APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD It was also claimed that legalizing liquor would reduce taxes. The facts refute that, according to the foundation, which sets forth that in addition to a heavier burden in taxes, entirely aside from war-bred increases, for each 81 of levy on liquor there has been a@ diversion of some $5 from legitimate and productive business. The repealists, in fighting prohibition, loudly asserted that the dry amendment had not solved the matter. The Nation’s drys can now say with equal right that repeal has also failed to solve it and go further to show that conditions are even worse. American Lithuanian Council, Lake County, Ind. EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. RAY J. MADDEN OF INDIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 1947 Mr. MADDEN. Mr. Speaker, on sev- eral occasions I have called the attention of Congress to the unfortunate situation involving self-government for small European countries. The people of Lithuanian descent in the great Calumet region of Indiana, along with the Americans who are familiar with the true situation, are justly protesting the present domination of Lithuania by outside influences. The principles of the Atlantic Charter and the “four freedoms” which were the great incentive for our fighting men are denied the people of Lithuania. I wish to incorporate in my remarks a letter received from Albert G. Vinick and George M. Dubickas, chairman and secretary of the American Lithuanian Council of Lake County, which further elaborates upon the present position of that unfortunate country. Our Gov- ernment should act through the United Nations organization to rectify this injustice. AMERICAN LITHUANIAN COUNCIL, Lake County, Ind., February 20, 1947. The Honorable Ray J. MADDEN, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. HoONorRABLE Sir: Lithuanians of Lake County, Ind., gathered at the observance of the twenty-ninth anniversary of the decla- ration of independence by the people of Lithuania, held at St. Casimir’s Parish Audi- torium on Sunday February 16, 1947, under the auspices of the American Lithuanian Council, of Lake County, Ind., after due de- lIiberations regarding the international situ- ation prevailing in Europe after the military victory, take note of the following: The Atlantic Charter and the “four free- doms” held out the promise of freedom, hap- piness, and justice to the peoples of Nazi- enslaved Europe. This promise wa: eagerly accepted as a binding contract by the en- slaved peoples. Anti-Nazi resistance move- ments were formed, and the instructions by the radio voice of America were scrupulously followed and carried out by tt 2 underground, including the exceptionally well-coordinated supreme Lithuanian committee of liberation. These principles were written into the ini- tial Declaration of United Nations of Janu- ary 1942. Several declarations to liberated European peoples made jointly by the heads XCIII—App.— -50 of state of the Big Three Powers seemed to carry out these promises. Following the military victory, however, the Asiatic peoples of the Philippines, India, In- donesia, Burma, Indochina, Syria, Lebanon, and Korea are the only beneficiaries of the Atlantic Charter: which was originally in- tended for European peoples. The “liber- ated” peoples of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland, Slovakia, Hungary, Romuania, Bul- garia, Yugoslavia, and Albania are, in fact, subjected to systematic mass extermination and deportations of the indigenous Estonian, Latvian, and Lithuanian populations. At the same time, masses of political refu- gees from the Baltic states and Poland are subjected to a regime of moral and physical terror and oppression at the hands of the UNRRA with the assistance of the American occupation forces, which are left unguided in consequence of the uncertuinty, wavering, and continual confusion created by conflict- - ing directives. While Russiun and Russian satellite delegates to the United Nations de- bate and deride human rights, the victorious democracies lack the courage to look squarely at the facts and to demand the restoration of freedom of the Baltic peoples. Of all the war-ravaged countries, Lithuania, Lutvia, and Estonia were and are alone denied any and all relief and rehabilitation assistance by UNRRA, which is paid for by the people of the United States. The principles of justice and the Atlantic Charter are absent from the so-called peace treaties dictated by Russia. Lithuania, the immediate neighbor of Ger- many, and Latvia, and Estonia, likewise vital- ly interested in the settlement of peace for Germany, were thus far excluded from the preliminary negotiations regarding the peace trenty for Germany. The forthcoming Mos- cow Conference on Germany likewise excludes any and all representation for the Baltic peoples, although both the Democratic ad- ministration and the Republicun Party are committed to the defense of the restoration of the political sovereignty and freedom for the Bultic states. Wherefore, we demand that the President and the Secretary of State guide the foreign policy of this country back to the principles of justice and the Atlantic Charter; That the Moscow conference be limited to preliminary discussions with no commit- ments binding the United States; That the United States demand forthwith the withdrawal of the Russian occupation armies, NKVD-MVD terrorist police, and Communist Party forces from Lithuania, Lat- via, and Estonia, and lend assistance to the peoples of the Baltic states, if requested by the accredited legitimate diplomatic agents of those countries, in restoring the political sovereignty and interim regimes of those countries. Furthermore, take note of the 1-day hun- ger strike by Baltic political refugees on the opening day of the Moscow conference. We will join them on March 10, 1947, in a day of fasting and prayers and will remind the hardened consciences of today’s masters of the world of their grave moral responsibility. Finally, we ask the United States Senate to deny ratification of the Russian-dictated oppressive peace treaties signed in Paris on February 10, 1947, and to refuse to join the proposed international refugee organization, which embodies oppressive constitutional provisions. Baltic and Polish refugee com- munities are fully qualified to administer their affairs without the aid of any inter- mediary agency infested with the agents of the Russian NKVD, and that aid by the American army of occupation in Germany may be rendered directly to the refugee com- munities, ALsrrt G. VUNICK, . Chairman, Grorcre M. DUBICKas, Secretary. A785 Resistance to the Budget Ceiling EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 1947 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, the Congress, handicapped by the Re- organization Act, has made a greater progress since it met on January 3, 1947, than any other Congress for more than a quarter of a century. It has not only been hindered by the detailed require- ments of the Reorganization Act, but it has had every obstruction possible from the minority, which has been so long inoculated with the spending and waste virus, and also has been confronted with departmental resistance to the cutting of any of their expenses, thus making the task a monumental one. Mr. George E. Sokolsky has developed some figures which are very interesting and applicable to the point under discus- sion. I am inserting under unanimous consent as part of my remarks his figures which appeared in the Washington Times-Herald of February 28, 1947: THESE DAYS (By George E. Sokolsky) It seems to be generally assumed that the estimated cut in the budget of $6,000,000,000 or of $4,500,000,000 means something. Those are tentative figures required by the Reor- ganization Act but which are binding upon nobody, not even as an estimate or a promise. Obviously, no Congress could pass a budget between January 3 and February 16 unless it accepted the Presidential estimate as is. The Presidential estimate is based upon de- partmental estimates as passed by the Budyet Bureau and are inevitably high. Most departments ask for much more than they will get to bulwark their actual require- ments. This process is as old as the hills and every son has tried it on his old man. Therefore, it should surprise no one that the departments, bureaus, and offices try to work it on Congress. In an older and saner period of our history, Congress often sought to please everybody by spending other people's money and the Presi- dent wus the conservative grandfather who watched the Treasury. As Mr. Roosevelt was by nature profligate with public funds and as he had adopted the Hopkins theory that a nation can spend itself into prosperity, the roles were reversed and Congress showed some regard for Providence and thrift—but not too much. The national budgetary expenditures of the American people rose in an amazing spiral: Expenditures chargeable against ordinary receipts $4, 947, 000, 000 9, 068, 000, 000 9, 127, 000, 000 -. 12,774,000, 000 32, 491, 000, 000 100, 404, 000, 000 ween enn e nee Hee 137, 500, 000, 000 1 Presidential estimate. It is interesting but not significant to com- pare these figures, say, with the expenditures for— 689, 881, 000 a eee enon nnn een e wwe een- 3, 795, 000, 000
A786 I should like to present another important and significant figure: In 1929, the total national income was $83,326,000,000; the expenditures of the Fed- eral Government amounted to $3,848,000,000, or more than 4.6 percent. In 1940, before we went to war, the total national income was $77,574,000,000 while the expenditures of Government vere $9,127,000,000, or more than 11.7 percent. In 1945, a war year, the national income was $160,983,000,000 and the expenditures were $100,404,000,000, or more than 62 percent. Similarly, the public debt rose. In 1929, the Federal debt was $17,500,000,000; in 1940, it was $53,500,000,000; in 1945, it has risen to @280,800,000,000. It is only natural and usual for every de- partment of government to demand as much money as it received the year before, if not more. Bureaucrats and politicians do not vote themselves out of jobs. Rare, indeed, is the man who is prepared to say, “My work is done. Abolish my office.” The Army and Navy always face prospective enemies, as they should, to keep in trim, and they always want more money. Few Government agencies, including the Army and Navy, are efficient. Few of them demand that an employee do a day's work for a day’s pay. Few of them are provident in the expend- itures for supplies. Few of them can jus- tify the expenditure of everv dollar they receive by approved methods of accountancy. We could afford profiligacy in Government when we were a rich country, that is, when the ratio between national ncome and Gov- ernment expenditures was such that the citizen found taxes not burdensome and could save, ou’ of his earnings, sufficient for his own improvement. That is no longer true. The Government ts loaded down with debt whick is a burden upon the people; the individual citizen is loaded down with taxes which are an impediment to national effi- ciency and productivity. This is a time for economy, where economy will not interfere with effective national de- fense and the essential services of Govern- ment. Waste is neither effective nor essen- tial. Waste knows no justificitic 1. Waste is an insult to the intelligence of the tax- payor and an admission of inc>ompetence by the wastrel. If the present Congress eliminates waste, abolishes the useless, kills off the obsolescent, cuts out the inefficient, and makes Govern- ment a competent rather than a profligate agency of the people, the budget can be cut by many billions. Congress has until July 1 to do that job and ought to do it drasti- cally. Freedom, Progress, and the Preservation of the American Way of Life Must Be Our Objectives EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN DAVIS LODGE OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 1947 Mr. LODGE. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following ad- dress of Hon. JoserpH W. MarTIN, JR., Speaker of the House of Representatives, at a Lincoln Day gathering of North Carolina Republicans held at Winston- Salem, on Saturday, February 15, 1947: Mr. Chairman, I am happy to come to this splendid gathering of men and women who are loyally supporting the Republican pro- gram of putting this country back on the American track. I am pleased to share the speaking program with my good friend, the former Congresswoman from Connecticut, the Honorable Clare Boothe Luce. Her voluntary retirement from Congress was a great loss to our party and to our country. It is gratify- ing to see she is still active in helping Amer- ica solve the many difficult problems of na- tional and world-wide importance. As we gather here tonight to pay honor to the memory of one of America's immortal sons—Abraham Lincoln—we are saddened by the passing of former Gov. O. Max Gard- ner, one of North Carolina's great political leaders and one whom I was privileged to call @ personal friend. He was struck down on the eve of his sailing to his new post as American Ambassador at the Court of St. James's, where it was expected he would ren- der a high service to the Nation. Max Gardner was an outstanding Ameri- can; a man who devoted many years of his life to public service. Had he remained among us he would have gone on to still greater honors in his career of public service. May he find peace and rest. Abraham Lincoln had two outstanding traits of character which grew broader and deeper until they became the most notable of his qualities: They were his profound faith in the power of right and his patience and firmness when beset by grave and pressing problems. Lincoln always refused to be stampeded into action before he had studied his prob- lem through; and he never yielded to any personal impulse of resentment, or the urg- ing of some of his advisers to act in malice. His policies were always directed toward the welfare of his country and never to advance himself. His goals were the common good and never narrow partisan advantage. The bitterness and strife which in his day divided this Nation have—thank God— long been healed. The sons of the South, fighting shoulder to shoulder with the sons of the North, have in more than one war laid down their lives, or borne wounds and suffering, in the cause of their common ideals and their beloved country. Today we are one people—a Nation undi- vided—of free men and women. The great- est contribution the South can make, not only to its own welfare but to the national good as well, would be to have two strong political parties. The South has long been retarded because of its one-party monopoly. You of North Carolina have a rare oppor- tunity to lead the movement to lift the South to greater influence in the Nation. Abraham Lincoln was the founder of the Republican Party. The inspiration of his life and character belongs to the whole Na- tion. Lincoln felt his ideals; he lived his prin- ciples. In the plain, simple language of the people, he stated them profoundly and per- suasively. His homely phrases probably have done more to keep before us the basic prin- ciples of free government—‘‘of the people, by the people, for the people’—than all the books on the theory of government ever written. Lincoln firmly believed our Government's proper and constitutional function is to pre- serve the liberties of its citizens—not to pander to the selfish wants of any single group, or be a brake on the Nation's economic life. At Gettysburg in ‘63 Lincoln declared we were testing whether our Nation, or any na- tion, conceived in liberty and dedicated to freedom could long endure. Again today, at the end of the most ter- rible war in history, we are testing in Amer- ica whether our Nation, conceived in liberty, and equality of opportunity, can long endure. Our solutions of our problems will have world-wide effect. They will determine whether liberty or tyranny 1s finally to follow APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the heroic sacrifices of our own—and of those of other countries—who, through the years, have laid their all upon the altar of freedom. Upon the new Republican Congress has devolved a grave responsibility to correct errors which if not checked, will surely de- stroy our system of free government. The tendency inherent in all governments is constantly to encroach upon the liberties of the people. Governments seek more and more power for themselves. They impose higher and higher taxes with which to pay for their extravagances and to maintain: themselves in power. When governments in the past have gone too far in depriving the peopie of their Hberties, or have imposed taxcs too great for them to bear, the people moved to remedy the situation—even though the only remedy available to them was re- bellion. The Eightieth Congress will secure this relief for our people the easier way—by legislation. That is one of the great bless- ings of our American system. I think this is an appropriate occasion for me to make some observations concerning the Congress and the problems it faces. Our opponents spent more than 14 years getting the country into the fix it is in, and now they insist that we must lay down an exact blueprint of detailed remedies in less than 6 weeks. Well—that is an uninten- tional compliment to our Republican govern- mental capacity, perhaps, but we don’t in- tend to be stampeded into unwise or ill- considered action. We intend to move as fast as possible consistent with wise and well-considered legislation. We promised a reduction in Government spending. There is going to be a reduction— a big reduction in Government spending. It will be cut to the bone in every activity. Just where, in what of the scores of differ- ent departmente, bureaus, and commissions these cuts are to be made is being developed by investigations into the functions and activities of those agencies which have for so long been screened from the view of the taxpayers. Committees of the House and the Senate are at work on those problems now. An essential part of the program of the Eightieth Congress is the balancing of the budget. To achieve a balanced budget the first step is to cut out all useless spending, big sums and the many little wastes which go to make up the big sums. The whole problem is, of course, the tark of the proper committees of the House and the Senate. It is a problem requiring weeks of intensive study, long hearings, and carefully calculated conclusions. No reasonable person expects otherwise. The Republican Congress is pledged to the paramount and undeviating purposes of cut- ting the budget to the last possible doar, by forcing efficiency to replace waste and ex- travagance; of balancing the budget; of be- ginning payments on the national debt; and of reducing taxes. The Republicans have not the slightest intention of turning away from these firm purposes. We intend to begin payments on our enormous national debt. We must—and we will—reverse the trend of the last decade and a half of going deeper and deeper into debt, and begin to pull the Nation out of debt. That can be done by greater economy in every department of the Government by maintaining a high national income, while, at the same time we can reduce taxes, and attain full production to bring down prices and improve quality. This program is entirely feasible in our Matton. What we need most is the will to jo it. Taxes. will be reduced. They will be re- duced in such ways as will be most beneficial to the Nation, to all the people, and most powerfully to promote the earliest return to peacetime prosperity. Our tax burdens must not continue to grow unchecked, as they have the past several
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD years. We must not permit the Government to feed on excessive taxes, continue to ex- Pand its powers, and impose more and more costly controls upon us. Fortunately, we now have a Congress firmly determined to relieve the taxpayers of some of their tremendous burden—the greatest tax burden in our history. We have a Congress determined to eliminate unnecessary func- tions in the Government, and to demand efficiency and economy in administration. Let us consider for a moment why our taxes are so high. The national debt is many times what it was a few years ago, The cost of the war was terrific, but you will remember taxes were high and the national debt was mount- ing skyward long before we were plunged into the war. Why? The answer is simple. The implications are profound. Taxes rose and the debt mounted beyond all reason because the Nation aban- doned, for a time, a fundamental principle laid down by the men who founded our Re- public—the principle that this should be a government of laws, and not a government by men, For more than a dozen years, the Congress surrendered much of its power to the Execu- tive. In large part Congress delegated its constitutional duties to the executive de- partments. Our Federal Government, there- fore, became all too much a government by men—the men in the administration—and ceased to be a government of laws enacted by the people’s representatives. Over those years more than 76,000 departmental regula- tions having the force and effect of laws were issued by the bureaucrats. Many of them are still in effect—how many we do not know. We mean to find out. There was, during those years, little inclination on the part of the party in power to check the tendency of the Executive to add new functions—there- fore new agencies and bureaus—therefore higher taxes to maintain them. We face today a national debt of 8259,000,- 000,000—more than $1,800 for every man, woman, and child in the United States. Figure that out for a minute. Every single man and woman in this Nation owes, as an individual shure of the Federal debt—beside all other personal obligations the sum of $1,800. Every family of four is in debt through the spending of your Federal] Gov- ernment the sum of $7,200. And remember, that figure does not include any part of the State, county, or municipal debts. Is it any wonder taxes are crushing—that we meet them in prices, in income, every- where? . One of the most important obligations facing the new Republican Congress, there- fore, is to give the country relief from its tremendous burden of taxation by cutting expenditures. And Congress is going to do that. We shall carefully, intelligently, ex- amine the entire Federal Government and determine what of its functions are useful, and what are not worth their cost to the country. We mean to find what functions or powers can be done better and cheaper by the States, by counties, or by municipalities, and to return those functions and powers to them. Yes, and what can be done better by private business, and private groups, or indi- viduals, will be returned to them. Every Fed- eral Government activity will at last have to prove it is worth its keep. The Federal Government has got to learn to live within its budget. The money so saved in Government opera- tions will help everyone. It will help reduce personal income taxes; to give relief to busi- ness where heavy taxes are slowing up pro- duction and keeping business from making jobs for the people; to reduce the national debt; and leave us more money for national defense. The exact details of those tax reductions will be worked out by the Ways and Means Committee of the House, and the correspond- ing committee in the Senate. That is what those committees are for. The plan for tax reduction will be a studied, scientific, care- fully considered plan which will give the best and broadest results. The only way to raise our standards of liv- ing is to produce more of the things we want and necd. Heavy taxes are a brake upon pro- duction. But taxes are not the only brake. There are others. Chief among them is the present confused state of manugement-labor relationships. We must find better ways of dealing with those industrial disputes which retard or stop production and injure our whole economy. The Nation was promised legislutive action to promote better labor-management rela- tions, and to protect the innocent public from unmerited and unnecessary hardships. There will be such legislative action. It is being worked out carefully and with full hearings and investigations by the appropri- ate committees of the House and Senate. We shall enact intelligent legislation to hold both labor and management to full re- sponsibility for their contracts and agree- ments. Light, heat, water, power, communications, transportation—each is vitally essential to our orderly economy. To be deprived of one for even a short while results in discomfort, if not danger and suffering, to the innocent public, and injures every businessman and every worker wherever he may be. We can have a vastly increased output of goods and services if both the men of man- agement and the men of labor, working in harmony, give their individual and collective best to their jobs. Industry and labor, for mutual advantage, utilizing miodern methods, can increase pro- duction and reduce costs without increasing the hours of work or reducing wages. A stuble economy requires labor and agri- culture to have the highest wages and reve- nues possible under sound practice. Busi- ness should have reasonable profits. The public must have minimum prices and maxi- mum quality. All this is entirely possible in America. Free competition—in a free mar- ket—with full production will rapidly reduce prices to proper levels and at the same time give us more in goods and services of better quality tor every dollar we spend. There are great readjustments which have to be made both in Government and in in- qaustry. But with determination, with energy, with the American know-how to get things done, we shall succeed in again putting our country on the high road to prosperity and plenty. The Nation was promised the confusion, secrecy and conniving in our forcign relations would be remedied. They will be remedied. We intend the American people shall know what is going on; to what they have been committed in the secret conferences which were held. We in America cannot—we dare not—tol- erate the forces which are working for the overthrow of our American system of consti- tutional government, free enterprise, and free society. Don't let anyone tell you that such subversionists are not active in America, They are very busy in this country as J. Ed- gar Hoover, and the Un-American Activities Committee have revealed, and they have penetrated into the State Department and other branches of the Government. We in- tend they shall be rooted out of their govern- mental berths, and they shall not be per- mitted to bring about the revolution which they seek. The danger to which we must be alert is that of subversionists—an organized and cun- ning minority—trying to seize the machinery of the government by subterfuge and sup- press any efforts of the people to defend their liberties, There is no place in the United A787 States of America for those who would over- throw our free United States of America. The country must huve an adequate, eco- nomical, and complete national defense so {ur as humanly possible to attain. That will be done—and done carefully and thoroughly. It requires study—intensive study—by the Defense committees of the two Houses of the Congress because it is one of the most im- Portant problems of our continued national existence and our personal liberties. After the thunder and horrors of war comes the drudgery of clearing up the wreckage. A shattered world must rebuild itself. Shut- tered ideals must be reestablished in a welter of cynicism and a reaction of recklessness. Shattered economies must be reconstructed by peoples almost too war-weary, frustrated, and discouraged to make the effort. Out of chaos and ruin must be forged new hope, new energy, and new endeavor. We in America—all creeds, all races, all parties, al} as Americans—must consecrate ourselves anew to the task, under God, of preserving the freedom and progress hallowed by the brave men and women who have struggled, and who still struggle, against the evil tyranny, brutality, and ruthless lust for power which world extinguish in suffer- ing and slavery the light of hope for all mankind. The price of liberty has been lives which were priceless, and human agony so vast and deep no words can be found to express it. Millions have died for peace. We must learn; we must learn, under the banner of Chris- tianity, to live for peace. This world-wide task must be accomplished in day-by-day living, day-by-day sacrifices, day-by-day progress tc better conditions. These tasks may be undramatic, but upon the fidelity with which the people perform them rest the liberty and progress of all the world, In America peace and progress will be found in full production; full employment; lower prices; better quality; lower taxes; more home rule and less Washington rule; more individual opportunity and initiative and less bureaucratic dictatorship and regi- mentation. America has led the world in human liberty and progress. We must continue to do 60. The reason we have excelled in human lberty und progress is because we huve achieved all our blessings, under the Bill of Rights— through devotion to God, country, and free- dom. Only in that way—our American way—can human progress and liberty con- tinue. All the world will note, and forever remem- ber, what we in America do in this continuing battle for liberty and progress. We may let our hearts be lifted up by hope. We may with courage and faith raise our eyes and our aims to new heights of human happi- ness and achievement. The America which accomplished such a marvel as winning two wars without losing liberty may with cer- tainty look forward to winning peace and plenty in freedom. Japan planned and worked for war for 40 years. Mussolini spent 20 years arming for the struggle; Hitler spent 12 years. We in America started practically from scratch when we were attacked. Yet in 3 years we were on the road to victory. We were able to equip and train vast armies for the European and African fronts. We sent billions upon billions in war supplies to our allies across the Atlantic. And, on top of all that, we were able to win the war in the Pacific practically unaided. A nation which under God can do that is a strong Nation, a determined Nation. It is a Nation which has yet to reach its full stature, which has yet great promise for the future; a Nation whose prosperity and prog- ress in peace are as certain and assured as was its invincibility in war.
