APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD result in a heavy loss in revenue. The advocates of such @ theory overlook the important fact that the yield from an income tax depends upon the amount of income which is subject to tax. If the individual rates are so high as to dis- courage production and expansion, inter- fere with business initiative, and deter venture capital, the tax yield on the in- come which could have been produced under fair and reasonable rates will be lost to the country. As will be shown, the tax on this increased income may go a long way toward offsetting any theo- retical loss in revenue due to decreased rates. Excessive taxes dry up the source from which the revenue stems, encourage tax evasion, and make the tax less and less productive. The enemies of the in- come tax are not those seeking to reduce its oppressive and excessive rates, but those who insist that such rates remain on the statute books regardless of their effect on production, expansion, and initiative, in order to soak the rich. I believe that a reduction in the individual income tax will lend encouragement and stimulation to the production of income. This is illustrated by the experience in the twenties: when the war rates of the First World War were reduced. As has been pointed out, the first reduction occurred for the year 1921 under the Revenue Act of 1921. In 1921, business and industry were faced with depressing influences arising as an aftermath of the First World War, and the country was passing through the trying period of liquidation and read- justment. Net income had declined from the all-time high of 23.7 billion to 19.5 billion for 1921, In the opinion of the Ways and Means Committee, the exacting of excessive taxes contributed in no small degree to the depression. For the year 1921, the reduction was lim- ited to increasing the marital exemption from $2,000 to $2,500, where the aggre- gate income of husband and wife did not exceed $5,000, and increasing the credit for dependents. For the year 1922, there was a reduction in rates in all brackets, the top surtax being reduced from a top rate of 65 percent to a top rate of 50 per- cent. Other reductions followed in 1924, 1926, 1928, and 1929. The following table based upon Statistics of Income for 1941, published by the Treasury De- partment, shows what was accom- plished through these tax reductions: Net income: Billions -- 189.6 -- 21.8 -- 24.8 -- 265.6 -- 21,8 -- 21.9 -- 22.5 ~~ 25,2 -- 24,8 Millions epee en eee n nee e een e eee eee 719 a eee een en nee ee nen ene 861 Seennncccncemsewncaneccewee 661 1924_.2---- ee 704 1925.......-----_---.-.-.--------... 735 1926... .--..-.-.-----------ee 2782 1927... .-.---.----- eee 81 1928.__..-.-..----.----.-------- 1, 164 1929... 2-2-2 ee nee ee » 001 It will be noted that the net incame increased through 1924 but decreased in 1925, although the tax yield for 1925 was greater than for 1924. The reason for this is explained by the following state- ment taken from the annual report of the Secretary of the Treasury for the fiscal year ended June 30, 1927: The sources of the income returned for the calendar year 1925 as compared with 1924 clearly illustrate the effect of the new reve- nue act. The total national income was un- doubtedly greater in 1925 than in 1924, due to increased prosperity, but the income ac- tually returned for individual income-tax purposes was less, due to the entire exemp- tion of over 40 percent of the 1924 income- tax payers. The income returned on ac- count of wages and salaries was about 83,- 876,000,000 less; from individual businesses about $1,100,000,000 less; from rents and royalties about @536,000,000 less; and from interest and investments about 8467,000,000 less. On the other hand, increased income was returned from dividends and from sale of property. Dividends increased about $214,000,000, while the gains from the sale of property, including that returned as capi- tal net gains, increased about 81,418,500,000. The largest reductions in net income re- ported for tax purposes, in the income from wages and salaries and in the income re- turned on account of individual business, were in the lower tax brackets, The reduc- tions in returns from rents and royalties and interest and investment income were al- most entirely in the lower brackets. The greatest beneficiaries of the 1926 act were, therefore, people of small incomes, wage earners, salaried men, and men operating smali individual business enterprises. Mr. Speaker, it will also be noted from the table that the tax for 1923 was Jess than the tax for 1922. This was due to the 25-percent reduction in the income tax for 1923 provided in the Revenue Act of 1924. This loss in revenue was recouped by the increase in tax yield during later years. Our capital gains also increased dur- ing this period. Prior to 1921, capital gains were subject to ordinary normal and surtax rates. Beginning with the. Revenue Act of 1921, capital gains were subject to a flat rate of 124 percent, where the asset sold had been held for more than 2 years. The following table, taken from Sta- tistics of Income for 1941, shows the increase in capital gains: A59 Capital net gains from sale of asaets held more than 2 years: $249, 000, 000 305, 000, 000 389, 000, 000 940, 000, 000 913, 000, 000 1, 081, 000, 000 1, 880, 000, 000 2, 347, 000, 000 A table is inserted in the appendix giv- ing a break-down of the net income during the periods 1922 to 1929. As has already been pointed out, the drop in wages and salaries was due, not to the lack of income in national income but to the fact that a large part of such income was made exempt from the in- come tax due to raising the personal exemption and credit for dependents. While there was substantial tax re- duction during the period 1921 to 1929, inclusive, there was also a sufficient sur- plus to provide an annual reduction in national debt which, in 1920, stood at twenty-four billion. By 1930 the debt had been reduced to sixteen billion. This is shown by the following table, taken from the Secretary’s report: June 30— Total gross debt 1919__22-----.--- ee $25, 482, 034, 410 1920.-......----....-. 24, 297, 918, 412 1921__--------.--- 8. 23, 976, 250, 608 1922__..-22---~-2 ee 22, 964, 079, 190 1923...---.--------... 22, 349, 687, 758 1924_..-----...------- 21, 251, 120, 427 1926_-_...------..-... 20, 516, 272, 174 1926....._-..-.---.... 19, 643, 183, 079 1927__..----.-..------ 18, 510, 174, 266 1928_......-.----..... 17, 604, 200, 568 1929_...----.-..- ~~. 16, 931, 197, 748 1980_....--------...-- 16, 185, 808, 299 There are some who advocate that any surplus which may arise should all be applied to the payment of the national debt. While Iam a great believer in debt reduction, I feel that it is also important that the Government deal fairly with its taxpayers, who, in the second year after the war, are still burdened with heavy war taxes. Any program which is adopted should, in my opinion, as in the twenties, pro- vide a balance between debt reduction and tax reduction which is fair to all. Payments upon the public debt should not be so large as to require the continu- ation of oppressive war taxation upon our people in peacetime. APPENDIX EXHIBIT 1. STATISTICS OF INCOME FOR 1941, PT. 1, PP. 218-219 (Moncy figures in thousands of dollars] Distribution Income: Salaries, wages, commissions, etc..... Business profit.......-.-------..-0-+- Partnership profit. ....--.......-.--. Profit from sale of real estate, stocks, bonds, ctc., other than taxed as capital net gain. ..-.....-.-.---...- Capital net gain from sales of assets held more than 2 years..........-.. Ronts and ro: Bowen. Dividends received... juciaries. Jo wane enwecesensseoncrcee 1926 14, 195, 356 | 13, 617, 663 | 9,742, 100 | 9,004, 318 | 10, 218, 450 4,722, 766 | 4,755, 488 | 3,688,804 | 3,072,805 | 3, 287, 421 1, 676,409 | 1,810,014 | 1,827,025 | 1.732 681 | 1,758,145 863, 107 | 1,124,886 | 1,991,650) 1,481,625 | 1,813, 306 305,04} 380,148} 040,869) 912,017) 1,081, 180 1,814,128 | 2,000,716 | 1,471,332 | 1,480,760 | 1.302, 276 3,319,829 | 3,980,914} 3)464,62% | 41011, 590 | 4, 254, 820 124 | *" 310,144 6,806 | 333,365} | 421, 481 43, 711 29,645] 25,681 47, 470 2,177,771 | 2, 281,703 | 1, 814, 402 eee
A60 EXHIBIT 1. STATISTICS OF INCOME FOR 1941, PT. 1, PP. 216-219—continued (Money figures in thousands of dollars) 1928 Individual Distribution returns of fiduciaries, with net Income EC. e nnn eee ee Partnership profit Profit from sules of real estate, stocks, bonds, ete., other than taxed as capital net 2, 928, 142 1,879, 780 gain Capital net gain from sales of assets held more than 2 years. Rents and royalties. Dividends received. Income from fiduciaries. . Partially tax-exempt interest on Guvernment obligations. Othor taxable interest........- Other inoome......-.- Total income. . EXHIBIT 2. CAPITAL GAINS The following data taken from the re- port of the Joint Committee on Internal Revenue Taxation for 1927 show the fol- lowing: Profits and losses on sales of assets reported by 4,063 individuals with a net taxable in- come of $100,000 and over in 1916 BESESERE Sxgsners The following table is prepared from the returns of 75 individuals who reported a net income in exceas of $1,000,000 each for the year 1924. The table covers the years 1917 to 1925, both inclusive. ductions 2,58 4,48 1.87 22. 47 2.72 43. 20 1.22 58. 00 44 49. 54 9. 35 43.78 27 32. 39 28. 38 18, 82 81.07 19.05 The first table shows that from 1917 to 1920, both inclusive, 4,063 individuals re- ported gains in the aggregate amount of €84,- 772,805 and losses aggregating §424,593,321, the net result being approximately §$340,- 000,000 more of losses than gains. In the game period of time the 75 individuals of great wealth reported $8,694,744 in gains and 6119,361,285 in losses. These were years of high values and great activity in the sale of property, yet in each year the losses were greatly in excess of the reported gains. Undoubtedly the very high eurtax rates forbade the taking of profite and encouraged the taking of losses. Beginning in the 1922 a large increase in profits is discernible, which amounts in both tables to a substantial exoess over losses in 1924, the first year in which the present method of taxing capital gains and treating returns and | Individual returns with no net income with no net Income 11, 173, 068 3, 327, 880 1, S46, 431 2, 335, 888 2, 246, 704 1, 28, 787 4, 783, 240 434) 988 £08, 221 429; 450 33 { 1, 9 } 161, 886 206, 235 ’ 20, 844, 758 1, 24, 385 capital losses went into effect. While some allowance must be made for the great pros- perity enjoyed in 1924 and 19265, the statistics support the conclusion that the capital gains tax has removed the restraint exercised by the surtax rate on profit-taking. The same trend in the relation of gains to losees is indicated in the following table pre- Pared for this committee covering the re- turns of all individual taxpayers. Statistics of losses are not available and the losses etated below are estimated from selected ac- tual figures. . Actual profits and estimated losses on sale of assets regardless of time for which such assets were held Se26 63 4 45 82 98 Cs] 00 12 BERS SaRLELLSS 2 1, 4. 8. 1, 3. 4. 5 ul, < It ts pointed out that in all three tables set forth in the preceding pages the ratio of gains to total income shows a marked in- crease in each case beginning with the year 1922, coinciding with the introduction of the capital gains rate of tax. Although the full effect of this rise may not be attributable en- tirely to the reduction of the rate, it is sig- nificant that the remarkable activity of the stock markets did not take place until some time later. A fair inference may be drawn that the lowering of the rate largely contrib- uted to bring activity in the sale of property. EXHIBIT 3, ANNUAL REPORT OF THE SECRETARY OF THE TREASURY FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUME 30, 1927, PAGES 10-11 Individual income tax: The Revenue Act of 1926 made sweeping changes affecting the taxation of individual tnoomes by increasing the personal credit exemption for single per- sons &O percent and that for married persons and heads of families 40 percent, by increas- ing the earned income credit and by decreas- ing the normal and surtax rates, More then 44 percent of the individual taxpayers were relieved from income-tax payments. In 1924, 4,489,698 individuals returned taxable net in- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD come, whereas in 1925 the number fell to 2,501,166, @ decrease of almost 2,000,000. Under the new law the rates of normal tax were reduced from 2 percent, 4 percent, and 6 percent to 114 percent, 8 percent, and 5 per- cent, respectively. Gurtax rates were cut from a maximum of 40 percent to a maxi- mum of 20 percent. The earned-income pro- vision was so extended as to apply to a maxi- mum of 620,000 of such incomes as com; with the limit in the former act of $10,000. It was very naturally anticipated that these changes would result in considerable loss of revenue. In fact, the report of the Ways and Means Committee submitted to the House estimated a reduction of $46,000,- 000 in normal tax paid and a reduction of 998,575,000 in returns from the surtax. As @® matter of fact, however, the individual returns for the calendar year 1925 showed a larger tax than did those for 1924. The indi- vidual income tax returned for 1924 was $704,265,390, and for 1926 $784,555,183, an increase of $30,289,703, As estimated, there was a very large falling off in the normal- tax return. Before the deduction of earned- income and capital-loss credits, the normal- tax returns decreased $41,434,565. On the other hand, surtax returns decreased only $4,687,627, while the capital-gains tax in- creased $68,967,907. There was a net gain of $22,845,715, to which must be added 86,067,- 280, representing a decrease in the earned- income credit, and $1,376,798, representing a decrease in the capital-~loss credit. The results are attributable to several causes: First and most important was the increased prosperity of the country as exem- plified by the increased income from certain sources, despite the reduction in number of returns, The income from dividends re- turned, which were $3,260,918,954 in 1924, Tose to §3,464,624,648 in 1925 despite fewer returns and the reduction in total income returned. More important than any other changes was the enormous increase in the income reported from the sale of property, both under the capital-gains section and under the general provisions. Income from the sale of property under the general pro- viston reported for 1924 amounted to §1,12¢,- 566,658, while in 1925 this figure had jumped to $1,901,659,499, an increase of $867,093,841, or 77 percent. In addition, income under the capital net-gains section increased from €889,148,484 to 9940,669,341, an increase of $551,420,907, or 142 percent, and the tax from 048,003,064 in 192¢ to $117,570,071 for 1925. In fact, the increased revenue from the capi- tal-gains tax more than offset the loss of 46,122,192 in normal and surtax returns, In the second place, the entire decrease tm taxable incomes occurred in the classes not in excess of $5,000, while for those in excess of $5,000 it materially increased. The number of taxable returns with income of leas than 65,000 decreased 55 percent, while the number in excess of 85,000 increased 18 percent; in excess of $25,000, 32 percent; in excess of $100,000, 67 percent; in excess of $300,000, 104 percent; and in excess of $1,- 000,06), 176 percent. The Department has always con- tended that in the long run the taxation of income at moderate rates would be more productive than at very high rates. The soundness of this contention appears to have been amply borne out by the tax returns under the law of 1926, for both the calendar years 1925 and 1926, The sources of the income returned for the calendar year 10925 as compared with 1924 clearly illustrate the effect of the new revenue act. The total national income was undoubtedly greater in 1925 than in 1924, due to increased prosperity, but the income ac- tually returned for individual tncome-tax purposes was less, due to the entire exemp- tion of over 40 percent of the 1924 income- tax payers. The income returned on account of wages and salaries was about €3,875,000,000 less; from individual businesses about $1,-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 100,000,000 less; from rents and royalties about $538,000,000 less; and from interest and investments about $467,000,000 less. On the other hand, increased income was returned from dividends and from sale of property. Dividends increased about $214,000,000, while the gains from the sale of property, includ- ing that returned as capital net gains, in- creased about $1,418,500,000. The largest reductions in net income reported for tax purposes, in the income from wages and sal- aries and in the income returned on account of individual business, were in the lower tax brackets. The reductions in returns from rents and royalties and interest and in- vestment income were almost entirely in the lower brackets. The greatest beneficiaries of the 1926 act were, therefore, people of small incomes, wage earners, salaried men, and men operating small individual business enterprises, Higher Sights EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HOMER D. ANGELL OF OREGON IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 8, 1947 Mr. ANGELL. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I include as a part thereof an address delivered at the annual convention of the Inland Empire Waterways Association at Port- land, Oreg., last October by Dr. Wilson Compton, president of Washington State College. This address is a valuable con- tribution to the problems facing our Na- tion and the world. Following is a copy of the address: It has been said that there is nothing 80 permanent as change. I can remember, and so can you, when the Columbia River was re- garded as a picturesque, historic stream draining a lot of water from the mountains, full of salmon, and wonderful for sightseers. I can remember, and so can you, when the Pacific Northwest was regarded as a good place to invest in timber and mines, a fine chance for wheat, cattle, and produce, and an excellent source of raw materials, with its future clouded only by high transporta- tion costs to the East. I can remember, and so can you, when the Pacific Northwest was regarded as the gate- way to a fabulous Alaska, and some time per- haps to a greater trade with the Orient. Ican remember, and so can you, the phrase “going back East” still so commonly used in the West and the phrase “going out West” still so commonly used in the East—the for- mer implying that one is returning home and the latter that the West is a frontier. These were all true. Toa large extent they are still true. But they are today only a small part of the truth. The West is losing its inferiority complex. The phrase “back East’’ no longer implies an intention some day to return to the East to live. The phrase “out West” no longer im- plies a bold, uncertain, and risky adventure. The West is on’ the way to developing an economy and a culture of its own. You in the constructive activity you have under- taken can speed it on its way. The Pacific Northwest is still the great natural gateway to the Orient, but the Orient itself 1s on the march and the prospect is that in the century ahead our trans-Pacific relations—financial, commercial, cultural, military, and political—will become as im- portant in our national life as heretofore have been our trans-Atlantic relations—per- haps more important. The Northwest is still an abundant source of industrial materials. But it no longer needs to be a raw-materials colony. Grad- ually it can finance its own enterprises, fabricate and process its own products, diver- sify its own agriculture, industry, and com- merce. It can follow, or even lead, the wholesome trend toward decentralization of industry, and in no region is there more favorable chance for the development of small industry in conjunction with agricul- tural production and marketing. The Columbia River system no longer is merely a picturesque waterway full of sale mon. It is already the most important sin- gle economic factor in an already power- dominated region. The experts say it is only one-fifth power developed, and its diversified irrigation and inland-transport possibilities barely begun. You have been studying the waterways pos- sibilities of this region for a long time. I am only a newcomer, although an interested and frequent visitor in the Northwest for many years. Perhaps I have not lived here long enough to know the things which ought to be done which can't be done. Anyhow, I am not much interested in them, and I hope that I may never learn, But I am interested in what can be done, and what we who live here can do to bring it about through intelli- gent public and private cooperation. But I don’t want to talk in vague and ambiguous generalities, What are our prin- cipal resources, and what can we do with them in agriculture, industry, and commerce? AGRICULTURE I know agriculture pretty well, and I have seen farming at close range in nearly every State of the Union and in many foreign countries. The Northwest has much of the best and some of the worst agriculture I have ever seen. In variable climates, rain- fall, topography, soils and production, and marketing conditions, the Northwest, as a whole, has the best opportunity for diversi- fied agriculture of any region in this country. Those of us who know the mixed history of agriculture well know the basic importance of diversification both of primary products and of processed and derived products; and the importance of a reasonable balance be- tween our agricultural, industrial, and com- mercial economies. Carrying all his eggs in one basket is hazardous for an individual; for a community or a region it may be disas- trous. The expanding facilities for food proc- essing and refrigeration, for the utilization of byproducts, and for storage and orderly marketing are one of the greatest safety valves of Northwest agriculture. The trends in this direction should be encouraged, and that encouragement is closely related to power and water development, FORESTS Timber has been much of the backbone of industry heretofore in the Pacific Northwest, and millions of acres of its lands are ape parently useful for no purpose except timber growing. The forest industries are today in transition from a depleting to a self-per- petuating basis. In no region is that tran- sition more evident than in these Northwest States. Lumber dominance is gone in Wash- ington, and gradually it is going in Oregon. But forest and forest-industry dominance is not gone—is not even going. Pulp and paper, plywood, plastics, and wood chemical derivatives are continuing to share the place in industry formerly occupied almost solely by the sawmills. As an Official of the State of Washington, I perhaps should not be boasting of the potential importance of an Oregon enter- prise. But I would like to point your inter- est to a new type of industry in the Wil- lamette Valley which, if it succeeds, as I think it will, may eventually revolutionize . A61 our forest industries. The Willamette Valley Wood Chemical Co. was formed about 4 years ago.to operate a wood-sugar plant utilizing sawdust, planing-mill shavings, and sawmill wastes. It should have been in operation a year ago. I now understand it will be oper- ating next month. It is equipped to make alcoho] and will have a large tonnage by- product of lignin. The plant is owned by the United States. The operating company ts owned by about 15 lumber and timber companies. There are about 60 other locations in the United States where enough sawmill wastes can be readily concentrated to provide raw material for a plant of this size, and hundreds of other loca- tions where smaller units could be instalied. Over half of these are in the West, and nearly a third are in the Pacific Northwest. This process converts wood cellulose into readily recoverable carbohydrates, primarily sugars like the sugar we put into our coffee or would have put in if we had it. A measure of its potential ultimate significance is in the fact that there is unnually in the forest- industry operations in the United States, in- cluding the logging and the mills, a quantity of waste wood sufficient, if converted into sugar, to supply annually a tonnage equal to the commercial production of all sugar from all sources the world over, or 38,000,000 tons, I helped a few years ago to organize the Willamette Valley Wood Chemical Co. If 1 had been smart enough to have kno vn that I would later be living ou the north side of the river, maybe I could have had this pio- neering Company set up in Washington in- stead of Oregon. The fact that this project has been carried on to this point is due largely to the perseverance, zeal, and en- thusiasm of the United States Forest Serv- ice. The timber and lumber companies of the Willamette Valley have evidently had enough sawmill troubles of their own FORESTRY Another significant recent forestry devel- opment is an agreement, called a coopera- tive sustained-yield agreement, between the Simpson industries on the Olympic Penin- sula of Washington and the Forest Service, now pending final ratification, br which, with the combined use of private timber and na- tional forest timber, a permanent operation is assured on a sustained-yileld basis equiva- lent to between 90,000,000 and 100,000,000 feet annually. There should be a score or perhaps more of similar cooperative sus- tained-yield forestry agreements in the Pa- cific Northwest alone. Scores of tree farms on private forest lands are in operation and scores more are in the making. Meantime, Oregon and Washington have strengthened their forest laws including their wholesome regulations of timber cutting All this holds important future promise for the Northwest and marks the trend of the transition under way in forest ownership and forest industry. It is the way to keep Strength in the timber backbone of North- west industry. LIGHT METALS Minnesota has its iron ore and Pennsyl- vania has its steel. There is no reason that Washington and Oregon should not similar- ly have their light metals industries or that these should not eventually occupy a place in the industria) economy of the Northwest comparable to steel in the East. Here we are with billions of tons under our feet of magnesite and dolomite and of alumina-bearing clays; and with ample pow- er to reduce, convert, and fabricate them. Washington State prides itself as the light- metals capital and Washington State College and the United States Bureau of Mines are engaged in important researches into the recovery and uses of aluminum and mag- nesium, Their future promise is dependent on the further diligent power and water development of the Columbia River system.
