1896 in the way of amortization of the obliga- tions of small business, for instance, rather than merely to investigate. We have conducted investigations and we have now reached the stage of reporting constructive legislation to assist inde- pendent small business enterprises, Unless after investigation we can leg- islate, we only muddle the minds of the small-business men, as the Senator has suggested. What I want the Congress to do is to pass a sensible, effective law. It is all right to investigate, but when the investigation is over, we should leg- islate, according to the results of the investigation or hearings, in the interest of the small-business men. In my opin- ion, that has not always been done. Our subcommittee and committee have now reached the stage of legislating. Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, I re- spond to the Senator by thanking him for his observations, and by saying that I, too, have felt that there was a hope- Jess gap in the program for small busi- ness through the functionings of the special committee which had no legisila- tive authority whatsoever, and which ex- isted through the war period and until the early part of last year. It was be- cause of that that I drafted and then submitted, in conjunction with the Sen- ator from Nebraska, Senate Resolution 58, which proposes to set up a standing committee with full legislative powers to deal with problems of small business. However, I may say to the Senator from South Carolina that while I still think that eventually that is what we will have to come to, and while I still feel that small business is entitled to have a standing committee of its own with full legislative powers, I try to be practical about these matters, and in our discussion of this subject in the Demo- cratic caucus some days ago I discov- ered that most if not all of the chairmen of the standing committees felt that the adoption at this time, of Senate Resolu- tion 58 as now proposed, would mean a decided reduction of the jurisdiction of some of their committees, and they were not sufficiently advised as yet as to how seriously their committees might be af- fected, to give their consent. It became quite apparent that we had very heavy opposition to the adoption of Senate Resolution 58, and that it had no chance of passage. So, Mr. Presi- dent, in the hope of getting the next best thing, I then looked at the situation to see what could be done with reference to expanding the functions of the sub- commitcee of the Committee on Banking and Currency, which undoubtedly does have greatest legislative jurisdiction in this field, so as to meet the problem as nearly as possible. I may say that I have lying on the table, and I shall hope to offer as a sub- stitute in the appropriate parliamentary way that may be available at the time, another method of handling this prob- Jem, which I wish to discuss briefly at this time in the belief that it dovetails better with what has been done already by the Eighty-first Congress through the passage of the two measures which I have mentioned, and through the mak- ing available of the funds which have already been made available, and CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE through the institution of the many studies which are already under way through the functioning of the subcom- mittee of the Committee on Banking and Currency. So, Mr. President, I hope Sen- ators will take the trouble to read the proposed substitute, and I wish to ex- plain its nature briefly, if I may, at this time. Recognizing the facts as I see them here, and that the Senate has committed itself to the course of action which I have already outlined, until February of next year, my substitute proposal would be to add to the legislative jurisdiction of the Committee on Banking and Cur- rency nothing whatsoever, because I realize that will bring about a fight as to how the jurisdiction of present commit- tees is affected, but instead, to make sure that that subcommittee has complete or plenary investigative authority, and to make that investigative authority so complete that there may be no doubt that it has the right to handle com- plaints from all types of small business, to render assistance, but not in the field of legislation, to all types of small busi- ness, retaining its own legislative au- thority which already has been ruled by the Senate to be a dominant portion of the legislation affecting small business. Mr. MAYBANK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. HOLLAND. May I finish my state- ment? It will take me but a moment to complete my outline of the proposed amendment. Mr. President, in order to have the functiqnings of this committee tied in better with other standing committees of the Senate which do have some Juris- diction over affairs of small business, 1t is my suggestion in the proposed amend- ment that five additional members shall be assigned to the Committee on Bank- ing and Currency and to its subcom- mittee, with full right of vote, but with their participation limited entirely to the consideration of small-busineSs ques- tions. I may say that we have a precedent for exactly that kind of handling of our Senate legislative business in the fact that the reorganization law and the pres- ent rule of the Senate, permit and re- quire that certain additional ex officio members of the Appropriations Commit- tee shall be assigned to it from the Com- mittees on Public Works and Armed Services and from other committees, to vote and to have complete participation as ex officio members of the Appropria- tions Committee in the handling of ap- propriations covering the matters that come from those planning committees, such as the Committee on Public Works and the Committee on Armed Services; and there are one or two others in the same classification. I will close my explanation of the pro- posal with the additional statement that in order to have this tie-in as effective as possible, my proposed amendment suggests that one of these additional five members shall come from the Commit- tee on Finance, because everyone knows that many problems affecting small busi- ness have to do with taxation. Another of the five shall come from the Com- mittee on the Judiciary, which has juris- FEBRUARY 17 diction affecting small business, over the field of antitrust legislation and monop- oly. A third of the additional five mem- bers would come, under my suggestion, from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, which has broad and sweeping authority over commerce in general. My proposed amendment leaves the other two of the additional five mem- bers of the Committee on Banking and Currency, who would sit ex officio and take part only in the consideration of small-business matters, to be chosen by the President of the Senate, of course, with the assistance of the policy com- mittees and the leaders of the majority and the minority parties. It is the suggestion of the amendment that three of the additional five mem- bers shall come from the majority party, and that two shall come from the minor- ity party. The sole purpose in offering the substitute is to make of the present functioning subcommittee of the Com- mittee on Banking and Currency a more powerful and more effective and a more satisfactory agency in serving the cause of small business. I may say that with all the good work which has been done so conscientiously by the present subcommittee of the Committee on Banking and Currency, which is handling the affairs of small business, it still seems to be definitely true that small business is not satisfied with that particular type of handling matters affecting it, and it seems to me that the making of this committee a vastly more important one in the man- ner suggested by the amendment will surely satisfy the legitimate demands and expectations of small business, that they have an important committee which shall have large legislative powers, and that it would continue to have leg- islative powers in the fields already cov- ered by the Committee on Banking and Currency, and would have direct tie-ins through interlocking membership with other committees which handle the ma- jority of legislative business affecting the small-business men of the Nation. Mr. MAYBANK, Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. HOLLAND. I yield. Mr. MAYBANK. I first want to thank the Senator from Florida for his state- ment. I understand what his thoughts on the subject are, and I can readily un- derstand the view of many small-busi- ness firms that under the Reorganization Act there is not sufficient organization fully to protect the small-business men. As Senators know, many difficult questions have been referred to the Com- mittee on Banking and Currency, and that committee has done its best to handle them. As chairman of the Com- mittee on Banking and Currency I have always taken the position that I did not want to interfere with the functioning of the Committee on the Judiciary with re- spect to such matters as the antitrust laws, or with the Committee on Inter- state and Foreign Commerce with respect to matters involving trade, and so forth. For instanco, the committee held long hearings on the 3-day coal week, but did not attempt to recommend Icgislation. We would send such matters to the Com- mittee on the Judiciary. Two bills have
1950 been introduced by members of the Com- mittee on Banking and Currency dealing with taxation of small-business firms. Of course, those bills were referred to the Co .imittee on Finance. Mr. President, as I see it, the cause of the great difficulty and trouble the smali- business man faces has been the lack of a coordinating commiviee to initiate leg- islation in his interest. Committees can hold all the henrings they want to, but unless some legislation in the interest of the small-business man can be initiated as @ result of such hearings, they will not be of as much value as they should be, The majority leader has introduced a bill providing longer periods of amortiza- tion in connection with RFC loans. Un- less legislation comes as a result of hear- ings on such a bill, the hearings are of little avail. I hope the present Congress will enact reorganization legislation under which real help will be afforded the small-busi- ness men. They should be able to obtain such hearings as they desire, have such investigations made as they feel are nec- essary, and then have legislation pre- pared and pushed after such hearings are held and such investigations com- pleted. The small-business man _ will not be greatly benefited by a committee simply preparing a report and leaving it on Senators’ desks. I hope the sugges- tion made by the Senator from Florida that members of other committees may sit ex officio with the Committee on Banking and Currency may be adopted. Such ex officio members can be of great help to us in preparing legislation and in pushing legislation which will be of benefit to the small-business men. Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, I thank the distinguished Senator from South Carolina. I will say, Mr. President, one addi- tional feature of my proposed amend- ment in the nature of a substitute, which I may not have mentioned, is this, that it very carefully preserves unimpaired all present legislative and other jurisdic- tion of all the standing committees in order to attempt to avoid any contro- versy here on the floor on that point. It carefully preserves their investigatorial powers, as they are given such powers under the terms of the Reorganization Act. And, Mr. President, without decrying at all anyone else's suggestions, I believe my suggestion from the practical stand- point of finding something on which the Senate can get together will very greatly increase the prestige and the functional capacity of the committee already serv- ing in this fleld—I believe that that re- sult will be accomplished by the adoption of the amendment. Mr. MURRAY. MY. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. HOLLAND. I yield. Mr. MURRAY. I believe the Senator is laboring under a misapprehension when he assumes that the special com- mittee, because of its lack of legislative authority, was incompetent to handle the problems of small business, That is en- tirely erroneous. Mr, MAYBANK. ILhope that nothing I said caused the Senator to draw that in- ference. I merely said I thought a com- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE mittee which could investigate and initi- ate legislation simultaneously would be far better than one which could only in- vestigate, and then would be obliged to send the subject matter to another com- mittee. Mr. MURRAY. The former Small Business Committee had no difficulty whatever in handling legislative matters and handling them more promptly than if they had been originated in the com- mittee where such matters were usually handled, because as the result of our studies, as the result of our hearings, and from the vast experience we had, it was possible for us very quickly to convince the appropriate committee that the leg- islation we were asking for was very im- portant. For instance, when automobile production was stopped, the automobile dealers of the country were in conven- tion in Chicago. They were facing bankruptcy throughout the United States. They sent a delegation to Wash- ington to see us, and after a consultation with them lasting for a very few days, we formulated a bill, and it was passed by Congress without any delay. It was passed by practically a unanimous vote. Mr. MAYBANK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. MURRAY. I yield. Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, I yielded to the Senator from Montana, to permit him to ask a question. Mr. MAYBANK. I beg the Senator’s pardon. Mr. HOLLAND. the question. Mr. MURRAY. I merely wished to ask the Senator if he feels that a special committee would be defective or lacking in any respect because it did not have legislative authority. My understanding of the situation is that when the special committee on small business was in ex- istence, it was very effective and came to be recognized by the small business of the Nation as the best forum for them to have in the Congress of the United States. Such a special committee is now working very well in the House of Rep- resentatives; the House has such a spe- cial committee, and it is still functioning. It seems to me that when it has been demonstrated that the problem can be handled successfully before a special committee, there is no reason, so far as I can observe, to change the rules of the Senate regarding the appointment of committees and to make a monstrosity out of one committee by setting it up with unusual powers and authority, dif- ferent from those of all other standing committees, If we are to have a committee to han- dle the problems of small business, such a committee should handle those prob- lems in the way in which they have been handled in the past and in the way in which the businessmen of the country expected them to be handled. They were satisfied with the way they were handled. Let me say that we could present thou- sands of telegrams today, if we wished to do so, from businessmen with whom we have been in correspondence or com- munication. A few days ago a delegation from the automobile dealers came to me and recommended that everything pos- I am still awaiting 1897 sible be done to reconstitute the special committee which functioned in a manner so satisfactory to them in the past. Mr. HOLLAND. I thank the Senator for his remarks and his question, and I wish to answer his question. My answer would be that a lack of legislative authority and jurisdiction very gravely handicaps a special committee; and my answer is based upon 2 years of service with the special legislative committee, at a time following the cessa- tion of the war. During the war period, Mr. President, when OPA was functioning and when there were all kinds of export controls, import controls, scarcities, licenses, quotas, and similar arrangements, there were undoubtedly a tremendous number of complaints from small business con- cerns which needed someone to handle effectively their complaints and to look after such matters, but this did not necessitate any legislative authority or legislative jurisdiction. I was not a Member of the Senate at that time, but I have no question at all in my mind that the able committee headed by the dis- tinguished and able Senator from Mon- tana I[Mr. Morray] during the war period rendered a very high-grade serv- ice to the people of the Nation. During that same period of time, Mr. President, I was serving as Governor of one of the States. We had in our State government at that time a special and very effective set-up to cooperate with small business in connection with the procuring of contracts and subcontracts on defense work. But at this time we have no such organization as that, and we have revamped our State organiza- tions in order to take care of peacetime needs and peacetime requirements. I am very strongly of the opinion that a lack of legislative jurisdiction and leg- islative power is a fatal handicap to the doing of any worth-while job in time of peace by a special committee devoted to the cause of small business. Mr. President, if the Senate will bear with me for a moment, I wish to remind Senators of something which happened on the floor of the Senate last year dur- ing the consideration of tre bill to ex- tend controls on the exportation from this Nation of certain rare metals and other commodities. The bill was being handled by the distinguished Senator from South Carolina [Mr. MaysBanx], chairman of the Banking and Currency Committee, and by the distinguished Senator who is now presiding over the Senate, the junior Senator from Alabama (Mr. SPARKMAN]. At that time the argu- ment was on the question of how long the measure then existing, which was one providing for voluntary controls in that field, should be extended—whether for 6 months or for 12 months. It so happened that the Special Com- mittee on Small] Business had conducted exhaustive study and investigation of the problems of small business concerns han- dling steel, and we had published an ex- haustive report, which was available both to the public and to the Members of Congress. But in the course of the de- bate on that measure, it developed—I cite this as an illustration of the com- plete ineffectiveness of hard work done
1898 by a special committee of this kind, a special committee which 1s without leg- islative power—that no member of the Banking and Currency Committee had heard about that study or about the printing of that report. I find no fault whatever with the members of the Bank- ing and Currency Committee on that account; they had been burdened with their own duties in connection with cov- ering by their legislative committee the same ground which already had been covered so completely by the special committee in its investigation. Iam sure the distinguished Senator from Alabama (Mr. Sparkman], who now is presiding over the Senate, will recall that the re- port of the special committee covered matters which bore so closely upon the subject then pending that they were al- most determinative of the issue which at that time had arisen, namely, whether @ 6-month extension or a 12-month extension was advisable. From that experience—quite specific and quite persuasive, because I had worked many hours in the course of the making of that investigation and the making of that report—it was borne home very heavily to the junior Senator from Florida that a Senator serving upon such a special committee which does not have any legislative power is to a large extent wasting his time, in time of peace, and is doing something which will not result in rendering any real service either to the groups affected or to the Senate of the United States in connection with the handling by a standing committee of legislation which pertains to the same subject matter which has been studied by such a special committee. I could mention other illustrations of that sort. The fact remains that a committee which does not have legislative power is emasculated in its effectiveness, and its members feel that they are wasting their time. The fact also is that a leg- islative committee which takes up a mat- ter coming from such a special commit- tee has to plow the same ground over again and do the same work all over. So, Mr. President, it seems to me that in time of peace a standing committee with as much legislative power as can be provided is required in this field. I would have preferred a standing com- mittee with plenary powers. That is why I joined in the submission of Sen- ate Resolution 58. But as I view the matter now, unfortunately we cannot hope to have that measure acted upon favorably at this session. However, I believe we can obtain authority for the appointment of a stronger and more ef- fective committee on small business; and by tying in its members, ex officio, with the members of other committees, we can do a good job for small business in this Nation. I call particular attention to the fact that the amendments in the nature of substitutes proposed by the Senator from Montana [Mr. Murray] and the Sen- ator from Nebraska [Mr. WHERRy] do not clear up the difficulty, but, in fact, complicate it further, in view of the ac- tion taken at this session of the Senate which commits us and ties our hands, and calls for the appropriation of funds for the doing of this job by a subcommit- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE tee of the Banking and Currency Com- mittee until February of next year. In closing, let me say that if the sug- gested arrangement does not work out well, we can do the matter later in a more fulsome way. But the Senate has acted on this matter, and now we must do the best job we can do in connection with the action already taken and the functioning already going on. Mr. MURRAY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. HOLLAND. I am glad to yield to my friend the Senator from Montana. Mr. MURRAY. The Senator from Florida referred to the steel hearings held by the Banking and Currency Com- mittee—— Mr. HOLLAND. No; I referred to the hearings held by the special Senate committee. I do not know whether the Senator was assigned to that special committee. Mr MURRAY. I recall the hearings. Mr. HOLLAND. But even if he was not assigned to that special committee, he certainly knew that those hearings were held. Mr. MURRAY. I remember the hear- ings very well. But it is my understand- ing that that special committee did not propose any legislation. The committee had been reconstituted It was under the control of the Republican majority at that time. It failed to recommend any legislation, and its members did not appear before any standing committee or any regular committee to propose the enactment of a bill to remedy the con- dition. Whenever the special committee had a problem of that kind, it prepared a bill and went before the appropriate com- mittee, and had no trouble whatever in having the bill acted upon by the com- mittee and reported to the Senate. We did not fail in a single instance to have such measures, originally coming from the Small Business Committee, reported to the Senate; and in almost every in- stance the standing committee in its action was unanimous. Mr. MAYBANK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield, to permit the record to be made clear? Mr. HOLLAND. First, Mr. President, let me say that I should like to correct the Senator from Montana in one mis- understanding he has. The study which was made was one to determine how a bill passed by the Eightieth Congress, providing for the approval of voluntary controls, was affecting small business. It came out very clearly in the hearings of the Special Committee on Small Busi- ness, on which I was serving actively as a@ member, that small business was being very adversely affected, that numerous small fabricators of steel and others were being shut down and had to close their doors because the big steel com- panies were giving undue preference and undue recognition to the needs of fabri- cators and erectors who were their sub- sidiaries. So when the bill was pending here, it appeared that certain testimony had been given by representatives of the De- partment of Commerce, who were not correctly informed regarding the matter, FEBRUARY 17 to the effect that the measure then pend- ing, to continue the act then being ad- ministered, which was based on voluntary agreements, was acceptable to small busi- ness, that small business was agreeable to it and wanted it continued for 12 months, instead of for a bare 6 months, although, of course, a continuance for only 6 months would have made it possi- ble for the Senate to have brought out some other measure on the subject at that session. The committee’s report, its findings, and the committee's recom- mendation very strongly showed that small business was being most adversely affected. I think those who were here and participating in the debate will recall that that was the determining point upon which the action of the Senate was finally based in providing the 6 months extension rather than the 12 months ex- tension. I call the attention of my friend from Montana to the fact that we were not looking for legislation; we were looking for the correct facts as to how the ad- ministration of the law then existing was affecting small business, and we got those facts in such a way that the Senate, at the appropriate time, was able to work it out; but the Senate would not have done so if it had not been for one member of the special committee, who happened to be on the floor at the time the vote was about to be taken and who brought in the findings shown by the report, which otherwise would have been over- looked. Mr. MAYBANK. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr, HOLLAND. I yield. Mr. MAYBANK. I merely want to keep the record straight. As I recall, it was last year, in January or February, when controls expired. I think the Eightieth Congress had passed the law, which, as the Senator now shows me, was to expire January 31. At that time a Small Business Subcommittee had not been set up, with appropriations. We did not get any appropriations until February 15. When the steel situation was called to my attention through the testimony of certain small steel pro- ducers who came down from New York, I sent for the Secretary of Commerce, Mr. Sawyer. He was, so to speak, rather upset about it. He was made to under- stand that it had been done in this way. A check was made into the distribution of steel at that time. We sent for of- ficials of the Commerce Department, who came before the committee to as- sure us they were going to give more at- tention to small-business firms. I do not want the Senator from Mon- tana to be mistaken. Neither do I want the Senator from Florida to be mistaken. That was before we had an appropria- tion for the Small Business Committee last year, and that was through no fault of his. I have never made any charges about it, but this is what happened: We went into the steel situation fully. I remember the Senator from Ohio |Mr. BrRICKER], who perhaps knows a good deal about steel through his experiences in the Ohio area, brought up the mat- ter. Congress abolished controls en- tirely. They were controls which the Secretary of Commerce, through his own
