AL160 ghoice, but rather invoked every means to conserve that freedom. fe FEW MANUFACTURING SECRETS . I come now to a third lesson of BOA: We faust ex! our ekille—-our know how—as well as Por dollars, This is, im fact, the pasis of the technical axsistance (TA) pro- at HCA, I have always been con- vinced that the adoption of American labor and management practices would ba a great boon to European lsbor, European manage- ment, and the Buropean consumers. My chance to do something about tt came one warm summer day in Paris in 1948. Sir Stafford Cripps, then Britain's ascetic Chan- eellor of the Exchequer, and I were talking over the economic recovery obstacles that lay ahead. “If we are to raise the standard of living in Great Britain,” he said, “we must have greater productivity.” My heart quickened; this was the kind of talk I wanted to hear from a European. Then he continued. “Great Britain has much to Jearn about that from the United States and,” he paused, “I think we have a few manufacturing secrets we've been conceal- ing for a generation or so that you might Uke to learn. Why don’t we interchange this information?” Naturally I jumped at the idea. “We'll eet up a system of trans-Atlantic visits,” I yeplied, “taking British management and labor on tours of American factories and shipping Americans to Britain for a look at your shops.” Sir Stafford made the deal right there and within weeks he had thrown his amazing vegeterian energy into the crea- tion of an Anglo-American Council of Pro- ductivity, Top figures like Philip Reed, of General Blectric, and Victor Reuther, of the CIO, were enlisted to represent American management and labor, The late Sir Fred- erick Bain, deputy chairman of the Board of Impertal Chemical Industries, and Lincoln Evans, general secretary of the Iron and Steel Trades Confederation, were brought in for the British, The first British team to arrive in the United States represented labor and management in the steol industry. This group spent 6 weeks over here, exploring our factories, taking notes by day and chewing ever them in the evenings. These were no junketeers; they came with determination to Jearn. When they returned to England they sat down and wrote a report so much of an eye-opener that it sold 25,000 copies in a fortnight and went into three extra print- ings, Ite gist: productivity per man in American foundries was from 50 percent to 00 percent higher than in British foundries; the latter must mechanize and raise output or workers’ living standards would fall even lower. At the same time that we were trying to help increase productivity in Europe with our large-scale technical assistance program, ‘we were also experimenting with another sort of technical aid in China. The China Ald Act of 1948 provided for the formation of the five-member Joint Commission on Rural Reconstruction and sponsored a novel attack on conditions behind the growing un~ test in rural areas—conditions which had made China (and southeast Asia) especially yulnerable to Communist agitation. Chinese and American agricultural survey teams had, in 1946, pin-pointed areas in which rural reform was heeded. In some places rents were as high as 50 percent of the farmet’s crop. Tenancy contracts were a mower. Chey could be altered or abol-« - ished at whim of the landlords. Middie- men profits cut, the farmer's earnings, and excessive tax rates bit deep into the meager semainder. Noarly 80 percent of Asia's one and one-quarter billion are farmers, so they ‘were susceptibie alike to the growing de- mand for rural reforms and to the propa- | gantle of Communist agents who quickly as- sumed the guise of agrarian reformers in matters of political importance, PRODUCTION UP, COMMUNISM DOWN The JORR was designed to fight on this front and to gain three major objectives si- multaneously. It began a social justice pro- gram to improve health, to insure feir rentals and increase production. Unlike missions, whose members spend their time at their desks, the JORR went out into the bills and worked with the people. There they Hved and talked with the peasants. I do not hesitate to say that not since Law- rence’s days in Arabla has a more sensitive or succeseful venture been carried out by any westerners in the Near or Far East. It was in the very provinces that the JCRR pro- gram had got underway—in Szechwan, Kwangsi, and Fukien—that the Communist invaders found some of the most stubborn grass-roots resistance to their drive. What &@ different story might have been told in China if this alternative to Communist strategy had been started a few years earlier. The work of the ECA has everywhere proved, whether in Asia of Europe, the valid- ity of ite basic assumptions; physical well- being, or the promise of it, provides the hope and the faith which permit free people to make rational judgments. The correlation between material benefits and election results backs up the point, There were, of course, other influences—the revival of prodemocratic political forces, the church’s crusade against communism, the increasing awareness among all groups of the difference between its rosy propaganda and its ruthless barbarism. Even when all these are taken into account, however, there remains a very definite connection between economic recovery and anti-Communist votes, as the balloting before the Marshall plan and afterward attests. In Belgium, for instance, industrial production has gone up 12 percent since the advent of the Marshall plan. At the same time, Com- munist strength in the Parliament dropped from 17 seats to 10. In Norway production is up 23 percent and Communist seats in Parliament have fallen off to zero. In the Netherlands, where industrial output is up 51 percent, Communist seats in the provin- cial assemblies have declined from 10 percent in 1946 to 5 percent in 1950. In Denmark output is up 31 percent and the Communist showing is down from 12 percent of the pop- war vote (in the 1945 elections) to 4 per- cent (in the 1950 elections). In Austria production has risen 140 percent; Com- munist mayors in 80 cities were all out of their jobs by 1950. In Britain, as in Switzer- land, communism has never been a serious problem; the Communist Party as such 1s outlawed in Greece, Turkey, and Portgual. In Italy the very announcement of ECA ald did help to decrease Communist representa- tion in the National Assembly, and the 27 percent hike in industrial output since then has been a hard blow at Communist strength within the labor forces. In France the ad- vent of the Marshall plan prevented, in all probability, a Communist take-over. With these proved lessons behind us, where do we go from here? First, I have one urgent legislative measure to propose on the basis of our experience: to get maximum efficiency out of the dollars we spend abroad, whether they go for re- covery, for development of retarded econo- mies, or for building up military defenses, one Government agency must have the pri- mary responsibility for allocating all funda, Only by concentrating control over our eco- nomic activities abroad in the hands of a single agency can we— 1. Properly apportion aid among countries (several agencies working aeparately often tend to give one natton too much help, an- other too lttie); APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Q, Avoid waste of dollars with a country (two or more agencies often duplicate func- tions); and 3, Control the impact of our dollars upon the economy of a reciptent country (too great a pressure for rearming on a nation of full employment, lke Britain, could unduly drive down the standard of living; the same dol- lars applied to rearming in a nation of un- employment, like Germany, would raise the standard of living). To tackle all this, we urgently need an overseas economic administration—of Cabi- net status—to take over the present set-Up of ECA, absorb the point 4 program now administered by the State Department, su- pervise at least the economic side of all sume to be spent on European reatmament under the mutual-defense-aasistance program, and give policy direction to American representa- tion in the World Bank and International Monetary Fund. If this new agency js to wage the fight for peace effectively, there ts something else the United States must do which may seem a good deal more painful than creating a new Government office: it must revise its whole attitude toward foreign trade. The great giver of peace, Great Britain, in the nine- teenth century advanced international sta- bility and amity by means of a world trade that benefited everybody. The United States must build to the same end. For a century we have hidden behind our tariff walls, protecting our infant industries, bulwarked by the self-sufficiency of our im- menee resources. We have sold to the world but have been reluctant to buy from it, and world trade has been thrown badly out of balance. The rea: volume of goods imported into this country between 1929 and 1948-49 increased about 6 percent at the same time that the real domestic output (our national farm and factory production) increased 60 percent. Under such circumstances other nations could not afford to continue buying from us unless we gave them money. And that is, of course, exactly what we have had to do through a dozen loan and grant schemes, starting from after World War I right down to our present ECA. American aid to Western Europe during the last 35 years has amounted to $22,000,000,000 exclu- sive of direct war outlays. This was—apart from genuine philanthropic motives—a way of subsidizing our exports; for practically all the American money that went abroad never stayed there; it always returned to buy American goods. All this means that we should take a hard look at both our tariffa and our customs regulations. Despite some progress since 1934, we still charge duties of up to 110 per- cent on some items. Moreover the entire procedure for dotermining them is antl- quated and obstructive. Our tariff act has several thousand classifications, many of them capricious and arbitrary. Some im- ported cotton carpets, for instance, are sub- ject to a 10-percent duty, but if they have fringe at the ends they may be subject to four times as much duty. Clearly, Congress should immediately pass the Customs Sim- plification Act that it now has before it. It should also, I believe, give the President wide discretionary powers to modify customs pro- cedures to cope with special situations. WORLD'S LARGEST PRICE UMBRELLA Perhaps the Achilles heel of our foreign trade is our domestic agricultural policy. Like Topsy, it has been allowed just to grow. Over the past 8 decades little thought has been given to its impact on the rest of the world. The nub of the present policy is the guaranteed minimum price to the farmer for his produce. The guaranteed minimum price ‘was originally designed to protect farmers against loss from a few key crops such as ootton and wheat, But its coverage has been
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD persistently extended until today more than half of farm commodities have been placed under this largest price wmbreila in the This excessive boletering of farm prices tends to restrict markets both at home and abroad. Consumers cannot afford to buy the entire available supply. Surpluses pile up in warehouses and in caves. And, since American prices are sp unrealistically high, overseas farmers are pushed into uneconomic planting of such crops as cotton and wheat, thus reducing United States export of these items, This shrinkege should cause every- body genuine concern, since agricultural products have comprised 24.5 percent of-all United States foreign trade. Moreover en- tire areas in the southwestern cotton helt, for example, largely depend upon foreign customers. What applies to Texas and Okla- homa in cotton applies to various wheat States, such as Kansas and Washington. Ag one who believes that the mainspring of free enterprise is to expand production by means of high volume output at lower unit cost, I cannot help but be troubled by the deaden- ing effect on American agriculture which comes from reversing this process. Present fixed and rigid prices not only viclate the supply and demand equation, but also fos- ter an ever-greater amount of Government regulation, intervention, and control. By mid-1950 the Commodity Credit Corporation, which 1s the Department of Agriculture's price-support agency, owned or had loans on $4,500,000,000 worth of surplus grains, eggs, butter, soybeans, and a long list of other farm products. To try to dispose of such sur- pluses, the Department has been compelled to resort to what amounts to “dumping” overseas, & procedure which Induces anger on the part of foreign farmers and retalia- tion on the part of their governments. Iam not a farm economist, but on a common- sense business basis it seems to me that the solution is to be found in the area of more sensitive and flexible price supports. Farm spokeamen for the countries of the free world should be able to sit around the conference table and reach agreement on how continue ously to modify internal agricultural pro- grams, bringing them in harmony with to- day's need for expanding world trade. We must seek and achieve a denationalizing of agricultural programs inside the countries of the free world. From ali that I have said it must be plain that I, like most Americans, am convinced that two world wars offer at least circum- stantial evidence that the United States cannot stand aside, and alone, if chaos and destruction swirl about us. And some cir- cumatantial evidence ts very strong. If you are eitting on a fence and a bullet whizzes by, perhaps no conclusion can be drawn; if a@ second bullet takes a similar course, you are warranted in entertaining a suspicion that all is not well. However, if a third bullet puts a hole in your hat and parts your hair, you are justified in concluding that someone is out to get you. World politics today shape our lives more tellingly than ward politics, A coffee blight in Bragil, a famine in India, devaluation in Britain, the almost perpetual cabinet crisis in France, the discovery of uranium ore in Africa, a political assassination in Lebanon, all have an increasingly direct and pervasive influence upon decisions which determine our destiny as individuals and as a people, THE “AMERICAN ISLANDERS” There are, of course, a few people who, de- spite two world wars and much other “cir- cumstantial” evidence, still bold that we can ‘wgual on our great island continent. They insist that we should keep all dollars at home and devote them to throwing up bae- tions that stop at our pwn borders. The simplest facta of economic life argue against these “American islanders.” Let us look at the comparative resources of our- selves, Western Europe, and the Soviet Union. In many important items we outstrip both the Kremlin and its satellites, The United States will have in 1961 the physical capacity to produce 95,000,000 metric tons of crude steel per year, and Western Europe 55,000,- 000. The Soviet sphere will probably be able to produce only 33,000,000 metric tons. The United States can produce if necessary be- ; tween six hundred and seven hundred mil- lion metric tons of coal as against Western Europe's four hundred and fifty te five hun- dred million, and an annual output in the Soviet and ite satellies of leas than 400,000,- 000. The United States can produce about 2,300,000,000 barrels of ofl, and Western Bu- rope about 25,000,000. In addition the re~ mainder of the free world, in South America, the Near East, and the Far East, can produce an additional 2,000,000,000 barrels. The Soviet Union and its satellites will probably produce in 1951 about $60,000,000 barrels, The United States will probably turn out 400,000,000,000 kilowatt-hours of electricity in 1951, and Western Europe 250,000,000,000, as contrasted with some 140,000,000,000 kilo- watt-hours by the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics and its satellites. No one who reads these figures can fail to note what a vital proportion of our produc- tion potential is provided by Western Eu- rope. Let those “realisis” who would aban~ don Western Europe to its fate remember that if Western Europe were taken over intact by the Kremlin, and its resources added to those of the Soviet sphere, the net result would be that the resources controlled oy the Kremlin would in many essentials equal those of the United States. I think this 1s proof positive that we cannot wage the peace by ourselves. Waging the peace is about the opposite of preventive war. I do not believe that we are faced by a dilemma ao direful that we have no choice but to cast mankind into the darkness of global war. I believe that an attempt to crush communism with atomlo bombs would be to miss the objective, like the bull that charges the cape instead of the matador. To wage a preventive war against the Kremlin would be to substitute emotion for intelligence, panic, or resourcefulness, You do not prevent a war by starting one. We can prevent wat—and wage effective peace—only by a positive program that goes beyond mere containment. It calls for wresting the initiative from the U. 8. 