APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Water Supply of the United States EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN R. MURDOCK OF ARIZONA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. MURDOCK. Mr. Speaker, the United States is becoming more and more aware of the great importance of its water supply and the proper uses and conservation of water. In that con- nection, I would like to call to your at- tention an address recently delivered by Carl G. Paulsen, chief hydraulic en- gineer, United States Geological Survey. This address was presented at the for- tieth convention of the National Rivers and Harbors Congress, held at the May- flower Hotel, Washington, D. C. The address is as follows: Water Suppiry or tHe Unrren States The front pages of the press throughout the country during the past several weeks have dramatized the critical water shortages in many parts of the Nation. The concern that has grown in recent years over the fu- ture of our water supplies has been forcibly brought to the attention of the public by the water shortage that New York City is experiencing. This shortage is not the first that has affected an American community, and it probably is not the most serious. Ample sources of additional water are known to exist in up-State New York, and in all probability construction that will bring this water to the city will be pushed as rapidly as possible. Nevertheless, the fact that our largest city, the center of our business life, has an acute water shortage, even though it may only be temporary, causes everyone to realize something of the importance that water has in our national life and our na- tional economy and security. In nearly every State of the Union one or more communities now has or has had water problems as seri- ous as or more serious than that which now faces New York City. These problems are springing up in increasing numbers, and it is high time that orderly and systematic con- sideration be given to their’solutions and to the avoidance of as many such problems as possible in the future. If the crisis in New York serves to bring this fact into na- tional focus, New York’s misfortune may in the long run be a blessing in disguise. The comments on water problems that have appeared in the press have ranged all the way from the alarmist view that we are short of water on a national scale to the complacent view that all that is needed to cure the troubles is some particular type of conservation or construction which the par- ticular writer or promoter favors. Actually, the truth lies somewhere between these divergent views. It has been said that we are running out of water. Yet throughout the period of record the total available water resources of our country, except for local and temporary variations due to droughts and floods, have not trended persistently either up or down, but have continued essentially constant. I know of no evidence in either long-term pre- cipitation, stream~flow, or ground-water data that controverts this statement. During the past several decades stream run-off in many places, as shown by carefully selected records | of the United States Geological Survey, showed a downward swing which reached its lowest point in the decade from 19380 to 1940, but most records show an upward swing since 1940. In the 1949 water year the annual ficw of all major continental rivers gaged by the Geological Survey was near normal or above normal. Likewise, precipitation data of the United States Weather Bureau show no persistent country-wide progression to- ward long-term declines. Records of water levels in nearly 15,000 observation wells maintained by the Geological Survey and its cooperating agencies show na over-all trend toward decline. Water levels in some wells have declined, but only because of pumping or other activities of man, or tem- porarily as a result of severe droughts. Even the great drought of the thirties was subse- quently offset by above-average precipitation which fully restored stream-fiow and ground- water levels to predrought stages. The amazing situation that has arisen in this country, however, is that our use of water has increased by leaps and bounds. A century ago the per capita use of water was probably not more than a few gallons per day. Today it is estimated that our per capita use of water amounts to more than 1,300 gallons per day, exclusive of water used for hydroelectric power, for dilution of wastes in streams, for navigation, recreation, etc. The total for the country probably ap- proaches 200,000,000,000 gallons (600,000 acre- feet) a day of water now taken from wells and streams for use by industries, munici- palities, irrigation projects, and domestic and other users. During the past century our population has increased about 600 percent. The use of water, however, has increased by several thousand percent. The future is expected to bring an even more digproportionate in- crease in the use of water. The rapid growth of industry and technological advances, the introduction of new industries such as the chemical industry, the spread of air condi- tioning and temperature control processes in industry, and the hydrogenation of coal and oil shale for synthetic fuels, will require enormously increased quantities of water. Plans are also going forward for large addi- tional developments of irrigation in the West. In the East, on Long Island and else- where, supplemental irrigation to provide optimum moisture for growth of crops has spread very rapidly in the last few years. It is to be expected that such uses will increase rapidly if our national economy is to he maintained at a satisfactory level. The question is, How does this use of water compare with the amount available? The 200,000,000,000 gallons daily that is esti- mated to be used now is equivalent to be- tween 1 and 1% inches of water spread over the surface of the country in a year. The average annual precipitation is about 30 inches, and the average annual runoff is about 8.5 inches for the country. Supposedly, this country-wide average of 8.5 inches that now runs off to the sea should be utilizable by man, but it is not possible in practice. At least a substantial part can- not be used economically because it is flood flow that occurs in such tremendous volume that there is no feasible means of storing it. And of the low flow of the streams, at least a considerable part must be reserved because it dilutes and carries off municipal, in- dustrial, and other wastes. Also, a part can- not be consumed because it supports hydro- electric power, navigation, and other pur- poses. Moreover, in some streams, there is the problem of maintaining enough flow to carry off the products of natural erosion. Therefore, our use of the §.5 inches of runoff is severely limited and restricted. Of the water now used by industries, irri- gators, and others, a substantial part is actually consumed by evaporation and trans- piration as it goes into the various processes controlled by man, The rest of it may be altered to a degree depending on the proc~-. esses through which it goes, but fortunately it eventually is discharged hack into the A3539 streams or into the ground and is available for reuse as it travels on its path toward the sea. Thus, the comparison of availability and use of water on a national basis is complex and has many ramifications. However, it appears safe to say, despite the fact that ac- curate and detailed information is not avail- able, that perhaps several times as much water is available throughout the country as @ whole as is now used or consumed. All of which leads to the bold statement that our Nation’s water supply as a whole is entirely adequate for all present needs. However, it does not follow that our water supply is adequate for an indefinite length of time in the future. Nor does it by any means follow that our local supplies in every case are even now adequate. Instead, as I stated in the beginning, there are many localities throughout the country today, including widespread areas in cer-= tain places, where the presently available supplies have been developed to such an ex- tent that serious problems have resulted. In some of these places additional supplies cannot be obtained within the present eco- nomic limits, and decentralization of popu- lation, industries, and agriculture is a real possibility. In other places, additional wa- ter can be obtained, but it will cost more, and the problem is to obtain it in the best and cheapest way. These problems in the aggregate are very real and are of grave concern to the people who are experiencing them. They cannot be taken lightly. It is one thing to say water problems may be solved by decentralization of man’s activities, and another thing to carry it out. We must do everything within our ability to solve the existing problems if possible without such decentralization, and to anticipate and prevent other problems from occurring in the future. The major way to solve water shortages still appears to be to make better use of water that is already available in our streams or ground-water reservoirs, and which in large part is not now being used or is being ruined by pollution. To do this effectively we need more water data, Some water-supply problems can be solved by importation of surface water from other drainage areas that have a surplus. Others might be solved by elimination of pollution upstream, making the existing supplies more usable, Impounding of streams salvages fiood waters and also lessens pollution prob- lems by using the stored water to supplement stream flow during periods of low flow. Multipurpose dams and drainage basin devel- opments are helping a great deal in many parts of the country. Another means of salving many local prob- lems is to make better use of our ground- water reservoirs. By and large, the develop-= ment of these reservoirs will not make more total water available, at least away from coastal areas and away from places where the ground water is now being used by waste- ful phreatophytes, for if not developed the water will seep out into streams and be avail- able as stream flow. However, ground-water reservoirs do have several natural advantages that in general have not been fully utilized. The most important advantage is position. Much of our country is underlain by water- bearing formations of one kind or another through which water may move great dis- tances before being withdrawn from wells. Thus, nature does a part of the job of col- lecting and transporting the water to the points of use. Many of these water-bearing formations are tremendous underground reservoirs. As with surface reservoirs, they collect water in wet periods and store it for use in dry periods. Two special ad-~ vantages of the underground reservoirs are freedom from large evaporation losses and freedom from sedimentation.
A3540 As the press has proclaimed, in some places the ground-water reservoirs are already be- ing utilized to the maximum extent possible under natural recharge conditions, and in a few areas are even overdeveloped. But in many other places there are large unde- veloped supplies available which might very well be used. Their use would be the means of salvaging water which otherwise seeps out into the oceans or into streams where it is not needed or where it cannot be impounded for use. Furthermore, there is the possibility of auzmenting the natural recharge of our ground-water reservoirs by artificially re- charging with surface water which otherwise would run off to waste during high flow, or which in some cases would be partially lost by evaporation from surface reservoirs. Such practice is termed water spreading. By such practice, the ground-water reservoirs might be made to serve almost identically as surface reservoirs, to store excess water during high flow for later use when flow is small. Such unique use of underground res- ervoirs is already being practiced on a fairly large scale in California and on Long Island, N. Y., and on a smaller scale in other parts of the country. Effective utilization in this manner of more of these underground reser- voirs, including the ones whose natural re- charge is already fully developed, it is be- lieved, will go far toward remedying the situation many localities face today, where supplies are plentiful most of the year, but are short in times of dry weather. The most urgent prerequisite to under- taking these various solutions of our exist- ing and pending water problems is more basic water facts. We can talk in general terms about our water resources, and for many areas we do have adequate basic data, but for much of the country our current store of such facts is pitifully meager. The general tendency in the past has been to take water for granted, and not to worry “until the well goes dry.” Now we are being given cause for worry. It will be impossible, of course, to go back into history and gather satisfactory data on stage, flow, recharge, discharge, and quality-of-water changes with time—those facts, once gone, are gone for- ever. However, for the future, and to help solve the serious water problems of the pres- ent, we can make a beginning at the earliest possible time to develop comprehensive pro-~ grams for collecting and analyzing the water-resources data that will be necessary for sound development. Careful detailed appraisal of our water resources and the establishment of an adequate water ac- counting system for our major sources of supply will materially assist in solving our present water-supply problems, and will pro- vide a basis for the prevention of future problems of increased magnitude. Capitalistic Common Sense EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ROBERT F. RICH OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. RICH. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following editorial from the Altoona Tribune of May 9, 1950: CaPITALISTIC Common SENSE So deeply have prejudice and class hatreds been sown in America in recent years by po- litical opportunists that too many people these days refuse to face common sense, are afraid, indeed, to consider it for fear that they may be victimized by clever propaganda. Adherents of big government, in their quest for political power in this country, have used a line borrowed from the Commu- nists for many years. That line is to pit the rich against the poor, the successful against the unsuccessful, and capital and manage- ment against labor. We in America have started paying the bill for that kind of rotten politics. The Alger Hiss-Whittaker Chambers case, the Bentley charges, the Budenz accusations, the Mc~ Carthy investigation may be traced back to this vicious departure from Americanism * * * this political strategy of creating issues to champion against the established business and very economic system of Amer- ica. The Government has been pushing an in- vestigation of monopoly in American busi- ness and industry. Mr. Ernest T. Weir, chair- man of the board of the National Steel Corp., denied to a House monopoly investigating committee the other day that monopoly ac- tually does exist within the industry. The mere fact of bigness has centered Gov- ernment action on the steel industry, as on others of the basic American businesses. Yet, it is illogical to assume that the steel industry could be small. By its very nature it must be big. A railroad never could be a small industry; by its very nature, it, too, must be big. What small-business man, or operator of any kind, could set up a steel mill? Blast furnaces, rolling mills cost mil- lions. What small-business man could set up a railroad? Both industries are vast. multiple owners * * * thousands of them * * * their stockholders. They make big business possible, and they alone make it big. There is, in a very real sense, the essence of democracy in our big industry. Of course, it has controlling geniuses, men of skill and initiative and vision to direct it. But its ownership is vested, with few exceptions, in the thousands who hold the stock, who buy the bonds, a majority of whom are just average Americans who want good invest- ment for small savings. Mr. Benjamin Fairless, president of United States Steel Corp., made one of these com- mon sense talks the other day. Prejudice on the part of many misled Americans may blind them to his wisdom. But, if they should think a moment, they must see it, as true Americans. Mr. Fairless himself comes under the “cap- italist” category. Yet, his father was a coal miner. Fairless worked his way through school, his father didn’t pay the way. He went to work on the Wheeling Railroad as a civil engineer, and he worked his way to the top the American way, the hard way, no politician to smooth his path, nobody to “pay his freight.” The Communists call him a “capitalist,” and they sneer when they say it. Does that make Mr. Fairless good, or bad? Does that detract from his words of wisdom? Here are some of them: “Our economic system is in deadlier peril today than ever before. Yet, I do not fear communism because every day proves its ut- ter failure. I do not fear fascism because it has killed the three great nations which adopted it. I do not fear outright socialism because in Europe, today, socialism itself is living on the dole, and America is the only country on earth that is able to foot the bill for it. “But when somebody in Washington starts telling me how much he loves free enterprise and how he proposes to save it from itself, I shake ‘in my very shoes. I wonder why it is that these self-appointed saviors of our national welfare always seem to miss the point. But they have APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The point is that our American system of free enterprise, competitive enterprise, is the only one left in the world that is not con- trolled by power-hungry politicians, and whether you call it the Square Deal, the New Deal, the Fair Deal or just plain Fed- eral regulation, the fact remains that once the dead hand of politics gets its convulsive grip on American business and industry, free competition will be strangled, and our eco- nomic system will be no different, and no more successful, than those noble experi- ments which are crumbling into dust in Europe.” Address by Senator Martin Before Presby- terian Chaplains’ Dinner EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN J. WILLIAMS OF DELAWARE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 11 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Rrecorp an address de- livered by the Senator from Pennsylvania (Mr. Marrin] at the Presbyterian chap- lains’ dinner, held at the Shoreham Hotel on May 9, 1950. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: ExcERPTS From ADDRESS OF UNITED SrTatrses SENATOR Enwarp MarTIN, OF PENNSYLVANIA, BEFORE THE PRESBYTERIAN CHAPLAINS’ DIN- NER OF THE MILITARY CHAPLAINS ASSOCIA- TION OF THE UNITED STATES AT THE SHOREHAM Horen, WaSHINGTON, D. C,, Turspay EVENING, May 9, 1950 America is a deeply religious Nation. We rejoice in the spiritual strength of our people, established on abiding faith in God and the teachings of the Holy Bible. , We are proud that in every corner of our land churches of every religious denomina- tion preach the word of God, free from all governmental regulation or restriction. In the early days of our history the deep religious convictions of the pioneers sus- tained and strengthened them in the face of grave dangers and terrible hardships. When trappers and traders crossed the mountains to establish homes in the wilder- ness and the plains of the West, they were accompanied by courageous men, dedicated to the service of God. Those heroic Americans carried with them Bibles, axes, and rifles, symbols of faith, truth, and righteousness; hard work and thrift; courage, self-reliance, and love of liberty. In the growth and development of the United States we have had times of trial and crisis. We have had financial depressions. We have had bloody conflict within our own borders. We have had wars to preserve American liberty from foreign aggression. We have experienced periods of reckless and extravagant living. We have had times when the spiritual side was at a low ebb because we placed too much emphasis on material gain. But, fortunately, from every period of crisis the great majority of our people have emerged strengthened in faith and in firm conviction that God rules in the affairs of men. The great majority did not forget the teachings of the Ten Commandments, the Golden Rule, and the Sermon on the Mount.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD One outstanding reason why North Amer= ica has made so much greater progress than South America was expressed by a student of history some years ago. He said that the early settlers of South America were seek~ ing gold while those who settled North America came in search of God. The United States will live and prosper so long as we continue the search for God in our daily lives, Americans are a peace-loving people. We have never engaged in a war of conquest or aggression. We know that war does not rightfully settle differences among men or nations. Nevertheless, we recognize that eternal vigilance is the price of liberty. We must be prepared always to defend American free- dom and independence against the threat of tyranny and enslavement. We have always fought to preserve those rights and liberties of the individual which we hold to be derived from the Creator of all mankind. The essence of American patriotism is will- ing sacrifice to sustain the rights, freedoms, privileges, and opportunities enumerated in the Declaration of Independence and given force and effect by the Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The strength of American military force is based on high morale. From early Colonial days our defense serv= ices have recognized the importance of reli- gion among our soldiers. The morale of the American Army depends greatly upon the spiritual attainments of the officers and men. It is developed through tolerance, self- denial, respect for the rights of others and devout love of God. Ministers who wear the uniform of the United States learn to work together in love and harmony. The relations between a real commander or a leader of a unit and his chaplain should be as close as those of members of the same family. The chaplain should be his con- stant advisor. When the commander is de- pressed by problems, hunger, losses, and de- feat, he can gain new strength from the spiritual advice and guidance of his chap- lain. Many heroic deeds are recorded in the his- tory of World War II. But none stands out with greater glory than the self-sacrifice of the four Army chaplains whose memory will be honored wherever Americans meet in the name of brotherhood. None of us can recall the heroism of these men of God without profound reverence and deep humility. Standing on the sinking deck of a tor- pedoed transport their thoughts were not for themselves but for others. In their glorious hours of surpreme trial and sacri- fice they offered their lives that others might live. Giving their life preservers to enlisted men they stood, hand in hand, with prayer in their hearts and on their lips for the safety of the survivors. Two were of the Protestant faith, one a Catholic priest, one a Jewish rabbi—all true servants of God and their fellow men. Each, in the manner of his own belief, prayed to the same God, the Creator of all mankind. Their honored memory calls upon all Amer- icans for greater faith in all religions and for deeper devotion to the sacred principles for which they gave their lives so heroically. In my own military experience I have known many tragic moments when differ- ences in form of worship faded into insig- nificance. ‘ I recall particularly an event of World War I which has made an unforgettable im- pression upon me. In the flerce fighting around Courmont, in France, the head- quarters of the One Hundred and Tenth In- fantry were blown up. There were many casualties. Three boys from western Penn- sylvania were among the fatally wounded— one a Catholic, one a Protestant, and the third a Jewish boy. In their dying moments they were min- istered to by two chaplains, one of the Catholic faith. the other a Protestant. No Hebrew chaplain was available but the Jewish boy was not neglected or overlooked. The prayer that ascended to heaven was said by the Protestant clergyman who also ad- ministered the last rites to the Catholic boy. The Catholic priest was at the side of the Protestant boy, bringing the comfort of hope and faith to a soldier who died for his coun- try. I cannot recall that day without realizing how trifling our worldly differences are when the soul of a hero goes to meet his God. America is again in a time of crisis. We live in a period of world-wide unrest and danger, It is a time when we cannot preach too forcefully the need for loyal adherence to the principles of religion, patriotism, and high moral standards without which no na- tion, however strong, can long survive. This is no time for men to prevail in poli- tics, business, labor, or the professions who have bitterness in their hearts or selfishness in their souls. We must break down the barriers that divide us. We must cleanse our land of in- tolerance, hate, and prejudice. We must strengthen the moral fiber of American citi- zenship. The United States must be kept strong and sound financially, physically, and spiritually. Yes; America is again in a time of crisis. We pray that we may never again be forced into the horror and the tragedy of war. But if the time should come when we must defend our liberty and independence, let us foster and inspire deeper understanding and wider acceptance of the sacred ideals that have made the United States the greatest nation of all times. Toward the achievement of that objective no group will take a more important part than the chaplains of our armed forces. New Formula Needed EXTENSION OF REMARKS fe) HON. SID SIMPSON OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. SIMPSON of Illinois. Mr. Speak- er, under unanimous consent I include in the Appendix of the CONGRESSIONAL Recorp an editorial of May 8 from the Quincy Herald-Whig, Quincy, IL: New FormMuta NgEepEp Roosevelt’s desperate hope that the Soviet Government would learn to cooperate as a member of the world organization, the United Nations, has not been fulfilled. Five years after San Francisco many agencies of the United Nations are in tight deadlocks. On the eve of the anniversary of the first con- ference Secretary Trygve Lie has set out in somber mood to explore the possibilities of making the wheels turn again, even mechan- ically. He hopes to wind up his journey in Moscow. It was the same motive that actuated his predecessor, Woodrow Wilson, and it became more and more dominant in Roosevelt's thinking as the conflict neared the end. Wilson accepted an unsatisfactory peace set- tlement in the conviction that the League of Nations provided the machinery for cor- recting the inequities of the treaties, After A3541 Yalta, especially, Roosevelt pinned all his hopes for a fair and amicable adjustment of Russian claims, which already deeply dis- turbed him, on the confidence he expected to grow out of membership in the United Nations. In his last days he was consumed with impatience to get the covenant signed and sealed before hostilities ceased. He kept telling those about him that there would be no peace unless the fighting coalition was bound irrevocably together in a working system for collective security before the war was won. It was a case of trying a formula different from the one that failed to work in Wilson’s time but different conditions are faced. In Germany the victors are taking a different line from that pursued after the first World War, but there is less assurance every day that it will be more successful. In both cases new elements change the picture. And old forces—expansionism and rooted suspi- cion in Russia, power and pride in Germany— are seldom given due weight in the assump- tion that the way to avoid previous errors is to adopt the contrary method. The United Nations succeeded the League because such an organization has to exist, but perhaps the best way to make it work is to forget what was done in San Francisco and what was not done in Geneva and strike out with an. entirely new formula. The Near East Armaments Situation EXTENSION OF REMARKS . HON. ANTHONY F. TAURIELLO OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. TAURIELLO. Mr. Speaker, the State Department’s reply of May 5 to the communication of the 51 represent- atives of May 3 to the Secretary of State, the Honorable Dean Acheson, is pain- fully disappointing. It is simply a repe- tition of the allegations of the Depart- ment of State during the last 3 months. Mr. Acheson’s assurance that “there has been no indication that the United Kingdom is diverting any undue pro- portion of its resources into military production” is, to put it mildly, mislead- ing. The amount and kind of arms which England is diverting to the Arabs may not represent an undue proportion of England’s resources, but it certainly is‘out of proportion to the Arabs’ ordi- nary needs for defense unless it intended for aggressive purposes. Mr. Acheson closes his eyes to the fact that there is an inconsistency between words and deeds; that there is a con- flict between the declared policy of the United States relative to peace in the Near East, and particularly between Is- rael and the Arab states, and the dispro- portionate shipment of arms by Eng- land to the Arab states, which is the very negation of the American policy., Pious words which are nullified by ac- tion are not only meaningless, they are even. cruel—cruel to the infant State of Israel, whose very life is being threat- ened by this overwhelming delivery of arms to the Arab states by England with the blessings of the Department of State. We call upon Mr. Acheson to establish a nermony-in-fact between words and eeds.
