APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The housing crisis now upon use demands @ successful solution. The inadequacies of America’s housing are not new innovations or problems. In cooperative housing, now being under- taken by desperate veterans throughout the Nation, the United States is far behind other countries. In Denmark, Austria, Switser- land, Norway, and Sweden great progress has been made. In Germany, between the years 1914 and 1927, cooperative housing societies tripled from 1,342 to 4,128. Do not misunderstand me. I am not anx- fous to consider any other nation’s problem other than America's, nor any other nation’s ideas or plans. We know the struggle Great Britain is experiencing now in her housing Program. We know that even in Russia, where the state is supreme, housing condi- tions are not alleviated with the dispatch demanded by homeless people. Our Nation's early history reveals housing problems. Housing is a fundamental right of any man. Food, shelter, clothing, heat in winter, water, and sunshine are essentials. And because they are essentials, because the demand is stationary and needs no stimula- tion, we have in our struggle for existence clamped restrictions, handicaps, and bottle- necks on the paths that lead to plenty. And so I think it is a sad commentary to say that in meeting the housing needs of our people, and particularly of our veterans, this great productive, inventive, ingenious Nation consistently fails to meet its housing needs. As American veterans and citizens, we sat on the side lines hoping that out of all the controversy, plans, and programs there would come the simple home which we all want, and must have. In this great controversy the American peo- ple can see signs of socialization in the home- building industry. And since we are a self- reliant people, independent and jealous of our inherited rights. we will have none of the paternalistic measures used as opiates for the peoples of other nations. However, there is much proctf and evidence that the dominant mood in Washington is that the Government should enter into hous- ing only in an effort to take the risk out of home construction in favor of the builders. Bo we find that what may undermine the independence of the man who wants a home and is willing to assume the risks of con- struction and finance does not always work the same way among those who would build for buyers, but who would allow the Govern- ment and the taxpayers to assume the risk, assure profits, and eliminate private builders’ losses. Somewhere there must be a reasonable, workable answer. Government hobbles round the feet of the construction industry are being removed. The amount of commer- cial construction permitted under Govern- ment regulation is being increased. The new Congress is asked to write housing legislation again. The housing legislation which drew such public fire during the seventy-ninth session of Congress may be reintroduced. There are indications that we may have sub- mitted a new housing bill, perhaps better suited to the views of the veterans, the in- dustry, and the people at large. I am recommending housing legislation. We have a staff to study what occurs in Con- gress; to be ready to supplement and com- plement legislation proposed, an action which might lessen the emergency facing too many millions of veterans and other citizens. I can see no further justification for a na- tional debate and controversy over a situa- tion that demands action. I favor the adop- tion of an industry-labor-Government pro- gram which, in the ensuing years, will house our people in a manner which they not only Geserve but which they must have. I have been encouraged by the plans and methods through which the manufacture of industrial and prefabricated homes may form part of the answer to tomorrow's housing problems. Remember that your children and mine and their children, too, will face life with the same desires for homes which have inspired us and carried us to a better life. Today in this Nation, we must deal with practical thoughts and tools. The contro- versy over economics, politics, and programs in home construction is worthless to the man who must have shelter. The Veterans of Foreign Wars is stepping into the housing picture with eyes open and heads cool. A Nation-wide effort is being made to have building codes and regulations simplified ang standardized so that manu- facturers, builders, and buyers can proceed in an orderly manner to house the Nation and themselves. Recently, a subcommittee of the Senate Small Business Committee held hearings in Washington. I will remark, after seeing a copy of the committee's report, that veterans’ organizations have done in some parts of the Nation what even Government could not ac- complish. In York, Pa., a citizens-veteran committee was established which brought to- gether builders, bankers, labor, buyers, real- estate people, and others interested, and reached agreements whereby building mate- rials available to the community were chan- neled into homes for veterans. In Fresno, Calif., another such committee went to the city commission and demanded that building permits be limited only to those commercial projects which had the sanction of the Civilian Production Admin- istration. Black markets were thus wiped out—simply and fast. The national housing committee of the Veterans of Foreign Wars met here in Chi- cago last month. We drew the membership of that committee from all sections of the United States. We were honored by the presence of your officials. Government hous- ing experts also spent several hours with us, discussing the various aspects of the housing emergency. Our suggestions, devised by the national housing committee, contain certain musts if the builders and the Nation are to meet their obligations to the war veterans. I am reminded of the statement made by Gen- eral Eisenhower before a group of American financiers in New York recently. The gen- eral pointed out, that any nation which could afford to win the last global war cou'd afford to house the men who made Victory possible. The musts, as veterans view them, are: 1. Direction and channeling of building materials and labor into the housing field. 2. Curtailment of nonhousing construction to the fullest possible extent, it being under- stood, however, that a reasonable industrial and commercial expansion is necessary to the economic development of our country. This will to some extent result in additional em- ployment for veterans. 8. Erection of multiple units must be en- couraged by the elimination of legislation, regulations, and restrictions which are pres- ently discouraging the erection of this type of rental unit. 4. Encourage investors in rental-unit proj- ects by providing long-term, low-interest- rate money for financing. We place the in- terest rate at 2 percent over a 40- 50-year period. Another “must,” agreed upon by the na- tional housing committee of our organiza- tion, was congressional approval of the Vet- erans’ Employment and National Economic Development Act of 1947. This legislation has been introduced in the House of Repre- sentatives by Representatives Jzssx WoLcoTT, Republican, Michigan, chairman of the Bank- ing and Currency Committee; B. W. Krar- wey, Republican, New York; JaMEs E. Van Zawyr, Republican, Pennsylvania; Enrrn Nourse Roosas, Republican, Massachusetts, chairman of the Veterans’ Affairs Committee; Eeres Keravuvex, Democrat, Tennessee; and Baawr Srancze, Democrat, Kentucky, former A747 chairman of the Banking and Currency Com- mittee. Among the many worth-while and sound undertakings which could be accomplished by this bill, popularly known as the veter- ans’ RFC, none could be more basic than a stimulus to the housing situation. Under such legislation, 10cal communities, counties, and States could participate in the loan fea- tures and solve their own problems in hous- ing. Builders and developers would be as- sisted. Under the provisions for a revolving fund, the controversy between Government and private-enterprise housing people would be eliminated. Private enterprise requires financing to develop large or small long- range projects of the types needed. In the prefabricated and tndustrial hous- ing fields, such an act would provide help. I suggest your great organization study this legislation. In a recent weekly national news magazine, one of the Nation’s more sound and leading economists and financial advisers stated that the Reconstruction Finance Corporation, established by Presi- dent Hoover in 1932, and the parent model for the veterans’ RFC, was—and I quote— “One of the most important public institu- tions ever created. In general, it has been one of the most successful.” In his recent budget message to the Con- gress, President Truman indicated the vet- erans’ benefit and readjustment program was complete, except for certain assistance which would allow the veterans to make further contributions to their Nation. In the estab- ishing of a_ self-liquidating, self-helping agency, much could be saved monetarily. Profits from such an agency would revert to the Treasury as credits against our huge national debt. In establishing the parent RFC, President Hoover said that its purpose—and I again quote— ‘was to furnish, during the period of depression, credits otherwise unobtainable under existing circumstances, in order to give confidence to agriculture, industry, and labor against further paralyzing influences.” The Veterans of Foreign Wars submit that our 15,000,000 veterans warrant the same kind of consideration in housing and in any fu- ture employment crisis. I am cognizant of your organization's dis- taste for any more legislation which inter- feres with your industry. I am also mindful, as are you, of the great future which lies be- fore your industry. It is in your power now to set the economic pace for the Nation in the future. It is a noble undertaking but one with great responsibilities. We know that the building industry vir- tually collapsed in 1926—3 years before the “big crash" hit the rest of the Nation. The reasons sre understandable to all. People did not have the money to finance the con- struction of desired homes. Reltable statistics indicate now that not more than 50 percent of our people can afford their own homes. Before the war years, over 8,000,000 families could afford only $15 a month rent. Six million homes were substandard; at present 20 percent of our people live in substandard shelter. The temptations are great when a market exists In any product. But if the tempta- tions in price and quality are allowed to run rampant, the market is soon exhausted and the Nation suffers, as does the individual or corporation. That temptation is running rampant throughout the veterans’ housing program is evident to us. Our national offices receive daily delegations of veterans who have been duped into signing contracts, agreeing to purchase at set prices, only to learn later that more and more money is required before they have a roof. Thousands of them have Geposited comparatively large amounts of money with builders who fail to complete projects or who become entangled with the laws. Uncertain labor and material costs make for umcertain prices and completions of
A748 homes. I recall a project at Front Royal, Va., sponsored by the Textile Workers of America, where homes were to be available for a little over $5,000. The actual cost of the homes today is around $8,200. I do not know how long either the Ameri- can people or the veterans who must have homes are going to remain patient. We know that construction and real-estate in- terests raised a mighty voice in November 1945 to have order L41 lifted—allowing com- mercial and industrial construction to grab the greater share of material and bullding- trades labor. I assume it was part of the industry fight to get the Government out of the construction business. That fight has been carried forward by the industry with increasing energy until now, the latest so-called veterans’ emergency housing pro- gram hus been freed of many of the restric- tions imposed by the Federal Government. Very recently, the President announced an agreement between the Associated Con- tractors and the building-trades depart- ment of the American Federation of Labor which promises to outlaw strikes in the con- struction industry. This agreement we all hail, as a constructive step forward. It should spur the completion of homes and step-up the tempo of the entire industry. However, if this agreement cements two components of the construction industry to- gether as a wall against the lower costs of homes or the use of new materials and the erection of good, precut, prefabricated or industrial houses, then we, as veterans, say it’s spinach and to hell with it. I am acquainted with the problems of one small builder in Virginia whose story of materials and labor costs amazes me. I was surprised to learn that this builder must pay the income and social security taxes of those who work for him. He assures me other employers do the same thing. He is paying common labor $10 a day and on top of that, he must pay, out of his own pocket, the withholding tax. His skilled workers, of course, muke about twice as much, and, their tax he also pays. I do not pretend to be an expert in your industry. I am somewhat of an expert in veterans’ problems. I cannot see a veteran audibly or secretly upholding for long what we know as private or free enterprise when the system fails to provide him with one of the very essentials of life on earth. Shelter is as necessary in our society as air and water and clothes, and I am prepared to warn this industry, or any other, that many veterans do not care how things are made or by whom they are constructed as long as he is given @ freeman’s chance to own a house, rent a house, or wear a suit of clothes. Iam not sure that you men, or the Nation, understand the things a veteran has learned. He fought in a team and found that the rug- ged individualist or selfish man exposed him- self to needless and unnecessary risk. Many did not return. The veteran learned that he could be clothed, housed, fed, transported, hospitalized—he learned it could be done en masse, Isn't it logical for him to question why it cannot be done outside the confines of Government—especially when all he asks is a chance to work, live, and proceed through life in the normal American way? I urge you as the Nation’s builders to com- ply with the regulations imposed by the vet- erans’ emergency housing program. I be- lieve it’s good business for you. Builders are under obligation to file sales reports with the rent-control offices and the Compliance Divi- sion of the OPA. The Nation’s veterans war- rant these safeguards. They have earned decent consideration and honorable con- tracts. I urge you to see that the small fraction of builders who persist in wild schemes, aimed at milking veterans of long-cherished funds for homes, are kept under control. While the present housing market may ap- pear to be another Klondike in gold, or a Signal Hill in oil, the human equation in home building is paramount. Upon the homes and home life of the Nation, hinges the future of America, her strength, the solution of her child-delinquency problems, respect for law and order and, above all, a healthy people, morally armed at all times, strong enough to hold the American line against ideologies and forces pressuring from all points around the world. A year ago, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, anticipating construction problems, en- deavored to help. We wrote the industry, the labor unions, and Government of tals in an effort to untangle many of the prob- lems as they affected vetera We were assured that progress was being made; that building requirements would be met. We were assured that apprentice training would be stepped up sufficiently to care for the great demand for additional construction workers. Today, the shortage of building employees threatens again to slow down home construction. Ayain I remind you that veterans as uniformed fighters and workers for their country have learned that great programs and plans can be accomplished through rigid planning and operations. As home builders, you are vitally in- terested in employment, taxation, national income, home financing, and the welfare of the Nation in general. When times are good, you have customers. Our future is entwined and dependent upon the welfare of the Nation as a whole, and since the. veteran population and those directly related to veterans for the first time in our history, constitute a majority of our people, it is only right that your organiza- tion and mine insure that veteran welfare is more than promises and words. Britain Issues White Paper on Palestine Crisis EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. THOMAS J. LANE OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. LANE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the ConGREs- SIONAL REcorD, I include the following article by John Chabot Smith, which ap- peared in the New York Herald Tribune on February 21, 1947: BRITAIN ISSUES WHITE PAPER ON PALESTINE CRISIS—IT CONTAINS BEVIN, MORRISON, AND ARAB PLANS BUT HAS LITTLE NEW MATERIAL (By John Chabot Smith) Lonpon, February 20.—A new white paper on Palestine was issued by the British Gov- ernment today, containing what have been called the Morrison plan, the Arab plan, and the Bevin plan. The pamphlet, designated “Cmd. 7044,” price 4 pence, is the latest addition to the monumental heap of documents which Brit- ain intends to lay before the United Nations. An official source said today that every white paper, committee of inquiry report, and other official documents dating back to the Balfour declaration of 1917 will be included, Today's release contained little new mate- rial, since the Bevin plan had already been unofficially circulated, and the other two Officially published. Significant, however, was Foreign Secretary Ernest Bevin’s summa- tion of Britain's 25 years as mandatory ruler of Palestine. His concluding paragraph follows: “Throughout the period of mandatory rule in Palestine it has been the object of His Majesty's Government to lay the founda- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tions for an independent Palestinian state, in which Arabs and Jews would enjoy equal rights. The state of tension between the two peoples which has existed thereto has continually thwarted the attempts of the mandatory power to progress toward this end. * * * The proposals contained in the present memorandum are designed to give the two peoples an opportunity of dem- onstrating their ability to work together for the good of Palestine as a whole, and s0 providing a stable foundation for an inde- pendent state.” Curiously enough, this statement is not exactly what the League of Nations mandate said the mandatory power was supposed to do, Whether Bevin's words mean the same as the words used in the mandate is argu- able; indeed, Arabs and Jews have argued the point for 25 years and the argument has con- tributed toward the tension Bevin referred to. The words used in this connection in the mandate are: “Whereas the Principal Allied Powers have also agreed that the Mandatory should be responsible for putting into effect the (Bal- four) declaration * * * in favor of the establishment in Palestine of a National Home for the Jewish people, it being clearly understood that nothing should be done which might prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country; and “Whereas recognition has thereby been given to the historical connection of the Jewish people with Palestine and to the grounds for reconstituting their National Home in that country, * * * “The Mandatory shall be responsible for placing the country under such political, ad- ministrative and economic conditions as will secure the establishment of the Jewish Na- tional Home, as laid down in the preamble, and the development of self-governing in- stitutions, and also for safeguarding the civil and religious rights of all the inhabitants of Palestine, irrespective of race and religion.” Bevin told the House of Commons on Tues- day that the mandate had proved unwork- able; the new white paper does not settle the old argument of whether Britain ever tried to make it work. The text of the Bevin plan, as released today, confirms in every important detail the versions of it which circulated unofficially as soon as the foreign secretary submitted it to the Arab delegations and the Jewish Agency representatives on February 7. The principal difference is that the text is tricky and ambiguous. The Morrison plan consists of an extract from a speech made by Herbert Morrison in the House of Commons on July 31, 1946. The Arab plan submitted by the Arab dele- gations to the Palestine conference on Sep- tember 30, 1946, was made public at that time. The white paper also releases for the first time the official explanatory map attached to the Morrison plan. This shows exactly what unofficial versions of the map portrayed—a small Z-shaped Jewish area, embracing part of the coast from Haifa, southward in the hills around Galilee; an Arab enclave at Jaffa; the Jerusalem district and the Negeb desert under British rule; and the rest, al- most half the country, designated “Arab Province.” By a curious accident of the map maker's art, the boundary of the Negeb in the Mor- rison plan neatly divides the name Palestine into the British-ruled “Pale” and the Jewish and Arab provinces of “Stine.” Britain has long used to word “pale” to distinguish a district which has a special law and govern- ment from the surrounding territory. There was an English “pale” in Ireland, until Queen Elizabeth conquered the whole island, from which comes the expression “beyond the pale.” The Russian Czars maintained a Pale for the Jews in Russia.