autenot tn, the vittues.cf Washington and “moday oir Republic faces e-crisis just as gras and Dt ee ohaliengig as tt did in aie fatet denow the plain truth. “Wo the people must ‘Xnow | be] » “We people” are the Amerioan Government—not the President, mot the State Department, not the Congress, not phe courte—but “We the people,” Our objectives and our foreign policy must be set forth in the language the people can ynderstand, Within the fimits of security they bave a t ta know the obligations we have under- in secret agreements, We know that rouch of the trouble we face today is the result of secret agreements made et Tehran, Yatta, and Potsdam. We know also that one of the men who infitenced those agreements ‘was disioyal to our country. Tt is not my purpose tonight to review the terrible mistakes, the glaring blunders and th® confused bungling of the past. But it is pathetic to look back only & years and to realige that in that short period we have dissipated and squandered #0 much of the atrength that made us the most powerful Nation of al) time. And when the Communist forces of ag- gression launched their brutal invasion of South Korea we were totally unprepared, even though nearly $50,000,000,000 had been ap- propriated to prepare for such an emergency. The American people are aroused. They are fully aware of the dangers forced upon ‘us by Communist aggression. They are pre- pared to make every sacrifice demanded for the defense of the American way of life. They ate ready to fight to the death to pre~ serve their rich heritage of HMberty and ine dependence. All they ask is leadership. In this hour of peril they want leadership in which they can their full truet and confidence. They look tn vain to Washington for leader- that will rise above deception, double talk, aid the shifty trickery of the machine politician. They look for leadership that will respond, honestly and sincerely, to the overwhelming demand for the strictest economy in Gov- ernment spending not related to national defense. We Republicans are not alone in that de- mand, It comes also from patriotic Demo- erate. Every right-thinking American sees danger of national bankruptcy in the deter- mination of the Truman administration to continue tte reckless and extravagant spend- ing for nonessential purposes. In the face of a great national emergency, and with the greatest debt ever carried by any nation in the history of the world—a debt which might destroy us-—Prosident Tru- man has ignored the demand that domestio spending be reduced, Higa budget for 1952 recommends spending for Ronmilttary Purposes of over 630,000,- _ That 1s an increase of more than $6,000,- 000,000 over this year’s figure. And furthermore, the budget is loaded with all the excess baggage of the Truman administration's socialistic programa which have been rejected by one Congress after another. . Let me remind you that Prestdent Truman, in his state of the Union speech, made this statement, and I quote: “The Government must practice rigid teonomy in ita tiondefense activities. Many of the things we would normally do must be curtailed or postponed. 1 charge that President Truman violeted that pledge when he included in his budget such dangerous and extravagant proposals as ‘the Brannan plan, to regiment agricuiture at @ cost of billons of dollars, the vicious acheme to socialize the practice of medicine, the outrageotw propose] to place education under Federal regulation, and other social- istic schemes which would restrict freedom of the individual. My good Jeffersonian Democrat friend, the able and distinguished Senator from Vir- ginfa, Harry Byep, had this to say about Mr. ‘Truman's budget, and I quote: “In my experience of 16 years, considering the perils that confront our country, this message represents the yery height of fiscal arr ibility.’ With all the sincerity at my command I submit thet this 1s no time for fiscal tr- responsibility or any other nonsense, on-the part of those at the head of our Government. T repeat, the American people want leader- ship to which they can safely entrust the security of the Republic. We do not have that kind of leadership in the White House. ‘We do not have that kind of leadership in the State Department. That, my fellow Americans, is one of the reasons why our people are worried, confused, and perplexed. In considering our problems it seems to me we should direct our aims toward four essential elements of our national strength— military, industrial, financial, and spiritual. We must not be swayed by emotion or hys- teria. We must remain cool. We must resist the call of the demagogue. Our decisions must be based on sound, hard, common sense. Name calling has no place in our present critical situation. One of the big problems is whether the President is authorized to send troops out- side the United States. While that may be a@ question for constitutional lawyers, yet the people are vitally interested and gravely concerned in the decision. I have the greatest confidence in our mill- tary, naval, and air force leaders, but the sending of troopa to Europe is only a part of the problem, I¢ is not entirely 4 military jssue. It involves economica, displomacy, and leadership for peace. Sending divi- sions to Europe may opex the door to war. It seems to me the President should destre the advice of Congress because Con- gress is the direct representative of the sovereign will of the people. Government that ignorea the will of the people will degenerate into dictatorship. I should like to offer, in brief outline, some steps which, to my mind, should be taken for the preservation of freedom and peace tn the world. 1. We should develop the greatest potential military strength the world has ever known. Reserve military power must be provided by universal military training. There must be no exceptions. Every American muet have military train- ing. In that way he will become a better American. He will Jearn how to protect hime self under conditions of hardship and danger. He will learn that he has an obligation to his comrades and to the flag, @. We should have the most powerful navy and the strongest sir force in the world. American supremacy on the sea and in the aiy might preserve peace in the world. 3. The ground forces should consist of 4 small Regular Army. It should be the fast- est, the best trained, and with the greatest ‘fire power of any army in the world. 4. We should have enough Regular Army officers selected by merit to instruct the men of universal military training age and aid in the training of the Reserve components. 5. A military and economic survey should be made of the whole situation. We should APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD know the extent to which the other free na- tions are willing to in defense against Communist egeression, “We should hat a complete undarssanciod that Shey wi stand by their 2 . We snould know the strength of our Morte mies and particularly the morale of the le, Pewith this information we can arrive at in- telligent decisions as to bow we can defend ourselves. 6, We must place in high gear all of the great productive capacity of the Vatted States, industrial and agricultural. Our pro- duction of planes, ships, tanks, munitions, equipment, and food must surpass any of our past outstanding records. 7. We must do everything possible to save manpower. Wars are won by men, not by machines or appropriations. We must cut down unnecessary personnel in government, in industry, and even in the armed services. For example, the Federal Government has been increasing ite payrolls by 1,000 em- ployees a day. That is equal to a battalion of infantry. In 180 days we have increased the Federal employees by s number equal to the total of our Armed Forces in Korea. If war comes, every man saved hastens the day of peace. We must avoid strikes and slow downs. The soldier who goes a. w. 0. 1. is frowned upon by his comrades, One ab- sentee worker in war production may deprive & soldier of a rifle, an overcoat, or an emer- gency ration. It may also mean a military casualty. 8. We must have economy in government. We must eliminate or drastically reduce every function not related to national defense, in- cluding services which may be desirable. We must have sound fiscal policies which will preserve the value of the dollar against the destructive power of inflation, Eyen though we defeat Communist aggression in battle, our freedom can be lost if our country is plunged into Anancial collapse. The strongest line of defense against infla- tion includes economy in government, 8 bal- anced budget, adequate taxation, and re- striction of credit. If we have economica] government we can lower the tax burden. Therefore, in all levels of government we must have sentinels on the ramparts, on the quarterdecks, and in the sockpita who make economy the watch- word. . 9. We must have none but loyal Ameri- cans in government, in our industries, cur schools and colleges, and in our churches. 10, Every American should be a part of civilian defense. Our provisions for the edu- cation of our children and the protection of the health and safety of our people must be the best that can be conceived. 11. The United States must never depart from its historic position as # leader for world peace and disarmament. While we cannot take our guard down we must not abandon hope that we can have peace. We must win the cold war of propaganda so that the world will know that the United States has no plan for aggression or conquest. Before we commit Army divisions into any part of the world we must give careful thought to the possibility that it will be considered aggression on our part, 12. Finally, let us, by our example of right living and by obeying the laws of God and man, show the world that the American system has given more of the good things of life to more people than any other form of government ever conceived. Let us lve in peace, righteousness, and good will, doing our full duty as Americans. In conclusion I would like to quote the words of George Washington end Abraham Lincoln. In his famous Farewell Address, Washington admonished the people of the young Republic that religion and morality are indispansable supports of political pros- perity—-the great pillars of human happiness.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD “Observe good faith end justice to all ne- tlons, Cultivate peace and harmony with ax addreas at Springfield, Il, Abraham Which gives mew P teioti tnepire regnt ving ic Eat every reading. pe on with I quate from Lincoln’s speech as follows: “Let every American, every lover of lib- erty, every well-wisher t his posterity swear by the blood of the Revolution never to vio- late, In the least particular, the laws of the country, and never tolerate their violation by others. Let every man remember that to violate the law is to trample on the blood of his father and to tear the charter of his own children’s liberty. Let reverence for the laws be breathed by every American mother to the Msping babe that prattles on her lap, let it be taught in the schools, in seminaries, and in colleges; let 1t be written in primers, spelling books, and in almanacs; let it be preached from the pulpit, proclaimed in leg- qative halls, and enforced in courts of jus- oe. We can strengthen our country if we all resolve to live by the precepts of George Washington and Abraham Lincoln. In a country blessed like the United States there should be no law evasion. There should be no racketeers lurking in the dark shadows of the criminal under- world. There should be no black markets, no profiteering, and no tax dodging. Everyone should accept personal respon- sibility to maintain the highest standard of honesty in our dealings with one another, The strong should realize that each of us is his brother's keeper. We must have ¢ moral and spiritual re- armament in the United States, Our churches should be filiei with people who love God and realize that individual liberty and the dignity of man are the greatest gift to mankind—that they are God given. We should be organized in strong battalions willing to go out and teach to the world the blessings of peace and good will. If we are strong enough in the faith and patriotism of Washington and Lincoln and strive in our daily Hves to exemplify the American way of life, we can overcome threat of war and bring peace to the world, Son Dies in Korea; “Why?” Asks His Dad EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EVERETT M. DIRKSEN OF ILLINOIS IN THE GENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, February 27 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr, DIRKSEN. Mz. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “Son Dies in Korea; ‘Why?’ Asks His Dad,” published in the Rochester Times-Unton of Rochester, N. Y., on De- cember 12, 1950. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Son Dies «w Koana; “Wary?” Asxs Hrs Dap “Where does the responsibility for this whole nasty mess (in Korea) rest?” That's the question asked—and anawered— by the father of a central New York marine who died in action in Korea November 29. "The father, W. J. Corwin, was an assistant at the Univeraity of Minnesota Col- lege of Agriculture until 1920, when he moved to New York tofarm. His son was Mactor Sgt. Mac R. Corwin. sae letter, to the Syracuse Post-Standard, “Thies afternoon, Mrs. Corwin and I fe- cetved s wire that our son was killed in Korea on November 29. “Now, this ts no harder for us to bear than for thousands and thousands of other pare ents. But right now I want to call attention to one question: Where does the responal- bility for this whole nasty mess reset? It is easy to gay, ‘In Moscow. “But is it? “In my opinion, it reste not with our Pres- ident, not with the State Department, and not with any particular individual or group or class of individuals, but with me, with you, and every mature voter in this great United States. They are the ones who have the death of our boys in Korea on their heads tonight. “There will be more tomorrow night. “When so many voters fall to vote or se@ to it that only the best qualified, high caliber men are chosen and delegated to do our work as we want it done, there are always plenty * of misfits, cheap politicians, and gangsters standing ready to slip in and very adroitly take over. “When we, the public, wake up, the dam- age is done and your son’s and my son's lives are sacrificed to the voter's indolence and failure to choose and keep strong, qualified, fearless men on our job, men able and will- ing to kick all quislings out a5 soon as spotted. “Yes; such men are scarce and the entan~ gling meshes of money and influence are great but the power of an aroused, demand- ing electorate ts more powerful. We have the power and the privilege today, but un- leas the voters use that power and transmit thetr demands to our present employees in the White House and Congress, soou more homes will get that sad message and more American boys will die from American-made materiala while the men in Moscow smile at our gullibility. “Now is the time to act and write your Senator and Congressman. “Ww. J. Corwin.” MEeExico, Proposed Amendment of Selective Service Act EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LYNDON B. JOHNSON OF TEXAS IN THES SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, February 27 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Recorp several editorials regarding proposed amendments to the Selective Service Act. These include edi- torials from the Philadelphia Inquirer, the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, the Provi- dence Journal, and the Galveston Trib- une, and the Richmond Times-Dispatch. There being no objection, the editorials were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: [From the Philadelphia Inquirer of January 22, 1951} Ewn Tuxex Datars mc Daare Decisions Week follows week in Washington with plenty of argument but no action on the cistons. ing to ai. versal—-training and service into shape and get tt into operation. Fateful questions press for prompt dis- ; Our problems of national safety and survival have become insistent. With Russia building e war machine even g " more mighty than the huge one it has main« tained since the end of the Second World War, the controversia) issue in America of drafting 16-year-old boys cannot be per- mitted to atall the whole manpower progtani. The fa whether, by excluding the 18-year-olda, we could ratse 3,500,000 men or anything like that number, by June 80. i is recognised that leaving them out of the Present draft would bo a seriously limiting contlition, in conjunction with the exclusion of veterans, sweeping rejections for dis- ability, and various deferment loopholes. These matters must be considered dis passionately and with appreciation of the urgency of the Nation’s needs in the face of ilimitable perils. Secretary of Defense George C. Marshall has stated the case about drafting 18-year-olds in well-weighed terms in his explanation that under the service and training program “virtually every able- bodied man would be inducted at 18 and given 4 to 6 months of basic training: after that some would be sent to college and some would finish out their term in one of the armed services.” The question for Members of Congress and just plain citizens to answer for themselves is whether adequate defenses of America can be established without 18-year-old recruits. The cold statistics regarding the manpower pool under the present draft say that the job cannot be done without taking in the younger soldiers. But it isn't the whole job. Top military leaders, returning from the Far East, declare it 46 more than likely that our defense forces will have to be enlarged much above the cure rently proposed figure of 3,500,000. Congress should be looking now toward that possibility. It has to consider—what- ever the size of our manpower demand—the importance of preserving, so far as it can be done, the supply of workers in agriculture and industry without which tremendously increased programs of production in both fields cannot be realized. Early attention should be given, in whipping new draft leg- islation into shape, to drafting also large forces of men not physically acceptable for combat duty and using them for the in- numerable bookkeeping and housekeeping jobs of the Armed Forces, We don’t have to ecan the unhappy stories of fighting in Korea to realize the need for larger forces of capable combat troops. We had to create them in the Second World War—sometimes on the fields of hattie. We've always had to improvire them, spend~ ing months getting them equipped and ready. No one can possibly cherish the idea that Russia would give us time to build up and train our fighting men. But the democratic process of discuasion—so long protracted— has lost enormously valuable time. Both Congress and the administration are to blame for this. The situation should be immediately cor- rected. Washington must reach proper deci- sions and translate them into action swiftly on the basis of this unassailable condition: The United States must have, as rapidly as it can be procured, a powerful defense force, well trained, fully equipped, and backed up by vast production of food and weapons. While we delay we invite war. The sooner we act the better our prospects of preserving peace, or at any rate, ourselves, will become,
Ai0e2 {From the Philadelphia Inquirer of January ' _ 48, 1961) Drarr ALCERNATIVES Support by two of the Nation's leading educators for the pian to drait 18-year-olds for a periad of training and military service serves to focus the argument on the real issue of the military manpower question. Nobody likes the idea of drafting 18-year- olds, and particularly of sending them abroad, if the need showld develop. We don’t Uke to take them out of school or jobs, and we don't like the idea of sending young men—who seem to their elders to be mere boys—off to learn to be soidiers or satlors, But the alternative, as Karl Compton, pres~ tdent of the Massachusetts Institute of Teche nology, and Harold Dodds, president of Princeton University, told a Senate Commit- tee, 1s to draft older men. This might mean taking veterans, or family men, or both. Our big problem ts to make sure we have the military strength necessary to face the present emergency. As long as there is no dil-out war we must get the manpower with the least possible dislocation to homes and careers, We must prepare for a long emer- gency by tnaisting that all young men get at least basic training, even if they are sent back to schoo! for training in the technical and scientific skills we need. And it is im~ portant that those physically or mentally unqualified for service be given compulsory jobs to ald defense. Those are the principles indorsed by edue cators whose own institutions would be seri- ously affected by the proposed draft. They deserve sober consideration by Congress in deciding on a military manpower program. {Prom the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette of January 12, 1951) UMT Wovutn Srasiuizey Our Miurtary Forces Defense Secretary George Marshall's pro- posal for compulsory military training and service of 27 months for all men reaching the age of 18 makes a heap of sense. It would, as he put tt so succinctly, “give ua a durable layer of military protection that would sur- vive the alternate moods of public alarm or complacency.” We have never had universal military train tng in this country, the traditionalists will promptly note. And the realists must reply, this country has never been prepared to meet @ War emergency. In past wars, fortunately, we have been able to buy enough time to build adequate military forces. But in this age of supersonic planes and atomic weapons the next gamble with e lack of trained man- power could prove fatal. “We must not,” sald General Marshall, “continue to make short-term plans for im- mediate emergencies to be followed by abrupt demobilization and the withdrawal of au- thority to train the men necessary to a rea- sonable posture of defense.” It may be argued that 27 months is too long a time to ask the Nation's youth to sac- rifice in the cause of preparedness, But this objection is met in a provision that “when emergency abates the President would have the right to reduce or eliminate service re- quirements on a uniform basis for all in- ductees and all services. Training require- ments of 4 to 6 months would remain, but the President could modify the type of training.” In other words, every youth sound in mind and body would be required to take basic military training for not more than 6 months. After that active servine in the Regular Armed Forces could range from géro to 23 months at the discretion of the President on the recommendation of the Secretary of Defense. Provision would be made to keep the edu. cational pipelines open. Etghteen-year-olda would be allowed to graduate from high school before being called for training, pro- vided graduation was prior to the nineteenth birthday. Those who started a college year before the eighteenth birthday would be per- mitted to finish the year, The President would be authorized to suspend temporarily the active service of up to 75,000 students so they could complete college training im- portant to the national Interest, following which they would owe the Government 23 months of service. Another 50,000 in active service would receive college training on military scholarships. The Marshall plan represents a departure from the administration’s pre-Korea UMT Proposals, which would have provided brief sugar-coated military training separate from the Regular Military Establishment. It recognizes that the Nation is going to have to raise military manpower either through the draft, which now takes thuse between 19 and 26 for 21 months and 1s turned on and off as the world situation changes, or through universal training and service aimed at a stabilized flow of man- power. © Of the two courses, we much prefer the latter. It would give assurance both at home and abroad, where our major allies have long had similar programs, that we will not con- tinue to fluctuate dangerously between mobilization and demobilization. It seems to us a conscientious and realistic effort to meet our present and future military man- power needs with a minimum of sacrifice. [From the Providence (R. I) Joucnal of January 15, 1951] UNIveRsAL SERVICE It should be understood at the outset that the universal military service and training program outlined to a Senate committee by Secretary of Defense Marshall and his as- sistant, Mrs. Anna Rosenberg, is long-range in character—10 years at least—and not merely for the immediate emergency. This is in line with Secretary Marshall's fundamental thinking on military manpower in a volatile democracy. The program 1s designated, in Secretary Marshall's words, “to train the men necessary to a reasonable posture of defense” in order to eliminate, in Mrs. Rosenberg's words, “the peaks of panicky rearmament in periods of emergency and the valleys of post-haste demobilization when the situation eases.” The problem before Secretary Marshall was twofold: One, military, how to secure an enlarged combat force for the emergency and a continuing base for military strength for defense; two, economic, how to secure these forces with the least harm to the Na- tion's productive power and without sacri- fice of medical, scientific, and technical skills necessary for future balanoe and leadership. Secretary Marshall, 48 a seasoned soldier and stateaman, understood, when tackling the problem, that our people are hot for building a gigantic military establishment when emergency breathes down thelr backs (witness Governor Dewey’s recent speech) and then for disbanding it as speedily when & pause comes and the gigantic standing army is literally standing around at tre- mendous cost to the taxpayers. Moreover, a moral rot sets in among the soldiers them- selves when the purpose of their military life is vague and indistinct, Therefore, the proposal is to call youths of 18 into service for 27 months—4 to 6 in basic training and the rest in regular mili- tary service—and then to pass them into the National Guard or Organized Reserves. The Marshall proposal differs from the Conant- Wriston plan primarily in that it offers greater flexibility tn officer training in col- leges and wider deferrments for specialized training in medicine, science, and tech- nology. The principle of universal service for 18~year-olds is the same. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Through this steady and consistent flow, it 1s anticipated that the Military Establish- ment will get manpower for immediate emere gency needs and also will be buliding an ever- growing reserve that will be the backlog and bulwark of our armed strength and pre- paredness over the years. It is argued reasonably that 18-year-olds (they probably would not enter for 4 or 5 months beyond their birthday) are for the most part not married and without children and that family life would not be disturbed; that they are at the turn from high school to college; that they have no roots sunk and have not entered into permanent vocations; that the domestic, financial, and emotional shock would be less for a boy of 18 than an older person; that they can be trained with a minimum of drain on business, science, education, and the ‘life of the community generally, Secretary Marshall quoted his own words from an earlier report that the 28- to 20-year-old group made the best, tcughest, and most alert fighters in the other wars. It is also pointed out that whereas the in- duction and training of married men, with or without children, would cost 8978,000,000 annually, the same for unattached 18-year- olds would cost $4€6,000,000—a difference of $513,000,000. Outside of deferments for special training, only physical, mental, or moral unfitness would disbar an 18-year-old from universal service. The needs of industry and agri- culture would be met by deferments in the 19- to 26-year-old group under selective service. It is apparent from the testimony of Sec- retary Marshall and Mrs. Rosenberg and the general outlines of legislation later to be in- troduced that great thought has gone into every avenue of exploration, with the secu- rity and the best interests of the Nation as a whole the criterion of judgment. Its design is to gain essential military strength in the most efficient and least painful manner, without fits and starts, advances and re- treats, on the basic assumption (which we believe holds) that public opinion is favor- able to universal military service until ten- sion in the world is satisfactorily resolved. [From the Galveston (Tex.) Tribune of Jan- uary 11, 1951] War Servicr MANPOWER The Detense Department, which 1s to say the Armed Forces, wants to draft as quickly as posaible some 450,000 boys in the 18-year. old age bracket. The Department also wants to put more young women in the uniforms of the WACB, WAVES, and Marines. How many more has not as yet been made clear. Gen. George C. Marshall, the Secretary of Defense, so advised Congress Wednesday. He asked for speedy revision of the draft act and lifting of the 2 percent ceiling on the feminine branches of the services. By coincidence, almost at the same time, General Marshall was making his request, American Legion National Commander Earle Cocke said in St. Louls that 18-year-olds should be drafted because they made better combat soldiers than men over 27 years old, However, there was an tmplication the 18- year-olds would not be sent into combat until they have reached their nineteenth birthday anniversary. That, however, would be subject to change without notice, of course, dependent on conditions and the size of the trained forces. Boys in the 18-year-old bracket should be cautioned, though, by their parents and their teachers not to rush pell-mell to the nearest recruiting station to enlist. It would be far wiser, if they are in school, to con- tinue on with their education until called, ' Deferments probably would be granted for that purpose,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Inoreasing the sixe of the feminine con- tingents in uniform would relense, as it did during World War It, a comparable number of uniformed soldiers, sailors, and marines for active duty. That, of course, is desirable because it would lessen the demand for man- power which might adversely affect war pro- juction, {From the Richmond (Va.) Times-Dispatch of January 18, 1961] UMST Is HicHiy Necessary, suT DETAtLs ARE DEBATABLE The case for the drafting of 18-year-olds into the armed services for universal mili- tary service and training, as urged by De- fense Secretary George C. Marshall, has not been well presented to the Senate Armed Services Preparedness Committee. This has brought a poor reception for the proposal at the hands of that body. One trouble was that Secretary Marshall and Assistant Secretary Anna Rosenberg changed their figures in the middle of the hearings last week. They called first for a total of 8,200,000 in the Armed Forces, but some days later upped the number to 3,462,- 000. This gave enemies of the whole idea of UMST an opening and they took advan- tage of it. Senator Epwin ©. Jounson, of Colorado, one of those chiefly responsible for the hys- terla after World War I which resulted in “bringing the boys home,” leaped upon the UMST plan as “undemocratic and un-Amer- ican.” Although it had been fully approved by General Marshall, Senator JonHNson per- slated in calling it ‘the Rosenberg plan,” and he pronounced it, absurdly, “the most brash and shocking ever made to the Congress in 162 years of existence.” Senator Lynnon JOHNSON, of Texas, chatr- man of the committee and another critic uf the plan, kept his feet much more definitely on the ground, and his opposition may have been more damaging for that reason. He contended that it 1s unnecessary to draft 18-year-olds in order to mako up a total of 8,500,000 in the Armed Forces by June 80, Fe also lectured Mrs. Rosenberg for the delay in producing an actual bill. He said there have been promises of # bill “every day or two” since last September. Mrs. Rosenberg suggested, in reply, that the committee was in some measure respon- sible for the delay, since it had said that before the bill was presented, it should have the approval of all interested Government agencies. She said it was undergoing last- minute revisions at the hands of those agen- cies. An actual bill is important, of course, b ‘ore the committee can make up its mind. Final and authoritative information as to whether the draft of 18-year-olds is essential to acileve the goal fixed for the Armed Forces also is necessary. Undoubtedly a lot of opposition to the drafting of 18-year-olds ig building up in the country. But as Dr. Karl T. Compton, of MIT, told the committee yesterday, “sim- ply to say that we do not like the drafting of 18-year-olds means almost nothing.” The alternatives have to be considered. Is it better to draft those from 19 to 26, even though many are married men with children to support? Ohairman JoHNsSON contends that th.s group will furnish the needed manpower. It is up to him to pro- duce the evidence of this, if he bas it. Nobody likes to draft boys of 18 into the armed services if it can be avoided. The question is whether it can. Nor does any- body want to send them out of the country until they are 10, but General Marshall says that to prohibit this would cause much con- fusion and greatly bamper the defense of We must get all the light we can on this matter, eepecially with respect to the con- ficting statistics involved. If a force of 8,500,000 can be had 6 months hence with. out dipping below age 19, that will be one thing. If it can’t, that will he something quite different. It does seem necessary to set up s system of universal military service and for the defense of the Nation. The details remain to be fully worked out, but the basic idea is sound. Peace or World War I! EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JAMES H. DUFF OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, February 27 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. DUFF. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Recorp a radio address on the ques- tion, Will it be peace or world war It? delivered by me last Sunday evening over the ABC network. There being no objection, the address ‘was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: My fellow Americans, will !t be peace or world war IIL? That question is on every tongue. Properly so too because the lives of everyone of us are affected by that question. In a ticipation of the answer our youth are again called from the usual routines of peaceful American living—from their homes, their schools, and from the farms, mills, mines, and workshops all over America, Every purse is affected. The ordinary ex- peages of living are mounting beyond reach. More and more restrictions are dally imposed upon our ordinary living. Soon the whole population will be groaning under the heaviest load of taxes we have known. This complete disruption of our lives is occasioned by that fateful question—will it be peace or war? No one has a right to doubt the penceful intentions of the United States. America cannot possibly gain anything from another world war. We must have peace, Because if we have war, it will be horrible beyond imagi- nation with atomic bombing, with possible H bombing and with chemical and bacterial warfare, so that all of us may be destroyed-— victor and vanquished alike. Despite America’s peaceful intentions, de- spite the inconceivable horrors of another world war, the evil men in the Kremlin are nevertheless stirring up hatred everywhere in the world. The puppets of the Kremlin are carrying on war in Korea, in Indochina, in Tibet, and fomenting possible additional war in peril pointe everywhere. Both our lives and liberties are theatened thereby. The world has become so small that America is affected by what takes place in Europe as though it were on our own soil. Last week a British bomber flew from an alr- field in Ireland across the Atlantic to Gander Air Field at Newfoundland in Canada in 4 hours and 37 minutes. That flight ought to convince even the most skeptical that what happens in Zurope can happen fast right here press train almost twice that long to run from east to west across the State of Penn- sylvania. We must approach this problem facing us, not under the fear that we will have war; but with the fixed determination that by con- atructive action we can and will have peace, A1003 The world is divided into two camps. The Russian camp that wants war and the free nations who want peace, Theirs is @ camp of slavery—ours of freedom. In this division we must have England, France, Belgium, Hol- land, Denmark, and Italy and the other free peoples on our side, There is little time left. We must decide right now. We will either have them as our allies in this struggie for freedom, or they will fall and become satel- lites of Russie, by our refualng now to col- Jaborate with them effectively for peace. . The American people must be united in a determination to prevent another world war. ‘We can only be #0 united when everyone takes the time to understand clearly the rami- fications of this tremendously important problem. General Eisenhower submitted a report to th Congress of the United States and to the American people. I had the honor to hear that report. In my judgment it was able, sincere, and above all other things hopeful in its attitude of what could be done in a constructive way for a build-up to prevent world war ITI. General Eisenhower's report was concurred in by General Marshall, Gen- eral Bradley, and other high military author- ities, who in World War II were the very men upon whose shoulders we placed the supreme responsibility of guiding us to vice tory. Are we to repudiate them today when they tell us now how to protect ourselves best against world war III, These men have already proved they are entitled to the pest consideration of the American people, not on the basis of mere promises but as the result of proven performance of the first order, These men now join in recommend- ing certain military dispositions of our troops, whereby some wil! be stationed in Europe. These troops are to be sent to Europe not to bring on world war III, but in an endeayor to prevent world war UI, by taking proper measures to that end with our allles under the Atlantic pact. They are troops for peace, not for war. Surely the one best way to protect our future is to fol« low the advice of the men who in the past have successfully guided us to victory and to peace. To prevent world war III Europe must be denied to Russia, because Russia must have the productive capacity of Europe to success- fully attack the United States. Let us in America constantly remember that the peo- ple in western Europe have the same know- how as we do. Take the automobile for ex- ample. Without the discoveries and inven- tions of Western Europe we would not have today’s automobile. The fact is that the peo- ple of western Burope, plus the people of the United States, are responsible for more than 80 percent of all the inventions and improvementa responsible for modern liv- ing. America cannot risk being deprived of that enormous know-how that with our own know-how can rule the world for peace; but split can arm Russia with power that might rule the whole world. While Europe is closer to the Russian menace than we in America; nevertheless the final objective and goal of Russia ia the destruction of the United States. We aro the nation Russia must destroy if it is to rule the whole world as it seems determined to try. While the United States was the sole pos- eessor of the atomic bomb, we were con- stantly shown diagrams of how far it was from the United States to Moscow and to Stalingrad and to other prime targets in Rus- sia. Now that the Russians have acquired the same secret we must surely realize that it 1s no further from the United States to Russia then it is from Russia to the United States. Atomic bombing will move on & two-way street in the event of world war ITT, Russia has surrounded hervelf with satel- lites, Her method is like a wolf pack with
A1004 @ flock of sheep--pick off the outside strag~- ers one at a time until they are all gone. ltimately this process will swallow up all of Europe unless something is done now to prevent it. Eastern Germany has already been Sovietized. Now Russla’s clear purpose is to cave in Western Germany. We in America are the leaders of the free people in today's world. We must act as that leader aince we have the responsibility or the whole cause of freedom will fall. The free peoples of the world must unite, We must stand together against commu- nism—because communism ita united. Une less we stand together, we will ultimately fall together. There is no easy way to peace, Although clearly there is a very easy road to war. The free people must stand together with a united front, and with a ful] deternii- nation to resist to the end. That is the one toncelvable means of preventing the horror of world war III, Tf we are to be successful, we must follow the judgment of our top military men—men in whoge patriotism and in whose judgment ‘we have every reason to believe on the basis of past performance, It may well be a fatal mistake in this critical hour if we substitute political opinion for military Judgment in what is clearly a military matter. This is no time for politics. This is a time for Amer- feaniam. As a united people with a com- mon purpose, with a common determination, and with a bipartisan policy with respect to world affairs, we may be able to preserve world peace—nothing less will prevent world war III. In today’s tortured world troops for Europe are not troops for war, they are troops for peace. And the only possible hope for peace is to follow the judgment of those whose business it is to know the way to have peace if peace is possible to be found. During World War I, Theodore Roosevelt defined our responstbilities when he said: “We here in America hold in our hands the hope of the world, the fate of the coming yeats. And the shame and the disgrace be ours if in our eyes the light of high resolve be dimmed, if we trail in the dust the golden hopes of men.” Civil Defense and Public Welfare CS emeeaamamnanad EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT R. O’CONOR OF MARYLAND IN THE SEVATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, February 27 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. O'CONOR. Mr. President, there is growing awareness, I believe, among the Members of Congress, and particu. larly of those who have been State offi- cials before coming to Washington, of the necessity of strengthening Govern- ment on the local and State levels against the possibility of too much cen- tralization in Washington. Lack of initiative by State and local officials in handling successfully vital problems that are constantly developing often has been cited by those who would further centralize operations in Govern- ment on the Federal level. For this rea- son it is particularly gratifying to note that the American Public Welfare As- sociation has established a Committee on Civil Defense and Public Welfare which will concern itself with the duties of public-welfare agencies in organizing welfare services under the civil defense program, so that fullest use may be made of all community resources in the event of enemy attack, It is particularly appropriate that a Marylander, Mr. J. Milton Patterson, di- rector of the Maryland Department of Public Welfare and deputy director of Civilian Defense, should be named chair- man of the new committee, for the people of Maryland have always been strong in the conviction that government should be close to the people, and have been outstandingly successful in govern- mental operations on the State and local levels. This concrete evidence of the readiness of the States and localities to take the initiative in moving forward in the field of welfare and rehabilitation deserves to be given widespread attention, and I ask unanimous consent, therefore, that an enclosed statement released by the American Public Welfare Association be printed in the Recorp as a part of my remarks. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Civ, Derense anD Pusrtic Wrrarp Mr. Fred Hoehler, president of the Amerl- can Public Welfare Association, today an- nounced the establishment of a Committee on Civil Defense and Public Welfare, under the chairmanship of Mr, J. Milton Patter- son, director of the Maryland Department of Public Welfare and Deputy Director of Civil Defense for that State. This committee, composed of representative public welfare of- fictals from all parts of the United States will concern itself with the responsibilities of public welfare agencies in advancing the organization of welfare services under the civil defense program in order to assure full utilization of all potential community re- sources in the event of enemy attack. Among the State welfare departments already well advanced in developing these plans, accord- ing to reports reaching the association, are those in New York, California, Washington, Tinols, Missouri, North Carolina, Nevada, Tennessee, Minnesota, Maryland, and the District of Columbia. “The emphasis in the present civil defense program on the utilization of existing gov- ernmental agencies to carry out the respon- sibilities of civil defense makes it particue larly important that State and local public welfare departments mobilize themselves for the crucial tasks assigned them,” Mr. Hoeh- ler pointed out, “In most States and in key communities throughout the country public welfare departments, under the supervision of the civil defense organization, are already at work preparing plans for registration and information units, for mass feeding, housing, shelter arrangements, for the provision of clothing, and for welfare services related to possible evacuation. Arrangements are be- ing developed for the mobilization of all avallable voluntary social agencies and vol- unteer personnel as a part of the total plan.” The American Public Welfare Association, organization of State and local public welfare departments and public welfare personnel at ah levels of Government, has offered the serv- ices of its committee to Governor Millard Caldwell, Federal Civil Defense Administra- tor, in helping to advance this program. Mr. Fred Hoehler, president of the association, is director of public welfare for the State of Ulinois and is responsible for the welfare aspects of civil defense in that State. Other members of the committee are: Vice chairman, Charles I. Schottland, director, California State Department of Social Wel- fare; Alden E. Bevter, administrative staf of- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ficer, New York State Department of Social ‘Welfare; Raymond M. Hilliard, commissianer, New York City Department of Welfare; Mau- rice O. Hunt, administrator, Indiana State Department of Public Welfare; W. J. Maxey, director, Michigan State Department of So- cial Welfare; J. O. McMahan, commissioner, Tennessee State Department of Public Wel- fare; George P. Mills, executive director, Al- legheny County Board of Assistance, Pitts- burgh, Pa.; Roderic Olzendam, director, Washington State Department of Social Se- curity; Alvin E, Rose, commissioner, Chicago Department of Welfare; E. H. Schuneman, director, Wyoming State Department of Pub- lic Welfare; Gerard M. Shea, director, Dis- trict of Columbia Board of Public Welfare; Bherwood H. Smith, commissioner, Florida State Welfare Board; Patrick A. Tompkins, commissioner, Massachusetts State Depart- ment of Public Welfare; Robert W. Beasley, Social Security Administration. Excessive Taxation REMARKS HON. A. L. MILLER OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 26, 1951 Mr. MILLER of Nebraska, Mr. Speak- er, this morning I received in the mail some rather unusual presentations to Congress: a pair of pants and the pockets from a pair of pants. The man who sent these pants that I hold in my hands was aprinter. He had been doing some pray- ing, apparently, because the knees are out, and the pockets are also well worn. These taxpayers are protesting the high taxes being imposed upon them. They are willing to pay the taxes if the Government will show a willingness to cut down on some of the unnecessary spending. It is quite evident that the New Deal, in packing the Appropriations Committee, has made it almost impos- sible to make any substantial cuts. They certainly are going to control the purse strings. While the Republicans have a representation of 46 percent in the House, some of the subcommittees are repre- sented by only 23 percent Republicans. A Senatcr from the other body has in- sisted that nearly $9,000,000,000 of fat could be trimmed from the Federal budget. This should be done. Mr. Speaker, there are two Franken- stein monsters who can destroy this country just as well as a military defeat. They are inflation and excessive taxes. This Congress has a solemn obligation to tackle both these problems without fear or hesitation. The letters follow: Quiz Inpustaiss, Ord, Nebr. Hon. A. L, Mrvtrr, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. My Drax Conaressman: There were many times out in the South Pacific that I knew it would be necessary to turn loose, quite unwillingly, of something quite precious in order that my country might live. But I never dreamed it would be my pants, But if other taxpayers, ike myself, are willing to give up their pants, it would seem entirely logical that our Government would be willing to tinshackle itself from the count- less useless bureaus, commissions, and prac-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tees which wd fatten 4¢ down to fhe police-state level as surely as Pilthe Rede oul drag us down to comme nism. The latter, I ‘believe, is just another have, whether they call it communism, facism, socialism, New Dealiam, or what. Some onions, you know, are red, some are white, but they all stink. Oongress alone hae the power to cast off these shackles. I thank you for your work tm the past, but you're not swinging hard Very sincerely, Evoar R. Apxina, Nogre Prarie, Nzse., February 23, 1951. Hon, A. L. Mrtuze, Washington, D.C. Drag Sma: In the movement of your pants to your Congressman, being immodest by mature and teachings and having only one pair of pants left, have cut the bottoms of the pockets to show you their condition from digging for taxes. Now the serious side of the affair, am glad to tell you that some ot the most radical Democrats have really turned against the present administration, Yours very respectfully, A CONSTITUENT, Foderal Taxation of State and Municipal Bonds EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 19, 1951 Mr, REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, the Ways and Means Committee of the Bouse of Representatives is now holding hearings on the President's $16,500,000,- 000 tax bill. One of his proposals is to tax the interest on State and municipal bonds, thus imposing heavier taxes on the citizens of our several States and upon the taxpayers of our cities and villages. There appeared before the Ways and Means Committee on Monday, February 26, 1951, Mr. Austin J. Tobin, secretary, Conference on State Defense, in oppo- aition to the Truman tax proposal. Under leave to extend heretofore granted, I am inserting as part of my remarks the statement of Mr. Austin J. Tobin heretofore named: Mr. Chairman, members of the committee, I appear here as secretary of the Conference on State Defense which was organized in 1938 by the attorneys general of the States, and other State and municipal officers, who considered it essantial at that time, and, since that time, to take a tnited stand tn Opposition to this proposal which sceks to establish Federal control through the power of taxation of State and local financing. I have been asked by er anit public offi- cers, the president of National Associa- tion of Attorneys General, the United States Conference of Mayors, the American Munici- pal Amocistion, the Nattonal Inatitute of ; pol Lew ¢ Moers, and the Munictpal Finance Offecrs Asociation—all of whom hearings—-to outline for the convenience of the commit- ‘tee the points which we will submit once again in opposttion to this proposal. The telegram which we have received from the clerk of the committeo asks that we limit our testimony to methods of raising addl- tional revenue. In accordance with your wishes I shall first address myself to that problem. I will demonstrate that the Ped- eral revenues which can be obtained from this proposal are nonexistent or insignificant, However, before I turn to this first point I showld like to recall that this proposal has been submitted to Congress upon one theory or another on many occasions over the past 80 years, and thet on each of those oceas‘ons it has been overwhelmingly re- jected. It was rejected in 1916 and in 1926 when it