A62 ATOMIC POWER No one in the Northwest needs an intro- duction to the era of atomic power. Some of us regard it as a promise, others as 4 threat. To all of us it is a mystery, as in- deed it still is to the very scientists who helped the most to harness the atom. The Hanford enterprise is likewise a mys- tery. Those of us who have been shown the gigantic installations on that project and have something more than a superficial understanding of its significance are not competent to predict the course of develop- ment of atomic power. Neither, I think, Is anyone else. There are, of course, some per- sons who speak pontifically on the subject and with an air of great self-assurance, Generally, however, these are not the men who know the most about it. They, on the contrary, are cautious and usually almost reverent in their forecasts and their opin- ions, for they know that they are dealing with the very mysteries of the universe and with forces in nature accumulating over billions of years. ‘When we as laymen reflect that the atomic bombs which destroyed great Japanese cities actually utilized only 1 percent of the energy hidden within the atom, we should be skepti- cal of the person who speaks with unre- strained assurance of the future of atomic energy. I have heard it said, for example, and so have you, that the harnessing of the atom has made hydroelectric power and such dams as Grand Coulee and Bonneville obsolete. That ts complete poppycock. Obviously, no one may say that atomic power will never supplant hydroelectric power. “Never” is a long time. But it may be said that there is no tota of present evidence to justify such a statement. That is not my opinion. That is the opinion of men who know as much as any men know of what is in an atom and what can be gotten out of an atom. I say it is their opinion, because I have asked them. The Hanford enterprise is the present “plu- tonium capital’ of the world. There is no known reason that it should not so remain; and it is at least not without significance that the principal reason that Hanford is the “plutonium capital” is that it has access clean water and abundant low-cost power; er words, it has access to the Columbia BES ae ? administration of the Hanford enter- now in the General Electric Co., under i plutonium and in related researches. The Pacific Northwest is not accustomed to leadership in research either fundamental or industrial. In fact, as many of you know, out of nearly 3,500 industrial research labora- tories in the United States in 1940, the en- tire five States of the Pacific Northwest had only 50, one-half of the number at that time in the single little State of New Jersey. Of course for the present at least, the light of Hanford is hid under a bushel. The ven of secrecy is bound to be continued as Jong as the tnterest of national security de- mands it. In time an international policy for atomic power control wifi be developed through the United Nations. In time the Atomic Energy Commission will be appointed. In time it will determine policies. In time the veil of secrecy will be lifted. The Hanford enterprise should be regarded not as fust another industry, but rather as potentially marking a new era in the march of science into the Pacific Northwest. The Hanford enterprise, with all of its significance for the present and ali its implications for the future, is itself a strong reason for acceler- ating, not retarding, the power and irriga- tion development of the entire Columbia River system. OTHER INDUSTRIES You know better even than I do the de- velopment opportunities in minerals, clays, and coals and in phosphates and chemicals. COMMERCE ACROSS THE PACIFIC There is one future prospect which I think warrants more public interest than it is now getting—the development of finance, com- munication, trade, and commerce across the Pacific. Pacific Northwest. Japan is not much in the news nowadays because Japan is not much of an issue nowadays, as is Europe. Japan is not an issue because MacArthur has mastered it in peacetime as he helped to master it in wartime. I spent several weeks in the Orient this spring on a special Army mission, No one can do that with his eyes open without get- ting an impression of great populations in ferment, almost a billion people. I hap- pened to be a guest in General MacArthur's home the afternoon that a proposed new con- stitution for Japan was announoed by the Japanese Government—a constitution for the t government of 88,000,000 people. proposed three major changes: 1. Abolition of the so-called Emperor sys- tem and continuance of an Emperor merely as a symbol of national unity but with no governmental] functions. 2. A democratic form of government based on a free electorate, universal suffrage, and genera! free public education, 8. Renunciation of war and abolition of the means of making war. The cynics may say, and some do say, that this is the handiwork merely of General Mac- Arthur and does not represent the views of the Japanese. That is not true. Obviously, no constitution for Japan can be adopted which General MacArthur disapproves. But he knows, and we should know, that even- tually the Japanese must shoulder and will shoulder the responsibilities of their own was vigorously debated for months in the new Japanese Diet and the Japanese press. A few weeks ago it was finally voted upon by the national legislature of 466 members with only 4 dissenting votes. That action may turn out to have been a turning point in the history of the Pacific; and in our daily Press it received about 10 lines of incon- spicuous notice. ' China is different. There is no present prospect of national unification diplomatic means. China if trying in one or two generations to solve many of the prob- lems, political, economic, industrial, and social, which we and our Anglo-Saxon fore- bears took four centuries to soive—that is, in- sofar as we have in fact solved them. Then wants our help and our patience—and it certainly needs both. The Ortent needs help in education, fi- nance, industry, and trade. J think it wel- comes and will continue to welcome Ameri- can cooperation in its affairs if we try to help exploit its resources and do not try to exploit its people. Many of you will live to see our trans-Pacific relations as impor- tant to our Nation as ite trans-Atlantic There lies a great chance for the. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD relations have been; and there is no reason that the Pacific Northwest may not continue to be the natural, convenient, and preferred gateway to the Orient. Whether the prin- cipal access is through Seattle or Portland is not so important as that the Northwest explore its opportunities across the Pacific, develop them, and rise to them. What bearing you may ask has all this upon the development of the great inland water system which more and more dominates the Pacific Northwest. This much as I see it: The dream of the future of the Northwest will never be realized without the complete development of the Columbia River system. By complete development I mean, of course; Power. But just as much I mean: Irriga- tion; and the low-cost navigation and in- land transportation byproducts of an orderly river development. The people of the North- west are alive to the importance of low-cost power. They are not yet equally alive to the importance of low-cast water on millions of acres of fertile lands which without water will continue as they now are: as arid wastes; and they are not yet equally alert to the present possibilities and future significance of low-cost inland transportation. Many people fear that development of ex- tensive new areas of agriculture will lead to overproduction. Certain {it is that overpro- duction may result if along with our agri- culture and forestry we do not develop di- versified industries, improved means of trans- portation, better storage and marketing, and larger and more dependable markets nearer to sources of ‘production. If the Northwest can foster a balanced economy of that kind and can gradually develop what I have called an economy and a culture of its own, the last thing it needs to fear is general agricultural overproductio: fally in the light of the world-wide production deficiencies ac- centuated by the vast destructions of a pro- longed war, I wish that through public and private co- operation the Northwest States would unite in support of a long-range program for the long-range development of the entire Colum- bia River system and seek its enactment by as a fundamental legislative charter and as a continuing statutory authorization for specific developments year by year and step by step. That, after all, is not much different in the basic objectives from those of the Bonneville Power Administration or eral Wheeler, the distinguished principal speaker at your convention, who has given you such radiant assurances of cooperation in the multiple-use development of the Co- lumbia River. There should be a firm com- that is and will continue to be. Such a char- ter would help to avoid the perennial sparring over which Columbia River projects first, which should be pushed the hard- est and which Federal agency does what. Such authorization has been helpful in other like circumstances. I know of no reason to think that it would not be helpful in these. If the Columbia River development can go forward on such an orderly basis, if diversi- fied agricultural, industrial, and commercial hand, and if we are wise enough, enough, and diligent enough ultimately to convert the great trans-Pacific potential into # human reality, the Pacific Northwest within the lifetime of some of you who are here to- day will see and will well support a popula- tion of 15,000,000 and will have come close to realising the dream which has attached so many of you for so many years to the objec- tives which have brought you here today. I hope, too, that you will encourage larger public interest in and greater public support
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD for the scientific services of your State insti- tutions. They are the principal leaders of the march of science in the Pacific North- west. They can greatly help you to help yourselves. I am well aware that progress is made not by grandiose generalizations or by big words about the grandeurs of the Pacific North- west, or by speeches by college presidents, but by the day-by-day effort of men and women who make things, who buy and sell things, and who perform useful services, and by enterprises which take good new ideas and convert them into a reality. Production of goods and trade in goods and services have been the foundation of our progress, and they will continue to be. Without them our educational and cultural opportunities and our chances for lasting peace are the form without the substance, for if anything is cer- tain, it is that if trade and commerce do not cross national boundaries, armies will. And yet the Pacific Northwest will never be bigger than its own ideas. Invention, it is said, is 1 percent inspiration and 99 percent perspiration. A good idea without courageous and diligent effort to put it to work is noth- ing more. Many people nowadays want jobs. Not so many want work. The national pro- duction and employment averages show that our collective productivity per man per hour of work is still 20 percent less than it was before the war. We can do better than that. We can, that is, if we will. It is still true, unfortunately, that some individuals gain from war. But no nation and no community gains. War is destruction, not construction, and no one can gain wealth by destroying it. We can postpone our day of reckoning. and we are doing just that right now in this country, blundecringly, to be sure, rather too blunder- ingly, I think, but postponing it, neverthe- Jess. But we won't avoid it. Some day we will face it; and if we face it successfully, it will be with more production, not less pro- duction; more trade, not less trade; more transport and more power, not less. Fortunately, the war also has brought many new products, new methods, new tech- niques. These will greatly increase the pro- ductivity of our effort. More and more heavy labor is for machines, not men. Nowhere is that more true than in the Pacific North- west, where the giant power of a Grand Coulee or a Bonneville can be captured in any factory or household or on any farm by the simple device of sticking a plug into the wall. But that does not alter the fact that eventually we will make a choice—either to work harder to produce more to make up for the world-wide war destruction in which all nations will share or to adapt ourselves to a lower standard of living than the standard which we are capable of achieving. No nation can permanently live off of the interest on its debts. Let us keep our eyes on the stars, but our feet on the ground, and in blueprinting a fue ture development for the Pacific Northwest, let us not be nearsighted or provincial and let us not waste our time on any small plans. Sugar Decontrol EXTENSION OF REMARKS or OnTO IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 9, 1947 leave to extend my’ remarks in the Rac- oRD, I include therein a memorandum regarding sugar control, which I have re~ ceived from the California & Hawaiian Sugar Refining Corp., Ltd., as follows: MEMORANDUM REGARDING SUGAR DECONTROL CaLirorNia & Hawallan Sucar REFINING Conp., Lrp., San Francisco, January 3, 1947. It has been our privilege and responsibil- ity for many years to supply the trade in the western and midwestern States with a sub- stantial part of its sugar requirements. We have always operated under the theory that whatever happens in the sugar businéss that is detrimental to the best interests of our customers is likewise not good for ourselves. For this reason we are very much concerned about the campaign now being sponsored by certain interests to bring about an early ending of sugar controls. Many of you are familiar with what happened following the quick lifting of sugar controls after World War I. For the information of those not so familiar, we would like to point out that at the time of decontrol, December 5, 1919, refined sugar was quoted at seaboard refineries at 9 cents per pound. On May 29, refined sugar at sea- board refinery touched 26 cents with re-sales being quoted substantially higher and re- tail sales being made at from 30 to 40 cents @ pound. From this date the price began to decline and by the end of the year, De- cember 31, 1920, refined sugar was selling at around 8 cents per pound. Sugar buyers large and smull suffered severe financial re- verses und many were actually forced into bankruptcy by the extent and abruptness of the decline. We feel that the situation facing us in 1947 is even more critical than was the case in 1920. After years of high employment, with increased purchasing power coupled with the long pent-up demand for more sugar, it would be difficult to estimate what quan- tity of sugar would be required to satisfy the demand in this country in the first year of free trading. It is quite obvious that with the most favorable division of the Cuban crop among world claimants, even if based on pre- war purchases, United States supplies for 1947 will fall far short of satisfying this de- mand. The early lifting of controls could only mean widely fluctuating markets with the logical sequence of economic disaster to jobbers and manufacturers. In a free mar- ket, when supplies are short, sugar would probably go to aggressive speculative inter- ests, with the result that the housewife and the small manufacturer might receive less than they did in 1946 and certainly less than their proportionate shares of the sup- plies. We are anxious for the return of the sugar business to a free-marke* status, but we want it accomplished in such a manner as to assure ~easonable stability of prices and equitable distribution during the decontrol period, and not a repetition of the disastrous expericnce of 1920. The Department of Agriculture is consult- ing with the various branches of the sugar industry as to recommendations for gradual decontrol with the idea of having the Gov- ernment entirely out of its wartime sugar program just as quickly as conditions war- rant. The Department of Agriculture should be allowed to carry out this program in con- junction with the industry, and such necese sary legislation to authorize the Department to do this should be passed by the Congress. If you ate in agreement with this, we would suggest that you get in touch with your Senators and Congressmen, who are always anxtous to. obtain accurate informa- tion and ‘auggestions from constituents who are familiar with a subject about which leg- id shouid be taken at.cnos as pressure on tie A63 Congress from the uninformed calling for immediate and complete decontrol is growing. Sincerely yours, Eart B. WILSON, President, Flaxseed and Linseed Oil EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CHARLES R. ROBERTSON OF NORTH DAKOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 9, 1947 Mr. ROBERTSON. Mr. Speaker, Iam daily in receipt of correspondence from manufacturers who use flaxseed and lin- seed oil in the manufacture of their products. Particularly is this true with the manufacture of linoleums. It is evident that a situation has de- veloped in the national picture that gives cause for alarm, sufficiently so that the Congress can well give consideration to this important subject. Under leave to extend my remarks, I include herewith a weekly letter pub- lished by the Archer-Daniels-Midland Co., vegetable-oi] manufacturers and re- finers, Minneapolis, Minn., which tells the story in a very concise manner: ARCHER-DANIELS-MIDLAND Co., Minneapolis, Minn., December 27, 1946. GENTLEMEN: As the new year begins, we should like to comment on prospects for sup- plies of flaxseed and linseed oil for United States requirements during the next 12 months, We do not recall ever having to face a@ gloomier situation on the Ist of January than we do this year. After a very careful analysis of the supply and disappearance fig- ures, we have come to the conclusion that on January 1 there will remain a linseed oll supply, over and above minimum stock requirements, of about 160,000,000 pounds. At the 1945-46 restricted disappearance rate of 62,725,000 pounds per month, these sup- plies should last until about the middle of March. In arriving at these figures, we have taken the latest Government estimate for the domestic 1946 crop and have added all supplies of flaxseed and linseed oil, either received since July 1. 1946, or promised from Argentina, Canada, Mexico, and Uruguay. When the last supplies of linseed oi] run out in the middle of March, the industries that utilize drying oils will have to get relief either from new crop Argentine flaxseed or from substitute oils. In regard to the first alternative, we are somewhat skeptical as to the ability of our Government to make ar- rangements for any substantial shipments of Argentine flaxseed or linseed oi] to reach this country much before April or May. In the first place, Great Britain has made an in- itial purchase of 100,000 tons of linseed oil in Argentina, and our Government has as yet concluded no such purchase. In the second place, Argentine flaxseed is moving very slowly to the Argentine processors because farmers are dissatisfied with the present price of flaxseed (reduced by 40 cents a bushel from last year) and because of labor difficul- ties on the farms and a shortage of harvest- ing equipment, We believe, therefore, that there will be some delay in getting the Argen- tine processing mills into full production and consequentty in getting any substantial sup- ply of linseed of] from that source. Turning to the substitute oils, we notice that the Government has-estimated. that out of the total af 1,150,000,000 pounds of drying