A788 Dulles at Moscow EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 1947 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speak- er, under leave to extend my remarks, I am including an article by Mr. David Lawrence which appeared in the Wash- ington Evening Star for Wednesday, February 26: DuLLES’ LONG TrAINTNG To Alp UNITED STATES AT Moscow—-CHOICE aS ADVISER WILL ASSURE BIPARTISAN FOREIGN POLICY (By David Lawrence) Selection of John Foster Dulles to go to the Moscow Conference as an adviser to the United States delegation and to Secretary of State Marshall insures a continuance of the bipartisan course that has been guiding for- eign policy. Mr. Dulles is not only a Repub- Mean but a man of wide influence in the party. The purpose in sending Mr. Dulles, how- ever, happens only to be in part related to the fact that he ts a prominent Republican. The truth is, he is one of the best advisers on foreign affairs in this country. His expe- rience dates from the days when he accom- panied the American delegation to the Paris Peace Conference at the close of World War I. Mr. Dulles was one of the principal advisers to Secretary of State Stettinius and the American delegation at the San Francisco Conference which wrote the United Nations Charter. He attended the Big Four meeting in London with Secretary of State Byrnes. For many years Mr. Dulles has been active ir the affairs of the Federal Council of Churches of Christ in America, being the head of a commission which has been con- cerning itself with declarations on peace- making. He is widely respected for his en- deavor to apply Christian principles to the making of public policy in the world gener- ally and probably has given more time and thought to international law and ethics than any other man alive today. FAMILIAR WITH WORLD PROBLEMS Mr. Dulles has, indeed, spent his adult life in the study of foreign policy and matters of law. In private practice he has been con- cerned with questions of world trade and is thoroughly familiar with the economic as well as the political background of world problems today. The American Government is, indeed, fortunate that Mr. Dulles has sac- rificed his private interests for the greater part of the last 2 years to serve the State Department. The connection of Mr. Dulles with domes- tic politics lies in the fact that he has the confidence of Governor Dewey of New York. It was reported before the 1944 election that, if Mr. Dewey were successful, Mr. Dulles would become Secretary of State. Mr. Dulles has the confidence of Repub- lican Members of the Senate, particularly Senator VANDENBERG, of Michigan, with whom he worked closely at San Francisco. Before accepting the Moscow post Mr. Dulles was in Washington and had a conference with the Michigan Senator. It appears, however, that Mr. Dulles does not go as a substitute for Mr. VANDENBERG or any other Senator. The Sen- ator from Michigan announced this because it is quite possible that a situation may arise requiring his presence at the side of Secre- tary Marshall for a brief interval. SENATORS WANT TO STAY HOME None of the Members of the Senate is anx- ious to go to Moscow because the pressure cf work is such that they want to be at Capitol Hill. The help of Senator Van- DENBERG, in particular, is vital in steering through the Senate some of the proposed treaties which were negotiated by Secretary Byrnes. There are other questions of foreign policy and matters relating to economic aid to Europe which will need stanch champions in the Senate, so Mr. Vanpsnsrro’s decision to stay here will assist the bipartisan program very decidedly, It is quite possible, too, that, with Sen- ators VANDENBERG and CoNNALLYy remaining here, they may be able to make speeches of comment on what's going on in Moscow and help to mobilize world opinion behind Secre- tary Marshall if issues or cleavages develop which require such public discussion to aid in arriving at a settlement. The whole world situation is growing in- creasingly critical and the hope here is that the Russian Government has at last come to realize that one of the things that is de- laying recovery in Europe and Asia is the con- stant bickering over relatively unimportant issues. Once there can be a clearing of the air and a settlement reached on how to govern Germany, it is likely that the whole picture will change for the better. To keep Europe in an unsettled state while Russia argues with the other powers of the world does no more than to give lawless forces, like the German underground, a chance to flourish—some- thing which merely adds to the occupation costs that have to be borne by the American and British texnayers and something which piles up more worries for the Soviet. It is against Russia that much of the fermenta- tion inside Germany ts bound to be directed. Sensible Interpretation EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LOUIS E. GRAHAM OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 1947 Mr. GRAHAM. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REc- orp, I include the following editorial from the Washington Evening Star of February 27, 1947: SENSIBLE INTERPRETATION Chief Justice Laws of district court, in de- nying a motion for a new trial in a robbery case, has made a forthright and promising attempt to clear away much of the confusion still prevalent in law enforcement circles as the result of the Supreme Court's muddled reasoning in the now famous McNabb case. The Laws ruling, if sustained in the higher courts, will remove the shackles which the McNabb decision placed on the police in their efforts to bring some criminals to justice. The McNabb opinion, handed down in 1948, invalidated confessions, however voluntary, if they were made prior to a prompt arraign- ment of the prisoner. This has been in- terpreted locally as meaning that the pris- oner must be brought before a committing Officer immediately after arrest. The court of appeals indicated, moreover, in the re- cent Akowski case, that police should take an arrested person direct to the commiasion- er’s office instead of to police headquarters for the usual preliminary fingerprinting and booking. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD But, as Justice Laws pointed out in a care- fully worded written opinion in the current Horace U. Boone appeal, the requirement for immediate arraignment gravely handicaps the police in their proper duties of clearing suspects who may be innocent and of identi- fying prisoners who are guilty of a crime. “After the arrest of one accused of a crime,” he asserted, “police officers should have opportunity to make further investigations of facts beyond those made before the arrest. Such investigations may be as decidedly in the interests of an innocent person who has been arrested as in the interests of efficient law enforcement.” The Chief Justice, commenting on the Mc- Nabb and Mitchell rulings of the Supreme Court and the Akowski opinion of the Corrt of Appeals, concludes that they go no fur- ther than to require reasonable prompt- ness in arraigning a suspect. The Federal Rules of Criminal Procedure use the phrase “without unnecessary delay.” Chief Justice Laws holds that “certain procedures custom- arlly followed by police in the District of Columbia for many years,” including booking at a police station, fingerprinting, searching, and questioning, are not unreasonable and do not constitute “unnecessary delay.” This is a sensible and realistic view of police author- ity and responsibility—one that was lacking in the Supreme Court's original McNabb decision. The Laws view ts subject to revision or re- versal in the higher courts, however. Indeed, the confusion over the McNabb case is likely to continue until Congress enacts the pend- ing Hobbs bill, just passed by the House. This six-line measure would legalize any pre- arraignment confessions or other evidence, provided they are otherwise admissible in court. The Senate can do its bit toward strengthening law enforcement by enacting this bill into law without delay. Statement of Views of Progressive Mine Workers of America EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EVAN HOWELL OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 1947 Mr. HOWELL. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrec- orp, I include the following statement by John McCann, president, Interna- tional Union, Progressive Mine Workers of America, sent as a letter to the Hon- orable Ropert Tart, chairman of the Senate Committee on Labor and Wel- fare, and represents the views of the Progressive Mine Workers of America: The Progressive Mine Workers. represent- ing upwarc of 80,000 independent coal miners in several States and their families, transmit this statement to your honorable committee to become a part of your offic:al labor hearing record. We believe that the 15,000,000 organized workers and their families, through the last half century of industrial »rogress, have earned the respect of industry and of the Nation through their tremendous improve- ment in our industrial and national econo- ‘my. Their free enterprise, their development of industry which has enabled this Nation to prosper out of all proportion to that of all other nations, has earned for labor the right to deep consideration of their own problems,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD aside fom the criticism which may be heaped on labor by virtue of incapacity or misdirec- tion on the part of a few of its already discredited leaders. We urge your honorable committee to re- view the achievements of organized labor throughout the crisis of World War II when labor permitted its own aspirations and its own interests to lie dormant while pouring out the billions upon billions of dollars of necessary war materials to rescue the world from ‘the kind of Hitlerism which many now seek to impose on labor. . We urge your honorable committee to recognize as well that while labor itself ad- mits it has faults, these faults are not to be corrected by hamstringing labor nor by re- stricting it so that its future growth is cur- tailed beyond all hope of future accomplish- ment For more than half a century econ- omists have admitted that the future well- being of labor presages the future well-being of the Nation as a whole, and we feel that what benefits labor, benefits the Nation. Conversely, what damages labor must neces- sarily damage the Nation as a whole. Labor has earned respect and recognition by its mass achievements, and the high eco- nomic level which America enjoys today is the direct result of the struggle for this high economic level waged unceasingly for more than 60 years by organized labor. Our school system has developed to its present state of excellence through the dili- gence of labor, and, in fact, there is no single important economic factor which does not owe much of its development, if not all, to labor. We urge your honorable committee to per- mit these facts to be thoroughly blazoned before your committee so that the dismal picture antilaborites constantly paint for public consumption may not prevail as a true picture, but that it may be shown in its true light of distortion and intentional misrepresentation. Labor has in the past, and labor will in the future, serve as its own stabilizing influence, and any legislation enacted which tends to circumscribe labor must by its very nature eventually serve to circumscribe the growth of our Greater America. We trust that your honorable committee will also remember this exceptionally vital point, Whereas it required millions upon millions of valuable man-hours to train our Army of untrained young men and young women for combat and other duties through- out the world, our trained army of 15,000,000 unionists was ready at the first sign of need— already trained, already informed on their jobs, through free unionism, so they could begin at once the production of the essential items to feed and clothe and arm ourselves and our Allies. This trained Army must not be crippled or rendered ineffective for the equally essential fight to win the peace as it stood trained and ready to win the war. Republicans Hailed for Budget Courage EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. DEWEY SHORT OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 26, 1947 Mr. SHORT. Mr. Speaker, under leave heretofore granted me to extend my remarks, I include, first, an excellent article by David Lawrence, and, secondly, an editorial, both of which appeared in the Washington Evening Star of Friday, February 21, 1947: REPUBLICANS HAILED FOR BupGEeT CouRAGE— CAPITAL ATMOSPHERE SURCHARGED WITH New DEAL SPENDING SPIRIT (By David Lawrence) The Republicans in Congress ure entitled to the applause of the whole country for their political courage. For when politicians who could get votes by giving the public's money away to special groups or blocs apply restraints to themselves and actually try to cut down the Govern- ment’s expenses and save money for all the people, the action 1s so rare that it merits attention. So surcharged is the Washington atmos- phere with the New Deal habit of spending and spending that the National Capital still seems to be dominated by critics from the Democratic side who are horrorstruck at the idea of a general cutting of the budget. It may take a long while to rid official Washington of the spending complex it has had since 1933—that money 1s something turned out by printing presses and that debt is just a thing that can be piled up indefi- nitely. COMMENTS ARE AMAZING It is amczing to read the comments thit are going forth these days about the deter- mination of the Republicans to cut the Tru- man budget by several billions. One would think that $37.000,000,000 budgets are nor- mal and that anyone who attempts to cut them is destroying the Government. Indeed, the cry of calamity if the budget is cut is a familiar one as it comes from bureaucratic circles. Only a few Democrats, like Senator Byro, of Virginia, have been pleading for economy during the last decade, and now the Virginia Senator joins with the Republi- cans in demanding a $6,000.000.000 cut in the budget. Whether the budget can or cannot be cut exactly by any such figure is less important than the formidable oppusition to any budget cutting which is coming from most of the Democrats and from President Tru- man. Just how Chairman Hannegan expects to reelect Mr. Truman—when he has sent a budget of 837,.500,000,000 to Congress and only last month predicted a deficit for the current fiscal year, and there is already a cash surplus of more than $2,000,000,050 vis- ible for next month—will remain somewhut of a mystery. The Democrats generally are ning them- selves up with the spenders. They are not helping in the budget-cutting process. Only the Republicans are carrying the ball on that issue, and they are doing it despite the snip- ing from the “left wingers,” who, of course. want more and more spending and their vested interest in bureaucracy to continue. The decision of the Joint Budget Com- mittee of Congress to cut $6,000,000,000 from the Truman budget has been favorably re- ceived by the House of Representatives, where a large number of conservative Demo- crats are joining with the Republicans to cul down waste in Government. In the Senate, some Republicans here and there are weakening, but a coalition may order a cut anywhere from four and a half to six billion dollars. ECONOMIES STARTED The details, to be sure, are not yet avail- able, but already it is apparent that the de- termination to cut is having its effect throughout the Government departments. Economies that should long ago have been made are now being put into effect, especially in the Veterans’ Bureau. As long as the psychology is one of increasing rather than diminishing expense, there can be no prog- ress made. This is the tide that Republican policy is now reversing. A789 When it is considered that Mr. Truman wants to spend more than $37,000,000,000 a year and can’t see any substantial cuts im- mediately~-notwithstanding the fact that the budget he submitted for the fiscal year which ends June 30, 1948, will be covering Government operations fully 3 yeurs after the war ended in Europe and almost 3 years from VJ-day—indicates how tur away the administration is from recognizing thut the people of America want to get back to a peacetime basis. The difficulty, of course, is that the Demo- cratic Party is still a New Deal party und is still wedded to the philosophy of getting votes by spending money. The Republicans, too, played that game many years ago, but fortunately today they are trying to benefit the maximum number of people by cutting the budget and stabilizing the value of the dollar. KEEP THE Lip ON Veterans’ Administrator Bradley has pre- sented to Congress a convincing cause against the removal of ceilings on job-training bene- fits to war veterans. If the Treasury is to contribute subsistence allowances not only to veterans in real need of this nid but to those who are willing to take it whether they need it or not, the whole veterans’ aid pro- gram will be placed in peril. There has been a growing tendency among veterans to regard the subsistence prcgram as a form of adjusted compensation—a bonus, in other words. But it is nothing of the sort. It was intended to aid the veteran whose opportunities for education and job training were interrupted by war service. It was not intended as extra compensation for employed veteruns who, although earning good salaries, may consider themselves in training for bet- ter jobs. General Bradley correctly points out that unless a ceiling is maintained on subsistence payments there is grave danger that the money appropriated for sound and useful job- training programs will go lar afield. Veter- ans urgently in need of training will be the chief sufferers from this diversion of part of the funds to those who neither need the money nor the training. There may be some merit to the conten- tion of many of the veterans that the exist- ing ceilings are too low, in view of rising living costs. A trainee with no dependents now may not claim subsistence if he earns $175 or more a month. If he has dependents he may earn up to 6200 a month without losing the allowance. If his earnings in each case are under these ceilings, he muy receive up to 465 if single, or 690 a month if he has dependents. In no case muy earnings and allowance combined exceed the $175 and $200 ceilings. There are half a dozen bills before Congress providing for higher ceilings and for in- creased subsistence payments. They caj) for ceilings varying from $250 to $350 a month for single. veterans and from $300 to 8400 a month for those with dependents, It the provisions for higher ceilings and larger pay- ments in one of the principal bills unde. consideration should be enacted, the total additional cost would amount to more than a billion dollars the first year. That is not the end of it, either. For if able-bodied trainees are entitled to these higher benefits, how about the totally disabled veterans who draw only $138 a month? And how about the lesser payments to the more than 2,C00,C00 other disabled veterans? Obviously, the Nd on veterans’ appropria- tlons must be put on at some reasonable level and held there against the pressure which is developing for new and bigger veterans’ bene- fits. Otherwise all hope of balancing the budget in the foreseeable future will go glimmering.