1950 agents, exercised. His own agents did not know of certain of the controls, not only affecting the steel industry, but also cottonseed and soybean oil, as the Sen- ator will remember. We then acted on a voluntary sugges- tion. We contacted the small-business people, and everyone who came to the Senate Committee on Banking and Cur- rency, we sent to the Commerce Depart- ment. I was told they were treated fairly, squarely, and honorably, as the Secretary of Commerce, Mr. Sawyer, would do. But he was unaware of the true situation. I want the Recorp to show also that I was totally unaware of it. This happened on January 31, as the Senator has now called it to my attention. It was in the early part of the session, when we were trying to rush through legislation that was to expire at the end of February, if I remember correctly. Mr. MURRAY. Of course, if I may be permitted—— Mr. HOLLAND. I yield. Mr. MURRAY. The Small Business Committee recommended very strongly against the removal of the controls, and we had conferences on several occasions in which we pointed out what would happen as a result of their removal. But it was insisted that the controls should be removed, and as a result, im- mediately there developed the conditions which were brought out in that hearing. The Small Business Committee made a report at the time, with which I did not agree. I filed minority views, in which I pointed out there was need of legisla- tion, and that legislation should have been enacted to protect the small-busi- ness men who were being deprived of access to materials necessary to enable them to continue production. Mr. MAYBANK. Of course, the Sen- ator is referring to the Eightieth Con- gress, when I was not chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency. No recommendation was made to the committee. Mr. MURRAY. No; the Senator had no connection with it at that time. Mr. MAYBANK. I merely want the Recorp to show we were not a party to what happened. Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, the only point I was trying to establish from the fact to which I have just referred—it is as clear as a bell—was that it shows conclusively two things; first, that the regular committee, with legislative au- thority, had to restudy, and did restudy, exactly the same questions which had been studied at great length and at considerable expense, and had been made the basis of a report of findings by the special committee; and second, it shows to what little extent the business of the special committee was considered to be vital not only to that particular stand- ing committce but to many others. Mr, President, we cannot know, each of us, the business that is going on in every other committee of the Senate, and no fault is to be attached to anyone. But if we have the same job being done twice, certain facts are going to be brought out in one place which never are made known at all in the other place. Since there is only one place where they can he acted CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE on effectively—and that is in the com- mittee which has legislative authority— therefore I am unalterably opposed to a special committee without legislative authority, which, as I have said a while ago, is completely emasculated of any ability really to get the job done. Of course, members of that committee want to get it done, but they have no legisla- tive authority, and they are not able to get it done. Mr. MURRAY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. HOLLAND. I yield. Mr. MURRAY. Of course, my experi- ence of about 6 years as chairman of the special committee is directly contrary to the conclusions of the Senator from Flor- ida. We found no difficulty whatever in having passed legislation which we thought desirable. Whenever we ap- peared before a committee with a bill, we had no difficulty convincing the com- mittee of what should be done. Not only that, but we were able, because of the hearings we held, to get from the various departments of the Government results which were of great value to the small- business concerns of the country. I am surprised to hear the statement made, after the experience of the Small Business Committee for 6 years, and the approval it won from businessmen throughout the United States, that the committee was not effective. I think it was one of the best special committees ever to operate in the Senate of the United States, because it procured re- sults of great value. For instance, one subject we had to investigate was aluminum. Another was rubber. As a@ result of our report on rubber, the commission appointed by the President of the United States, with Mr. Baruch at the head of it, called us into session with them and had us submit to them the result of our findings. They based their report to the President on the findings of our committee. We had a letter from Mr. Baruch commending us and pointing out that it would be a fine thing if such cooperation could be had through all committees of the Congress. I cannot understand how it can be said today that the special committee of the Senate has been ineffective and has not accomplished anything for the small- business men of the country. I have in the files of the Small Business Commit- tee stacks of letters expressing approva) of the work of the committee. The distinguished Senator from Ne- braska knows that what I am saying is true. He knows that I cooperated with him and that he cooperated fully with me in our efforts to mect the problems of small business. The Senator knows that our files are filled with letters of com- mendation from businessmen and from large and small concerns all over the country. We not only helped the small- business men, but we removed certain of the troubles of the larger concerns. Take, for instance, our investigation of the requirement of reports from busi- nessmen. Some of the business con- cerns had to employ extra help in order to enable them to make the voluminous reports which were being demanded by various agencies of the Government. We found that most of the information al- 1899 ready existed in some department in Washington, and that the repeated de- mands for reports from small-business concerns were unnecessary. One large firm told us they had to spend more than $100,000 a year to prepare reports, half of which were unnecessary. I think it is a very peculiar thing that at this time and place the special committee is described in the Senate as an ineffective and ineffi- cient committee, whereas it has the ap- proval of businessmen in every section of the United States. Mr. HOLLAND, Mr. President, I may again say what I said a while ago, which apparently was not heard by my friend from Montana. I would not in any man- ner seek to question the fact that the committee under his leadership from 1941 to 1946 rendered good service in many regards. I think I mentioned the fact that OPA was operating at the time, and most of that time. I believe its dis- continuance was one of the last acts of the session of the Congress in 1946, be- fore adjournment, and that other con- trol measures were effective. Various kinds of permits and licenses were re- quired to do business, both in exporting and importing. There were shortages in many critical goods, which do not now exist at all. I tried to say as clearly as I could that I thought the special committee had a function at that time, and performed it, and performed it well. I based my statement upon partici- pation in the service of the committee, jointly as a member with the Senator from Montana, in the two postwar years of 1947 and 1948. Without at all ques- tioning the fact that the able chairman of the committee did his very best to render good service, and did render some good service, and that other members did, and I participated, I think, as ac- tively in the affairs of the committee as did any other minority member, includ- ing my friend, the senior Senator from Montana—I merely want to say I found that in frequent cases we were stymied because we did not have legislative au- thority. I cited one of those cases a moment ago. So far as the junior Senator from Florida is concerned, basing his state- ment on 2 years of postwar experience, at a time comparable to the time any committee now created would serve, I gained a very deep conviction that a special committee, under peacetime con- ditions, is largely wasting its time, and that the proper thing to do is to follow the path laid down by the Reorganiza- tion Act under which legislative juris- diction is distributed among standing committees, and to have special investi- gations carried on, so far as possible, by standing committees. Under the pres- ent conditions, the best we can do is to turn to that standing committee which the Senate has already voted, by an overwhelming vote, as the dominant place, insofar as legislation is concerned, affecting small] business. Mr. President, before I conclude, I ask that at this point in my remarks there be printed the proposed substitute amendment which is now lying on the table and which, at the appropriate time on Monday, I shall hope to offer.
1900 There being no objection, the substi- tute amendment intended to be proposed by Mr. Houianp was ordered to be printed in the ReEcorp, as follows: Strike out all after the word “Resolved,” and insert in Meu thereof the following: “That five Senators (three from the ma- jority party and two from the minority party), to be appointed by the President of the Senute, shall be ex officio members of the Committee on Banking and Currency, or any duly authorized subcommittee thereof, to serve on said committee or subcommittee (a) when any study or investigation of the problems of small business enterprises ts being conducted pursuant to the authority granted to suid committee by clause (2) of section 1 of Senate Resolution 101, E,ghty- first Congress, agreed to May 6, 1919, and (b) when proposed legislation, the predomi- nant subject matter of which relates to small business enterprises, 1s under con- sideration. One such Senator shall be a member of the Committee on Finance, one shall be a member of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, one shall be a member of the Committee on the Judi- clary, and each of the others shall ke a mem- ber of such other standing committee oi the Senate as may be designated by the Presi- dent of the Senate “Sec 2, (2) The first section of Senate Resolution 101, Eighty-first Conyress, agreed to May 6, 1949, is amended by striking out ‘during the Eighty-first Congress, until Feb~ ruary 15, 1950,’, and by inserting after ‘small business, including’ the following: ‘(but without limitation).’ “(b) Section 2 of such resolution is amended by striking out ‘the Eiyhty-first Congress, until February 15, 1950,' and in- serting in lieu thereof ‘the Congress’ “(c) Senate Resolution 218, Eighty-first Congress, agreed to February 9, 1950, is hereby repealed. “SEc, 3 Section 4 of Senate Resolution 101, Eighty-first Congress, ugreed to May 6, 1949, is amended to read as follows: ““Srec 4. The authority granted by this resolution with respect to the problems of small business enterprises shall not enlarge the legislative jurisdiction of the Committee on Banking and Currency ss set forth in paragraph (d) of section (1) of rule XXV of the Standing Rules of the Senate, nor shall it diminish the power of any other standing committee of the Senute to investigate any matter within its Jurisdiction.’ ” Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. HOLLAND. I yleld. Mr. LUCAS. Under the Senator’s pro- posed amendment, five Senators are to be appointed by the President of the Sen- ate, and they are to be ex officio members of the Committee on Banking and Cur- rency when small-business questions are involved. What power would they have, so far as voting is concerned? Mr. HOLLAND. Full power, both on the subcommittee and when the full com- mittee mects to consider those questions alone. I say to the Senator that the Leg- islative Drafting Service took the words which will be found in lines 1 and 2 at the top of page 2, out of the provisions of the Reorganization Act which are ap- plicable to the Appropriations Committee and to its ex officio members from the Committee on Public Works and other committees who are given full participa- tion and full voting privileges both in the subcommittee and in the full com- mittee, but are limited to the considera- tion of those matters which lie within their fields. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE Mr. LUCAS. Who would determine whether a subject before the Banking and Currency Committee involved small business? Mr. HOLLAND. The chairman of the committee would determine it. Gener- ally there would be no discussion and no possibility of any difficulty about it, but, as under the Reorganization Act the President of the Senate is required to refer matters to appropriate committees, on the very question of what committee is the proper field to which to refer a mat- ter, so would the chairman of the com- mittee act in this case. I may say, in enlargement of my re- mark of a moment ago that a part of the wording is taken from the Reorgan- ization Act which describes the duties of the President of the Senate when a bill lies within two or more fields. Those words are copied into my amendment in the nature of a substitute, to deter- mine which field has the predominant subject matter, and then appropriately to refer 1t. Just such a determination would prevail in the Committee on Banking and Currency Mr. LUCAS. Mr President, will the Senator further yield? Mr. HOLLAND. I yield Mr. LUCAS Under the Senator’s amendment, in the Banking and Cur- rency Committee all matters determined by the chairman of that committee to be in the interest of small business would be considered and disposed of by 18 members instead of 13 members. Is not that correct? Mr. HOLLAND. No; if it were a mat- ter of legislation in the field of Jurisdic- tion of the Banking and Currency Com- mittee, that would be correct. If the subject cid not have to do with legisla- tion, but should affect questions of com- plaint, or investigation, the Senator is correct, except that his number is wrong. The present subcommittee consists of 10 members. Ten plus five would make fifteen. The full committee, in the con- sideration of a matter in the fleld of in- vestigation or small-business legislation within its jurisdiction would consist of 13 plus 5, or 18 members. Mr LUCAS. What I am trying to ascertain is whether it is an enlargement of the Banking and Currency Commit- tee, so far as membership is concerned, and just what good it would do to have five additional members on the subcom- mittee from the various committees sug- gested. Mr. HOLLAND. The same good that is accomplished in the Appropriations Committee, where there are three Sen- ators from the Public Works Commit- tee, the Armed Services Committee, and the Committee on Agriculture and For- estry, and possibly others are assigned as ex officio members to consider appropria- tions offecting those particular fields. By sitting they swell the membership of the subcommittee by their number and they also swell the membership of the full committee by their number. The value of having them is to bring to bear the experience of men who are serving, let us say, on the Judiciary Committee, the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, or the Committee on Finance, and to have liaison back to the chairmen FEBRUARY 17 of those committees, if, indeed, the chair- men do not themselves wish to serve. The additional members, I may say to my good friend, the majority leader. were left, without reference to what commit- tee they would come from, at the sug- gestion of the senior Senator from Ari- zona [Mr. Haypen1, who remarked that we have on this side of the aisle one ex- ceedingly successful and experienced man in small business, the junior Sena- tor from Connecticut |Mr. BEnton], who, by reason of his juniority, did not have membership on any of the major committees, but who has been very ac- tive in various small-business ventures, not merely business enterpriscs of his own, but in conjunction with other men engaged in small business. The Sena- tor from Arizona remarked that we have experienced men on both sides of the eisle. I believe the distinguished ma- jority leader made the same point, that there are Members on the other side of the aisle who, by reason of their junior- ity, could not be assigned to major com- mittecs, but who could be made avail- able to the committee in order to assist in solving the problems of small busi- ness in the event the measure should be adopted. Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, will the Senator further yield for an observation? I shall not ask him any further ques- tions. Mr. HOLLAND. I shall gladly yield. Mr. LUCAS. I always dislike to dis- agree with my friend from Florida upon matters which he presents, because he is usually very forceful and gives all questions very thorough consideration. However, I think, when an amendment of this kind 1s offered, giving to the Committee on Banking and Currency additional members to the extent of five, based upon the argument made by the junior Senator from Florida as to why it should be done, I could use that same argument in the case of practically every existing standing committee, because we frequently have bcfore us the question of jurisdiction 1n connection with a bill, as to whether it should go to the Com- mittee on Agriculture and Forestry, to the Commitice on Banking and Cur- rency, or to some other commuttee. So if this should be established as a prece- dont we shall, before very long, find some other Senator offering an amendment to increase the membership of some other committee. I personally believe the committees at the present time have sufficient mem- bers. We can hardly get around to per- form efficiently the work which we are expected to do, and if we load the Bank- ing and Currency Coinmittee with five additional members from other impor- tant committees, it seems to me we shall be establishing a precedent whereby we have some other committee asking, sooner or later, for the same thing. Some Senator may get the idea that he wants to be on the Judiciary Committee. This is one way to start a move in that direction. He can get some of his friends together who will say, “I think this com- mittee is trespassing upon the jurisdic- tion of other committees, and I am a member of a committee on which I be- lieve it is trespassing, and I should like
