A328 and I would ke to hope we can avoid it. Reeding the headlines tt sounds to me as if we probably should not go any further than General Marshall bas recommended in this area, Chairman Grantx. Thank you. The President’s Budget —ee EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN TABER or WEew TORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr, TABER. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I insert a radio broadcast on NBC, Friday, Janu- ary 19, 1950: The President's budget calls for new ob- ligational authority, and that means appro- priations—and that is what the budget ts-— of $94,600,000,000, There will be, according to his estimates, $80,000,000,000 remaining to be expended out of this and prior years’ after June 80, 1952. Included in the $94,500,000,000 is @62,500,- 000,000 for military functions and $9,500,- 000,000 for foreign aid of one Kind and an- other. The nonmilitary operations of the Government are only reduced in cases where legislative programs are expiring, such as certain programs in the Veterans’ Adminis- tration, or where enormous sums were pro- vided, such as the stockpile job, and have not yet been expended or obligated. There still ts a huge increase in the For- eign Information Service in the State De- partment, headed by Mr. Barrett, which has so far proved utterly worthless in getting the position of the United States across to foreign countries. Here they are asking for 116,000,000, as against $34,000,000 expendi- tures in the fiscal year 1950. I have made it my business to procure from them scripts of their broadcasts, on eight or nine different days since the 25th of June when the Korean hostilities began. Never once have they broadcast to foreign countries anything which in the slightest degree would make these foreign countries fee] favorable to the United States or realize why we are taking the position and attitude we take on foreign relations questions, Moat of their operations are so ridiculous and puerile that they would drive listeners away, rather than interest them in the United States and its programs. They seem simply to try to get off a lot of words, some of which sound like they were being placed in a bag and drawn out by lot. Frankly, I believe we need some kind of a propaganda service, but there is no sense tn our spending more money on a service that is completely worth- leas. It would seem as though the adihin- istration would take interest enough in the ‘war effort to realize the value and necessity of such a service. The longer the Congress continues to appropriate funds, only to have them wasted, the longer the State Depart- ment will continue to maintain the so-called Information Service on an utterly inade- quate and worthless basis. The President is asking for a $1,000,000,000 increase in the lending authority of the Ex- port-Import Bank and a $1,000,000,000 in-~ crease in the lending authority of the Inter« national Bank, at a time when we should be conserving every eingle item. Foreign loans should be used only in places where the war effort of the United States will be promoted. We should get over the idea of lending money just to help foreign countries when it will not contribute directly to our de- fense. The question of doing good in the world will have to be postponed if we are to have the resources to support our war effort. The President 1s calling for a large item for the continuation of the ECA, when we have already this year provided $500,000,000 more than they are able to spend, even with the very liberal programs they have set up. Foreign relief should be limited to what is absolutely necessary to keep the people in other countries together and to what we can afford to pay out. Unless we get down to what we can afford to pay out, the expendi- tures are going to be so big that we will not be able to raise taxes enough to meet them. Power projects stand out in enormous fig- ures in the estimates of the engineers and of the Bureau of Reclamation. Many of these are in territories where the power costs, if all the cost factors are taken into considera- tion, make the power produced more expen- sive than steam. And this is especially true of the large dams in the Missouri! River where they are unable to compete for cost with the steam plants placed beside the coal moun- tains of the Dakotas. Many projects are in territories where the dams will silt full in a comparatively short time and where they will be utterly useless for either navigation or power, as compared with their cost. With very few exceptions, the President proposes to increase the number of personnel in the already top-heavy bureaus of the Gov- ernment. Even in the Defense Department there is enormous waste. There are offices where large numbers of officers are gathered together with civillan personnel, doing al- most nothing. My information ts that the building and rehabilitation of the set-ups for the armed services are being done on a very extravagant scale and under loose contracts which cost vast sums of money, I cannot single out many things yet, be- cause the requests have not been broken down. Out of the $98,500,000,000 request for ap- propriation authority, only $21,008,000,000 is detailed. The rest is to follow later, and totals $76,700,000,000. The President 1s asking nearly 83800,000,000 to start off on subsidies to farmers, along the lines of the Brannan plan. This is ridicu- lous. He js asking for a $290,000,000 spending program on Federal aid to education for the purpose of starting that program and getting the Federal Government committed to it in such a way that we could never get out. He is asking for the construction of 75,000 public housing units which, very evidently, could not be built for under $600,000,000. The President is also proposing medical aid to be operated by a payroll tax by the Fed- eral Government, a start toward socialized medicine and an effort to break down the morale of our civilian doctors. How much it would cost no one can tell, Amongst other New Deal operations, the President is proposing the FEPO, an effort to completely regiment and destroy the morale of the workers in industry. Those who think about it know that the passage of the FEPC is a declaration that the mi- nority groups are inferior races and that they are unable to get a job without the decree of a Federal commission which will be com- posed of social promoters who know nothing about the problems of the industry involved. In other words, the President wishes to promote every activity which would tend to demoralize our people in time of stress, and he is trying to sneak through a lot of these measures at a time when everybody should be giving of his best to prepare the United States to resist the efforts of the Communists APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD in Russia to destroy the last vestige of free= @om in the world. America became great, and the Opportuni- ties of our people for a good life with a high living standard became possible, because our people were taught to work and produce, and the rewards of industry went to those with the greatest capacity to produce. The incentive of rewards has kept the individual production of individual workers in the United States at an increasingly high level, and that is what has enabled us to build up and improve the standards of living of our people. When we get to the point where we measure the rewards of our people and the pay that they receive on some other basis, than the ability of the individual, selected by the employer who is working for a big production, then we slow down the wheels of industry and the production for defense. For my own part, I think we should stop try- ing to socialize the United States and con- centrate more and more on our war effort. I think perhaps the best comment on the budget message is that the President, in- stead of promoting these socialistic and de- atructive measures and demands, should co- operate with the efforts that are being made to get rid of enormous expenditures and should quit attempting to distract the thoughts and efforts of the people from the thing that should be before them first at this time. Question. The President suggested new taxes of sixteen billions to meet the deficit, do you think the budget can be cut much below his figure, and reduce the deficit? Mr. Taper. The budget should be cut by three to four billion dollars. Question. Is it possible to raise $16,000,- 000,000 more by taxes than present laws will yield? Mr. Taper. A 10 percent retail sales tax, exempting food, would yield 87,000,000,000. That is the biggest figure that I can put my finger on. Other increases would very largely have to come out of the lower income tax group, because increased taxes on the upper brackets will not yield very much money. Question. As a general practice, should we raise taxes to meet whatever the deficit may be-—-in other words—pay as we go? Mr. Taser, If it is possible to increase taxes and balance the budget, !t should be done. Otherwise, we're going to have a continua- tion of the inflation which Mr. Truman has steadfastly promoted ever since his inaugura- tion. The dollar of 1945 purchased more than twice as much as the 1951 dollar. Big dollar figures in income are no good to the people unless they will buy something. Question. You have referred to the differ- ence between the seventy-one billions which the budget has earmarked for spending, and the ninety-four billions of obligational au- thority, which you say is the true budget. Does this difference mean still higher budgets in future years? Mr. Tagen. If we appropriate $88,000,000,000 in 1951 and spend forty-seven billions, we will have, including the carry-over, left over to spend in 1952 and subsequent years—#54,~ 600,000,000. If we appropriate ninety-four and one-half billion and spend seventy-one and one-half billion, we will have left, on July 1, 1952—with odd figures that will be added—about $80,000,000,000. If we appro- priate just as much for 1953 as we are being asked for 1952, very evidently the expendi- ture in 1953 will go up to ninety-seven or ninety-eight billion dollars, and we will have a continual increase in the amount we spend—so that there will be a deficit in 1953 of twenty-six or twenty-seven billion dollars, even if we increase our tax take by 616,- 000,000,000 now.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The Late William T. Cowan EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WESLEY A. D’EWART OF MONTANA IN THE POUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. DEWART. Mr. Speaker, I have just received word that one of Montana's most distinguished pioneer citizens, Mr. William T. Cowan, of Box Elder, has passed away. For many years I have been privileged to know Mr. Cowan and I cherished his friendship and support. I join with the countless other Montana people who mourn his passing. I wish to include in the Recorp a tribute to Mr. Cowan written by Herbert C. Watts, Jr., editor of the Havre (Mont.) Daily News, and published in that newspaper Janu- ary 19: Bru, Cowan: A Rea MAn We like stories with a point to them and with a zesiful flavor, Bill Cowan could epin @ yarn with a degree of authenticity which could never be questioned, That ulone would make him dear to us but there are so many other fine facets in the make-up of the late sage of Hill County which make us pause and say, Now there was a real man. When we were notified yesterday that Bill had passed away we felt that for a moment at least, time had stopped, for Bill had represented all that is good for this old world. His name stood for good deeds, for interest and loyalty to his fellowman and for conscientious endeavor. He character- ized those attributes which are the alpha and the omega of the perfect personality. Bill always was in balance. What he had to offer in his enerciecs and talents gained for him the admiration of all wits, whom he came in contact. Whenever problems beset him he tackled them as {f his very existence depended on their answers. If he got his nose bumped tn the process, his philosophy was “Well, I gave them e darn good run for their money.” One of our bigest regrets will be that we never did get around to chronicling some of the historical high lights of this area as re- lated by Bill, A photographic memory equipped to give the facts in considerable detall, his descriptions were priceles-. You see, Bill Cowan was raised in an age when life meait so much that people cou'd take some time off and include the side lights which made any story worth listening to and absorbing. All men are created equal as far as the Cowan line of reasoning went. That is, all have equal opportunities if they will take the brains that God gave them and apply them in self-betterment. He once told us, “Young man, anybody with a lick of sense can be rich, Most of us are born with a lick of sense or else somebody takes care of us at State expense in an asylum or sumething. I'm rich in a way. I don't mean as far as money goes. I mean in great friendships. That's what I mean, Uncte Sam can take my money away from me every year in taxes but he can’t take away my friendships. So I have 8 lick of sense, I have good friends and, I might add, I have the satisfaction of helping this country of ours along in my own little way.” Some people have described Bill as a politician. He certatnly wasn’t a politician in the popular sense of a man throwing the curves for material gains, He was proud to be a Republican and was an indefatigable chairman of the Hill County Republican Oen- tral Committee and later as national commit~ teeman. But his real politicking was built in working among all men regardless of party allegiance. Everybody knows the background of Bill Cowan's stout fights for Northern Montana College and the Mariaas project. We are Grateful for his foresight and the bringing into reality dreams of progress for this State which Bill dearly loved. We can’t be hackneyed in thought at thia writing and state that Bill never had an enemy. Perhaps he had many. That makes no difference because he was a human being not an ethereal creature passing through the space of the years. However, he had the courage of his convictions and he stood up for his beliefs on hts own two feet. When he was wrong he admitted it but he would often say, “Maybe there is a particle of truth in what I stand for and tf so I'm not going to sit down totally licked.” That was Bill Cowan, merchant, stock- man, Statc senator, community worker, friend of men, and forgive an oft-used ex- pression, salt of the earth. We thank God that we had the joy of knowing him for whet he was—a real man.-~-H. C. W. Representative Norris Poulson Reveals Central Arizona Project Would Con- sume Vital War Materials EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. NORRIS POULSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE I:OUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. POU!.SON. Mr. Speaker, Arizona leaders have stated they once more will push for swift passage of the central Arizona project bill, 8. 75, and that this year they will urge its adoption on the ground that it is vital to the national defense program. To term this fantastic and nonessen- tial project a national defense measure is to place it on a completely phony and deceitful basis. The bill itself absolutely refutes any argument that the project would con- tribute to the national defense program, The promoters of this scheme will pre- tend that the electric power to be de- veloped by the project-—some 10 years hence—would be used by national de- fense industries. Let me cite just one paragraph from the bill which shows that any national defense needs would be the last to get power from this project. I quote from page 5, section 4, of the bill: Electric energy developed at any of the generating plants herein authorized shal) be used first for the operation of pumping plants and other facilities herein author- ized, and for replacement purposes, and the renvainder thereof sold or exchanged to ef- fectuate the purposes of this act. In other words, surplus fleld crops, in- cluding potatoes, come first in this bill, and our national security comes last. In addition, the authors of 8. 75 have tried to becloud the real issues by adding @ meaningless section to this year’s bill, namely, section 15, which is intended to A329 decetve Congress into the belief that the project would not be built if critica) ma- terials to be used are needed for the war program. ‘ The fact is, that the principal mate- rials which would be consumed by the project are steel, other war metals, con- crete, machinery, and, above all, man- power—a vast number of skilled workers. Do we need @ finding by some bureau- cratic agency that at this very moment steel, concrete, machinery, and man- power are critical materials? Even though the central Arizona proj- ect used not one ounce of critical ma- terials, it would infilct upon the tax- payers of the Nation an additional tax burden of more than $2,000,000,000. And that statement is based on the tax es- timate made by Secretary of the Interior Oscar Chapman. It is shocking that at a time like this, when we are faced with a war for our survival, that the Members of Congress should be required to waste one moment of their time in considering an outra- geous project of this nonessential nature Fight for Survival EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS J. LANE GF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. LANE. Mr, Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to include the following radio address I delivered over Station WMEX, Boston, Mass., on Monday, January 22, 1951: ‘We REARM To SURVIVE Fellow Americans, we’ve got a job to do, a biz job, and it’s high time that we roiled up our sleeves to do the extra work required from all of us. It's the job of protecting our homes and our families from the international outlaw who wants to take us over. For the past 5% years we gave in to him on this point and that point, hoping that reason would finally prevail and that he would mind his own business because he had enough work to do in his own enormous back yard to absorb all of his time and his energy. We have found out, belatedly, that such &@ policy will not bring peace. For very concession that we make the appetite of Russian imperialism becomes hungry for more. The Russian Government has the mental- ity of a criminal, employing every element of fraud and force to take away from neigh- boring nations what they have built by honest effort. Think of this fact. It has more land and natural resources than any country in the world. And it knows that there is no combination of other nations that haa the power or the intention of in- vading that land mass. Then, why isn't the Russian Government concerned with the de- velopment of its own country so as to raise the standard of living for the Russian people? Basically it envies and fears the free way of life beyond its frontiers. It realizes that if its own people Knew the truth of life in the United States they woula demand the right to bulld such a life for themselves,
Put that would lead to freedom and under- mine the power by which the Communist minority holds the majority in bondage. They must destroy us because they cannot compete with us out in the open. Only 800 years ago this land of ours was a wilderness. ‘What happened between then and now? Did a miracle occur whereby a nation of 150,000,000 people with all its homes and cars and schools and churches was dropped ready-made from a celestial assembly line upon the North American Continent? The Reds haven't got the nerve to offer this propaganda line to explain our progress. For that would admit that there is some- thing divine at work here in the United States which is an incentive for men to bulla a society from which all benefit in varying degrees, depending upon the ability and the effort of individuals. Tnat miracle is freedom—the right to think ard do, and experiment, and work, and produce. We are limited only by the moral restraints of the Ten Commandments and the laws we make through our servants in Government, and not by the 10,000 curbs enforced by a tight and rigid group of tyrants who cannot be recalled or repudiated by the people for the crimes they have committed against the people. The Communist leaders know that they cannot match the broad distribution of the good things in life that is a developing fact under free governments. When millions of automobiles are pro- duced in 1 year in the United States, they are not sold to the members of any one special class. Americans do not have to pass a Marxist test or produce a card showing membership in the Communist Party or any party in order to buy a television set. Re- publicans and Democrats debate Aercely, then vote a decision as to laws and appro- priations. After that, they obey the majority opinion, and then worship in mixed congre- gations on Sunday. Behind the Communist double talk we penetrate to their real purpose. The few want to gather into their hands the concen- trated power that will completely dictate to the many. The devil himself wants to be God. The pity is that communism lures the envious, the ones with twisted minds, and the gullible to follow the leaders who stop at the gate, exhort their followers to go in, and then lock the door of the prison behind them. We the people of the United States are not attracted by this form of security. The sell game of communism will not deceive us to our own loss. And if they try to pull a gun on us to make @ fast dollar and rob us of all that we have, we shall be waiting for them with a bigger gun aimed at them in order to discourage them. Our job ts to get that gun ready, ‘It won't be easy. No sane person wants war. But as long as there are lawless elements in the community or the world we have no other choice than to establish an effective security force that will prevent aggression or punish it. It will have to be a big gun, costing a fabulous sum in terms of money, brains, and manpower, both military and industrial. We had hoped and still hope that the United Nations may be able in some measure to halt aggression. On a more substantial basis, however, we must count on the efforts of ourselves and those nations allied with us in common de- fense under the Atlantic Pact. Here are the facts that compel us to mobilize. Communist Russia and ite satellites cone trol more than one-third of the earth. From iran to Japan, Asia is threatened. Europe, from Turkey and Greece to Scandinavia, is open to attack. Communism is international in scope, and tts goal is conquest of the world. The Soviet Union has rejected all offers of cooperation because it seeks to dominate. As of the present, the Kremlin is attack- ing the outposts of the free world with troops of ita satellite slaves, while the Red Army is being built up for the major assault, Stalin plans to defeat us by one or & come bination of two ways: (1) By forcing us to undertake such unbearable defense costs that the American economy will crack under the strain; (2) by all-out military force. We know that we will not start a war, but can the same be said of Russia? Soviet diplomacy ts trying to involve us in an exhausting land war on the Chinese main- land. At the same time it is trying to provoke misunderstandings among the United States, Britain, and France, that will splinter the unity of the free world. What is the strength of this Nation which seeks our downfall? The major war assets of the Soviet Union and its stooges include: A central position in the Europe-Asia land mass with vast nat- ural resources. The population totals more than 700,000,000. It has powerful land armies; an air force that exceeds ours in quantity if not in quality; hundreds of mod- ern submarines; and cells of traitors in every country including the United States, Among the weaknesses of the enemy are: The low level of efficiency in the members of its armed forces, its Industry and its agri- culture; and the shortage of technically trained personnel. The transportation sys- tem is poor. Steel and petroleum are not sufficient to sustain a long war effort. And there are millions of people within the Rus- sian sphere of control who would rebel if they had a chance. In the planning of new and secret weapons, we are ahead of Russia. And we have the great industrial machine that can produce them in quantity if the holding operations give us time to work out these blueprints along the assembly line and to train people in the use of these weapons. A favorite