A3542 Accidents—Bruce Barton’s Column EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ALEXANDER WILEY OF WISCONSIN IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 11 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Rucorp a column by Bruce Barton, published in a recent issue of the Seat- tle Post Intelligencer, in which Mr. Bar- ton suggests that plenty of leeway should be allowed for accidents in mak- ing life plans. There being no objection, the column is orderd to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: ACCIDENTS A young man asks: “Should I have a plan for my life?” Yes. But allow plenty of leeway for acci- dents. When I graduated from college my picture was printed in a Chicago morning news~ paper: “Chicago Boy Makes Good.” The publisher of some little magazine in Chicago saw the picture, sent for me, and asked what I was going to be. I told him a professor of American history. “How do you know you want to be a pro- fessor?” he asked. “You have never been anywhere except school. You should take a year in business; then you would have other experience to compare with academic life, Come into my business for a year,” So I hcoked up with the printing press for a year, and never got unhooked. If that man had read the other Chicago newspaper that morning, my whole life would have been different. It was by just that sort of fluke that the career of Alfred P. Sloan, of General Motors, was changed. When he graduated from Massachusetts Institute of Technology he couldn't connect with any big firm; his first salary was a few dollars a week from a man named Hyatt, who had one ambition—to make a synthetic billiard ball. Hyatt never realized this dream. . Instead of billiard balls, he developed a process for manufacturing roller bearings, At first the business was small and almost insolvent. Sloan persuaded his father, a wholesale grocer in Brooklyn, to put $100,- 000, half of his life’s savings into it. The father’s other $100,000 was invested in good, sound securities. The good, sound securities all went sour. But the automobile came along and made Hyatt a big company almost overnight. Sloan and his father sold out their $100,000 interest to W. C. Durant, as a part of United Motors, for $15,000,000. Later, Durant merged United Motors into General Motors, and Sloan was merged with it. “So, you see, it was just a series of acci- dents,” he told me. By all means, have a plan. But keep your eye peeled for the accidents. They often are more important than the plan. One other suggestion. Don’t fall into the prevalent habit of leaning back and letting the big’ planners in Washington make the plans for you. They promise to employ you, and clothe and feed you. But when you sit down at their table the seating arrange- ment is always the same. They sit at the top of the table and are first served. You sit at ome foot, near the cashier. You get the check, EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOSEPH R. BRYSON OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. BRYSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REc- orp, I include the following article from the Clipsheet of the Board of Temper- ance of the Methodist Church: ALCOHOL, WASHINGTON, BLABBERMOUTHS, WaR Currently, a remarkable open letter to the President of the United States, signed by Billy Rose, is appearing in newspapers throughout the country which carry his col- umn, Pitching Horseshoes, Mr. Rose makes the statement that an editor of a national magazine with more than 15,000,000 readers (is there more than one such magazine?) not so long ago was present at a dinner party in Georgetown, a community of the city of Washington, and over a postprandial brandy was told by a high-ranking official just how many atom bombs the United States has, where they are stored, and the security measures effective in that area. “Fortunately,” remarks Mr. Rose, ‘the editor in question is a man of re- sponsibility and discretion.” He continues, however, that the recipient of this informa- tion is of the opinion that Washington is cur= rently “a-bursting with blabbermouths” who, at the drop of « Caiquiri. are perfectly ready to blurt out classiicd it: ormation to anyone who cares to listen, “including those who cash their pay checks in the First National Bank of Moscow.” Mr. Rose concludes his letter with a postscript that calls attention to the fact that the per capita consumption of liquor in Washington is greater than it is in any State of the Union. The damage which has been done to this country, and is now being done to this couniry, by alcohol consumption on the leadership level consti- tutes a peril difficult to overestimate. The Board of Temperance of the Methodist Church has repeatedly, and with the greatest earnestness in recent years, called attention to the fact that it is here the damage and danger of the alcohol custom, promoted under law for profit, imperils the very life of the United States and the future of civilization. Alcoholism is not the alcohol problem—it is only one phase of it, a relatively small phase of it. More important is the fact that the consumption of alcohol causes blabbermouths, that persons in places of responsibility are by it made irresponsible, that it results in wrong political and mili- tary decisions, and this at a time when even one wrong decision may mean. disaster, final and complete. The scientific principle involved is ex- pressed thus: Alcohol successively weakens and suspends the hierarchy of functions of the brain, and therefore of the mind, in the order from above downward; that is to say, in the in- verse order of their development in the in- dividual and in the race. For the emo-~ tional dispositions or capacities are a very ancient racial endowment and have their physiological seats in the basal ganglia, the lowest levels of the great brain, the part which alone is represented in the brains of the lower vertebrates. The higher in- tellectual faculties, on the other hand, are the latest acquired and are connected with the anatomically highest and last developed parts of the brain. ‘APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Alcohol and Blabbermouths in Washington This is the effect of alcohol which ts the all-important effect, and which has nothing to do with drunkenness, which, on the con- trary, is brought about by the em--uri+is4 of relatively small amounts of f.27 .4., 07a amounts as are commonly consumed at cock- tail parties and dinners, where men meet other men for casual social talk. It is a reasonable deduction from the known effect of alcohol as commonly con« sumed, that drinking may have been in large part responsible for the fundamental misconception at Yalta which has had such terrible resulis. With the international communistic conspiracy, brutal and bloody beyond description, shutting off vast areas of the world from the light of freedom, closing the Baltic Sea to the western nations, probing at the defense lines of free men with provoca- tive aggressions, the time has come to call upon all men in places of political or military responsibilty to adopt a policy of total ab« stinence from the use of alcohol as an in- herent obligation of their position, in order that the nation may be wisely led in this time of increasing peril, Tax Exemption of Cooperatives EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JAMES J. DELANEY OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. DELANEY. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following article from America, by Hon. Walter A. Lynch: COOPERATIVES AND TAX EXEMPTION Should cooperatives pay income taxes? This controversial question is posed for the thoughtful consideration of the readers of America. It is a vexing problem, and one to which this writer will not, in this article, at- tempt to give the answer. The affirmative and negative sides of the question were re- cently argued by more than two score of wit- nesses before the Committee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives. There are some who believe the question is too hot a political potato for the committee to handle in an election year. Others are of the opinion that no really comprehensive study and consideration of the problem by the committee was possible in the 2 days of public hearings. It is a fact that while wit- nesses were presenting their carefully pre- pared statements, there were at times only two or three members of the committee in attendance. This was due neither to a lack of interest on the part of the members nor to any discourtesy toward the witnesses, but ‘was caused solely by the fact that the days set for the hearings were unfortunately the 2 days when the opponents of a fair employ= ment practices law were using every parlia- mentary device to block that legislation. Quorum calls, teller votes, and yea-and-nay votes were so numerous that the committee members worked in relays in their endeavor to hear witnesses. Nevertheless, a group composed of well< organized businessmen seems determined to get action in this session. Its spokesmen point to the existing tax treatment of co- operatives as a loophole in the tax structure and of cooperatives as a revenue source which neither the President nor Secretary of the Treasury Snyder mentioned in the tax program submitted to the Congress.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HISTORY OF OUR CO-OPS In the consideration of the question it might be well to take a look at the role of the cooperative in the economic history of our country. It is beyond question that the profit system is the bone and sinew of the American way of life, It has made America great by opening up vast opportunity for the enterprise of individuals. As a result of the profit system, the country has developed a revenue structure based ~“ircinclly upon the taxation of income. ica o' WW percent of the revenues for the general operation of the Government, na- tional defense, and the commitments the Government has made abroad toward peace and world security come from the taxes imposed on the net incomes of individuals and corporations, Our economy and tax structure are lashed firmly to the principle of private enterprise for profit. Yet it has been the policy of the Government to encourage the establishment of cooperatives which claim to be nonprofit in character. An apparent conflict that could, perhaps, be safely ignored in 1940, when income taxes amounted to only $2,000,000,000, may require critical reappraisal in 1950, when taxes on corporate and indi- vidual profits are estimated at nearly $30,000,000,000. The cooperative business organization in American history dates back to 1752, when Benjamin Franklin joined with others in setting up a mutual fire-insurance society. Farmer cooperatives, however, originated as @ natural outgrowth of the profit system, for as farmers began to grow more cash crops they also began to try out cooperative meth-~ ods of selling to get better prices. In 1820, livestock raisers in Ohio made joint shipments to a terminal factory. Nearly a hundred years ago a cooperative cheese face tory and a creamery were established in New York State and a cooperative grain elevator was started in Wisconsin. By the turn of the century mutual fire- insurance companies, irrigation associations, cooperative creameries, grain elevators, and fruit-marketing associations were common- place. Between 1900 and 1920 the number of farm marketing co-ops almost doubled, as farmers learned to organize regional co- operative associations of local cooperatives, such as the Dairymen’s League Cooperative Federation of New York and the Farmers’ Union Livestock Commission Associations of Omaha and other midwestern cities. When farm prices broke in 1920 and 1921, farmers’ marketing cooperatives were uti- lized to control the supply and movement to market of various farm commodities, includ- ing wheat, cotton, and tobacco. The importance of this new function of the cooperative was recognized by the Federal Government in the Capper-Volstead Act, which resolved any doubt about the exemp- tion of co-ops from the provisions of the antitrust laws. Moreover, their exemption from Federal income taxes was broadened. At the same time there was a flood of State statutes on the organization of cooperatives. With the passage of the Agricultural Ad- justment Act in 19383, farm cooperatives re- turned to the problem of better merchandis- ing methods and left the job of controlling agricultural production to the Government. Between 1920 and 1930, when most of this legislation was enacted, the estimated total farmer co-op business ranged from $1,300,- 000,000 to $2,500,000,000, and the number of farmers’ marketing and purchasing associa- tions grew from approximately 7,000 to nearly 12,000. Today the number of such farmer associations is closer to 10,000, but the esti- mated volume of business is $8,600,000,000. Businessmen engaged in purchase, storage, and processing of farm products, and dealers in feed, farm implements and hardware, fertilizer and other farm necessities com- plain bitterly about competition from the farmer cooperatives. They point out that in 1930 the Federal corporate tax rate was only 12 percent, in e~~r-~iss™ with the 38- percent rate today. (\..%!.c -1 ‘aller corpora- tions pay a tax of 21 to 25 percent on an in- come of less than $25,000, they must pay 53 percent on earnings between $25,000 and $30,000.) Businessmen contend that Federal tax ex- emption is the explanation for the increase in the volume of cooperative business and for the rapid rise in co-op net worth. They charge that the tax savings provide capital funds for the expansion of co-op activities— for the purchase of refrigeration plants for the storage of fruits, creameries for the bottling of milk and cream and processing of butter and cheese, gins and warehouses for cotton, oil wells, cracking plants, pipe- lines and filling stations supplying fuel oil and gasoline to the farmers, and for many other ventures. The members and supporters of coopera- tives answer that cooperatives should pay no Federal income tax because they are founded and operated to do business without making any profit. The doubtful value of the Fed- eral tax exemption to farmer cooperatives is underscored by the -fact that only about 60 percent of them take the trouble to qualify for the exemption. They embrace the view, expressed by Secretary of Agriculture Bran~= nan, that “the existing tax status of farmer cooperatives is an aid to agriculture and is fully justified in the public interest.” Both sides admit that the heart of the issue is the practice of the Bureau of In- ternal Revenue of allowing all cooperatives— city consumer co-ops as well as farmer co- ops—to subtract from their total income the amount they pay out in patronage refunds, and to compute their tax on the remainder. In the case of consumers’ and purchasing cooperatives, the patronage refunds are treated as an overcharge return to customers. In the case of marketing cooperatives, the patronage refund 1s considered as additional cost of goods sold. Co-op supporters argue that a commerical business obligated to re- turn its profit to customers could also deduct such refunds in figuring out its taxable income. Competing businessmen retort that the patronage-refund ruling is abused by the is- suance of “scrip” dividend notes payable at some indefinite time in the future. They say that, since farmers are not actually re- funded the cash, the cooperative has a tax- free source of retained earnings for invest- ment and expansion that is driving its com-~ petitors to the wall. And, they add, “al- though these patronage dividends are sup- posed to be taxable income to the farmer in the year received, we'll bet that very few patronage refunds ever show up on a Form 1040-F.” The patience and wisdom of a Solomon may be required to resolve the conflicting views. Meanwhile, however, individual busi- nessmen are crying, “Don’t look to me for higher taxes. I am going out of business. I cannot compete with the tax-free co- operative.” “Nor to us,” says the president of a farm- implement company, “We are turning co- operative. We will work for a salary and not for profit.” Of course, a dividend credit to eliminate the double taxation of corporate income would solve the problem; but this is so ex- pensive to the revenues as to make the enactment of such remedial legislation in the immediate future extremely doubtful. Meanwhile, if modification of the existing tax treatment of cooperatives should be enacted, perhaps the next barefoot step along this thorny tax-exempt path would be an analysis of the Federal tax status of A3543 mutual savings banks and savings-loan as~ sociations. Interest is mounting in the need of an over-all revision of our tax structure. Per~ haps the question of whether cooperatives should pay income taxes should not be de- cided apart from a more general overhauling of sources of public revenue. General Counse! of NLRB Is Policy Maker as Well as Prosecutor EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. HUGH J. ADDONIZIO OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. ADDONIZIO. Mr. Speaker, there is startling evidence that the NLRB gen~ eral counsel is in a position not merely to prosecute, but also to interpret and apply the act. Take, for example, the Taft-Hartley Act provision against excessive union initiation fees. The act says that— In making such a finding the Board shall consider, among other relevant factors, the practices and customs of labor organizations in the particular industry and wages cur- rently paid to the employees affected. Notice that the act says “the Board shall consider,” not “the general counsel shall consider.” The act calls for collec- tive deliberation by the members of the Board. But the General Counsel alone can is- sue a complaint. The Board cannot issue one. If the general counsel believes that a given initiation fee is not exces- sive, nothing can be done. A clear case of policy determination vested in a prosecutor. The same thing is true with respect to the duty of unions and employers to bargain collectively. If the general counsel believes that a particular union or employer is excused from bargaining, or has fully satisfied its duty to bargain, he simply dismisses the case. The Board may believe that on the same state of facts the union or employer should bar- gain, or that it has not satisfied its ob- ligations under law. But there is noth- ing the Board can do. Even in election cases the Board can- not enforce its views without consent of its general counsel. Only the Board can issue a certifica- tion. But this is not a binding order. An employer may refuse to honor a cer- tification. A rival union may refuse to honor a certification. Then, the matter is entirely up to the general counsel. He may prosecute or he may not prosecute. If, for any reason he refuses to prosecute, the Board certifi- cation is useless. It is a mere scrap of paper. If an election is held during a strike and the strikers have been replaced, their eligibility to vote will depend on whether they went on strike against un~ fair labor practices by the employer, or for other reasons.