was supported by the utility com- panies in a misguided effort to block the development of municipal light, power, and transit systems. It waa rejected 1 the early 1980's, It was rejected by this committee In 1930 and again in 1042. It was rejected on the floor of the Senate in 1940 by a vote of 4¢ to 30, and again in 1942 by a vote of 62 to 34. After Congress had #0 decisively rejeoted the proposal the Treasury and the Depart- men. of Justice turned to the courts and commenced test actions against bondholders of the Port of New York Authority and the Triborough Bridge Authority. In e press re- lease issued when these cases were started the Treasury said that they were intended ultimately to prove in the courts that the Federal Government has the right under the Constitution to tax the income from all State and municipal securities. The courts rejected that contention. It waa rejected by The Tax Court of the United States and in the circuit court of appeals for the second circuit in an opinion written by Judge Augustus Hand. In 1046 the Supreme Court of the United States rejected the Govern- ment's petition for a writ of certiorari re viewing the decisions of those courts. In 1989 and 1940 and 1942 the officers of the States and cities considered it their duty to come here, as they do again today, and to appeal to their Representatives in Congress to prevent the damage to local institutions that is implictt in this destructive proposal. ‘We believe that this committee will ocon- clude, as did the report submitted to the Benate by the Honorable Warren Austin jn 1940 that— “We have not here the partisan testimony of persons interested in pecuniary gain for themselves, or in the accomplishment of some ulterior objective. These witnesses were public offictals charged with the duty of protecting the interests of their communities, They had no personal ax to grind. Anyone who sat through the hearings must have beon impressed with their sincerity and their conviction that it would jeopardize the financtal welfare of their communities and that it was their duty to oppose it. “In the face of such unanimous State and municipal opposition, our duties bere, as rep- resentatives of the States under a Federal system, based upon a constitutional guaranty of their sovereignty, compel the conclusion that we, too, must oppose this measure.” I turn, then, to the first point of the States and cities: That no Federal revenues can be obtained through this proposal. The responsibility placed upon this com- mittee in providing the resources with which to pay for our national defense ts a grievous one. In meeting that responsibility the com- mittee has been urged to look to new sources of revenue and to recommend a tax program including such additional revenue at an early date. The inclusion of this proposal in the Treasury's recommendations at this time is therefore quite jexing, for the tial revenues for the next 20 to 30 years. In 1989, Under Secretary of the Treasury John Fianes aatd that the revenues which could ‘by P And Secretary tament portant. And ata! to this committee of « few weeks ago made no claims that the proposal Would add to the Federal revenues at this time. While the ‘s statement Was phrased in rather general language I assume that the proposal to which he directed the committee’s attention had to do only with Federal taxation of future issues of State and local bonds. Now, the average rate af issuance of municipal bonds over the past 20 years has been about $1,000,000,000 a year, s0 that we are talking about « tax next year on the interest paid by the States and cities on about $1,000,000,000 of bonds, The present average interest rate on Btate and local bonds 4s 2 peroent, but it is generally recognimed that a Federal tax would increase that rate to at least 8 percent. That means that the theo- retical maximum in the way of additional Federal revenues is a tax on 3 percent of $1,000.000,000, which is to say a tax base of Only $30,000.000. But not all of this base could be taxed. The Treasury reports that Government funda, pension systems, mutual insurance companies, and savings banks, which pay no Federal income tax, hold about 25 percent of ali State and loval bonds. With the higher interest rates available on taxable bonds, these investors would increase their hold- ings from 25 percent to, let us say, one- third of the total of new issues, That brings us down to a tax base of $20,000,000 on which a Foderal tax could be imposed next year. However, we must allow for the average amount of bonds which are bought by corporations and by individuals in the lower income-tax brackets. The Treasury tteelf reports that individuals only buy about 40 percent of our State and local bonds. So that, if the tax payable by in- dividuals on such interest runs as high as 50 percent, individuals would pay about $6,000,000, and corporations, even at the new 85-percent rate proposed by the Secretary of the Treasury, would pay about $4,000,000. The end result is a maximum Federal tax potential of $10,000,000 from a tax next year on new issues of State and local bonds; & revenue yield so small that you could hardly find it in the estimates of Federal revenue. It would take at least 20 years for such a tax to reach its maximum potential. Even then, with income taxes at the present rate, it is estimated that the Federal Government would derive no more than 200,000,000 by taxing our State and local financing. The task of this committee tn this time of emergency ts to find new revenue sources which now, during the next few years, will meet the Government's revenue require- ments. This source could not possibly aver- age more than twenty-five to thirty million dollars a year over the next § years. In the field of Federal financing this ts hardly a sum attractive enough to justify the disrup- tion of our constitutional system, by the establishment of a Federal power to tax and so to control the financial operations of the States. And that immediately brings us to the view which will be expressed here today by the attorneys general of the States and the city attorneys who will appear here in op- position to any proposal to tax local secu- rittes. They will tell the committee that such a tax is wnoonstiiutional and would eo held if it came before the Supreme This committee ts looking for money to Duy tanks, ships, and planes now. cannot be paid for by 8 or 4 years of litiga~ tion leading up to the Supreme Court and @epending there on a reversal of the estab- Jished law of constitutional immunities, which the Court has upheld since Pollock v. Farmery Loan & Trust Co. And the Court's
most recent milings in the test case on the bonda of the Port of New York Authority, and the opinions of the majority of the Justices in the Saratoga Springs decision of 1046 encourage no hope for as reversal of the doctrine of the Pollock case, Even before the set-back of the Treasury and the Depart- ment of Justice in the Port Authority test case in 1945, and the opinions expressed by the majority of the Court in the Saratoga Springs case in 1946, the steff of the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation had reported to this committee that— “Jt is the opinion of this office that s constitutional amendment is the only effec- tive way by which the Federal income tax may be applied to this interest (on State and municipal bonds).” When I said, therefore, at the outset that the additional Federal revenues to be gained through this proposal were unsubstantial or nonexistent I meant it quite literally. In his recent statement before the com- mittes the Secretary of the Treasury re- ferred to the immunity of State and local bonde as “a long standing barrier to the achievement of equity in the distribution of the individual Income-tax burden.” We sub- mit to the committee that this so-called loophole has been grossly exaggerated. The report which Senator Warren Austin submitted to the Senate in 1940 and 1942, and which was supported on the floor of the Senate, said: “(This proposal) ia based upon a theory of tax evasion that is not supported by the facts. Though it has been popularized with the public as a device to obtain additional taxes from the wealthy, it would in reality place upon the States, and particularly upon the cities, a heavy burden of increased local taxation. Stripped of its popular catch phrases, tt would simply shift e further, and perhaps, unsupportable burden on the home owner and the rent payer.” The Teasury’s own statistics admit that about 60 percent of our municipal bonds are held, not by individuals, but by Govern- ment agencies, pension systems, sinking funds and other institutional investors which are not subject to progressive per- sonal surtaxes. With reference to the re- Taaining 40 percent of these bonds held by individuals, the estate tax returns show substantial holdings in smaller estates. The Treasury's statistics reveal also that the severity of income tax rates has had no relation whatsoever to the percentage of municipal bonds held by individuals. Al- though taxes rose steeply from 1987 to 1945 the percentage of State and local bonds held by individuals in 1945 was actually some- what le~s than in 1987. So also consider the fact that in 1937, with an effective tax rate on a 850,000 net income of 17.8 percent, the percentage of outstanding municipal bonds held by individuals was 45 percent; whereas in 1947 with an effeotive tax rate on a 650,000 net income of 49.6 percent the percentage of municipal bonds outstanding in the hands of individuals had dropped to ¢1 per- cent. The fact is, also, that the State and local bonds held by individuals do not on the average constitute any substantial portion of thelr wealth. The Treasury's analysis of returns for taxable decedents’ estates aince 1927 ahows that on the average only 12 percent of the wealth in estates of $1,000,- 000 and over has been invested in State and municipal securities. In other words, over seven-eighths of thetr wealth haa been invested in te and other forma of securities. 80, too, a study prepared by the ataif of your own Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation in 1939, shows that only 6 peroent of the incomes tn the mijiion dolar brackets were derived from interest. on State and local securities. Buch percentages ft the piotute of normal diver- sification of investments far better than the Treasury's picture of tax avoidance. Finally, as the committee knows, anyone ‘who purchases s municipal bond pays & heavy tax to the State or local issuing body at the time he buys the bond in the form of a much lower interest rate than he would accept if the same bond was taxable, I think that most of the members of this committee are familiar with the heavy im- pact of this proposal on the cost of pro- viding State and municipal facilities. There would seem to be general agreement that that increase would probably be about 1 percent or more in the interest rate, or an ineréase in State and local borrowing costs of 50 percent on a 2 percent municipal bond, On the present volume of State and local debt, that means that this proposal would undoubtedly impose a burden of added costs on local government rumn‘-~ «~vard of _ It ia true that this total would be reached gradually, just as the relatively meager Fed- eral revenues could only he realized grad- ually. However, the full weight of the tax on individual States and cities and on local projects would be felt immediately. If the city or town you live in needs a new school, a new hospital, a sewage-disposal project, or an irrigation facility next year your local tax- payers will fee] the heavy impact of this pro- posa: at once. If the States of Ohio or Penn- sytvania or Rew Jersey or New York wish to construct or add to their new systems of turnpikes and through ways next year, or the year after that, the full weight of this Fed- eral tax proposal on those projects will be felt at once. If the Chicago Transit Author- ity must purchase new busses by the sale of bonds next year it must a..ticipate a 30-per- cent or a 60-percent increase in its financing cost. The difficulties faced by local government since the last war in providing the essential services which the people of your localities require are, I believe, well known to the mem- bers of this committee. Population increases of 50 percent in new suburban areas and a well-defined shift of population to the West- ern States have created needs for schools, roads, and utilities which would be hit at once by this proposal. You will bear in mind too that the immediate needs and require- ments for the extension of utilities, the con- struction and repair of streets, and for schools and fire and police protection, brought about by the construction and ex- pansion of defense plants, must be met, and are being met today, by the municipalities. Some 90 percent of all State and municipal bonds are issued by the local governments, As you know, our cities and towns are hard pressed themselves to find sources of reve- nue, or perhaps I should gay in just squeez- ing the old real property tax to meet the needs of their people for hoapitals, schools, streets, sewers, transit, and a decent standard of living for their civil servants. There is no fatr comparison in this proposal between the impact of a 50-percent increase in the cost of local financing, and the compara- tively meager return that could be hoped for by the Federal Government. Much hae been said about the necessity of perfecting the progressive character of the Federal income tax. We submit that not enough thought has been given to the fact that this propa would have just the re« verse effect on the local tax structure, where ita burden would be borne almost entirely by property owners whose taxes ¥ not levied in accordance with ability pay. The municipalities, as I have eaid, tesue 90 percent of our State and local debt, and they derive almost 85 percent of their revenue from real-estate taxes. Yet the same tax perfectionista who keep bringing this issue back to this committee year after year, would admit that the real-estate tax is one of the most regressive forms of taxation. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD In many circumstances, however, the con- sequences of this proposal would be even more serious than the increase in cost and the consequent increase in local property taxes. It would frequently involve the abil- ity of the community to finance a needed improvement at all. When we were before this committee in 1942 Mayor LaGuardia and Commissioner Moses emphasized the fact, as will Mayor Impellitteri! today, that the heavy addition of interest costs would mean that many of our new self-supporting public projects in New York City could not be financed at all. The estimates of cost and revenue upon which we must go to the market for the financing of transit systems and toll bridges and tunnels and turnpikes and airports and public terminals are fre- quently quite marginal. It requires close fig- uring to demonstrate that these projects can meet their operation and maintenance charges and their debt service. In these estimates interest costs are frequently the deciding factor. The Chicago Transit Au- thority could not have been financed $f its bonds were taxable by the Federal Govern- ment. Detroit could never have effected its tremendous refunding program after its de- pression of the 1930's if its bonds were sub- ject to Federal tax. We must build a new tunnel under the Hudson to cope with metropolitan conges~- tion in northern New Jersey and New York. We have been working on the estimates for that project for the past year, and I must say frankly to this committee that there is no possibility of financing such a tunnel on a self-supporting basis if the Treasury suc- ceeds in its efforts to tax our bonds. Is it the purpose or objective of this pro- posal to increase the need and pressures for Federal aid? Are the States and cities to be forced to call upon the Federal Government to finance projects which they could have financed themselves if the Federal Govern- ment had not disrupted local financing by taxing municipal bonds? That would cer- tainly be a wry outcome of a revenue bill addressed to the problem of additional Fed- eral revenue. We submit that much of the misunder- standing of this proposal arises because the Treasury discusses it simply as a problem in taxation or in alleged tax evasion. But this is not a problem in abstract economics. The answer is not to be found by adding up possible Federal tax revenues on the one hand, increased interest costs to local gov~- ernment on the other, and then substracting the two totals. The real nature of this p- blem is one of the preservation of inde- pendent local government, of the continu- ance of true federalism under our Consti- tution. It is a problem that reaches into the very nature and quality of the demo- cratic process. As Senator Bailey, of North Caroline, said when this proposal was de- bated on the floor of the Senate in 1940 “the really great issue here 1s not one of revenue. The really great issue here ts the power of one sovereignty to tax another, and the wisdom of it, even conceding that the Federal Gov- ernment has the right to tax the credit of my State, for that is what it all amounts to.” If the functioning of local government is vital to our liberties in times of peace, it Js vital to our national existence in times of war. This !s particularly true in a war that will be fought in city streets and by the cities themselves. National defense calls for the fullest co- Operation of States and municipalities in the maintenance of city services and the construction of municipal facilities vital to the war effort. It requires the atrengthen- of their credit standing and the utmost efficiency in the administration of their local affairs. The cities are loyally meeting these proper demands; local government is enlist- ing “for the duration.” Nothing would tn- jure this unity of purpose and effort more
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD United States. power to tax always carries with it ‘the power to exempt and to classify the sub- fects of taxation. Thus, any future admin- istration controlling the Federal Govern. ment could, through the to tax our securities, and through the power to exempt and to classify within the activities of local ment * * * the power to tax lightly 1s the power to tax severely. The power to tax is, indeed, one of the most effective forms And no more powerful in- ent for centralization of government could be devised. For with the Federal Gov- ernment immune and the States subject to tax, the economic ability of the Federal Gov. ernment to expand its activities at the ex- pense of the States is at once apparent.” ‘We understand that when the Secretary a for the constitutionality of this proposal on the study submitted to the Senate in 1928 by the Department of Justice. We sub- mit to the committee that the propositions of law advanced in that study were com- pletely repudiated in the opinions of Chief Justice Stone and Justices Reed, Murphy, Burton, Dougies, and Black in the Saratoga Springs case in 1046. That study, on which the Secretary of the Treasury told this committee that he relied upon, frankly asserted the supremacy of the Federal taxing power over the functions of local government. That propoaltion was re- jected by the Chief Justice in the Saratoga Springs case when he said: “The counterpert of such undue interfer- ence has been since Marshall's v. Maryland (4 Wheat. 316). And by Justices Douglas and Black when they said: “The power of one sovereign to tax an- other is an innovation so startling as to re- juixe explicit authority if it is to be allowed. Federal exercising the powers of sovereignty guar- anteed them by the Constitution, (when they issue securiiies or perform any other acts within the scope of thair police power.” So too in the Departament of Justice study of 1939, which the Secretary of the Treasury has sald he relies upon, it was argued that many of the activities of the States were propristary and eo taxable. This distinction was rejected py all eight justices in the Sara- sab eri short the Supreme Court seems to have lett nothing but shreds of the opinion on which the Departenant of Justice relied when 2+ wemt into the test cases involving the bonds of the Port of New York Authority and the Triborough Bridge Authority and on which it velied also in the Geratéga Springs onan, Chief Justice Vinson became a mromber of the Supreme Court after the decision in the Saratoga Springs case. He had ied the fight ageinst Federal taxation of municipal bonds, even by constitutional amendment, when he was a Member of the House in 1924, And it was Mr. Justice Burton who led the fight against taxation of municipal bonds on the floor of the Senate in 1942. The real tesue here should be very clear. Tt ts an issue thet transcends the field of taxation or the field of mere fiscal argument. It rises beyond the niceties of legal debate and distinctions. if Congress has the power by simple stat- ute to tax State and nrunicipal bonds, it has inevitably the power to control State and municipal financing. Without control uf tte own financing no government can continue as a free and inde- pendent state. That ts why the States and cities believe that this ig the chosen battleground upon which they must meke their stand for the preservation of local government and ail that it means under our constitutional syatem. Under that system denrocracy itself ls com- pletely dependent upon the continued free- dom of the States to carry on the functions of local government without Federal inter- ference. So long as such a eystem is to be matntained, tax interference by one govern- ment with the functions of the other can oniy be prevented by reciprocal constitu. tional immunity. In the words of the memorandum in op- position which the American Federation of Labor submitted to this committee in 1942: “To preserve the sovereigity to our several and separate State governments, and the home rule of our cities, the credit and bor- rowing capacity of our several States and political subdivisions should be taxable only by the respective States, thus reserving to the States exclusively this field of taxation, preventing the coercion of the States by the Federal Government and preserving local self-government.” The States and cities are confident that this conrmittee will reject this destructive recommendation as tt has on every occasion in the past when it has examined tts de- merits. Retreat From Victors’ Justice EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KATHARINE ST. GEORGE OF NEW TORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 27, 1951 Mrs, 8T. GEORGE. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the Reoogn, I inciude an article by William Henry Chamberlin showing once more the crimes committed by us and our allies as victors in the name of justice on Human Events of February 21, Rerezat Feom Vicrogs’ Josricz (By Willam Henry Chamberlin) It is remarkable how fast we are retreat. inent of Poland, the giving of Manchuris to Btalin, the . new Polish-German and Polish et frontiers, the uprooting of many millions from homes which thelr ancestors had occupied for génerations, the total disarmament of Germany and Japan? Most of these decisions were crimes elementary humanity; al) were grave biun- ders from the coid-Mooded standpoint of American national interest. Now there has been a substantial and wel- come, if belated retreat from the unsound conception of “victora’ justice,” to use the phrase of the Srttish publiciet, Montgom~ ery Beigion, which found expression in the Nuremberg trial and tn the many subee- quent trials of alleged German war orimi- nails by American courts. High Commissioner John J. McCloy and Gen. Thomas T. Handy, commander of United States forces in Wurope, recently an~ nounced the completion of their review of 101 sentences {mposed on prisoners held in the Landeberg prison. The revision of these sentences was so drastic as to throw considerable doubt on the justice of the original sentences. Twenty-one out of 28 death penalties were commuted. Thirty-three criminals, including all the industrialists who bad been sentenced in one of the flimsiest of the trials, were released. Mr. MoCioy offered the comment that the confiscation of the property of Alfred Krupp Was generally repugnant to American con- ceopte of justice and reversed this sentence. Thirty-five prison terms were reduced. It was natural that this decision should be met by outories of enraged criticiam by two groups in this country and abroad. There are those who want their pound of fiesh of vengeance. And there are others who, because of active participation or ex- preased approval, have built up an emotional vested interest in vindicating the justice of the war-crimes trials. However, there seems no reason to ques- tion the aincerity of Mr. MoCloy’s state- ment: “I have made every effart to decide each individual case objectively, dispassionately, and on its merits. All of my decisions have been rooted in the firm belief in the basic principle of the rule of law which all must respect and to which ali are answerable. With this principle I have striven to temper justice with mercy.” Indeed, one might well go further and, in the retrospect of the years which have elapsed since the end of the war, say that the decisions to set up victors’ courts to try members of the vanquished nation for war crimes was a moral, judicial, and political taistake and should never be repeated. The most obvious objection to the war- crimes trials, and it is one which a less in- telligent and literate people than the Ger- mang would scarcely have failed to appre- ciate, was the complete absence of two ine dispensable attributes of any genuine legal tribunal: impartiality and universality. The Germans wete judged and condemned not because they had committed crimes of ap- character, as some of the defend- ants unquestionably had; but because they were defeated. One could offer many concrete iilustra- tions of this proposition; but two may suf- fice. The planning and of aggressive ‘war was one of the principal ttems in the Nuremberg tndictment. But it was widely known at the time, and has subsequently phase of Hitler's aggressive war, up to the joint of concluding advance agreements as how the human and territorial apoils of aggression in Eastern Europe should be shared. But representatives of the U. 8. 8. 8. were not in the dock at Nuremberg; they sat on the bench with the other judges.