technique of the Reds is to weaken a neighbor for conquest by provok- ing civil wars. They tried this in France and Italy, but we countered this maneuver effec- tively by our Marshall] plan ald which helped these Nations to regain production and pro- vide income-producing employment for their people. Communist propaganda makes headway in Asia where too many people exist in ignor- ance and poverty. But while we strive to offset Communist influence there as best we can, the main danger centers in Europe. The Atlantic Pact, which will be strength- ened by the military assistance program, is evidence of the importance of Western Eu- rope in our foreign policy. If the resources of that highly developed area should fall into the hands of the enemy and, added to his own, should then be turned against us, what would be the result? We would be isolated and then slowly strangled. Looking at it the other way around the resources of West- ern Europe, coupled with our own, give us a decided edge. The defenses of this area must be strengthened without delay. Even then, our chief reliance would be the over- whelming number and quality of our weapons to overcome the masses of Soviet manpower. A foreign policy to be sound must prevent war of, failing that, be able to win a war, Our Government cannot succeed in either unless it knows what is going on in the world. Above all, it must secure informa- tion concerning the atrength, disposition and intention of the potential enemy. We, as a Nation, have been weak in this department. At the end of World War II, a central intelil- gence agency was organized to put all these APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD functions under one head and to bring sys- tem to the job of digging up these vital facts and interpreting them correctly. Our security demands among other things that our morale or spirit must be superior to the enemy's. To guarantee this, we must carry the psychological or propaganda war directly to the enemy's population. In the contest of ideas, the so-called Voice of Amer- ica, beamed to the heartland of the Commu- nist empire, is an important weapon. So far, however, ‘ts timid approach has turned up few ret ‘Its. We shall have to strengthen this program, pointing up the contrast be- tween communism and democracy, showing the Russian people how they can better their lot, and encouraging them to overthrow those who enslave them. To do this con- vincingly we must employ the talents of those Russians who have escaped from com- munism, broadcasting the truth to their own people back home. The A-bomb, long-range planes, saboteurs, and the possibilities of germ warfare all ex- pose our civilian population to direct attack, The Nation has been slow to recognize this danger, because we have never had to cope with it before. Short of all-out war and complete mobilization it ts up to the cities and the States to organize their civilian de- fense staffs and to train them in advance. We cannot afford to wait until after a sur- prise attack has hit us for proof that such an attack could happen. The best insurance is to be prepared ahead of time. As o}e reads the daily papers, it seems that the mobilization of men and women for the Armed Forces and the mobilization of plant, materials, and skilled labor are all competing for priority. This underscores the fact that the Nation with the best industrial set-up and resources, is more likely to deter an aggressor, or to defeat him if he plunges the world into war, Manpower problems as a whole come first. We need men to make the weapons and men trained to use them. At the same time, we need workers In agriculture and volunteers for civilian defense. The services of more and more women Will be needed on a full- or a part-time basis, Modern defense costs a lot of money. But the tax burden we shall be called upon to bear is light compared with the crushing burden suffered by those who have fallen under the iron rule of communism. You and I can help to keep our burden from becoming greater by giving extra effort to our job, by avoiding waste in any form, and by resolutely avoiding the black market which would weaken the controls that will be imposed to hold the line on prices. Look at {t this way. Most Americans are working to give us the products and the serv- ices that we rely upon for our everyday peacetime needs. To this we must add those things and those services required for de- fense, We can meet this larger order if all of us work longer. I am confident that we can build up our defenses without suffering critical shortages of peacetime goods by working harder all around. The American people are anxious to know what they are expected to do. I have tried to sketch in the dangers of the situation confronting us, and the steps that must be taken to protect ourselves. Communism must be prevented from tak- ing over other countries because the balance of power would shift to them, thereby plac- ing us at a hopeless disadvantage. Up to Korea, Russia had gobbled up plenty of this world's real estate and the people on it without meeting any military resistance, For our own security, we must oppose Red Rusala’s expansion and let the Kremlin know that we are preparing to oppose it with power,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The wishful thinkers who cling to the hope that Russia will respond to the appeals of reason or morality, blind themselves to the record of communism, Stalin has broken so many agreements during the past few years, that I haven't got time to Hst them. The Reds are materialists, and the only thing that will stop them is the fact that we refuse to be tricked and that henceforth we shall arm to the teeth. The big gun that will in- flict a mortal wound on communism if it dares to attack is the only deterrent that the Reds understand and respect. The big gun of defense is what we must build and man. It 1s not a course of our own choosing, are impelled to it by stern necessity, The sooner we arm the better will be our chance of avoiding a major conflict or sur- viving, if that grim test should be forced upon us, I believe that under our present realistic policy the odds incline toward an uneasy truce instead of an all-out war. We An Issue for Great Debate EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, just prior to the openinz of the present Congress, it became evident to most of us that the adventure in Korea had failed. It be- came more than ever manifest that this country’s foreign policy was leading di- rectly to world war III. Because of these things, Republican leaders in the other body planned a “great debate” on the subject of our foreign relations. Properly speaking, they proposed a complete reexamination of foreign policy, and a demand for an accounting from the Truman adminis- tration. The attitude and actions of the Presi- dent and his Secretary of Statc, had made it clear that bipartisanism in foreign policy was dead. This, in itself, was a good thing. It was so because the former bipartisan policy never had been anything but Democratic policy, with some Republican leaders saying “me too.” A situation had arisen wherein those with the energy and courage to oppose the tragic blundering of the administra- tion, were silenced for the most part by smear words, such as “isolationist’’ and “Pascist.” In any event, their protests and criticism were ignored. Therefore it seemed that the opening of a new Congress presented a favorable opportunity for opening up the whole subject of foreign relations. It seemed that some light at last might be thrown upon the dark area of administration concealment, with respect to its panicky vaciliations, its failures properly to evaluate Russian intentions, and its im- pulsive and ill-considered use of such military power as remains to us. And so the “great debate” was started, It has continued, rather sporadically, for nearly 3 weeks. But now it seems to have boiled down to a single question. Does the President rossess constitu- tional powers to send American troops in force to Europe, or anywhere élse, with- out the consent of Congress? The President sent our troops into the Korean debacle without the consent of Congress. And without the consent of Congress, the late President Roosevelt sent our troops to Iceland, just before the onset of World War TI. Many still earlier precedents for such action exist in American history. It is true, even, that many constitu- tional authorities of past years, have supported the contention that American Presidents do, indeed, possess such pow- ers, Nevertheless, I believe that a question still remains. Can the President send our troops abroad at his own discretion, any time and for any reason that seems to him valid? Or can he do so only when American citizens or American proper- ties directly are jeopardized? That ques- tion, I believe, remains to be answered. At the same time, it seems to me that the question concerning the President’s constitutional right to send American divisions to Europe this year, without first obtaining the consent of Congress, is somewhat beside the point at this time. The President acted without consult- ing Congress in sending our young men to fight and suffer and die fruitlessly in Korea, Plainly he acted on impulse, without due consideration, and without consulting even such poor advisers as he keeps about him. His action brought disaster. Therefore, it would seem to me now, in view of President Truman’s tragically ir- responsible decision on Korea, that the real question at issue pertains chiefly to the responsibility of his actions in the future. Especially with respect to the decision on when, and if, and in what number our troops should be sent to bolster a faltering defense of Western Europe. Can the President be trusted to use properly, with due caution and good judgment, those powers to which he lays claim in this connection? One of the constitutional functions of the Congress is to serve as a checkrein upon the ambitions, or the possibly ill- judged actions, of the Chief Executive. Is not this the time for Congress to exercise that curb on the Chief Executive which is implicit in the powers granted Congress by the Constitution? This, I believe, ts a question really worthy of debate. Rabbi Maxwell Dubin, of Los Angeles, Speaks Out Against Communism EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GORDON L. McDONOUGH OF CALIFOANTA IN 'THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1952 Mr. McDONOUGH. Mr. Speaker, the people of America are awake to the dan- A331 ger of Communist aggression and of the design of Communists to spread their power and enslave the free nations of the world, They are alert to the dangers of sabotage within the United States as well as to the threat from foreign aggressors, and they realize that every American must join in a united effort to defeat the threats of aggression. In a recent address delivered at the Wilshire Boulevard Temple, Los Angeles, Rabbi Maxwell H. Dubin gave an inspir- ing message enumerating the reasons why every American must today be on guard against communism which is worthy of the attention of every citizen. The following editorial from the Holly- wood Citizen-News high lights the vital message from Rabbi Dubin: REASONS FOR BEING ON GUARD Civilians are just as much in this war as though they actually wore a uniform, ce- clared Rabbi Maxwell H, Dubin, of the Wil- shire Boulevard Temple tn a recent sermon dealing with the “horrible thing” that threatens this country. “Ware are fought at home,” said Rabbi Dubin. “Wars are fougl.t in the laboratories. Wars are fought in the factories. That is where Russia has declared war upon us. Her aim is to paralyze—to sabotage—to slow down the work that we in America are try- ing to do in order to prepare ourselves for the ordeal. “In the days ahead you and I have got to be on guard, very much on guard, because attempts have been made and attempts will be made to befog the tesue, You are going to be asked to sign all kinds of protests and all kinds of proclamations. Be care- ful. Know what you are doing and if you do not know, ask.” We have made many false assumptions in the past concerning the enemy, Rabbi Dubin pointed out. We failed to understand the real aims and ambitions of Soviet Russia. “We were led to believe in America that communism was a forward-looking social movement, led by great idealists who had a high code of social and international mor- ality. “We were sold the idea that Soviet Russia was a civilized country, determined to di- rect its international life in paths of peace and of progress. We were told that Soviet Russia had a government that would have respect for its iuternational promises and commitments and would devote its best in- terests to the welfare of its own people and to the peoples of other lands.” Such ideas should never have been ac- cepted, the Rabbi said, as he pointed out how the millions of Jews who lived in Russia when the revolution took place were the first ones to be liquidated by the Commu- nists. “They were sent to labor camps, they dug the canals; they were sent to Siberia and they died—by the hundreds of thou- sands—bedause the thing for which the Jew stood and stands—respect for human indt- viduality—was not and ts not wanted by Soviet Russia.” But the warnings of those who knew went unheeded, so “Russia was treated by the na- tions of the world like a spoiled child that threatens to hold its breath if it does not get what it wants. We accepted her word. We had faith in her signature, faith in the agreements that were made. * * * “Russia violated every promise to the Weatern World. She abused our trust, spread her power, seized lands, destroyed governments, developed fifth columns throughout the world and potsoned the minds of millions of people against their native governments.”
A332 Rabbi Dubin hopes that now after 5 years . Of disillusionment we have awakened to facts. He referred to the fact that today behind the iron curtain “the last traces of Jewish life are being eliminated.” After 8 months in Burope, Rabbi Dubin reached the conclusion that everyone wants to come to America because “materially and spiritually there is not another land in the world as fortunate as ours.” The above few extracts from an inspiring address provide reasons enough for the Rab- bi's declaration that, “we must be on guard.” The Price of Lettuce EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN PHILLIPS OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. PHILLIPS. Mr. Speaker, I wish to comment on the excessive mark-ups in the price of lettuce, a subject which was discussed January 19 by Gabriel Heatter, the well-knowr. Mutual news commentator. He reported the average Nation-wide retail price of lettuce as 27 cents per head. If this price is correct, the people should know that the farmers last year received an average of less than 5 cents per head for their lettuce. That is still the price, although growing costs are about 7 cents per head. We had in my district of California over 30,000 acres in lettuce. I am told that almost half of the crop on this acreage has been destroyed by frost, which will lower the supply and make the growers’ costs greater. The farmers of my district will do all they can to get lettuce to the markets at the lowest possible cost. Following is a telegram which the let- tuce growers of my district sent to Mr. Heatter immediately after his broad- cast: Ex Centro, CALI¥F., January 21, 1951. Hon. Joun Puri.irps, Washington, D.C.: Your timely review of lettuce prices in grocery stores has opened possible channel for benefits to every household and pre- vent further injustice to farmers of lettuce. Through you it is possible to bring factual information to public and in these times this gesture would be welcomed by all. Your quotation of 27 cents per head of lettuce is reported to be accurate Nation-wide in chain stores as well as independent mar- kets. The public will be interested to know that the farnier is now and has been for the past year receiving an average of less than 6 cents per head for his lettuce. Costs have averaged at least 7 cents minimum. The lettuce farmers have been and are now suffering their greatest financial losses be~ cause of the situation you have exposed, That ie the excessive profits obtained because of excessive mark-ups over costs by those who retard consumption with high prices. This could be worked to better advantage with cheaper prices to housewives, causing greater consumption, thereby creating great- er demand for farmers’ lettuce which would inorease volume and lower unit costs. Noth- ing new to axiom of supply and demand. Nothing new to larger volume and lower prices and same total profits for retailer, Nothing new to production being among greatest assets of our country. Your stand against profiteering is applicable to lettuce and would be one more of your noted public services. It touches every family and would be invaluable in establishing an understand- ing between producer and consumer. This becomes increasingly important when the retailer and the Government are getting what the consumer believes is going to the producer. The Imperial Valley Farmers As- sociation in Imperial Valley, Calif., along with our neighbors in Arizona produce over 90 percent of the lettuce consumed In the United States and Canada. ImpertaL VALLEY FARMERS ASSOCIATION, El Centro, Cali}, YuMA VEGETABLE SHIPPERS ASSOCIATION, Yuma, Artz, Antisubmarine Ships and Weapons EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON, WILLIAM A. BARRETT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. BARRETT, Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Reo- orp, I would like to include the following comments as a preface to an editorial which appeared in the Philadelphia Daily News of December 21, 1950. The most recent edition of Jane's Fighting Ships reports that the Soviet Union is building a powerful fleet of 1,000 submarines. Those of us from the Atlantic seaboard remember only too vividly the dark days of 1942 when Nazi Germany with a much smaller fleet of less advanced design than the deadly snorkel type submarine now being built by the Communists wrought ter- rible destruction upon our merchant shipping and threatened for a time to disrupt our entire war effort. It took us many months of hard work to overcome the initial advantage en- joyed by the enemy submarines. Even today some of our beaches are darkened by the oil lost from the scores of tankers that were sunk 7 or 8 years ago by U-boats lurking off shore, Our Navy is keenly aware of the men- ace of the submarine fleet being built by Soviet Russia. They need to be en- couraged to meet it. If we are called upon to fulfill the obligations assumed under the North Atlantic Pact, the sub- marines which seek to cut our lines of communication across the sea may well be the most dangerous threat we will meet. The Philadelphia Daily News in a re- cent editorial has deplored false econ- omy which cuts into appropriations for the latest type antisubmarine ships and weapons which the Navy needs. Mr. Speaker, this is no place for economy. We must recognize the challenge of the submarine and prepare to meet it, It is not a phase of our defense effort we can afford to neglect even for a moment. Two world wars have found us un- prepared to deal with undersea warfare, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD It must not happen a third time. The warning given by the Philadelphia Daily News is, indeed, timely and important: Navy SHovLD Have ANY ANTISUBMARINE Weapons It Asks Since the days of Commodore John Barry and Capt. John Paul Jones, the United States Navy always has been a major consideration in any plans for the Nation's defense. True, between wars, its personnel and ships and equipment have been reduced to proportions that other countries thought ridiculous. But when the shots were fired and the United States began to rebuild its Navy, the odds for victory increased apace. And quite often, the efficiency of the Navy represented the difference between victory and defeat. Most military strategists admit the need for a strong Navy for they realize the Ameri- can sea forces are, when at full strength, the Nation's first and greatest line of defense from attack abroad. The gathering clouds on the international horizon have brought this question forcibly to the forefront of public attention. In the First World War, the major threat to the lifelines of the United States and its Allies was the German submarine warfare, in which hundreds of vessels were sunk un- til the United States Navy went into action and immobilized the undersea wolves of Kaiser Wilhelm. In the Second World War, Hitler’s Third Reich also tried to use the suymarine but never was able to accomplish the destruction, either in scope or mone- tary loss, that the Imperial German Navy did because of the alertness of the American Navy. However, the Nazis did considerable re- search on submarines and built the snorkel, the most powerful and fastest undersea craft ever constructed. And when the Russtan Armies swept into the Baltic States, where the Germans had their shipyards and sub- marine pens, they confiscated the plans and models. They also made prisoners of the German scientists, naval experts, and archi- tects who were engaged in the development and put them to work for the Communist war machine, Since then, the Russians have been busily building submarines and today it is known they have a fleet of approximately 200 snor- kels, whose range is more than 7,000 miles, which enables them to make a trans-Atlantic crossing and return without stopping. In addition, they have more than 150 other types they can use to harass shipping if they go to war. They also have 120 submarines under construction and plan to expand their underwater fleet to 1,000. At present there are more than 100 of these Russian submarines lying in the waters off Japan and Korea. If Russia entered the Korean War, the havoc these subs could wreak to the Allied forces attempting to evacuate their hard-pressed troops would be catastrophic, except for a gallant stand by our never-give-up-the-ship Navy. They also could threaten the American defense line from Japan to the Philippines. For these reasons Congress must give the United States Navy whatever it asks in the way of finances to butld its own submarines and antisubmarine service to meet the gath- ering threat from the Soviet Union. Any secret weapon in process must be speeded to production at once, because the leet of 200 Red snorkel subs presents a major problem. If these U-boats can be immobilized, the total defeat of the Russian Navy is certain, and the American Navy will have little dim- culty in keeping the sea lanes open tor American and Allied transports and supply ips. . The staggering sum of 62,000,000,000 was apent to perfect the atomic bomb, but if this