A3544 The Board members believe that they have no power to decide the cause of the strike unless the general counsel issues a complaint. This means the strikers can- not vote if the general counsel, for any reason, fails to issue a complaint. In this way action or inaction of the general counsel may determine the outcome of elections. What we have at the Labor Board to- day is no mere separation of the prose- cuting function. Great policy-making power, at the initial stages of labor dis- putes, is in the hands of a single officer. It is time we corrected this situation. I urge approval of plan 12, by voting “no” on the disapproving resolution. Present Divided Organization of NLRB Creates Confusion Among Field Person- nel and Overemphasizes Litigation EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. PETER W. RODINO, JR. OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. RODINO. Mr. Speaker, one weakness of the present set-up at the Labor Board that has not received suffi- cient attention is the dual and uncer- tain control of staff. Under the law the five-man Board has power to appoint personnel. Under the same law, the general counsel, an entirely separate and independent agency, has general supervision of the Board’s field and legal staffs. Over 90 percent of the work of the agency is actually performed and com- pleted in the field offices. Election cases are the final responsibility of the five- man Board, but they are largely han- dled by the field staffs whom the law places under the supervision of the in- dependent general counsel. A man can- not serve two masters. Shall he try to please the Board which has power to hire him, or the general counsel who has statutory authority to supervise him? This might not present a real problem where the two separate and independ- ent agencies work hand in glove. But the record demonstrates that this is not the case. Frequent and important dif- ferences of opinion and policy have arisen between the Board members on the one hand, and the general counsel on the other. Moreover, the statute, as written, contemplates their independ-~ ence of each other. Under the circum- stances it is impossible for an employee in a field office to know whose policies to follow. The result is insecurity, un- certainty, and inefficiency. Mr. Speaker, I know of no other Government agency whose employees are placed under a similar disability. Another activity which ought to be carried out under the supervision of a single policy maker, is the function of securing compliance with the law through informal procedures and agree- ments. Under existing law, this function is performed by employees who take their orders, not from the policy-making five-man Board, but from a single, in- dependent general counsel. Under the old Board field employees became pro- ficient in closing out cases through vol- untary compliance or agreement, and by securing compliance with Board orders after hearing, so as to make further liti- gation unnecessary. Now these same employees are under the supervision of a prosecutor. They take a prosecutor’s point of view. The public comes to re- gard them as prosecutors. This has had @ most unfortunate effect on field settle- ment efforts. The testimony of Board Member Styles before the Senate com- mittee is particularly pertinent on this point because he was until recently in charge of a field office. He testified: One of the great weaknesses of the general counsel concept has been the difficulty of administration at the regional level, because people wanted to litigate; people said, “This is a statute under which you prosecute. Now, get out there and prosecute.” The whole approach of the Board in the past, of all its regional offices, was “Let us get the public,” the employer, back in those days, “to comply with the law. Let us talk him into complying with it. Let us settle these cases if we can.” I noticed in my own regional office that, the minute the new act was passed, there was a tendency on the part of everyone, not con- fined only to the attorneys who ordinarily like to go to court, who, after all, spend years in law school anyhow to get into the courts, and what to do when they get there, but the field examiners themselves, the people who really do the work of the Board, to say, “Let us litigate.” They dropped their settlement efforts to alarge degree. (Senate hearings, p. 228.) Staff members are not to be too much criticised for this. In view of the fre- quent disagreements between the Board and the general counsel the staff is no longer in a position to tell the public just exactly what is agency policy. The confusion resulting from disagreement between equal but independent agency heads filters down to the staff, and on to the public. Under such a setup, field examiners will shrink from expressing themselves on agency policy. The in- evitable result is confusion, uncertainty, and needless litigation. If the only thing accomplished by plan 12 were the clarification of this situation and a restoration of an agency staff se- cure in the knowledge of who their boss is, its adoption would be eminently worth while. For this reason, among many others, I shall vote against the resolution of disapproval. Destructive Foreign Competition EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. JOSEPH R. BRYSON OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. BRYSON. Mr. Speaker, some weeks ago I called the attention of the House to the increasing threat to our APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD textile industry by the infiltration of tex- tiles from Japan. Since that time, I have been giving further thought and study to this problem, making investiga. tions through every possible channel, but, as yet, I have not compiled the data I have in hand. Manifestly, our textile industries with their high wages, the average textile worker in the United States receiving more for an hour’s work than a Japanese textile worker receives for a day’s work, cannot continue to compete under these circumstances. Of course I intend to continue my studies and seek to prevent this evil un- American practice by every possible means. I attach hereto a newspaper article pointing out that a committee of out- standing textile men are now in Japan and, of course, we shall be anxiously awaiting their report. Textine INDUSTRY WORRIED BY COMPETITION From ABROAD; PRODUCTION BEING Cut Back SLOW BUYING AT HOME EXPECTED TO IMPROVE IN FALL TRADE New Yors, May 6.—Threats of competition from abroad, slow buying at home, and cut- backs in production have returned to harass the textile industry. Trade sources say the slow buying and pro- duction curtailments are only temporary. They say they’re looking forward to a good fall. But foreign competition—that has them downright worried. The possible influx of foreign textiles into the United States troubles them more than a little. And in addition, dollar-shy world markets are finding it more convenient to puy from sterling-area industries, When cotton-textile exports from the United States drop, American mills must cut back production. When production is cur- tailed there are going to be unemployed tex- tile workers. How much unemployment will shrinking exports mean? Take an export figure of 1,000,000,000 yards of cotton cloth a year. That was the total in 1948. BILLION-YARD YEAR FINE The Cotton Textile Information Service figures that means work for 50,000 persons and an annual payroll of $104,000,000. A 1,000,000,000-yard year for exports is fine. Many in the industry consider '700,000,000 yards a satisfactory figure. . But cotton-textile exports are slipping. They dropped from a billion yards in 1948 to 980,000,000 yards last year. That isn’t too much of a drop. This year, however, figures for the first 2 months are at an annual rate of 420,000,000 yards. And that’s not good. The cotton men aren’t just sitting back twiddling their thumbs. They’re starting with a survey of the Japanese textile in- dustry, one of our large competitors in world markets before the war. A committee headed by Robert C. Jackson, of Charlotte, N. C, executive vice president of the American Cotton Manufacturers In- stitute, has gone to Japan for a joint survey with British textile men. Their purpose is to collect factual infor- mation for use as a possible foundation on which the industry can build a long-range policy for both domestic and world markets. Japanese osnaburgs are an example of the things they are concerned over. Osnaburgs are a course cotton cloth used extensively for bag linings. They also are sometimes used for upholstery and sportswear,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD REPORTS DISTURBING Osnaburgs have heen quiet in the domes- tic cotton textile market recently and mills specializing in that type of cloth have been disturbed by reports that substantial addi- tional quantities of Japanese osnaburgs are scheduled to arrive here to compete with the American product. Recently trade sources reported as much as 500,000 yards of Japanese osnaburgs had beew sold here at 1 cent a yard under the comparable domestic fabric. The domestic market for cotton textiles has been slow for some weeks. But most trade sources feel that the fourth quarter will be good. They do not expect a robust third quarter but they point out that nor- mally is a slack period of vacation slowdowns. At the minute folks just aren’t buying. Hand-to-mouth purchasing has returned to the retail and converter markets. The fabric-making mills have curtailed production by cutting back premium shifts—shifts on which overtime is paid. They prefer this to piling up inventories in slow times Many trade sources look on this type of ac- tion as healthy. They say mills are a little gun shy after a depressing experience a year ago. KEEP GOODS MOVING Rather than be left with a warehouse full of unsold goods they slow production a bit, confine their operation to filling orders they have in hand. And when buying starts again they'll be set to roll again full tilt. The slackness in recent weeks has been noticeable in woolens and worsteds as well as in cottons. But the wool men, too, feel it is a tempo- rary situation. One wool-trade spokesman termed it a great waiting period during which everyone is attempting to determine a level at which to stabilize. Keen competition for the consumer dollar has brought the slow buying at retail levels. This in turn has delayed orders for fall goods by the converter—-the garment maker. But comes fall, he adds. business should be excellent. One source even went so far as to forecast a scramble for delivery of fabrics. Meanwhile the Government is calling for bids on various types of cloth. Recent Gov- ernment orders for woolen and worsted goods amount to around 5,000,000 yards. And in the cotton field, the Army Quartermaster has asked for bids on a total of 5,670,000 yards of gray cotton duck. These orders probably will help several mills bridge a gap. Prices for civilian goods in the fall? Most textile men think there will be no significant change. They say they just don’t see how there can be with raw material and labor costs high and no likelihood of material changes in either category. Forzicn TexTites SEEN SOUTH CAROLINA PaY~ ROLL THREAT Union, May 9 (AP).—South Carolina’s economy is inescapably linked with the tex- tile industry, now harassed by a potential influx of goods from cheap-labor foreign countrics, a writer-lecturer on textiles said here today. Mrs. Mildred Barnwell Andrews, long iden- tified with the cotton and cotton-textile in- dustries, said erican textile exports have shrunk sharply and that a large quantity of Japanese osnaburgs sold cheaply on the American markets recently. Mrs. Andrews, who addressed the Union Ro- tary Club, said the loss of a billion-yard an~- nual market by American mills—exports were that much in 1948, but shrank drastically last year—can be translated into the equivalent of 50,000 jobs and an annual payroll of $104,- 000,000. . The American Cotton Manufacturers In- stitute, she added, believes United States tariff policy should provide proper safeguards to the American textile industry and its more than 600,000 employees. A joint Anglo~ American textile group now is in Japan on a fact-finding mission. Only in recent years have textile mulls been able to earn profits comparable with those of American industry as a whole, Mrs. Andrews declared. A large part of these earn- ings had been plowed back into moderniza- tion and research, she said. She cited State labor department statistics showing that South Carolina cotton-manu-~ facturing plants began 1950 with $358,901,< 038 capital investment, an increase of $110,- 081,988 over 1948. She said average employ- ment increased from 95,181 in 1937 to ap= proximately 125,000 in 1949. “You get a payroll in this State from the textile industry of approximately $284,000,- 000 a year (the 1949 figure, which reflected a recession in the industry) but which never-~ theless is an amazing increase from the $72,- 000,000 in 1987,” she said. “Just visualize the enormous purchasing power represented by the textile-mill employ- ment in South Carolina, and you get some idea of why continuous employment in the textile industry is important.” Senator McCarthy’s Charges EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YORK IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 11 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President, the Saturday Review of Literature, an emi- nent and respected periodical published in New York, recently ran an editorial entitled “Subversion in the Senate.” The editorial is an exercise in irony and is thought provoking. I ask unanimous consent of the Senate to insert it in the Appendix of the Rrcorp. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: SUBVERSION IN THE SENATE The editors of the Saturday Review have carefully studied the records of the con- gressional hearings into the charges against communism in the State Department. As a@ result we have reluctantly come to the inescapable conclusion that the chief par- ticipant must inevitably be a Communist. We refer to Senator McCartHy of Wiscon~ sin. This conclusion is based on a working definition of Communists and secret agents as used by Senator McCarTry. We are glad to present the documentary evidence: First, guilt by association. For 4 years Senator McCartuy has belonged to an or- ganization ef which a well-known member has been a prominent supporter of the pol- icies of the Soviet Union. Moreover, Sen- ator McCarrHy has actually worked full- time for that organization. We refer to the Congress of the United States, of which Viro Marcantonio, a consistent party liner, has been a Member since 1935. Second, guilt by smokescreen. Senator McCarrHy, inferentially and otherwise, has stated that the public anti-Communist ac- tivities of such persons as Dorothy Kenyon and Philip Jessup are ostensibly only (a cover-up for their real activities and sym~- A3345 pathies. The greater the apparent opposi= tion to communism, the greater the real af- filiation. This being the case, it is clear that Senator McCartHy’s violent outbursts are merely intended to conceal his real sympa- thies somewhere on the other extreme. What better smokescreen than to attack the State Department of the United States? Third, guilt by imitation. This is the most incriminating count of all, for it is ap- parent that Senator McCartHy has modeled his tactics after the notorious Russian purge trials. All the elements of justice in a@ democracy—due process of law, grand jury, presentation of direct evidence, the assump- tion that an individual is innocent until proved guilty—all these have been spurned by the Soviet as outworn bourgeois niceties. The Senator from Wisconsin has paid high honor to this Soviet conception of justice in his tactics on this matter; indeed, his use of slander and vilification under immunity bears an uncanny resemblance to the privi- leged position enjoyed by official character assassins of the Soviet Union. Fourth, service to the cause. The easiest way to black any reasoned, impartial, and effective examination of subversion is through a helter-skelter, wild-Jamboree ap- proach that obscures the real problem. In addition, the damage to America’s reputa~ tion abroad must be heartfelt satisfaction to those who have a large stake in the defama- tion of the United States. For this service to the cause the Senator is entitled to what= ever distinctions the Kremlin can bestow. Spending by Government EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. A. L. MILLER OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May £1, 1950 Mr. MILLER of Nebraska. Mr. Speak- er, in my several visits to my district, I repeatedly said that I would vote for every cut offered in the appropriation bill, and that I would vote against all attempts to increase the amounts. Mr. Speaker, the country is deeply dis- turbed about the spending of the Federal Government. They are disturbed about the 16 years of deficit spending under the Democrats. They realize their money is being polluted and the dollar buys less andless. They realize that inflation and increased taxes are two Frankenstein monsters that can destroy our economic system. Mr. Speaker, the committee has been considering the one package appropria- tion bill for 5 weeks. It is interesting to note that 45 amendments have been offered to increase items of expenditures and 35 of them came from the Demo- cratic side of the aisle. There were 36 amendments offered to reduce various items, and only 5 of them came from the Democratic side. The other 26 came from the Republican side, and they were rejected. We never did have more than five or six votes for reductions from the Democratic side of the House. That, Mr. Speaker, is the record to date. Your party has voted for continued deficit spending and high taxes. You did not vote for economy.
A3546 The amendments offered by Mr. TaBEr, of New York, and Mr. Jensen, of Iowa, should be adopted. They will mean a further reduction in the Federal Gov- ernment of about 300,000 people and will cut appropriations about $1,500,000,000. T voted for these amendments and I hope that they stay in the final bill. The administration is full of expensive plans and programs for leading the American people down the road to social- ism. The programs grow and multiply. They all cost money. It means more taxes, inflation, and deficit spending. The only way to stop deficit spending and balance the budget is to stop spend- ing. It is just as simple as that. The Government is no different than the peo- ple. We must stop spending money for things we might want but do not neces- sarily need. Mother’s Day EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HUGH D. SCOTT, JR. OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. HUGH D. SCOTT, JR. Mr. Speak- er, Sunday, May 14th, the second Sun- day in May, will be observed through- out the land as Mother’s Day. Each of us in his own way will bestow love and devotion upon the best mother who ever lived, our own, and in so doing give honor where honor is due. It will be a wonder- ful day indeed. . This beautiful custom of setting apart one day in each year to pay just tribute to our mothers should never be aban- doned or forgotten. We regard mother as the noblest, sweetest and best of all God’s creations and in appreciation of her love and devotion pause to pay espe- cial tribute to her this sacred day. The real origin of Mother’s Day dates back to the period immediately follow- ing the Civil War, when Mrs. Anna Reeves Jarvis, organized the mothers of her community in West Virginia. The avowed purpose at that time was the re- uniting of families and invitations were extended to Union and Confederate soldiers and their families to meet, re- establish friendships and pleasant asso- ciations. The results were so encourag- ing and successful as to instill in the Jarvis family a sincere desire to promote on a national scale the spirit of love and honor. Miss Anna Jarvis, a daughter of Mrs. Anna Reeves Jarvis, 2 woman of keen intellect, broad vision, high ideals and commanding personality, developed and promoted the idea of honoring the Mothers of America, both living and dead. It was through her persevering efforts over a long period of time that Mother’s Day has been officially recog= nized and proclaimed. Therefore, when paying tribute to our mothers, let us Spare a fine thought of appreciation for Miss Jarvis, whose efforts made this Special day possible. The Biggest Story EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mrs, ST. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the REcorp, I include the seventeenth article by Mr. Frank C. Waldrop on the infiltration of communism in our country: Biccest STORY (By Frank C. Waldrop) Communism, today, is an all-Russian power play. In every important country in the world there is now a tightly organized and carefully trained force of Russian agents whose sole aim and object is to carry out the purposes of Russian foreign policy. There is a very simple way to distinguish between these Communists and the local political groups in any country. In our own, for instance, we have a nhum-~ per of legally qualified political organiza- tions seeking to elect their candidates to public offices. The Communists here claim themselves, too, a political party with all the legal rights and powers of any other. But unlike any other group on these shores, the Commu- nists take oaths of allegiance to something they called the Marxist-Leninist line. That oath ties them to the Communists in France in Britain, in Germany—wherever other Communists may be—to fight and when need be, to die, for Stalin in Moscow. Such is the Red thread that tied Dr. Klaus Fuchs, the German who became a Briton, to persons as yet undisclosed in the United States of America, and so resulted in the atom bomb being stolen for the Kremlin. Such is the thread that binds the Harvard prize package, Alger Hiss, to the events of long ago and far away being reviewed here. When you know how all this began, you know with certainty why things happen now and what to do about them. And so it means something to us now that as soon as the Communists set up a govern- ment in Moscow in March 1918, they rebuilt the musical clock on the Spassky tower in the Kremlin so it would play not God Save the Czar, as of old, but the Internationale, world communism’s fighting song. Lev Davidovitch Bronstein, alias Leon ‘Trotsky, knew why. He was home after years of exile and busy at the right hand of Lenin, the organizer of the Soviets. In rapid order, Trotsky joined the Bol- sheviks, became head of the Soviet foreign Office, negotiated the peace of Brest-Litovsk ‘with Germany that was the Kaiser’s balance against United States entrance into Europe’s war of 1914-18. And then Trotsky became commissary for war, for he wanted to send Communist armies out against all the rest of the nations as soon as possible. He was rolling high and wide with a pri- vate railroad train, a special commissary out of which to dole judicious gifts to factions that would remember him. For it was al- ready obvious that among Communists as among all others, one boss follows another, sooner or later. Trotsky, as Lenin’s most spectacular leu- tenant, was running with all his hands and feet and his lightning brain, to be next when Lenin would go over the river. Trotsky was a really able soldier and he was a very clever plotter and deceiver. But APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Trotsky had one great weakness that turned out to be fatal. He was so vain that he could never see himself as others saw him. He took flattery to be faithful adoration. And he was so interested in forming the Communist International that was to breed revolution abroad he overlooked something at home. The consequences killed him. He had failed to take care against some- body who was not a Russian at all, who did not care for drinking tea from a glass or wiggling his toes while he talked airily about “historical necessity” or “dialectical materialism” or explained to friends abroad the regrettable incident of machine-gunning the streets of Petrograd to ‘keep revolu- tionary discipline.” No. Lenin died, and Petrograd, which had been St. Petersburg, now became Len- ingrad. And Trotsky, unfortunately, was out of town when the boys got together to see who would be next up. That was in 1924, It took time, but just the same on Jan- uary 20, 1929, the Gosudarstvennoye Poli- ticheskoye Upravleniye, which means “state political board,” and which we know as the GPU, issued the following order: “Considered, the case of citizen Trotsky, Lev Davidovitch, under article 58/10 of the eriminal code, on a charge of counterrevo- lutionary activity expressing itself in the organization of an illegal anti-Soviet party, whose activity has lately been directed to- ward provoking anti-Soviet activities and preparing for an armed struggle against the Soviet power. “Resolved, citizen Trotsky, Lev Davido- vitch, to be deported from the U. S. S. R.” The revolution was beginning to eat its own children. Curtailment of Postal Service EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YORE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 11 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Rrc- orp excerpts from a letter which I have received from a highly respected con- stituent, a close friend, and a leading surgeon in the city of New York, Dr. Richard Lewisohn, of 1155 Park Avenue, protesting against the curtailment of postal deliveries. The letter is typical of a large number of protests which I have received. I believe that it will in- terest the Members of the Senate. There being no objection, the excerpt from the letter was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: | I was delighted to see that you spoke against curtailment of postal deliveries in New York. I hope you will get strong sup- port from your colleagues in the Senate. It seems ludicrous that the richest city in the world should cut down on mail service. They have three deliveries in the residential sec- tion of London and four in the business sec- tion; one delivery a day seems a joke, like RFD. This is the first time in my life that 1 write to a Member of Congress. So please don’t disappoint me.