A790 Where Is Our Copper Supply To Keep Men Employed in Industry? EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 19¢7 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, the devious ways and clever devices by which the State Department officials and the internationalists have sought to de- ceive the public have been obscured by their adroit and misleading propaganda. I want to point out the present effect on our economy resulting from the ship- ment of war materials to our enemies in an effort to make our citizens believe in and give support to the fake export pro- gram of the State Department. Are our industries short of copper right now? Is our stock pile of this indispensable metal close to the vanishing point? Where is our copper stock pile? It may be of interest to our citizens, especially to our working men and wom- en, to know that, through a program of conniving to pad exports by the free trade group. there were exported to Japan alone during a 5-year period 717,- 247,918 pounds, or 358,623.95 tons, of cop- per. The desperation of the trade agree- ment advocates to increase exports is shown by the year-by-year increase in the export of copper to Japan. Here are the figures: Pounds 1936 _. 2.22.2 5, 355, 471 1937 ......-...---------------- 10, 838, 709 1938 ...-.--.------------------ 217, 879, 738 1939 _.-------- eee 249, 277, 000 1940 __.....------------------- 233, 897, 000 Total____.-...---........ 717, 247, 918 This does not include the tons lost at sea. Neither does it include the ship- ments of copper to Cermany and Italy. The fake export of essential war material to a nation which has refused to cooper- ate with the United States since the close of hostilities is still in operation. It would seem that Russia, after receiv- ing $11,260,000,000 through lend-lease, would cease to throw every hindrance possible in the way of post-war peace plans, yet it has been arrogant and non- cooperative. Russia knows full: well that she can rely upon her communistic friends who hold key positions in the United States Government to tip the scales in her favor when her vital inter- ests are at stake. The present plan of the State Department's Reds to send $35,- 000.000 worth of American industrial equipment without requiring actual pay- ment of shipping charges as stipulated by Congress is a continuation of the pro- gram of fraud and subterfuge. I wonder how many American lives will eventually have to be sacrificed be- fore this program of arming our poten- tial enemies will cease. This danger will continue as long as the fifth column of Communists is suffered and permitted to infest our Federal departments, espe- cially our State Department. It is the function of Congress, if the Chief Executive refuses to act, to clean out this nest of communistic vipers. Veterans’ Housing EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HELEN GAHAGAN DOUGLAS OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, February 20, 1947 Mrs. DOUGLAS. Mr. Speaker, today we have fresh proof that the policy of the majority leadership, as far as veter- ans are concerned, is “hand-me-down houses for heroes to live in.” Under unanimous consent, I include in the Recorp at the close of my remarks an article from the Washington News of February 27 setting forth the features of a so-called housing bill to be sponsored by the chairman of the Banking and Cur- rency Committee. This bill was unveiled not here in Con- gress but at the National Association of Home Builders, meeting in Chicago. This is the organization that advocates the trickle-down theory of housing—let the well-to-do have the new houses, at what- ever price or rent the market will bear, and hand down the old houses to those with lower incomes. That means that veterans and their families, most of whom can pay less than $50 a month, will get second-, third-, fourth-, and fifth- hand housing when they get any at all. They grew up in the fox holes; they can now raise their families in the slums of this, the richest country on earth. What a confession of failure, Mr. Speaker; what a shameful breach of faith with those who fought to save our way of life. What would the Wolcott bill do: First. Take off the $10,000 sales ceil- ings on homes for which veterans’ prior- ities were granted. A barefaced run-out on the veterans. Second. Take off all rent ceiling on new homes. Third. Lift all restrictions on com- mercial and industrial construction. Fourth. Do away with the 1,500- square-foot limitation on new homes— luxury for the few; overcrowding for millions. Fifth. Do away with regulations chan- neling raw materials to building-prod- ucts manufacturers. Sixth. Abolish the Office of Housing Expediter. Mr. Szeaker, I protest this shameless reneging on the millions of the vet- erans and their families who today lack decent housing. In the last Congress, by passing the Veterans Emergency Housing Act, we made certain commit- ments. The Wolcott bill would run out on those commitments. I think we should stop and consider. We should oppose this bill and keep our pledges. We should do more. We should act at once to provide more veterans’ hous- ing at rents they can afford to pay and APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD do so by advancing $1,000,000,000 in loans and rental subsidies as proposed in my bill, H. R. 1750, now before the Banking and Currency Committee. The article from the Washington News follows: Woxcorr To Orrer Britt Scrapprnc Most or Vererans’ HOUSING AcT (By Ned Brooks) Cuyicaco, February 27.—Tottering Govern- ment controls over home building received a fresh blow today from a high-ranking Re- publican who moved for repeal by Congress of all but two provisions of the Veterans’ Housing Act. Chairman Jrasz P. Wo.corr, Republican, of Michigan, of the House Banking and Cur- rency Committee, said he would sponsor a bill retaining only the preference given vet- erans in buying or renting new homes and the system of liberalized financial aids. ENDORSEMENT EXPECTED Representative Wo.Lcorr revealed his plan before the National Association of Home Builders, ending ite annual convention late today. The association was expected to en- dorse the Wolcott program. The measure, assured of strong GOP back- ing, would: Eliminate al) rent ceilings on newly built homes. Remove the 810,000 sales celiing on humes for which \eterans’ priorities were granted. This system was discontinued in December, but outstanding priorities still have been subject to the 810,000 price limit. Lift all restrictions on commercial and industrial construction, now limited to $50,000,000 a week. Eliminate the 1,600-square-foot Jimit on new homes, thus permitting the building of luxury dwellings. Discontinue regulations under which raw materials are channeled to building-products manufacturers. Abolish the Office of Housing Expediter, now headed by Frank R. Creedon. Representative WoLcoTT said the period of veterans’ preferences for renting or buying new homes wo.1ld be substantially reuuced in his bill. If other veterans’ organizations join the American Legion in favoring elimination of the preference rule, it may be done, he said, Veterans now have first choice for 60 days on units cffered for sale and 30 days on those built for rent. The financing aids which Representative WoLcotTt proposes to retain allow lenders to insure mortgages on low-cost homes up to 90 percent of their value at 4 percent interest. Disagreeing with a Senate bill which pro- poses a 10-percent across-the-board increase in rents on existing properties, Representa- tive WoLcoTr proposed a 9-month extension of rent control beyond June 30 with no in- crease. This would continue present ceil- ings until March $1, 1948. His bill would abolish what remains of OPA, transferring its rent-control, rationing, and price-control functions to other agencies. Surplus Shudders Sign of Sick Society EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. JOHN R. MURDOCK OF ARIZONA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, February 19, 1947 Mr. MURDOCK. Mr. Speaker, in the February issue of the Nation’s Agricul- ture, appears an article by George W.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Barr, of the University of Arizona, under the title above—‘“Surplus Shudders Sign of Sick Society.” This gentleman is rec- ognized in Arizona and throughout the Southwest as an outstanding authority on agricultural matters. He speaks with authority, and whenever he deals with a controversial matter, one feels confi- dent that he is on firm ground and of- fering right solutions. Under leave to extend my own remarks and include this item, I herewith submit his thought- provoking article. One of the chief arguments which the proponents of reclamation encounter is the contention on the part of eastern farmers that bringing in new lands will only increase the danger of agricultural surpluses which so aroused the fears and harmed the economy of American farm- ers in years passed. The following article refutes that argument and allays that fear. The article is as follows: SURPLUS SHUDDERS SIGN OF SICK SOCIETY (By George W. Barr) With 9 out of 10 people in the world lacking adequate food and clothes and shel- ter, Americans are worrying about surpluses. Bricklayers fear that workmen will lay too many bricks. Plumbers greatly restrict ap- prenticeship for fear there will be too many plumbers. Barbers seek ways to limit the number of men qualifying to cut hair. Farmers feel sorry for the people who are not getting meat in the city but fear a sur- plus of too much meat in 2 or 3 years. Government agencies are talking of reviving the practice of limiting acreages of cotton and corn and potatoes to avoid surpluses. An article in the American Farm Bureau Federation organ, the Nation's Agriculture, for September 1946 red-lines the title, “More Agricultural Surpluses?—Sure!"” Here the writer refers to the expansion of irrigation in the 17 Western States, pointing out that the irrigated area has increased 10 percent in 20 years, or one-half percent per year. He did not mention the fact that the popu- lation in these same States increased 18 percent in the last 15 years, or 1.2 percent per year. In the three Pactfic Coast States and Arizona, where most of the irrigation development has occurred, the population increase was 47 percent in 15 years. Considerable could be said about this fear that additional irrigated land will add to surpluses, The irrigated land is being developed in that part of America where the population is growing most rapidly and where the influx of new people requires production close at hand of such commod- ities as fluid milk, vegetables, and fruits. Mountain States that formerly shipped much of their agricultural output eastward in competition with midwestern and eastern farmers are now routing an ever-larger por- tion of this output westward. More and more Idaho potatoes, Colorado beef, Nevada and Arizona hay are used to meet the needs of people in growing Pacific-const cities. A decade ago Arizona shipped 70 percent of its lambs to Kansas City for an eastern market. In the last few years more than 80 percent of these lambs have gone to the Pacific coast. Much of the irrigation development pro- posed is for the purpose of supporting and making permanent irrigated areas already developed but for which insufficient water is available. The stabilization and preser- vation of irrigated areas already developed should, in fact, be a major objective of recla- mation planners in the immediate years ahead, or at least until such time as unem- ployment threatens to become rampant. At such a time the use of America’s man- power and machines to develop still other areas may be readily justified. Again, this land developcd for irrigation in the past half century has only in small part replaced the extensive areas in America de- pleted and worn out by long cropping. Much more land could be developed for irrigation without fully replacing the productivity that has been lost through soils wearing out and subsequent abandonment of farms. Foreign competition is a far greater hazard to the American farmer than are surpluses. Only an America that seeks out and develops its natural resources to the fullest extent pos- sible can compete with the low-cost produc- tivity of new frontiers in South America, the South Pacific, and Asia. Old and worn- out lands will let America down. Farming must be shifting to new and fertile lands. Every opportunity for irrigation expansion that can be justified by a dollar-and-cent balance should be explored and developed if we are to have a greater America, agricul- turally speaking. For America to compete successfully with other countries may mean that costly water must be used on new land where young men are stirring virgin soil. WAA: Bilious Billions EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 1947 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, there seems to be no limit to the inge- nuity of those who devise fantastic meth- ods of wasting the taxpayers’ money. Of course, the wasters do not want a budget ceiling which will in the slightest degree prevent their free access to the taxpayers’ pocket book. I insert, under leave to extend my re- marks, an article which appeared in the Pathfinder under date of February 26, 1947, entitled “WAA: Bilious Billions,” as follows: WAA: BILI0vs BILLIONS (By Pope Haley) Almost any American over thirty-five can still raise a chuckle over the delightful childhood experience of reading George Barr McCutcheon's fantastic fiction Brewster's Millions, in which the hero was charged with the nerve-shattering job of squandering a million dollars in 12 months. BRAIN STRAIN But even McCutcheon's imagination could never have stood the strain of reading the facts on the operation of the War Assets Ad- ministration, which can take care of Brew- ster’s problem ualmost any afternoon after lunch, Much of the story has been told. Two Congressional committees have worn out the dictionary looking for words to indict the agency for its fumbling business prac- tices, inconsistencies, delays, lack of records, and general “abysmal chaos.” But nobody yet has given the final answer on the all-im- portant question: “Why?” A critical analysis of the record at least sets up a few signposts. WAA 1s custodian of some $20,000,000,000 worth of surplus Government property, with approximately $10,000,000,000 yet to be de- clared. By law, WAA must dispose of it at the best possible recovery value for the pro- tection of taxpayers. When the earlier investigations were finished, a special committee of the old Con- gress practically whitewashed Gen. Robert M. Littlejohn, present WAA Administrator, A791 blamed his predecessors at both WAA and the old Surplus Property Board. BRASS-BOUND WAA, as presently constituted, was set up in March 1946. When General Littlejohn took over as Administrator in July, one of his first moves was to put high-ranking Army and Navy officers into every key position. Every subsequent vacancy in policy position has been filled by a uniform. Some 150 military and naval officers are ‘on call” for assignment to WAA. In June 1946, just prior to Littlejohn’s ap- pointment, WAA sales reached a peak of $711,000,000. Immediately afterward, (1) sales dropped; (2) percentage recovery on what was sold dropped; and (3) operating expenses skyrocketed; all of which add up to hundreds of millions of dollars in losses for taxpayers. Had sales continued at the June level, the total for the rest of the year would have been $1,460,000,000 higher than it was. Percentage recovery on all surplus prop- erty disposed of by WAA @ropped from 39 percent in June to 33.2 percent in December, including real estate, electronics, and air- craft and aircraft parts. Under the heading of general products (items for which there was popular demand), the drop was more startling—from 42.1 per- cent in June to 29.5 percent in December, at a time when consumers were crying for sup- plies and prices were rising in most fields. Loss on recovery value on general sales dur- ing the last 6 months of 1946 totaled about $125,000,000. THE COST At the same time, operating costs shot up. During the first half of the fiscal year 1946 (July-December), they topped $278,000,000. Projected fcr the full year on the same basis, the total will reach some $567,000,000—as against $435,000,000 Congress appropriated. During the same period, personnel rolls jumped from 36,510 to 58,795, boosting sala- ries alone by $72,400,000 a year. These three items add up to losses—which the taxpayers ultimately wil] have to pay— of some $500,000.000. Thus, circumstantial evidence at least ind!- cates that blame for the slump in results since July can be tacked on the military's mismanagement. Analysis of policies shows five major blunders, The first of these occurred when field offices were haphazardly consolidated and reorgan- ized. Inventory records were broken up, and dumped without warning on ill-equipped offices. While groggy clerks battled for months to sort out and match records, surplus declara- tions, sales, withdrawals and transfers of property continued. In a short time it be- came physically impossible to reconcile rec- ords and inventories, and still is in many offices. Cash became sepxrated from sales documents, so that in one office (Chicago) as much as $10,000,000 gathered moss with no record of where it came from. PANACEA Secondly, with sales dropping and chaos in inventories, WAA adopted as a ‘‘quickie” cure @ proposal by Vice Administrator Maj. Gen. Clinton F. Robinson for “site-sales.". Under this plan, assets were frozen wherever they happened to be at the time and offered for sale ‘as is, where is.” Despite internal pre- tests, plans were laid for 1,000 such “site- sales.” ‘This prevented deliveries through regular sales channels, and added more faces to the pay roll. About 600 of these “site- sales” were actually undertaken before the plan fizzled out. Then, on October 1, WAA ordered all regional offices to sell any or all property on a@ competitive bidding basis. Immediately this knocked the props from beneath the Commodity Sales Division in Washington, charged with determining the most advan- tageous type of sale for any individual asset.