1950 to have you join with me in offering a resolution to make the Judiciary Com- mittee larger. Let us put on it a Sena- tor from the Banking and Currency Committee, a Senator from the Commit- tee on Finance, and so forth.” Certainly if the amendment is proper and a mem- ber of the Finance Committe is entitled to sit on the Banking and Currency Committee when it considers small-busi- ness matters, some member of the Bank- ing and Currency Committee is entitled to sit in the sessions of the Finance Committee to see what goes on with re- spect to small business, of which pos- sibly the Banking and Currency Com- mittee will have no knowledge. Mr. HOLLAND. I thank the Senator for his observations, but I do not think he has thought the subject through very fully. He says that five Members of the Senate would be confronted with additional duties which they do not now have. I respectfully invite his attention to the fact that under either of the alter- native proposals a full committee of Members of the Senate would have given over to their jurisdiction entirely new matters, so that instead of there being 5, there would be 12, as under one of the suggestions, and 13 as under the other suggestion, with completely new duties, and there would be a com- pletely new committee with a completely new staff, with all the expense and ex- penditures in connection therewith. What we are trying to do is to build on the base or which the Senate has already built rather fully at this session, and in a way to better take care of the problems of small business, without affecting one jot or tittle the vested juris- diction of the various standing commit- tees in their respective ficlds. Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, I shall be very brief, since I understand the Senate will recess shortly, and this matter will be debated fully Monday. But masmuch as there have been so many observations about the various proposals, and in view of the interpreta- tions which have been placed upon them, I should like to make an observation or two which I feel should be made at this time. To begin with, I have a very great re- spect and affection for the junior Senator from Florida. That comes from my service with him on the very committee we are now discussing, and I appreciate deeply his views. I believe that if Senate Resolution 58 could be adopted by the Senate, it would be a great step forward in helping the citizens of this country, not only in matters of investigation, but also legislative matters. Mr. President, I feel that the small- business man is the backbone of our American economy, that he should be protected, that he should be able to come to Washington, and without having to go to all the various Government agen- cies, have in the Senate a committee which could speak for him, and handle his problems, whether they are legislative or of a different kind. The junior Senator from Florida says it is impossible to adopt Senate Resolu- tion 58, which would provide a perma- nent standing committee with legislative authority. So far as I am concerned, I XCVI——120 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE think such a committee would be just as important as any legislative committee we have today. When the distinguished Senator suggested that there should be debate on Senate Resolution 55, which the junior Senator from Nebraska was asking to have referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration rather than to the Committee on Banking and Currency, since I thought, under the rules of the Senate, it ought to go to the Committee on Rules and Administra- tion, the Senator came forth with an idea, and it was then he offered me an opportunity to join with him in this resolution, and I did so. I think 1t is one of the most constructive steps the junior Senator from Florida has taken since he has been a Member of the Sen- ate, one of the best contributions he has made. So tar as I am concerned, I should hke to have a vote on that meas- ure, vote 1t up or vote it down, and see whether or not we can establish that kind of a committee in the Senate. Mr. LUCAS’ Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. WHERRY. from Illinois. Mr. LUCAS. I desire to ask the Sen- ator whether or not, under the parlia- entary situation at the present time, we could have a vote upon that measure, and vote it up or down. Mr. WHERRY. If the majority leader will permit me, my idea is that Senate Resolution 58 1s only the vehicle to which other amendments have been offered in order to reach one of three determina- tions: First, to set up a special committee only for the period of this Congress; sec- ond, adopt the amendment offered by the Se.ator from Nebraska, which would ac- complisk the same purpose, except that the committee would be a continuing committee, and not have to be brought before the Senate each 2 years and be extended, a committee without legisla- tive authority, as has been suggested by the Senator from Montana; or, third, provide for the creation of a permanent standing committee, which the junior Senator from Florida himself says will be the ultimate outcome of all these pro- posals at some future date. Mr. President, we have those three or four issues before us. I should be glad indeed, if there were any way to get a vote on Senate Resolution 58, to with- draw the substitute, if I could—and I think I would be granted that privilege— and get a vote on the resolution. But after talking with the distinguished jumor Senator from Florida and other Senators I agree that there is great re- sistance by the chairmen of the legis- lative committees, and that they do not want to give up any jurisdictional rights their committees possess. In a way, I agree with them. They are very jealous of their jurisdiction, and I suppose they should retain the jurisdiction they now have. But I submit, by the same token and by the same argument, that the im- portance of the Small Business Commit- tee is demonstrated. The Small Busi- ness Committee cuts across the lines of all other committees. For that reason I believe we should set up a special com- mittee which would handle all these matters, either with or without legislative I yield to the Senator 1901 authority. I say that with the greatest of affection for the members of the Com- mittee on Banking and Currency, and especially for the chairman. I believe they are perfectly within their rights in insisting that a special committee be set up to handle problems of small business, so far as they are concerned. They have that mght. The same applies to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, as it does to the Committee on the Judiciary. If there is anything on which I would take issuc with the Senator from Florida, it is on the point suggested by the ma- jority leadcr, namely, why stop at five? Why stop with one from the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, or one from the Committee on Finance? Think of the Committee on Rules and Administration, on which I serve, or the Committee on Appropriations. These committees are interested in the prob- lems of small business, just as much as are the committees which have been sug- gested by the able junior Senator from Florida Mr. MURRAY. Mr. the Senator yield? Mr. WHERRY. Let me finish this one point, then I sha!l yield. For the reasons I have given, Mr. Presi- dent, I do not see how any Senator can offer an amendment and say, “We will have members from just five commit- tees.” It seems to me that if the com- mittees which have been mentioned do not give up some of thcir jurisdiction, under 2 permanent set-up, it is not pos- sible for a Senator to come forward with an amendment and say, “This commit- tee will be represented,” or ‘“‘That com- mittee w'll be represented,” and deny representation to all the others. Mr. MURRAY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. WHERRY. I yield. Mr. MURRAY. Does not the Senator believe that the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs should be represent- ed? That committee has jurisdiction over mines and mining. Nothing is more important than the protection of the small-min2 operators of the Nation, who Supply the metals and minerals which enable our industries to operate. It seems to me it would be very important to have that committee representation on the Banking and Currency Com- mittee. Mr. WHERRY. I thank the Senator for his observations. I would just as soon let the junior S.iator from Florida decide who should be the ex officio mem- bers of the committee. I would just as soon leave it with him as anyone else in the Senate. However, in the final analysis, practically every committee ought to be represented. That is the reason why we ought to have a special committee, with or without legislative authority. The majority leader approached the problem from the angle of who would wish to get on the special standing com- mittee. I should like to approach it from the angle of giving the Banking and Currency Committee more power. I agvee with the Senator from Florida, the Banking and Currency Committee is not today handling the problems of smal} President, will
1902 business. They cannot do so under their yuisdiction; it is impossible for them to do so. It is therefore necessary to increase their power. It would be nec- essary to increase the committee’s juris- diction. When that is done, the same difficulty arises as when a special com- mittee is created. Ex officio members are placed on a committee to consider matters which come before the com- mittee. However, the distinguished majority Yeader makes the distinction that the ex officio members are serving only for investigative purposes, that they cannot serve on the committee for legislative purposes, because by so doing they would override the jurisdiction of the com- mittee. I agree with that. They cannot be on the Committee on Banking and Cur- rency to increase the legislative author- ity of that committee. If that were done, then the jurisdiction of all the other committees interested with the Banking and Currency Committee would be vio- lated. Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. WHERRY. I yield. Mr. HOLLAND. I believe the Senator is mistaken in perhaps one detail of what he has just said. The ex officio members would have the authority to vote both on nonlegislative and on leg- islative matters, but they would be con- fined as to their votes on legislative mat- ters wholly to questions which were pre- dominantly small-business matters. They would have the right to vote as do members assigned from the Public Works Committee and other committees when serving as ex officio members on the Appropriations Committee, who now are entitled to vote in passing upon mat- ters coming within their field of juris- diction. Mr. WHERRY. Either the Senator did not understand my remarks or I misspoke myself. The answer to his ar- gument is that if we give authority to each of the 5 members—and I say there should be 14 or 15—then there is no difference between their jurisdic- tional power and the power of a perma- nent Small Business Committee of the Senate set up with legislative authority. There is no difference whatever. Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, will the Senator yield further? Mr. WHERRY. I yield. Mr. HOLLAND. Is there not this dif- ference between that kind of a commit- tee and a special small-business com- mittee; that both committees would have exactly the same sort of investigational powers, but that the Banking and Cur- rency Committee would, in addition, have legislative power in its field which the Senate has already ruled is the fleld of predominant interest, so far as small- business legislation is concerned? Mr. WHERRY. Perhaps that distinc- tion can be made. The point can be reached in the interpretation of author- ity where it is possible to split birdseed. I do not say the Senator wants to do that, but it can be done. The junior Senator from Florida asked me if I would join with him, and I should like to be open-minded on the subject. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE Certainly we need to do something to help small business. If what is pro- posed is the only solution, I do not wish to be prejudiced against the only solu- tion that can be offered at this time. However, the way I feel about it now is that we would simply be extending the authority and jurisdiction of the Bank- ing and Currency Committee, both in the investigative field and in the legis- lative field. The purpose could be better accomplished if we were to give the same authority to a special standing commit- tee, which could do a much better job. If we let the committee have a subcom- mittee, and let them have power, then we should let the Committee on Inter- state and Foreign Commerce have the same power. They would have a perfect right to set up a subcommittee, and I would vote for that. I would vote for a separate committee to help the small- business men of the country, who need help, especially in matters of taxation. Certainly that is not within the preroga- tive of the Banking and Currency Com- mittee. It belongs to the Finance Committee. What we need is a committee which has power to deal with the subject mat- ter. We have not had such a committee since the Eighty-first Congress con- vened. Small-business men are asking for a committee with power. I have re- ceived more mail on this subject during the past year than I have received in prior years. While I do not wish to seem to stress my service on the Small Busi- ness Committee, I wish to say that I did give considerable time to the work of that committee. In fact, I believe I can truthfully say that I spent more than half my time on the work of the Small Business Committee. I believe I spent more time on the work of that committee than on the work of all the other com- mittees on which I served combined. And, believe me, I did a great deal of work in other committees. That will show that I believed the Small Business Committee to be an important one. With respect to the matter of appoint- ing members of other committees as ex officio members of the Senate Commit- tee on Banking and Currency, I wish to suggest to the distinguished majority leader that it is a poir.t he ought to con- sider, if the amendment suggested by the Senator from Florida is adopted. I do not know who would have the right to select the members of the respective committees the Senator from Florida suggested should serve on the Banking and Currency Committee, but they would come from standing committees, and they would be chosen by reason of sen- fority. The five Senators in question would be chosen from among the senior members of the committees involved, which would not make available such places to the younger Members of the Senate, many of whom would be out- standing members of a special committee if they were given the opportunity to serve on it. Ican think of 3 or 4 younger Members of the Senate on this side of the aisle who, if given the opportunity to serve on such a committee, would render excellent service. However, they would not be afforded opportunity to be chosen or appointed as ex officio mem- FEBRUARY 17 bers of the Committee on Banking and Currency. If a special committee were appointed, Members of the Senate from both sides of the aisle could be selected who would have the time to give to serv- ice on the special committee. Mr. MURRAY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. WHERRY. I had not intended to detain the Senate so long. I yield to the Senator from Montana, however. Mr. MURRAY. I merely wish to say that it has been repeatedly asserted that the major jurisdiction over problems of small business lies in the Committee on Banking and Currency. I think that is not a true statement. The main juris- diction of the Committee on Banking and Currency relates to financial aid to commerce and industry. There are other committees which have jurisdiction over matters which relate to small business. One of the most important subjects is business research and education. The country is suffering from the great growth of monopoly and concentration of ownership. Small business is finding it very difficult to compete. Small busi- ness requires much assistance in the way of research and education to make it possible for it to survive in competition with large business concerns that are be- coming so integrated that soon there will be nothing left in the country for small independent businesses. Then there is the subject of monopoly and unfair-trade practices. I think that js a subject which is more important than any subject over which the Com- mittee on Banking and Currency has jurisdiction. If any committec is to take over this problem as a special agency for handling small-business problems it ought to be the Committee on the Judiciary. But it seems to me that the able minority leader [Mr. WHERRY] has hit the nail on the head when he says that the only place where proper con- sideration and action can be had for small business is in a special committee or a standing committee. I am in favor of a special committee because I think it is the only practical committee that can handle the subject at this time. Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. WHERRY. I yield. But first I wish to thank the Senator from Montana for his observation. Mr. HOLLAND. I think it is neces- sary to say that the statement made by the junior Senator from Florida to the effect that the Banking and Currency Committee is the committee which has the major portion of legislation appli- cable to small business is not simply his statement, but is based on the ruling of the President of the Senate, as upheld by an overwhelming majority of the Senate. I quote now, if I may, from the ruling of the President of the Senate, Vice Presi- dent BarKLEY, that portion of it which deals with this subject: In any case in which a controversy arises as to the jurisdiction of any standing com- mittee of the Senate with respect to any pro- posed legislation the question of jurisdiction shall be decided by the Presiding Officer of the Senate, without debate, in favor of that committee which has the furisdiction over the subject matter which predominates in
1950 such proposed legislation; but such a deci- sion shall be subject to an appeal. Therefore, so far as the rule giving specific jurisdiction to committees is concerned, which was one of the objects of the Reorgan- ization Act, undoubtedly the preponderance of jurisdiction—even though that might not include all the jurisdiction which could be conceived of in that connection—would be in the Banking and Currency Committee. And from that ruling appeal was taken, and the Vice President’s ruling was over- whelmingly sustained by the Senate. Before closing may I say—— Mr. WHERRY. Let me speak to that point for a moment. I yielded to the Senator from Florida. Mr. HOLLAND. May I add one point? Mr. WHERRY. Is it respecting the same point the Senator has just dis- cussed? Mr. HOLLAND, Yes. Mr. WHERRY. Very well; I yield. Mr. HOLLAND. The Senator from Montana did not read completely from the Reorganization Act those matters which relate to the Banking and Cur- rency Committee’s jurisdiction over small business. Item 2 reads “Financial aid to commerce and industry,” and so forth. That is one of the two items as quoted by the Senator. But item No 9 js “Contro) of prices of commodities, rents, or services.” . That again has been the subject mat- ter of much legislation of great effect upon small business and was one of the facets upon which the Vice President hung his case and his decision, Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, speak- ing to the point just made by the dis- tinguished junior Senator from Florida, if I recall correctly, the appeal in ques- tion was made on the basis of the de- cision of the Chair to send Senate Reso- lution 29 and Senate Resolution 55 to the Committee on Banking and Cur- rency, instead of to the Committee on Rules and Administration. I objected to the ruling of the Vice President then, and I should object to a similar ruling now. A good case for objection was made at that time, because after the de- cision of the Vice President was appealed, the senior Senator from Colorado [Mr. MILLIKIN] succeeded in having adopted an amendment rclating to the jurisdic- tion of the Committee on Banking and Currency. The amendment provided that in no case could the Committee on Banking and Currency assume jurisdic- tion over matters respecting which the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce had jurisdiction. The Senate agreed to that amendment by an over- whelming vote. I may be confused whether the action I last referred to was taken at the same time the other action was taken, but it related to the same legislation. The Senate voted to uphold the Vice President in his decision to send the resolutions to the Committee on Banking and Currency instead of to the Committee on Rules and Administra- tion, but the Senate agreed to the amend- ment offered by the senior Senator from Colorado which provided that in no event did the Senate, by the action it then took, provide that the Committee on Banking and Currency could assume jurisdiction of any kind, or power over CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE matters which came under the juris- diction of the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. Mr. Presicent. as a small-business man I can stand on the floor of the Senate and argue all day that the most important thing the small-business man needs today is relief from taxation. The Committee on Banking and Currency does not have jurisdiction over that sub- ject. That is why I oppose the proposed expansion of the Committee on Banking and Currency. If a small-business man cannot get the relief he needs through his banker he comes to Congress for help. The rea- son the small-business man comes here is that he wants relief from some other source than his banker. So that pre- sents a psychological reason why the small-business man should be allowed to come with his problems to a special com- mittee, instead of to a subcommittee of the Committee on Banking and Cur- rency. Mr. President, I had not intended to go into the merits of the question until Monday, but inasmuch as other Senators made observations today. I felt I should also say something on the subject. At this time we do not have a committee which is doing the job needed to be done for the small-business man. That is now admitted. Even the chairman of the Committee on Banking and Currency, the Senator from South Carolina | Mr, MAYBANK] says the power of his commit- tee has not been expanded. He says his committee has gone as far as it can go. His committee cannot step over the line. Does the Senate wish to give his com- mittee such power? If the Senate is willing to give expanded power and au- thority to the Committee on Banking and Currency, why not give that authority and that power to a small-business com- mittee, an independent committee? I do not wish to tell the majority party what to do in this connection. The majority party seems to think it 1s doing all right, and has thought so for the past 18 years. But let me say that the best and most popular thing that could be done in the effort to help small business today would be to give small business a permanent standing com- mittee with legislative authority. Tomy mind that is necessary. Senators may argue all day long on this question, but when they finish they will come back to one of two methods. Either that pro- viding for a special committee without legislative authority, or that providing for a special committee with legislative authority. Mr. President, I do not wish to speak in a political vein, because I say to my fellow Senators that my heart is with the small-business men. I think I know something of their problems. Beleve me, I have had plenty of similar problems in my lhfetime. I believe those in this great segment of our economy are en- titled to a committee to which they can come with their problems. A commit- tee should be established to which they can come with matters of allocation, to which they can come with requests for relief. Such matters came before the Small Business Committee, and help was 1903 afforded small-business men without such matters coming to the attention of the Senate. It was not necessary that the Senate be informed of what was done in many cases. Help was afforded the small-business men in connection with such matters as newspaper print. Help was given them along many other lines. Time and time again the personnel of the committee ironed out difficulties, re- specting which complaints were made by small-business men, but which did not require legislation. Legislative authority exists now, but the thing the small-business man wants most of all is the opportunity to present his problems to a committee which can conduct investigations and study the things he needs and his problems. He can bring such matters to a special com- mittee which either has or does not have legislative authority. I sincerely hope the junior Senator from Florida will not cease to press for action on Senate Resolution 58. I hope we can take final stand here once and for ull, and create a comrnittee which will be permanent, so we will not have to ask for extension of the committee either upon adjournment of the session of Congress, or when Congress coi.venes, If a committee is not a permanent one, but whose life must be extended from year to year, the result is that it loses much of its personnel. It is impossible to keep such a committee strong, be- cause its personnel does not know from one year to the next whether it is going to be continued. Mr. President, it seems to me the only sensible thing to do is to vote to estab- lish a special committee, either without legislative authority or a special ccm- mittee with legislative authority. In the meantime, if that cannot be done, then I suggest that certain standing commit- tees appoint subcommittees to handle matters involving small business. I will say to the distinguished chairman of the Banking and Currency Committee, and the distinguished junior Senator from Florida, that I shall vote to continue ap- propriations in the interest of small business, if the latter is the only way the matter can be handled during the pres- ent session of the Eighty-first Congress. [Manifestations of applause in the gal- leries. } The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Chair admonishes the occupants of the galleries that demonstrations are not permitted, and requests the cooperation of all our guests in the galleries. Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, I regret very much to find the distinguished Sen- ator from Nebraska and the distin- guished Senator from Florida, who are team mates on Senate Resolution 58, now deserting that resolution. The Senator from Nebraska says he hopes the Senator from Florida will stand up and fight for Senate Resolution 58, but the parliamen- tary situation now is such that the Sena- tor from Nebraska is offering an amend- ment in the nature of a substitute for Senate Resolution 58, and the Senator from Florida has offered a different amendment in the nature of a substitute for Senate Resolution 58. Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?