A64 Oils to be used in 1947, only 700,000,000 pounds will be linseed oil and 450,000,000 pounds will consist of other oils. We are extremely doubtful whether even such a supply of dry- ing oils other than linseed will be available for 1947. In the first place, the fish-oil crop has been much smaller this season than for some time past. Soybean oil is badly needed for edible requirements; tung-oil exports from China have been disappointingly small; and the beans from which castor oil is made are eagerly sought at high prices by Europe so that the amount available for this country may be reduced. Our conclusion, therefore, is that the United States of America will be compara- tively bare of drying oils from April to June, when the first of the Texas and California flaxseed is marketed. We consider that this country is entering a new era in drying oils in which we must place less dependence upon supplies from abroad and more on our own flaxseed and soybean crops. The United States Government's goal of 6,000,000 acres of flaxseed for 1947 is not large enough to make up the deficit caused by a shrinkage in supplies from Argentina. We seriously doubt whether even the 5,000,000 acres indicated as a goal will be achieved un- less the Department of Agriculture will pay heed to the advice of State PMA committees, seed men, and farmers that the support price on flax be raised from @4 a bushel, f. o. b. Minneapolis, to at least $5.50 a bushel. Ac- cording to the above-mentioned authorities, farmers, especially in the Northwest, where the bulk of flaxseed is grown, do not believe that the present market price of $7.25 a bushel in Minneapolis will hold when flaxseed comes to market in volume next August. On the other hand, they realize that if they are to raise flax, they must pay from 68 to 610 a bushel for seed flax. That expenditure, added to increased labor costs on the farm, makes the flax crop look like a pretty ex- pensive affair. Farmers, therefore, feel that the Government should assure them a sup- port price which will give them from two and one-half to three times the price of wheat, four times the price of corn, and twice the price of soybeans. If we are to avoid a major catastrophe in the protective-coating indus- try in this country, we cannot emphasize too strongly the need for prompt Government action to assure at least 5,000,000 acres of flaxseed for the United States for 1947. Very truly yours, T. L. DANtELs, Rice EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HENRY D. LARCADE, JR. OF LOUISIANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 9, 1947 Mr. LARCADE. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Recorp, I submit a statement on the situation in regard to the rice industry in the United States, which statement has been prepared by Hon. Homer L. Brinkley, general manager of the Ameri- can Rice Growers Cooperative Associa- tion, and Hon. W. M. Reid, executive vice president of the Rice Millers’ Associa- tion. Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that rice is one of the principal industries of my district, and as rice is produced in only four States—Louisiana, Texas, Ar- kansas, and California—and as matters -them to be true. affecting our industry will be considered by this Congress, I am submitting this statement in regard to our industry for the benefit of the membership in order that they may be informed in respect to this very important industry in our coun- try, especially in view of the fact that consideration of rice in trade-agreement negotiations with foreign countries must be taken up in the near future. The statement is as follows: Laker Cuarugs, La., December 16, 1946. CHARMAN, COMMITTEE FOR RECIPROCITY IN- FORMATION, Tariff Commission Building, Washington, D.C. Subject: Consideration of rice in trade- agreement negotiations with Australia, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Chile, China, Cuba, Czechoslovakia, France, India, Leb- anon, Luxemburg, Netherlands, New Zea- land, Norway, Union of South Africa, and Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Sin: This statement is comprised of two parts—the first component states reasons why export markets must be provided for United States rice, and the second component states reasons why no reductions should be made in tariff rates on rice imports. PART I The production of rice in the United States in 1946 is officially estimated at approxi- mately 70,000,000 bushels of rough rice, which will produce approximately 2,000,000,- 000 pounds of milled rice. Production of rough rice in the last 5 years has averaged 67,500,000 bushels, which when processed has averaged 1,900,000,000 pounds. The domestic utilization of rice in the United States during the last 6 years aver- aged approximately 1,000,000,000 pounds, only slightly more than 50 percent of the total quantity produced. Shipments to ter- ritories average approximately 280,000,000 pounds, or 15 percent of the total quantity produced. Exports account for the remain- der, oF approximately 85 percent of tne total production. Inasmuch as more than one- third of the total production must be ex- ported, foreign markets are of vital impor- tanoe to the United States rice ‘ndustry. The countries with which trade negotia- tions are contemplated which are the most likely potential markets for United States rice are: Belgium, Canada, Cuba, Czecho- slovakia, Luxemburg, Norway, and the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics. Cuba is the principal foreign market for United States rice. Shipments to that coun- try during the past 5 years have averaged about 305,000,000 pounds. Cuba would have taken considerably more rice from the United States if it had been permitted to do so. United States exports went to Allied countries during the war, and since have gone to areas in the Far East having critical rice shortages. Tn accomplish this, the Gov- ernment has restricted the quantity of rice which might be shipped to Cuba and other normal markets, Cuba utilizes about 500,- 000,000 pounds of rice annually, approxi- mately 10 percent of which is supplied by domestic production, and 90 percent by im- For a long period of years prior to 1987, importers in Cuba who maintained a monop- oly of the rice trade with the Orient asserted that the Cuban trade did not like American rice. Some United States Government offi- clals, being informed of those statements, and without making any effort to ascertain the reason for such statements, assumed Since 1937 the United States has supplied Cuba with 60 percent or more of its total requirements for rice. The consumer of rice in Ouba definitely prefers rice from the United States to rice of any other origin. This may be accounted for in APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD large part by the fact that the United States 1s constantly developing new and improving its older varieties of rice. At the present time the United States produces the finest quality of rice produced anywhere in the world. Another reason which contributes to Cuba‘s preference for United States rice is that rice mills in the United States are the most modern of any in the world, and are capable of processing rice in a manner most desired by the market in which it is to be consumed. In negotiating a trade agreement with Cuba, arrangements could and should be made by which that country will agree to make it possible to import not less than 400,000,000 pounds of rice from the United States annually. Before the war, about 75 percent of Ca- nadian imports, which averaged 28,000 tons of rough rice and 8,000 tons of milled rice, came from the Far East, principally from Burma. In the war years Canada obtained all of its rice imports from the United States. Because of the proximity of Canada to the United States, because of its friendly trade relations with the United States, and last- ly—and of prime importance—because of the dependence of Canada upon the United States in time of war and economic crisis, arrange- ments should be made with Canada by which that country will agree to obtain its re- quirements of rice regularly from the United States. The per capita consumption of rice of Bel- gium, Czechoslovakia, Luxemburg, and Nor- way is small, therefore these countries are not important markets for rice; however, in- asmuch as they do not produce any rice and as their trade with the United States is ex- tensive, it should not be difficult to induce these countries to give preference to rice from the United States. PART II Inasmuch as the production of rice in the United States is on an export basis, tariff duties have been provided to protect the in- dustry against importations of rice from foreign countries whose living standards are 80 low that rice is produced and sold at prices with which the United States rice industry is unable to compete. It is essential that the full measure of tariff duties provided by the Congress be maintained. A trade agreement, dated February 1, 1936, was entered into between the United States and the Netherlands, by the terms of which the rate of duty on broken rice which will pass readily through a metal sieve perforated with round holes five sixty-fourths of 1 inch in diameter, was reduced from five-eighths to one-sixteenth of 1 cent per pound (Cus- toms TD 48075). In making that reduction, Government experts stated that broken rice is an insignificant byproduct obtained in the milling of rice. That is not a fact. Broken rice is an important product of rice. United States Standards for Milled Rice classify bro- ken rice as Second Heads, Screenings, and Brewers’ Rice. They differ in size only. They are almost identical in food value and have approximately the same end use. Broken rice is used in the brewing industry, in the manufacture of starch, and for human con- sumption. Over the past 10 years the brew- ing industry alone by average has used ap- proximately 210,000,000 pounds of broken rice annually, Every pound of broken rice, ir- respective of class of broken rice, which is imported, replaces a comparable quantity of domestic rice. In 1935, the last year before the Nether- lands trade agreement became effective, im- portations into the United States of broken rice amounted to 27,614,000 pounds. In the firet year after the import duty was reduced ‘on broken rice pursuant to the trade agree- ment with the Netherlands, importations of broken rice amounted to 92,771,000 pounds,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD an increase of 236 percent. Of the total quantity imported approximately 60 percent was shipped from the Netherlands, the other 40 percent was shipped from countries re- ceiving most-favored-nation treatment. Rice is not a product of the soil of the Netherlands. Practically all of the rice which is processed in the Netherlands is produced in the Orient, where wages and living stand- ards are very much lower than those in the United: States, Inasmuch as the United States produces a far greater quantity of rice than it utilizes, concessions which may be made to the Neth- erlands or to any other foreign country on rice are for the most part illusory, for al- though importations of broken rice increased appreciably in the first year under the trade agreement with the Netherlands, imports in subsequent years were practically nil. The domestic industry, recognizing that it must maintain the domestic market, simply re- duced its prices to a level of values that made importations unprofitable. Any con- cessions in import duties on rice which the United States Government may hereafter make would have the same effect. Therefore, concessions made to foreign countries would not benefit them at all but merely tend to decrease the domestic price for rice. Any reduction in tariff duties on rice would be most inconsistent with legislation enacted by the Congress which provides price support for United States rice and would tend to in- crease unduly the cost of maintaining such price support. Respectfully submitted. AMERICAN Rick Growers Coor- ERATIVE ASSOCIATION, Homer L. BRINKLEY, General Manager. Tue Rice MILLERS’ ASSOCIATION, W. M. Ret, Executive Vice President, Relief From War Laws EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE B. SCHWABE OF OKLAHOMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 9, 1947 Mr. SCHWABE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, there Js a popular demand that the people be relieved from war laws. War emergency acts should be repealed as rapidly as possible, and Congress should take the necessary steps to de- clare the hostilities terminated. I in- troduced such a measure on the date Congress convened, January 3. It is true that the President has eased the situation scmewhat by Executive order, but the people are demanding that Congress go further than the President has gone. It is my opinion that we can safely go much further. We can go far enough to get rid of a lot of bureaus. Hostilities can be terminated either by proclamation of the President or by a concurrent resolution of the two Houses of Congress. The people want relief from war laws. They want us to get back on a peacetime basis. We cannot stimulate and en- courage reconversion and production un- til we can rid ourselves of these war laws. These emergency acts and Executive orders must be repealed. The abolition of one bureau and setting up one or more XCITI—App.——-5 to take its place under a different alpha- betical designation will not satisfy the people and will not solve the problem. It is high time that we relieve the people from the necessity of obtaining permits from some bureau, or bureaucrat, every time they want to engage in a new busi- ness or expand their present activities. Therefore, the emergency war acts should be repealed, and the hostilities Officially terminated. The following editorial on the subject is taken from the Tulsa (Okla.) Daily World of Januery 6, 1947: RELIEF FROM WAR LAWS Numerous repressions and services by the Federal Government ended with the Presi- dent's announcement of the end of hostilities. The action greatly increases the responsi- bilities and opportunities of the new Con- gress. A great many affairs will have to be reshaped. It remains for the Congress to make a formal declaration of the ending of the war emergencies established by proclama- tions in 1939 and 1941. That formal action will set aside possibly 500 statutes; hence congressional leaders are not disposed to hurry procedure. There was a long and weary period of war- time restrictions. The people practically re- volted against many of them last year, and the remaining restrictions as well as the pol- icles themselves had dynamic effects in the last election. The President suggests that some of the controls seem proper for reen- actment. The big feature for the public, however, is relief in several directions. A principal direction ts taxation, for Congress is expected to follow up by the demobiliza- tion of war practices and implement the sav- ings made possible. There are reductions in taxes in certain luxury goods; immigration restrictions are restored in some instances. Outlays foi stabilizing farm prices and regu- lating production are out unless Congress re- stores them. The tremendous flood-control program is not greatly affected by the order of President Truman. Many of these projects are rein- stated by the order but work will not go on until appropriations are made, The emer- gency con.truction system of getting power from flood-control dams may be ended. The general hope is that hereafter these big proj- ects for dams will be clearly defined at the outset and be confined to the expressed purpose—fiood control. The abuses under the war system were strong. The end of the war laws, coming with the end of the old year, should add to the com- posure of the country. There remains the caution given out by the President recently — that it all depends upon all of us going to work. Some of the alibis have been removed, Terminal-Leave Bonds Should Be Paid in Cash Now EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WRIGHT PATMAN OF TEXAS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 9, 1947 Mr. PATMAN. - Mr. Speaker, the law authorizing terminal-leave bonds for enlisted men was passed during the second session of the Seventy-ninth Congress. The gentleman from Florida {Mr, Roars] was author of the bill. It _Mmerely gives enlisted men of World War AGS II the same benefits, privileges, and rights that had been given to officers serving in World War II. DEBT CONFESSED BUT PAYMENT WITHHELD At the time of passage of the bill in the House, the author and most of the Members of the House insisted that the former enlisted men should be paid in cash in the same way and manner that the former officers had been paid in cash. However, the Senate adopted the bond method, which confesses a debt to the former enlisted personnel in the armed services during World War II, but with- holds payment. In the conference be- tween the two Houses, near the end of the session, the House was forced to yield to the bond method or permit the bill to fail. Certainly it was preferable that the bill pass in the bond form rather than not pass at all, so the House yielded. After all, the bond method caused much progress to be made in the direction of final settlement because it enabled the veterans to obtain a certificate from the Government showing that they were entitled to a certain amount. In other words, the debt was transformed from an unliquidated debt to a liquidated debt. AVERAGE BON; $208.60 The average size of bonds issued up to date is $208.60. The bonds were issued only in multiples of $25. If a veteran is entitled to less than $50 he is paid in cash. If he is entitled to $199 he is given a bond for $175 and is paid $24 in cash. The number of bonds audited to date is 2,915,- 000 and the amount of bonds issued is $627,800.825. The data on the average size and total number of bonds issued refers to bonds, the stubs for which have been received from finance officers by the Federal Reserve banks and audited by them. An unknown additional amount have been issued and received but not audited by the banks. The average size bond has been somewhat larger than that anticipated in preparing estimates of the total amount expected to be paid. It is possible that larger claims have been processed with more uniform speed than other claims and that the average size may drop from its present level. The total amount of terminal] leave expected to be paid in cash and by the issuance of bonds was $2,700,000,000, at the time of the passage of the act. It is possible that the actual amount will exceed this sum, INTEREST NOT INCLUDED IN BONDS The interest on the armed forces leave bonds is not included in the face value of the bonds. Each bond contains this statement on its face: The United States of America, 5 years from the issue date hereof, will pay ~.--.------ (amount, to veteran named) with interest thereon from the issue date at the rate of 2% percent per annum, payable with the principal, On the reverse of the bond it is stated that— Interest ceases upon maturity or on the last day of the month in which payment of the bond is made, whichever may be earlier. I introduced, the first day the Congress was in session, a bill providing for cash payment of these bonds at the option of
A66 the holder. The bill was actually filed with the Clerk for introduction last Au- gust. In other words, this bill if en- acted into law, will] make the bonds liquid in the hands of the veterans and they may cash them immediately. Many veterans prefer holding the bonds and receiving the 24 percent in- terest. Other veterans are desperately in need of money and can use it to better advantage now than they can at any other time of their lives. TEXT OF H. RB. 6 If the House had gone Democratic this time, my bill to pay these bonds would have been H. R. 1. The Republicans, exercising their rights, preferred not to permit me to use this number by elect- ing, instead, to use H. R. 1 for a bill to reduce income-tax payments to individ- uals up to the amount of 20 percent on incomes of $300,000 a year and less and a reduction up to 10 percent on incomes in excess of $300,000 per annum. I am not criticizing the Republican majority for using H. R. 1 in any way the party in power desires; i. is their privilege and right. However, I do feel like the pay- ment of these bonds is more important to the veterans of World War II and to the country generally, than the reduction of income taxes at this time. It occurs to me that we should pay our debts while we have the money to pay on them. We should first eliminate all unnecessary expenses, reduce the ex- penditures of government to the lowest possible level, and then pay as much as possible on our huge nationa’ debt. This would give us a balanced budget and a substantial payment on the debt. Both are greatly needed. The text of H. R. 6 follows: A bill to amend the Armed Forces Leave Act of 1946 to provide that bonds issued under such act shall be redeemable at any time Be it enacted, etc., That 80 much of sec- tion 6 (a) of the Armed Forces Leave Act of 1946 as reads as follows: “Each such bond shall mature 5 years from the date thereof.” is amended to read as follows: “Each such bond shall mature 5 years from the date thereof, but shall be redeemable at any time prior to maturity at the option of the holder thereof.” Src.2. Section 6 (d) (1) of such act is amended to read as follows: “(1) Pursuant to regulations prescribed by him, the Administrator of Veterans’ Affairs is authorized and directed to accept an as- signment of a bond issued to the insured under this section, the proceeds of which shal! be used in payment of premiums or in payment of the difference in reserve in case of conversion to insurance on another plan or in payment of a policy loan on a United States Government life-insurance policy or a national service life-insurance policy.” Mr. Speaker, the provisions of section 1 of H. R. 6 would turn the bonds into liquid assets by providing that they may be redeemed at any time at the option of the holder, whereas they must now be held until maturity or be used only in payment for insurance controlled by the Administrator of Veterans’ Affairs. Section 2 of H. R. 6 would eliminate from the law, regarding use of the bonds, the restriction that a policy loan, for pay- ment of which the bonds were assigned, must have been made prior to July 1, 1946; and in conformity with the new redeemability of the bonds, eliminate the requirement that the assignment not be @ means to cash the bonds. COMMITTEE ACTION REQUESTED: This bill has been referred to the Com- mittee on Ways and Means of the House of Representatives. I have addressed a letter to the Honorable Haroun Kwurtson, chairman of the committee, asking that this bill be reported out for House action at an early date. It occurs to me that hearings will be unnecessary, but if hearings are neces- sary, I hope they will be granted before hearings are held on the tax-reduction INTEREST SAVING The United States Treasury can bor- row money to pay these bonds for an interest rate less than 50 percent of what the veterans will receive. A Bill To Create an Alaskan International Highway Commission EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. MIKE MANSFIELD OF MONTANA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 9, 1947 Mr. MANSFIELD of Montana. Mr. Speaker, I have introduced again a bill to create an Alaskan International High- way Commission. This bill, which passed the House unanimously last year but died in the Senate, is, in my opinion, one of the most important measures that has been presented for this Congress’ consid- eration. My interest in this bill lies in the fact that I consider our national fu- ture, both economically and stragically, lies to the north over the polar icecap and the Territory of Alaska. The recent flight of a group of B-29’s from the Alaskan Wing of the Air Com- mand into the polar regions; the Opera- tion Musk Ox carried on jointly by the United States and Canada, and the re- cently completed Operation Frostbite, all indicate the importance of the northern areas of this continent. The Army and Navy during the summer past and this winter have carried on Arctic operations in the Bering Sea, in the Aleutians, in Alaska, and in Colorado and Wisconsin. There is a distinct connection between my proposal for the creation of an Alas- kan International Highway Commission and the operations which have been and are being carried on in the subpolar and polar regions of this continent. It is necessary that an international commis- sion be created to investigate the build- ing of necessary roads to connect this country with Alaska. It is, in my opin- ion, one of the most important questions facing the welfare and security of our country today. I am certain that the Canadian Government will be tremen- dously interested in this matter and would be more than happy to cooperate ‘With us. It is no mere coincidence that the various operations have been and are be- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ing carried on at this moment in the northern regions of this continent. All these movements indicaic to me the in- exorable march of events in this day and age and should bring home to us quite clearly the importance—from all points of views—of Alaska and the Arctic areas. This measure, which I am today intro- ducing, is only the proposed foundation of the building which must and will take place both on the ground and in the air in the future. Our destiny lies in that direction, and we would do well to re- member it always. United States Supreme Court Tenure Should Be Limited EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, January 9, 1947 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speak- er, it has become quite obvious to the people of this country that the tenure of the Supreme Court Justices should be on a limited basis. At the present time the Court is lopsided from the political angle, and the people are demanding that our judiciary be strictly nonparti- san in character. It should not repre- sent a majority of either party. Its pres- ent complexion is strictly New Dealish, and the time has come for the Congress to propose a constitutional amendment which would provide fixed terms for the high Court so that the people in a meas- ure could have some control over this important department of government. Mr. David Lawrence, outstanding po- litical writer and editor of the United States News, has a most interesting edi- torial in the January 10 issue of his val- uable magazine. Under leave to extend my remarks, I include herein the edito- rial in question. It should be of consid- erable interest to the Members of this House: THE NEw DEat Lives ON—POowWER OF NEw DEAL CONTINUES IN DOMINATION OF SUPREME CourT—CONSTITUTIONAL AMENDMENT Pro- VIDING Fixep TERMS FOR JUDICIARY WOULD Give PEOPLE PERIODIC CHECK—JUDICIAL PowER MISUSED IN INTERPRETING LAWS OF CONGRESS (By David Lawrence) The American people may think that, bo- Cause they have taken control of both Houses of Congress from the Democrats, the Repub- lican Party has been put into control of the Government, But this is largely an illusion. For the truth is the New Deal lives on in the Su- preme Court of the United States, where the Justices are appointed for life. Justices Murphy, Rutledge, Black, Reed, Douglas—all ardent New Dealers—comprise the majority. This is the Court which insists on writing legislation by employing the fiction that it is merely interpreting legislation. This is the Court which has brought upon the Nation an economic crisis by an ambigu- ously worded and irresponsible decision in the portal-to-portal case.