A792 It also ran head-on into the fixed-price method of selling specialized commodities; and sandbagged national sales programs previously set up. About this time, WAA made a $150,000 con- tract ($7,000 a week) with a management firm, one of whose partners was General Robinson’s wartime right-hand man, to survey WAA. This was a move to ease out Frank Creedon. civilian in charge of sales, who had frequently clashed with Robinson. Creedon resigned and later was named United States Housing Expediter. “ATTACK AT MIDNIGHT” With WAA now in the hands of the mili- tary, General Robinson conceived a brand- new “operational program” filled with Army- talk like “fire power” and “target dates.” “The objectives”: To speed up the lagging disposal rate, get rid of 75 percent of current inventory by February 1. But the “target dates” had already passed before the “com- muniqués” reached some offices, and with less than $6,000,000,000 in sales during the past 12 months, it was manifestly impossible to dispose of 75 percent of the remaining $14.- 000,000,000 in 90 days. Finally, the ball was fumbled in the letter to all regional managers authorizing them to cut prices of slow-moving property 5 percent on their own initiative, plus another 10 per- cent if approved by the brass hats in sone offices. Such a plan obviously would torpedo any fixed price program, would wreck price structures generally, and pave the way to “undtr-the-counter” deals. That order was later modified: Authorizatiens for reductions must be in writing over the signature of the authorizing official, with reasons. Latest in the series of trial devices is the “consumer service” plan of setting up retail outlets, similar to big mail-order houses, across the Nation. With only a handful of the number planned already established, costs are running into the millions. The answer would seem tc be to start over before it 1s too late, and put experienced merchan- dise men, instead of uninformed amateurs, in charge. Address by Secretary of State Marshall at Princeton University Bicentennial Cele- bration EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM B. UMSTEAD OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 3 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. UMSTEAD. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the REcorp an address delivered by Hon. George C. Marshall, Secretary of State, at Princeton University’s bicentennia) celebration, on February 22, 1947. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: Following is text of Secretary of State Marshall's address Saturday, Fehruary 22, 1047, at Princeton University’s bicentennial observances (during which he received hon- orary degree of doctor of laws): “IT had an engagement with your distin- guished president to attend this ceremony exactly 1 year ago. Instead, I celebrated Washington's Birthday in China. Now, a year later, I am glad that it is at last pos- sible for me to keep my engagement. “I do not wish at thi: time to engage in & discussion of specific international questions. But I would like to talk to you about the home front as it relate: to international af- fairs, and about your personal interests as American citizens. I might say I am talking to the students more than I am to the alum- ni and their guests. “As you all must recugnize, we are living today in a most difficult period. The war years were critical, at times alarmingly #0. But I think that the present period is, in many respects, even more critical. The prob- lems are different but no less vital to the national security than those during the days of active fighting. But the more serious aspect is the fact that we no longer display that intensity, that unity of purpcse, with which we concentrated upon the war task and achieved the victory. “Now that an immediate peril is not plainly visible, there is a natural tendency to relax and to return to business as usual, politics as usual, pleasure as usual. Many of our people have become indifferent to what I might term the long-time dangers to the national security. “It is natural and necessary that there should be a relaxation of wartime tensions. But I feel that we are seriously failing in our attitude toward the international problems whose solution will largely determine our future. The public appears generally in the attitude of a spectator—interested, yes, but whose serious thinking is directed to local immediate matters. Spectators of life are not those who will retain their liberties, nor are they likely to contribute to their coun- try'’s security. “There are many who deplore, but few who are willing to act directly or to influence political action. Action depends upon con- viction, and conviction in turn depends upon understanding—a general understanding both of the history of man on this globe and an understanding that action is a basic ne- cessity of man's nature. Justice Holmes said: ‘Man is born to act. To act is to affirm the worth of an end, and to affirm the worth of an end is to create an ideal.’ So I say to you as earnestly as I can that the attitude of the spectator is the culminating frustration of man's nature. “We have had a cessation of hastilities, but we have no genuine peace. Here at home we are in a state of transition between a war and peace economy. In Europe and As.a fear and famine still prevail. Power relationships are in a state of flux. Order has yet to be brought out of confusion. Peace has yet to be secured. And how this is accomplished will depend very much upon the American people. “Most of the other countries of the world find themselves exhausted economically, financially and physically. If the world is to get on its feet, if the productive facili- ties of the world are to be restored, if demo- cratic in many countries are to resume their functioning, a strong lead and definite assistance from the United States will be necessary. “What are we going to do about it? That is the critical problem with regard to which I have a heavy responsibility. “We do not lack for knowledge of what to do for our future security. The lessons of history provide plain guidance. But can we tear our thoughts sufficiently away from the personal and local problems of the moment to see the world picture and our relation to it In proper perspective? We should think now in long terms of years rather than in terms of months and their immediate politi- cal issues. “Twenty-five years ago the people of this country, and of the world, for that matter, had the opportunity to make vital decisions regarding their future welfare. I think we must agree that the negative course of ao- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tion followed by the United States after the Pirst World War did not achieve order or security and that it had a direct bearing upon the recent war and its endless tragedies. “There were people in those days who un- derstood the lessons of history, who knew well what should be done in order to min- imize the danger of another world disaster, but their combined voice was a feeble one, and their proposals were ignored. Now this, in my opinion, is where you come in. “In order to take a full part in the life which is before you, I think you must in effect relive the past so that you may turn to the present with deep convictions and an under- standing of what manner of country this is for which men for many generations have laid down their lives. Therefore, a deep un- derstanding of history is necessary—not merely recent history which concerns itself with the trivia surrounding conspicuous men and events, but an understanding of that history which records the main currents of the past activities of men and which leads to an understanding of what has created and what has destroyed great civilizations. “You should have an understanding of what course of action has created power and security, and of the mistakes which have undermined the power and security of many nations, and above all a clear understanding .of the situations upon which human liberty and individual freedom have depended, and the struggles to gain and maintain them. “It has been said that one should be inter- ested in the past only as a guide to the fu- ture. I do not fully concur with this. One usually emerges from an intimate under- standing of the past, with its lessons and its wisdom, with convictions which put fire in the soul. I doubt seriously whether a man can think with full wisdom and with deep convictions regarding certain of the basic international issues today who has not at least reviewed in his mind the period of the Peloponnesian War and the fall of Athens. “I am therefore greatly concerned that the young men and women of this country, men like yourselves and the students in every university, college, and high school] in the United States, shall acquire a genuine under- standing of lessons of history as they relate to governments and the characteristics of the peoples, and as to the causes of the wars which have destroyed so much of human life and progress. You should fully under- stand the special position that the United States now occupies in the world, geograph- ically, financially, militarily, and scientific- ally, and the implications involved. The development of a sense of responsibility for world order and security, the development of a sense of overwhelming importance of this country’s acts, the failures to act, in relation to world order and security—these, in my opinion, are great ‘musts’ for your generation. “It is rather bromidic to say that there is little new in the world or that the world is & very small place. But I think we seldom realize our own ignorance of what has hap- pened in the past except by way of chrono- logical sequence of events with the related dates. There have been wars and revolu- tions; there have been republics, kingdoms, and empires; there have been tribal rule and various experiments in government till it would seem that there is small possibility of any new departure. But the important thing is to understand the true significance, the lessons of these historic events and periods. “There is another consideration in con- nection with the course to be followed by the young people of this country today to which I personally attach great importance. And that is that young men and women should take an active part as workers in one of the political parties so that they will get the feel of government, so that they will
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD become intimately aware of the influence of political organization upon the govern- ment of the home town, of the State and the Nation. “We have had two wonderful examples of this course in the lives of Theodore and Franklin D. Roosevelt—members of opposing political parties, great Americans who rend- ered magnificent services to their country. You can do no better in starting your active life as citizens than by emulating their example." ' Address by Hon. Robert A. Taft, of Ohio, to Yale Alumni EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. ROBERT A. TAFT OF OHIO IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 3 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. TAFT. Mr. President, I ask unan- imous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an address de- livered by me to Yale alumni in New Haven, Conn., February 22, 1947. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: It is a great privilege for me to address the alumni of Yale University for the first time in many years. I have tried to represent the views of the alumni on the Yale corporation for the last 10 years, and I don't believe that any association in my life has been more pleasant and interesting than that which you have made possible by your two ballots. I can tell you now that there is no university board of trustees which takes more interest in the affairs of the university or has more to say about the basic policies of the university than that of Yale. That is in accord with Yale tradition and it has given the alumni a@ real voice in the conduct of the alma mater. Matters may not always be decided the way you would like to see them decided, but you may be certain that someone is there arguing. I have listened this morning with interest to the plans of the university to cross- fertilize the sciences with the humanistic studies. Certainly every graduate of Yale ought to have both a broad rerception of human affairs, and also a clear insight into the significance of science. However, I rather think most of us achieved something of both of these results even 37 years ago when the class of 1910 was dominating the affairs of the college by the force of its intel- lect and its athletic ability. A university, of course, is an institution to spread knowledge and correct knowledge— lux et veritas; and I suppose a bit of cross- fertilization may improve the breed. But Yale has always emphasized, even more, the development of good citizenship. For that purpose the university succeeds if it does two things—if it teaches men how to think and analyze fects, and if it teaches them the fundamental principles of the American Re- public, its origin, its Constitution, and its governmental philosophy, “a Nation con- ceived in liberty and dedicated to the propo- sition that all men are created equal.” Lib- erty and equal Justice under law. There has never been a time when these two accomplishments were more important or more difficult. The American people seem to be doing less and Jess thinking for them- selves and they seem to have less and less knowledge of the history and basic princi- ples of the American Republic. I have to be concerned constantly with public opinion and the reaction of large groups of people to the issues which happen to be uppermost throughout the Nation. One thousand letters and telegrams a day pour into my office. Opinion is voluble on all sides and perhaps the 1 percent who write are not a fair cross section of the 99 percent who do not. But it seems to me that people have come to form their opinions, not from facts and their own thinking, but from the thinking and opinions of others. Perhaps it is due to the development of motion pic- tures and radio. To listen to either requires only the slightest mental effort. They are « Kind of education or recreation which gives knowledge without much thought. A large number of the men and women who write me seem to accept their views in capsule form from a favorite columnist or radio com- mentator or some organization which asks them to write. It is essential to the success of both com- mentators and columnists, apparently, that they shall appear to the public to have ex- amined all the facts about which they are writing, and to have analyzed these facts from a purely objective point of view. The truth is that there is hardly one of them who has not a strong bias for one philosophy or another, for one party or another, for one man or another. This they attempt to con- ceal, and the unthinking are likely to take them at their own estimate of their impar- tiality. No man cculd examine the facts on all the subjects with which they attempt to deal, and so their opinion is often based on much less information than we Congressmen get in hearings. The radio is a pecullarly plausible instru- ment, more so than the written word. Voices are made to sound sincere. Most listeners seem to feel that a man would not stand up and make a statement unless he completely believed it. The forums have provided a real service in giving both sides an opportunity to present views, but muny commentators are unanswered and only provide the facts which support their own views. People seem to be more skeptical about the written word, even in the case of impartial news dispatches. But even the news today in many newspapers is given a strong slant in the direction of the paper's policy. The mental attitude of millions who accept without thought what is presented to them makes the American people today a fertile field for propaganda. And we de- veloped the art of advertising goods and then of advertising facts and ideas, and supposed facts and false ideas, far beyond anything that existed 25 years ago. Propaganda for some proposal, for some program or some bill gets well started and reaches millions of people before opposition has had a chance to form, Public opinion is formed without any real knowledge or analysis of the facts or the issues. At the present moment there is a tremen- dous furor regarding the cutting of the President’s budget. I receive many letters from one school of thought insisting that six billion must be cut from the budget or the Republicans are spineless pork-barrel spenders. Another school insists that the country is left without defense if any cut at all is made in the Army and Navy, As a matter of fact, none of these people has the slightest idea what the problem is, what activities the cut will affect, whether it is feasible to cut six billion or not feasible. No one today seems to be in- terested in facts. As a matter of fact, the budget question is largely one of degree. A very large part of the budget cannot be cut at all. Most of us agree that by rigid economy and cutting out or cutting down a lot of popular projects we can take out from 3% to 4 A793 billion dollars without touching the armed forces, I have felt that a further 10-percent cut in the armed forces after the very large reduction already made from the ex- penres in the current year was the wisest solution. I believe any military or naval organizations spending as much as $11,0C0,- 000,000 can cut out 10 percent without im- pairing its efficiency. On the other hand I hesit:te to take 25 percent, because I don't believe it can be done without eliminating entirely some military and naval projects and some services which I believe the American people really wish to have con- tinued under present world conditions. No matter which figure is set, it will be pos- sible to achieve a 20-percent cut in the personal income tax and still reduce the debt by several billion dollars. But it has interested me to see the violent views on both sides of the question without the fant knowledge or analysis of the budget acts, Labor legislation offers another example. A large majority of the people believe, and correctly so, that legislation is required to correct a good many abuses which have arisen through the excessive powers given to labor leaders. Very few have analyzed the actual causes of strikes, or the effect of the different proposals which are now before us and oc- cupy the headlines. They do not hesitate to be violently for every measure which in any way limits the power of labor. But they are not very helpful in solving the most com- plex problem in America today. They accept their thinking from the overwhelming con- demnation of strikes in the press. On the other side we are flooded with tele- grams from every labor union in the United States, and many others inspired by them, op- posing every suggestion which has been made. The labor leaders who have appeared before us during the past week have opposed every bill and made no suggestion of their own. I hope in a very short time we may present & constructive program fitted to cure the abuses which have arisen, without impairing the effectiveness or just rights of labor unions. But we are hardly assisted in our task by violent opinions, formed without thought. Yale can perform no more useful service than to teach people to think for themselves and reach conclusions only on facts that are available to them. Great public issues can then better be determined on the basis of an informed public opinion, rather than by a relative strength of propaganda, acknowl- edged and concealed. The influence of prej- udice and bias can be steadily decreased. The second job which Yale has always done better than other universities is the teaching of the fundamentals of American govern- ment. It is a task which has been poorly performed for many years throughout the United States. The neglect of American his- tory 1n our educationa] system is notorious. In the days of Abraham Lincoln, every boy learned how this country was formed and why, and accepted the principles of lberty and equality as the basis for all action. Per- haps he acquired a rather flamboyant picture of the American Revolution, but it did not obscure the true spirit which created this Nation. Today, according to @ recent poll, only 17 percent of the people know what the Bill of Rights is. Only a small percentage un- derstand the principles of the Constitution and the functions of the States and local governments. Only a limited number realize that the true purpose of this country was to achieve freedom of thought, freedom of gov- ernment and freedom of opportunity. Our tremendous growth in standards of living and productive ability were only incidents of these freedoms, Today the interest of the people has come to center entirely in the field of economics. The be-all and end-all of political action is apparently to improve the economic and
A794 material welfare of the citizens. Programs are judged on the question of whether they g.ve men or money, more bathtubs, more automobiles, and less time to work. Cer- tainly no one can be against these economic objectives, but it is wrong to subordinate to them the need for greater morality, greater liberty of thought, and greater liberty of action. I believe that opportunity and not security is still the goal of the American people if they think about it, but they don’t think about it and material welfure has been substituted for nearly every intellec- tual and moral purpose. This makes an easy fleld for Communist propaganda and for the philosophy which proposes to divide up material things. It has led us into a number of Government programs which regulate and regiment and send Federal inspectors into every home and every farm in America in the name of im- proving the condition of the farmer or the woikmun or the businessman. These pro- grams have good objectives in nearly every case. Those objectives, I believe, can be cbiained, often through Federal or State action, but they should be sought with an over-all insistence that they do not violate the principles of liberty and justice. Both Nberty and ju;tice huve been for- gotten. If any problem arises, the only solution has been to ass’gn all the money and power available to some administrat.ve board and give it the right to develop what- ever program seems wise to it. In effect, it is made the lawmaking body and issues reg- ulations in its discretion having the force of law. No adequate hearing is given. Courts are deprived of the right to review the arbi- trary discretion of the boards. One of the essentials of liberty in a country the size of the United States is lccal self- government, the right of every community to make its own decisions and administer i:s own affairs in accordance with the will of its people. If the powers are all transferred to Washington, the people really have nothing to say about 90 percent of the action there taken. But programs now proposed, includ- ing that of national compulsory health in- surance, center everything itn an all-powerful state. The attitude of most Federal bureaus gradually comes to be that the people are too dumb to understand. The little clique which controls the bureau believes completely in its infallibility. All of that result comes from the complete disregard and often lack of knowle<ige of the real principles of Amer- ican Government. I believe that programs for health, welfare, education, and housing can be worked cut, leaving complete freedom to every community to administer the program and determine its Character. Progress has been made for 150 years under American principles. It can be resumed, but it will not be resumed unless our educational system, and in particular our universities, are prepared to teach the people the principles on which this Government was founded. The whole world has drifted toward the rhiloscphy of totalitarian government. That philosophy has infiltrated into the think: ng of radicals and conservatives alike in the - United States. Men who talk of free enter- prise rush to Washington to cure al the trou- bles which concern them personally. We are faced with a real danger that every important decision will Se centered in an all-powerful state in order to improve the economic con- dition of the people. History does not show that any such state can solve even the eco- nomic problems. We have solved our problems here better than anywhere in the world by adhering to the principles of individual freedom. They offer the means by which economic progress also can best ultimately be achieved. It is up to our universities and our schools to see that our pecp!> never forget again the eternal principles on which alone true progress can be made. Address by Mr. Justice Frankfurter at Willkie Award Dinner EXTENSION OF REMARKS KON. WILLIAM F. KNOWLAND OF CALIFORNIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 3 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. KNOWLAND. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an ad- dress delivered by Mr. Justice Frank- furter at the Willkie award dinner at Washington, D. C., on February 28, 1847. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Reccrp, as follows: The unfo'ding of America’s destiny may be caid to fall thus far into five strg2s. There was the founding of our Nation. Washing- ton's character was indispensable to keep the Thirteen Colonies together for achieving independence. After the military victory, his character was equally indispensable to fuse the 13 independent States into a nation. Jefferson gave the Nation its democratic mission. His claims on posterity summarize the three indispensable aims in the unceas- ing effort to realize democracy: the Declara- tion of Independence symbolizes political freedom; the Virginia Statute for Religious Freedom sought to put an end to tyranny over the inner life of man; the founding of the University of Virginia expressed the reel- ization that neither political nor religious freedom can long be enjoyed withcut the continuous systematic pursuit of truth through free inquiry. Lincoln saw that freedom within a Nation must be indivisible and his compassionate nature did not flinch even from the awfulness of war in order to establish that the Republic cannot survive half free and half slave. Fifty years later it became clear that the country’s inner strength is not suffisient safeguard for our great democratic experi- ment—-that we are part of the world and that the world must be safe for our democrecy. But even that turned out not to have keen enovgh. And so, within less than another quarter century, war came again for millions of Americans scattered all over the globe, on land, in the air and on sea, because the Nation had come to realize that totalitarian regimes imperi’ed our democracy. This does not mean, of course, that other nations must copy our form of Government, or that there is no such thing as a long and painful his- toric process, or that overnight we can turn democratic formulas into a working civili- zation. It does mean that democratic aims must be pursued with passion and pertinacity. Democracy is neither a mystical abstrac- tion nor a mechanical gadget. It is the teaching of experience, and is vindicated by Nature herself. Nature plants gifts and graces in ways that defy all the little arti- fices of man, and in the long course of human history democracy has proven itself beyond any other form of social arrangement that which evokes these gifts in the largest measure. All the devices of political ma- chinery—votes and parties and platforms— are merely instruments to enable men to live with one another under conditions which bring forth the maximum gifts of each for the fullest enjoyment of all. The kind of civilization we cherish is the society which was launched by the Declaration of Inde- pendence, which was to move within the spacious framework of the Constitution, which was rededicated by Lincoln at Gettys- burg and in his second inaugural. It is APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD @ society in which the dignity of every indi- vidual is central, regardle3s of the accidents of antecedents; a society in which there is no unimportant people; a society in which institutions are progressively to be shaped so as to bring to mex:mum fruition the potentialities of men. One does not have to think too well of what our civilization has thus far achieved to refuse to destroy its good together with its evil in arrcrant and humorless hope of writing in the future nothing but good on a clean siete. The answer to the Qeects of cur sccicty is not denial cf the democratic faith. The answer is more loyal practice of that faith. If one faith can be said to unite a great people, surely the ideal which holds us together be- yond any other is our belief in the moral worth of the individual. whatever his race, color or religion. And the glare of war re- vealed fissures in our spiritual structure, deeper ones than we had heretofore real'zod. Until recently men did not talk much ebsut these great simple themes. The pace of ma- ter‘al development preoccupied the energ:es of men; it too often overawed their thouzhts. The deficiencies of democrecy became a favorite jibe of the worldly wise, and the promise of democracy was too romantically conceived. We are desperatcly in need not of new truths but of passionate devotion to old truths. Not so long ago we used to hear & great deal woout a new platecu of com- mercial] values, and almost imperceptibly it was assumed that we were also being elevated to a new plateau of mora) values. The law of political and economic institutions is the law of change. But there are eternal veri- tles—those conditions without which free- dcm is cutraged and faith replaced by cynicism. Ultimately, there can be no free- dom for self unless it ts vouchsafed for others; there can be no security where there is fear; end a democratic society pretunposes con- fidence and candor in the relations of men with one another and active collaboration for the common ends of life. For we are enlisted in a common enter- prise—the bold experiment of freedom. It involves the most exacting collaborative effort. It demands the exercise of reason on the largest scale and self-discipline of the highest. order. For its ultimate reliance in achieving the common good is the responsi- bility of the individual. No office !n cur land is more important than that of being a citizen. We are, in short, engaged in the most difi- cult of all arts—the art of living together in @ gracious society. For this it is not encugh to be literate; it is not even encugh to be literary. While mankind is literate as never before, environment for reason is least con- genial. Thus, while the conditions for a good life have not changed, they now operate in @ much more complicated setting. We talk glibly about the annihilation of distance. Speec of communication has, of course, brought many gains, but these triumphs of science have brought in their train far- reaching and subtle problems which we have not solved because we have hardly begun to face them. The mobility of words too often brings in its train immobility of reflection, In our jealous regard for freedom of the press we pay little heed to the vast change of circumstances in which that freedom oper- ates. It touches uncritical sensibilities even to recognize the potential opportunities for arousing prejudices, confusing judgment, and tregimenting opinion represented by chain newspapers, syndicated articles, headline ex- ploitation, the movies, the radio and private Polls. Moreover, we now know better than did the Elghteenth Century, in which the modern democratic faith was born, how slen- der a reed is reason—how recent ite emer- gence in men, how deep the counterveiling instincts and passions, indeed how treacher- ous the whole rational process. Moreover the whole temper of our society is hurried; its
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD atmosphere and appurtenances are hostile to reflection. Thus, while mankind is literate as never before, reason is asked to flourish when the conditions for it are least favorable. And yet democracy beyond any other form of society is dependent on reason. Without respect for freedom of inquiry and freedom of opinion there is no democracy. But no less indispensable is the assurance of the means by which opinion really remains free. Modern instruments of dissemination may unw!ttingly make the public the victims either of gullibility or ot cynicism or of both. But only critically disciplined readers and listeners can generate that healthy public opinion which a democratic government ex- presses. Informed opinion and free activity cannot issue without an atmosphere in which free and informed thoughts are dominant, Future of Free Enterprise EXTENSION OF REMARKS F HON. BURNET R. MAYBANK OF SOUTH CAROLINA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 3 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. MAYBANK. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the ReEcorp an article by Russell Porter appearing in the New York Times of Monday, March 3, 1947, entitled “Future of Free Enterprise in World Found Uncertain.” I might say, Mr. President, that following this ar- ticle there are other interesting and im- portant statements with reference to the matter. I appreciate the fact that it would be rather expensive to have all of them placed in the Recorp, but I do desire to have printed the article by Rus- sell Porter to which I have referred, for the reason that I have always believed that much of our free enterprise and trade are based on free enterprise and trade in the rest of the world. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: FUTURE OF FREE ENTERPRISE IN WORLD FOUND UNCERTAIN—TIMES' SURVEY SHOWS NATION= ALIZATION TREND GROWING OUTSIDE WESTERN HEMISPHERE, MIXED ECONOMY IN MANY LANDS (By Russell Porter) Of 19 nations surveyed by correspondents of, the New York Times, Canada appears to be the only one in which private enterprise can be said to be functioning today with anything like the freedom from Government controls that obtains in the United States. The prospects for the survival of the com- petitive free enterprise system outside the Western Hemisphere seem covered with un- certainty in view of the growth of nation- alization under various forms of socialism and communism, The tendency is apparently toward moder- ate exercise of Government controls in Brit- ain, the western areas of the continent and the Pacific and toward extreme application of Government control in the Soviet Union and its satellites in eastern Europe. Since the end of the war, Canadian busi- ness and industry have been restored to virtually their prewar condition, without fundamental changes; price controls have been removed from everything but food and rent, Britain's nationalization program is planned to leave 90 percent of the economic system in private hands but hedged about with government restrictions, espectally on the use of raw materials and credits and the right to hire and fire. France has had a mixed economy since the end of the war. Nationalization is written into the new constitution, but the govern- ment is going slow on the elimination of free enterprise. The trend is away from private enterprise toward some form of state control in Italy. The Spanish Government's declared policy is to encourage private enterprise, but the tendency for 8 years has been increasingly toward controls. Sweden ts following a program of slow but sure absorption of the bulk of big business and industry despite strong opposition from bankers, industrialists and the cooperative movement. Frivate enterprise is still active in Belgium, but there are many government restrictions. Holland has more and stricter restrictions. The situation in Germany is in a state of flux because of the occupation, the lack of economic unification and the nation's un- certain future. In Russia private enterprise is, of course, outlawed except for some unimportant ac- tivities on the fringe of the totalitarian economy. It is reported to be on the way out in Hungary. In Poland, it has recently been emphasized that limited private industries are Officially welcome, but whether this toleration is a stopgap until the nationaliza- tion of basic industries is made to work satisfactorily is not clear. For the time being, private enterprise re- tains considerable position in Czechoslovakia, although industry is 70 percent nationalized, but the Communist-headed government is opposed to indefinite continuation of the present mixed system. Although nationalization laws went into effect in Austria last September, the pros- pects seem better there for the survival of private enterprise than in the rest of south- eastern Europe. In the Balkan countries of the Russian sphere—Rumunia, Bulgaria, Yugoslavia, and Albaniu—industry is being completely na- tionalized; private enterprise is fighting a losing battle there. Greek businessmen hope for a revival of private enterprise when the country becomes more settled, The Australian Labor Government owns and controls many major industries. Since the end of the war political pressures have been growing for more socialization. In Japan the government opposes na- tionalization but is increasing controls over production. Although private enterprise there is in a shaky condition, it is expected to survive during the occupation. Civilian Employees Outside of Continental United States REMARKS OF HON. ROBERT J. TWYMAN OF ILLINOIS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mr. TWYMAN. Mr. Speaker, when the conferees of the House meet with the Members representing the other body to discuss the extent of the cut in the President's budget, we know that they will carry out the wishes of the House which are really the wishes of the people. I merely wish to call their at- tention to an article which appeared in A795 the Washiagton Times-Herald on Sat- urday, March 1, which brings out the fact that the United States has almost 300,000 civilian employees on the pay roll outside of continental United States. I include the article as part of my re- marks. The article goes on to point out that there is almost one civilian em- ployee for every soldier abroad. Some- thing is wrong with this picture. Turee HUNDRED THOUSAND FEDERAL EMPLOYEES WorKING OUTSIDE UNITED STATES (Bp Walter Trohan) The Federal Government has a vast army of almost 300,000 civilian employees outside continental United States. There is slmost one civilian employee for every soldier abroad. The Army has some 400,000 troops abroad, the bulk of them in occupation forces in Germany and Japan. The War Department alone has 189,971 civilians Overseas. ALIENS ON PAY ROLL These civilian employees include thou- sands upon thousands of aliens who are sup- ported by American taxpayers. Almost half of the State Department employees in for- eign lands are aliens. The army of civilian Federal employees outside the United States has increased ten- fold since the war. It was estimated that the number of such employees was less than 30,000 in 1939. The 300,000 pay rollers outside the country constitute more than 10 percent of the total Federal pay roll of 2,276,856 persons. In- cluded in the 300,000 total are employees in the Panama Canal Zone, Alaska, Puerto Rico, Hawaii, and other American possessions. These employees share more than $1,000,- 000,000 in sularies and travel and allowances, it was estimated. Special commissaries are maintained for employees in destitute na- tions, which adds to the total cost. WOULD CUT EMPLOYEES Under President Truman's $37,500,000,000 budget for the fiscal year beginning July 1 this army would be further increased und the cost of maintenance would rise propor- tionately. The House has voted to cut $6,000,000,000 from the budget und the Senate has voted to cut $4.500,000,000. Economy-bent Repub- licans agree that there should be heavy cuts in the ranks of foreign civilian employees. Americans abroad should be brought home and foreigners on American pay rolls should be fired, many Republicans are convinced. They hold that the pay roll outside con- tinental United States should be cut back to prewar levels, Hon. William Randolph Hearst REMARKS oF HON. EDITH NOURSE ROGERS OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mrs. ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, I rise to pay tribute to an illus- trious former Member of the Congress of the United States who today observes his sixtieth anniversary as a newspaper pub- lisher, He is William Randolph Hearst. If ever the term “public service” re- quires a synonym, I believe it will be Hearst.
A796 From the morning of the 4th of March 1887, when the San Francisco Ex- aminer made its first appearance under the direction of William Randolph Hearst, his name has been inseparably identified with a better, happier, more universally prosperous nation and world. To review, even briefly, Mr. Hearst’s accomplishments and_ contributions would be to write a complete and most inspiring history of the past six decades. In the time allotted to me I can men- tion only a few of the things which are illustrative and charactesistic of his goodness and greatness. As chairman of the Committee on Vet- erans’ Affairs, I naturally think of Mr. Hearst as a provenly loyal and always helpful friend of the men who fought and won our country’s battles. My thoughts go back to the First World War and the utter disillusionment of those who came home expecting decent treatment but finding in its stead care- lessness, callousness, and, sometimes, calumny. To Mr. Hearst and his newspapers, stretching from coast to coast, these vet- erans were not bonus grabbers, treas- ury raiders, or peacetime liabilities; they were the most deserving of all Americans. He stood with them and by them and for them through a!] the ensuing years, and never relinquished his campaign un- til hospitals were built, civil-service-pref- erence laws were passed, and the ad- justed-compensation law was enacted. When the Second World War came, despite the efforts of Mr. Hearst and other far-sighted Americans to preserve peace, he demanded proper training for all recruits, collected huge funds for Christmas gifts to servicemen and wounded veterans, and sponsored recre- ationa] facilities, of which the interna- tionally famous Buddies Club in Boston is an example. The moment it became apparent that the heartlessness of the First World War might be repeated, Mr. Hearst person- ally directed a Nation-wide appeal for a just and adequate mustering-out pay bill. When the amount voted by the Congress proved paltry and niggardly, Mr. Hearst sent some of his best writers to Washington to work with the Ameri- can Legion and interested Senators and Representatives for a GI bill of rights. The effort was eminently successful and, because of it, millions of our vet- erans are recovering their health in hos- pitals; completing their education in schools and colleges; resuming their em- ployment in business, industry, and gov- ernment; and training for better jobs and increased usefulness, The same sympathetic understanding of other persons’ needs which made Wil- liam Randolph Hearst a dauntiess friend of the Nation’s defenders caused him to support woman’s suffrage at a time when Susan B, Anthony and the other pio- neers in the movement were ridiculed and vilified. It was a long, hard fight, as history shows, but the Hearst newspapers never abandoned it until the vote for women became a reality in all the States and the National Government, They say the best way to know @ man is to hear his own words and that, I be- lieve, is particularly true in Mr. Hearst's case. Therefore, as I salute him and all his newspapers and magazines on this happy sixtieth birthday, I should like to place in the record this editorial written by him on April 21, 1935: The Hearst papers are American papers published for the American people. They support the American system of gov- ernment, the American Constitution, Ameri- can institutions, and American ideals. They labor to maintain the American standard of living. They are opposed to thc various forms of tyranny which our American forefathers came to this country to avoid. They are in favor of American independ- ence, American rights and liberties, free speech, free assembly, freedom of thought and action, and freedom of the press. They are advocates of ruzged individual- ism, and of the industrial independence and enterprise which have made our country the richest and greatest in the world. They are opposed to paternalism in gov- ernment, They believe with Thomas Jefierson that the least governed country is the best gov- erned country, particularly in vicw of recent political experiments, which have done nothing but prove that the most governed country is the worst governed country. They are oppused to communism, fascism, or any form of despotism, They are opposed to intolerance, as well as to fanaticism. They are cpposed to race prejudice and to class conflict. . They believe in opportunity for all and equality before the law. - They believe in the capitalistic system, so- called, which is the only practical economic system of proven worth and with adequate reward for merit. They believe 1n compensation in propor- tion to service rendered, and in no limit to the extent of the compensation if the extent of the service is equally great. They believe in the creation of wealth through industry and the distribution of wealth in wages. They believe that the attempt to distribute wealth through theft is not only disastrous morally but economically, and means the ruination of industry and the destruction of all possible prosperity. They are opposed to any form of politics and economics which endeavors to grade down the most prosperous to the level of the lowest; and they believe ardently in the American system of politics and economics which for a century and a half has success- fully raised the lower strata to a nearer level with the upper. They believe in deportation of alien cranks and criminals, particularly those who came to this ccuntry to find freedom of speech and remain to abuse it; who came to this country to gain the liberties which they are unable intelligently to understand and enjoy; who came to this country to find prosperity and who are trying to create in this country the conditions which have brought adversity to other lands. They are opposed to government by any clique or class. They believe in genuine democracy, the rule of the majority. They believe that America should be for Americans and that Americans should be for America. Those who do not approve of these policies would better not take these papers, because these are the policies which will be adhered to as long as these papers are published. WYLLuuM RANDOLPH HEARST, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Justice Assured for Trainees Under the On-the-Job Training Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JAMES E. VAN ZANDT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, the House Commitiee on World War Vet- erans’ Legislation deserves the commen- dation of every veteran in the United Stetes for favorably reporting House Resolution 246, introduced by Hon. Brr- narp W. (PaT) KEARNEY, of New York. “Pat” KEARNEY, as a former comman- der in chief of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, brought to Congress the experience and ability necessary to understand the veterans’ problems. With such a fine background he has diligently applied himself in an effort to improve conditions for veterans by sponsoring numerous bills designed to remedy evils in existing legislation or to inaugurate benefits that are sorely needed. House Resolution 246 which is certain to be approved by Coneress, will prove a monument to the untiring zeal and sin- cere devotion of “Pat” Krarnry. Com- mander Tyrrell Krum, editor of Veter- ans’ Affairs of the Washington Times- Herald has lauded “Par” Kearney in the following article which appeared in the Times-Herald February 26, 1947, and I join with veterans in paying this de- served tribute to “Pat” because he is one of the outstanding veterans’ leaders in the United States and a comrade with whom I have enjoyed a strong bond of friendship since the termination of the First World War: VETERANS’ AFFAIRS (By Tyrrell Krum) Hats off to members of the Committee on Veterans’ Affairs of the Congress of the United States. They had the courage of their ccn- victions in moving forward at top speed to right the terrible wrong done hundreds of thousands of veterans of the Second World War engaged in job-training programs un- der the GI bill of rights. In voting unanimously late yesterday to report out for final passage on the Houce ficor Resolution 246 which would materially increase the strangling limitations placed on the amount of subsistence job-trainees m‘git receive, the committee members acted with a courage and fortitude seldom seen in the Halls of Congress. It should be remembered that less than 8 months ago, General Bradley and members of his Veterans’ Administration “palace guard" went before the Veterans’ Commit- tee, then controlled by Democrats, and sand- bagged through the infamous Public Law 679, without even so much as a whisper being heard by anyone outside the star-chamber sessions. And let us say here and now, that millions of veterans of this war have, in that com- mittee, a real friend who can be looked upon to stand guard against the encroachments of the VA—without doubt the most bloated bureaucracy of all those ever established in the American processes of Government. And while “thanks and much obliged” are being passed around, all you veterans affected by the Public Law 679 stranglehold on your