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The map shows scattered Jewish settle- ments in the Areb provinces of the ‘‘Stine,” but a detour of uhe boundary excludes the southernmost Jews from the “Pale.” The map is dated July 1, 1946; since then the Jewish settlements have been extended southward deep into this area. No map accompanies the Bevin plan in the pubiished white paper. but an official said the requisite map has been prepared. It shows at least 20 different Jewish and Arab zones, the unit of local administration being the municipality instead of the prov- ince, he said. Select Committee To Investigate Newsprint EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHARLES R. ROBERTSON OF NORTH DAKOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 26, 1947 Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. Speaker, I am happy to support House Resolution 58. Throughout the country many small papers and, in fact, many large papers have been confronted with the serious problem of obtaining newsprint. The same can be said of many other types of paper, including wrapping paper and paper products used by other business concerns. It is imperative that the Congress establish this committee to make these studies. In order that the country may know the reasons for this shortage, and the ever-increasing demand for paper and paper supplies in the United States, this study and investigation is necessary. Unless we can find a correction for this difficulty, it is probable that many of the small newspapers will have to dis- continue publication. Living Costs and Wage Levels REMARKS HON. PHILIP J. PHILBIN OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. PHILBIN. Mr. Speaker, in view of the rapid advance in the cost of liv- ing and particularly in view of the price increases in some meats and other food- stuffs, it is my belief that the Congress is under an imperative duty to explore the reasons for these increases and seek to provide relief for the distressed American consumer. In the main, we have two alternatives. We can permit this situation to continue without taking any action to alleviate it, permit the cost of living to bound sharply upward, and in that event be confronted with renewed, determined wage demands, strikes, and labor disputes, and possibly be faced also with demands for the re- turn of drastic economic controls over our economy, or, on the other hand, we can move now, speedily and efficiently to uncover the causes, practices, and basic conditions that lie behind the rapid rises in the cost of living and if we are pains- taking in the matter be in a position where we can take specific action to stop these alarming trends and stabilize the wage-price relationship at reasonable levels, Believing as I do that this Government and our free-enterprise system of con- ducting business will have to find satis- factory answers to the great pending question of the increased cost of living in the very near future, I am teday intro- ducing a resolution to investigate every phase of this problem and hope for its early adoption. The resolution follows: Resolved, etc., That there is hereby estab- lished a select committee (hereafter referred to as the “committee'"’) to study the prices of necessaries of life and problems facing the purchasing public as the result of price advances, to be composed of seven Members of the House of Representatives, to be ap- pointed by the Speaker of the House of Representatives, Sec. 2. It shall be the duty of the com- mittee— (a) To make a full and complete stud); and investigation of the problems facing American consumers with regard to the pur- chase of necessities of life in the markets of this country at reasonable prices and in udequate quantities, the basic reasons for the advance in the cost of living, and prac- tices, factors, and conditions which bear on or contribute to cause high price levels. (b) To make recommendations to Congress at the earliest practicable date with respect to remedial action looking toward increased production, efficient distribution, lower prices for consumer goods, and increase in con- sumer purchusing power. . Sec. 8. For the purposes of this resolution the committee is authorized to hold such hearings, to sit and act at such times and places during the sessions, recesses, and ad- journed periods of the House of Representa- tives of the Eightieth Congress, to employ such experts, and such clerical, stenographic, and other assistants, to require by subpena or otherwise the attendance of such wit- nesses and the production of such corre- spondence, books, papers, and documents, to administer such oaths, to take such tes- timony, and to make such expenditures as it deems advisable. The cost of stenographic services to report such hearings shall not be in excess of 25 cents per hundred words, (b) The committee shall have power to appoint subcommittees to assist the com- mittee in its work. The members of the committee shall serve without additional compensation, but shall be reimbursed for travel, subsistence, and other necessary ex- penses incurred by them in the exercise of the functions vested in the committee. Src. 4. There is hereby authorized to be appropriated the sum of €50,000 to carry out the provisions of this resolution. Nebraska’s Eightieth Anniversary REMARKS HON. KARL STEFAN OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. STEFAN. Mr. Speaker, in 1867 a terrible War Between the States had only recently ended. The martyred Lin- coln was still fresh in the memory of A749 every living man. Secretary Seward was to conclude the purchase of Russia's only possession in the Western Hemi- sphere—Alaskua—and would be wincing under the barbed words of the press which would call what he was to do Seward’s Folly and the “Secretary's Ice Box.” Archduke Meximilian had failed to make Mexico a European colony. It was against this brilliant backyround of woild-shaking events that President Andrew Johnson affixed his signature to a proclamation on March 1, 1867, making the State of Nebraska one of these United States. There are not many alive today who remember the Nebraska of 1867. Yet few out of the 140,000,000 Americans today are unaware of what they owe to Ne- braska. During the late war Nebraska men and women, Nebraska factories, and Nebraska farms contributed far beyond the line of duty to the attainment of our common victory. What Nebraska farm- ers did for victory is typical of the fight- ing spirit of present-day Nebraska. Al- though most of Nebraska's farm popu- lation which came within the limits of the draft age could have claimed occu- pational deferment, 31 percent of that age group waived such immunity and went into the armed services. More than 15 percent of that age group left their farms to work in war factories. Thus, with only about half of the normal farm workers and with makeshift machinery hung together by baling wire and a pray- er, Nebraska's remaining farmers tackled the most challenging task which has yet come their way—that of feeding the armed services, of feeding our allies, and of feeding the American people. How well they did this tremendous job is now proud history. Truly they made bricks without straw. During the war years Nebraska farms produced grain and meat crops 10 to 40 percent in excess of the highest yield of peacetime years. What were the factors behind this monumental] accomplishment? There were two such factors—the land and the people. Early travelers through what is now Nebraska saw few trees and concluded that land which was not suitable for trees was not suitable for agriculture. Maj. Stephen H. Long was one of these tale bearers. After visiting this region in 1819 he drew a map of his travels on which he called the entire area between the Platte River and the Red River in Texas “the Great Desert.” In his offi- cial report he said that— It— Nebraska— is almost wholly unfit for cultivation and, of course, uninhabitable for people depend- ing upon agriculture for their subsistence. But George Catlin—one of America's great artists and the first painter of Ne- braska scenery—held a far different opinion. After being in Nebraska in 1832 he wrote: There is no more beautiful prairie country in the world than that which is to be seen here. The surface of the country is grace- fully * * * undulating like the swells of the ocean after a heavy storm, and cvery- where covered with beautiful green turf and with occasional patches of trees. The soil
A750 in this region is also rich and capable of making it one of the most * * * pro- ductive countries in the world. Nebraska’s 80 years of statehood have proved that artist Catlin—not Major Long—was the true prophet. The people who settled this fertile State were home builders. They had no desire to wrest what riches they could from Nebraska soil and spend their gains elsewhere. These people came to Ne- braska to live. They built homes, churches, and schools, These were their primary interests. In fact, Nebraska produced the first homesteader in the en- tire United States. In the early hours after midnight on January 2, 1862, Daniel Freeman was the first to take ad- vantage of the Homestead Act. He claimed 160 acres on Cub Creek near Beatrice. Since that time, over 1,000,000 homesteaders have reccived more than 120,000,000 acres from our Government. Of these homesteaders, considerably over 100,000 have lived in Nebraska. Whence came these people who sought Nebraska as home? From New England and New York, from Michigan and Illi- nois, from the war-torn States of the South. More and more settlers came from far across the seas. The Irish set- tled Holt County in 1874 and Greeley County in 1877. Germans settled Madi- son, Stanton, and Thayer Counties be- tween 1867-70. Swedes settled in Polk and Saunders Counties about 1870 and in Phelps and Burt Counties about 1880. Bohemians founded communities in Knox, Colfax, Saunders, and Saline Counties about 1870. A group of Hol- landers settled in the south of Lancas- ter County between 1868-70. Eastern Germans began to settle Jefferson County about 1875 and extended their settlements into Clay and Hamilton Counties. Danish, Swedish, Bohemian, and Polish communities were founded in Howard and Valley Counties. French settlements were made in Richardson, Nemaha, Antelope, and other counties. The seeds of greatness of Nebraska's peo- ple were brought in from a score of dif- ferent States and from a dozen different foreign countries; but, once these seeds took root in Nebraska soil, the product which grew from them became Ne- braska’s most valuable asset—coura- geous, hard-working, law-abiding Amer- ican citizens. Nebraska is not today—and it was not 80 years ago—a land for the man who thinks the world owes him a living with- out blood, sweat, and tears. It is a land for the patriot; a home for the producer. Nebraskans have weathered blizzards in winter, watched their seedlings perish in a spring drought, faced a plague of grass- hoppers in the summer, and fought prairie fires in the fall. Nebraska pio- neers, alive today, have seen their loved ones fall under Indian tomahawks. The land that is theirs they paid for—not in gold, but in gore; not in silver, but in suffering. Is it any wonder that tne sons and daughters of these veterans of the last frontier had the strength, the courage, the endurance to patch up overworked farm equipment and, in spite of the war- time lack of farm workers, to break all reccrds in farm production? Nebraska was home to one of the great- est of the prairie scouts, W. F.—Buffalo Bill—Cody. It was also home to J. Ster- ling Morton, who will always be remem- bered as the father of Arbor Day, a day which was first observed in Nebraska— before being celebrated by any other State—on April 10, 1872. Charles G. Dawes, former Vice President of the United States lived in Nebraska, as did Will'am Jennings Bryan, who attained world-wide fame as the boy orator of the Platte. General of the Army John J. Pershing lived for several years in Nebraska. John G. Neihardt wrote the history of Nebraska in deathless poetry in his Song of Hugh Glass. Willa Cather, Bess Streeter Aldrich, Caroline Renfrew, Howard Erickson, Leonard Stromberg, and Alvin Johnson are among the score of able writers who have immortalized Nebraska in prose. Ne- braska’s Thurlow Lieurance composed By the Waters of Minnetonka. Howard Hanson, of Wahoo, Nebr., has written symphonies and choral works as well as a well-known opera, Merry Mount. Nor can we here forget that Frederick Rem- ington, who was with the Army in 1890- 1900 in Nebraska, told the story of our frontier in his justly famous paintings. Yes; Nebraska has had more than her share of great men and women in agri- culture, in industry, in commerce, in transportation, in religion, in education, in art, in science and in literature. They are and they always will be assets to our great State. Yet, the greatest of all assets will be those unnamed heroes and heroines, who endured torch and toma- hawk, prairie fire and blinding blizzard, that their land might produce and that the people of their country and the peo- ples of the world might be fed. Their heritage of abiding faith and matchless courage is by far a greater gift to their sons and daughters than even the firm, rich soil itself. Without intending it, the ablest por- trayal of Nebraska before or since made is contained in a paragraph describing the great seal of Nebraska, passed by the Nebraska State Legislature in 1867. I quote: The eastern part of the circle to be repre- sented by a steamboat ascending the Missouri River; the mechanic arts to be represented by a smith with hammer and anvil; in the foreground, agriculture to be represented by a settler’s cabin, sheaves of wheat, and stalks of growing corn; in the background a train of cars heading toward the Rocky Mountains, and on the extreme west, the Rocky Moun- tains to be plainly in view; around the top of this circle, to be in capital letters, the motto, “Equality Before the Law,” and the circle to be surrounded by the words, “Great Seal of the State of Nebraska, March 1, 1867.” “Equality before the law,” “Honesty be- fore men,” “Reverence before God”— these are the precepts that have made Nebraska great during her 80 years as a State; these are the precepts which will continue to keep Nebraska great as long as our free Nation, under the Constitu- tion, endures. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Retirement Pay of Certain Members of the Regular Navy and Marine Corps REMARKS OF HON. CLAUDE I. BAKEWELL OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. BAKEWELL. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced a bill, H. R. 2226, for which I desire to solicit the support of the House. The purpose of this bill is to resolve certain inequalities in retirement pay for those members of the Regular Navy and Marine Corps who were promoted from enlisted status and given temporary commissions in the Regula: Navy or Ma- rine Corps during the war. Under the law as existing at the begin- ning of the war and as amended since that time—Public Law 305, Seventy- ninth Congress—enlisted personnel of the Regular Navy and Marine Corps who hed served sufficient time to make them eligible for retirement benefits were transferred to what is known as the Fleet Reserve if physically qualified. This con- stitutes a pool of trained men to be called upon in an emergency and is ad- ministered and supervised by the Navy Department. The status of these mon corresponds to that of the members of the Naval Reserve who are on inactive duty. In order to be eligible for mazi- mum retirement pay, the law requires that enlisted personnel who retire after 20 years’ service join the Fleet Reserve. Later, after a specified period of years, they are actually retired and are no longer subject to recall to active duty. As originally constituted, the Fleet Reserve was only for enlisted personnel and the law in that respect has never been changed. A temporary commission for these ex- enlisted men lapses after termination of the emergency or upon transfer to the Fleet Reserve prior to actual retirement. Under the present law it is necessary that these temporary officers transfer to the Fleet Reserve and draw pay while in the Fleet Reserve at the scale of the highest enlisted rating held by them during their tour of active duty. This bill seeks to make these temporary offi- cers eligible to draw pay in the Fleet Re- serve at the scale of the highest com- missioned rank held while on active duty and so amends the present law. The second part of this bill is con- cerned with former enlisted men who received a permanent, as distinguished from a temporary, commission in the Regular Navy. These officers will not revert to enlisted status. Under the present law these officers are not eligible for retirement benefits as officers until they have served a specified number of years in commissioned rank. In many instances these men were well up in years when they were commis- sioned as officers and they may not therefore be able to complete the re- quired number of years of commissioned
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD service before they are forced by age, illness, or reduced appropriations to re- sign. The second part of this bill seeks to correct this situation and to put these officers on an equality with other perma- nently commissioned officers of the Regular Navy. Mr. Speaker, as one who served as a Reserve officer in the Navy during the war, I am in a position to know that no more loyal or valuable service was ren- dered to the cause by any group of cffi- cers than was rendered by these former enlisted men who are familiarly known in the service as “Mustangs.” I think it only fair that we express our gratitude for their long years of loyal service in the ranks by putting them on an equality with other Regular Navy officers who spent their entire careers in a commis- sioned status. National Defense REMARKS oF HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, I have asked for this time to call attention to three resolutions introducted by the gentleman from California (Mr. GEARHART. ] The first resolution, House Joint Reso- lution 136, deals with a request for nego- tiations with Denmark for the acquisition of Greenland; the second, House Joint Resolution 137, purports to enter into negotiations for the acquisition of certain islands in the Atlantic, the Pacific, and Caribbean sea; and the last one, House Joint Resolution 138, and to do with an invitation to the people of Iceland to be- come a State of the Union. This matter is important because it is @ part of the national-defense program, or if it is not at the present time, it ought to be, and I think that the Members of this House should get behind these reso- lutions. I have today addressed a letter to the chairman of the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Mr. Eaton, asking for consideration of the resolutions. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks and include a copy of my letter and the three resolutions. The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Wis- consin”® There was no objection. Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. The letter and resolutions are as follows: WASHINGTON, D. C., February 27, 1947. Hon. CHaruies A. EATON, Chairman, House Committee on Foreign Affairs, Washington, D.C. Re: House Joint Resolutions 186, 137, and 138. My Dear Mr. Cuarrman: I am respectfully urging reasonably prompt hearings on the above resolutions introduced by our col- league, Representative GrarHarT, of Cali- fornia. If you will examine these resolu- tions, you will note that the first directs that negotiations be entered into with Denmark for the acquisition of Greenland. House Joint Resolution 137 requests that negotia- tions be entered into for the acquisition of certain lands in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and the Caribbean Sea. Resolution 138 provides for the issuance of a letter of invitation to the Government and people of Iceland to become a State in the Union of the United States of America. I believe, Mr. Chairman, that we arc all intensely interested In hemispheric defense. We have already indicated our willingners in the Tr-aty of Chapultepec to work for the establishment of a complete system of de- fenses, including the Western Hemisphere. The import of the resolutions offered by the gentleman from California constitutes, in my opinion, an integral part of these defenses. Now is the time to act. I feel sure that the people of our country are greatly interested in seeing that the objectives of the resolu- tions are accomplished. Respectfully submitted. LAWRENCE H. SmMitTH. House Joint Resolution 136 Joint resolution requesting that negotiations be entered into with Denmark for the ac- quisition of Greenland Resolved, etc., That the President is re- quested to enter into negotiations with Den- mark for the acquisition by purchase of Greenland. House Joint Resolution 137 Joint resolution requesting that negotiations be entered into for the acquisition of cer- tain islands in the Atlantic and Pacific Oceans and in the Caribbean Sea Resolved, etc.. That the President is re- quested to enter into negotiations with— (1) The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the Republic of France for the acquisition by purchase of all islands of the United Kingdom and of the Republic of France situate off the At- lantic Coast of the United States and in the Caribbean Sea; (2) The United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland, the Republic of France, and such other Countries us may be necessary for the acquisition of all islands in.the Pacific Ocean deemed essentiul to the defense of the United States, the Panama Canal Zone, or of the Philippine Islands; and (3) Such countries as may be necessary to acquire ownership and control of the islands mandated to the Empire of Japan after the First World War and such other islands of the Empire of Japan as the Secretary of War or the Secretary of the Navy find essential for the purpose of maintaining peace in the Pacific Ocean areas. House Joint Resolution 138 Joint resolution providing for the issuance of a letter of invitation to the Government and people of Iceland to become a State in the Union of the United States of America Resolved, etc., That the President is au- thorized and directed to issue a letter of invitation to the Government and people of Iceland to apply for admission into the Union of the United States of America. Any such application shall be addressed to the Con- gress and the President and shall contain an assent to the adoption of the Constitution of the United States of America and a copy of the State constitution adopted to apply if such application for statehood is accepted by the Congress, A751 Select Committee on Small Business EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHARLES R. ROBERTSON OF NORTH DAKOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. Speaker. one of the tragedies of this Nation is the conclusive fact that small business is daily being pvshed aside by concentrated capital. It would seem to me that we are destroying the very cornerstone of our American system of free enterprise. I enthusiastically endorse House Reso- lution 18 which sets up again the select committee of the House of Representa- tives to study the conditions surrounding small business. Mr. Speaker, most of the large busi- nrsses of our generation at one time were small businesses. They have grown to their present proportions almost within the lifetime of the majority of the Mem- bers of this Congress. With the trend of events favoring the larger business concerns, the beginning and develop- ment of new smaller businesses grows more difficult daily. The field before this committee is of far-reaching importance. We must de- termine at an early date whether or not we will abandon once and for all the open doorway that has made possible the great business enterprise enjoyed today in the United States of America. Two forces are at work in this country—one is a system of monopoly against which too little is being done by our Government. This force is rapidly crushing small busi- ness and depriving the individual of the opportunity to operate a business for himself. Another equally dangerous situation, perhaps not monopolistic, but much of the same character, prevails, and that is the consolidation of businesses with large capital structures, The people of the Nation, and the Members of Congress, must at some date not too far in the future recognize once and for all what the future policy of this Nation is to be. I, for one, would deplore the day, if it arrives, when small business is moved aside by either monopolistic powers or large capital groups. It is frequently argued that a greater efficiency is to be found in the large business enterprise. And yet we go back to the very fact that most of our pres- ent large businesses were once very small. They have grown to their present pro- portions due to good management, and perhaps due to consolidations, and as a result of advantages that have been ac- corded by the Government. Small business needs the protection of the Government of the United States. This committee can well study these problems and recommend to this Con- gress methods that can be put forth in the form of laws that will preserve per- manently a place in Amcrica for the small businesses of this day and those which are still to come.