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD This is the Court whose majority is so im- bued with class partisanship that one of its fair-minded members, Justice Jackson, Called in effect for an investigation of the Court by Congress when he filed last summer with the judiciary committees of both Houses 8 formal letter setting forth a set of circum- stances of which the Democrats failed to take ccgnizance, The Republicans have the power to look into the goings-on inside the Supreme Court. A STARTLING CASE Justice Jackson in his letter referred to the portal-to-portal Jewell Ridge Coal decision— the forerunner of the much-publicized Mount Clemens Pottery case. He said: “The Jewell Ridge Coal decision in itself was a somewhat startling one. The United Mine Workers reversed the position it had previously taken about the Fair Labor Stand- ards Act superseding the coal miners’ collec- tively bargained contracts. It employed as counsel Mr. Justice Black's former law part- ner to argue its new contention to the Supreme Court and he too took a position as to coal miners not consistent with his argu- ment used the previous term to win a case for the iron miners. Mr. Justice Black re- versed the position he had taken in manag- ing the bill as Senator. The Court by a bare majority of & to 4 supported the change of front by the United Mine Workers. * * * “On the Court, Mr. Justice Black controlled assignment of the case because the Chief Justice was in dissent. Mr. Justice Black chose Mr, Justice Murphy to write the ma- jority opinion. While Mr. Justice Murphy was preparing his opinion, a strike of the mine workers and negotiations with the operators were proceeding. It was proposed to hand down the decision in favor of the miners, without waiting for the opinion and dissent. The only apparent reason behind this proposal was to announce the decision in time to influence the contract negotiations during the coal strike. Chief Justice Stone protésted such proposed irregular treatment vigorously. “I do not believe Mr. Justice Murphy favored it. In all events it was abandoned. * * * “The defeated parties in the Jewell Ridge case applied to the Court for a rehearing and asked that Justice Black be excluded from participation because of his past relations to the attorney for the successful parties. As there 1s no power in the Court to disqualify a duly commissioned Justice, all members were agreed that the petition for rehearing must be denied.” CONGRESS BHOULD SEEK FACTS Why doesn't Congress prescribe a rule per- mitting the Court itself to disqualify a mem- ber in particular cases? Why doesn’t Con- gress seek now the facts as to how the vex- atious portal-to-portal decision came to be handed down and why a rehearing was denied? To fail to look into charges made by a. member of the Supreme Court is for Congress to fail in the duty given it by the Constitu- tion to watch over the behavior of the judiciary. The Constitution does not use the phrase “life tenure,” but states that judges may hold office ‘during good behavior.” This does not mean that a partisan Con- gress shall examine the opinions of the judges as a pretext for impeachment. The phrase means ethical behavior, The answer to the problem is not to im- peach Justices on technicalities or to punish them for their opinions. That was New Deal unmorality. The answer lies in legislating against abuses in the proper way—by amend- ment to the Constitution. Had Mr. Roosevelt chosen that course, there could have been no valid criticism of his plan to enlarge the Court. An amendment to the Constitution should be adopted by Congress and submitted to the States for ratification which will provide that Justices shall serve a term no longer than 10 years, but that they shall be eligible for re~ appointment by the President for subse- quent 10-year terms. The present members of the Court should have the opportunity to be reappointed—their terms of 10 years to begin from the day of their original appoint- ment. The United States Senate, however, would have the opportunity to say each time whether it wished to confirm those renomi- nated. This would mean that the people, through their Senate, would declare whether the Jus- tices should be continued in power. On mat- ters of this kind in the Senate, it is unlikely that partisan majorities would be mustered, but, in any event, the people would have a voice. No political philosophy imposed by one President would then endure for life in the Supreme Court. “PACKING ENDED 60-40 PRECEDENT As for the Federal judges on the courts below the Supreme Court, there are many able men among them, including many who were appointed by the Democratic adminis- tration who have made good judges. But here, too, the “packing” went on. Out of the men appointed to the bench from 1933 to 1945, about 95 percent were Democrats. Such an abuse of the traditional principle of a 60-to-40 ratio between the major parties, up- held by Republican as well as Democratic Presidents prior to the Roosevelt regime, calls for an investigation. Certainly the same constitutional amend- ment which governs the tenure of Supreme Court Justices can be made to apply to the judges of all the Federal courts. They, too. should be appointed for 10-year terms and eligible for reappointment. It will be argued that life tenure insures an independent judiciary. But a fixed tenure in the highest courts in the various States has proved effective in that direction, too. Judges in the highest court in the most populous State of the Union—New York—are elected for fixed terms and nominated by both parties through bipartisan agreement The people thus retain a check against bad judges. PEOPLE WANT THEIR JUDICIARY The American people today do not favor the New Deal. Nor do they favor the misuse of the judicial power to get across collectiv- ism or revolutionary doctrines which are aimed at the confiscation of private property by judicial flat. The portal-to-portal de- cision is typical of many cases in which the New Deal Court has disregarded custom and practice and set about to confiscate private property on the pretext of interpreting a law of Congress. The “workweek"' is and should be what the employer and the employees agree it is, and when Congress limited the maximum hours to 40, beyond which overtime should be paid, there never was the slightest intent to rule on what constituted the first 40-hour sched- ule—whether payment should be made for changing clothes, walking from « time clock ts a work bench or any of the other absurdi- ties which the Supreme Court now has in- troduced in its misguided effort to write a definition of the workweek. Congress did not wish to make such a definition because custom already had provided a practical defil- nition, The portal-to-portal decision not only has brought confusion but it may bring financial ruin to some companies. It will delay expansion. For who wants to lend money to a company with lawsuits involving millions of dollars hanging over that com- pany? The way of reform lies in getting rid of life tenure, which has proved dangerous, and to substitute a system of appointment for 10-year terms, Justices failing of reap- pointment can be given the opportunity to A67 accept retired pay and be called on to serve as special masters or referees in judicial pro- ceedings. The American people want a fair judiciary and they are entitled to it. It never was in- tended that any party should control the judicial branch of the Government com- pletely for generations of time. Not only Republicans but a substantial number of Democrats will support proposals to create a fair judiciary. For therein lies the safeguard of a government that really rests upon the consent of the governed. The Late Dave E. Satterfield, Jr. EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOSEPH P. O'HARA OF MINNESOTA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday. January 8, 1947 Mr. O’HARA. Mr. Speaker, it was with a feeling of deep sadness that I learned of the death of Hon. Dave E. Sat- terfield, Jr:, on December 27, 1946. I became acquainted with Mr. Satter- field at the beginning of my service in the Seventy-seventh Congress, and from that early acquaintanceship developed a Strong and abiding friendship for him. He was a distinguished lawyer and served with great ability upon the Judi- ciary Committee and as a Representative in Congress. His sincerity won the con- fidence and respect of all those who were associated with him. He was at all times agentleman. It was with genuine regret that his colleagues learned that he had decided, early ‘n 1945, to leave Congress to become general counsel of the Life Insurance Association of America. He was truly a great American patriot. In World War I he served as & naval aviator, and with the outbreak of World War II he immediately offered his serv- ices and was sent to Englard on a special mission by the Navy. I shall always prize the friendship and loyalty of Dave Satterfield. I know my colleagues share with me the deep sorrow of his untimely death and join with me in extending to his wife and sons our sym- pathy in the loss of husband and father. May his soul rest in peace. A Suggested Remedy for the Portal-to- Portal Mess EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. GEORGE B. SCHWABE OF OKLAHOMA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, danuary 9, 1947 Mr. SCHWABE of Oklahoma. Mr. Speaker, I am just in receipt of the fol- lowing letter from the Curtis Manufac- turing Co., of St. Louis, Mo., enclosing an editorial from the St. Louis Post-Dis- patch of December 29, 1946. I think the letter and the editorial are worthy of our most serious consideration in connection with the unprecedented
A68 conflicts that confronts industries which were engaged in manufacturing during the war: St. Lous, Mo., January 6, 1947. Hon. Groroe B, Scuwaze, House Office Building, Washington, D.C. Dean Sm: The scandalous situation that has developed as a result of the Supreme Court’s decision with respect to portal-to- portal pay demands prompt action by Con- gress. Our company, whose combined capital and surplus totals 62,828,000, has been sued for $2,000,000 portal-to-portal back pay. Bank- ruptcy would result if the company had to pay any such fantastic sum. : There is universal agreement that maxi- mum production is needed in 1947 to re- store the shortages caused by the war and to bring prosperity to the country. But it would be silly for our company, or any other company faced with similar suits, to expand facilities and operations when faced with possible insolvency. Many recommendations have been pro- posed to correct the situation. The one sug- gested by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch in an editorial published December 29, 1946, ap- Pears to be so simple, and so easy to accom- plish, that we are taking the liberty of send- ing a copy of the editorial to you. Won't you read it? The matter is so important and needs such prompt action that Congress, when it con- venes, should not delay in considering ap- propriate relief. We urge that legislation along the lines indicated in the above edi- torial be promptly enacted. Yours very truly, CurrTIs MANUFACTURING Co., C. W. FREnrs, Secretary and Treasurer. [From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch of Decem- ber 20, 1946] REMEDY FOR THE PORTAL-TO-PORTAL MESS Here is a solution for the fantastic epidemic of lawsuita against employers to recover portal-to-portal pay, with heavy penalty, as a@ result of the Supreme Court decision in the now celebrated Mount Clemens Pottery case. It is estimated that these suits seek sums Tanging from five to six billion dollars. If they are successful, many industries face financial ruin. Members of Congress, ac- cording to Representative WoLcoTT, of Michi- gan, are being flooded with appeals for ac- tion. The line of attack against the portal-to- portal cases most frequently mentioned is a limitation on the collection of pay to 1 year. A bill to this effect was introduced in the last session by Representative GwYNNneg of Iowa and passed by the House. In the Senate, the limit was increased to 3 years, but Con- gress adjourned before a compromise could be reached. It is doubtful, however, under the ex post facto principle, whether such ac- tion by Congress would provide a real remedy. The Mount Clemens Pottery case was based upon the Fair Labor Standards Act, better known as the Wages and Hours Act. This law was passed by Congress in 1938 to set mini- mum wages and an eventual 40-hour week. It provided for time-and-one-half pay when- ever the maximum hour specification was ex- ceeded. Nothing was said about portai-to- portal pay in so many words, but judicial construction of the law by the Supreme Court held the Mount Clemens Co. liable for such pay. In drawing up the Wage-Hour Act, Con- gress spent considerable time in preparing definitions for the various terms used in the act. It defined “person,” “commerce,” “Btate,” “employer,” “employee,” “industry,” “goods,” and other words. It did not, how- ever, define what it meant by the word “workweek.” This, it turns out, was an all- important omission. For want of a clear ‘definition of “workweek” in the law, the task fell upon the courts to decide just what this means. Last Friday we described the tangled pro- cedure preceding the Supreme Court deci- sion. When the case came to the highest court, Justice Murphy, on behalf of the ma- jority, undertook to define what constitutes the workweek. He found that employees in the Mount Clemens plant were compelled “to spend an estimated 2 to 12 minutes daily, if not more, in waiking on the premises.” He added: “It follows that the time spent in walking to work on the employer’s premises, after the time clocks were punched, involved ‘physi- cal or mental exertion (whether burdensome or not) controlled or required by the em- ployer and pursued necessarily and prima- rily for the benefit of the employer and his business,’ Work of that character must be included in the statutory workweek and compensated accordingly, regardless of con- trary custom or contract.” But when Justice Murphy used the phrase “statutory workweek,” he did so in a sense that caused Justices Burton and Frankfurter to dissent. In his dissenting opinion, Justice Burton said: “To sustain the position of the court in requiring these additional moments to be recorded and computed as overtime, it is necessary to hold that Congress, in using the word ‘workweek’ meant to give that word & statutory meaning different from ‘ts com- monly understood reference to the working hours between starting and quitting time— or from whistle to whistle.” Justice Burton added: “There is no evidence that Congress meant to redefine this common term and to set aside long-established contracts or customs which had absorbed in the rate of pay of the respective jobs recognition of whatever pre- liminary activities might be required of the worker by that particular job.” Later, in his opinion, Justice Burton con- tinued this line of reasoning by saying: “ ‘Workweek’ is a simple term used by Congress in accordance with the common understanding of it. For this Court to in- clude in it items that have been customarily and generally absorbed in the rate of pay but excluded from measured working time is not justified in the absence of affirmative legislative action.” So, in a very real sense, the judicial con- flict in the Mount Clemens case revolved around two different conceptions of what “workweek” means. This is confirmed by Edward Lamb, of Toledo, the lawyer who originated the portal-to-portal legislation. He said yesterday that the Supreme Court decision did nothing more than “define a workweek.” There’s the rub. Congress, while defining every other important word and phrase in the Wage-Hour Act, did not define “work- week” and therefore forced the courts to try to determine what Congress meant. They were faced with a hiatus in the law and, as we pointed out Friday, legislated from the bench, with Justice Murphy's interpretation prevailing over Justice Burton's. The solution is for Congress to relieve the courts of guessing what it meant by the term “workweek” and to define this term itself. It can do so by a simple amendment to the Wage-Hour Act, adding the definition of workweek to the other words and phrases which are defined. This amendment might well be based on the reasoning of Justice Burton when he said that it was improper for the court to in- clude in the word “workweek” items that “have been customarily and generally ab- sorbed in the rate of pay but excluded from measured working time.” The purpose, of course, would be to bar portal-to-portal Claims except where either custom or con- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tract recognizes the additional time as com- pensable. If Congress should pass such an amend- ment, it would clarify and simplify the task of the courts and, we make bold to aay, it would blast to kingdom come most of the suits that are now plaguing the Nation. As to meritorious portal-to-portal claims, com- pensation can be determined by contract be- tween the parties. Such claims, for example, are fair when, say. a coal miner has to walk or ride a mile or more underground to reach the coal face to be mined. It 1s fair, too, as the railroads recognize, when they compensate an engineer for the time he must spend oiling up his engine before starting on a run, Such un- usual situations are already covered in col- lective-bargaining agreements and other justifiable portal-to-portal claims can be cov- ered in future collective-bargaining agree- ments. The need for the present is a remedy for an intolerable mass of windfall lawsuits, many of them instigated by opportunistic lawyers, which take advantage of a flaw in a statute. We urge Congress to apply the remedy by defining the term “workweek.” Role of the Senate in Foreign Policy EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ELBERT D. THOMAS OF UTAH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, January 10, 1947 Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. Presi- dent, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an address entitled “The Senate’seRole in Foreign Policy,” delivered by me be- fore the Institute of World Affairs at Riverside, Calif., December 9, 1946. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: THE SENATE'S ROLE IN FOREIGN FOLICY Urder the American constitutional system the Congress is the policy-forming branch of government. That, of course, is theory. In foreign relations, the Senate has the last word. That, too, is theory. If our Constitu- tion worked as the schoolboy assumes it does, on first reading. it would be as simple to understand as Caesar's opening statement about Gaul, which, if I remember rightly, was that Gaul was divided into three parts. The American Constitution assumes that the powers of Government are divided into three parts. No government is static and de- spite the fact that constitutional government is described as rigid, American Government has never been either static or rigid. That which is done today may not be done tomor- row, and that which was done yesterday may never be done again. The notion of popular sovereignty with the people’s representatives responding to the people's wishes, in the long run and over a long time, apparently works as the founding fathers thought that it would work. But at particular times and under varying degrees of party, presidential, or public-opinion pressure those who have the last say at any given time may be quite different from those who have had the last say the last time the Senate spoke. Sovereignty in the sense of the last word is still not easy to discover in the American: governmental system. Therefore, despite the glib pronouncements of those writers who placed responsibility for all things in the American Government upon the person or