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD earnings should give an especially hearty salute to Representative Epirn Nourse Rocers, the committee chairman, and Brr- NARD W. “Pat” KEARNEY, Who led the fight to get the ceilings raised. A week ago we came out in endorsement of General KEARNEY’s measure as the best in the whole unprecedented heap—there were 22 to be exact—dropped into the legis- lative hopper then resting with the com- mittee. Yesterday it was reported out. Mrs, RoGers, PaT’’ KEARNEY, and the en- tire committee membership have performed a great service for all our war veterans over and above the considerations involved in the immediate legislation—they have shown the Plain ordinery ex-servicemen that on Capitol Hill is a friend to Whom they can turn when- ever the VA starts its bullying tactics again. Because in repealing the old subsistence ceilings they challenged the great personal popularity of General Bradley and they squared off against the VA “palace guard” in full array—the most resourceful group of bureaucrats found anywhere. We've backed the Kearney bill (as it now becomes known) for many a long day. We're glad to see it clear the first hurdle. Now it’s up to the House Rules Committee to give it special handling and then for the House to pass it. Let’s don’t hesitate. Hundreds of thou- sands of veterans are living on a shoestring with all their subsistence cut off by the VA “palace guard.” They need the dough. Thanks again, Gen. “Pat” KEARNEY. North Dakota Legislative Assembly Asks for 30-Cent Wheat Bonus EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHARLES R. ROBERTSON OF NORTH DAKOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. _ Speaker, under leave to extend my own remarks in the ConcREeSsionaL ReEcorp, I include herewith House Concurrent Resolution D as passed by the Thirtieth Legislative Assembly, State of North Dakota. The concurrent resolution memorial- izes the Congress of the United States to provide funds for the payment of the 30-cent bonus on all wheat produced in 1945 on which a 30-cent bonus has not been paid. It follows: House Concurrent Resolution D Concurrent resolution memorilalizing the Congress of the United States to provide funds for the payment of a 30-cent bonus on all wheat produced in 1945, on which a 80-cent bonus has not been paid. Be it resolved by the House of Representa- tives of the State of North Dakota (the sen- ate concurring therein): Whereas the United States Government paid a bonus of 30 cents per bushel on wheat marketed between April 19, 1946, and May 25, 1946, on so-called famine relief wheat; and Whereas the payment of this bonus was unfair and unjust to all those farmers who had marketed their wheat prior to the decla- ration of the bonus, in that: 1. Government news releases and reports issued during the fall of 1945 and the winter of 1946 indicated that the effective ceiling prices on wheat would be maintained and that there would be no benefit to the farmer in holding his wheat. 2. The farmers were repeatedly urged by the United States Government, its agencies and representatives to market their wheat 80 as to make it available for starving foreign peoples. 3. The price ceilings maintained during the time that the farmers were so urged to market their wheat were below parity as defined by Congress. 4. The bonus payments on wheat were made to those farmers who needed the bonus the least and those farmers who had to sell their wheat to live and maintain themselves and their families and pay debts received no bonus. 5. The farmers who sold their wheat prior to the bonus either because they had to or were induced to do so by propaganda’ must help pay for the cost of the 30-cent bonuses already paid through taxation. 6. Large subsidy payments were made to industry during the war in the form of cost- plus contracts, and contracts based on non- competitive costs of production. 7. Industry in this period of rising prices obtained bonuses by the simple method of holding their products off the market and creating shortages. 8. Retroactive bonuses were granted to labor. 9. What is in substance retroactive bonuses was granted to industry by the Rum! plan of income-tax payments and the Tax Adjust- ment Act of 1945: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That we, the members of the Thirtieth Legislative Assembly of the State of North Dakota respectfully memorialize Congress to provide Federal funds for the payment of a 30-cent bonus on all wheat pro- duced during the year of 1945; and be it further Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the Secretary of Agriculture of the United States, to the United States Sen- ate and United States House of Representa- tives, and tu each of the Senators and Repre- sentatives of the State of North Dakota in the Congress of the United States. VERNON M. JOHNSON, Speaker of the House, KENNETH L. MorGANn, Chief Clerk of the House, Cc. P. Dant, President of the Senate, W. J. Trovt, Secretary of the Senate. Our Unhappy Experiment in False Realism EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALTER H. JUDD OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mr. JUDD. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include an ar- ticle by the distinguished columnist, Edgar Ansel Mowrer: OUR UNHAPPY EXPERIMENT IN FALSE REALISM (By Edgar Ansel Mowrer) Moscow’s sudden acceptance of the recent American claim to a strategic (exclusive) trusteeship over all the ex-Jap mandated islands of the Pacific was a diplomatic mas- terpiece, I cannot say that I have had much occa. sion in the last few years to admire Russian policy. This time, purely as a student of international affairs, I feel I ought to send six bright red roses to the Kremlin. For with their bland acquiescence in the United States demand they have put Presi- dent Truman on one of the hottest spots even he ever found himself on. A797 By accepting almost unconditionally the American demand for islands thet until re- cently were all but juridically Japanese real estate, the Russians have staked out the strongest possible claim for acquiring the largest parcel of ex-German, Chinese, Polish, Rumanian, etc., real estate. By basing their acceptance on the gracious recognition that in the Pacific war United States forces “played a decisive role in the victory” and “bore incomparably greater sac- rifices than other Allied Nations,” the Rus- sians have greatly bolstered their own case for whatever they happen to want in Europe where Soviet forces “played a decisive role in the victory" and “bore incomparably greater sacrifices than the other Alliled Nations.” Finally, by encouraging the United States in the nationalist rather than in the inter- nationalist pattern of behavior, the Soviet diplomats have gone some way toward forc- ing a recognition of their own persistent de- sire for a world permanently parceled out among‘and ruled by three great powers. In the process the United States has once more been nicely diddled. Control of Europe is. from any viewpoint, vastly more valuable to the Soviet Union than occupation, even strategic, of Pacific islands can be to the United Stutes. Ignoring the difference in economic values between the two, Europe means not only landscapes and buses; it means people, first-class soldiers, and many of them trained technicians, prob- ably the dominant factor in any future fights. In the second place, if playing a decisive role in victory and making bigger sacrifices is going to be the accepted criterion of the right to extend a nation's power, then Soviet annexations can legitimately be pushed far beyond anything even mentioned to date. No less an authority than Walter Lippmann has recently bolstered the Soviet opinion that, by chemselves, Britain and the United States never had big enough armies to beat the Germans. Finally, the United States has no interest in seeing power concentrated and every in- terest in seeing it distributed as widely as possible. For in a world, most of whose lesser peoples trust the U. 8. A. and dis- trust the U. 8. S. R., the more these lesser peoples can be deprived of infiuence the greater the influence of Moscow, the less the influence of Washington. All this was, of course, obvious from the beginning. Back at Lake Success last No- vember, when the American trusteeship plan for the ex-Jap-mandated islands was first announced, I noted that grins for the first time appeared upon the faces of the Rus- sians and their friends. And I suggested thut the smartest thing Moscow might do would be to accept the American plan, Now, on the eye of the Moscow Conference to settle the future of Germany, they have done just that. No wonder that our State Department is confused and dismayed by Moscow's skillful move. For, to the honor of the State De- partment be it said, civilian diplomats did not approve the American demand for a strategic mandate that amounted almost to outright possession. They wanted the inter- national side stressed more. Above all, they wanted it explained immediately that the American claim could and would be modified along with the achievement of real collective security. Responsibility for this latest blunder does not lie with the Department. It lies else- where. President Truman has seen fit to surround himself with generals and admirals to a greater extent than any previous President. What is more, he trusts their judgment over that of civilians. It is the generals and admirals who finally persuaded the President that the United States must be “realistic” and demand the Pacific islands regardless of the international
A798 consequences of such a departure from the United Nations spirit. It was, to an over- whelming extent, the generals and admirals who during the war committed us to political policies in Europe the disastrous results of which have now become evident to everyone. No particular blame lies on them. It is natural that our military people should pre- fer the national-controlled, physical force in which they (successfully) deal rather than those international politics and ideas in which they are unlettered. The trouble is, the whole American people will be asked to pay for the mistakes. In formulating a successful United States foreign policy, any realism that believes that bombs, rockets, armed forces, and national ultimatums can substitute for collective ac- tion and obtaining the greatest number of potential allies is unrealism. Though force is essential, our fate is far more likely to be decided on the ideological than on the mili- tary field. Federal Income Tax EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ELLSWORTH B. FOOTE OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, February 28, 1947 Mr. FOOTE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Appendix of the Recorp, I wish to include a letter received on February 25, 1947, from one of my constituents in New Haven with reference to the inequality in Federal income-tax levies which is brought about due to the community-property law in nine States of the Union. Should not the Federal income-tax law be uniform in application and exact the same tax from al] taxpayers similarly situated regardless of their State of residence? The letter reads as follows: Fesruary 24, 1947. Hon. E. B. Foore, Member, House of Representatives, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. Foore: Recent radio and press re- leases give assurance that the Members of the incoming Congress propose to give seri- ous consideration to a reduction in individ- ual income taxes. I desire in this letter to invite your attention to a situation now existing which, in my opinion, requires con- sideration in connection with any proposed reduction in individual income taxes or tax rates. The Federal income-tax law is intended to be one of uniform application and to exact the same amount of tax from all taxpayers similarly situated regardless of their State of residence. It was not intended that a resi- dent of one State should be subjected to either more or less tax than a resident of an- other State upon the same amount of income derived from an identical source, yet such is the result of the law as presently inter- preted and applied. In any one of the nine States (Arizona, California, Idaho, Louisiana, Nevada, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas, and Washington) recognizing community property between husband and wife, the husband and wife are permitted to divide the income earned by either and report this income for Federal income-tax purposes in equal amounts upon their respective tax returns. In this manner, the income is placed in lower surtax brackets and taxed at correspondingly lower rates. In the remaining 39 States, no such division of income between husband and wife is per- mitted for Federal income-tax purposes and the income is taxed to the spouse who earns it at increased surtax rates. Accordingly, the husband and wife residing in any one of the non-commiunity-property States pay more tax upon their income than the husband and wife residing in the community-property State and deriving the same amount of in- come from an identical source. I am listing on the next page a comparison of the present income taxes on a husband and wife where the income is earned by only one spouse in community and noncommunity States. United States income tar table for 1946 P ol Income | Income Savings savings in taxes in | taxes in taxes for States | States for man man and Taxahh that are | that are living in wife liv income not com- | commu- mmu- | ne in munity- |nity-prop- commu- property erty ae hh nity- tater States property Btates |" States $3,000.-22202. $5n0 $570 $19 0. 082 $4,000__ 79% 760 047 $5,000. ... 1, O44 970 76 ore $10,000 .. 2, 508 2, 080 418 1% $12,000. 3, 20 2, RA (46 2% $16,000. 4,940 3, 724 1, 216 ti $24,000 9, OR2 6, 470 2, 622 2s $30,000. 12, 558 8, 987 3, 752 we 50,000 28, 579 19, 2FF 104 243 $100,000.22... 8, 854 50, {i8 12. 988 ax $200,000... 148, 078 127,908 | 21,07) 141 Iam of the opinion that the proper ap- proach by Congress to the problem of tax reduction is to first correct this apparent discrimination by permitting the husband and wife residing in noncommunity States to divide their total income for income-tax purposes in the manner now permitted resi- dents in community-property States. This would reduce the income tax of most married couples living in noncommunity States 3 to 28 percent. In fairness to a man and wife with taxable income below $12,000, Congress should make a reduction in rates in addition to privileges of dividing income so that their total tax reduction will exceed 20 percent. If after these adjustments are made, and it is the opinion of Congress that an additional reduction can be made, then tndividual tax rates could be reduced for all States. It will be apparent that no general reduc- tion in income-tax rates can correct the dis- crimination permitted above. While a gen- eral reduction in rates will relieve taxpayers, the husband and wife residing in a non-com- munity-property State would still pay more tax upon the same income than the residents of the community-property State. I am confident that you will recognize the merit and importance of this suggestion, and I look forward to your reply stating that you will work for this needed change in our in- come-tax laws. Yours very truly, Feat & Vorcr Srrvicr. Louis F. Voicr. Rural Electrification EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. H. CARL ANDERSEN OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mr. H. CARL ANDERSEN. Mr. Speaker, to indicate the interest of the people of Minnesota in the rural-electri- fication program, I would like to call to APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the attention of the Members of the House the following concurrent resolu- tion passed by the State Legislature of Minnesota: A concurrent resolution memorializing the Congress of the United States to continue its appropriations in support of the rural- electr‘fication program and to refrain from enacting any legislation adverse thereto Whereas the rural population of the State of Minnesota is vitally interested in the benefits and conveniences afforded by the Rural Electrification Administration; and Whereas there should be sufficient appro- priations of the Rural Electrification Admin- istration as approximately only 55 percent of the rural population of Minnesota is served by this program; and Whereas the rural population of Minnesota is anticipating the time when rural Minnesota will be 100 percent electrified; and Whereas rural electrification has proved & good investment to the Government by rea- son of the fact that it has met its obligations, both principal and interest, in advance: Now, therefore, be it Resolved by the house of representatives (the senate concurring), That the Congress of the United States shall continue to pro- vide funds for the expansion of rural electri- fication where such construction is economi- cally feasible and likewise to refrain from passing any legislation adverse to the rural electrification program; and be it further Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be forwarded to the President of the United States, the Vice President, the Speaker of the House of Representatives, and to each Con- gressman and Senator from the State of Minnesota. LAWRENCE M. HALL, Speaker of the House of Representatives. C. ELMER ANDERSON, President of the Senate. Adopted by the house of representatives the 4th day of February 1947. G. H. Leany, Chief Clerk, House of Representatives. Adopted by the senate the 6th day of Feb- ruary 1947, H, Y. Torrey, Secretary of the Senate. Nomination of David E. Lilienthal EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. TOM STEWART OF TENNESSEE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 3 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. STEWART. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “It’s a Long Story But Very In- teresting,” published in today’s Washing- ton Times-Herald. The editorial deals with the nomination of David E. Lilien- thal to be chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Rzcorp, as follows: Ir’s a Lona Story, BuT Very INTERESTING ‘We may as well go on record now as say- ing we don’t know whether David E. Lilien- thal is going to be confirmed by the Senate as Chairman of the United States Atomic Energy Commission, but we hope not.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD That hope not has led this writer to read some 19 volumes of testimony before the Joint Congressional Committee on Atomic Energy, which has the momentous job of recommending to the Senate whether to O. K. Lilienthal and his fellow nominees to the AEC. PROBLEM OF LILIENTHAL We rise from that reading slightly cross- eyed by the strain of it all, but with fresh- ened respect for the processes of government in our country that have brought such a congressional committee into being. The record shows a conscientious effort to be fair and let all sides be heard, and that is in the best American tradition. And with two exceptions, Senators Mc- Manon, Democrat, of Connecticut, and VAN- DENBERG, Republican, of Michigan, we would say that the committee members have scrupulously kept the record clean of their private judgments on the evidence so far heard, Incidentally, we also learned the com- mittee has no directive to investigate the nominees on its own, but sits primarily as a jury on data brought it by others. UNITED PRESS PULLS A BONER Our squawk for today, therefore, is almed at various high-collared journalists and edi- tors who profess in general to report the news tmpartially and give the folks a square shake even on the editorial page. If all congressional proceedings are as badly reported and as calculatedly misrepresented as this vitally important atomic-energy hear- ing, we’d say the editors and publishers of the U. S. A. had better get back to work and find out what's going on down where the news is made, For instance, on February 24, the United Press sent out a story to all its clients say- ing that the Federal Bureau of Investigation had made a “loyalty investigation” that O. K.’d Lilienthal and his fellow nominees, Couple of hours later, the United Press swallowed its gum and came through with the following: “A spokesman for the Federal Bureau of Investigation said today that the FBI had never investigated David E. Lilienthal or any other member of the Atomic Energy Com- mission.” Well, we all make mistakes. But time was in the newspaper business that such news would have set a hundred reporters on the trail to find out why, why not, etc. Here are five men appointed by the Presi- dent of the United States to a collective job even bigger than his own, yet without hav- ing been subjected to the kind of active in- vestigation you’d think normal precaution for any kind of government post of trust above that of filing clerk. How come? What’s the news behind that news? Or take another case, that of Lilienthal against McKe.iar, popularly represented these days as good versus evil, pure govern- ment versus patronage swilling, etc. But what does the record show? It may amaze you to learn that some 80 years ago while David Lilienthal and most other Amer- icans now alive were in the knee-pants-and- doll-buggy stage, Senator K. D. McKE tar, of Tennessee, was working to put the tor- rential Tennessee River into harness by dams and flood control means. THE STORY OF TVA McKELLAaR is now 78. In the record of the hearings above mentioned stands his testi- mony of struggle to get the money for the Tennessee Valley Authority, a project of great controversy as to the philosophy of govern- ment underlying but in which any American can have pride for its engineering achieve- ments. The record of those hearings also discloses that David E. Lilienthal conceded under oath that McKeiiag has never asked him for pa- tronage jobs—contrary to the widely distrib- uted propaganda line, McKELLAR represents those who believe TVA’s books should be audited by the Gen- eral Accounting Office as all other Govern- ment books should be audited and that its operations should be under the constant eye of Congress as Government operations usu- ally are. Lilienthal represents those who think TVA should be given the go-ahead money by Con- gress and left to go its independent way. There are honest men on both sides of that argument. The point here is that in the stories coming out of the atomic-energy hearings, Lilienthal’s side of the TVA record has been represented as pure and noble and McKE .ar’s side as low and ignoble. That's unfair to the public, for there is every reason to think that if he gets hold of atomic energy Lilienthal will be the same man he was in TVA. And on the evidence before the committee aforesaid, we find for instance that in TVA there developed a very definite, nasty, and disruptive Communist outfit under Lilien- thal’s nose that he admits he didn’t know about until exposed by outside investigators. That's a bad omen, for if the Communists fooled him once they can do it again, and if they do while he has the atom bomb in his pocket that’s going to be just too bad. MAN OF CONTENTION The record also shows Lilienthal as a very able lawyer who rouses in some people pas- sionate devotion but in others passionate animosity. That's a bad omen, too. For the master of the atom bomb should be above that. On the record, Lilienthal ain't. So why doesn’t the New Deal propaganda gang shut up and let the country hear the facts about him? A thorough investigation by the FBI with details laid on the line at a public hear- ing before the joint committee ought to do Just that. And why not? There will never be another Presidential appointment half as important to all man- kind. Glebal Spending Schemes Are Hiking the Cost of Living EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HOWARD H. BUFFETT OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mr. BUFFETT. Mr. Speaker, do you wonder why grain and other commodity prices have been spiraling upward? Are you surprised that the Dow-Jones futures index went above 130 last week, the highest figure since its compilation was started in October 1933? What will happen to the current labor peace if food prices follow commodity prices upward? The headaches that these questions imply will quickly be on the doorstep of Congress unless we stick by our guns and reduce Truman's inflationary budget by at least $6,000,000,000. You may ask, What has happened to create this inflationary rise in prices? Well, here are a few of the causes: First. From February 1 to 27, the pub- lic debt increased by $1,515,000,000. Second. On February 26, $1,794,725,000 was paid out of the Treasury stabilization A799 fund into the International Monetary Fund. Third. During February, $158,'750,000 was paid into the fhternational Bank by the Treasury. Fourth. During February another $100,000,000 was advanced to Great Bri- tain, making a total hand-out to date on the gift loan of $900,000,000. Fifth. During the first 27 days of Feb- ruary, $96,342,000 was paid into UNRRA. Sixth. With funds obtained from an Export-Import Bank loan, the Colombian Government will construct dams at Sisga and Siecha to irrigat> 65,000 hectares— March 1 bulletin of the Andrux Press. Seventh. The Ecuador Government is negotiating a $30,000,000 loan from the United States to consolidate its foreign debt, pay its dues to the International Bank and the Monetary Fund and build highways—March 1 bulletin of the An- drus Press. Eighth. Truman asks $350,000,000 more to supplement UNRRA relief when that hand-out is exhausted. Ninth. Hoover reports need for $475,- 500,000 for American relief in Germany, the necessities of Austria yet to come. Tenth. United States to prop up Greece with $250,000,000 hand-out—news item. The foregoing is a hasty and incomplete list of actual and proposed inflationary actions taken by the administration dur- ing February. Desirable or essential as these items may be, they all add to the fires of inflation. Mr. Speaker, these inflationary policies of the Truman administration are giving humble people a brutal beating in the pocketbook. On July 3, 1946, I tried to warn this House of the danger that now confronts us in these words: Mr. Speaker, * * °* the people of America cannot keep prices down long if the administration continues to dilute our cur- rency by deficit spending. The people can treat the effects of infla- tlon—higher prices. But only the adminis- tration and Congress can stop the outpour- ing of paper currency that causes higher prices. If the British loan is passed and other inflationary hand-outs continue, prices will go up, despite the patriotism and self-re- straint of the people. The radicals who demanded the OPA veto must not get away with any effort now to shift the blame for 14 years of Roosevelt- Truman New Deal inflationary spending. That wild spending—and not prices—is the Cause of the rise in the cost of living. OPA WAS FAKE WEAPON AGAINST INFLATION The noise and furore about continuing OPA to stop inflation is futile and useless as long as only effects of inflation and not inflation itself are attacked. The genuine remedies to high prices are to cut expenses of Government, reduce the national debt during this prosperous period, reenact one-half the wartime excess-profits tax, keep OPA and subsidies dead, and re- turn purse strings of Government to Con- gress. Unless these steps are taken, the current magnificent fight by the people against a heart-breaking rise in the cost of living will eventually be lost. (Appendix to the Con- GRESSIONAL Recorp, vol. 92, pt. 3, p. A3888.) Mr. Speaker, the primary task of Con- Gress is to get qur own house in order.
