediately evident that our Government may have entered upon an overly ambitious program, even assuming that humanitarian considerations were at stake. Under the circumstances there are one or two alternatives which might ease the situ- ation. Distribution is extremely important. Nat- urally any large quantities on the Pacific coast would immediately result in deficien- cies elsewhere. Due to the fact that naviga- tion has been closed since the early part of December, the Government, for matters of convenience, has taken too much wheat out of Southwest positions, and shipped it via Gulf ports, so that in many localities millers are already finding difficulty in obtaining supplies, and some of the industries may ac- tually be forced to close. With a fair amount of wheat owned by the Crop Insurance Corporation, it would be our suggestion that some of these supplies be sold back and replaced by later delivery. The farmer would just as soon be paid in cash as by receiving wheat. It would be more eco- nomical for the Government and would nave transportation. During the period of heavy accumulations by the Government the commodity exchanges have performed a valuable public service. It would have been difficult at any time to have bought such quantities of cash wheat as were required to fulfill export goals, except for the fact that merchandisers were able to enter into negotiations with the Government for the sale of millions of bushels. They were protected by purchases of similar quantities of futures, thus having the risks of market fluctuations eliminated. For several months now merchandisers and elevator concerns, despite small visible supplies, have thus been able to carry on the business, and gradually as cash wheat is obtainable they are selling out their insurance, which in this case are long futures which were held for this very purposes. Thus the Government, with no risk to itself and without actually having to enter the grain business, has been able to carry on exports and, for the most part, was sole agent in participating in the business. A short time ago our association undertook an analysis of the current grain situation in which we attempted to present the facts and high light some of the considerations in- volved. We are sending you a copy of this analysis herewith. We are confident from your remarks in the Senate that we have a common goal in the endeavor to bring order out of chaos in the grain markets. We assure you our full support and cooperation in this highly im- portant objective. Sincerely yours, J. A. Hiaaons, Jr., Executive Vice President. {National Association of Commodity Ex- changes and Allied Trades, Inc., Chicago, Til.) ANALYSIS OF CURRENT GRAIN SITUATION Last summer's wheat harvest was the larg- est on recard. Due to previous heavy ex- port shipments, our reserve stocks had been reduced to nearly 100,000,000 bushels com- pared with 235,000,000 bushels, the 10-year average. Nevertheless, the statistical situa- tion at the beginning of the season appeared to be about as follows: Million bushels Winter and spring wheat production... 1, 156 Carry-over reserve.........------... -- 101 Total supplies.....-..--.-.. ence 1,257 Disappearance (BAE estimate) : Food Balance for export and next carry-over ........ woennenene The Government originally planned to ship about 267 million bushels of wheat abroad for relief purposes, which included 17,000,000 bushels from the previous crop. On that basis it was considered likely that the reserve stock on July 1, 1047, would be nearly 200,- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 000,000 bushels, or only slightly below aver- age. Purchases of wheat and flour were made from time to time, and the program was being carried out in an orderly way, 80 that by November 29 the Department of Agri- culture revoked certain restrictions that had been placed on the usage of some grains. Accompanying the release was a statement that the Government had purchased, or had under contract, enough wheat, plus the amount of flour to be shipped, to equal the 267,000,000 bushels for export on this crop. The trade was not quite prepared for this statement, that CCC purchases would continue almost indefinitely. The re- sult was that in the following 2 days there were declines in the market of about 10 cents per bushel, carrying May wheat down to about $1.84 per bushel. On December 19, the Department of Agriculture issued about the most optimistic report that was ever handed to the public. They estimated win- ter wheat sowings at 56,400,000 acres, or an increase of slightly over 4,000,000 acres from the previous year, and almost 10,000,000 acres larger than the 10-year average. The condl- tion of the crop was reported at 98 percent, indicating a prospective yield of 946,500,000 bushels. Such a crop would be approxi- mately 100,000,000 bushels larger than the combined 10-year average outturn of both winter and spring wheat. It was only a few days later that word came from Kansas City that Commodity Credit Corporation would support wheat on basis of $1.88 per bushel for shipment in May. This was a higher price than the May wheat future was bring- ing in that market, and it immediately had & firming tendency. The trade could not figure out why the Government, in making purchases so far ahead, should resort to this policy, in view of the previous statement made by Mr. Anderson that the export pro- gram for this season had been concluded. Some believed that it might be a support program rather than one designed for relief purposes. However, as time went on, we were told that in view of a larger prospective crop, it would be possible to carry on the ex- port program with greater vigor, and that the Government planned to ship 400,000,000 bushels of grain by March 31 and to con- tinue shipments at the rate of 56,000,000 bushels per month to the end of the season, bringing the season's total to between 500,- 000,000 and 650,000,000 bushels. The in- creased goal it was stated would include 350,- 000,000 bushels of wheat and flour equivalent, or 83,000.00 bushels more than the original It is quite true that we have raised three successtve billion-bushel wheat crops, but it must also be borne in mind that only once before in history did we achieve such a rec- ord: namely, in 1915, when we had a total crop of 1,008,000,000 bushels. Should the Government's estimate be realized and a total crop of 1,170,000,000 bushels be harvested next summer, we shall have a 4-year record as follows: Peak production Million However, bumper crops are just as unusual as failure crops. Therefore, it is well to bear in mind that during the drought years we raised less than we actually consumed, as the following figures will illustrate: Crop fatiures
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD It is not fair to figure on either bumper crops or failure crops in trying to make com- parisons. Therefore, we call to your attention that in the 10 years prior to the war average wheat production in this country amounted to only 740,000,000 bushels. However, that was sufficient because during that period our consumption was only 677,000,000 bushels, which included 479,000,000 bushels for food, 81,000,000 bushels for seed, and 117,000,000 bushels for feed. Consequently, it was pos- sible to have small quantities for export and carry-over. At the present time our domestic consumption is estimated at 792,000,000 bushels; so if we revert to normal crops of 740,000,000 bushels it is quite obvious that we may have to import wheat from Canada. Likewise, it is almost a necessity if we are to continue relief programs in Europe to maintain production on a tremendous scale. Most people lose sight of the fact that since World War I our population -has increased by about 30,000,000 persons. Those people consume about 1,300,000,000 bushels of all Grain, which is just about the amount that our production has increased during that period. It is quite evident, therefore, that we are no longer as dependent on export markets as we were 25 years ago. From the figures given at the beginning of this report it is also obvious that with 465,- 000,000 bushels for export and next carry- over the only reason for high prices is be- cause we are probably shipping larger amounts than are safe for our economy. True, the outlook for next summer’s wheat crop is still very good, but crops are never made in March, and many of the hazards are still ahead of us. We believe there are in- herent dangers in letting our carry-over re- serve sink to a level of about 100,000,000 bushels, for the reasons that have already been explained. At the present time the Government has decided not to ship any