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD institution mearest at hand or those easiest to criticize or praise, an accurate evaluation of responsibility is difficult at all times. The American Government is exceedingly oom- plex. That is both prologue and general. There is no doubt m my mind but that the twenty-third session of the Institute of World Affairs is interested in the Senate's role in our foreign policy as of 1946 and 1047. The Senate's strength comes as a result of the two-thirds requirement for the ratifica- tion of treaties. But even this requirement has been tempered lately by a use of the reso- tution technique which requires only a ma- jority vote and becomes effective after pas- sage in both Houses in Congress end the President's signature. Also, due to a number of factors, the treaty technique instead of initiating an era of peace or setting wp machinery for interna- tional relations is now not as readily used as it has been. For example, not one single peace treaty has yet been ratified. Still, in Japan a new constitution based entirely upon @ peace status has already beoome effective under military-occupation auspices. No peace treaty will affect that. Even if a treaty had been ratified, inter- national rerations today are on such a day-to- day scale due to rapid communication and transportation that administration of a treaty has become the big factor just as the administration of a law is the big factor rather than the treaty or the law itself. Thus, that statement which I made before that the Congress of the United States, and, in regard to treaties, the Senate, while being a policy-forming instrument under the Con- stitution, are today tempered by both time and circumstance. T spite the fact that we have won a great war for democracy and despite the fact that we have crushed dictators, the executive branch of our Government looms stronger, more important, and more active than ever. After the Civil War the Supreme Court put a constitutional curb upon the powers of the President, but during this war the Supreme Court sustained and made the Presidency more powerful than ever. The pen may still be mightier than the sword, but the doer has definitely the inside track over the theorizer. the deliberator, and the policy former. The President is the doer in our Government. Am I, a United States Senator, attempting to make my job seem less important? Defi- nitely not! I do think, though, that if we are to understand how the wheels go around in our great Government we must appreci- ate comparative values of those agencies which in theory and in practice had divided among them powers of government in these Uaited States. Now, for a bit of history, which to date has not been recorded and hardly noticed. There has been ia the United States Senate at least one Senator very conscious of the fact that the Senate of the United States upset a -constructive program -f a farsighted President at the end of the last war. That Senator deemed that the Senate acted un- wisely and not for the country’s nor the world’s beat interest. He, of course, may have been wrong. But still those were his sentiments, President Wilson stressed the writing of peace treaties that were never ratified and to a great extentenever became operative. He stressed the ideal dreams of & League of Nations and a World Court which fatied to come true because of the lack of cooperation of the most important sponsoting Nation. The world watched, Gespite the lack of American membership, the growth and development of the Inter- national Labor Organization and the ac- eceptance of its basic idents by nearly three soores of nations. Early in his first term, the Senator, mentioned above, aided materi- ally in bringing the United States into the International Labor m and was one of those who fought for but falied to get American adherence to the World Court protocol. When World War Ii broke out in Europe, this Senator remembered well the actions of his country after the last world war and believed that world organization was not only practical but necessary and consistently worked for placing America in the position of being prepared for peace when the war should be won. That single thought never left the mind of the Senator. Oonsistent with it, as time went on, the following things were done: First, in order that the Senate of the United States might function .properly in planning for the peace it was necessary to bring about a changed attitude on the part of the Foreign Relations Committee. This oowld only be done by changing the com- mittee’s membership. That most difficult task was inaugurated and consummated. ‘This ts that story. It should be remembered that the Manda- tory Neutrality Act which was the law of the land demanded that the United States should treat equally both the aggressor and his victim. 1 had introduced a resolution providing that the act be changed so that it would act against only the wrongdoing aggressor and not the victim of the aggressor. We were unsuccessful in having this neu- trality amendment accepted. In the sum- mer of 1989 when tt appeared to many per- sons that war in Europe was certain the President of the United States himself asked for a change in our Mandatory Neutrality Act. This the Foreign Relations Committee denied. The reason given by the majority of the committee was that war would not come. When the new Congress organized in January 1041 this action on the part of the Foreign Relations Committee was pointed out. Lend-'ease was in the offing and I men- tioned the fact that the .dministration could not afford to take a chance with that. Ag a member of the Committee on Committees of the Democratic Steering Committee, I was asked what might be done. I pointed out that first of all no new Senator should ever be put on the Foreign Relations Committee and that Senators representing strong com- mittees should be there so that if the Presi- dent wished to use the Foreign Relations Committee ag a council of state he would have such an organization. The council of state idea is very old constitutional theory. George Washington himself assumed that the Senate as a whole, when it consisted of merely 26 Members, might act as such a council. It should be pointed out here that the For- eign Relations Committee in 1941 consisted of 23 Members. I was also asked what Senators 1 would suggest going on the committee since I had mentioned new Senators should not be placed there. Immediately I suggested Senator Glass, of Virginia, and Senator Byrnes, of South Carolina. These Senators both had great seniority and were administration sup- porters. It was thought by some that Sen- ators of long standing would not give up their seniority on other committees to serve on this committee, but both Senator Glass and Senator Byrnes accepted. Senator Glass teld me personally how grateful he was for the opportunity it gave him to serve his country. There were two Democratic va- cancies ani these two great Senators were named. The Republicans accepted the theory and Senator Austin gave up his as- cendant position on the Judiciary Commit- tee and accepted the position on the Foreign Relations Committee. Those three leading Senators, two Democrats and one Repub- lican, gave up strong positions on other com- mitéees to serve in the most junior positions on the Foreign Relations Committee. With the reorganization of the Foreign Relations Committee, the President now had @ council of state if he wished to use it, for the commiteee now consisted of both the majority and minerity leaders and the chair- men of the following committees: Foreign A69 Relations, Finance, Banking and Currency, Military Affairs, Education and Labor, Inter- oceanic Canals, Appropriations, Audit and Control, Pensions, and Public Lands, and in the course of time the majority party whip. Was this change necessary? Of course, no one can say for sure. Probably lend-lease was not important, but without it, I, for one, believe that we would still be fighting Hitler and the Japanese. Was the reorganization important for lend-lease? Even after the reorganization lend-lease was reported out of committee by just one vote. If the Presi- dent of the United States had failed in hav- ing accepted his lend-lease recommendation nO one can say today what might have hap- pened to the President’s whole war program. No sooner were we in the war than the Sen- ator mentioned above took the stand that the plans for peace must run along simul- taneously with the development of the war. To this proposition there was great opposi- tion. “Let’s win the war,” shouted many, “and leave the peace until tae war is won.” Thus assuming that that for which we were Aghting as not important. In rapid succession Mr. Hull, of the Statc Department, appointed a committee of ex- perts to study for the peace. A small group of Senators and Representatives were invited to meet with Mr. Hull and Mr. Welles with these . Senator Connatry, chairmait of the Foreign Relations Committee, ap- pointed a subcommittee of eight Senators to consider any propositions for peace which might be referred to the committee. This committee of eight met regularly. At the time of its first meeting seven of the eight were opposed to doing anything. At the time of the reporting out of the Connally resolu- tion seven of the eight favored that resolu- tion. This changed attitude, I am sure, came primarily because these men were almost daily struggling with a great problem and be- came convinced that a constructive start was necessary. Thus, through the Connally reso- lution Congress spoke in favor of world organization to prevent war. The Dumbarton Oaks Conference was called. The Hot Springs Conference on Food and Agriculture was called. The International Labor Organization came to America in 1941 and then again in 1944 for the great session where it adopted the Declaration of Philadelphia. The San Francisco Conference was called and the Onited Nations Charter was worked out pro- viding for various branches of international activities under the Charter. The Senate ratified the Charter. The Senate ratified the constitution of the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization and the United Nations Bducational, Scientific, and Cultural Organization. These were all done while we were still at war. And before the world was legally at peace, the Senate of the United States acted upon the compulsory jurisdic- tion provision for the International Court of Justice, Thus, today, before the ratification of a single peace treaty, America stands legally and already in international organi- zation. Without constructive leadership in the Senate of the United States this could not have been. I emphasize the Senate's part in this program because it has all too soon been forgotten. Had we neglected to act during the war the United Nations Charter, like the Covenant of the League, would have becn made part of the treaties and it might have suffered the same fate. One other aspect of the Senate's activity in international organivation; as early as 1985 in a conference made up of the Under Secretary of State, Mr. Welles, and the presi- dent of the Foreign Policy Association, Mr. Raymond Leslie Buell, I advocated a closer te:ationship between the Senate and the State Department and the Executive. I even suggested the use of Senators as negotiators of treaties and conventions. That our Gov- ernment had turned its back definitely upon
A70 this idea, adhering strictly to President W1l- 60n's theory of a harsh division between ne- gotiators and ratifiers of treaties, was ap- parent from the reception my idea got. Still, in time it prevailed. Senator Wurtz was sent to Cairo. I was appointed to the Philadel- phia Conference. Senators CoNNALLY and VANDENBERG were appointed to the San Francisco Conference. Senators Murray, CHAVEZ, AUSTIN, WAGNER, ToBEY, and BREW- STER were appointed to other conferences, and much good has been accomplished. This practice provides for a better under- standing, on the part of the Senate, of treaties that are to be ratified and helps in their ratification. The practice also has con- tributed greatly to what of late has become an accepted idea of both major political parties—that foreign relations should be car- ried on as bipartisan or nonpartisan activi- ties. Surely in our conduct in relationships with other nations we should present this united front. The nonpartisan idea has be- come reflected also in those other committees which represent a united Nation such as the Committees on Military and Naval Affairs. That which has been done is all to the good for America of 1946 stands vastly different. from what she did a generation ago. All of these things have not been accom- plished just as a result of growth. They have been planned for and they have been fought for, and sometimes the going was not easy. There is no doubt in my mind, at least, that future generations will know that what has been done is good. Has the power of the President been made less effective because of his partnership in action with Congresa? Has the power of the Congress been affected adversely because of its close connection with the Executive in our foreign policy? Not even the old-fashioned stickler for the abso- lute separation of powers in our constitu- tional theory can point out any evil result coming from this close relationship. Inter- national relations are not relations which are aloof and far off. They are relations which affect the homes, the firesides, and the people quite as much as any wholly domestic question. The bringing of the people closer to these problems through the action of the people's representatives in no sense does vio- lence to our constitutional scheme or its theory. Now, what of the Senate’s role for tomor- row. I repeat again, not a single treaty has been ratified. But the Senate has already had a part in framing the ideals and the ideas which will go into many treaties which will be presented to us. Last fall there were three great international meetings being carried on at the same time; the Treaty Conference in Paris, the United Nations meeting in New York, and the International Labor Organiza- tion in Montreal. These three were all ac- complishing great things. As time goes on we shall be able to evaluate and compare that which was done, but at present all were tending toward a Single great objective. A common desire of nations seemed to be for the first time in history a predominating motive, and that desire was world unity, By this I do not mean that nationalistic tenden- cies are dead. Nationalistic advantage-tak- ing and selfishness will no more become dead issues than will state and sectional tenden- cies and selfishness in our own country. Ad- vantage-taking on the part of persons, groups, and nations cannot be overcome by mere organization. The processes: of educa- tion, the reevaluation of aims, the changing of ideals, and the conscious development of new outlooks are all essential to bringing about this change. Age-old tendencies only Give way as a result of the substitution of other tendencies. Growth and development should be our aim, not fiat or decree. Let me illustrate my point about all of the international meetings tending toward world unity. Senator Austin in making a speech before the United Nations pointed out that if, and when, the United Nations set up trusteeships those trusteeships would be administered for the benefit of the people within the trusteeships. Almost at the same time he made his remarks I was presiding in Montreal over the Committee on Dependent Territories of the International Labor Or- ganization Conference. One of the basic theories this Committee worked out in Phil- adelphia in 1944, made tangible in Paris in 1945, and gotten ready for a draft conven- tion in 1946-in Montreal was the idea that the peoples in dependent territories should be governed in such a way that they should not be exploited, but that they themselves should receive the benefita of good govern- ment in their behalf. In other words, when Senator Austin made his pronouncement to the United Nations, already the representa- tives of 50 nations in the International La- bor Organization had agreed that depend- encies should be administered for the bene- fit of the people in those dependencies. Could Senator Austin have said anything else? I bring out this incident to illustrate an old point which has always been overlooked in the Senate's role in foreign relations. That point is the point of interdependency. The President, of course, is important in all matters connected with the American Gov- ernment and especially in foreign relations. The State Department, too, is important, but as long as our Constitution gives the Senate the last word regarding the making of treaties it is Just childish not to let the Senate have one or two first words also. May 1 make another point? Under the Constitution, treaties ratified become the su- preme law of the land. Since the Supreme Court's decision in regard to the Migratory Bird case, there is no doubt in anyone’s mind that a treaty, because it is the supreme law of the land, can supplant legislation both of the State and the Nation. Thus it is a tre- mendously great legislative principle at stake, and, therefore, it must be assumed that the Senate and the Congress will always be most jealous of its prerogatives. It is right that this should be. The people’s representatives should have a voice in the law which governs the people. Let me moralize a moment. From time to time, since Theodore Roosevelt told the world after the election of 1918 that Woodrow Wilson was a repudiated leader and that if parliamentary government prevailed in America, as it did in most of the European states at that time, Wilson could no longer logically be the spokesman for America, per- sons have suggested that we change our form of government and make it parliamentary rather than presidential. And lately again it has been syggested that President Truman resign as a result of the last election. This much should be said if we are to contrast our American system of the separation of powers with the British parliamentary sys- tem. The British Government always knows that it is responsible, that if it does not meet the will of the people it will be brought down. The American Government does af- ford the opportunity for putting the blame for actions on someone else’s shoulders. Our Government, therefore, affords a constant in- vitation to alibi. Skillful politicians, when they have been in the White House or in Con- Gress, take advantage of this situation and blame either Congress or the President for inaction or improper leadership. The more separated our powers become the mere alibi- ing, the more shifting of responsibility, and the more placing of the blame on someone else's shoulders will prevail. If we can unite the Executive and the Congress in foreign relations we at least confine the alibiing, the blame shifting, and the refusing to take re- sponsibility to domestic issues. Thus Amer- ica, among the nations of the earth, stands stronger today as a result of the new nership between Congress.and the Executive APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD than it has ever before in our history. I count that . In the light of what has taken place in the last 6 or 7 years that which we did in 1919, '20, and '21 seems anything but states- maniike. Think of a great government, such as the United States, making formal Peace with Germany after the last war by providing Germany with a treaty which in effect said, “We, America, will take all of the rights and you will assume all of the obli- gations of the treaties so far negotiated, but we will accept none of the responsibilities.” Could there have been a stronger invitation to aggressor men or nations than that? Who can blame an opportunist Mussolini, an ambitious Hitler, or imitators of per- version, such as a Matsuoka.or a Tojo, from assuming that there is no such thing as a national morality and anything a state may do must be deemed good if it is successful. If men and nations forget duties, obligations, and responsibilities, morality ceases to exist. It 1s these three: Duty, obligation, and re- sponsibility, that make right, not might. Germany, Italy, and Japan were not wrong in the last war because they lost. They were wrong because they assumed that nations had rights only. But no nation has any right which refuses to accept its obliga- tions, duties, and responsibilities in the sisterhood of nations. History is not just lived, it is made. Peace will never come by fiat. It has got to be Planned for. World organigation cannot grow, it must be set up. All facts of political governmental development in the world tell us that. Still, men today assume that there is nothing that can be done to better condi- tions. Still, we are discouraged. Yet in the face of those things accomplished .in the last 6 or 7 years where is there room for discour- agement? By that statement, please do not assume that I have an idea that nothing more need be done. Quite the contrary. We have only made a beginning. World organi- zation does not mean that men will live in & condition of bliss. There will be strife, there will be deliberation, there will be de- bate, and there will be talk, but out of it all will come the strengthening of political techniques which will lead onward and up- ward and man will find himself in a better world as far as war is concerned. Interna- tional war can be overcome by international organization if there is a will for such an objective. It cannot be brought about if we shirk because many of the things presented to us are hard and difficult. The Senate's role must still be that of having the last word, but with the last word should come a sense of the heavy responsibility which it must maintain. That there is a will to do this among the Senators today is one of the bright promises of the immediate future. Attitude of National Grange on Agriculture EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ARTHUR CAPPER . OF KANSAS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, January 10, 1947 Mr. CAPPER. Mr. President, I wish to invite the attention of the Senate to the action taken by the National Grange at its eightieth annual session at Port- land, Oreg., last November. This state- ment contains the Grange platform for agriculture and expresses their views on current issues. I ask unanimous con- sent to have the statement printed in the Appendix of the Recon».