A800 Unless America now reestablishes finan-. cial solvency, we cannot long help others in their fight against communism. If we exhaust ourselves in the impos- sible task of attempting to carry the burdens of the world, the lights of west- ern Christian civilization will go out everywhere. We dare not shut our eyes to this danger. Battle of the Budget EXTENSION OF REMARKS KON. JAMES E. VAN ZANDT OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Speaker, the following editorial from a recent issue of the Washington Post expresses the opinion that every avenue of savings open to the Army and Navy have not been explored. It professes * difficulty in understanding why the cost of main- taining a 1948 peacetime establishment is almost as high on the average as it was when the Nation was at war. In addition, the observation is made that the heads of civilian departments and agencies, like military men, are re- luctant to agree that there is a possibil- ity of practicing economy by operating with smaller appropriations. Since the views of this editorial are of timely significance, I sincerely hope that Members of Congress will take time to carefully read it, and with that object in view, I am inserting it in the Concres- SIONAL RECORD: BATTLE OF THE BUDGLT Congress and the administration have hbe- come embroiled in a verbal contest over budget paring that leaves the public utterly bewildered. ‘or nobody outside the Gov- ernment is in a position to say just how much the President's estimates of 1948 ex- penditures can be cut without tmperiling our national defense and impairing other essential functions of Government. Conse- quently, the people who have to pay the bill of costs must perforce look on helplessly while the Executive budget makers and the legislators battle it out. Although detailed information showing where the proposed $6,000,000,000 budget cuts are to be made is not available, it is obvious tha such a drastic over-all reduc- tion would entail heavy cuts in the defense budget. Thit inference is supported by horrific warnings of disaster uttered by the Secretaries of War and Navy and top-ranking officers. However, we do not belie.e that every avenve of savings open to the Army and the Navy has been explored. The Pres- ident himself has admitted that unification of the armed services could effect substan- tial economies, although the kind of uni- fication that has just been proposed is not calculated to save money. The extraordinarily high cost of the peace- time defense establishment suggests that even under the existing wasteful set-up there is considerable room for economy without weakening of our defenses. The Commit- tee on Postwar Tax Policy points out, for example, that the average expenditure per man by the War and Navy Departments for 1948 is estimated at $6,790, compared with 06,960 in 1945. It is hard to see why the cost per man of maintaining a 1948 peace- time establishment should be almost as high on the average as it was when the Nation was at war. Indeed, for the Army alone the cost is expected to exceed the 1945 average. We agree with the committee that the burden of proof must be assumed by those who insist upon the need of spending on the scale indicated by these figures. Heads of civilian aepartmnts and agencies, lke military men, are seldom willing to ad- mit that they can get along with smaller appropriations. They, too, should be com- pelled to show cause why they cannot do so. Certainly there is abundant evidence of an unofficial nature testifying to : surplusage of employees in some civilian departments. Unless Congress administers the punch that will force officials to weed out their staffs, we shall go on paying more than we should for all sorts of Government services. Ordinary prudence requires that expendi- tures should not be reduced without a searching preliminary investigation of the probable effects. Unfortunately, there has not bcen time for a thcroughgoing study of the President's budget recommendations. That, of course, is not the feult of the Leg- islative Budget Committee, since the Legis- lative Reorganization Act of 1946 compels members of the Appropriations Committees of the Pouse and the Senate, the Ways and Means Committee, and the ‘cnate Finance Committee to meet jointly at the beginning of each regular session of Congress to frame @ legislative budget for the ensuing fiscal year, including estimates of over-all Fed- eral receipts and expenditures. In a normal year these conferences would probably insure a comprehensive survey of the fiscal outlock as a guide to legislative pro- cedure w.thout violently vpsetting the Ex- ecutive budget plan. Under present condil- tions, wh'ch are far from normal, legislative budget making of this kind ts likely to prove a stumbling block to systematic economy for the simple reason that too little time has been allowed for acquiring pertinent information and studying reduction proposals. The ad- vocates of economy have weakened ther case by snap judgments that put them on the de- fensive. Under the circumstances, the best that can be hoped for is an eventual compro- mise that will recetve some reductions in the President's spending estimates while falling considerably below the ¢6,000,000,000 reduc- tion approved by the Legislative Budget Com- m.ttee. The committee's recommendations are merely advisory, and as its report states, realization of the over-all objective “depends entirely upon the final action of the Congress upon budget estimates, individually and col- lectively.” Whatever the outcome may be, it will at least have focused attention on the necessity of reducing expenditures as rapidly as possi- ble tu a level at which the budget can be bal- anced without overtaxing the people. Taxes are now so high that they hamper production by discouraging individual initiative and in- dustrial risk-taking. Because the will and the ability to produce are the primal source of our success in defending ourselves against armed aggressors, tax reduction may properly be regarded as a means of strengthening our national defenses. Presidential T: EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. GLEN H. TAYLOR OF IDAHO IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 3 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. TAYLOR. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the Rrc- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD orp a very cogent editorial on the sub- ject of the drive for a constitutional amendment to limit the choice of the American people in electing a President. The editorial appeared in the Evening tar of Washington on Monday, Feb- ruary 24. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: THIRD-TERM BAN The drive for a constitutional amendment limiting future Presidents to two tcrms hes about it an atmosphere of political immatur- ity—a suggestion that the inheritors of the best political system in the world lack confi- @ence in the essential foundation of their political structure. It is probably true that, in the absence of unu.ual circumstances, the best interests of the country are served when a President does not serve more than two terms. There is nothing magical, of course, about two terms, and it is worth noting that the Senators and Representatives who are supporting the pro- posed amendment apperently see no tncon- sistency in having themselves reelected to 28 many successive terms as possible. Still, in the absence of exceptional conditions, an ex- cellent argument can be made for the pro- position that a President should serve two terms at most, and then turn the job over to someone else. Implicit in this, however, is recognition of the fact that in some future grave emergency the national interests might be served best by continuing a President in office for more than two terms, and the trouble with the pro- posed amendment is that it would make this virtually tmpossible. There are those who say that the amendment, if adopted, could always be repealed, but this is an argu- ment which overlooks two things—first the time element, and second the very important fact that a constitutional amendment, once adopted, c2nnot be repealed except by vote of two-thi'cs of the States. Thus a decision which might be vital to all of the people could be controlled by the whims or the pro- crastination of seventeen States. The question which should be posed to the sponsors of the amendment is this: Why should we of this generation undertake to tie the hands of our children in any and all circumstances, none of which can be foreseen now? Surely, on the record of our own per- formance, we have no valid claim to the re- quisite wisdom. Why not permit them to make their own free decision in the light of conditions which they will have to face and which we cannot possibly anticipate? That is the essence of the democratic process, and we would pay ourselves a highly dubious compliment in undertaking to short-circuit it. This amendment is one which should not Pass, and the Star hopes that it will never be written into the Constitution. Mr. Marshall, the American People Are Not Slackers; They Are the Good Sa- maritans of All the Ages EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HOWARD H. BUFFETT OF NEBRAEKA IN THE HOUSE CF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mr. BUFFETT. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include the following editorial from the Febru- ary 25 edition of the Omaha World- Herald:
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD THE. ARE NOT SLACKERS We, the pecple of the Unitec¢ States, aren't aoing our duty by the people of more un- fortunate countries. General Marshall, our Secretary of State, hurls that charge. What the world needs from us, he says, is “a strong lead and definite assistance” for the preservation of democracy. And we must “lend our ald” if the productive facilities of the world are to be restored But, regrettably. having won the var, we gre showing a “natural tendency to relax.” Many of us are “becoming indifferent” to the long-term danger of world disord«r. In fect, “we are seriously failing in our attitude to- ward the irternational problem.” That, anyhow, is whit Secretary and Gen- eral Marshall says. With due regard for a greut soldier and highly respected man, he is talking worse than nonsense. In the same paper and in an adjoining column to that reporting Secretary Marshall another report appeared. Credited to un unpublicized report pre- pared “from State Department and Foreign Liquidation records,” covering loans, surplus goods, and UNRRA aid, it says that “more than $30,000,000.000 in aia and relief has been given to foreign countries since the end of the war.” In this, seven and one-half billions was in the form of surplus property, the full value of which to the recipients is open to serious question. Making cue allow- ance for that fact, there is represented an enormous outpouring of our national treerure and credit for the aid of stricken peoples. Has Secretary Marshall considered that fact? If so, does he regard this continuing flov ‘¢ billions, in peace the same as in war, as evidence that we are “relaxing,” “becoming indifferent,” “seriously failing”? Certa’nly he cannot. He must mean then that we are failing in some other respect. A bill of particulars would be helpful. Surely our Government, of which Secre- tary Marshall is a part, is not showing in- difference. A ve-y large part of its time and energy and activity is constantly given to the international pro%le1,. Never before has an American administration shown such keen concern in the affrirs of other nations, great and small, or participated so actively in dealing with thei: problems. There is no indifference on the part of the press. Daily, column upon column, often page after page, are given to foreign news, to its interpretation, comment, and discus- sion. The people themselves? They are reading that news and comment, They are listen- ing to it over the radio. They are attending lectures to hear more. They are thinking and worrying about it all. They are joining in all kinds of organizations and movements to lend aid and to give definite assistance. In fact, the international situation that has cost them so much is still for them a black cloud by day and a pillar of flame at night—a hor- ror they cannot banish from their thoughts. If Secretary Marshall doesn't know this, then he doesn’t know the American people, and is living and acting in ignorance of what they are doing and thinking and feeling. The people of the United States are not boasting of their generosity, thei. neighbor- liness, their righteousness. Braggarts though they mav be in some other respects, it is not their habit to boast of such qualities as these. But they are entitled to a word of disap- proval when those who lead them in the far and fearful fields of international disorder appear to understand them so little. They are the good Samaritans of all the ages. They do not deserve to be branded from their State Department as indifferen.. slackers. XCITI—Arpp.——51 Twenty-ninth Anniversary, Republic of Lithuania Independence Day, February 16, 1947 EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. THOMAS D’ALESANDRO, JR. OF MARYLAND IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mr. D’'ALESANDRO. Mr. Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the ReEcorp, I include the following letter and an address delivered by me on the twenty-ninth anniversary of the Re- public of Lithuanian Independence Day: LITHUANIAN LEGATION, Washington. D C., February 26, 1947. The Honorable THomas D'ALESANDRO, Jr., House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. My Dear Mp. D'AcEsANnDro: I am gratcful to you for inserting 1n the CONGRESSIONAL REC- orp of February 18, 1947, the resolution passed at a meeting held under the ausp-ces of the Lithuanian Socictics in Baltimore on the oc- casion of the twenty-ninth anniversary of the declaration of Lithuania's independence. 1 have heard about the enccuraging and inspiring address which you delivered at this meeting, and of the deep impression it had made on your audience It would be very much appreciated by every friend of Lithu- ania if your kind and sympathetic under- standing of the sufferings of the Lithuanian people, as expressed by you at this meeting, could also be recorded in the CONGRESSIONAL Recorp, With my very best wishes, Sincerely yours, P. ZADEIKIS, Minister of Lithuania. Assembled here this evening ts a repre- sentative group of Lithuantan-American peosle who belicve that the freedom of small nations shall be retained—nations which, be- cau-e of their size and location, have been and are now being used as buffer nations for the protection of warring nations. Today the atomic bomb has indeed made obeolete the whole consideration of the buffer state. For no nation cun be used as a pro- tection against another in the atomic age and the only certain guaranty of peace is u general, firm, and fast agreement among the nations to keep the peace—a peace based on the fundamental rights of man. Knowing the Americans of Lithuanian de- scent, I know no greater patriotic group of Amcricans, whether this be the land of their birth or the land of their adoption, who have steadfastly fought for independence No man can know a Lithuanian without discovering that a never-dying passion for the independence of his country is eating into his soul. Out of the depths there comes a cry from this nation which for centuries has been forced to be inarticulate. It is not a demand for privilege, for terri- tory to which it might have only a historical claim; it is a cry for life, and if we really believe in our own profession, if the tradi- tions of 1776 have not been effaced, if the definition of self-determination with which President Wilson sought to change the cvil systems of lust and avarice in Europe and the rest of the world after the First World War, we Americans must listen to this cry from the core of the hearts of the Lithu- anions, We cannot close our ears to it. A801 It is argued that small nations are not able to develop a sound economy and a de- cent standard of living within the frame- work of national independence. A look at Lithuania's record of 20 years of postwar independence will prove the contrary Lith- uania organized a successful agricultural economy on a sound Cooperative basis. Her budget was uniformly balanced. There was no unemployment. The people are convinced that the resto- ration of national independence is the only adequate compensation for the sulfering of the people and the only sure remecty to raise Lithuania from the ruins left by war and aggression. The Lithuanian people re- ject the Moscow-made liberations. They de- mand the termination of the present Soviet domination and they pray for the restora- tion of their country’s independence. Lith- uania bases her hopes for a haprier future on moral law; she tenaciously clings to the idea that, after all, right and not might alore will rule the destinies of mankind I hope the day is not far away when Lith- uania and the other smaller nations will find their place in the sun along with the leading nations of the world. God bless America. God bless Lithuania. H. R. 496 EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. EMANUEL CELLER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 17, 1947 Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, under leave granted to extend my remarks in the Reccrp, I include the following re- marks of F. Joseph Donohue, counsel for Washington Retail Liquor Dealers, Inc., before a Subcommittee of the House District Committee: Mr. Chairman and members of the ccm- mittee, I am F. Joseph Donohue and I am here to present the views of the Washington Retail Liquor Dealers, Inc., on H. R. 496. My client is an association of some 50 retail liquor dealers, each of whom operates a store where all classes of alcoholic beverages may be purchased for consumption at home. Each operates under a retailer's license, class A, issued to him by our local Alcoholic Bev- erage Control Board under the authority of the act of Congress of January 24, 1934, Eech has been found to be a person of good moral character, end his place of business found to be tn accordance with the wishes of the persons residing or owning prcperty within the neighborhood of such location as is required by the terms of the act of Congress referred to a moment ago. Collectively, they, as well as the other persons who are licensed under that act, constitute a group of businessmen who are contributing their part to the commercial life of this community. They are family men. Many are property owners. All are employers of labor. Some are fathers of one or more veterans. Some were themselves members of the armed services in World War I and in World War II. Individually, and as an industry, they have assumed at least their fair share of com- munity responsibilities. In the purchase of war bonds, in support of the Community Chest, the American Red Cross, the Metro- politan Police Boys Clubs, and all other calls for community service, they have given and do give gencrously of their time and of their substance.