more wheat during May and June, but to confine its activities to flour purchases. How- ever, in the final analysis this is all the same, and it makes little difference whether we ex- port wheat or flour, because in the end it will mean a small reserve stock. Very little cognizance was ever taken of the severe car shortage, which made it im- possible to build up supplies at terminal markets. On September 24, the commercial visible reached its peak at 106,000,000 bushels compared with 174,000,000 bushels the year earlier. Chicago, which is the largest grain market in the world, had only 8,700,000 bushels at that time, and both Chicago stocks and the total visible have declined substantially since that period. In view of the fact the Government insisted on buying greater and greater quantities of flour, it meant that merchandisers and elevator con- cerns, in order to carry on this business, had to protect themselves with purchases of wheat futures, and at the same time specu- lators who believed the price to be high were predominantly on the short side of the market. Thus each time that new business developed, it meant that the shorts were squeezed, and the merchandisers remained long futures until such time as they could buy cash wheat. Actual wheat, of course, was tight because the mills were competing for purchases, and likewise the car short- age prevented ample supplies from coming forward. This situation was just the re- verse from ordinary years when there are stocks of wheat held in elevators and when short hedges were in the market. Thus minor crop scares had more than the usual effect in scaring speculative shorts in, and we have had consistent advances in the market in the past 2 months. It has been known for a long time that European conditions had been very bad. Supply and distribution has been unsatis- factory in Germany, Austria, Italy, Greece, XCII—App.—88 and Rumania. In Italy food supplies for nonfarm consumers averaged less than 2,000 calories per person. The same has been true in Austria and in the American and British zones of Germany. Finland, Poland, Hun- gary, Spain, and Portugal were able to sup- ply their population with only about 2,000 calories on an average. In continental Europe there was only Ozechoslovakia, Nor- way, Sweden, and Denmark enjoying 2,600 calories or more. Bread was rationed in the United Kingdom and total quantities are slightly lower than a year ago. Recently further cuts in rations for unemployed de- pendents have been announced in the So- viet Union even though production of food in 1946 was better than the year before. UNRRA officials have on several occasions painted an alarming picture of the food needs in those countries which are no longer receiving their aid. Likewise the Secretary- General of the Emergency Food Council stated that Britain's stocks of wheat were at their lowest ebb, that France was mak- ing urgent appeals, and that conditions in Germany were desperate. He also said that Hungary and Rumania were begging for cereals. So it was no surprise that Mr. Hoover's report should have confirmed these truths. What actually happened was that few surplus countries outside of the United States were making heavy contributions to- ward European import requirements. As a matter of fact, since August 1 to the pres- ent date, shipments of wheat and flour from the four major exporting countries have been as follows: {000’s omitted} Aug. 1 to present Year ago date Bushels Rushels 120, 137 223, 145 161, 289 231, 122 Argentina... 121, 426 36, 645 Australia... ...cnnenneceneenee 325, 400 11, 016 328, 252 501, 928 1 Revised, 2 Partly estimated. It will be seen from the above that actually 178,000,000 bushels less has been shipped this year than in the corresponding period last year. If our own export goal is met, we shall probably furnish about half the world’s shipments for the season. Now, a word about corn: We harvested a crop of 8,287,000,000 bushels, which was a record for all time. Crops in excess of 3,000,- 000,000 bushels are likewise exceptional, as there have been only five of them in history, of which four were successive aince 1943. Under these circumstances it is not surprising that the corn-hog relationship should stand at about 18 for January, which was a near record for the third consecutive month. In other words, even with tremendous prices being paid for hogs, corn sold at relatively low levels for the reason that consumption on farms will probably be somewhat smaller, and it is likely that the carry-over at the end of the season will be much larger than last year. About 40 percent of the corn crop goes for hog feeding, and on January 1 the number of hogs on farms was about 4,000,000 smaller than last year, and the lowest since 1941. The hog population is far below either 1943 or 1944. The reduction in the number of hogs in 1046 was due chiefly to the 11-percent reduction from the previous year in the size of the 1946 fall pig crop. On the other hand, our exports of corn will be large, and a few . weeks ago when the Government found that it would be difficult to ship larger quantities of wheat, they focused their attention on corn, This immediately started a buying A1393 spurt with the result that prices advanced about 30 cents per bushel, and many felt since the sharp increases in wheat prices were due to the Government program, it would have a similar effect on the corn mar- ket, despite other considerations. As matters now stand, the Government in- tends to export about 20,000.000 bushels monthly, and while this quantity may appear small in comparison with the 3,000,000,000- bushel crop, yet it looks large in comparison with the primary receipts which for a num- ber of years have run as follows: Primary movement of corn to terminal markets Million bushels In an ordinary year 85 percent of the corn never leaves the county in which it is grown. Therefore, if one hundred to one hundred and fifty million bushels or more is exported, it naturally takes a large percentage of the grain from terminal stocks, preventing accu- mulations. Likewise, with the shortage of cars and the commercial demand, it can only be regarded as a sustaining influence. 1. SUMMATION AND ANALYSIS—WHEAT It will be seen from the foregoing how com- pletely control of the entire situation is in the hands of the Government. Any at- tempted prediction of price trends would be futile unless given factors respecting govern- mental intentions were known. The words “governmental intentions” are used in this case significantly, as there is be- lieved to be good warrant for the widespread conviction held in the trade that govern- mental humanitarian activities recently have been closely integrated with what are, in effect, price-support activities—due to fears of surpluses and threatened Steagall price- support problems. Tf, in the spirit of realism, this is con- ceded to be so, and if it is going to continue, then it immediately becomes apparent that the entire matter of attempting to forecast future grain prices becomes a guessing game as to possible Government moves in the course of its gigantic dual-purpose opera- tions, It is not being considered within the prov- ince of this memorandum to examine the integrity of governmental operations of the nature stated above. Racher, an attempt will be made to analyze objectively the pos- sible market effect of such future govern- mental objectives as have become discernible and deducible to date, and to point out both on a near- and long-term basis certain outstanding risks and dangers, both economic and social, that are inherent in indicated governmental policy. All signe point to the fact that it must be considered that the pattern for the bal- ance of the current crop year will continue to be of the same hybrid character as that believed established at the year end. As set forth at the beginning of the first part of thys memorandum, a reasonable program appar- ently had been established for the current crop year resulting in an indicated near-aver- age stock on July 1, 1947, of 200,000,000 bushels after allowing for relief commitments of about 267,000,000 bushels. Subsequent chronological developments speak for themselves: 1, The Department of Agriculture an- nounced completion of relief purchases «9 of November 29, 1946.