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD There being no objection, the matter was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: ACTION BY THE NaTIONAL Granor Go ahead sanely and promptly on reoon- version problems of both industry and agri- culture was the keynote of the eightieth annual session of the National Grange just concluded at Portland, Oreg., and {tts pro- nouncements will strike a responsive chord among thinking people across the Nation. The session sternly faced the reconversion problem, urged proper consiteration for the needs of agriculture, and emphasized the ne- ceastty for mobilizing all national forces for an energetic program of self-help, best ex- pressed by cooperative effort—aided by sound Government agencies, but never dependent upon them. The principle of individual initiative and effort was stressed in nearly every committee report at Portland, supplemented by a posi- tive command to cut Government expenses, abolish all unnecessary bureaus and other spending agencies, and accomplish a balanced budget at the earliest possible moment. Community service work by loca! granges was especially emphasized, seeking not only maximum direct benefits to members of the organization but overflowing into the life of the community; with the Grange hull made @ genuine social, educational, and planning center, thus proving the Grange to be the effective spokeaman af the rural people of America. Thousands of Pacific coast patrons came to the Portland convention, with groups from a score of more distant States; and a class of nearly 5.800 candidates received the sev- enth degree, highest in Grange ritualism. The 1947 convention of the National Grange was unanimously voted to the State of Ohio, the city to be later designated, while Maine made a strong bid for the 1948 session Below in concise form appears the Grange platform for agriculture, unanimously adopt- ed by the Portland convention after thor- ough study and extended discussion. Fol- lowing it is a condensed itemized summary of the principal declarations, both favored and opposed, made by the Portland gathering. GRANGE PLATFORM VOR AGRICULTURE it is the conviction of the National Grange that a sound farm program to be used as a guide during the strenuous period of read- jJustment which our Nation faces is more essential than ever before. The stability of agriculture, as well as of the Nation as a whole, rests upon the following basic prin- ciples promulgated by the National Grange: 1. Conservation of our basic natural wealth of soil and timber must be promoted through sound soil-building, water-conservation, and fire-prevention programs on a self-sustainig basis. 2. Farmers’ equitable share of the national fncome must be secured through a modern- fzed parity and obtained through fair mar- ket prices rather than by subsidies. Support prices are justified where necessary to assure consumers adequate supplies and producers a fatr price. 3. We shall continue, as in the past, to encourage both marketing and purchasing cooperative farmer organizations as the first reliance for adjusting and stabilizing mar- kets in the interest of both producers and consumers. 4. The Grange supports efforte of the Council of Mconomic Advisers created by ‘Congress for development of a “stock of rem- edies” for emergency actions in meeting eco- nomic dislocations and restoring an economy of balanced abundance. 6. We urge extension of the Marketing ents Act to include producers of com- modities which can wse it to an advantage im securing for consumers adequate supplies at reasonable prices while at the same time protecting producers against seasonal market dislocations. 6. We favor use of marketing quotas, when. approved by two-thirds of the growers voting in a referendum, for preventing surpluses from creating market gluts, supported by a multiple-price system domestically for utili- gation of surpluses. 7. We favor expansion of international trade through ocommodity-agreement pro- grams and the use of such devices as the export-debenture plan and equalization fee, for assuring American farmers a fair share of world markets, and the adoption of safe- guards which will protect domestic producers from tmports in such volume as to destroy the American market for American producers. 8. We favor establishment of a health pro- gram which would tnclude preventive medi- cines, make adequate hospital and medical facilities available to all areas through co- operative efforts, and the establishment of & Federal office of nutrition to cooperate with State, local, and private agencies in promot- ing improved diets. 9. We favor Federal and State guidance and assistance tn the development of sound, long- range readjustment programs for areas where changes in agricultural production had cre- ated serious social or economic problems. 10. We urge consolidation and coordina- tion of Federal agencies participeting in the Agricultural Research and Marketing Act, in order to centralize authority. eliminate dup- lication, and obtain maximum efficiency. We recommend that each cooperating State ap- point advisory committees patterned after the National Advisory Committee to work with State agencies in developing sound re- search programs. The National Grange favors: A sound farm-credit system under an in- dependent bipartisan farm credit board. ‘Oongressiona] action to promote and en- courage increased housing construction. Strict enforcement of liquor laws. Inclusion of farm-to-market roads in prin- cipal secondary highways classification. Removal of Federai taxes on motor fuels. Increased activity to promote highway safety. More economical and equitable distribu- tion of surplus war materials. Increased activity in promoting rural health programs. Increased allotments of sugar for home canning. Standard rims for farm wagons and ma- chinery. Adequate rural electrification financing on a self-liquidating area-coverage basis. Extension of old-age and retirement social security to farmers and farm workers. Strengthening and extension of farmer cooperatives. Extension of rural free delivery to serve all citizens on public highways. Increased conservation of natural re- sources, Continuation of United States Department of Agriculture administration of the farm- labor-placement program. A transportation policy which will best gerve users and give a reasonable return to investors. Amendment of labor laws to establish eq- uity and fix equal responsibility on contract- ing parties. More vocational agriculture teaching in high schools. Establishment of national fund for re- gearch in the major diseases. More and improved pubitc radio service progfams for agriculture and civic insti- tutions. Legislation to make the Extension Service financially and politically independent of any farm organization. Local and State control of public schools. A national fertilizer policy which would eesure farmers ample supplies at reasonable costes. Rapid expansion of rural telephone service. A modernized parity formula, including labor costa, A771 Protection of American producers from a flood of cheap agricultural imports. Reduction of Federal expenditures and a balancing of the budget. Unqualified support of the United Nations. Retention of the Soil Conservation Service as an independent agency in the United States Department of Agriculture. A minimum wage, related to the cost of living, by areas. Deferring public works construction unless it provides urgently needed health or other essential services. A policy encouraging production sufficient to meet demand. End of all consumer subsidies. Extension of social security to employees of publicly owned utilities. Continued charitable contributions to dis- placed people of war-torn areas. Creation of labor courts to promote indus- trial peace. The National Grange opposes— Legisiation making uniform rates compulsory. Admission of Hawaii into statehood. Exportation of farm machinery and house- hold articles until] domestic needs are met. Restriction on the production of sugar beets. Repeal of the acreage limitation in the reclamation law. Restriction of markets for perishable farm products to a 5-day week. Publication of salacious, obscene, and ob- jectionabie literature. Socialized medicine. Peacetime military conscription. Lowering of national park standards. Establishment of acreage allotments as a Prerequisite for receiving price supports. Increased taxation of cooperatives. Sharing the atomic bomb secret with any- one. insurance THE GRANGE SETS UP GUIDE POBTS Several years ago the Grange set up three basic guide posts and has repeatedly reaf- firmed them. They have attracted wide- spread approval and were given new en- dorsement by the Portland session, which declared them fundamental in assuring per- manent prosperity. Here they are: 1. All prosperity springs from the produc- tion of wealth; or anything which retards the production of wealth is unsound. 2. The compensation of each should be based on what he contributes to the general welfare. 8. The prime purpose of government is to Protect its citizens from aggression—both physical and economic. Applied to every-day problems, this means this Nation must continue to produce a bal- anced abundance; must prevent monopolies in agriculture, industry, or labor, which re- strict production in order to enhance prices; must see that reasonable compensation ts made possible for those who earn it; and must do this under the private enterprise system, which provides an opportunity for everyone to develop his own talents as he may desire. Promotion of World Peace EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ELBERT D. THOMAS OF UTAH IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, January 10, 1947 Mr. THOMAS of Utah. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix af the Recorp an ad- dress on the subject What We Must Do
A72 To Promote World Peace delivered by me in the Salt Lake Tabernacle at the Armistice Day celebration November 11, 1946. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Rrecorp, as follows: WHAT WE MUST DO TO PROMOTE WORLD PEACE In a letter sent to me by General Eisen- hower, dated June 20, 1946, he wrote: “I am of the considered opinion that progress to- ward universal and enduring peace lies along three roads—organized internationa) cooper- ation, mutual international understanding, and progressive international disarmament. All must be traveled simultaneously. Prog- ress along any one of these roads will en- gender mutual confidence and so stimulate progress along others.” The outstanding characteristic of Ameri- can generals and admirals in the second World War is that they were basically great statesmen along with their military genius. Thus we have seen the fruits of American democracy proved. Citizens trained in the theory of government who can take lead of armies and navies and defeat the great- est aggressors in all world history should be a sign to the world of the strength of the American system. A trained citizenry for America is our firm belief. In our meeting this afternoon we have come together to honor those of our citizens who have proved their worth and their belief in American culture and American life. We bow our heads in honor and in gratitude for those who can be present with us only in spirit. We raise our heads and we salute as man to man those to whom we are eternally grateful. But with it all we dedicate our lives and our national entity to the ideals, the hopes, and the aspirations stated so strongly, so well, and so statesmanlike by our great Chief of Staff, General Eisenhower. Can we as individuals put our faith in the future as our great military leader has done? How can we who have only shared in a small way the concern of our great leader fail to have faith in his description of the pur- poses for which we fought? It is now for us to win the peace. It can be done. History proves that it can be done. Our own hearts tell us first that nothing good in this world is accomplished without planning, without organization, and without understanding what our ultimate aims are to be. American leadership, honored as it has never been honored before in the world—and, inciden- tally, worthy of honor—bids well to guaran- tee that the dream of the ages and the desire of the nations will become a realization. Those of us who have been privileged to be close to our great generals and admirals, not only in this war but also in the last, have learned to honor their simplicity of life, their devotion to duty, their love of country and its ideals. Marshall, King, Eis- enhower, Nimitz, MacArthur, Halsey, and Clark, all knew what they were fighting for. Americans all. But everyone a citizen of the world, and so honored. It is in the states- manship and the ideals of these great mili- tary leaders that I put my greatest faith in future peace. Most of these men and some I have not named I have been privileged to honor by sponsoring a bill which provided permanent rank for our five-star generals and admirals. They have been honored by the Amercan people. America thus does not fear her military. How has this faith in our own principles been evolved? First, because of a sublime belief in the inspired principles that underlie our form of government. Second, because all of these generals and admirals were trained in American public institutions. They know their history, They understand the worth of the philosophy of the founding fathers. In honoring them I honor all who followed them. There is poetry but there is also sad- ness in the fact that today two great groups of American soldiers, with a scattering of vet- erans of former wars, and separated only by a generation, are greeting each other as broth- ers in arms. World War I and World War II each fought for the same cause. Each in theory accomplishing the same purpose, But the Second Great War was made neces- sary by the failure of the peace of the first. This picture, poetic as it may seem, is too sad to be repeated. Surely our great Govern- ment has purposes other than those of merely creating veterans to be honored once every generation. If we have fought for a cause it is time for us to see that that cause is accomplished now that victory has come. It is to the accomplishment and the realiza- tion of that cause—the peace—that our lives here are dedicated. Is it a dream which baffles our endeavors? Is it an ideal which cannot be attained? I say not. World or- ganization is now in the making. Respect for it will bring results. Is world organiza- tion for peace impossible? Definitely yes, if we think only of the perils and the hard- ships to overcome, both of which muy lead to such utter discouragement that the will to try will be lost. I take encouragement for the possibility of a united world with a common objective of peace from what has occurred in our own culture, and in the history of Europe and America during the last 200 years. Man, his ideals, his aspira- tions, and his purposes have greatly changed in those 200 years. I cite but one incident of that history. Two hundred years ago men thought that it pleased God to burn at the stake those whom they called heretic. Persecution in its vilest form was rampant in the earth, and mankind called it good. Then came over the earth a changed attitude. Men ceased to say: “Let us kill those with whom we dis- agree.” They said: “It is better to put up with them than to murder them.” And a spirit of forbearance took the place of perse- cution. Then about the time that our Con- stitution came into existence men said to each other: “It is better to tolerate those with whom we disagree than to either perse- cute them or to forbear with them.” And thus a bit of religious tolerance came into existence. America has thrived under this spirit and we found it good. Yet it is not the ideal even in the field of religion. There ts one step further we must go. And that step, I suggest, is appreciation. If we are to have world peace, if we are to have world unity, if we are to have world organization, we must substitute and replace persecution of all men and ail ideas with forbearance, and then move into the field of toleration. But before world unity can be attained we must learn to appreciate one another. Through appreciation the world will gain the good and temper the evil which its diverse civili- zations and cultures have to offer. This can be done. It should be done. And if I may judge from the spirit of this occasion, all present agree with me that the time has come to attempt the making of a new world along the lines of appreciation of the cul- ture, the habits, and the ideals of all civilized parts of the world. That is the dream of a United Nations organization came true. That is a dream of a Bolivar brought to its fulfillment. That is the dream of a Wash- ington who hoped to see the day come when men dwelt with one another throughout the whole world as brothers. Those are the ideals which this meeting represents today. Will they be attained? I will cite but one promise of their ulti- mate fulfillment under American leadership. The soldiers’ education bill which I had the honor to author was written not primarily for the benefit of the soldier boys and girls but it was written because America realized that she could not afford to risk the leader- ship of an untrained generation. France and England both failed to replace by training the losses they suffered in the last war. That APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD we were determined we should not do. As @ result there are now in our universities and colleges and other institutions 1,300,000 sol- dier boys and girls studying under the guid- ance of teachers and institutions who know the worth of America, the ideals which have made us great. Never in the history of edu- eation in the world has anything like it ever happened before. From this army of one million and a half of trained leaders what is there this Nation cannot accomplish? Will the world follow? It is following. It is for us to remain worthy of the position of lead- ership God and circumstances have placed usin. It is to that task that we dedicate the hopes, the aspirations, and the prayers of this great meeting and of ‘all our country- men throughout the land. The Sugar Problem EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CARL A. HATCH OF NEW MEXICO IN THE SENATE Of THE UNITED STATES Friday, January 10, 1947 Mr. HATCH. Mr. President, in the Washington Post this morning appears an editorial on the sugar problem. I ask unanimous consent that it be printed in the Appendix of the Recorp. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: NOW IT’S SUGAR The Republican Congressional Food Study Committee sharply criticizes the administra- tion for holding down sugar prices during the war years and failing to stimulate pro- duction in Cuba, Puerto Rico, and the con- tinental United States. The committee con- cedes that immediate decontrol of sugar would result in a free-for-all scramble for available supplies and lead to speculative hoarding. But it says there is every prospect that controls may safely be removed gradu- ally during the present year and abandoned entirely late in 1947. For the present it recommends increases in 1947 sugar rations twice as largo as the increases recently pro- posed by the Department of Agriculture. In our opinion, the administration deserves to be applauded rather than blamed for not unduly encouraging sugar production. So far as the continental United States is concerned, the decline in beet production was brought about by the Government's ef- forts to increase the output of more necessary crops during the war period. And it cer- tainly would not have been desirable either from the viewpoint of Cuba or that of the United States to encourage an excessive ex- pansion of sugar production in Cuba. The result would have been serious world over- production when supplies of cane sugar from the Far East again became available and European beet production approached normal. Agitation is not confined to demands for more liberal sugar allotments for our people. Immediate decontrol of sugar is being urged by certain interests that, Secretary Anderson declares, hope to reap speculative gains from &@ rise in prices. Possibly Government esti- mates of the size of the coming Cuban and European crops err on the side of conserva- tism, warranting a somewhat larger allot- ment of Cuban sugar to the United States. That is a matter on which expert opinions differ. However, Secretary Anderson rightly views with alarm any proposal that might result in giving our people a larger share of world sugar supplies at the expense of
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Other nations, He explains that the Cuban crop represents the major portion of world export sugar. The United States as a mem- ber of the International Food Council has been buying the whole of that crop and allocating it to various countries. Most of these countries have a great deal less sugar per capita than we have, and they also have less of other foodstuffs. Hence the burden of proof rests upon those urging an increase in our share of the Cuban crop. To abandon sugar controls any time in the near future would create great hardship to needy European countries forced to cumpete for scarce supplies with sugar-hungry Ameri- can consumers able to outbid them. In short, early decontrol of sugar would not only impose fresh burdens on American consumers; it would be a betrayal of the countries that have trusted us to act for them in buying and distributing Cuban sugar. They have a right to expect that we will not let them down. As Secretary Ander- son puts it, “Our integrity is at stake.” God’s Law in Modern Life EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. ARTHUR CAPPER OF KANSAS IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, January 10, 1947 Mr. CAPPER. Mr. President, I send to the desk and ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the ReEcorpD an address delivered by the jun- jor Senator from Vermont (Mr. FLan- pers], on Laymen’s Sunday, October 20, 1946, broadcast on the Church of the Air radio hour, and reprinted in the No- vember 1946 issue of Christian Laymen. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Gop’s LAW IN MODERN LIFE (By Ratpx E. FLANpgErs, former president of the Federal Reserve Bank of Boston and recently elected Senator from Vermont, made this address on Laymen’s Sunday. October 20, 1946) When we look back over the last 200 years, we realize that human life in this world has changed beyond all recognition so far as its material aspects are concerned. This has resulted from a series of discoveries made by the natural sciences and all the related subjects on which the greatest intellects of our race have focussed their attention in this marvelous period. The laws, the physical phenomena, have always existed. In a real sense we have not invented these great developments. We have discovered them. They were always there. These great discoveries have other results. The wonders of transportation and of communication have expanded our in- terests to cover the whole world. What we do affects the whole world. What the whole world does affects us. This has great po- tentialities for good and for evil. They have enormously multiplied material goods. The automobile, for example, as a useful device for the ordinary man, became possible as a result of a complex sum total of these discoveries derived from all the branches of science and engineering. Again, we must see that this process may be used for good or evil, for the same com- plex web of discoveries and inventions makes either poesible. It has made possible bigger and more destructive wars. Indeed, we have brought this development to the point where it threatens the destruction of our material civilization; and, being brought to that point, it threatens the same fate for intellectual and spiritual values as well. It does this because we are leaving the moral problems unsolved. We are evading the question as to what we shall do with this great mass of discovery and invention. What they will do for us is of small impor- tance as compared with the great question of what we will do with them. This morning, let us narrow down our dis- cussion to one of the problems thtt affect us as a nation and view it in the light of the passage which was just read from St. Paul’s first epistle to the Corinthians.) This prob- lem arises from the fact that science and engineering have tied many millions into one great community. We have had a year in which the Nation has suffered from widespread and long-con- tinued industrial strife. Industrial strife igs not new. It has always broken out here and there in local disturbances for genera- tions past. What is new is the greatly en- larged scale of its operations and effects. When great national unions come to a dead- lock in their negotiations with great national industries, we have a condition which is no longer local, It affects us all. It works great harm to the people of the whole Nation. Some of this harm is immediate and direct, while other results extend over long periods of time indirectly, but nonetheless seriously, and over great areas of the population These great deadlocks between management and labor can no longer be directed solely against the parties to the dispute. They are directed against the well-being of the whole body of our citizens. Rebellion of the members, whose function St Paul so vividly described, hurts the whole body. The health of the members is only to be found in the health of the whole body. One of the things St. Paul was writing about js the value and worth of every in- dividual soul in the total mass of a great population like ours. The individual soul of the humblest citizen is the concern of the whole Nation. The individual likewise, and in reverse, has a contribution which she or he can make to the well-being of the whole. This is Christian doctrine. It is not Nazi or Fascist doctrine, in which the inter- ests of an imaginary body called the state is the ultimate object of human endeavor. Christian doctrine is that the state is charged with the welfare of the men, women, and children which compose it. The body's con- cern is with the health of its members; and the members, in turn, contribute to their own individual welfare and that of their fel- lows by doing their part to maintain the health of th- body as a whole. How can we make this doctrine effective? I venture to suggest that it will help us if we take a new view of our reasons for accept- ing Christian doctrine. We can accept it be- cause it comes by revelation, but that may not be all there is in the matter that makes it demand our acceptance. Christian doctrine is not true solely because it has been revealed. It has been revealed because it is true. We must be willing to see that throughout the history of mankind it has been found by those who observe life intently and clearly that if men acted in certain ways, human re- lations were rich and satisfying. If they acted in other ways, man was set against man, the tremendous advantages of coopera- tion were lost and valuable social institutions disintegrated. The laws of the spiritual life which pro- duced these resulta are universal laws apply- ing to all mankind; and in studying them and discovering them, gleams of truth shone through the darkness in widely scattered 11 Corinthians xii: 12-26. A73 corners of the earth and over millenniums of time. This was a slow and painful proceas. What revelation has done is to prescnt these laws simply and as a whole so that each civiliza- tion, each generation, and each person does not have to go himself through arduous trial and painful error to discover these things for himself, They have always been there, but by taking advantage of revelation, each per- son and the world can escape a mass of misery. By thinking of these laws of life exclusively in terms of Christian revelation, we have done our society great harm. By considering them as laws of life existing eternally which revelation has made available to us, even as scientific discovery has made the ether waves available, we can perhaps make them more readily understood and more diligently fol- lowed. The damage that has been done is that in considering them as the exclusive doctrine of a particular religion, we have eliminated them from the education of the young on the theory of the separation of the church and the state. So long as they are considered to be the exclusive property of religious sects, rather than as being great universale whose rewards and penalties we can by no means escape, so long we may suffer the major part of our children to go out into life untaught, and unprepared to face the most important facts of life. The laws of Christian ethics are universally true. We must find means of reinstating their instruction tnto the training of the young. They must become the rules of living for their elders. To bring this about is the great task of the church and this task must not be approached on the basis of sectarian- ism or from the standpoint of revelation alone It must be approached as a task of instruction and practice in the fundamental laws of life. St, Augustine's great pronouncement holds true—“Thou hast made us for Thyself and our lives are restless til] they rest in Thee.” This truth comes to us with far more serious implications than tn St. Augustine’s simpler world. We live in a world far more danger- ous, far more filled with possible material blessings, than his generation could possibly conceive. Let us begin now to teach and to live. Bilbo’s Drumhead Trial EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLYDE R. HOEY OF NORTH CAROLINA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, January 10, 1947 Mr, HOEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have inserted in the Appendix to the Recorp a very well- considered editorial entitled “Bilbo’s Drumhead Trial,” from the Boston Her- ald, together with an article by Prof. Zechariah Chafee, Jr., of the Harvard Law School, in which he gives a clear discussion of the constitutional question involved. Certainly, neither the Boston Herald nor Mr. Chafee can be charged with southern prejudice. There being no objection, the editorial and article were ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: [From the Boston Herald of January 6, 1947] Briso’s DrumHEAD TRIAL You can hate “The Man” with all the right- eous hatred of demagogy, bigotry, and ebeap