A752 Select Committee To Investigate Newsprint EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHARLES B. HOEVEN OF IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 26, 1947 Mr. HOEVEN. Mr. Speaker, House Resolution 58, which would create a select committee to conduct a study and inves- tigation with respect to present and fu- ture supplies of newsprint is most timely. During the war period a subcommittee of the Committee on Interstate and For- eign Commerce assisted in bringing about a rather fair distribution of the available newsprint, and now that con- trols have been lifted the industry has been struggling along in an attempt to carry on under a voluntary cooperative agreement plan. Although we are producing more news- print in America than before, the de- mand for paper and paper products has increased by leaps and bounds and, as a result, there is a great shortage. This shortage is particularly prevalent among the small newspapers of the country, and at the present time many of them are faced with the danger of suspension. Consequently, almost every press and publishers’ association, including the small newspaper associations, has ear- nestly requested that the Committee To Investigate Newsprint Shortages be con- tinued. The objectives of the committee will be to procure a fair distribution of the pres- ent available supply of newsprint and paper and to deal with the problem of getting increased paper production. Those of us from the Midwest who are interested in agriculture are particularly interested in the experiments that have been going on at several Midwest colleges and universities including Iowa State College, seeking ways and means to man- ufacture paper out of farm waste such as cornstalks, oat hulls, straw, corncobs, and so forth. If it is found that we can make paper from these byproducts of agriculture, we will go a long way in helping agriculture remain prosperous. I am heartily in accord with this reso- lution and urge its adoption. Select Committee To Investigate Newsprint EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JAMES I. DOLLIVER OF IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 26, 1947 Mr. DOLLIVER. Mr. Speaker, there are nearly 80 newspapers published in the 15 counties comprising the Sixth Iowa Congressional District. Of that number, there are five daily papers and other weeklies published in county- seat towns. Numerous weekly papers are published also'in the smaller com- munities. These newspapers provide a comprehensive news coverage for the people of that area. I know and recognize the great im- portance of these publications. They provide the local, national, and interna- tional news to their readers. No doubt there are many homes in Iowa who rely more implicity on their local newspaper than on any other medium of public information. No other periodical re- ceives such careful perusal by the mem- bers of the household as the local paper. The editor and publisher are the friends and acquaintances of their readers. They merit and have the confidence of their subscribers and advertisers. The “country press” exercises a greater de- gree of influence, proportionately, than the gigantic metropolitan newspapers on the public with whom they come in contact. Therefore, I join heartily in the effort of the House of Representatives to pro- vide adequate sources of newsprint to these papers. Perhaps no other problem has so beset the smaller newspaper pub- lisher as this shortage of printing paper. Furthermore, this committee’s work may have an important bearing on the industrial use of farm wastes. Iowa farmers produce considerable supplies of the basic materiai of cellulose, such as cornstalks, which may eventually be used for newsprint, or otherwise commercially. This committee can, and I am sure will, contribute valuable information and im- petus to enlarging the market for farm wastes of many kinds. Mr. Speaker, I therefore give my vote and unqualified support to this resolu- tion, establishing, as it does, a select com- mittee of the House of Representatives to deal with the newsprint shortage. Too Drastic EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. WAT ARNOLD OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. ARNOLD. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Ap- pendix of the REcorp, I include an edito- rial from the Wall Street Journal of February 25 relative to the deplorable conditions existing in the fleld of labor because of faulty legislation and setting forth the urgent need for corrective legislation: TOO DRASTIC In recent days there has come before the Committee on Education and Labor of the House of Representatives 8 parade of wit- nesses whose testimony adds up to an almost incredible story of intimidation and arro- gance perpetrated on helpless individuals by labor unions, In each case the law-enforce- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ment agencies were either helpless or un- willing to act. There is not space here to give even the major details of the story, but perhaps one statement credited to a union leader in a court proceeding will epitomize the attitude from which this violence sprung. He as- serts: “Contracts don't mean anything to us. We don’t have to recognize them unless we want to. That's the law." Technically that statement may be faulty. Practically it is no exaggeration. The terms of the law are such that this man and his kind have ample reason to believe that they occupy a privileged position wherein they can tear their solemn promises to bits and flaunt their immunity before the courts of the land. Practically that is the position they occupy. Federal laws—principally the Norris-La Guardia and the Wagner Acts—have made available to union leaders a field of power where they could operate uncurbed by the rules that other citizens must mind. When that field was opened two things were inevitable. One was that it would be occupied. The other was that the successful occupants would be those capable of the most ruthless methods. No one expects that men like Mr. Green and Mr. Murray, who are its beneficiaries, will acknowledge this situation or do anything except to try to hold their privileges. But it is puzzling when a great many conscientious lawmakers either do not see the situation or are unwilling to take action that is adequate. And certainly the legislative proposals that seem to gather the most support do indicate either blindness or timidity. A union imports its strong-arm squad into @ small Connecticut village, overturns the trucks of a family-owned dairy, and beats up employees. What makes a Congressman think that men who do that will become sweetly reasonable if legislation creates a Federal mediation board? Or that it will be checked by a provision of law that says such actions will result in a withdrawal of bargain- ing rights? For what possible evidence is there that such a union means to do anything that could seriously be called bargaining? Another reform proposed is that employers shall have the right of free speech, and what does that mean to a union officer who in- forms an employer that he can resume busi- ness only after he gets to his knees and apologizes for a personal remark? The fact is that the measures on which congressional sentiment seems to be crystal- lizing merely skirt the edges of this problem. They insist on treating symptoms and even those not very boldly. When it is suggested that this Congress undo the grant of special privilege which another Congress legislated, leaders—even so good a man as Senator Tart—speak warnings about “drastic” action. What is there drastic about penalizing men who disregard their contracts? What is drastic about the withdrawal of the legal right of a union of teamsters demanding tribute from girl clerks in a food market? And what about a law which allows the same union to say when an employer shall attend to his own business in his own shop? What @ travesty to talk of “cooling off” periods changing the course of men who have delib- erately organized armies skilled in arson and mayhem. The conditions from which these things result were created by legislation. They can be corrected by legislation. Unless that is done, something which is indeed “drastic” will happen, and it is only necessary to point out that in one case told to the House com- mittee only the good sense of the bedeviled employer prevented members of his commu- nity taking matters into their own hands.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Ships From Russia EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. ALVIN F. WEICHEL OF OHIO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. WEICHEL. Mr. Speaker, the Subcommittee on Ship Sales, Charters, and Lay-Ups of the House Committee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, cover- ing the Ship Sales Act enacted by Con- gress, has been holding hearings cover- ing the matter of the return of our merchant ships from England and other countries, including Russia. In the course of the hearings there has been a refusal to disclose to the committee and Congress certain communications, and today I have caused a subpoena to issue for the Honorable George C. Marshall, Secretary of State, to appear before the committee and there to testify on matters concerning this transaction and bring with him all books, papers, and communications covering some 100 mer- chant ships belonging to the United States and now in the possession of Russia which have not been returned to this country. The Assistant Secretary of State, William Clayton, at a former hearing stated there had been a communication directed to Russia and that some con- siderable time ago a reply was received. He further stated the answer was un- satisfactory but refused to disclose to the committee and to the Congress the con- tents of the reply, saying it was not for the committee. Since that time the Russians have issued a statement that the United States and Great Britain divided 470,000 tons of merchant ship- ping taken from the Germans. Up to this time the committee has no informa- tion of the United States receiving any such tonnage. What connection could there be with reference to this state- ment and the Russians keeping our ships? Since the refusal to disclose the con- tents of the correspondence covering these ships with Russia, I am informed the Department of State has disclosed communications from countries in the Western Hemisphere. Could it be that Russia is the sacred cow of the State Department? Who Laughs Last EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. GEORGE W. GILLIE OF INDIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. GILLIE. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following edi- XCITI—App.——48 torial from the Fort Wayne (Ind.) News- Sentinel of February 19, 1947: WHO LAUGHS LAST At long last a noticeable percentage of the people in the land are awakening with a shock to find that the dry rot of Commu- nist infiltration has progressed here to a dan- gerous stage. A lot of citizens won't believe there is any such thing as fire until they find a blaze on their own roofs; they refuse to take com- munism seriously until they find that a net- work of Red spies, under the leadership of a German alien, has honeycombed the country for months, perhaps years. We wonder what a certain Indiana edu- cator named William Albert Wirt might say today if he were alive. We wonder how many people even remem- ber the name of this Gary school superin- tendent who was mercilessly pilloried by the crackpots and revolutionaries, the stupid in- telligentsia, and the know-nothings of 13 years ago. It was on the morning of March 24, 1934, that William A. Wirt’s letter, which he had sent to a few close friends and a few news- papers, broke into print. There is no need to go into details, but the letter related how he, Wirt, had attended a party during a trip to Washington, and had heard the guests planning how the Communists were eventu- ally to take over the United States. Their thesis, he said, was that Roosevelt was merely the ‘“Kerensky of this revolu- tion,” and their scheme was to “keep him in the middle of the stream,” drunk on his own power, until the strong man was ready to take over. Seldom in our history has a man been so vilified, so ridiculed as was Mr. Wirt when the charges were published. Representative Foulkes, of Hartford, Mich., harangued the Congress on “intellectual jackasses.” ALFRED L. BULWINKLE, North Carolina's Representative in the lower House, said, “We've had two great discoveries: Dr. Cook, who discovered the North Pole, and Dr. Wirt, who discovered Conimunists in the United States Government.” The left-wing New Deal pay-rollers joined Pravda, the Communist daily, in hooting at the Gary educator and his charges; Ickes called him a sorehead; Richberg called him a “cuttlefish squirt”; Adolph Berle called him a “credulous old duffer”; Mrs. Roosevelt, with her inimitable wit, compared his story to Alice in Wonderland. Wise boy cartoonists across the country joined in the fun. Herblock, of NEA, pic- tured Dr. Wirt leaving Washington, his own face having been discovered “the reddest part of the investigation.” Duffy, in the Bal- timore Sun, showed him as a naive Little Lord Fauntleroy, reading Das Kapital. Tal- burt, in the Washington Daily News, pictured a miniature cat escaping from the “red plot” bag. So it went. Everybody had a good laugh. Everybody, that is, who didn't know any better. It is a source of some gratification, though no particular pleasure, to recall that on March 27, 1934, 3 days after Dr. Wirt made his statement, the News-Sentinel said, edi- torially: “It will be a serious mistake for anybody to attempt light dismissal of the charges brought by Superintendent Wirt. * * * Indeed, there is more of the Stalin than of the Kerensky type of government al- ready manifesting itself in Washington. * © There should be a deep-searching probe." The cartoon by the late Harry Lari- mer, News-Sentinel cartoonist, urged that the charges be “smoked out” for a thorough investigation. Of course, there was no thorough investi- gation or, as we had urged, a deep-searching probe. The investigation was deliberately turned into a three-ring circus, with Dr. Wirt depicted as the leading clown. A753 Let us check back to see what the famed educator’s charges were. The Communists and fellow travelers at the party, he said, had outlined the follow- ing plan: To keep Communists in key positions in the Government, To substitute decrees by executive de- partments and agencies for organic law. To replace private industry and commerce with a planned economy. To decentralize cities and redistribute in- dustry and population through housing projects. To end private lending agencies and con- tro] borrowers by Federal monopoly of long- term commercial loans, To dictate policies of newspapers, maga- zines, and other avenues of public opinion. To corral the farm vote through subsidies. To quiet business and labor by doles to make them dependent on the Government. To chill the spine of business by public inve-tigations. To discredit financiers by picturing them 4s crooks. To call political opponents traitors and use the police power of the State to crack down on them. To keep President Roosevelt, as the Kerensky of the revolution, in the middle of a swift stream and intoxicated with his decisions until he could be replaced by a determined dictator. These were the charges; this was the plan Dr. Wirt exposed, and for his pains he was smeared and ridiculed by some of the very people who today are just emerging from their stupor to find that communism is flourishing in the United States. One may check over all the 12 points of the Communist pattern of 1934, and see for himself whether the New Deal did not, by one method or another, try them all and with considerable success. Only in a figurative manner did Mr. Roosevelt develop us the Kerensky of the Red revolution in America. But it was Mr. Roosevelt and the New Deulers who laid the groundwork for the Communist infiltra- tion which now menaces this Nation. Abraham Lincoln EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. AIME J. FORAND OF RHODE ISLAND IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 26, 1947 Mr. FORAND. Mr. Speaker, only a few days ago, throughout America, the birthday of Abraham Lincoln, that great President, was marked by a series of ban- quets as well as patriotic meetings and essay contests. A pupil of St. Patrick’s Parochial School, Valley Falls, R.I., in my district, Miss Esther M. Powers, 12-year-old daughter of the Honorable William E. Powers, State representative and Demo- cratic deputy floor leader in the Rhode Island General Assembly, was awarded the Thomas Leighton Memorial Fund prize for her essay on Abraham Lincoln. This essay is so well done that under leave already granted to me, I include it herewith as a part of my remarks. It follows: ABRAHAM LINCOLN The year 1809 gave to the world a baby who was to grow up to be one of the greatest
A754 and best-loved men in American history. As & boy Abraham Lincoln had little school training, but his mother both encouraged and helped him in his studies. His desire to read, always present, somehow seemed to quench an unknown longing. His many virtues made this man, even as a bey, well liked. Simplicity, honesty, kindness, and humor were just a few of his outstanding characteristics, Take his hu- morous nature, for example. His appear- ance alone was unusual and somewhat comi- cal. This, added to his droll way of telling a@ story, could keep his listeners on the edge of thetr seats or shaking with laughter. This Wwasasaboy Later he could still tell a funny story, but nis witty sayings, however fre- quent, were scarcely ever without a point. People frequently misunderstood his stories. Sometimes they felt hurt. For ex- ample, once when something he found did not prove to be as valuable as he had hoped, he said it reminded him of a blacksmith. This blacksmith found a piece of iron on the floor in the corner and thought it would make a good hammerhead. When melted, though, it was smaller than he had expected and although no good for a hammerhead it would still make an excellent screwdriver. But it still proved small after some hammer- ing. Holding it over the flame for a second melting he reflected it at least would make a nail. After some shaping. however, he decided it would make absolutely nothing. Suddenly. as an inspiration struck him, he took the white-hot metal and threw it into a puddle. Then with a malicious smile he said, “At least, 1 know it will make a good sizzle.” Abraham Lincoln delighted in explaining what he had read. He said in this manner others would gain new knowledge and he himself would more clearly understand it. Dennis Hanks once said, “There's suthin pe- cullarsome about Abe.” Often after reading a book, questions would pop up in his mind no other reader experienced. When asked to write a letter, he would ask, “What do you want to say? Are you sure you want to say it that way? There might be some way that is better than we can think of.” When Lincoln became the sixteenth Pres- ident of the United States he didn't stop be- ing a lovable, good-natured man. Even his face looked a picture of kindness. Many were the occasions when he had a special in- vestigation sponsored for some innocent or even guilty man. One story of this great kindness and one which proves his charuac- ter is “The Soldier's Reprieve,” by Mrs. R. D. C. Robbins, When Lincoln's assassin, John Wilkes Booth, shot and fatally wounded him in Ford’s Theater in Washington he was ab- sorbed in the play, “Our American Cousin.” What a blow it was to the country. It sent the United States into chaos. Everyone mourned this great personage. The follow- ing lines sum up the greatness of his char- acter: “He built the rail-pile as he built the state, Pouring his splendid strength through every blow, The conscience of him testing every stroke, To make his deed the measure of a man.” —Markham. Viewing Handicaps as a Challenge EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD J. HART . OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. HART. Mr. Speaker, in connec- tion with the address recently delivered by Mr. George E. Stringfellow to the graduates of the A. Harry Moore School in Jersey City, I include in this extension of remarks an editorial comment upon the thoughts expressed in that address which appeared in the Orange (N. J.) Transcript, under date of February 13, 1947. The editorial follows: VIEWING HANDICAPS AS A CHALLENGE Our Government has been very thoughtful about the sensibilities of its citizens. We haven't been allowed to see the wounded and broken men who came back from the wars. For the most part they have been hidden away in the Middie West or in isolated spots in the East. During the war the explanation for this was that it wouldn't do the home- front morale any good, and, besides, the wounded man preferred to be alone with his hurts or at least among others who were battered like himself. Cold reality reveais to us that there are thousands upon thousands of these veterans without an arm or a leg, or with damaged faces, or without eyes or hearing. There are thousands upon thousands of these men who have never been able to shake off the thought that for them life ts over. This problem Offers to the rest of us a supreme challenge which we will some day have to face. Speaking at a‘home for disabled soldiers recently, George E. Stringfellow offered a pos- sible lift to the men witi the idea that there are two ways of looking at a handicap. One is the defeatist way of weeping over one's imagined fate, of sitting idly by and doing nothing about it. Then there is the second way of looking upon a handicap. The kind used in sports. It is imposed upon those be- lieved to be superior in performance to their rivals. In other words, the handicap is not a liability but an equalizer. That's the way Thomas A. Edison looked at his deafness. He realized that he had 60 many other natural requisites that other men didn’t possess that he could easily spot them such a thing as hearing and still become the outstanding inventive genius of our times. We will find ourselves meeting this prob- lem more each day. Gradually our hospitals are fitting our wounded with artificial arms and legs and sending them back into the world, It is up to us not to pamper these veterans, but to deal with them as completely whole men. This could be our greatest help and kindness to them. This could be the solution of our problems with the physically handicapped whom we will meet. Some Unsolved Problems in Marketing and Distribution EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. CLIFFORD R. HOPE OF KANSAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 26, 1947 Mr. HOPE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following address which I delivered at the National Farm Institute at Des Moines, Iowa, on February 14, 1947: The great success of the National Farm Institute vindicates the vision of those who conceived the idea a few years ago. Perhaps the best evidence of the real service which its meetings have rendered the Nation and its agriculture is the large number of similar organizations which have grown up through- out the country on a local, State, or regional APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECOPD basis. I consider it not only an honor but & privilege to have a place on your program. The meeting this year is particularly im- portant and significant because it