5. R. not only by anticipating its moves, and thus thwarting them, but even more importantly by eradiciting the social and political and economic conditions on which communism thrives. In this respect the Marshall plan has been and remains the pilot plant and proving ground for an American foreign policy that is firm, constructive, and far. reaching. For the first time the Soviet Union’s hboring-from-within strategy has been halted and hurled back as the Marshall plan’s hydroelectric power plants and hous- ing developments and tractors and seed have been set against Marxist dialectic; as the Marshall plan’s bread and butter are set in contrast to the hollow cake of the hig lie. One of the prime necessities in such a program ts to assure our military defense in ways that make economic sense, Our mili- tary leaders report that we must spend some 50,000,000,000 annually for defense. Of thia gum, some 615,000,000,000 will go for the new equipment required by our own enlarged Armed Forces. Fortunately, much of this new equipment will represent what business calls capital outlay, such things as mate- riala, factories and plants that do not be- "A1161 come obsolete and so require only infrequent replacement, Thus, after the third year, and when our Armed Forces have been built up to it should, we would of course have to scrap such figures and return to deficit spending. ECA IN asta The relationship between what we spend on defense and our gross national product ($2'79,000,000,000 in 1960) is a very sensitive one, I think that if we can hold our defense spending to the levels I have suggested, and can sharply reduce them after the third year, we Will not seriously endanger our economy. But to do this we must change some of our ideas of soldiering. Right now the average American private is paid about $3 a day plus allowances. He needs it—for many of our boys in uniform are the sole means of sup~ port of young wives and children. But we simply can’t pay three million or more sol- diers in uniform @3 a day in peacetime and stay within that 20 to 25 billion dollars a year bracket that the country is able to carry over the long term. The answer, to my mind, is universal military training—taking all male Americana at about 18, before they have assumed family obligations, and paying them perhaps @1 a day. (A Turkish soldier gets @1 a month in cash.) When they are released at 20, they can return to their jobs or continue their schooling. Both militerily and economically this is the only program that seems to me to make sense. What, meanwhile, will it cost us to wage the peace abroad? No one can forecast too accurately, but I am willing to make an esti- mate and put it on the record. Before doing 80 I would like to repeat that no one in his right senges is thinking of an all-embracing Marshall Plan for the world. However, many men of good sense in many countries are, thinking in terms of strengthening those areas vital to the security of the free world.' Here is my estimate: Economic aid to those coun< tries in whose development is im t to the secu- rity of the United States and the free world........ $2, 000, 000, 000 Political activities.........- 350, 000, 000 Informational activities and ' propaganda .......---...- 800, 000, 000 Total__.....--------- 2, 650, 000, 000 These figures for economic aid may seem low in view of what has been spent on the Marshall Plan alone, The explanation, how- ever, is quite simple. Out of the nearly $11,000,000,000 that the Marshall plan has cost so far, an estimated $7,500,000,000 was for relief and rehabilitation stemming directly from the war itself—some of it for emergency food supplies for the undernour- ished; more of It to rebulld and re-equip bomb-damaged plants. In other words, not more than one third of our BCA expenditures covered the normal postwar needs for eco- nomic expension, Another reason why economic aid can be held within the figures I have cited is that ECA operations are now expanding only in southeast Asia, There are good reasons— aside from better earnings from exporte such as rubber and tin—why thie first year’s pro- gram in southeast Asia requires the relatively small sum of 864,000,000, Southeast Asta is a largely agricultural community and wil! ree main eo for many years. The emphasis, therefore, s on agricultural development; on shifting from wooden to steel plows; on bet- ter seed and irrigation and soil care. In some areas we will use the techniques we
A1162 found so effective with the rural rehabilita- ‘tion program in Ohina, In other areas, hows ‘ever, we must first ight debilitating diseases before we can even begin to help modernize eprioultural methods, In Viet Nam (one of the three associated states of Indochina), fox inatance, the great problem is malaria, Thus our top-priority project there falls into the health and sanitation feld, ' ‘To wage the peace and win it is an alm that #O tranacerids any other reasons for invest- ment in the recovery of other nations that only with some hesitation do I suggest it in to cur commercial as well ag to our political advantage to strengthen the free world. Every businesarnan knows how diMoult it is to build a profitable business in a com- munity that is broke, Every successful busi- nessman aleo knows that he must invest a certain amount of his company’s annual in- come to develop markets, Usually that amount ranges from 2 to § percent, depend- ing on how much of his advertising program goes into building Suture, as against cur- remit, sales. The sum I propose is less than 1 percent of our total gross income, Perhaps even from a practical business standpoint that is not too much for a prosperous America to invest in developing world prosperity. If these expenditures help to bring about suc- cessful resistance to the Kremlin’s internal aggression, they must be regarded as one of the best-paying investments ever made by any people, any time, anywhere. A third world war would not only neces- sitate genuine sacrifice, but would also bring individual tragedy and perhaps even na- tional disaster. How disastrous a third world war would be can best be shown by taking a backward look at World War I and World ‘War II. The only cost of war that can be stated in Agures is the dollar cost. The out- of-Locket cost, or the shooting expense for World War I, was approximately $22,000,000,- 000; for World War II, approximately $340,- 000,000,000. However, Gordon Gray, ex-Secre- tary of the Army, reckons that the ultimate cost of World War IJ, before the last pension 1s paid, will be approximately #1,300,000,000,- 000. When I look at that figure, when I note the great increase in the lose of lives in World ‘War IT over World War I, when I think of the atom bomb, guided missiles, bacteriologi- cal and gas warfare, I find myself over- whelmed by the nightmare of what world wor III would do to us and everybody else. The prospects of any such catastrophe, if nothing else, should goad us into getting on with waging the peace on all fronta and keeping at it until it is won. Divided Responsibili EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JOSEPH R. BRYSON OF BOUTH CAROLINA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March §, 1951 Mr. BRYSON, Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rxc- ord, I include the following editorial from the clip sheet; Drvien Responsrriry Divided responsibility is at the very heart of democracy. The country fully realizes the critical na- ture of the emergency which faces the United States and the entire free world. It also fealiaes the necessity of dealing with this emergency efficiently but without developing totalitarianism, against which we ‘There is NO more corrupting influence than the development of ever-swelling power. For this reason, and with entire sympathy for the Armed Forces in every legitimate and reasonable demand upon Congress and the American people, we suggest the high im-~ portance that Congress shall not forget its own responsibility. For the elected repre- sentatives of the people to put the stamp of Approval upon every request of the Armed Forces even when those requests are within the area of congressional responsibility and run counter to the considered opinions of the legislators, would be an abdication which the people would regard with pro- found unease, Have we not been warned that we cannot defend ourselves without losing everything we want to defend? We do not believe this to be true; it is ours to see to it that it is not atlowed to become true. There was reason in Representative Monot’s suggestion that even the contem- plated expenditures for defense should be subjected to close scrutiny for possible savings. These thoughts are prompted by the fall- ure of the Senate Armed Services Committee, in the bill it is reporting, to provide for pro- tection of the men in the Armed Forces against systematic exploitation by the Mquor traffic. Many of these men will be very young and many of them—we believe on the aver- age, the best of them—will come from homes where they are encouraged to abstain from liquors. Indeed, the majority of them will have been taught in their schools and in their churches that abstinence is the better and safer way of life. ‘The American Legion, in a bill it proposed to the committee, made very clear its atti- tude that such protection should be offered dn any system of military training or service, Members of the Senate committee consider- ing this legislation, men of great experience and prestige, believe that such provisions should be made. So far, they have not been made, and this failure seems to be due to an uneasy deference on the part of the legisla- tors to all suggestions from the Pentagon. ‘Too great a deference may lead to a cus- tomary bypassing of the elected Representa- tives of the people, to reach an autocratic group holding all power of decision. There are men high in the Armed Forces who are evidently disturbed by the number of alcoholics among veterans. When an ab- stainer becomes a drinker he incurs a certain Uability to alcoholism, a greater liability to ordinary addiction, and a very formidable liability to involvement in alcoholic misfor- tunes which are almost infinite in variety, For this reason we suggest that the matter should receive adequate consideration in general debate. Why are not the provisions of existing law carried out? Why are there persisting rumors, and more than rumors, of unsatisfactory conditions in the occupation area in Germany? Why these humiliating stories of misconduct, so damaging to the prestige of the United States? Is it because examples set the men are bad? Is it because no standard is raised, no high ideal of morality ts set before the men in regard to alcoholic indulgence? We believe that others in places of respon- sibility should share the evident concern of General Elsenhower in this matter, Too much is at stake for them to fatl to do so. In the meanwhile, the responsibility pri- marily rests upon Congress. There should be no rubber stamping. GENERAL SISENHOWER AND BEER IN THE ARMY Gen, Dwight D. Eisenhower, in testimony before the Committee on Armed Services of the United States Senate, February 2, 1951, made the following significant statement: “T will tell you this about the American eoldiers, When I finally got enough ship- ping to send home for something of that kind for our soldiers after the first landing in Africa, I conducted a Gallup poll and found that instead of beer, they wanted ‘APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Coca-Cola, which was easy because you can bring over the sirup and make it there.” The statement appears on page 1104 of the hearings, Universal Military Training and Bervice Act of 1951. Notz.—This statement was in reply to a question by Senator SatTonstTaLL: “He also buys Coca-Cola, does he not?” Opposition to Taxation of State and Municipal Bonds ——- EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HAROLD C. OSTERTAG OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 5, 1951 Mr. OSTERTAG. Mr. Speaker, local governments everywhere, including both municipal and school districts, are alarmed over the proposal by the Sec- retary of the Treasury to abolish the tax-exempt status of future issues of State and municipal bonds. The Fed- eral Government has today entered every field of taxation except real estate, so that localities are hard pressed to find sufficient tax resources to finance essen- tial services, If now the Federal Gov- ernment removes the tax-exempt status of State and munipical bonds, the local- ities may well find it impossible to finance current operations and long-range cap- ital improvements. Many local officials, groups, and agencies have written me urging that this proposal be dropped. Among them are the Interstate Commission on the Delaware River Basin; the Village Board of Warsaw, N. Y¥.; John J. Hickey, the president of the Board of Education of Letchworth Central School, Gainesville, N. Y.; Mark Heath, county attorney of the county of Orleans; Joseph B. Boyle, legal adviser to the county of Monroe, speaking for the Board of Supervisors of Monroe County; Edward F. N. Uthe, ex- ecutive secretary of the Association of Towns of New York State; the County Officers Association of the State of New York; Mayor Elbert H. Carver, of the village of Scottsville, N. Y.; and the coun- cll of the city of Rochester. Mr. Speaker, under unanimous con- sent, I insert in the Recorp a duly at- tested resolution adopted by the council of the city of Rochester on February 27, 1951, petitioning the Congress of the United States not to enact this proposed legislation. The resolution follows: Resolution 61-19 ‘Whereas it has been brought to the atten- tion of the council of the city of Rochester, that the Treasury Department of the United States has again renewed its efforts to obtain congressional legislation imposing taxes on income derived from State and municipal se- Curtties, in spite of the fact that such pro- Posal has been several times rejected in the past by the Congress; and Whereas this council is advised that such Proposal is now pending in the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Represent- atives; and Whereas the council is of the firm opinion and has been advised that such proposal 1s both economically unsound and unconsti- tutional; and
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL .RECORD Whereas such # tax would be reflected in substantially higher interest rates upon bonds and other securities issued by the States and their municipalities, which in- creases would result in substantially increas- ing the tax burdens of citizens of the States and the municipalities issuing bonds and Particularly the tax burden on real estate; an Whereas such legislation “ould, in the opinion of the council, do violence to the fundamental concepts upon which our con- stitutional Government is based, in that it would tend to destroy the dua. sovereignty of the Federal and States’ Governments and tend to make the States and their municipal- ities in all things subordinate to a central government: Now, therefore, be it Resolved, That this council does respect- fully petition the Congress ot the United States not to enact such proposals; and be it turther Resolved, That a copy of this resolution, duly attested, be forwarded to the Congrese- man representing any part of the city of Rochester, N. Y., and to each member of the Ways and Means Committee of the House of Representatives, Two Thousand Two Hundred and Twenty Dollars Per Acre Cost of Central Ari- zona Project, President’s Water Policy Commission Finds EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLAIR ENGLE OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 5, 195i Mr. ENGLE. Mr, Speaker, California has always ‘contended that putting water on the land under the central Arizona project would cost close to $2,000 per acre in capital investment. But Arizona has always pooh-poohed those charges. Now we have it on high au- thority: The President's Water Re- sources Commission. The commission puts the capital cost of a full supply of water for the land under the central Arizona project at $2,200 per acre on 1948 price levels. Moreover, the com- mission points out that for the lands under the project which will receive only a supplemental supply of water, the cost will be $620 per acre. A supplemental supply is added water to make up a full supply for lands which do not have suffi- cient, but have some water. These fig- ures fully verify the charges made by California against this fantastic proj- ect, and the verification comes from ex- perts of high authority and unquestion- able impartiality. The statement of the President's Water Resources Policy Com- mission appears in volume II of their report at page 384, and reads as follows: of lands need- Tn many places the acreage ing emental water is much greater than new irrigation lands. Among thase the oen- tral Arizona is an % one, project Tentative allocations indicate that the capi- supplemental water supply by the project. ' However, it has been estimated that ap- proximately 467,000 acres of those 640,000 could be irrigated with the present water supply in the avyea to be benefited. The ad- ditional equivalent acreage which would re- ceive full water supply through the central Arizona project, therefore, is about 178,000, Caloulated on this basis, the coste of trriga- tion are about $2,200 per acre benefited, (Basis of estimate: Alicooation to irriga- tion of $397,693,000, as given in H. Doc. No, 186, central Arisona project, Washington, 1949, p. 206. A 1948 price level in assumed.) Costs of other supplemental water supplies on other projects generally are less, some being as low as $200 per acre on the basis of price levels in several different years between 1946 and 1949. The Tragedy of George Marshall EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. WILLIAM E. JENNER Or INDIANA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 5 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. JENNER. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have printed in the Aprendix of the Recorp an article entitled “The Tragedy of George Mar- shall,” written by Walter Trohan, and published in the American Mercury for March 1951. There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Yur Tracpy or GrorGe MARSHALL {By Walter Trohan) At a corner of one of the vast avenues in the Pentagon, erect in a high-backed chair, sits a tragic old man. Hoe is George Catlett Marshall, General of the Armies, Secretary of Defense, former Secretary of State, adviser to Presidents, and, in the eyes of Hatry Tru- man, the “greatest living American.” He is the devoted old warrior—patriotic, loyal, courageous; yet his life is a tragedy, both for himself and for the cause of mankind, be- cause hig unsound judgment hae helped to lead his country from one disaster to another. On March 12, 1950, General Marshal] an- nounced that he would not write his mem- oirs for these remarkable reasons: “To be of any historic importance they have got to be accurate; that is, one musn’t omit and make it pleasant reading. Now, if you do put it all in, you may do irreparable harm. You almost ruin a man, but if you don't mention that, it is not history.” Prom the lips of a leader of freemen these are disillusioning words. They say, tin de- spair, that freemen must not be told the truth; they indicate that the speaker ts in a mental purgatory for hidden sins which he has either observed or committed, and they emphasize the graver tragedy: that an old man who must conceal past errors from his countrymen ia still exeroising powers of decision. Can freemen trust a leader who will not trust them with the truth? By what right does a public servant say to freemen: “You trusted me with leadership, but I will not because the truth torical Association: “I believe that much of the colossal waste, much of the tragedy of ‘warfare, is due to the ineffective manner in which history is written and taught.” Yet he now seals his lips on historical truth. A1163 The tragedy of George Marshall 1s that his vision has never matched his courage. As 4 young man at military school he was acci- dentally transfixed by a bayonet and en- dured his wound, not unlike the Spartan lad with the gnawing fox, without identify- ing the man at fault. He is self-dieciplined and ioyal. In a quiet way he possesses charm. But, strangely, while refusing to trust the American people with the truth, he has always heen cuick to blame the peo- ple for mistakes, On November 30, 1960, alibiing for the war in Korea, he said: “The basic error has always been with the Ameri- ean people.” If the general only trusted the people, he might make some valuable additions to our history, for he has been present when most of the critical decisions were made since 1989. And, according to President Truman, he has a phenomenal memory. Truman once told two Congressmen: “I've got & mighty great man working for me now.” Why, do you know he has an absolutely phe- nomenal memory? He can even tell the day and hour, and exactly what was talked about, without any notes.” But here are some examples of the gene eral’s memory: Before the Senate Armed Services Com- mittee on September 19, 1950, he disclaimed any personel responsibility 1or the disastrous China policy which he had imnlemented in his 1046 mission to Chins. He said “the policy of the United States was * * * fesued while I was on the ocean, going over there.” But in the authorized biography of Presi. dent Truman by Jonathan Daniels, Admiral William D. Leahy ts quoted as saying: “I was present when Marshall was going to China, He said he was going to tell Chiang that he had to get on with the Communists, or with- out help from us. "Ne said the same thing when he got back,” Former Secretary of State Byrnes, in his memoirs Speaking Frankly, says: “As soon as President Truman appointed General Marshall his personal representative in China, I asked the general to study the draft (of policy) #o that he could help pre- pare the final statement for presentation to the President. The Sunday before I left for Moscow, Under Secretary Acheson, General Marshall, and members of his staff met in my office. By the end of the morning’s discus- sion, we had agreed upon the statement of policy. Thereafter the President made no change in that policy except upon the recom- mendation of General Marshall or with his approval.” When General Marshal) left for China he carried with him, not only the documents setting forth the policy of enforced coall- tion, but a letter from the President which said: “I understand that these documents have been shown to you and received your approval.” In June 1950 General Marshall wrote a letter to Senator Millard Tydings saying that so far as he could recall, "I never met Mr. Owen Lattimore.” Yet, during a State Department seminar tn October 1049, for 3 days Lattimore sat within five feet of Marshall and obtained permission to ex- prese his views at least 15 times. And seve eral times Marshall was observed greeting Lattimore warmly. The general has had difficulty remembere ing the names of his closest associates. Dur- ing the Second War he referred to General Zisenhower as the ‘‘red-headed fellow down the hall,” and to Gen. Bedell Smith as “the fellow with the red eyes.” In January 1961 ha told a Benate committee that he couldn't xyemember the strength of a Second War divi- aion, but he could recall the strength of a First War division. The most notorious lapee in the phenome. hal memory, of course, is the general's tn- ability to remember waat he was doing on
AllG4 the eve of Pearl Harbor, the most important > of his life. testimony before a congressional com< mittee General Marshall admitted that he knew, following a meeting at the White House on November 25, 1941, that the United States was likely to be attacked by December 1 and that the attack was likely to come without warning. He further admitted that he knew on December 1 that Hawail was alerted only against sabotage. Then came the fateful moment at 9:30 p. m. on Decem~- ber 6 when President Roosevelt, on being handed the decoded Japanese ultimatum, exclaimed: “This means war.” Few knowledgeable persons in Washington believe that Roosevelt went to bed on Decem- ber 6 without communicating this fateful news to Marshall, But Marshall has sworn before Congress that he can't remember where he was, that he has no recollection of the night of December 6, and that he didn’t get the measage until he had returned from a horseback ride at 11 a. m, on December 7. Marshall still had 2 hours to save lives at Pearl Harbor, but he disdained the scrambler telezhone on his desk, declined Admiral Stark's offer of Navy radio, and sent his mes- sage to General Short by commercial cable without even marking it “Urgent.” By the time the message was decoded in Hawail, 2,826 Americans were dead. This is the essence of the tragedy of George Marshall. Wherever the American people have depended on him in the clutch, he has come up with advice or decisions whicn have led to disaster. General Marshall was born in Uniontown, Pa., on December 31, 1880, the son of a Ken- tucky coal and wool dealer who had moved north after the Civil War. Because his father, a solitary Democrat in a Republican community, could not wangle him a West Point appointment, he went to Virginia Mili- tary Institute. Although just above the middle of the 1901 class scholastically, he was first captain of the cadet corps and an all-southern tackle at 166 pounds. His first Army assignment was map making in the Big Bend country in Texas. His career fol- lowed the regular Army pattern of waiting and serving. In 1907 he was made a first lieutenant and sent to the Army Staff Col- lege, where he graduated at the head of his class. He became known as a “staff man” rather than a command officer among his euperiors. In 1916 he was made a captain. Upon America's entry in the first war Mar- shall was sent to France to serve on the staff of the First Division, and was promoted by General Pershing to operations officer of the First Army. After the war Pershing made Marshall his atde-de-camp while Pershing was Chief of Staff. Up to the early thirties Marshall's career was one of slow but steady progress. He had a deep persona) loss in 1927 in the death of his first wife, but was remarried happily in 1930 to Mrs, Katherine Boyce Tupper Brown, of Baltimore. With 14 years to go to the mandatory retirement age of 64, his fue ture appeared serene, if undistiguished, espe- elally since Pershing, a retired but influen- tial old dog of war, had promised to have him made a brigadier general, But here Marshall met his first failure. True to his promise, Pershing called upon Douglas MacArthur, then Chief of Staff, and asked that his protégé be made a general. MacArthur was ready to oblige, but insisted that the promotion go through regular ‘ohannels. Pershing agreed, confident Mar- ahall oould clear the hurdies, Friendly ex- amination of the Marshall record showed what hie superiors regarded as insuficient time with troops. MadArthur proposed to remedy this by giving him command of the th it at Fort Screven, Ga., one ef the finest regiments im the Army. Marshall was moved up from Neutenant colonel to colonel, but his way to a general's stars appeared to be blocked forever when the inspector general reported that under 1 year of Marshall's command the Kighth Regiment had dropped from one of the best regiments in the Army to one of the worst. MacArthur regretfully informed Pershing that the report made promotion impossible. To this day Marshall is uneasy in the pres- ence of MacArthur. In 1986, after MacArthur had been suc- ceeded by Gen. Malin Craig, Pershing tried again. But this time, knowing that the Army would never make Marshall a general, Pershing went directly to the White House. He persuaded Roosevelt to promote Mar- shall; and 3 years later when Roosevelt was looking for an agreeable Chief of Staff, he chose Marshall over 20 senior major gen- erals and 14 senior brigadiers. Marshall is, therefore, a “political” gen- eral—a general by virtue of Presidential fa- vor. It is unlikely that he would ever have become a general on his Army record. Early in the Second War Roosevelt told Pershing that he expected to make Marshall “the Pershing of the Second War”; and there are confiicting theories as to why Marshall never assumed fleld command. One theory ig that Churchill acquired an intense dis- Uke for Marshall ct Tehran when Marshall advocated the cross-Channel invasion in support of Stalin and opposed the Balkan invasion which Churchill preferred. The more likely theory is that Marshall himself, remembernig his failure with an Army regiment, chose to remain in a staff Position. Admiral Leahy writes that Mar- shall and Sir John Dill, British member of the Combined Chiefs of Staff, were “as close as the proverbial peas in the pod"; and Dill could probably have persuaded Churchill to accept Marshall. Instead, Dill used his in- fluence to keep Marshall in Washington— but this could have been on instructions from Churchill. At any rate Marshall re- paid his friend Dill by burying him on the best acre of ground at Arlington National Cemetery, and by having Truman dedicate an equestrian memorial over Dill’s grave. Dill has more ground and a larger monument than any American hero, not even Pershing or Dewey or Sheridan has a monument to match Dill’s. The dispute at Tehran illustrates how Marshall's feeble Judgment has led to trag- edy. There were two proper concerns for the representatives of free men at Tehran in 1943. The first concern was who would hold what when the German Army was de- Teated; the second concern wae the defeat of the German Army. Churchill, at least at the outset, seemed to have these two con- cerns in their proper order: He was primar- ily concerned with keeping Russia out of Europe. But poor Marshall—at a tragic cost to all of us—had the two concerne reversed: He was primarily interested in the destruc- tion of the German Army, and he evidenced no concern over how far Russia advanced into Europe. This is the essential tragedy of American leadership during the last decade. Our leaders have evidenced no broad vision or deep wisdom; they have made decisions on the emotions of the moment, And the fall- ures have not been failures of the people—as General Marshall would have it; our failures have been the failures of trusted leaders like Marshall. George Marshall was the willing instru- ment of the tragic policy which held that Russia was an ally to be trusted, that Joe ‘was “good old Joe,” that the way to peace and serenity was to destroy Russia's enemies and let communism work fte will in both Europe and Asia, Marahall was the willing instrument of the Hisses and the Achesons, the Latttmores and the Jessups, the mis- guided men who let American boys die to make Eurasia safe for communism. If Marshall is the greatest living American, why didn’t he stand up at Tehran and prove APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD his greatness? Why didn't he raise his voice against the sell-out of Poland and Ozecho- slovakia? Against the marooning of Berlin in a Russia sea? Against the whole traitor- ous process by which the Reds were invited to sack western civilization? Numerous associates of Marshall have re- ported that in 1943 he seemed much more interested in furnishing arms to Russia than in equipping our own forces. He answered all criticism with this remark: “The fastest way to kill Germans is to send tanks to Rus- sia.” The thought of what would happen when an all-powerful Russian Army stood astride Europe—apparently no such thought ever crossed his great mind. At the Yalta Conference in February 1945, General Marshall helped to deliver Asta to Russia just as he had helped to deliver Europe at Tehran. Japan was beaten and would have surrendered to us within 6 months, but Marshall was so anxious to co- operate with Russia that he approved the granting to Russia of Port Arthur, Dairen, preeminent rights in Manchuria, the Kurtle Islands, the southern part of Sakhalin— everything thet would enable Russia to dom- inate Asia. The man who sat next to Marshall at Yalta was Alger Hiss, and Hiss was the ex- ponent of the Acheson-Jessup policies in the State Department, the men who believed the destiny of China Mes with the Commu- nists.” On no point at Yalta did Marshall disagree with Hiss, After the war the Hiss-Acheson-Jessup group squeezed the last drop of usefulness out of the greatest living American. They sent uim to China to compel the Chinese Na- tionalists to quit fighting and come to terms with the Communists. It was Marshall who embargoed arms shipments to Chiang Kal- shek, and it was Marshall's personal order which allowed the first Chinese Communist armies to enter Manchuria, One of the Americans who patiently briefed General Marshall on the Chinese situation was Col. Ivan D. Yeaton, who had been assigned to Yenan, headquarters of the Chinese Communists. Colonel Yeaton ‘warned Marshall of Mao's close ties with the Kremlin. But Marshall completely disre- garded this advice; he listened instead to the pro-Communists in the State Department; and when he forced Chiang to cut his army down to 50 divisions, he forced numbers of Chinese Nationalist troops to join the Red Army s0 that they could get food and pay. When Marshall returned from China, which he had helped deliver to the Communists, and was made Secretary of State, his first action was to name Acheson his chief of staff with “complete authority to cleanse the De- partment.” In 1947 Marshall sent Gen. Albert C. Wede- meyer to China. When Wedemeyer's report did not ratify Marshall's findings—when it urged instead that we erect a bulwark against communism in China—Marshall angrily sup- pressed the report and banished Wedemeyer to an obscure post. Marshall, on his record, 4s a man who believes in suppressing reports; he doesn't believe that the people should have the truth; be blames the people for disasters. Before he left his post of Secretary of Btate because of il] health, Marshall gave his name to the European-aid plan. Actu- ally the plan was first proposed by Dean Acheson, speaking for Truman, in the little town of Cleveland, Miss., May 8, 1947. Tru- man called it the Marshall plan, but a few ‘weeks after the plan’s promulgation Marshall was unable to say under questioning whether or not Eire was included in his own plan. In 1949 Marshall retired, In retirement he was given the post of head of the Amer-~ ican Red Oross. His retirement pay as a five-star general was, with living allowances, 18,761 a year, but he accepted from the Red ‘Cross an additional $22,500 a year as salary and $6,000 a year as expenses. His
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD pretiecemer, Basii O'Connor, had served the Red Cross without pay. ‘When Truman was considering whether or not to wend ground troops into Korea, be sought the advice of his “greatest living American.” Marshall advised him to send in the troope—and this is now conceded to have been one of the most foolish and dteastrous decisions ever made by an Amer- fean Government. After suffering 60,000 casunities we are now struggling to get out of Korea eo that we can exploit the advan- tageous position which we were in before Truman, Marshall, and Acheson comumHétted our ground troops. As Secretary of Defense, Marshall's war planning ts now gravely distrusted by the ablest offfoers in the Armed Forces. He and his manpower assistant, Anna M. Rorenberg, want & vast land army with 18-year-olds as the core. On Decomber 16, 1050, he was calted in to confer with Truman and the leaders of Congress. Three times Marshall spoke up during lulls to say: “I'm going to butid a big new army.” This wae his only contribution to the diecusston, and each time he made the pronouncement he smiled proudly. Members of Congress left the con- ference shaking their heaxs. Marshall planned the eecond war with alrplanes having the towest priority of all armaments. fle conferred weekly with the eighty-odd-yeer-old Pershing, and Pershing detested airpianes—he told Congress that “no airplane bad ever affected the couree of a battle.” Today it is feared that Marshall ts pian- ning to fight the Ruesian and Chinese hordes with manpower. When the Air Force sends suggestions to him, he merely draws a line through the pages and sends them back. im January 1951, Marshall made ancther remarkable appearance before a Senate sub- committee. Talking about hie 16-year-olds and his big new army, he said, “IT sometimes think thet our standards are teo luxurtous. I think sometimes we provide more than js advisable. When I was in the Army, we didn’t have turkey and chicken. This te off the record, of course, I woukin’t want the troops to hear {t.” In the room where Marshall was epeaking thus off the record were at least 300 persons, including representatives of Tass, the Soviet news agency. Perhaps Truman is correct, Perhaps Mar- shall is, indeed, the greatest living American. But the free world will certainly have to be strong tf we are to survive much more of his advice. Californin’s Democratic Attorney General Denounces Central Arizona Project neem EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. CLAIR ENGLE OF CALAVORNTA IN TEE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 5, 1951 Mr. ENGLE. Mr. Speaker, I have re- cetved a commaunication from Edmund (at) G. Brown, attorney general of Califcrnia, regarding the proposed cen- tral Artsons project—8. YS and H. R. 1900—now before beth Houses of Con- gress. Speaking as the chief law officer of California, Mr. Brown states that the gation in their effort fo win that ob- tive. Mr. Brown points out that the pres- ent central Arizona bill gives ouly lip service to California's repeated efforts to take the Colorado River controversy be- fore the Supreme Court for final adjudi- cation, He expresses his disapproval of the present bill's subsidiary provision for Supreme Court review, which, he declares, has been tied as a tail to the central Arizona kite, and binds Itiga- tion to prior congressional approval of the fantastic project. Terming the central Artsona bill a “serious threat to the national economy,” Mr. Brown states that it entails stag- gering subsidies amounting to billions of dollars, which would be an additional burden on the Nation's taxpayers. The complete text of Mr. Brown's com- munication follows: My Deas Concunssman Exoix: Since as- suming the office of attorney general of Cali- fornia and surveying the problems that con- front the State in which the attorney gen- eral has an official tnterest and responsi- bility, I have become convinced that none of these te of more immediate end far-reach- dng concern than the proposed central Ari- gona project. A review of the record in the current and earlier Congresses convince me that our Cali~- fornia delegation in both House and Sen- ate has been vigilant, courageous, and vig- orous in opposition to what ts obviously a serious threat, not only to the national econ~- omy, but to California's right and peed to the use of the waters of the Colorado, con- firmed to various California public agencies under Pederal contract. it is gratifying to me personally that you and your colleagues have made such a splendid record and have held the line so well, As the chief law offi- cer of the State I propose to support fully the work you and they have done and are doing. You may be assured of my earnest and camplete support also in the handling of the many legal problems involved in which moy office may be of service to you. The first objective must be to defeat de- cisively the pending bills on the central Ari- gona project. It is unsound and infeasible. Power which could better be used for the needs of industry in the Southwest must not be dedicated to the ralatively uneconomic pumping of water for irrigation of ordinary eld crops. The project would ental] hidden subsidies in a staggering total amount by di- verting the interest component in power rates to repayment of the capital cost of irrigation works. The proposed financial scheme pro- vides no revenues to pay the interest on the national debt which would necessarity be tncurred to construct the works; and it woul * cost the taxpayers of the Nation over $2,000,000,000 in interest over the 75-year financing period. The cost of the works themselves ts wholly disproportionate to the value of the lands involved. After the defeat of the central Arisona project, which I trust will be the result of your efforts directed against the bills, there ‘will remain a serious controversy between California and Arizona over the rights of sach to the use of the waters of the Colorado. This dispute must be settiet, in the interset of interstate harmony and in fatrness to the Court review that kas been tied es a tail to ‘the central Artaona project kite, Decnuse it &ves only Lp sere*ce bo 4 sotntion the Supreme Court and binds tais to prior congressional upproval of the proposed fan- tastic irrigation venture. Certainly the availability of the needed water should be decided before the costly Arisous proponal is given congressional approval, contingent or ‘other wine. ‘We in Cattfornis are confident, morally anc legally, of the soundness of cur position founded upon the water rights we hald. ‘We have been and are willing to submit the points at tasne to the Supreme Court, and to do this without any $2,800,000,0008 string at- tached. The efforts of you and your col- leagues will surely bring this reasanahioc course to realization. Railroads: A Vital National Asset EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. JAMES P. KEM OF MISSOURI IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March 5 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1981 Mr, KEM. Mr. President, J ask unan- imous consent to have printed in the Appendix of the Recorp, an address de- liveted at a meeting of the Misesour! Pa- cific Club of St. Louis, Mo., on February 15, 1851, by former Congressman Leon- jdas C. Dyer, of St. Louis, Mo. Mr. Dyer served as a Member of the United States House of Representatives from the Bixty-second to the Seventy-second Congresses, inclusive. There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Ramsoaps: A Vita, Narional Ass&kT (By Leonidas C. Dyer) I wish to speak to you about the Nation's transportation facilities, with special refer- ence to the railrosd gree of mobility, economic activity would re- vert to @ primitive state, and our means of defense against aggression would be crippled. Movement is an emential adjunct to extrac- tion and utilisation of raw materials, manu- facture, distribution of commodities, and countless other operations embodied in our and highly developed eoconcmy. Transportation provides valuable social ad- vantages, and makes possible the economib nor equipment. The urgent military re- quirement of “getting the mostest there the fastest” would be an impossibility, land atea of the world; we have about 7 percent of the world’s populstion, our means of transport represent a much greater On of world totale. ror , we pousess 38 percent of the world's raitroad mifenge, about 70 percent of the world's motor vohicles, and a large percentage of the wortd‘s impro ighway mileage. Tt is my frm conviction thes certain trans- portation problems exist which, % not
ALIGG -polyed,.will eventually cause serious deteri- Oration in our national tranaport syatem. 1 aball try to point out, briefly, some of the @eoyelopments now taking place which are definite danger signals. . . Let me review briefly the development of ‘transportation in this country. First, of course, there was the post road and the canal, By 1830, rail service made its appearance. During the next 100 years, railroads made ome of the most remarkable growths of any mode of transportation 1n all history. The railway network increased from <3 miles in 1880 to 199,000 miles in 1000, and further expanded to e peak of 254,000 miles just prior to the Firat World War, Rall transport serv- foe, during that time, became available from coast to coast and from Canada to Mexico, Since then, railroad efforts have been devoted chiefly to intensive improvement of existing facilities rather than to further expansion of the network. Following the First World War, came the rise of motor transport. Today, a total of 26,300,000 passenger cars, 7,698,000 trucks, and shout 185,000 buses are in operation on the Nation's streets and highways, In the decade following the First World War, air transport emerged from its experi- mental state and became an accepted means of commercial transport for passengers, mail, and express. In 1949, domestic scheduled air carrier operations included movement of 16,120,015 revenue passengers, and transport of 41,418,156 ton-miles of mail and 123,001,« 652 ton-miles of express and freight. These totals are rising sharply. The last three decades have witnessed a Tenaissance of inland waterway transporta- tion, due chiefly to large ex’ res by the Federal Government for improvement of in- land waterways, suck as rivers and channels. In the first 90 years of Federal Government, expenditures on waterways (including sea- coast harbors) totaled less than 890,000,000, Tn the decade following the First World War, they aggregated 6492,000,000; in the decade of the thirties expenditurea rose to 81,206,- 000,000; and in the decade of the forties despite postponement of work because of war, the total exceeded 8933,000,000, In fact, Guring the past 20 years the Government has spent almost twice as much on rivers and harbors as had been spent in all our na- tional history, prior to 19380. As a result of these large expenditures by Government, the volume of traffic moving over our Injand waterways showed a marked increase. Roughly, the tonnage of water- borne commerce moving over rivers, canals, and connecting channels increased three- Toid between 1922 and the beginning of the Second World War in 1939, Gince that time there have been further incrases, Despite all this recent development and expansion of other forms of transport, the basic element tn our national transportation ds still the railway. Now almost a century anda quarter old, the railroads, as the Inter- state Commerce Commission once pointed out (178 ICO 680), “now furnish the back- bone and most of the other vital bones of the transportation system of the country, and we believe this will be the situation for @ Jong time to come.” The railroads, virtually the sole mesns of gommon carrier trangport avaliable to ship- pera and travelera for many years, now find themselves faced with a mounting tide of compeition, which has developed largely since the close of the First World War. The “eonditions under which this competition is Permitted to operate, constitute a serious and growing threat tothe continued welfare of the rail industry. Unless ateps are taken to relieve this situation, we shall be guilty of permitting the easential raliroads, the very foundation of our national transportation Byetem, to deteriorate to a point where they eatnet provide the volume and quality of gervices so vital to our economic welfare, and to our national security. Thie danger be- comes particularly significant in times like these, when the international situation ts fraught with uncertainty and peril. I am not taking a position inimical to the new modes of transport which have come into being during the past 30 years. I belteve there is a distinctive place in our national transportation system for motor transport, for water-borne facilities, and for air trans- port. Insofar as they provide services charac- terized by advantages which are inherent in these new means of moving property and people, they should receive every legitimate encouragement, both by Government and shipping and traveling patrons. The railroads only object to discrimina- tion. What are the inquities in competition of which the railroads complain? They may be grouped under three general heads: sub- sidies, inequality in regulation, and the vary- ing degree to which the several modes of transportation are subjected to taxation. The effect of such inequities is, of course, loss of rail traffic and revenues, increased costs of operation, and consequent inade- quate net earnings which make it difficult for the railroads to obtain capital funds for essential improvements at moderate cost. Motor transport, water carriers operating on our inland waterways, and domestic air transport operate with extensive facilities provided at public expense. In some in- stances, as in the case of alr mall, outright subsidies are paid to carriers competing with the railroads. In most cases, no user charges are assessed against those carriers making use of the publicly provided ways over which they operate, or for various other facilities such as navigation aids for water and alr carriera, airway markers, air-traffic control, end the Hke, Commercial motor carriers using the highways usually pay less than maintenance cost and interest on the invest- ment involved. The result is that rates quoted by the car- riers which use such pubdite facilities do not represent the full cost of the services they render the public. Ratlroads, on the other hand, which provide and finance all their own facilities are forced to compete on a rate basis with carriers whose sole invest- ment is that required for procurement of equipment. The result has been to build up additional competition for the railroads, with little thought for the welfare of the railroads, or for integration of the various facilities into & sound national system, in whith each mode of transport would, if unsubsldized, serve the purpose for which best fitted. It is hardly necessary, I think, to enlarge this picture of a transportation situation with which you ali are familiar. What I would emphasize is the detrimental effect, of course, to divert important elements of trafic from rail carriers. Not only is the volume of such diversion increasing, under nt governmental policy, or lack of policy, but traffic thus weaned away from the ralls is, in most instances, higher-rated types, the loss of which bears heavily on railroad revenues. Unlike the railroads, which constitute the only 100-percent com- mon-carrier mode of transport, competing carriers are permitted to pick and choose what they will carry. Naturally they select the better-paying types of traffic. Railroads, on the other hand, must and do carry every type of shipment offered. The monetary dis- advantage such a situation creates Is exem- plified by the fact that the average ton-mile revenue received by highway carriers, com- mon and contract, which report such figures to the Interstate Commerce Commission, is atout four times the average ton-mile rev- enue of the rafiroads. This indicates the extent to which highway freight carriers select the traffic they wish to haul, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ZI have mentioned certain inequalities in regulation. Let us consider some of these inequalities and their effect on railroads, A few examplea will serve. Although the Transportation Act of 1940 brought water oarriers under the juriediction of the Inter- state Commerce Commission, that law pro- vided for so many exemptions that a large proportion of inland waterway movement, which ts directly competitive with the ratl- roads, is permitted to operate without any economic regulation whatever. These un- regulated carriers move a large percentage— probably as much as 70 or 75 percent—of all inland waterway traffic. Thus, the highway Tegulated railroads are forced to compete for a large part of inland waterway traffic with carriers over which the Government exercises No control, as far as economic regu- lation {sg concerned. Bimilarly, the Motor Carrier Act of 1936, now part II of the Interstate Commerce Act, exempts certain important classes of truckers trom regulation by the Interstate Commerce Commission. One of the escape provisions of that act relieves from the usual regula- tions motor vehicles used in carrying agri- cultural products, livestock, and fish. These exempt truckers are estimated by the Com- mission to number approximately 40,000 which ig twice as many as the 20,000 regu- lated motor carriers of property. Virtually half the fruit and vegetable crops of Florida, for example, are moved by truck which, with very limited exceptions, are exempt from any economic regulation. Such traffic is highly desirable from the standpoint of the rall- roads, but they must compete for {t against motor trucks which are subject to no re- straint as to rates or other restrictions under which the rallroads operate. Railroads operate under a heavy burden of taxation. Like any other self-supporting business, railroads provide and maintain all of their facilities and pay taxes on them, These include cars and locomotives, shops in which such equipment is repaired, office buildings, and other structures, as well ag roadways, tracks, signal systems, and numer- ous other properties. These facilities are distributed throughout the United States and are therefore subject to taxation by the several States and their various subdivisions. In addition to such taxes, railroads also pay Federal income and other taxes, besides being taxed heavily to support the retirement and unemployment insurance systems administered by the Rail. road Retirement Board. Taxes constitute a heavy drain on rail revenues, and currently take about 10 cents out of every dollar of operating revenue. In contrast to the rallroad tax situation, such carrier groups as motor carriers, water carriers, and air transport, are relieved in large measure of tax burdens. In measuring the economic value of the railroad industry as a national asset, we should recognize that in addition to pro- viding a facilitating service—low cost, mass transportation—so necessary to the smooth working of our economy and 80 vital to our national security, the ratiroads contribute heavily to the welfare of the country as purchasers, as employers, and as taxpayers. In normal years, raliroads purchase about 28 percent of our bituminous coal produc- tion, about 19 percent of the fuel ofl output, gpproximately 16 percent of the timber cut, and about 17 percent of the fron and steel output. In 1949, railroads of class I spent €1,641,000,000 tn direct purchases of material and supplies, Of that total, fuel purchases aggregated $564,000,000; expenditures for forest products totaled $142,000,000; outlays for tron and steel products amounted to $454,000,000; miscellaneous purchases amounted to $461,000,000. The raiiroads also, in 1949, spent $1,812,- 200,000 for additions and betterments to their properties; employed on the avetage
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD 1,101,500 employees, and disbursed over 84,- 378,000,000 in wages and salaries. The tax bill of the railroads in 1949 aggregated about 6833,000,000, or more than $2,200,000 a day. Incidentaliy, railway taxes took 9.7 cents out of every rail operating revenue dollar, a fact to which I have already referred. In closing, I would reemphasize our criti- cal need of railroads in times of national emergency. In the susreme test which this country faced in the last war, the railroads carried nearly three-fourths of all the Na- tion's freight traffic, more than 90 percent of war freight and more than 97 percent of organized military travel. In view of the present disturbed condition of our inter- national relations, the need for seeing that our railroads are kept in sound physical con- dition, 1s more pressing than ever before. This can be accomplished only by giving the Yallroads opportunity to earn enough to meet the capital outlays which the industry must make in order to provide a vitally needed transportation service. Railroads cannot continue indefinitely to provide the high olass of service they do provide, and to which the public is entitied, on the meager returns of recent years. Un- less relief is afforded, our basic agency of transport will deteriorate. We should not and cannot let this happen. UNESCO and the Cultivation of Human Rights EXTENSION OF REMARES HON. WILLIAM BENTON oF CONNECTICUT IN THE SENATE OF THE U..ITED STATES Monday, March 5 (legislative day of Monday, January 29), 1951 Mr. BENTON. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent to have reprinted in the Appendix of the Rzcorp the address of Dr. Richard H. Heindel, Deputy Direc- tor, UNESCO Relations Staff, Depart- ment of State, before the 1951 Conven- tion of the American Association of School Administrators meeting at At- Jantic City on February 22. Dr. Heindel until a year or two ago cerved on the staff of the Benate Foreign Relations Committee; prior to that as a valued associate of mine in the Department of State. I have long argued that UNESCO cannot stand apart from the ideological struggle that is rending the world; that it must become a vigorous champion of freedom. Herein lies its great immedi- ate opportunity. Thus I am glad to see Dr. Heindel arguing that “when con- fronted by the poisoning of minds, the stifling of the sciences, the imposition of canons of taste in art, and the sub- versive attacks on the cultural values of peoples and on the orderly improvement af disadvantaged countries,” UNESCO must work to “protect the integrity of education, science, and culture against the inroads of tyranny, totalitarianism, and—darkness.” There being no objection, the address was ordered to be printed in the Recorn, as follows: UNESOO anp THe Cuirvariow of Human Ricwrs (By Richard H. Heindel) UNESCO can be ylewed as a revolution. If the titie of this session—“UNESCO as a World Force in the Establiahment of Human Rights’’-{s taken seriously, UNESCO is cere tainiy much more than an academy, No one declaration, no one program, no one agency can comprehend the establish- ment of human rights and the staggering responsibilities which always accompany such rights. But I like to think that every- thing UNESCO touches, and everything that men and women of talents and good will do for it, alone or collectively, in any part of the world, advances the cause of human rights. Examine a few of the related, major UNESTO activitics which are “directed to- ward the peace and prosperity of mankind” at a time when “human solidarity is under trial and when human rivhts are in peril.” You may conclude that UNESCO can be tn- terpreted as an agent of brain-power and leadership—to guide the present revolutions against oppression and poverty into more democratic channels, and to inject a leaven of universalism into the stirring nationalism of many areas of the world. Iam certain that UNESCO's dyanmic role dces not frizhten us. Even Karl Marx once said, “In the eighteenth century, the Ameri- can War of Independence sounded the toc- sin for the Buropean middle class * * * in the nineteenth century the American Civil War sounded it for the European working class.” Recently, Justice William O. Doug- las suggested that the United States “direct the revolutions of the world into’ demo- cratic channels;” if we do, he adda, “We will at once enlist the support and enthusiasm of the peoples.” Time and time again, American scholars, educators, and intellectuais have tried to do something about the situation described by the Director General of UNESCO when he spoke in Cleveland, April 1949—"“The most dangerous division in the world is the one between education and ignorance, between the culturally privileged and the culturally underprivileged, between the intellectual ‘haves’ and the intellectual ‘have-notse’,” I am eaying these things because I be- lieve the fundamental objectives and pri- ority directions of UNESCO coincide with United States foreign policies generally, and with the basic motivations of American echolarly and creative workers. I am say- ing this, too, because forces hostile to UNESCO and to us have been debauching the integrity of education, science, and oul- ture, they have stolen and perverted our most cherished words and valuea, and they have generally fouled international seman- tices and the channels of communication. In my reading of American history, of American education, I find a democratic, @ynamic political and sooial heritage; a pop- ulation of many nationalities, creeds, and races; the willingness to share ideas and experience through education and by mass media; a concern for civic responsibility and individual dignity; technological skills for & world that is being rapidly changed by the impact of acience; and broad as well as specialized accomplishments in many fields of knowledge and creation. I do not find, in sum, a dreary record of reaction, war mongering, incuricus provinocialiam, ob- suroantiam, dilettantism, or cultural im~ perlaliam. I believe this analysis expiains in part why the United States takes, and ought to take, such a deep interest in heiping UNESCO find its vital role in the present world situation. Besides, there are many advantages, for ourselves and for the rest of the world, in testing and sharing Amori- can strengths and ideas through a multilat- eral agency of many nations and cultures, 1. In waging peace, in establishing the bed- rock of human rights, the widest of the cen- running through the UNESCO program, UNESCO has begun to concentrate som> of its efforts on fundamental educa- tion, within its regular program and pos- A1l67 sibly in a special project which would apply 820,000,000 over a period of 12 years for various areas atich as equatorial Africa, Latin America, the Par Kast, India, and the Middle East. The masses want education and give it a higher priority that we might tmagine under the present circumstances. Projects aimed at preparing the illiterate, the unfranchised, and the young for useful national and tntere national participation require neal, patience, diplomacy, and skills. Here is a task which may very well involve the competences and contributions of all the scholarly and cre- ative fields presently identified with UNESCO, Of course, this is  Jong-term process. But immediate, vigorous, and proper execution now will yield immediate values and results which are urgently needed. | I eam confident that American education has much to contribute in know-how, per- sonnel, end epirit to this priority, to this revolution if you like. And you can work on it at home or fn the foreign fields. 2. Economic well-being is an aspiration for all people throughout the world. UNESCO has got under way its share of the world’s work in technical sssistance and has agree- ments with 13 countries. Basically, this also includes the encouragement of improved training for tomorrow's leaders in educa- tion and sctence. Toasibly, if one looks at the time tables, at the urgencies, secondary education may need as much invigoration as @ program for universal literacy. Here again all the disciplines and special- ties can participate, perhaps not so much to elaborate ag to share the world’s store of knowledge. Yes, UNESCO is as revolutionary as the spirit behind our great elementary and secondary school gzystem, and behind the act of our land-grant colleges and universities. But this is not enough. And, fortunately, UNESCO does not think so either. 8. It is heartening to hear the Director General of UNESCO declare that: “UNESCO is first and foremost an organ of education for peace under the law.” This must cer- tainly mean a vigorous and effective support for the United Nations’ system, human rights, collective security, and the development of a sense of loyalty to international cooperation, The programs of “education for interna- tional understanding” and of “teaching about the United Nations and the special- ized agencies,” one may surmise, will enable influential leaders and major public opinion groups to play a more effective, intelligent part in influencing the course of interna- tional affairs toward peace and security. A positive educational m in support of the kind of tnternational life the UN stands for is necessary on a world-wide basis. This seems to me political education of the high- est order—politiaal literacy 1s added to jit- eracy. A thinking citizenry cannot but be @n appropriate concept for UNESCO. It appears to me, to adapt the words of the executive board's resolution about Korea last August, that these programs will help to reinforce “in the minds of men the intellec- tual and moral defences of peace through law.” This is important, even though we must admit that only free minds have al- ternatives from which to choose. This work will help to correlate intellec- tual enlightenment and the maintenance of peace and justice, Once more, this activity helps us to achieve a synoptic view—it is not just what UNESCO can co for particular educational, scientific, or cultural activities, it is also what education, science, and cul- ture can do for UNESCO. 8o much for these three priorities. There are other projects and intrumental- ities which are related to today's theme, and also to what you are doing and can do in your own community. You are a contributor to and beneficiary of whatever helps to carry out the demon- stration of world cultural interdependence,
A168 Certain of you, for example, have been try- ing hard to broaden and deepen foreign area studies in your school systems. A sincere recognition of the achievements of other cul- ‘tures helps to promote solidarity among di- verse peoples. UNESOO, through aotivities in the field of book and gift cowpons, trana- lations, the interchange of persons, and the removal of barriers, has aimed at widening end improving the sharing and interchange of eesential scholarly and cultural data. There is little doubt that UNESCO has to solve a communication problem in the rela- tively new field of intercultural relations and eultural diplomacy. This is not easy be- cause tn many countries the intellectuals have not solved communication among them- aslyes or with the masses of their own coun- try. The way is wide open for social inven- tions, workable devices, and the testing of traditional methods in the field of inter- national eultural relations. UNESCO has also to recognize and digest the growing knowledge about social action and the roots of social behavior. It will have to identify pasic predispositions and motivations, and it will have to find the best ways for UNESCO to influence and modify attitudes and be- havior, UNESCO cannot be designed merely as an arena for genteel discussion on seemingly ir relevant topics, or far neutral aloofness when confronted by the poisoning of minds, the atifiing of the sciences, the imposition of canons of taste in art, and the subversive at- tacks on the cultural values of peoples and on the orderly improvement of disadvan- taged countries. UNESCO and its national commissions can and should develop the prestige which would help to achieve bal- ance and perspective in a troubled world, and which would help to maintain the unity and morale of the UNESCO world. UNESCO, as many of us here may view it, has a particular responsibility to protect the integrity of edu- cation, science, and culture againat the in- roads of tyranny, totalitarianism, and— darkness, Yes, the cultivation of human rights is a plodding, searching, arduous task which is only occasionally lighted with drama. It is good that UNESCO is an ally in that task. The Postal Service EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. MATTHEW M. NEELY OF WEST VIRGINIA IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES Monday, March § (legistative day of Monday, January 29), 2951 Mr. NEELY. Mr. President, I have been requested ta ask unanimous con- sent that there be printed in the Appen- dix of the Recorp an editorial entitled “Fourth Class Service,” which appeared in the Chicago Dally News recently. There being no objection, the editorial ‘was ordered to be printed in the Rrcorp, as follows: Fourts Ciass Servics A Daily News staff member who has lived in many parts of the worid,-and who is now in New York City, has been keeping tabs on the mail service between Chicago and New York, He saya that ordinary mail from here to hts home in Queens takes 4 days—apout we same time as air mail from Chicago to 2, His conclusion is that the United States now hae about the same letter service as a second-rate Latin American country. It’s better in Brasil and in many European coun- tries whose governments we subsidize. If the time ever comes when our Governe ment finds a decreased need for raising live ing standards all over the world, perhaps some of the savings could be devoted to im- proving the mail] service in the United tates. Beloit (Wis.) Buccaneers Basketball Leaders EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONSIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 5, 1951 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speak- er, I am including as part of my re- marks an article which has been pre- pared by Mr. Jud Allen, publicity man for Beloit College, on his favorite sub- ject of the Beloit College basketball team. I am submitting his statement which brings worthy recognition to a small Midwestern College which has only 400 eligible men for varsity athletics yet is in big-time basketball in this country. I am proud to present the article in question: Beloit College’s basketball team has often been referred to as “the smallest school in the big time.” The 104-year-old liberal arts college located on the southern boundary of Wisconsin has Slightly less than a thousand students, with only 400 men eligible for varsity athletics. While 1t has made an impressive basketball record since the arrival of Coach Dolphe Stanley following the war, lke any small school, it must defeat an army of sports skeptics before gaining any recognition in athletics. The unheralded Buccaneers made their debut in the big time several weeks ago when they met a strong DePaul University team at the Chicago Stadium. What re- sulted was one of the most surprising ex- hibitions of basketball ever seen in any arena this or any season. Before the largest crowd of stadium sea- son (more than 13,000) Beloit defeated De- Paul 94 to 60, to set a new stadium scoring record, previously held by Kentucky and the University of TWlinois (86 points). It was DePaul's only decisive defeat of the sea- son, having lost by three points to Ken- tucky, the Nation's number one team, and in a double overtime to Oklahoma A & M, DePaul also listed the University of Ilinots as one of its victims. Illinois is currently leading the Big Ten. Here were some of the comments by the Chicago scribes following the game: “Beloit gave the most amazing exhibition of speed and bali-handling I’ve ever wit- neseed,” said sportscaster Joe Wilson. “Beloit easily belongs among the Nation’s top 10. It is the most beautifully condi- tioned club I've ever seen,” said Bob Russell of the Chicago Daily News. “I wag tired just watching them. Nobody ean run that much,” commented Dutch Lonborg. athletic director of Kansas Univers ty. “I'd rank the Buccaneers among the firat 10,” said Bd Sainsburg of the United Press, "Beloit 1s the runningest and best passing team I’ve ever seen in my obaching career, After Kentucky and Oklahoma A & M, they APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD are ag good as any team in the country,” said Ray Meyer, coach of DePaul. “fen't ft wonderful that a Httle school like Beloit can have a team like that. Amazing,” said Tug Wilson, Big Ten Athletio Commissioner. , These were just a few of the comments made by a& completely surprised crowd of basketball fans. Coach Stanley had this to say after the game: “I only hope that this game will help the cause of all small colleges who may have everything but the recognition they deserve, So many people seem to forget that excel- lence has always been based on quality, not size,” Lebanon, Conn.: Example in Democracy EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. HORACE SEELY-BROWN, JR. OF CONNECTICUT IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 5, 1951 Mr. SEELY-BROWN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to insert in the CONGRESSIONAL Recorp, the text of an article which appeared in the New York Herald Tribune of March 4, under the page 1 heading “Booklet on Connecticut village going to Russia to answer lies.” Mr. Speaker, this refers to Lebanon, a town in New London County in my dis- trict, and I would like to say that I share with every citizen of Lebanon the feeling of pride that this town has been selected as one of the typical communities in the United States, to demonstrate to the people of other lands, the kind of lives we lead and the type of folks that we are. I would like to say, also, Mr. Speaker, that I commend the State Department for its judgment in the selection of Leb- anon as an exemplary community. It is one of our historic towns, having been settled in the closing years of the seven- teenth century, named in 1697 for Leb- anon in the Near East, and incorporated in 1700. It was the home of Gov. Jona- than Trumbull, the celebrated War Sec- retary referred to by George Washington as “Brother Jonathan,” and it was from the War Office in Lebanon that much of the business of organizing and equipping and supplying Washington’s armies was transacted. That is not its only claim to fame, by any means, It is a beautiful and peace-~ ful community whose citizens are regu- lar, freedom-loving Americans, with reverence for the great past of our coun- try, and concern about its future, and about the peace of the world, There being no objection, the article was ordered to be printed in the Recorp, as follows: Booxter on Conwnecricur Viiiace Gora tro Russia To ANswar Lisgs—Srare DeparTMEnT Printing 500,000 SHowinc Democracy nv LesaNoN—Disritsvtion Puan Is Secesr {By Bernard Peyton, Jr.) The State Department announced yestere day in New York and Washington that it has prepared a 24-page pamphiet about an Amer- ican village and will print 500,000 copies, many of them for distribution behind the
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD iron curtain, to combat lies about this coun- try there, The Department picked out Lebanon, Conn., a rural and unsophisticated dairy town of 1,400 population, 25 miles southeast of Hartford, as best exemplifying the demo« cratic process tn action. This town, which was founded 251 years ago, and has never yielded very far to big city attractions or pressures, should appeal to peoples all over the world, the Department indicated. The pamphlet, filled with photographs of village activities, will be printed in 18 lan- guages including Russian. Michael J, Mc- Dermott, press officer of the State Depart~ ment, declined to state how it would be dis- tributed within Soviet-controlled areas. “If I told you, maybe we couldn't dis- tribute it,” he said. The cover of the pamphlet bears a picture of children in front of a library, and the story opens with an aerial view of the rolling coun- tryside in which Lebanon is situated. The commentary begins: “Beset by anxlety, a tiny farming village has an air of unreal tranquillity. To the casual eye such would be the first impression of Lebanon—e ttle cluster of buildings some 60 miles from the shores of the Atlantic Ocean in the northeastern United States. Each rocky fleld is bounded by watat-high fences of stone, culled from the earth through the 200 years the flelds have been cultivated. Little traffic passes by.” The narrative carries the reader through town meetings, social get-togethers at homes, and the various occupations of the residents. A theme links the successive lay-outs: The young couples in town feel the need for a kindergarten, but are opposed by the elders, who feel the need ts not too drastic. The young members work up interest in their project, and wtimately, through a process indigenous to democracy, put it over. This situation, the Department said, closely reflects its actual prototype in Lebanon, Lebanon's historical importance, pro- claimed by its own residents and by State chapters of patriotic societies, which hold their annual conventions on the village green, did not influence the selection of the town for the pamphlet, according to the Department. Nevertheless, it conceded that the home- bred background of the village’s residents— many of whom are descendants of the orig- inal settlers—has been responsible for main- taining the village heritage. Headstones in the town cemetery are inscribed with the names of Revolutionary War soldiers, and the famous village green, a mile long and 600 feet wide, was a camping aite for Lafayette and a French detachment for 8 months dur- ing the war. HAS HISTORIC CHURCH At the south end of the green, known as Lebanon Common, stands the Lebanon Con- gregational Church, founded the year the village was started. John Trumbull, the painter, designed the present replacement for the original structure. His father, Jona- than Trumbull, was the only governor elected by the people and not an appointee of George III, and inspired the peopie of the Btate to help General Washington in his bleakest hour. Governor Trumbull, a resi- dent of Lebanon, delivered 300 cattle to the American forces at Valley Forge when their provisions were almost exhausted. The town in those days was the fifth largest in the State, with a population of 4,000. Its residents employed themselves much as they do now—in farming. Today dairy herds graze over many hillsides near- by, with chickens and vegetables adding to the farmer's fare. There are no industrial plants, and most of whet is grown is con- sumed locally. The disinterest in an export economy is typical of the residents. The town was once XCVII~App.——4 & stagecoach stop on the New York—Boston road. When the railroad pushed through, the citizens vigorously opposed it, and today the Willimantic branch of the New Haven bypesecs the town to its function 6 miles north, TOWN HAS FOUR CHURCHES Lebanon, besides its kindergarten, boasts an elementary school and the Tisdale High School. Although the Congregational Church is most prominent, with {ts command of the green, the residents attend a Baptist, a Roman Catholic, and & Methodist Church, with pride in the influence these churches have had on community development. “Lebanon people do not ask anyone else to accept their ideas,” the pamphlet states, “but they do have some beliefs which are perhaps larger in scope than this one small village: “They believe: The needs of the individual are the concern of the community; the com- munity can act successfully to meet those needs; the goals of stability and progress can be attained within the framework of a free society. Foreign Policy Questionnaire EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. T. MILLET HAND OF NEW JERSEY IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 5, 1951 Mr. HAND. Mr. Speaker, pursuant to permission granted me by the House, I include a draft of o letter and a form of foreign policy questionnaire, which I propose to send to people in my district. I shall later report the results with the hope that we may obtain some help from a cross-section opinion of my area, The letter and questionnaire follow: My Dear Frmnp: Most problems now facing the people have their root in one thing: The foreign and military policy of the United States. For example: 1. Upon the nature of our policy depends the severity and duration of the draft of our young men. Their very Hives depend upon decisions in the immediate future. 2. The President’s budget calls for $71,- 000,000,000 cash, a Federal tax increase of approximately sixteen billion. New Jersey's share is calculated at nearly two and a half billion or about $2,000 for the year from the average head of a family of four. A large percentage of this money is allocated to the support of a possible global war. Taxes are high and will be very much higher. Very few begrudge any sacrifice necessary for Amer- ica’s defense, but millions object to preparing for a vast land war in Asia. 8. Prices are high, and despite controls, will be higher. Goods of all kinds will be searcer; restricted. Black markets will be back; possibly rationing. These are incident to a war economy, which in turn depends on the wisdom or the folly of the foreign policy. Illustrations could be multiplied. You can be sure that the subject of paramount importance in the whole world today is the foreign policy of the United States. Therefore, I am issuing a short special questionnaire, devoted to this single sub- ject. Many of you Know my views. I want to know more about yours, That's the way @ representative govern- ment works the best. Your prompt answers will help me to de- cide issues now before us, and you will be Al169 BY participating in what is called the Great hate. ‘ Sincerely, Miter Hanon, Member of Congress. Return to me at 180¢ House Office Building, Washington, D. ©. QUESTIONNATRE “The great dobate” now proceeding in the country and in the Congress, concerns itaelf with a fundamental question of whether the President, as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces, may, by his own action, send them into war in Korea, or send them, as he now proposes, to occupy Hurope, or whether Congress, having the sole right to make war, must approve basic policies which involve war or the possibility of war. What do you think? 1, Committing ground troops to Europe, or elsewhere outside of the continental United States: ) A. May be done by the President alone, O B. Must be done only with the con- sent of Congress. C) C. Should not be done at all. 2. Dealing with question No. 1 a little further, Senator Tarr argues that if Russia intends to attack Western Europe, it will do s0 now, and certainly not wait the two or more years it will take to prepare de. fenses there; moreover that no land army can be built sufficiently large to resist the huge numbers that Russia can bring to the | attack. Eisenhower feels that Europe has the will to resist, and if encouraged by our leadership and divisions, will build up a strength that will deter war: Which is closest to your position? (a) ( Give Europe all the aid necessary in an attempt to build strong defenses there. (b) [) Send the four divisions now pro- posed, but no more. (c) (] Send no men, but supply Europe with equipment, (d) 1 Send no equipment or aid, unless Europe raises its own adequate army. (e) O Keep out of Europe entirely, 8. If Russia attacked Western Europe to- morrow, should we: (a) C] Continue to mobilize a large land army to fight Russia in Europe, Aaia, or both, (b) () Concentrate our Air Force in Eng- land, or at any other available point, and at- tack and harass the Russian Army in Europe. (c) () Attack Russia itself by air. (d) ( Let Burope protect itself and con- cern ourselves exclusively with the defense of this hemisphere. 4. On June 25, 1960, the North Koreans launched an attack on South Korea. Fol- lowing the Truman doctrine, which assumes it to be our duty to help any free people anywhere resist aggression, the President or- dered the Navy, Air Force, and most of our Army and Marine Corps into action. What was originally described as a police action has resulted in 50,000 American casual- ties. Was the action justified? What should we have done, or now do? (a) [] Send the Navy and Air Force to harass the North Koreans, but kept away from a land engagement. (b) Q Done nothing on the assumption that our vital interests were not affected, (c) (] Watted to see if the United Nations were willing to do their full share, (da) (1) Gone ahead as we did to uphold the principle of collective security. (e) © Now that we're in it, fight it out. (f) O Withdraw from Korea. 6. Nearly all Americans agree that the freedom of the United States must be de- fended at any cost. The question is where and how? Leading Americans have recently declared a variety of views, They are: summed up here very briefly. Mark the one closest to your opinion:
(a) 1 Truman administration: free people everywhere in restating “Contain” coramuniem wherever it secks to dominate. For exemple, fight in Korea, ssstet end perhaps fight in Indochina, Tran, India; wand our men and arms to Bu- rope, In ehort, fight wherever Russia, or these influenced by Russia, ight. (b) .[) Kennedy: Give up Asia as e bad job, and leave Burope to protect itself, Withdraw to the Western Semisphere, and build swongest. possible defense for North and South Armerica. Russia will bite off more than it can chew, and will be unable to main- tain tts dominant position. te} ( Hoover: Concentrate on defenses of , but maintain our sur- rounding positions as in Jrpan, the Philip- pines, etc. Ala Burope only after it proves its willingness to help itself. (a) ( Tatt: Much like Hoover. Is willing to send a Itmtted nuniber of divisions to Bu- rope, but insists that Congress muct approve, not just the President. (e) C Dewey: The administration posi- tion, exoept that he favors all-out mobiliza- tion, including at least 100 divisions. 6. A group of 123 Republican Representa- tives recently filed a six-point Declaration of Policy, under which they propose to change the course of the administration's foreign policy. How do you feel about each it’ point? Yes {1 WoO 1. Whatever or ore miYitary or political policy is e, it mi be determined with the full participation and of the Congress. Yeo O No 2. Make this country im- pregnable to attack. Yes CO Nol 8. Reduce nonessential ci- vilien expenditures, We C} No 4. Build a strong defense system in the Western Hemisphere. Yes C] No 5. Establish a strong de- fense fine in the Atlantic and Pacific. Refuse further aid of any kind to Western Burope untess that Western Eu- rope is carrying its full share of the burden, In any cave tnvite Britain and the British Commonwealth of Nations to partictpate fully tn this program. Yes 1] Wo 6. Conclude peace treaties with Germany, Japan, and Austria, 7. Do you favor— Yee © Nol} Draft of 18-year-olds. Yee (] No 1) Draft of married men be~ tween 19 and 26. Yes O No] Draft of veterans. & Qf the prinaipal branches of the armed services, which does the strategy of this country require to be at top strength? (a) Army. (yb) 1) Navy. (c) () Air Force. Sign if you choose. Ce ahamnenstmnened Free Wheat te India EXTENSION OF REMARKS WON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF wWrsCcoMsIn IM THE BOVEE OF REPRESENTATIVES , Monday, March &, 195% Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speak- important question the current legislation: “Shall the Amer- joan taxpayer alone pay the hill for free wheat to India?” What about the United Nations helping out? - The edi- torial follows: Faun Wremat to Torpta India appealed to the United States for millions of bushels of wheat to avert a famine and there are indications that the wheat will be given without charge. That is typical cf American generosity, and the urge to take care of unfortunate people who are starving is traditionally American. We hope that wheat is furnished immediately. But why didn’t India ask the United Na- tions instead of the United States? Dozens of countries in tho UN raise wheat. Of course, the answer is obvious. America doesn’t sel] anything to people in trauble; it le all free, and the American taxpayer foots the bill. We'd like to ask whether wheat that 1s paid for wouldn't alleviate a famine as qui kty as free wheat? Some of the richest people in the world lve in India. Ten Billion Dollars Budget Cut EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. DANIEL A. REED OF MEW TORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 5, 1951 Mr. REED of New York. Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Federal Tax Policy has just proposed a comprehensive plan to reduce the $71,000,000,000 Pederal budg- et by $10,000,000,000. I am in hearty accord with the objective of many of our leading citizens and leading organiza- tions to cut nonmilitary spending. I be- lieve that many billions of dollars can be saved the taxpayers of this country by a broad program of flacal retrenchment, The plan proposed by the Committee on Federal Tax Policy is a step in the right direction. Some conclusions by the committee I cannot completely agree with. But I do think that this exhaus- tive ..wudy is timely and the plan merits the thorough consideration of the Con- grecs and the people. The proposal of the comm 'ttee follows: Wasnimeron, March 6.—Immeditate sus- pension of all nonmilitary Federal spend- ing programs for the fiscal year 1952 was proposed today as the first step in a plan to Cut $10,000,000,000 from the projected $71.6 ne plan, which we panied . was accom, a breakdown arexs where Savings could be made, was by the Oom- mittee on Federal Tax , Corsposed of five leading fiscal authorities. Following suspension of “the operation of every provision of the law now in force re- quiring expenditures or s ns,” theese her steps would effect the saving: 1. Congress, with the cooperation of the President, would ask the Budget Bureau to prepere a new budget on a clean-elate ba- aie, with no coramitments to a roe ne or group, the total betng $10,000, low the present 871.6 bi!lion. 2. Congress would then consider the re- vised proposals on a clean-~slate basis and would permit no additional expenditures not by the Budget Burean, uniess a Budget Bureau proposals. There should be no exceptions in the sus- pension of spending “except for direct (not APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD indirect) military expenditures or interna- tional aid,” said the committee, pointing os that no detail is shown for these two cate- in the President's new budget for Gs- cal 1052. Laws relating to interest on the publtc debt would be ieft undisturbed. The recommendations were contained in.a 82-page study made public by Roswell Ma- gill, former Under Secretary of the Treasury, who is chairman of the committee, Other members are Pred W. Fairchild, Enox pro- fessor emeritus of economics, Yale Univer- sity; Rowland BR. Hughes, comptroller of the National City Bank of New York; Walter A. Cooper, well-known accountant and former chairman of the Committee on Federal Taxa- tion of the American Institute of Aceount- ants; and Thomas N. ‘Tarleau, former tax legislative counsel of the United States “We are recommending this ciean-alate approach to Federal spending as a sheer ne- cessity at this time,” said Mr. Megill. “Few people seem to realize that some $35,000,- 090,000 in the propoved bucget comes from previous authorizations and commitments, making it virtually impossible far the pres- ent Congress to effect needed reductions in these areas. To avotd an intolerable tax burden, Congress must act firmly. “The drastic demands of the present situ- ation require drastic action. Budget par- ing ts essential. But no one believes that paring will do the whole job. The need is to start with a clean slate, so that only ex- penditures that can be proved necessary un- Ger today's: conditions will be authorized. With teamwork between the executive and legislative branches of the Government and the understanding and alert support of the public, this can be done.” The committee said that a clean-slate policy will have the additional advantage of strengthening the sppropriations procedure by giving Congress better annual control over expenditures. For sams years, it was contended, the appropriations and expend- itures have been getting further apart. By June 30, 1952, unspent appropriations under the budget will have accumulated to $81,300,000,000. Most of the study, entitled “Financing Defense: Can Expenditures Be Reduced?”, 1s devoted to @ detatiod discussion of nonmil- rearranged the budget into new groupings: Loans, €2,100,- 000,000; public works, commodity inven- tories and equipment, $3,700,000,000; aids and special services for programs of State and local governments and others, $0,600,000,000 (domestic) and 67,000,000,000 (inter~ national); and other current operating exe penditures, $2,400,000,000. This totel, which the committee desig- nated the reducible arenas, comes to 024,800,000,000. “Not every ttem in the nondefense area of expenditure can be eliminated,” said the atudy. “However, under present-day con- ditions .nd necessities, the burden of proof is not upon the citizen to demonstrate where reduction can be made. Rather, the burden of proof falls on the Government and its aepartments. Bach item should be justified for retention only after a thorough review of its purposes without regard either to any previous approval of tts programs or to legislation on the statute books.” The committee's review of reducible areas includes the following recommendations to 1. A prompt withdrawal of the Federal Government from the lending field, and a limitation of its future operations to servic- ing and collecting outstanding loans, with an estimated saving in fiscal 1982 of #1,500,000,000. A deep cut in the public-works program and 8 suspension of all projects not con- tributing directly to some essential defense
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ‘to our Government that it would be will- purpose, with a resultant: saving in fiscal 1982 of $780,000,000. %. Drastic curtailment of Federal aid, gtants, subsidy, and spectal services pro- grams, largely by making the States respon- sible for various services now supported by the Federal Government, with an estimated saving of $3,000,000,000 in fiscal 1952, 4. Immediate application of remaining re- forms outlined by the Hoover Commission and a general tightening up of Federal man- agement to eliminate waste, with a saving of €1,000,000,000 in fiscal 1952. Adding another #2,000,000,000 in savings resulting from sale of loans, mortgages, and commodities, the committee arrived at @ nondefense reduction goal of $8,250,000,000. It warned, however, that “the precise ar.ounts in the budget total that can be eliminated by applying standards of prudent judgment will have to be carefully worked out by the Congress, with the aid of the administration and the alert and continuous active support of the public.” With respect to defense expenditures, the committee noted that no attempt was made to determine how much could be saved from the 87,000,000,000 included in the 1952 budget for international aid, or in the $41,000,000,- 000 listed for the military. It also suggested further savings by more exhaustive inspec- tion of civilian expenditures. “Giving recognition to the very many ad- ditiona) opportunities for saving, it is cons servative to conclude that a reduction of at least $10,000,000,000 is possible, while still leaving intact all the government that a free nation requires.” The committee based its recommendations on the fact that “we must look forward to an extended period, possibly 10 years or more, of tensions abroad and huge budget demands at home.” Pointing out that there is little prospect of a large budget deficit in fiscal 1951, ending June 30, the committee added that there are just three ways to make up the gap of 816,- 800,000,000 expected between revenues and expenditures for fiscal 1952: reduce expendl- tures, increase taxes, borrow. In supporting the principle of pay-as-wee- go, the committee explained: “To increase our present peak tax bill of $55,100,000,000 enough to cover expenditures of $71,600,000,000 is to strain our economy and heavily burden our whole people. To borrow the money to meet such a budget is to fan the flames of inflation. On the other hand, even if budget expenditures are cut sub’ tantially, very generous provision will still be made not only for all defense re- quirements but for essential and reasonable nondefense activities. We can then tax our- selves enough to meet the total bill. * * * Our citizens must tighten their belts. They can fairly require the Government to show similar prudence in spending.” India Wants To Pay for Grain EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCONGIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 6, 1951 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speak- er, there has been a good deal of misin- formation about the so-called gift of grain to India which is supposed to take care of starving people in that unfortu- nate land. Asa matter of fact.the In- dian Government did not ask for a gift of wheat for this purpose but it suggested ing to pay for any grain that. we sold them on a long-term credit basis. Why then should the American taxpayer be asked to foot the bill for this grain when the Indian Government is willing to pay for it? The answer to that question can only be secured from the planners in the State Department and those who ad- vance the threadbare argument that a gift of this grain will stop communism in India, Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks, I am including an article by that well-known newsman, Mr. Henry Hazlett, who has an article in the cur- rent issue of Newsweek entitled “How To Cause a Famine.” I commend this arti- cle to all Members of this House: How To Cause a Famine (By Henry Hazlitt) “This program,” said President Truman, in asking Congress to give the Indian Govern- ment 76,000,000 bushels of grain, “does not constitute a precedent for continuing to pro- vide food to India on a grant basis or for providing similar aid for other countries.” But it does, of course, constitute precisely such a precedent. We cannot do less in fu- ture for India or any other country without being accused of less generosity or plain dis- crimination. Famine and starvation should, of course, always be prevented or relleved when hue manly possible. But we must also ask what caused it, whose duty it is to relieve it, and what steps are essential to prevent its recur- rence. It has gradually, precedent by precedent, become the assumption of most foreigners and most American Fair Dealers that when any real or imagined deficiency of any- thing whatever exists anywhere on earth, it must be made good primarily, if not solely, at the expense of the American taxpayer. Yet even the Indian Government did not ask us for more than a long-term loan to enable 1t to buy this grain. Given reasonable pru- dence, it could easily have repaid such ea loan, Why did Mr. Truman recommend a gift? The process will be this. America will give the grain. But the average Indian (nearly 85 percent of the Indian people are illiterate) will probably never know this. For the gift will be to the Nehru govern~ ment, and the Nehru government will sell the grain to India’s hungry. Moreover, the Nehru government will be allowed to keep for statist schemes even the counterpart tunds it gets for selling what we give. Just as Mr. Truman ascribed the Yugo- slavian food shortage solely to the drought, so he now ascribes the Indian famine solely to natural disasterse—earthquakes, floods, droughts, and plagues of locusts. Yet the famine has at least been intensified, if not principally caused, by the economic policies of the Nehru government. 1. The Nehru government is a planning government, u Socialist government. Like all such governments it has embarked on a Brandiose industralization program. This means that it has diverted land, labor, and capital from agricultural to industrial pro- duction. This has directly reduced ia's production of faod. ‘Mr. Truman apparently approves of this compulsory diversion, For he wants to compel American taxpayers to subsidize it. It is explicitly because he wishes the Nehru government to have funds to eon- tinue this long-range economic development program that he thinks American and not Indian taxpayers should be asked to pay for the present Indian food deficiency. a. Speotfically, the Nehru government ine tensified India’s food shortage by its iscla- tiontst efforts to become independent of Pak- istan (or anywhere else) for cotton and jute. It ordered a reduction ta grain-growing scre- age to increase cotton and jute acreage. 8. The Nehru government has uot per- mitted free markets in agriculture. It has put price ceilings on grain. These have, as always, discouraged and reduced the preduc- tion and sale of grain. The government has resorted to forced government procurement of grain from peasant growers. Our Goy~ ernment is asking American taxpayers to suffer from these policies and is not suggest- ing any change in them. Therefore the food shortage 1s likely to recur. The argument that India cannot pay #190,000,000 for grain because it has only Hmited foreign exchange reserves and an unfavorable balance of payments is eco- nomic nonsense. These conditions are the result of the Nehru government's own ex- change-contro] measures. It has made dole lars scarce in the same way as it has made foodstuffs scarce—by putting artifictal price ceilings on them. In this grain discussion the whole em- phasis has been on distribution, But in the long run nothing can save India or the world from poverty and famine but greater pro- duction. And thero is willful blindness to the fact that governing planning, price-fix- ing, and socialism inevitably discourage, re~ duce, and disrupt production. The Sampson Exposé As Told by George O'Conner, Newshawk De Luxe © - EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL OF NEW YORK IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March. 5, 1951 Mr. EDWIN ARTHUR HALL. Mr. Speaker, a few days ago my good friend, George O’Conzor, Binghamton City councilman, reporter, and radio com- mentator, made some startling revela- tions in the Binghamton Sun through his daily column, City Desk. Mr. O’Connor spent several days at Sampson, near Geneva, N. Y., which was used as a4 training stetion by the Navy in World War I, and recently has been taken over by the Air Force. Mr. O'Connor's investigation is an eye- opener, to say the least, I feel sure his disclosures, which follow in part, will be of deep interest to all the countless read- ers of the Concressronat Recor. Mr. Speaker, I include Mr. O’Connor's report on Sampson herewith: [Station WINR, City Desk Broadcast, February 28, 7 p. m.] Our operation Sampson started officially as we walked up to the main gate of the sprawl- ing former Naya) station. Blue-clad Air Force guards with guns stood at the gates tu stop visitors. It looked as if w might have « tough time getting in with- out explaining what we were there for-—to have a look at what makes the place tick, We wa.ked into a small building near the gate—a place bearing a sign reatling “Se- ourlt; aad A TV orgeant behind the desk looked up, asked what ve wanted, We said we would like to go into the base. “O. K.", be replied cheerfully, “do you want & temporary or & permanent pas.’ Not ons question as to who we were, what we wanted or what we planned to do inside