A1008 Few wer crimes exceed in atrocity the epld~blooded massacre of thousands of Po- Mah war prisoners whose bodies were dis- covered in 1943 in the Katyn Forest, near the town of Smolensk, in western Russia. The aircumetantial evidence that this massacre was carried out by the Soviet political police tn the spring of 1940 1s overwhelming. The Nuremberg tribunal iteelf, certainly not in- elined to give the Germans the benefit of any doubt, refused to find them guilty of this cular outrage, although it had been ted in the indictment. But no one pro- posed to call the Soviet authorities respon- gible for this violation of international law and elementary humanity to account. And Count Stauffenberg, cousin of the officer who was one of the leaders of the plot against Hitler of July 20, 1044, voiced a not unnatural sentiment when he recently pro- posed the prosecution of “those Allied war criminals who were guilty of raping and plundering the German people when the Allies advanced into Germany.” mm It is this obvious absence of any attempt to apply even-handed justice in the punish~ ment of offenses against humanity that ex- plains the cynical apathy with which most Germans have reacted to the war crimes trials. Had a genuinely international tri- bunal, including judges selected from neu- tral countries and from non-Nazi Germane, been eet up after the war for the purpose of investigating all offenses against human- ity, the effect would have been impressive and edifying. But a long series of trials of vanquished by victors could only be expected to produce among the vanquished at best indifference, in some cases sympathy with the accused. The inconsistency was too glaring, especially after the cold war heated up and the west- ern powers and the Soviet Union began to accuse each other of the crime of preparing @ new aggressive war. Apart from this general inconsistency, there were grave objections in detail to the conduct of many of the war crimes trials and the assumptions on which these trials were based. In the trial of 12 members of the Krupp firm there was an avowed deter- mination of the prosecution to get a Krupp, regardless of how little evidence there might be against him. As Alfred Krupp wrote to General Clay after his conviction: “During the whole procedure I felt that I was standing before prejudiced and biased judges.” The counsel for the defendants, in their appeal, asserted that all the questions put by the judges aimed at implicating the ac- cused, that no witness for the prosecution was cross-examined for credibility, whereas this method was applied to witnesses for the defense, that documents were misused and cited out of context, The court held the Erupp firm responsible for measures pte- scribed by the Nagi government for the treatment of foreign laborers and paid no attention to evidence that the firm did what 4t could to improve this treatment. As in many other cases, notably {n the trial of such former members of the Foreign Office staf as Weizsaecker and Woermann, there was a deliberate or unconscious ignor- ing of the psychological condition under which men lived and worked under Hitler's dictatorship. Long prison sentences were imposed not for acts of spontaneous cruelty and inhumanity, but because industrialists and diplomats did not file protests which would have been useless to the victims of the Naais and self-destructive for themselves, wv Btiil more sinister were the methods used to extort confessions from German soldiers acoused of having killed American prisoners in the Malmedy region of Belgium during the Battie of the Bulge. According to Judge Edward Van Roden of Pennsylvania, who investigated this case for the Army, physical torture and mock trials and threats to fam- ilies of the accused were employed on such ascale that “it is impossible to know whether the men being hanged are guilty or inno- cent.” Senator McCartiy of Wisconsin, who de- nounced this perversion of the ideals of American justice on the floor of the Senate, suggested one of the explanations: “Many members of the interrogation team were American citisena of very recent origin— German political refugees from Hitlerian Germany—employed by the Army because of their hatred for the defendants for the purpose of getting confessions from the accused.” All in all, the purposes of justice and American political interests were badly served by the war crimes trials, High credit is due to a few men who spoke out against the abuses of these trials, to investi- Gators like Judge Van Roden, to Judge Wen- nerstrum, who sharply disassociated himself from the spirit and methods of a trial of Ger- Man generals, to Judge Powers, who pre- sented a powerful dissenting argument in the case of the Foreign Office officials. A German of outstanding political intelli- gence, with whom I discussed the recent re- vision of sentences, predicted that this would lead to better understanding and added: “There is nothing to be said personally in favor of the seven men whose death sen- tences were upheld. They were proved mass murderers. The only argument for commu- tation in these cases is that the death pen- alty has been abolished in the German Fed- eral Republic. I think there is & case for further modifications of the sentences passed on some of the generals. They have been condemned for dealing harshly with guer- rillas; but your own experience in Korea shows that guerrillas cannot be handled with silk gloves.” Voice of Democracy Contest EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM F. KNOWLAND OF CALIFORNIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, February 27 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp, the re- marks of Earl J. McGrath, United States Commissioner of Education, made at a luncheon honoring the four high-school winners of the Voice of Democracy con- test, held at the Hotel Statler in Wash- ington on February 22, 1951. There being no objection, the state- ment was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: This is a time for fundamentalse—for straight talk about freedom, democracy, and brotherhcod—for clear thinking about the spiritual values that have made our Nation great. If we mean to preserve our heritage and save western civilization, we must grasp the full meaning of individual dignity and equal opportunity, and we must put these ideas to work in our daily lives. sufflce cn this anniveranty of Washiogtons on versary ‘s birthday, for the hour ts perilously late and the danger to our way of life ts total and relentless. At this moment, the disciples of Communist imperialiam are beaming their APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD great lies about the free world, about the United Nations, and about the United States to every corner of the globe. Their “upside- down talk” makes mockery of our institu- tions and our beliefs. It is of cructal im- portance that we seize every opportunity to speak out against the evils of totalitarianism, and at the same time affirm our belief in and devotion to the ideals of democratic living. It is especially significant, therefore, that today in Washington we are paying special tribute to four young people who speak for democracy. These high school studentsa— two girls, age 16, and two boys, age 17—have shown that they know how to talk straight and think straight about the fundamentals and about the moral principles that really count in this free society of ours. They are about to receive scholarship awards honoring them as winners of the fourth annual Voice of Democracy contest. In this contest the United States Office of Education has taken @ part since its inception in 1947. One and one-half million young people took part in this year's contest in the second, third, and fourth years of high school, It has been apparent to those who have heard their words that our young people fully understand the meaning of democracy and appreciate the significance of the present at- tack upon its values, Their statements bear eloquent testimony to the fact that in our schools young people learn that democracy is as democracy does. Our youth know what they believe in and what they are willing to defend. In these words a former winner of the Voice of Democracy contest recently ex- plained why it ts important that young people speak out for democracy. He said: “America never has had, and most likely never again will have such a need for re- affirming support of democratic principles. The Voice of Democracy contest did this for me, for I can see that only democracy and its degree of individual freedom can stand as the ray of hope beyond the blackness of tomorrow. Working among America's high school generation, the contest is of highest importance in helping young Amertcans grasp that thread of idealism which ts the only hope for maintaining our national integrity.” The contest awards to 1951's eloquent spokesmen for democracy will be presented by the Honorabie Frank Pace, Secretary of the Army. (At this point, Commissioner McGrath in- trovuced Secretary Pace who spoke in tribute to the Voice of Democracy contest and pre- sented the 1951 awards to the four winners: Robert A. Burnett, of St. Louts, Mo.; Maroia Anne Harmon, of San Bernardino, Caltt.; Norita Newbrough, of Baton Rouge, La.; and Ricardo Romulo, of Washington, D. ©. Por- tions of the award-winning broadcasts were then read, after which Dr. McGrath ad- journed the Juncheon with the following re- marks): I believe that you, like me, must get a great elevation of spirit in hearing the ex- pressions Ly these young people of the ideals and the ideas for which this country stands. T am sure, too, that you, the adult members of this audience, feel very humble. I am sure you feel some soul-searching is neces- sary to discover to what extent we Hve up to these high ideals. I never leave these meetings without feeling a great deal of sat- isfaction and a great sense of security with respect to the future of this great country. The other members of this audience will forgive an educator if he says that in a small way he gets personal satisfaction out of being associated with a profession which, to be sure, is not entirély responsible for these performances bécause it shares that responsibilty with the church and the home, but which nevertheless has these young people in hand for e large portion of their daily lives. I feel, wnen I hear these state-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD mente, ‘aoing tha school teachers of the Na- are ‘8 pretty good job in ‘uate ing the traditions and the ‘dels ot our country. For yo:' I express to these two young ladies and two young gentlemen a great admiration for what they have done and through them to a million and a half others. I am sure that I on their behalf express their gratitude for the distinguished group that has come to meet with us here oday. No Indians Will Be Made Homeless by Central Arizona Project EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN R. MURDOCK . OF ARIZONA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 27, 1951 Mr. MURDOCK. Mr. Speaker, on pages A989-A990 of the Appendix to the ConcressionaL Recory for February 26, Congressman CLAIR ENGLE, of Calt- fornia, extended his remarks under the title “Indians Will Be Made Homeless by Central Arizona Project.” In the course of his introductory remarks Congress- man Enote says concerning thé apal Tribe of Arizona: Their long struggle tostay on thetr land will be lost, however, tf Congress mpproves of the central Arizona project. Following this Congressman Enouz in- serts a lengthy memorandum on this Indian tribe to substantiate his state- ment. Perhaps Congressman Encis has not seen the canyon area in which the Bridge Canyon Dam is to be built. I urge him to go with other members of the House Committee on Interior and Insular Af- fairs to see whether any land occupied by dwellings of these Indians will be taken from them should a dam at the Bridge Canyon site be built. This is about the wildest terrain on the North American Continent. Although it les outside the Grand Canyon National Mon- ument and many miles outside the Grand Canyon National Park, it is a region just about as rough as the Grand Canyon area itself. The Hualapai Indians do not live in and never have lived in, their live- stock do not use and never have used, that part of the canyor which would be flooded. It is erroneous to assume that because the Fort Peck Dam on the Mis- souri River will flood some Indian home- land, causing villages and cemeteries to be moved, that the same is true concern- ing the Hualapai Indians in the deep canyon where the Bridge Canyon Dam is to be built, The two cases are not at all similar, The only land which the Government would require of these Hualapai In- dians—and that part is worthless land for Indian purposes—is just enough can- yon wall and bed rock on which to build the dam, plus the bottom of the canyon where the river flows,a temporary site for the work plant during the construction, and a right-of-way for 1 road to bring in materials, and so forth. Ample pro- XCVI-—~App.-----64 vision is made in the bill to recompense the Indians justly for any loss incurred because of this construction. Furthermore there wouid be great ben- efits accruing to these Indians tempo- rarily and permanently should this con- struction be done, and the Hualapai Tribe would be exceedingly heavy losers if this dam were not built. As proof that the Hualapai Council does not agree with Congressman Encuz I cite a resolution passed by the governing body of the Hua- japai Tribe and inserted jn the ConarEs- sIonaL Recorp, volume 96, part 2, pp. 2043-2044. The Hualapai Indians have officially sanctioned the program as con- tained in the legislation before Congress, Their resolution is as follows: Reso.vurion 20u or tits Govrrnina Bony or THE HVALAPAI TRIBE OF THE HUALAPAI RESER- VATION, A FEDERALLY CHARTERED INDIAN CorporaTION Whereas there is now pendin, in the Con- gress of the United States legislation known as Senate bill 75 covering the construction, operation, and maintenance of a dam on the main stream of the Colorado River at Bridge Canyon, and for other purposes; and Whereas in the event satd Bridge Canyon Dam project should be constructed and op- erated, the lands and rights of the Hualapal Tribe would be materially affected in that the dam, and the townsite for the dam and @ great many of the rights-of-way would be on the Hualapal Reservation, and unless said lands and rights of the tribe are protected, the tribe and its members will be severely damaged; and Whereas there has now been proposed & compromise amendment to section 14 of said Senate bill 76 which compromise amendment in substance meets the major requests of the Hualapai Tribe for the protection of their rights and interests by giving the Indians a chance to negotiate a voluntary sale of their land and a right to @ fair jury trial on com- pensation if no voluntary agreement is reachec; and Whereas the Hualapai Tribe realizes the great importance of the Bridge Canyon proj- ect to the State of Arizona and in the interest of the people of the State of Arizona the Hualapai Tribe now desires to lend their en- dorsement and support to 8. 75 with the attached proposed amendment to section 14 being made a part thereof: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the Hualapat Tribal Council in meeting assembled this 16th day of Febru- ary 1950, That it endorse 8. 75 as amended by the attached proposed amendment; and by it further Resolved, That the Hualapal Tribal Coun- cil, expressing deep appreciation for the sym- pathetic support for the protection of the tribe, given by civic and labor organizations, and by many Senators, respectfully urges Senate endorsement of S. 75 as amended; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be f.swarded to the members of the Arizona congressional delegation and to other Mem- bers of Congress and other organizations con- cerned with the protection of Indiar rights. CERTIFICATION I, the undersigned, as secretary of the Hualapai Tribal Council, hereby certify that the Tribal Council of the Hualapai Tribe is composed of nine members, of whom eight, constituting a quorum, were nt at a meeting thereof this 16th day of February 1950, and that the foregoing resolution was duly adopted by an affirmative vote of eight members. Lao B. ANDAEWS, Secretary. A1009 “Things Past Redress Are Now With Me Past Care” EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 20, 1952 Mr, EDWIN ARTHUR HALL. Mr, Speaker, Political Observer Bob Mc- Manus, of the Binghamton Press, now covering the Albany scene, reports that reapportionment of New York's congres- sional districts will not be made known until long after next September, I could have told Igim that. I had just talked with the oracle who visits me every time he gets something hot off the wire. . The last story he related was perfectly amazing. It was about face from the one before. He said he was in @ well-known pub a few days ago in the State capital when a couple of boys “in the know” accosted “Tell that guy Hat,” they spluttered, deep in their cups, “we’re going to carve his district into beefsteaks.” “we've got plans, and he ain’t goin’ to like ‘em. Only he won't know soon enough to do him any good. We'll show him what a gerrymander job really is.” This latest report upset me no end, because it was an about face from what I was told would be the new congres- sional district. I find it difficult to believe that the underlings my friend refers to would de- liberately go out on a limb contrary to the wishes of just about everybody. The Governor himself expressed pub- Nely, several weeks ago, that they ought to get the redistricting job out of the way | as soon as possible. ' I fail to see how anyone can profit by our being kept in the dark until the eve of the next election as to where the new districts will lie. They seem to take special delight in rubbing this into me. They gloat over the idea that they are accomplishing a grand coup by worrying me over the make-up of the counties I must run in next year. This is strictly small potatoes. I long ago made my plans. I am keeping them to myself, but I can assure you this much: I will be campaigning in every direction at once and I will be lining up support in every prospective county. After all, they cannot eliminate all the other counties up-State from the Broome orbit, regardless of how much they might want to declare us a foreign State. Moreover, they cannot keep me from campaigning in the other counties, Tt is atill a free country, I guess. Of course, it is an insult to up-State to try to take a single Congressman away from that mighty area. But, as I say, I have made my plans, T have tried my best to see an open, aboveboard fight out of this thing, but Iam doomed to disappointment,
Alo16 may, I will be in there Come what pitching. It will be necessary to expend a little more energy going all over the will be good exercise. I will get better acquainted this way also. So, for the benefit of those who think their n on the most im- portant subject before the people this year, tirat of preserving our American system, is annoying or irritating me, I say, have your fun. In the words of a line from Richard II, “Things past redress are now with me past care.” Let Us Utilize Dur Defense Facilities EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD H. JENISON oy ILziwars IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 27, 1951 Mr. JENISON. Mr. Speaker, in these perilous times, when the very preserva- tion of our Nation may depend upon our staliation in the hezrt of our country, I refer to George Pield, located in east- ern Tilinois and in the center of a net- work of rat] and highway facilities vital Government for an immediate considera- tion of reactivating the base. Lawarncrvaire, ls, Febrtery 10, 1961. Hon. Eowakp Jzwwon, United States Representative, Dean Sm: We have not bothered you much untill now for we have felt that the Govern- Yndiana people are doing all they con and are getting letters beck from Washington George Field were sent to our ta tives from both States in Washington at at time, and we received letters back tell- owned by the Government and there are dozens of good butidings and hangars in good conditton just standing there, also acre after acre of thick good concrete runways large and good enough to take care of the largest type of planes. Roads, water system, elec~ tric system, large well-built housing area, raitroad switch into fleld from main line of B. & O., warehouse, store, post office; tn fact everything ia standing there ready to be put back in operation. They tell us that field cast about $100,000,000 in 1941 and was only ‘used in the last war so It is not old enough to be worn out or obsolete. . This field nas never been Gooded, and has been cut off by high waters only twice as far back a@ anyone can remember, This field is definitely above any and all high water, and by ralsing the road to the fleld a couple of feet in some low places, the road would be above any and all high water. George Field was inspected as 2 possible Iocation for the proposed West Point of the alr and the « told us at that time a amall levee could be built for nearly nothing that would forever atop any threat fram high water. Surely a $100,000,000 investment won't let a few hundred dollars atand in the way of its being used. When George Field wae in operation planes from other fielde were flown here to get them out of the heavy winds that destroy planes at other fields. George Field's location would save the Government enormous amounts of money every month, being located in the center of the densely populated area that it la; there would be leas freight and trans- portation cost on personnel and supplies; and, belng an the main line of three promi- nent railroads, the B. & O. running east and west and the C. & 2Z.-L and the Big Four running north and south, and on the two most prominent highways in the country, D 5S 5O running east and west and 0 SB 41 running north and south. In fact, we chal- ' Jenge anybody to find a location that even comea close to George Field. It is true, of course, that the reactiva- tion of military bases is a primary re- sponsibility of the Defense Establish- ment, and the representatives of the area involved will continue to press diligently country at a time when vast funds are APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD able facilities before we embark on any program of new construction. It is to be hoped that our defense authori see both the wisdom end the necessity for such a course in the immediate future. Fred Earle Taylor en EXTENSION OF REMARES HON. HOMER D. ANGELL or ORERcon . IN THE HOUSE OF REPREAEINTATIVES Tuesday, February 27, 1951 Mr. ANGELL Mr. Speaker, I have the sad duty to announce the death of one of the outstanding citizens of my congressional district, Fred Tarle Taylor, which occurred on February 19, last. 1 deem it of importance to many of us in Government to make this anounce- ment here due to the fact that Mr. Tay- lor performed an outstanding service during both World War J and World War i. He. was president of the Reality Board of Portland, Oreg., in 1916 and in 1920 was president of the National Asso- elation of Real Estate Boards. In 1930 he represented the national association at an international housing conference in Stockholm, Sweden. Throughout his entire career, Mr. Tay- lor devoted a substantial amount of time and effort toward raising the standards -of the real-estate profession and assist- ing his country and community. It was largely through his efforts that one of the first real-estate license laws in the United States was adopted in Oregon in 1919. During World War I, he was a dollar-a-year man with the United States Housing Corporation. As NAREB president, Mr. Taylor traveled 28,599 miles and saw NAREB board member- triple that of any previous year. With the advent of World War II Mr.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Man of the Sonth for 1950—Article by Huber F. Lee EXTENSION OF REMAKKS HON. CLYDE R. HOEY OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Tuesday, February 27 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. HOEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix to the ConcressIonaL REc- orp an article entitled “The Man of the South for 1950,” which appeared in a re- cent issue of Dixie Business. This relates to Reuben B. Robertson, of Asheville, N. C., who established and developed one of the greatest industrial plants in our State, the Champion Paper and Fibre Co., located in Canton, N. C. The selection of Mr. Robertson as “the Man of the South for 1950” had the hearty endorsement of the people throughout the country, and this article gives an account of the Reuben B. Rob- ertson Day Observance at Asheville on December 16, 1950. I also wish to have included the edi- torial from the Asheville Times of De- cember 18, 1950. no There being no objection, the article and editorial were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: MAN oF THE SouTH For 1950 (By Hubert F. Lee) The man who in the days of his young manhood had come to the tree-covered mountains of North Carolina nearly a half century ago to help build a paper and pulp mill, and stayed to become one of America's greatest industrialists and leaders, was hon- ored by friends he had made over the years on December 16 as few men are honored dur- ing thetr lifetime. And on the evening of the day that had been designated “Reuben B. Robertson Day” in western North Carolina he heard his life and works praised to the heights of the Land of the Sky by some of the South’s outstand- ing leaders of business, education, industry, finance, and government * * * and the Dixte Business “distinguished service award” presented to him, formally proclaiming him “Man of the South for 1950.” It was an impressive testimonial dinner his friends gave him by their presence and their words and handclasps. He termed it one of the highest honors ever to be bestowed upon him. The testimonial had been ar- ranged by some of his old friends who had formed a sponsoring committee to do him honor when he was elected “Man of the South for 1950" by some 6,000 votes from more than half of the States over the Nation. Reuben B. Robertson, the “Man of the South for the Year 1960," stands at the gates of the second half of the twentieth century &6 & symbol of all the great leaders and men of achievement over the South who in their lifetime have set in motion forces that will work for the betterment of mankind through the years. And some 175 of his friends let him know it at the testimonta!l dinner in the ballroom of the swank Battery Park Hotel in Asheville, and at the mill in Canton, and in letters and telegrams from leaders over the Nation. The theme was “Free Ent and the Community—A Case History,” and the story ot the chairman of the board of the Cham- pion Paper & Fibre Co. was reviewed in retro- spect by old friends °* * * when bread had been broken and Rev. C, Grier Davis had delivered the invocation, The character and greatness of Reuben B. Robertson, the man, was formed by the influs ence of his mother and his father when he was a child in Cincinnati, Judge and Mrs, Charles Robertson, an old friend of his father, Judge Alfred K. Nippert, said in reviewing the life of Robertson and tracing the history of his forebears. Judge Nippert told of Robert- son's home life, his childhood, his boyhood, and of his courting and marrying Hope Thomson on June 7, 1905, and how she had gone with him for the rendezvous with des- tiny in the mountains of North Carolina, He said Robertson had inherited his father's “Viking spirit.” His words were intimate and heart-stirring as the distinguished judge turned back the pages of time for a glance at the beginning. And hearing him were Reu- ben 1., Jr., and Dr. Logan Thomson Robert- son, the two scns of tne Robertsons who were born in North Carolina, and Dwight J. Thom- son ind the nieces and nephews of the Rob- ertsons. They heard tributes paid also to Mrs. Robertson's father, the late Peter Thom- son, who founded the Champion Paper & Fiber Co., with a few thousand dollars of borrowed capital in 1894 * * * at Hamil. ton, Ohio, and whose vision it was that led to the selection of Canton, N. C., as the site for the second pulp mill that was built in 1907. In the keyno~ve address, United States Sen- ator ClypE R. Hory, Democrat, North Caro- lina, expressed the sentiments of those pres- ent and thousands who were unable to be there in person: “We do honor to ourselves for by his many acts of service, his wisdom, and his judg- ment, Reuben B. Robertson hus honored us far more than we are honoring him. “His unfuiling faith ahd courage is the type of spirit needed by Americans to ineet the present world crisis. “Under the leadership of men like Reuben B Robertson America has demonstrated the great power of the free enterprise system—— a system which has survived many crises before, and will prove equally strong to meet the present emergencies. “He mukes me able to say, in the words of William Allen White: ‘I have seen yes- terday, I have loved today, and I face to- morrow unafraid’.” Senator Hory paid gracious tribute to Mrs, Robertson, saying she -had walked the road of high adventure with Robertson and shared all his triumphs and disappointments. Tull L, Jamison, who had helped make paper at Canton for 41 years and is now re- tired, rose from his seat of honor at the speakers table and traced the history of Champion at Canton from the beginning to the present and there was a note of high praise as he declared Reuben B. Robertson has “built up a spirit of friendship and co- operation that nothing can shake loose.” Dr. Frank Graham, with whom Robertson had served during World War II on the Na- tionul War Labor Board, credited him with helping otabilize “through the creative co- operation of organized business and organ- ized labor, the mighty American production which helped to defeat the Fascist dictator. ship and is now getting ready to resist, if necessary, to the utmost another monstrous enemy.” Dr. Graham declared Robertson is “a much beloved man of the North Carolina moun- tains and an enterprising and diatinguished pioneer in the development of the Southern wood and pulp industry; that he has been an important factor in the growth of the South * * 9” North Carolina's Commissioner of Labor, Hon. Forrest H. Shuford, termed Mr. Robert~ son's industrial labor program “one of the inert labor relations programs in the Na- on,” AIL R. J. Btockham, president of the Btockham Valves & Fittings Co., Birmingham, tinme- diate past chairman of the Bouthern Indus- trial Relations Conference, said that “much of the superior relations enjoyed in humen relations in industry resulted from Reuben B. Robertson's leadership and example,” Robert M. Hanes, back from 2 years us head of the BOA mission tn Belgium and Germany and head of the Wachovia Bank & Trust Co., and one of the South’s 50 fore- most leaders named with Robertson in 1049, praised Robertson's ability as a banker and h's “unquestioned integrity and good judg~ ment.” Earlier in the evening, when Mr, and Mrs. Robertson had been escorted to the dais, it was Robert M. Hanes who rose and ied the assemblage in singing For He's a Jolly Good Fellow. Ernest E. Norris, president of the Southern Railway System, was unable to attend but his words of high praise were read by Robert Darden. William A. Kirkland, executive vice presi« dent of the First National Bank of Houston, Tex., praised Mr. Robertson “Texas style” and said that “Texas has tried hard to lure him from North Carolina, so we'd have some- thing more to brag about.” Also, trom Texas, were the “Four Flats From Houston,” a quartet, including Leon Shiro Rolland Storey, Charles Underwood, and Charles Wallace, who provided mirth and comedy and entertainment and brought loud applause when they sang one of Mrs, Robertson's own compositions and a song of their own, The Man of the South. The editor of Dixie Business, in making the Man of the South award, traced the his- tory of the “South's hall of fame for the living” movement back to 1946 when Thomas W. Martin was named for the honor, He gave full credit to the editors of trade publi- cations and magazines and newspapers and hundreds of others who, more than himself, had started a chain reaction of interest that has sprend over the Nation. He unveiled and presented the illuminated scroll in the name of the 6,000 who had voted for Robert= 80a and for the editors of Dixie Business. In his response, Mr. Robertson said the testimonial was, to him, “a focal point in an adventure in kindliness.” “I have been given personal credit for what, in the most part, has been done in a representative capacity. I have endeavored to represent stockholders, workers, and asso~ clates to the best of my ability *" * °" He said the growth of the Champion Paper & Fiber Co. was due to many people. “It constitutes a tribute, not only to the loyal men who made these things possible but to the enduring principles of free enterprise without which no such progress would have been possible.” He gave credit to Mrs. Robertson, who had shared all the things of hie life for 46 years and given him encouragement and under- standing and inspiration, And as I listened to him sharing his honors with so many others, I thought back to a day when his name first came to have a meaning to me. I was 22 and the year 1923, And already the leadership of Reuben 8B. Robertson had become e legend in the paper industry and in the leadership of men. The late L. A. Thomas, a great paper maker end inventor, and I were embarked on an adventure in trying to build a newsprint miil to use southern pine—he to furnish the know-how and supervision and me to raise the capital, The plan fatied becawse of my lack of ability to promote the ides. Mr, Thomas told me of whet others were doing 4n the pulp and paper industry and what we could do. Had Reuben B. Robertson remained with his father’s firm of Robertson & Buchwalter in Cincinnati, he would have been @ mem~ ber of the Bupreme Court today, no doubt.
tions Conference began with Mr. Robertson when he fi-st came to the mountain country. Donald Comer, Man of the South for 19€7, whose example at Avondale Mills is one of the finest, in his letter of ratification wrote: “Back toward the g of my ass0- ciation with ..vondale I have been much in- Conference on ployer and employee, union and nonunion, For several days we live together under the game roof: we sit together for three meals & day and we liaten to speakers from all walks of life and we discuss together our common problems and come away inspired and refreshed in our determination to im- prove industrial relations. “T mention this because Mr. Reuben Rob- ertson has been the inspiration and leader in ali of these conferences year after year. His enthusiasm has permeated the group. “It is a boost to the hope for the future that a man Mke Mr. Robertson can be se- lected Man of the Gouth of the year * * *.” Perhaps it was because Mr. Roberteon came into the woods before the mill was built and helped with its planning and came to know the men who worked to cut the trees and saw the lumber and helped construct the mill. And in January of 1908, while his work- ers were learning the science of making pulp and paper, he was learning how to operate s mill, He respected the dignity and integrity and intelligence of the men whose forebears had come ag pioneers when the Nation was young and settled the area. He liked them and they liked him. They like his sense of fair play in all his dealings with them. They admired his sound business judgment and his executive ability. They liked him for his human qualities * ‘* ° his dynamio energy and his jovial disposition. Thus began the epic story of free enter- prise and the community as exemplified by Reuben B. Robertson and the men who make the Nation’s finest paper and pulp. It was in the days of the horse and buggy and mule and wagon and the slow mode of transportation yoay bave influenced a pro- gram that has become far reaching and made Mr. Robertson a pioneer in reforesta- tion and . At any rate, he saw that @ pulp mill could not be pulled up end moved like a small sawmill. For him and his workers and associates and stockholders there could be no policy of “out out and get out’ so far as the supply of pulpwood was concerned. So he set about on a program of reforesta- tion and protection. Not anly were planted to replace the trees cut for pulp- wood in Champion's own forest holdings, Mr, Robertson set in motion a crusade to encourage others to do the same. He was one of .he first to apply the tech- nique of extracting tannin materials from chestnut wood and making bleached pulp from the spent wood, As a result of his early efforts there is today at Canton the laxgeat single tannin extract plant ever t. Thirty years ago, Mr. Robertson realized the importance of developing the full po- tentiallities of the rapidly growing southern pine and began working on the problem of developing 2 satisfactory bleached pulp from ime. He overcame many technical difi-. culties and the Canton division became the Sirst mill in the Nation to produce an ¢x- cellent quality of this bleached pulp from southern pine. His success led to the con- stru:tion of the Houston, Tex., division of Champion tn 18986. He was an early promoter of a system-~ atic program of sefety and socident preven- tion. He has led in adopting many employee programs now in general practice in indus- .- try. He authorized the publishing of the Log, one of the early company house organs to keep hie worksrs informed about what other workers were doing and giving them features on many subjects. The North Carolina State College in 1982 bestowed on him the honorary degree of goctor of science for his achievements tn acience, in industry, and in promoting social welfare. Not only has Mr. Robertson been « leader in the pulp and paper industry, he has been in the forefront of many movements tor the advancement of his fellow man. At various times he has served as president of the Canton Civitan Ctub, president of the Aslevilie Pen and Plate Club, chairman of the City-County Debt Committee of Ashe- ville, director of the Waciovia Bank and Trust Co., member of the North Carolina State Planning Board, member of the ad- visory board of the Charlotte branch of the Reconstruction Finance Committee, presi- dent of the North Carolina State Planning Board, president of the North Carolina For- estry Association, a member of the North Carolina Highway County Debt Commission, trustee of the Asheville School for Boys, and where a large dormitory bears the name “Reuben Robertson Hall,” chairman of the board of trustees of Western Carolina Teachers College, and trustee of the Uni- versity of North Carolina. He has served as chairman of the Asheville community chest and chairman of the Amer- ican Red Cross fund for Canton. He served with great success this fall as in director of the Crusade for FPree- om, As one of the Nation’s top leaders, he served ax a member of President Roosevelt's labor-industry conference of 1941, as a mem- ber of the National War Labor Board, as a member of the war committee of the Na- tional Association of Manufacturers, and director of the National Association of Ho is a graduate member of the Business Advisory Council of the Department of Com. meroe, 3 member of the Industrial Relations Counselors of New York City and a trustee of the Committee for Economic Develep- ment. Whenever the cal) for service comes, Reu-~ ben B. Robertaon 1s ready today, as he has been for half a century, to give his time and talents. THE ANNUAL ELECTION In the beginning of the “South's Hall of for the Living’ movement the tite the man of greatest achievement South was “South’s Man of the sHescdet fe = EF eed. fis g RERPEE BE igs peeee , Ae as ihe APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD “es @ © IT quote these Istters as Myr. Xurth will be among the South's 60 Foremost Business Leadere—as will Reuben B. Robert- fon * * *.” Ernest L. Kurth was elected Man of the South for 1949 and Reuben B. Robertson for 1950. This year the concept of permitting lead- ers in all fields to be nominated and 80 more top leaders were selected. Mr. Robertson was thus elected from 100 of the South’s foremost leaders who were named in recogni. tion of a lifetime of distinguished service to the South. Mr. Roberteon’s election was ratified by the four past Men of the South: Thomas W. Martin for 1946; Donald Comer for 1947; C. Hamilton Moses for 1948; and Ernest L. Kurth for 1949. The news of the election electrified Mr. Robertson's many friends in Canton, Ashe- ville, Houston, Tex., Hamilton, Ohio, and over the Nation. A group of outstanding leaders formed a committee to sponsor Reuben B. Robertson Day and the testimonial dinner for the pres- entation of the man-of-the-South award. The committee included J. Gerald Cowan, Wachovia Bank & Trust Co., Asheville, chair- man; Ernest E. Norris, Southern Railway System, Washington, D. C,; Don 8. Hillas, the Citizen-Times Oo., Asheville; Richard W. (Dick) Wortham, Jr., Southland Paper Mills (headed by Ernest L. Kurth, man-of-the- South. for 1949) Lufkin, Tex.; Barrison Jones, the Coca-Cola Cp., Atlanta; Robert E. Henry, J. P. Stevens & Oo., Inc., Greenville, 8. C.; and Richard J. Stockham, Stockham Valves & Fittings Co., Birmingham, Thus another honor {fs accorded a man who over his lifetime has merited honor. There are thousands who echo in their hearts the sentiments by C. Hamil- ton Moses, man-of-the-South for 1948, who wrote: “I am proud of this selection. His busi- ness and civic accomplishments are known throughout the Nation. Mr. Reuben Robert- son is a credit to our American system, and the of his life work with its great con- tribution to his people could have been written in no country besides America.” [From the Asheville Times of December 16, 1950) Reosew B. Rosxerson, 1950 MAN oF THE Sours This is Reuben B, Robertson Day in west- ern North Carolina. Some of Mr. Robert- son's special friends and admirers have desig- nated it that because this evening the “Man of the South” award for 1950 will be present- ed to him at a testimonial dinner in his honor. If all the e in this mountain region who know . Roberteon personally or by reputation—eand who doesn't?—had been asked to pase on the decision and plans for this occaston we are confident the vote of approval would have been unanimous, Now in his seventy-first year, Mr. Robert- son has been intimately associated with the of western North pion Fibre Co. in 1907 and {2 1912 became general manager of the Canton plant. He became of that company and held that position until 1935 when it merged with the Champion Paper & Fibre Co. and he was appointed executive vice president. He be- came president of that great industrial or- ganisation in 1046 and in July of this year was named chairman of the board. At that time his son, Reuben B. Robertson, Jr,, suc- ceeded him as president. For many years now Mr. Robertson has been one of the top industrial leatiers not the South but of all America. Many have been bestowed upon him for his i
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD distinguished achievements in science, in in- dustry, and in promoting the social welfare. During World War II he served for nearly 2 years on the War Labor Board by appoint- ment of the late President Roosevelt, Mr. Robertson’s counsel and support have been sought in innumerable worthy causes and enterprises for the good of his commu- nity, region, State, and Nation. His response was always generous, wholehearted, and ef- fective. His words, his deeds, and attitude have marked him as a man of outstanding vision, wisdom, tolerance, and humanity. As one of the Nation's great industrialists Mr. Robertson has been a leader in the movement to better employee relations. Hoe has practiced as well as preached his con- viction that high morale and good teamwork are essential to successful business. This quotation from a speech Mr. Robertson made some years ago gives the gist of his philoso- phy and policy as head of a vast industry: “The building and maintaining of cons genial and constructive attitudes and rela- tionships within the human organization of enterprise can be successfully achieved only as the methods employed are of the kind that stimulate the better emotions of peo- ple, promote loyalty, inspire cooperation in a@ search for mutual welfare, create confl- dence, and remove distrust.” We salute Reuben B. Roberston, the “Man of the South” for 1950. He deserves this and all the other honors that have come to him because he is a big man by ‘any yard- stick—big physically, big mentally, big in heart, and big in achievement. This man is trwy one to match our mountaing. Our Present Postal Service EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HAROLD C. HAGEN OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Tuesday, February 27, 1951 Mr. HAGEN. Mr. Speaker, there has been a great deal of controversy relative to our postal service. The Postmaster General on April 17 issued extremely drastic orders curtailing vital and im- portant services to the American people. The majority of the Members of the House of Representatives, by a decisive vote, demonstrated that they thought these orders were unnecessary and un- warranted. Appearing in the Postal Record for March 1951 is an article by a very dis- tinguished retired postal official, who voluntarily retired on October 1, 1950. James J. Doran has a most distinguished career. He started his service as a letter carrier in Waterbury, Conn., in 1906, He succeeded the present Postmaster General as Chief Inspector in August 1945, which position he held until July 1949. He was Director of Budget and Planning in the Post Office Department from July 1949 to August 1950, and Di- rector of Rates from August 1950 to October 1, 1950, when he voluntarily re- tired, He has written a most thoughtful ar- ticle on the subject of our present postal service. This article should be read by every Member of the House of Repre- sentatives, and I ask unanimous consent to have it printed in the ConargsstonaL Recorp. It follows: Our Presenr Postan S-rvice (By James J. Doran) NATIONAL ASSOCIATION or Lerrer CARRIERS, January 18, 1951, Mr. James J. Doran, Chevy Chase, Md, Dear Mr. Doran: You are undoubtedly fa- millar with the present postal curtailment program and the existing controversy re- sulting from the orders contained in the Postal Bulletin of April 18, 1950. As one who has spent a lifetime in the United States Postal Service, I am convinced beyond words that a statement from you would be of great importance at this particular time. I am in a@ position to nablish whatever statement you care to make in the monthly organ of this association, the Postal Record. It goer without saying that whatever your approach to the postal problem, this asso- clation will publish your views verbatim. It is my firm conviction that you will be rendering a grvat,public service by making known your views on the prasent-day postal system. With kind regards, I remain Sincerely yours, W. C. Donerry, President. Curvy Cnass, Mp., February 14, 1951. Wm. ©. DoHErTy, President, National Association of Letter Carriers, Washington, D C. Dear Mr. DoHERTY. I have given a great deal of consideration to your letter of Janu- ary 18, 1961, in which you invite me to make & statement on our present day postal service to be published in your official organ, the Postal Record. I note that you have agreed that an;thing I might offer in the way of ap article w:ll be published verbatim. I have decided to accept your offer and I do so in the hope that some part of the article which I will submit may in a small measure lead to a settlement of the present- day postal cor.troversy. Some of my friends will perhaps think that it was unwise on my part to become involved in this controversy, but to those who would form such an opine fon, I call their attention to the possibility that any dispute, disagreement, or contro. versy stands a better chance of being adjust- ed and settled equitably tf all of the truth is known anc understood and not just a part of the truth. I believe that I have in my possession and I am setting forth in the article certain features of the rate situation and the postal curtailment matter that have not been given very much publicity in the past. I thank vou for your offer. Sincerely yours, JamEs J. Doran, Until shortly after World War II the aver- age American, and in fact all Americans, took our postal service for granted. It was looked upon with confidence and faith in its honesty and efficiency. Its rank and file could, if they so desired, boast of a fidelity not easily equaled and never surpassed. If its laws were broken or violated ita inspec- tion service went into action and stayed at it until the law breakers were in custody and punished. It could match its performance with any of its fellows in the National Gov- ernment and do so without apology or exe planation, It was generally credited with dcing a fine job during the war and was praised highly for contributing a great deal to our fighting men’s morale by its prompt and efficient handling of the military mail. Jt did all A1018 this in spite of the abeence of thousands of ite best employees who were in the war. After the war rising costs of operation brought on staggering deficits which aroused Congress and brought considerable criticism from a variety of sources, This made & strange and not easily understood picture— with a lesa exporienced force during the war we were praised; with our experience and eMcient men and women back at work, we were being charged with waste and inefil- clency, There had to be a reason for this change and the reason was not hard to find. The Department wanted a raise in postal rates and the publishers and heavy mail users said, “No. It was not justified. Cut your costs. Put in up-to-date methods. Avoid your duplication. Dispose of useless rece ords," and onandon. The deficit had grown steadily until in each of the figscal years of 1949 and 1950 it exceeded 8650,000,000. All concerned became postal deficit conscious, The Department and other parts of the Federal Government had been investigated by the Hoover Commission. After the task force that spent the greater part of a year in its work on the postal service made its report a claim arose that a yearly savings of more than $200,000,000 was possible if up-to- date methods were used and modern me- chanical equipment bought for the field service. This was just the kind of charge the opponents of the increased postal rate bill wanted and they used it to the best of their ability and capacity. Just about the time it seemed nothing more could happen to or be said about the postal service that would add to its worries and troubles, the Post Office Department, yes the Department itself, decided otherwise. The Department reached the conclusion it had to curtail and eliminate postal service throughout the country. Accordingly on April 18, 1950, there appeared in the Postal Bulletin one of the most drastic orders ever written by a Postmaster General. You are familiar with the order which has been prop- erly labeled the curtailment order. Now for the reasons for the order. The Postmaster General said Congress and the Bureau of the Budget has reduced his re- quests for appropriation by such amounts as to compel a curtailment in postal service all over the Nation. He explained there was no other way in which to meet the situation and the order was placed in effect despite the opposition of Congress, the public, busi- ness, and the labor unions of postal em-= ployees. There had heen substantial reduo- tion in the amounts asked by the Depart- ment by the House of Representatives, and the Postmaster General took the viewpoint the Department would not be allowed to proceed on a defictt-spending basis. The Senate had not yet acted on the appropri- ation bill. If I or any other person were to say the order was a mistake, that there were other means of reducing the over-all costs of oper- ating the postal service, and failed to produce evidence to support and substantiate such a contention, you the reader would promptly and properly proceed to the conclusions my views and opinions were worthless. In place of setting my views and opinions on whether the order was a mistake, I am going to place before you facts, clear undisputed facts, all of which have been published by the Depart- ment at one time or another, All that is contained in this article is public property and a matter of public record. If perchance some of these public documents confiict with or contradict the efforts and representations of the Department in its fight for higher postal rates, then the Department must truly accept the responsibility so created. And if these public papers or some of them cast an element of doubt on the validity of the Department's case before Congress and the
Aloi4 people, then the Department can blame it- aelf for a not too carefully prepared and pre- wented Itne of evidence to establish the proof that higher rates and service curtaile ment were absolutely necessary, Your organization contends the postal establishment is a public service and the need for a balanced postal budget is not as vital as the Department claima. You have called attention to other departments of the National Government that produce little or no revenue and yet obtain their appropri- ations without apparently too much trouble. All Americans use the postal service. There- fore it is a public service. As to the value of the contention that it should be sup- ported by congressional appropriation re- gardie.s of the disparity between income and expense, that at first glance seems a wide departure from what might be considered the good, old-fashioned “earn your own keep” American methods. But if we look into the history of the postal service right down to the present moment we find considerable support for that very theory. Yes, the reo- ords of the Department will show that more than 36,000 of the more than 41,000 post offices of the country could not operate with out what is truly a postal subsidy. These 39,000 offices are of the second, third, and fourth class and are called district offices. At none of them are the receipts more than $40,000 a year and many have annual revenue of only a few hundred dol- lars. But they are necessary and perform good service, a service that our people could not and would not be expected to give up. Far from being self-supporting they cause an annual deficit of about $130,000,000 and this does not include the cost of mail transporta- tion to and from these offices. The Depart- ment says its mail transportation costs amount to over $420,000.000 a year. It would be difficult to apportion the exact amount of the total transportation charges to these district offices, but recalling they are located in 39,000 different places in all 48 States and our possessions, an estimate of $50,000,000, which 1s slightly over 10 percent of the whole cost, would certainly not seem too high. At any rate a very substantial deficit is to be expected year after year and it can only be met by congressional appro- priation, Suppose the Department got a 20 percent increase in rates, the added revenue at these istrict offices would amount to probably not more than 610,000,000 unless the rate on firet-claas matter were raised. All the ef- forta of the Department up to the present were for increases on everything except frst~ Class mail. Congress can never be expected to hike postal rates sufficiently to wipe out the deficit in these district offices and it should not attempt to do so. The Postmaater General and other officials of the Department have stated on many occasions that the cost of free postal services ta other Government Departments and agen- cies, free in county newspaper handling, etc., amount to @160,000,000 a year. Add this to the annual deficit at the district offices and you have $280,000,000 or more than one-half of the entire postal deficit. And if we add the 650,000,000 (estimated) for mail trans- portation to these 39,000 offices we have a total of 8880,000,000. This amount we will agree takes quite a slice out of the total postal deficit of 86570,000,000. And if you add to that the subsidies given the air lines and other carriers of matt, you have ace counted for at least $400,000,000 of the def~ ictt. Subsidies should be recognized and labeled as such and there is. no justification for the postal service being saddled with them. If Congress decides to reduce the subsidies given, it can do postal raves, but it cannot wipe out either now or in the future the subaldy it is giving to suppart the district The 89,000 represent 94 percent of all the offices in our postal service. The other 6 percent make a profit, and they, the 6 per- cent, were the ones most affected by the cure tailment order. If a postal rate increase is granted it is their profits which will be in- creased, But ia it a fair arrangement to ex- pect the larger offices to produce enough revenue to wipe out the deficit, excluding the @150,000,000 which is the cost of the free services? Any increase in postal rates will be effective at all offices, but unless the Depart- ment changes its stand and asks for an in- crease on letter mail postage—on, which it claims to make a profit—the added revenue at the district offices will be slight compared to that of the 6 percent now more than earn- ing their expenses. Until this subsidy to the postal service is recognized and treated as such and not placed on the mail users at the profit making offices there can be little or no hope of proceeding in a fair and equitable Manner in this matter of rates. Certain rates should be raised, particularly those on gecond- and fourth-class, but all concerned should be certain of the equity involved in the increases requested. The Department’s basis for asking for in- orease in postal rates is to be found in its cost ascertainment figures and statistics, Cost ascertainment js a time, weight end count study on all the mail handling and special service operatioins made at more than 500 offices of a)) four classes located in various parts of the country. From this study the Department puts forth the Information that certain specified losses are incurred in han- dling second-~, third- ang fourth-class mall, and all the special services excepting postal savings. The opposition to the rate increases, and this opposition is numerous and forceful, says the cost figures are not accurate; that the Department does not know what its costs are, and furthermore it cannot be expected to find out what its costs with relation to each operation are under its present system of cost ascertainment, Congress has 2 real interest in the postal service, True it has not passed the rate bill; probably because the Department said we lose so much on each operation and each Class of mall except first, but it apparently did not produce enough proof to satisfy Con- gress on that issue, The postal service should pay ite personnel good wages, better than at present, and im- prove working conditions where possible; and the personnel owes it to itself, the Depart. ment and the people to @o the best job pos- sible. Postal employees have a great invest- ment in the service. The best and greatest investment possible. It is themselves as people and thelr future, and it is upon them that the country must depend for an efficient service. The employee, like the Department must be realistic and recognize conditions and facts as they exist, if they can be changed for the better, well and good. [f not, they must be faced. And one of the important facts to face is the cost of operation in the largest offices. Cost-ascertainment figures show there is a Aifference in cost, a great difference; and, until it {1s wiped out or plainly explained and accounted for, the entire service is on ‘weak ground in trying to convince anyone, espectally Congress and the publishers, that an appreciable boost in rates ts justified. The Department has accepted cost-ascer-< tainment figures and bases ite efforts for in. creased rates on these figures. The Depart ment claimed it could not continue to give the country the postal service that was in existence on April 17, 1960, and for some time prior thereto, because it was not getting the money needed for that servies, and curtall- ment was the answer to the problem created by reduced appropriations. ‘The head of the Department aaid he disliked to curtail the " postal service was operated economically there was nothing else to do, Savings were not possible in any APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD other way. Sounds reasonable; doesn’t it? A frank statement made about « frank and Now, no one who knows the OMolals and those holding high places in the Cost Ascer- tatnment Division as I do, would charge these officials and employees with a desire to work against the Postihaster General. On the contrary, they are loyal honest people. Their responsibility is to put the data and statia- tics together in the form of reports of costs on different postal activities. Theee figures are gathered in the field. Under date of March 15, 1950, such a report was prepared and it was issued about the time of the April 1g bulletin—perhaps a few days later. This particular report contradicts the assertions that savings could only be made through curtailment. Yea—if the report is accurate, and in the absenoe of evidence to the con- trary it should be accepted as accurate—this particular report dealt with the cost of oper- ation in the 20 largest offices of the country. On one item, the cost of handling first-class mail, one office showed a cost of 133 percent more than the one that operated at the least cost. The average cost for the 20 offices was almost double that of the best office. Just imagine spending 85 for a piece of work in One office and getting that same piece of work done in another for $2.75. Would {t seem that savings could be made with such conditions existing? Yes, tf the report accurately portrays present condl- tions ang tosta in the 20 offices in question, & savings of over $46,000,000 @ year could be made in-the handling of first-class mail alone. There was no explanation why such ditfererjeé ‘in operations cost should’ exist. There aré bound to be some differences in costs of many postal activities but any re- Port which showed such glaring disparity costs should be most carefully examined and analyzed before being made public. There were other differences of costs in other Op. erations at these same 20 offices, but I might be considered as trying to build up @ case if I offered additional detail. The report tn question is not @ secret. I am quite sure the congressional committee got copies of it and your organization may also have one, The question will naturally arise in the minds of men of good sense—was this cone dition known to the officials of the Depart« ment and, if known, what, if any, action wag taken? Let us again look at the record. The report of March 15, 1950, was not the first of ita kind to be printed and issued. Others in years and months past had been dis- tributed and showed similar conditions exe isting at the time specified on each report. The Department officials were aware of this disparagement in costs for the same kinds of work and in some of the reports discussions were had on what was termed “vartables.” Variables were introduced to offer some rea~ sone why a difference might justifiably exist, But what kind of a variable it is that per- mits one office to spend the @5 for the same wen and kind of work and another only Could it be that the over-all management ‘was satisfied to obtain and print cost figures and their related data and then go on to eomething else? Is it possible that the pres- ent postal management considered it had adequately and competently discharged its duties and responsibilities by gathering and pubNehing these very detailed reports on the operation costs in the 20 largest offices and then the very conditions its own re~ ports brought to light? If ao the conclu- ston is and must be there is something wrong in that kind of management. Bach and every matter I have discussed wig) att pee pol ese ng e presen’ m1 at one or Mnother’ Only bt of ng 4 acknowledged, felt owed it to the postal officials to call to their @ conditions, some of which at least, were in atrong contrast to the repre- E HF
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD sentations that savings could only be made through curtailment of service. I have al- ways considered it disloyal to keep from my superiors any information which had a bear« ing on any of their policies or programs. It was & duty to call attention to the unpleas- ant and contradictory conditions—and one I tried to carry out under all conditions. There may be some who disagree with such procedure, I Need Not Point Out to the Members of This House the Great Service Which Stu Symington Is Rendering His Coun- try—We Know and Love Him as an Able, Sincere, Trustworthy, and Great Public Servant EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. FRANK W. BOYKIN OF ALABAMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 26, 1951 Mr. BOYKIN. Mr. Speaker, many Members share my belief that one of the best-known, highly regarded, and most popular National Broadcasting Co. programs, either on radio or télevision, is the program, Meet the Press, which follows Battle Report, Washington, Sun- day afternoon, On this program, high-ranking Gov- ernment officials are, each week, inter- viewed by top-flight Washington news- paper correspondents on questions with respect to their own or the activities of the organizations over which they pre- side, Members of the Senate and House, of the President’s Cabinet, of the diplomatic corps, together with other top-rank mili- tary, a8 well as civilian executives, have appeared as guests on this program at various times. There is no prior rehearsal. No holds are barred. Nothing but a high sense of propriety and of common respect, one for the other, establishes the criteria as to the questions asked by the news cor- respondents of their various guests. I have long tuned in this program. I have done so in order to avail myself of the wealth of information imparted with respect to current problems which this half-hour question-and-answer period provides. Mr. Speaker, there is probably no board ever established by Congress or appointed by the President, the results of whose influence could be of greater importance to the Nation, in peace as well as in war, than those of the Na- tional Security Resources Board, estab- lished under Public Law 253, Eightieth Congress. The major function of that Board is to advise the President concerning the coordination of military, industrial, and civilian mobilization. These include ad- vices as to policies concerning industrial and civilian mobilization that would in- sure maximum utilization of the Na- tion's manpower—the Nation’s maxi- mum effective use of natural and indus- trial resources—the maintenance and stabilization of civillan economy in time of war to implement the adjustment of such economy to war needs and condi- tions. Moreover, the National Security Resources Board establishes policies for unifying Federal Agencies and Depart- ments of Government concerned with the production, procurement, distribu- tion, and transportation of all supplies, materials, and products—civilian as well as military. Additionally thereto, it ad- vises the President with respect to poli- cies for establishing adequate reserves of strategic and critical materials, and the conservation of the same, as well as stra- tegic relocation of industries, Govern- ment, economic, and other activities es- sential to the Nation's security. Mr. Speaker, some several weeks ago, the Honorable W. Stuart Symington, Chairman of the National Security Re- sources Board, was the guest of the af- ternoon on the Meet-the-Press program. While I well know that newspapermen always regard Stu Symington as good news copy—I want to say that no pub- lic official who has appeared, to my knowledge, on Meet the Press, has evi- denced more complete, forthright, and greater alertness, or ever made a more unequivocal statement—than did Stuart Symington, Chairman of the National Security Resources Board. At the conclusion of the telecast one could not help but feel that here was a business executive of great ability, of great power, courage, and the will-to- do—who was unselfishly sacrificing much of his own personal interests—in order to serve his Government in these troublesome times. Mr. Speaker, I need not elaborate on or even point out to the Members of this House the great service which the Hon- orable Stu Symington is rendering his country as Chairman of the National Security Resources Board, We know him and love him as an able, sincere, trustworthy, and a great public servant. It is because of these facts, and in or- der to bring the Meet-the-Press inter- view with Stu Symington to the atten- tion of all Members of this House, that I ask unanimous consent of my col- Jeagues to extend my remarks and in- clude same in the RecorD. The program was as follows: The ANNOUNCER. Our guest of the after- noon, ladies and gentlemen, will be Mr. W. Stuart Symington, Chairman of the National Security Resources Board. And, now, ladies and gentlemen, meet the press. Ready for today’s unrehearsed, sponta- neous press conference are four of America’s top reporters. Please remember that their questions do not necessarily reveal their point of view. It's their way of getting a story for you. Now, meet Mr. Frank McNaughton, of Time magazine; Mrs. May Craig, of the Portland (Maine) Press-Herald; Mr. William White, of the New York Times; Mr. Marshall Mc- Neil, of the Scripps-Howard newspapers. Finally, Miss Martha Rountree, moderator of Meet the Press. Miss RountTers. Good afternoon, ladies and gentlemen, members of the press, and Mr. Symington. I understand, Mr. Byming- ton, this is actually your first appearance on any radio or television program, 80 we are not going to warte any time breaking in, I eee Mrs. Craig has the first question. A1015 Mrs, Cratc. Mr. Symington, as 3 member of the Security Council, you are a very close top-level adviser of the President, aren't you? Mr. Symincron. Well, I am a member of the Council and I am an adviser. Mrs. Crata. And it is a very smal! top-level body? Mr, SYMINGTON. Yes. Mrs. Craic. Well, Mr. Symington, I under+ stand that you have made some pretty strong proposals to the President as to what we ought to do in the Far East. Would you tell us today what you think we ought to do abou: Red China? Mr. SYMINGTON, Well, it’s a difficult ques- tion to answer from the standpoint of whet I personally feel. Mrs. Craic. Yes, I know, Mr. Syminaron. But I believe that in the Far East we should utilize to the fullest our sea power and our air power where I belleve we are superior. Mrs. Crasa. Well, do you think that we can stay in Korea if we do not get the full back- ing of the United Nations? Mr. SYMINGTON. Well, I think that we should stay in Korer. if our military people think it is the right thing to do, Mr. Wuoire. Mr. Symington, would the recommendations of your Board have a good deul to do with strategy in the end? Don't they go from you to the National Security Council of which the President {s Chairman? Mr, BymINeToN. That's right, Mr. White, but our recommendations would be primarily on the basis of resources and not on the basis of strategy. Mr. Wuirs. Not on a military besia? Mr. SymrncrTon. No; they wouldn't be, ex- cept from the standpoint of resources. Mr. Wurrs, Well, what resourees.do you refer to? Mr, SYMINGTON. Well, for example, the question of shortage of materials, and where we would stand if we lost Asia or Africa, South America. How self-sufficient we were. I don't mean by that as members of the Coun- cil that we nevertheless don't feel that we have a right to talk about those matters, but we try to have more of a positive position on those matters which directly affect resources. Mr, WuHiItE. Would that affect manpower? Mr. Symrinaton. Oh, yes; that's a resource, Mr, Warrr. Military manpower? Mr. Symrneron. That's right, sir. That's a resource. Mr. McCNauGHToN. To get back to your mention, Mr. Symington, before of the utill- gation of air power and sea power, do you mean a blockade of the China coast as rec- ommended by some Senators and the bomb- ing of bases in Manchuria from which the attack is coming? Mr. Symincron. Well, I don't think I should anewer that question because what- ever my own personal recommendations were, they would not be final, nor is it my primary responsibility. Mr. McNavaHton. Well, you said in your speech out in St. Louis the other day that Russia had a 5-year lead on us in preparing for war. You were a former Secretary for Air. I want to ask you if you think this country is preparing fast enough now? Mr. SYMINcTON, Well, I'll put it to you this way: The faster we go, I think the better we are. Mr. McNet.. Mr. Symington, in that same speech in St. Louis you said, “Soviet-bullt jet fighters sent agatnet our airmen in Korea proved truly superlative in performance.” In a speech on the same day at Philadelphia, Charles E. Wilson, the defense man, said: “Their’—meaning the Russians—‘jet planes under war conditions have been no match for our newer jets.” There seams to be some sort of a conflict there, What about these Russian jets? Mr. Symincton. I don’t think there is 8 confiict. We have three type jets: P-80,
Al016 Pust, P-86. It’a my belief that the P-86 is probably superior to the MG-15, the Russtan- built Chinese jet, both with swept-back wings. It's my understanding that the Rua- sian plane is superior to the P-84 and the P--80 Mr. MoNmL. We have got one that is better than that? lur. SYMINGTON. I think we have, or just a8 Mr, McNett, What about their bombers? Mr. Sysawaron, Well, as we know, they have @ great many of the so-called TU-4 bomber, which is a B-29 type, and presum- ably they have improved it like we have im- proved the B-29 type into the B-50, which is primarily an improvement in engines. Also, they have some jet bombers which presum- ably are better than the B-29 type. Mr. MoNet.. You spoke a minute ago of this using of air power in the Far East. Who stopped the Air Force from bombing those hydroelectric plants on the Yalu? Mr, Symineron, That I couldn't answer, Mr. McNeil, Mr, MoNsti. If you were Secretary of the Alr Force, would you be in favor of bombing them? Mr. Syminaton. Well, tf X were Secretary of the Air Force, I'd like to see air power used just as much to our advantage as it was pos- aible because, certainly, manpower, one of the asseta of our opponents, is being used to its fullest advantage. Mr, MoNem. Weill, you stand with Rosle O'Donnell? Mr. Symincton. Well, I don’t know exactly what it was that Rosie said, but I will always stand with Rosie O'Donnell, if possible, be- cause I think he is a fine American and a great fighting man. Mr. McNzw. He wants to use the big bomb. At least, that's what the papers reported, aome of them, Mr. Symiwaron. On the basis of using the big bomb in China—and, again, I am out of my field, I think it would probably be a mistake. Mr, Warr. Mr. Symington, you are Wash- ington’s greatest advocate of airpower, I think. Oertainly, you were when you were Secretary of the Air Force. Do you think that the success of the sir arr in Korea has been enough ty justify your own earlier con- clugions and predictions? Mr, Srminoton. Well, I certainly do. We didn’t build an Air Force to fight Korea. We bullt an Air Force to defend ourselveg against all people and primartiy against the Soviet. When we had to cut because we didn’t have enough money, we cut the two things that we thought would be less necessary if we were attacked as against the two we thought would be more necessary, ar. Wurre. What were the two that you ou Mr. Srmrnoron. Air lift and tactical air considerably more than air defense and strategic air. Mr, Wutrx. Has tactical alr been, rather, well, not too good in Korea? * Mr, Sxatwaron. I think it’s been—TI think, considering what we had, they have done a magnificent job, and people who have come back, Mr. White, told me we would have been out of Korea long ago if it weren't for the wonderful job being done by the Air Force and naval aviation, Mr. Warre. I'd like to ask one other ques- tion; going back to Mr. McNeil’s on this Russian homber you mentioned, what ts tts effective range? Mr. Sysmoron. Well, the effective range of all bombers that I know of, except the B-86, means that they cannot hit this coun- try and return home if they were coming from Soviet territory. On the other hand, people should realize that they could come here on a euicide mission and parachute down and be imprisoned and ted—as we don't shoot prisoners—or through the process of refueling in which, as you know, nearly 2 years ago we sent a plane around the world that never came down once; on the basis of refueling, they could come over and they could go back. Mr, Wars. When you esy “here,” do you mean anywhere in the United States? Mr. Symrneron, Ob, yes; anywhere in the United States. Mra, Cratc. Mr. Symington, Senator Doud- LAB in his great speech tn the Senate the other day said that we should let Russia know that the next satellite that strikes, we will hold Russia responsible. Do you agree with that, and how long do you think we ought to be bled by satellite wara? Mr. Symrarom. Well, Mrs. Craig, I think that what we should do as much a8 possible is to face up to whatever the problem is. I believe our policies should be based in the future on policies of action as against policles or reaction to action. In other words, if I may just for a minute add to that, I think from here out, regardless of what anybody else does, this country should get strong ard stay strong and should get strong just as aoon and as quickly as possible and then stay strong. Mrs. Cratc. Well, Mr. Symington, I'd Hke to go back to my first question. I'd like you to tell me a little more fully aa to what you think we ought to do about Red China now because that is a very pressing problem, fan't it? Mr. Symxncton. [ think it’s a very pressing Problem and one of the mast important problems in the world. I don’t think I ought to answer that question based on my position on this program publicly. Mrs. Craic. Well, let me ask you then a side question. Do you think that we should assent to the seating of Red China in the United Nations? Mr. Syminaron. My persoral opinion on that is that the President is a hundred per- cent right, and we should 2 ot agree to the seating of China tn the United Nations. Mr. McNavauton. I'd like to revert back to the question aiong the line Mrs. Craig asked. How long can we continue, Mr. Symington, to put up with allowing the Soviets to bleed us white in actions like Korea or maybe in Western Europe? Where do we draw the line? Senator Doveras said ‘we ought to draw It now. Do you agree that we should? Mr. Symrnoton. Well, if I had as many constituents as Senator Dovatas hed, I think I’d be more sympathetic with his position. Mr. McNaventom. Do you agree with him that we ought to have 6,000,000 men in the Army as soon a8 we could by the end of this year, tu the Army and Navy? Mr. Symrnaton. I think the number of, men that we have in the services depends upon the over-all decision with respect to strategic planning, because the one thing that we do have in this country is produce tive capacity, and if we put so many people into the Army and the Navy and the Air Force, when our allies have a lot of people, to the point where we affect our civilian productive capacity, then I think that would probably be a mistake. When I say “civilian productive capacity,” of course, I mean for war materials and easential civilian economy to support those materials. Mr. McNavoexron. When you said in an- swer to my frst question that the faster we went and the farther we went, the better 1t would be so that the mare we get in right away, the more defense we will have, won't it? Mr. Symrneron. I think ao, but I think it’a more important to approach the probiem as it is today, considering the world situa- tion, from the standpoint of all-out produc- tion than it ig to. approach tt from the stand~ point of all-out people in uniform and pro- duction, because all-out production, as we Move into that type of mobilisation, requires APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD an awful lot of people in the plants theme selves. Mr, McNat. I want to ask you something else about that 8t. Louis t's @ darn good speech about tt, wasn't it? You said that equality of sacrifice is now the only path left to our security. Well, there are a lot of folks around here who are wring- ing their hands by inflation, “It’s bad, it’s terrible," they say, but do you know anybody that’s renlly doing anything about it? Do you share the belief of some that the ad- ministration wants inflation and that per- haps they want a little of it, but they got too much and now don't know what to do about it? Mr. Srsaincron. Well, answering the last part of your question first, I am absolutely certain that our Prestdent not only doesn't want inflation but wants to do whatever js necessary to prevent inflation. Mr McNer. Well, why don’t he do some- thing? Why don’t they freeze wages and prices? Why haven't they done that since Korea? They have the authority, I believe, haven't they? Mr. Syminoron. Well, can I try and answer 1t? Miss Rounrere. Go ahead, Mr. Symington. Mr. SyMINGTON, First, it was very difficult to freeze prices before you had the beginning of an organization, but more important to me was the fact that we had very little mili- tary ordére'for months after Korea going into the economy. Now that has been corrected and the fustification for the freezing of prices and wages, which, incidentally, I am for and have been for for some time-—— Mr. McHen. Yes; I know. Mr. SyminoTon, Is based on the fact that you now are getting a military impact and that you now have the core of an organiza- tion, Mr. McNer, Well, there was some differ- ence on that, of course. A very smart cookie, My. Baruch, said that you should have done that a long time ago, and he’s no novice at this thing. He sald you could have done it at the start, so there is a conflict of opinion about that. Mr. SymMInoTON. That’s right. YI used to get quite a few letters and telegrams and have conversations with him about it, but I claim that the military should force the recognition of the importance of it because I thought the hoarse should be the military orders and the cart should be a result in the form of price and wage controls, that mill- tary orders should be first and price and wage controls should be second. That's the way it’s going to he now. You have already got a great deal of new military orders com- ing into the economy. Mrs. Craig. Mr, Symington, a lot of people are interested in your future. When you left being Secretary of Alr, there were many people who thought you would come back eventually as Secretary of National Defense, Could you tell us anything about that? Mr. Srmtnoron. Well, IX certainly oan. I am certain that I will not go back as Bec- retary of National Defense. I believe that the American people haye great confidence in General Marahall and in his alde, Mr, Lovett, and I am quite happy where I am. Mr. Wartr. Mr. Symington, there are three great boards in Washington about which the people Know very little. One of them, of course, ts the National Security Council— you mentioned one as your own board—and one is the Atomic Energy Commission. Do ou feel comfortable that peopie Know so ttle about what Ja going on in those agen= eles sinoe they affect them so much? My. Gruuearon, Well, I think you have a very tell
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Mr. Wuitr. May I ask this question—if it 4s unfair, please consider it withdrawn. You are almost uniquély qualified to express an opinion, if you care to do so—I suppose no one but Stalin knows the answer—~but what js your opinion, is it your opinion that a world war is more probable than a mere long period of tension like we have now or no! Mr. Symincron. Well, I’d like to answer you one that would fit the way I did in that speech. I think if we get strong and stay strong, regardless of the cost, that we might avert a world war. If we don't, I think we are going to have one, and I think we are going to lose it, Mr, WuHrre. Would you define a little more what you mean by strong? That is some- thing with generality. You mean a great deal stronger than we are today, or a great deal stronger than we may be in a year? Mr, Syminoton, Well, I think last year we were putting around 5 to 6 percent of our gross national product into our defense, and I think in 1944 we were putting about 40 percent in our gross national product in the 1 year. Now, I'd rather see—and I don't know yet, I don't think anybody knows too much just how much of that gross national product is going into our national defense— pefore I state “yes” or “no” whether I felt that we were going fast enough. Does that answer your question? Mr, Warrs. Thank yeu.very muck. Miss Rountres. Bo.you still feel, that the B-36 is as powerful.gh¢ effective,a,.weapon as you testified wheir you were Secrntiey for Air? “ “ Mr. SymincTon. I certainly do. Miss RountREE. Do-:we have estoagh of them now? If we remity tomorrow:-had to fight up to a war, could we do an effective job? Mr. Symrnoron. ‘Vell, I’d like to answer this way: Based on the size of the ship and the job it has to do, I don’t think we can have too many of them. Miss RounTREE. Do we have enough now? Mr. Syminaton. Well, the more we get, the better. 1 don’t know what the figure is. I know we are puilding more, and I know we are going to build a lot more than originally planned. Mr. McNet. Mr. Symington, this job of yours as head of the Security and Resources Board, you are supposed to know whether we got the stuff to win this war if we ever get in it. You are supposed to Know whether we got the tin and the lumber and the oil and the manpower and everything else; isn't that right? Mr. Symineron, Well, that was—primarily, Mr, McNeil, Iam an adviser to the President on the integration of the military and the industrial with the civilian. Mr. McNer. Yes. Mr, Syminctron, Now, many of the normal peacetime duties of the Resources Board will be taken over by Mr. Wilson as Director of the department of OPD. He'll handle those, Mr. McNew. Still aren’t you the man that signs the final certification for handling the ateel plant? Mr. SyMINGTON. Yes, I do; but I am only doing that until he is ready to take it over because we have agreed together, with com- plete agreement, that he should take that over because primarily that's an operating matter. Mr. McNavontTon. I'd like to nail this down &@ little harder on just what we should do, Mr. Symington. Since you advise the Prest- dent on these matters, let's hear just how many men you think we should have in the Army, say, at the end of this year? How many air squadrons you think we should heve, and what you think about that? You have talked in generalities here. You said if we didn’t get golag, we might lose the war, Now, what does it teke within this next year so that we can he aure that we are not going to lose it? How many men in the Army? How many men in the Navy? How many alr squadrons? Mr, Symincton. My impression is that we are putting just as many people in the Army and we are building just as many groups and we are having just as many task forces ag we believe it is necessary from the standpoint of stategic planning which, of course, is not discussible at this meeting, and we think we can handle. In other words, we could only digest 30 many people into the econ- omy—or, rather, into the military from the economy, and I honestly couldn't answer how many people I thought should be in the Military Establishment at this time. Mr, McNauauton. Well, do you say then that the defense preparations are going fast enough to sult you? Mr. Symincron. I thought I answered that to Mr. McNefl when I’d rather see how much of our gross national product we are putting into the defense effort as against, for example, what we put in in 1942 or 1944—! think was our biggest year when we know we were in trouble. Mrs. Craig. Mr. Symington, in that speech you said that 1¢ was vital for us to be fully mobilized now. Do you think we are even planning full mobilization? Mr. Syminatron. Well, I think that we are planning for as many peopie now as we can use. I think in the last few weeks the deci- sion has been made on materials and men to go faster than was the previous decision. To pe frank, not too long ago I didn’t think we were going fast enough, but I happened to have « chance to digest the new situation and again I say that I think that how fast we go depends upon how much of our national product we are going to put into it—in other words, how many guns we think we can have and how much butter we think we can have based on the emergency. Mrs, Craic. There has been a good deal said here about men and manpower and people today. Now, it seems to me that when you were Secretary of Air, you did not like that idea of balance between air, ground and sea, that you felt air power should have preponderance. Now, do you still think that today? Is air power sufficiently preponder- ant in this mobilization? Mr, Syminoton. Well, there is a big differ- ence between what it is today and what tt was then, because then we had an arbitrary shielding established on the amount of money we were allowed to spend. Now, I be- lieve, in the Air Force—and that was good because I thought we should have a greater proportion of that limited amount of money, but, on the other hand, I was fully sympa- thetic with those of the other services who felt that they should have a greater propor- tion of that amount of money. Today, there isn't a limitation, and they go based on a plan which 1s a military plan presumably, as agatnst a fiscal limitation as a premise to their development, Mrs. CRAIG. But as a top-leve) adviser look- ing at all three, do you thin!. that the air is getting the preponderance you always be- lieved in? Mr. Syminoron. From the figures that I have heard—now, I am out of the Air Force and I can only speak personally—but from the figures that I have heard, I believe we are building an air force which is an adequate air force to face up to the emergency. Now, if at any time for any reason like concillatory gestures or any other reason we don’t go through with the plans that we have, then I reverse myself. and say that we are not carrying out our planning on an action basis, ‘We are reacting to what other people do and I think that’s wrong. Bra. Crasa. Senator Taft, you know, as you recollect, aaid we should concentrate on sea and air power and not on ground forces, Mr, Srsmorow. Well, I think that what we should concentrate on depends upon what A1017 the President and General Marshall and the military chiefs think ig right. I belleve im- plicitly that air power is absolutely easential to the security of the United States, and I think that sea power, control of the seas, is essential to the security of the United States, and I also believe that we have got to have a good army. Mr. McNen, You said something about conciliating somebody a minute ago, and earlier you talked about a whole strategic plan that we have. Are we building up something here to conciliate somebody about something? Mr. Sruinctonw. What I meant ie tf we lis- tened to what the Nazis said they were going to do, why, we would have been better off than not believing them. If we listen now to what the Russians said they are going to do and then don't when they say, “We sre only fooling,” in my opinion we would be better off and I'd like to see us go ahead regardless of any conciliation. I have always heen willing to negotiate for peace, but negotiate on the basis of a strong background inatead of the basis of a weak background. Mr, McNzn.. As aman who did more selling around this town of the necessity for a big air force, I think you'd feel pretty happy about “Stu” Symington now—they are talk- ing about a hundred group air force. Mr. SyrMinoron. Well, bygones are gones. Mr. McNaucHron. Well, it was about 3 years ago here, I think, Mr. Bymington, that you were walking around with some nine hundred million in your vest pocket for air- planes that you couldn't spend, That was withheld from you, wasn't it? Mr. Symincron, Withheld? Mr. MoNauGHTon. You weren’t allowed to spend it at any rate. Do you think it was a mistake to have taken that action at that time? Mr. Srmrnoron. I think anybody who did anything to reduce our strength 3 or 4 years ago now realizes that was a mistake at that time. Mr. MoNavonton. Who did that? Mr. Syfarncton, Well, I think it was done by—I think it was done by the adminis. t: tion and also by the Congress, and I'd rather stick to issues than to get into per- sonalities on that point. Mr. MCNavcHTon. They started us out late on our actual rearmament, didn’t they, the action taken then? Mr. SyMiInaron. Yes; but that was only one point. I think our greatest mistake for 6 years has been that we were fighting for peace while these other feliows have been fighting to get ready for war, Mrs. Cratc. Mr. Symington, how long do you think we have before we have got to he ready to fight? It’s an opinion. Mr, SyMINcTON. Well, I couldn’t answer you directly because I might be giving a date away of being an established date, but my own ja the sooner that we are ready to defend this country with that strength we think is essential to defend it, the better it will be for the American people. Mrs. Crarc. Maybe this year? Mr. Srmincron. The sooner the better. Mr, Warrs, Mr. Symington, I have heard it said in the Pentagon that in 18 months, tf we go fast, we might be in a position where we couldn't be challenged by the Russians. Is that too optimistic? Mr, Srmincron. Well, I wouldn't want to date myself on that. Mr. Brminaron, The sconer we are ready, I think, the better it is for the country. Miss Rounwrsxx, I am sorry, we don't have time for any more questions, Mr. Mo- Naughton. Our time is up. This concludes our latest edition of Meet the Press; and thank you, Mr. Symington, very much for being with us, by-
A1018 Wisconsin’s Quality Milk Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. GLENN R. DAVIS or wisconsnr IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 19, 1951 Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, under its competent and dy- namic director, Don McDowell, the Wis- consin State Department of Agriculture is doing much to expand and justify Wis- consin’s Nation-wide reputation as America’s dairyland. Since Wisconsin supplies such a large amount of dairy products to all parts of the country, its quality milk program is of interest far beyond the boundaries of the State. I am inserting herewith, Mr. Speaker, that portion of Mr. McDowell's biennial report which deals with the depart- ment's quality milk program: Quatiry Mux From Farm to Taste: A Mm- OxNTURY CHALLENGE—As Damrura Gors, So Goxs Wisconsin The datry business, from the farm to the table, is the economic lifebload of Wiscon- sin'’s agriculture. No other business enter- prise means so much to the general welfare of Wisconsin people. It supplies the Nation with protective, health-giving dairy foods. It is the greatest single factor tn conserving the soll resources of the State. The dairy industry provides the home and livelihood Yor 160,000 Wisconsin dairy farmers and their families. In addition, the dairy industry employs the largest number of people of any agricultural pursuit in the State. On the farm alone it represents an investment of over $2,000,000,000. Wisconsin citizens cannot afford to take lightly the welfare of dairying. The dairy- men’s welfare is the State's economic barom~- eter. While the future success of dairying in Wisconsin reste largely with farmers them- selves, no other social or economic group ean proaper in the face of a distressed datry industry. DAIRYING NO ACCIDENT Wisconsin’s leadership in the Nation's dairy industry is the result of hard work and the practical use of the State’s natural re- sources. Pioneers who settled this State came largely from the Northeastern States or from northern Europe. They saw in Wiscon- ain’s rich soil, favorable climate, and rolling countryside a land particularily suited to dairying. Early dairying in the State did not follow an orderly and well-planned course. In the Pioneer days wheat-growing was the main source of income. It was the day of the family cow. But as transportation improved and markets were created through the growth of villages and cities, a dairy industry slowly emerged. Acientific developments like the cream separator, the Babcock test, and improved factory processing equipment spurred the growth of the industry. In 1916 income from milk amounted to $93,000,000, or about 88 percent of Wiscon~ sin's cash farm income. By 1940 income from milk had soared to $453,000,000-—nearly 60 percent of the State's gross farm income, GTABILITY DV DAIRTING Cash ts from milk are vital to the atabliity of Itfe and business. Milk checks received monthly or semimonthly by armers provide purchasing power for most of the necessities of farm living. Except for 8 years, the cash income from milk has accounted for at least one-half of the annual total farm inoome since 1923. Even during the depression, when milk prices were at an unusually low level, the percentage of the total farm income from this source was the highest on record for Wisconsin. Often the income from sales of cattie, hogs, and other livestock are used for taxes, new equipment, repairs, and payments on loans, Compared with the 46.7 percent of 1949 cash farm income from milk, the sale of cattle and calves acoounted for 15.8 percent, hogs 12.1 percent, poultry 11.2 percent, other livestock leas than 1 percent, and crops 13 percent. Not all of the importance of dairying in ‘Wisconsin can be measured in terms of in- come from milk. Wisconsin is internation- ally known for tts dairy breeding stock. In- come from breeding cattle sold makes up a large part of the returns from the sale of cattle and calves, which in 1949 were esti- mated at 6146,000,000, or about 16 percent of the annual cash farm income. TAKES BIG INVESTMENT With today’s heavy use of machinery and the inflated costa of equipment, the inveet- ment in Wisconsin’s dairy industry is etag- gering. In many instances a dairy farmer's favestment equals or exceeda the capital in- vestment of the merchant he trades with in his home town. In addition to land, build- ings, and machinery for crop production, he has a substantial investment in his herd and the dairy equipment so essential for efficient production of top quality milk. ‘Wisconsin's dairy herds alone had a farm value of $520,000,000 at the of 1050. The total value of all cattle was $647,- 000,000. Farm investment ts only one part of the capital required in the entire dairy tndustry. Millions are invested by farmers and others in the State's 2,274 dairy processing plants. The investment in Wisconsin's 6,800 milk trucks alone probably exceeds $20,000,000. A LIVELIHOOD FOR OTHERS Wisconsin’s billion-dollar dairy industry is the largest single factor in the State’s eco- nomic system. The State's 160,000 dairy farmers are heavy purchasers of machinery, equipment, feed, fertilizer, household and personal goods which directly affect thou- Bands of nonfarm citizens. The dairy farm creates business for truckers, cattle buyers, wholesalers, retail stores and many others, Thousands aré employed in the processing, distributing, and marketing of more than a billion pounds of Wisconsin's milk every month. ‘WHA4T 15 BOMETIMES OVERLOOKED Our dairy industry provides 150,000,000 Americans with an economical and depend- able source of health-giving protective min- erals, vitamins, and complete protein essen- tial to good health. Our dairy industry encourages the con- servation of our soil and natural resources through the encouragement of grassland farming. It is the only system of agricul- ture which improves rather than depletes the priceless fertility of our cropland, The datry cow is the most efficient machine the world has ever known for converting plant roughage into a palatable, concentrated human food. Wisconsin's dairy 1 plays a vital role in our Amertoan way of life. Today, as & Natton, we find ourselves assuming diffi- cult and complex responstbilities in attain- ing and maintaining a peaceful world. America must be strong. A well-fed Nation has strength. The stakes are high—we all have a share in the future of America's datryland. MEETING TODAY’S CHALLENGES The continued success of any business in America today depends largely upon how ‘well it can cope with suddan sa well an long run changes. Keeping up with the times in auch a decentralized industry as the dairy pusiness is an ever-present chal- _ lenge. ' APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD AN OUTSTANDING PRODUCTION RECORD Wisconsin dairy farmers have proved that they can produce dairy products. Wiscon- sin today produces 15,500,000,000 pounds of milk a year—about twice as much as its closest competitor. This is 18 percent of all the milk produced in the United States, We rank first in production of cheese, con- daeused and eyaporated milk, powdered milk and malted milk. We lead in the number of milk cows. We rate third among the States in the production of butter. A large pert of the Nation’s total dairy production comes from Wisconsin. We pro- duce one-half of the Nation's cheese, slightly Jess than one-half of the powdered whole and skim milk. Three-fourths of the Na- tion’s matted milk powder is produced in Wisconsin and one-fourth of the condensed and evaporated milk. NEED NATIONAL MARKETS Our major outlets, therefore, are beyond the State’s borders. Wisconsin has more at stake in developing national dairy markets than any other State. About 21 percent of our total milk pro- duction was marketed as fluid milk in 1049. Twelve percent was shipped to out-of-Btate fluid markets, and another 9 percent con- sumed in the State in fluid form. Approximately 70 percent of our total milk production was used for the manufacture of dairy foo@s. In 1948, 87 percent of these foods found markets in other States. This included 95 percent of our cheese, 95 per- cent of our evaporated milk, 96 percent of our powdered whole and skim milk, and 65 percent of our butter, These foods move through a complex net~- work of trade channels which are very hard totrace. But we do have reports from several large market centers which give an indica- tion of how widely some of our products are distributed. First let us look at cheese, one of our most important deiry foods. Reports are available of receipts of cheese at 10 major markets and the origin of these shipments. They show that in 1948 these markets received about 286,000,000 pounds of cheese, with more than 166,000,000 pounds coming from Wisconsin— 58 percent of all the cheese received and one-third of Wisconsin's total cheese pro- duction. We still had nearly two-thirds of our cheese to be sold in hundreds of other markets throughout the Nation. Or we might look at butter: These 10 major Markets in the same year received about 33,000,000 pounds of Wisconsin butter-—again about one-third of all the butter we pro- duced in 1948. Another third went to other widely ecattered markets. ONE HUNDRED AND FIFTY MILLION AMERICANS 18 OUR MARKET In the final analysis our market is every one of the 180,000,000 of American people—men, women, and chiidren. For many years much emphasis has been given to the importance of plenty of milk and dairy products for children. Today, with the average life span greatly lengthened, wo are just beginning to renlize that milk is also very essential to good health among adulte— pertioularly older people. Recent research has shown that one of the essentials to a ‘vigorous old age ts plenty of calctum. Milk and dairy foods are the chief sourtes of calcium in the diet. They also supply many other food elements essential to good health
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD cent, while deliveries of cream dropped & percent. This brought widespread changes in the type of producta manufactured, including a much greater use of milk solids and a drop in the production of butter, Today the American people drink more whole milk and eat more cheese, ice cream, and evaporated and powdered milk than ever, but consume less butter. Here are the comparative figures for per capita consump- tion during 1949 and the average for the five prewar years; ke oream 9.5 vaporated milk....} 16.0 Fluid = milk and cream .......------. 840. 0 Total consumption (milk equivalent) !.} 801, 0 ee a ee See 1 Milk equivalent means the total amount of milk represented by all the various types of dairy foods, A GREAT POTENTIAL MARKET The question of too many dairy products is not new. Sixty years ago many Wiscon- sin people thought we had expanded our dairy industry to the point where we had too much milk and too much cheese and butter. At that time we were producing less than 3,000,000,000 pounds of milk & year. Since then we have increased our output to five times that amount. Immediately someone is going to ask: “But what about the surplus of milk and dairy products?” Without digging into the deeper fundamentals of today's situation, there may seem to be justification for the question. Let’s look at it for a moment. We have pointed out that the United States consumption of milk and dairy foods in 1949 totaled 768 pounds. Our peak national con- sumption was 839 pounds per capita in 1942. If we had had a per capita consumption tn 1949 equal to that of 1942 we would have had no surplus. Instead, we would have been 6 percent short of having enough milk to go around. But that isn’t the whole story. Americans consume much more milk and dairy products than do the people of most other countries, Dr. Hazel K. Stiebeling, Chief of the United States Bureau of Human Nutrition and Home Economics, says “we cannot be satis- fied with only passable nutrition.” Recent surveys point out that some 40 percent of the families need more calcium in diets, 20 percent need more food supplying the B vitamins, and 10 percent need more protein and iron in their diets. Dairy foods are ex- cellent suppliers of all these important re- quirements. Nutritionists recommend 1 quart of milk a day for children and at least a pint a day for adults for adequate nutrition. Based on our present distribution of population, this would require nearly double the amount of milk now being consumed. On the basis of all these studies and years of painstaking research into the part an adequate nutrition plays in good health, the United States Department of Agriculture has ested that an annual consumption of 160,000,000,000 quarts a year is a goal that can be achieved in the Nation. Our present national production is about 60,000,000,000 quarts a year. MAREETING CHALLENGES CAN BE MET Wisconsin's dairy industry has outstripped the production records of any other indus- try in the past 10 years. Dairy farmers have proved they can produce. But nutrition su- thorities tell us that American families should consume nearly double their present consumption of milk and dairy foods, Some people will argue that families do not consume more dairy foods because they don’t have the money to buy them. Car- tainly our dairy industry must constantly strive for more efficient production and mar= keting methods to give consumers dairy foods at the most economical cost, But the facts do not bear out the claim that the purchas. ing power of consumers is the only factor affecting consumption, Dr. Stiebeling, of the United States Bureau of Human Nutrition and Home Economics, points out, in a recent survey, that almost 40 percent of our fami- lies even with incomes as high as $7,500 per year live on diets which are low in calcium. Why don’t these families consume enough dairy products to make up this defictency when a quart of milk per day or its equiva- jent in other dairy foods supplies 100 per- cent of an adult's calcium needs? The dairy industry must face this question squarely, It presents one of the basic needs of our marketing program. The answer can come only from the dairy industry through & new and more vigorous use of three age-old marketing tools: 1. An all-out sincere quality program. 2. A greatly expanded advertising and pro. motion program. 8. Continuation and expansion of sound research to lead the way. NO SUBSTITUTE FOR QUALITY Consumers demand good quality dairy products, They want the quality of their products to be good day in and day out. If Madam Consumer buys dairy foods on Mon- day and likes them she'll be back to buy more on Thursday. If she doesn't like the product she gets on Thursday she won't be back to buy more on Saturday. If Wisconsin cannot live up to this chal- lenge for uniform quality products which are attractive to consumers the results to dairy marketing will not be pleasant. These are among the possibilities: First, Wisconsin may lose the marketa it now has, as well os lose the opportunity to develop any future potential outlets tor dairy foods. In the second place, synthetic and subati- tute products will have a better chance to take over our markets. Herein Mes a con- stant and serious challenge. Finally, consumers will continue to insist on good quality products, and they will be supplied by other areas which can give them the products they want, NOT A NEW PROBLEM Quality-wise thinking is not new in the Wisconsin dairy industry. It is as old as the industry itself, and during the past 75 years it has passed through a long process of gradual growth and evolution. No word has been heard more frequently among dairy farmers, field men, plant operators and others * the dairy industry than the word “qual- Better quality was taught by the early Wisconsin dairy leaders, Then, as dairying expanded, it became a cooperative job, spear- headed by the Wisconsin Dairymen’s Asso- ciation. This association not only talked quality, but it took the lead in actually showing how cheesemakers and buttermakers could do a better job. ‘When the dairy and food commission was created in 1689, quality became its watch- word, It took over the fleld work started by the Dairymen’s Association, and its feld inspectors became an important part of the State quality program. When the dairy and food commission, the Department of Marketa and the old Department of Agriculture were consolidated into the present Department of Agriculture, dairy quality continued to be one of its major activities. When we speak of quality milk today we have in mind something quite different from the generally accepted concept of that term 50 years ago. As our dairying has changed A119 so have our ideas of quality. Quality stand- ards have moved steadily forward as thé industry changed from a small-scale produc tion for home or community consumption into a modern large-scale operation for the national naarkets, . QUALITY EVERYONE'S J08 Quality dairy production in Wisconsin to- day means the continuing cooperation of 160,000 individual dairy farmers. Producers must make a sincere, consistent, and diligent effort every day to meet many routine but important details. Production of top quality dairy products on the farm is a wonderful beginning. But milk haulers, dairy plant Aeldmen, em- ployees and managers of over 2,200 dairy planta must work together and with the farmer to make certain that the natural goodness of the milk and dairy products are preserved all the way from the farm to the consumer's table. Dairy plant operators and fieldmen, dairy organization leaders, extension specialists and State inspectors serve the industry all the way along, helping to keep it alert to undesirable practices affecting the salability of dairy foods. Quality milk today means good quality dairy foods on the tables of 160,000,000 Americans from Maine to California and from Washington to Florida, That brings into the team ail of those who assemble, transport, wholesale, and distribute these dairy products at retail to all the homes in the Nation. TEAMWORK BEGINS ON THE FARM High quality dairy products cannot be lege islated. It is not enough to produce them in a scientific laboratory, They can be made only through sound quality production prace tices on the farm, followed by careful han- diing in transportation and skilled processing in clean, well-equipped, and properly man- aged dairy plants. It 1s fundamental that our dairy products cannot be better than the quality of the milk from which they are made. Healthy dairy cows are the beginning. HERD HEALTH VITAL Wisconsin began ita fight agatnat livestock diseases when our dairy industry was still in its infancy. Much progress has been made, but the job is not finished. One of the first diseases against which a State-wide campaign was launched was tuberculosis in cattle. Wisconsin has besn & leader in the eradication of this disease, It too was accomplished through teamwork between dairymen, veterinarians, and State and Federal agencies over a period of 320 years. Latest tests indicate that Wiscon- ain has virtually eradicated this disease. Another cattle disease which has more re- cently come into the spotlight is brucellosis, or Bang’s disease. Concerted action against this disease was started about 15 years ago, and while considerable progress has been made, much greater strides will be necessary if we are to eradicate it completely. Ate tention was directed to the need for prompt action against brucellosis by recent an- nouncements that future milk market re- quirements may exclude any milk except that produced from brucellosis-free herds, Recent area tests in certain sections of Wisconsin indicate that less than 5 percent of our livestock is infected with brucellosis, These tests show that less than 20 percent of the herds in these areas have any infec~ tion at all. A recent survey in one county further shows that about 40 percent of the infected herds had less than 1 cow out of 10 infected with the disease. Like any quality program, Aghting live~ atock disease also requires teamwork. Only through the cooperation of farmers, lives stock dealers, and veterinarians, and with the heip of latest scientific developments, Wisconsin can eradicate brucellosis.