A1394 2. Prives backed away from levels ruling at approximately 100 percent above prewar average (1936-41). 8. Commodity Credit Corporation reen- tered market for deferred positions at above- market prices. 4. Announcement made of of greatly expanded governmental export progr: 6. Pew market pattern are established with fu- tures market furnishing hedging facilities and affording cheapest coverage for the trade’s sales of grain and flour to Govern- ment. 6. Government actively absorbed all offer- ings of grains us they became available, com- peting with trade for cash supplies, 7. Highest prices of 27 years were estab- lished as the result of widespread competition for the meager supplies in the face of light movement of grain from the country be- cause of voluntary withholding action on farms and restricted shipping activity due to boxcar shortage. NEAR-TERM TECHNICAL PRICE CONSIDERATIONS At this very writing March wheat is selling in Chicago at a premium of 14 cents over May. There have keen no deliveries yet, and though this is the largest grain market in the world, there is less than 1,000,000 bushels of wheat stored here, and the bulk of it probably belongs to CCC; at Kansa-. City a similar situation exists. Cash wheat is bringing 20 cents over the May future, and in another 214 months cash and futures must come together. If the Government continues its aggressive buying policy futures will have to advance to a price that the Government is paying for actual wheat. Thus there are great dislocations being brought about by this ambitious export plan that were probably never anticipated by those who studied statistics, but lacked prac- tical experience. No wonder that markets are fluctuating violently every day, in these circumstances. Even though we raised the largest crop in history, the total visible sup- ply is less than 36,000,000 bushels, and each week inroads are being made on these ac- cumulations, which have had a marked effect on prices thus far, and will probably be greatly accentuated as our supplies dwindle further. MARKET CONSIDERATIONS From a technical base as above, the market is faced with explosive possibilities due to the fact that the Government's reputed program has been stepped up to the point where it will require full realization of the bumper crop of 1,170,000,000 bushels indi- cated in the last crop report to prevent the creation of a supply condition that would be dangerous in this country. With an indica- ted 100,000,000 bushel reserve, latest reports are that intentions exist to export another 850,000,000 bushels from the next crop. As stated earlier, crops are not made in March. Any failure of the crop from this point on could lead to disaster. Two decades ago, with a population of 120,000,000 people, a minimum safe cairy-over was considered to be 125,000,000 bushels. Last year it was only by virtue of an all- provident nature that our reserve of 100,- 000,000 bushels carried us through without trouble. The market cannot and will not ignore the implications of what is—whatever its pur- pose—a highly dangerous program. While it is true that prices rose rather sharply during the past month, yet it is a fact that the Government agencies could not have obtained their four commitments ex- cept for the fluid market which permitted flour mills to protect themselves. During the period that cash wheat was moving slowly from first hands, long hedges were the only insurance offered. Strengthened demand was reflected in higher prices, but at. least wheat and corn futures made it possible for merchandisers to satisfy the demand for grains and flour, thus making the automatic adjustment of consumption to If, on the basis of the record as it stands, the Government intends constantly to re- vise upward its export goals to the hilt of possible supply, the possibilities of further market reflection are apparent. In this regard, the Production and Market- ing Administration of the Department of Agriculture, under date of March 5, with reference to the export program for all grains stated: “This originally called for the ex- portation of 400,000,000 bushels of grain and grain products during the period July 1946 to June 1947. As previously announced, the targets have been raised in view of the con- tinuing great need for United States grain abroad, and the higher rates of shipment which had been reached. The effort now is to reach the 400,000,000 bushe! total as soon as possible and to exceed it as much as poss!- ble during the rest of the marketing year.” Orthodoxy in market analysis has ceased to exist. The situation is right in the palm of the hand of the Government, subject to the will of nature PSYCHOLOGICAL FACTORS In addition to the tangibles set forth in the foregoing, a psychological market factor of extreme potency is increasingly present in the way of the constant stream of pronuncia- tions emanating from official and semioffiicial quarters hinting that this Government in- tends to enter into all manner of short- and long-term socialistic programs, arrange- ments and agreements, including that of meeting various nutritional targets for peo- ples all over the world. Agriculture, and the agricultural trades of America, have both a desire and a determina- tion to hold out the helping hand of relief to war-torn peoples. They are well able to distinguish between this category of activi- ty and that of international socialism. The ever-present threat of being involved in the latter is causing perpetual foment in the psychology underlying our grain markets. MaRcH 1947. EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. ALEXANDER WILEY OF WISCONSIN IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, April 1 (legislative day of Monday, March 24), 1947 Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, it was my privilege a few weeks ago to visit in the home of one Mr. William J. McKinley, of Convent, N. J. Like most Irishmen, he has a heart that sings, and I learned he had written poetry. I should like to read one of his poems into the Recorp. My justification for doing so, Mr. President, is that it would not be a bad idea if in this august body we would go apart from our daily activities now and then and listen to some good poetry. An eminent psy- chologist said on one occasion that if he could devote 15 minutes a day to going apart and reading Scripture, listening to fine music, or fine poetry, it would in- crease his efficiency. I personally feel of late that there has been too little “reaching for the stars” and too much of APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL. RECORD criticism and innuendoes which, as Emerson said: “Fall indiscriminately upon every lovely thing, like the frost upon the flowers.” T ask that Mr. McKinley's poem en- titled “Home,” be printed in the Recorp following my remarks. There being no objection, the poem was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Take me back to my old thatched cottage In far off Donegal, Where the thrushes sing in the evening, Beside the waterfall. I'm tired of the noise of the city, I long for the peace of the plough, Where the seagulls circle above me As I wipe the sweat from my brow. I long for the sounds of the horses, The cows, coming down from the hills, The bleat of the lambs in the springtime, The song of the lark, how it thrills! I want to go back to the heather, The roses that cling, ‘round the door, The hawthorne, the primrose and daisies, To my childhood egain, as of yore. Take me back to my dear old mother In far off Donegal, Where the thrushes sing in the evening, Beside the waterfall, Address by Senator McCarran Befere Izaak Walton League EXTENSION OF REMARKS or -ION. HENRY C. DWORSHAK OF IDAHO IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, April 1 (legislattwe day of Monday, March 24), 1947 Mr. DWORSHAK. Mr. President, 1 ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Reconp a very able address delivered by the senior Sen- ator from Nevada (Mr. McCarran] at the national convention of the Izaak Walton League of America, on March 28, in Chicago, Ill. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Rgcorp, as follows: Mr. Chairman, ladies and gentlemen, your executive director, Mr. Kenneth Reid, is responsible for my appearance here this afternoon. I am glad that circumstances made it possible for me to accept the invitea- tion. I was glad to have the opportunity of appearing before such a large and represent- ative gathering of the Izaak Walton League of America. What is more, f am sure that after this meeting is all over, I shall still be glad I came. I say this in spite of the fact that I have been warned that the purpose of the invita- tion extended to me was to put me on the spot. In fact, I understand this program has been carefully and deliberately planned for the purpose of making a monkey out of Par McCarzan. At least, an official of the Izaak Walton League so stated, quite recently, before a fairly substantial audience. In that regard, I want to say that I do not think it is necessarily beyond the powers of the Izaak Walton League to make a monkey out of this particular Irishman. I have grandchildren who do that with great regu- larity, And I take some solace from the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD certainty that not even the Igaak Walton League of America can make an Irishman out of a monkey. Seriously, the reason I welcomed the op- portunity to come before you is my knowl- edge that the Izaak Walton League is made up of sportsmen and sportswomen, and my firm belief that such men and women are as fair-minded, reasonable, and reasoning as any group in the country. Mr. Reid assured me of that ‘in his letter of invitation; and whether or not he had his tongue in his cheek when he wrote it, I still believe it to be true. The recently aroused interest in the use and disposition of these western lands is a source of great satisfaction to me. Such an interest is a healthy and desirable thing. I regret, however, that in many discussions of this question there has been far too much use of intemperate language. There has been too much mere name calling; too many charges not based on fact, and that cannot be supported. I hope that what I am able to say here may, to some extent, help to clarify some of this thinking, and to bring it nearer to the realities. The open public domain is the greatest natural asset this Nation has. This vast area of public land, on which hundreds of thousands of livestock graze, and from whick have flowed and will flow billions of dollars’ worth of metals and min- erals, is a matter of concern not only to the people of the West but to the people of the entire country. The fair and impartial administration of this great area of public land, in the manner best suited to advancing the interests of those who use the land and who mine it, and of the States in which this land is sit- uated, is a most important factor in the development of the West; and the develop- ment of the West is one of the greatest proj- ects, if not the greatest project, now con- fronting the people of the United States. Legislation is urgently needed to stop fur- ther withdrawals of public land, to termi!- nate many of the withdrawals already made, and to provide that no future withdrawal shall suspend precious metal mining. All public lands withdrawals should be re- ported to Congress annually, and should ter- minate after 2 years unless Congress author- izes their continuance. All outstanding pub- lic lands withdrawals, except those included in national forests, national parks, and other projects and reservations authorized by stat- ute, should be required to be similarly re- ported, and should also terminate after 2 years unless specifically authorized by Con- gress. Effective withdrawals of public lands should be limited to those specifically author- ized by lav’ and those ordered by the Presi- dent, in a time of emergency, for the use of the armed forces. Emergency withdrawals in the latter class should terminate whenever the emergency terminated. I have covered these points in my bill 8. 32, now pending in the Senate Committee on Public Lands. Our national forests are not a part of the open public domain, but they are the great- est and most important of our renewable natural resources. They provide vital water- shed protection for thousands of communities and millions of our citizens. They provide lumber for the urgent housing program and afford recreational opportunity for a tenth of our population annually. They give shel- ter and food for 84 percent of the big game in our country, and in them rise the sparkling trout streams which provide sport for my friends, the Izaak Walton League members, and for a few million other sportsmen who do not have the good fortune to be members of your organization Nearly 200,000,000 acres of national forests are found in the continental United States. Within them are found more than 80,000,000 acres suitable for the grazing of livestock. Last year 1,290,382 cattle anu horses and 3,896,258 sheep and goats found their food in these forests, and lessened by their weight the critical shortage of meats. The saw-timber requirements of our Na- tion are slightly over 53,000,000,000 board feet annually—but the annual growth amounts only to a little over 35,000,000,000 board feet. We are cutting down this wealth 60 percent faster than we grow it. It is the responsibility of the United States Forest Service to manage these many uses of the national forests. They should be managed in such a way as to give the highest efficiency and the best results to those who use them, whether they be stockmen, timber operators, sportsmen in pursuit of the game, or recreationists bent upon seeking pleasure and relaxation. There is one qualification that must be imposed on this statement, and that is that the resources of the forests shall not be wasted or destroyed. I want to say emphatically that I do not now want, and never have wanted, to turn these forests over to the States or to private ownership. They belong to the people of all the States. The Federal Government is the custodian and the manager. If that man- agement falls down, if it does not refiect the wisdom of our people, then it becomes the responsibility of the Congress to give such direction and make such changes in the law as will bring the administration into harmony with the will of the people. Bu- reaucracy ir not always right: quite fre- quently it lags behind the people whom it is set up to serve. We of the West feel that we know our country and the responsibility it has toward the rest of the Nation. There we have hardy pioneers in every walk of life having to do with the plains, the forests, and the mines. These men live their lives in producing many needs of the rest of the country. Livestock is an important, essential in- dustry. It plays a vital role in our national economy. The urgent plea for some years has been to produce beef, and mutton, for not only our own people, but for our forces abroad and the hungry people of desolate Europe. Those who thought the end of the war would bring an end to all the pres- sure from our foreign commitments have learned that they were mistaken. Even without foreign commitments, the task of supplying the needs of this Nation for meat is greater than the private and public do- main grazing lands of the west can under- take. The forest grazing lands are essential to this national responsibility. The United States Forest Service is the manager of this enterprise of grazing live- stock on these forest ranges. Due to exces- sive use during and immediately after the First World War, these ranges suffered dete- rioration through overstocking. All told, about 26,000,000 acres became sick and scarcely fit to give sustenance to livestock. The Forest Service began to cut down on both the number of permittees and the amount of stock that could be grazed. The situation from the viewpoint of the West became so critical that the stock growers in many instances would go bankrupt under the regulations and be forced out of business. In the lower House of Congress, Con- gressman Ricwarp WetcH, of California, chairman of the House Committee on Public Lands, notified the Secretary of Agriculture that a subcommittee of his would make an investigation of, ana I quote: “The wide- spread complaints by users of the range in the western forests on the proposed reduc- tion in permit allotments, particularly in the States of Colorado, Wyoming, Utah, and California.” Congressman WELcH asked the Secretary to withhold action on the pro- posed reductions until the subcommittee A1395 had concluded its hearings and made its recommendations. Secretary Anderson replied stating that the allotments had been made for this year but that he would withhold making them for 1948 in order to give time to the commit- tee to conduct its investigation In his an- nual report to Congress the Secretary said, and I quote: “Large areas of national forest range are now in good shape, and prospects are good for keeping them that way. Many national forest ranges, however, have not recovered from past misuses. *° * * Range reseeding will restore depleted ranges and increase graging capacity.” I have introduced a bill, 8. 2, which pro- vides that 10 percent of all forest revenues shall each year be used for the making and maintenance of range improvements, in- cluding development of range water re- sources, reforestation, and reseeding. I hope to get favorable action on this bill. Last session, early in 194), and again this session, I introduced Senate bill 33, which seems to have aroused the ire of the Forest Service and some of its supporters. Just why this should be so is beyond my understand- ing, for this bill is a sound approach to a wise management of the grazing resources of the national forests. Nowhere does it do the things that have been charged against it. Section 1 of my bill, 8. 