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Dynamic Republicanicem EXTENSION OF REMARKS or OF NEW YORK IY THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. COUDERT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, it gives me ereat pleasure to include an inspiring and enlightening speech by the distin- guished gentleman from Connecticut [Mr. Loner]. I had the good fortune to hear this address delivered and felt that it was of sufficient importance to bring to the attention of the entire membership of the Congress, DYNAMIC REPUBLICANISM Ladies and gentleman, in Maxwell Ander- son’s play Valley Forge, George Washington says: “This liberty will look easy by and by when nobody dies for it.” Well, it is less than 5 years since Americans were fighting and dying for freedom and yet our freedom is today more seriously threatened than at any time in our history. We cannot take free- dom for granted. The great world conflict is still and most urgently a contest between freedom and slavery. In this battle what we do at home is inevitably related to our actions abroad. Indeed our ability to meet this somber challenge, to forge a less precari- ous peace will depend on what we do at home. It will depend in large part upon the survival of the two-party system. If we had more than two major parties our political system would prohably degenerate into a myriad of splinter parties reminiscent of Europe. We would in all likelihood have a minority government which would be far too weak to preserve political stability. On the other hand, if we had Jess than two parties, we would have a one-party system and this would completely nullify our Con- stitution, neutralize our Bill of Rights, and invalidate all our free institutions. Our checks and balances would be but a nos- talgic memory and there would be no separa- tion of powers since all power would be con< centrated in one partisan instrumentality. The two-party system is the greatest bul- wark of American freedom. And yet we have a growing body of in- dependent voters in America. More serious still, there were in the last presidential elec- tion some 45,000,000 people who failed to vote. The independent voter represents the bal. ance of power in our elections. To some ex- tent this can be a healthy condition. It can put the major parties on their mettle. It can engender a fine spirit of political com- petition out of which the country can bene- fit. It can result in electing the best candi- dates to public office. It can produce sound policies and progressive programs. But if independence of party is carried too far it can undermine our two-party system. The increased independence of the Ameri- can voter is in large part the fault of the parties themselves. It is due to an inability to make the parties attractive to a larger number of people. The Republican Party contains people of varying views, and this is natural since our party is a national party and since our country includes many races, creeds, occupations, and climates. Politics is in large part the art of conciliating vary- ing and differing groups of people, of bring- ing them in and keeping them in under one partisan roof. The Republican Party must convince a majority of the people who vote that it has a constructive plan of action which will respond more effectively to the needs and aspirations of all the people than the tired clichés, the reckless promises and the special interest appeals with which the Democrats have in recent years preyed upon the fears and apprehensions of the voters. But this electoral independence is also, it seems to me, due to the factthat many people do not associate themselves with the politi- cal life cf the Nation. It is que to the tend- ency of many independent voters to think that if the Republican Party should fall by the wayside, 1f 1t should succumb for lack of adherents, or because of an excess of inde- pendents, then that is “tough luck” for the Republicans. That is hard on the office-hold- ers and on the party workers. It is none of their affair. Yet it is, I fear, desperately true that the disappearance of the Renvb'can Party would affect them as much es 1. “outé affect the Republicans. It would affect the Democrats. It would deeply affect the lives of all Americans. The American people have & great stake in the survival of the Repub- lican Party. The independent voter depends for his independence upon the survival of the two-party system. Narrow partisanship is, of course, deplor- able. Partisanship which places party above patriotism, patronage above principle, and personalities above policies is highly repre- hensible. Yet the best way to discourage such sordid attitudes and such demagogic practices is not to retire to the sidelines in derisive independence but rather to plunge into the political melee and endeavor to in- fluence the party of one’s choice in the direc~ tion of the people’s real welfare. The best, the only way to be effective politically is through the medium of one of our two major parties. We cannot give a vigorous demon- stration that we believe enthusiastically in our kind of government unless an increasing number of Americans become increasingly active in polit:es. In creating a broader base of political par- ticipation it is vital that the young people of America should play a prominent part. Based upon a Census Bureau estimate of July 1949 there are some 24,000,000 people in this coun- try between the ages of 21 and 30. It is only by strong infusions of new blood that the Republican Party will survive as a vital and effective political force. The Republican Party is, in its original concept and by its best traditions, the party of youth, the party of new ideas, the party of individual freedom. We are the young Turks, the insurgents. We are the party of reform. Some Republicans contend that the reason for our lack of success at the polls is that the Republican Party has become infested with a point of view which has been labeled me- tooism. Others maintain that Republican defeats are due to a philosophy which has been described as reaction. The result of this pulling and hauling has been to create a spirit of division, defeatism, and defection which has prevented us from going forward as an integrated and dynamic team. It seems clear to me that if our choice is in- deed between copying the Democrats on the one hand and a die-hard horse-and-buggy philosophy on the other, then we are de- servedly doomed not only to defeat but to dis~ appearance. Happily for the American peo- ple, this is not our choice. That this is not our choice is underscored by the interesting fact that an increasing number of northern Democrats, anxious to appease the growing apprehension among the people of our coun- try, have been talking increasingly about the merits of the private-property free-enterprise system, about the need for economy in gov~- ernment, about our great tax burden and about a strong antiappeasement policy. In sober truth they are becoming me-too Demo- crats. Now there is no occasion for us to respond defensively to the personal abuse and name- calling of the Democrats, If they choose to wallow in the weasel words of recrimination A8547 and demagoguery then let them be hoist with their own political profanity. We must attack, We must take the offensive. We must fight the great kattles on the broad highways of Nation-wide debate and not in the side streets and hack alleys of Pendergast politics. There is no lack of momentous issues to be thrashed out during this election year. There are many grave public questions on which we can take a strong and vital stand without on the one hand betraying the time- lest prmeirles on which our party was feunceu cm cs the other her? etary a weak and ignominious * . .-* 7 oy would require us io rubber stamp every half- baked New Daal proposal. For stance, we should take a strong stand on civil-rights legislation. The Dernocrats are weak, ¢~c’cr~"2 and divided in this whole field, ~“. w° “© the Democrats have been arguing with each other and maneuver- ing for partisan advantage we have been acting in the best interests of all. We must continue this activity. It is right, it is just, and it is in the best Republican—Lin- colnian—tradition. On labor legislation we should floodlight the shocking hypocrisy of the Democrats. Tne Democrats have done great damage to the cause of labor by their determination to treat the welfare of the working men and women of America as a political football rather than as a matter involving the public interest. We should remind the voters that when the repeal of the Taft-Hartley law was brought to the floor of the House, out of 263 Democrats only 80 voted for repeal. We should recall that these same Democrats who voted against repeal camvaigned on the cynical slogan that they favored repeal. These are the self-styled .ciends of the com- mon man who referred to the Taft-Hartley law as a slave-labor law. And then we can point out that these same Democrats not only voted against repeal of the Taft-Hartley law but also voted against virtually all Re- publican~sponsored amendments which weuld lkeralize the law, eliminate its most serious defects, and accommodate it to changing circumstances. We can discuss the question of high taxes and point out the many hidden taxes which are depriving the people of this country of a large share of their earnings. It was Abra- ham Lincoln who said that a man is entitled to the fruits of his labor. While recognizing that our Government needs a large revenue at this time of crisis and change, we should point out that an early implementation of the Hoover Commission reports and recom- mendations can bring abou’ great economies. ‘We have a duty to do this in spite of the fact that the Hoover Commission reports and recommendations are not a partisan matter and because of the fact that there is a la~ mentable tendency in some administration bureaucrats to block a proper streamlining of our Government. Surely even those who want the Government to do so much must want it done without waste and with effi- ciency. We can point out that job security is more important than unemployment compensa- tion, however necessary that may be, and we can add that job security is fast disappear- ing not only because of the import of goods from iron-curtain countries but also be- cause of the absence of adequate incentives for equity investments. The grab-bag pol- icy of this administration deters our citizens from investing their savings and thus pro- viding new jobs. It has been estimated that the average job in America requires a $6,000 investment. It is a disservice to labor to discourage such investments. We can remind the people also that while the Democratic Party is talking loud and long about security, they are resorting to the very policies which undermine security. They are undermining it by a policy of deficit
A3548 spending which pumps into our national economy more money than the taxes can pay for and which, therefore, diminish the value of the dollar. This is inflation. In- deed, the American dollar has been cut 40 percent since before the war. This year we face a deficit of approximately $5,000,000,- 000, and this will further depreciate the value—the purchasing power—of our money. Here one might ask how much security for the average citizen 1s there in a system which requires that you pay your taxes in a dollar worth 100 cents, that you pay for your social security in a dollar worth 100 cents, that you pay for your old-age and survivors insurance benefits in a dollar worth 100 cents, that you pay for your pensions and retirement funds in a dollar worth 199 cents, and then when you are old you re- ceive payments in a dollar which, if present policies continue, may be worth only 15 cents? Is that security? How much security is there for the many millions of American citizens who are hving on fixed incomes, on endowment policies, and so on, when their Government is con- sistently eating away these modest incomes, not only by taxes but by cutting the value of the national currency? The Democratic administration in Wash- ington is attempting to bribe the people with the people’s money to vote for the Demo- cratic politicians. This 1s immoral; it is wrong; it is an issue. And there is also a clear-cut cleavage on sccial legislation. Here the Republican Party is not, in my opinion, faced with a dilemma. We should not turn our backs on social problems where they exist; but neither should we feel bound to embrace the solutions offered by the Democrats. We of the Republican Party have the vigor and the talent and the intellectual creativeness to produce better solutions. But the funda- mental and irreconcilable difference be- tween the point of view of the Democrats and our point of view is that for us social legislation represents an attempt to respond to a human need, while for the Democrats 1t is usually part of a plot to concentrate additional power in Washington. Such con- centration of power is, of course, entirely agreeable to the Communists since it en- ables them more easily to destroy the Amer- ican economy and, what is even more im- portant, cause a breakdown in the Ameri- can character. It was Herbert Hoover who pointed out recently that if we continue along this profligate path, private charities will cease to exist and the element of human compassion, which is so wonderfully a part of our whole culture, will have been sacrj- ficed on the altar of Government panaceas. It is precisely because the Government must be the servant of the people that it must be wise enough and strong enough to respond effectively to the problems of the day. The Government must be flexible and alert in order to function 1n areas where our private-property system does not reach. But it should only run the traffic signals; it should not operate the automobiles, It may regulate; it should be reluctant to own. This is a delicate field in which the Govern- ment must seek to protect the freedom of the individual without crushing him. And then we must also bear in mind that how- ever valid much so-called social legislation may be, the essential welfare of the American people depends upon the continuation and increase of the vital opportunities for em- ployment and effort which are inherent in our free society. When a government at- tempts to redistribute to its citizens more than the citizens can produce, inflation and eventual dictatorship are the inevitable result. These then are some of the great domestic issues with which we are faced. Now let me turn for a moment to foreign affairs, mindful of the fact that these mat- ters, involving as they do the grim issue of life and death, should be treated on what Senator VaNDENBERG has ¢..¢cpl.ctolv req ferred to as an unpartisan bis. Buv ce. us not forget either that there 1s an inevitable interdependence between what we do abroad and what we do at home. Moreover, our standard of living, our social improvements, our prosperity will dissolve if we should have war. And so, while this overriding issue which broods over all our doings should be met without regard to party advantage, it is, I venture to think, more important to be right than to be bipartisan. It so happens that I have been a non- partisan supporter of foreign-affairs legisla- tion ever since I have been in Congress. But I do not feel that because Iam a Republican, therefore I have no right to criticize or to disagree. After all, the Democrats are not of one mind on these matters. Indeed, Iam profoundly convinced that the American people are entitled to a second voice on these fateful questions. And I believe also that to attempt by cries of narticc rshin to denrive our people of these cr.. INS LL MA: Of such importance is to subvert the great pur- pose of our political system at a time of increasing national peril. If we Republicans akdicate our preroga- tives in the field of foreign affairs, America will soon become an island of liberty in a sea of slavery. While I am frequently in disagreement with members of both parties, a partisan attitude in this field 1s dangerously out of place. Accordingly, it is most unfortunate that our President has by his actions shown that he beheves more firmly, more in- stinctively, in partisanship as usual, than in bipartisanship at the water’s edge. President Truman has accused certain Republicans of partisanship in their attacks on this country’s foreign policy. He went further. He said these Republicans are making partisan attempts to sabotage the bipartisan foreign policy of the United States, and he is reported as saying that such efforts during the cold war are just as bad as trying to shoot our soldiers in the back in a hot war. I deplore smear tactics. I deplore smear tactics whether they are employed by Repub- licans or Democrats, and particularly when they are employed by our President. I think itis a dangerous business to attempt to assess the motives of others. Moreover, while I do not believe in innocence by association, neither do I believe in guilt by association. Because of this I do not feel responsible for the positions taken by my colleagues in the Congress, But I do believe that our Presi- dent must be held responsible for his own expressed attitudes, and I am convinced that such extravagant pronouncements at a time of international crisis and internal tension are not helpful to the cause of bipartisanship at the water’s edge. They will accentuate the very condition which our President de- cries with such violence. Indeed, such petulant outbursts as those recently made by our President exacerbate a situation which is already highly irritated. It is most unfortunate that our President should not use the prestige of his high office in efforts to bring divergent elements to- gether instead of driving them farther apart by intemperate statements. Perhaps I may respectfully venture the suggestion that he should attempt to emulate General Eisen- hower’s behavior in the lamentable armed services controversy: Pour oil on troubled waters. For surely the President himself is open to the accusation of partisanship when he singles out Republicans for attack and does not also attack the Democrats who have joined in the outcry against the foreign policy of this administration. If the Presi- dent felt called upon to attack the critics of the State Department, he should -have included members of his own party. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD But it would have been wiser had he not attacked at all. By such attacks he gives aid and comfort to the Communists at the same time that he accuses certain Repub- licans of being an asset to the Kremlin. Furthermore, our President is in a most vulnerable position when it comes to svch accusations. The cataclysmic results of ithe agreements made at Yalta, at Tehran, and at Potsdam are, I fear, of far more terrible con-~ sequence in the cold war in which we ore in- extiicably engaged than are the statements now being made by ceztain Members of Con- gress. Certainly these historic arrangements have been an incomparable asset to the Kremlin. And there have been other great assets to the Kremlin for which the Republicans can- not be held responsible. You will recall that it was contended a short time ago that the dictator of Russia was ‘‘good old Joe,” and that, we could “get along with him.” It was also thought, as Hanson Baldwin has pointed out in an interesting article in the Atlantic Monthly, that the Politburo had given up its policy of world conquest and was sincerely desirous of having friendly relations with capitalist governments. And there were other mistakes for which we could hardly be held responsible, such as that Russia’s entry into the war against Japan was essential to vic- tory and was necessary to save American lives. You will also remember the appre~ hension that Russia might make a separate peace with Germany and the effect that this had on our strategists. These mistaken judg- ments have been real assets to the Kremlin. I mention these grievous and costly errors not in order to recriminate over what has been done, but simply to set the record straight. A dispassionate inspection of the past can perhaps help us to rescue the future. Then, too, it is pertinent to recall that at the time that the Alger Hiss case first arose, the President made his celebrated red-herring statement. Subsequent events have amply demonstrated the dangerous inaccuracy as well as the political nature of this comment. Due in large part to the Alger Hiss case many people in our country are deeply appre- hensive regarding the Department of State. While this apprehension is natural, it is not sufficient reason for our President’s outbursts of anger. I had hoped that our President would sympathize with that sincere appre- hension and would himself take the necessary steps to increase confidence in our State De- partment. I had hoped that he would help the cause of unity by attempts at conciliation rather than assist the forces of division and agitation by recrimination and abuse. I now recognize that this was hoping against hope. Indeed, there was, I sup- pose, little basis for such hope. A cursory glimpse at the record will dis- close that in the campaign of 1948 the President described the Hightieth Congress as a “do-nothing” Congress. This was the Republican-controlled Congress which at the President’s request provided aid for Greece and Turkey, passed the Foreign Relief Act and the interim-aid bill, and created the Marshall plan. This was the Congress which, at the President’s request, passed the selec- tive service law and the measure providing for unification of the Armed Forces, and ap- proved the loan of $65,000,000 for the con- struction of the new UN headquarters. These are but a few of the many notable accomplishments of the Eightieth Congress. The taxpayers of America who are paying the bill don’t think that this massive legislative achievement is nothing. And if all this was nothing, then why did the President ask for it? Unfortunately, this Presidential attitude is at least consistent. In the campaign of 1948 the President refrained from attacking the 106 Democrats who voted for the Taft- Hartley law and leveled his attacks exclu-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD sively on Republicans who had voted the same way. He made it clear then that he does not believe that the welfare of the work- ing men and women of this country is en« titled to bipartisan consideration. I be-= lieve that it is. I believe that he has ren- dered a grave disservice to the cause of labor. But be that as it may, the President has from time to time made it devastatingly clear that he is not so much interested in unity in confronting the Communist aggressors as he is in making political capital out of the unfortunate and dangerous situation which now exists in the Congress, a situation which, it can be said in all fairness, he has done much to bring about. I may say that some of us Republicans anticipated this predicament and expressed our preoccupation last year during the New York senatorial campaign. Surely the Pres- ident must have known that the great hu- manitarian and.statesman, John Foster Dulles, an eminent Republican, could be of more value to him in the preservation of a nonpartisan attitude toward foreign affairs than could the distinguished Democratic Senator HrersperT LEHMan, whatever his attri- butes. Yet, the President went out of his way, as did other leaders of the Democrat Party, to give John Foster Dulles the knife in a cynical and reckless exhibition of vicious attacks and partisan prejudices rarely equaled in the political annals of our country. I am delighted that our President has recently appointed Mr. Dulles as a principal adviser to Secretary Acheson, and I am glad, also, that Mr. Dulles has accepted this ap- pointment. With this excellent selection, it was to be hoped that our President had at long last understood, and then, alas, just the other day our President chose to announce that he intends to campaign in the congressional elections this fall on foreign-policy issues. He said this at a meeting with members of the United States Commission to the United Nations. This was not only in very bad taste, since politics is supposed to have no place in international discussions, but his statement also produced the impression that he was criticizing the entire Republican Party, in- cluding those who have supported the for- eign policy of the administration. As David Lawrence pointed out, the President made no differentiation between those Republicans who support the bipartisan concept and those who oppose it. Accordingly, says David Lawrence, he has given cause for the as- sumption that, no matter what support an individual Republican gives to the adminis- tration’s foreign policy, the leader of the Democratic Party in the White House will re- fuse “to recognize such service in the only place where restraint has been urged, name- ly, in political contests.” It is also to be regretted that Mr. Averell Harriman, who, as Ambassador at Large, is our diplomat for the European recovery pro- gram—a creation of the much-maligned Eightieth Congress—should deliver himself of a speech as partisan as that which he made a week ago in New York. Such an utterance seems to me ill-timed and unwise. Handsome is as handsome does. Bipar- tisanship must, by definition, be a two-way street. The foreign policy of our country is, under the Constitution, primarily the re- sponsibility of the Chief Executive. The President must take the lead in creating a climate of unity. Perhaps, clever politi- cian that he is, he feels that since the Dewey unity campaign failed in 1948 he will have no part ofit. Perhaps his profound partisan predispositions incapacitate him for non- partisan attitude. I do not know. But it does seem clear that, because of his partisan indiscretions, the President has made it diffi- cult for himself to call upon the magnanim- ity of those Republicans who have been working for a nonpartisan approach to these XCVI—App.——224 great and challenging c‘ic~*‘cns while he descends to the lower levi =v. pt oi. com- bat to thrash out these urgent matters in a@ partisan, knock-down, drag-out, no-holds- barred, brass-knuckle political brawl. In the hope that he would see the light, I have remained silent while the President has made vociferous statements characterized by vindictiveness rather than by a lofty desire to reach useful solutions. I feel that the time has come for me to speak and I deeply regret the necessity to speak in these terms. But in sober truth the time is out of joint, and we live in the midst of resiless events which surpass us all and which are no re- specters of persons. In reply to a shallow suggestion recently advanced by the senior Senator from Con- necticut as a nostrum against war, Secretary Acheson said, and he said it well, that what Wwe need in the cold war is steady nerves and firm resolve. Surely we are also entitled to expect some poise and some vision from the President of the United States. Total diplo- macy must ultimately depend upon the united effort of the American people. It is a@ primary responsibility of the President so to conduct himself as to help in creating this unity. While I do not always agree with the Secretary of State, for my part I shall con- tinue a nonpartisan attitude in an effort to help achieve a policy which will enable us to win the cold war. For if we do not win the cold war, we shall have a war in which the penalty may be slavery or death. I continue to harbor the fervent and prayerful hope that our President will con- sider the dangers to this Republic ahead of the political campaign of 1950. For I need hardly stress the remorseless fact that we are in mortal danger not only in Europe but in Asia. And while, in gen- eral, I have gone along with the President’s recommendations regarding the European area, Iam convinced that in Asia the admin- istration has been engaged largely in at- tempts to justify its errors instead of to correct them. The Secretary of State, in my opinion, is most unconvincing on the Asiatic question. And, whereas in Europe we are bringing aid, in Asia we should, according to him, rely mainly on the defenseless anger of the Chi- nese to liberate themselves by the spread of Titoism. Yet at this very moment we have it within our power to help to safeguard southeast Asia—to help to liberate the peo- ple in China—by helping the anti-Commu- nist forces on Formosa. It has been reliably estimated that an expenditure of two or three hundred million dollars could safeguard this island from Communist invasion. I recom- mend, not intervention, not the American Army, Navy, or Air Force, but aid on the Greek pattern. To date no satisfactory reasons have reached me why this should not be done. ‘We cannot base a successful foreign policy on a doctrine which calls for hunting with the hounds in Europe while we run with the hare in Asia. The Republican Party must speak out on these and on all other matters involving the national interest. The present administration has grown old and tired in office. While mouthing hypo- critical incantations to freedom and liberal. ism and human rights, they have become the party of authority, of reaction, and of regi- mentation. It is in the interest of all the people that the Democrats should be defeated for public office next November. Abraham Lincoln caid: “Revolutionize through the ballot box, and restore the Gov- ernment once more to the affections and hearts of men by making it express, as it was intended to do, the highest spirit of justice and liberty.” Dynamic republicanism is needed to ac- complish this wholly desirable end. We Re- publicans can take heart from the sure A3549 knowledge that our opportunities for use- ful cervice are equal to cur unprecedented responsibilities. Ladies and gentlemen, this is the challenge to the young people of America; this is the challenge to the Republican Party. This is the challenge to America. Tax Tricks—Millville Republican Com- ments on Congressman Hand’s Recent Statement on Hidden Taxes Imposed on Low-Income Groups EXTENSION OF REMARES oF KON. T. MILLET HAND OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. HAND. Mr. Speaker, the Mill- ville Republican recently commented on my statement concerning indirect and hidden taxes, and I am including their editorial in the Recorp. I do so because of my conviction that we will never get away from extravagance, deficit financ- ing, and high taxes until the average American family realizes that no matter how small their income is, they are pay- ing their full share of the bill. The editorial follows: “If more Americans realized how much they pay in taxes—direct and hidden—each year, their clamor would force real economy in Government.” That is the opinion of Congressman Hann. A lot of people don’t think they pay taxes, or at least very little, simply because they do not own their homes or because they pay only a meager or no income tax. Con- gressman Hawn calls this “the greatest fal- lacy of modern times.” He would like to make every citizen in this congressional dis- trict aware of how they are being victimized by tax trickery. The Congressman in a recent public ad- dress cited the study of the American Tax- payers Association. This showed in actual case studies that a man earning $960 a year paid $123.08 annually in hidden taxes; a man earning $1,800 paid $243; and & man with $2,400 income paid $314.76 in hidden taxes, The association’s survey traced various products from the first step to the point of sale. There are 78 different taxes on a quart of milk, 151 on a loaf of bread, 100 on an egg, 125 on a woman’s cotton dress, 118 on a man’s suit of clothes, 154 on a cake of soap, and 201 taxes on a gallon Of gaso- line. Hidden taxes, according to the study, take $10 of every $380 of rent, nearly $7 a year on every telephone, one-third of all normal day-to-day living expenses. On a $7.85 cotton dress there are $2.20 in hidden taxes. An automobile that costs $1,600 to $2,000 is encumbered with 206 taxes amounting to from $355 to $466. A study made on a woman’s hat showed that it car- Yied 64 Federal taxes, 43 State taxes, and 41 local taxes. Congressman Hann contends “until the majority of Americans fully realize the huge slice that taxes take from their annual in- comes, until they realize that no one escapes hidden taxes, there can be but little hope for genuine economy in Government. It is easy to hide taxes on the things everyone tuys in order to give the public all the sery- ices and things that so many people think they get for nothing from the Government.”
A3550 President Truman’s Speech at Seneca, Nebr., on May 8, 1950 EXTENSION OF REMARKS EON. EUGENE D. O’SULLIVAN OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. O’SULLIVAN. Mr. Speaker, the Presidential train, proceeding westward on May 8, 1950, stopped for a brief time at Seneca, Nebr., and was greeted by a cheering crowd who were privileged to hear the President make the following remarks: I didn’t think there would be very many people here this late in the evening. I am surprised and really appreciate your greeting me. I appreciate it more than I can tell you. Since yesterday afternoon, I have traveled halfway across the country. I have met and talked with a great many people. There is no better way for a President to find out, what people are thinking about, and what they think of the great problems of today than to come out here and exchange ideas with you. Tonight I want to talk with you briefly about the greatest problem we have today. That problem is how to obtain a world peace. When you stop to think about it, there is nothing more important to us than that. This is the fifth anniversary of VE-day. In the last 5 years we have learned that the road to peace is a most difficult and expen- sive one. Eventually we will get the kind of world peace we are working for. It will come when the great majority of the people in the world have learned that the kind of de- mocracy we have in the United States offers more to the average citizen than any other system of government. Some people forget that what we do here at home has a direct bearing on whether there will be peace in the world or not. Peace depends on our staying strong, and re- maining prosperous, and making constant improvements in our democracy. That is why we need to see that business and indus- try continue to grow. That is why it is so important for us to press forward with better housing, better health, better schools for all our owg people. That is why it is so im~ portant that we have strong and prosperous farms. I am working for these goals because I believe that they will not only strengthen this country, but will provide the best means for achieving world peace. I am more than happy that you came out here tonight, and I am more than happy that I stayed up to come out here and talk to you tonight. I started out on this trip to let you know that I am still working for the same goals, and trying to do the same things for the welfare of the country that I was when I was out here asking you for votes. I think that we could accomplish the things that we really want to accomplish if we work hard enough to get them done. I tried to prove that to you in 1948. I think I did. We still have a great many things that need to be done in this country, and in the world. Iam going around to Grand Coulee Dam, and out to Wyoming, Montana, and North Dakota, Minnesota, and Wisconsin, and am going to finally wind up in Chicago; and when we get through, I think the people of the United States will understand that my position on the great issues which face this country and the world has not changed, that TI am still working for the same goals, and I am doing my best to make this Government @ government of all the people, that I am doing my best to attain world peace, a peace that will last and that is to the interests of all concerned. I appreciate most highly your coming out here tonight, and I thank you very much for your kindness. The Railroad Strike EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN W. BRICKER OF OHIO IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 11 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. BRICKER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there may be printed in the Appendix of the Record a series of telegrams which I have received from industries and businesses in my home State, showing the very serious unemployment situation now existing and which will become more serious as the result of the present railroad strike. There being no objection, the tele- grams were ordered to be printed in the Recor», as follows: MANSFIELD, On10, May 11, 1950. Senator BricKER, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Mansfield is materially effected as a re- sult of train stoppage on Pennsylvania Rail- road, If your office can be helpful we solicit your cooperation. MANSFIELD CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. WELLSVILLE, O10, May 10, 1950. Hon. Jouxn W. BRIcKER, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Rail strike has paralyzed our operations affecting 700 employees as well as our cus- tomers since we are served only by Penn- sylvania Railroad. Please use your best ef- forts to terminate this interruption. Strertine Curna Co. STEUBENVILLE, Onto, May 10, 1950. Hon, JoHN W. BRICKER, Senate Office Building: Rail strike if continued will necessitate _ complete lay-off of all personnel. H. W. Hewnines, President, CHICAGO WaLL PaPER Co. Warren, Onro, May 10, 1950. Hon. JoHN W. BRICKER, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.? The strike on the Pennsylvania Railroad will shortly shut down our plant. After a steel strike and a coal strike this railroad strike is ruinous. We respectfully urge you to use your good office toward an early set- tlement. J.N. Kerr, President, THE OHIO CorRUGATING Co. CIRCLEVILLE, OHIO, May 10, 1950. Hon. JouHn W. Bricks, Washington, D. C.: As a patron located on the Pennsylvania Railroad at Circleville, Ohio, the trailroad trainmen strike starting 6:00 a. m. this morning will close our plant completely, de- priving our customers of approximately 30 cars animal and poultry feed daily, badly needed for the production of poultry, eggs, meat and milk. Also approximately 200 men will be laid off. We urge you to take all possible action to effect settlement. Joun W, EsHeLmMan & Sons, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD CoLumBus OHIO, May 10, 1950. Hon, Joun W. BrIcKER, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Strike of firemen and engineers already crippling and will soon result in complete shutdown of this plant affecting 1,500 em- ployees. Request that you use every means at your disposal to terminate this strike at once, Buckeye STEEL CasTINGs Co., F. H. Bonnet, President. ROSEVILLE, OHIO, May 10, 1950. Hon. Joun W. Bricker, Senate Office Buulding, Washington, D. C.: Your support solicited to settle railroad strike. Business suffering. RoBINSON RANSBOTTOM PoTTERY CoO. ZANESVILLE, OHIO, May 10, 1950, Hon. JoHNn W. BRICKER, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Appreciate your best efforts for early set- tlement of present railroad fireman strike. DRESDEN PaPER MILLS Co. CoLuMBUtUs, OHI0, May 10, 1950. Senator Joun W. Bricker, Senate Office Burlding, Washington, D. C.: Today’s trainmen strike paralyzing cer- tain of our railroads promises a chaotic condition within this territory and to our business. It is ridiculous that our Govern- ment would permit such disregard of pub- lic welfare and we must ask that you exert every possible effort to have this situation corrected without delay. We appreciate your position but we know only you as peo- ple to whom we can call upon. If there is anything we can do in any other fashion, won’t you wire us what to do in order to end this unnecessary interruption to a busi- ness that is already staggering. ‘THE Baker Woop PRESERVING Co., R. M. HaMittron, Vice President, East PALESTINE, OHIO, May 10, 1950. Senator Jonn W. Brickrr, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Our plant with 100 employees is now shut down indefinitely for the duration of the strike in effect on the Pennsylvania Rail- road. This will throw 100 people out of work and on unemployment compensation, We trust that you will use your best efforts to bring this strike to a conclusion. ADAMSON Co., INC., D. B. GILLiEs, President, WaYNESBURG, Oxtl0, May 10, 1950. Hon. Jomn Brickzr, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Railroad firemen’s strike and resulting shutdown of Pennsylvania Railroad west of Harrisburg is serious threat to continued operations of this company and to the local public interest in the continued industrial operations on which the people of this com- munity are dependent. The executives of this company point out that industry-wide labor monopolies are permitted under present Federal laws to take action incompatible with public interest and believe they should be restrained and regulated by Federal law as industrial monopolies, including the rail- road, long have been. WH8ITACRE GREER FIREPROOFING Co. D. D. Wrrracre. Wesr Larayverre, OH10, May 10, 1950. Senator Joan Bricker, Washington, D. C.: What can you do to cancel this railroad strike? We can't even receive mail regularly.