Av74 ignorance, but you cannot summarily de- prive him of his rights without also doing grave violence to the very decencies he has himself attempted to tear town. The Sen- ate’s exhibition over Txxxoporr G. Brzs0 does no credit to it, nor does tt promote the prin- ciple of government by laws and not by men. Prof. Zechariah Chafee, Jr., of the Harvard Law School, in a thoughtful letter in the Mail Bag, deplores the move to refuse BILE0 @ seat as a dangerous practice against which Senator Hoar once warned. The more emo- tional haters of Brzzo will regard this as legalistic hair-splitting, and much too good for the Mississippian. But in the careful observance of our democratic guarantees for even the most unworthy lies the freedom of all of us. The Senate undertook its action Friday on the basis of the reports of two committees— Campaign Expenditures and War Investigat- ing. The first concerned his intimidation of Negro voters and the other his use of his high office “for his personal gain in his deal- ings with war contractors.” Under the con- stitutional provision that the Senate “shall be the judge of the election returns and qualifications of its own Members,” the in- timidation charge, 1f formally confirmed, could be a basis for the exclusion of Brz0 on a mere majority vote. But on this matter the majority report of the committee found no basis for the charges. Only the minority held him guilty. This was, of course, a whitewash by Chair- man ELLENDER, of Louisiana, one of the pro- Bilbo leaders. The Senate would most cer- tainly reverse it in any formal consideration. But there had been none, and the BILBO ex- clusion move came on a committee election report finding him guiltless. As for the bribery findings, these do not concern “election returns and qualifications” under the clear meaning of the Constitution. They are properly matters for expulsion by a two-thirds vote after a free opportunity for debate, not for peremptory exclusion at the door on a@ majority vote. This does not mean that the flibustering Southerners were exactly on the side of the angels. In their battle to get 1 Senator seated they prevented 35 other Senators from being sworn in, not to mention tying up Con- Gress and presenting a sorry picture of democracy in action to the rest of the world. The departure of Brz0 to the hospital has temporarily suspended the issue. He is tech- nically neither excluded nor admitted. But in effect he has been deprived for the time being of his seat by a process of summary justice that is, as Professor Chafee says, un- pleasantly like lynch law, and Mississippi has lost half of its senatorial representation. Attempts by the North at compulsory ref- ormation of the South are likely to have the reverse effect. Brtz0 was the worst pos- sible symbol of State’s rights for his fellow Southerners to champion, but most of them rallied to his side. This revival of the Civil War might have been avoided by a more con- sidered attack. THe Mar Bac A PLEA AGAINST LYNCHING BILBO To the Eprror or THe HERALD: Little as I lik» Mr. Brtzo, of Mississippi, I believe that the Senate Republicans are doing him a grave injustice in trying to stop him at the door. Assume that the charges against him, if properly proved, are a suffi- cient ground for disqualifying him by a ma- jority vote—this is certain as to the charges of intimidating Negroes, although there is considerable doubt whether the better-sup- ported charge of receiving money from war contractors does not have to be established by the two-thirds vote required by the Con- stitution for expulsion (art. I, sec. 5). My only point now 1s that the effort to disqualify Bruzo before he takes the oath violates well- considered precedents of the Senate, When the eligibility of Senator Smoot, of Utah, was contested on March 5, 19038, on a charge of polygamy, Senator Hoar, of Massa- chusetts, said: “The orderly and constitutional method of procedure in regard to administering the oath to newly elected Senators [is] that when any gentieman * * * presents * * * @ certificate of his due election from the executive of his State’—which Briso has done—“he is entitled to be sworn in, and all questions relating to his qualifi- cation shall be postponed and acted upon by the Senate afterward. * * * [Other- wise] a third of the Senate might be kept out of their seats for an indefinite time on the presenting of objection, without re- sponsibility. * * * [Consequently] a change in the political power of this Gov- ernment which the people desired to accom- plish would be indefinitely postponed.” No Senator questioned this statement. The same day Mr. Smoot took the oath of office. The committee investigating his elec- tion reported in June 1906 that Smoot was not entitled to a seat, but this report was rejected by the Senate on February 20, 1907. During the intervening 4 years, Smoot voted with the other Senators, except that he did not vote on questiofis concerning his own eligibility. (Webb and Pierce, “Senate elec- tion case” (1913), at pp. 929, 980; see also 1297.) Senator Tarr claims that there are prece- dents the other way, but they are not gup- ported by thoughtful reasons like Senator Hoar’s. The Smoot case has governed most subsequent cases of contested Senators, in- cluding the famous case of Newberry, who was elected from Michigan in 1918, The present disregard of this practice of letting the contested Senator take his seat provisionally comes with very bad grace from the Republican Party, which took full ad- vantage of it in the case of Newberry, a Re- publican. He was allowed to sit, although his election was immediately contested by Henry Ford (the opposing Democratic can- didate); Newberry’s vote for the Republicans helped greatly in keeping the United States out of the League of Nations; subsequently, after several years of usefulness to the Re- publicans in a closely divided Senate, he was disqualified for enormous expenditures in the primary. The Massachusetts legislative practice con- forms to Senate practice in the cases of Smoot, Newberry, and others. (Cushing, “Re- ports on Contested Elections to Massachusetts House” (1853), pp. 474, 163 note; compare p. 439.) The strongest precedent known to me for the present contrary position of the Re- publican Senators was furnished by Rhode Island Democrats. On January 1, 1935, they barred two duly certified Republican State Senators at the door (like Bizz0), thus get- ting a bare Democratic majority of the Sen- ate, which was immediately used to throw al- most everybody in reach out of office, in- cluding the whole Supreme Court of Rhode Island. This striking illustration of the validity of Senator Hoar’s reasoning against “stopping at the door” is hardly a precedent for Senator Tart to cite with enthusiasm. A decision on Brio need not be delayed for years, like the decisions about Smoot and Newberry. After Brzs0 has been allowed to take the oath and has been provisionally seated in accordance with the well-consid- ered practice of the Senate, there is no reason why the question of unseating him should not be brought before the Senate ns soon as the orderly conduct of business permits and the disposition of more pressing matters, such as legislation on portal-to-portal claims. Whatever charges are now prematurely urged to bar Brzo at the door will be just as persuasive to bar him later, after he has had the usual trial before the Senate. The Bilbo case touches a sensitive spot in several States in the South, and it is very im- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD portant that it should be handled with scrupulous respect for established precedents. Every effort should be made not to offer Br.s0’s supporters any excuse for hailing him as a martyr to injustice. Give Brzso a fair and regular trial, and then deal with him as he deserves. The op- ponents of Br.zgo and lynching ought not to lynch BILz0. ZECHARIAH CHAFEE, Jr. CAMBRIDGE. Congress Comes Back EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. A. WILLIS ROBERTSON OF VIRGINIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Friday, January 10, 1947 Mr, ROBERTSON of Virginia. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the REcorpD an article entitled “Congress Comes Back,” written by Fred Brenck- man, Washington correspondent for the National Grange Monthly. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Conaress Comms BacK—THE PEOPLE OF THE Nation SEEM To BE IN GENERAL AGREEMENT THaT LABoR AND INDUSTRY Must SOMEHOW OR OTHER LEARN To Work TOGETHER, AND Conaress HAs Orpers To Work EARNESTLY To Brina THIs ABOUT (By Fred Brenckman) There is a general agreement that the first and most important duty confronting the Eightieth Congress, which convenes on Jan- uary 3, is to revise existing legislation with reference to labor and industrial relations. On several occasions during recent years the House of Representatives has coura- geously grappled with this problem, brit its efforts were nullified by inaction in the Sen- ate. At the last session of Congress the Case bill was passed by both Houses, but the measure was vetoed by President Truman. A great deal of water has passed beneath the bridges since that time. We have had a national election, and the outcome is re- garded as a mandate to the incoming Con- gress to do something really effective in sta- bilizing conditions on the industrial front. While the CIO-PAC made a blacklist upon which were inscribed the names of those who voted for the Case bill and boastingly pro- claimed that these Members of Congress would be retired to private life, nothing of the kind happened. On the contrary, with scarcely any exceptions, those Members of Congress who voted for the Case bill und who were candidates for reelection won handily, while many of the most subservient followers of the CIO-PAC line were buried under an avalanche of votes. This was true not only in the rural sec- tions of the country but in many urban districts as well. This makes it plain that millions of union members and their fam- ilies cast their ballots in favor of needed changes in existing laws. The fact is that the people of the country are fed up with the strikes, work stoppages, and everlasting bickerin, that have prevailed since VJ-day, halting our reconversion pro- gram and engulfing th Nation in the rising tide of disastrous inflation. The feeling 18 general that if this condition of affairs is al- lowed to continue, it will wreck our economy and destroy our system of private enterprise. No segment of the population is immune to the ill-effects of the industrial warfare that
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD has been in progress for many months, with no present signs that the scourge has run its course. We fought and won two wars of gigantic proportions at the same time through team play and united action, and common sense dictates that that is the way to win the peace, which is so mockingly elusive. WAGNER ACT IS RESPONSIBLE The exact nature of the remedial legisla- tion which Congress may enact at the coming session is still a matter of conjecture. How- ever, it is widely recognized that the glaring inequities inherent in the National Labor Relations Act, commonly known as the Wag- ner Act, are at the root of our troubles. Passed in 1935 to diminish the causes of la- bor disputes burdening or obstructing in- terstate and foreign commerce, it is manifest that it is not working as its proponents Claimec that it would at the time of its en- actment. As has frequently been said, it is a one- way act, when what is needed is a two-way act. Reading this act irom top to bottom, one finds little but an enumeration of the duties, responsibilities, and obligations of the employer, with nothing to correspond on the side of the employee. To make this or any similar legislation fair and workable, there must be mutuality of responsibility. There is a legal maxim to the effect that a contract without equity is void. A legisla- tive enactment without equity should be void, too, or, better yet, it should never have been passed, The agency established tc administer the act under consideration is known as the Na- tional Labor Relations Board, which acts as prosecutor, judge, and jury in all cases in- stituted by it or coming before it. This is in violation of the fundamental principle that any person who brings a dispute to a tri- bunal for judgment is entitled to have the controversy determined by a fair and impar- tial Judge. Many people are of the opinion that the National Labor Relations Act should be repealed and that a more fair and work- ble law should be enacted to take its place. SOUTHERN FARM LEADER SPEAKS How large numbers of farmers teel about the situation was indicated in the recent annual report of W. G. Wysor, general man- ager of the Southern States Cooperative, with headquarters at Richmond, Va. In outlining what he termed the minimum reforms neces- sary to correct the inequities and defects of the Wagner Act, Mr. Wysor said: “1, Make labor unions responsible for com- pliance with their contracts and agreements. They now can and do violate their contracts with impunity. “2, Bubject unions and union members to antiracketeering laws, as are other citizens. “8. Restrict collective bargaining to the plant or company level, rather than the in- dustry-wide level. The latter system, now in effect, can be and has been employed to de- prive the people of essentials such as ateel, coal, and transportation. “4. Unions as well as employers must be compelled to bargain collectively. Union czars are slapping down contracts and saying, "You sign it or we walk out.’ “8, Subject labor unions to anti-monopoly laws, as are corporations and individuals. “6, Prohibit jurisdictional strikes and sec- ondary boycotts. “1, Prohibit the closed shop, which is the mechanism by which labor monopoly is achieved. Does not an individual have the right to work, which is the right to earn a living, without heing forced to pay tribute to a union to which he may not want to belong? “g, Prohibit royalties or any other taxing power by labor unions. The power to tax should be vested only in the Government. “9. The right of tree Mpeson must be re- stored to employers. The Wagner Act de- prived the employer of that fundamental right.” In concluding his discussion of the sub- ject, Mr. Wysor declared: “Farmers recognize the right to organize labor unions and the right to bargain col- lectively or individually. Our objection is to the abuses, the irresponsibility, the racket- eering, the domination of the Government itself by labor unions and labor union leaders.” LEWIS SUPPLIES FINAL TOUCH If anything more was needed to convince the people of the United States that Congress must act to bring order out of chaos on the industrial front, the final touch was supplied when John L. Lewis blandly announced that the contract which the Government made with the United Mine Workers was termi- nated, and the 400,000 bituminous-coal miners walked out, creating a situation that threatened to paralyze our entire economy on the very verge of winter. Then followed the dramatic proceedings before Justice T. Alan Goldsborough, of the United States District Court for the District of Columbia, with President Truman, Secre- tary of the Interior Krug, and Attorney Gen- eral Clark refusing to back down. Whether or not the sentence of Justice Goldsborough, imposing a fine of 83,500,000 on the United Mine Workers, together with a fine of $10,000 which was meted out to Mr. Lewis, for contempt of court, will be sustained will be decided by the Supreme Court. Argu- ment in the case will be heard on January 14. The truc: announced by Lewis when he or- dered the miners back to work, after the pro- duction of coal had been stopped for 17 days, is scheduled to end on March $1. NEW CIO CAMPAIGN Meanwhile, the CIO has announced that it intends to open a campaign for another in- crease in pay, amounting to 25 percent. Philip Murray, president of the CIO, declares that a survey made by his organization's economist, Robert R. Nathan, former Deputy Director of Reconversion, indicates that such @ wage increase is possible without raising prices or reducing the prewar profit of industry. It will be recalled that similar reckless and irresponsible statements were made by s0- called economists in the Department of Com- merce a year ago. These economists and their statements were utterly discredited by the events that transpired almost immediately after a wage increase of 18 percent was granted in most of the key industries of the country. Report on Cooperatives EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALTER C, PLOESER OF MISSOURI IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, January 10, 1947 Mr, PLOESER. Mr. Speaker, during the adjournment of the House I wrote the chairman of the House Small Busi- ness Committee on the subject of the committee’s report on cooperatives. Fol- lowing is a copy of my letter: Crayton, Mo., October 2, 1946. Hon. WricHt PATMAN, Chairman, House Committee on Small Business, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr, CHamMAN: You will remember my original objections to the publication of the House Small Business Committee's Report on AT Cooperatives. At the time the committee’s Report on Cooperatives was published I gave my assent to its publication because I under- stood from you that the report was to be purely factual and but a tentative explora- tion into the subject matter of the tax-ex- emption privileges enjoyed by cooperatives in the United States. Immediately after the publication of this report my office was del- uged with mail from small businessmen who protested that the report was a vigorous de- fense of the tax-exemption privileges enjoyed by the cooperatives and that it was seriously defective from the standpoint of making un- warranted conclusions with respect to the evidence presented and a general failure to give proper weight to the evidence introduced by private business. During the weeks that have elapsed since the publication of the re- port I have also heard another comment which has greatly distressed me. The story is being circulated that this report was in- tended to capture the votes of cooperative members for the Democratic Party in the coming election. I think that the position taken by the re- Port does lend color to this kind of political gossip. The report, far from being tentative, is, in my opinion, extremely conclusive, and my assent to its publication was based en- tirely on my understanding with you that the report would be careful to refrain from com- ing to any definite conclusions. The report was to be entirely tentative and the matter was to be pursued further by the committee when Congress reconvened. Instead of that, the report definitely and positively defends the tax-exemption privileges enjoyed by co- operatives and comes to the unfair conclu- sion that such privileges are not discrimina- tory against private business. With one phase of the report I concur. The staff has done an excellent job of show- Ing that the tax-exemption privileges enjoyed by cooperatives are entirely legal and consti- tutional. The report thus sets forth very clearly and instructively the legal and con- stitutional basis of the tax-exemption privi- leges enjoyed by cooperatives. If the report had stopped here, I would have no complaint to make. What I do object to is the fact that the report then proceeds to justify the privi- leged tax position of cooperatives with argu- ments which are not based upon supporting facts, or which are open to serious challenge. Let me give you a few examples: 1, The report says that a cooperative “ap- parently has no unfair tax advantage over any other type of firm or corporation which may elect to operate on the same basis.” Anyone knows that there are many corpora- tions and firms in the United States which could not operate on the basis of a coopera- tive without abandoning the profit motive which has been such an important factor in the amazing material progress of our Nation. Cooperative theory attacks the whole system of profit in our capitalistic economic system and boldly declares that it seeks its elimina- tion. Private business, on the other hand, believes in the advantages of profits and in fact the profit motive and profits are an in- dispensable part of free capitalistic enter- prise. To say that cooperatives have no tax advantages over private business, provided private busircss will abandon the profit mo- tive, is to tcil private business that if it does not like such advantages enjoyed by coopera- tives, it must withdraw from capitalistic en- terprise. Such an argument ts thoroughly revolutionary in its implications and ex- tremely unfair to private business. 2. The report states that the tax advantages of cooperatives are relatively small and that they in no way give cooperatives an undue advantage over private business. How can this statement be supported? Did the com- mittee attempt to examine certain coopera- tives to determine whether their ability to accumulate tax-free capital has been a major factor in their rapid growth? Within my own