1904 Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield to me? Mr. LUCAS. In a moment, please. Mr. President, it seems to me that the Senator from Florida has gone south on his original proposal, and the Senator from Nebraska has gone west on his original proposal, and that the honorable thing and the quick thing to do is to get behind the proposal of the Senator from Montana and settle this matter. Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. LUCAS. Now I yield to the Sen- ator from Florida. Mr. HOLLAND. I think my good friend the Senator from Illinois might have been fair enough to have said for the record that the Senator from Flor- ida had not opened his mouth or re- ferred to any substitute until after the minority leader had offered an amend- ment in the nature of a substitute and until after the Senator from Montana had offered a substitute for that substi- tute, which then was withdrawn while th: Senator from Florida was seeking the floor. I think that it might be ap- propriate to clarify the record at this time by making that statement, if my friend would be good enough to do so. Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, appar- ently the Senator from Florida has clari- fied the record from his own viewpoint. I am not objecting to what has been done. I merely picked up an amend- ment which had been offered by the Senator from Florida. Apparently he had the amendment drawn long before this afternoon. It now is at the desk; and he was lying in wait, getting ready to offer it as a substitute; and finally he did talk abcut it. So 1 think I am justified in making a little argument in behalf of the amendment in the nature of a sub- stitute, intended to be proposed by the Senator from Montana for the Wherry amendment in the nature of a substitute. Mr. WHERRY. Mr. President, will the Senator yield? Mr. LUCAS. I yield. Mr. WHERRY. I thank the Senator very much for yielding. Mr. LUCAS. Iam glad to yield; but, of course, I can yield to only one Senator at a time. Mr. WHERRY. That fs correct, and I appreciate very much the Senator’s courtesy in yielding to me. Mr. President, the position of the Sen- ator from Nebraska in this matter is clear. I am in favor of the appointment of a Small Business Committee. I will agree to the appointment of a Special Committee on Small Business. I have said on the floor of the Senate time and time again that I will vote for the appointment of a special committee for that purpose or for the appointment of a legislative committee, with authority, for that purpose. The reason why I have offered the amendment in the nature of a substitute is in order to give the Senate a chance to vote on those questions. I have not gone west, nor have I been in the south. I have been all over the United States, talking to small-business men, and I wish to inform the majority leader that they want a committee of their own, either with legislative authority or without it. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE I will support either one which the Sen- ate wishes to approve. Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, I am sure the Senator from Nebraska ifs interested in small business, and I realize that he has been during all the years since he has been a Member of the Senate. Iam merely pointing out what the legislative situation is, as I understand it. I wish to reiterate that, in view of the fact that these two very distin- guished Senators, who long ago rushed in with Senate Resolution 58 and said, “This is the answer to your prayers, so far as small business is concerned,” now are moving away, one going in one direc- tion and the other going in another di- rection, and in view of the fact that the Senator from Montana [Mr. Murray] is going to offer a perfecting amendment, as I understand, it seems to me that if the Senator from Florida and the Sena- tor from Nebraska would agree to go along with the Senator from Montana, we would be able to end this argument. Mr. WHERRY. Let me_ inquire whether the Senator from Dlinois would go along, too. Mr. LUCAS. I certainly would go along with the Senator from Montana. Mr. WHERRY. I appreciate that, be- cause that is the first time in the years I have been here that the Senator from Nlinois has been in favor of a commit- tee on small business. If we are going to get the record clear, let us make it complete. Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, the Sen- ator from Nebraska is in error in that respect. When I was serving on the Committee to Audit and Contro] the Contingent Expenses of the Senate, we on that committee furnished all the money the Senator from Nebraska wanted in order to take care of the Spe- cial Committee on Small Business. Mr. WHERRY. That is correct, but that was done after the committee was authorized. Mr. LUCAS. Of course; but the Sen- ator from Illinois certainly had an op- portunity to block the Small Business Committee, in connection with the ap- propriations it needed, and could have done so had he wished to. Mr. President, after the Reorganiza- tion Act was passed, all the Senator from linois was trying to do was comply with the letter and spirit of that act, so far as the organization of committees was con- cerned. However, the Reorganization Act has been violated so much that I shall have no qualms of conscience what- ever in voting for the appointment of a special committee on small business to perform the task which was performed so well in prior Congresses by the spe- cial committee headed by the Senator from Montana [Mr. Murray], and dur- ing the Eightieth Congress by the special committee headed by the Senator from Nebraska (Mr. WHERRyY]. So I shall vote for the amendment in the nature of a substitute, to be offered by the Senator from Montana. Mr. President, in view of the depar- ture, all of a sudden, of the two Sena- tors from the original issue, I think that in the interest of harmony and in the interest of the small business of the FEBRUARY 17 country, both Senators should throw their arms around the Senator from Montana, so to speak, and should per- mit us to proceed with the amendment in the nature of a substitute offered by the Senator from Montana for the amendment in the nature of a substi- tute proposed by the Senator from Ne- braska. Mr. MURRAY submitted an amend- ment in the nature of a substitute in- tended to be proposed by him to the amendment of Mr. WHERRY to the reso- lution (S. Res. 58) to amend the Senate rules by creating a standing Committee on Small Business, which was ordered to lie on the table, and to be printed, as follows: In Meu of the matter proposed to be in- serted by said amendment insert the follow- ing: “That (a) a special committee to be known as the Committee on Small Business and to consist of 18 Senators shall be appointed by the President of the Senate as soon 8s prac- ticable after the date of adoption of this resolution. “(b) It shall be the duty of such commit- tee to study and survey by means of research and investigation all problems of American amall-business enterprises, and to obtain all facts possible in relation thereto which would not only be of public interest, but which would aid the Congress in enacting remedial legislation, and to report to the Senate from time to time the results of such studies and surveys. “(c) For the purposes of this resolution the committee, or any duly authorized sub- committee thereof, is authorized to hold hearings, to sit and act at such times and places during the sessions, recesses, and ad- journed periods of the Senate during the Eighty-first and Eighty-second Congresses, to employ such experts and clerical, steno- graphic, and other assistants, to request such information from any departments and agencies of the Government, to require by subpena or otherwise the attendance of such witnesses and the production of such books, papers, and documents, to administer such oaths, and to take such testimony and to make such expenditures as it deems advis- able. The cost of stenographic services to report the educational material and data on such hearings shall not be in excess of 25 cents per 100 words. The expense of the committee, which shall not exceed §——— in any calendar year, shall be paid from the contingent fund of the Senate upon vouchers approved by the chairman of the committee.” RECESS UNTIL MONDAY Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, I move that the Senate now stand in recess until 12 o'clock noon on Monday next. The motion was agreed to; and (at 4 o’clock and 30 minutes p. m.) the Senate took a recess until Monday, February 20, 1950, at 12 o’clock meridian. NOMINATIONS Executive nominations receivec by the Senate February 17 (egislative day of January 4), 1950: UNITED STATES MARSHAL Stanford C. Stiles, of Texas, to be United States marshal for the eastern district of Texas. He is now serving in this office under an appointment which expired September 28, 1949. IN THE NAVY Rear Adm. John W. Roper, United States Navy, to have the grade, rank, pay, and al- lowances of a vice admiral while serving as deputy chief of naval operations (personnel).
1950 SENATE Monpay, Fesruary 20, 1950 (Legislative day of Wednesday, January 4, 1950) The Senate met at 12 o’clock meridian, on the expiration of the recess. The Chaplain, Rev. Frederick Brown Harris, D. D., offered the following prayer: Our Father God, from all the tradi- tions which separate us and write our names in different camps of thought and conviction we pause for the upward look which makes us one in solemn, yet glad, communion with Thee. Teach us so to live and so to toil and so to play our part in this age on ages telling that we may face with clear conscience the gaze of our contemporaries and the judgment of posterity. May our atti- tudes and hopes widen every area of good will within the reach of our influence. In a divided, fear-haunted, violent world, may we be among those whom the gen- erations to come shall call blessed, be- cause the record shall write our names among today’s peacemakers. Amen. THE JOURNAL On request of Mr. Lucas, and by unani- mous consent, the reading of the Journal of the proceedings of Friday, February 17, 1950, was dispensed with, and the Journal was approved. LEAVE OF ABSENCE On request of Mr. SALTONSTALL, and by unanimous consent, Mr. Younc was ex- cused from attendance on the sessions of the Senate beginning today, through Wednesday. CALL OF THE ROLL Mr. LUCAS. I suggest the absence of a quorum. The VICE PRESIDENT. The Sccre- tary will call the roll. The roll was called, and the following Senators answered to their names: Aiken Hayden Malone Anderson Hendrickson Martin Benton Hill Maybank Brewster Hoey Millikin Bricker Holland Morse Butler Hunt Mundt Cain Ives Murray Capehart Jenner Myers Chapman Johnson, Colo Neely Chavez Johnson, Tex O’Conor Connally Johnston, 8. C, O'Mahoney Cordon Kefauver Robertson Darby Kem Russell Donnell Kerr Saltonstall Douglas Kilgore Schoeppel Downey Knowland Smith, Maine Dworshak Langer Smith, N. J. Eastland Leahy Sparkman Ecton Lehman Stennis Ellender Lodge Taft Ferguson Long Taylor Flanders Lucas Thomas, Utah Frear McCarran Thye Fulbright McCarthy Tobey George McClellan Watkins Gillette McFarland Wherry Graham McKellar Wiley Green McMahon Williams Gurney Magnuson Withers Mr. MYERS. I announce that the Scnator from Virginia [Mr. Byrp], the Senator from Minnesota [Mr. Hum- pureY], the Senator from Florida [Mr, Pepper}, and the Senator from Mary- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE land [Mr. Typrnes] are absent on public business. The Senator from Oklahoma [Mr, Tuomas] is absent by leave of the Senate. Mr. SALTONSTALL, I announce that the Senator from New Hampshire [Mr. Brivces] and the Senator from North Dakota [Mr. Younc] are absent by leave of the Senate. The Senator from Iowa [Mr. Hicken- LOOPER] is absent on official business. The Senator from Michigan [Mr. Van- DENBERG] is necessarily absent. The VICE PRESIDENT, A quorum is present. VISIT TO THE SENATE OF MEMBERS OF THE JAPANESE DIET Mr. LUCAS. Mr, President, in the Vice President's office at the present time are 14 members of the Japanese Diet. They are now visiting this country to study the organization and procedures of the United States Congress and of various State legislatures. I respect- fully request the Vice President to direct the Sergeant at Arms to escort these distinguished visitors into the Senate Chamber in order that they may wit- ness the Senate procedure. Following the preliminary proceeding we will take a@ recess of some 20 minutes in order that we may all become better ac- quainted with these men from Japan. The VICE PRESIDENT. Is there ob- jection? The Chair hears none, and it is so ordered. The Sergeant at Arms will escort the distinguished visitors into the Senate Chamber. The visiting members of the Japanese Diet, escorted by the Sergeant at Arms, entered the Chamber. The SERGEANT aT ARMS (Joseph C. Duke). Mr. President, I have the honor to present members of the Diet of Japan. [Applause. ] The VICE PRESIDENT. The Chair will state what the Senate, of course, al- ready knows, that members of parlia- mentary bodies of other nations are en- titled to the courtesy of the floor during any visit they make here. The members of the delegation from the Japanese Diet were escorted to the seats assigned them in the rear of the Chamber. TRANSACTION OF ROUTINE BUSINESS Mr. LUCAS. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that Members of the Senate be permitted to submit petitions and memorials, introduce bills and joint resolutions, and present routine matters for the Recorp, without debate, and without speeches. The VICE PRESIDENT. Without ob- jection, it is so ordered. EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC. The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate the following letters, which were referred as indicated: AMENDMENTS OF INTERNATIONAL WHEAT AGREEMENT ACT A letter from the Secretary of Agriculture, transmitting a draft of proposed legislation to amend the International Wheat Agree- ment Act of 1949 (with an accompanying aper); to the Committee on Agriculture and ‘orestry. 1905 SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION OF ALIENS— WITHDRAWAL or NAMzE Two letters from the Attorney Generul of the United States, withdrawing the names of Heather Mary Bocko or Heather Mary Gill, and Fanny Sara Moritz or Fannie Sarah Mor- itz, from reports relating to allens whose de- portation he suspended more than 6 months ago, transmitted to the Senate on May 1, 1949, and January 16, 1950, respectively; to the Committee on the Judiciary. REPORT OF SECRETARY OF COMMERCE A letter from the Secretary of Commerce, transmitting, pursuant to law, his annual report for the fiscal year ended June 80, 1949 (with an accompanying report); to the Com- mittee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. REPORT CN AGREEMENTS ENTERED INTO BY NAVY DEPARTMENT RELATING TO NAVAL PETROLEUM RESERVES A letter from the Director, Naval Petroleum Reserves, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on agreements entered into by the Navy Department relating to naval petroleum reserves (with accompanying papers); to the Committee on Armed Services. Avupir REPoRT OF INLAND WATERWAYS CorPORATION A letter from the Comptroller General of the Unite’ States, transmitting, pursuant to law, an audit report of the Inland Waterways Corporation, for the fiscal year ended June 80, 1949 (with an accompanying report); to the Committee on Expenditures in the Ex- ecutive Departments. REPORT ON OPERATION OF GOVERNMENT-OWNED Tin SMEtTER, Texas City, Tex, A letter from the Chairman of the Recon- struction Finance Corporation, transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on the operation of the Government-owned tin smelter at Texas City, Tex , and the program fo, the purchase and sale of tin metal, during the 6 months ended December 31, 1949 (with an accom- panying report); to the Committeee on Banking and Currency. REPORT ON PERSONNEL OF NaTIONAL LABOR RELATIONS BoarD A letter from the Chairman of the National Labor Relations Board, transmitting, pur- suant to law, a report for the fiscal year ended June 80, 1949, of all the name’, salaries, and duties of employees and officers in the employ of the Board (with an accompanying report); to the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. REporT OF NATIONAL LaBoR RELATIONS BoaRD A letter from the Chairman of the National Labor Relations Board, transmitting, pur- suant to law, a report of the Board for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1949 (with an ac- companying report); to the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. SERVICEMEN’sS EDUCATIONAL AND TRAINING PROGRAM A letter from the Administrator of the Veterans’ Administration, transmitting a draft of proposed legislation to assure that expenditures under the Servicemen’s Read- justment Act, as amended, for education and training yield a proper return both to the veteran and to the Nation as a whole (with accompanying papers); to the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS Petitions, etc., were laid before the Senate, or presented, and referred as in- dicated: By the VICE PRESIDENT: A telegram in the nature of a petition, signed by Cheever Evans, Merill N. Penn, and Robert T. Peterson, Legislative Committee, Lioyd E. Frost Post, No. 4084, Veterans of Foreign Wars, of Ridgecrest, Calif., praying
1906 for the enactment of House bill 4617, to liberalize the requirement for payment of pension in certain cases to veterans and their widows and children; to the Committee on Finance, The petitions of Bruce Merlington, of Cedar Springs, Mich., and Martha Chesbro, parliamentarian of Post No. 4198, Veterans of Foreign Wars, of Raynesford, Mont., praying for the enactment of House bill 4617, to lib- eralize the requirement for payment of pen- sion in certain cases to veterans and their widows and children; to the Committee on Finance. Resolutions adopted by the California Motor Transport Associations, Inc., of Los Angeles, Calif., favoring the enactment of legislation to repeal the tax on the trans- portation of property, and the Federal auto- motive excise taxes; to the Committee on Finance, A letter in the nature of a petition, signed by Hosea V. Smith, clerk, of the Free Will Baptist Church, of Mount Vernon, Ill, relat- ing to legalized gambling; to the Committee on Finance. A resolution adopted by the Military Order of World Wars, of Washington, D. C., pro- testing against the enactment of legislation to provide a world government; to the Com- mittee on Foreign Relations. The memortal of John C Sarracino, Gov- ernor, Pueblo of Laguna, N. Mex., remonstrat- ing against the enactment of certain provi- sions of Senate bill 75, authorizing the con- struction, operation, and maintenance of a dam and incidental works in the main stream of the Colorado River at Bridge Canyon, to- gether with certain appurtenant dams and canals, and for other purposes; to the Com- mittee on Interlor and Insular Affairs. Resolution adopted by the women's board of Doctors Hospital, and the women’s board of the Polyclinic Hospital, both of Cleveland, Ohio, and the Outagamie County Dental Society, of Appleton, Wis., protesting against the enactment of legislation provid- ing compulsory health insurance, to the Committee on Labor and Public Welfare. A telegram in the nature of a petition from the crew of the steamship American Shipper, of Baltimore, Md., relating to amendment of the Taft-Hartley labor law, to the Commit- tee on Labor and Public Welfare. The memorial of Mr. and Mrs, Henry Lan- vaner, of Forest Grove, Oreg, remonstrating against the enactment of Senate bill 1103 and House bill 2945, to adjust postal rates; to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service A resolution adopted by the Board of Su- pervisors of Delaware County, N Y., protest- ing against the enactment of legislation pro- viding a flood-control dam on Charlotte River, Davenport, N. Y.; to the Committee on Public Works. A concurrent resolution of the Legislature of the State of South Dakota; to the Com- mittee on the Judiciary: “Senate Concurrent Resolution 1 “Concurrent resolution memortalizing the Congress of the United States, His Excel- Jency the President of the United States, to make an immediate, thorough, and ex- haustive study and investigation of the loyalty of the members, officers, and employ- €es oi the State Department, and to take such further appropriate action to rid the Depart- ment of State of procommunistic employees in order that the safety of our Nation will not be further endangered by men in high pleces who condone acts of treason which endanger the safety of the United States of America and the people. “Be it resolved by the Senate of the State of South Dakota (the house concurring therein): “Whereas through the activities of the House Un-American Activities Committee and the Federal Bureau of Investigation CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE Alger Hiss was twice tried in the Federal courts of the United States of America, and convicted of the crime of perjury; and “Whereas members of the United States Supreme Court, Supreme Court Justices Frankfurter and Reed, voluntarily testified in the first trial as character witnesses, thereby breaking all of the precedents heretofore existing in relation to our Federal courts, and creating in the minds of the American people a disregard for members of our Fed- eral judiciary; and “Whereas upon the conviction by a Fed- eral jury in a Federal court of the sald Alger Hiss, Dean Acheson, Secretary of State of the United States of America, issued a prepared and considered statement in which he said, ‘I do not intend to turn my back on Alger Hiss,’ which statement was designed to be- little the actions of an American jury in an American court and to raise in the minds of the American people a doubt as to the gullt of one of Dean Acheson’s friends and former State Department employee in spite of, and in total disregard of, results of a free and fair trial and a verdict rendered by a jury as pro- vided by the Constitution and the laws of the United States: Now, therefore, be it “Resolved, That the Senate of the State of South Dakota, the House concurring therein, do memorialize the Congress of the United States and His Excellency the President of the United States to make an immediate check of the loyalties and beliefs of the men employed in the State Department of the United States, from Dean Acheson on down, to determine whether or not the ideus and ideals of such individuals are such that the American people can have continued faith that such Department, through its repre- sentatives, will safely keep and guard the secrets of the United States of America from foreign enemies and that such Department and its employees in preparing and carrying out a foreign policy in relation to Russia and other foreign countries will adopt and carry out policies which are not contrary to the ideas and ideals of the American people as expressed by the Constitution of the United States and the laws udopted thereunder; be it further “Resolved, That His Excellency the Presi- dent of the United States make immedi- ately available to the House Un-American Activities Committee all secret files and lists and reports of investigations covering the loyalties and activities of any and all employ- ees of the Government of the United States which jn any way show or indicate disloyalty to the United States of America as expressed by Communist membership or otherwise; be it further “Resolved, That copies of this concurrent resolution be forwarded to His Excellency the President of the United States, to United States Senator Cuan GuRNEY, to United States Senator Kart Munopr, to Congressman Francis H. Cas8, to Congressman Haro.p Lovre, and to the Presiding Officers of both Houses of Congress. “Rex TERRY, “Lieutenant Governor, President of the Senate. “Nrets P. JENSEN, “Secretary of the Senate. “A. E. MUNCK, “Speaker of the House of Representa- tives. “W. J. MATSON, “Chief Clerk of the House.” By Mr. CONNALLY: A resolution of the Senate of the Legisia- ture of the State of Texas; to the Committee on Finance: “Senate Resolution 24 “Whereas the Congress is considering a measure which would repeal or reduce the depletion allowance now made in connection With income taxes on producers of natural Tesources; and FEBRUARY 20 “Whereas the economy of the State of Texas to a great degree is tied up with the production of natural resources; and “Whereas these industries furnish a large portion of the revenue for the support of the State government, including its public- school system and its welfare and other pro- grams, and “Whereas prospecting for new reserves ls 8 hazardous and expensive operation; and “Whereas the elimination or reduction of the present allowance for depletion would tend to create unemployment and would seriously cripple these industries, and par- ticularly the smaller units and independ- ents who have been the backbone of these industries; and further would seriously re- tard the search for and development of new sources of supply vitally necessary to this country, particularly in case of war: Now, therefore, be it “Resolved by the Senate of Teras, That the Congress of these United States be and is respectfully urged to defeat this attempt to eliminate or reduce the depletion allowance, and thereby to preserve the economy of the various States and assist in preparing this country to defend herself, if necessary; and, be it further “Resolved, That a copy of this resolution be wired immediately to Hon. Sam RaYBURN, Speaker of the House of Representatives, and to Hon. ALBEN W. Bark ey, Vice President of these United States; and that copies hereof be mailed to the Representatives and Sen- ators in Congress from the State of Texas. “Grapy HAZLEwoop, “President Pro Tempore of the Senate.” By Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina; A resolution of the House of Representa- tives of the Legislature of the State of South Carolina; to the Committee on Armed Serv- ices. “Resolution memorializing Congress to enact legislation reimbursing those individuals who were drafted into the service in 1940, the difference between the base pay of a private of 821 per month and 850 per month which became the base pay of a private soldier 2 years later “Whereas in 1940, due to a national emer- gency, the Congress of the United States enacted legislation which drafted into the service of our country thousands of young men who, while anxious to make any sac- rifice for the defense of their land, were nevertheless most desirous of continuing their chosen professions and businesses in civilan fe; and “Whereas these young men were drafted into the armed forces and served willingly and with honor and credit; and “Whereas these Americans in many cases gave up lucrative and highly paying posi- tions and served for $21 per month for a period of about 2 years, when the base pay of & private soldier was raised to @50 per month, and by so doing, Congress recognized the inequity of the scale of pay for the different grades of rank; and “Whereas Congress has never recognized the very pertinent fact that these men who were drafted and served for $21 per month for about 2 years form a large bloc of Amert- cans to whom some form of additional re- muneration is justly due; and “Whereas many of these men returned to civilian pursuits after the cessation of hos- tilities only to find that their savings were gone and the matter of starting again was a long, expensive, and difficult task: Now, therefore, be it “Resolved, That the Congress of the United States be memorialized to enact legislation immediately, giving those men who were Grafted into the service on account of the national emergency in 1940, the differ- ence between the $21 of a private and $50