comes at a time when we are entering upon a new era for the Nation and for agriculture. We have behind us the great problems which srose during the war—problems which imposed a serious strain upon American agriculture and which farmers met in a magnificen. way. Now we are on the threshold of new prcb- lems—national and international—which in some respects dwarf those which confronted us during the war. Our domestic industry has now made its transition from war to peacetime production. In the wake of this adjustment, however, we have before us great domestic problems such as labor-manage- ment relations, atomic energy, national de- fense, and fiscal policies, to mention only a few. In the international ficld we are con- fronted with the fact that most of the real questions arising out of the war have not been settled, nor does it appear that satisfac- tory settlements are likely to be brought about in the near future. Whether we like it or not, this country must assume constantly greater responsibili- ties in international leadership. If we are to successfully carry such responsibilities, it means that our Nation must be strong mor- ally, industrially, and militarily. It requires not only sound, strong international policies but a wise and constructive disposition of our industrial and economic problems here at home. This conference, dealing as it does with the economic and social problems of agriculture, can well be expected to contrib- ute much that is helpful and constructive. I have been given the subject of “Some unsolved problems in marketing and distri- bution,” Preliminary, however, to discuss- ing that subject I want, by way of back- ground, to briefly review the problems now confronting agriculture and the adjustments which must be made in the years ahead. While industry has made its conversion from war to peace, that is not true of agri- culture. Up to the present moment farmers are confronted with practically the same p-oblems which faced them during the war. It was then a question of expanding produc- tion to the very limit. That is still the pro- gram, and for 1947 the over-all acreage goals called for by the Department of Agriculture are greater than the acreage planted during any year of the war. Shortages of labor, fer- tilizer, machinery, and transportation which plagued farmers in the war years still exist. Our agricultural production during the war increased one-third. It, together with ac- cumulated surpluses, was all consumed and today our supplies, with few exceptions, are at a low point. The question is: How long can consumption continue at this rate? It goes without saying that farmers are dis- turbed over the prospect. They have built up @ productive capacity far in excess of pre- war consumption, During the years imme- diately preceding the war, with a much smaller production, we found ourselves with vast surpluses of some agricultural commod- ities, and farm prices in most cases far below Parity. This, notwithstanding the fact that production and marketing controls were in effect on most of the basic commodities. With the war in the background, increased supplies of farm implements, labor, fertilizer, and transportation which we can confidently expect within a reasonable period may ex- pand productive capacity beyond what it was during the war. Theoretically, under the Steagall amend- ment, we have a breathing spell of 2 years to work out our postwar policies, during which time farmers may make such produc- tion adjustments as they may be able to do. In practical effect, however, since over-all production goals this year are at about the same level as during the war, there really will be only a 1-year adjustment period.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The present Congress must consider what kind of a farm program we will have follow- ing the expiration of the Steagall amend- ment. This is not the time or the place to discuss that program, but it is in ordcr, I think, to say that the House Committee on Agriculture expects to conduct extensive hearings on this question, beginning in April. It is the hope that there will be wide participation in these hearings on the part of farmers, farm organizations, and all others who are interested in working out a sound and adequate farm program. It is the further hope that the ideas and proposals which may be xdvanced at that time will be given wide publicity by the agri- cultural press, the radio, farm organizations, and Members of Congress with a view of crys- tallizing sentiment on a program which will best serve the interests of the Nation and its farmers. Then, after this thorough consid- eration on the part of Members of Congress, farmers, farm organizations, and the public, it ls hoped that when Congress reconvenes in January, legislation can be quickly enacted. But everything has not been left for this Congress to do. The last Congress, recogniz- ing that productive capacity had outstripped probable consumption of agricultural prod- ucts, passed the Research and Marketing Act. This act, while not neglecting production re- search, made it clear that Congress wanted to emphasize the importance of research in the fields of utilization and marketing. It Was an express recognition of the marvelous strides heretofore made in the expansion of agricultural production and a finding that from now on equal progress was needed in expanding consumption. Agricultural research has been recognized as a proper function of Government for many years. It was implicit in the legislation passed in 1862, setting; up the bureau which later became the Department of Agriculture. It was given express recognition by the pas- sage of the Hatch Act in 1887, as well as in subsequent legislation. It was natural that in the beginning emphasis should have been placed upon research in production because at that time most of our production was for use on the farm or in nearby communities. But now our system of Nation-wide trans- portation and distribution of agricultural products has made the problem of marketing tremendously important, and our huge pro- ductive capacity makes it necessary to call upon applied science to bring about new methods of utilization, This at last brings me to the topic which has been assigned me. I am not a marketing expert. I do not pretend to be informed in the technical aspects of marketing agricul- tural products. That fact is well known to those who prepared this program. I assume therefore that I have been assigned this sub- ject because of my interest in the Research and Marketing Act which, for the first time, makes it possible for the Federal Govern- ment, in cooperation with the States and in some instances with private industry, to carry out research on an adequate scale in the flelds of utilization and marketing and distribu- tion. This act was passed because Congress recognized the fact that there were many unsolved problems in this field. As an indi- cation of what Congress had in mind in pass- ing this act, it might be of interest for me to point out some of the things which led Congress to feel that such legislation was necessary, Back in the Seventy-eighth Congress, the late Hampton P. Fulmer, of South Carolina, then chairman of the House Committee on Agriculture, introduced a resolution provid- ing for an investigation of the marketing sys- tem for agricultural products. Mr, Fulmer didn’t introduce that resolution just because some one told him there ought to be an in- vestigation. He was speaking from experi- ence as a farmer in South Carolina produc- ing fresh vegetables among other things. He was somewhat mystified, as well as indignant, shall we say, that sweetpotatoes that he sold for a cent a pound in South Carolina turned up in retail markets in Washington at from 8 to 10 cents a pound, with a comparable spread existing as to other perishables. Mr. Fulmer wanted to get at a practical situation. The House of Representatives authorized the Commitee on Agriculture to make the proposed investigation. However, it was late in the session, Mr. Fulmer was not in good health, and no active work on the matter was done in the Seventy-eighth Congress, At the beginning of the Seventy- ninth Congress, JOHN W. FLANNAGAN, Jr., of Virginia, chairman of the Committee on Ag- riculture, introduced and securcd the adop- tion of a similar resolution. Notwithstand- ing the fact that marketing conditions were not normal during the war period and that there was difficulty in securing u staff, the committee did considerable work in investi- gating the marketing of fresh fruit and vege- tables, livestock, and other farm coummodi- ties. The experience of the committe in making this investigation convinced it that there were tremendous problems in the field of murketing, and that there wus great need for practical study and research, Practically culncident in point of time was the work of the Pace subcommittee of the Committee on Agriculture, which was ap- pointed in 1944 to study the problems of cotton, This subcommittee conducted ex- tensive hearings in December 1944 and, upon its reappointment in the Seventy-ninth Con- gress, did much further work on cotton, One conclusion reached was that if cotton were to meet the competition of paper and rayon and other synthetic fibers, it would be neces- sary to conduct systematic research in utili- zation. The committee found that one great udvantage which synthetics and fibers had over cotton was the fact that extensive re- search in industry had enabled those prod- ucts to be developed as to form, texture, and quality in such a way as to meet consumptive demand. During this same period the Republican Food Study Committee, consisting of a group of Republican Members of Congress ap- pointed by Minority Leader Josep# W. MAR- TIN, was making an active study of war-food problems. This committee, like the others just mentioned, became convinced of the great need for study in the field of market- ing, distribution, and processing of food products. As a result of this committee study, I introduced a bill on March 28, 1946, which, after considerable revamping, finally became title II of the Research and Market- ing Act. . I mention these things to show that although the Research and Marketing Act passed Congress without opposition and in record time, it was not the result of hur- ried and spontaneous action but rather the product of study and consideration, going back months and years. Nor do I want to leave the impression that all of the activity in this connection was limited to Congress, because the legislation as finally enacted was the result of work by many agencies—the land-grant colleges, the Department of Agri- culture, the Cotton Council, and all of the major farm organizations, as well as numer- ous individuals interested in a sound and prosperous agriculture. Now that the law is on the books, what are some of the problems awaiting solution? What processes and what program should be followed in order to get the most from the money expended? I think any one who has looked into the matter will agree that there will be no lack of projects. The act covers such a wide scope that there are hundreds, yes, thousands, of projects which can and no doubt will be proposed. Therein I think lies a great danger. Unless care and good judgment are exercised in determining poll- cies and in selecting worthwhile and im- A755 portant projects for study, the funds appro- priated could be frittered away with little really accomplished. Another mistake which must be avoided 1s expecting too much 1n the way of early re- sults, Our accomplishments in production research are the result of patient and pains- taking work covering a period of years and years, Research in distribution and utili- zation will likewise take time to bring re- sults, but in the end there will be results just as far-reaching and important as in the field of production. Now, getting down to cases, what are some of the problems ripe for study? Many have been suggested to the Committee on Agri- culture, not only in the hearings on the Re- search and Marketing Act, but in the course of its previous studies as well. Time will permit me to refer only to examples of the kinds of problems which I feel merit research and study. One of the first things which should be undertaken is un over-all study, from a national standpoint, of the whole field of distribution of agricultural commodities. In a statement made before the Committee on Agriculture last year, in connection with its marketing investigation, Mr. C. W. Kitch- en, at that time an official of the Depart- ment of Agriculture, who had been connected with marketing activities in the Department for 34 years, made this statement: “There is comparatively ttle information of the costs, wastes, and inefficiencies of marketing, item by item, through the chan- nels of distribution. Such information is fundamental in any thorough study of our marketing system. It would focus attention on weak spots and indicate steps for im- provement which might be taken by al) con- cerned, Government and private business. “A group of well-trained people, familiar with the marketing system and working closely with farm and trade organizations and State institutions, could produce sig- nificant results, not only as to possible im- provements which might grow out of such studies, but to provide information to the public regarding marketing costs and what makes up the margins between what the producer receives and what the consumer pays. * * * It means having people who know or can be trained to know the actual problems and methods of marketing and who work at those problems just as the scientists have laboriously worked out better ways of increasing the efficiency of production and whose findings have been put into use by gradual adoption and without the force of law.” Certainly, from a national standpoint, we should have a program to make available the type of information suggested by Mr. Kitchen. It should include not only mar- keting, distribution, and processing, but transportation as well, because in these times that is perhaps the most !mportant single element which enters into the mar- keting of agricultural products, Have you ever thought of the part which the refrigerator car has played in the field of agricultural marketing? The fact is, no technological development of our times has made greater changes in agriculture than modern refrigeration. It has worked a revo- lution in the geography of agricultural pro- duction as well as in the field of human nutrition, What would become of agricul- ture in States like California and Florida if refrigerator transportation were suddenly eliminated? What would become of our live- stock and meat industry and the distribu- tion of fresh milk and other dairy products if it were no longer available? How might the health of people living in our great cities be affected if they were no longer able to get the perishable food products to which they have become accustomed? Yet there are surely improvements to be made in refrigerated transportation if research is ap- plied to the problem as intensively as it has been to agricultural production.
A756 In the first place, valuable as they are, most present day refrigerator cars are in- efficient and cxpensive to operate. They must be iced frequently during a railroad journey. However, a new refrigerating unit has re- cently been developed which uses an oil burner in much the same manner as hcuse- ncjd gas refrigerators operate. Those who have developed this new method believe it will be cheaper, better, and more satisfactory than existing icing systems, and that it will keep refrigerator car temperntures low enough to handle frozen meats which pres- ent methods do not take care of satisfac- torily. Of course, thoruugh tests must be made to determine whether the claims of those who have developed this new method can be borne out. No doubt, further research might develop even more satisfactory improvements. Certainly, it is a field ripe for development. Another possible sou'ce of research in con- nection with refrigerator transportation is thet of preventing the losses which are now suffered in the shipment of perishable com- modities. A recent study by the Department of Agriculture discloses that in 1944 the direct. losses of shipping fresh fruits and vegetables in that year amounted to 611,0C0,000. This was the direct loss—-the amcunt of damage for broken crates and other obvicus wastage fur which claims were paid by the railroads and other shippers. There is no way to esti- mate the tndirect loss—that resulting from fruits and vegetables which were not visibly damaged but which were bruised or which suffered other deterioration in quality or price. Who pays for these millions of dol- lars of loss and wastage? The railroads settle the claims, but, of course, the bills are actu- ally paid by farmers in lower prices for their preducts and by consumers in higher prices at the market place. We need also turther studies tn the fleld of refrigeruted transportation on the public highways. Private industry has done and will do more work along this line, but the only way that such studies can be conducted and coordinated on a national basis is by the Federal Government—in many cases working with private industry as provided under the Research and Marketing Act. Nor does waste and inefficiency in trans- portation stop with long-distance hauls. It is stated on good authority that in New York City 50 cents out of every dollar the house- wife pays for fresh produce goes to get that produce from the city limits to her kitchen. All the costs that have been incurred before, including what the farmer received for grow- ing the product, total no more than the amount needed to bring the food from the terminal in Jersey City to the family kitchen. Certainly, here is a research problem worthy of our attention. At the other end of the line, we know that in many parts of the country the facilities for collecting, grading, and shipping farm- ers’ products are as antiquated and inefficient as city wholesale marketing practices. With- out suitable collection, grading, crating, and shipping facilities in the country the farmer not only receives less for what he sells, but, in many areas, it is impossible for him to engage in diversified production because he has no satisfactory means of marketing what he grows. Still referring to the question of trans- portation, one field in which research might very well be undertaken is tn the construc- tion of farm-to-market roads. Congress has recently made large appropriations for this type of road. Yet the designs for such roads worked out by the engineers in the Bureau of Public Roads are in many cases costly and impractical, resulting not only in the wrong type of roads but in roads so costly that the funds appropriated will not provide anything like the mileage needed. Another field in which more extensive re- search is needed is that of the direct market- ing of livestock. This has been a contro- versial matter in the Midwest for the last 25 years. It has been the subject of proposed legis!ation, One of the first bills I introduced when I came to Congress 20 years ago dealt with this question. Nothing has been done about it yet. I have even stopped introduc- ing bills. Some studies have been made of the question, but, as far as I have been able to learn, there has been no rea) satisfactory research on a national scale which goes to the bottom of the matter. That is, there has been no clear-cut determination of whether direct marketing is a good thing or a bad thing for the producer. The heurings before the Committee on Ag- riculture on the Rease:rch and Morketing Act wer: filled with suggestions for research in the field of distribution and processing, including packaging. compression, qu'ck- freezing, and dehydration. These sugges- tions dealt with a large number of agricul- tural commodities. During the war, because we were forced to do it, grest advances were made in the fields of dehydration and com- pression. Private industry has made great strides in the distribution of frozcn focds, but there is no one who pretends that per- fection has been reached thrcuzh any methcd now in use. We need research with reference to the effects on marketing and consumption, resulting from the construc- tion of frozen locker plants throughout the rural sections of the country. Also, what chanvyes will come about as home freezing units become more numerous. Distributors of milk are interested in new proposals for the handling of that product, including drying, powdering, and reconstitu- tion. In talking the other day with a Mem- ber of Congress who had recently returned from Mexico City, I learned that a substan- tial part of the miJk consumption there con- sists of reconstituted milk shipped from the northern dairy States of this country. I understi.nd some of the same situation pre- vails in the urban areas of our own South. Furthermore, there are interesting possibili- ties ahead in the further utilizaticn of dairy products. The uses to which skim milk might be put are in no way as yet fully explored. During the war, aloohol was made of whey coming from cheese factories in Wisconsin, The committee hearings contuin some very interesting discussions on the question of utilization in connection with cotton. The Pace Cotton Committee found that one of the principal reasons rayon was supplanting cotton was that research on the part of rayon manufacturers had resulted in a prod- uct which met the specifications of spin- ners and other users much more nearly than it had been possible to do with cotton. It was brought out that the processes of spin- ning and weaving cotton have undergone few if any fundamental changes tn the last 150 years. While cotton was standing still, the laboratories of this country have been turning out synthetic products which have now become serious competitors. Those who know say that cotton is a better fiber than any of its rivals, and that with proper research in both production and utilization it can compete with them. The chemical industry is said to spend 2 percent of its gross revenues on research, much of it on synthetic fibers. Practically nothing has been spent up to date on research in the util- ization of cotton. Then there is the field of nutrition. What a lot we have to learn there. Nutritionists say we are on the threshold of great discov- eries. From the standpoint of marketing farm products, what we need to do more than any other is to make the results of nu- tritional research available to the public. Therein lies the great opportunity of induc- ing people to spend a greater proportion of their income for agricultural products. It is a matter of such common knowledge that it hardly bears repeating that we know far APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD more about feeding our hogs and our chick- ens than we do human beings, or, at least, we apply that knowledge better. Asa nation, we have been deeply humiliaved by the tact that about 40 percent of those who were called up for military service during the war were rejected physically. A large proportion of those defects were due to malnutrition and resulting dieeasts. One significant thing which has been disclosed by nutrition studies is that malnutrition exists, ix a very large degree, among people who have ample funds to spend for fuod but who have never been taught an\thing about food or nutritional va‘ues. During the war, people spent on an averrge of 21 percent of their incomes for food. Certainly this is a small amount to spend for such an important item, and yet there is danger that in the next few years this percentage may be reduced, because op- portunities for spending in other lines will be increased. Research and educrtion in nutri- tion should counteract this tendency. Cer- tainly, when we are currently spending some- thing Hke 87,000,000,000 annually for alco- holic drinks and another $4,C0U,000,09 for tea, coffee, and soft drinks, there is room for expansion in the consumption of nourishing food. The typical projects which I nave men. tioned serve to illustrate the opportunities which exist in marketing and utilization. They could he multiplied many times. Th's ie the age of the test tube and the laboratory. Our generation has witnessed the greatest industrial development the world has ever known. It was possible be- cause we have learned how to make practical application of ecience in industry. In the field of agriculture, we now know that this country can produce the foo and the fiber to make possible a constant improvement in our standard of living. The great problem ts & proper utilization and distribution of what we have learned to produce. In this we have lagged behind. Through th. research and marketing program we have the opportunity, if we will use it, to bring about an era of agri- cultural progress which will not only mean better times for American farmers but a liv- ing standard for all our people higher than ever before known in the history of mankind. Teaching Is No Longer a Profession EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHET HOLIFIELD OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Speaker, the impending break-down of our educa- tional system is alarming to many of us who believe that an educated electorate is the foundation of democratic proc- esses. A very thoughtful and challenging article appeared recently—February 24, 1947—in the Los Angeles School Journal. Under leave to extend my remarks, I include this article in the Recorp, as follows: TracHiInG Is No LONGER A Prorgession—It Js a PROCESSION FROM THE CLASSROOM What would you say was the greatest haz- ard to constructive change in any program which involves people? Ignorance? Nol Stupidity? No! These certainly play a part. But, more destructive than either of these is indifference. What better example of this could be found than the reaction of educators to the present crisis in education. Too many