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD written a column about NBC's negotia- weapon had not been developed, the loss of American lives in the invasion and of imperial Japan would have been terrific. So, regardiess of the cost, the Navy, as the bulwark against foreign invasion, as the protector of the open sea and as the guard of freedomi's forces abroad, must not be ham- strung in its plans to meet any threat posed by the Russian submarine fleet. This of national emergency is not the time for Congress to become penurious. Economy is one thing, but any penny-wise policy that will rob the Navy of any weapons it needs to put a foreign submarine cam- paign under control would be only pound- foolish in the end. Economy is «a matter of saving with good judgment, not paring funds to a point where the rematnder will not accomplish the full purpose of national de- fense required. The United States Navy, today as in the past, is an integral part of America’s pro- tection and shares equally with the Army and the Atr Force the responstbility for safe- guarding American lives. At present it is giving a remarkable ac- count of itself in bombarding enemy poal- tions in Korea from the sea to permit the ground forces to maintain their orderly withdrawals from dangerous areas. None can say how many American lives are being saved every time a shell from the U. 8. 8. Missouri explodes in Chinese Communist ranks. Each branch of the Navy, likewise, is im- portant to the effective whole. Without its carriers in the Pacifico war, the Japanese Fleet would not have been driven back to its ports and destroyed forever as a threat to peace. Its transport service, its battle wagons and fast cruisers and destroyers have their special roles to enact in any action, and they must be brought to the fullest degree of efficiency. But, at the same time, the submarine phases of the problem are emerging as most important. If the United States is to cope with what will be, in time of war, a major peril, not only to the surface craft, but to the coast-line cities as well, the Navy must be given the green light to develop whatever antisubmarine or other naval defenses they need. To do otherwise would be depriving the Nation of a defense it may sorely need at a not too far distant time. *  Vietor Lasky EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ISIDORE DOLLINGER OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. DOLLINGER. Mr. Speaker, the television and radio industry is currently beset with problems rising out of the Communist menace. The industry hes Jong been a target for Communist infil- tration. Therefore, it is heartening to learn that the great pioneering network, the National Broadcasting System, is considering the appointment of Victor Lasky as a consultant and commentator. Mr. Lasky, as many of you know, is co- author of Seeds of Treason and one of the Nation's outstanding authorities on the Communist menace. ‘The noted radio editor of the New York Daily News, Mr. Ben Gross, has tions with Mr. Lasky, a staff writer of the New York World-Telegram and Sun, I am inserting it in the Recorp so that the Members of the House may have an opportunity to read it: (From the New York Dally News of December 29, 1950] The big headache, Who ts a Communist sympathizer? What is pro-Communist propegande? Trying to answer these ques- tions is giving the radio and television networks a major headache these days. The problem has come to the fore again with the recent attack on commentator Drew Pearaon by Senator Josepx McCartuy. It also boiled over a few weeks ago when sév- eral hundred protests poured into NBC denouncing @ program celebrating the Bill of Rights, with Melvyn Dougias, Burgess Meredith, and Kenny Delmar in the leading roles, as Moscow-inspired. The truth is that the broadcasters have become so jittery of late that they fear almost any offering save an innocuous song and comedy period might contain some hidden leftist signifi- cance, To those who know the leaders of the broadcasting industry—most of them con- servative Republicans and all of them patri- otic citimene—the idea that they would know- ingly permit their properties to be used for anti-American purposes is nothing less than laughable. But whether some of their em- ployees—commentators, performers, and writere—are sympathetic to the Commie cause—well, that is a different matter. The powers that be in radio and TV are hopelessly confused. They simply do not know the score. What they need is sound advice from experts who can tell the differ- ence between a party-liner and one who believes in democratic principles. So it’s interesting news that NBO is con- sidering the appointment of Victor Lasky not only as a commentator on the Commu- nist movement but as & special con- sultant on communism ‘as it affects policy, programs, and personnel. Lasky, an able newspaperman and the coauthor of the most interesting book written about the Alger Hiss case, the best selling Seeds of Treason, is an acknowledged authority on the topic. He knows who the Commies are and what they are up to. But, at the same time, he's not one of those fellows who shout “Communist” at everyone in aight. For ex- ample, when the recent excitement over Anna Rosenberg hit the print, he tmmedi- ately appraised the charges as being un- founded. It seems to me that NBC is on the track of a good idea. And it’s one that other networks might well copy. Men in Politics EXTENSION OF PEMARKS or HON. JOHN A. McGUIRE OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. McGUIRE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I wish to in- clude in the Rrecorp an editorial entitled “Men in Politics,” that appeared in the Scranton, Pa,, Catholic Light on Novem- ber 9, 1950, Logether with an editorial that appeared in the Boston, Mass., Pos under date of November 13, 1950 1980, entitied A383 “Impeliitteri’s Victory.” The above- mentioned editorials follow: [From the Scranton (Pa.) Catholic Light of November 9, 1950) Msn rn Potirics A politician is a politician even after the election. Unfortunately, this fact is not al- ways appreciated. And while everyone realises that a man seeking office is a poli- tician, entirely too few remember that he is no different and no better after he gains office. Consequently, the candidates who lose are remembered as politicians. Those Who win become office holders and remain such until the next election. But they're stil} poli- tictans. These iatter, mindful of their atetus, should study remarks made recently by one of their very own, the Honorable James A. Farley. Mr. Farley traces the Christian attitude toward political power back to 8t, Paul's re- mark that “there ls no power but from God and those that are ordained by God.” This, he avers, means that those who hold political power are in a sense ministers of God tn the temporal order. Since their powers come from God, and since they act in His name, obviously any politician who dares use his office in a manner that is contrary to the laws of God or in a way likely to arouse His wrath is rushing toward an inevitable day of reckoning with a speed and a blindness awful to behold. And thif applies to every politician, however great or small the office he holds. To Mr. Farley, politics is an ancient calling. More than that, it is an honorable profes- sion and s sacred trust. So long as God remains in the picture; so long as politicians remember that they are the servants not the masters of the people and so long as they do not lose sight of their only raison d'etre no one will quarrel with Mr. Farley’s statements. But what ts the principal task, nay the only purpose, that even remotely justifies the existence of politicians? Again Mr. Far- ley supplies the answer: “Always the common welfare is the goal. In a public order under God, neither the heads nor the members of the political par- ties should try to advance merely partisan or group interest. Self-enrichment ig a be- trayal of the sacred trust of the public officer dn his office and of the political party in ita power. It violates sound ethical principles and is an offense again good morals. We must never forget that tt is the common good which is commanded by the natural law—that is, by the eternal law of God which we learn by examining human nature with our human reason.” Porthright as are these words, they are mild compared to those Mr. Farley uses in declaring that politicians have definite re- sponaibilities. Oddly enough, no mention is made of responsibility or loyalty to the party. Mention is made, however, of responsibility to God and man. Politicians, he declares, “are responsible to God to keep a just ac- count of their stewardship. They are re- sponsible to man for the wise and temperate exercise of their God-given authority.” And yet who can deny that all too often no one is more completely forgotten than the people—unless it be Almighty God, As Mr. Parley points out, the day will come when each politician must render an account of his works, He will be better prepared for that day of strict Judgment by frequently recalling these final words of one who knows whereof he speaks: ‘Tet no one think that these are trifiing matters. Let no one think that they are easy matters. Let no one think that they
are matters which can be responsibly han- dled except reverently and prayerfully under God.” [From the Boston Post of November 18, 1060] Impeciirrrer’s VICTORY The victory of Vincent R. Impellitteri, the new mayor of New York, 1s entirely his and the pie’s. The machines were defied; the parties were defied: the bosses were defied. He performed a politica! miracle and demon- strated the strength of American democ- racy—the tough fiber that lies beneath the political encrustations. But a word of thanks goes from all to James A. Farley, who lent his name and prestige to Mayor Impellittert’s campaign. In a_ political squabble such as that out of which the three-cornered New York mayoralty fight developed there are a good many voters who, hesitant about the issues, will gladly put their vote beside the name of the man that Mr. Farley says is “deserving.” The Railroad Workers Tell Their Side of the Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GARDNER R. WITHROW OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. WITHROW. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to extend my re- marks in the Recorp and to include therein an editorial which appeared in the Wisconsin Dally News, Monday, Jan- uary 22, 1951. This article was by W. P. Kennedy, president of one of the great railroad brotherhoods, namely, the Brotherhood of Railroad Trainmen, which I believe is the largest of the trans- portation organizations. I know of no organization of men who have been more patriotic and who have done more in the industrial field for the country, both in time of war and in peace, than have the railroad brotherhoods. In rain or snow, in ice or sleet they man the transportation systems of this great Nation. They are ever patient, but among them at the present time is a bit- terness that is clearly justified by the treatment that they have received at the hands of their employers who have made the Government their chief instrument. The following is an intelligent and factual statement of the case of the rail- road brotherhoods, and I commend it to the House for their conscientious con- sideration: Tuxm Birreeness Runs Desp—Tex Ran Worxers Tet, Tamm Siwx or tux SToRY (By W. P. Kennedy) The men who battle the icy blasts of win- ter and face death every day on their jobs to keep the Nation's trains running are not Betting a fair deal these days. They cannot understand just why this should be. Haven't the Government, the press, and their employers been telling them how important and how valuable their work is to jnational welfare during these trying If their jobs are so vital, if their contribu. tion to our economy and to the defense effort ds 20 necessary, why is it that 22 months of negotiations have failed to yield conditions of employment that ate standard {n practi-+ cally all other tndustry? This is shabby reward for the patience, responalhility, and the generally cool-headed manner in which the railroad man has al- ways conducted his relations with his em- ployer. And it has fostered a bitter resent- ment against our employers that has hither- to been unknown in the ratlroad industry. It runs deep. It is dangerous. DISCRIMINATION CHARGED Although practically all United States workers have now long enjoyed the standard 40-hour workweek with overtime on the sixth and seventh days, the railroad switch- man and yardman are being denied this ace cepted American working standard. One million nonoperating rail employees (clerks, shopmen, bollermakers, machinists, etc.) have enjoyed the 5-day week with no pay reduction for almost 2 years. Why the discrimination? Train crews, who operate the trains over the road, are seeking in addition to desper- ately needed wage-rate increases, improve-~ ments in working rules that are long over- due. These include away-from-home ex- penses, such as lodging and meals, and pen- alty pay for delays at the terminals that are the result of management bungling. There are some others, but these are two objectives that should be readily understood. They are accepted practices in all other industry. As matters now stand, a majority of yard service employees work 7 days a week at straight time. They work that kind of schedule just to buy their families the bare necessities of life under today’s soaring liv- ing costs, the biggest in United States his- tory. Steelworkers, auto workers, common la- borers, in fact, most other workers have received four wage increases and some a fifth since the end of World War II, Train- men have had three. Their last pay hike was in October 1948. EIGHT RATE INCREASES In contrast, the railroads have asked for and received eight general rate increases since the end of the war. They add up to 57 percent. They are hauling more freight and making more money than at any time in their history—and have just filed for still another rate hike. Of course, we want the railroads to pros- per, but we want and must have a fairer share in our contribution to that prosperity. The railroads are today hauling several times the freight of 25 years ago—and they are doing it with more than 1,000,000 fewer em- ployees. This means that individual pro- ductivity has increased manyfold. Manage- ment refuses to share this increase with the men who make possible its improved fnan- cial situation. Because of this attitude, the operating rail worker, who was once at the top of the list, has slipped to about thirtieth place in the scale. For example, in Cleveland, BRT head- quarters, yardmen’s pay ranges from 81.34 to $1.64 an hour as compared to building tradesmen who range from $1.95 (for com- mon labor) to $2.70; steel workers, $1.80 to $2.25, and machinists, @1.80 to 62.10. Many are paid bonuses over and above thelr regu- lar rates because of labor shortages. They have all this plus deuble time on certain holidays, overtime after 40 hours, and many other benefits not included in our contracts, ‘We are glad our brothers in the A, F. of L, and CIO enjoy such conditions, but are not men engaged in the hazardous and important work of ratl transportation entitled to at Jeaat as good a break from their employers? THE MEN ARE SITTER The restive and bitter spirit among oper- ating rail workers, which broke out around the country a few weeks back in unauthorized strikes, is the result of management's abso- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD lute refusal to enter into collective bargain ing in the usual and realiatic sense as prac- ticed in most other industries. We have obeyed the Ratlway Labor Act to the letter—and have not violated its spirit. We came to the bargaining, table, prepared to give and take in an effort to work out a satisfactory agreement of our differences. The carriera came to the table to delay, At no time did they deal straight across the table. Their intention from the beginning was to take advantage of the endless delays afforded by the Railway Labor Act. They could stand the walt more than the switch- man on the job. Each day the settlement was put off meant almost $1,000,000 In their coffers, When the case finally went to a Presiden- tial Emergency Board, we painstakingly and patiently presented the justification for our demands, backing them with irrefutable sta- tistical and sociological data. That Board, comprised of men totally unfamiliar with the railroad industry and rail labor prob- lems, turned in a report we could not accept. FINDINGS NOT MANDATORY Contrary to the general belief, Emergency Board reports under the law are not mands- tory or binding on either party to the dis- pute. We rejected the Board's findings but did agree to use it as the basis for discussion and further negotiation. The carriers retorted that it was either the Board's report or nothing. This has been their position in recent years, Its acceptance would amount to compulsory arbitration, a mechanism most repulsive to free enterprise and free labor. How can we permit strangers, unfamillar with the complexities of rail labor-management relations to have the final say in such vital matters? Our demands were first served on the car- riers 22 months ago. By exploiting the Rail- way Labor Act and their loyal, responsible employees, the railroads have thus far managed to avoid a fair and realistic settle- ment. At this point “realistic” means at least the 40-hour week with no pay cut and substan- tial wage raises to match those of the rest of labor, including the coal miners, who have been granted a 30-cent hourly pay hike with- in the last 11 months, The recent White House proposal was turned down because, iike the Emergency Board report before it, it would have given away conditions achieved in over 60 years of collective bargaining, and would not have granted the standard 40-hour week or a reasonable wage hike to help meet the bur- dens of the onrushing inflation. Living costs are the same for the railroad man as the painter, auto worker, carpenter, or Plumber, and he is entitled to the same treatment they have demanded and received from their employers. MANAGEMENT STUBBORN We are now trying again to reach an agree~ ment with the carriers but we are up against 8 recalcitrant, stubborn, and greedy manage- ment that is using the Korean War to weaken our union and jam an unfair, unreasonable deal down our throata, The railroad men's plight is desperate, That's why our thanks go to the Seripps- Howard newspapers for giving us this space to tell briefly our side of the story that in recent weeks has put the rail workers on the front pages. Since we can't strike—the workingman’s only real weapon—during the war emergency, and since the hand of Government has made no genuine effort to even the scales that are balanced against us, we are asking public Opinion to come to our aid. Our cause is Just. Our men are the 40-hour week and two pay rounds behind—and inflation is way ahead. ‘ The “rail” deserves a better break than he is getting today.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Horees and Mules Needed in Korea EXTENSION OF REMARKS w HON. THOMAS R. UNDERWOOD Of KENTUCKY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. UNDERWOOD, Mr. Speaker, un- der unanimous consent to extend my remarks, I include an editorial which appeared in the Lexington (Ky.) Herald of January 4, 1951. The editorial fol- lows: Hoeses aap Muits and other books dealing with horses. For years, in connection with the United States Remount Service, he was in charge of breed- ing and purchasing horses for military use of the Government. Colonel Wail, in a recent interview with the Camden (S. C.)} Chronicle, said: “In the first place the only reliable source of information of enemy troops any- where near the front is secured by other ground troops and cannot be relied upon if reported by atr, This is true for the reason that a division of troops can be easily hidden between Lugoff and Blaney—or even more open territory, all day, end not be detected from the air. That division may then move by night with safety if reconnatasance by air is the dependence by his adversary. Unfor- tunately, we have depended much on recon- naissance by jeeps, and other motor military outfits. That worked very well in the park- way country of Europe and in same of the more rugged terrain. But in «a rough tangled country such a2 our men have found in parts of Korea, a dismounted infantry- man or a horseman is the safe reliant egency. They can go in the byways or across coun~ try. Ambushes are avoided that way. But our infantry has taken the lesson from our recent war in Europe. They are transported on trucks, while our horse cavalry has been eliminated from the Army. “The G2 in the Korean theater had to depend on the information he could secure, Had he had the old-time patrols of infantry and horse cavalry, his estimate could have been accurate. “But information of the enemy and pro- tection on the march from him js aot the only place that we want to mention the horse and mule situation. Horse cavairy has been used effectively against our troops in Korea. It is indeed sad that men of the . n pieces.” ‘The comments of Colonel Wall are per- ticularly timely. Much bas been heard af the losses Jn Korea and of the need for horses the type to critictee, for he is, fret of afl, an Army man. But he deaires to see the Ameri- can forces with all they need, in- cluding horses and mules which in such ao- tivities ne hove tm Korea rematn indispen- sable, H. R. 1658 Wil Provide a Nonvoting Delegate in Congress fer District of Columbia and Other Changes in the Dis- trict Government EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. BROOKS HAYS OF amtasuas IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, Janwary 23, 1951 Mr. HAYS of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker, the Slll H. R. 1658 which I intreduced on January 17 is shmilar to the bill intro- dueed in the Eighty-first Congress by my colleague from Arkansas, Mr. Hargis. The bill bears the title ‘‘A hill to provide for a Delegate in the Heuse of Repre- sentatives from the District of Colum- bia; for a Board of Education of the Dis- trict of Columbia to be elected; and for reorganization of the executive depart- ments of the District of Columbia.” This bill, if enacted, will accomplish four things: 1. BELZGATE TO CONGREBS First, it authorises qualified electors domiciled in the District of Columbia to elect a nonvoting Delegate to the House of Representatives biennially with the same rights and privileges as the Dele- gates from Alaska and Hawaii now have. Yt has been a traditional practice of the United States to grant to areas which are part of the Union but not yet Siates the privilege of being represented in the National Legislature by nonvoting Dele- gates in the House. Alaska and Hawaii have such status and are so represented. The District of Columbia has such a status. Organized Territories which are not part of the Union are occasionally given this privilege. Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands have this status. The former is represented by a Resident Conmi- missioner in the House. There is precedent for the District of Columbia to have a nonvoting Delegate in the House. From 1871 to 1874 it did have such a Delegate elected by the voters of the District. It was eliminated when the franchise was denied District voters under the temporary commission- er government in 1674, the beginning of disfranchisement for the District which has continued to date. I believe that a District nonvoting Del- egate to the House would be a valuable addition and materially relieve the work- load en the rest of Congress. He would be familiar with District problems and act as ite spokesman. He could intro- duce District legislation and check on its legislative progress. -ie would be the representative to receive petitions, con- sider grievances, and otherwise care for District restdents—thas freeing other Members of the Congress from such bur- A dens, He would be very useful in giving other Members the District viewpoint. 2, BOARD OF KDUCATION In the second place, this bill creates an elective Board of Education for the Dis- habilitation functions and policies and to arpoint the superintendent of schools. Members of the Board of Education under this bill must be qualified electors, resident and domiciled in the District. They may hold no other elective or com- pensated appointive office. Their term of office would be 4 years. The Board of Exiucation would elect a president from among its members every 2 years and could remove him from office. The board would appaint a secretary and hold regular monthly and special meetings which would be open to the public, ex- cept for executive sessions. Vacancies on the Board of Education would be filled by appointment by the judges of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia. It has frequently been recommended that the Board cf Education tn the Dis- trict of Columbia be elected. It is en- tirely within the tradition of loca) gov- ernment in the United States to elect the school board. An elected Board of Edu- cation for the District ef Columbia has been recommended by Mrs. Henry Grat- tan Doyle who for 20 years was the able chairman of the school board here. The recent controversy between the District Board of Education and the superintend- ent of schools has revealed the weakness of the present appointed board. 3. ELECTIONS IN THE DISTRICT In the third place, this bill provides for a three-member Board of Elections for the District of Columbia, to be appointed by the President of the United States for staggered 3-year terms. Members of the Board of Elections must be qualified electors and residents in the District. The Elections Board would prepare and maintain a permanent registry of quali- fied electors and conduct the elections for Delegate to Congress and the Board of Education. No person could register to vot’ in Dis- trict elections under this bill unless he ts a citizen of the United States, has re- sided or been domiciled in the District for 1 year, is 21 years old or over, can read and write the English language, is not mentally incompetent, and has never been convicted of a felony or has been pardoned. Nomination to elective office shall be by petitian, filed with the Board of Eleo- tions not later than 60 days before the election, signed by not less than 90 reg- istered persons, and accompanied by a filing fee of $125 in the case of a petition nominating a candidate for the office of Delegate, or $25 in the case of a petition