A76 knowledge, I know of at least two coopera- tive corporations which have enjoyed an amazing growth due almost entirely to the fact that they have been able, year after year, to reinvest their actual net earnings without taxation. The argument advanced, therefore, seems to me to be entirely unsup- ported by any factual evidence. In view of the foregoing, I have made up my mind that the report, as it now stands, in completely misleading and deceptive and has done great damage to the interests of private business. It constitutes, in effect. a complete whitewash of cooperatives from the standpoint of tax exemption. The commit- tee did not have sufficient evidence to came to such conclusion, and, in default of such evidence, it was very unfair for the report to come to such conclusion, Personally, I do not think that the tax-exemption privi- leges of cooperatives can be justified, but I am perfectly willing that the whole matter should be tested by a fair and impartial analysis of the issue rather than determined by conclusions which lack supporting data. I understand, furthermore, Mr. Chairman, that you have written a letter to coopera- tives urging them to get behind this report and to defend it to the death because you warned them that a hornet’s nest has been stirred up and that private business is going to do its best to overthrow the report. Such @ letter seems to me to be utterly uncalled for and certainly should have been submitted to the full committee before being trans- mitted. I see no other alternative, Mr. Chairman, except to inform you that I must make pub- lic my opposition to this report as it now stands. I intend to release this letter to the press and to inform the small businessmen of this country that that report does not express my sentiments, I shall also move quickly, when Congress reconvenes, to have that report completely reexamined. In the meantime, I hope that the small business- men of this country will understand that several of the members of the committee sympathize with their just complaints against it. Very sincerely yours, Wattrr C. PLOESER, Member of Congress. Mr. Speaker, I also include with this letter the following editorial on the sub- ject from the St. Louis Post-Dispatch, printed on January 7, 1947: THE PRICE OF BUTTER The Department of Justice, with very good reason, has launched an investigation of market rigging on butter in New York. The Dairymen’s League Cooperative Association, representing 60 percent of the producers in the New York milkshed, has admitted buy- ing upward of 500,000 pounds of butter to sustain the price past the deadline for set- ting milk and butter prices in New York for the month of January. Farmers’ cooperatives have been treated very generously by the Government. They have been exempted from business taxes levied on private companies and given the aid and sanction of the Department of Agri- culture. It is open to question whether they can be reached by an antitrust prosecution, but it is time to find out. If cooperatives try to rig the market against the consumer, and to sus- tain artificial prices by artificial scarcity, they should be subject to the same penal- ties—and the same taxes—as other preda- tory enterprises. A move to lift tax exemptions now en- Joyed by cooperatives has been kicking ground Congress for some time, and the policy of the Dairymen's League is a sure way to guarantee its success, Meanwhile, it is worth noting that butter prices in St. Louis, in the center of an area natvrally adapted to dairying, are higher than they are in New York City. The retail and wholesale price of butter has fallen here recently, but the wholesale price in St. Louis is still several cents higher than the price of 69 cents at which Swift & Co. is contracting to sell butter to State institutions in the Mid- west. We are moved to inquire, in the plaintive vernacular, How come? It might be worth while for the antitrust division to take a look at the underpinning of dairy prices in the Midwest as well as in the East. A Real Tax-Reduction Program EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WALTER A. LYNCH OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, January 10, 1947 Mr. LYNCH. Mr. Speaker, on January 6 I introduced H. R. 480, which has for its purpose the amendment of section 25 of the Internal Revenue Code. Under the provisions of this bill, the normal and surtax exemption for an individual would be $1,000 and where a joint return is filed by a husband and wife the exemp- tion would be $2,000. The exemption for each dependent would remain at $500. To the low bracket taxpayer this would mean a tax saving of approximately $100 per $500 of increased tax exemption. It seems to me that if there can be a tax reduction program at this time it should take the form of increasing the tax exemption, rather than an across- the-board reduction of 20 percent as has been so loudly proclaimed by the Re- publican majority through the new chairman of the Ways and Means Com- mittee, the distinguished gentleman from Minnesota [Mr. Knutson]. As a matter of fact, H. R. 1, which was in- troduced by the gentleman from Minne- sota on the opening day of the Fightieth Congress, does not live up to advance notices, much, I assume, to the disap- pointment of those Republicans in the top bracket, who would get only a 10 percent reduction on their top bracket income, while other taxpayers receive 20 percent. As the number in the top bracket with an income over $300,000 number approximately only 600 to 1,000 persons, I assume it was felt that they are not politically numerous enough to cause any great disturbance. Under the bill introduced by the gen- tleman from Minnesota, the married man with two children and an income of $3,000 would benefit by approximately $27.50. A taxpayer with similar exemp- tions but with an income of $15,000 per year would benefit to the extent of ap- proximately $690, while if his income were $50,000 a year, he would benefit to the extent of approximately $5,650. However, the real joker in H. R. 1 is the fact that age becomes the standard for tax exemption, rather than ability to pay. If an old dowager with an income of $300,000, who has never done a day’s work in her life, reaches the age of 65, she is entitled, under the Republican bill, H. R. 1, to an additional exemption from tax ability of $500, or $1,000 total. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD If an oldster of 64 years is still on the job and has an income of $1,000 or $1,500, he gets no additional exemption above the $500 which is presently provided in the current law. Evidently, the Republicans forget that the price of a quart of milk, a dozen of eggs, or a can of tomatoes is the same on Willis Avenue in the Bronx as it is on Park Avenue in Manhattan, and that other items of daily food and daily use are equally costly. Contrast the Republican bill, H. R. 1, with H. R. 480, which I have introduced, and. you will find that the latter is based on the sound economic principle that taxes should be levied against those who are best able to pay. To me, only the emergency of a global war could justify the levying of taxes on pittances of in- come, scarcely sufficient to keep body and soul together. The sooner we free those in the lower brackets from the shackles of taxation, the longer deferred will be the day when the Government may be obligated to contribute to their mainte- nance. Ever since VJ-day, almost a year and a half ago, the economy of the country has been torn asunder by the flerce struggle between labor and management. The effects of this struggle have been de- plorable, yet its fury has not subsided. To my mind, a partial cure lies within the power of the Government itself. Raise the tax exemption and thus in- crease the take-home pay of the worker, and I am convinced that you will find, in large part, the road to industrial peace. The Revenue Code and Its Administra- tion—Gem No. 1 EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. NORRIS POULSON OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, January 10, 1947 Mr. POULSON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I am in- serting the following statement made by a leading tax accountant of Los Angeles showing a case of some of the absurd rulings of the Department of Internal Revenue: A revenue agent examines the returns of a large taxpayer for the war years and decides that the invested capital is overstated. As @ result he reduces the excess-profits tax credit, thereby showing more income sub- ject to excess-profits tax and a greater tax. Purely as a result of this action he must, and does, reduce the net income on which he computes income tax and the result is as follows: Additional income sub- ject to excess-profits wee w mene nn neene ene $160, 000 Additional excess-profits tax there- on at 90 percent...-.-..-.-..... $135, 000 Reduced income subject — to income tax....-..-. @150, 000 Reduction of income tax—40 per- cent on $150,600............__.. - Additional excess-profits tax, less reduction in income
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD The ex, Taore or less voluntarily, con- sents to this adjustment and sends its check to the collector of internal revenue in the amoun‘ of $75,000, asking him to figure the amount of interest payabie, and says “That's He was never more mistaken, because the collector will demand that the taxpayer send him an additional 869,000, and wait for the - 4 B the have deen $80 and the socks $20 50 @5 more on the ties. { suggest that he apply one against the other but he says he can't do that because the overpayment on the socks has to be upan by the board of directors. How long would that store stay in business? Finally Washington approves the over- assessment and orders a refund of 860,000. This action is given publicity in the news- papers in the taxpayer's home town und the man in the street says “Ha, ha! They're at it again. It beats all how these big fellows wangle large sums from the Govern- ment end leave me to pay the taxes.” Subsistence Allowances for Veterans Attending Schools and Celleges EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. EDITH NOURSE ROGERS OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE ‘HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, January 8, 1947 Mrs, ROGERS of Massachusetts. Mr. Speaker, under permission to extend my remarks, I wish to call the attention of the Members of the House to a great number of petitions I have received from veterans who are attending schools and colleges under the provisions of the so- called GI bill of rights and who are ex- periencing difficulties due to the ceilings on subsistence allowances. To date petitions containing about 16,- 000 names have been received. Many of these petitions are acvompanied by personal letters detailing the difficulties under which the writer is laboring in his effort to complete his education. Fol- lowing is the preamble to the petition: The program of federally .ponsored vet- eran education and rehabilitation (Public Laws 16 and 346)) was undertaken in the best and most generous spirit by our Na- tional Government. The thousands of vet- erans now attending colleges and univerai- ties throughout the Nation are deeply ap- preciative of this opportunity to bring them- selves back into civilian America on a par with their fellows. The veteran knows he has earned this reward and is working hard and well at his studies. His worries have been relieved somewhat by the section of both laws which provide that he be paid a monthly subsistence allowance of $65 if he is single and $90 if he is married. When the laws were originally passed the figure was lower. The Seventy-ninth Congress noting the rising cost of living, increased the sub- sistence allowance to @65 and 890, But the rising cost of living has overtaken this ree lief until the situation leaves the collegiate veteran with no alternative but to turn again to Congress for help. We, the undersigned, veterans of World Wer Ul, respectfully ask the Eightieth Congress and the Veterans’ Af- fairs Committee of the House of Representa- tives to do all in thetr power to raise our monthly subsistence allowances. We rec- ommend that the amount be raised from 065 for single men to 990, and from $90 to $125 for married men. We must.remain in the colleges. Our education is an important part of the future of our great Nation. The danger is not amall that if no relief is forth- coming from the Congress many of us will be forced to leave our education behind and seek jobs. We must not disarm education- ally. The decision reste with Oongress and the House Committee on Veterans’ Affairs. Address of Hon. E. Barrett Prettyman EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. KARL STEFAN OF NEBRASKA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, January 10, 1947 Mr. STEFAN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the REc- orp, I include the following address by the Honorable E. Barrett Prettyman, as- sociate justice, United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. at the Welcome to Washington Dinner for newly elected Members of the Eightieth Congress, Hotel Mayflower, Saturday, January 4, 1947: Mr. Toastmaster, Members of the Congress, ladies and gentlemen, it is my very pleasant privilege to welcome to Washington those of you who are newly come to the Congress. You have entered upon a great adventure, and this city is to be the scene of it. You are to be participants in the moving drama of world affairs. You are to be the living part of the machinery of democratic gov- ernment, conductors of a great experiment, craftamen responsible for the design of a great project in human history. And so we congratulate you every one, and welcome you to the scene of the great experience. We also welcome back those of you who are re- turned to Washington. For you, too, it is @ great event, and we congratulate you upon it. This dinner has no purpose but that of welcome, and has no other program. It seems strange that a mere welcome should supply a subject for discussion. But the fact is that in this case it does. Because I am no longer active in affairs, the spon- sors of the dinner tonight thought that I could talk about it with complete objec- tivity. Hence I am here. As Members of the Congress, of course your chief concern is with matters of national importance. You are the lawmakers of the Nation in matters committed by the Con- stitution to the Federal Government. And so it is right and proper that your chief con- cern and interest should be directed to those measures which affect all the people. Your next interest Lies, of course, in matters which affect the State or district which you represent. Their residents are your constit- uents, and you are their representative in the legislative branch of the Government. It ts proper that this be your next concern. But you have another function less empha- siged than the others, and it is about this that we want to talk. It is a function of which you may be scarcely aware. AT You are the town council of the city of Washington. You are the legislature of the Federal territory known as the District of Cotumbia. We are the people who live or work in that city and that District. Mutual problems arise from those two facts. Those problems are rarely faced in their entirety, in full perspective. They are gen- erally approached from the limited stand- point of some ar matter which ts ueute at the moment. We would like to take a quick look at the whole of the situa- tion. First, may we note the history and nature of this place we call the District of Colum- bia. In the second report of the Committee of Eleven in the Constitutional Oonvention of 1787, it was proposed that the Congress should have the power “to exercise exclusive jurisdiction, in all cases whatsoever, over such District—not exceeding 10 miles square—as may, by cession of particular States and the acceptance of the legislature, become the seat of the Government of the United States.” This clause remained in the , Constitution and is the seventeenth clause of section 8 of article I of that document. Pursuant to that provision, a site was selected astride the Potomac River. Maryland ceded half of it and Virginia half of it, and the boundartes were fixed in 1781 by deciaration of President Washington. In 1800 Congress passed an organic act for that District and in 1602 incorporated the city of Washington. Since then, the Virginia half of the Dis- trict has been receded and the whole of the remaining part has become one body politic known as the District of Columbia. We shall not venture further into the complicated history of the place. The point of interest to us tonight is that in the Constitution there was created a District which was to be the “seat of the Government of the United States.” It was to be separate and apart from all the States and sub- ject to the exclusive legislative control of the Federal Congress. The step was a nntural and wise one. The members of the Constitutional Convention were well aware that in Europe, where the national governments attempted to function in established cities, there were constant difficulties between the local and national authorities. The national governments were exposed to harassment by local people and by parties in the cities tn which they operated. They were not in command of the locations of their own operation. Moreover, our founding fathers had had experience of their own in New York and Philadelphia. Bo the basic concept was that the Federal Government should have a place of its own in which to operate, subject to its control, apart from the turmoil of local disturbances, and at al] times subject to its own needs and uses. The District of Columbia, there- fore, is the seat of the Government of the United States. That is an easy phrase and a@ wise concept. But it has many practical aspects. The Government of the United States is not composed of inanimate bits of machinery. It is composed of human beings. The Con- gress of the United States is not an incor- poreal theory. It is a congregation of men and women. The executive departments are not abstract unrealities. They are com- posites of living people. The work of all these people constitutes the operatton of the Government. Those people have families. ‘When you establish a place in which the Gov- ernment is to be, you thereby assemble in that place many people, all the people whose daily work is the Government, and all the families of those people. Moreover, those people have needs. They must have food to eat, education for their children, shops to buy in, streets to travel on, sanitary facilities, churches, libraries, courts, hospitals, doctors and dentists, and so on. They must have places in which to live, When it requires a
A778 hundred thousand or so of officials and em- ployees to operate the Federal Government, the seat of that Government necessurily be- comes a great city composed of those people and their families, and all the other people and their families who are necessary to sup- ply the needs of the Government people. The fact is that the efficient day-by-day operation of the Government depends in large part upon the health and happiness of the people who compose it, and this in turn depends upon the nature of the place where they live, its facilities, its arrangement, and its ef- ficient operation. So, by virtue of the Con- stitution, you are the exclusive legislative authority of a great city of about a million population. Under present arrangements, you control the utmost detail of that opera- tion. You are the body which says how high the buildings shall be, what bridges there shall be across the river, what diseases shall be quarantined, what courts there shall be here and their respective jurisdictions, how estates shall be probated, what acts shall constitute crimes, how negotiahle instru- ments shall be enforced, what schoole there shall be, and all the ten thousand more de-" tails which make up the operation of a fairly good-sized municipality, which is also a sepa- rate Federal territory. ‘You dictate by items how the city finances shall be raised and dis- bursed. You say how much shall be spent. for streets, and each street, how much for hospitals and how many employees there shall be in each, how much for each and every minute item in the city budget. You even say that there shall not be meters on the taxicabs here. Thus we have a peculiar combination of facts. On the one hand is a city council composed of 531 members from every place in the whole United States except: from the District of Columbia. On the other hand is & great mass of citizens, living and working here, in part employed by the Federal Gov- ernment, in part their families, and in part the people, and their families, who conduct the activities necessary to supply the needs and wants of the others. The problems are mutual ones. You have a deep responsibility for the operation of the seat of the Government of the United States. You want that operation to be ef- ficient and effective. You want the Nation’s Capital to be the most beautiful city in the world. You want the city under your man- agement to be decent and progressive. On the other hand, the people who comprise the city are the living material with which you must deal. You are directing the actualities of their daily lives. Their homes, their chil- dren's education, their fire protection, their police, their law enforcement, their health measures, their social programs are the mate- rial of which you must fashion the city which you are building and managing. Many of these problems are big and com- plicated, such, for example, as the financial relationship between the Federal Govern- ment as s whole and the local treasury which is composed of local revenues. Some others are more or less trivial. There are frequently a hundred or two hundred bills pending before the Congress affecting only the District of Columbia. But in the aggre- gate these matters make up,on the one hand, the creation and operation of the seat of the Government of the United States, and on the other hand the municipal govern- ment of a million people. The mutuality of the problems seems to call for a cooperative approach. Should not the Members of Congress and thse people resident in the city be friendly? This group here tonight thinks that they should be, and they are pretty certain that they can speak for the vast majority of the inhabi- tants in the city. We fully realize that from your point of view Washington is in some respects'a prob- lem child, and at times a disagreeable one at that. When you get here ‘you have a hard time finding a place to live. You have no friends here. Your wife has trouble making arrangements for her marketing and shop- ping and her social life. Your children have to go to strange schools. All in all, you may not like it. Moreover, there is no obvious political recompense in service for the Dis- trict. The people in your home districts may hot applaud your acts in providing good government for the District. In some cases, fortunately rare and eccentric, they even re- sent the time thus spent. We fully realize your hindrances. But you do have direct interests here. Aside from your official re- sponsibilities for local government, you also have personal interests. You have a home back home, but you alzo now have a home here. You are part of the people for whom this District was created. And the difficul- ties are not all one way. From the point of view of Washington, Congressmen are some- times somewhat of a problem too. You do not let these people vote, not even in a Presi- dential election. You do not let them have 8 voice in the selection of even one adminis- trative offictal in the local government. You won't let them do lots of things they would like to do. You frequently dislike them and say so publicly and in vigorous language. An. illustration of. the respective difficul- ties has appeared tt the papers in the tast week or two. All of you need places in which to live. Naturally you resent the fact thet you can’t get them. You don't like it. We thoroughly understand that. If we were in your position we would feel as you feel. But, on the other side, Wash- ington ts some 30,000 housing units short and 9,000 of those are reported to be acute requirements of veterans and their tamilies. The point of the matter tonight is not what should be done about this or any other particular problem. The point is: Instead of treating each other as bothersome, trou. blesome, unreasonable so-and-so’s why not sit down together and together work out a solution to the problems which affect and irritate both? Much greater headway can be made together than can be made sep- arately. As you come to deal with District affairs, you will find city administrative officials equal to any in devotion and ability. You will find neighbors just like the folks back home. You will find civic organizations ag- gressive in community affairs. You will note a striking peculiarity, and this we emphasize as of great importance. Although, in na- tional and international affairs, Washington is the most political of all places, in local affairs there.are not any politica of a party nature. In all my years of experience, I have yet to see a local matter either presented to, considered by, or decided by Congress on a partisan party basis. The chairman of the respective committees are, of course, of the dominant party but the custom is invariable that the committee members who take an interest approach these matters on a co- operative, nonpolitical basis. It would be an oddity of first impression if they should divide on a@ local issue on party lines. You will find a great many friends of the District and its people in the Congress. 1 need not call the roll. Senator McCarran, Senator Caprrr, Senator O’Manonnzy, Senator Buck, Senator BALL, Senator Hory, Congress- men Everett Dinusen, Gronoz Bats, Karu Sreran, Ep Hisrrt, VauaHAN Gary, Mary Nor- TON, JOHN McMmn.Lan, are among the many who have devoted much of their time to District affairs. The great city which you find here, its arrangement, its beauty, its operation are due in no small measure to the unselfish contributions of these men, thelr fellow workers and their essors. I believe that if you were to listen to them, you would find that this service and this attitude are not without satisfaction as APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD major items in their country's business upon which they are engaged. And so it is that we extend to you to- night a hearty welcome to the great city of which you are among your many duties, the city council. And with that welcome is urged mutual friendliness in mutual local problems. This dinner, as I said in the beginning, has no other purposes or program. This group of people wants you to like Washington. They want you and your fam- ilies to be happy here. They want you to take an interest in the affairs of the city. They know you have difficulties. They be- lieve that joint efforts on a friendly basis will achieve the best results—better gov- ernment, and greater happiness tor all, They wish that you may come to see in them, not a distasteful ne chore, but a friendly congregation of people whose daily lives and living are so much in your power, And now all of us wish for each of you @ career of great success in the momentous world of affairs in which you have become an important working part. Truth in Politics EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. BEN F. JENSEN OF IOWA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Friday, January 10, 1947 Mr. JENSEN. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Ruc- orD, I include the following article by Frank C. Waldrop, from the V/ashing- ton Times-Herald of Noveniber 30, 1946: TRUTH IN POLITICS (By Frank C. Waldrop) Business appears at last to be coming out of its corner swinging in an aggressive way at the bureaucrats who have for nearly a generation been beating it ovef the head with malicious accusation and intimidation. And none too soon. Maybe it is going too far to say that busi- ness, meaning all business, has got up that much steam. But, at any rate, at least one tough customer by the name of Young. per- forms in a way that is old-fashioned and refreshing. He is no small-fry businessman, either, He is a multimillionaire railroad president, and his name is Robert R. Young. In the railroad business Mr. Young is no small- timer, nor is he quiet. Now he has moved on in his bear hunt and, in the current issue of the Atlantic Monthly, takes off against not only his business com- petitors but the biggest of all monopolies, the Government. As to the rights and wrongs of Mr. Young's raliroad battles, you'll have to go to a judge and expert superior to this writer for an opinion. But when he gets around to discussing the Government, that's territory in which we feel at home. Never mind all his detailed fussing about what has happened to him in his d with Government and competitors—but just concentrate your mind on the logic of this: “Our country was started by placing limi- tations, regulations, and restrictions—not on the people but on the Government; that is what the Constitution ts, a comprehensive plan for regulation of the Government. “But for 175 years now the fans have been reversing this wholesome initial process by taking the limitations off the politicians and putting them on the peopte. '