1950 which became the pay of the private soldier later, which payment will only partially re- imburse these men for the financial sacri- fices that they were called upon to make on account of the national emergency; and be it further “Resolved, That the clerk of the house of representatives be directed to furnish a copy of this resolution to the two United States Senators and the Members of the House of Representatives of the Congress of the United States from South Carolina, and to each of the State commanders of each vet- erans’ organization in the United States, and to each national commander of such organizations.” TAXES ON ADMISSIONS TO CERTAIN ATHLETIC CONTESTS — RESOLUTIONS OF GENERAL COURT OF MASSACHU- SETTS Mr. SALTONSTALL. Mr. President, On behalf of my colleague, the junior Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. LopcE] and myself, I present for appropriate reference and ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Rrecorp, resolutions adopted by the General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, relat- ing to the removal of the existing taxes on admissions to high-school athictic contests or athletic contests conducted by charitable and nonprofit organiza- tions. The resolutions were referred to the Committee on Finance, as follows. Resolutions memorializing Congress to re- move existing taxes on admissions to high- school uthletic contests or athletic con- tests conducted by charitable and non- profit organizations Resolved, That the Genera! Court of Massa- chusetts hereby urges and petitions the Con- gress of the United States to enact legislation repealing any existing requirement of luw that any admission or other tax be imrosed or collected upon tickets for admission to high-school athletic contests or athletic con- tests conducted by charitable and nonprofit organizations, and be it further Resolved, That copies of these resolutions be sent forthwith by the secretary of the Commonwealth to the President of the United States, to the presiding officer of each branch of Congress, and to the Members thereof from this Commonwealth. In house of representatives, adopted, Feb- Tuury 6, 1950 LAWRENCE R. GROVE, Clerk. In senate, adopted, in concurrence, Febru- ary 9, 1950. IrvING N. HAYDEN, Clerk. The VICE PRESIDENT laid before the Senate resolutions of the General Court of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, identical with the foregoing, which were referred to the Committee on Finance. LONG-RANGE SHIPBUILDING PROGRAM— RESOLUTION OF CITY COUNCIL OF QUINCY, MASS. Mr. SALTONSTALL. Mr, President, on behalf of my colleague, the junior Senator from Massachusetts |Mr. LopcE] and myself, I present for appropriate ref- erence and ask unanimous consent to have printed in the REcorp, a resolution adopted by the City Council of Quincy, Mass., favoring the adoption of a long- range shipbuilding program. There being no objection, the resolu- tion was referred to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, and CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Whereas employment in shipbuilding ia decreasing nationally on a scale to cause serious concern, not only to shipworkers but to all thoughtful citizens; and Whereas shipbuilding has played an im- portant part in the growth and develop- ment of the city of Quincy, Mass.: Therefore, be 1t Resolved by the Quincy City Council in regular meeting, That the preservation of shipbuilding skills, the protection of for- etgn commerce, and the protection of the Nation's defense, demands adoption by the 1960 Congress of the United States of a long- range shipbuilding program, and he it fur- ther Resolved, That copies of this resolution be forwarded to United States Senators from Massachusetts, LEVERETT SALTONSTALL and Henry Caznor Loves, and ull Members of Con- gress from the State of Massachusetts. EXCISE TAXES ON TRANSPORTATION AND COMMUNICATION SERVICES—RESOLU- TION OF NEBRASKA STATE RAILWAY COMMISSION Mr WHERRY. Mr. President, I pre- sent for appropriate rcference and ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Recorp, a resolution adopted by the Nebraska State Railway Commission on February 7, 1950, concerning the present Federal excise taxes on transportation and communication services. There being no objection, the resolu- tion was referred to the Ccmmittee on Finance, and ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Resolution 156 Whereas the Federal excise taxes on trans- portation and communication services were initially levied to help defray war costs and to discourage unnecessary travel and com- munication, and Whereas almost 5 years have elapsed since the end of the war, and the urgent need for the levying of such taxes no longer exists; and Whereas said taxes are discriminatory against the long distance users of transpor- tation snd communication services, and against Nebraska citizens because they are far removed from centers of population; and Wheress the taxes are calculated on a percentage rather than on a flat basis and in- creases of rates necessitated since the end of the war have greatly increased the amount of tax; and Whereas the tax as applied to rural and exchange services is grossly unfair and in- equitable and has become more burdensome by reason of increases In exchange service rates made necessary by large increases in costs of rendering service with consequent pyramiding of taxes thereon; and Wherens because of increases in rates for transportation and communication services, a decrease in traffic and a decline in economic status of the users of service, particularly the rural subscriber of telephone service, a situation has been created where the use of exchange services has reached a point of diminishing returns: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the Nebraska State Railway Commission is of the opinion that the pres- ent excise taxes on transportation and com- munication services are inimical t> the main- tenance and use of transportation and come munication facilities and should be com- pletely repealed; and further Resolved, That a copv of this resolution be forwarded to Kenneth 8. Wherry and Hugh A. Butler, United States Senators, and to Carl T. Curtis, Eugene D. O'Sullivan, Karl Stefan, and A. L. Miller, Representatives of 1907 Congress, and to Walter R. McDonald, Gen- eral Solicitor of the NARUC. Adopted at Lincoln, Nebr., this 7th day of February 1950, at regu'ar session. THE NEBRASKA ETATE RAILWAY COMMISSION, Haroip A. PALMER, Chairman. Wa ter E Rosgerts, Commissioner. RICHARD H. Larson, Com missioner. Attest: JosgerH J Brown, Secretary. CLEAR CHANNELS IN RADIO-—-RESOLU- TION OF AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION Mr. BRICKER. Mr, President, I pre~ sent for appropriate reference, and ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Recorp, a resolution adopted by the American Farm Bureau Federation, re- lating to clear channels in radio for the dissemination of farm news. There being no objection, the resolu- tion was referred to the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce, and ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Farm people generally are having to de- pend primarily upon clear-channel rndio- broadcasting stations for their radio infor- mation and dissemination of their programs to others. This will continue unless unfore- seen new developments improve transmis- sion and reception. We therefore firmly op- pose any reduction in the number of clear- channel stations. We urge that the trequen- cies of clear-channel stations be held in- violate by international agreement und that the power of these stations be increased to allow for complete coverage to all areas in territories of the respective stutions. We ask that radio service to farmers by substations be maintained and improved with reference to the special needs of people on farms. REMOVAL OF CERTAIN RESTRICTIONS IMPOSED UNDER FOREIGN TRADE ZONES ACT—RESOLUTION OF AMERI- CAN WAREHOUSEMEN’'S ASSOCIATION, CHICAGO, ILL. Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, I have in my hand a resolution which was adopted by the fifty-ninth annual convention of the American Warehousemen’s Associa- tion in Chicago early this month. The resolution was sent to me by Harold M. Willardson, president of the Milwaukee Warehousemen’s Association, who, like his associates in this industry through- out the country, is deeply interested in the passage of certain legislation to re- move restrictions which have been im- posed by the activities in the Foreign Trade Zones Act of 1934. Naturally I share the deep interest of these warehousemen in facilitating world trade, and I ask unanimous con- sent that the text of this resolution be appropriately referred and printed in the body of the Recorp at this point. There being no objection, the resolu- tion was referred to the Committee on Finance, and ordered to be printed in the ReEcorp, as follows: Whereas the Foreign Trade Zones Act of 1934 (title 19, section 81 A.-U, USCA) was enacted for the purpose of creating free ports wherein many operations essential to foreign commerce may be carried on without the burdensome intricacies of customs, laws and regulations applicable to ordinary ports of entry; and
1908 Whereas the purpose of said act, namely to promote, stimulate, and facilitate interna- tional commerce, has not been entirely achieved by reason of undue restrictions against certain activities within foreign trade zones notably the activity of manufacturing and exhibiting; and Whereas H. R. 2163, a bill, has been intro- duced into the present seasion of the Eighty- first Congress by Representatives Bocas and Crier for the purpose of removing these re- strictions imposed by the activities in For- eign Trade Zones Act of 1934; and Whereas the achievement for the purposes of the said Foreign Trade Zones Act of 1934 have been further hampered by confining foreign trade zones privileges to an extremely narrow and limited orb, namely the few for- eign trade zones created by the Foreign Trade Zones Board pursuant to the Foreign Trade Zones Act of 1934; and Whereas we held that the extension of foreign trade zones privileges (as reflected in the Foreign Trade Zones Act of 1934 and as proposed to be amended by the aforesaid Boggs-Celler bill) to qualified warehouse- men will stimulate, promote and foster for- eign commerce; facilitate the handling of commodities and materials shipped, stored, and handled in foreign commerce; stabilize world trade and cure the deficiencies of im- ports as compared with exports and mate- rially contribute to the peace and economic well-being of the world; and Whereas all of these aims and purposes are provided for in H. R 4728, @ bill intro- duced by Representative Bocas into the first session of the Eighty-first Congress and re- ferred to the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives; and Whereas the said H R. 4728 docs no vio- lence to the customs of the United States or to the principles of the Foreign Trade Zones Act of 1934 but is, un the contrary, thor- oughly consistent with all of the tariff laws and regulations promulgated thereunder, and with the principles of the Foreign Trade Zones Act of 1934: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That the American Warehouse- men's Association merchandise division, in convention assembled thereby lauds the aims, objects, and purposes of H. R. 4723 and en- thusiastically endorses and urges its passage by the Congress of the United States; and be it further Resolved, That copies of this resolution be transmitted to Representative Bocas, to the chairman of the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives, to the chair- man of the Finance Committee of the United States Senate, President of the United States, and to such additional Representatives and Senators and to such other Officials and agen- cies of the Government as may be desig- nated by the AWA merchandise division committee on foreign trade zones. REPORT OF A COMMITTEE The following report of a committee was submitted: By Mr. MORSE, from the Committee on Armed Services: 8. 2853. A bill to authorize the acceptance of foreign decorations for participation in the Berlin airlift; with amendments (Rept. No 1277). EXECUTIVE REPOHTS OF A COMMITTEE As in executive session, The following favorable reports of nominations were submitted: By Mr. McCARRAN, from the Committee on the Judictary: George W. Whitehurst, of Florida, to be United States district Judge for the northern and southern districts of Florida; and Frank A. Hooper, of Georgia, to be United States district Judge for the northern district of Georgia. CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE BILLS INTRODUCED Bills were introduced, read the first time and, by unanimous consent, the second time, and referred as follows: By Mr. TAFT: 8.8058. A bill for the relief of Nessie 8. Widiler; and 8.3059. A bill for the relief of John J. Sebenlck; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. KNOWLAND: 8.3060. A bill for the relief of Petr Zenkl end his wife, Paula; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. LANGER: 8. 3061. A bill for the relief of Dr. E. Gun- nar Johansson; and 8. 3062. A bill for the relief of Alfred The- odor Ex; to the Committee on the Judiciary. 8.3063. A bill to allow additional credits for income-tax purposes in the case of per- sons reaching the ages of 75 and 85 years; to the Committee on Finance. 8. 3064. A bill to increase annuities under the Railroad Retirement Act of 1937 by 25 percent, and for other purposes; to the Com- mittee on Labor and Public Welfare. By Mr. DWORSHAK: 5.3065. A bill to authorize loans to assist farmers in clearing cut-over timber lands; to the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry. 8.3066. A bill for the relief of Dionisio Aguirre Irastorza; and 8.3067. A bill for the relief of Andres Agutrre Irastorza; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. McFARLAND: S. 3068. A bill for the relief ot the adopted child of Lt. and Mrs. Neill C. Burnett; to the Committee on the Judiciary. (Mr. McCARRAN introduced Senate bill 3069, to establish a Bureau of Passports and Visas to be headed by a director, which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary and appears under a separate heading.) By Mr. LUCAS: 8.3070. A bill authorizing the naturaliza- tion of George Mikroulis; and 58.3071. A bill for the relief of Maria P. Sigioltzakis; to the Committee on the Ju- diciary. By Mr. GEORGE: 8.3072. A bill to provide benefits for mem. bers of the reserve components of the armed forces who suffer disability or death from injuries incurred while engaged in active. duty training for periods less than 30 days or while engaged in inactive-duty training; to the Committee on Armed Services. By Mrs. SMITH of Maine: 8.3073. A bill for the relief of Sono Theresa Nishimura; to the Committee on the Judiciary. (Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina (by re- quest) introduced Senate bill 8074, to pro- vide for the payment of severance pay to cer- tain officers and employees separated from the service of the Federal Government or of the municipal government of the District of Columbia, which was referred to the Com- mittee on Post Office and Civil Service, and a@ppears under a separate heading.) By Mr. IVES: 8. 3075. A bill for the rellef of Evald Ferdi- nand Kask; to the Committee on the Judi- cilary. By Mr. JOHNSON of Colorado: 8.3076. A bill to amend the Administrative Procedure Act; and 8.3077. A bill for the relief of Shizu Fujii and her son Suenori Fujii; to the Committee on the Judiciary. 5.3078. A bill to define service of certain members of the Women's Army Auxiliary Corps as active military service; 8.3078 (by request). A bill to define mis. conduct for compensation and pension pur- poses under laws administered by the Vet- erans’ Administration; and 8.3080 (by request). A bill to provide al- Jowance of death pension when death in serv- FEBRUARY 20 ice Is denied service-connection; to the Com. mittee on Finance. By Mr. GURNEY: 8.3081. A bill to provide for boundary ad- justnrents of the Badlands National Monu- ment, in the State of South Dakota, and for other purposes; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs, By Mr. MURRAY (for Mr. Perpre): 8.3082. A bill for the relief of Erika Kue- bart and her minor son; to the Committee on the Judiciary. 8.3083. A bill for the relief of Mrs. Rosa J. Cason; to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Service. By Mr. MORSE: 8.3084. A bill authorizing the erection of @ monument to the memory of Henry Milton Brainard at Cape Arago Light Station in Coos County, Oreg.; to the Committee on Rules and Administration. By Mr. BUTLER: 8.3085. A bill to confer jurisdiction on the State of Nebraska over offenses committed by or against Indians on Indian reservations; and 8.3086. A bill to provide for disposition of inherited interests in the estates of deceased Indian allottees under jurisdiction of the Winnebago Indian agency in Nebraska; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs. By Mr. ANDERSON (for himself and Mr. CHAvrz): 8.3087. A bill to authorize an appropria- tion for cooperation with the Gallup Board of Education, New Mexico, for the construoc- tion, extension, improvement, and equipment of school buildings to be available to both Indian and non-Indian children; to the Com- mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs. (Mr. MAGNUSON introduced Senate bill 3088, to amend section 22 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, to strengthen its provisions providing for the imposition of tmport quotas on agricultural commodities when imports of such commodities tend to interfere with price support or other programs adminis- tered by the Department of Agriculture, to transfer its administration from the United States Tariff Commission to the United States Department of Agriculture, and for other purposes, was referred to the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, and appears under & Separate heading.) BUREAU OF PASSPORTS AND VISAS Mr. McCARRAN. Mr. President, I in- troduce for appropriate reference a bill to establish a Bureau of Passports and Visas to be headed by a director, and I ask unanimous consent that the bill, and an explanatory statement prepared by me be printed in the Rrcorp. The VICE PRESIDENT. The bill will be received and appropriately referred, and, without objection, the bill and ex- planatory statement presented by the Senator from Nevada will be printed in the Recorp. The bill (8. 3069) to establish a Bu- reau of Passports and Visas to be headed by a director, introduced by Mr. Mc- CarRAN, was read twice by its title, re- ferred to the Committee on the Judi- ciary, and ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That the Immigration Act of May 26, 1924, as amended (43 Stat. 163; 8 U. 8S. C. 201), be amended by adding & new section to be known as section 2A ag follows: “2A. (a) There is hereby established in the Department of State a Bureau of Pass« ports and Visas to be headed by a Director with rank and compensation not less than that of an Assistant Secretary of State. The Director shall be a native-born citizen of the United States with not less than 10 years’
1950 experience in the Foreign Service of the United States, and shall have attained at least class one in the Foreign Service. He shall be appointed by the President by and with the advice and consent of the Senate. “(b) The functions of the Visa Division and of the Passport Division of the Depart- ment of State are hereby transferred to the Bureau of Passports and Visas and the func- tions of the Chiefs and other officers and em- ployees of the Visa Division and of the Pass- port Division are hereby transferred to the Director for redelegation and redistribution by him in his discretion. “(c) The Director shall have authority to maintain direct and continuous alson with the Directors of Federal Bureau of Investiga- tion, Central Intelligence Agency, and other internal-security officers of the Government for the purpose of obtaining and exchanging information in enforcing the provisions of this act in the interest of the internal secu- rity of the United States The Commissioner of Immigration and Naturalization and the Director shall maintain dircct and continu- ous liaison with each other with a view to a coordinated, uniform, and efficient adminis- tration of this act. “(d) Within the Bureau of Passports and Visas there shall be a Visa Division and a Passport Division each to be headed by a Chief having at least 10 years’ experience in administering the immigration and na- tionality laws. There shall also be a law Officer designated to serve as general counsel of the Bureau of Passports and Visas who shall have authority to maintain liaison with the appropriate officers of the Immigration and Naturalization Service with a view to uniform interpretation of the provisions of this act “(e) Estimates of expenditures to be made by the Bureau of Passports and Visas of the Department of State shall be sepurately stated in the budgets submitted by the President for such Department; and appro- priations for such Bureau shall be separately Stated in all acts making appropriations tor such Department and shall not be available for expenditure for any other function “(f) The Director shall perform his dutics unde: the general direction of the Secretary of State" The explanatory statement presented by Mr. McCarran is as follows: ETATEMFNT BY SENATOR M’CARRAN Mr President, I have today introduced a bill providing for the creation in the Depart- ment of State of a Bureau of Passports and Visas, to be headed by a Director, who will rank not lower and have compensation not less than that of an Assistant Secretary of State The introduction of this bill ts prompted by the results of the testimony, given before the Stbcommittee on Immigra- tion and Naturalization of the Judiciary Committee by officers of the Department of State and the Immigration and Naturaliza- tion Service, and other officers of the Govern- ment. It will be recalicd that the Senate authorized the Judiciary Committee to make a study of the various provisions and opera- tions ot our immigration and naturalization laws. We have heard testimony from the Deputy Under Secretary cf State for Administration, the Chief and other officers of the Visa Divi- sion, and we have studied the operations of the Passport Division, of the Department of State We have heard testimony from the Attorney General and officers of the Immigra- tion and Naturalization Service, and we have heard testimony from the Director of the Central Intelligence Agency. In the light of this testimony I have come to the unavold- able conclusion that there is something wrong in the present organization of the Department of State and I believe that Con- gress should step in and straighten out some of the organizational deficiencies which CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE need attention at the earliest possible mo- ment, It has been too easy for subversive aliens to obtain visas with which to apply for admission into the