AS36 nominating a candidate for the Board of Education, Voting in District elections shall be se- cret, by paper ballot or voting machine. Ballots must be cast in the precinct where the voter resides. Absentee vot- ing is prohibited. Provision is made for watchers at the polls, recounts, and con- tests. Interference with registration or voting is prohibited. Penalties are im- posed for violation of the election laws. Only voters domiciled in the District of Columbia may vote for a Delegate to Congress, Persons who are qualified to vote elsewhere are not disqualified from voting in District elections. 4, REORGANIZATION OF CITY DEPARTMENTS Finally, this bill reorganizes the ad- ministrative structure of the District government. It consolidates -the exist- ing 42 departments of the city govern- ment along functional lines into 12 new departments, each headed by a Director to be appointed and removable by the Board of Commissioners, at salaries to be fixed by the Commissioners. Provision is made for the transfer of functions, personnel, property, records, and funds to the new departments. The 12 new departments under the Board of Com- missioners would be: Health, Welfare, Recreation, Public Safety, Finance, Law, Public Works, Library, Labor, Commerce, Corrections, and Professional and Occu- pational Standards. The Board of Com- missioners is also authorized to appoint an executive officer to serve at their pleasure and to perform functions as- signed by them. The administrative structure of the District government has grown like Topsy since 1878. New agencies have been set up from time to time in piece- meal response to local needs until today it has become a tangled jungle of over- lapping, uncoordinated, and duplicating departments, boards, and commissions, Since 1920 a series of studies of the or- ganization and operation of the District government have been made by congres- sional committees, Presidential commis- sions, citizen groups, efficiency engineers, and the Brookings Institution. All these studies have agreed that the administra- tive set-up of the District government is incredibly cumbersome, complicated, and confused, It is generally agreed that modernization of the administra- tive structure is long overdue. Major Provisions of Proposed Amend- ments to the Selective Service Act EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LEON H. GAVIN OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. GAVIN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I énclude the following statement: Mayor Provisions or Prorossn AMENDMENTS TO THE SxLectivz Sexvice Act 1. Policy statement is changed to corre. apond with the proposed UMST program, 2. Registration is required at 17 instead of 18. 8. Induction {s authorized at 18 instead of at age 19. 4. The term “trainee” ts used for the first time, but such term is limited to persons in- ducted before attaining nineteenth birth- day. A trainée must be given 4 months’ basic training, and this period may be raised to 6 months by the President. Such persons cease to be trainees upon completion of initial period of basic training. Trainees may not be assigned to duty in a combat area of be permanently assigned to duty (other than training duty) at any installation lo- cated on land outside continental United States. 5. No overseas service is authorized for 18-year-olds untt! after basic training (4 to 6 months). 6. Twenty-seven months’ service is re- quired instead of 21 mronths' service (in- cluding those already inducted). 7. Eight years of active and Reserve serv- ice is required (instead of the present 21 months’ active service plus 8 years of serv- ice in Organized Reserve unit or 5 years of inactive Reserve service) for those inducted after this amendment is enacted. 8, Eliminates authority to enlist volun- tarily for 21 months in Army. 9. Does not repeal provision establishing general classification test ccore of 70 as min- imum required for enlistment or induction, (Services no longer use GCT but use Armed Forces qualification test.) 10, Authorizes compulsory officer training upon completion of required training and service. 11, Release from active service is permitted for those who agree to enter organized units of National Guard and Rererve components, 12. President may reduce basic training pay of trainees to $30 a month. 18. President may increase basic training to 6 months and reduce 27 months’ active service, and do this differently for different age groups. 14. Extends period of required service for doctors and dentists to 27 months and re- peals section of “doctor draft law” which provided fo. annual deferment of optometry students and premedical, preosteopathic, pre- veterinary, preoptometry, and predental stu- dents equal to level of present attendance at colleges. (Such persons are to come from 75,000 to be deferred annually until June 30, 1964, by proposed amendment; or pursuant to section of the nt law, not repealed, that permits President to defer students necessary for national health, safety, and interest.) 15. Repeals deferment of persons enlist- ing in National Guard prior to 1814 years of at age. 16. College training: (a) Until June 30, 1954, President author- ized to relieve annually from active duty 76,000 men after they complete basic train- ing (civilians selecting them), with a post- education civilian or military service obliga- tion (to study medicine, science, humanities, etc., presumably at their own expense). (b) ROTC or equivalent deferments are continued and expanded, with 2 years’ active duty after graduation plus 6 years’ reserve service required, Subsidy authorized with a year’s additional service required in return therefor. (c) Other officér candidate programs eu- thorized for persons on active duty. 17, President’s present authority to pro- vide for deferment of persons engaged in in- dustry, agriculture, etc, and those whose activity in study, research, medicine, science, etc.—necessary to national health, safety, and interest is not repeated. President may also continue deferment of men with dependents, and those mentally, physically, or morally defective. , 18. Eighteen-year-olds’ inductions are postponed until end of college academic year an which ordered for induction, High-school APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD students’ inductions sre postponed until age 19 or until comp'tstion of high school. 19. Liveralizes and clarifies reemployment rights for persons enlisting for firat time, and requires employers to grant leeve for employ- ees reporting for induction, and requires re- employment of those rejected. 20. The act is indefinitely extended; no termination date. 21. Extends for 2 years authority for in- voluntary call of reserves and doctors and dentists, 22. President is authorized to establish committee of five to eight civilians to advise him on basic training. 23, Voluntary rehabilitation through civil- fan agencies is authorized for those disquall- fled for inductior so as to qualify them for induction, 44. Two-year extension of authority to ex- tend enlistments for 1 year. 26. Removes limitations on size of WAC, WAVE, WAF, and Women Marines until July 81, 1954. 26. Suspends active duty personnel ceil- ings of the Armed Forces until 1961, Resolution Declaring Communist China an Aggressor in Korea EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JOHN T. WOOD OF IDAHO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, January 19, 1951 Mr. WOOD of Idaho. Mr. Speaker, I should like to explain my opposition to the resolution introduced by the gentle- man from Massachusetts last Friday, stating the United Nations should im- mediately declare Communist China an aggressor in Korea. My objection was based upon my im- pression that such action would be tan- tamount to a declaration of war against Communist China, and also that it would give the tentative consent of Congress to the ill-advised and tragic action of the Chief Executive in Korea. Mr. Speaker, I am not a pacifist, nor a Communist lover. I think we shall perhaps always have wars so long as international “mad dogs” range around in the world. One does not placate such ravening beasts, even though deploring the fact the animal has hydrophobia. But I am irrevocably opposed to the idea that any other power than that of the duly elected representatives of this great people should be given the power to commit us to war. Looking backward from the vantage point of elapsed time, it now seems easy to comprehend that we should never have joined the UN. Conceived in sin, and born in iniquity as it was, a child of the warped and traitorous brajn of Alger Hiss, committing us to admit the mur- derer, Stalin, as our bed-fellow, how could one expect anything else than what we got? If the “blood of Abel cried from the ground to the ears of the Lord God,” with what a roar must the blood of the scores of millions of Stalin’s murdered countryay en ascend to the Father of all Advisory action through a league of free nations might be a good thing, but
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD I shall always be opposed to leaving the determination of our destiny to the devious minds of savage or barbarous peoples which form part of the present membership of the UN. Tax Deduction for Mothers Engaged in War Production EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 195! Mr. AUGUST H. ANDRESEN. Mr. Speaker, I wish to call the attention of the House and particularly the Ways and Means Committee, as well as the Treasury Department, to a timely sug- gestion made by Mr. Kenneth Allen, edi- tor of the Albert Lea Evening Tribune, of Albert Lea, Minn., with reference to the expenses of women workers who must hire someone to take care of their children while at work. Under existing regulations of the Treasury Department these women are not allowed to deduct as a business ex- pense the pay for those who take care of their children. Mr. Allen clearly points out the need for a change in the revenue laws and regulations of the Treasury Department so that such ex- penses may be deducted as a legitimate business item. Women are being en- couraged to go into war production in the war emergency, and it is only fair and just for them to be allowed to charge off as a business expense such items of necessary expense. I am grateful to Mr, Allen for calling this matter to our at- tention in the following editorial: [From the Albert Lea (Minn.) Evening Tribe une of January 17, 1951] Workina Gals Neep Break IN TAXATION Labor recruiters are finding their task of finding men for essential jobs becoming more dificult. There are fewer able men every day. So the usual stories about “scraping the bottom of the manpower barrel” are cropping up. And the Nation’s lawmakers, with an eye on the headlines such proposals always get, are threatening to “draft the dames.” . America’s women demonstrated during the last two wars they can hold down jobs in industry on equal terms with men. They did good work, And a great number of them probably will go back to work when the situation in manpower grows more acute. ‘Women actually perform many tasks in in- dustry better than men; particularly they do well in monotonous jobs that irk men, Women usually do not engage in shop poli- tics, nor do they let a burning ambition blunt their output. Women are conserving of materials and are good housekeepers— traits appreciated in industry. Women, once they get used to the idea of wearing slacks and hairnets, are safe work- ers. They are apt at learning rules and usually abide by them without question. Oh, there {s a lot to be said in favor of women in jobs. There's another side, too, but it need not concern us in this column today, because whether or not, a lot of women are going to be needed by the economy in a few more months. XCVII~~App.—22 The purpose of considering women in es- sential work was to point out an tnoon- sistency in the income-tax structures. If the Government wants women to do their bit—and frum every indication it does— then the Government should give the women a@ break in the income-tax-deductions col- umn. When a woman, for instance, is forced to hire someone to take care of her children, this expense cannot be legally deducted as a cost of doing business. But her boss can entertain a colonel from the procurement section by taking him to a hootchy-kootchy show and that is considered a legitimate business expense, The militant woman-righters, always ready to splinter a lance for the fair sex, should do something about these deductions for women who work. The idea would be a shot in the arm for labor recruiters because they would have a bargain to offer women. And what woman can resist a bargain? Ninety-five Percent in Poll Hit Korea War EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST, GEORGE OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, un- der unanimous consent to revise and ex- tend my remarks in the Appendix of the Record, I include an article by Bob Con- sidine, appearing in the New York Jour- nal-American, showing the result of a poll he has taken. This poll shows the overwhelming de- sire of the American people that our Ground Forces be pulled out of Korea. The Journal-American article follows: Ninery-Five Percent in Pott Hrr Korza WaR (By Bob Considine) A recent radio query of mine, asking lis- teners for their opinion on whether or not we should keep our forces in Korea, has now resulted in a response of about 17,000 wires, letters and cards. About 95 percent of the responses, and they came from every State in the Union, recommend we pull our forces out of this still undeclared war. A great percentage of these messages are pretty bitter. There is sharp criticism of the President, Secretary of State Acheson, and the failure of other gnited Nations properly to share the bur- ens, The theme of the responses seem to be “let's lose face and save lives.” But sev- eral letter writers suggested, after hearing the way the vote was going, that the letters might be a vast Communist plot to sway official action, ENDLESS MIXTURE But that’s preposterous. It is belied by the variety of the mail, both in text and geography. It comes in in an endless mix- ture, some of it dictated to secretaries by tycoons, some of it scrawled in pencil on penny postcards, There was no pattern to the choice of words, as there always is when a writer is the target of an organized letter-writing movement, I wired several officials in Washington, giving them the count on the mall and the margin in favor of withdrawing from Korea, and asked them to make some comment that would clarify the situation. My point was that if this great propor- tion of the writers were for our getting out A337 of Korea, they must reflect a very widee spread public antagonism toward the strug- gie, REPLY FROM MARSHALL ' And that an explanation of some kind might satisfy the letter writers on why we seem determined to stay. wae Secretary George C. Marshall re- Plied; “Thanks for your information on letters you have recetved. Would like to oblige (with statement) but must consider the timing and frequency of my public state- ments, particularly as regards my appear- ances before congressional committees next week.” \ Secretary of War Frank Pace, Jr. wired: | REASONS THIS WEEK. ' “Binoe question of United Nations forces staying in Korea is not a matter for decision by Department of the Army, I feel state. ment by me on that subject would be in~ appropriate. Results of your mail poll were most interesting and I appreciate your ree questing my views. Best regards.” Secretary of State Dean Acheson replied by phone through Bill Wood, in charge of the department’s radio section. His point, in effect, was that he'd like to give a clarify- ing answer but felt he couldn't give it to a single reporter. Which makes sense even to this married reporter. Mr. Acheson added something which might mean a lot, or little. He empowered his spokesman to say that clarification of our position in Korea will be presented early this coming week. The reasons why we will of must stay, or will or must leave, will be provided by appropriate officials in Wash- ington. Bill Wood said it was safe to assume that “appropriate officials” meant men in the po« litical and military fields, as well as diplo- macy. The Secretary, Wood continued had found the poll most interesting and had seid, in effect, that it is things of this type that clarify the thinking of public officials, \ \ CONNALLY SILENT Senator Tom CONNALLY made no reply to the wire. But that may be due to the fact that he and every other Senator and Repre- sentative in Washington is currently swamped by mall of this general type which I received. A check of congressional offices, some of which are inundated by the most mail the men ever received, shows that the mood of the people is consistent. People want this country to check its costly Korean adven- ture, after about 50,000 casualties and great loss of matériel, and they want it even though this happens to coincide with Soviet wants. In addition they want us to encourage and equip the Chinese Nationalists to fight against the Chinese Reds. And, finally, and somewhat enigmatically, they want a big, well-trained army without the services of 18-year olds. How these demands will be resolved seems e@bout to be decided. Our Present Danger EXTENSION OF REMARKS - HON. ALBERT P. MORANO or CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 ; Mr, MORANO. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- ord, I include the following article by
A338 Hugh A. Murrill from the Greenwich Time, January 19, 1951. ish Empire Medal, the Croix de Guerre with Palms from the French Govern- ment, the Order of Leopold from the Belgian Government, the Legion of Merit with Oak Leaf Cluster, and two Bronte Stars. The article follows: Ovun Peesxwe Damore: Cause, Evvacr, sup Furvas WHERE ARE WE? (By Hugh A, Murrill) Our country is at wer, and no amount of United Nations’ diplomatic shadow boxing can obscure that fact. We may be on the verge of world war IIL We have weak (riends and a strong enemy, ‘The military strength against us is atid growing faster than cur own, pilus that of our friends, The crisis we ate now in has been pre- cipttated by continued aggressive and un- ng action by the Russians as part of a long-range plan for world com- munism. We have been slow to recognize the deep- rooted, ruthiess determination of the Russian drive, with its terrorism, suppression, aud intrigue. We have been sicw 60 appratese the uncon)- promising hatred of America that the Krem- lin has set about implanting in the minds of both its own people and those of its satellites. We have been reluctant to believe the Lenin-Statin concept that communism and democracy cennot Uwe side by side in a wortd of peace, and thet the United States, as the leader of democracy, must be the foe of Ruesia in the struggle for survival between two irrecanciiable ways of life. to att Internationa! sffatre, the Kremiin We have no guaranty that they will walt 1 year, 2 years, or 8 years, to move for the two things they want most: 1. The Ruhr with its coal, iron, and steel. 2. The oll of the Middte Hast. They will move when they think {t ex- pedient, when they are convinced that mili- mneans will be more profiteble than political means. We may be certain that the only thing that restrains them now is their belief that they could not exploit elther of these re- sources under atomic bomising by the United States strategio Air Force, The oudy thing that will continue to re- strain the Russians is the balance of power against them. We amt gather maore quickly, preparing for the worst in the hope that adequate preparation and steadfastness will keep the worst from happening. We did not get where we are crusading for western civilization, We were pushed here by the hand of des- tiny and the Mongol character of the Rus- stens who have squght out the United States as the major foe to be destroyed. Withdrawal from Yurope, withdrawal in the PaciGc, wauld only strengthen the ene~ my, act in any way alter his determination. OW OED WE GET wymET The United States and Ruscta emerged from Workd Wer If as the strongest netions of the wortd. The technology of modern war iteeif had completely demolished feointtorism as an ef- fective policy for the United States. Time after time, the war showed that no istand, large or emali, can be defended suc- cessfully ff the enemy has adequate sir, land, and sea power to tsolate and attack it. Singapore, the great tsiand fortress which took 20 to tsulld, Corregidor, Truk, Okinawa, all fell to the coordinated attack of air, land, and Bea forces. Japan iteeif would have fallen to United States assault without the wee of the atom bomb. Anyone who was in England under V-1 bombardment from launching sites on the continent can visualize all too clearly the impossibility of holding the British Isles with the continent of Europe overrun by the enemy, and modern guided missiles added to his capabilities of attack. There is no impregnable Gibraltar today, no island fortress secure against a step- ping-stone advance, end courdinated attack by air, land, and sea. Hence, any isolationist withdrawal to the North American Continent has become an eoprecticnl and futile policy for the United ates. Tt has become clear that the successful defense of America must begin far from our shores. A further succession of events, whore po- tency we were slow to realize, pushed the United States forward as the leader of west- ern civilization against communism. These events were: 1, The defeat of Germany and the Yalta agreement, which extended the Russian oc- c pation none well west of the Elbe Biver, thus eliminating Germany as an effective force against Communtet expansion. 2. The defeat of Japan and the Yalta agreement, which ceded to Russia the Kurile Islands, and the southern half of Sakhalin Isand, strategically dominating Japan on the north, and definitely limiting her mili- tery capabilities, regardiess of what type of peace treaty might later develop. 8. The weakening of the British Emptre 8 & result of the strains tmpoved by World War II, the decline of sea power as 2 world force, and postwar government polictes In England iteelf. 4. The too-rapid demobilization of Untted States air, tand, and sea forces, to a state of virtual disermament. Such were the supporting events which ted Stalin aad the Politeuro in 1048 to reafirm the Lenin doctrine that communism and democracy cunnot exist tn a world of peace and that comrmuniem orust destroy its democratic enemies. Since that time, Russia has bulited, bius- tered, and maneuwered by tmorigue and force, oe herseli ead weaken the United Tt has became apparent that any further gains by the Soviet in the direction of the Ruhr, the oil of the Middle Hast, or the Japa- nese Islands, are a serious threat to the ae- curity of the United States. We may not be able to contain Cammu- nist aggression tut ia these three strategically vital areas, we must oon- t Wien the Soviet launched thatir puppets in Korea, we reacted with cecision and courage. Why? Because our Government cupy the last remaining strategic area neces- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD cary to ficure thetr demyinance of Japan, from nearby haves on the evaialand, euppie- menting their telaad bases to marth. If Japan should fall to the Okinawa, the Philippines, and all of island outposts in the Pacific would vulnerable. We know now tlat the Goviet cannct be deterred from thelr aggressive drive far world communism by conciliation or rerson. They now see in America the last strong ip and intrigue. We must banish amy wishful thinking that some stroke of diplomacy may produce & rapprochement between the United States and Russia. game They are determined to weaken and de- comanin tem. On the Soviet timetabie it may be iater than we think, WHIRE DO WE @O FROM MERE? The hour for a iacger motlitration of our military forces struck 6 months ago with the Russian move in Korea. Events since the Soviet-englaesred Chinese move have high-lighted our present danger. In our security actton, however, we must take thoughtful account of two factors: 1. The Russian flalr for propaganda and subversion and the ability of the Communist Party to carry om political warfare in the United States and the democratic worid. 2. The difficulties of sustaining partial mo- biligeation in a free democracy over an ex- tended period of time, even 5 to 10 years. The Wussiams may elect to the crisis we are in for a tong time without risk- us white soomomically, in the hope of setting up Internal stresses and strains in our politi- cal system. We must recognize the difficulties inherent to a democracy in maintaining 2 steadfast course without the daily drama of a major war to keep us steeled in cur purpose. &ix months ago the public reacted to our countermove in Korea with decision and courage. It was am immediate and under- taters and columnists have poured out to the people an anguished and unending barrage | of hysteria, fom, and oriticiam more powerful than the Voice of Auserica, by which we try to reach the people behind the iron curtain, To sustain a greet national program of partial mobilization, to «beel the people against hysteria. and misinformation, the Government must reach thelr minds as well as their emotions. First, we must have an agreed national policy defining the vital interests of the United States, and what we must do for their advancement and defense. This basic polécy must be clearly nonpo-~ litioal im character, net Mr. Acheson's pian, not dr, Truman‘s, but a Sscurity Council dectsion which the people can believe is an effective safeguard for our country. Ita beaic framework must be explained and sald to the people. Gecond, to implement such « policy, we must have a long-range program to do these talags: 1. To increase our active miliary fences, in being fully trained and equipped, to such