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of the people, free from the pressures of the classroom, whose duty it is to safeguard this profession, follow the idiotical and familier technique of declaring pontifically that everything is satisfactory and that we have as usual, “The finest school system in the United States.” Everyone within the ranks who dares to point out that the best system, wherever it muy be, is not good enough; who tries to spotlight weaknesses and suggest lines of im- provement is immediately labeled a ‘“crack- pot,” a “trouble-maker,” and is subjected to @ personal attack which becomes the perfect proof of an inability to refute arguments. You would expect the public to be the last group to wake up to this crisis. Sig- nificantly enough, the reverse is true. It is the laymen who are campzxlgning in this emergency—in magazines, on the radio, in the press. It is the noncertificated com- mentators— Drew Pearson, Walter Winchell, Cecil Brown-—the usually nonserious Bob Hope and Bing Crosby who take time out on their unbelievably expensive radio shows to issue a warning, to meke a plea to the people to do something now to avert the threatened break-down in their educational system. Most of the emphasis is placed on the low Salaries as the reason for the exodus. Grad- ually, however, they are beginning to seek the answer in job conditions. They are getting “warm.” Presently, we predict, the pecple entrusted with the safeguarding are going to have to take their heads out of the sand and run like mad. Even though the ostrich has long legs, he is an awkward bird. Stop and realize the significance of this present phenomena: For the first time in history the people are becoming conscious of their responsibility toward education. They bcgin to see what this break-down would mean. Even big business, usually so antug- onistic toward any tax increase, begins to suspect that an educated public makes the best market—particularly when they ure shown figures which prove it. The public, at the moment, believes low Salaries to be the cause. It certainly is a@ part of the picture. (The take-home pay for a beginning teacher in Los Angeles aver- ages 636 for the 52 weeks in the year. Nice going!) Now is the time to utilize this unusual interest on the part of the pecpie to make a definite, practicul, and possible suggestion. The Los Angeles School Journal with this issue makes such a suggestion and launches @ campaign to put it over. As this issue rolls off the presses telegrams go out from this office to key people all over the Unitcd States. THE PLAN That Congress pass a law exempting from Federal income tax all persons employed in the public educational system, this law to be made retroactive to January 1946 and 80 cancel the payments due for the past year due in March 1947; that this exemption be made permanent. ARGUMENTS FOR 1. The increase in teachers’ pay must be made quickly to prevent further exodus and to encourage university students to train for this profession. District, county, and State machinery is cumbersome and involves too much time. This tax exemption would equal a 20-percent increase in pay and would affect every teacher in every State. 2. There has been a growing feeling for some years that part of the financial burden of education should be assumed by the Fed- eral Government. The fear that a Federal grant might result in Federal control has caused the present impasse. This tax- exemption plan would result in a substantial boost in the teachers’ take-home pay with no possible threat of Federal domination. It would be financial aid at the spot where it is most needed—with no chance of previ- ous dissipation. 3. There is a precedent established. Until 1939 teachers were exempt froin this tax— as were other public employees. 4, Even without precedent of previous ex- emption it has long been the policy of our Government to subsidize private enterprise engaged in public service. The railroads, steamship ccmpanies, and air lines huve re- ceived such belp. Never has their need been &s great, nor the implications in their failure &s tragic as in this present emergency in education, 5. By exempting everyone employed in the public cducational system we would increase the pay of our noncertificated heipers and 50 secure and hold better qualified workers. The burden of inefficiency in this field even- tually falls on the teachers. At the moment we cannot compete with private industry in pay and so our selection is necessarily made trem their rejections. 6. Local boards should welcome this help. It should muke It easier for them to offer a decent wage to secure and Keep their school personnel. 7. The public should welcome this help. It would offer immediate relief and brcaden the base of financial support. 8. It would afford a tangible proof that the teaching job has a special significance and importance—a bit of morale boosting that is sadly needed by the protession. REFUTATION OF POSSIBLE ARGUMENTS Why exempt teachers and not other public employees? 1. Because teachers are the lowest paid of all public employees when you consider the training requirements for their job. 2. They are entrusted with the job upon which rests the future fate of the Govern- ment and the people. 3. No other agency of the Government is threatened with a collapse due to an exodus of workers and a rapidly diminishing replace- ment reserve. The Federal Budget EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. HARVE TIBBOTT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. TIBBOTT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- ORD, I include the following address by the Honorable EDWARD ManrtTIN, delivered at the annual dinner of the Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association at the Belle- yue-Stratford Hotel, Philadelphia, on Tuesday evening, February 25, 1947: Mr. President and my fellow Americans, Americans must know more about their Gov- ernment and take a greater interest in it if it is to endure and to give Americans the opportunities we have always enjoyed. The great ‘veakness of ou Government is not the form of the government, but the little the voter knows about it and the small part he takes to preserve it. The example set by the patriotic and venerable founder of this na- tionally known organization, Senator Grun- dy, should spur all of us to a greater interest in governmental affairs. It is about some phases of that govern- ment that I would like to talk tonight. You are businessmen. You operate your own firms, or you are officers and directors of corporations, with all the headaches and heartache and responsibility that your posi- tions call for, A757 But you've nothing on me. Even the big- gest of you, connected with some of the taig- est industries ‘in the Nation, are in small bus’ness compared with the business in which I am engaged. I sit on the board of directors of the largest corporation in the world and‘our board has recently received from the President of our corporation a budget calling for the spending of €37,500,- 000,000 duriug our next fiscal verr. That, gentlemen, is really big business. The rest of you are in small business. Ualike you men, we don't munulacture anything. We rre a sort of service trade for 140,000,000 people and the proposition which our board of directors inclines toward now is twofold: to cut out some of the eervices which we are not well set up to handle and which we operate at an unnecessary loss; and, second, to start getting out of the red. Our business has been deeply in it for so jong, that it has become home to many in Weshington's high places. In fact cur President and the other officers of cur corporation have gotten so deeply into the hebit of spending what they haven't got, that the board of directors is facing a stiff battle to save a penny here und there for 140,000,000 stockholder customers. And now I'd like to report sume facts of our finances. The Government's estimate of tux income for the next fiscal year is approximately $39,000.000.000. This, however, is based on the premise that the national income—the income of all the people and all the busi- nesses of the United States—will amount to an unprecedented $167.000,000.000. Let me say that again, 8167,000.000.000. In 1946, he all-time-record year, the na- tional income, according to United States Department of Commerce figures, amounted to one hundred and sixty-five billions, so that in order to get the estimated taxes, national income has to climb even higher than last year. Now I am no prophet of doom and I don’t know what is going to happen, but I have read the predictions of leading economists that somewhere along the line we are going to have a recession, “Vell, suppose we recede just a little bit. Suppose we recede so little that the esti- mated national income should drop from one hundred and sixty-seven billions to one hundred and sixty billions. That is still a lot of income and we would not be at all badly off. But this is what it would do to Federal tax collection. Instead of producing an estimated thirty- nine billions, the present high and numerous taxes would produce for Uncle Sam only thirty-four billion five hundred million. That, you say, is a lot of Federal taxes and what in the world am I worried about? Well, you see, the President of our corporation, President Truman, sent us a budgct calling for expenditures of thirty-seven billion five hundred million. In other words, more than 2 years after the war is over, if there is even a very mild recession, we are liable to wind up a fat $3,000,000,000 in the red. And suppose in this next year the national income should fall to one hundred and fifty billions. That is a lot of money, too. I'll tell you how much. In the year 1941, the most prosperous prewar year, national in- come was less than 897,000,000,000. And in the great boom year of 1929 it was only a little bit over 883,000,000,000. So one hundred and fifty billions is a lot of money. Yet if the national income should decline only that far, Uncle Sam's tax income would dwindle to 32,000,000,000 from all sources—even with the present high tax rates—even if your personal income-tax rates, or your corporate tax rates, or your excise- tax rates are not reduced by as little as one- hundredth of 1 percent. And remember, the President asks a budget $5,500,000,000 more than that figure.
A758 If national income should dwindle to one hundred and forty billions, stil] much greater than anything in our prewar history, Federal tax collection would be only twenty-nine billions. And so on down the line. Knowing all of these things—certainly the Government must know them-—for I can assure you the Republican Senators don't have an exclusive “pipe line” to these official estimates—nor do Republican Senators claim a monopoly on knowing that things sometimes get a little worse and not always a@ little better—knowing all of these things, the administration still dares to come out with an unprecedented peacetime budget of 837.590 000.000. The administration still re- fuses to admit that economy can be more than a word in the dictionary, It still claims it must have more and more and more. It stii—may I emphasize—refuses to permit business to become properly stabilized. And there is not the faintest doub. in the world that if we are going to achieve a $167,000,- 000,000 national income or anything close to it, it will be only because business operates at high speed and keeps people employed. Do you know what we have in this country today? We have ttark economic warfare which can hurt us almost as much as a shoot- ing war if we lose it. We are engaged in the extremely delicate task of easing our economy from the war to the peace pitch. We are engaged in the battle to prevent fusther in- crease in the national debt and to make a start upon decreasing it. That is tough, deadly fighting; with the enemies of economy engaged in every type of guerrilla warfare in the book-——and a few new ones besides. I want to say here that I have taken my stand in Congress alongside of. and in the front ranks of, those who believe that the budget can be cut by a full $6,090,000,( 00. I make no retreat from that line even though some members of my perty have done so. I am also proud of cur Pennsyl- vania delegation in the House of Represent- atives. They too stood up and were counted among those favoring the $6,000,000.000 reduction. This stand is important for Pennsylvania. Our State is heavily industrialized, the kind of State which gets hit worst and whose people suffer the most, in depression. That is one reason why I am so tnststent that the Federal budget must be cut, must have the oozing lard sliced away—down to the last ounce. We need that $6,000,000.000 for two purposes even if business stxys good. We need it to help reduce the $260,000,000,000 national debt, and we need it to cut taxes so that our people have money to spend and money to invest in the days ahead to keep the wheels of business turning and to protect their futures. Finally, just in case the possibilities I mentioned earlier occur—a drop of seven billions or fifteen bilttions or more in the national income, we need to cut out expenses to prevent an- other year of Federal deficit. There sre very few things in our budget which cannot be reduced. I would say they are: First, the 85.000,000,000 to service the nitional debt. Our Government’s bonds are widel, held among all the people. Their value must be maintained. 8-:cond. whatever is required to take care of our disabled war veterans and the de- pendents of those who .aid down their lives that we might remain free. Third, the 82,000,000,000 for estin.ated tax refunds as provided under the law. And fourth, whatever ts n for na- tional defense in order to show the world that America intends to have peace. Beyond that, I say, let's sharpen the knife and go to work. The future of America de- pends upon our doing a real—and not a token—job. A great how! is going up against cut in the budget for the armed forces. You know my military background. Do you think for one moment I would do any- thing to weaken this Nation's defenses? I would never vote for a cut in the budget for the armed services if 1 thought for a moment our national defense would be weakened. I do say, however, that Congress has a right to Know exactly how the money is to be spent and to eliminate the waste. If after going over the whole situation thoroughly they can satisfy the Members of Congress that the amount requested is needed for the armed services, I venture to say not a single Member would turn down the request. This can be done at the appro- priate time, even though we fix the budg- etary limit at $31,500,000.000 as a goal for the House and Senate Appropriations Com- mittees. I am confident that this goal can be attained without impairing in any way whatsoever the defense of our country. One of the most important scurces of cut- ting should be the over-all Federal civilian employee lists. They are loaded and over- loaded. There are still 2.300.000 of them. That is the too many by from half a million to eight hundred thousand. There’s a lot of money to be saved there and a lot of efficiency to be picked un simultaneously. I'm for it. Why, do you know that there are now in Phijadelphia, according to the Byrd commit- tee, over 500 separate Federal offices. And do you know that, outside of the armed forces. the Federal Government has actually increased the number of its emplovees since the close of the war by more than 300 000. And I am for stopping the Federal Gov- ernment from competing with the lower lev- els of government and private industry for employees. And I am also for stopping the Federal Government from engaging in business in competition with private enterprise. And finally, many of our budgetary diffi- culties are due to our efforts to get what we want in the world by handouts, appease- ments, and by loans that never come back. Recently, a prominent Turk speaking in America said: “The whole world in distress ie insisting, almost as a sacred right. that Uncle Sam should keep on acting as Santa Cleus. We cannot expect any‘ hing of that sort from the United States. If America falls into a de- ficient state by exaggerated charity and be- comes in the end merely interested in its own immediate survival, all hopes of improvement in our commor destintes are doomed to fall. Therefore, it is in the interest of everybody that America should follow a reasonable course of mutu.ul profit in its outside eco- nomic activities.” That, I may say, is much better American- ism that I've heard from some of my own countrymen. It is the kind of advice we shou!d follow. America must be sound economically. This is the strong arm in defense. America must be sound also in having people whose objec- tives are peace and good will. We want honest, healthy, God-fearing people. And we want an honest, healthy, God-fear- ing Government with the same high standard of morals we expect from our individual citi- wens. Address of Hon. E. Wallace Chadwick te the Members of Post No. 214, American Legion, February 22, 1947 EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. E. WALLACE CHADWICK OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. CHADWICK. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rec- ORp, I include the following address de- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD livered by me before Post No. 214, Amer- ican Legion, in Upper Darby, Pa., on February 22, 1947: Onder any circumstances it would be a pleasure to be a guest of this great post of the American Legion; it is a privilege to come to you as your congressional repre- sentative, and a great honor to be invited to address you as a speaker on your pro- gram, particu‘arly on Washington's birthday. I have always bed a profound admiration for the American Legion; I have observed it grow in importance and prestige through- out the Nation; it is one of the great founda- tions on which our citizenship is based. I have also observed its growth as a great sta- bilizing and energizing force in the life of our people. Always having been interested in the so- called service clubs, such as Rotary, Kiwanis, Lions, Optimist, and Exchange, with their high ideals and their great contributions to the communities of which they are a part, I realized long ago that the Legion clso is truly a service group, not merely because it is made up of men who have seen military service, but of men who have come to learn that service, in the other sense. is one of the great duties and should be one of the most rewarding parts of the life of every American citizen. The word service has so many implica- tions that it would be vain to try to define it. It ranges from the simple devotion of plain men to the conspicuous contributions of na- tiona] leaders; from the simple expression of relig'ous devotion of the Salvation Army to the more eloquent and influential expressions of the great leaders of religion; from the boy who volunteers his services or is called to duty as a buck private or a gob, to the tre- mendous responsibilities of men like Eisen- hower, MacArthur, and Nimitz. But from the highest to the lowest levels those who serve have at least this in common, that they all desire, each in his own way, and to the limit of his opportunity, to sustain their country, to make their lives count for some- thing toward the betterment of their home community, their own nation, and, if their vision is far enough, to serve the whole human race in its aspiration toward a better world. In these causes, all right-thinking men and women should and do enlist themselves; but just as the individual opportunities of some are greater than those of others, so the op- portunities of some groups are greater than those of others. We can do so much more collectively than we can individually; Amer- icans are almost unique in their natural apti- tude for such cooperation. We get together in scores and hundreds of organizations, al- most all patriotically and generously in- tended in an effort to further our natural aspiration to contribute as much as we pos- sibly can. You who are members of the American Legion are among the fortunate ones because you are banded together on the basis of a common tie; you all responded to the call of your country for military service in time of crisis. I suspect that this is per- haps the very firmest ground that any such organization could have, that it is made up of men who have proven their willingness to fight for, and if necessary to die for, their country and for the preservation of human freedom in the world. I remember back in 1942 addressing a group of youngsters who made up one of the thousands of such groups who were about to go t0 camp, in remnee to the sutemons ct their country, through the operation of their draft boards. I told them that on the next day they were going to be initiated into the oldest, the greatest, and the most hon- orable of all fraternities, the fraternity of arms. The average boy doesn't think of it that way, but the fact is that when he dons the uniform he has joined a host which ranges back in history far beyond the days of Napoleon, or of Julius Caesar, or of Alex-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ander the Great. Not all wars have been worthy wars; not all soldiers have been worthy soldiers, but the spirit which made the Spartans under Leonidas hold the Pass of Thermopylae against the invading Per- sians is exactly the same spirit which made the boys from Delaware County hold the little village of Fismette on the far bank of the Vesile in 1918, and which steadied the line in the Battle of the Bulge in 1945; the spirit which won the Battle of Trafalgar for the British’ under Admiral Nelson is exactly the same spirit which made history in the Battle of the Coral Sea. But now this tradition of courage has had to take to the air, and our new generations of warriors have learned to fight wars not only in the stratosphere, but in the cold loneliness of the depths of the sea. But the motivation is still the same, the love of country, devotion to a cause, and self-sacri- ficing courage which has motivated all the soldiers and a!) the sailors from the begin- ning of the human race. This is one of the great traditions o. our race. Perhaps the fact that I never shared this service makes it more appropriate that I should acclaim it. But if I did not share it in person, I have at least been able to share it in spirit, because I have been blessed with enough iniagination to be able to follow with some sympathy and understanding the blooa and sweat which are the lot of the soldier. It is certainly not necessary, in such a group as this, with a background like yours, on such a day as this, to talk to you about duty; but it may not be out of place for ‘us to remind ourselves that duty still oalls. Indeed, it lays upon every one of us a com- pelling hand, and it points a directing finger to new problems, new conflicts, and more service. In this world, the more we do and the more we give the more is expected of us. This is rightfully so, else how could we hope to meet new and ever increasing problems? The brave man cannot be permitted to rest on his laurels; the intelligent man cannot close his mind to new problems; the man who has sacrificed, must sacrifice more, if we are to make any progress in a world of constant change. We must, whether we will it or not. The human race is forever mov- ing; the problem is to keep it moving ahead. I wish I had time to talk to you in more detail about some of these tremendously urgent problems of today. I do not have to tell the American Legion that our very way of life, the ideals which have made America unique for 160 years, are under attack. I do not have to tell you that the enemy is no longer abroad; he is among us at home; and that, for the first time in our history, we are subject to the infiltration of a well- organized, diabolically resourceful, and un- sleeping enemy, proposing a basic and revo- lutionary change in our American institu- tions, a change contemplating the abandon- ment and destruction of everything every right-thinking Amerftan has held dear since the days of our forefathers; since the day of George Washington, whose birth you cele- brate. There are unfortunately many in America who still believe that this is an idle threat, and that we can temporize with these for- eign ideologies; but the number is vastly fewer now than it was 5 years ago, fewer even than it was 2 years ago. What a change we have seen in Washing- ton. Last year 65 Members of the Seventy- ninth Congress voted against a proposal to pursue with punishment a flagrant example of communistic arrogance and contempt for our institutions. But last week only one voice was raised in the lower House of the Eightieth Congress in protest against the ef- fort to castigate another conspicuous Com- munist agitator. Of those 65 men and women who were uncertain about the threat of communism during the last Congress, half were defeated by their constituents at the recent election; and let me tell you that the other half have seen the light. But this is one of the easier ways in which we can show our devotion to our American ideals. The real question is, Do we have the brains, the courage, and the devotion to in- sist that in other and less dramatic flelds we will stand true to America. It took some courage last Thursday for the Republican majority in the lower House of Congress to pledge themselves to a program of real economy in American governmental expenditures, in the hope that we might re- store our country as promptly as possible to a course which leads to financial solvency, rather than extravagance and waste, infla- tion. and finally to a disaster as real as the destruction that the Communists are plan- ning for us. We believe, those of us in the lower House of Congress, that such economy can be ef- fected without sacrifice of our military secu- rity and without the abandonment of any essential part of our national defense. Frankly, we believe that the era of extrav- agance which has marked this country in late years is not solely restricted to the civilian activities of the Government. We believe that the leaders of the Army and the Navy can, if they will, introduce reforms in their spending programs which would result in tremendous savings of the taxpayers’ money, without sacrificing the essentials of their responsibility. You fellows who have served can judge better than I whether this is true. You know it is true; must we deny its truth? We are not crying over spilt milk; we do not criticize the wastefulness which 1s an unavoidable attribute of war; war is itself a waste; and it breeds extravagance among sol- diers. Men whose lives are in danger have no time to worry about money. But is it thought that this sort of thing is to be en- couraged and practiced indefinitely? Do you want us to spend a billion and a half more of your dollars next year, merely to have it said that there is no limit to which we will not go to demonstrate that we intend to be militarily strong? Personally, I do not think we fool the Russians in any such way. It is part of their planning to see that democ- racy shall fail. Shall we contribute to its failure merely as a gesture of deflance to them? Personally, I do not think so. I would rather that we were truly strong than that we make a show of strength; America wins wars not because of bluster, but be- cause it has resources of human courage, backed up by its unique industrial system, which in turn is based on a solvent and strong economy. If we spend ourselves into weak- ness before another emergency occurs, that emergency may prove to be the last for Amer- icans and their way of life. I sincerely hope that the American Le- gion will not be misled. Without their support, and the support of all of the right- thinking people of the country, their Con- gress cannot accomplish much for them. In the long run, it is public opinion, and not the votes in Washington, which control the destiny of America, You have honored me by making me your Representative; let me report back to you that there is nothing that I or any man in the Congress can hope to accomplish. except as we do it with your support. We have no ends of our own to serve; our authority is gained from you; our honest purpose is to serve you as best we can. If we are right, we have a right to your support; if we are wrong, you will be quick to tell us; but always remember that lesser things must be sacrificed to the greater ones if we are to keep America strong and ready for greater service to humanity and the best interests of this great Nation. A759 The Roosevelt-New Deal Brave New World Pay-Off—Double Talk and Double Cross EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HOWARD H. BUFFETT OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 27, 1947 Mr. BUFFETT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I am in- cluding Dorothy Thompson’s column from the Washington Evening Star ‘of February 26, 1947. In reading this soul-sinking exposé of the moral collapse of the victors of World War II, I recalled my attempt in this House 2 years ago to end the ruthless stupidity of unconditional surrender. After reading Miss Thompson’s report, this passage from my remarks then looks somewhat prophetic: For it was Hitler who boasted that regard- less of what happened to Germany, the Nazt concepts of militarism and ruthless might would be victorious throughout the world. The consequences of the lack of a peace formula and continued use of the purely military phrase “unconditional surrender” may fulfill Hitler's boast. Unless America's political leadership has the courage to turn away from this error, we may be yet mocked by the Roman victory, described by St. Augustine, wherein the conquerors became more and more like those they had conquered. Miss Thompson’s column follows: ON THE RECORD (By Dorothy Thompson) The crisis in which the world finds itselt today—a crisis unparalleled in the history of the white race and western civilization—is a moral crisis. It is marked by the almost unt- versal break-down of morality and law. The war has not been won and it is impossible to make peace because the moral crisis, which, we thought, culminated in the murderous regime of Adolf Hitler, has not been resolved. We are in a state of progressive moral an- archy, and add to our confusion by calling progressive disintegration ‘‘progress.” In Nuremberg a Herr Sauckel was con- demned and hanged because he brought for- eign workers to Germany and impressed them into slave labor. Slave labor is labor per- formed against consent and without free contract. In sentencing Herr Sauckel the Allies de- parted from a time-honored principle of western law—that a crime is not a crime un- less it has been previously so defined in law. The moral justification for branding as a crime an act justified as “wartime necessity” and clearly not defined and subject to legal sanctions in international law was that it was, in. fact, a crime before the conscience of mankind. The test of such justification is, however, that the prosecutors, as guard- ians of that conscience, should henceforth recognize it as a crime—whenever and by whomever committed—subiject to the same conscience and the same sanctions, There is no luw except that which its codi- fiers, prosecutors, and judges agree to live under themselves. However, on the day following the execu- tion of Herr Sauckel, newspapers reported that Russia had repulsed German protests against the exportation of Germans for labor in Russia on the ground that the Germans had unconditionally surrendered and there- fore had no voice in the matter. No con- science of mankind was involved. A certain American major in Munich, who directed a
A760 German paper, had previously expressed a similar opinion regarding the forced deporta- tions of Germans from the east. Since then a Soviet newspaper in Irkutsk has stated that 6,000,000 prisoners of war are being retained in Siberia for labor on railroads, in mines, and on public-works projects. The Soviet Union is not the only country who thus, nearly 2 years after the end of hostilities, is employing what was defined at Nuremberg as slave labor. The Soviet Union was never a signatory to the Geneva Convention respecting prisoners of war. But the United States and France were. The United States held to that convention dur- ing war, when American prisoners of war were in the hands of the Germans. But when our own and French prisoners were released, 80 that there was no possibility of reprisals, the United States turned over Ger- man prisoners of war to France. That coun- try, thereafter, with our consent and con- nivance and in defiance of the Geneva Con- vention, has been employing them ever since as slave labor under the same definition of slave labor as that used against Herr Sauckel in Nuremberg. The general attitude of the public in Allied countries is that it serves the Germans right. Few care to recall that President Roosevelt, in his foreign-policy speech of September 1944, gave a specific pledge to the German people: “The Allies do not traffic in human slavery.” Whoever raises his voice today in behalf of the application of the new Nuremberg law to all, including ourselves, is promptly casti- gated as pro-German. But do only a handful of people see that we are therewith deepening the moral an- archy which is developing into physical anurchy? Do only a handful of people see that we cannot possibly achieve universal peace un- less we can put universal foundations under our political life? Do only a handful of people see that if, having defeated Germany, we accept for our- selves Hitler's standards and Hitler's meth- ods, Hitler has conquered? The only way peoples and governments can establish moral foundations under their na- tional and international life is by the accept- ance and application of the Golden Rule. It is to do to no one what you would not want done to yourself under similar circum- atances. That is the essence of justice—the capacity to put oneself, one’s nation, one’s Class, one’s race, one's society in the dock on the charges preferred against another, and ask: Were I in this position—I, my nation, class, or race—would I accept this judgment as just? That question is the basis of morality and law. And until we accept this foundation, we shall have neither international peace, social peace, nor peace of mind. We shall simply go on going crazy, in a split-person- ality division between our avowed moral standards and our actual behavior. Should Foremen Be Compelled To Join Labor Unions? EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 13, 1947 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, Iam inserting in the CONGRESSIONAL REC- oRD under unanimous consent, hereto- fore obtained, the following article en- titled “Should Foremen Be Compelled To Join Labor Unions?” by Lawrence Sulli- van: SHOULD FOREMEN BE COMPELLED TO JOIN LABOR UNIONS?—CONFLICTING RULINGS BY THE NLRB SINCE 1942 PRESENT AN URGENT PROBLEM FOR CONGRESS (By Lawrence Sullivan ) WASHINGTON.—The high-pressure CIO campaign to force shop foremen afd super- visors into collective-bargaining units threat- ens to disrupt the entire American industrial system, say opponents of the new union of- fensive. They urge a provision in the forth- coming labor amendments to exempt fore- men and supervisors from the scope of the Wagner Act. Foremen are the agents and spokesmen of management in every phase of production, industry contends. Once forced to join a union, supervisorg cease to be a part of man- agement and tend to become advocates and defenders of the union's programs and pol- icles. Soon the day-to-day decisions of man- agem:nt pass from the plant managers to the union boss. For all practical purposes, the union becomes management. The CIO, on the other hand, presents its arguments in a 30-page educational pamphlet titled “Should Labor Have a Direct Share in Management?” Here President Philip Mur- ray sounds the introductory keynote: ‘It is a mistake to assume that an employer needs no aid from his employees in managing his enterprise.” Congress sought last year to protect fore- men from such unionization drives by incor- porating in the Case bill (later vetoed by President Truman) a section specifically ex- cluding supervisors from the scope of the Wagner Act. The Senate vote on this amend- ment, jointly sponsored by Senators ELLEN- DER, Byrp, HATCH, Lucas, BALL, TAFT, HAWKES, and FErcuson, on May 25, 1946, was 48 to 30, with 18 not voting. New Senators elected last November change the alinement on this issue today to 71 against unionized foremen and only 25 supporting, according to recent testimony before the Senate Labor Com- mittee. The issue also is before the Supreme Court, where Packard Motor Car Co. seeks a verdict against compulsory collective bargaining with the Foreman’s Association of America. Argu- ments in the Packard case were heard on January 9, 1947. It was never the intention of Congress in 1935 to place foremen and supervisors under the Wagner Act. This matter of legislative intent once was noted by the NLRB in a 1943 ruling. “There is nothing,” the Labor Board ma- jority observed, “in the committee reports or in the debates in the House and Senate which would indicate that this specific Prob- lem was ever considered in Congress. * * It was traditionally recognized by all parties that the interests of foremen lay predomi- nantly with the management groups.” Not until June 15, 1942, almost 7 years after approval of the Wagner Act, did the NLRB hold a supervisors’ union to be an ap- propriate collective-bargaining unit. By that decision, against the Union Collieries Co., of Oakmont, Pa., mine foremen and supervisors gradually were incorporated into the United Mine Workers of America. About a year later, on May 11, 1043, the Labor Board reversed itself on foremen, hold- ing in the Maryland Drydock case that or- ganizations of supervisory workers were not appropriate bargaining units. These conflicting decisions are the seat of today's great difficulties. Since 1948, hun- dreds of disputes involving the issue of fore- men’s unions have clogged the dockets of APPENDIX TO-THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD both the NLRB and the Federal courts. Sev- eral major industries have been crippled by intensive union campaigns among their fore- men—each dispute fired to white heat by the conflicting decisions of the Labor Board, one holding for and one against the unionization of management functions. On March 26, 1945, the NLRB handed down yet another ruling, in the Packard case, hold- ing a foremen’s union to be an appropriate bargaining unit. But, basing its resistance on the Maryland Drydock ruling, the Packard management refused to bargain with the Foreman's Association of America, It is this case which now is before the Supreme Court. On March 6, 1946, NLRB held that super- visors in the Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp.’s coal mines made a suitable bargaining unit; and in the Krug-Lewis strike-settlement agreement of May 29, 1946, the Government bound itself on all questions touching fore- men and supervisors “to be guided by the decisions and procedures laid down by the NLRB.” It is this unhappy state of conflict and con- fusion which Congress now is urged to clarify. Several long-established national associa- tions of foremen or professional workers re- sist the NLRB rulings which tend to drive them into labor unions, The National So- ciety of Professional Engineers told the Sen- ate Labor Committee that since adoption of the Wagner Act in many cases the profes- sional employee has been required to become a union member as a condition of employ- ment. The National Association of Foremen, which boasts more than 23,000 members in 185 cities and 33 States, reports that a Na- tion-wide public-opinion poll found only 13 percent of the working foremen either be- longed to a union or were interested in join- ing a union. Similarly, the Foremen's League for Edu- cation and Association insists that foremen are a part of management, and that rela- tion is destroyed if the individual foreman loses his identity and becomes a member of a union, thereby dividing his responsi- bility and loyalty. . Farm organizations likewise oppose the unionization of management. Testifying be- fore the Senate Labor Committee on Feb- ruary 7, Charles W. Holman, secretary of the National Cooperative Milk Producers Asso- ciation, said: “When a union reaches out to take control of management, or to control farmer pro- ducers, it acquires such a scope of power that the notion of collective bargaining becomes @ mockery. The public is open to ruthless exploitation.” Management characterizes the campaign to unionize foremen as revolutionary. In the words of H. Parker Sharp, general counsel of Jones & Laughlin Steel Corp., before the Sen- ate committee on January 31: “Supervisory employees are Management, and only a per- son desiring to change the American way of doing business would promote such a revo- lutionary undertaking.” C. E. Wilson, president of General Motors, told the committee: ‘To make collective bar- gaining work the status of management em- ployees must be clearly defined by placing them on the management side of the bar- gaining table.” In the same vein Clarence E. Bleicher, president of De Soto Motors, told the com- mittee: “Foremen are managers. What can we look forward to if, added to rank-and-file union factionalism, foremen go over to the other side and we also have foreman faction- alism mixed up with rank-and-file faction- alism?” Free foremen are the hub of the American mass-production system. Unionized fore- men turn the shop into a soviet,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD New Jersey’s Fight Against Cancer EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. CHAPMAN REVERCOMB OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, February 28 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr, REVERCOMB. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp a very able address on the subject How New Jersey Raises Funds and Fights Cancer, delivered by George E. Stringfellow, president of the New Jersey division of the American Cancer Society and mem- ber of the board of directors and the executive committee of the American Cancer Society, at the national campaign meeting, Coronado Hotel, St. Louis, Mo., February 7, 1947. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: In organizing for the battle against cancer, we recognize that the lives of thousands of our citizens depended on what we did and how we did it. We were faced with an increasing death rate from cancer. Our job was to devise and set up a pro- gram that would coordinate the thinking and action of the people of the State into & well-geared unit of human machinery; one that would function smoothly, effectively, and with determination to achieve the ob- jJective—find the cause and then the cure of cancer, Any structure we built, if it was to remain permanent, must be erected on the four cardinal pillars of management which are: Plan, organize, delegate, and supervise. We planned to organize local chapters, self-governing, within the limitations pre- scribed by our national and State constitu- tions, bylaws, policies, and regulations. We planned cach chapter would write its own bylaws, elect its own officers and board of managers, and also to elect one lay and one medical delegate to the State board of trus- tees. The State board was to be the policy- making body for the State division. Every county therefore would have an equal voice in its decisions. Laymen were to be responsible for raising funds and for the business administration of the chapters’ affairs. The medical pro- fession would devise and prepare projects for the expenditure of funds. Laymen would be prosidents, secretaries, treasurers, and chairmen of the finance, campaign, pub- icity, and education committees. Medical officers would control the local and State, medical and service committees. The chair- man of the chapter executive committee would be a medical doctor, The cancer advisory committee of the County Medical Society would be the medical committee of the county chapter. We realized that the only way to avoid misunderstanding is to have a definite un- derstanding at the outset, so that the lay- men and the medical men will not con- sciously trespass on each other’s responsi- bility and authority. Very often, the lay- men and the medical men speak a different language, but they usually talk about the same things. Those who criticize the med- ical men when they oppose certain projects, in effect, promote socialized medicine. In such cases, I support the medical men, for I am as much opposed to socialized medicine as I am socialized industry. With our coop- erative plan decided upon and approved, both by the laymen and the State medical society, whose cooperation was pledged, we pro- ceeded with our planning and organization. We also discussed our plans with news- paper editors and publishers and radio peo- ple Their approval and willingness to coop- erate was quickly assured. We were now ready to organize. Because no chapter had been organized to spend money for medical and service or edu- cational projects prior to the Nation-wide appeal for funds in April 1946, our early ef- forts at organization were developed mainly for campaign purposes. By April 1, 1946, we had organized fund-raising units in 17 of the State's 21 counties Great care was used in selecting the volun- teer supervisory personnel of these groups. Each person chosen for participation in the campaign was eager to work and enthust- astic over the program. This interest was clearly reflected in the results of our organized appeal. Aguinst a quota of $471,600 assigned to New Jersey, the amount contributed by the people in the 17 out of 21 counties of our State was $716,904, New Jersey, although ninth in wealth among the States, was third in total tunds raised per State; although ninth in wealth, New Jersey was first in funds raised per million dollars of her wealth; although sixth in income per capita, New Jersey was first. in funds raised per capita. At this point, I want to say a word about the fleld army. For many years this noble group of women has given outstanding serv- ice to the American Cancer Society. In the development, first, of our campaign units in the counties, and Jater in the develop- ment of the service and education commit- tees of the chapters, the field army, now an integral part of the State and loca] or- ganizations, has continued its fine service to humanity. The cancer-control program owes much to the field army. With the fund-raising campaign over, we turned to organization of county chapters. By the end of September 1946 each of the 17 counties organized for the April cam- paign had formed chapters. The four re- maining were organized later—two in De- cember and two in January of this year. Every one of our 21 counties in New Jersey now has a chapter of the New Jerscy division, Since the formation of our chapters, their medical committees have lost no time in developing projects for the expenditure of funds contributed by the public for the con- trol of cancer. With the guidance of our medical director and the approval of the medical men at county and State levels, medical projects have been fully approved in 30 hospitals of 11 counties. Funds totaling ¢ 221,339.62 have been made available for these clinic proj- ects, The funds will be expended for pur- chase of deep X-ray therapy machines, ra- dium, gold radon seeds which are being es- tablished in county-wide pools, instruments, and other equipment needed by the clinics for diagnosis and treatment of cancer, for payment for service of medical secretaries, nurses, follow-up workers, and technicians in the clinics and in certain areas to stimulate and improve bedside nursing care in the homes of cancer patients. We also have set up a State-wide tissue diagnostic service. Through our statistical research program we are providing vital in- formation on cancer mortality and incidence to the medical profession, welfare agencies, hospitals, and the lay public. Other county projects now are being con- sidered. Before the end of our fiscal year, August 31, 1947, it 1s anticipated that all of the available funds from the 1946 campaign A761 will have been expended or earmarked for expenditure. We are now organizing or our campaign appeal which is less than 3 months away. One general meeting of chapter presidents, campaign managers, and publicity chairmen from each county was }.eld last November. At that time our complete campaign plans, which had been prepared in advance for their consideration, were discussed. Three regional precampuign mectings tor final review of campaign plans have been scheduled in different parts of the State, The first, for the northern counties, was held in Newark on Wednesday night. The second will be in Trenton on February 11 and the third in Camden on February 18. One of the points 1 have emphasized to all of our workers is the necessity for conduct- ing our business and our plans for the ex- Ppenditure of public contributions in a man- ner that I call operating in a goldfish bowl. T insist that the affairs of the society be con- ducted in a manner that would reflect to our credit if everything we do should appear on the front pages of the press of the State and over all of our radio stations. The public contributes the money, Therefore the pub- lic is entitled to know what is done with it, down to the last penny. For this reason I have asked that before the campaign each county make public the purposes for which the 1946 contributions have been used and, at the same time, present a budget for expenditures in 1947 and 1948 on the basis of which they propose to solicit contributions in April. That is keeping faith, and it is only by keeping faith that public confidence and support can be retained and expanded. As a means of coordination and super- vision of the machinery we have built in New Jersey for the control of cancer, there has been set up at State level a service de- partment. Thut unit takes the place of what is generally known as a State headquarters staff, and to its personnel and to the volun- teer personnel of the chapter hus been dele- gated the authority to act. The department is exactly what the name indicates it to be—a service department. The time and skill of its personne! is at all times at the service of each of the State’s 21 county chapters, the medical profession, the cancer patients, and the general public. Comprising this service department are a manager, who in our State also serves as di- rector of public relations and publicity; a medical director, who acts as liaison between the medical profession and the laymen and guides in formation of cancer projects; a State field army commander, who guides the field army activities throughout the State; and a field director, who supervises organiza- tional activities and is State campaign man- ager. In addition, we have retained the services of a statistical research consultant, who is directing this important phuse of our pro- gram. We also retain a certified public ac- countant, who advises us on financial pro- cedures and supervises the accounting—uall of which ts done by our central office: County funds are restricted for use to the counties in which they are collected, and disbursements are made by the central office upon approval by the county chapter and the State division officers. Thus, we carry out the four principles of management—plan, organize, delegate, and supervise. With «u sound plan—a cause as worthy as ours is—we had little difficulty in attract- ing the type of men and women needed for a successful program. We then delegated authority to them and the matter of super- vision was relatively unimportant. To an organization of high-type citizens willing and accustomed to discharge responsibility
A762 has been delegated the authority to act in our great movement, and so a reasonable amount of success has attended our first year of organ:zed effort. It has becn a great pleasure to be with you today and I am most appreciative for the privilege of discussing with you the manner in which we organized and how we function in the New Jersey division of the American Cancer Society. Ammonium Nitrate Borrowed by the Army Should Be Made Available to American Farmers for Oats and Other Crops REMARKS HON. WILLIAM M. WHITTINGTON OF MISSISSIPPI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 1947 Mr. WHITTINGTON. M1. Speaker, American farmers are dependent upon the Tennessee Valley Authority, Lion Oil Co., and Spencer Chemical Cc., with a combined monthly production of approx- imately 41,000 tons for ammonium ni- trate. Under the operations of the In- ternational Emergency Food Council, and, as I understand, by priorities of the Civilian Production Administration, from June until December 1946, the Army borrowed approximately one-third of said production, or 90,000 tons, to be returned for domestic growers out of the production of Army plants in 1947. The amount borrowed by the Army was shipped to occupied areas overseas. In November 1946, by priorities of Civilian Production Administration, the Tennes- see Valley Authority, Lion Oi] Co., and Spencer Chemical Co. were directed to ship the said approximately 90,000 tons as returned by the Army overseas to Al- lied governments, and, in addition there- to, by priorities, were requested to make available from 15 to 20 percent of their production from January until June 1947 for shipment overseas, including ship- ments to Puerto Rico. With the known shortage of nitretes, the Civilian Produc- tion Administration made a mistake in requesting the loan to the Army, but in directing priorities for the shipment overseas when returned by the Army and for additional exports January-June 1947, the American farmer, desperately in need for oats and other crops, is being discriminated against. The Army has reactivated 11 plants. Their January production was approxi- mately 34,000 tons, their February pro- duction 40,000 tons, and the capacity of 65,000 tons is expected to be reached by the Army in March 1947. The Army pro- duction is being shipped to occupied areas. In addition to the Army borrow- ing the said 90,000 tons in 1946, the Army borrowed, to be returned, from War Sup- plies, Ltd., Canada, 20,000 tons of am- monium nitrate, which would have other- wise been available to American grow- ers. War plants operated by the Army are to ship overseas in 1947, with a capac- ity of almost double the combined pro- duction of Tennessee Valley Authority, Lion Oil Co., and Spencer Chemical Co., some 600,000 tons of ammonium nitrate. With a desperate shortage and with American farmers pleading for ammo- nium nitrate, with delays in the impor- tation of Chilean nitrates, with strikes in steel plunts, to correct a mistake made, the Civilian Production Administration and those responsible for its operation should immediately cancel the require- ments for shipment overseas of the am- monium nitrate, as returned by the Army, and should relieve the Tennessee Valley Authority, Spencer Chemical Co., and Lion Oil Co. from overseas commitments for January—June 1947, and certainly until June 1947. The supply would still be short, but the least that can be done is for the procuction of these three plants, including the amount borrowed by the Army, to be made available to the farm- ers who are desperately in need of ni- trates for oats and grains generally, and other crops at the present time. Tiis is especially true when the war plants will be producing, commencing in March, as I am advised, for shipment to occu- pied countries approximately 65,000 tons monthly, against the said total produc- tion of Tennessee Valley Authority, Lion Oil Co., and Spencer Chemical Co., of approximately 41,000 tons monthly, which is the only source available to American growers. The Department of Agriculture han- dled satisfactorily the production and distribution of ammonium nitrates for the 1946 crops. Mr. C. C. Smith, of the Commodity Credit Corporation, rendered most exellent service, but he is no longer in charge of nitrates. It is said that the Department of Agriculture, Civilian Pro- duction Administration, and other Fed- eral agencies now have no control over the allocation and distribution of ammo- nium nitrates. This is but half the fact and is only partially true. Civilian Production Administration, until its au- thority expires March 31, 1947, is exer- cising priorities to the detriment of American growers who are sympathetic with the needs of fertilizer overseas and who contribute taxcs to the operation of the war plants for supplying occupied areas. American growers are pleading with Congress for ammonium nitrate. The loan of one-third of said produc- tion in the fall of 1946, to be returned by the Army, and the policy of divert- ing as the Army is now returning, to Al- lied countries, has resulted in the Ameri- can growers being deprived of approxi- mately one-third of the production of the said three plants in the fall of 1946 and approximately one-fifth of their pro- duction in 1947. The distribution of am- monium nitrate is being hampered by priorities to the discrimination of Amer- ican growers. The best that can be said of the handling by Civilian Production Administration, the Department of Agri- culture agencies, and other governmental agencies in 1947 is that all Members of Congress have been able to obtain for 4 months is statistics that are confusing and an alleged program that is ineffec- tive if not inefficient. The time is long past to correct the discrimination. Ammonium nitrate un- der priorities for overseas shipment should be immediately made available to American farmers for oats and other crops. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The Budget and Taxation EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HARVE TIBBOTT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 1947 Mr. TIBBOTT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to cx-.end my remarks in the ReEcorp, I include the following address, entitled “The Bucget and Texaticn,” by the Honorable Ricwarp M. Srmpson, of Pennsylvania, delivered at the Pennsyl- vania Manufacturers’ Association meet- ing at Philadelphia on Tuesday, Febru- ary 25, 1947: Gentlemen, 1 appreciate the ccurtesy of your organization in inviting me to address you this afternoon on a subject of the utmost importance to our national life—the Budget and Taxation. You will, I hope, pardon an admission on my part of inability to ade- quately discuss this subject in 20 minutes. Hundreds of specialists, thousands of busi- ness and unton offtcials, and millions of our citizen are now, and will continue, discues- ing the budget and taxation for months to come, as experts. In the hodge-podge of laws that is our Revenue Code there are found ample questionable laws, rules, and regulations to justify any amount of dis- cussion. I would be sadly remiss in addressing you of the Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Associa- tion, who provide substantially the jobs for other workers in industrial Pennsylvania, if I failed to compliment you on a job won- derfully well done throughout and since the close of the war. Under most difficult and uncertain conditions, you—literally not knowing from one day to the ncxt what new regulations and restrictions would be foisted on you by the bureaucrats in Washington— have carried on, hoping for a better day after the war’s end. You look forward to once again having the opportunity to run your business as you know it should be run, for the good of your country, your State, your employees, and your owners. The educational work done in that cam- paign for our citizens bore fruit. The aver- age Pennsylvanian recognized: 1. That in our form of government he had something worth while to save. 2. That no sacrifice was too great to save America. 3. That his job de- pended upon the private enterprise system— that is, a private employer. 4. That what is good for business is good for all. 5. That no nation can borrow itself rich. 6. That we must have good housekeeping in Washington if we don't want bankruptcy. The average Pennsylvanian spoke, and has charged the Republicans in Congress to bring order out of chaos. We shall do that. , Yes; the average American citizen is today more than casually ‘nterested in taxation and the budget. The age of innocence is past. We know now that our country, just as ourselves, cannot spend more than it earns for a long period of time without bankruptcy. The American citizen wants to know now who spends his tax dollars, why it is spent, and for what it is spent. This is a healthy condition. Closely associated with taxation is the budget. The budget sets forth the number of your dollars Congress will take from you and spend for what it deems your business. Historically we have had but one budget in Washington, the one prepared by the Presi- dent through his Bureau of the Budget. This Bureau, because it reflects the President's ccntrol and desires is known as the Presi- dent's right arm. The President’s budget is the budget of the spending agencies, the group which, unfortunately, strives ever to
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD grow bigger and bigger, and feeding upon it- self grows larger year after year. Starting this year with the Eightieth Con- gress, something new has been added to our legislative procedure in Washington. It is the legislative budget—a budget prepared by those who are charged directly by the people with making appropriations and levy- ing taxes. It sets forth the amount of money your Congress believes will be collected in taxes and the amount your Congress thinks will cover all appropriations for the ensuing year. It is the budget of the taxpayers as contrasted with the budget of the spenders. Now, at best a budget is a guess or esti- mate of governmental receipts and expendi- tures for a year to come. Consequently, and in view of grave uncertainties in seeking to peer into the future, it cannot be binding on Congress It may be decreased or exceeded if circumstances permit or demand. The important consideration for those in- terested in good government is that the leg- islative budget will be viewed as a maxi- mum, the amount above which the Congress will not (save in an emergency) make ap- propriations. Thus, by the adoption of a legislative budget, the full Congress strength- ens the hands of its appropriation commit- tees as they strive to keep spending within the budget. In the same way, it guides the Ways und Means Committee of the House and the Finance Committee of the Senate in their taxing duties, so that they may, with reasonable certainty, know the financial re- quirements of the Government for the en- suing year. And at the same time, it serves as a warning to the bureaucrats of gov- ernment that they must cut their cloth to fit. The Eightieth Congress is now adopting its legislative budget for the fiscal year starting July 1, 1947, The House of Representatives has already voted a legislative budget of $6,000,000,000 less than that requested by the President's budget, setting a ceiling on ap- propriations of $31,500,000,000. It will per- mit the discharge of hundreds of thousands of unnecessary employees, the elimination of dozens of wasteful Government agencies, and the curtailment of others; it will insure more adequate funds for national defense, for the veteran, and for our fixed interest charges. There is nothing which threatens our na- tional defense program, our obligations to our veterans, our bondbolders and workers more than does our continued extravagant Government policies with their resulting an- nual deficit. Those who pretend that dol- lars—mere printed pieces of paper—circu- lated by a government continually in the red help our national defense and economy do a disservice to our country. Pieces of paper, whether dollar bills or not, never won @ war or built a nation’s defense. It is work and sweat, a balanced budget, a nation not burdened with debt or taxes, a nation with stable and good money, with a citizenry will- ing to fight for a good land which is our real national defense. My colleagues of the Republican Party in Congress and all the Republican candidates in Pennsylvania covered this State and the Nation last fall announcing our determina- tion to bring saneness once again into Gov- ernment in Washington. We said the situ- tion was serious, and we were going to stop the waste. With the American people be- hind us, the Republican Party, seeing the right, will not fail them in this hour. Our first step is the adoption of this legis- lative budget—billions less than the spend- ers seek. It will serve as a guide for our spending, to be decreased, if possible, and increased only if dire necessity demands. TAXATION It will bear repetition to say once again that “the power to tax is the power to destroy.” Your Congress has that power today within constitutional limits which, unhappily, cannot be defined with certainty. The Federal tax collector takes today 25 cents of every dollar in our national income of 8160,000,000,000. Hence, for the Federal Government alone, you and all your em- ployees work 3 months of the year, whether rich or poor, to pay that tux. It may be paid directly as income or excise taxes or indirectly through hidden taxes. In addition, you work another month or two each year in order to pay your State and local taxes. Certainly with from a quarter to a half of your effort going to pay taxes to buy the services of government, many of which you don't want, you are interested in getting that service, if desirable, as cheaply as pos- sible. Just as in buying a suit of clothes, you want the best for the money; you don't want to pay extra for a lot of unnecessary and undesirable gadgets. So, whoever you are, it is safe to assume you want Government expenses and taxes lowered. If we don't reduce them, they will go up and up until you work 8 months, then 10, then 12 months a year to pay your taxes, which in effect is what they do in Russia today. Most people think of taxes as a means to an end: that of collecting money to pay Government expenses. That, of course, is a most important function of the tax col- lector. There is another purpose evidenced par- ticularly in recent years—that of using the taxing authority to accomplish what are called social changes. Many of these pro- posals are drastic, and do indirectly what the American people will not do directly. For example, the proposal of a few years ago to limit salaries to $25,000 must have been designed, not to secure revenue, but to break down private initiative by making it unprofitable for a man of ability to exert himself. That this was the true purpose is evident when you recall that the man living on a “spendthrift trust” and basking in the Florida sunshine could, without working at all, continue to loaf on an unearned income of over $25,000 Yet our revenue laws today through high taxes accomplish in effect this social change and they remove the reward incentive essential for full effort toward business expansion. Likewise, the misguided undistributed profits tax passed by the New Deal in 1936 was especially designed to force poor busi- ness practices by requiring business undcr penalty of heavy taxes to pay out its earn- ings, even though good judgment required that the money be reinvested in expansion or repair. Here, too, the social purpose was to break down the private enterprise and corporate structure of business, presumably so that the Government might take over all private business. This tax caused the s0- called recession of 1937, with its millions of unemployed. Shortly thereafter, a hun- dred new Republican faces appeared in the House of Representatives and the New Deal- ers were forced to repeal that law. However, it must be noted that under section 102 of the revenue Jaw, the principle of taxing undistributed profits remains in the law. Anytime the Administrator deter- mines to enforce this provision, on his own findings, he may collect a tax on profit which is not distributed as dividends. I add that in our anticipated revision of the Revenue Code the Congress will do well to include an investigation into section 102. There are many proponents of this theory of using taxes to effect social changes in the Government's service and Congress today. Taxes are a charge against production. They retard production through increasing its cost. They help our overseas competi- tors in low-cost producing areas. They favor methods and manners of doing business not subjected to the particular tax in question. Our anticipated Federal-tax income, based on a national income of $165,000,000,000 and our present tax structure, for fiscal 1947 is A763 thirty-nine and one-tenth billions. Should our national income decrease by as little as 10 percent, our anticipated tax receipts would decrease by almost $5,000,000,000. You readily see how important it 1s to keep our national income high and to cut our expenditures as low as possible as an insurance factor. Note this, a 10-percent reduction in the national income would cause a deficit of about $3,000,000,000 on the basis of the President's budget. On the basis of the Iegislative budeect passed by the House of Representatives, there would be no deficit if the national income falls off by 10 percent, Our efforts must be devoted to keeping our national income high. Otherwise, with a narrowing base against which our taxes will be applied, our tax receipts will fall, nothing will be paid on our debt, and our budget, however carefuly scrutinized, will be out of balance. To the extent our taxing laws re- tard expansion of business which provides the source of the national income, the tax laws should be changed. We learned in the 1920's, following World War I, that wise re- duction of taxes and rates led to both in- creased business and increased tax revenues, Your Congress, through the House Ways and Means Committee and the Senunte Finance Committee, are now and will con- tinue to examine our tax structure, intend- ing to eliminate from the Revenue Code tux inequalitics and taxes which retard business and employment. There is a black-out of the money an ex- panding industry needs today. Risk capital, that which the investor, big or little, puts into a business in the hope of large returns cunnot be found. It can’t be found, first, because the tax collector has taken it in high corporate and personal income taxes, and, second, because the risk incident to in- vestment in a new business or industry today Js too hazardous. Even if the new business “clicked.” the tax collector tukes from one-half to 80 percent of the profit. So, the prospective investor with funds available takes the easy and safe course. He puts his money in Government bonds and lives on the interest and the worker loses mil- lions of jobs so badly needed. We are going to need many new industries if gainful employment is to be assured to all. New industries mean more jobs, and an ex- panded market for raw materials. Without risk capital we will not get new industries. Consider Henry Ford as an example. At the turn of the century he developed an idea for a horseless carriage. The banks and Wall Street would not finance him, for they deemed his idea visionary and un- sound—certainly risky. But his friends did raise $40,000 which the tax collector in that day permitted them to keep. They took the risk and with this 840,000 we had the begin- nings of the giant industry which now gives employment directly and indirectly to nearly 2,000,000 families. The automotive industry today is the fruit of the private enterprise system. The national income must be kept high, thus providing the tax base necessary for our taxes, without which we will not have the money to pay on the national debt and to balance the budget. It is proposed, after as- suring a balanced budget and a payment on the national debt, to reduce personal income taxes by 20 percent this year. I believe that this reduction in taxes, coupled with the bal- anced budget, will contribute greatly toward maintaining and increasing the national income. Under the proposed plan substantially all taxpayers will have the same percentage of reduction, and to a large measure the money formerly taken by the Government for in- efficient and wasteful spending will be avail- able for business expansion. Likewise, and this is most important, the lower tax rate
A764 will lend encouragement to those risking their capital for profit, As business expands, more and more jobs will be available, there will be certainty of employment, and every income-tax payer will profit more through business and work op- portunities than directly through the tax reduction. It is important to note that without the present wide bas~ for income-taxing pur- poses the budget will be hopelessly out of balance. The total personal income-tax col- lections in 1946 were 618,700,000,000. Of this, 88 percent, or 87,100,000,000, was paid by the 43 million taxpayers with incomes under $3,000. Fifty-eight percent, or $10,800,000,- 000, was paid by the 47,000,000 taxpayers with incomes under 85,000. In all, there are 60,000,000 personal income-tax payers. leaving 4 percent, or about 2,500,000 tax- payers, with incomes over 85,000 paying 68,- 000,000,000, It is obvious that the tax base must be very wide in these times of vast spending and astronomical budgets. Let us consider for a moment some of the suggested changes in our revenue laws which will benefit the taxpayer by lowering his taxes, or equalizing them with his competitors, will serve to spur industry to greater effort, will revive the personal incentive to work, and will insure an expanding economy 80 essential to our Nation's welfare. Taxes imposed by the Government un busi- nesses should substantially apply equally on competitive manners and methods of con- ducting a business. Where the tax in one manner of doing business is considerably greater without compensating advantages, business wil] shift into the tax-free methcd, and the Government's tax-revenue lase will be decreased. Thus, today more and more business 16 being conducted in the cooper- ative manner, free of certain taxes imposed against business conducting the same enter- prises as individuals, partnerships, or corpo- rations. The resulting loss of revenue to Government is great, and the Congress must adjust our laws to provide that the coopera- tive nanne~ of doing business pays its just share of business taxation. Our Federul taxes should apply equally to all persons within a given class in every State of the Union. Yet, in the so-called community-property States. where, by State law, earnings of either spouse are divided equally between them and so taxed, th: re- sulting tax payment is substantially less than a married couple pays in the non-commu- nity-property States. Obviously, this is un- fair and must be equalized. One suggested method is that the revenue law for taxing purposes require each man and wife to file an individual return for one-half of the couple’s aggregate taxable income. Thus, the taxpayer would be subjected to the lower surtax rate. This suggested change would cost the Treasury $900,000,000, and doubtless would require an adjustment upward of the surtax rate, but would equalize tax pay- ments. Investors and businessmen generally com- plain, with reason, that our Federal policy of double taxation as applied to corporate earnings is a substantial drag against busi- ness expansion. We tax. first, the corpora- tion's earnings and then tax again these same earnings in the hands of the individual who receives them as dividends. Double taxation is wrong, it savors of a capital levy. As the law stands today, the net return to an investor, big or little, from dividends, after a payment of the corporate tax and per- sonal-income tax is so low that it frequently is unprofitable for the investor to put his money in corporate ownership. He is more apt to place his money in mortgage securities, and avoid the risk incident to ownership and management of business. Again, we lose risk capital. There are many more items the taxing committees must study in any general revi- sion of the Internal Revenue Code. As we seek tax revenue, we will be guided by a determination to make the taxes apply equi- tably and with a minimum of burden to the taxpayer and the investing public, in the interest of an expanding economy. Some of the items requiring consideration at this time include: (a) The excise taxes. (b) Credit for earned income. (In a recent survey I conducted of 6,000 businessmen in the United States, 67 percent of those replying believed that earned income should not be taxed as heavily as other income.) (c) Increased in- itial allowance for depreciation. (d) Changes to encourage new and small businesses with Special treatment. (e) Increasing exemp- tions. (f) Changes in the capital-gains law to encourage investment. (g) Corporation taxes. (h) Permission to businesses to re- Port as operating charges funds used for stream purification. All these subjects and many more will be studied in the proposed general revision of the Revenue Code expected this year. You will think it a far cry as I jump, now, from the taxing and appropriating commit- tees of Congress into your back yard. I do 80 because your responsibilities are not ended with the election, in which you took so im- portant a part. Pennsylvania's 28 Republican Members of the House of Representatives and our dis- tinguished United States Senator and former Governor are in Washington now seeking to carry out the voters’ major demands as ex- pressed in the last election; to return the Government to the people and to restare its financial stability. We are a united group, but we cannot fight this thing alone. The executive branch of the Government is still controlled by the New Dealers with their thousands of propaganda outlets. They are and will continue to decry every attempt of our party to stop waste anc reduce expenditures. ‘You must support your Congress as it tries to bring order out of chaos. Don’t expect miracles. Don’t expect the Republican Party to correct overnight the inequities of the New Deal, which was 14 years in sinking its fangs into Government and which even yet controls the executive branch. Don't urge appropriations of your Con. gressman far any but the most urgent needs. Don't be misled by Government agencies sending representatives around to tell you that unless Congress appropriates millions for their continuation their services to you will end. Thank your lucky stars that you have a man in Washington who is doing his best to break up this bureaucracy. Write your Congressman your encouragement from time to time rnd thus counteract the letters he gets daily from the spenders. And, finally, know that you have a delega- tion in Washington working in closest coop- eration with our great Senator, Epwarp Martin, determined as always to contribute more than Pennsylvanta’s share in our fight today for a solvent America. The Gwynne Bill Destroys Labor’s Gains —— EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN A. BLATNIK OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 1947 Mr. BLATNIK, Mr. Speaker, I am against the Gwynne bill, and I wish to point out a few of its obvious and dan- gerous implications. Under the guise of attacking the problem of portal-to- portal pay, the proponents of this bill are APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD seeking to invalidate the provisions of the Fair Labor Standards Act. They are attempting to use the hysteria, confu- sion, and misunderstanding whipped up by irresponsible newspapers and selfish interests regarding the portal-to-portal pay question to cover up the true pur- poses of this bill. I have four major objections to the bill, namely, the 1-year statute of limita- tions, the waiver and compromise clause, the part which makes reliance upon ad- ministrative interpretation and lower- court decisions an employer defense, and its customs and practice provision as a definition of work. The court in the Mount Clemens Pottery case has already determined the portal-to-portal question in a most adequate manner through application of the de minimis doctrine. Let me examine the custom and prac- tice provisions of the bill briefly. Sec- tion 3 reads as follows: No action or proceeding of any kind wheth- er or not cammenced prior to the effective date of this act, ahall be maintained to the extent that such action is based upon fail- ure of an employer to pay an employee for activities heretofore or hereafter engaged in by such employee other than those activities which at the time of such failure were re- quired to be paid for either by custom or practice of such employer at the plant or other place of employment of such employee or by express agreement at the time in effect between such employer and such employee or his collective-bargaining representative. A considered judgment of the provi- sions of this section of the bill must con- vince any thinking person that its pas- Sage would revive and perpetuate the worst practices which have ever prevailed in the most backward occupations, in sweatshops, in unorganized industries with the lowest labor standards, in direct contradiction to the Fair Labor Stand- ards Act, which was designed to set up certain minimum standards below which no labor conditions should be allowed to This bill, as now worded, would legalize the practices of individual employers by substituting their customs and practices for the decision of the Supreme Court— Tennessee Coal, Iron & R. R. Company against Muscoda Local No. 123—with re- spect to the meaning of work as meaning “physical and mental exertion (whether burdensome or not) controlled or re- quired by the employer and pursued nec- essarily and primarily for the benefit of the employer and his business.” Do you gentlemen on the other side of the aisle disagree with this decision of the court? Some unscrupulous employers have maintained in the past, and under this act, could institute again, a multitude of oppressive and unfair practices, and employers who desire to maintain de- cent working conditions in their plants would again be at the mercy of these unfair competitors. In the garment in- dustry in the past, many workers have not been paid for time spent in deliver- ing finished work to jobber’s establish- ments, for time lost because of machine break-downs and power shut-offs, for cleaning and repairing machines, for making samples, and even for sweeping and cleaning shops. They were retained in the shops for hours without’ pay, awaiting orders which might possibly
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD come in. In tobacco warehouses some empleyers kept workers weiting for hours, without pay, for farmers to bring in produce. In other industries some employers have not paid workers for time spent in loading and unloading trucks, waiting for machine setters when the type of work was changed going from one job to another or from one work station to another, or for time lost due to. break-downs in machinery and belt systems. Workers have been or- dered to report for work at a specified time, and then kept waiting, without pay, for several hours before being given worx. Others have been required to remain on call for emergency duty for many hours without pay. For example, miners on the Iron Range in Minnesota were at one time required to report to the dry house, receive thei: orders for the day, were issued their tools, and were then required to report to the lift and be carried to the various levels within the mine and from there walk an average of three blocks before the miner’s pay time began—an aver- age of over 30 minutes of unpaid make- ready work per day. Such violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act nave been corrected in some Minnesota mines through court decision, but still con- tinue to exist in other mines. This bill, with its custom and practices clause as a definition of work, would make it impossible to correct these injustices still suffered by many miners in my district and would discriminate against those mining companies who do abide by the law's provisions. Again, in the lumber camps in my dis- trict, timber workers were required to report to the boss at 6 a. m., travel half to three-quarters of an hour to their work, cutters had to sharpen their tools, and winchmen and cat drivers oiled their machinery on their own time; in many camps this make-ready work averaged as much as 2 hours per day. Here, again, these practices have been corrected in some camps by the courts, but the adopt- ing of this bill would prevent the cor- rection of future abuses. If we pass an act to protect an em- ployer from court action for nonpay- ment of wages for activities hereafter as well as heretofore engaged in, for which it was not the individual employ- er’s practice to pay at the time of such failure to pay, what is to stop an un- scrupulous employer from - instituting some practices again? It may be true that the practices men- tioned here were perpetrated by a rela- tively small minority of employers, and that the majority of honest employers did not. treat their employees so unfairly. Thus, in 1928, when the National Indus- trial Conference Board made its study of systems of wage payments, it found that less than 20 percent of reporting plants did not pay their workers for lost time due to causes beyond the control of the workers. But it is this minority which would gain a competitive advantage over employers who try to maintain higher standards. This would force these em- ployers, too, to lower standards, thus de- pressing labor standards in all industry, causing commerce and the channels and instrumentalities of commerce to spread and perpetuate substandard laor con- ditions. In other words, the custom-and-prac- tices clause of this proposal is objection- able for two reasons: One, it will have the effect of creating unfair competition for business; and two, it undermines legally established work standards for labor. But this provision is only one of anum- ber of objectionable features of the Gwynne bil]. It also proposes a 1-year statute of limitations on actions for un- paid wages arising out of violations of the Fair Labor Standards Act. . Many workers, especially the unorganized, are not always fully informed of their rights, and hence do not discover violations of the wages-and-hours law until months after it occurs; often workers are afraid to start action against their employer until after they cease working for the company. The result is that it is often several years before a worker is in a position to start action for recovery of wages. The l-year statute of limitations would prevent many of these suits, and thus cripple the enforcement of the Fair Labor Standards Act, as well as the Walsh-Healey Act and the Bacon-Davis Act. Another part of the bill allows em- ployers to free themselves of any lability by the plea of good faith consistent with a lower-court decision or administrative opinion. This is entirely contrary to our common-law system in that it virtually takes away appellate jurisdiction from the higher courts. In other words, an employee's natural right of appeal is be- ing violated if a lower court has the final say affecting his claims for back pay. This is a judicial procedure which exists nowhere in our entire legal system. Finally, I object to that part of the bill which allows employees to enter into agreements or waivers whereby they sign away their rights under the Fair Labor Standards Act, or permit the compromise of employer liability. Any law which allows private parties to enter into agree- ments which violate its provisions is a bad law. The waiver and compromise Sections of this bill would mean that many unorganized workers especially, out of fear, would be forced to sign away their rights under the Fair Labor Stand- ards Act. These are the grounds that force me to oppose the Gwynne bill. In my opin- ion, this bill would have the effect of virtually destroying that humanitarian and progressive piece of legislation, the Fair Labor Standards Act. During these first few weeks which I have spent as a Member of this honor- able body, I have heard a great deal spoken about the rights of business and have seen many tears shed over the plight of big business. This is occurring at the very time that business profits are at the highest point in American history. Corporate profits, after taxes, for 1946, have been estimated to total eleven and eight-tenths billions, or over three times the volume of profit in 1939. It has been estimated that corporate profits for 1947 will be still greater. Is it not about time that we start thinking about the interests of the peo- ple, of the veteran who cannot find a house to live in, of the farmer who may A765 soon be faced with a slump in farm prices, with the small businessman who is in danger of being crushed by the cor- perations and chain stores, and-of the laborer who is faced with falling stand- ards of living as a result of higher living costs and reductions in take-home pay? If the House was interested in the wel- fare of the people, they would today be considering a housing program, social security, the REA, health insurance, and other measures designed to raise the living standards and provide for the se- curity of the people, instead of attempt- ing to destroy by the enactment of meas- ures like this Gwynne bill, aimed at de- stroying the Fair Labor Standards Act— an act designed to help provide millions of workers a better life. Farm Loans for Veterans EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. EUGENE WORLEY OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 1947 Mr. WORLEY. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REc- orD, I would like to call to the attention of the Congress letters from two Ameri- can Legion posts in my district relative to the appropriation for financing farm loans for veterans. I hope the appro- priate committees will give this matter immediate attention. The letters follow: THE AMERICAN LEGION, FRANK Krinc Post, No. 249, Wellington, Tez., February 10, 1947. Hon, EvGENE WORLEY, Washington, D. C. Dear Sir: The farm veterans of this coun- ty huve found that there is no source through which they may secure credit to finance their farming operations with the exception of the Farmers Home Administration. However, in checking this Administration, it has been found that the FHA 1s out of adequate funds for such financing. Since it is now time for these boys to purchase their equipment and to start farming. they would like very much to have something done about this. We, Frank King Post, No. 249, American Legion, of Collingsworth County, Tex., appeal to you as our spokesman in Washington to see that adequate appropriations be made immediately to the Farmers Home Adminis- tration in order that the farm boys of this county can start their farm operations at once. ¢ Yours very truly. Frank Kine Post, No. 249, J. W. WELLS, Adjutant. THe AMERICAN LEGION, WILLIAMS-GRAVES Post, No. 402, Silverton, Tez. Be it remembered that on February 4, 1947, there was held a regular meeting of Williams- Graves Post, No. 402, of the American Le- gion, There being a quorum present the following motion was voted and carried in favor of, to-wit: “That this post of the American Legion urge Congress to immediately appropriate funds for the making of Farmers Home Ad- ministration loans as provided under the provisions of title IZ of the Bankhead-Jones Farm Tenant Act.”