United States at ports of entry in this country, where they and their backgrounds are unknown to the immigra- tion officials. We have also noted thut cere tain American citizens with subversive or questionable records have been able to ob- tain American passports, with which they have proceeded abrvuad for purposes which ob- viously are not in the interests of the secu- rity and safety of the United States. My inquiries and studies concerning the provisions and operations of our immigration laws have convinced me that there is urgent need for some amcndatory legislation in ad- vance of the completion of our study of the entire problem and the submission of a full report of our labors for the lost 2 yeurs. I have already introduced a bill (8 1632) on the substantive provisions of the law relating to the exclusion of subversives However, nu provision of law that the Congress could write will solve the problem tf the organiza- tional set-up for its administration and en- forcement is faulty The results of my inquiries and study have been sufAcient to convince me that the offi- cers and employees of the Passport and Visa Divisions of the Department of State are handicapped by a defective organizution set- up. For many years both the Passport Divi- sion and the Visa Division of the Depart- ment of State functioned directly under an Assistant Secretary of State and maintained direct and continuous contact with the Fed- eral Bureau of Investigation and other secu- rity and intelligence agencies of the Govern- ment, from which they obtained promptly and directly classified information relating to applicants for passports and visas. This information was analyzed by the experi- enced staffs and technicians of the Passport Division or of the Visa Division, depending upon whether the application was being made for a passport or for a visa, and the informa- tion was therefore brought directly to bear upon the decision reached on applications. Mr. President, since the Judiciary Commit- tee initiated its inquiries into the operational functioning of the Passport and Visa Divisions of the Department of State their long-estab- lished and direct contacts with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other security and intelligence agencies of the Government have been abruptly terminated by directive af the higher officials in the Department of State My information does not indicate that the ubrupt termination of contacts be- tween the Federal Bureau of Investigation und other agencies of the Government and the Passport and Visa Divistons was effected at the request, or the wish, of the Federal Bureau of Investigation or of any of the other agencies, such as the Central Intelli- gence Agency, the military or the naval in- telligence services Mr. President, I wish to say to the Senate that this policy in the Department of State vitally affects our national and internal se- curity. Can you imagine anyone in this day and time who is so oblivious to all consider- ations of our national security as to weaken the hands of those officers and employees of our Government who are trying to enforce the provisions of our law which exclude sub- versive aliens from this country? If the Kremlin had ordered this termination of con- tacts between the Passport and Visa Divisions and the security and intelligence agencies it could be no less fatal to our security. Mr. President, let me recite some of the incidents which apparently led to this abrupt termination of direct contacts between the Passport and Visa Divisions of the Depart- ment of State and the Federal Bureau of In- vestigation and other security and intelli- gence agencies of the Government. You will recall that officers of the Visa Division testi- fied before the Subcommittee on Immigra- tion and Naturalization of the Senate Judie 1909 ciary Committee in 1948. One of these offi- cers was reprimanded by his superiors in the Department of State for telling the subcom- mittee the facts, which have been amply con- firmed in the testimony of that officer's own superiors and other officers of the Govern- ment. We have established beyond a doubt that he was correct in saying that many sub- versive aliens were infiltrating into the United States. The Department of State, however, pretending not to know the facts, appointed a special committee of three pri- vate citizens to examine into this question. They submitted a wholly unrealistic report in which they denied the facts which have since been amply proven to be true, although the Subcommittee on Immigration and Nat- uralization was denied access to any of the Mes of the Government in this instance. However, the committee of three private citizens must have been disturbed in their own minds regarding the accuracy of the contents of their report. They must have figured that some day the true facts would certainly become known. They therefore in- cluded in their report to the Secretary of State the following statement: “Your committee believes that existing ad- ministrative procedures, and the legislation on which they are based, are sufficient. The committee is not satisfied that practices under the outline of procedures are satisfac- torily coordinated. This subject will be dis- cussed in a subsequent memorandum to you, embodying certain suggestions which have occurred to your committee in the course of its inquiries.” Mr. President, I have seen no person who is willing to say what the suggestions were that occurred to the three-man committee which reported to the Secretary of State. The officers of the Visa Division say that they have never seen any record of the suggestions and have no idea what the suggestions were. However, I think we have the answer now. It appears that the abrupt termination of the direct contacts between the Passport and Visa Divisions and the Federal Bureau of In- vestigation and other security and intelli- gence agencies of the Government occurred soon after the three-man committee sub- mitted its report. Now I do not wish to give the Members of the Senate the impression that the Passport and Visa Divisions do not receive any infor- mation whatever from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other security and intelli- gence agencies of the Government. They do recelve some information from these sources, but it now comes through an intermediate office, called the Division of Security in the Department of State. When asked whether they are furnished by the Division of Security with all information received by that Divi- sion from the Federal Bureau of Investiga- tion and other agencies bearing upon appli- cants for passports or visas the officers of the Passport and Visa Divistons could not answer. How would they know? If asked whether the information had been edited or excerpted be- fore reaching the Passport and Visa Divisions, the answer of the officers of the Passport and Visa Divisions would he the same. How would they know? Mr. President, I have outlined a situation which could be considerably elaborated upon, but I believe that it is more important at this time to think in terms of a remedy for the faulty organizational structure which precludes the long-established direct contact between the Passport and Visa Divisions and the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other security and intelligence agencies of the Government. Under the bill I have introduced there will be created in the Department of State a Bu- reau of Passports and Visas. The Passport and Visa Divisions of the Department will be re- organized under the Director of that Bureau. The Director will be required by statute to maintain direct and continuous contact with
1910 the Directors of the Federal Bureau of In- vestigation, the Central Intelligence Agency, and with other security and intelligence agencies of the Government, as well as with the Commissioner of Immigration and Natur- alization, to the end that every applicant for a passport or a visa may be adequately and expeditiously screened, insofar as it may be practicable to do so, before final action is taken on his application, Mr. President, I have given some thought to the qualifications which should be re- quired of the Director of the Bureau of Pass- ports and Visas, and of the Chiefs of the Pass- port and Visa Divisions in that Bureau. Of course, the loyalty and ability of these officers should be beyond question. In view of what has happened I cannot be satisfied that the security of this country will be adequately protected from the infiltration of subversive and questionable persons unless we lay down in the law the requirements for appointment of the officers in charge of the Bureau and the divisions in it. The Department of State took over the re- maining functions and personnel of certain wartime agencies several years ago. The Fed- eral Economic Administration, formerly Henry Wallace's Bureau of Economic War- fare, the Office of War Information formerly under Elmer Davis, the Lend-Lease Adminis~ tration under Harry Hopkins, and the rem- nants of the Office of Strategic Services, were all taken over by the Department of State in a process of liquidation. Those who constitute the remnants of these liquidated agencies have been established in Key posts in the Department of State. As they were trained to regard the Soviet Union as an ally instead of a cobelligerent it is quite nat- urally going to take some time for them to adjust themselves fully to the actual fact that Soviet communism is actually the en- emy of the United States and of all free countries of the world. Mr. President, to protect the internal se- curity of the United States, I have introduced my bill to reorganize that part of the Depart- ment of State which is required to admin-~ ister and enforce our immigration and na- tionality laws. I think a Bureau of Passports and Visas, organized to include the present Passport and Visa Divisions of the Depart- ment of State may accomplish the purpose. SEVERANCE PAY TO CERTAIN EMPLOYEES OF THE FEDERAL AND DISTRICT GOV- ERNMENTS Mr. JOHNSTON of South Carolina, Mr. President, by request, I introduce for appropriate reference a bill to pro- vide for the payment of severance pay to certain officers and employees of the Federal Government and the municipal government of the District of Columbia, and I ask unanimous consent that the bill and a statement of the bill prepared by me be printed in the REecorp. The VICE PRESIDENT. The bill will be received and appropriately referred, and without objection, the bill and ex- planatory statement presented by the Senator from South Carolina will be printed in the Recorp. The bill (S. 3074) to provide for the payment of severance pay to certain offi- cers and employees separated from the service of the Federal Government or of the municipal government of the District of Columbia, introduced by Mr. Joun- ston of South Carolina (by request), was read twice by its title, referred to the Committee on Post Office and Civil Serv- ice, and ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Be tt enacted, etc., That (a) each officer or employee (including employees paid on an CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE hourly or piece rate basis and employees whose compensation is fixed and adjusted from time to time as nearly as is consistent with the public interest in accordance with prevailing rates) in the service of (1) the executive branch of the Government, includ- ing the field service of the Post Office Depart~- ment, (2) a corporation wholly owned by the United States which is an instrumentality of the United States, or (8) the municipal government of the District of Columbia, who ig involuntarily separated from such service, on or after the effective date of this act, not by removal for cause on charges of miscon- duct or delinquency, shall be paid, immedi- ately upon separation from such service, & sum as provided for in section (1) of subsec- tion (b) (hereinafter referred to as “sever- ance pay”) by the department or independ- ent establishment of the Government, or by the department or agency of the municipal government of the District of Columbia, with which he was employed immediately prior to separation. (b) Such severance pay shall be in an amount equal to 1 day’s basic compensation at the rate such officer or employee was en- titled to receive immediately prior to sepa- ration, multiplied by the number of whole calendar months of that period of continu- ous service performed by him immediately prior to separation, but such amount shall not exceed 90 days’ basic compensation at such rate. Sec, 2. This act shall not apply to— (1) any such officer or employee who is subject to the Civil Service Retirement Act of May 29, 1930, as amended, or any other re- tirement law or system, and, at the time of separation from such service, has fulfilled the requirements of optional or automatic re- tirement under such act of May 29, 1930, or such other rstirement law or system; and (2) any such officer or employee who fs en- titled to receive compensation under the Federal Employee's Compensation Act, as amended, except an officer or employee en- titled to receive any benefits under such act on account of the death of any other person. SEc, 3. There are hereby authorized to be appropriated such sums as muy be necessary to carry out the purposes of *+his act. Sec 4, This act shall take effect on the first day of the first calendar month following the calendar month in which it is enacted. The explanatory statement presented by Mr. JoHNSToN of South Carolina is as follows: BTATEMENT BY SENATOR JOHNSTON OF SOUTH CAROLINA This bill provides for the payment of sev- 6rance pay to certain officers and employees of the Federal Government and municipal government of the District of Columbia. Officers and employees who are involun- tarily separated from the service, not by removal for cause on charges of misconduct or delinquency, shall be paid severance pay in an amount equal to one day's basic com- pensation for each whole calendar month of continuous service performed immedlately prior to the employee's separation, not to exceed 90 days basic compensation, at the rate such officers or employees were entitled to recelve immediately prior to separation, Officers and employees who have fulfilled the requirements or who are entitled to re~ ceive compensation under the Federal Em- ployees’ Compensation Act will not be ell- gible to receive severance pay under the pro- visions of this bill. Federal employees at the present time are not covered by unemployment compensation or severance pay and this legislation when enacted into law will not cost very much but will protect those employees who are let out of the service by reduction in force. FEBRUARY 20 AMENDMENT OF AGRICULTURAL ADJUSTMENT ACT Mr. MAGNUSON. Mr. President, I introduce for appropriate reference a bill to amend the Agricultural Adjust- ment Act, and I ask unanimous consent that the bill, together with a statement by me explaining the meaning and pur- pose of the bill be printed in the Rec- ORD. The VICE PRESIDENT. The bill will be received and appropriately referred, and, without objection, the bill and ex- planatory statement presented by the Senator from Washington will be printed in the Recorp. The bill (8. 3088) to amend section 22 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, to strengthen its provisions providing for the imposition of import quotas on agri- cultural commodities when imports of such commodities tend to interfere with price support or other programs admin- istered by the Department of Agricul- ture, to transfer its administration from the United States Tariff Commission to the United States Department of Agri- culture, and for other purposes, was read twice by its title, referred to the Com- mittee on Agriculture and Forestry, and ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Be it enacted, etc., That section 22 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act, as amended (U S. C., title 7, sec. 624), is hercby amended to rend as follows: “Src, 22. (a) Whenever the Secretary of Agriculture has reason to believe that any article or articles are being or are prac- tically certain to be imported into the United States under such conditions and in such quantities as to render or tend to render ineffective, or materially interfere with, any program or operation undertuken under this title or the Soil Conservation and Domestic Allotment Act, as amended, or section 32, Public Law No. 320, Seventy-fourth Con- gress, approved August 24, 1935, as amended, or any loan, purchase, or other program or operation undertaken by the Department of Agriculture, or any agency operating under its direction, with respect to any agricultural commodity or product thereof, or to reduce substantially the amount of any product processed in the United States from any agricultural commodity or product thereof with respect to which any such pro- giam or operation is being undertaken, he shall cause, on his own motion or on the motion of interested producers or processors, aff immediate investigation to be made by the appropriate office or agency of the United States Department of Agriculture respon- sible for the administration of the affected program, which shall give precedence to in- vestigations under this section to determine such facts. Such investigation shall be made after due notice and opportunity for hear- ing to interested parties, and shall be con- ducted subject to such regulations as the Secretary of Agriculture shall specify. “(b) If, on the basis of such investiga- tion and report to him of findings and recommendations made in connection there- with, the Secretary of Agriculture finds the existence of such facts, he shall certify to the President such facts and the President may by proclamation impose such fees not in excess of 50 percent ad valorem or such quantitative limitations on any article or articles which may be entered or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption as he finds and declares shown by such investigation to be necessary in order that the entry of such article or articles will not render or tend to render ineffective, or materially interfere
1950 with, any program or operation referred to in subsection (a), of this section, or reduce substantially the amount of any product processed in the United States from any such agricultural commodity or product thereof with respect to which any such pro- gram or operation is being undertaken: Pro- vided, That no proclamation under this sec- tion shall impose any limitation on the total quantity of any article or articles which may be entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption which reduces such permis- sible total quantity to proportionately less than 60 percent of the total quantity of such article or articles which was entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consump- tion during a representative period as deter- mined by the Secretary of Agriculture: And provided further, That in designating any article or articles, the Secretary of Agricule ture may describe them by physical qualities, value, use, or upon such other bases as he shall determine. “(c) The fees and limitations imposed by the President by proclamation under this section and any revocation, suspension, or modification thereof, shall become effective on such date as shall be therein specified, and such fees shall be treated for adminis- trative purposes and for the purposes of section 32 of Public Law No. 320, Seventy- fourth Congress, approved August 24, 1935, as amended, as duties imposed by the Tariff Act of 1930, but such fees shall not be con- sidered as duties for the purpose of grant- ing any preferential concession under any international obligation of the United States. “(d) After investigation, report, finding, and declaration in the manner provided in the cause of a proclamation issued pursuant to subsection (b) of this section, any proc- Jamation or provision of such proclamation may be suspended or terminated by the Presi- dent whenever the Secretary of Agriculture finds and certifies to the President that the circumstances requiring the proclamation or provision thereof no longer exist or may be modified by the President whenever the Sec- retary of Agriculture finds and certifies to the President that changed circumstances require such modification to carry out the purposes of this section “(e) Any decision, finding, or certification of fects and required fees or quantitative limitations of the Secretary of Agriculture under this section shall be final. “(f) No internationel agreement hereafter shall be entered into by the United States, or renewed, extended, or allowed to extend beyond its permissible termination date in contravention of this section,” The explanatory statement presented by Mr. Macnuson is as follows: STATEMENT BY SENATOR MAGNUSON EXPLAINING THE MEANING AND PURPOSE OF THE BILL AMENDING SECTION 22 OF THE AGRICULTURAL ADJUSTMENT ACT Mr. Macnuson. Mr, President, today I am introducing a bill amending section 22 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938, as amended. The bill conforms generally to two amendments I introduced last October when the so-called Anderson farm bill was before us. Most Senators will recall the de- bate on those amendments—debate culmi- nating in Senate approval of one, by a vote of 44 to 28. Section 22 of the AAA Act was designed by its authors .o provide a means of protect- ing domestic agricultural producers—under certain circumstances—from ruinous im- ports Its machinery may be_ invoked through a proclamation by the President when imports threaten the efficacy of a marketing agreement, price support, school lunch, export subsidy, or similar farm pro- gram. Section 22 has never been the effective safety valve its authors intended it to be. To the best of my knowledge, only two sets CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE of domestic farm producers have ever been successful in obtaining the protection sec- tion 22 is designed to extend. The two sets of producers are growers of cotton and wheat. I have been unable to find a single case in which producers of a perishable agricultural commodity have been successful in obtaining action under section 22. Recent experience with imports dictates that the Congress elther make section 22 an effective tool or write it off the books. There is no point in having a safety valve that doesn’t work. Since I argued this case here on the floor of the Senate in October, a number of in- cidents have occurred which demonstrate the soundness of the course of action I then implored the Congress to take. Let me cite two of them. Last week newspapers throughout the country carried the story of Canadian potato imports. A shipload of Canadian potatoes reached New Orleans at a landed cost 10 to 15 cents per 169 pounds less than the sup- port price on Maine potatoes in Maine. This is a repetition of what happened during the 1948 marketing season. During that period Over 10,000,000 bushels of potatoes were im- ported from Canada at a time when this Nation was spending $200,000,000 to support the price to domestic growers. I draw the second example from the experi- ence of the apple industry. During fiscal 1949, apple imports amounted to about $5,750,000. During the identical period we exported apples valued at about 85,500,000. From the same crop we purchased for school lunches domestically grown apples valued at $4,500,000. It is obvious that school-lunch purchases from section 32 funds almost equaled the dollar value of apples imported. I don’t necessarily’ conclude that section 22 should have been invoked to stop these imports although many members of the in- dustry urged such action, I do contend, however, that the machinery to deal with the situation should be sufficiently streamlined to permit such action should the facts so dictate This bill proposes a streamlining of sec- tion 22. Here’s what the amendment does: First, it transfers the fact-finding function from the Tariff Commission to the Secretary of Agriculture, thus, the Secretary will con- duct the investigation of the effect of tm- ports upon agricultural programs such as marketing agreements, school-lunch pur- chases, price supports, export subsidies, and similar programs. Second, he will recom- mend action to the President based on the facts developed through his investigation. Third, if the President concurs in the Sec- retary’s recommendations, he may by procla- mation impose either an import fee up to 60 percent ad valorem, or place a limitation on the quantity that can be imported of the commodity involved. Under this bill, the Tariff Commission would be relieved of the responsibilities now assigned to it under section 22. The line of action would run from the Secretary o: Ag- riculture to the President, instead of as is now the case, the Secretary of Agriculture to the President—the President to the Tariff Commission--the Tariff Commission back to the President. In my judgment this is Justified. The Sec- retary of Agiiculture is charged by Congress with heavy responsibilities in connection with domestic production—when price sup- port or similar programs are in effect. He should have parallel authority over imports, because domestic production plus imports constitutes the over-all supply with which the Secretary has to deal. The President may or may not concur in the Secretary's recommendations, but at least under section 22, as I propose to amend it, the Secretary's