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD strength as may be necessary to insure against a quick and easy Russian success tn Europe, the Middle East or Japan, or other areas defined by our national policy. 3. To ald and hasten the build-up of the forces of our Allies, who have the will and physical capacity to resist Communist ag- saa (General Etsenhower's job in Eus rope. 8. To establish and bring to readiness the productive facilities to supply and equip both the forces in being, and the greater forces that will be required under full mobiliza- tion. 4. To build up basically trained Reserves suppementing the active forces, to insure the most rapid full mobilization of our military strength and powers of retaliation. If war comes, the initial Russian move will be a sudden “Pearl Harbor” blow. 5. To accomplish all of the above without destroying the essentials of Democracy that we are prepared to fight the Communists to protect, patriotic individual liberty and free enterpeise. The responsibility for the plan and mobili- gation of our forces rests with General Mar- shall, Secretary of Defense, a great soidier and 6 great American. The responsibility for the mobilization of productive facilities has been assigned to able and rugged Mr, Charles Wilson. Mr. Wilson bas already chosen experienced and able executives in General Clay, General Har- rison, and Mr. Sidney Weinberg. Before Mr. Wilson can really move to set up the facilities immediately required for equip- ping our active forces, and those ultimately to be required for full mobilization, the entire program must be crystallized and re- duced to specific requirements. We must assume that this is now being accomplished with the greatest urgency, and without too much dependence upon either our allies or the atom bomb. Finally, there remains the vital matter of how to provide the reserve strength we must have ready for swift mobilization, without permitting the Russians to bleed us white by prolonging the emergency. The type of confilct we are in will require the active assistance of every patriotic Amer- ican. Millions of our people now realize that in modern war, the trained have a better chance of survival than the untrained. The Selec- tive Service Act, the draft, does not provide the reserves that we require for safety. It is full of inequalities and exemptions, and fails to kindle the spirit of national service that must underlie our program. For an all-out war, all of our young men need military training. It is time to supplement the Selective Serv~ ice Act with a program of universal military training for every young man as a part of his basic education. We know that the complex technology of modern war requires a longer pertod of training than a strong and crafty enemy shall give us. The period required for universal military training is stated by our experts to be 24 months, to begin at age 18, or upon completion of high school, This would train from 800,000 to 1,000,000 young men every year. There would be no exemptions except for physical or mental disability, because there are many technical requirements in the Army, Navy, and Air Forces, where extreme physical fitness 1s not essential. The time has come for America to develop in its young men a spirit of national service, We must guard against the softer belief that the magical machines which flow from our production lines, will, themselves insure our security. It is the men who manage the ma- chines, their skill and dominating spirit, that count most, Universai military training is the only effertive way to develop the reserve skills required to enable us to shift quickly to meet an all-out Communist attack, It should become a part of our national security plan in 1981, ihe people are ahead of our leaders on 8, In this time of danger, let us do quickly what must be done, Get Forces Out of Korea EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD J. THYE OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, January 23 (legislative day of Monday, January 8), 1951 Mr. THYE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that an address on the subject of the withdrawal of United Nations forces from Korea, and the help- ing of Japan to rearm, delivered by John Cowles, president of the Minneapolis Star and Tribune, on January 17, 1951, be printed in the Appendix of the Rec- ord, to the end that other Members of the Congress may have the privilege of reading it, It is very thought provoking. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Get Forces Out or Korea, Cowizs Urces, ADVOCATES HELPING JAPAN TO REARM The most important thing in the world to Americans is freedom. We believe that each individual has God- given, inalienable, natural human rights, and the basic right is freedom. While free- dom is indivisible, its most important phase is freedom of choice; the freedom of the in- dividual to speak as he chooses, the freedom of an individual to worship as he chooses, the freedom of an individual to choose one’s own job, the freedom to choose where one wants to live. Of course these various freedoms, even though they are theoretically indivisible, are of relatively differing degrees of importance. In an emergency we must voluntarily abridge some of our lesser freedoms in order to try to save our basic freedom. We are having to give up, tn large measure, our freedom of choice as to how we will spend, for example, our earnings or income. We have no choice but to pay the bulk to the tax collector. In contrast with our philosophy of belief in the freedom and dignity of the individual, communism flatly rejects the idea that there are any intrinsic human rights, The Com- munists believe that collective society con- fers upon individuals conditional rights which may be withdrawn at the pleasure of the state. Our philosophy and that of the Commu- nists are completely irreconcilable, and I believe that our philosophy of individual freedom-——our whole system of life—is now and in the years immediately ahead will be in greater peril than ever before. BELIEVES RUSSIANS SEEK TO RULE WORLD While I make no claim to any expert knowl- edge of Russia—TI have only been there briefly twice, once in 1928 and once in 1937—I am convinced that the Russian leaders sincerely expect that communism will eventually con= quer the world. I believe that the fundamental! law of the Communist Party is the enhancement of its power. I am convinced that the Commu- nist Party will use any methods whatsoever to attain its objectives, A339: We are thue facing a dynamic interna. tional revolutionary movement with which historic Russian or Pan-Glav imperialist ex- pansion has been fused. The Russian leaders in their cold fanati- clsm regard every nation that they do not control as an enemy to be taken over or destroyed, We may have an armed truce for many years but there is, in my judgrnent, no posstbility of a permanent accommoda- tion or of genuine peace until and unless the Communist philosophy changes. That is the nature of the threat we are facing. Perhaps some day the Communist philoso- phy will be modified. Perhaps some day the Communists will shed their imperialistio militancy. Only if and after that happens can the two systems exist side by side in the world without our always having to be ready at any moment for all-out war. BETTER POLICY WILL COME FROM DEBATE The current great debate over our foreign policy is the best thing that has happened in the United States in the last 6 months. It is giving the public a clearer understand- ing of the problem, and we will end up with a better policy that has much sounder public support. Although the administration does not ad- mit it, ft should be obvious that our foreign policy is currently being substantially modi- fied. The doctrine that we would, and could, contain Communist aggression wherever it took place anywhere in the world has been proved impossible of fulfillment. That pol- icy has failed, and we are now forging a new and more realistic one. Ever since we hastily dismantled our Armed Forces after winning military victory in World War II, our foreign policy commitments have been greatly in excess of our capabilities for fulfilling them. We were bluffing. We were endorsing notes at the bank without realizing that we might be called upon to make them good. Fortunately we got away with our bluff in both Greece and Turkey. Had the Russians thought {t wise they could easily have thwarted the so-called Truman doctrine at its very start. Russian satellites alone could have quickly taken Greece, and Russia could have conquered Turkey easily. Our bluff fortunately was not called at the time when the Trumen doctrine was first enunciated, and we are lucky today that Tur- key ia still with the free world. I was in Turkey briefly last spring, and was told by men who should know that Tur- key is now much better prepared than she was a few years ago and will without ques- tion fight if Russia attempts to invade her, You will all recall, too, that Turkey sent several thousand ground troops to help us in Korea, and according to reports they fought courageously. MARSHALL PLAN PROVES ITS WORTH On the whole the Marshall plan phase of our postwar foreign policy was, I think, a magnificent success. I was in Western Eu- rope just before the Marshall plan was started, and I believe Italy certainly and very probably France also would have gone Com. munist if we had not extended those coun- tries Marshall plan aid. But because we appeared to be successful with the Truman doctrine of containing Communist aggression against Greece and Turkey, we became overconfident and too inclined to make sweeping international commitments about containing communism everywhere. Our bluff was called in Korea, and events have clearly demonstrated that the United Btates does not have the power to win ground wars against foes, whether Russian or satel- lite, whose manpower is inexhaustible and to whom human life means little or nothing. The Korean wat also demonstrated that while the United Nations may stil be—and
A340 I believe stil 1s—our best hope for grad- ually developing world law and world order, moat of its member nations, aside from the United States, are at the present time either unable or unwilling to furnish much mill- tary assistance toward suppressing aggres- sion in remote areas. Since Korea has no strategic value, I in- cline to the view that the sooner sil Amer- ican and other UN forces are evacuated from Korea, the better. Tt ig now accepted by everybody, I believe, that we do not possibly have the power to contain communism in every single part of the globe. Consequently, we must hereafter ‘use our resources only where they can be used effectively and successfully, or where the loss that would result if we fatled to attempt to atop aggression fully justifies our taking the calculated risk. BALANCE OF POWER NEEDED IN WORLD In his World War If strategy, President Roosevelt ignored one of the basic facte of history, namely that unless there is either a single nation or an effective world organ- ization thet is able to enforce law and order, a reasonable balance of power among the various ntions is, always has been, and al- ways will be essential to the maintenance of eace, P We did away with that balance of power by our destruction of Germany and Japan, We voluntarily opened up to Russia those areas which had formerly been influenced or controlled by Germany and Japan. The Rus- gians naturally moved in to the vacuum. The sooner we now make a genuine peace settlement with Jepan and help Japan to rearm, the better. There is a deep-lying hostility between the Japanese and the Rus- sians. Putting Japan back on her feet mili- tartly is a calculated risk that I believe it would be wise for us to take. Tt we can possibly avoid it, I think it would be a grave mistake for the United States to engage in even a Hmited war with Red China, The idea for our fighting a war against Red China was simply a naval block- ade and some Air Force bombing may sound appealing in theory. I fear, however, that no one can foretell where such a war with China might lead, and I think it would be @ profound error for us again to send American ground troops any~ where in eastern or southeast Aala. Possibly we can give some substantial un- official assistance to the non-Communist Chinese war lords in their attempts to make civil war against Mao's Red China, but I question whether we should go further than that. I think it would be a grave error for us to put Amerioan Ground Forces into Indochina to help the French or into Malaya to help the Britiah. From people who have been there within the last month, I hear that the French position in Indochina is desperate. I suggest that we might be wise to urge France immediately to offer the Indochinese full autonomy within the French Union or to grant them their complete freedom under a temporary United Nations trusteeship on the theory that there thus might be one chance in a thousand that Indochina would not go Comnrunist, whereas it is absolutely certain to end up under Red control if the people think that the only way they can gain their independence from the French is through joining with the Communists. In addition to suggesting that the French give the Indochinese their freedom, I think it would be beneficial if the British Gov- ernment would announce offictally that Mu- laya also would be given its freedom or be made a self-governing dominion within the British commonwealth at some specified fu- ture date. Uniess the British do this, and perhaps even if they do do it, I fear that they are going to have great difficulty in holding Malaya. The United States ia on the unpopular side in southeast Asta. The natives suspect our motives. The Russian propagandisty charge that the United States has gone into Asia not only to support Prench and British colonialism, but also because we have aimilar imperialistic designs of our own. The slogan Asia for the Asiatics, has real appeal and the Communists are making full use Of it. Serious as the loss of southeast Asia ‘would be to the free world, it does not com- pare in importance with what the loss of Western Europe would mean. Western Europe, including Turkey but excluding the Russian satellite nations, has a populaticn of ‘some 270,000,000 people, and approxi- mately half as much income es the national income of the United States. Western Europe has great industrial ca- pacity. If Russia were to take over its iron and coal mines, its steel mills and its fac- tories, our present huge margin of productive supertority over Russia would be enormously lessened. Wholly apart from reasons either of honor or sentiment, our abandonment, or the loss, of Western Europe to Russia would make our own national security fer more precarious, ENGLAND WOULD FALL WITH REST OF EUROPE If the Russians were to sweep over conti- nental Western Europe, I don’t believe the British Isles would be tenable. I was in England during the bombing of World War IT, and I don’t see how England could stand up under heavy sustained attacks of guided mis- siles, particularly if they carried atomic war heads. . We shouldn't ignore the disagreeable fact that if the Russians take Western Europe, probably England would be Jost as well. I fear that those who express the contrary view are letting wishful thinking influence their judgment. It is a grim picture, and I hope we won’t find ourselves confronted with the unhappy taak of having to prove whether or not those who optimistically predict that with Europe gone the Western Hemisphere could be made a Gibraltar of peace and security are correct, In a recent speech, Senator Tarr again repeated that in his judgment the United States should go to war with Russia instantly if Russia attacked Western Europe. I agree completely. So long as the Rus- sians know that any attack by them on Western Europe would mean immediate all- out war between Ruesia and ourselves, and that the first of s long series of atom bombs would promptly begin to fall on Russia, Rus- sia may be deterred. Russia certainly now has sufficient mili- tary strength to enable her to occupy Weat- ern Europe to the Atlantic and the Mediter- ranean. She has had that capability for the last 4 years. I suspect that the reason she has not moved is because she has feared that even though she were successful in occupying Western Eu:ope she would probably face eventual defeat from the United States be- cause of our superiority in atom bombs and our capacity to deliver them on Ruasia. Whether that superiority will long con- tinue is debatable. Perhaps Russia has not moved in Western Europe because of her appraisal of ber own internal weaknegses, Perhaps she is having more trouble at home than the outside world knows about. We can hope that such js the case, but can- not rely on it. WE CANNOT ABANDON BUROPE TO RUSSIA Defeatiem and war-weariness, plus Com- muniat minorities, are so widespread in France and Italy that I personally question whether their military strength and, even more important, their resolution and will to reeist, can be built up to a point where it is certain that with reasonable help on the ground from the British and oureelves the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD west would be able to stop the Russians if they at’ to overrun Western Burope. Certainly the United States and the Brit- ish cannot alone maintain sufficient divi- sions in Western Europe to stop the Rua- sians, and any suggestion that we should attempt it is fantaatic. Nevertheless, despite all the arguments that have been advanced, it would in my opinion be an act of nattonal insanity for us at this time to conclude to abandon Eu- rope to Russia or to proclaim that we will not send another American division there. It is entirely possible that the Russians may direct the Communist East Germans, whom they have rearmed, to invade West Germany under the guise of its being simply an internal civil wer to unify Germany. We thus might quickly face a situation where the Communists actually were controlling the Ruhr although ostensibly Russia herself had not been involved. ff the United States and Britain, however, each promptly put two or three additional combat divisions into West Germany, we then presumably would have sufficient allied strength so that it would be clear that the East Germans alone could not take over West Germany. KISENHOWER MAY WORK A MIRACLE The Russians in turn might be deterred trom using their own troops to help .“e East Germans i vade West Germany, since the Russtans would know that such action on their part would mean immediate all-out atomic war. ‘ In other words, the sending by the British and ourselves of a very few more divisions to West Germany might prevent any possi- kility of the Ruhr's falling into Communist hands as the result of wha. pretended to be simply an internal German civil war of unification. It is vithin the realm of possibility, more- over, that Goneral Eisenhower will be able to rekindle the will to resist that is so desper- ately needed tn France today. It is at least premature for us to conclude that he can’t perform that miracle. Per- haps he can. And if he can I think we should make every effort to help the west rearm. But certainly that program would not and should not involve the use of many American ground divisions. General Eisenhower has had unique ex- perience in dealing with the Europeans, Surely we can depend on his not recommend- ing involving either American or other troops in an international army with himself as its commander if in his Judgment the people of Western Europe are not going to demon- strate the will to resist and if the project is consequently doomed to failure. Surely the American people should await Eisenhower's return from his European trip a few weeks from now and hear his recom- mendations ard conclusions before making any inal decisions as to what our future defense policy should be. While the United States !: in the process of ham™ering out its new foreign policy, one which I hope will be truly and not syn- thetically bipartisan in nature, we must not overlook another important fact. The men in the Kremlin are the ones who will deter- mine the date when the war, if it comes, starts. It might be next week or next year, or it might not be for many years. The Communist leaders may conclude that it is in their interest to stimulate our all-out i § i : B é tional few years. We have, therefore, to make an extremely difficult decision as to the speed and extent of our mobilization
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD program, On this potnt, too, we should have wide and bipartisan debate before our policy is finally determined. MEETING OF MINDS NEEDED ON POLICY It is tragic that President Truman and Secretary Acheson did not welcome Senator Tarr’s recent suggestion that he would be glad to sit down with them and work out a policy that both parties could support. Actually there are many vital areas of agreement between the views Senator Tarr recently expressed and those of the Truman administration. The administration should emphasize and try to expand them. I would guess that far wider agreement still could result from frank private discussions between the ad- ministration and Republican congressional leaders if a reasonable spirit of compromise on nonessentials and a desire for a meeting of the minds in the interest of real national security were evidenced by the administra- tion. And while we are trying to increase our national strength in a material way, we must steadfastly keep our faith in right principles, from matters of the highest importance to the lowest. The nation that acts in accordance with principle hag the best chance to find the strength and courage for ultimate victory. If a nation does not act from principle but only from expediency, unavoidable defeats may make its people despair and become defeatist. We should increase our efforts to remove social injustices. If we fail to do that, we help the Communiets’ propaganda become more effective and thus lessen the likelihood that all of our people will continue to have the faith in our social system and the de- termination to preserve it that may be necessary. In conclusion, let me repeat that I am not saying that war with Russia is certain, but rather that there can be no real peace in the world until and unless the philosophy that now motivates the Communist leaders 1s modified. In the meantime, the best we can hope for is an armed truce, with the United States possessing such military power in being that the Russians may be deterred from starting a war in view of our terrible power of instant retaliation. If the American people show wisdom and resolution, I have not the slightest doubt that we can end will permanently keep our freedom, which is more important to Ameri- cans than life itself. Chinese Communist Propaganda EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. WILLIAM BENTON OF CONNECTICUT IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, January 23 (legislative day of Monday, January 8), 1951 Mr. BENTON. Mr. President, at a time when the Senate is hearing much about the question of how many divisions of troops we should send to Europe, it is particularly important for us to realize that the Armed Forces are only one in- strument of national policy. Because it has been concentrated on military ques- tions, this debate has drawn into the shadows, nationally as well as here in Washington, the nonmilitary methods of achieving our ends. Therefore, I ask unanimous consent for inclusion in the Appendix of the Recorp, a story from Hong Kong in yesterday's New York Times about the rapidly expanding psychologtval activities of the Chinese Communists. At a moment when the Chinese Communists are flushed with militaiy victories, we find the Peiping radio talking less about the fighting in Korea, than about the propaganda vic- tories they are winning on the Chinese mainland. The news in this story is not that the Communists are concentrating on propa~ ganda. The news is the colossal scale of the effort by which they claim they can reach China’s 450,000,000 people with the party line within 24 hours, even in the absence of the big newspaper circulations or a large number of radio receivers. While their people are starv- ing, they build radio networks and train propagandists. When General Marshall returned from his mission to China I heard him say— and remember, his whole career had been devoted to the effective handling of Army divisions—that the course of history in China for the free world might have been altered by the use of radios and motion pictures on a scale hitherto unheard of. When I made my first remarks on the floor of this Chamber last March, I think some of my colleagues were a little startled and perhaps unbelieving when I declared that China had fallen, not so much to Communist armies as to Com- munist propaganda. I commend this New York Times story to the Congress. Its moral for our own policy is obvious. There being no objections, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Bic Rapio Net Ams CHINA PROPAGANDA MANCHURIA AND NoRTHERN AREA HEAR Voicx or Prtpinc—Atm Is To Cover ENTIRB Counrry Hone Kona, January 21.—According to the Peiping radio, Chinese Communists have built up a vast propaganda netwerk through which the voice of Peiping will be heard by virtually half of China's vast population. In North China and Manchuria, the Com- munists assert, the propaganda network already is showing results. Unofficial reports said branches of the gigantic network were being set up in other parts of the country. When the nation-wide network is in full operation, the Communists will be able to make their line of thought known to the country’s 450,000,000 inhabitants within 24 hours. Peiping will be the nerve center of this propaganda network. From there the Chi- nese Communist policy makers will be able to transmit their speeches and the influen- tial People’s Daily in Peiping will be able to broadcast its editorials to even the smallest villages in China. This is the first time in Chinese history that rural districts have received such special attention. BPECIAL TRAINING The Communist New China News Agency disclosed that 8,000 party members in North China recently were mobilized to undergo special training in propaganda work. They form the nucleus of the propaganda net- work, They were assigned to handle political indoctrination and supervise the ‘learning of current affairs” among 2,000,000 People’s Militiamen in North China, In Hopei Province alone more than 40,000 teachers were trained to mold stu- dents and lead local political activities in rural districts. The Province also trained 30,000 winter school teachers to conduct AS4i adult classes among farmers, The network also has 6,000 full-time propagandists to. distribute material received from Peiping. In the neighboring Province of Shansi winter schools for farmers have spectal newspaper-reading classes. In conducting propaganda the Commu- nists employ various forms, mastly vocal and visual. There are street-corner theatri- eal performances, Yanko songs and dances, singing story tellers, lantern slides, movies, cartoons, blackboard newspapers, and house- top loudspeakers, to relay Communist broad- casts. NEWSCASTS COPTED In Hopei as well as Shansi Province copy- ists in every county listen to Communist newscasts from Peiping and distribute mimeographed sheets which are used as text. books for various winter schools, In north China, according to the New China News Agency, the propaganda net- work handled the recent anti-American Ko- rean aid movement so successfully that farmers whose minds previously were par- alyzed now are responding warmly to the call of resisting Americans and defending the fatherland. Many have put down names to join the people’s volunteers in Korea or to serve as stretcher bearers, the news agency added. They have also shown a high degree of enthusiasm in turning in grains to state granaries. In Manchuria the Communist propaganda network is built on workers’ schools where laborers attend classes after working hours, In the North Manchurian Province of Hei- lungkiang alone there are more than 34,000 authorized propagandists. In Antung City, which {fs across the Yalu River from the North Korean city of Sinuiju, 1,400 propa+ gandists drum up feeling against the United States. In the western Manchurian Province of Jehol 360 laborers attend workers’ schools and 200,000 peasants attend winter schools where propagande also is intensively con- ducted both in basic party lines and ag cur- rent affairs. Petition of the People’s Lobby of California EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. NORRIS POULSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 3, 1951 Mr. POULSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following peti- tion of the People’s Lobby of California: To the President of the United States of America, Harry S. Truman, the Senate, the House of Representatives: The board of directors of the People's Lobby of California organization, through its committee, passed the following resolution at \ts regular meeting in Los Angeles, Calif., Monday, July 17, 1060: Whereas the United Nations Security Council has commenced proceedings involv- ing the United Nations flag for war; and Whereas such action by the UN violates the United Nations Charter; and ‘Whereas such action by the UN is uncon- atitutional and Illegal; and 1. To exercise such interference among nations is ilega) and violates article 1, sec- tion 8 of the Constitution of the United States, in which it states, “Congress shall declare war”:
A342 Wow, therefore, it 1s the sense of the board of directors of the People’s Lobby of Call- fornia that (1) such proceedings as those above mentioned are of vital concern to the people and civic organizations; (2) all civic organizations should take all necessary steps to Inform themselves of the issues involved and defend themselves against such usurpa- tion of power by the United Nations Security Council by all appropriate methods including bringing the same to the attention of the Congreaa and of the people; (4) the matter should be retained on the board's agenda for further consideration, and should move actively to participate in this matter. On July 7, 1950, the United Nations Se- curity presented a resolution relative to, the use of the United Nations flag for war. Such use of police force power violates the UN Charter, and the resolution passcd by UN July 7, 1950, is unconstitutional and ‘legal. No American suldier should be permitted to enter battle and offer his services and life under any emblem other than the flag of the United States of America, The United World Federaliste favored be-~ fore our State legislature the resolution which was passed favoring a world govern- ment. Our organization opposed the pas- e of the resolution and was partially responsible for securing its revocation. The ground of our opposition was the effect of such world government in nullify- ing the provisions of our Constitution, that war must be declared by action of Congress. If this is a trick to strengthen the UN into world government which would give mixed ideologies prestige, establish a prece- dent for police rule through the UN, it would be the first atep to the last chapter where we would give up our Constitution, Bill of Rights, and our Republic of the United States of America. The UN is exceeding ils power to make puppets of our President, Senators, and the Congressmen. If we are not fighting for the United States ideals of freedom, then why are wo fighting? If our boys and young women are induced to fight for peace with honor, we want it to be only under our own Stars and Stripes, representing the United States and the Republic. The United Nations was set up for peace, not war. Why then should they be sent to foreign soil over the nation of Korea squabble? We oppose foreign entanglements and, most certainly oppose any entangle- ment that would create, or help to create world government and, the nullifying of the Constitution of the United States. We request proper action on the part of our House of Representatives and the Sen- ate to take such action as will make the action in accordance with the Constitution of the United States. The petition of resolution above tg prayer- fully submitted by the committee and pa- triotic citizen names attached and in behalf of the people of the United States, Respectfully, People's Lobby of California, now United Patriotic People, U. 8. A., Los Angeles, Calif.; Clara McDonald, President; Dr. Charles T. Murdock, Vice Presi- dent; D. B. Troth, Executive Secretary; Katie B. Gay, Mrs. Francee Tufts, Nicholas Kudosh; Joseph Weldon An- derson; Mrs. Maude B. Jones, R. C. W. Friday, Joy A. Winans, Regina V. Far ris, Michael J. Riedel, Annetta Heep, Clarence HZ. Burr, George D. Higgins, Margaret Wheeler Hess, Betty Hender- aon, Mary P, Cathey, Elsie M. Smoot, Helen Mary Lucas, Max E. Perkins, Mrs, Luella Anderson, Homer A. Jonas, Sr., Prederick L. Boon, Dr. Robert B, Anderson, Mrs. Ethel H. Richards, Anne G. Webb. Goldye M. Brierton, Mra. Lou T. Downs, Russell P. Howard, Sam P, Fontano, Prank B. Hewitt, Amy E. Merrihew, Rae Sichman, ¥. L. Parker, Frank B. Ohlquist. Contribution of Small Business to Defense Production EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. GUY M. GILLETTE or IOWA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, January 23 (legislative day of Monday, January 8), 1951 Mr. GILLETTE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp, an article by me entitled “Small Busi- ness To Do Its Share,” which was pub- ‘shed in the Daily News Record on Mon- day, January 22, 1951. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: SMALL Busingzas To Do 118 SHARE—MANU- FACTURERS, RETAILERS or ALL SrzEs Reavy To BERVE IN EMERGENCY—-INVENTORIZS IN Srorss Sern AMPLE FOR aT Least 6 MONTHS (By Senator Guy M. GILLerTr) Waswinaton.—The crisis confronting our country today may ultimately determine whether we, a8 a Nation, ure to exist free or in bondage. It ia dificult to overesti- mate the seriousness of the situation in which the entire world finds itself. Never before in our history has the need been greater for America to stay strong—and hbe- come stronger. If we are to preserve our political democ- racy-~the cherished ideals and institutions upon which this Nation was founded—we must bend every effort to maintain and strengthen our economic democracy. For our system of competitive free enterprise ig one of the prime sources of our national vigor. To stem the tide of aggression, the Presi- dent has ordered mobilization of our man- power. Congress has blueprinted the effec- tive use of our vast industrial potential. Now is the time to make certain that small business, the broad base of our great in- dustria) and commercial pyramid, has the opportunity to contribute its full share to our war effort. It would be folly for us not to profit by the bitter experience of small-business men itn the early years of World War IT. Unfortunately for many a small operator, it was then a question of too little and much too late. While our defense effort got under way in 1940, it was not until the middle of 1942 that official notice was taken of the thousands of small-business facili- ties which were being bypassed in the race for more and more production. For two eritical years, small-business men waited outside the defense-production door for such subcontracting crumbs as might fall their way. Their plants lay idle. Their supply of materials dried up. Their skilled labor drifted away to larger plants, whose backlogs of orders were even then refiected in weapon shortages on the fighting fronts. In an industrial mobilization program, it is customary to emphasize the role of man- ufacturers, since they produce the actual materiale of warfare. We must not forget, however, that most retail establishmenta serve basic civilian needs and have an in- dispensable place in any wartime economy. Moreover, retailing is essentially smail business, Slightly more than one-half of the 8,670,000 business concerns in the coun- try are engaged in retailing. And more than two-thirds of all retail establishments in the apparel, shoes, and accessories field employ fewer than four persons. In every APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD neighborhood throughout the Nation, we find that the amall retailer ts the very heart of the business community. During World War UW, with ita serious material shortages and rationing of civilian goods, many small retailers failed to sur- vive. While their costs of doing business rose, the volume of merchandise they had to sell declined, Today, there is hope that, at least for the next 6 months, the dislocations in our ol- villan economy may not be too severe. In- ventories of consumers’ goods on retail shelves and in industry warehouses, seem ample for several months to come, In addition, with employment at a record high, the prospect of millions of dollars in overtime wages and a vast Government- spending program point to a continued brisk demand for merchandise, especially in the apparel lines. What shortages develop will in all proba- bility be spotty. Increased dollar volume should more than compensate for loss of sales through shortages. In fact, some re- tallers feel that dollar sales may exceed com- Parable 1950 figures by ag much ag 10 per- cent. This, unfortunately, will probably be attained through hirher prices to the con- sumer, rather than by an increase in unit sales, As nearly as can be foretold at this time, the heaviest demand seems likely to be in the accessories, ready-to-wear, and men's and boys’ wear lines. In thetr planning for the future, all busi- nessmen, and especially the small-business man, must take into consideration the pros- pects of even higher taxes. It is clear that at this time we are able to estimate our tax n7ede only for short periods and within the shifting framework of our milltary require- ments. Although we cannot calculate with certainty the exact amounts needed, tax policies in general will be governed by three main objectives. These are: (1) A tax load commensurate with our defense expenditures, (2) control of inflationary forces, and (3) expansion of essential civilian and military production, Two provisions of the excess-profits tax just passed by Congress were designed to be of specific aid to small business. Under the old law, no minimum credit was provided. Now, any company earning leas than $25,000 will not have to pay an excess-profits tax. In addition, new compantes—those started since the beginning of 1946~-will be entitled to a credit equal to their entire industry's average rate of return on assets during the base period. The only way for our Nation to minimize the inevitable dislocations which will occur os the war-mobillzation program gains speed ds for business, Government, and consumers to work hand in hand. Our American re- tail trade has a splendid reputation for cooperation, It is gratifying to observe the readiness with which the cotton-textile in- dustry and the men’s-wear tndustry have pledged their cooperation with voluntary system of price controls. The Senate Select Committee on Small Business, o* which I am proud to be a mem- ber, plans to exercise every means at its dis~ posal to assure that in the present race for Gefense production the vital interests of smal! business are not overlooked. In this regard, let us fervently hope that the bit.er lessons of the last war were not lost upon us. If ‘we cannot learn from so recent an experience, the road ahead will be rocky indeed, We may well ask ourselves this question: How firm and enduring will the foundation of our cherished political democracy be if we allow our economic democracy to crum- ble? In some places in the world today even to be permitted to conduct a business is @ privilege. In America it is a right. Now and in the perilous days ehead we cannot
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD afford to take any chances with our tradi. tional institution of free and independent enterprise. We cannot afford to ignore the needs of the small-business men, who, by their numbers, furnish the major portion of our national productive and service facilities, America cannot be strong; America cannot stay strong—without independent enterprise. Resolution Adopted by the Thirty-eighth General Assembly of the State of Colo- rado, January 19, 1951 EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. WILLIAM S. HILL OF COLORADO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, January 22, 1951 Mr, HILL. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following resolution: Senate Joint Memorial 2 Joint resolution memortalizing the Congress of the United States to enact legislation providing for the creation of a department of natural resources, the establishment of regional or branch offices of that and other Federal departments and agencies, and for the location of a United States Military Academy of the Air in Colorado Whereas the Honorable Herbert Hoover, Chairman of the Joint Committee on the Or- ganization of the Executive Branch of the Government, has recommended the reorgan- ization of the Department of the Interior and the incorporation of its functions and re- lated functions concerned with the conserva- tion and development of natural resources into a new Department of Natural Resources; and Whereas it would be highly desirable that regional offices of that and other Federal departments and agencies be established in order to bring the Federal Government and its activities closer to the people; and Whereas consideration is being given to the establishment of a United States Mili- tary Academy of the Air: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Senate of the Thirty- eighth General Assembly of the State of Colorado (the House of Representatives con- curring herein), That the Congress of the United States be and it is hereby memorial. itzed to approve legislation for— (1) The creation of a new Department of Natural Resources; (2) The location of a regional office of that department and of other important Federal departments and agencies in Colorado; and (8) The location of the United States Mill. tary Academy of the Air kewise in Colorado, Be it further resolved, shat copies of this memorial be forwarded to the President of the Senate and the Speaker of the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States, and to the Senators and Con- greesmen representing the State of Colorado of the United States. Gorpon ALLOLT, President of the Senate, Mrtprep H. CRESSWELL, Secretary of the Senate, Davin A. HAMIL, Speaker of the House of Representa- tives, . Vincent CrawsHaw, Chief Clerk of the House of Repre- sentatives, Opposition to United States-Korean War EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. WILLIAM LANGER OF NORTH DAKOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, January 23 (legislative day of Monday, January 8), 1951 Mr. LANGER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp, an article entitled “Many Here Opposed to United States-Korean War,” published in the Benson County, N. Dak., Courier of Jan- uary 18, 1951. . There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Po.z Finns FoLxs THINKING AND CONCERNED— Many Hert Orpostp To UNiren Srares- Korean War There is a lot of opinion—some offered as expert; some just comment—to be heard on the world situation, how it affects us a8 a nation, and what we should do about it. A lot of the comment heard on the air and available through the syndicated col- umns in the newspapers is regarded by some to be the reflection of special interests. Some probably is; some is not. The Courier believes the real voice of America is the opinion to be heard on the streets, in the cafes and stores, and in homes where people on the grass-roots level con- gregate. These opinions, magnified thou- sands of times, are the real voice of America, We present here 15 opinions on the cur- rent international situation from Benson County folks. The opinions were solicited for publication and are necessarily brief. They are not intended to be related to one another. J.G, Johnson, Leeds plumber: “I think we should get out of Korea and get back to Japan and watch Europe more closely. We should furnish material to Europe, but there should be an understanding that they should attempt to defend their own countries.” Joseph Blegen, Leeds township farmer: “I’ve wondered what we were doing in Korea in the first place. I’ve asked and have yet to get a satisfactory answer. I think we should keep our forces closer to home—at least till we see how things are shaping up.” Harold Whalen, Knox merchant: “The 8t te Department is right in withholding aid from the Chinese Nationalist Government under Chiang Kai-shek, whose government for years practiced corruption in keeping the peasants of China in a state of servitude. I think any American forces sent to Europe should be matched at least man for man by the European nations. I don’t think we should help any Communist nation—Yugo- slavia included; communism is communism, wherever it is. I think the American people should wake up to the dangers of McCarthy- ism.” (Whalen observed conditions in China firsthand as an American pilot there during World War II.) Nels ©. Fosen, Springfield Township, farmer: “I am absolutely for getting out of Korea. I don't know what we were doing there in the first place.” Oscar Tufte, Leeds, merchant: “I think Tart is closer to right than anybody so far, I think it is a mistake to stop Nationalist China from opposing Red China and also in not rearming the Japs, I think the Japs should have 6 land army only, but Japan could protect themselves and our bases, too.” A343 A. E. Petsinger, Leeds, merchant: “T can't help but feel that we should draw back to Japan till they make up their minds what they are doing. I can’t see losing a lot of lives in Korea for what seems to be no gain. I don't think we should send more than our proportionate share of troops to Europe.” Fritz Hove, York Township, farmer: “I don’t think we ever had any business in Ko- Tea. We're just as much an aggressor as Russia would be in moving into Mexico in the name of peace. Rather than so much stress on rearmament, I think we should have more faith in United Nations. I think Red China should be recognized. They are a majority of the people there. A big army here could bring economic breakdown—and commu- nism. Russia can’t impose communism here.” C. T. Madsen, Maddock, creamery manager! “TI feel we have our elected officials and their military staff, and we'll have to rely on their Judgment and hope for the best. 1 don’t feel that the State legislature was in position to judge on the Korean situation.” Palmer Larson, York, farmer: “I feel we should do our share, but I also believe the other nations seem to be expecting too much of us in manpower and finances, both in Korea and Europe. I think the next war will take longer to win than any before.” Matt Johnson, Wolford, farmer: “I’m afraid we are going to have another big war, and I think we can win it, but to say what has been right or wrong with what we have done 80 far is hard to say from what we know.” Mrs. Frank O’Connell, Brinsmade, house- wife: “It’s hard to know what to say. I have maintained that the United States has been the goat for the world in previous wars. I don’t say that we should try to fight man- for-man with the North Koreans and Chi- nese. I'd say one American is worth five Reds, and we don’t want to spend our man- power in that way. Maybe if we knew more, we could appreciate the situation better.” Mrs. Einer Skold, rural Leeds, housewife: “I don't think we should send all our men over to Korea to fight. I don’t think it's worth it to lose as many men as we have. I think we should send help to Europe to fight communism before it gets to this country.” Miss Nora Jacobsen, Leeds, music teacher: “Way down deep in my heart I can't help but feel that we are not going to have an all-out war, that somehow, something will come to make those people over there change to be better able to reason, feel, and understand. I think we have all gotten away from the fundamental Christian principles.” John Johnson, Leeds, farmer: “I don't think we should pull out of Korea. That would be the same as giving up. It doesn’t seem that it should be so hard to hold, European nations should have help.” John Burkhardsmeier, Leeds, cafe opera- tor: “We'd be a lot better off if we'd mind our business and let other nations mind theirs. We had no business in Korea. Hoover is no fool.” The Good-Faith Sales Rule EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. OWEN BREWSTER IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, January 23 (legislative day of Monday, January 8), 1951 Mr. BREWSTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed
A344 4n the Appendix of the Reoory, an ar- ticle by Harold Pleming. The article ts to be found in the Christian Science Monitor of January 15. It relates to the “good-faith sales rule” and it is worth reading. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Goon Farrn Satxs Rois sx Cotrr Heip Wricnty (By Harold Fleming) New Yosuk—The recent Supreme Court 6 to $ decision in the so-called Standard of Indiana or Detroit gasoline case is considered by antitrust lawyers here as the most im- portant high court decision on the antitrust laws since the Cement Institute (basing- point) case in 1948. It is also virtually the first t anti-~ trust decision in over a decade which has upheld the position of a large corporation against Government lawyers. ‘The other such decision was in the Colum- bia Steel case, allowing United States Steel ta buy a west coast steel fabricator. But in its Columbia decision the court obliquely took into account the west coast’s interest in getting in new eastern steel capital. Also the Columbia decision was 6 to 4, and the minority report contained Justice Douglas’ famous remark: ‘Here is the curse of big- ness." But in the recent Indiana decision Justice Douglas sided with the majority. LEGALITY OF DISCRIMINATION The original and basic issue in the case was the legality of good faith price discrim- ination. A price discrimination under the Clayton Act of 1914 and its amendment, the Robin- son-Patman Act of 1936, merely means the giving of a lower price to one customer than to another. The law prohibits such discriminations— but with certain exceptions, One is for quantity discounts when justiNed to the Federal Trade Commission on the basis of cost savings on large orders. Another is where the reduction is made in good faith for the purpose of meeting a competitor's price. Such was the Indiana case. In this case the Indiana company sold Gasoline to oertain Detroit jobbers. A com- petitor offered these jobbers lower prices. Indiana met the lower prices. But this en- abled some of these jobbers to undercut some retailers to whom the Indiana company sold direct. GOOD-FAITH EXEMPTION Some of these retailers complained to the FTC. The Commission ordered Indiana to quit granting these lower prices to these jobbers. Indiana replied that it had to make these prices or lose the business; that the cuts were made in good-faith competition. The FTC replied that the good-faith exemp-~ tion was in section 2 (b) of the Clayton Act, and so didn’t apply to section 2 (a) under which Indiana's cuts were injuring compe- titors (i. e. some of Indiane's retail cus- tomers). The court of appeals agreed unanimously with the PTC, but the Supreme Court has now restored to the law the meaning most people thought it had before the Indiana enrse. Said the Supreme Court majority: “There is nothing to show a congressional purpose * * * to compel the seller to choose only between ruinously cutting ita prices to all its customers to match the price offered to one or refusing to meet the competition and then ruinously raising its prices to tte remaining customers to cover increased unit costs.” RESALE PRICK MAINTENANCE There was, however, another aspect of the case, not Awelt on by the high court, in- volving resale price maintenance. The beck- ground on thie is shown by the following quotations taken from chapter 6, The For- gotten Consumer, of a forthcoming book on the antitrust Iaws by Harold Fleming, to be published by Prentice-Hall, Inc., in February under the title “Ten Thousand Command- ments.” “Long before World War I * * * & group of retail lumber dealers were angered by a number of wholesale lumbermen. The wholesale firms were edging into the retail bueiness, and * * * not respecting the usual retail mark-up. * * * The retatl- ers, however, felt that they had a fair and proper place in the business, including mark- up, and that it should be protected. “At about the same time a leading patent medicine company, Dr. Miles, fell out with some of its distributors. They were not maintaining the retail price. * * *° “The Supreme Court had little difficulty in striking down both of these efforts at what js now called resale price maintenance. If distributors wanted to cut prices below the customary margins, that was all right with the Court. It was a form of competition, and {tt benefited the consumer. (U. S. v. Eastern States Retail Lumber Association (284, U. S. 600 (1914)), and Dr. Miles Medi- cal Co. v. John D. Park & Sons Co, (22 U. 8. (1911)). “Much more recently the Supreme Court made a similar finding in the Ethyl Gaso- line case. * * * It here again struck down resale-price maintenance. * *° * Recently the Federal Trade Commission found resale-price maintenace to be a vio- lation also of the Federal Trade Commission Act as an unfair method of competition.” “FTC REVERSES ITSELF IN DETROIT CASE “TBut] in an astonishing recent case—the so-called Detroit gasoline case—the FTO re- versed iteelf in effect and required a big ofl company practically to enforce resale price maintenance on certain of ite Jobber~ retailer customers. What bappened in the case was this: “The Standard Oil Co. of Indiana, had tn Detroit, what is called a ‘dual-distribution system’ * * * it sold, on the one hand, direct to several hundred retail gas stations; and, on the other hand, to four jobbers, some of whom not only sold to retailers but also sold at retail * * * direct to con- sumers. “Standard sold to the jobbers at 1% cents a gallon lower than tt sold to retail-station operators. This was a tank-car price to the jobbers, and a tank-wagon price to the re- tailers. This was not a wide spread. In fact, a number of oil companies had been fined a few years earlier under the Sherman Act for holding the jobber-retailer spread at 2cents. (C. R. 11964, 5, Western District of Wisconsin, 1986, companion case to the so- called Madison case (310 U. 8. 160).) “COMPETITIVE BATTLE AGGRAVATED “One of these jobbers, however, selling at retail through its own service stations, often passed on some of this discount to the drive. in customers during some of the repeated price battles that raged in the Detroit gaso- line business. And this tended to aggra- vate the competitive battle, pull down retail prices to the consumer, and hurt some of this jobber-retailer’s competitors. “The FTC thereupon ordered the Indiana Standard Co., among other things, to cease dealing with any wholesaler who {it] knows, or should know, will not maintain [its] price to retailers. And the court of appeals up- held the PTO in this, saying that Standard might, under the right to choose its cus~ tomers, refuse to sell to wholesalers who sell to retailers below the price [it] makes to its own retailers. “By odd coincidence, a somewhat similar case was tried in Milwaukee at about the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD game time, ‘also involving gasoline prices but with a quite different outoome. * ° ° Tt was Detroit gasoline dealers who * * * precipitated this FTC price maintenance rul- ing. But meantime the State of Wisconsin was winning a caso against price mainte- nance in Milwaukee. The Milwaukee Retail Gasoline Dealers’ Association had pent bul- letins to its members suggesting resale prices, which were adhered to by more than 90 percent of ita members, while only 55 per- cent of the nonmember dealers to whom these bulletins were sent maintained the price. The Wisconsin court found the association to have conapired to main- tain gasoline prices, fined it $2,000, and or- dered its charter dissolved. “The Wisconsin proceeding was brought under a State antitrust law. This law and the action taken under it were in line with the original spirit of the Federal antitrust aws.” The Phillips Petroleam Natural Gas Rate Case ——ae EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ALEXANDER WILEY OF WISCONSIN IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, January 23 (legislative day of Monday, January 8), 1951 Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, there is tremendous interest in the State of Wis- consin and throughout the Midwest in the long-pending investigation by the Federal Power Commission of alleged excessive prices charged for natural gas at the well-head by the Phillips Pe- troleum Co. Unfortunately, however, there have been no fewer than seven postponements of the hearing, all but one feet have been due to the company i . Now, we all recognize that the high cost of living is one of the gravest prob- Jems which America faces on the home front. Naturally the fuel element in that high cost must be controlled if we are to prevent further terrific inflation- ary pressures from developing in our already over-inflated economy. For this reason I was happy to act upon a sound recommendation which I had received from the new attorney general of the State of Wisconsin, the Hon. Vernon Thomson. This distinguished officer recommended that on hehalf of my State, I contact the Federal Power Com- mission urging the setting of a day cer- tain for the filing of evidence. I was happy to do so, not only in the interest of Wisconsin consumers but in interest of other Midwestern consumers as well, and more important, in the interest of the over-all national effort to hold the price line. There is, as I have said, widespread interest in this subject, and for that reason in order that my position on be- half of the setting of a specific hearing date may be absolutely clear, I ask unan- imous consent that there be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp, the follow- ing items: (a) The text of the letter from the attorney general of Wisconsin to me; (b) The text of my reply to him;
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD (c) The text of my letter to Chairman Walegren, of the Federal Power Commis- sion; and finally, (d) The text of an illuminating edi- torial which appeared in the Wednes- day, January 17, issue of the Milwaukee Journal. . There being no objection, the letters and editorial were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Tue Srare or Wisconsin, Orricn or ATTORNEY GENERAL, Madison, January 9, 1950. Hon. ALEXANDER WILEY, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. My Dear Senator: In October 1948, the Federal Power Commission initiated an in- vestigatory proceeding upon its own motion as to the status of the Phillips Petroleum Co. under the Natural Gas Act. A copy of the order describing the basis for the Commission's action is enclosed herewith and is self-explanatory. The respondent, Phillips Petroleum Co., is the exclusive supplier of natural gas to the Michigan-Wisconsin Pipeline Oo., which in turn is the exclusive wholesale supplier of natural gas to Wisconsin distributing companies. The price of natural gas at the wellhead is a material factor in the com- position of the price to the consumer in Wisconsin. The contract between Phillips Petroleum Co, and the pipeline company is a subject of inquiry in this proceeding. It is interest- ing to note that the price of the gas supplied by Phillips Petroleum to the pipeline com- pany was increased five times between the date the contract was first entered into and the date the first cubic foot of gas was de- livered {nto our State. This, notwithstand- ing the contract was supposed to be an arms-length transaction. It can readily be seen that unless some control is exerted over the sale of the gas from the supplier to the pipeline company, the regulation of the price between the pipe- line company and the distributors becomes an empty and meaningless formality. You are fully conversant with the Kerr bill which was vetoed by the President in the last session of Congress. The effect of that bill, among other things, would have been to nul- ify the basis for the present inquiry into the status of the Phillips Petroleum Co. It is my understanding that the cost of gas charged by Phillips Petroleum Co. to the pipeline company is approximately $5,000,000 per year greater than the amount which would have been permitted under the origtnal contract. It is conceivable that if the matter goes to hearing and the State of Wisconsin prevalls upon its contentions, a substantial saving will be effected to the consumer public in this State and in other States served by the pipeline company. The Phillips Petroleum Co, has endeavored from time to time to postpone the hearing. It now relies heavily upon its participation in the national mobilization effort as the basis for @ motion for indefinite postpone- ment of the hearing. The State of Wiscon- sin does not wish to interfere with this com- pany’s participation in the national mobili- gation effort. However, by a motion being filed with the Commission this day, I believe we have suggested a procedure under which the public interest can be fully served and the respondent company’s participation in the national mobilization effort can be fully protected. A copy of that written motion is enclosed herewith and is self-explanatory. In your capacity as a member of the bar, and as as a representative of the public in- terest of the citizens of Wisconsin, I request that you study this matter; and if you share my conclusions as expressed in the enclosed motion for a definite hearing date, I request that you communicate with Chairman Wall- gren, of the Federal Power Commission, and submit your viewpoint to him. Respectfully, VERNON W. THOMEsON, Attorney General. Unrrep Srates SEnats, COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, January 15, 1951. Re Federal Power Commission Natural Gas case. Hon, Vernon THOMSON, Attorney General, State of Wisconsin, Madison, Wis. My Dear Vernon: I appreciate very much your fine letter of January 9 and enclosed materials setting forth the petition by our State of Wisconsin to the Federal Power Com- mission for the setting of a hearing for a day certain in the Phillips Petroleum case. I have read through your | ver and en- closures most carefully, and I should lke to state now that I feel that Wisconsin is on completely sound grounds in urging no fur- ther postponement of the seven-times de- layed FPO hearing. I shall, therefore, in compliance with your suggestion, immedi- ately contact the Commission along the lines set forth in the enclosed letter to Chairman Walgren. As you will kindly recall, I voted against the Kerr bill which would, as you say, have nullified the basis for the present inquiry into the status of th: Phillips Petroleum Co, From all the evidence I have seen since my vote, I believe more strongly than ever that the natural gas companies must be controlled at the source of supply. Obviously there is tremendous pressure for cost of living in- creases all along the line, and I feel that the consumers of Wisconsin and other States are being squeezed enough already without having to worry about still further increases in natural gas rates, Be assured, therefore, of my complete co- operation with your office toward the objec- tive you have well stated. I shall be happy to receive your further suggestions and re- actions. With all good wishes, I am Sincerely yours, ALEXAISDER WILEY. Unirep Sratres SENATE, CoMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, January 15, 1951, Re Phillips Petroleum Natural Gas case. Hon. Mon WALLGREN, Chairman, Federal Power Commisston, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. Cuarrman: I am writing to you to express my complete support of the po- sition adopted by the State of Wisconsin in urging that there be no further postpone- ment of the Federal Power Commission hear- ing on the Phillips Petroleum Co. Natural Gas case. I have endorsed the sentiments expressed by the attorney general of my State, the Honorable Vernon Thomson, in contending that no further postponement of the hearing is justified. Neither my State nor any other Btate would want to interfere with the par- ticipation by this company in the national mobilization effort; however, I do not believe that the hearing contemplated under Wise consin’s appeal would in the slightest con- etitute such interference. I do not like to see “the national defense effort” or “the mobilization emergency” be used as a cloak under which any company seeking its own self-interest can justify any arbitrary action. Already the hearing has been postponed seven times and all but one of those times such postponement had been requested by Phillips. A345 T want to be fair to this company but I feel that it ia infinitely more important that we be fair to the public interest as set forth by the Wisconsin brief. I appeal to you, therefore, and to your fellow Commission members to immediately set @ day certain under which the evidence * ould be presented in this case. I feel that the Federal Power Commission owes an obligation to the consumers of my State and to the sovereign State itself. Al- ready the price of gas supplied by this com- pany to the pipeline company has increased five times between the date the contract was first entered into and the date the firat cubic toot of gas was delivered into our State. These facts, tt seems to me, underline the imperative necessity for an immediate hear- ing. I do not presume to judge the merits of the case in detail because that is a matter tor the Commission itself to determine; but I do presume, because it is my right as a United States Senator, to respectfully urge that there be no further stalling. Looking forward to hearing from you on this matter, and with all good wishes, I am Sincerely yours, Auzxanpen WILEY. Ce cmanand {From the Milwaukee Journal, January 17, 1961] FPO Rerusrs To Prorecr User or NATURAL Gas; Wuy Is Tx18? A year ago natural gas consumers won what seemed to be a great victory when President Truman vetoed the Kerr bill, which would nave removed so-called independent nat- ural gas producers from control of the Fed- eral Power Commission. There is disquieting evidence that the vic- tory may have been hollow. The FPC, after winning the right to “control,” isn't showing much interest in “controlling.” Long ago the State of Wisconsin and the city of Detroit asked the FPO to investigate alleged “excessive prices” charged for gas at the wellhead by the Phillips Petroleum Co. Phillips, which owns 12 percent of the Na- tion's natural gas reserves, is exclusive sup- plier of the Michigan-Wisconsin Pipe Line ©o., one of the two wholesalers in the Wis- consin market. Gas in the area served by the pipe line com- pany is costing consumers $5,000,000 more a year than original contract agreements set because Phillips has made five successive price boosts, the State of Wisconsin claims, The first hearing on the State’s complaint was set for last March. It has been post- poned seven times. On December 19 the FPC, at the urging of the Phillips Co., voted “indefinitely to postpone” the hearings. That, in effect, gave Phillips a clear fleld for setting any gas rate it desires. The decision to kill the investigation will be reconsidered, because one commissioner was absent when the vote was taken. But the 3 to 1 vote knocking the probe on the head doesn’t lend much hope of reviving it unless one of the majority can be persueded to change his mind. The entire fight egainst the Kerr bill was based on the theory that unless gas prices can be controlled at the wellhead, controls by the FPC of pipeline rates and by the ‘Wisconsin and other State public servite com- missions of consumer rates are “an empty and meaningless formality." The wellhead price, as Attorney General Vernon Thomson, of Wisconsin, has pointed out, of necessity sets pipeline and consumer prices. If Philips can ralse prices at will the FPO and the State PSC are wasting their time—and consumers have no protection. Phillips' argument against the investiga- tion is ridiculous. The company has claimed that if tt has to spend time defending itself at hearings the national defense and mobili- zation effort will be hampered. This is pure