88, apparently is the controversial feature of the bill. In ef- fect, this section provides that holders of 10-year permits to graze livestock in a na- tional forest shall not be denied renewal of their permits, or forced to accept reduc- tion of their grazing rights, unless the Sec- retary of Agriculture, after according the permittee an opportunity to be heard, suc, find that such denial of renewal, or such re- duction, is necessary either (1) to protect such lands from overgrazing. (2) to pre- serve public resources from destruction or improvident impairment; or (8) for the orderly administration of the use or uses to which such lands shall in fact be put for re- forestation, recreation, wildlife conserva- tion, mining, pudlic watershed protection, or public water storage and flood control. Section 1 further provides that “in the event of such dental or reduction, the Secre- tary, upon the request of the permittee af- fected, shall set forth in writing the grounds upon which such denial or reduction is based.” Section 2 of the bill defines what property shall be considered commensurate, and sim- ply implements section 1, as reports from the Interior and Agriculture Departments have recognized. Sections 3, 4, and 5 of the bill would enact into law what is admit- tedly the present practice with respect to local advisory boards. These sections pro- vide, in effect, for the constitution and elec- tion of local boards, to consist of not less than 3 nor more than 12 members each, who shall in esch case be national forest grazing permittees in the area for which the board is constituted and recognized. It is further provided that a wildlife representative may be appointed, as a member of each board, by the State game commission or Correspond- ing public body of the State in which the advisory board is located. The function of the wildlife representative would be to ad- vise the board on wildlife problems. The bill also provides that proposed modifications or denials of renewals, or reductions in grazing permits, or the establishment or modification of an individual or community allotment, shall, upon request, be referred to a local board in each case, and that the board shall be allowed 30 days within which to file a recommendation with respect thereto. The bill goes on to provide that if any such rec- ommendation is overruled, disregarded, or modified, the loca] board shall be furnished in writing with the reasons for such action. The Secretary of Agriculture would not have
A1396 to follow any recommendation of the iocal advisory board; but the bill would require him, ff he did not follow it, to give his rea- sons for his action; and I believe that a pub- lic servant should be willing to do that. Section 6 of the bill provides that “nothing in this act shall be construed as limiting or restricting any right, title, or interest of the United States in any lands or resources.” So it is clear the bill is not a land grab, no matter how many times it may be so char- acterized. On January 26 of this year, the American Forestry Association issued a press release attacking this bill. The press release con- demned what it called attempts being made by private interests to invade the public lands of the West; and specifically condemned my bill, 8. 83. This release stated that—and I quote—"S. 3, it is asserted, would give hold- ers of 10-year grazing permits on the na- tional forests virtual perpetual rights in the forest ranges.” This statement seems care- fully phrased to avoid direct responsibility, through the use of the words “‘it is asserted”’; and the statement apparently takes no notice of the fact that section 1 of 8. 83 specifi- cally permits a denial of a renewal appli- cation, or a reduction of a grazing permit, if such denial or renewal ts necessary to protect from overgrazing, to preserve the public resources, or for orderly administra- tion in the interests of reforestation, recrea- tion, wildlife conservation, and s0 on. This press releage of the forestry association con- tains numerous inflammatory phrases. It says “The stockmen's proposals are bold and insidious.” It speaks of “a raid upon public resources, astounding in its audacity.” It predicts “a conservation storm that before the Eightieth Congress is over may rock the American people.” This press release appar- ently is the motivating factor in the rise of widespread opposition to the bill, particularly in the press. Let me make this perfectly clear: My bill, 8. 33, has nothing to do with the public do- main, and has no connection whatsoever with any proposal that public-domain graz- ing lands should be transferred to private ownership. On the contrary, 8. 33 has rela- tion only to the management and adminis- tration of national-forest grazing lands. I will not take personal issue with any man just because he attacks S. 83, or any other bill I have introduced. He has a right to make such an attack, though I will admit to the belief that, in doing so, he should not nulsrepresent the facts. But it is not alto- gether fair to attack me personally for bills I have not introduced. Yet a number of bills for which I am being roundly attacked, in a widespread campaign now underway— a campaign which, I am sorry to say, has been joined by at least some of the officials of the Izaak Walton number of bills for which I am being attacked are not my bills at all. In fact, the alleged bill that ap- pears to be the center of this attack upon me, and upon the livestock associations, is still only in the discussion stage, so far as I have been able to learn. I have not been con- suited regarding the terms of this proposal, nor has it been suggested to me that I author it in the Congress, if eventually it should be introduced as a bill. I am informed that this proposal has not been approved by the two national livestock associations; and since these groups hold their annual conven- tions in January, it would appear that this vitriolic attack is being waged against a pre- natal child, still some 9 months away from birth. Nor is there any assurance that, even without this attack, the child would ever be born. There is still a considerable dif- ference of opinion within the groups of or- ganized Itvestock men as to the economic feasibility of any such proposal. I refer, of course, to @ proposal that a means be whereby lands administered under the Taylor Grazing Act may be permitted to pass to private owner- ship. It is my understanding that the pro- posal under consideration does not include any of the lands in the national forests, In other words, the lands involved are those poorest remnants of the open public domain whose one economic use is for grazing pur- poses. And I am informed that the proposed transfers to private ownership need not iIn- volve the subsurface rights. Perhaps this proposal may have some merit; but it is definitely not my baby, and I do not see why I should be called upon here and now to defend it: However, I want to make my position perfectly clear. I have seen no Dill embodying this proposal. I do not believe there is such a bill, I have not been asked to write or to sponsor such a bill, and I would not write it nor sponsor it if I should be asked. I have seen no bil) to turn national- forest lands over to administration under the Taylor Grazing Act. I do not believe there is such a bill. I have not been asked to write such a bill nor to sponsor it; and I would not write it nor sponsor it if I should be asked. I do not have definite information as to the underlying source of the current vitriolic campaign directed against this proposal and against me in connection with it. But I think that it would not be difficult to put a finger upon that source. Most of you doubt- Jess know that during the past 6 years I have had the honor of being the chairman of a subcommittee of the United States Senate which has conducted a long and careful and detailed investigation of the use and ad- ministration of the public lands. Many pub- lic hearings have been held throughout the public land States and in Washington, D. C., and many highly unsatisfactory situations and practices and policies have been brought to light, particularly in the administration of the public grazing lands. The record is available in the voluminous printed hear- ings, and in five separate reports by my sub- committee. These findings have trod pretty hard upon certain bureaucratic circles and officials. It is not at all unusual for such Officials to seek and find allies in certain pressure groups, or even to seek to bend wholly worthy organizations, such as the Izaak Walton League, to their purposes, in attempts to pull their chestnuts from the fire. And, all too frequently, the groups or organizations so used, particularly the rank and file membership, have little real knowl- edge of how their influence is being applied or misapplied. Sometimes the bureaucratic officials are also officers in some of the groups thus used, and that makes it easy for them to sway the membership thelr way. In the present instance, it should not be overlooked that a publicity campaign directed at discrediting me might well be a useful device to those who fear that through my efforts there might be brought about some loss in authority and positions on the part of the grazing administrators. I think that at this point it would be well to review briefly the extent of public lands, and their vital importance in the economy of the West. The area of the lands owned by the Fed- eral Government within the limite of the 48 States is approximately 456,000,000 acres. This is 24 percent of the total area of all of the States. Ninety percent of these Fed- eral lands lie within the boundaries of the 11 Western States; and these States comprise @ percent of the area of all the States. More than half of the total land area of the 11 Western States is federally owned. In 3 of these States, more than 79 percent of the land is owned by the Federal Government; prrantnts Slal Pukaatadnetahl vata ii ay tion reaches & percent, If the area of Alaska is added to that of the 48 States, we find that 86. percent of the total land area of the continental United States is owned and administered by the Government in Washington. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Now, my friends, these are not just statis- tics. They are facts of the moat vital con- cern in the life and the development of each of the 11 Western States. These public lands contain a high proportion of the na- tural resources of the West; and in a very real sense, the development of this vast regton, the expansion of its industries, the employ- ment of its citizens, are dependent upon the orderly and proper development of these resources. The existence of these high proportious of public lands in many of the Western States means that there is a very narrow base of taxable property available for the support of the State and local governments. There are many counties throughout the public land States in which more than 80 per- cent of the land areas are in Federal owner- ship. Upon such narrow tax bases, it is with exceeding difficulty that the local gov- ernments can be maintained with even the very minimum of essential functions and services. The great bulk of the public lands of the West are the remainder of the original pub- lic lands. They have never passed to private ownership under any of the public lands laws, However, for more than a decade there has been an increasing tendency on the part of Federal departments and agencies to ac- quire considerable acreages of Jand from pri- vate ownership, under various land-purchase programs. This ese, Of Course, Was ac- celerated, just prior to and during wartime. by the acquisition of many large bombing, gunnery, and other training sites for use by the armed forces. Coincident with these Federal land acquisi- tions, there has been a virtual stoppage 1n the passage of the public lands into private ownership. It has been the studied policy of the Department of the Interior, wherever and whenever possible, to prevent the pub- lic lands under its administration from go- ing to patent. For 8 years the Grazing Serv- ice has made a complete mockery of those provisions of the Taylor Grasing Act intended to permit homesteading and the purchase of isolated tracts of public grazing lands with- in the grazing districts. The net result has been a steady increase in the acreages of the public lands in the Western States. Along with this increase in the areas of public lands has gone increasing restrictions upon the uses of such lands. I am not now referring to the restrictions im- posed by the multitudinous and often bur- densome administrative rules and regula- tions, but rather to the restrictions imposed by Executive order withdrawals. The abuse of Executive-order withdrawals has grown to one of major proportions. It is no exaggeration to say that there remains in the West today scarcely an acre of public land not covered by a withdrawal; and much of the land is covered by two or three or more overlying and overlapping withdrawals with varying of restrictions. In most in- stances the lands are withdrawn from settle- ment, entry, location, and sale. The bulk of the withdrawals are so-called temporary ones, since that is the only kind that the Executive ts authorised to make under the General Withdrawal Act of 1910, as amended. But the temporary withdrawals usually stand in- definitely, There are temporary withdrawals in effect today issued as early as 1862. A high proportion of the withdrawals are issued in aid of legislation or for classifica- tion of lands, and they remain in effect in- definitely, long after all legitimate purposes have been served. Many of the withdrawal orders are intended to have, and do have, the effect of circumventing or nullifying acts of the Congress. The withdrawal order is the favorite device of certain Government agencies, particularly those in the Department of the Interior, to
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD bring additional public lands under their direct administration and control. Usually the orders include far more land than could possibly be Justified for the purposes stated therein. The keystone in the public land program of the Izaak Walton League of America and its kindred organizations, as I understand that program, is contained in the statement that the public lands are the property of all the people; that all citizens everywhere have an equal interest in them; an equal voice and concern as to how the land shall be used. So far, and as a purely abstract proposition, and as long as the lands remain the sole property of the Federal Government, we of the West may not be prepared to challenge that posi- tion. It is with the corollaries which many of you attach to that premise that we cannot see eye to eye with you. We cannot agree that, because these lands now are in the possession of the Federal Gov- ernment, they have suddenly acquired a sac- rosanct status which should not be subject to alteration. We cannot forget that most of the land in the United States at one time or another has been public domain. We cannot forget the historic land policy under which our country has been settled and developed, and we do not believe now that that policy was a mistaken one. Most of these western public lands are still public lands because no one has been able or could afford to acquire them under any of the existing public lands laws. Our home- stead laws and policies were developed earlier in our history and were adopted to meet the conditions in the more humid regions of the country, where generally a quarter section of land served as a base for a family farm unit. Those laws did not so well meet the needs of settlement in the desert and semidesert open- range country. We do not believe that be- cause of these accidents of time and rainfall a whole new philosophy of land settlement and ownership should be applied to these western public-land States. What I have said here is not with reference to the ownership or control of those public lands in the higher elevations, upon which the flow of our streams and the sources of our irrigation and domestic water supplies are so vitally dependent. Nor am I discuss- ing the forested public lands. I do not un- derstand that these lands are involved in the present controversy. I do not know of any proposal or any suggestion that these forest lands might be proper subjects for private ownership, And I certainly would not agree with any such proposal. What is involved here are those poorer left-over desert lands used and usable only for grazing. No one but the livestock men could put them to a useful purpose. They aro not recreation lands, though they do sup- port some wildlife. They do not contain streams, for the areas bordering useful streams have long since passed into private ownership and become incorporated in ranch or other properties. These lands are low in their carrying ca- pacity for livestock and very low in economic value per acre. However, they are large in total area. There are 142,000,000 acres of public lands within the boundaries of