A802 Men such as they are not unmindful of their responsibility to the community in the sale of alcoholic beverages. As members of the community they are as interested in seeking the cause and finding the cure of the compulsive drinker as is any other good citizen. As the licensed handler of alcoholic beverages they are more immediately con- cerned with this problem than is any other Person. In that latter position they are doing all that they can to keep such bev- erages from the chronic drinker. Their ef- fort in this direction would be aided im- measurably by the cooperation of the fam- ilies and friends of such drinkers. To be more specific on this point, let me call attention to the fact that existing law prohibits the sale, service, or delivery of beverages to any intoxicated person, or to any person of notoriously intemperate habits. There isn't a licensed dealer in Washington who has not on many occasions refused to sell persons who were re crted to them as being alcoholics. There isn't a beverage dealer in Washington who will not cooperate to the fullest in seeing that the letter and the spirit of this provision of the Jaw 1s carried out. To accomplish the pur- pose of the act the cooperation of the public is needed and is eagerly sought. It is regrettable that a stigma attaches to the alcoholic. The modern concept of the alcoholics as one suffering from a disease and needing sympathetic, mcdical treatment may in time remove that stigma. It is equally to be deplored that those who sel! alcoholic beverages under our licensed system are too often subjected to the same stigma. If the figures of the experts are correct, and but 144 percent of vhe 50,000,000 who do in some measure use alcoholic beverages are prob- lem drinkers, surely you can understand that the business of the 114 percent is not wanted and any measure to discourage it will be welcomed. H. R. 496 has a lofty purpose. I am cer- tain that Mr. Hépert in sponsoring the measure is conscientiously seeking to curb the growth of alcoholism and to bring relief to those who now suffer from this dis- ease. No one of ‘18 car be certain that the method provided in this bill will prove to be the correct solution. My clients feel that should but one alcoholic be cured, or but a single person be deterred from becoming an alcoholic, by the method provided in this bill, it will have justified its enactment. whatever may be its cost. I am sorry that the framer of this bill has deemed it necersary, in section 1, to charge to the abusive use of alcoholic bev- erages social ills, to a dezree which seems to be negatived by such analytical research as I have seen. To do so is to bring onus on those who carry on a lawful business in a lawful manner under the authority of Congress, acting in the interest of a sub- stantial majority of the people, and to make it increasit.gly difficult for the alcoholic who seeks to be cured to view his condition as that of one suffering from a disease rather than of one who fs guilty of a criminal act. By the same token we view the language of section 15 as an unjustifiable penalty im- posed on those who are in the business of disposing alcoholic beverages. The language of section 15 is vague and indefinite. But its purpose is clear. The moderate drinker is to be made to pay for the dereliction of that small but important percentage of chronic alcoholics. I think we should view this measure wholly in the light of its purpose to bring, statutory recognition to the plight of the alcoholic as a diseased person requiring care and treat- ment and to provide for his treatment as a public responsibility. This laudable purpose should not be obscured by incautious crit- icism of the effects of alcoholic consump- tion nor by unnecessary and uneconomic use of the tax power as a medium for pun- ishment, If the alcoholic be a community responsi- bility as the modern thinkers believe him to be, his care and treatment and the cost there- for should be a charge against the whole community. The licensed beverage dealer will bear his fair share of both, the respon- sibility and the cost. By direct tax and Hi- cense fee the beverage industry is paying more than 88,000,000 of the cost of local government. If we were to add the property tax paid on the places of business where such beverages are sold, many of which were long vacant before the repeal of prohibition, and the tax on incomes paid by those who own such businesses to the District of Columbia, the tax contributior of this industry and of its several thousand owners and many thou- sands of employees would appear a very Con- siderable sum. In the belief that a doubled tax will return a doubled income, it is now proposed to double the present tax rate on alcoholic beverages. Whether the rate of tax be increased or remain constant, the pres- ent tax contribution of this industry is surely adequate to justify the position that the relatively small sum needed to carry out the purposes of this bill be charged against the genera] tax fund of the District of Columbia. Today the moderate drinker pays a direct tax of 82.87% a quart, $1.90 a fifth for 100 proof distilled spirits. Insofar as a tax is proposed to regulate or discourage consump- tion, it would seem that this tax has reached its peak and for purpose of revenue !t may have approached the point of diminishing returns. Whatever be the tax, it surely serves no purpose as a deterrent to the com- pulsive drinker The very nature of his ‘compulsion negatives such a possibility. Therefore, to add any special tax as pro- vided in this bill will be a deterrent, if at all, to the moderate and not to the compulsive drinker. A recent article in the Washington Post tells the story of the successful operation of two clinics for alcoholics by the Bureau of Mental Hygiene of the District Health De- partment. Seventy percent of the 616 cases handled during the first year were of volun- tary patients. Many patients were success- fully treated as out-patients and without hospitalization. I am quite sure that this experience will be studied. I am equally sure these clinics were operated on a minimum of expenditure. Perhaps these facilities can be increased. It is quite likely that since their patients who did require hospitalization were dependent upon the limited facilities of the Gallinger Hospital that the announced in- tention of the new George Washington Unt!- versity Hospital to provide facilities for the treatment of alcoholism will add sufficient opportunity for exploring the ability of med- icine and science to meet the challenge of the alcoholic. It wou'’d seem an unwise policy to raise a sum, perhaps considerably in excess Of $1,- 000,000, surely in excess of any rational amount needed to accomplish the purpose of this bill, just for the added purpose of imposing an additional tax burden on the sale of alcoholic beverages. Would it not be a wiser policy to develop the existing and immediately potential facilities available and to meke a reasonable allocation of money out of the general tax fund for that purpose? A year or two later, from the experience gained, we can speak with as- surance, We will know then if we are mak- ing progress and we can more certainly estimate the cost of the ultimate goal in dollars and cents. That cost will be met, not, I hope, as a penalty, but as recognized and accepted public responsibility. Mr. Chairman, the Washington Retail Liquor Dealers, Inc., are wholeheartedly in favor of this bill in its purpose to make avail- able the finest clinical treatment for the chronic alcoholic. We believe its cost should be defrayed out of the general tax fund. To that fund it makes substantial contri- bution. If we realize only a part of the APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD benefits which we hope from this bill, a saving to the genera] fund will accrue far greater than its original cost. If the general fund is inadequate to finance this most desirable public enterprise, and its support is thrown upon the charity of the puolic, this association will quickly and generously be in the forefront of those who will support it. A public responsibility ought not to be relegated to the charity of a few, nor ouzht the cost of its assumption be avoided by any part of that public whose responsibility it is. Wanted: Another Horace Mann EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN R. MURDOCK OF ARIZONA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mr. MURDCCK. Mr. Speaker, on glancing through the February issue of the Phi Delta Kappan, I came on an arti- cle entitled “Wanted: Another Horace Mann,” by Edward M: Tuttle. Being a member of that educational fraternity myself, and having been a school man most of my mature life, I read this article with care and appreciation. I must com- pliment the author on the selection of that title as well as upon the content of the article. Under leave to print, I want to offer this informative item to my col- leagues. One reason why I personally appreciate the title is that I have often thought it myself; that is, that America needs again the stirring voice of Horace Mann. I think today the need is greater than at any time previousiy, and certainly in my lifetime, for we are in the educational doldrums greater than those of 100 years ago. Somewhat the same causes are at work to produce that condition now as were at work in the forties of the last century. Horace Mann, a little over 100 years ago, dedicated his life and ‘jis great tal- ents to fighting the battles for American public education. He realized that finan- cial support of public schools is the first requisite. Therefore he adopted the pol- icy of getting the money where the money is and spending it for education where the children are. That came to be rec- ognized as sound democratic policy. So firmly did he establish the principle of tax-supported, free, public schools that for a long time we took them for granted, and now it seems that this battle must be fought all over again. Because of the unequaled distribution of wealth throughout this great country of ours there is great variey and differ- ence in standards and quality of public education. There are educational high grounds and low grounds in America, but in this age of motor travel the citizen who spends his life in Chicago, Detroit, or New York may have gotten his early schooling—and too little of it—in Missis- sippi, South Carolina, or Louisiana. Very few of us perceive to what extent every community in America is now interested in the kind of schooling that every other community affords its children. There are those who cry out for greater finan-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD cial support, a broadening of the tax base, and an equalizing of educational oppor- tunity for all the children of the land, but such voices are not adequately heard or heeded. Certainly America needs anoth- er Horace Mann. The magazine article fclows: Wantep: ANOTHER HorAcE MANN (By Edward M. Tuttle) Education in America has fallen on evil days—not evil in the wicked sense, but evil in the sense of lost prestige and impotence to do the job it is supposed to do. The plight of our schools is not the fault of any particular group either within or without the teaching profession. It is the fault of every American citizen. As a peo- ple we are not really concerned about educa- tion, at the moment. Why aren't we? It may be claimed that the present situa- tion is the product of the times through which we are passing. This might be an explanation, but it is not an excuse. There can be no excuse for our blindness and in- difference to so vital a factor in cur national life. We Americans have frown up with a smug ldea that we have the best schools in the world. Maybe we have had in the past, though the claim might be open to argument. But our schools are losing ground now. What good is it to set the pace for a brief stretch if we lost the race in the end? We are told that more than 82,000,000,000 are spent on education in the United States every year. That seems like a lot of money and we are generally opposed to any increase in school budgets and their resulting taxes. Warnings from here and there that our schools deteriorated during the war years and are in desperate need of stronger cup- port fall for the most part on deaf or un- willing ears. Even a United States Cham- ber of Commerce investigation finds it difi- cult to dent the public consctousness with the report that there is a direct relation be- tween the quality of education in a com- munity and its economic prosperity. Who will rouse us from our lethargy? Who will undertake the task of again selling the American people on the importance of educa- tion as Horace Mann sold it to his public 100 years ago? The light of his torch burned brightly for decades after his death in 1859, but now it has grown dim. Generations which knew him not have lost the sense of his message. Newer times and newer prob- lems call for a modern crusade under a leader with the same persuasive and convincing power. . Someone must rise in this Nation who can open our eyes to the fact that 62,000,000.000 is not much when considered as a percentage of our national income. Actually it is less than 2 percent—far too small an investment for a great nation to make in its future. Each year we spend less for education than we do for amusement, for tobacco, for liquor, or for beauty aids. But these things are in- dulgences, not investments. They have no significance for the future. They do not help equip our children for the responsi- bilities to be met in years to come. Why are we so self-indulgent on the one hand and so shortsighted on the other? News comes to us that Great Britain has inaugurated an enlarged program of public education which will require 6 to 7 percent of its annual national income. At the same time it is said that Russia is: planning to spend from 17 to 20 percent of its national income on all phases of education. Grant that they need it more right now. But look ahead 10, 25, or 60 years on such a basis, Then what will be our relative position to countries spending from 8 to 10 times as much of their wealth on their youth as we are willing to spend? : Suppose, however, that we disregard what other countries are duing or may do, and think only of ourselves. Who will drive home to all of us the truth that the only hope for the future lies in giving each succeeding generation superior training? How can we be led to understand that we ought to use the leaders of our generation us the teachers of the generation to follow? Or to realize that we cannot do this without a far larger meas- ure of support than we have been accustomed to give? Someone must be able to dramatize for us the fact that no matter how much a good teacher is paid it can never be enough, while anything paid to a poor teacher its too much, For teachers, unlike all other artisans or artists. are working with developing minds and personalities. The impress that they leave, for good or ill, is never errsed. Hu- man lives are enlarged, inspired, made more capable and strong, or they are left stunted, warped, aimless, and ineffective by the terch- ers of their early years. Today, teaching is at the lcwest level on the scale of the professions. It is so poorly paid and so hemmed in by tabocs that it does not attract the men and women who should be guiding our youth. Our teacher-training instituticns are all but emptv cf students preparing to be teachers beczu:e they can see no future in such a choice. The real teachers still left in our schools are there because they love to watch boys and girls grow and flower under their guidance. Ma- terial rewards are secondery in their eves But there are too few such teachers, and we ought to be ashamed of ourselves to treat them as we do. . Yes, education in America is in the dol- drums. Nor is this just an interesting phenomenon to excite the curious. It is a crisis in our national existence, the effects of which wil] touch every man, woman, and child among us. We must wake up and act before irrepareble damage is done. More than all else we need a leader to stimulate and focus our educational renaissance. We need a twentieth century Horace Mann. A GOP Platform EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LEON H. GAVIN OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mr. GAVIN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I include the following editorial from the Bristol (Pa.) Courier of March 1, 1947: A GOP PLATFORM It would be impossible to overemphasize the importance of the various political mes- sages delivered before the annual meeting of the Pennsylvania Manufacturers’ Association this week. Coming as they do, at a time when the National Republican Party is at one of its most critical crossroads, they served to throw terrific weight in favor of a definite line of Republican action. Broadly speaking, the choice faced by the party's national leadership is whether to fight or compromise on a series of issues. These include budget balancing, tax reduc- tions, the labor problem, and, eventually, the future foreign policy of the Nation. The speakers at the manufacturers’ asso- ciation were in complete harmony on how to meet these issues. They demanded a reduction in the Presi- dent’s spending program of a full $6,000,000,- A803 000. They called for sharp cuts in Federal taxes. They insisted that the strike wave must be broken—that labor unions must be responsible for their acts, must be made to live up to their contracts; that the national officers of Government must stop playing favorites with labor bosses to curry political support. Moreover, back of all their remarks were a series of convictions: That this Nation is on the verge of com- munism. That it could be forced over the edge into dictatorship either by a continuing break- down in the enforcement of the laws, or by an economic collapse resulting from over- tovctien ond overcponding. That now, if ever, is the time to balance the hudgct cnd stert retiring the top-heavy national debt. That present Federal taxes are so high as to be a deterrent to industrial expansion. That centralization of power in the hands of the executive branch of government has proceeded to a dangerous stage, and must be reversed—again, now if ever. Foreign policy was not discussed in detail, but there were enough references to show agreement on certain fundamentals in that field. Among these are: That virtually all the world pcwers out- tide the United States of America are s0 far committed to Communistic doctrines as to be enemies of our American system of economy. That this Nation’s sole hope of being of help to the rest of the world is to maintain its own economic strensth. That the only sound form of economy is that of free enterprise. That. while a strong Army and Navy are necessary, they are not our main reliance in foreign affnirs—that something more idealistic and just must be sought. All of these several points may be con- sidered as forming a restatement of Repub- lican position—as a sort of revised political platform, distinctive from most largely in being issued after and not before the election, The importance which it is Judged to play in the national situation depends upon the weight which Pennsylvania herself exerts in the country’s and the Republican Party's affairs, as well as upon the influence which these various spokesmen themselves have in the policies of party and government. As for Pennsylvania, this State is a key- stone in more than name alone. It is une of the largest industrial centers cf the world. It is one of the Nation's principal taxpayers. Moreover, with its diversified interests—one- third agricultural—-it is substantially a re- production in miniature of the whole Nation. In recent elections, it has largely been true that as Pennsylvania goes, 80 goes the United States. Politically, it long enjoyed a reputation of being a Gibraltar of Republican doctrine, but followed the rest of the Nation into the New Deal column in the early thirties. But it promptly became a major battle- field of the basic conflict between New Dealism and Constitutionalism—between the made-over Democratic Party and the historic Republican doctrines, Here the tide of national politics was turned in 1938, and the bulk of the Repub- lican resurgence in the Nation's affairs may be said to have been initiated in the Penn- sylvania campaign of that year to oust the “litle new deal" from Harrisburg. That campaign marked the first smashing defeat which the New Deal suffered with itself as the issue. In general, it may be stated that all campaigns in which the Republican Party adopted elsewhere the line of faith for which it went to bat here in 1938, have
A804 been consistently successful. The party vic- tories, when, as has happened, its spokesmen have supported other convictions, have been few and far between. What this means is that Pennsylvania, itself a large and important factor in national affairs, showed great capacity for leadership and inspiration in the recent past—and may easily do so again. As for the identity of the Republican lead- ers who set forth their views, they represent about as powerful and outstanding a group of party chiefs as could possibly be assembled. Among them were a past and the present Republican Governors of this Republican State, one of them a man who has just recaptured a United States Senate seat from a wheelhorse New Dealer. Present also, as speakers, were the State's Republican national committeeman; the chairman of the powerful Pennsylvania Republican delegation in Congress (a bloc of 28 votes, largest single delegation except that of New York, with which it ties); the Republican leader on the floor of the State senate; the Republican chairman of the all- important House Labor Committee, which will initiate legislation in one of the most urgent single fields, that of corrective labor laws; and the Republican Speaker of the House—a position usually ranked as second in national importance only to that of the Presidency itself. At least two of these men already are being spoken of as possibilities for the Re- publican nomination for President—both of them named Martin, incidentally. One is Pennsylvania's Gen. Epwarp Martin, who is almost certain to be the State's “favorite son” in the next convention, and the other is Speaker JosePH W. MARTIN, Jr., of Massa- chusetts. When a group such as this unites in out- lining a platform for the Republican Party, that platform becomes as nearly authorita- tive as is possible at this period. Republicans from other parts of the Na- tion will do well to give it the attention it deserves. Wages-and-Hours Law EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOHN A. CARROLL OF COLORADO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 3, 1947 Mr. CARROLL. Mr. Speaker, I was very pleased to note an article in the New York Times, dated February 28, in which a very able lawyer, the Honorable Walter Gellhorn, of the New York bar, points out with great clarity the weak- nesses of the so-called Gwynne bill, H. R. 2157, which was passed by this body on February 28, 1947. The reason and logic set forth in Mr. Gellhorn’s article is so compelling that it should create a doubt in the minds of those who voted for this bill and should reassure those who voted against it that they acted properly. Under leave to extend my remarks, I include herewith Mr. Gellhorn’s letter as it appeared in the New York Times: Wace-anv-Hovur LAW—GwYNnng Brit To AMEND IT CRrITICIZED AS WEAKENING LAW To the Eprror or THe New Yorx Truzs: The House of Representatives is about to consider a bill which, if enacted, will drasti- cally weaken and perhaps even destroy the Pair Labor Standards Act of 1938, the Federal wage-and-hour law. The bill in question is the Gwynne bill, H. R. 584, which has been favorably reported by the House Judiciary Committee. This proposal purportedly deals with the so-called portal-to-portal or walk- ing-time lawsuits which, in recent months, have produced many spectacular headlines though, so far as I am informed, not a single judgment against an employer. If the bill were, in fact, limited to !ts os- tensible purpose, public examination of its terms might be unnecessary. But since, in truth, the measure will expose honorable em- ployers to unfair competition and will re- move from needy employees the fundamental protections of present law, the Gwynne Dill should receive more critical attention than has yet been accorded it. Among the major deficiencies of the proposal are these: BARRED AFTER A YEAR 1. All claims ar'zing out of viclations of the wage-and-hour law would be barred after 1 year. Nearly 10000,000 workers covered by the act do not belong to unions, As a rule, they do not have enough resources, informa- tion, or confidence to protect themselves against overreaching employers Steps to se- cure redress against undevpayment of pre- scribed wages are rarely taken until after Government investigators have uncovered the violations. The job of inspecting 600,000 business establishments is a tremendous cne which can never be completed in a single year. If this bill were to pass, many just claims would be outlawed. It is significant that every State which has large-scale employment has a much longer period of -limitations for wage claims than the Gwynne bill advocates. 2. The Gwynne bill would absolve an em- ployer from all liability for any violation of law which was not marked actively by “bad faith.” It would also relieve him of liability for nonpayment of wages for an employee's activities in the employer’s behalf, unless payment was required by an express contract or by the employer’s own past practice. In other words, before a violator of the law could be required to make good to his underpaid employees it wculd be necessary to prove that the violation had not been in gocd falth—an extremely difficult task. Moreover, if it had not been the employer's practice to pay for this or that sort of work, he would be absolved from the necessity of doing so in the future. For example, if he did not pay his plant guards for inspection or drilling time, he could continue to ignore his obligation to do so even though all his competitors throughout the industry were paying their employees for like services. Thus the Gwynne bill would legalize un- fair competitive advantages in interstate commerce which it was the very purpose of the Fair Labor Standards Act to eliminate. WAIVER OF CLAIMS 8. The Gwynne bill would permit the waiver or release by an employee of his just claims under the wage-and-hour law. The Supreme Court has solemnly warned (Brook- lyn Savings Bank v. O’Netl (324 U. 8. 697) ) that this would “tend to nullify” the force of the statute. And all the leading State minimum-wage laws recognize that needy workers can be easily beguiled into sur- rendering claims for back wages for a mere fraction of their true value. But the Gwynne bill goes a step further in discouraging effective enforcement of the wage-and-hour law. The bill also forbids employees to assign their claims to anyone else, but instead requires each one to sue individually on his claim. Since individual claims, no matter how meritorious, may be for relatively small amounts which would not justify individual litigation, this pro- hibition against the pooling of claims will make it yet easier for an unscrupulous em- ployer to escape his responsibilities, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 4. The Gwynne bill undertakes to absolve & person from all liability for acts done in good faith in conformity with any admin- istrative interpretation, ruling, or policy. On the surface this seems fair. In fact, how- ever, it would permit the positive terms of the law to be set aside whenever an in- dividual correctly or incorrectly applied any one of the literally thousands of informal advisory rulings which Government officials make annually by way of expressing tenta- tive opinions in response to inquiries. OPINIONS HELPFUL These informal opinions are usually given on incomplete statements of fact and with- out hearing both sides. They are intended to be and are helpful, but they are not ai- thoritative. If Congress wants to permit absolute reliance on them, it should empower the Administrator of the Wage and Hour Di- vision to apply the statute and to make de- terminations of fact which will be binding on all parties until set aside in appropriate proceedings. An administrative determination that an employer does owe his employees back pay shculd have the same effect as an adminis- trative determination that he owes them nothing. But the Gwynne bill does not pro- duce this equality. Instead, it says that if any official, no matter how obscure or ill- trained, expresses an opinion favorable to an employer, the employer can rely on it abso- lutely to bar the liabilities the law imposes on him. But if the opinion is unfavorable to the employer, and even if i‘ is formally expressed by the highest officials, it is given no binding quality. The evils which Congress struck at in the Fair Labor Standards Act of 1938 have not been wholly eliminated by the passage of time. Excessive hours and inadequate pay produce a blight which affects not only the workers immediately involved but also the communities in which the workers live and all the ethical employers who must compete against substandard producers. The present law advances the interests of the public at large. Congress, if it chooses to deal with the probably overem- phasized issue of the portal-pay sults, should avoid at the same time eviscerating a statute which has long proved its worth. The Na- tional Consumers League and other nonpar- tisan, nonlabor organizations oppose the Gwynne bill because it will do just that. WALTER GELLHORN. NEw York, February 25, 1947, The Closed Shop EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WAYNE MORSE OF OREGON IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 3 (legislative day of Wednesday, February 19), 1947 Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have published in the Appendix of the Recorp one of the best editorials on the closed shop I have read. The editorial to which I refer was published in a great newspaper of my State, the Oregon Daily Journal, of Port- land, Oreg.; and it sets forth the reasons why the editor of that newspaper thinks an anti-closed-shop bill would be un- sound legislation. There being no objection, the editorial ‘was ordered to be printed in the Rscorp, as follows: