A4084 one of his greatest speeches in opposition to the ratification of the Constitution. Patrick Henry—who had inspired every Revolutionary soldier. Patrick Henry—whose immortal oration in St. John’s Church in Richmond has been memorized by every schoolboy—“Give me liberty or give me death”-——made the speech of his life, almost, against the ratification of the Constitution by the State of Virginia, on the ground, as he said, that if it were adopted and a new nation created under it the people would lose all the liberties for which they had fought for 8 years. Due to the influence of George Washing- ton and of John Marshall and of others, Vir- ginia ratified by a majority of 9 votes, and when she ratified her influence was sO ex- tensive that enough of the States ratified to create a new nation here, 13 States, not at first but ultimately, with a little popu- lation of 3,000,000, fringing the Atlantic sea- board. And that Constitution was adopted, and this fledgling Nation took on its existence among the nations of the world. It had its difficulties. Jt had its contro- versies. It had its misunderstandings. It had to fight a great internal war on social and economic problems three-quarters of a century after it was established. But it was united again, and is now united, and, in spite of all the discouragements, in spite of all the pessimistic views that are entertained sometimes by people in our own country, we enjoy today greater liberty and greater influ- ence and greater friendship than we have ever enjoyed among the nations of the world. We still enjoy the freedom which so many peoples have lost—freedom of worship, free- dom of speech, freedom of the press, free- dom of assembly, and two other freedoms Dave been added recently in recent years, which are a part of our goal, not only for ourselves but for all mankind, freedom from want and freedom from fear. I congratulate the B’nai B'rith, not only on its antiquity of origin, not only upon the 350,000 members which honor its roster, not only for the great charitable and eleemosy~ nary activities in which it has been engaged, not only on its success in unifying and unit- ing Jews of different politics, of different in- terpretations of their own religion, of differ- ing economic conditions. But I congratulate it and honor it because through its influence it has helped to break down the barriers of misunderstanding, of intolerance, of bigotry, and hatred, and, therefore I am sincere when I say that I hope that in the years to come it may not only grow in numbers, but that it may grow in influence and power among all the peoples, not only of Jewish distinction, but among all the people in this great country and all the people of the world. We are all traveling the same road. We are traveling toward the same goal. May that goal be happiness and peace and under- standing and the joy of making contributions to the elevation of the standard of life in this country and throughout the world, and the happiness that comes from individual men through their part in this great work of reformation and of realization. Again, Jet me thank you, Mr. President, and Mr. Trygve Lie, and all of you who have by your presence here and by your great program made us all feel stronger and prouder that we are not only citizens of the United States but that in our way, different as it may be in every individual case, we are trying to contribute to the peace and hap- piness and prosperity of all mankind throughout the world. _—— Frank Goldman, in thanking the Vice President, sald: “Mr. Vice President, when I say that everything about you breathes the true American democratic spirit, I do not mean it in any partisan sense. I feel sure that in you and Mrs. Barkley, we are graced with America’s greatest ambassadors of good will. You give people throughout the world a vivid picture of the good our country seeks to accomplish. May it, under God, never hesitate to continue to fulfill this humane ideal. “we thank you for your delightful speech and are very, very grateful for the sentiments expressed by you here tonight about the B'nai B’rith we love.” Commencement Address by Hon. Harley M. Kilgore, of West Virginia, at Davis and Elkins College EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HARLEY M. KILGORE OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. KILGORE. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp a speech I delivered at the commencement exer- cises of Davis and Elkins College, in Elkins, W. Va., on May 30, 1950. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the RrcorpD, as follows: AvpREsS BY SENATOR HaRLEY M. KILGORE, AT THE COMMENCEMENT EXERCISES, DAVIS AND ELxins CoLLEcs, Exxins, W. Va., May 30, 1950 “The only limit to our realization of to- morrow will be our doubts of today.”—FrankK-~ zIn DELANO ROOSEVELT. Dr. Purdum, distinguished guests, and members of the class of 1950 of Davis and Elkins College, I would be less than candid if I failed to say that I am honored to be here this morning. This is my second op- portunity in 2 days to speak to large groups of young people who are entering new phases of their lives. Last night I spoke to the graduation class of my home town high school in Mannington. I do not know how many of those boys and girls will enter col- Jeges this fall, but I hope the number is large, because there is a great need in the world today for well-trained, clear-thinking young men and women. I do not know how many of you young men and women will continue your formal education after today, but I sincerely hope that all who have such an opportunity will take advantage of it. There probably are some here today who are tired of class- rooms and studies. This is a normal reac- tion after 4 years Of hard work. Do not let this reaction deter you in your quest for edu- cation. If you do, you will regret it in the years ahead, Those of you who will not have an oppor- tunity to take advanced work at another education institution should give serious thought to how you can best continue your education at home. There are many possi- bilities, and I am certain your college pro- fessors will be glad to advise you on how to take advantage of them. I mention these things to emphasize the great need today for educated men and women, the need for people who can recog- nize truth when they see or hear it; people who have learned to love democratic rights, and stand willing to fight for them even if the cause be unpopular. It is customary at commencement for the speaker to tell the members of the graduat~ APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ing class that they are embarking on a grand new experience—that the world is awaiting them with eagerness. Whether or not this is true today is a philosophical question I shall leave to other commencement speakers. What is true, and it is a fact that cannot be emphasized enough, is that this commence- ment and similar commencements through- out the Nation, are being held at a time when the world desperately needs a great trans- fusion of free, democratic ideals. STRUGGLE OF IDEAS IS WORLD-WIDE The world today is engaged in a great struggle over political and economic ideolo- gies. This is a struggle to determine whether or not freemen can build and maintain and expand democratic societies. This is a struggle to determine whether people shall serve the state or the state shall serve the people. In a real sense it is a struggle to determine the political and economic fate of the world. This struggle is commonly called the cold war. Frankly, I feel we should banish the term “cold war.’ In no sense does it depict the real meaning of the issues involved in this world-wide struggle for the minds of men. In addition, the term “cold war” leads many people to express the belief that this strug- gle can be settled only through armed con- flict. This is a suicidal approach. We have learned, or at least we hope the world has learned, through the suffering of two terrible wars in my generation, that armed conflict does not settle many real problems, least of all conflicting ideologies. And the greater the conflict, the less chance for anyone to emerge victorious. In an age of guided missiles and atomic weapons, the victor would suffer only a Httle less than the conquered, If any real victory is to be achieved in this present world-wide struggle, it can come only without armed conflict. This does not mean that we should abandon our defenses. Far from it. We must at all times be ready, not only in a military way, but also politically and economically, to meet the challenges of the forces of totalitarianism. The important point to remember is that this struggle is for the good will and support of human beings all over the world. If we are to achieve that goal, it can come only through our giving them the moral and ma- terial assistance they need in building dem- ocratic societies. It will come through the spread of ideas that men can accept freely, without thereby losing their freedom or the opportunity for freedom. MORAL AND MATERIAL SUPPORT ESSENTIAL No one can exaggerate the scope of our task. In the simplest terms, it means we must find a common ground of agreement with all democratic nations and strengthen the spirit of cooperation among them. We have come a long way since that June day in 1947 when Gen. George C. Marshall made his immortal speech at Harvard University, pledging our help to the needy peoples of the world. The Honorable Winston Church- ill referred to the speech of our then Secre~ tary of State as the most unsordid act in all human history. The Marshall plan has been a@ great success. We also feel optimistic over the possibilities of success for our newer efforts to bind together the nations of western Europe. In fact, there is every reason to believe that these programs will be successful if they receive the wholehearted support of the Congress and the American people. This - means moral support as well as the costly material support that is so essential in these programs, There is another phase of our search for world peace that has achieved little atten- tion and less success. I speak of the hope of many of us of finding an avenue of ap- proach to the peoples of the so-called satel- lite nations. This group includes the na-~ tions of castern Europe, China, and those
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD pordering countries that are dominated para tially or completely by Russian-trained Communists, Through a gradual process, we must wean the peonics of those nations away from Rus- sian dommacon, if real peace is to be achieved in this or the next generation; we must penetrate the iron curtain and give our moral support to the subdued but still-existent democratic forces in those lands. There are some people who say we should seal ourselves off from the satellite nations. By following such a course, we are admitting to the belief that we can achieve victory in this world struggle only through armed con- flict. And no thinking person will subscribe to such a thought. It is only if we make an appeal for freedom everywhere—and of- fer our full mors? ruvrcrt and material sup- port, wherever pu.:.3°2. to the exponents of freedom—that we stand a chance to emerge as victors in this grave struggle. SATELLITE NATIONS OFFER REAL CHALLENGE Freedom has been stifled behind the iron eurtain, but according to reliable reports from Europe, it is not dead in the satellite nations. There 1s unrest, both political and economic, in many of the satellite nations, put the democratic forces in those countries cannot be mobilized, or at least will not be mobilized, unless we of the free world offer them great moral encouragement. I think it should be emphasized that we have done very little thus far toward reaching those people. To some extent this has been due to the difficulties encountered in binding together the free nations. It also has been due to our own fears and doubts and indecisions, largely manufactured by witch-hunters who have wrapped themselves in self-designed cloaks of superpatriotism. At this period in history, we should pause to recall the words of the late President Roose- velt: “The only limit to our realization of tomorrow will be our doubts of today.” AS an amateur student of history, I be- lieve I recognize the Importance of study- ing the past for guidance in the formation of decisions on problems that are with us today. At the same time, it should be ob- vious that no sensible person would hold that the problems of today and tomorrow can be solved by living in the past, or by compound- ing confusion with indecision and fear. DELIBERATELY FOMENTED CONFUSION One of the most unfortunate factors to- day is that much of our present political atmosphere is charged with confusion, I speak not of the unintentional type of con- fusion that can be expected to arise in any difficult period, but of deliberately fomented confusion. The apostles of doom who are responsible for this tragic and deplorable situation are deadly enemies to our demo- cratic society. If you believe these are harsh words, I agree. Sometimes it takes harsh words to bring home the fact that the healthy func- tioning of a democratic form of government is primarily dependent on a unanimity of purpose and ideals. The founding of our democracy derived its main strength from a cohesiveness of democratic spirit. It has run all through our history. There have always been dissenters, there have always been doubters, there have always been prophets of doom—but the country pro- gressed and prospered beyond the fondest dreams of its founding fathers, primarily be- cause thetr ideals and their strong purpose 80 completely overshadowed the doubters, the dissenters, and the professionally unhappy. Today this small group has taken on @ significance far beyond any it previously had, because of the world-wide struggle of ideas— democratic versus totalitarian. The apostles of doom give comfort to our enemies by spreading fear here at home. It is impor- tant as it never was before that we recognize fully those in our midst who endanger our democracy. The confusion they sow can only be combated if we recognize these archi- tects of devastation who put fanatical theo- ries, personal neuroses, or political gain above the values of democracy. To successfully combat the confusion they sow we must recognize them and then op- pose them with every weapon that a free and democratic people possess. Bear in mund that if we must fight military strength and armed aggression our weapons and our methods are fairly obvious, but the fight against confusion presents a far more subtle problem, as well as a very deadly enemy. A totalitarian regime thrives on confusion, but @ democratic society can endure and grow only through cooperation and trust among people. LESSON OF “ENGLAND’S GRAVEST HOUR” While I was driving here I recalled the words that were spoken by a great English- man, Mr. Winston Churchill, just 10 years ago. It was June 1940. It was the gravest hour in England’s history. It also proved to be England’s finest hour. Mr. Chiirchill rec- ognized better than anyone else that England could survive—and bear in mind that there were only a few people around the world who thought England could survive at that grave hour—only if the full resources of the nation were mobilized against the enemy. That was the atmosphere when Mr. Churchill told his countrymen: “If the past undertakes to sit in judgment on the present, then the future will be lost.” With those words Mr. Churchill mobilized @ great nation for a desperate fight. It was not only the building of armaments and the training ‘of people to use them, but also the conditioning of the people to the full realiza- tion of the struggle and what it meant in terms of human endeavor and human life. There is a great lesson for us today in that incident of history, We are now engaged in a@ great struggle that will determine the fate of ourselves as well as other democratic peo- ples. We cannot win this fight by crawling into a shell. We can win only if we are will- ing and able to mobilize our full resources for the struggle for peace as we did for war. APOSTLES OF DOOM COMPLICATE TASK The task is complicated tremendously by the fact that we are faced with the apostles of doom on one side and a great totalitarian force on the other. We recognize the totali«- tarian force, but sometimes we fail to rece ognize the other enemies, and that is why they are so deadly. If these foes within our own house succeed in compounding con- fusion in their malicious campaign, then we may lose our cherished democratic rights. This would prove the greatest possible victory for our enemies and it could mean the end of democratic government for gen= erations to come. Protecting our own dem- ocratic rights while pursuing our search for peace will not be easy. It will be long and costly. But we must be prepared to pay that price if we hope to ignite the flame of de- mocracy around the world. : In conclusion, I wish to say that whether our Nation succeeds or fails in this great search for peace will depend in great meas-~ ure on how well you and your fellow col- lege classmates throughout the Nation meet the challenges of this day. I urge you to give serious thought to these words from the constitution of the United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultu- ral Organization: “Since wars begin in the minds of men, it is in the minds of men that the defense of peace must be con- structed.” . May you go forth to join in the search for peace, A4085 Dedicatory Address, Schools of Levittown EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. W. KINGSLAND MACY OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, June 1, 1950 Mr. MACY. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous consent to extend my re- marks in the Appendix of the Rrcorp, I include a dedicatory address made by me as the member of the New York State Board of Regents for the Tenth Judicial District, last Friday, at the opening of the new Division Avenue School, com- prehending the three other school build- ings erected in the past few years, on behalf of the Catholic War Veterans, the Jewish War Veterans, the American Legion, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars, at Levittown, Long Island, N. ¥.— a Village that was created out of Hemp-~ stead Plains within 4 years’ time to accommodate a population of 40,000 people: Mr. Chairman Gambling, reverend clergy, Supervisor Patterson, Congressman Hall, my esteemed colleague, members of the four great veterans’ organizations represented here—the Catholic War Veterans, the Jewish ‘War Veterans, the American Legion, and the Veterans of Foreign Wars—the many dis- tinguished guests present, and fellow Americans: My great pleasure in being with you to- night to participate in these impressive dedi- cation ceremonies derives from _ several sources. AS a Member of the Board of Regents of the State of New York, which has jurisdiction over all phases of formal edu- cation in New York State—from the kinder- garten through postgraduate work—I am delighted to have a part in the dedication of this great new school building, which in the years and decades to come will serve many thousands of your children. I repre- sent the tenth judicial district on the board of regents and that is the district in which you of Levittown and Nassau County and I of Suffolk County live. So, I am close to your educational problems and it is my in- tention to continue to be an active ally in helping you solve them. It happens, too, that Iam youn Ronvecent- ative in the Congress of the Trice S17 0s, representing as I do the First Congressional District of New York, in which most of you and I reside. My colleague, Congressman Lzowarp Hani, represents most of Nassau County in the Congress. I feel particularly fortunate in representing what I believe to be the pioneer section of your great county. Here in this community of Levittown we see dynamie young America at its best. Here we see thousands of men of action and valor busying themselves in the pursuits of peace. Here is a broad expanse of thousands of comfortable homes in an area that but a few years back was a collection of potato farms and truck gardens. Most of those at these ceremonies have chosen to cast their lot with a brand-new community—a community whose fame is al- ready world-wide. While it is true that the men and women of Levittown had to cross no trackless plains or climb rugged mountain passes to get here, they are mid-twentieth-century pioneers be- cause they have set up a new community and are determinedly and enthusiastically intent on making it the best community in the country in which to raise their children
A4086 and round out their adult lives. And what a magnificent beginning has been made. In addition to my pleasure in being with you in the two capacities I have mentioned, I am deeply appreciative in being asked to deliver the main address at these ceremonies dedicating this great new institution of learning for the very young of this com- munity, which is made up almost entirely of veterans and their families, to the mem- ory of deceased war veterans whose last full measure of devotion to their beloved country made it possible for us to assemble here in peace and safety today and tonight. The building of the Division Avenue Schcol results from the cooperation of many men and women. If I attempted to enumerate now the names of all individuals and the official agencies, from the local level up to New York State officialdom, that played an active part in making this magnificent structure a glorious reality, the list would be so long I would have to take most of the time the committee in charge has set aside to me for these dedicatory remarks. Con- gratulations to every one of you on the ac- complishment of such a splendid work on behalf of your children and the children of today and tomorrow. Levittown is unquestionably unique among the housing developments of the country. That uniqueness does not consist solely in the remarkable, almost overnight growth of a large community—a growth that had it occurred in California or Florida would have been hailed as a boom, with the probable resultant immediate creation of artificial, inflated values, As important as growth is, I want to apply a different yard- stick than mere growth in pointing up Levittown’s uniqueness, To me the most unique part of this extra- ordinary community is that Levittown and the Levitt Corp. set an example for the en- tire country and for every other major hous- ing development that may be later instituted in reserving land for school buildings before the homes in which the students-to-be would live, were built. It was said of fictional Topsy that “she just growed.” If she “just growed” in pleas- ing mold it was a benign act on the part of the Great Creator, But Levittown didn’t just grow. Levittown was wisely planned in all its details and a basic part of that long- visioned wisdom was in the provision that was made for the education of the young— your young. Had that foresight not been employed it is difficult to imagine just how those interested in the education of the young—-those of you who have now or will have young to educate—would have coped education-wise with the enormous growth of this community and the immediate neigh- pborhood. Wise initial planning came to full fruition through coordinated effort and enthusiastic co-operation between official agencies and interested individuals every step of the way. The board of regents, having been fully informed in the schoo] district’s acute educa= tional needs and the certain prospect of con~ tinuing developing needs, expressed its con~ fidence in the stability of this remarkable community by approving two bond issues— one in the sum of $2,135,000 and the other in the sum of $1,650,000. The first bond issue was for the purchase of four school sites, at a combined cost of $185,000 and the erection of two schools, the Center Lane School, costing $250,000, with accommodations for 250 children and the Di- vision Avenue School we are now dedicating. The Division Avenue School will make imme- diate provision for 600 students and is wisely planned so as to permit the building of an- other wing large enough to take care of an additional 600 students. The second bond issue, as most of you know, was for the erection of the Abbey Lane and Gardiner Avenue Schools, each of which is designed to care for 600 students. I understand that preliminary plans are being considered for a fifth school, to be known as the North S:de School, to be built at a cost of $896,000, with seats for 720 pupils. So, it is quite obvious that in Levittown we are not dealing with the storied little red schoolhouse of affectionate American mem- ory. Parenthetically, although nearly every- where the little red schoolhouse is as extinct as the surrey with the fringe on top, it still exists in too many backward rural sections of cur country. But, the little red school- house, nostalgically written about by Mark Twain in his Tom Sawyer, in which chil- dren from the first to the tenth grades were all housed in the babble of one room, with sanitary facilities out back somewhere, has not existed in these parts for many. years. We look back on it with affection but like the mustache cup it is not for this enlightened day. No, here in this brand-new, thoroughly modern community of Levittown we are not dealing with 80 or 40 children walking or riding horseback to a little red schoolhouse from all points of the compass from miles around. We are preparing and furnishing shining new and completely practical facili- ties for thousands of children inhabiting a comparatively limited geographical area. It ean truly be said we are dealing here with the finest kind of mass production of which our land is capable—its cherished children by the many hundreds, with thousands to follow. The Board of Education of Union Free School District No. 5—and I like those words “Union” and “Free” tied in with the description of a school district—simultane- ous with the beginning of this great housing project, were alert to the serious financial problems that would arise in connection with the building of schools adequate to keep pace with one of the greatest home-building op- erations in history. Your district superin- tendent, Harry W. Gross, your Nassau County officials and your Nassau County Planning Commission measured the extent of the problem at an early date and went forth to meet and grapple with it. Members of the various divisions and bu- reaus of the State education department visited the school district repeatedly and dis- cussed with the school board the formula- tion of plans, which included the instruc- tional, the financial, and the construction of buildings. They were ably assisted by consultants employed by the school dis- trict. The Levitt Corp. was most coopera- tive with the district superintendent and the board of education in the selection and setting aside of desirable sites for school buildings. The financial study that was made clearly indicated that the usual State-aid formula was not adapted to Levittown and to Union Free School District No. 5. Consultations with State Senator John Bennett and As- semblyman Frank Becker and in co-operation with your other capable legislators from Nassau County and you able county execu- tive, Hon, J. Russel Sprague, resulted in the decision that legislation should be intro- duced that would give special State-aid con- sideration to Levittown. Senator Bennett and Assemblyman Becker were most diligent in seeing to it that the needed legislation wae enacted in Albany—not always an easy task, This legislation gives the commissioner of education power, with the approval of the director of the budget, to set up a special State-aid formula that would avoid undue hardship on the taxpayers of Levittown. Only as a result of this legislation has it been possible for union free district No. 5 to build up, within the past 2 years, a splendid school system without invoking a burden- some tax levy. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Under the usual State-aid formula, the State pays $200 for each elementary student and $250 for each high school student in average daily attendance over a 3-year period, Levittown, because of its shining newness, could present no such average daily attend- ance figure. Accordingly this requirement was waived and Levittown was granted the same amount of State aid on the basis of average daily attendance during the best 4 weeks of either December or January. It is very likely that this school district will need this special State-aid consideration for some time to come. The State education departe ment will keep in constant touch with the situation and will continue its readiness to assist the school district in every way possible. ! In dollars and cents, permit me to cite the figures showing what Levittown would have received in State aid under the usual formula and what it has actually received as a result of the special consideration given. Figures are usually dry and uninspiring but those I am about to recite are anything but that to residents and taxpayers of this school dis< trict. In the year 1948-49 the aid normally received from the State would have been $625. The aid actually given was $36,174.77. In the year 1949-50 the aid normally received would have been $37,398.80. The aid actually given this year, under the special formula, has been $102,878.77. The series of facts I have just cited have been made available to me in my capacity as a member of the board of regents. I am glad to share them now with the good people of Levittown, whose interest in them is direct. When we look back to 1940 and realize that the total enrollment of students in what was then an intensively developed farming sec« tion was 60 students and that the same area’ now has approximately 2,000 students, we get some idea of what the future has in store. Within the past 2 years you have provided actual accommodations for 2,800 boys and girls in four economically constructed, soundly planned buildings. \ All concerned must continue to look ahead because the school population will continue to increase year by year for at least a decade orso. The further development of adequate educational facilities in this district and in this general section will continue to be a matter of primary interest to me in my. capacity as a regent. I won’t attempt to describe the facilities within this beautiful building we are now dedicating. As it stands, the statement that it is as fine an elementary school as there is in the country cannot be challenged. It has everything—literally everything—to contribute to the mental and physical wel- fare of the children fortunate enough to attend it. In my opinion, there will be little or no “hooky” played from this school. It is too pleasant a place, having too many facilities, for a youngster to want to stay, away from. Truly a new day is dawning in education when a young student’s com- forts and pleasures in his school can vie with those to be found in the home. And under the head of pleasures I am not in- cluding the fully equipped dental clinic. The old-time “hooky cop,” familiar to many in this audience, who I now believe func~ tions under the more impressive title of “attendance officer’? may conceivably have to seek other employment in Levittown. There could be no more fitting motive than the one surrounding this ceremony in which we are dedicating the Division Avenue School to the memory of the war veterans who laid down their lives for their country. I understand that the exact word- ing of the dedicatory plaque will be “The schools of this community are dedicated in memory of those who fell on the fleld of battle defending the American heritage
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD which we and our children are still privi- eged to enjoy.” Simple, dignified words, shose; not flowery, not poetical, not rhetor- cal, but direct and understandable by young ind old. They add up to the deep senti-« nent we feel here at these exercises, a senti- ment that will endure as long as young xyes can read, ponder and understand those vords. It 1s completely fitting that on this date, ust 4 days before the Nation as a whole »bserves its most hallowed holiday—Me-~ norial Day—that we precede and thereby dd to, the general country-wide honor be- ng paid our fallen heroes. This new school—this pile of brick and nortar and glass and modern materials that ashioned it—and they are the materials of yveace and not the matériel of war—which or many years and generations to come will cho and re-echo the happy voices of the arefree little Americans who will use it— $s a part, and a large part, of what the men nd women who died in World Wars I and II, nd in fact all other wars our country has veen forced to fight, laid down their lives or. This is what they would have liked to ave lived to see in our free America. In heir warriors’ Valhalla I know they are haring our deep satisfaction in the driving f still another strong rivet to strengthen ur American system of free education. They, the hallowed and honored dead, and hose of you who also wore the uniform but rho were permitted by God’s infinite grace o return to your country, made possible this Jivision Avenue School, and all other schools o be built hereafter in this free land of urs. They, and you the living, have made ertain that their children, your children, nd the children of all devoted and loyal mericans in the district, can here receive be first lessons in good Americanism, can 2arn the early needful lessons of adjustment o their fellows, can be grounded in good ving and clean thinking, and can get their rst conscious glimpse of the great useful- ess that is potentially inherent in the lives f all of us, no matter how humble. Our valorous dead and our living former oldiers, sailors, and marines fought for lany reasons. The United States of America annot possibly mean identical things to wo or more men because of the individual- yy of our own thought processes. We all gare our love of country, while admitting 1at the ramifications of that deep, devoted seling vary with each of us in our private ainking. Love of country defies exact defi- ition. It has many facets but regardless f our private thoughts and feelings all f us as Americans have definite beliefs and eterminations in common, We are against tyranny, oppression, and ytalitarianism in any and all forms. Ortho- ox Democrats and Republicans have that ommon meeting ground as Americans re- ardless of the techniques they advocate in heir determination to keep this country ee from these threats. We believe that the state exists to serve ne individual, not to control him, not to 1old him in identical pattern, not to make im march in economic or political lock step. Je, as Americans, believe that the state, or re Government—if the word “government” lakes my meaning clearer—is not, never hould be, and was never intended by the yunding fathers to be the inflexible, imper- onal master of its citizens. If that happens fe cease to be citizens and become subjects. All too often in the recent past and in this ear of 1950 we find a tendency on the part f some of those in high places in Govern- rent and in its executive bureaus to forget hat in the last analysis the rank and file of ur people are the only controlling force and hat officialdom by “‘directive’—an imported ureaucrat’s smooth word with unpleasant uplications—edict or command cannot aake 150,000,000 citizens of varying racial and religious backgrounds dance like puppets to the planned economy pull of its strings. Our honored war dead knew well the harsh and needful disciplines of military life. War, which by its very nature violates all rules of normal living and demands implicit and im- mediate obedience, must not be permitted to intrude its harsh exactions into our peaceful, permanent way of life. Our honored dead were free of military and Government dom- inance before they donned the uniform, They were glad to wear the uniform in order to get a distasteful and highly dangerous mission behind them. At the end of the war they expected to return to their homes, doff the uniform, and fit themselves, free of Gov- ernment domination, back into the mold of a peaceful world—in a country everlastingly free of the blood, sweat, and tears of war. We must see that their ideals, their hopes, and their desires are not thwarted through any act of ours. Those we honor at this dedication fought for the right to say “yes” or “no” on programs or policies affecting their welfare, their homes, and their children. They were pre- pared at all times to abide by the conse- quences of their decisions. They merely wished them to be free decisions, not reached by coercion or implied threat. They wanted no dictators here or even the remote threat of dictation. They fought against the dictatorship idea and its result- ant tyranny in the midst of carnage and indescribable horror. So must you who served the country continue in these days of peace to fight for that®ideal. So must all of us who are the beneficiaries of the sacrifices of the dead and the living. Alien ideologies have no place on Ameri- can soil, no matter how palatably they may be presented by some of those temporarily in high places. The American way of life is still the finest way of life to be found in the world, granting us as it does complete indi- vidual freedom, within the law, under the Constitution of the United States. And you Will agree that the Constitution remains the finest document ever written by man on behalf of man. We can and do amend it to meet changing conditions in a changing day but we retain its basic structure because the Constitution and the flag are the symbols of free men. The written word of the Con- stitution and the unfurled magnificence of Old Glory combine to exemplify the faith under which Americans have lived and died since our emergence as a free people. It seems to me that our departed heroes would have little patience and give short shrift to those in the educational and po~ litical world who would re-tailor our mode of living to fit the statism mold. Under statism, or government dictatorship, this new school would not be a place designed solely as one in which to impart needful knowledge to the young; it would be a fes- tering point, regardless of the beauty of its surroundings, for a supernationalism that demanded slavish obedience to the dictator ideal from all, even from lisping tots in the kindergarten and first grade. At this Memorial Day season particularly, and every other day in the year, we must be on guard, to see to it that the sacrifices made for*us are not taken for granted. What our war dead stood for and died for must for- ever be graven in our hearts and imbedded in our consciousness. For us to slip, even slowly and imperceptibly, down the road of state socialism into inevitable dictatorship and tyranny, would make a mockery of their sacrifice. . We must realize, as I believe we are all be- ginning to, that the problems of peace are equally as grim as those of war. And just as urgent. We are learning the hard way that we just can’t ponder while others act. If we do not remain alert to our responsi- bilities, the sacrificial heroism of others will become dangerous lethargy for us, the living. A4087 The proud sacrifice made by our heroic dead could evaporate into soft national indul- gence. If we permitted that, our national pride would degenerate into national indo- Jence. And then our war dead, whose mortal remains are scattered cver many battlefields and at the bottom of the seas could justi- fiably accuse us of not keeping the faith, because 1n lethargy, soft indulgence and in- dolence we would be easy prey to those wnose design is world conquest. We continue to believe firmly, and believe it has been demonstrated throughout our national life, that human beings enjoying the blessings of equality and liberty, will not take the yoke of any cmress, from without or within, on their «hoillucrs. Americans look ahead. They work for, scheme for, plan for better things for enrichment of their national and personal lives. Ancient and medieval systems, devised for the enslave- ment of the individual, can find no fertile soll in which to sprout within our borders, We will continue to forge ahead, if we retain @ proper awareness of our national destiny, with our eyes fixed on the ideal of freedom for ourselves and those properly within our orbit of influence. Despite the traitorism of an occasional Alger Hiss, no group of subversionists, no slimy alien cells within our borders, nor any propagandists from without, can convince Americans that our time-tested institutions are outmoded. Ours is and will continue to be a government by consent—by ballot box consent—of the governed. We will resist to the death the taking root here of a godless, materialistic Communist concept. We who abhor war—you who have fought and are bone weary from its horrors and futility— will forever resist any attempt to force alien isms and “ologies,” disruptive of our way of life, down our national throat. Under our Constitution we bind ourselves to refrain from the oppression of minorities, And we do just that. Inequalities and dis« criminations are becoming rarer and rarer. Our Bill of Rights gives us the right to worship God as each of us chooses in con- trast to countries in which those who have religious ideals are among the first oppressed, silenced, jailed, or executed. In free America we have the right to ex- amine in detail the acts of our Government and officials and criticize them if we see fit. We can change our lawmaking and admin- istrative officers when we deem a change to be necessary for the good of the country. We have the right of petition and peaceful assembly. We have the right to speak our minds. The words I am saying now could not be uttered behind the iron curtain or in any other land in which the dictator dwells and ces~oticelly lashes his little voiceless peop. J- .9 i’. rut he decrees they must travel. We have the right to seek employment. We have the right to quit our job if we don’t like it or desire to better ourselves. We have the right to go into business; to train for and practice a profession. We even have the right to fail. We, as free men, ac- cept no cradle-to-the-grave paternalism from & know-all, want-all government, and we grant our next-door neighbor, or the man down the block, the identical rights we re- serve for ourselves. It is these rights, after 171 years as a nation, that have made us great, the envied of the world, enjoying the most freedom and the highest standard of living found any- where. These are some of the rights our heroic dead fought for. On behalf of their children and ours, we fervently hope that wax will never again come to this globe; that it will never reach our shores, desolate our cities, and lay waste our peaceful countryside. None knows bet- ter than the soldier that war, instead of being a chivalrous adventure, carried on
A4088 under inspiring flapping banners to the ac- companiment of stirring trumpets, is a cold, scientific methed of bringing about mass destruction without discrimination between the combatant and noncombatant. The next war between major powers, which would inevitably involve the rest of the world, would be no idealistic adventure, pitched on a high plane, sparked by high- sounding and heart-warming slogans. Mili- tary men and scientists tell us that the next world war would be global suicide. Hence, common sense tells us we must do what we honorably can to avoid war. To do so, it follows we must have public Officials in high places in whom we have implicit trust— men who have no taint of acquiescence of fellow-travelerism about them. It behooves us as a nation to continue to be strong and resolute; to strongthen and uphold the political, educational, and eco- nomic systems of which we are individual representatives and recipients. The strong do not attack the strong. The history of wars, from the beginning of time, in that the predatory aggressor attacks out of a belief that the nation to be attacked, is weak, irresolute, has no stomach for even a defensive fight, and will bow cravenly and supinely to the threat of the sword. We know from the history of the last two world conflagrations just how lightly we were re- garded by aggressors. Coldly, calculatingiy they counted our ships, our planes, our troops, and gauged the extent of our ma- tériel. They decided that although poten- tially strong in resources we were weak in the will to defend ourselves—that we were a nation of fat sheep ready for the shearing. Twice in a quarter of a century our na- tional character was misgauged. Twice our burning desire for peace misled the inter- national spoilsmen and the dictators. Twice ‘we were caught off guard. And twice the United States of America had its sweet dreams of peace and brotherhood forcibly in- truded on, and we had to fight for our existence as a free nation and win wars costly in our greatest asset—our young men. There is some evidence that another ag~ gressor may be contemplating the same mis< take made previously by aggressor nations. But twice burned, in our case, is thrice shy. We are determined that we shall be per- mitted to pursue our national life in peace. Thus we are determined to be strong, so strong that our very strength, our readiness, will be the balance of power—for peace. Our will to remain free, to repel invasion of our country from without and treachery on the part of the weak, the misguided or revo- lutionary from within, to uphold our ideals and live as free men, will prevent world war III. By continuing to be strong, alert, and adamant in our belief that all men are created free and equal and should be per- mitted to live and prosper under that philos- ophy, we will guarantee that the sacrifices made by those heroes, to whom we are dedi- cating this institution of learning, were not made in vain. By our deeds henceforth, and not by our words on this or any similar occa- sion, we will memorialize them in the only way they would consent to be memorialized. This school in union free district No. 5, in the county of Nassau, in the Empire State of the greatest Nation in the world, is a fitting symbol of the patriotic devotion of the American fighting men who have passed on, Although they cannot see their chil- dren in it, we are serving them and their ideals by building it, equipping it, dedicat- ing it, and using it for the education of free boys and girls in a free Nation. So, this occasion should—and I feel cer- tain does—mean more to us than the mere dedication of a school building that is the last word in modern planning. To give it its full meaning it must be an occasion for the re-dedication of every one of us to the never- ending fight for freedom. If we thus re-dedicate ourselves here ard now, we truly honor those who have gone before and made possible the continuance of the God-given blessings we now enjoy. It has been a deeply satisfying experience to share with you the accomplishments of this day. Thank you, Atlantic Union EXTENSION OF REMARKS F HON. ESTES KEFAUVER OF TENNESSEE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. KEFAUVER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp the address delivered by the Senator from Iowa [Mr. GILLETTE] before the Atlantic Union Committee, at Washington, D. C., on dune 1, 1950. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: e SPzrcH pr SENATOR Guy M. GILLETTE (DEMO- cRaT, Iowa) BEFORE ATLANTIC UNION Com-~ MITTze LUNCHEON, HOTEL SHOREHAM, WasHINGTON, D. C., THURSDAY, JUNE 1, 1950 Ladies and gentlemen, I wish to compli- ment you on your timely presence here this week for the 1950 Work Conference for At- lantic Union. To me, the Atlantic Union proposal is one of the few hopeful signs on an otherwise dark and dreary horizon, one of the few constructive ideas looking beyond the bleak fixation of the so-called cold war. I am both honored and pleased to have an opportunity this afternoon to speak briefly to you about it. Rather than undertake the wholly unnec- essary task of urging your support for a pro= posal to which I know you are already com- mitted, I think it might interest you to know how one Senator, who was not always a strong advocate of Atlantic Union, came to his decision to support the resolution intro- duced last year by your chairman, my friend and colleague, Senator Krrauver, of Ten- nessee. I can’t help smiling when I recall that only 3 or 4 years ago I had the pleasure of de- bating on the radio against the Atlantic Union idea with its most outstanding ex~ ponent, the great jurist who is your commit- tee’s president, Justice Owen Roberts. Times and the world have changed since then, and, to a certain degree, I have changed with them. During the discussion of the North At- lantic Treaty on the Senate floor last sum- mer, I tried to sketch the long, painful road that the nations have traveled toward the goal of a world free from war and with sub- stantial and dependable moral, spiritual, po- litical, and economic securities. More prog- ress has been made in this direction in the last 25 years than in all the centuries of the past. Our own country, during the re- cent world war, completely ended the policy of withdrawal from the world that had caused it to reject the League of Nations, and joined with its allies in taking five major steps away from isolationism and toward the creation of a world compact or coalition for peace. Those five steps, which I cited during the Atlantic Pact debate, were the following: Step No. 1: The Atlantic Charter, which spelled out in terse and unmistakable lan< APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD guage the principles for which we and our allies were waging war. Step No. 2: The Connally resolution, which sought to commit our Nation, so far as the Senate could commit it, to cooperation with the rest of the world in building an organiza- tion for peace and security. Step No. 3: The Moscow Declaration, which insisted that, prior to writing a peace treaty, the nations should draft a tentative docu- ment for cooperative peace efforts, to be ready for study, revision, and hoped-for ac- ceptance before the end of the war. Step No. 4: The United Nations Charter, the tentative draft of which was presented at the Dumbarton Oaks Conference, after pro- tracted conferences between Secretary of State Hull and a bipartisan group of Senators to which I had the honor and privilege of belonging. Step No. 5: Ratification of the United Na- tions Charter and establishment of the new world organization. As one who participated in some of these great steps taken by our country toward a world without war, I kelieve I have quite intimate knowledge of the principles on which our actions were based and of the goals which we were then seeking to attain. With the glorious record of these five great steps toward world peace, it was not surpris- ing that when the Atlantic Pact was proposed there should have been widespread skepti- cism among our people as to this new mili- tary alliance. Did it constitute a sixth great step in the direction of world peace? Was it a retrogression, a reversal of direction? Or was it an evasion, if not negation, of the fun- damental principles to which all had sub- scribed? I for one was unable to reconcile the At- lantic Pact with the principles to which our country had subscribed, and in the imple- mentation of which I had personally taken some part. I therefore opposed this pact as a step backward and as a military alliance which could not, by any twisting of meaning, be considered as a reinforcement of the United Nations. Nevertheless I voted to rat- ify the pact, since the situation had devel- oped to a point from which there was no return. The United States had already been committed, and it would have gravely em- pbarrassed our national leadership as well as jeopardized our position vis-a-vis the people of western Europe, had the Senate at that late date failed to ratify the treaty. I can assure you, however, that I have rarely, if ever, cast a vote with greater reluc- tance, greater hesitation, or greater regret. On the heels of the ratification of the pact came the military-assistance program, which I not only opposed but for which I felt absolutely no compulsion to vote. This program was committing our country to a backward course for years to come, and to a policy of militarism and force that could, and probably would, destroy completely the very values and equities which we sought most to preserve. . Even prior to the debate on that bill, how-= ever, I had reached the conclusion that, since the United States had ratified the At- lantic alliance, the one remaining hope was to transform that alliance, if at all possible, into something other than a purely mili- taristic pact. Seeking some practical way to give human, as contrasted with military, content to the Atlantic Treaty, I found in the resolution offered by Senator Kerauver an instrument whereby the American people might stic- ceed in implementing the pact by some means other than the then pending bill for ® program to ship military weapons to for- eign armies. if the countries grouped together in mili- tary alliance could be intimately associated in a political, economic, and moral union of democracies, then the negative and retro- gressive military emphasis might be equal-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ized or even overbalanced by the social, po- litical, Juridical, and spiritual emphasis of @ union of peoples in a federal structure. Until the pact was ratified, I had been supporting proposals for a world-wide coali- tion or organization of nations for peace, After the pact was ratified, I was obliged to retreat ‘a step myself, without abandoning the hope of world-wide coalition. Ratifica- tion of the pact underlined and affirmed the division of the world into two hostile camps. For the American people, it was the turning point at which the United States Govern- ment declared that the world could not now be organized as an effective unity. The sixth great step toward world peace could not then and there be taken. I therefore saw in the Atlantic Union the starting point from which might possibly develop, in time and in a different, more organic way, that great world coalition or union for peace, which all thinking men know, at the core of their minds, is the only way the world will ever eliminate interna- tional war while remaining, at the same time, free and democratic. Considering the Atlantic military alliance @ drastic move away from world unity, I believed that through a constitutional con- vention of at least the Atlantic democracies, the military alliance could be transformed into a nuclear union leading to a steadily growing and widening federation of demo- cratic peoples. Such a transformation, I thought—and still think—would be a stu- pendous and ringing victory for reason over force, and for human dignity over brass- knuckle diplomacy. Yet, I do not consider even the political and economic federation of the Atlantic democracies sufficient to our need. What is ultimately needed is a world-wide union, including as many nations as can be incor- porated within it in the near future, and including, someday, all the nations of the earth. For the present, this is a hope de- ferred. A democratic federation must be composed only of democratic countries, and so long as antidemocratic, totalitarian re- gimes hold power in parts of the world no completely global union is possible. At- tempts to achieve that world-wide union now might even turn a dream into a ghastly nightmare. Let us therefore start with what is feasible and also desirable. The Atlantic Union is only a beginning, a regional application of the concept of union, but it is both feasible and desirable. It has astonished me that those respon- sible for our foreign policy in the Atlantic region have not welcomed the Atlantic Union idea with open arms, for it is the only approach to the Atlantic area that offers real possibility of permanent solution for the manifold problems—financial, industrial, po- litical, diplomatic, and military—besetting the peoples on both sides of the ocean. It offers the only program seeking to draw together, into one single comprehensive and comprehensible whole, all the economic and political measures that have up to now been treated individually, separately, and with slight promise of ultimave success. The Atlantic Union proposal goes far be- yond any mere military alliance, and by- passes the weaknesses inherent in all alli- ances while at the same time reducing the emphasis on unadulterated militarism. Not only that, it would provide for the people of the Atlantic community so much more than military security—an illusory and unattainable goal in any case in the modern atomic world. It points the way for @ real union of peoples in an organization already familiar in structure to the Ameri- can people in our Federal Union of the United States itself, with all that means in economic progress, political liberty, and spiritual values. In a recent column in the New York Times, Mrs. Anne O’Hare McCormick wrote that she saw rising dimly out of the London Foreign Ministers’ Conference, the outlines of a re born continent, the ancient continent of Atlantis. We may hope that such a conti- nent, with the Atlantic Ocean as its mare nostrum, may evolve from conversations among foreign ministers of great Atlantic powers. But if we depend on such limited means to achieve our purpose, we shall, I am afraid, wait for many, many years. Secretary Acheson, in a noteworthy address not long ago in San Francisco, called for total diplomacy. To my mind, that meant par- ticipation of the whole American people in the formation and application of our world policy. What better way can the American people participate in total diplomacy than by joining themselves voluntarily in an as- sociation of other peoples, in a fusion and merger of the resources, the skills, the cul- tural values, the spiritual and moral atti- tudes, and the common humanity of peoples now living separately but as neighbors on the shores of the North Atlantic? Finally, Atlantic Union is the only answer that I have been able to find for the most acute and critical single problem on the Con- tinent of Europe; a problem that is becoming more aggravated and in more need of speedy and permanent solution than any other in that part of the world. I refer to the proh- lem of Germany and its proper place among the other nations on earth. Of all the many proposed solutions to the problem of Germany, the soundest, safest, and most practicable proposal seems to me to be the incorporation of the German people within a broad trans-Atlantic framework of democratic nations. Germany is a three-way problem involv- ing Europe, America, and Russia, Our prob- lem is to find a way to prevent Germany from either uniting with the Soviet Union in a new Russo-German alliance, or uniting with a western European federation so as to dominate Europe and compel it finally to turn its back on the Atlantic and toward collaboration with Russia. Success in find- ing a way to accomplish this will call for far greater diplomatic ingenuity than we have so far demonstrated anywhere. In fact, it will call for efforts far greater than tradi- tional diplomacy can even envisage. The most feasible way to solve this prob- lem is to evolve, out of the tentative efforts toward western European integration or federation, a union of Atlantic countries having such a preponderance of industrial production, manpower, markets, and, above all, democratic vitality—having, in a word, such an appeal to the German people and the people of western Europe—that none of the antidemocratic and anti-American ele- ments in Europe or in Germany can succeed in seizing power or in divorcing either Ger- many alone, or Germany together with west- ern Europe, from the Atlantic community. Western European union will not provide @ solution to the German problem, cer- tainly not a solution in keeping with the interests of the United States or the rest of the Atlantic region. Although the Schu- man proposal for a French-German coal- and-steel consortium has been widely and even enthusiastically acclaimed, a second look at tts possible implications may lead many to revise their original opinion and see in’ it a proposal essentially divisive rather than cohesive in nature. Already there are faint indications that some realize that a Europe organized without America might become a Europe organized against America. Leaving aside all the other easily imagined consequences of such an outcome, we can certainly see that it would mean splitting the Atlantic community in two and de- stroying all hopes for a democratic Atlantic federation, A4089 A European federation would not have American or Canadian members, and it might well not have even the participation of Great Britain. What assurance is there, then, that with three of the principal demo- cratic nations of the Atlantic region left out, the European union would or could remain democratic, or that it would remain friendly to us and not seek an arrangement with the Soviet bloc? These dangers can be eliminated at one stroke: by the participation of the United States, along with Canada and Great Britain, in a trans-Atlantic union of all the free and democratic countries bordering on the North Atlantic Ocean and incorporating soon afterward all the democratic countries of western Europe, including Germany, of the Mediterranean region, of the South Atlantic area, of Africa, Asia, and the Pacific. For the peoples of the countries lying around the ocean that now connects rather than separates the Old World and the New, @ federal union is the loftiest and most logical proposal that has so far been offered them since the establishment of the United Nations. For the other democratic nations of the world, on whatever ocean or continent they may be, the concept of an Atlantic union as a nucleus for a broader and greater union will stand out as a beacon light in a darkening world, beckoning them to join with us in what we hope may one day be- come an all-inclusive union of the peoples of the entire globe. Achievements of Freemasonry in the History of America EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWARD MARTIN OF PENNSYLVANIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MARTIN. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Recorp a copy of an address which I delivered at a meeting of the Reading Consistory, Scottish Rite Masons, at Reading, Pa., on Friday evening, May 26, 1950. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: In the glorious history of American great- ness freemasonry has recorded many chap- ters of brilliant achievement. The list of outstanding patriots, states- men, and leaders who have been prominent in the work of.the Masonic fraternity is long and impressive. Masons had places of leadership in the struggle for American independence. They helped build the foundation of these United States. They upheld the principles of social, political, and religious liberty. They have fought and sacrificed in every generation to preserve the American heritage of freedom of the individual and equal opportunity in the pursuit of happiness. ‘We have every reason to be proud of the part they played in religion, charity,.moral, social, and cultural uplift, and in the cause of good government. In every crisis Masonic brethren have served God and our country with courage and humility and with loyal devotion to the sacred ideals of the American Republic. Today we are in another crisis. We are in a time of confusion and danger—a time
A4090 when evil men who deny God conspire be- hind an iron curtain to destroy freedom and to enslave mankind. Their hope is to weaken America, to preak down our moral and spiritual strength, to pring us to economic collapse and thus gain mastery over our country and the world. The basic doctrine preached by the Com- munist enemies of freedom is that the United States can be forced to spend itself into destruction. The people of the Soviet Union are told repeatedly that it will not take a shooting war to conquer America. It will not be necessary to drop bombs upon our cities. Propaganda is constantly spread among them that our system is doomed because we are pursuing fiscal policies that must inevi- tably lead to national bankruptcy. In. our own midst Soviet agents give vigo- rous support to every proposal which means greater and more extravagant spending by the Government. They are seeking to speed up the inevitable collapse of our financial structure under a crushing burden of debt and deficits. They encourage the selfish demands of pressure groups. They advocate the adop- tion of every socialistic scheme which holds out the false promise of something for noth- ing. In their work of undermining the foun- dation of American freedom they are aided by disloyal fellow travelers and fuzzy-minded pinks as well as thousands of misguided “do- gooders.” They find their greatest hope for success in a spendthrift administration at Wash- ington and in the spendthrift attitude of many of our people. The greatest danger confronting America is not atomic warfare that might be launched against us by a foreign foe. I am convinced that a more serious and more imminent threat to American freedom is the bomb of national bankruptcy. The real danger we face is the destructive, explosive power of excessive taxation, Gov- ernment extravagance, debt, and inflation. Against that danger we must build our de- fenses high and strong. If order and sta- bility are to be restored—if we are to return to safe, sound, common sense management of our national affairs—it must done through the strength of the people of the United States. Our order can play an important part in developing that strength because our mem~ bers are a cross section of the best elements of Americanism. As you well know, no man can be a Mason who does not believe in a Supreme Being. ‘We must mobilize all the moral and spiritual forces at our command to keep America strong. If we falter or fail, human liberty will surely perish and individual freedom will vanish from the earth. What has our plan of individual freedom done for us as a nation? In less than 200 years we have made more progress than any other people since the world began. From a little group of sparsely populated colonies along the Atlantic coast we have expanded our territory to the slopes of the Pacific. W> have built a diversified empire of in- dust. 7, agriculture, and transportation with- out equal in all history. Our commerce ex- tends to every corner of the world. We have developed the rich, natural re- sources of our country for the benefit of all mankind, We enjoy a cultural and spiritual level never attained by any people. We have been able to build churches, schools, hospitals, research institutions, and centers of art and music for the benefit of all our people. Listed among our assets are 250,000 churches of every denomination. They are in the great cities. They are in the moun- tain valleys. They are on the hill tops. We give more for humanitarion cts to the Red Cross, to research «1. to hospitals and for higher education than all other nations combined. We sent our missionaries to preach the word of God to all the distant islands of the seas. Our people own more homes, more life- insurance policies, and more savings ac- counts than those of any other nation on earth. We are pouring out billions of dollars to restore stability to the free nations of the world and to help them resist the advance of godless and churchless communism. Millions would starve without the pro- ductivity and the generosity of the United States. With this wonderful list of achievements it would seem we have no dangers. But we have and it seems to me that this is a time to consider them. As I said before, we have the great danger of nation-? h-~irurte erciced b7 excessive taxation, «x.~. L. Gover mer l spending, debt, and inflation. We are now spending for local, State, and Federal Government almost $65,000,000,000 per year. We are collecting taxes of thirty-eight bil- lion for the Federal Government, six billion in payroll taxes and about sixteen billion for State and:local government. That is a total of $60,000,000,000, or 28 per- cent of our nationalincome. In other words, it takes more than one-fourth of our pro- duction to govern ourselves. But unfortunately, this enormous amount is not enough to pay for all the costs of government. We will have a Federal deficit in this fiscal year of six or seven billion dollars and a similar deficit next year. There are also large deficits, through borrowed money, in many of the States and munici- palities. State and local government debt have increased enormously since the close of the war. By adding these new deficits to the present staggering burden of debt, we are placing a crushing mortgage on the future of our children. If we are to avoid national unbalanced budgets we must either increase taxes or cut down the cost of Government. Many of us believe that an increase in taxes will not bring additional revenue hbe- cause taxes are now so high that they are reaching the point of diminishing returns. When that time comes it is a stern warn- ing that the cost of government must be reduced. The American people must, in some way, be aroused to this danger, Deficit spending can finally destroy us. We must have a bal- anced budget or this country cannot escape bankruptcy. Another great danger in our country is inflation. There seems to be a new wave of inflation in the air. What is causing it? There are three main reasons: 1. Government is spending at the rate of six to seven billion dollars a year more than it receives in taxes. This puts more money in circulation which is highly inflationary. 2. The Government has put into effect a policy of easy money through grants and loans, This also puts an enormous amount of money in circulation and depreciates the value of the dollar. 8. Increased wages without a correspond- ing increase in production. Greater produc- tivity aids in keeping down inflation. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Inflation comes so slowly that its dangers are not recognized until too late. It is like a thief in the night. Inflation makes savings worth less. It makes money buy less. Infiation reaches into the pockets of every working man and woman to steal some of the real value of the dollars they work for. Inflation is a great danger to our way of life. It destroys the fruits of labor. It destroys the value of the nevsio% to the dis- abled soldier and his cependcesis. It de- stroys the value of unemployment insur- ance. It destroys the value of the grants to those who are on relief. It destroys the work of the frugal. Because of the Government’s inflationary policies the $100 savings bond bought 10 years ago for $75 will buy only $60 worth of g3ca~ tader. Trt. ry: young men of opportunity to get ahead because it takes twice as much capital to start a small business today as it did 10 years ago. The same condition makes it difficult for an existing business to expand. Back in the 1930’s the planners increased the money supply by taking us off the gold standard and by devaluating the dollar. We resorted to deficit financing. After World War II the planners sensed deflation and again they increased the amount of money in circulation. We must never forget that a government that continues to go into debt must have inflation in order to catch up. It looks as if inflation would help balance the budget but in reality it does not, because with inflation comes devaluation of the dollar, thereby increasing the cost of government. Let us consider what happens to a nation on the road to bankruptcy. Taxes become more excessive and burden- some. Inflation destroys purchasing power. Wages decline in real value as prices climb higher and higher. The standard of living is lowered. Unemployment is increased. Venture capital is dried up. The expansion of industry and business creating new jobs is stopped. With this comes rationing of food, cloth- ing, and all the necessities of life. Confusion and unrest spreads among the people. Then the bomb of bankruptcy explodes with all the horror and suffering of atomic warfare. Not a single citizen escapes its destructive force. Savings are wiped out. Life-insurance policies become worthless. Values estab- lished by generations of toil, thrift, and sacrifice disappear. Out of the smashed and ruined economy a socialistic form of dictatorship rises to take control. Government becomes the all- powerful and absolute master of the citizens. The people are controlled and regulated in their daily lives by the iron hand of a planned and regimented police state. The free enterprise system is destroyed. All industry is taken over by the govern-~ ment and free labor unions are outlawed. Human rights, human dignity, and free- dom. of the individual are lost, As so well stated by that distinguished statesman, James F. Byrnes: “Every indi- vidual, whether farmer, worker, manufac- turer, lawyer, or doctor, will be an economic slave, pulling an oar in the galley of the state.” So many say that government can never curtail individual liberty here in the United States. Let us take one illustration. A century ago individualism was deeply rooted in Great Britain. The British carried the flag of freedom. But today they are controlled and regi- mented. They cannot repair their own homes without government consent. They are told where to work. They are told where
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD to plant and what crops they are to raise. Medicine is under polities! control with such tragic results. Ther h.-e nationalized many of their great industries. Here in the United States we have not yet gone in for public ownership of our indus- tries, yet the Government competes with private enterprise in many lines of business. During the last 20 years we have been putting ourselves into strait jackets through price supports and Government loans to both big and small business. State and local gov- ernment have been going hat in hand to the Federal Government for aid in projects which could be better done by local and State gov- ernment or by the people themselves. Another danger lies in the fact that as in- dividuals we have allowed our material prog- ress to advance beyond our gains 1n spiritual strength, We have allowed envy, greed, selfishness and lust for power to blind us to the eternal laws of God. We have been indifferent toward law eva- sion, racketeering, chiseling and other cor- rupt results of the desire for an easy way of life. Furthermore, too many of us have begun to feel that Government can plan better than God. As Americans what course should we pur- sue for the good of our country? We must all take an intelligent part in government. At the last primary election 400,000 Republicans did not vote in Philadel- phia. That is an unfortunate situation, In the past our greatness as a people rested on the spirtual strength and character of our people, their love of freedom and their willingness to work and sacrifice. We want to keep America safe with free- dom, for the individual. We want to live in a@ period of reason and not of force. To be in that position it seems to me we must observe the following: 1. We must willingly obey the laws of both God and man. Our obedience to law must be an inward expression and not under com- pulsion from an outward force. Let us con- tinue to be a God-loving people. Let us fill the churches of every denomination. Let us preach righteousness, truth, tolerance, hard work, thrift and the love of God. 2, All should willingly and enthusiastically serve the Nation, both in time of peace and time of war. Peacetime service is so im- portant. If we demand it strong enough our fiscal policies would be sound. We will have individual freedom and not Government pa~ ternalism. Centralization of government can destroy us. When Government directs when, how and where we are to work and what we are to plant, production is lost and our liberties are curtailed. That will not happen if we do our duty as peacetime sol- diers fighting for the American form of gov- ernment contemplated by the founding fathers. 8. Let us work for peace and good will but let us maintain our material, physical and spiritual strength. We must be materially strong. We must be strong in military prep- aration. We must be strong in our spiritual attainments. 4. Let us lve in peace and righteousness with each other and with prayer, spread those ideals throughout the world. 5. Let us resolve that this Nation, founded to sustain the God-given liberty of the in- dividual, shall live forever and become stronger as the generations pass. In making this resolve we must remember that God remains unchanged. We must move ahead with falth in God and faith in ourselves. We can continue this country as the Nation of opportunity if we will to do so. There are still frontiers to conquer. tae? will not be conquered by a socialistic state. America will never be a socialistic country if the people do their duty. Appeal to Humarity EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LOUIS B. HELLER OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mr. HELLER. Mr. Speaker, within the Soviet sphere, a system of concentration camps exists, rivaling in extent and hor- ror those of Nazi Germany. President Truman has stated, on the best authority available to him, that the Russians hold 16,000,C00 hopeless human beings in these camps. On the basis of thousands of docu- mented reports from escapees from be- hind the iron curtain, the distinguished French journalist and writer, David Rousset, who was imprisoned from 1943 to 1945 in the Nazi horror camps of Buchenwald and Neuengamme, issued an appeal to humanity, reprinted in abridged form below, for an investigation into the Soviet concentration camp sys- tem. I wish to commend his appeal to humanity tc the reading of my col- leagues: [From the New York Times of February 28, 1950] An APPEAL TO HuMANITY (By David Rousset) I address this appeal to the conscience of all free men. During the last 5 years there have heen increasing numbers of reports on the Soviet system of concentration camps. The war, which opened the Nazi camps to the world and then destroyed them, also broke the silence wh.ch concealed Russia’s remote ter- ritories. Under the pressures of the war and its aftermath, non-Russian nationals, after being deported into Russia by the thousands, were then freed. As these vice tims escaped to the west, a horrible land- scape of concentration camps was unveiled. Sources of information in regard to the Russian concentration-camp system are widely varied. They come from every na- tionality—Poles of every political complex- ion, even Communist; from Germans, Jews, central Huropeans, Spaniards; and from Rus- sians, including MVD officials. Even the Soviet legal texts themselves attest to this horror. All this cannot be a conspiracy. The number of documented reports and their insistence do not permit us to reject them without a hearing. Vishinsky tells us there are correction camps where men are rehabilitated through labor. Not so many years ago Gestapo Chief Himmler posted above the infamous Sach- senhausen camp the slogan “Joy through work.” The Soviet code of corrective labor was recently published abroad. I will quote only two parts. Section 129 recalls that in Octo- ber, 1948, “institutions for corrective labor were transferred from the Ministries of Jus- tice to the NKVD (now MVD) of the U.S. 8. RB.” It is an ill omen when the highest police organization of a government takes charge of the reeducation of its citizens. Section 8 states: “Those persons are sent to correctional labor camps who have been con- demned by (a) a sentence passed by a tri- bunal; (b) a decree of an administrative body.” There is no possible misinterpreta- tion: the law recognizes and approves de- portation without trial. The stone buildings of Buchenwald, built to last, gave that prison city the aura of eternity. The same feeling grips you when A4091 you examine the file on Russia. Even after the German experience, the immensity anu stability of the Russian concentration camp system staggers us. Like the Germans, they have a transport system involving all the horrors which we know so well—the station platform with frozen bellies and feet, the stench in the ship’s holds, the masses of men dying on heaps of their own excrement. But innovations have been added. The Russians also have special trains for prisoners, old passenger cars trans-~ formed by sealing the windows and replac- ing partitions with iron gates, so that the guards in the passage may watch their cargo. In order to transport 800 to 2,000 deportees over a period of several weeks, converted freight cars are used, with iron tubes through the flooring for toilets, tiers of wooden bunks, and sentry stations connected by telephone to the commandant’s car. These small new details are alerming. for they indicate a special kind of calecui T'or, necessary only in the case of permanent institutions. The camps make the police an imposing social power within the state, a well-defended master of manpower. Their central admin- istration, the Gulag, is one of the largest economic trusts of the U.S. 8. R. Contracts are prepared on the basis of the prevailing wage rates, but since deportee labor costs far less, the difference is absorbed by the police corporation. Here again the inmate of the concentration camp supports his guardian, The Nazi SS reached this state only at the very last stages of its existence. In this sense the world of the concentration camp develops like a cancer within society, cor~ rupting the executioner along with the victim. Qut of the cacophony of the thousands of documented reports, the “concentration camp man” emerges. He is nightmarishly typical. He is hungry, sick, and afraid. He lives in wooden barracks, or under a tent, or in earth caves. His fate is locked between barbed wire barricades, beneath observation towers. Under constant threat of dogs and rifies, he works far beyond the power of his muscles, Given neither the means nor time to wash, he wears foul rags. He is awakened before dawn; at night, having returned exhausted from work, he stands in an interminable line, near a hospital lacking medicaments. In the middle of the night, in every kind of weather, he is aroused by blows to unload freight cars. This is a faithful condensation of hundreds of reports—and thousands of such reports exist. The world of the concentration camp keeps growing. Yesterday the Soviet Union had only political detention camps. The cruel war of the collectivization period started her on this enterprise of forced labor which plays its part in every economic sector, including scientific research. The present network of camps spreads across Siberia to the White Sea and the Baltic, from the very outskirts of Leningrad and Moscow to Baku. During nearly their entire existence, the Nazi camps were but one apocalyptic aspect of a general pathological pattern. Only dur- ing the last years did they become an inte- gral part of a society founded on a new type of human exploitation. In Russia this devel- opment is entirely completed. The class that organizes the camps is not threatened with extinction. It is in possession of all power and firmly resolved to carve out its future. These camps are thus an expression of nor- mal relations, the natural development of a hew type of society. And it is this unique quality of the Soviet system of concentration camps which fills us with such horror. Imagine the mass graves of the old Buch- enwald erupting with a resurrection of their dead, delegates of a protesting humanity united on the great square under the flares and in the snow, listening to the drumbeats and waiting to be counted. How would they
A4092 judge the safe, comfortable, intelligent citi- zens of the West who heard these new cries of terror and did nothing to answer? The strongest obscenities would be too weak, Millions of men today suffer horribly, with no hope. I do not ask the world to state: “Concen- tration camps exist in Russia.” Some might reply: “Our information is insufficient to pronounce such a serious verdict. I only ask you to say: ‘The file must be opened.” So that the file may be opened, I now pro- pose the establishment of a commission of inquiry, consisting of former political de- portees, inmates of the Nazi concentration camps, men who know the world of the con- centration camp and cannot be duped. Once established, this commission would formally demand from the Soviet Government the right to conduct an investigation on the spot, within the Russian camps. The Soviet Government solemnly denies the charge that its system of corrective labor camps constitute a crime against humanity. Our proposal, that men who have suffered as victims of the Nazis shall freely study the corrective labor camps, offers the Soviet Union the fairest way to justify its good faith before the world. Rebuttal of Board of Trade Argumenis Against Home Rule for the District of Columbia EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ESTES KEFAUVER OF TENNESSEE IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. KEFAUVER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent Lo have printed in the Recorp answers to some argu- ments prepared by the board of trade against the so-called home rule bill for the District of Columbia. My reason for asking that these answers be printed in the Recorp is that some time ago the dis- tinguished gentleman from Texas, Rep- resentative TracusE, placed in the Recorp the arguments of the Board of ‘Trade of the District of Columbia, which for some strange reason is opposed to home rule for the very people whom the board of trade is supposed to be representing. So these answers have been prepared to the arguments of the board of trade. There being no objection, the matter was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: REBUTTAL OF THE BoarD oF TRADE ARGUMENTS AGAINST Hommr RULE FOR WASHINGTON On March 24 the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Tracvus] inserted in the Appendix of the Rrcorp a leaflet prepared by the Wash- ington Board of Trade entitled “Does the Kefauver Bill Really Provide for Home Rule?” ‘This leaflet is full of misstatements and mis. conceptions calculated to confuse and deceive the ordinary citizen. In order to keep the record straight on this important issue, Mr. President, I have prepared a rebuttal of the arguments against home rule for Washington which are currently being made by spokes- men for the board of trade, REBUTTAL Argument: The Kefauver bill (S. 1527) would bring carpet-bag rule to Washington— meaning local government by outsiders, Rebuttal: Section 302 of the bill provides that members of the District Council, which would be the governing body of the city, must reside and be domiciled in the Dis- trict. The bill contains no provision which would prevent the appointment of local men to the positions of District Manager and de- partment head. There is plenty of local talent in Washington for these top executive jobs and local citizens might well be chosen for these important posts. But if only Dis- trict residents were eligible for appointment to these places, the new government would be unreasonably handicapped in obtaining the best talent for the task. City manage- ment has become a national profession dur- ing the past 40 years, and it is common practice for manager cities to hire the best administrators wherever they can be found. The problems of city management are essen- tially similar throughout the country. From the viewpoint of home rule, however, it does not matter where the District ~°anager and the 12 department heads come from so long as they are subordinate to a locally elected legislature composed of local residents. Un- der the manager form of government, de- partment heads are responsible to the city manager who appoints them, the manager in turn is responsible to the city council which appoints him and can remove him, and the council in turn is responsible to the voters who may change its composition on election day. Under the present system, Washington in fact is now governed by outsiders. For Con- gress is now the governing body of the Dis- trict of Columbia and all the Members of Congress come from other parts of the coun- try. The chairmen of the District of Colum. pia Committees of the House and Senate are customarily spoken of as the “mayors” of Washington. Mayor McMinnan comes from South Carolina, and Mayor NEELY comes from West Virginia. Moreover, even under the present form of District government, department heads are often appointed from the States. Eleven of the present forty-two department heads in the District government were not residents of Washington at the time of their original appointment. For example, Dr. Corning, the Superintendent of Schools, was then a resi- dent of Nebraska; Dr. Seckinger, the District Health Officer, lived in Georgia; and Mr. Shea, the Director of the Board of Public Welfare, came from Massachusetts. One advantage of appointing outsiders is that they are inde- pendent of any local interest group affilia- tions. Argument: No real home rule is possible under the Kefauver bill. Rebuttal: The essence of home rule, as it is understood throughout the United States, is the making of local policies by locally elected officials. The Kefauver bill transfers the local law-making power of the Board of Commissioners of the District of Colum- bia to a locally elected District Council. Over the years Congress has delegated to the Dis- . trict Commissioners broad powers to make rules and regulations to protect the life, health, safety, and general welfare of all persons and property in the District of Co- lumbia. (See 1, D.C. Code 226.) Their ordi-« nance-making powers, which the Council would inherit under the Kefauver bill, cover 90 percent of all local matters and would not be subject to congressional or Présiden~ tial review. The other 10 percent—corre- sponding to legislation on the State level— will become effective in 45 days under the bill, in the absence of negative action by con- current resolution of Congress or subsequent veto by the President. For all practical pur- poses, this will be home rule for Washing- ton. For municipal legislation will be en- acted by a council elected by the people of Washington instead of by a Board of Com-< missioners appointed by the President. Short of a complete delegation of legislative au~ APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD thority by Congress to the Council, this will be as much home rule as the Constitution permits. So much self-rule is surely better than none. Nine-tenths of a loaf is prefer~ able to none at all. The insistence of the board of trade upon the whole loaf, know-~ ing it to be unattainable, may conceal their secret desire for none at all. Argument: Congress cannot surrender its exclusive authority over the seat of the Na- tional Government. Rebuttal: This objection refers to article I, section 8, paragraph 17, of the Constitution of the United States, which reads: “The Congress shall exercise exclusive leg-« islation in all cases whatsoever, over such District (not exceeding 10 milés square) as may, by cession of particular States, and the acceptance of Congress, become the seat of the Government of the United States * * *,” It is well settled in our constitutional law that the word ‘‘exclusive’” in the paragraph quoted above was meant by the founding fathers to exclude the authority of the States over the Federal District. But there is noth~ ing in the Constitution to prevent Congress from delegating its legislative authority, as the legislature for the District of Columbia, to its own agent. In actual practice, Con- gress since 1879 has made broad grants of local legislative authority to the Board of District Commissioners who have wide pow= ers to make rules and regulations covering purely local matters. Similarly, Congress could make a locally elected city council its agent for the enactment of municipal leg- islation in the District of Columbia. This is what the Kefauver bill provides for. _ Argument: The only way to obtain genu-~ ine home rule for Washington is through national representation of the District of Columbia in Congress. Rebuttal: This argument puts the cart be« fore the horse. It overlooks the fact that successful local self-government has been a condition prerequisite to national suffrage and representation in Congress throughout our history. Before the various States have been admitted into the Union since its crea- tion by the Original Thirteen States in 1789, they have had to prove their capacity to gov ern themselves competently in their local affairs. Home rule consists in the right of a com- munity to control its local affairs through its own locally elected representatives in a city council. That is what is meant by home rule throughout the United States. If the people of Washington could elect Represent~ atives in Congress, these Representatives would have no more voice in running the local government of the city than Members of Congress from Chicago or Philadelphia or New York have in running the govern- ment of those cities. Members of Congress from the District of Columbia would not perform any of the local legislative or ad- ministrative functions which are the essence of home rule. They would serve as national legislators. Long repetition of the argument that national suffrage and national repre- sentation is the road to home rule for Wash- ington may have led some unthinking people, parrot-like, to believe it. But this argument is, in reality, a smoke screen designed to conceal other grounds of objection to local suffrage for the District of Columbia. Argument: The District council would be dominated by the two councilmen to be ap- pore by the President under the Kefauver Rebuttal: The Kefauver bill provides that the District council shall be composed of 11 members; nine elected by the qualified voters of the city, and 2 appointed by the President of the United States, Since each of the 11 councilmen would have one vote apiece, it is obviously absurd to argue that the 2 members appointed by the President could make their will prevail over the otner
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 9. The provision for the appointment of two councilmen by the President is designed to protect the Federal interests in the Na- tional Capital. At present the District gov- ernment is headed by a Board of Commis- sioners all three of whose members are ap- pointed by the President. The board of trade has not objected to this arrangement. Are they sincele in objecting to the presi- dential appointinent of 2 out of 11 council- men? Another precedent for presidential ap- pointment cf lncal District officials is seen in the fact that during the territorial period (1871-74} the President appointed all the members af the upper house of the bicameral District legislature. Argument: The 1-year residence require- ment in the Kefauver bill for voting in Dis- trict elections is not long enough. Rebuttal: The typical residence require- ment for voting in the United States is resi- dence of 1 year or less in the State and 6 months or less in the county. Thirty-three States require 1 year residence in the State; 5 States require 2 years residence in the State, and 9 States require 6 months resi- dence in the State. No State requires a longer residence than 1 year in the county. The proposal for a longer residence re- quirement for voting in District elections is probably designed to exclude from the local electorate the so-called floating population of Federal employees to whom spokesmen for the Board of Trade frequently refer. Yet census figures show that the average tenure of office of Federal employees in the United States ai large is more than 11 years, and the average of those who reside in Wash- ington, D. C., is believed to be even longer. More than one-fifth of the population of Washington is composed of officials and em- ployees of the Federal Government and many of them think of Washington as home. Argument: The Kefauver bill provides that registered voters in other places may vote in the District if they have lived here 1 year. Rebuttal: Section 1206 of the Kefauver bill provides that “a person who is otherwise qualified shall not be disqualified by being entitled to vote in another jurisdiction.” The board of trade fears that this “dual vot- ing” provision might give persons resident in Washington, but legally domiciled in the States, the balance of power in District elections. According to the board of trade’s own. estimates, Federal workers would com- prise 20.7 percent of the total District elec- torate. Four-fifths of the local electorate would not be Federally employed and only one-ninth of the total population of the Dis- trict maintain legal domiciles elsewhere. The fundamental error in this objection is the attempt to distinguish between “trans- jent” Federal employees and “permanent District citizens.” This is a false dichotomy. Federal workers resident in Washington are “people of the District’? as much as anyone else who lives here and has a stake in its government. To suppose that the “genuine” people of the District are a few native sons or the eight-thousand-odd members of the board of trade is a supercilious conceit which is contrary to fact. The chief purpose of the so-called “dual voting provision” of the Kefauver bill is to increase the size and improve the composi- tion of the District electorate by allowing - some 100,000 Federal employees to vote in District elections who reside here, but main- tain legal domiciles in the States whence they came. These people have a vital stake in this community because they own property and pay taxes here, send their children to local schools, and depend upon local municipal services. If persons who actually live here in Washington, but retain legal domiciles in the States, were denied the right to vote in District elections, two classes of citizenship would be created in the District of Colum- bia, In one class would be the residents of XCVI—App.——258 Washington who have seen fit to retain vot- ing rights in another jurisdiction and who, if unable to vote in District elections, would look to Congress for the protection of their interests. In the other class would be the residents of Washington who do not have the right to vote elsewhere and who would look to the District Council for the protection of their interests. Between these two classes of citizens, as well as between Congress and the Council, conflicts would certainly arise which might jeopardize the successful con- duct of the District government. . Argument: The Kefauver bill does not confer the right to vote in national elec- tions upon Washington residents. Rebuttal: It is true that the Kefauver bill does not confer this right. Congress cannot confer the right to vote in national elections upon the residents of the District of Colum- bia simply by passing a law. The Consti- tution of the United States grants the right to vote in hational elections to the inhabi- tants of the States, and the District of Co- lumbia is not a State. It will require a con- stitutional amendment to enable the resi« dents of Washington to vote in national elec- tions. Proposals to amend the Constitution to this end have been introduced in Congress for many decades, but none of them has ever been approved by Congress for submission to the State legislatures in accordance with the prescribed amending process. For 40 years the Washington Board of Trade has tried in vain to induce Congress to propose such an amendment. But for various reasons Con- gress has always been deeply opposed to na- tional suffrage and national representation for the people of the District of Columbia. The chances are slim indeed that such a con- stitutional amendment will ever be adopted. To ask that home rule be suspended until the District has been granted national xopresen- tation, as the general counsel of thé board of trade has done, is to fly in the face of both history and common sense and to class- ify oneself as an obstructionist against any form of District suffrage. Argument: The city-manager form of government, which the Kefauver bill proposes for Washington, is unworkable. Rebuttal: The manager form of city gov= ernment is modeled upon the internal struc~ ture of the modern American’ business cor- poration. Under the manager form of gov- ernment, an clected council is the governing body of the city, and a manager, appointed by the council to serve at its pleasure, is the chief administrative officer of the local government, subject always to the control of the council. Thus, the city manager cor- responds to the general manager of the private corporation, the city council cor- responds to the board of directors of the private corporation, and the voters cor- respond to the stockholders. Since the manager form of city govern- ment was first adopted by Staunton, Va., in 1908, more than 900 American cities and towns have adopted it, almost a third of them since the late war. The manager form of city government has long been recom- mended by the National Municipal League in its model city charter. So successful, in- deed, has been the experience of American cities with this form of government that less than 8 percent of them have even aban~ doned it. Argument: No city the size of Washington has ever had the manager form of govern- ment. Rebuttal: Cleveland, Ohio, with a present estimated population of 900,000, has had the manager form of government. Cincinnati, with a present population estimated at 500,000, is the largest city in the United States now having this form of government. Among other large cities which now have the manager type of government are Roches- ter, Hartford, Richmond, Dallas, and Oak- A4093 Jland. The basic principles of the manager form of government are applicable to cities of any size. Argument: The District Manager pro- posed by the Kefauver bill would become the all-powerful boss of Washington. Rebuttal: Section 502 of the Kefauver bill provides that “the District Manager shall be the chief executive officer of the District government. He shall be responsible to the District Council for the proper administra- tion of the affairs of the District coming under his jurisdiction or control * * *” To this end he is given powers of appoint- ment, removal, and supervision commensu- rate with his responsibilities. But he is sub- ordinate to the council which appoints him and which may remove him at any time. He must perform his duties in such a way as to meet with the approval of the council. Under the manager system, the line of re- sponsibility runs straight up from the bu- reau chiefs to the department heads to the manager to the council to the electorate. Each has the power to dismiss those below it in case of corruption or incompetence, subject of course to the safeguards of the civil-service merit system. The general ex- perience of the manager cities in the United States has been that the manager has not become the boss of the town. Argument: Home rule would result in higher real estate and income taxes in the District of Columbia. Rebuttal: Under the present system, in- creases in District tax rates must receive congressional approval. Under home rule, bills raising local tax rates would be subject to congressional veto. Taxation without representation is now the rule in the city of Washington. District residents have no voice in the determination of their tax rates or as to how their money shall be spent. Under the Kefauver bill they would have such a voice. Proposed changes in the tax rates would have to be initiated by the repre- sentatives of the people in the District Council and could be disapproved by Con- gress or vetoed by the President. Thus, whether District property and income taxes went up or down, they would change in re- sponse to the decisions of the elected repre- sentatives of the people in the District Council, subject to a congressional and Presi- dential veto. Washington would have tax- ation with representation for the first time in 75 years. Argument: Transient residents would vote for bond issues which the permanent resi- dents would have to pay for. Rebuttal: This argument is based upon the false assumption that there are two kinds of people in Washington—the permanent residents and the transient, floating popu- lation. The population of Washington is as stable as that of any city in the coun- try. To be sure, the individual composi- tion of the federally employed population in the District of Columbia may change from time to time. But as long as Washington is the Capital of the country there will al- ways be a hard core of Federal employees resident here—even if they are not the same people—to help pay the carrying charges on & local debt. No State in the Union limits the right to vote on bond issues to its so-called perma- nent residents. . It has long been an accepted principle of public finance that governments should pay for their current operating expenses out of their current revenues, and that they may borrow for capital improvements such as schools, highways, plant and equipment, etc. In keeping with this principle, section 701 of the Kefauver bill authorizes the District government to borrow for capital improve- ments, but limits its maximum indebtedness to an amount not exceeding 5 percent of the
AA094 assessed value of the taxable real property in the District. The Kefauver bill also provides a triple hurdle for bond issues. Furst, they must be approved by majority vote in the District Council. Second, bonds may be issued only after approval by majority vote in a popular referendum. And, third, the bond issue may be disapproved by Congress or the President. These three safeguards, together with the 5- percent debt limit, will prevent the new District government from rash debt ventures. Argument: Passage of the Kefauver pill will mean the reduction or elimination of the annual Federal payment to the District. Rebuttal: Title KK of the Kefauver bill provides for an annual Federal contribution toward the cost of the District government amounting to 20 percent of District local revenues during the preceding fiscal year. This formula, if it were now in effect, would produce a Federal contribution to the Dis- trict of $20,000,000 in 1950. The actual Fed- eral payment to the District this year is a lump sum amounting to $12,000,000. Thus the formula in the Kefauver bill would increase the Federal payment in 1950 by $8,000,000. Argument: The passage of the Kefauver pill would not save much congressional time. Rebuttal: One of the main arguments in favor of home rule for Washington has been that it would relieve Congress of the onerous task of functioning as a city council for the District of Columbia when it ought to be devoting its full attention to more important national and international problems. It has been carefully estimated that the House of Representatives alone devotes 3,000 man- hours each session to the consideration of District affairs. The House and Senate to- gether probably devote at least 5,000 man- hours a year to District of Columbia business. The House of Representatives sets aside 2 days each month for the consideration of Dis- trict business. Most of this congressional time would be saved under home rule because the formula- tion of District legislation—most of the 28 stages in the enactment of an act of Con- gress—would be devolved upon the District Council and the time spent in its considera- tion would be spent at the local level instead of at the national level. Under the legis- lative veto procedure set forth in the Kefauver bill, for possible use in the 10 per- cent of District legislation subject to con- gressional review, all Congress need do under home rule is vote up or down a concurrent resolution of disapproval if one is introduced. Argument: If Washington had home rule, the colored people would capture control of the District government. Rebuttal: This objection is not openly raised by the board of trade, but it is whispered about and is one of the silent obstacles to passage of the Kefauver bill. The truth is that, under the method of vot- ing provided for in the Kefauver bill, no minority group in the District could possibly win a majority of the nine elective seats on the District Council, or a majority of the seven elective seats on the Board of Educa-~ tion. Title KII of the bill provides for a system of city-wide voting in which the can- didates who receive the largest number of votes in the general election shall be elected to these offices. The Negro population of Washington has been remarkably stable through the years. Since 1880 it has varied between one- fourth and one-third of the total population of the District. At the present time, accord= ing to the latest census estimates, the Ne-~ groes account for about 30 percent of the city’s population. This percentage would en-~ title them to three out of the nine elective seats on the District Council, In Richmond, Va., which has the manager form of govern= ment and where 82 percent of the population is colored, only one of the nine members of the city councilisa Negro. The colored peo~ ple have the right to participate in the politi- eal life of a community in proportion to their numbers and their qualifications. The ex- perience of other cities in the United States where the colored people are allowed to vote shows that they do not vote en bloc, but scatter their votes as the white people do. In short, it is a myth that home rule for Washington would mean domination by the Negroes. Investigation of Interstate Gamblizg and Racketeering EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. ALEXANDER WILEY OF WISCONSIN IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. WILEY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Rzcorp a statement I have prepared on the subject of interstate gambling and racketeering, a radio speech on the same subject, delivered by me on May 27, 1950, from Station WGN at Chicago, Ill, and several newspaper editorials relating to the same subject. There being no objection, the matters were ordered to be printed in the Rrecorp, as follows: SrareEMENT By Senator WILEY AN ALL-OUT FIGHT AGAINST CRIME Today it was my pleasure to pay a visit, with my colleagues on the Senate Crime Committee, to President Truman to discuss executive-legislative cooperation for the pur- pose of coping with the problem of inter- state gambling and racketeering. It has always been my opinion that only by the most complete cooperation on the part of both branches of the Government and the judiciary can we lay the basis for per- manent legislation which will wipe out the shame of the cities—with so many major metropolitan centers now being under the thumb of organized crime—under a com- bination of gambling, racketeering, dope peddling, slot machines, policy rackets, etc. My radio address on nonpartisan probe Last Saturday night I delivered by means of transcription, an address over the great Station WGN, Chicago, on this issue. I tried to emphasize that there are promising signs that the committee investigation will be a nonpartisan probe. However, already there are some'signs that some rotten political influences are at work in the Democratic organization to pervert, distort, and send off on a tangent the crime investigation. Of course, any such charges on my part will be denied publicly. I do not expect any member of the majority party to admit: “Yes, we are a little unhappy at some of the criminals who may be discovered because many of these hoodlums are heavy contrib- utors to the Democratic Party organization and because in countless wards, precincts, counties, and even at the State level there is a close relationship between organized crime and shady politics.” No, no one will admit that publicly but I have substantial evidence or else I would not be making the statement that I have already made concerning shady political influences at work. I repeat that I do not make these allega- tions for partisan purposes—in order to + active crime commissions. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD show up the Democratic Party. I make these allegations publicly because I am anxious to have the strongest, most effec- tive possible probe. I want to put the crooked politicians on notice to beware be- cause we are wise to their game. I would not want this probe distorted into @ Republican smear hunt. At the same time, what is far more important and far more dangerous, I do not want this probe distorted into a whitewash of filthy influ- ences which work in many of our major cities, particularly crime-ridden Chicago. I believe that my own Republican Party is deeply desirous of the finest, highest type of investigation, and I believe that responsible elements in the Democratic Party are similarly desirous. I have high confidence in the committee staff and per- sonnel. However, as reflected in skeptical newspaper editorials and articles which I have in my hand, many Americans are deeply dubious whether the Democratic Party, whose hands are still stained by the plood of the Kansas City murders and by “pendergastism”—whether the Democratic Party will have the guts to allow a com- pletely nontrammeled, nonpartisan investi- gation. While all of this attention, however, is being devoted to the Federal effort to probe crime, I hope that there will not be the slightest lessening by States and localities of vigilance in cracking down on local rats. We have it on no less an authority than the notorious Frank Costello himself, as pointed out in a Wisconsin State Journal editorial, that gambling could not exist un- less it had a green light from local officials, Newspaper editors’ counsel sound I believe that the opinion of the alert newspaper editors throughout the Nation should be consulted because these men are well aware, based on long investigative experience, of the lawless element in our midst. We of Wisconsin have always been proud that ours is a relatively crime-free State, but we know that we are challenged as is the rest of this Nation to further im- prove enforcement of the law. The racetrack wire-service boys in Mil- waukee, the numbers men, plying their trade undercover in my State, can be assured that we are going to look under the rocks to find these crawling insects there as well as elsewhere throughout the Nation. Ravio INTERVIEW BETWEEN SENATOR WILEY AND His EXECUTIVE SECRETARY, SATURDAY, May 27, 1950, on Srarion WGN, CxHicaco, Inn. CRACKING INTERSTATE CRIME Senaror. Does crime pay? You, my lis- teners, and I were brought up to believe that crime does not pay. That the wages of sin are death. That he who lives by a gun will die by a gun, To a considerable extent, what we learned is still very true. Crime, generally speak- ing, does not pay. It does not pay, thanks to our great Federal Bureau of Investigation; thanks to honest law-enforcement officers in most of the country; thanks to the work of Thanks to them and to you, the honest citizens of America, crime, generally speaking, does not pay. But a new investigation by the United States Senate’s special committee looking into inter-State gambling and racketeering is now getting under way, and it seems very apparent already that to a certain extent, materially speaking, crime does pay. It pays off and pays off well to the syndicate, to the strong-arm boys in its employ, to many crooked policemen on city beats, to many tin-horn gamblers, it pays to some rotten Judges, to some serflike officials in mahy big centers of our country.
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Government officials are by and large honest Now, my friends, don’t get me wrong. By and large your Government Officials are hon- est, decent citizens. I say that contrary to the distorted picture which Red Russia tries to paint of us—a distorted picture of an al- Icgedly corrupt, venal America. You know, the worst thing that could happen in the world would be for Mr. and Mrs. Average American to lose faith in his or her officials. However, a second thing would be to keep faith 1n those officials who are rotten, cor- rupt, and who ought to be in jail rather than in city halls. Committee is going to operate silently SECRETARY. Well, Senator WILEY, you are @ member of that special Senate committee which is probing into crime. Can you tell us something about your work? Senator. Glad to. But please understand, friends, it is not my plan now to present any so-called inside story of the confidential things we are going todo. Let the hoodlums worry about that. Let them keep guessing about our confidential plans. Let them grow increasingly uneasy, because this com- mittee, generally speaking, is going to oper= ate on them with an expert silent treatment. At the same time, however, members of the committee, like myself, feel that it is up to us to help inform the American public of certain essential background facts regarding our war against the underworld. That is why I am happy to speak to you now. Competent committee and staff Secretary. Well, Senator, how do you feel about this anti-crime committee itself? Senaror. Truly, I can answer that by say- ing I have tremendous confidence in the committee chairman, the Honorable Estzs Kerravuver of Tennessee and in my colleagues on the committee—both Republican and Democrat. I know that they want to do an honest, conscientous job. I am glad that we have a very competent and experienced chief counsel in the person of Rudolph Hal- ley—who gained invaluable experience with the old War Investigating Committee. We must be nonpartisan SEcrRETARY. Do you feel that this committee should operate on the basis of bipartisan policy? Senator. No. We all definitely feel we must be nonpartisan, not bipartisan. Let’s shove partisan considerations in the ash- can. It is up to the Senate committee to pull no punches whatsoever in its investiga. tion. Let the chips fall where they may. If the spotlight falls on a crooked Republi- can organization, then I say let’s get the facts and tell the truth about it. If the spotlight falls on a nest of democratic racketeers, then let’s also tell that story. There must be no whitewash, no glossing over any sordid situation, no matter whose poli- tical toes are stepped on. Secretary. Is this nonpartisan approach the way things have proceeded thus far? Advice to the mob: hands off the committee Szwaror. Well, frankly speaking, not com-~ pletely. I know that certain outside influ- ences tied up with crooked big city organ-~ izations have already attempted to put the heat on, have subtly attempted to apply pressure, to use influence to distort the pur- poses of this committee. Let me repeat that my friends—I am charging that certain out- side—I emphasize—outside—influences, and frankly—they are connected with the Demo- cratic political organization—are apparently already attempting to use pressure to pervert the committee’s work. The big shots have already tried certain high-up channels of approach. Undoubtedly they are going to try others. I say, however, publicly here and now: You had better lay off, boys. You had better not try any wise- guy stuff on this committee. You had better keep your filthy hands and filthy attempted influence away, because if you do try to use pressures, they are going to boomerang against you and you’ll be doubly sorry. Now, my fellow Americans, I would like to make this charge more explicit, but I do not want to reveal more facts than are nec- essary at the present time. The new look in racketeering influence Let me point out that these influences are not of course of the blackjack, pistol-pack- ing, lead-poisoning type. They are subtle, silk-glove, apparently respectable influences, the sort of thing one would expect from billion-dollar racketeering influences—tied up with shady politics. This is the new lock, so to speak, in United States rackets— a look of respectability. SECRETARY. How about the old rough look? Has it disappeared completely? Senator. No. It’s still there. You can still see the old look too. Just look around you—in Chicago—or anywhere else in most big cities. You'll see them: The vicious dope peddiers, the crooked ward committeemen, the rotten precinct captains, the numbers kings, the slimy slot-machine boys, the hoods, the thugs, the trigger-crazy rats. SEcrEeTaRY. That’s certainly quite a list, Senator. I think, however, that we are par~ ticularly interested in what you say about the change—the new look—that has oc- curred in crime and criminal methods—the fact that the gangsters have gone respectable and now are wearing tuxedos and silk hats in place of exclusively the old garb of street hoodlums. Senator. Yes. One of the most disgusting trends of recent years has been the move- ment of ill-gotten crooked money into de-~ cent, respectable American businesses. It is perfectly nauseating for me to read the rec- ords that I already have, showing how ex- bootleggers and other riff-raff have suddenly blossomed behind all sorts of fronts into tre- mendous ownership of stocks and bonds in some of our Nation’s largest companies. These filthy rats cannot do anything but bring filth into these businesses and to dis- tort them for their own nefarious purposes. SECRETARY. I’m sure it isn’t easy to get all of the facts involved, is it, Senator? How crooks have infiltrated business SenaToR. That’s right; it is almost impos- sible to get a complete financial picture of the interlocking directorates by which the big-time racketeers have infiltrated into many upstanding American businesses. Like an octopus they have used their dirty finances to reach out their tentacles into the following types of business, among others: Hotels, transit companies, motion~picture theaters, laundries, gasoline stations, real estate, railroads, automobile franchises, etc. There are all sorts of agents or go-be- tweens, sometimes 10 times removed, from the hidden “big shot” who really pulls the strings. ‘ I know that my colleagues on the Crime Committee intend to expose this so-called respectability trend by facts. Stockholders’ battles between crooks and honest groups Already, if you follow reports, you have noted that stockholders’ battles are breaking out all over the country between decent ele-~ ments and the go-betweens of the crooks. I think that we can expose the go-betweens and enable decent citizens to maintain con-= trol of American companies. SEcrETARY. I gather, Senator, then, that speed is essential to prevent the racketeers from becoming still further entrenched in respectable businesses. Srnator. Absolutely. I am hoping that decent stockholders and bondholders and company officials will “hold the fort,” so to speak—will hold out and not sell out or give in further to these hoodlums in the various States, A4095 SECRETARY. Well, Senator WiLry, time 1s running out, and perhaps we might run down on some of the matters covered in the broadcast thus far. Summary Senator. I can summarize as follows: First. Crime has gone “big time.” It is obviously a huge multi-billion-dollar affair, operating behind a thousand false fronts. Second. The Senate Crime Committee, I trust, is going to do a nonpartisan job. Third. The wise-guy racketeers and their big city political machines had better keep hands off and quit trying to use pressures on us, because if they don’t they are going to regret it twice as much as they are golng to regret having gone into racketeering in the first place. Fourth. There is no need to exaggerate in- terstate crime. The simple facts speak for themselves. Most American businesses are decent and honest, just as most citizens are decent and honest. Let no one become cyni- cal and begin to think that every business is crooked or that every public official is a crook. Such vicious rumor mongering and cynicism is as bad as, or worse than, being so innocent as to believe that there is al- most no crime, Fifth. Uncle Sam, your Federal Govern- ment, has a great responsibility. But it alone cannot do the job. The crime com- missions in the various States, the honest municipal officials, the district attorneys, the sheriffs, and all other honest Government workers at State, county, and local levels must do the basic job. I conclude, my friends, as I began. We— you and I—~were taught that crime does not pay. We want our children to grow up in an America as crime-free as possible. But to make it so we have got to take the profits out of crime, out of gambling, out of rack- eteering, out of the tie-up with shady poli- tics. We must make sure that crime does not pay. [From the Milwaukee (Wis.) Journal of May 22, 1950] HEADLINES DON’: CLEAN HousE Senator Wier said the other day that he expects no headline hunting in the investiga- tion of Nation-wide crime by the five-man Kefauver committee of which he is a member, There will be “silent sleuthing” instead of “eop and robber circuses,” said Wisconsin’s senior Senator. The investigation will be “full, fair, and with the attitude of let the chips fall where they may—whether they hit Democrats or Republicans. * * * TI have no intention of making it a Kansas City smear.” * * * * * The crime investigation is too important to let it be turned into headline hunting. What the Nation needs is facts—facts that will help honest officials clean up crime and force indifferent officials to do the same thing. It needs facts that will end whatever con- nection there is between public officials and gangsters wherever such connection is found. The job, as Senator WiLEy said, is to “clean house.” * * #* [From the Green Bay (Wis.) Press of May 20, 1950] THE PROBE OF CRIME AND SUBVERSIVES It is a fair question to ask: Do the people expect an honest exposure of crime and subversives? ‘We are moved to present the question be- cause if there is a full and sincere exposure of both crime and subversives across the country and the elimination of their effec- tiveness, the Democrats are almost certainly defeated in the next election and they know it. Anyone who wants to go to an almanac or blue book and read the figures in the popu- lous States which resulted in Mr, Truman’s
A4096 election in 1948 will clearly understand what we mean. Judged by those figures Mr. Tru- man simply cannot carry such great States as California, Illinois, and Ohio without the aid of the underworld. * * * = * The electoral vote in great States like California, Illinois, Ohio, and Michigan can easily swing an election. Even one of those States has been known to be decisive. The Democrats for the past 20 years have jad the support of the gambling element and of subversives because they gave them Now, of course, the Democrats reui.ze Laat they gave them too much. But jn expecting such elements to be reasonable or restrained, the Democratic leaders showed that they have very little conception of either Communists or criminals. Both elements will grab everything in sight. If the Reds are given a few important places, they always contrive to take over. If criminals are given a little special protection, they immediately become bold and brazen. If they are per- mitted by threats and blackmail to force someone to sell them a lucrative business at a@ ridiculously low price, as actually hap- pened at Kansas City, they insist upon and secure from the political boss immunity from even the ordinary license fees exacted of all business of their nature. A few years ago a member of the Chicago Crime Commission estimated that the under- world was good for 200,000 votes in that city. He included the women and the members of their families. It was quite a revelation to observe the list of the thousands who were employed in the numbers rackets, or daily picking up bets on the ponies all over the county, or servicing, selling, or installing slot machines, or engaged in the small pack- room dice and stud operations, and of course those occupied in the dining, dancing, and ornate gambling palaces. If these committees on subversives and on crime actually and earnestly sought to give the country the entire and unembellished truth, they would perform a marvelous public function. To date they have indicated no purpose of doing any such thing. Between serving the country and trying to insure the maintenance of their own power, Democratic leaders have lost no time in making a decision. [From the Wisconsin State Journal of May 10, 1950] HAND ON THE GREEN LIGHT Americans who manage to muster up @ little interest in presidential elections, but seldom bother to vote otherwise, should take to heart the words of one Frank Costello. Mr. Costello’s social and economic activi- ties lie in the fields of racketeering, gam- bling, and what have you. Speaking before a committee of Congressmen investigating race horse betting, “Frankie” came forth with a great truth: “Gambling can’t be operated by anyone,” he said, “unless you can get a green light from somewhere, like local officials.” Mr. Costello should know, being an old hand at the game. Wisconsin, during the past few years, has pretty well purged itself of the criminal fringe that fed itself principally from the millions in nickels and dimes dropped into the slot machines. A succession of good State administrations, plus both enlightened and outraged local thinking and action, has resulted in a Wisconsin markedly free from organized gambling. We can keep it that way. We can, in fact, go even further in our clean-up campaign by paying attention to the local officials who—~ as Mr. Costello says—are the ones with authority to switch on “the green light.” [From the Fond du Lac (Wis.) Common~- wealth Reporter of May 15, 1950] No Moret SLots We comniiment the Federal circuit court of app:7!- "= ('“re7 for ruling that States have the right to bar slot machines. The issue arose in Wisconsin which has an anti- gambling statute. The test was provided when slot machines were seized on an Indian reservation, theoretically under the control of the Federal Government. The operators were arrested, but they appealed tua: S.a-e law does not apply to an Indian reservation. There is always the argument that people are going to gamble anyway so why not legal- ize 1¢ and enable the States to collect some revenue from it. We do not know whether there is such a thing as honest gambling, s0 perhaps we ought to take a peak into some of these slot machines. A great majority of them are manufactured in Chicago and the manufac- turers claim they leave the plant set to pay out at least 75 cents on the dollar. But’ ac- companying those machines are instructions explaining how they can be geared to pay out nothing or 10, 20, 40, or 60 percent of the cash poured into them. Federal licenses were paid on slot machines in nearly seventy thousand places last year. Conservatively there probably were ten times that many machines. It is impossible to estimate the gambling syndicate take on slot machines, but the Cali- fornia commission on organized crime said last year that the gross take by people who control slot machines probably is around two billion dollars annually. Yes, the Chicago court acted wisely. [From the La Crosse (Wis.) Tribune of May 25, 1950] Gametine TAKE AND Natrionan DEFENSE A billion dollars a month—twelve billions a year. That's the take of gambling in the United States—bookmaking, slot machines, and pol- icy games. It is just the commercialized games of chance that are included in this estimate. The figures come from a new survey on gambling compiled by the American Acad~ emy of Social Science. It is no Johnny- come-lately outfit, either, dating back to its organization in Philadelphia more than threescore years ago. This organization has made a thorough study and published its results with these conclusions: 1. The ordinary gambler is a sucker who must lose in the long run. 2. Big-time gambling can’t operate with- out political or police protection, 8. Gambling rackets are helped by legiti« mate communications channels, and elimi- nation of sports wire services to bookmakers would reduce them from a major national racket to a petty local nuisance. It breaks down the $12,000,000,000 taken by the promoters of chance as $8,000,000,000 to the bookies, $3,000,000,000 for the num~ bers racket, and a billion to the one-armed bandits. One who thinks seriously cannot escape the thought that this $12,000,000,000 is get- ting close to our total bill for national de- fense—about 10 percent under the proposed budget for this coming year, Yet there are many who believe we are spending too much on armaments—say it goes for nonproductive outlays. What a comparison. “I will say unto God my rock, Why hast Thou forgotten me? Why go I mourning because of the oppression of the enemy?” (Psalms 42: 9.) APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Better Medical Care Without Compulsion EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. KENNETH B. KEATING OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, June 1, 1950 Mr. KEATING. Mr. Speaker, as the old saw goes, “Many a true word is spoken in jest,” Certainly Bing Crosby summed up the situation with regard to socialized medicine in Great Britain when, upon losing in the British golf tournament last week, he quipped, “Well, I didn’t come to Britain to win at golf anyway, I just needed another wig.” Consider the number of aging Holly- wood actors who would need new wigs if we embarked upon socialized medicine in this country. Now, at least, they have to go to Britain to get them. The tourist trade is stimulated and the dollar short- age eased by our refusal to adopt this socialistic scheme. This remark empha- sizes the evils and the dangers of allow- ing its advocates to get their foot in the door. The constructive alternative is, of course, to encourage the development of voluntary health insurance plans, for in- stance, through the device of permitting income-tax allowances for premiums paid to these voluntary plans. My bill, H. R. 6819, sets forth a solu- tion to the problem of providing better health for a greater segment of our pop- wation. There is no doubt that some answer to this urgent question is needed. The allowance of tax credits for contri- butions to voluntary health plans is in accord with the traditions of individual initiative and a free opportunity system, unfettered by governmental dictation or interference. Compulsion is neither necessary nor desirable, since this easier and cheaper method of broadening the scope of medi- cal care for our citizens is available, pro- vided the real interest of our leaders is in providing better medical care for a larger segment of our people, rather than in creating a small army of additional Federal employees to administer a Gov-~ ernment insurance company and ride herd on the doctors, dentists, and nurses of the country. Truman’s Chicago Circus EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. DANIEL A. REED OF NEW YORE IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Wednesday, May 31, 1950 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speak- er, under leave to extend my remarks heretofore granted, I am inserting in the ReEcorD an editorial entitled “Truman’s Chicago Circus,” which appeared in the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Rural New Yorker, New York, N. Y., June 3, 1950: TRUMAN’s CHIcaGo CIRCUS Though several tons of newsprint and hundreds of pounds of ink were devoted to various incidents in President Truman’s latest ‘“nonpolitical” tour through the West, only minor mention was made of the final event that was obviously planned to be the master stroke in public relations. After a week of whistle stops at which the President spun his dangerous political philosophy in a disarmingly folksy manner, he was wel- comed to Chicago by members of his Cabinet who had held a meeting the previous day. It was this meeting of our Government’s Cabinet that merits comment and censure. It was an extraordinary event, conducted something along the lines of a circus. For the first time in this country’s history, the Cabinet met in public before an audience and facing television cameras. Called to order by Vice President BarKiLey in the Chi- cago Opera House with seats available for 4,000 spectators, the meeting had no pur- pose other than to beat the drum prior to Mr. Truman’s arrival. On one of the walls was a gigantic framed poster of the Presi- dent, wreathed in heroic olive sprays, very reminiscent of Hitler and Mussolini displays, and quite similar to the monster posters of Stalin that now adorn every pedestal and market square in the iron-curtain countries. According to all reports, this so-called pep rally in Chicago—that 1s what its sponsors called it—was a complete dud, with fewer than 25 percent of the seats occupied. The simple fact appears to be that the general public was not interested in spite of all the heavy advance barrage of publicity. Indeed, it was most fitting that the people did not respond to this shameful spectacle where the top Government officials acted out a farce in an open arena, going through the motions of being inspired by the grotesquely enlarged countenance of their leader, who gazed down on them wisely and beneficently from the wall above. Hitler and Mussolini, the originators of the leader complex, are gone. They were toppled by the forces of American democ- racy. Stalin, the lone survivor of the origi- nal totalitarian trio, is supposed to stand for everything we are against, and opposed to all the principles that we hold dear. Yet, right in our own midst, our own Govern- ment sponsors a public demonstration, paid by all the taxpayers, that one would more naturally expect to see in the Kremlin at Moscow, or could have seen a few years back in der fuehrer’s Berlin. Mr. Truman may have thought he made some good political hay in his most recent barnstorming trip, and he probably did. But the Chicago episode proved to be a haymaker of quite another sort—a wild swing without the expected wallop. Let us hope it will never again be repeated, or even attempted, within the confines of this Republic. Reorganization of the Government Departments EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HERBERT H. LEHMAN OF NEW YOR IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. LEHMAN. Mr. President, I ask Unanimous consent to insert in the Ap- pendix of the Recorp an editorial deal- ing with the reorganization of the Gov- ernment departments, published in the New York Times of Thursday, May 25. There being no objection, the editorial was ordered to be printed in the Rreconp, as follows: SIXTEEN OF TWENTY-ONE With the dead line passed for a congres- sional veto, the scoreboard shows that 16 of the 21 plans for reorganization of the Gov- ernment submitted to Congress last March by President Truman now go formally into effect. That the score is as high as this is due in large part to the efforts of the Citizens Committee for the Hoover Report, to some effective speeches on the floor by Senator BENTON, of Connecticut, and to a belated but welccme decision by a sizable group of Son- ate Republicans not to play politics with this issue. The score might have been even a bit higher if President Truman had stuck a little more closely to the original recom- mendations of the Hoover Commission—{for example, in the case of remodeling the Na- tional Labor Relations Board. The need for modernizing the vast, anti- quated machinery of the Federal Govern- ment is so imperative, the possible gains both in better administration and in money saved are so substantial, that there is good reason for satisfaction in the results just achieved. At the same time it must be noted that only one of the 16 plans now put into effect— this one relating to the merchant marine— involves a major operation. The others are chiefly concerned with establishing a clear line of control from the Chief Executive to various department and agency heads—a wise and necessary reform, but one by no means earth-shaking in importance. So far as major operations are concerned, the Hoover Commission originally recom- mended 18. Four of these have now been accomplished: that involving the merchant marine (just noted), and three others (ef- fected at the previous session of Congress) involving unification of the Armed Forces, reorganization of the State Department and creation of the General Services Adminis- tration. On this larger and more important scoreboard, therefore, there remain 14 “ma- jor operations” still to be achieved. Since these 14 deal with such highly important matters as veterans’ affairs, social security, and natural resources, it is evident that there is plenty of work still to be done— ' on the part of the President, of Congress, and of all those outside the Government who are interested in more efficient and economical administration, Let Us Look at the Record EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. REID F. MURRAY OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, June 1, 1950 Mr. MURRAY of Wisconsin. Mr, Speaker, the farm program of our Gov- - ernment has been in existence for many years. The price-support angle was started in 1920 with the establishment of the Federal Farm Board. It was fol- lowed by the AAA of the 1930’s and by the Steagall bill of the early forties. The Steagall bill which broadened the base of commodities support was killed by A4097 President ‘Truman on December 31, 1946, by Executive Order 2714. The issue has been rather more political than agricul- tural since that day. The Hope bill was passed by the Bightieth Congress and is similar to the Steagall bill. To have any supports of any value the Hope bill was passed by the House and was in opera- tion in 1948 and 1949. The Hops bill was really an improvement of the Steagall bill. Much criticism was directed to-the Aiken bill that was to go into effect Jan- uary 1, 1980, in the campaign of 1948. The WHighty-first Congress, when it passed the Anderson-Cooley bill in 1949, really passed a bill very, very similar to the Aiken bill. The Anderson-Cooley bill was a step backward legislatively. In the first place, it is special-privilege leg- islation, in that some commodities are given preferred legislative consideration, and in the second place it is antilivestock in its provisions, The feed price is sup- ported at a higher percent of parity than is the livestock products obtained by feeding the grain. In fact, some live- stock products do not have any manda- tory support whatsoever. The support price of manufacturing milk was $3.21 per hundredweight under the Steagall and Hope bills and $2.72 par hundred- weight under the Anderson-Cooley bill. The Hope bill is a milestone for Amer- ican agricuiture. The approach was based and is based on three premises. One is that all major farm commodities are entitled to equal support legislation and second that labor performed in pro- duction of food is entitled to a minimum wage somewhere near comparable to the minimum wage provided other groups; and third it was legislation based on law and not based on the opinion of any one person. All legislation is a question of trial and error. The Hope approach was in my opinion the most fair and the most acceptable approach we have obtained as yet. It is based on the philosophy that we should keep the best we have ever obtained and try to improve it. There is no reason why the next goal should be 100 percent of parity. Wemay have plenty of promises but you will note that in 1846 under the OPA and large subsidies that the farm income of each State was lower than the years under the free Steagall year of 1947 and Hope years of 1948-49. You will also note that in 1950 nearly every State is experiencing a smaller income in spite of the fact that the stock market is rising, big business activity is thriving, and that we are going in debt fifteen to twenty million dollars more every day. Farmers are paying more for many items they buy but sell for less. The 1949 farm prices were not supported in accordance to the law and it should also be remembered that we had a balanced budget under the Eighti- eth Congress instead of an economy based on ever-increasing debts. So I repeat that the Hope bill origi- nating from the Committee on Agri- culture of the House under the leader- ship ef our distinguished colleague frum Kansas, the Honorable Crirrorp Hors,
A4098 APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD has given us a pattern and a hope of better agricultural things to come—the Hope bill—the farmers of America owe a great debt of gratitude to our colleague from Kansas, the Honorable CiLirrorD Hope. son-Cooley bill. His constructive agricultural Jeadership will long be recognized. It is hoped that we can regain the losses that resulted from the passage of the Ander- own State: Tantus 1.—Cash receipts from farm marketings, by States, by months, 1946-50 March My conclusions are based on observa- tion and a study of the official tables which I include in my remarks at this point, and any Member can check his January February State ee See 1949 1950 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 31,793| 13,954} 12,982/ 21,879] 14,675] 2,610] 14,877] 18,127} 23,858] 16,991 | 14, 763 19, 953 93 se4 | 31,165 | 10,886) 12,502) 15,851) 13,741 | 12,672) 3,614! 17,803) 17, 272 18, 213 13, 805 5145 | 93'613| 19°904 | 34,670 | 17,893 | 36,200 | 22,338 | 16,368 | 29,483 | 22, 184 31, 255 18, 693 158318 | 137,029} sa.o12| 111,061 | 113,458] 106,989 | 82,980 | 90,529 | 112,262) 118, $48 113; 706 93, 408 35,808 | 42.873 | 24.370 | 30,779 | 32,172 | 27,261 | 80,842 | 20,688 | 32, 768 | 88,243 | 35, 408 29, 708 ios? | isos | 9.480] 12,540] 14,002] 11,548 | 11,270 | 10,138 | 16,227 | 16,604) 15, 068 15, 6O4 10, 860 6, 534 6, 232 5, 206 6, 303 8, 548 6, 100 7, 222 5, 031 6, 385 7, 749 7,191 3409 | 42380] 42821 | 28,853] 31,412] 36,383] 47,082] 54,017 | 35,446 | $4,524 | 48,443 | 50, 585 30, ad1 | 21.086 | 20/458 | 24,013 | 19,068} 25,770 | 19,252 | 15,089) 29,289 | 21,438 | 20, 146 17, $80 soa | 24858 | 15,699 | 21/302] 25,392] 18,988 | 20,300 | 13,645 | 24,362 | 98,780 | _ 26, 055 19, 751 15,987 | 451100 | 947375 | 133-108 | 112,926 | 120,778 | 122,476 | 88,214 | 128,352 | 127,587 | 141,055 | 129, 697 so6i6 | 67962] 48,832 | 71,037] 62,042] 61,837 | 59,005 | 47,715 | 69,054 | 70,610 | 74,869 | 68, 909 guz ogg | 232,225 | 138,852 | 181,084] 162,402 | 167,333] 144,853 | 106,081] 178,437 | 135,815 | 178,636 | 143, 546 75,726 | 87,661 | 49,135 | 74,883 | 54,178 | "86,840 | 62,225 | 35,449 | 77, 164 | 58,970 | +70, 421 51, 899 og aa6 | 112718 | 41's74] 435,077 | 32,156 | 28,910 | 21,152) 17,278 | 25,381 | 27, 868 25, 008 93) 457 40,793 | 20,036 | 9/950 | 17,525 | 10,302) 20,723| 7,493) 9,445) 11,371 | 12,354 18, 038 11, 123 i7.635] 14918] 8 136| 31.246} 18,456] 20,819} 15,092] 15,968] 22,026] 22, 718 34,200} 18,311 i430 | i116] 10/734] 12%109| 13,737] 15,492] 13,724] 12,680] 18,629) 15, 792 16, 187 15, 279 16335 | 13/773 | 9,662] 11,513 | 13,704] 12721 | 11,105 | 10,751) 13,441 | 14, 500 13, 855 12, 326 soa93 | 54683 | 32°762| 41,567 | 39,756 | 45,636 | 48,255 | 36,401 | 47,476 | 47,519 | 47, 741 44, 604 102710 | 1or'4ss | 76/423 | 87,319| 91,454] 81,413 | 88,186 | 68,655] 99,353 | 88,864 | 98,000) $7, 149 69,499 | 17677 | 19/834) 30,726} 21,748] 49,785 | 11,452} 16,141 | 33,366 | 17, 918 26,825} 32/011 70685 | 69,914 | 48962] 61,310] 55,243 64,863 | 50,087 | 43,672 | 65,900] 58,650 | 68,860} G1, 556 94580 | 20,672 | 12,493| 18,499] 14,410| 15,546] 14,760| 9,706| 17,549] 13,778 | 17,138} 15,806 90842 | 0/286 | 73/939 | 99,008] 68,902] 74,217 | 78,175 | 56,459) 92,275 | 72, 620 74,832 | 55, 744 ; 2100} 2272| lers| 2418] 3,727| 2288] 2884] 1,387] 2,901 4, 053 3, 553 2) 832 3364} 4217| 3,536] 4.292) 4806] 4,719] 3,882] 3,931 4 985 5, 201 5, 102 4 488 NewJersey...-| 14418 | 16317| 16,485] 10,048] 15,743) 12,143 | 14,845 | 15,236 | 17,050 | 14,626 | 13,333 | 17,180) 18,288 | 18, 509} 16, 900 New Mero} Seog | soss| i3i77| 14448] izeds| 5,919) 7,797 | 7,150] 9,433 | 8,922 | 97,005 | 9, 72 7,204 | 6, 887 52k New York..-.2.| 62643 | 62,508 | 68,619 | 70,080 | 63,784 | 40,767 | 82,735 | 61,062) 54,754 | 53,749 | 48, 225 | 59,851 | 70,583 | G4, 733 57’ 593 Nom Garclina.| 24574] 47'902| 33,980 | 29,106) 10,747] 20,486] 23,901] 23,003) 29,462 | 16,876 | 23,456 | 29,531 | 23, 915 24,580] 18,136 North Dakota..| 36,463} 61,837 | 67,989 | 40,203 | 28, 781 1g 492 | 38,936] 96,414] 20,885 | 17,658) 19,183) 43,708} 27, 382 580} 23, 250 Ohio...------.0- 56, 489 | 73,063} 847510 | 72,572 | 70,861 | 45,192 | 62,130 | 63,014 | 58,440 | 55,484] 51, 188) 71,649 | 77, BAT 77,439 | 71, 271 Oklahoma. 26103 | 42°305 | 40,266 | 38,130] 51,937| 19,264] 34,230/ 25,833] 26,985 | 32,477 | 19,185] 35,828 | 31, 152 32,053 | 27, 864 Oregon 19024} 23.057 | 21,502) 22,5481 21,000) 13, 777| 18,481 | 15,552) 17,013} 16,524 | 14,788 | 20,428 | 17, 559 22,921 | 16, 507 Pennsylvanio...| 62470] 62891] etia31| 62, 710| 53,403] 46,243] 58,608 | 85,838 | 55,579 | 47,292 | 44,200) 66,843 | 68, 521 63,287 | 58, 536 Rhodeisiand...| 1479} 1608| 1,075] 1757] 1,497) 1,239] 1,534] 1,821 1,730 | 1,470 1,286] 1,665 1, 806 1; 829 1, 689 South Carolina..| 10408) 15759] 17/363| 19,817| Sosa | 13,396] 15,905] 11,622] 13,590] 7,907 | 15, 87 20,015 | 13, 470 8, 849 7,819 South Dakota...| 34886 | 60/495 | 9,679 | 48,930] 42,702 | 30,244 | 49,032} 36,886] 37,878 | 32, 879 25, 97 48,288 | 37,409 | 30,134 28) 622 Tennessee-...--- aor | si'7s7| 43.660! 46,603} 46.592| 27°708] 33,301] 26,517| 29,307] 28,080] 22,403] 27, 304 34,050} 22,417] 21,198 ‘Doxas...- | 78,341 | 100, 889 160,559 | 116, B88 | 196, 38) 8 750 73,971 62,700 | 92, 085 90,804} 64,305 | 97,808] 101,234] 89,838] 85, 006 _ - , , 94 75% 7 b ‘ Vermont. “| 5,806 9102) 9,525] 9,538 9,054 | 5, 546 7, 566 8) 647 z 268 ? bot ? eet aptase 10 ous 3 318 ee Virginia... “} setse | 4o'asa | asioa2| saaso| sser7| riz} 21586] 22,533] 22,500 | 20,172 | 17,179] 23,198 | 22,749 | 26, 348 24, 718 Washingion.....| 36518] 60,239] 40,647] 44,563 | 38,902] 26,886 | 37,930} 26,879 | 33, 808 29,076 | 22,636) 33,959} 27,581 | 41, 207 24; 762 West Virginis_-| 6518] 9,412] 8,715) 8,030] 7%177| 4,647] 6,464] 6,494 6, B11 5, 600 4, 470 7, 428 7, 298 7, B49 6, 969 Wisconsin.....--| 67,776 | 77,948 | 93,686 | 76,785 | 68,607 | 58,870 | 81,822 | 82,812 | 68,675 | 65, 240 64,765 | 83,096 | 80,083 | 81,820} 79, 401 Wyoming.-__--- 4382 | 6,734| 8122] 6831) 6,694) 4,663] 8156) 7,506 4,806 | 4,770 4, 691 6, 298 7, 521 4, 840 4,220 United States.|1, 716, 884 |2, 880, 997 {2, 545, 002 |2, 367, 186 |2, 288, 255 |1, 406, 764 |1, 868, 954 |1, 665, 236 1, 767, 057 1,595, 930 |1, 334, O14 |1, 951, 411 |1, 811, 021 |1, 910, 747 | 1, 642, 700 a ee ee ee April May June 1947 1948 1947 1948 1949 1950 1946 1947 1948 1949 950 195 18,393 | 19, 580 17, 942 6 13,690 | 20, 750 12, 356 20 805 70 12 5 By i 2s a 19,324 | 28, 873 16,895 | 23,006 | 26, 201 19; 546 | 23, 633 127, 408 | 119, 692 165,584 | 153,032 | 150, 194 , , 26,655 | 30,972 2 215 | 33,110] 84, 047 199° ao | OR” 0D , , 2 ; ; 36,101 | 39, 538 37,323 | 39, 716 mG ia 23° 007 a 133 21,972 | 22, 018 21,062 | 21,819 | 23, 039 24,935 | 34° 546 18,457 | 29,191 16,976 | 18,374} 19, 297 13,503 | 18, 904 132, 206 | 184, 990 126,041 | 184,949 | 123, 250 149, 384 | 1617698 73,061 | 70, 655 71,984 | 75,421 | 70, 738 73,075 | 84, £07 168, 654 | 144, 131 180,274 | 154,520] 137, 760 179,776 | 102, 124 77,308 | | 81, 665 60,674 | 83,13 73, 637 66,957 | 91,872 25,333 | 23, 669 26,442 | 30,046 | 26, 793 29,860 | 38,315 15,044] 14, 800 18, 400 | 11, 848 12, 181 11,497 | 12, 897 Maryland... 10,601 | 15594 16, 666 19,82 | ah006 | 28,398 Sta | fier Mansachusetts.- 10, 022 15, a7 15, 708 13,215 | 15,340] 12,508 tos | a3! 553 eee Ie ” 7 ff, 5‘ Minnesota....--| 67,349 | 83,385 | 88, 978 Pa 346 102 a ane arate HOS Mississippi 14,167 | 14,842} 97, 910 16,386} 19,195 | 20, 844 be 73S | 116, 08D Missouri. 46, 564 | 67,001 | 68, 897 89,538 | 74,405 | 66,502 e art ae ga? 6,378 | 14,002] 14, 035 14,448 | 16,085 | 25, 235 pees | ae aa Nebraska 64,273 | $1,914 | 83, 20 75,856 | 72,670 | 65, 901 Tsd8 | 1488 : 5 554 ’ : New Hampshire} 4,119 5,174 8, 656 z 980 z 548 z ub ran 2 ie New Jersey--... 15, 412 1%, 628 18, 989 21,290 | 22,801 | 23, 035 23 ot Bi 609 ‘ , 7 , 48,019 | 60,026 | 67, 796 6965 | 68,683} 60,733 $395 | 7 408 North Carolina.| 18,157] 19,603 | 24, 856 24, 577 w) 28, 714 i117 | 79) 174 North Dakota... 16,745 | 23,264] 84, 602 32,082} 46,299] 30, 508 Bt 300 | Bh Tat 0 7053 | 75,314 | 75, 607 68.008 | 75073| 66,447 31,270 | OL, 697 20,451 | 27,440 | 40, 708 28,583 | 46,806 | 35, 576 70,389 | 88 414 Oregon_.... 12837} 7877 | 18, 578 17,768 | i971 | 18,236 : 87,774 | 77, 355 Pennsylvania...| 46,789 | 89,357 | 78, 478 58, 816 1834 | 67, 848 22,985 | 27, 079 Rhodelsland.--| 1,372] 1,474] 1,755 1,444) 1,769) 1, 583 Be) She) a South Carolina... 11,948 | 18024 | 12, 74 12,88] 16,302| 14 496 ; Poss rat South Dakota... 25, Q12 | 34,490 | 37, 650 ies | axsss| 40,778 26,486 | 43° 580 a 161 i 5 25,292 | 25, 908 26, 0 32,483 | 28) O1L Texas..-.00..-- 102,172 | 103,479 | 162, 472 | 134,668 |Z-820275771 947106 | 116,112 | 146,684 | 133, 981 [Z22L2LLL re oe8 1 abt ) an
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD A4099 TABLE 1—Cash receipts from farm marketings, by States, by months, 1946-50-—-Continued [In thousands of dollars] April May June State ; 1946 1947 1948 1849 1950 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 Utah...... a 6368] 8,113] 9,874 7,708 | 7,877) 10,721 | 8,997 |.....-.-| 9,083] 9,928 | 12,519 | 10, 965 |_._ Vermont...----- 8,616} 11,180] 12,969 8,701 | 10,200] 12,156 8,487 | 9,643 | 121938 : Virgima_...--_.. 16,533 | 21,182 | 22, 586 18,275 | 22,603) 28,122 24,609] 25,991} 33,492 : Washington_..-- is,864| 28,270 | 30, 989 21,555 | 31,996 | 31,070 27,981 | 34,378 | 34, 116 Wost Virginia] 4,181] 6,972] 7,100 4,892 | 7,341] 7,901 8.0291 $838] 40,467 : Wiseonsin......- 64,646 | 80,879 | 93, 664 75,502 | 88,951 | $9, 779 77,088 | 90,242} 116, 542 : Wyoming...---- 4,269} 5,270} 6,051 3,609 | 4,193} 6,698 4,792} 4,615 | 5,876 775 | United States.|1, 387, 255 |1, 812, 560 |1, 995, 334 |1, 822, 608 |... 1, 466, 731 |1, 854, 020 |2, 058, 494 |1, 915, 553 |... 1, 641, 307 |2, O64, 283 |2, 357, 478 |2, 036, 426 |___------- July August September State ——_—— | --—__—_——_—- —_—|--___— 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 1046 1947 1948 1949 1950 14,643] 16,574] 17,276] 16,002 |_....---.- 14,631 | 17,797 | 23,897} 16, 448 34,250] 43,992} 52,940 | 38,107 |___-_e 12977] 13,774 | 19/711 | 14,381 |2....-.--- 4,776| 6,408] 6,671] 5,906 6459| 8757} 8419| 9,609 |....-..... 29/970 | 20,823 | 26,815 | 22 900 [7222-72777 18121 | 91,904 | 31232 | 21,815 33,459] 61,796 | 49,384 | 53/060 |1__.----. 226, 930 | 204,635 | 206,475 | 170,896 |_..-....-- 222479 | 214,759 | 208,334 | 177; 438 238, 712 | 208,647 | 203,989 | 1€3, 898 [12-2202 : 33,470 | 35,983 | 39,667} 34,551 |_...-..--- 40,000} “49,006 | “s1;932 | 48) 063 37,692 | ‘61,184 |} 87,732 | 85,008 |......--. 9,655 | 11,091 | 9,495 |_..-.--..- 8,675] 10,254] 14,588] 11, 288 10,645 | 12439 | 15,955 | 12,610 |_...-.---- Q ell | 10,562 | 10,74 [222222222 9,739 1 10,352] 411,593] 10, 287 719} 9,998 | 30,139 | 8,533 |2222TT2 : 12,005 | 17,986 | 19,634 (2227220227 15,121] 18,173 | 15,848 | 20, 245 121638 | 12650 | 149399 | 14844 [TTTITTTT : 41,205 | 48,487 | 41,119 [72207 ToTTT 49,902 | 56,885 | 55,693 | 57, 180 35,586} 57,801] 50,193] 34,655 |.1._.. ae ig)7c9 | 99°905 | 15) 092 [7207777777 32,948 | 35,605 | 32408 | 31, 388 40,278 | s1,518| 42.310 | 42/419 [12-77 175,091 | 187,789 | 146, 187 |7.._-_---- 113,158 | 134,581 | 139/371 | 117,052 66,136 | 140,838 | 199,007 | 114,531 2720220- : 100,360 | 101,425 | $0,989 |-.__.-___- 82,707 | 88,009 | 90,291 | 77, 262 53,574 | 100,203} 99,795 | 87,214 [1722777 208,022 | 171,810 | 140,342 2.2220 135,396 | 182,854] 162,359 | 130, 917 73, 431 | 163,915 | 149,119 | 127,374 |... : 219, 537 | 154,292 38, 074 44, 666 11, 990 11, 449 9, 575 10, 662 36, 297 34, 839 15, 471 16, 015 66, 854 82, 704 93, 664 98, 448 16, 122 22, 484 109, 780 | 114, 281 18, 869 20, 449 123, 215 95, 254 2, 519 2, 928 . 5, 538 6, 191 New Jetsev_.--- 82, 271 36, 129 44, 057 New Mexico. 9, 612 12, 444 8, 465 New York 81, 86% 82, 938 97, 984 North Cr 27, 645 27, 226 29, 057 Noth Dikevs. , 42,870 83, 780 36, 993 ; 97, 063 115, 764 81, 654 70, 005 36, 207 42, 888 69, 181 76, 225 55,345 | 112,413 | 78,955 | 74,640 L2TLIIIILL 22,204 | 38,825] 41,809] 36, 592 |___ 31,327 | 50,705| 55,438 | 41, 246 10,751 | 12177] 14,303 | 14,100 15,747 | 21,693] 22,391 | 19, 905 24,161 | 21,400] 21,889 | 17, 511 65,428 | 78,499 | 60,151 | 64, 242 73,245 | 199,955 | 118,476 | 103,943 32407 | 64.867] 68,937 | "36, 713 53,169 | 107,486} 95,141] 78,703 |. 44,965 | 66,125} 53,409] 37,360 _ 51,042] 79.672] 71.501 | 66,243 - 4, 682 6,776 7, 032 5, 558 4,977 6, 725 6, 749 5, 943 28,536 | 26,478} 23.532} 28 664 11,114 | 11,976 | 10,943 | 10,077 |- 100, 87: 98,974 | 106,883 | 92, 978 |. 139,313 | 160,804 | 185,539 | 173, 454 74,609 | 124,733 | 95,173 | 73,690 63,405 | 92,963 | 90,044] 81, 717 36,830 | 62,849} 52,862] 51,569 52,212 | 53,442] 45,442] 42, 509 65,296 | 74,985 | 74,076] 67,884 2, 278 2) 535 2) 652 2) 437 130,605 | 100,685 { 112,010 34, 048 39, 682 37, 484 24, 379 34, 630 18, 509 11, 490 13, 267 9, 357 oat G i=) od oxi or ms cr = or ra oo m Oo A 19 rong oo 39, 289 37, 308 22, 233 £3, 796 86, 482 71, 107 3, 982 4, 141 3, 463 5, 923 6, 575 5, G18 46, 564 46, 590 42, 853 7, 931 5, 476 7, 632 89,797 | 109, 267 86, 631 41, 632 85,152 | 100, 499 84, 876 79, 120 58, 234 83, 912 87, 031 77, 137 49, 297 53, 385 69, 356 55, 782 49, 042 41, 484 71, 257 78, 467 65, 313 2,051 2, 292 2, 128 Sou (Coy ., 21, 073 18, 821 19, 481 42,196 66, 057 60, 151 61, 184 69, 290 58, 996 83, 754 |e Sou a Dexa -' 61,978 59, 844 50, 542 76, 915 72, 746 46, 328 44, 480 82, 146 75, 316 51, 757 |e eee ‘Tennessee -| 28, 632 30, 578 35, 462 25, 300 82, 899 27, 062 24, 488 44, 406 42, 359 41,189 [oe Texas... -| 139,002} 165,616 | 114,320 163,606 | 192,715 | 200, 434 132,436 | 235,614 | 218,406 | 224, 440 Utah. -{ 10, 918 13, 219 12, 510 12, 335 12, 336 13, 114 16, 441 20, 456 21, 639 17, 588 Vermont. -| 10, 466 10, 852 11, 519 2, 755 11, 358 9, 454 8, 848 10, 286 LL, 244 10, 106 Virginia. -| 34, 685 38, 729 40, 802 36, 256 35, 577 32, 108 31, 582 83, 805 51, 224 42, 705 Wervrcion.....| 62, 644 60, 577 52, 624 73, 938 57, 552 59, 050 68, 789 76, 451 62, 245 66, 217 Wi ct Vicu "} 10, 699 11, 149 12, 401 11, 352 15, 517 13, 186 13 O81 18, £47 15, 388 13, 401 Wisconsin...-.--| 102, 788 95,414 | 114,828 84,170 99, 205 77, 164 |. 75, 012 21, 078 97, 068 81, 010 9, 331 13, 516 12, 033 18, 314 20, 334 33, 074 29, 340 Wyoming...---- 7, 404 7, 036 6, 127 2, 626, 801 |2, 753, 724 |2, 410, G51 |--.---.- 2, 216, 159 |3, 153, 239 |2, 990, 07 |2, 601, 700 |---.... United States.|2, 527, 107 |2 619, 942 |2, 588, 579 |2, ———————————————————— October November December State 10468 1947 1948 1949 1948 1949 1950 1946 1947 1948 1949 1950 83, 060 65, 150 26, 894 37, 718 104, 912 | 120, G79 249,501 | 274, > oe 26, 185 35, 447 45,370 19, 042 20, 034 24, 354 25, 312 37, 340 52, 492 51, 501 78, 328 47, 234 193, 944 | 189, 410 195, 972 176, 054 38, 43 48, 456 43, 803 37, 458 12, 106 12, 566 14, 295 i, 615 6, 428 7, 202 6, 932 5, 187 83, 099 30, 620 83, 745 40, 491 30, 582 48, 865 43, 086 28, 433 30, 606 39, 825 34, 038 25, 477 186, 754) 189,300 157, » #50 129, 514 74,210 | 92,583 | 95,304 | 58, 098 12582] 15,070 | 16,718 | 21,271 110,291 | 132,876 | 124,488} 63, 656 317, 282 | 244,177 | 239,726 | 215, 883 55,058 | 73,116] 74,560} 62, 962 14,944 | 11, 476 8,579 7, 045 25,634 | 32, 492 97,422 | 70, 939 36,002 | 39,790 219,477 | 242, 621 5 126,925 | 113, 275 92,813 | _79, 279 81,900 | 101,616 | 87,144] 71,980 Town 188, C96 | 209, 205 294,797 | 171, 975 207, 322 | 262,436 | 224,143 | 185, 328 Kansas, 160,446 | 71, 769 $4,708 | 66, 052 83,755 | 83,266 | 83,468 | 68, 920 Kentucky 30,222 | 47,184] 42, 874 34, 460 51,458 | 46, 933 80,846 | 181,908 | 132,744 | 105, 501 Louisiana__.-.-- 41,327 | 59,094 | 60,787 | 42, 105 51,208 | 53, 005 40,462 | 42293 | “44,372 | “44,766 Maine. -.200222. 18,722 | 16,654 | 22, 529 is 986 23,403 | 17, 108 16,624] 17,871] 22,444] 13, 646 en 17,278 | 18,583 | 19,634] 17,330 17,973 | 16, 691 14,931] 15,625] 16,103] 18,657 : 24,993 | 20,237 | 20,416 | 18, 631 21,572 | 19,888 13,548 | 17,290] 18,690 | 15,673 56, 462 59, 886 54, 047 54, 350 110,144 | 180,088 ; 103, 893 90, 206 32, 679 52, 636 76, 900 32, 170 99,698 | 104,803} 109, 699 80, 363 : - 82, 829 75, 647 76, 4382 73, 776 “ 119, 282 | 148,306 | 181,704 | 115, 652 Mississippi... - 70,251 | 115,231 | 110,099 62, 451 34,929 | 103, 312 |. 117, 354 | 108, 162 Nae 145, 810 1, 4 ei 048 | | 47,300 53,139 | 33, 960 28,193 | 28,977 | 32,418 22, 4 4a Nebraska... 84,323 | 83,319 | 104,593 | 86, 716 84,240 | 69, 854 86,603 | 94167] £9,411] 77,283 Novada-wcw.] 6323 | «5917 | 7,638 | 6,110 |. 3148] 3.4511 4,041 3, 421
A4100 APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Taste 1—Cash receipts from farm marketings, by States, by months, 1946-50—Continued [In thousands of dollars] Tt October November State 1946 1947 1948 1049 1950 1946 1947 1948 New Hampshire. 5, 734 6, 328 4, 891 5, 604 5, 669 New J orev. oe , 933 26, 374 19, 936 19, 871 22, 100 New Mexico_.--| 34,397 43,091 30, 308 28, 918 39, 580 New York__---- 87, 517 91, 936 70, 652 82, 348 79, b03 North Carolina.| 19, 48: 184, 360 122, 290 120, 083 96, 160 North Dakota.._| 66,983 | 107,923 55, 925 66, 598 61, 548 Ohio.....----..- 110,750 } 111, 200 104,111 97, 500 $6, 898 Oklahoma. 64, 878 79, 227 55, 248 64, 891 69, $04 Ovegon....... -| 47,409 44, 597 40, 654 42, 667 41, 666 Pennsylvania...} 64, 247 69, 494 60, 378 66, 741 62, 988 Rhode Island... 2,150 2, 284 2, 02 , 101 2,129 South Carolina._| 51, 684 53, 690 25, 459 33, 460 39, 049 South Dakota.._} 55, 279 63, 205 51, 699 52, 615 50, 863 -| 63,07 63, 640 48, 511 50, 457 59, 139 177,581 | 281, 271 168,270 | 246,402 | 244,074 17, 668 17, 809 18, 659 21, 215 17, 887 9, 455 10, 141 7, 888 8, 652 , 621 60, 833 55, 192 57, 252 54, 417 55, 098 74, 809 73, 513 51, 453 50, 422 53, 424 17, 634 18, 445 10, 361 11, 885 18, 214 92, 784 97, 832 96, 231 92, 540 88, 499 36, 252 389, 158 22, 332 20, 397 22, 845 United States. |3, 429, 487 |3, 754, 978 |8, 871, 148 |3, 126, 799 |-_-...-.-- 2, 928, 970 |8, 155, 043 |8, 216, 445 |3, 038, 265 December 1047 1048 5, 606 5, 498 18, 272 19, 371 18, 785 16, 437 73, 763 G7, 928 58, 301 51, 868 46, 508 88, 581 91, 666 83, 814 46, 053 46, 425 31,842 | 32, 663 64,320} 64,400 2, 075 2, 054 20,097 | 24,62 60, 470 49, 407 64, 469 65, 321 178,920 | 185,732 16, 258 14, 300 8, 202 9, 073 45, 245 40, 574 39, 421 47,719 10, 900 10, 425 92, 403 78, 280 11, 630 10, 977 2, 822, 260 }2, 695, 126 |2, 316, 639 |-.-.-_-.- - ns nnn URES USSU SUIOSINS SSI SSIS SUID SUNS SOSIEICE To cc ee Source: Farm Income Situations, Taprn 2.—Government payments, by States, annuaily, 1946-49 [In thousands of dollars] State 19461 | 19472] 194831 19493 Alabama...ene-eeen- 6,343 | 4,673 | 4,150 5, 482 Arizona. 3,153 | 2,165 | 1,792 745 Arkansas... 6,756 | 6,788 | 5, 044 4, 043 Crintornia.. 45,729 | 18,004 | 13, 611 9, 220 17, 042 { 11,321 9, 456 8, 472 3, 977 65 531 393 1,345 593 517 246 5,484 | 4,284 | 3, 428 2, 180 7,412 | 8,542) 6,395 , 903 10,239 } 6,069 | 6,941 5, 059 35,183 | 11,151 | 10, 402 1, 904 21,784 | 8,324 | 6,034 3, 869 44,948 | 12,124 | 10, 748 §, 301 20, 220 } 11, 737 7, 865 , 079 15, 577 | 11,688 | 8, 608 5, 024 11,795 | 9,079 | 8, 558 ), 093 ~-~-| 3, 208 1, 203 1, 208 744 Noaryland..-.-...---| 6,163 | 2,743 | 1,660 1, 688 Massachusetts. 4, 805 869 979 470 Michigan...... 29, 034 | 10, 288 | 8, 460 4,195 Jiinnesota. 61,894 | 8,883 | 9,879 5, 781 Mississippi 9,935 { 6,827] 5,684 4,766 Missouri....-. 25,021 | 12,286 | 6,398 5, 493 Montana... 11.889 | 7,023} 6,538 879 Nebraska... 23, 639 | 13,568 | 8, 505 6,841 Nevada._.-..~- 793 404 429 129 New Hampshire. 1, 763 528 495 899 New Jersey.-... 6,540 | 1,386 993 629 New Mexico_ 8,918 | 8,689) 2,552 1, 064 New York... 42, 686 , 918 | §,159 4,475 North Carolin: 8, 677 056 | 7, 905 7, 557 North Dakota 20, 426 , B14 9. 3, 547 fo... 27,011 | 9,952] 8,110 4, 557 Oklahom: 16,873 | 8,467 | 5,676 6, 654 Oregon... 8,766 | 4,016 | 4,196 2, 450 Pennsylvania. 27,363 | 6,728 | 8,318 4, 828 Rho'le Island. _ 791 128 9! 65 South Carolina. 8,704 | 8,403 | 3,260 2, 634 South Dakota_. 15,074 | 5,996 | 4,419 4, 241 ‘Tennessee... 13,416 | 6,907 | 5,61 5, 160 Texas___. 88, 502 | 23,914 | 16,438 | 14,739 Utah... 5,872 | 3,123) 3,07 1, 881 Vermont. 7,628 | 1,071] 1,535 1,112 Virginia... 9,721 | 5,719} 4,040 8, 517 Washington 11, 794 | 3, 803 9 2, 210 West Virginia... 4,090 | 2,885) 1,946 1, 918 Wisconsin... 67,684 | 9,402; 8,27: , 260 Wyoming......----- 4,618 | 3,622 | 3,106 2, 057 United States_.|771, 680 |318, 813 {256,505 | 185, 453 1Poyments under dairy, shecp and lambs, and beef production, agricultural conservation, Sugar Act, and price-parity programs, __ 2 Payments under agricultural conservation, Sugar Act, and price-parity programs. 3 Payments under agricultural conservation and Sugar Act programs. Source: Bureau of Agricultural Economics, In 1946, for the United States, the $771,680,000 in subsidies was only 3.01 percent of the $25,635,645,000 total in- come from farm sales and subsidies combined, In 1947 the income from farm sales was $30,013,938,000, and the subsidies were $313,813,000, which was only 1.03 percent of the total farm income from sales and subsidies. In 1948 the subsidy was 0.83 percent of the total farm-income sales and subsidies. In 1949 the subsidy was 0.67 percent of the total farm-income sales and subsidies. The price at the market place is the real problem. The subsidy is very, very small in comparison to the price in the market place. In the meantime we should keep in mind that certain individuals and groups that pretend to show such deep love and affection for farmers in general and dairy farmers in particular are the same ones that promoted the onslaught on the dairy business by their support of the oleo bill. Their new-found interest is most evident but far from convincing. A Senator’s Vote: A Searching of the Soul EXTENSION OF REMARKS 3. HON. HUBERT H. HUMPHREY OF MINNESOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the ConcriessronaL Record an article which appeared in the magazine section of the New York Times of April 30, 1950. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed as follows: A Senaror’s VoTe: A SEARCHING oF THE SovuL—PRINCIPLES AND Pracrican, PoLrrics ComBINE TO Mak Decisions DirFicuur Yur CoNSISTENT (By Paunt H. Dovaras) WasHINGTON.—There were 226 roll-call votes in the Senate last year. As the clerk called our names, those of us on the Senate floor had to answer either “aye” or “no.” Many times we wished an issue had never arisen. Many times the issue itself was not clear. Many times we felt that the truest answer was neither “aye” nor “no” but “maybe.” Still, we could not stall by repeat- ing the truth that there was much to be said on both sides. In the Senate, when our names are called, the time for objectivity ends. We must answer with a categorical “aye” or “no.” What lies behind the words that are spoken? What leads one Senator to vote “aye” and another “no?” This question is not only of absorbing interest to a gallery that includes all of America. Men on the Senate floor also ask the same question. “How,” we ask, “did we get that way and how did the fellow next to us or on the other side of the room reach the same or an opposite conclusion?” The “realists,” as always, have a simple answer. They explain that a Senator either votes according to the weight of his mail or by a rule-of-thumb estimate of how political forces are balanced in the home State. The more cynical among the realists add that a Senator votes the way some political boss, some utility or banking magnate, or some labor leader wants him to vote. In this view, a Senator is a moral puppet who re- sponds more or less automatically to external pressures exerted on him by organized groups in the community at large. Now, there may be Senators who cast votes in this manner. But if there are such, I do not know them. All Senators, of course, are sensitive to the climate of opinion. They must be. How else could representative gov- ernment function? All Senators, too, read their mail. They are quick to spot and give special weight to unprompted, open-hearted letters, whether they are scratched on rough’ paper or written on embossed stationery. They all make tabulations on how the spon- taneous mail runs when a controversial issue is approaching a vote, But experience has taught them that the volume of mail is no true index to public opinion; that the most articulate are often those who have a concentrated special inter-~ est; that the great mass of the public, with its diffuse general interest, would, if pressed, frequently state views contrary to those voiced by the disciplined letter writers. In itself, of course, there is nothing virtu- ous or evil about disciplined letter writing. Saints and sinners alike have used the device for ends both good and bad. Anyone has a right to use this device to influence publis policy. Moreover, there is no difference be-
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD tween a thousand identical letters or post- cards sent in by individual members of an organization, of a thousand signatures on a dccument sent in by the secretary of the or- ganization. Both are aspects of the right of petition. But the question here is how the best soundings of public opinion can be made by a Senator. In a great State every group in- terest divides itself into an infinite number of conflicting internal parts, so much so that the differences within groups are often greater than the differences between them. To whom, then, should a Senator listen? I believe his most accurate sounding of pub- lic opinion comes about in an almost sub- jective way. The Senator, returning to his home State, throws himself open to a tidal wave of voices, c’ berwive~ and pullings this and that way. C. ..U,. and almost unobtrusively, the clamor of many voices somehow yields a consensus that is clearly identifiable to him. Whether he agrees with that consensus or whether he tries to change it is another matter. Bull Herndon used to explain this to Abraham Lincoln by saying that “he felt things in his bones.” And Lincoln, in reply, would comically refer to this as ‘“Herndon’s bone philosophy.” Yet Herndon was closer to the truth than Lincoln suspected. Some Senators, overburdened with the routine of office work, are often unable, or forget, to return to their point of origin. Others who make these returns for political soundings expose themselves to the charge that they are neglecting their duties in Washington. But the quality of their deci- sions inevitably becomes better or worse ac- cording to the degree to which they can im- merse themsclves in the bath of genuine public opinion. Apart from these immer- sions, a Senator has certain selected points of contact which enter into the complex of forces that shape his vote. There are people in America of experience, objectivity, a devotion to the common good, and a unique skill in making prudent deci- sions regarding public matters. No one elected them to their posts of opinion mak- ers. They are that by the sheer force of their arguments. Most generally they are content to express their viewpoint to a Senator over the telephone or by a brief call at his office. But whether they do it this way, or invite the Nation to eavesdrop, they command enormous attention. ‘These devoted servants of the common good may not make up a Senator’s mind on how he should vote. But what these men and women say must be answered by a Senator before he casts his vote. In this connection it is America’s good fortune that there are several of these aristocratic Democrats who are Members of the present Senate. One, whom we all deeply respect, is the man whose name is called first at voting time. He is Senator GrorcE D. AITKEN, Republican of Vermont, who can neither be bought nor bluffed, fooled nor frightened. I openly confess that there have been times in the Senate when my mind has been in great doubt right up to the voting time. And then Senator AIKEN’s name would be called. And I, for one, have often been influenced by the character of his sturdy response to the Clerk. Like the rest of us, he may err on an issue of fact. But, like his Democratic counterpart, Senator Frank P. Granam, of North Carolina, he has never, to my knowledge, erred on a moral principle. Is there any thread that runs through a series of separate votes cast by a Senator? At first glance the answer seems to be a negative one. Yet the appearance of pure pragmatism in Senate voting is highly de- ceptive. For all the wide range of matters on which they cast their votes, in one way or another, all Senators have repeatedly asked and answered the basic questions in _Politics. What, for instance, should be the relation- ship between the one and the many? What should be the relationship between the lead- ers and the people? What should be left to the operation of custom and what should be made the subject of law? Which body of practices should be institutionalized and which ones should be left in a free-floating state? At what point must the system of rights be made to intersect with the system of duties? What is the area in which the right of dissent can operate without sub- verting the will of the majority? These are timeless questions, asked everywhere. In each vote on a particular measure the Sen- ators also vote on a general principle. In- deed, it is the operation of the general principle on their thoughts which gives a discernible inner unity to most of their de- cisions. At the same time, while the general prin- ciple can ke stated and examined objectively, its cestece---~ to a particular case is often Leer: cr 22 a mood of emotional stress, A politician, no less than a surgeon, is com- monly reluctant to describe these inner stresses. It is not because his motives are base, or because an cpen statement of his own struggle would disturb the patient with whose life he 1s entrusted. It 1s due more to the reluctance of Americans in all walks of life to expose their inner thoughts and deepest values. But it so happens that I have been a Quaker of sorts for mahy years and have painfully acquired the habit of open con- fession. If I reveal the factors which lay behind my own votes on several matters of current interest, perhaps I can speak for a mumber of my more reticent colleagues in the Senate. - The first difficult decision I faced was on the problem of Federal aid to education. I believed in the principle of Federal aid be- cause the average income per school child in most of the Southern States is only about one-half the national average and only a third cf that in the most prosperous Svates, The result is that though the South taxes itself for education at a level above the na- tional average, the yield does not produce enough money for decent schooling, whether the children are white or Negro, since its taxable resources are low. Federal aid, rep- resenting a levy on the taxable resources of the Nation as a whole, is needed if the aver- age southern child is to have a decent chance in life. But I soon found that the real conflict was not so much on the program of Federal aid itself as on the relation of the private and parochial schools to it. Some people wanted to specify that Federal money could not be used in any way for private schools. Catholic groups, on the contrary, felt that such moneys should be provided to the pri- vate schools, not for religious instruction, but for collateral services such as health, transportation and nonreligious books, and that if State laws prohibited this, then the Federal Government should withhold the proportionate funds earmarked for such States and should, on its own, distribute money directly to the private schools, These two views appeared irreconcilable, though the sincerity of their respective pro- ponents could not be questioned. But if either view became public policy, the effect would be to engender a bitter and divisive religious controversy. I was deeply dis- turbed by such a prospect and hoped a way could be found which would heal an immi- ment breach. One avenue of approach sug- gested itself. Whether children are in public or private schools, and whether they are Protestant, Catholic, or Jewish, children present a unl- form health problem, and what is done to improve their health has a beneficial effect upon the community as a whole. In con= sequence, it appeared to me that a dise tinction could be drawn between health serv A4101 ices on the one hand and transportation and books on the other; that Federal aid for these health services should be fur- nished to all children, whether they were in private or public schools. Under this view, the schoolhouse at certain hours in the term would have the status of a convenient neighborhood dispensary. I helped, therefore, to prepare a bill ap. propriating $35,000,000 for health services to children in all schools, which, when en- larged by local funds, would make available a minimum yearly average of $2.40 for each child. I should note that the measure, al- though a supplement to the Federal aid bill then under discussion, was kept apart from it so that a vote for the supplemental bill could proceed on its merits alone. Having gained the approval of the Senate Committee on Labor and Public Welfare for this measure, I thought with its members that the question of using Federal funds for transportation of private school students could best be left to the decision of the people in the various States and localities. By localizing decisions on the transportation features of the education bill, I hoped that the Nation as a whole could be spared a re- ligious controversy. The Thomas Federal aid to education bill, as reported out to the Senate, embraced this principle. It gained the overwhelming ap- proval of the Senate which, by a roll-call vote of 63 to 3, defeated an amendment which would have confined all Federal funds to the public schools. At the other pole, the Senate, by a voice vote, defeated an amendment requiring that these funds must be furnished for auxiliary services to all private cchools. But, as is now known, the House rejected the formula proposed to it by the Senate. It sends the school-health bill to the Com~ mittee on Interstate Commerce, while the education bill was sent to the Committee on Labor, where it was referred to a Bub- committee on Education headed by Con- gressman BARDEN, of North Carolina. In due course, Congressman Barkbzn offered a bill which explicitly denied Federal aid to any private school. The ensuing bitter discussion has thus far prevented agreement over a formula which would permit this much-needed legislation to pass. I still feel confident, however, that the Senate has pointed the way to gain what is needed. A similar problem came up in connection with the public housing and slum clearance bill. As matters developed on the Senate floor, those of us who were devoted both to the principle of low-ec= housir? ard slum clearance and to the pri cisco. civ ! rights, were jockeyed into a heart-rending position. My friends, Senators MAYBANE, of Soutna Cur- olina, and SPARKMAN of Alabama, had intro- duced a@ measure providing $1,000,000,000 over 5 years to help clear slums. It also guaranteed the interest on local-housing bonds sufficient to construct 810,000 housing units, to the immeasurable benefit of at least 3,500,000 persons, or about one-quarter of our slum-dwelling population. I was priv- ileged to work with these men in helping to draft the measure, and in the process I came to wish that more of my northern friends could appreciate the public spirit and devo- tion of these sons of the South. Then came a body blow which was all the more telling because it was in the form of an amendment which dealt with a problem of elemental importance to all Americans. Senator Bricker of Ohio proposed an amend- ment to the housing bill providing that all public-housing projects in every city must be thrown open to Negroes and whites. Every liberal-minded Senator wanted to vote for that amendment. But the problem of choice took: on a different shape when the amendment was placed in its legislative setting.
A4102 To begin with, Senator Bricker was the spokesman for some 25 Republican Senators who were openly opposed to public housing. Secondly, these same men had shown litile interest in an earlier effort to liberalize Senate rules so that civil-rights legislation could be passed. On the contrary, most of them had joined the forces which made those rules all the more restrictive. What then was the purpose of their civil- rights amendment? The answer was per- fectly clear, It was to get northern and western Senators, like myself, who were for housing but against segregation, to join him in support of the Bricker amendment. But what would happen next? The passage ef the amendment would then influence some 20 southern and border-State Senators who were for public housing to abandon that support because of the Bricker “civil-rights” amendment. Once the housing measure as a whole came ur for a vote, they would vote against it, which is what this group had wanted all along. We would then wind up with no slum clearance and no low-income homes. No one on the Senate floor was really deceived by the move. I chose housing, as did virtually every Senator who was also a vocal supporter of civil rights. We voted for housing and against the Bricker amendment, knowing all the while that we exposed ourselves to sharp attack from fellow supporters of civil rights elsewhere who were not familiar with the legislative picture. I felt it to be of the utmost importance that the character of the choice before the Senate should be explained to the country as a whole. Nearly all my political friends urged me not to do this, say- ing that the subject was so delicate and so highly charged with emotion that anything anyone said would be misunderstood and attacked. Still, I felt confident that discussion would clear the air. I pointed out that on the basis of past experience Negroes would probably occupy one-third of the units built and that, therefore, about 270,000 families, or over a million and a quarter members of that race, would be provided with decent housing. I furthermore pointed out that most of the public housing projects in the North and est would explicitly bar segregation by local ordinance and that the civil rights principle would be extended rather than curbed. If, on the contrary, the Bricker amend- ment was passed, we would have a vacuous assertion of civil rights but no homes in which they could be asserted. Virtually all Northern and Western liberals reechoed this same view and the housing bill was passed without the Bricker amendment. We all felt that we had the right to choose the ground on which we could fight for civil rights as a measure in itself. I might mention one more inner struggle between my heart and my head, between my sympathies and my reason, which gave me afew bad days. The first appropriation bill to come up last year was that for the De- partment of Labor and Federal Security. I was more interested in these agencies than probably any others because I had cam~ paigned for the causes they represented in their formative days over 2 decades ago. I had actively fought for old-age pensions and unemployment insurance and had played a modest part in getting them adopted into Federal and State laws. Moreover, as an early advocate of public employment offices, and as one who has constantly used price and wage statistics of the Bureau of Labor Statistics, I knew the importance of these two branches of Government work. I wanted all of these agencies to be adequately fi- nanced so that they could do effective work. But I also knew most Government agen- cies were overstaffed, and from personal ex- perience with the labor agencies I was quite certain that they were not immune from this occupational disease of officialdom. I felt the staffs of these agencies could be pruned with profit and that this was espe- cially necessary in view of the big impending Government deficit. The Republican leadership was proposing @ 5-percent cut in the administrative ex- penses of these agencies. As the hour for voting approached, I was torn emotionally by a strong conflict. My inner conflict was made even more intense because I knew that many conservatives wanted to cut the wel- fare agencies to the bone while at the same time they would later defend wasteful sub- sidies granted those economic groups that didn’t need them. “Why,” I asked myself, “should I play into their hands?” During the last hour of the debate, I left the Chamber and sought the quiet of the Senate reading room. As I sat there alone, it became clear that even though it meant disappointing my friends and my party, I must at all costs vote my convictions. If I were to urge prudence in the way the tax- payers’ money was spent, I must apply econ=- omy even to those agencies and causes in which I was deeply concerned. As I debated the issue with myself, I re- solved it in the conviction that in time fair- minded people would see that economy was also a virtue and that to be a liberal one did not have to be wastrel, I thereafter went back into the Senate and voted for the cut. The incident was crucial. It forced me thereafter to relate a zeal for prudent ex- penditure with a desire for human welfare. Having tried to apply the pruning knife on causes which were close to my heart, I was free to seek economies elsewhere with good grace, Yet all the foregoing does not really ex- plain how and why a Senator casts his vote this way instead of that. When the com- mittee hearings and the important books and articles on a proposal are read; when the mail has been apprised; when the briefs and arguments have been weighed; when the wise men, living and dead, have been con- sulted, the Senator still faces the task of moving his own lips to say yes or no. On the clerk’s list, his name stands out in all its solitude. And that is the way he must vote. It is also, I believe, the primary way in which he decides beforehand how he is going to vote. His hour of decision is not seen by the outer world. It can come in the dead of night, in periods of reverie in one’s office after the day’s work is done, over the break- fast or dinner table with one’s family, or in a taxicab ride to or from the Capitol. It is at these times, I believe, that the final decisions which affect the life of the Nation are generally made. The tension of the roll call merely expresses the decisions Which 96 widely differing men, with different background, have already made in the quiet of their individual consciences, The Private-Enterprise System and the Church EXTENSION OF REMARKS oF HON. KARL E. MUNDT OF SOUTH DAKOTA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES . Thursday, June 1 (legislative day of Wednesday, March 29), 1950 Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp an address APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD delivered by the Reverend Daniel A. Poling, editor of the Christian Herald, and national president of the All-Ameri- can Conference To Combat Commu- nism, The address was delivered before the Conference of Business Public Relations Executives, in the Waldorf- Astoria Hotel, in New York City. I think the Members of the Senate will find the address exceedingly interesting because it points out the relationship between Christianity and the private-enterprise system, There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the REcorp, as follows: THE PRIVATE-ENTERPRISE SYSTEM AND THE CHURCH (Address delivered by Daniel A. Poling before the conference of business public relations executives, Waldorf-Astoria Hotel, New York City) In a letter received some time ago from a distinguished member of this conference ap- pears the following paragraph: “Frankly it is my impression that industry, generally speaking, has done a poor job in developing satisfactory communication with the clergy. Perhaps it is more accurate to say that in- dustry has practically neglected this duty. At any rate there is surely a dire need for a better understanding between the two.” Reverse the order and make the paragraph read: “The clergy, generally speaking, has done a poor job of developing satisfactory communication with industry,” and you have an equally significant and, I believe, equally true statement. In each instance the para- graph, though properly modest and forth- right, is, I think, perhaps an overstatement, but an overstatement that points up the “dire need for a better understanding.” First, then, let us agree, and certainly we do agree, that what we variously call free initiative, individualism, capitalism, the dig- nity of personality, or the American way of life is that which makes America tick. It Is the reason for our continuing existence. And above all others it is the reason for our uniqueness and power. In it lies the world’s best, and I think last hope of escape from regimentation and the final totalitarianism. The survival of this freedom, the survival of America stands not upon the past but updbn the present, not upon the founding fathers, put upon you, upon youand upon me. Free- dom is both an inheritance and an achieve- ment. If it is to continue, if it is to defeat communism, it must be rewon in each suc- ceeding generation. It must be rewon in this generation and it must be reborn in me. You are public-relations directors, and I with my clerical associates have a place in the broad field of public relations. Gentle- men, right here is the first and supreme sell- ing job of our time. With a certain diffidence in your presence, but with a deep conviction I submit to you that the American way of life must be sold by and to the individual and not by group pressure or mass propa- ganda, I may be mixing my figures, but what be- gan with a single-shot musket will not be perpetuated by broadsides from battlewag- ons. Individualism just can’t be sold in bulk. It’s against nature. Whatever the media used, and all media should be used, individ- ualism must be made attractive to, it must be sold to, the individual. At the beginning, before George Washing- ton and progressively afterward the Ameri- can way of life was a complete and natural liaison of the religious and economic concept of individual dignity and personal liberty with individual responsibility. The home, the church, the echool, and industry were at one. Certainly they were never antagonistic.