the grazing districts. They can be utilized only by those who own or control nearby lands and waters. They do, however, furnish the seasonal grazing essential] to round out an operating livestock set-up. In fact, most of the ranches in these areas cannot operate without the use of these lands. These public grazing lands and the nearby ranches are interdependent. They have been developed together, over a long period of years. If you take away these public lands, you would destroy most or all of the values in the nearby ranch properties, for the latter could no longer provide a means of liveli- hood for the rancher and his family. And conversely, without the use of the nearby ranches and waters, most of these public lands could not be utilized at all. To any- one acquainted with the nature of the pub- lic lands which we are discussing, it is there- fore dificult to understand the sudden and violent interest in these lands, evidenced by groups which are in no way affected. At this point, ladies and gentlemen, 1 should like to make it clear that I am and always have been a firm believer in a proper and common-sense program of conservation. By conservation I mean the prudent and or- derly utilization of our resources without un- necessary waste. That, I believe, squares with the concept of Theodore Roosevelt and those other farsighted leaders who brought the conservation movement into being. I do not conceive of conservation as a philosophy or a process for the locking up of our resources, a blind withholding of them from present use. Such practices, applied to surface land uses, not only result in the wastage of an annually renewable resource, but they are likely to lead to immediate dam- age to the land much greater than could pos- sibly result from the reasonable utilization of the products on that land. I refer here not to any sensible and justifiable restric- tions on grazing, but to the practice of the National Park Service, in seeking to elimi- nate grazing entirely from national parks and monuments. This inhibitory practice only results in increasing the fire hazard and fire losses and damage, as representatives of the Forest Service testified in hearings be- fore my committee. I should like to express further my con- viction that there is no group of citizens in the western country more genuinely or di- rectly concerned with soil and resource con- servation than those engaged in the live- stock producing industry. And in this I speak from a lifetime of close association with the problems and the members of that industry. These men are vitally interested in the conservation of the lands they utilize because their welfare and their means of livelihood are directly concerned. They can- not afford, and they know they cannot af- ford, to misuse the lands they own or control. They know that the penalty for misuse will come home to them directly, and will be paid for out of the income from the business from which they earn a living for themselves and their families. We all have read and heard much, and some of us have seen much, of the effects of overgrazing upon the western public range lands. But most of this overgrazing and re- sulting soil damage occurred during the long years of the unregulated open public domain. Under that system, or lack of system, the livestock man could not protect the public land that he used because he had no con- trol over it. Fortunately those days and those practices are past. There can be no doubt that the public lands suffered grievous damage during that epoch. It is important to remember that this history of overgrazing and damage to the lands did not occur under a system of land ownership. Regulation of the public grazing lands has brought considerable relief to the hard-pressed stockman. It has given him some degree of continuity in his operations— some assurance that, if he properly protects the lands that he uses, he will have the opportunity to profit thereby. Regulation, with all of its faults, has brought more sta- bility to his business, and he is properly appreciative. But the livestock man is thor- oughly convinced from his own experience that greater stability, in a business that is highly hazardous at best, and better protec- tion for the grazing lands that he uses, can only come with full recognition of the inter- dependence to which I have already referred. At the same time I know that a majority of western stockmen would resist, as I would resist, any effort to turn the national-forest grazing lands over to administration under A1397 the Taylor Grazing Act, or otherwise to fur- ther centralize bureaucratic control of all grazing lands. Before I close, I want to speak briefly on what might be termed, in the Senate, “a question of personal privilege.” I have received through the mail a copy of the minutes of a recent meeting of the Chicago Conservation Council. These min- utes throw some interesting light upon the current campaign of vituperation to which I have previously referred. A representative of your executive director addressed that meeting. I shall quote from the minutes a part of the statement therein with respect to what he said. Your representative said, “Many bad bills were being dumped into Congress, especially by Senator McCarran, which represents an attempt to steal public lands and practically give them to a small minority of western stockmen. Senator McCarran is determined to make available for private ownership all of the public domain now in Taylor Grazing Act lands and in the national forests. The stockmen now hold leases, but they are mak- ing an all-out effort to get actual possession through purchase. Their insatiable demands were evident at a recent meeting in Denver. * «* © Their proposal is that the land should be sold only to present permittees and that no one else should be allowed to buy for 15 years. The price proposed is 60 cents an acre. * * ®* “The roster of Congress shows that, with few exceptions, the legislators from Colorado, Wyoming, and Utah are controlled by this group of stockmen. McCarran’s name on any bill means a steal by some group. The Senator ignores other valuable uses of these public lands, namely, watershed protection for western irrigation, recreation, wildlife and fisheries conservation, and timber pro- duction.” My only comment on this statement, at- tributed to the representative of the Izaak Walton League in the official minutes of the council he addressed, is that it contains more misstatements of fact and opinion than I can recall having ever before seen in a state- ment of similar length. Mr. Reid is a well- informed man and he should know the facts. My friends, I did not come to challenge you. There is no more reason why I should pick a quarrel with the membership of the Izaak Walton League than there is for one of your officers to attack me personally, impugn my motives, and deprecate my good faith. It was in the hope that I could shed some light upon the confused thought surround- ing my bill that I accepted Mr. Reid’s most cordial invitation to speak at your conven- tion. I have the greatest respect and a pro- found admiration for the Izaak Walton League, and its announced purposes of de- fending our woods, waters, and wildlife. It is a cause in which every American can join wholeheartedly, in the knowledge that what he is doing will make for a better country. Our heritage in our forests is a priceless asset. Let us use it wisely for the benefit of all our people. Communist Party Counterattack EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. JOHN E. RANKIN OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, April 1, 1947 Mr. RANKIN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- ord, I enclose the following article by Sidney Shalett in today’s New York