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD More than a couple of days of this will cause severe losses to this company because our competitors are not affected. THE JONES METAL Propucts Co., E. F. MULLIGAN, CANTON, OHIO, May 10, 1950. Hon. Joun W. BRIcKER, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Pennsylvania Railroad strike crippling eco. nomic life of our community. What imme- diate action can you take in Washington to end strike? CaNTON CHAMBER OF CoMMERCE, G. R. HOSTETLER, President. NEWCOMERSTOWN, OHIO, May 10,1950. Hon, JoHN Bricks, United States Senate, Washington D.C.: The refusal of the railroad unions to abide by the recommendations of fact-finding boards is a serious threat to the economy of the Nation. We strongly protest the utter disregard of the public. The inaction of the Tiuman administration is beyond compre- hension. HELLER Bros. Co. oF OHIO, CZORGE H. Hoparp, President. SaLeEM, OHIO, May 10,1950. Hon. Jonn W. Bricker, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Continuation of rail strike will force com- plete shutdown of this plant with 800 persons employed within 5 days and result in shut- down of our two affihated plants with 1,300 employees at Ford City, Pa. and Marys- ville, Ohio, immediately thereafter. We earnestly request your influence in obtaining immediate settlement of the rail dispute. Tur Natronat SANITARY Co., Lovis Prosst, Vice President. CaNTON, OHI0, May 10, 1950. Hon. JOHN BRICKER, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C. As shippers of glazed tile face and paving brick being used in essential construction in-~ cluding schools, hospitals, and public utili- ties, we urge all possible speed in early con- clusion of rail strike and without further featherbedding. A continuation of strike means loss of production to us and of wages to our employees. Merropouitan Brics, INC., D. J. RENKERT, President. PrrrsBuRGH, Pa., May 10, 1950. Hon. JoHN W. BRICKER, Senate Office Butiding, Washington, D. C.: The railroad strike is seriously affecting operations at our East Palestine, Waynes- burg, and Magnolia, Ohio, plants. We ask your good offices and efforts in restoring vital rail service to our country at the earliest possible hour. NATIONAL FIREPROOFING CoRP., R, A. SHIPLEY, President. CLEVELAND, O10, May 10, 1950. Hon. JoHN W. Bricker, Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.: Eleven hours of railroad strike conditions resulting from unreasonable demands on part of one small group of workers demon- strate clearly paralyzing effects upon our na- tional commerce. Respectfully urge govern- metal action to stop this hindrance which stands in way of normal conduct of business and spread through the welfare of all. F. R. Hysenn, General Traffic Manager, Glidden Co. WILMINGTON, OHIO, May 10, 1950. Hon. Jouw W. Bricker, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Current railroad strike imposing great hardship on our business. It appears to be without any just reason and we respectfully ask that you use your best efforts in urging termination. THe Irwin Avuczer Bit Co. CAMBRIDGE, OHIO, May 10, 1950. Hon. JouHn W. Brickur, Senate Office Buzrlding, Washington, D. C.: We are greatly handicapped here due to lack of facilities of Pennsylvania Railroad caused by strike. Anything you can do to get railroads working again will be appre- ciated, THE CAMERIDGE Guiass Co. WELLSVILLE, OHIO, May 10, 1950. Joun W. Brickner, Senator, Washington, D. C.: Honorable Sir present railroad strike caus- ing undue hardship to ourselves and cus- tomers. Why docs the public have to ke continually plagued with these hardships? Please use your efforts to get an early settle- ment. WELLSVILLE CHINA Co. ToLEpo, OHI0, May 10, 1950. Senator JoHN W. Bricker, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: On behalf of the many business and indus- trial establishments who are highly depend- ent upon New York Central, Pennsylvania, and other rail service curtailed by strike of Brotherhood of Firemen and Enginemen. The Toledo Chamber of Commerce urges you to extend every effort to seek end of this stoppage. ‘ Wayne E. Karena, Executive Manager, TOLEDO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, MANSFIELD, OnI0, May 10, 1950. Hon. Joun W. Brick=r, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.; Our company is located on side track of Pennsylvania Railroad. The present strike on this railroad has greatly inconvenienced delivery of outgoing production of much needed building materials, baths, lavatories, and sinks. If continued for 1 week it will be necessary to lay off approximately 600 em- ployees, The issues as we understand them are so fantastic that we urge that steps be taken immediately in the public interest to bring about the operation of railroads with- out penalizing the carriers. THE HUMPHREYS MANUFACTURING CO., M. A. Downs, Vice President. CoLuMBUS, OHIO, May 10, 1950. Hon. JoHn W. BRICKER, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Must have early settlement. Rail strike crippling business and will cause untold suf. fering of millions by action of only a few. Use all power to settle without delay. R. J. JOYCE, Chairman, Car Efficiency Committee, Ohio Valley: Transportation Ad-= visory Board and General Traffie Manager, the Central Ohio Paper Co. A3551 CLEVELAND, OHIO, May 10, 1950. Hon. Joun W. EBricwer, Senate Office Building, Washington, D, C.: Imperative you do everything possible to expedite end of railroad firemen’s strike seri~ ously affecting our mine operation in Ohio. CHESAPEAKE CoAL Co., Epwarp R. Sweabd, President. CanTON, OHIO, May 10, 1950. Hon, JoHnN W. Bricser, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Every effort should be made to terminate existing rail strike which 1s discriminatory between certain areas and railroads and is seriously affecting us as well as other ship-~ pers and receivers in this area. At present we have no passenger or express service. Mail is being seriously delayed. Freight service impaired. Every effort should be made to- ward an early settlement. We urge your sup- port for prompt action. HOovrer Co., J. F. HaTttTersLey, Executive Vice President. ROSIVILLE, OHIO, May 10, 1950. Hon. Jounw W. BRICKER, United States Senate, Washington, D. C.: Present rail strike paralyzing manufactur. ing business this district also delaying recon- struction of our pottery plant destroyed by fire recently. Please take necessary steps to relieve this serious situation. THE NeLsON McCoy Pottery Co. — PorTSMOUTH, OHIO, May 10, 1950. J. W. Bricker, Senator, Washington, D. C.: Strongly urge you use all available effort to have President Truman as well as Senate and Congress take action to immediately end rail strike caused by striking locomotive fire~ men whose demands have no merit as evi-+ denced by reports of Presidential Fact Find- ing Boards dating from 1946. J. H. Cross. Cotumsus, OHIO, May 10, 1950. Senator Jonnw W. Bricker, Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.: Today’s trainmen strike paralyzing certain of our railroads promises a chaotic condition within this territory and to our business. It is ridiculous that our Government would permit such disregard of public welfare and we must ask that you exert every possible effort to have this situation corrected with- out delay. We appreciate your position but we know only you as people to whom we can call upon. If there is anything we can do in any other fashion, won’t you wire us what to do in order to end this unnecessary interruption to a business that is already staggering. D B. Frampton, President, D. B. Frampton & Co. MASSILLON, OHIO, May 11, 1950. Hon. Jonn W. Bricker, Senate Office Building: Pennsylvania strike causing delay and pro= hibitive expense to our company; nonstrik- ing railroads inadequate; urge immediate action your part, SUPERIOR PROVISION Co. Coiumsvs, Onto, May 11, 1950. Hon. J. W. Bricxsr, United States Senate: Immediate action should be taken to ter= minate railroad strike at once, otherwise our
A3552 plant, along with many others, will close down completely. THE JAEGER MACHINE Co., Ray McLzan, President. New LExinctron, OnIo, May 11, 1950. Senator Bricker: Railroad strike already jeopardizing our business. Evans REAMER & MACHINE Co., W. J. BLAZER. New LExIncToNn, OHIO, May 11, 1950. Hon. JOHN W. BRICKER: Imperative railroad strike end at once, our utility customers need our coal. J. T. Coat Co, Whither Are We Tending? EXTFNSION OF REMARKS © HON. PAUL W. SHAFER OF MICHIGAN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. SHAFER. Mr. Speaker, with the passage Wednesday by the House of Rep- resentatives of the greatest peacetime appropriation bill in history—to pay the cost of government—I am reminded of the ancient political cliché which has the speech maker asking; “Whither are we tending?” In ordinary English, this means: Where do we go from here? The question, at this time, is pertinent. Just where is this Nation headed? A truth- ful answer is vital now, as never before, to the welfare of the American people; if not, indeed, to the survival of the Republic. I shall attempt here to provide that truthful answer, at least insofar as it is possible for anyone to doso. In order to simplify the answer, and thus make myself clear from the outset, I shall have to begin with a few quotations. If you will listen closely, I think you will find them far from tedious. In his first interview ever given the western press, Nicolai Lenin, chief archi- tect and first leader of Russian com- munism, as we know it today, declared back in 1923 that: Three*steps block the progress of world communism from its present state to its ultimate objective. The steps are, first, to nullify the strength of the British Navy, through internal polit- ical action in the British Empire; second, to nullify the power of the Catholic Church by a world-wide campaign against religion; and third, to dissipate the savings of the American working class by inducing the United States to spend itself into the status of a third-class power, In this interview Lenin predicted that the three objectives, to bring about the ultimate triumph of world communism, would be reached in the span of a single generation. In his book entitled “The Economic Consequences of the Peace,” the British economist, J. M, Keynes, had this to say: Lenin is said to have declared that the best way to destroy the capitalist system was to debauch the currency. By a continu- ing process of inflation, governments can confiscate, secretly and quite unobserved, an important part of the wealth of their citi- gens. By this method they cannot only confiscate, but can confiscate arbitrarily; and while the process impoverishes many, it actually enriches some. The sight of this arbitrary rearrangement of riches strikes not only at security, but at confidence in the equity of the existing dis- tribution of wealth. Those to whom the system brings windfalls, beyond their de- serts and even beyond their expectations or desires, become profiteers. They are the ob- ject of the hatred of the bourgeoisie, the middle class, whom inflation has impover- ished, not less than they are the object of the hatred of the proletariat. As the inflation proceeds and the real value (the purchasing power) of the cur- rency fluctuates wildly from month to month, all permanent relations between debtors and creditors, which form the ulti- mate foundation of capitalism, become so utterly disordered as to be almost meaning- less. The process of wealth-getting degen~ erates into a gamble and a lottery. Lenin was certainly right, concluded Keynes. There is no subtler, no surer means of overturning the existing basis of society than to debauch the currency. The process engages all the hidden forces of economic law on the side of destruction, and does it in a manner which not one man in a million can diagnose. It is a strange thing that J. M. Keynes, the man who wrote the words I have just quoted, should be the same man who persuaded a large section of the Ameri- can people that deficit spending by our Federal Government and a consequent tremendous national debt are desirable because as they said “we only owe the money to ourselves.” Keynes, as an economist, knew the inflationary effect of deficit spending by any government. Yet it was Keynes whose blandish- ments encouraged Franklin D. Roosevelt to embark upon the Government spend- ing spree which has now reached great height in the Truman Fair Deal “squan- dermania’; which now, indeed, threat- ens the very existence of the Republic. From this, you may be sure that Keynes came to America, not as an ethical and highly skilled economist, but solely as a propagandist; solely as a servant of the British Government, which needed then, as it needs now, to support socialism, larger and ever larger chunks of the money collected from American tax- payers. Lenin said that the first step toward a world-wide triumph of communism should be nullification of the strength of the British Navy through internal po- litical action in the British Empire. All of us by this time know that this step has been taken. The British Empire, through socialism, has fallen apart at the seams. The British Navy is largely obsolete or out of commission, and Brit- ish seapower today is a mere shadow, Lenin said that the second step toward world-wide communism should be nulli- fication of the power of the Catholic Church. All of us know by this time of the unparalleled ferocity of the Com- munist attack on all religion. The Mindszenty case, the recent expulsion of Mormon missionaries from Czechoslo- vakia, and many other instances of the kind, involving all religious sects, but especially the Catholic, prove that the second step toward a Communist world is now being taken, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Lenin said that the third and most important step toward world commu- nism should be dissipation of the sav- ings of the American people by inducing the United States to spend itself into the status of a third-rate power. Keynes quoted him as saying also that the best way to accomplish this end, of dissi- pating the savings of all Americans, would be through inflation; by debauch- ing the currency, as well as by endless deficit spending. In view of our present 50-cent dollar, and in view of the senseless waste and deficit spending of the Fair Deal admin- istration, can any one of you doubt for an instant that by means of inflation and the pouring of American tax money down political rat holes around the world, the third step toward world com- munism is well on its way? Since the war, the present Fair Deal administra- tion has spent more money than did all the administrations preceding since the founding of the Republic. Even the United States Treasury, which is dominated by the White House, estimates that the Federal deficit in the present fiscal year, which ends next June 30, will be $5,500,000,000. More likely it will be $7,000,000,000 or more. The Treasury estimates, on the basis of the President’s budget, that the deficit next year will be at least $5,300,000,000. But the spending policies of the present Democratic Congress indicate that, in fact, it will be at least $8,000,000,000, and perhaps $10,000,000,000, or even more. Last Wednesday, the House of Repre- sentatives passed the so-called one- package appropriation bill for the fiscal year of 1951 which begins next July 1. In spite of reductions of more than a billion dollars, the total appropriations for the coming fiscal year will amount to around $28,000,000,000, and this does not represent the total of spending by the Democratic Highty-first Congress; not by a long shot. The President’s budget, remember, is $42,500,000,000 and it appears now more than likely that in the end congressional spending will ex- ceed the President’s budget by a wide margin. Mark my word, the spenders are still in the saddle and in spite of a temporary set-back, are in the mood to carry on, on a grand scale. President Truman and his Fair Deal supporters started at the beginning of the present session of Congress to whoop it up for bigger and better spending, for bigger and more disastrous deficits, Un- til recently, when the President’s hand was forced, they supported his policy of reducing national defense expenditures, while increasing those for Fair Deal measures to socialize the American econ- omy. Thereafter they fought to pile the increased expenditures for national de- fense on top of the other expenditures, the latter calculated only to advance Fair Deal political interests. Republicans in Congress, almost to a man, have opposed this spending pro- gram. During consideration of the om~ nibus appropriation bill, Republicans of- fered 36 amendments involving reduc- tions of about $2,000,000,000. All but three of them were voted down with a whoop by the Democrats. At the same
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD time, Democratic Members added amounts here and there through 45 amendments increasing appropriations, so the end savings that were accom- plished were far less than they should have been. Now, just what do you, as American citizens and taxpayers, think of a Demo- cratic majority in Congress which would spend in excess of a Presidential budget? Especially when that budget is so large that the wiser heads, even in the Demo- cratic Party, time and again have warned that it will lead to a disastrous deficit; when they have warned of its terrific in- flationary effect? What do you think of a Fair Deal administration which would cut defense expenditures in a time of international emergency, while at the same time boosting expenditures for ad- vancing the cause of socialism within our own borders? What do you think? Up to this point, I have traced the manner in which the three steps to world communism, as outlined by Lenin, either have been or are now being completed. Lenin was the creator of communism as it is known today. He knew whereof he spoke, and his teachings are the only bible of his communistic followers. British seapower has been virtually de- stroyed. The church is fighting in the last ditch in all countries behind the iron curtain. In the United States, inflation and deficit spending by the Federal Gov- ernment have debauched the currency by reducing the dollar to little more than half its former purchasing power. The savings of the American people have been largely dissipated; confiscation of private property through inflation and excessive taxation is progressing apace. The national debt now exceeds $1,700 per capita; and $1,700 is pretty close to the average family’s annual income. Now what is your answer to all this? I think you will agree with me that the only possible answer lies in drastically cutting domestic expenditures by the Federal Government, through imple- mentation of the Hoover Commission recommendations, as they actually are, and not as they are twisted by the Pres- ident in his many proposals to Congress, The only possible answer lies, too, in throwing out of power political oppor- tunists, the demagogues, the spenders, and fellow travelers, who are playing Lenin’s game—Stalin’s game—for the sake of their own greed for political power. Disapproval of Reorganization Plan No. 21—Statement by Roscoe H. Hupper EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. OWEN BREWSTER OF MAINE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 11 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. BREWSTER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix of the Recorp a state-~ ment by Mr. Roscoe H. Hupper in sup< port of Senate Resolution 265 directed to the disapproval of Reorganization Plan No. 21 relating to transfer of the United States Maritime Commission to the Department of Commerce. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: STATEMENT OF Roscoz H. Hupprr BErore UNITED States SENATE COMMITTEE ON Ex~ PENDITURES IN THE EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS, To Bre FIinep Pursuant To Leave May 9, 1950, IN SurPoRT oF SENATE RESOLUTION 265 DInecTeD TO DISAPPROVAL OF REORGANIZATION PLAN 21 RELATING TO TRANSFER OF UNiTED STATES MARITIME COMMISSION TO DEPART- MENT OF COMMERCE My name is Roscoe H. Hupper. I am a lawyer, member of the firm of Burlingham, Veeder, Clark & Hupper, 27 William Sireet, New York City, with which I have been connected since 1911, since which time I have practiced actively in ,various shipping, transportation and other commercial mat- ters both before courts and commissions, including Interstate Commerce Commission and the Maritime Commission and its prede- cessors. I make this. statement principally as a citizen, and against the background of my experience and observation, for such aid as the same may be to your committee. I support S. Res. 265 but my doing so is not pursuant to any retainer or request by any particular interest; rather because of my personal belief that plan 21 as now before your committee should not be permitted to become effective because adverse to what I conceive to be the national interest in shipping. My views thereon appear in the several numbered paragraphs below. My comments stem to considerable extent from my contacts with shipping men of many nationalities over a period of nearly 40 years and my representation of many of them in legal matters affecting ship affairs before courts and commissions; likewise from being counsel for many years to various conferences both in domestic and widespread foreign trades as established under section 15 of the 1916 Shipping Act. I have a fur- ther contact with shipping in that as trus- tee I am sole stockholder of Luckenbach Steamship Co., Inc., a seasoned common car- rier (not subsidized) which owns and oper- ates 16 substantially new C-3 and C-2 vessels (acquired under the 1946 Ship Sales Act) in our intercoastal trade and in foreign trades. It may be that substantially all its operations will presently be in the inter- coastal trade. That company has not par- ticipated in announcements heretofore made on behalf of a considerable number of other carriers indicating that they did not intend to oppose plan 21. Their reasons for this view are naturally not my concern, but I can say that my contacts throughout the ship- ping fraternity have given me the distinct impression that there is a complete lack of enthusiasm for plan 21, and lack of faith in its purpose or power of accomplishment, amounting almost to a sense of frustration. Coming now to certain major points: I. WHY DISCARD OUR MARITIME COMMISSION? The set-up of the Commission is that of an independent agency responsible to Con- gress created by section 201 of the 1936 Mer- chant Marine Act following the declaration of policy in section 101 thereof, following the most thorough investigation and con- sideration. It is specially to be noted that section 201 divides membership between political parties and staggers terms of the Commissioners; this doubtless to minimize political considerations and control. Having noted the barrage of discontent which has been leveled at the Commission “over a considerable recent period I find my= A3553 self confused as to the reason for or purpose of the same. At any rate I condemn it as exhibiting a lack of fair perspective in re- spect of tho functions and performance of this important governmental body. This I say notwithstanding that I have noted signs of discontent or friction within the Commis- sion itself; but emphasis on such would also seem to me a distortion of perspective. Res- toration of a true perspective, affected neither by praise nor blame, would appear to be most necessary. It is right to admit that the Commission, like most other bodies whether private or public, even on occasion Congress itself, have not always operated at the highest level of efficiency. This is but common human experience. On occasion the heart and incentive for highest efficiency and cooperation has rather been taken out of the Commission members and representa- tives by a form of treatment from a priv- lleged seat which although probably not so intended could in a cooler moment be de~ scribed as unduly harsh. Matters of criti- cism generally have two sides but it ought to be remembered that the Commission has had and still has stupendous duties to per- form, quite enough to consume for some time yet the time and energies of its entire membership. There has been inevitably a heavy hang-over of affairs as aftermath of the war, among which may be mentioned the ship-sales program, the chartering program and the subsidy program, to say nothing of regulatory matters, the problems as to ship- building and a few considerations as to the future in international affairs where ship- ping is or may be involved. Congress itself in these last few months has been making a considerable investiga- tion into a long-range program. By plan 6 only recently put into operation the Chair- man of the Commission was given enlarged powers, and the President doubtless has au- thority to go further in this respect. Be- sides it should be simple to amend the Merchant Marine Act if additional authority or enlarged compensation were deemed nec- essary by Congress. The possible efficiency of the independent agency set-up of the Maritime Commission will be brought to mind and emphasized by recalling the performance of Joseph P. Kennedy as first Chairman, likewise the chairmanship of Admiral Land, likewise the valiant service of Admiral Vickery; also of many others who have held the post of Commissioner or other office in the Com- mission. I venture the thought that there can be no reason against constant attain-~ ment by the Commission of whatever effi- ciency is requisite. I have had the privi- lege of some acquaintance, as I recall, with every Commissioner of this body and with many of its other personnel from the time the Shipping Board was organized under the Shipping Act of 1916 up to the present date. Against the background of all the fore- going I state that the current attacks on the Commission are substantially unin- formed and ill-considered; and that the greatest spirit of helpfulness and coopera- tion should be evinced pending the reach- ing of a far better conclusion than the one projected before your committee by plan 21. Nobody has suggested yet what departure from the independent agency principle would gain for us; nor has any reason been sug- gested why Congress should permit its sub- stantially direct control of this great na- tional interest of shipping (just because of occasional hard problems, or shortage of patience) being renounced and turned over to some executive department. In event that mistake should be made, who can say that sometime the inquiries of Congress might be answered only as from behind an iron curtain—with a genial sug- gestion that the executive is independent of the legislative.