recommendations would stem from his parallel responsibility on the gne hand over domestic production, and on the other over imports of commodities which threaten to render ineffective u marketing 1911 agreement, price support, or similar farm program. In addition, the bill amends subsection (f) of section 22. That subsection was added by the Eightieth Congress. It reads: “No proclamation under this section shall be enforced in contravention of any treaty or other international agreement to which the United States is or hereafter becomes a party.” I propose that the emphasis be reversed. The section should be amended to read: “No international agreement hereafter shall be entered into by the United States or renewed, extended, or allowed to extend beyond its permissible termination date in contravention of this section.” The issue here is simple, namely, shall the protection to agricultural producers and programs provided in section 22 be ab- brogated by an international treaty or trade agreement? Or to put it another way, shall the United States Government on the one hand say to the farmers of this country, “We have provided a safety valve against exces- sive and injurious imports through the medi- um of section 22,” but on the other say to our foreign friends, “The trade agreement we are negotiating with you nullifies the effect of section 22.” In conclusion, section 22 should be stream- lined if it ts to be the effective tool its authors intended it to be. Subsection (f) should be reworded or repealed if we are to be honest with the farmers and taxpayers of this country and with our foreign friends. May I add a postscript—by way of general comment—on my attitude toward trade agreements as they relate to the bill I have just introduced. I have consistently sup- ported trade-agreement legislation. I see no inconsistency between that action and what I am here proposing. The United States of America has been catapulted into world leadership. Recipro- cal trade agreements are one of the media through which we seek to exercise that lead- ership. We do this because we believe freer trade will promote a higher standard of liv- ing in the world and will make a substantial contribution to world peace. Reciprocal trade agreements cannot be ne- gotiated under utopian circumstances. We can be idealists and still recognize the hard facts as they exist. If we were starting our trade-agreement policy with a completely clean slate we could remove all barriers, thereby adding tmmeasurebly to the cffec- tiveness of our world leadership and at the same time avoid wreaking irreparable dam- age upon specific industries and, therefore, upon selected groups of our own citizens. Unfortunately trade practices and national policies over the last 200 years have en- couraged patriotic, industrious American citizens to invest their energies and finances ix enterprises to which the death knell would be sounded if a system of complete free trade were instituted world-wide, as of tomorrow morning. The practicalities of the situation demand, therefore, that the Congress and the executive branch, particu- larly the State Department, approach recip- rocal trade in the light of things as they are. I am not too much disturbed by the re- peated accusations on the part of industry that the concessions we grant—as the lead- ing Nation of the world—exceed in value the concessions we receive. Such is the price we pay for world leadership. I am extresnely disturbed, however, over the ap- parent failure on the part of our negotia- tors to balance the international good we expect will emanate from a concession granted by us; against the immediate or prospective damage such concessions will wreak upon a domestic tndustry—-the im- mediate and prospective damage such con- cessions will wreak upon a minor segment of our population. I do not want to see the United States play the role of Uncle Shylock. Neither do
1912 I want to see our reciprocal trade program jeopardized by those ardent free-traders who fail to recognize that steps toward our ulti- mate objective must be taken in a world where existing industrial and economic pat- terns demand consideration. PRINTING OF ADDITIONAL COPIES OF BULLETIN ENTITLED “OCCUPATIONAL OUTLOOK HANDBOOK” Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. President, I submit for appropriate reference a con- current resolution authorizing the print- ing of additional copies of a bulletin en- titled “Occupational Outlook Handbook,” and I ask unanimous consent that an explanatory statement by me of the con- current resolution be printed in the REcorpD. The VICE PRESIDENT. The concur- rent resolution will be received and ap- propriately referred, and, without ob- jection, the explanatory statement pre- sented by the Senator from Utah will be printed in the Recorp. The Chair hears no objection. The concurrent resolution (S. Con. Res. 74) was referred to the Committee on Rules and Administration, as follows: Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That Bulletin No. 940 of the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the Department of Labor, entitled “Occupa- tiona: Outlook Handbook,” containing in- formation on employment opportunities in occupations of interest to veterans and stu- dents, be printed as a Senate document, and that 38,300 additional copies be printed, of which 2,300 shall be for the use of the Sen- ate and 1,000 shall be for the use of the House of Representatives, and that the Bu- reau of Labor Statistics be requested to keep the information in this publication up to date, The explanatory statement presented by Mr. Tuomas of Utah is as follows: EXPLANATORY STATEMENT BY SENATOR THOMAS OF UTAH The Occupational Outlook Handbook gives information on employment opportunities in the major occupations and industries. It ig used in vocational counseling of veterans and young people in schools who are trying to choose a fleld of work. The Nation spends billions of dollars on education annually; the information in the handbook helps young people to plan their courses of educa- tion to train them for jobs in which they will be able to find employment. The handbook has been widely acclaimed by educational authorities in State school systems and colleges throughout the Nation. In its preparation, the Department of Labor had the cordial cooperation of thousands of business firms, trade associations, profes- sional societies, and trade-unions in the various industries and professional fields. Many Members of Congress have received requests for copies from schools and colleges in their States, but these requests can no longer be handled by the Department of Labor because the small supply originally printed for Department use is completely exe hausted. The handbook is available from the Superintendent of Documents for 81.75, and many schools and private individuals have purchased {t from this source. How- ever, a great many State school systems have been unable to afford even this modest cost to equip each school in the State with a copy. The purpose of this resolution is to print a supply of the Occupational Outlook Hand- book for the use of Members of Congress in meeting requests coming to them from schools, colleges, and other organizations in their States which provide vocational guid- ance services to young people and to veterans, CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE COTTON AND PEANUT ACREAGE ALLOTMENTS—AMENDMENT Mr, JOHNSON of Colorado (for him- self and Mr. MILLikKin) submitted an amendment intended to be proposed by them, jointly, to the joint resolution (H. J. Res. 398) relating to cotton and pea- nut acreage allotments and marketing quotas under the Agricultural Adjust- ment Act of 1938, as amended, which was ordered to lie on the table and to be printed. COLORADO RIVER DAM AT BRIDGE CANYON—AMENDMENTS Mr. McFARLAND (for himself and Mr. HAYDEN) submitted an amendment in- tended to be proposed by them, jointly, to the bill (8S. 75) authorizing the con- struction, operation, and maintenance of a darg and incidental works in the main stream of the Colorado River at Bridge Canyon, together with certain appurte- nant dams and canals, and for other pur- poses, which was ordered to lie on the table and to be printed. Mr. DOWNEY (for himself and Mr. KNowLanp) submitted amendments in- tended to be proposed by them, jointly, to Senate bill 75, supra, which were or- dered to lie on the table and to be printed. Mr. McCARRAN. Mr. President, I submit certain amendments intended to be proposed by me to Senate bill 75, au- thorizing the construction, operation, and maintenance of a dam and inci- dental works in the main stream of the Colorado River at Bridge Canyon, to- gether with certain appurtenant dams and canals, and for other purposes, as this is the last day on which amendments can be offered. If I were to make the statements necessary to explain the amendments, it would take a good part of the afternoon, and I do not desire to do that. Therefore, I ask unanimous con- sent that I may offer the amendments, and have them printed in the body of the REcorD, together with explanatory state- ments respecting each amendment. The VICE PRESIDENT. The amend- ments will be reccived, printed, and lie on the table, and, without objection, the amendments and the statements refer- red to will be printed in the Recorp. The Chair hears no objection. The amendments and statements are as follows: Mr. McCarran Mr. President, at the out- set of any discussion of the pending meas- ure it should be clearly understood—and this fact should be borne in mind at all times— that whereas the title of the bill 8. 75 speaks of “authorizing the construction, operation, and maintenance of a dam and incidental works in the main stream of the Colorado River at Bridge Canyon, together with certain appurtenant dams and canals,” actually the muin objective of the bill is to authorize the diversion of Colorado River water for an irri- gation and reclamation project in central Arizona. It has been repeatedly pointed out, and correctly, that the Bridge Canyon Dam has no essential physical relationship with the central Arizona project. It is a means to that end, but not the only means; its use- fulness 1n connection with the central Ari- zona project would be for the production of power to be used for pumping water nearly 1,000 feet high; and it has not been demon- strated that the proposed Bridge Canyon Dam would be the only possible source of FEBRUARY 20 such power. Indeed, it has not even been demonstrated, and it may be questioned whether it can be demonstrated that the proposed Bridge Canyon Dam would even be the cheapest source of such power. This bill does contain authorization for construction of the Bridge Canyon Dam. It also contains various other authorizations and grants of authority, extremely broad in their nature. Indeed, in some respects the language of the bill is so vague that it is difi- cult to say just what it does authorize. For example, the language contained in subparagraph (4) of section 1 (beginning on p. 2 of the bill, in line 22) and in subpara- graph (4) of the same section (beginning on p. 3 of the bill, in line 8) is susceptible of being construed as a tremendous grant of power to the Secretary of the Interior. Con- struction of this legislative language, if en- acted, will rest, in the first instance, with the Secretary of the Interior, and past expe- rience leads us to believe that the language in question, under such circumstances, will not be narrowly construed. The language of subparagraph (4) of sec- tion 1, referred to above, appears to embrace authority for the construction of steam plants for the generation of electrical energy without any Hmiteation upon the number or capacity of such plants so long as the Secre- tary of the Interior shall deem such plants to be “incidental structures suitable for the fullest economical development of electrical energy generated from water at the works constructed hereunder.” Senators will note the Secretary is not even required to find that steam plants are needed; he need only find that they are suitable. If it is not desired that the Secretary of the Interior be given authority to construct steam plants, this section of the bill should be amended, and I shall propose such an amendment when the proper time comes. AMENDMENT NO. 1 On page 2, in line 22, after the word “plants”, insert the words: “(other than steam plants for the production of electrical energy).” Mr. McCarran. Subparagraph (65) of sec- tion 1 is either very poorly worded, or very skillfully worded, depending upon whether it is intended to have any hidden effect. The language on page 8, beginning in line 4: “in- cluding interconnecting lines to effectuate coordination with other Federal projects” could be construed to refer to power trans- mission lines, I believe it would be so con- strucd by the Secretary of the Interior. I believe it is intended that it shall be so con- strued. Under this language, so construed, the Secretary of the Interior would have blanket authority to construct a network of power transmission lines which would tie together the generators to be installed at the Bridge Canyon project, and those at Boulder Dam and at Davis Dam. He could even go further, and extend the interconnecting net- work to tie in the power production at the Shasta Dam in northern California, Con- struction of such a transmission line network has long been an objective of the Interior Department; and this bill, if enacted without amendment, could be deemed to give the au- thority for such construction, which has hitherto been denied by the Congress. If there be those who say it would be a good thing to tie Boulder Dam power and Davis Dam power and Bridge Canyon Dam power together in a single system, so that power from Boulder Dam and Davis Dam might be supplemented with power from Bridge Can- yon Dam, let me point out that there is noth- ing in the bill now pending before the Sen- ate which would guarantee the accomplish= ment of that purpose. The objective of sup- plementing Boulder Dam power and Davis Dam power with power from Bridge Canyon Dam necessarily involves a flow of power from
1950 Bridge Canyon Dam toward Boulder Dam and Davis Dam, and an allocation of Bridge Can- yon power to be pooled with the power from Bouider Dam and Davis Dam. But power teanc mission lines work equally well in either direction; and it would be perfectly possible under the language of this bill, once such lines had been established connecting the three dams named, to turn the flow in the other direction, and take power from the Boulder Dam and Davis Dam projects, und allocate it for use or sale in connection with the Bridge Canyon project. This would involve violation of contracts already in existence providing for the disposi- tion of power from Boulder Dam; and in the opinion of the senior Senator from Nevada, that is exactly what would happen. On the basis of the estimates of power rev- enues, prepared by the Bureau of Reclama- tion, it seems perfectly clear that the Bureau intends to “firm up” Bridge Canyon power by supplementing it with power produced at Boulder Dam. Furthermore, it seems per- fectly clear that the Bureau intends to ac- complish this by simply transferring and crediting Boulder Dam power to the Bridge Canyon project, and to do this without charg- ing any of the cost of the Boulder Dam to the Bridge Canyon project. Such a plan neces- tarily entails a totally unwarranted invasion of the rights of those who have contracted for power from Boulder Dam. The rights of the State of Nevada to power from Boulder Dam are thus threatened, and that is a matter which greatly concerns the senior Senator from Nevada. Such an extremely broad grant of authority for the construction of power transmission lines, which subparagraph (5) of section 1 of this bill might be construed to grant, is un- justifiable and indefensible. If that is the way the bill is intended to be construed, then the bill should be defeated. If that is not the way the bill is intended to be construed, then the bill should be amended; and in or- der to give the Senate an opportunity to ex- press its will on this point, I shall offer an appropriate amendmont at the proper time. AMENDMENT NO. 2 On page 3, in line 4, aiter the word “lines”, 4nsert the following’ ‘(but in the case of power transmission lines, only when such lines huve been specifically authorized by law and appropriations have been made therefor).” Mr McCarran. The last proviso in sectidn 8 of this bill (on p. 6, beginning in line 7) would give the Secretary of the Interior the absolute discretion to fix the repayment period for costs of the project. The only Umitation placed upon this discretion would be that the repayment period to be fixed by the Secretary should not exceed the useful life of the project. The question of how the Secretary determines the usetul life of the project would be left to the Secretary. He would not be limited to the period within which it is probable the reservoir to be created by this dam would be entirely filled with silt. That might be anywhcre from 30 to 50 years, depending on whether Bluff Dam is constructed; and remember, the con- struction of Bluff Dam is prohibited under the Watkins amendment, which was adopted by the committee, and which consists of the matter in italics beginning on page 3 in line 20. In its estimates, the Bureau of Reclamation has talked about a 70-year re- payment period; but there is nothing in the bill which would Iimit the repayment to 70 years. As a matter of fact, it seems per- fectly clear that the project cost could not be repaid in 70 years, and that undoubtedly some longer period will be necessary. The Secretary of the Interior could make that period 100 years, or 150 years, or 500 years. I do not mean to he facetious, but there is nothing in this proposed law which would CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE prevent the Secretary of the Interior from determining that the dam had a useful life of 1,000 years, or 2,000 years, and making the repayment period 10 centuries or more. I do not say that he would do it, but he could do it under the language of this bill. Furthermore, this bill applies the reclama- tion laws with regard to repayment, which means that during the entire period of re- payment, whether it is 70 years, or 100 years, or &00 years, or whatever it is, no interest is to be charged on the construction cost. There may be good justification for such a provision in the case of a project which is to be repayable within 60 years, as the present reclamation law provides, but there is very little, if any, Justification for it in the cass of a repayment period which may be 2, or 3, or 10 times the period now provided for in the reclamation law Here, again, the bill needs amendment, and I shall offer an amendment at the proper time. AMENDMENT NO, 3 On page 6, in line 10, strike out the period at the end of the line and Insert “with due regard for the probable reduction in capacity of the Bridge Canyon Reservoir by reason of silting, but not to exceed 70 years regard- less of such determination.” Mr McCarRRAN. Mr. President, it has already been pointed out that the Bridge Canyon Dam is in no way peculiarly a part of the central Arizona project, and it is certainly true that the central Arizona project is in no way necessary to the construction, mainte- nance, and operation of the Bridge Canyon Dam. The Bridge Canyon Dam and cen- tral Arizona project are tied together in this bill because the construction of the dam will provide one means of generating the huge amounts of power necessary for the success- ful accomplishment of the central Arizona project. Personally the senior Senator from Nevada would much prefer, and believes that other Senators would much prefer, to see the Bridge Canyon Dam constructed as a sep- arate entity. However, this bill as it now stands does provide for tying the Bridge Can- yon Dam and the central Arizona project together, and it earmarks approximately one- third of the power to be generated at the Bridge Canyon Dam to be diverted for the uses and purposes of the central Arizona project, If that is to be done, Mr. Fiesident, it seems only right and fair that the rights of other States to the remaining power should be adequately protected. Accordingly, Mr. President, I propuse to offer an amendment at the appropriate time providing that all of this remaining power shall be divided equally among the States of California, Nevada, and Utah, AMENDMENT NO. ¢ On page 6, line 14, beginning with the word “sold,” strike out all to and including the word “act,” in line 15, and insert in lieu thereof the following: “for distribution in equal parts in the States of California, Ne- vada, und Utah.” Mr. McCarran. Mr. President, it has al- ready been pointed out in this Chamber re- peatedly during debate that this bill con- tains provisions for unprecedented Federal subsidies amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars. The amount which is used in the minority report, and which is referred to as an outright gift, is $850,000,000. If we are to authorize subsidies on any such scale—or, for that matter, if we are to authorize sub- sidies at all—we should write into the bill the strongest provisions we can to guarantee against land speculation or the unjust en- richment of those, if any there be, who may already have speculated in land in contem- plation of the possible enactment of this measure. Fortunately we have a precedent in this regard, for provisions of this nature were written into the law when Congress au- 1913 thorized the reclamation of a large area in the Columbia Valley in connection with the construction of the Grand Coulee Dam. I propose to offer an amendment to this bill, following the lines of that precedent, which will remove incentive for speculation in the lands proposed to be irrigated under the project which this bill would authorize, and which will, to some extent at least, guard against unjust enrichment of any owners of such lands. AMENDMENT NO. 5 On page 7, line 9, strike cut the period, in- sert in lieu thereof a colon, und udd the fol- lowing provisos: ‘Provided, That every such contract shall require that all irrigable land held in private ownership by any one owner in excess of 40 irrigable acres and all county and State lands which may be Irrigated un- der the said project shall be designated as ex- cess land and as such shall not be entitled to receive water from said project. The con- tract shall provide further that no owner of such excess lands in the said project shall receive water therefrom for any part of the land owned by him tif and so long as he shall refuse to sell any excess lands owned or held by him under terms and conditions satisfac- tory to the Secretary of the Interior and at prices fixed in the appraisals made and ap- proved as herein provided. The Secretary of the Interior may require each landowner, as & condition precedent to receiving water from the said irrigation works, to execute a valid recordable contract wherein he shall agree to dispose of excess holdings then or thereafter owned by him in the manner pro- vided in the contract between his district and the United States, and wherein the said landowner also shall confer upon the Secre- tary of the Interior an irrevocable power of attorney to make any such sale on his behalf. For the purpose of determining excess lands under the provisions of this section husband and wife shall be considered separate persons and each may hold not to exceed 40 irrigable acres as nonexcess lands or husband and wife together may hold 80 irrigable acres of community property as such nonexcess lands: Provided further, That in addition to the foregoing provisions, every such contract with any district shall also provide, with re- spect to all irrigable lands whether initially excess or nonexcess, that whenever any land is sold at a price in excess of the sum of the appraised value of the arid land, as deter- mined by the Secretary, the appraised value of improvements made thereon after the date of the original appraisal, and the amount of irrigation construction costs ac- tually paid for that land, then, before the new owner shall be entitled to receive water from the project, a proportionate part of the said excess or incremented value shall be paid to the United States as follows: If such payment is made to the United States more than 50 months after such sale at an excessive price has been made, then as a prerequisite to the right to receive water all of the incremented value shall be paid to the United States to apply on construction installments to come due on such land in inverse order of their accrual; if payment is made in less than 60 months but more that 49 months after the date of such sale, then 99 percent of such incremented value or excess of sale price shall be thus paid and applied; if payment is made in less than 49 but more than 48 months after the date of such sale, then 98 percent of such incro- mented value or excess of sale price shall be thus paid and applied, and so on for earlier payment allowing an additional ree duction of 1 percent for each month, so that in the event that such payment is made to the United States within 1 month after the date of such sale, then the percentage of the incremented value required to be paid to the United States for application to construc- tion costs as a prerequisite to the right to receive water shall be 60 percent thereof.”