A1398 Times showing what a frantic drive the Communists are making to prevent Con- gress from putting a stop to their sub- versive activities in this country. The matter referred to follows: Communists Giap mv SEcrET Sessions To Compat ATTACKS—PARTY LINE OF DEFENSE Lar Down BY “AMERICAN KREMLIN,” LEAKS From REGIONAL TALKS—NINE POINTS ON ProGRAM—LEADERS CHarT BATTLE AGAINST “ANTI-SovigT” AcTs AsroaD, FBI “SMEAR,” Union AID (By Sidney Shalett) WASHINGTON, March 31.——-The Communist Party of the United States, agitated over the recent trend in American foreign and do- meatic policy against communism, is at- tempting to organize a counterattack. A report has leaked out on discussions con- ducted at a recent secret meeting of the local Communist Party executive committee in Washington, and on a similar meeting that took place in Pittaburgh. At these meetings, which presumably were duplicated in other Fey cities, the “party line” for the counterattack was laid down by the “American Kremlin,” as Communist Party national headquarters in New York City is called. Proposed anti-Communist legislation and alleged intensification of the anti-Soviet policy of the United States, as the American Communists view it, are the two develop- ments which bother the party most. Recent trends toward antilabor legislation, which have developed in Congress since the rash of postwar strikes. also have the Communists worried. BACKS AGAINST THE WALL President Truman's March 12 speech, in which he called for aid to Greece and Tur- key to bolster their political resistance to the Soviet Union, was viewed by some of the speakers at the Washington conference as putting our backs against the wall. The meetings on which the reports leaked out all preceded the March 22 Executive order calling for removal from Federal em- ployment of all persons of doubtful loyalty. The President's order was based on recom- mendations of his six-agency temporary commissivwn ou employee loyalty, which has been investigating the problem of possible subversion within the Government. However, the discussions at the Washing- ton and Pittsburgh meetings virtually antic- ipated the effect of the President's order. At the Washington meeting, held on March 12, according to report, district chairmen of the Communist Party reported on the meeting which they had been summoned to attend at national headquarters in New York City the previous week end. The mes- sage they brought back was that national headquarters was frankly worried. BASES OF COUNTERATTACK A counterprogram which may be summed up in nine major points is being mapped out. These include: 1. The Communist Party will engage in a campaign bringing in as many supporters as it can swing to attempt to stifle or at least postpone domestic anti-Red legisla- tion, Anti-Soviet acts abroad also will be battled. 2. A smear attack aimed against the Federal Bureau of Investigation is planned. The Communists will attempt to Mnk the FBI with the House Un-American Activities Committee; will seek to paint the FBI as anti-trade-union, and will try to make a cause célébre of the case of Gerhart Eisler, the alleged representative of the Communist International in America, whose activities are under inquiry by the House committee. 3. Liberala—particularly among public figures who go alung with the party in every respect but have not actually joined—may be urged to join the party openly for the effect on public opinion. 4. All Communist front organizations will be brought into the pressure campaign in behalf of Eisler. . 5. An intensive recruiting campaign for party members will be launched. At the Washington meeting it was said that the party actually nad only 60,000 bona fide members, although Communist publications have set the total as high as 74,000. 6. A money-raising campaign, with at least $250,000 as the goal is being considered. 7. Protest demonstrations may be staged in the capita] early in May. “Big names” will be sought to appear on the programs, 8. The Communists would like to bring the American Federation of Labor and the Congress of Industrial Organizations to- gether in key American cities to fight pro- posed untilabor legislation through some spectacular means. A 1-day country-wide strike is being discussed by the Commu- nists 9. Emphasis will be put on attempting to delay through preseure and , any definite legislative action against domestic communism until after the summer recess of Congress. TOP LEADER AT REGIONAL TALK At the Pittaburgh meeting, reportedly held the day after the New York parley adjourned, a representative from the party's national secretariat was present. He went over much the same ground for a small group of Communist officiala who are key men in the Pennsylvania organisation. Considerable discussion was devoted to possibilities for using veterans sympathetic to communism in the demonstrations planned for May. The meetings probably will be staged from May 8 to 10 to give them a VE-day fiavor. The speaker said the party must hammer away at “restating the love of the Communist Party of the United States for America.” Contributions of American Communists to the war will be stressed. There even was discussion of the advisa- bility of asking Gen. Dwight D. Eisenhower to send a VE-day message to the Commu-: nist-sponsored celebrations, and of attempt- ing to send a delegation to the White House. Twelve States Have Ban on Communist Party EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRED L. CRAWFORD OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesduy, April 1, 1947 Mr. CRAWFORD. Mr. Speaker, a country-wide awakening to the menace lurking in the Communist virus that is being spread among the present and also the next generation of Americans is now in evidence. It is a strange para- dox when we legalize the Communist Party, which has for its avowed purpose the overthrow of our form of Govern- ment by violence ff necessary, by dig- nifying it with a place on the ballot. The question now widely discussed is how to isolate the Typhoid Marys of the Communist stripe. It has been sug- gested that the party be banned from the ballot. Some have suggested this will drive them underground. They APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD have achieved their present standing as underminers of the Republic by under- ground operations. Can they get any lower underground? Communists, now legalized as a party, do not run around spreading their poison against this Gov- ernment while wearing big red lapel buttons bearing the Communist Party insignia, Twelve States now have laws denying a place on tite ballot to parties, the tenets of which include overthrow of our form of Government. Miss Helen G. Lohm, of the State Law Section of the Library of Congress, has prepared at my request a summary of State laws prohibiting the Communist Party from appearing on the ballot. The summary follows: Stats Laws Pronwrrina Comsunter Party From APPEARING ON THE BaLLor ARKANBAS An act to amend section 4910 of Walter L. Pope's Digest of thc Statutes of Arkansas, the same being an act to bar un-Amefican par- ties from the election ballot. No political party (a) which is directly or indirectly afi- liated by any means whatsoever with the Communist Party of the United States, the Communist International, or any other for- eign agency, political party, organisation or government; or (b) which either directly or indirectly advocates, teaches, justifies, aids, or abets the overthrow by force or violence, or by any unlawful means, of the Govern- ment of the United States or this State; or (c) which directly or indirectly carries on, advocates, teaches, justifies, aids, or abets & program of sabotage, force and violence, sedition or treason against the Government of the United States or this State, shall be recognized, or qualified to participate, or permitted to have the names of its candi- dates printed on the ballot, in any election in this State. (Dig. Stat. (Cum. Supp. 1944), ch, 55, sec. 4910, p. 192.; CALIFORNIA Notwithstanding any other provisions of this code, no party shall be recognised or qualified to participate in any primary elec- tion which uses or adopts as any part of ite party designation the word “Communist” or any derivative of the word “Communist.” Notwithstanding any other provisions of this code, no perty shall be recognized or qualified to participate in any primary elec- tion which is directly or indirectly affiliated, by any means whatsoever, with the Com- munist Party of the United States, the Third Communist International, or any other for- eign agency, political party, organization, or government, or which either directly or indi- rectly carries on, advocates, teaches, justi- fies, aids, or abets the overthrow by any unlawful means of, or which directly or indirectly carries on, advocates, teaches, jus- tifles, alds, or abets a program of sabotage, force and violence, sedition or treason against the Government of the United States or of this Btate, The Secretary of State shall, with the ad- vice and consent of the Attorney General, determine which parties are qualified to par- ticipate in any primary election. Such de- termination shall be subject to review by the courta in accordance with law. (Codes (Deering, 1939) Elections Code, secs. 2540.3. 2540.4, 2540.9, p. 118.) ILLINOIS That no political organisation or group shall be qualified as a political party here- under, or given a place on a ballot, which organization or group is associated, directly or ingtrectty, with Communist, Fascist, Nazi. or other un-American principles and engage