A&46 hokum. ‘The defense and mobitization effort will be much more henepered if gaa prices are allowed to scar far above fevels and to add to the already high cost of tiving. The FPC Is charged with protecting the public. Bf it refuses Wisconsin's request for an investigation aimed at protecting natural gas consumers it ought to be investigated itself. A New Congress Sits EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. WILLIAM LANGER OF WORTH DAKOTA IN TRE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, January 23 Uegislative day of Monday, January 8), 1951 Mr, LANGER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “A New Congress Sits,” published ,in the Bismarck (N. Dak.) Leader of January 4, 1951. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Rsecorp, as follows: A New Coeroarss Srrs While it esems more important to us in North Dakote that we have a legislature in session, we should not forget the national— and international—importance of the fact that a new Congress opened in Washington the day after our legisiature opened. ‘What can we expect from thts new national legistative body? It seems to be the unantmous opinion of economic experts that we can expect more taxes, lees and more expensive goods (infta~ tion), and thet on the whole tt would be a very good idea if we could have avoided ltv- ing during this next year. We shall have leas of almost everything that goes into the American standard of living, and we ahall pay more for leas. We shall also pay more into the national treasury tn taxes of all sorts. not & very cheerful prospect being held out ‘or Us. Some of those threatened things have al- ready come to pass. It was not necessary for the President to await the approval of the new Congress to put some of the things into effect. He had wartime powers already written lito law that gave him the right to issue executive orders. But the Congress will have to imple- ment (what a miserable word to use in this connection, but economists use it and seem to adore it) his program, whatever it might be or become. We might as well believe this, for there is not the slightest disagreement among experts about tits. Congress will have to give the President a& iot of things he is going to ask for. Whether the Members like Mr. Truman makes not the slightest difference for the President is in a poattion that guarantees him his way in a tot of things, so long as there is & war threat hanging over the world. There will nct be much room in Washing~ ton, or in the national legislature, for poll- ties as such. The welfare of the Nation is the concern of all of us, congressional Mem-~- bers inoluded, and broadly interpreted, the atm of the administration must be the aims of the Nation, trrespective of political fesi- ing of the persan in Congress who must vote for or against what the President and his advisers propose. The fob of cur State tors may seem tough. But it is of itttle hardehtp compared to what the Members of Congress must do. , What we do in our own Utate effects our own State principally, tf not entirely, What Congress does not only the entire Nation, but the entire enti-Communist world. The eyes of the whole world are on our national Congress snd our President. Whet Washington does ts of supreme importance. Proposed Draft of Youths EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLYDE R. HOEY OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, January 23 (legislative day of Monday, January 8), 1951 Mr, HOEY. Mr. President, Task unan- imous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recogp an excellent ar- ticle entitled “Mothers and Youths Un- duly Frightened About War Outlook,” by Roger W. Babson. This article ap- peared in the Washington Evening Star and other afternoon papers of January 22, 1951, and I think it is well worth in- cluding in the REooRD. There being no objection, the articie was ordered to be printed in the Racorn, as follows: Moruers anp Yourus UNDULY FRIGHTENED ABouT Wag OUTLOOK, Dectarnes Basson (By Roger W. Babson) Wasummcton, January 20.—I am not a mili- tary expert and cannot speak with authority as to what is to happen to our 18- to 28-ysar- old young men during the next few years. The plans and hopes of many homes, jobs, and colleges are completely upset. Let me, however, add a little hope to frightened families, Men who know what the probabilities are ‘assure me that the fu- ture is not as bad as it now looks, They insist that only # few more boys will be shipped to Asia. We will be willing to sup- ply guns and munitions to enable the Japa- nese to protect Japan, to enable Nationalists to hold Formosa, and to give needed aid to the Philippines. But no more American boys will be sent to Korea, Indochina, Burma, India, or elaewhere tn Asia. Experts at Washington believe world war III, if it comes, will be fought mainly by the Navy and Air Force. They say it would be suicidal to depend upon numbers of infantry to meet the Russians, even in Europe. With the large number of Communtsts who infect each European country, it may be best to limit our help to Western Europe to stp- plying them with A-bombs. Therefore, I be- lieve mothers and boys are unnecessarily excited. Amrericans seem unable to strike a middie course. They either ignore danger and insist on business, profite, wages, and entertainment as usual, or elee become stricken and go too far in the opposite di- rection. I, therefore, strongly advise that parents and thetr youths avoid getting unduty ex- cited. Sirst, the chances are 8 to 8 that Rusale wil! not risk a “hot war” for some time to come, and second, if only the present “cold war” continues, 2,500,000 young men tn train- ing would be a nuisance and handicap to all concerned. J, moreover, speak with some authority, having founded throe oplleges and graduated thousands of young men. I further advise young men between 18 and 20 to quit Rstentng to ratio commen- tatore who know mo more as to the future than you, my readers, do. Go an about your plans for schooling or work the same as if no war is now probable. Then if you eré APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD efforts enable a proved . intelligence forces that let us down. We can win brains. If world war III comes it will be a conflict of superior intelligence. Hence, let our youth prepare to use their bratns; white the poor Russians, Chinese, and other peoples are treated as cannon fodder. %f Generel MacArthur had given more attention te the intelligence division of his Army and lees to old-fashioned fight- ing customs, things would be different. REMEMBER OUR RELIGION Finally, let us parents not forget that God continues to rule in His Heaven and that, in the iong run, the Russians can never win without Him. God is still our refuge and to make our young people—who have hed things pretty easy—'stap, look, and listen. McMahen’s Plan To Express Amity Toward Russians Hailed EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. BRIEN McMAHON Or CormmacrrouT IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, January 23 (legislative day of Monday, January 8), 1951 Mr. McMAHON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix an article entitied “Mo- Mahon's Plan To Express Amity To- ward Russians Hailed,” written by Da- vid Lawrence, in his column Today in Washington, and published in the New york Herald Tribune of January 23, There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: MoMaunox's PLAN To Expauss AMItT Towarp Russinws Hawcp {By David Lawrence) Wasirecron, 98.—Senator Brew MoManon's proposal of a resolution to he adopted by the Senate expressing friendship for the Russian people ts the firct sign of common sense that has come in a long while from officiaidom here on the subject of moral foree as a preventive of ‘war. The aesumption that because armement has to be increased rubstantially to meet outbreaks of aggression, all other forms of
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD: peaceful effort to prevent war need not be pressed is erroneous. Yet whenever military measures take the lmelight these other methods of avoiding war seem to be side- tracked, With two world ware to remind mankind that military conquest does not really bring peace, there have been equally erroneous as- sumptions current that military strength has become futile or unnecessary. The truth is that defense armament is indispensable, and so is an armament o/‘reason and genuine friendship expressed by one set of peoples to the other. THE CAUSES OF WAR The Russian people are not bellicose by nature, They do not want war any more than do the people of the Allied countries. Inasmuch as all peoples would prefer the ways of peace to armed hostilities, the real question always is why there should be any wars. Generally they result from the acts of a dictator or of a small group of men—oll- garchies, they used to call them in ancient days—who exploit whole nations and force the young to go to war by inflaming public opinion against other countries. There is no reason to believe that, if the minds of the 200,000,000 people of Soviet Russia could be reached with genuine evi- dences of friendship, the rules of the Com- munist regime would have the power to take the steps of aggression which have now brought the world tu the brink of war. Like all other moves of this kind—and they are by no means novel—the question of methods and means arises, The United States has brought forth what is known as the Voice of America program. This project was for a long time in need of funds, but now has the money from Congress. What is lacking is the ideas that must go into such an undertaking to make it successful. Those ideas cannot hegin and end on the bureau- cratic level. They must come from the very top level of our policy makers, They must be part of national and international policy. Today the Voice of America is just one of a number of bureaus in the State Department. It ought to be an important agency inde- pendent of any department and reporting di- rectly to the President. It should have enough prestige to command the sympathetic support of Members of both Houses of Con- gress. It should be the “public relations” instrument of the Government itself in in- ternational relations. Few men who have been at the head of the State Department have ever been qualified to do this type of planning even if they had the time to devote to it. But to occupy so important a role, the proj- ect must have Cabinet-level ranking and must be composed of advisers who are able to suggest major policies that will appeal to other nations, especially those behind the fron curtain, Strange, indeed, that nobody has put any official momentum behind the idea of a formal expreasion of triendship by the Congress addressed to the people of Soviet Russia or that other moves which can appeal to peoples behind the fron curtain should not have come before now from authorita- tive quarters, MUST CAPTURE IMAGINATION The Voice of America can relay messages and broadcast interesting scrips and carry a polemic technique to counteract Communist propaganda, but that’s not enough. There must be ways to capture the imagination of the Russian people. That's why the sugges- tion by Senator McMazton is likely to prove more penetrating that all the high-sounding epesches of diplamatic phraseology that come forth eo regularly as the only expression of American idealism, But will such policies of friendship and other proposals get through to the people be- hind the tron curtain? The answer is that any event of sensational importance perco- lates through any man-made barrier, The persons who go and come across the border from the satellite states to the free world are constantly discussing these same issues. Word-of-mouth distribution of ideas atill re~ mains the most effective single instrument of communication the world has ever known, Proposed Draft of 18-Year-Old Youths EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD MARTIN OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THR UNITED STATES Tuesday, January 23 (legislative day of Monday, January 8), 1951 Mr. MARTIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp, a letter I have received from Frederic B. Terry, of Waynesboro, Pa., quoting an article by Dr. Charies 8. Tippetts, headmas- ter of the Mercersburg Academy, at Mercersburg, Pa., regarding the pro- posal to draft youths of 18 years. There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the REcorD, as follows: Warnessoro, PA., January 13, 1951. Hon, Epwanbd Martin, Senate Office Butlding, Washington, D.C. Dear SENATOR: Concerning the idea of whether or not the United States should lower the draft age to 18, Dr. Charles 8. Tip- petts, headmaster of the Mercersburg Acad- emy, Mercersburg, Pa., has written pointedly in his Headmaster'’s Letter for the Mercers- burg Academy Alumni Quarterly. His strik- ing contribution to American thought in this matter follows: “Again we have to decide whether or not to lower the draft age to 18. This should not be done unless we become involved in a mejor war, and even then with the provision that no one under 20 should be sent to the front. Our allies during the last war had stricter regulations about age than did we. We sent many a boy of 18 over as an infan- try replacement after only & few weeks of training. Australia would not permit her young men to leave the country until they were 20; England did not let those under 19 go overseas until the last few months of the war. But we callously let 17-year-old Dboys join the Marines, the Navy and Coast Guard and be blown to bits. Look at the list of 17- and 18-year-old boys killed and wounded in Korea. “Yet in Pennsylvania if we let a 17-year- old boy stand on a box and wash windows we are subject not only to a fine but to a jail sentence. We learned this at Merceraburg the hard way. But a 15-year-old boy ean work on the roof of a barn, fall off and break his neck and it is perfectly legal, because it was a farm and farmers have lots of votes, and no one dares to say, ‘No’ to the farm vote. I saw a sign in the window of a liquor store the other day saying that no one under 21 could legally buy Nquor, “But it is perfectly legal in this ‘civilized’ country to kill boys under 21 by the thou- sands with bullets, bombs, and bayonets, and yet anyone selling them a drink will go to jail for a long term. When a distinguished lawyer and judge told me I should not say such things because it bred disrespect for the law, my answer wae that if judges and lawyers want laws to be respected, they should pass laws that are worthy of respect. No other country in modern times except Germany and Russia has had £0 cruel and brutal a policy of throwing boys who are still children into the front lines to be killed as had the United States of America. Why . thelr mothers and fathers stand for this I have never been able to understand, “Oordially, “Oxnantes S, Trperrts.” To this statement by Dr. Tippetis the question should be appended: Why should anyone under 21 be subject to draft when he is denied the right to vote? ‘ Sincerely yours, Farorrio B. Terry. Address by Assistant Secretary of Labor Ralph Wright, Representing the Sec> retary of Labor, Maurice J. Tobin EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, January 23, 1951 Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, on Janu- ary 11, 1951, there was a tremendous out- pouring of Americans. They gathered at the Hotel Waldorf-Astoria in New York City to pay a well-deserved tribute to a great labor leader in the person of William Green, president of the Ameri- can Federation of Labor. Messages of good will and of high commendation came from many high and respected sources, including our own President, Harry 8. Truman; the President of the State of Israel, Chaim Weizmann; United States Supreme Court Justice William O. Douglas; the Prime Minister of Israel, David Ben Guiron; the Speaker of the Israeli Knesset, Josef Sprinzak; as well as from labor organizations throughout the world. The dinner was sponsored by the American Trade Union Council of the National Committee for Labor Israel. The chairman of the dinner was Joseph Breslaw, chairman of the American Trade Union Council and vice president of the ILGWU. The toastmaster was Max Zaritsky, president emeritus of United Hatters, Cap, and Millinery Workers International Union. In addition to addresses by Dr. John Steelman, assistant to the President of the United States; Matthew Woll, vice president of the American Federation of Labor; and His Excellency Abba 8. Eban, Israel] Ambassador to the United States; our distinguished Secretary of Labor, Maurice J. Tobin, sent his greetings by his Assistant Secretary of Labor, Ralph Wright, whose remarks follow: It 1s an honor to represent Secretary of Labor Maurice J, Tobin at thie splendid tes- timonial of the American Trade Union Coun» cil to President William Green, of the Amer- ican Federation of Labor. Secretary Tobin deeply regrets that the inordinately heavy press of emergency duties has kept him in ashington. He has asked me to bring you & message from him which I am giad to read to you: “To the American Trade Union Council, Nae tional Committee for Labor Israel: “TY congratulate the American Trade Union Council on its great achievements and upon this most fitting testimonial to William Green. I am delighted to have this oppor- tunity to pay tribute to him, This wise and noble leader, who has been president of the
A348 American Poderation of Labor for more than 26 years, ia one of our greatest Americans. His lifelong, effective fighting for the caure of the common man has raised great eco- nomic monuments to his victories that will stand eo long as there are freemen. “Go iong a8 we have men like William Green labor atatesmanship will continue to be a fact of tremendous significance in the life of America, The interests of labor have been widened with the years and William Green has been a part of these broadened horizons. He can always be counted upon to stand on the high plateau of national well- being and world advancement. “Yhat is why when William Green de- clares—as he did recently—that ‘American wage earners face the future and ite respon- sibttities sertousty, but with confidence,” the country’s spirit is Mfted. That is why when he declares, ‘we want peace and the oppor- tunity that peace affords for new progress,’ he expresses the heart's desire of the Ameri- can people. “William Green has contributed immeasur- ably to the improvement of our American way of life. He has always striven to make our democracy work ever better. He has led the fight to raise free trade-unionism to ita ‘rightful place in this country and in the reat of the free world. He has seen economic justice joining political equality to promote the good of all. “Qn that account and for his great ability, kind and warm personality, and unimpeacha- blo integrity we honor and love him.” I want to subscribe fully to all that Secre- tary Tobin has said and to add my own con- gratuletions to the American Trade Union Counell and to President Green for his ocut- standing leadership in the field of trade- unioniem and for his equally outstanding service to his country. His is a record of servioe in both peace and war—a record of invaluable contributions to the welfare of the peopte of his own country and to the cause of economic justice and freedom throughout the world. You meet here tonight to do honor to Mr. Green. You meet here also—as you have on other ogsasione—-to help the free trade~- unjoniets of Israel, a movement and a state which President Grean has always aggres- sively supported. I warmly commend you and him for your unselfish activities on behalf of fellow workers in Israel—the world's newest democracy. 43 we look upon the map of Asia, particu- larly in the Near or Middle East, we find that Israel is the only nation in that area which has been built from the very beginning on the same principles of democracy on which we in the United States have built. Israe) is probably the only country in the Middle Hast which has an effective free trade- union movement, a movement which owes much of ita structure and character to the Amertcan trade-union movement and to a large degres to the inspiration and leadership Of men like Mr. Green. Tarael as a nation faces gigantic problems. But I know that the people of Israel have the faith and the stamina and the will to win through. Histadrut, Israel's free democratic trade-union movement, will be in the van- guard, Aynerican organised labor applauds His- tadrut's contribution to the welfare of its memibers and to the State of Israel. This is shown by the important contributions which American labor has made to labor in Israel. Because of the importance of this heip across international boundaries, organ- ized labor in America will continue this program. As President Jaber unions have fine work in communicating with labor in Europe, in Latin-America, and elsewhere. The atory of free American labor, told by American trade- untenista, is a better weapon against Com- munist propaganda among workers in other _ Truman said recently, “Our: done countries than any number of speeches by Government officials.” Never in the history of the world was the tion of freensen so vital. These are critical times. We are in great danger. The peace of the world ts gravely threatened by Communist imperialism. When the freedom and security of freemen of good will is threatened by naked Soviet imperialism, then all freemen must stand together resolute against this threat. We must bulld our defenses to whatever is necessary to contain this threat. This will entail much sacrifice by all of us. But we have the faith which will impel those sacrifices. We know that the stakes are high. Free American trade-unions will never trade their democratic institutions and way of life for a life that 1s based on totalitarian concepts, American workers want no part of a mess of Communist pottage. The American trade-union movement knows that the Communist claim that Soviet Russia is a paradise for workers is a mockery of the truth. Even tf we should base our consideration on wages and working condi- tions alone, without thought for the precjous God-given freedoms we possess, it is sheer madness for an American worker to consider for a moment changing places with the worker in Russia. Ig America were transformed overnight into a Busslan-dominated economy, I esti- mate that the American workers’ wages would be reduced by approximately 86 per- cont. Yn other words, the erican worker would have to give up four out of every five doNars to qualify for the low living standard of the Russian worker. A Labor Department study shows that the Ruasian worker must toil 44% hours for a pound of beef; it takes the American worker only 29 minutes—and you can bet that he will get better beef. The American worker earns a dozen of eggs in 27 minutes—for the Russian worker jt takes 2% hours, and so on, The workers of America will never be sucked in by the red. fame of Communist propaganda. Thank God for American or- ganized labor, which stands as an impreg- nable bulwark against communism’s false promises. Thank God for the leadership of men Hke William Green. American organ- ized labor flatly and completely rejects the totalitarian philosophy of communism and its resulting low standards of living and sup- pression of individual liberty and initiative. In midcentury the Communist war ma- chine bas drawn the issue of communism versus democracy. To maintain our free- dom and security democracy must win. It will win through the work of organizations like your American Trade Union Council, It will win through the leadership of men like William Green, who has always stood like granite against communism, and whose rocklike strength is based upon an abiding and vigorous faith in the dignity and free- dom of individual man. It will win through the efforts of such men because they know, as Emerson said: “For what avail the plow or sail, Or land or life, if freedom fail?” Red China an Aggressor EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD MARTIN OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, January 23 (legistative day of Monday, January &), 1951 Mr. MARTIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the Appendix of the Recozp an editorial regarding Red China’s aggression, pub- lished in the Pittsburgh Press on Thurs- day, January 18, 1951. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Ger a Suow-Down Now Red China's rejection of the United Na- tions offer of Formosa and a United Na- tions seat in exchange for a cease-fire agree- ment in Korea has removed the United States from the predicament in which the State Department placed it by approving this in- famous propoeal at the outset. That brings us back to the original prop- osttion that Red China is guilty of unpro- voked aggression by ite attack on the United Nations forces. This issue should be pushed to an imme- diate vote, and this country’s future par- ticipation in the United Nations should ride upon the result of that roll call. Our troops have no business in Korea if the United Nations will not support them with all of the resources at ite command. This means reinforcements in men and equipment, as well as the organization’s wholehearted moral support. If this support is not immedtately forth- coming, we should pull out of Korea, and pull out now. So much for Korea. Should this vote demonstrate, as now seems the cas*, that India and the Arab States, fronting for Britain, have captured the United Nations, to use it to serve their own selfish ends, let them have it. But let them support the empty shell that is left with their own money, without the United States as a member. We cannot afford to be a party to so base & betrayal of the Charter to which we sub- scribed with such high hopes. We should demand an immediate show- down in this {ssue. The roll call on this question will be use- ful to us in deciding on our future rela- tionships in the struggle against interna- tional communism. We cannot afford to go along with any nation which 1s willing to compromise with it. This is the time to ask them to stand up and be counted. The atipulations in the Hed’s counter- proposal to the United Nations’ confessed willingness to sell out to them are so ar- rogant and insulting that they could only have been intended to humiliate the organi- gation. The Communists not only name the members of the United Nations with whom they are willing to meet but insist that the representatives of those nations must come to China to see them. Having arranged a set-up in which they would have an assured majority, the Reds demanded a free hand in Korea and with- drawal of all protection from Formosa, as well as the United Nations seat they were offered, This would be unconditional sur- render, with the surrender given on Chinese soil, and delivered on bended knee. Thus the appeasers have convinced Mal Tee-tung that he is a modern Genghis Khan, who can write his own ticket. We should have no part of this ridiculous farce. We should break, and break clean, with this whole situation and do it now. But this break will come only if the Amer- ican people demand it. No euch forthright action can be ex- pected under the leadership of Secretary of Btate Acheson. He has worked throwgh- out his tenure to bring about a situation where the Petping Reds would be recognised as the legal government ef China. He has been willing to eacrifice the only friends we have in Asia with an army ready and willing to Aght the Communiste—the Chinese Nattonalists. And the British have very good reasons for regarding him as the