A3554 It is appropriate to add here that the very pendency of this plan 21 has already been prejudicial to the functioning of the Com- mission and to important maritime interests. Proposed abolishment of the Commission (the Chairman only definitely to be retained in the proposed Maritime Board) has placed four worthy gentlemen in doubt as to their continuance with any part or character of the official status for which they were selected under section 201 of the Merchant Marine Act, and confirmed by the Senate. An un- just and unseemly situation has thus re- sulted in which it must be difficult for them severally to avoid pulling, if they could find one, some political string in aid of continu- ance in office. This by itself is bad enough but from point of view of the public interest it is much worse; seeing that these gentle~ men. since March 13 last can scarcely have had peace of mind adequate to give them complete devotion to their public duties. The resultant bogging down of public busi- ness has become rather apparent, and im- portantly noticed in the press. Procedural delays have already been far too great and costly to carriers and to the public even when our commissions have been functioning reg- ularly. Something must surely be done about that before long, in any event; seeing that our administrative bodies now appear often to out-legalize and out-technicalize our courts. However, when a fairly complete bogging down results from such a proposi- tion as plan 21 the situation becomes truly destructive and unendurable both as con- cerns the Commission and the public interest which the Commission is bound to serve. Tl. OUR MERCHANT MARINE REQUIRES AN INDEPENDENT AGENCY Our ships are now of superb quality, op- erated by men of the highest capability. There are great difficulties and obstacles par- ticularly in the foreign trade resulting from almost overwhelming competition, due prin- cipally to much higher costs than the ship~ owners of other nations have to bear. This circumstance is at the base of our national subsidy policy, which has been deliberately adopted as matter of national necessity; in contrast to the policy of placing our reliance as to commerce and safety largely on the shipping of other nations through medium of charters, and so forth, which on many occa- sions would involve lower expenditures. Our world responsibility has substantially dic- tated our shipping policy. The myriad ques- tions which attach to shipping whether for- eign or domestic are of special content and quality which fit well into the functions and supervision of an independent agency, and for aid in which such an agency appears to be absolutely requisite for close collaboration. with Congress. Many of us recall the great benefit of such collaboration which con- tinued many years as between Senator White in the Senate and Mr. Bland, of Virginia, in the House both with the present Commission, and its predecessors. Putting control of shipping into any executive department would be a complete back-track on the tried and true independent agency principle which had its first expression in the 1916 shipping act, after most extensive hearings and con- sideration beginning in 1911, The question and proposition then pending was as to whether this country should be important in maritime affairs or not. That we should be- come so important was demonstrated by the First World War and its aftermath and again demonstrated by the Second World War and its still pending aftermath. ' The character of the Shipping Board as an independent agency was based on the pat- tern of the Interstate Commerce Commission as established in 1887 to deal principally with rail transportation. There is a parity of purpose, and necessity as between land traffic and high-seas shipping which natu- rally calls for independent agencies respon- sible directly to Congress, without inter- ference from other bodies. It would surely be scarcely endurable that the functions of the Interstate Commerce Commission should be turned over to any executive department; and less endurable if that should be possible as concerns the Maritime Commission. Both Commissions have performed well and justified their establishment and continu- ance, quite irrespective of defects in per- formance which show up from time to time, and which can always be cured by a re- freshed sense of responsibility, whether on the initiative of Congress or from the side of a reasonably vocal public. Ill WHY SUBSTITUTE THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE FOR THE MARITIME COMMISSION? The Department of Commerce was not established with any purpose that it would ever be called upon to carry out in any respect such functions as the Merchant Marine Act states. None of its pcorsonnel have ever shown any capabilities or sense of direction in the, matter of our shipping or national shipping policy that would justify said Department in having the slightest measure of participation in or control over the making or fixation of shipping policy— any more than say the Department of Agri- culture or the Post Office Department. In- deed any executive department we might name would be just about as well qualified for exercising ocean shipping functions in the national interest as a fairly capable law- yer, by virtue of his profession, would be qualified to be bishop of Washington. The achievements of the Interstate Commerce Commission, and comparably with it, those of the Maritime Commission, would never have been brought about under the aegis of any executive department, burdened with widespread interests and responsibilities which make impossible that quick focus on problems and necessities that characterize shipping affairs. We need not doubt the capabilities of the Department of Commerce in making important studies and reports but that is no qualification for exercising ship- Ping controls. That the Secretary of Commerce has in mind extensive control is demonstrated by his April 14, 1950, letter to Senator Macnvu- son in reply to the Senator’s letter of April 5. The first portion of the Secretary’s letter is gentle, genial and cooperative as con- cerns that remnant of the Commission characterized as “Maritime Board” but the latter portion (pp. 3-4) indicates rather completely the purpose of the Department to take over all the truly important func- tions now exercised by the Commission, The hearing on Monday, May 8, developed the view and purpose of the Secretary to take over subsidy control under items (a) and (b) of section 211 of the Merchant Marine Act. This purpose was not very apparent from anything said in his April 14 letter and its specific development at the hearing, although perhaps ascertainable by an in- formed and careful study of the letter, was almost surreptitious, which circumstance in ltself justifies careful questioning of the whole proposition as concerns subsidy con- trol. The purpose of the Secretary if per- mitted to be carried out would amount to nothing less than a fairly complete vivisec- tion or evisceration of the subsidy provisions of the Merchant Marine Act in respect of their application and administration. In contrast with the protections in section 211 of the Merchant Marine Act directed to avoiding political control, let it be remem- bered that administration of shipping af- fairs under the Department of Commerce could not have such protection. That De- partment and its personnel are subject to political winds, tides, and currents which are variable and no executive department yet has been able to avoid harboring now and then personnel of considerable political APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD vigor and disposed to exercise the same in this, that, and the other direction. There is nothing to be gained for transportation and the public interest by such political controls and they should be avoided at all costs. <A suggestion that Dopartment of Commerce control would give our national shipping the benefit of Cabinet delibera- tions is without beneficial weight. The gene eral subject matter is too involved and complicated to permit of helpful result from consideration by men having so many di- verging intcrests and so busy as Calinet members. Iremain ready to render any further assist- ance that your committee might request, Two Worlds in Conflict EXTENSION OF REMARKS F HON. ANDREW J. BIEMILLER OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. BIEMILLER. Mr. Speaker, with permission to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I attach an excerpt from an article titled “Two Worlds in Conflict,” published in the ALF’s Labor’s Monthly Survey for April-May. It is a penetrat- ing discussion of the significance of the battle for Berlin and the need to formu- late and carry out a constructive pro- gram for the whole of Germany. It fur- nishes instructive background material for the current discussions of Germany and related problems by the Big Three Ministers: Two Wortips IN CONFLICT American workers today realize that events in Europe and Asia are of utmost conse- quence to them in thelr daily HMves. No longer can two oceans and four or five thous- and miles of space make us secure against totalitarian communism which drives to close in on United States of America from two sides of the world, as well as throush fifth-column activity within our shores. We know that communism means the end of freedom; under it workers cannot choose or change their jobs, no union can raise wages, anyone may be imprisoned for years without trial for such minor offenses as lateness and absence from work or through false accusa- tions. The people, deprived of all voice in choosing their government, cannot remedy such evils. For all but a favored few, com- munism means a life of poverty, shadowed by the secret police, purges, concentration camps, a life of mental stagnation, where true facts are denied and the worker’s mind is filled with false propaganda. Communist aggression is of utmost concern to all Amer- jeans. For, unless we stop losing the cold war and permitting ourselves to be outwitted in strategy, our whole Nation in self-defense will be forced into a shooting war in which bombs ‘will fall on our homes. Stalin’s method, in his drive for world con- quest, is to attack every strategic spot he thinks he can seize without starting a shoot- ‘ing war with the western powers. BERLIN, ISLAND OF FREEDOM Berlin’s west sector is such a spot—an Island of freedom completely surrounded Uy Soviet tyranny. If, under guise of the May 28 youth rally, 500,000 Moscow directed young German Communists peacefully march into western Berlin, they can install their agents, set up their cells and action committees, foment strife and civil war, and by familiar
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD methods attempt to complete their peaceful conquest by destroying its democratic gov- ernment. Once allowed to enter, they could not be thrown out except by force. Gerhardt Eisler, top Communist escaped from United States of America, is master-minding this piece of trickery for Stalin. The Communists try to conceal from the outside world the fact (well known behind the iron curtain) that Gerhardt Hisler, Stalin’s tool, makes good use ef the secret police to see that these German youths carry out Communist orders. And kack of the secret police is the Soviet terror and the concentration camp. The Soviet also conceais from the world its new use of the Nazi horror camps—Buchenwald and the rest. These camps have been reopened and are now filled to capacity with German anti-Communists, free trade-unionists and other men and women within Stalin’s reach who have heroically stcod for freedom. ALSO KEYFOINT Berlin is a keypoint in Stalin’s effort to subjugate Europe. As their former capital, it has for Germans a significance beyond any other city. Seizure of Berlin would open the way for a Communist campaign of irresistible pressure to destroy the German Republic. But as long as western Berlin re- mains a symbol of hope and freedom to all Germans, Stalin cannot consolidate his grip on east Germany or subjugate the western republic. Germany is the heart of Europe. Stalin is reaching for the Ruhr, because a shift of its immense steel, coal, and other in- dustrial capacity would change the balance of productive power from west to east, and after that the rest of Europe would fall easily into Stalin’s hands, West Berlin’s 2,000,000 people have shown tremendous courage in their unflinching stand against communism.’ Surrounded by communism, they know what democracy and freedom mean, Free trade-unionists who have suffered under Hitler’s dictatorship have no desire to suffer under Stalin’s. The United States Government has announced that the “peaceful” invasion of Communist youths will not be permitted. This is for- tunate, for protecting the people of Berlin against “peaceful” conquest depends on the allied occupation forces. NEEDED: A CONSTRUCTIVE POLICY FOR GERMANY The German Federal Republic (west Ger-~ many) under the courageous leadership of Chancellor Konrad Adenauer, has left no doubt of its desire to cooperate with the western Allies. The people of Germany do not want an alliance with Russia” But they are faced with many difficulties. Foremost is the problem of making a living. Germany has always depended heavily on trade with the east to provide a market for her products and jobs for her workers. Today trade with the east is reduced to a mere trickle. To re=- vive it would open the doors to Soviet pene- tration, for the Soviet uses control over trade as one method of dominating a country. But Germany cannot support herself until other foreign trade is developed to replace the lost eastern trade, Meanwhile unemployment in Western Germany has increased every month since December 1948 and now (February 1950) affects 13 percent of the population, a level equivalent to 8,000,000 unemployed in the United States of America. In western Berlin, due to Soviet interference with trade, one worker in every four is unemployed. This problem of German export trade should be a first concern of the occupying powers— Britain, France, and the United States of America—for until it is solved the German people must depend for support on American Report of the Federation’s European rep- resentative. 2 Report of the Federation’s European rep- resentative after interviews with leading German trade-unionists and others, taxpayers. Unemployment will continue and German workers cannot hope to raise their living standards. Since the occupying pow- ers have not yet permitted Germany to set up diplomatic relations with other countries, the responsibility is theirs. ON SAAR SEPARATION Another serious problem is the action by France of separating the Saar from the rest of western Germany so that Germans see their country further torn apart. Britain con- tinues to dismantle essential German fac- tories in her zone. The American Federation of Labor has steadfastly opposed dismantling as an unnecessary burden on the American taxpayer and a crushing and needless blow to German working men and women. Dis- mantling destroys workers’ means of earning a living, eliminates needed factories, adds to unemployment. The argument that dis- mantling destroys war potential misses the point; factories now slated for dismantling were never on the Official list of war plants; they were declared surplus under the level of industry rule which restricts production, thus limiting employment and living stand- ards. While the Western Powers have not yet developed a constructive program for Ger- many, the Soviet beckons German industrial- ists to revive their trade with the East. So- viet propaganda ceaselessly promises the Ger- mans peace and unity under the Communist banner, and Soviet military power grows from: month to month creating in every Ger- man a paralyzing sense of insecurity. Refu- gees, fleecing Communist tyranny and perse- cution in East Germany, pour daily into the western republic, adding to the burden of unemployment; among them come Commu- nist agitators, disguised as refugees, to work upon unemployed Germans with their lies about the Soviet paradise. The German people do not want commu- nism. But they desperately need the jobs that could come from industrial expansion and they want to share in the restored Euro- pean economy and help make it a going con. cern, secure against Soviet infiltration and aggression. They want to revive German trade in order to maintain expansion. The 5,000,000 German trade-unionists and the Social Democratic Party have voluntarily de- cided that they do not want German rearma~ ment—-but they want a chance to produce adequate food, clothes, housing. The real security is not in dismantling German plants or in separating off German territory, but in restoring the German econ- omy, thus strengthening her present friendly government, and in enabling Germany to play a constructive part in building the new Europe. The Railroad Strike—Article by Don Ross EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. FORREST C. DONNELL OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 11 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp a news article entitled “Rail Service Cut in 27 States by Firemen’s Strike on 4 Roads,” by Don Ross, published in the New York Herald Tribune of today, May 11, 1950, There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows; A3555 Rat Service Cur In 27 STATES BY FIREMEN’S STRIKE ON 4 Roaps OTHER LINES MOVE TRAFFIC-—PENNSYLVANIA RAILROAD TAKES OFF 250 TRAINS-—-CENTRAL, 125-——SOUTHERN USES OFFICIALS Operation in 27 States of 4 of the Nation’s major railroad networks—the Pennsylvania, the New York Central system, the Santa Fe, and the Southern—were disrupted yesterday by a strike of 18,000 firemen. Though pas-= sengers and freight movements were seri- ously hampered at many points, it appeared that no crippling blow had been struck at communications because of the many alter- nate routes available on other railroads and by other means of conveyance. The strike, which became effective at 6 a.m. yesterday in each of the country’s time zones, was aimed by the union, the Brother- hood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen, unafilhated, at the entire Santa Fe and Southern systems, which operate, respec- tively, from Chicago to the west coast and south of Washington. Only those portions of the New York Central west of Buffalo and of the Pennsylvania west and north of Har- risburg, Pa., were included in the strike call, which followed 25 straight hours of media- tion in Chicago between the disputants and Francis A. O’Neill, Jr., Chairman of the Na- tional Mediation Board. Effects of the strike were felt in the New York area, however, because of the cancel- lation by the Pennsylvania—largest railroad in the country—and the New York Central of many freight and passenger trains to the West. The Pennsylvania reported it had “:opped 250 passenger trains out of 1,000 it runs daily over its entire system. The New York Central canceled 125 passenger and 300 ireight trains. Both railroads placed embargoes on freight shipments. The strike also involved portions of the Chesapeake & Ohio Railroad, which uses ter- minals of some of the struck roads, C. & O. trains serving Washington, Chicago, Toledo, Columbus, Ohio, and Grand Rapids, Mich., were taken out of service. The strike was caused by the insistence of the union that the railroads hire a second fireman to work on multiple-unit Diesel locomotives. The railroads, describing this a “featherbed” demand, refused, while the union claimed that it was necessary for safety reasons. Presidential fact-finding boards have held that the railroads are justi- fied in refusing the union demand. Late yesterday, David B. Robertson, presi~ dent of the union, said at a news conference in Chicago that the union had offered con- ditionally to drop its demand for a second fireman on all multiple-unit Diesels. The union had proposed instead that the rail- roads agree to arbitrate the question whether a second fireman should be hired only on high-speed Diesel hauling through-passenger trains, he said. MEDIATORS GIVE UP In Chicago Mr. O'Neill said that ‘‘we’ve given up” and that a report on the deadlock would be submitted to the White House. For the railroads Daniel P. Loomis, their chief negotiator, announced that the industry would hold out adamantly against this featherbedding drive even if the union should extend the strike to other roads. Mr. O'Neill said later that he had con- ferred with Dr. John R. Steelman, an assist- ant of President Truman, over the long-dis- tance telephone. Dr. Steelman is in Wash- ington. The mediation board, Mr. O'Neill said, would remain in Chicago a few days to be available to the disputants for con- sultation. The Pennsylvania and the New York Cen- tral reported that, in general, passenger and freight travel along the Atlantic coast would not be hampered by the strike, which is the first involving more than one major rail sys- tem since 1946, The roads also said that
A3556 their commuting operations into New Jer~ sey, Pennsylvania, and New York State would not be affected. West of Harrisburg the Pennsylvania said no freight or passenger trains were moving. The Southern Railway system said in At- lanta that it had begun running idle trains with supervisory employees as firemen and that it expected to meet “95 percent of our regular schedule within the next 48 hours.” A railroad official said that all the work normally done by firemen will be taken over by managerial and supervisory employ- ees as fast as they can be indoctrinated in their duties. Other railroads were also using supervisory employees as firemen On some runs. ‘ The union’s strategy of confining the strike to four networks, though it has the same grievance against most of the railroads, was said to be based on the belief that President Truman could not declare a national emer- gency and seize the roads. It was explained that essential shipments can be moved over other lines, while much freight could be shifted to trucks. The union also said that it had agreed to furnish firemen for trains carrying troops and medical supplies. The Santa Fe announced that it had can-~ celed four of its major trains between Chi- cago and the Pacific Coast. The road also placed an embargo on all carload and less- than-carload shipments of livestock and per- ishable freight. The Pennsylvania said that perishable freight scheduled to go over its lines would be rerouted to other railroads, while the New York Central said that freight permits would be issued in New York for perishables and other essentials. LAYOFFS TO START TOMORROW Figures on unemployment, other than that of the strikers, caused by the strike, were sketchy yesterday. The New York Central estimated that the strike would eventually cause the furloughing of some 50,000 of its employees. A large number of its employees would be laid off tomorrow, the Pennsylvania said, adding that the number was as yet un- determined. Among the trains canceled by the New York Central for the duration of the strike were the Twentieth Century Limited, the Com- modore Vanderbilt, the Cleveland Limited, and the Chicagoan. Only one main line train will operate over the Central lines from New York to Chicago. This will be a combination of the Pacemaker and the Commodore Van- derbilt which will leave Grand Central Ter- minal at 4 p.m.daily. At Buffalo, beginning of the strike area, supervisory personnel, will replace firemen, it was said. The Empire State Express will continue to leave Grand Central at 9 a. m. daily. The section to Detroit will operate over the Ca- nadian division of the line, which is not struck, but the Cleveland section has been canceled. Trains to Canada are unaffected. The Pennsylvania canceled 10 through trains to the West, including the Broadway Limited to Chicago, the Jeffersonian, and the Spirit of St. Louis to St. Louis, and the Red Arrow to Detroit, Florida trains from Pennsylvania Station, which proceed south over the lines of the Atlantic Coast Line and the Seaboard Air Line, will run as usual. Mails for the strike area, the Pennsylvania said, will be sent to Washington and there be rerouted over the Baltimore and Ohio lines to the affected areas, The Post Office Department in Washington and New York reported that mail shipments were being maintained with only a few de- lays. No unusual increase of activity was reported yesterday at New York’s airports be-~ cause of the curtailment of train service, but there were indications that airline travel would increase sharply if the strike were not Speedily settled. Airline ticket offices re~ ported an unusual number of calls for reser- vations. American Airlines said it had added one extra round-trip flight out of La Guardia Airport to Chicago, and that it wouid oper- ate 11 extra flights to Chicago and other points tomorrow. The Railread Strike—Article by George Eckel TENSION OF REMARKS HON. FORREST C. DONNELL OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, May 11 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. DONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that there be printed in the Appendix of the REcorp a news article from the New York Times of to- day, entitled “Railroad Traffic Is Dis- rupted as Firemen Strike on Four Lines.” The article is by George Eckel. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: RattroaD Trarric Is DISRUPTED aS FIREMEN STRIKE ON Four LINES Crrcaco, May 10.