1914 Mr. McCarran. The committee amendment to the bill contained in section 12, beginning on page 9, line 16, purports ta accomplish the purposes of Senate Joint Resolution 4, by authorizing an original action in the Su- preme Court to adjudicate claims of right to the use of waters of the Colorado River; and the succeeding section, which is section 13, also a committee amendment, purports to provide a measure of protection by deferring the construction of works required solely for the purpose of diverting, transporting, and delivering water from the main stream of the Colorado River for beneficial consumptive use in Arizona until after water rights have been adjudicated under the provisions of section 12. There is grave doubt, however, whether the committee amendments actu- ally do what they purport to do in this re- ard. 8 Section 12 contains no provision protecting the adjudication of Colorado River water rights by the Supreme Court, for which that section purports to provide, from being af- fected by other provisions of this proposed legislation. Since this whole measure will become law at the same instant, the act will necessarily be effective before uny action can be brought under the provisions of section 12; therefore, section 12 should contain some safeguard against the possibility that this new law itself might be construed as limiting or coercing the action of the Supreme Court in adjudicating Colorado River water rights. In connection with this danger, which I have pointed out, that the very enactment of this legislation might itself have a bear- ing on the adjudications of the Supreme Court with regard to Colorado River water rights, it 1s also necessary that sections 8 and 9 of the bill be amended, 50 as to make it perfectly clear that the Colorado River con- tract, the water-delivery contract between the United States and the State of Arizona dated February 9, 1044, the Mexican water treaty signed February 3, 1944, the protocol thereto dated November 14, 1944, and the un- derstanding recited in the Senate resolution of April 18, 1945, are to be controlling as con- strued by the Supreme Court through the adjudication contemplated in section 12 Accorcingly, I propose to offer amendments to sections 8 and 9 at the appropriate time. AMENDMENT NO. 6 On page 8, ine 16, strike out the period, and add the following: “other than as they may be construcd, modified, or affected by an adjudication of the Supreme Court under section 12 of this act” AMENDMENT NO. 7 On page 8, Hine 25, strike out the period, and add the following: “other than as they may be construed, modified, or affected by an adjudication of the Supreme Court under section 12 of this act.” Mr. McCarkan. During the debate on this bill, and, indeed, for a long time before this bill was introduced, there has been substan- tial controversy over the rights of the State of Nevada, and the rights of other States, to the use of water from the Colorado River. It has been the consistent contention of the State of Nevada, and of the senior Sen- ator from Nevada, that under existing law, the State of Nevada is entitled absolutely to 300,000 acre-feet of water annually from Mead Lake, primarily for the production of power at Boulder Dam. Other States have made other claims, but I shall confine myself at this point to the claim of the State of Nevada. It has been stated, most irre- sponsibly, that Nevada has no such right to water from Mead Lake. The senior Senator from Nevada is not content that this bill should be enacted without protecting Nevada's right to water from Mead Lake. I propose to offer an amendment to this bill, at the proper time, which will confirm Nevada's right to Mead Lake water. Be~ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE cause the 300,000 acre-feet per year to which Nevada is now legally entitled, under exist- ing law, is by no means the full amount of water to which the State of Nevada has an equitable claim, the amendment which I shall propose will specify 1,000,000 acre- feet of water per year. I anticipate that other Senators, from other States, may wish to have this amendment modified so as to give protection to the claims of their respect- ive States; and I shall be giad to entertain suggestions to that end, and to discuss the matter, either here on the floor, or privately, with Senators who are interested. AMENDMENT NO. 8 On page 9, beginning with line 11, strike out the period, insert in Meu thereof a colon, and add the following proviso: “Provided, That any appropriation, control, or use shall be subject to the right of the State of Nevada to withdraw from Lake Mead 1,000,000 acre-feet of water per annum.” Mr. McCarran. Mr. President, I referred &® moment ago to the fact that section 12 of the bill before us is deficient because it con- tains no provision which will protect the Supreme Court, in its adjudication of ac- tions brought under authority of this sec- tion, from the possible argument that Con- gress, by enacting other provisions of this very bill, has determined at least some of the issues involved. As I said before, section 12 should contain some safeguard against the possibility that this new law itself might be construed as limiting or coercing the ac- tion of the Supreme Court in adjudicating Colorado River water rights. Accordingly, I propose to offer an amendment on this point. This amendment, which comple- ments the amendments, I propose to offer to sections 8 and 9. AMENDMENT NO. 9 On page 9, beginning with line 16, strike out all to and including line 13, page 10, and insert in lleu thereof the following: “Sec. 12. If any State or States within 6 months after the effective date of this Act shall begin a suit or suits in the Supreme Court of the United States to determine the right tu the use of water for diversion from the main stream of the Colorado River through aqueducts or tunnels to be con- structed pursuant to this act for beneficial consumptive use in Arizona, and to adju- dicate claims of right asserted by such State or States or by any other State or States, based on any applicable compact, statute, priority, or treaty. consent is hereby given to the joinder of the United States of America as a party in such action or actions. Any State of the Colorado River Basin may inter- vene or be impleaded in such sult or suits. Any such claims of right affected by the project herein authorized and asserted by any defendant State, impleaded State, or intervening State under any compact, stat- ute, priority, or treaty, or by the United States may be adjudicated in such action. In any such suit or suits process directed against the United States shall be served upon the Attorney General of the United States." Mr. McCargan. Section 13 of the bill refers, on page 10, beginning in line 19, to “works authorized by this act which are required solely for the purpose of diverting, trans- porting, and delivering water from the main stream of the Colorado River for beneficial consumptive use in Arizona.” There may be some question whether this Janguage in- cludes the aqueduct from Lake Havasu to and connecting with the main canal and the pumping plants to raise water from Lake Havasu, which are authorized in section 1 of the bill. Certainly there should not be any such question, for it is obvious that these works are intended to be included in FEBRUARY 20 the language quoted. As a matter of fact, they are the primary works which are in- tended to be so included. But I say there “may be’ some question whether they are included because the language of section 1, on page 4, does not in terms provide that these works are to be “solely for the purpose of diverting, transporting, and delivering water from the main stream of the Colorado River for beneficial consumptive use in Ari- zona.” What section 1 says, on page 4, Is that these works are to be authorized “in order to provide a means of diversion of water from the Colorado River to the main canal pending the construction of said tunnel and gaid portion of the canal and"—now mark this language—“and for use thereafter as supplemental and stand-by works.” I can- not conceive what use the Secretary of the Interior might decide to make of the aque- duct and the pumping plants except “for the purpose of diverting, transporting, and deliv- ering water from the main stream of the Colorado River for beneficial consumptive use in Arizona”; but if such other use can be found, however inappropriate and uneco- nomical it might be, the Secretary of the In- terior would be in a position to contend that the works in question are not comprehended within the language of section 13. In fact, it might even be argued that, since section 1 contemplates that the canal and the pump- ing plants shall be used at some future time as “stand-by works," this means that they are not to be used solely and forever “for the purpose of diverting, transporting, and deliv- ering water from the main stream of the Colorado River for beneficial consumptive use in Arizona,’ and therefore that the works in question are not comprehended in the lan- gunge of section 13. Since it is clearly the intent that the con- struction of the canal and the pumping plants shall be deferred, pursuant to the pro- visions of section 138, until the adjudication of any suit or suits which may be brought under the provisions of section 12, and since it can do no possible harm to guard against a possible undesirable construction of the law, I propose at the proper time to offer an amendment which will leave no possible room for any construction different from the con- struction intended by the Congress. AMENDMENT NO, 10 On page 10, line 19, after the word “act”, insert the following. “(including, but not by way of limitation, the aqueduct from Lake Havasu to and connecting with the main canal in the vicinity of Cunningham Wash, and the pumping plants to raise water from Lake Havasu authorized in section 1 hereof).” Mr. McCarran. Section 13 of this bill is also poorly drafted in another respect. It purports to defer construction of certain works during the pendency of any action brought under section 12; but it would per- mit the period of deferral to end as soon as the court, has handed down its opinion in the last of any suits so filed. This 1s a rea- sonable result only if the Court’s decision gives Arizona enough water to make the cen- tral Arizona project feasible. Obviously, if the Court decides that Arizona does not have the right to enough water to make the project feasible, then the construction of works solely for the purpose of diverting, trans- porting, and delivering water from the main stream of the Colorado River for beneficial consumptive use in Arizona should either be deferred indefinitely, until the plan can be revised in line with the Court’s decision, or should not be authorized at all. The report of the Bureau of Reclamation shows that the central Arizona project, as now designed, will require a water supply of approximately 1,200,000 acre-feet per year. Adoption of the amendment which I now send forward would mean that if the final adjudication of the Supreme Court shows an
1950 available water supply materially less than 1,200,000 acre-feet per year, the project would be halted until it could be redesigned, and reauthorized by the Congress, to fit the avail- able water supply, whatever that may be. AMENDMENT NO. 11 On page 11, line 1, strike out the period and insert in lieu thereof a comma and the following: “or in the event that final adjudi- cation by the Supreme Court of any and all suits in which the United States shall be Joined as a party under and by virtue of the consent granted in section 12 of this act fails to confirm the right of Arizona to an ade- quate and dependable supply of water from the main stream of the Colorado River for the trrigation and reclamation uses within Arizona contemplated by this act.” Mr McCarran. Mr. President, the amend- ments which I propose to offer, and which I have discussed here, are not suggested, and will not be offered, for any captious, or dila- tory, or obstructive purpose. The sole pur- pose of these amendments is to improve the bill, to guard against possible improper con- struction ut some future time, and to erect safeguards which fairness and equity dictate. There is a reason for each of these amend- ments, and I have stated those reasons. I am not sure, Mr. President, whether I can bring myself to vote for this bill in any event; but so long as there is any chance that this measure may be enacted by the Con- gress, I feel it my duty to seek to perfect the bill in every possible way, because the in- terests of the State of Nevada, which I have the honor to represent in this honorable body, are vitally concerned. I earnestly hope that any Senators who were not able to be present today to hear my explanation of these amendments will study the record, and familiarize themselves with the amendments between now and the date fixed for voting upon this bill. BROTHERHOOD—ADDRESS BY SENATOR SMITH OF NEW JERSEY AT INTERDE- NOMINATIONAL BROTHERHOOD MEET- ING {Mr SMITH of New Jersey asked and ob- tained leave to have printed in the Recorp an address entitled “Brotherhood,” delivered by him before an interdenominational Broth- erhood Meeting at the Synagogue of the Congregation B’nat Israel, of Elizabeth, N. J., on February 17, 1950, which appears in the Appendix | INTERNATIONAL CONFERENCE ON CON- TROL OF ATOMIC ENERGY, WORLD DIS- ARMAMENT, AND REVISION OF UNITED NATIONS CHARTER [Mr WILEY asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp the text of a statement issued by him on February 19, 1950, together with a letter addressed by him to the Secretary of State, urging the State Department to request a poll of the United Nations regarding a new international con- ference on control of atomic energy, world disarmament, and revision of United Na- tions Charter, which appear in the Appendix ] LINCOLN DAY ADDRESS BY REPRESENT- ATIVE LODGE [Mr. HENDRICKSON asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp the Lin- coln Day address delivered by Representative Joun Davis Lopor, of Connecticut, before the New Haven Republican Organizations’ annual Lincoln Day dinner, February 13, 1950, which appears in the Appendix.] BROTHERHOOD IN AMERICA—EDITORIAL FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES {Mr. HENDRICKSON asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp an edie CONGRESSIONAL RECORD—SENATE torial entitled ‘Brotherhood in America,” published in the Now York Times of February 19, 1950, which appears in the Appendix. ] MISSOURI BASIN—ADDRESS BY W. G. SLOAN [Mr. BUTLER asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp an address de- livered by W. G. Sloan, chairman, Missourt Basin field committee, before the thirty-first annual convention of the Mississippi Valley Association, St. Louis, Mo., February 7, 1950, which appears in the Appendix.] ECONOMIC AND MILITARY PROBLEMS IN THE PACIFIC—ADDRESS BY GEN. WIL- LIAM J. DONOVAN |Mr. MURRAY asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp an address deliv- ered by Gen. William J. Donovan on the occasion of the presentation to him by Co- lumbia University of the Alexander Hamil- ton award, at the Ritz Carlton Hotel, New York City, on February 16, 1950, which ap- pears in the Append!x.] LEADERSHIP IN ASIA—EDITORIAL FROM THE NEW YORK HERALD TRIB- UNE {Mr. MURRAY asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Rrecorp, an editorial en- titled ‘Leadership tn Asia,” published in the New York Herald Tribune for February 18, 1950, which appears in the Appendix.] CONTROL OF COAL SUPPLIES IN THE STATE OF NEW YORK |Mr. IVES asked and obtained leave to have printed in the REcorD, chapter 15 of the laws of 1950, State of New York, the text of “An act providing emergency measures for the control of coal supplies,” approved by Gov- ernor Dewey on February 14, 1950, which ap- pears in the Appendix.]} BIOGRAPHY OF SUSAN B. ANTHONY |Mrs. SMITH of Maine asked and obtained leave to have printed in the REcorD a short biography of Susan B. Anthony, which ap- pears in the Appendix.] GOVERNMENT SPUD MUDDLE—LETTER FROM GEORGE B. BUCK {Mrs. SMITH of Maine asked and obtained leave to have printed in the REcorp a letter written to the Belfast (Maine) Republican Journal by George B. Buck, relative to the potato situation, which appears in the Ap- pendix.) POTATOES, POLITICIANS, AND ATOM BOMBS: AROOSTOOK COUNTY HAS DONE ITS JOB WELL—EDITORIAL FROM THE BANGOR (MAINE) COMMERCIAL [Mrs. SMITH of Maine asked and obtained leave to have printed in the REcorD an edi- torial entitled “Potatoes, Politicians, and Atom Bombs: Aroostook County Has Done Its Job Well,” published in the Bangor (Maine) Commercial of February 18, 1950, which appears in the Appendix ] BROTHERHOOD WEEK—ADDRESS BY JOSEPH J. MORROW [Mr. BENTON asked and obtained leave to have printed in the RECORD an address en- titled “Prejudice: A Moral Problem,” deliv- ered by Joseph J. Morrow, personnel manager, Pitney-Bowes, Inc., of Stamford, Conn., bee fore the Catholic Interracial Council of New York, on November 20, 1949, which appears in the Appendix.] HISTORY OF THE MILITARY ORDER OF THE CARABAO [Mr. MARTIN asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp an excerpt from the history of the Military Order of the Care 1915 abao, written by Commander Arthur Stanley Riggs, USNR, for the 1939 Wallow, and printed in the Army and Navy Journal of February 18, 1950, which appears in the Appendix. ] THE NEW GRAND PARAMOUNT CARABAO— ARTICLE FROM THE ARMY AND NAVY JOURNAL [Mr. MARTIN asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp an article entitled “The New Grand Paramount Car- abao,” written by Carabao Robert Sherrod and published in the Army and Navy Jour- nal, which appears in the Appendix.] EXPENSIVE “WILDCATS” — EDITORIAL FROM THE OIL CITY (PA.) DERRICK {Mr MARTIN asked and obtained leave to have printed 1n the REecorp 4n editorial en- titled “Expensive ‘Wildcats’,” published in the Oil City (Pa.) Derrick of February 14, 1950, which appears in the Appendix.] “HOUSING” IS A MISNOMER—EDITORIAL FROM THE NEW YORK TIMES [Mr. BRICKER asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp an editorial entitled “ ‘Housing’ Is a Misnomer,” pub- lished in the New York Times of February 20, 1950, which appears in the Appendix. ] AMERICA'S ROLE IN THE CHINESE TRAG- EDY—COMMENTARY BY W. EARL HALL |Mr. MUNDT asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp a radio commen- tary entitled “America’s Role in the Chinese Tragedy,” by W. Ear] Hall, managing editor of the Mason City Globe-Gazette, published in the Mason City Globe-Gazette for Feb-= ruary 6, 1950, which appears in the Appen- aix.] PORTRAIT OF A STATESMAN—ARTICLE BY "REV. A. 8S. TURNIPSEED” [Mr. SPARKMAN asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp an article entitled “Portrait of a Statesman,” written under the pen name of “Rev. A. 8. Turnip- seed,” published in the Montgomery (Ala.) Examiner for February 9, 1950, which appears in the Appendix.] PROHIBITION OF INTERSTATE LIQUOR ADVERTISEMENTS (Mr. KILGORE asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp a letter ad- dressed to him by Hon. Harlan M Calhoun, of Moorefield, W. Va., in regard to Senate pill 1847 prohibiting interstate Mquor ad- vertisements, which appears in the Appen- dix J YOUTH RALLY ATTRACTS 2,000 WHITE AND NEGRO STUDENTS—ARTICLE FROM THE BALTIMORE SUN [Mr. O’CONOR asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp an article en- titled “Youth Rally Attracts 2,000 White and Negro Students,” published in the Baltimore Morning Sun, Saturday, February 18, 1950, which appears in the Appendix. ] JUDICIAL LEGISLATION: A THREAT TO CONSTITUTIONAL GOVERNMENT—AD- DRESS BY SENATOR BRICKER [Mr. FERGUSON asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp an address entitled “Judicial Legislation: A Threat to Constitutional Government,” delivered by Senator Bricker on February 11, 1950, which appears in the Appendix.] IT’S FUN TO SPEAK YOUR PIECE, TOO [Mr. FERGUSON asked and obtained leave to have printed in the Recorp a folder en- titled “It’s Fun To Speak Your Plece, Too,” which appears in the Appendix.]