—Large-scale disruption of traffic, together with scattered industrial shut-downs, cut-backs, and lay-offs, marked the first-day effects of the strike called this morning by the Brotherhood of Locomotive Firemen and Enginemen against four major railroads. Hope for a settlement of the dispute ap- peared dim tonight after the principals had lashed at each other during the day. Francis A. O’Neill, Jv., Chairman of the Na- tional (Railway) Mediation Board, who con- tinued conferences nearly 4 hours after the walk-out became effective, made a report to Dr. John R. Steelman, the President’s assist- ant, in Washington. The Board will remain here for a few days to be available if its services are further de- sired, Mr. O’Neill said, but no further media- tion conferences have been scheduled. He described the negotiations as “deadlocked.” The principal issue in the strike is the union’s demand for a second fireman on mul- tiple-unit Diesel locomotives, Two fact-find- ing boards have held that the demand was not justified. One of the panels was ap- pointed in 1943 by President Roosevelt and the second was named last fall by President Truman. The four strike-bound railroads are the New York Central west of Buffalo, the Penn- sylvania west of Harrisburg, the Atchison, Topeka and Santa Fe and the Southern Raill- way. They normally carry 39.2 percent of the country’s passengers and 24 percent of the total freight volume. Other lines using the tracks of the four railroads or connecting with their affected trains, also discontinued or reduced service. David B. Robertson, president of the brotherhood, said that the strike was ‘com- pletely effective among the 18,000 firemen and enginemen affected on the four lines.” Nevertheless, the New York Central and Santa Fe operated “skeleton” service through the use of supervisory personnel or engineers qualified as firemen. Mr. Robertson said that no expansion of the strike was contemplated. The statement caused considerable interest in view of spec- ulation on whether the extent of the present strike was sufficlent to warrant Presidential seizure of the railroads on the basis of na- tional emergency. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The union leader indicated at a press con- ference that the strike might have been averted if the railroads had accepted a union proposal to arbitrate after the Union had modified its original demand by abandoning the request for a third fireman in all freight and passenger locomotives of the multiple- unit Diesel type. The arbitration would have related only to passenger trains, and among those only to high speed, streamlined and main line through trains, he said. His arbitration proposal contained a con- dition, however, that a finding adverse to management would carry with it acceptance of a second fireman on the types of pas- senger trains in question, he added. A management spokesman asserted that “this is offering to arbitrate after losing two court cases,” referring to the two fact-finding board verdicts. Mr. Robertson declared that while the rail- roads termed the union demand “featherbed~ ding,” they now had about 6,000 “special duty” men doing the same job the brother- hood sought for the firemen. . “Not true,” a railroad spokesman said,add- ing that firemen were not qualified for the job done by Diesel experts now occasionally carried as a “third man’ to observe perform~ ance of the engines. Mr. Robertson held firemen were qualified as “third men.” Today’s walkout, which was postponed for 2 weeks on April 26, came after Federal mediators had worked nearly 2 days without sleep in an effort to head it off. They were led by Mr. O'Neill, who is 72 years old. The strike is the largest rail tie-up since the 2-day country-wide walkout of the engi- neers and trainmen in May 1946, which ended in an “indefinite postponement” shortly be~ fore a seizure deadline set by President Truman. Great demand was reported throughout the affected area for transportation by alter- nate rail routes and by bus and airplane lines, While Chicago, the rail hub of the country and a terminal for three of the affected lines, was experiencing no immediate economic ef- fects of the walkout, reports from other cities gave this picture: The Fisher Body plant in Cleveland shut down, sending its 7 a. m. shift home after 4 hours when outgoing materials began pil- ing up. The Midland Steel Co., also in Cleveland, cut back operations 80 percent at noon, after an unsatisfactory experiment with trucit transportation. In Pennsylvania, coal began to pile up at once at the mine. Automobile manufacturers in Detroit re- ported extensive plans to use trucks in place of trains, but several of them expected serious effects if the strike lasted long. Chrysler Corp., Just resuming operations after a 100- day strike, said it would “try to operate for the rest of the week, but longer than that 1s very doubtful.” Thousands of commuters in Pittsburgh and Chicago had to seek alternate means of transportation, As many as 200,000 employees of the af~ fected railroads themselves will be thrown out of work if the strike continues more than a day or two, it was Indicated. The Pennsylvania has notifled 75,000 of its 120,000 employees that their work will stop Friday morning. The New York Cen- et mates that about 50,000 are out of work, \ Total or limited embargoes were put in effect by the roads, but mail service will be little affected, if at all. Such trains ag are kept in service will carry mail to their ca- pacity, and the Post Office Department will rely on its own and contract trucks to sup- plement the diminished rail service, it was announced in Washington. The New York Central, which took off 125 passenger and $00 freight trains dally, said that it was operating today a combined
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Pacemaker and Advanced Commoadore be- tween New York and Chicago; the New Eng- land States between Chicago and Boston; a combined Detroiter and Wolverine between New York and Detroit; and between Detroit and Chicago, the Mercury westbound and the New York special eastbound. All trains were scheduled to operate in both directions. Three freight and two mail trains also were sent out from Chicago. Pennsylvania Polka EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. CHET HOLIFIELD OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I call attention to a very interesting article in the April 3 issue of Newsweek regarding the troubles of the Republican Party in Pennsylvania: PENNSYLVANIA POLKA The Republican Party is undergoing the shake-up of its life in Pennsylvania, one of its strongholds. Following is a report by Harold Lavine, Newsweek political writer, on the causes and effects of the commotion. Gov. James H. Duff, of Pennsylvania, is a big, belligerent man, with a streak of stub- pornness that wide and a temper as flaming as his nickname, “Red.” A lawyer by profes~ sion (“and I was a helluva good one, too”), he spent most of his youth wildcatting in oilfields from western Pennsylvania all the way to Mexico. He drilled a few dusters, brought in a few gushers, and ended up with @ million. Then the 1929 crash came along and wiped Buff out. It left him neck-deep in debt, with nothing to show for his years as a wild- catter except an oilman’s crackling vocabu- lary and an oilman’s love of a brawl. As far as Duff is concerned, they were years well spent. Last week Jim Duff was having the brawl of his life. It was a brass-knuckle battle with Pennsylvania’s powerful Grundy machine, fought under boomtown-barroom rules, Everything went, including rabbit-punching, eye-gouging, and kneeing in the clinches. Duff swore that he would smash the machine into a heap of twisted junk. It was that, he said, or else the machine would destroy the Republican Party in Pennsylvania and nationally. That was big talk even for Big Red. In one way or another, the Grundy machine has pretty much dominated the Republican Party in Pennsylvania for 80 years. Usually it has simply pulverized opposition. When it couldn’t do that, it has pitched a little woo and married its opponents. The Grundy motto is that ancient political pre- cept “When in doubt, deal.” Grundy leaders boast that no Governor has sat in the statehouse since 1922—except for Democrat George H. Earle—without the ma- chine’s O. K. In recent years it has just about named the Governor. Nationally, of course, the Grundy machine isn’t nearly as powerful as that, but it can still move mountains when the wind is blow- ing right. The Grundy machine was pri- marily responsible for making Warren G. Harding the Republican candidate for Presi- dent in 1920. At 87, Joseph R. Grundy is the last survivor of the historic “smoke-filled room.” And it was the Grundy machine that started the bandwagon rolling for Thomas E. Dewey in 1948, If past performances mean anything, fizht~ ing the Grundy mechine is a painful and rather vsolent form of political suicide. Neverthelecs, Jum Duff has put up a full slate against the machino’s candidates in the May 16 Republican primary Dvff himecelf is run- ning for the GOP nomination for the Senate against the Grundy choice, Reprecentative Joun C. KUNKEL, a Member of Consress since 1928 and the latest in a long line cf poli- ticians starting with his cr-c*-T 7 Ate John Ssrgcant, who ran "Ve RL, with Henry Clay back in 1832. Dufi's princi- pal heutenant, former Superior Court Judge John §S. Fine, the boss of Luzerne County, 1s campaigning for the nomination for Gover- nor egainst Jay Cooke, a retired Philadelphia investment banker and hero of two wars, who protests weakly that he’s not a Grundy man but has the machine’s open support. The issue, says Duff, is Grundyism and Grundyism he defines as “the rule or ruin taci.cs of a small group of men, selfish and self-serving, one of the most reactionary grours in the Republican Party anywhere in America.” The Grundy machine doesn’t care about anything except the pocketbooks of Pennsylvania’s big manufacturers, he in- sists. And he considers this not only wrong but politically insane as well. The Repub- lican Party cannot hope to win in Pennsyl- vania this year or nationally in 1952, Duff maintains, unless 1+ convinces the voters that 1 represents all the people and not just “the interests.” Who's a liberal? When Duff talks of him- self as a liberal Republican and denounces his opponents as Old Guard reactionaries, the Grundy men look utterly bewildered. One of the machine’s top leaders said last week: “I don’t know what a liberal is and Vl give you a thousand dollars if you can define the word for me, but if that guy Duff is a hberal then I’m a liberal, too. He keeps calling me a reactionary. So far as I can figure out that’s just a nice way of saying I’m ans. 0. B.” The Grundy machine insists there’s no question of principle involved. Duiff’s talk of liberal Republicanism the Crundy lead- ers say, is merely a cover-up for the fact that he wants to make himself dictator of the Republican Party in Pennsylvania. They call him power-mad, a would-be Caesar, a megalomaniac. Aciually, the issue doesn’t appear nearly as simple as either side pretends. As usually is the case in political brawls, policies and personalities have become inseparably en- tangled, If Duff can make out a good case for his view of the conflict, the Grundy lead- ers can offer an equally good one for theirs. However, Duff does have this advantage: Pennsylvania voters generally do regard the fight as one between liberalism and stand- pat Republicanism, although the Governor’s critics contend that his liberalism 1s nothing but me-tooism and ask why he doesn’t join the Democratic Party. Therein hes the na- tional significance of the conflict. If Duff wins, his victory will be interpreted widely as a victory for liberal Republicanism And since the same issue has split the GOP elsewhere, that will have inevitable repercus- sions in other States, and especially at the Republican convention in 1952. As a matter of fact, it’s a cinch for any soap-box speaker to depict the Grundy ma- chine as a stronghold of reaction. For the Grundy machine is simply the Pennsylvania Manufacturers Association by another name. The backbone of the organization is PMA’s 17 branches. National Committeeman G. Mason Owlett, who runs the machine now that Uncle Joe Grundy has retired, doubles in brass as PMA president. And PMA was founded on the assumption that what is good for its 8,000 members au- tomatically is good for the State of Pennsyl- vania. A8557 In the early days of the New Deal moreover, the Grundy machine stood steadfast against social and welfare legislation. Joe Grundy himself is almost the ';. of Old Guard Republicanism,: 7. . leading exponent of the GOP’s traditional high-tariff policy. Pro and con: That’s only part of the story, hewever. For the PMA has mellowed cou- siderably in recent yoars, and even Demo- cratic critics admit that 1t has shown an in-« creasing understanding of the worlingman’s point cf view. And further to complicate Duff’s black-and-white picture of the fight as beng one between liveralism and reaction, the Grundy leaders offer two major argu- ments: It was the Grundy machine, they say, which made Duff attorney general and which later threw him the nomination for gover- nor, “If I’ve keard Duff say once I have heard him say 20 times: ‘When God made Senator Grundy he threw the mold away’,” Mason Owlett asserts, “and now he says, ‘Our objective is to eliminate CGrundyism’.” Moreover, alihough the PMA hasn't al- ways approved of Duff’s program, Grundy legislators nevertheless have supported him whenever his bills came up for a vote. To koth arguments, Jim Dufl has ready answers: To the first, he says: “I didn’t know what those guys were like until after I was elected.” To the second: “Sure they voted for my bills, They were too ycllow-livered to stand up and be counted against them. It was in commiutiee they did their dirty work; behind closed doors they did everything they could to knife me.” According to Duff, his break with the Grundy machine came shortly before his in- auguration. “Owlett barged into my Office with a budget all figured cut and an inau- guration address all written. I wasn’t sup- posed to ask questions. I was just supposed to sign the budget and read the address. The Grundy machine had done all my thinking for me. Now what do those guys figure they are—a supergovernment?” The principal issue over which the break occurred was repeal of the 5-mill tax on manufacturers’ capital stocks. Grundy lead- ers insist that Duff promised repeal. “Other~ wise,” they add, “we’d never have given him the nomination.” Duff retorts: ‘“They’re liars. I mever made any such promise.’ One of Duff’s first acts had been to propose raising the cigarette tax from 2 cents to 4 cents a pack and putting a new tax on beer and soft drinks. ‘When Owlett came here and said he wanted the capital-stock tax repealed, I told him: ‘If you think I’m going to give you a free seat in the grandstand at the same time I’m raising the price in the bleach- ers, you're crazy.” Duff says the Grundy machine has been fighting him ever since. Owlett, however, declares that, “although we didn’t agree with the Governor, we went along.” Duff snorts: “Nonsense.” As Governor, Duff has raised State aid to education, improved the mental hospitals, increased the State’s nursery capacity, started cleaning up the Schuylkill River basin, built new roads, and made other im- provements. He says the Grundy machine has fought him on every reform. Grundy leaders deny it. Duff’s program is merely the program of former Governor (now Senator), Epwarp Martin, they say, and they supported it. They add: “The only thing we objected ta was reestablishing the general State author- ity. That was just a subterfuge for running Pennsylvania into debt in violation of the constitution; it’s deficit financing. Duff answers: “Sure, they liked the pro- gram; they Just didn’t like the idea of paying for it. As for whether or not the general State authority is constitutional: The courts say ‘Yes.’ ” BO aeteg art)
A3558 So the fight has raged with almost un-« paralleled bitterness. The Grundy ma- chine charges that Duff has used the State police to gather evidence against county chairmen, which he uses to blackmail them into supporting him. This Duff point-blank denies. When Harry S. Truman humorously invited six Republican governors, including Duff, who had blueprinted a new GOP pol- icy, to join the Democratic Party, the Grundy leaders shouted: “We told you so.” Duff for his part has been lambasting the Grundy machine as vituperatively as any Fair Dealer might. It is conceded that Duff will win the nom- ination for the Senate, but control of the State GOP is dependent on control of the State House, for that is where the patron- age lies. The race for governor is a toss-up. And even if Duff's man Fine wins, he will still have to defeat the Democratic nom- inee, Richardson Dilworth, a Main Line Fair Dealer. The Grundy machine can survive a Democratic governor, since it has the PMA organization. The machine that Duff has built up probably can’t. Grundy leaders say that if Fine wins they’ll back him, but the bitterness of the primary fight has been so great that who- ever is the GOP nominee will have a great deal of ill feeling in his own party to over~ come. It will be a miracle if Dilworth wins the governorship, but Dilworth watches the GOP primary fight with unconcealed glee, hoping that it will help make a miracle happen. United States Economic Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WRIGHT PATMAN OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, May 11, 1950 Mr, PATMAN. Mr. Speaker, under Jeave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orp, I include the following address of President Truman at Pendleton, Oreg., on May 10, 1950: ‘Text or TRUMAN’S OREGON SPEECH ON UNITED Srares Economic ProcrRaM I am glad to be here in Pendleton today. I am always happy to visit the Pacific Northwest. You know, I have come out here to dedicate Grand Coulee Dam tomorrow. On the way out, I have been reporting to the people on some of the problems that our Nation faces, and the progress we are making in solving them. At different towns and cities, I have talked about world peace and the farm program, and the development of our national resources. All these things are tied together, because we need to build a strong United States; strong morally and strong materially, as the basis for our own expanding future, and as the basis for world peace. Today, I want to talk with you about the economic progress of our country. The growth of the Pacific Northwest is a symbol of the breath-taking economic prog- ress of the United States. In one century you have grown from a few people pushing back the wilderness to thriving States with several million people. One hundred years ago ox teams were the power for your covered wagons. Today you use the energy of the Columbia River and in a few years more you may be harnessing the tremendous force of the atom for peace- ful work, These changes did not come about by them- selves. They are the result of the daring and independent spirit which has always characterized this area. The people of the West have always looked ahead. In their private actions and jointly through their local state and Federal Gov- ernments they have been eager to take bold and imaginative steps toward a better fu- ture. THE DANGER OF TIMIDITY So long as we hold fast to the frontier spirit of the West, we need never fear the greatest danger that could overtake our Na- tion. That is the danger of timidity of be- ing satisfied with things as they are; of failing to seek ever higher goals. Throughout our history there have been timid people who have been afread to move forward. They opposed all the progressive measures we now take for granted. These timid folk once tried to reverse the trend toward free education and political democ- racy. They called this trend mob rule. Today the spiritual descendants of this timid group are afraid of bold, progressive measures to achieve an abundant and ex- panding economy and to distribute its pro- ducts more fairly among all our people. They call these measures statism or socialism. The use of the powers of Government to achieve a higher living standard and a fair deal for all the people is not statism and it is not socialism, It is a part of the American tradition. Every day we should thank Almighty God that the progressive trends of American life and progress have never been stopped for long. We have moved steadily toward a higher conception of human needs and human freedoms and a greater appreciation of the rights of the average man. This progress in American life has not not been accomplished without a struggle. It cannot be continued without a struggle. Repeatedly the common sense of a majority of the American people has had to assert itself in the face of the opposition of those who wanted to cling to the past. Much of this struggle has dealt with whether our vast country with its wealth of resources should be developed for the benefit of the many or the few. The issue has been whether we should stop trying to provide all our citizens with a good standard of living just because a few people already had more than enough. The timid minority do not believe that prosperity for all our people is a goal that we should fight for. Many of them are sin- cere and well-meaning individuals. The trouble has not been always with their hearts, it has been with their eyes. Not only were they blind to the prospects of the future, they could not even see backward clearly enough to understand what had already happened. POINTS TO THE DEPRESSION Let us look to the recent progress of the United States. Twenty years ago we had entered upon the greatest depression in our history. We suffered huge losses for more than three long years. Then we began vigorous policies of recovery and reform. Our recovery was 80 successful that by 1939 our total national output of goods and services was actually higher than it was in the last hoom year be- fore the great depression. Since 1989 we have gone on to make fur- ther gains—tremendous gains. Iam going to give you some facts, The calamity howlers don’t like to look at the facts because the facts prove how wrong they are when they tell you what a terrible fix the country isin. They have been saying over and over and over again, for years, that the country is being ruined. But facts show that things have been getting better. So what do they do? They just ignore the facts. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Well, we are not going toignore them. We are going to keep the record straight. We are going to see what has actually been hap.~ pening to our country. The best over-all measures of a nation’s economy is its annual output of goods and services, In the United States the annual output of goods and services has increased in the last 10 years about 60 percent. Now how does this affect the individual citizen? You know a favorite theme of the boys who are always trying to run our country down instead of trying to build it up, is that the Government takes all our gains away by high taxes. But the truth is that the annual per capita income of our citizens after taxes has increased in the last 10 years by more than 40 percent. And some of the people who are doing the loudest yelling are the very people who have got the biggest increases. Most of them are better off now than they have ever been before in their lives. However, and for this I am very thankful, the increased incomes have not been con- fined to a favored few. Annual wages and salaries of employees increased almost 75 percent in the last 10 years, The income of farm owners, although it has fallen off in the last 2 years and has fal- len off more than it should, is still more than 50 percent higher than it was in 1939. You would think all this would be enough to convince anybody that the country is doing very well. But some people are hard to convince. They say this administration looks after labor and looks after the farmer but that it just doesn’t give the businessman a chance, that business is being taxed to death. PUTS INCREASE AT 100 PERCENT Let’s examine that. The fact is that the annual income of corporate business after taxes—I repeat, after taxes—have increased about 100 percent since 1939. That’s right—100 percent. It seems to me that free private enter- prise is doing pretty well. Iam glad that it is. I want business to be prosperous and I am going to do all that I can to see that it remains prosperous. There are some die-hard reactionaries who won’t give up even when all the facts I have mentioned are pointed out to them. So they say, “Well, maybe so, but the dollars people have won't buy as much as they used to.” That argument is just as phony as all the rest of the arguments the pessimists use. In all the figures I have given you, allow- ance has been made for changes in the pur-~ chasing power of the dollar. The increases I am talking about are real increases, not Just dollar increases. In dollar terms the gains would be even larger. During the last 5 years, we have success- fully met one of the greatest economic tests that can ever confront a nation. We have come through the adjustments following a great war without a depression. We have had depressions after most other wars and many people expected that we would have one this time. Instead, we have weathered the readjust- ment period with relatively few hardships. Almost every newspaper you pick up gives new evidence of increasing business activity. We have avoided the calamity of a post- war depression because our whole economy has been strengthened by a program of ac- tion which began 17 years ago. This pro- gram has been directed toward the humaniz- ing of our economy and toward the humaniz- ing of Government. This program has been, marked by such measures as bank deposit insurance, regulation of the security markets, old-age and unemployment insurance, mini- mum wages, slum clearance and low-rent housing, resource development and protec- tive farm legislation,