All?2 We sald we just wanted to go in and he told us to drive right in. Yor all the guards knew, we might have had the back end of the car filled with bombs, poison, or both. Put we said nothing about thre lack of se- ourtt, and drove inside. Here was an important military installa- tion, where thousands of Air Force boys are to be trained, and anyone, Russian or “ body alse, oan drive in and out without - ing any questions. Of course, we're not at war, but there cer- tainly should be a little security where hhumen lives and military installations are eoncerned, Inside the baso it's hari to believe what you see. The once shipshaps bulldings are aprawling in disrepair in a sea of dirty, w ist-high weeds. The sleeping giant that once wea potent, vigorous Sampson, ls a down -at-the-heels wreck. Stark brown piuildings, with paint peeled off, are pitted with thousands of broken windows and cracks. Doors creak on sagging hinges, ches sag, and wind whistles through the n windows and doors. The plumbing khat waan't stolen by looters, 16 almost use Crews of workers—eome up to $300 @ week—are trying to put the piace back in shape, But it’s a big job. When the Navy left Sampson in 1946, it left in a hurry. Workmen told us of finding molding food in the big electric ovens in the mess halls, The umbing wee split and cracked, and many lers were flooded betattee of someone's neglect. £ ve electrical eq: t had been ripped from the walls and must be re- placed. From the time the Navy left, Sampson was at the mercy of the looters. They didn't miss much, including Just about everything that could be carried away. Squatters lived in the furnished buildings for months after the sailors moved out, and apparently no one paid much attention to poor old Samp- son, Sampson was bullt in 1942, at a cast of $82,000,000. The rebuilding job may run almest that much. The firet contractor got the contract on a bid of $3,877,721, bat that was only the beginning. Last Fridey, when the contract was terminated, the contracter aaid he had spent alaast $6,000,000. Now there's a new coniract. This one ealls for repair work to the time of about $18,000,000, and new construction amount- ing to $12,000,000. This is going to be a cost-piue proposition. Meanwhile, the Atr Porce is going ahead with tts job of train- @ good job despite big handicaps at the rundown base. We'll tell you more about that tomorrow. Yor the last couple of dnys we have talked about the run-down, dilapidated yolcal plant at Bampson, or what was left of it when the Air Force moved tn to set up shop, Then the contractor took over and started Alr Force, which hed to wait, before cocupy- Ing Dttiidings, until! repairs hed been mado by the ctyilian workers. Aa tt ta, the Air Force is operating under tremendous handicaps—handicaps that might not exist if the base bad not been per- Aduch of the millions of dollars in repatr work now in progress could have heen avoided, tf fust a amati working force had stayed on the bese after the Navy left in 1046, to keep the place tn shape. Unfortunately, that’s now water over the dam, and the blame will probably never be placed where it belongs. Ducle Sucker, or rather the millions of taxpayers, are paying and will be paying in withholding taxes, for a colossal case of neg- lect and short-sightednese. When the frst batches of trainees ar- Tived, there was a shortage of mattresses. ‘The Air Force had to use mattress covers stuffed with pillows and blankets so some of the youngsters would have a comfortable place to sleep. Now, despite the confusion at the hase, the Air Force is doting its bast—and doing a pretty commendable job—of running a training operation. We had lunch in one of the mess halis— only the Air Force doesn’t zefer to mess— but as breakfast, luncheon, and dinner. We went through the line with the base public information officer, Bob Merritt, who is doing a good job of trying to keep the public and the parents of the trainecs in- formed as to whai’s going cn. Luncheon consisted of some vegetable soup, bot dogs and sauerkraut, a slab of American cheese, some plums—which we , bread and butter, and coffee, flus a green sulad. It was good, nourlahing chow, not perhaps eerved in Waldorf Astoria style, but never- theless pretty solid stuff for hungry airmen. Most of the equipment in the mess halls fe trercd new, installed for the Air Force. duct what bappened to the Mavy stuff, no One seemed to know quite clearly. At point, there tmn‘t much the Air Porce can do in the way of furnishing leisure- time recreation for the trainees. There were bowling alleys tn the ship store peared. We tried to find out where they went but no one esemed to know. They're working on the theater butidings end drill halls, which also have swimming pools, to get them tm shape for use—but tt will be a long time before they‘re back in Class-A shape. ‘work. But the piace wasn’t usable the way the Aly Force found ft, and there was nothing ‘tise to do but start spending. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Restore the Constitutional Powers of Congress Ce eeeaunmemnenl EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OP WiS0CNGiN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March &, 1951 Mr. SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr, Speak- er, I am including as part of my remarks a radio speech delivered by my colleague, the distinguished gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Hann], over redio station WOL on Sunday, March 4. Mr. Ham clearly states the position of the great weight of authority of those who believe that the President has the right to dis- his speech at this point in the Recorp. It is a remarkably clear statement and I commend it to all Merabers: Restore THE ComwsvizurionalL Powxes oF Comgasss (By Hon. T. Mrtuer Hany) A few weeks ago a respected newspaper of this city said, in part: “There can be little doubt that the Con- stitution invests in the President the right, the duty, the authority, and the power to order, without prior convent of Congress, the dispatch of American military forces to for- eign areas when and if he finds that such action is necessary to sefeguard the inter- ests and security of the United States. This principie—a principle put into action by several of our part Chief Bxecutives—is so deeply rooted in our history and system of government that ft now seems to be far beyond the reach of any effective legal challenge.” This is a clear exprersion of the admin- Astration’s view. I flatly challenge it. I Challenge the dangerous theory that by the device of labeling a war as a “police action,” one may decree that we engage in bettie with the North Koreans, with the Chinese, in Indochina, Iran, Tibet; in fact with any- one anywhere, if he and he alone sees fit. So holding is to ignore not only the plain words of the Constitution, bit the essential mean- ing gt our representative form of govern- ment. The Commander in Chief has the to direct the movement of the Armed Forces, more power to make war, than one of his in- ferior officers,” says General Hisenhower. Article 1, section 8, dealing with legislative cal forth the militia to azecu
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD the Constitutional Convention to make sure that the high responsibility of raising and regulating the use of armies was exclusively vested in the Congress, hence, by representa. tion, in the people. In addition, Congress has complete con- trol of our money, without which no troops can be sent anywhere. . In contradistinction to those broad and detailed powers, article II, section 2, briefly provides that “The President shall be Com- mander in Chief of the Army and Navy of the United States, and of the militia of the several states when called into the actual service of the United States; * * *” This is the only reference to such powers, Can we infer from this a nower to start and maintain a major war, as in Asia? Those who support the President’s powers rather glibly refer to a large number of prec- edents and Supreme Court opinions. They don't bear careful analysis. It is of course true that from 1798 on, marines and limited forces have been dispatched to protect Amer- ican lives or property, usually as a result of a civil war or internal disturbance which could not be controlled by the local govern- ment. Such temporary emergencies are hardly to be compared with a permanent policy of occupying Europe with large num- bers, for long years; or with fighting in Korea the fourth wort war in our history, with 250,000 troops, 50,000 casualties, and 15,000 monthly replacements, a war in its ninth month, now involving us with the most nu- merous nation on earth; a tragic war in which the end is not in sight. While I am satisfied, as a lawyer, that the President is without constitutional right to Aight all over Asia, or to occupy Europe, without congressional sanction, it is even more important that he should not attempt to involve the Nation in such vast projects without an assurance of the Nation's will, and the backing of its representatives. Ob- viously he must come to Congress to imple- ment his actions. How much wiser to ob- tain their approval in advance. You don’t avoid war by omitting a formal declaration of war. We are presently en- gaged in a major war which may suddenly or by degrees become a world war. To sug- gest that such a course may be pursued without action by Congress is to reduce ite authority, and hence the authority of the people, to a debating society, with some lim- ited function of approving the appropriation of money demanded by the President. To so limit the Congress and exalt the Presi- dency, is, of course, to abandon democracy and surrender to a dictatorship, On January 15, Senator Tarr said: “The basic liberties of the people * * * are imperiled unless we can retain in Con- gress the right to pases on policies affecting (their] very life and being. * * %” I agree. I am not prepared to surrender in whole or in part the power of the people exercised by their elective representatives. Neither am I prepared to deliver the fate of this country solely into the hands of Presi- dent Truman. Are you? Why All Three Services Are Needed EXTENSION OF REMARKS Or HON. JOHN W, McCORMACK OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THX HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, February 26, 1951 Mr. McCORMACK. Mr, Speaker, un- der leave to extend my remarks in the Recoap, I include the following inter- view with Admiral Forrest P. Sherman, Chief of Naval Operations, appearing in the February 23, 1951, issue of United States News and World Report: Wry ALL THaRes Ssrvicrs Are Nexnep Question. Admiral Sherman, do you think you can draw a line of demarcation today between sea power and land power and air power, and treat them as three separate, autonomous factors in war? Answer. I don’t see how you can draw any sharp line between sea power and air power, I have spent nearly 80 years working in both at the same time. I don't see how you can separate what you might call land power from air power, Certainly one gets nowhere without the other. I don’t see how you can separate land power from sea power unless you're going to defend yourself on your own continent, I think we have to talk about the military power of the United States, and get away from being too compartmented. Naval strategy, in its broader sense, has always involved the use of troops as well as ships, military positions on shore as well as fleets deployed at sea, and the coordination of naval action with military and political action as well. It seems to me that the time has come to talk in terms of national strat- egy involving all elements of our national strength, rather than in terms of power in only one or two elements. Question. When you speak of air power being tied in to land power, do you mean in the support that bases and overseas sta- tiona have to give to land power? Answer, I think it has been demonstrated that an army in the field cannot achieve the best results unless it is alded and sup- ported by air. Certainly air cannot be main- tained without antiaircraft artillery to de- fend its bases, without ground troops to defend its bases, or, if the air power 1s over- seas, without sea power to project the air bases overseas and sustain them there. Question. Isn't the impression that air power can act independently based upon the belief that there are bombers now that can fly from our continent to another continent and back? Answer. If you try to survive with nothing but the resources of North America against the combined resources of the rest of the world—that’s what you would be coming to 1f you go to the thesis of nothing but inter- continental air warfare—I believe that in the long term you would be doomed to de- feat. Question. Suppose you had sea and air combined—that seems to be the new con- ception—— Answer. I doubt that we can sustain the allies that we must have, unless we are pre- pared to exert a balanced effort. I refer, of course, to collective balance. To the degree that your allies can contribute locally any of the components in the required over-all mil- itary effort, we can concentrate on the other components, but in the long run, if we are going to have allies and other nations friendly to us, those nations will have to be defended by the combined efforts of regional organizations, such as the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the Inter-American Defense Organization, and their defense will have to be accomplished by the required combination of military effort in all three spheres. Question. We would have to supply troops as well aa airplanes and pilote? Answer, Each situation will have its own requirements, Question. Should our air power be possi- bly considered in two phases—the initial phage of a war, where the long-range inter- continental bombers inflict immediate re- Prisals, and then the second phase, which would be conducted from shorter ranges A1173 | and overseas beses——is that part of the gen- eral concept? Answer, Well, viewing the world’s stta- tegic situation broadly, it would seem to me that our national security must involve several concepta. Being surrounded by great oceans we must control those oceans, make sure that we can use the sea and make sure that war cannot be brought to us by sea. Then certainly we must have an acde- quate air defense of the United States and we should have the capability of prompt and severe retaliation by air in case of attack. But ability only to retaliate is not enough. If we concede that we need the support of allies with whom we have entered into a regional pact and to whom we have made commitments, then it seems clear that we must stand ready to assist them in a way which gives them a chance of survival, Pounding an aggressor at long range cannot be the whole answer. Question. There js some talk now of our being strong at home and probably main- taining Britain, Spain, and north Africa, and forgetting Europe. Would that con- cept—that ts, drawing back from Europe pre- sumably because we couldn’t defend it any- way—be logical from the point of view of gea power? Answer. I think the British have long believed that the survival of the Untted Kingdom required that no unfriendly nation be on the opposite shore of the English Channel, UNITED STATES INTEREST IN WESTERN EUROPE Question, Haven't we as a Nation always felt the same way about Western Europe, too? That is, that we shouldn’t have an un- friendly power controlling all of Europe op- posite us? Answer. We should remember the days of 1940 when the total strength of the Axis navies was greater than the strength of our Navy, and the total ability of the shipyards of Western Europe to produce ships was greater than the ability of our shipyards to produce ships, and we felt that if all of Western Europe were overrun, and if the Brit- ish Fleet were removed from the balance of power we would then be on the weaker side, even in terms of sex power alone, and the Axis powers with contro) of all Western Eu- rope in time might outbuild us, and achieve control of the Atlantic, Question. But isn’t one theory now that alr power could keep their factories reduced over there so that they couldn't use them to build up thelr armament? Answer, The difficulty with that theory is that the distance is the same westbound as it is eastbound. Question. You mean they have planes, too, and they could hurt our industry as well as we could hurt them? Answer, It seems to me that the security of the United States lies in keeping war as far as possible from home. Question. Does that require occupation of territory or having friendly armies to keep back potential enemies? Answer. It certainly requires the ability to project our military power overseas into the areas that are selected by us, and in the form that is required by the particular aituation, Question. Well, in Zurope, would that in- clude land troops? Answer. At the present time purely milf- tary reasons require that it include a cer- tain proportion of troops. Psychological rea- sons also require that tt include troops. NEED FOR SUPPORT OF ALLIES Question. So that we probably wouldn't be wise to depend upon just our Navy and Air Force? Answer. We might depend on the Navy and Alr Force in the short term, but in the long term our security requires the maintenance
Al174 of @ free world, which includes countries on the other side of the Atlantic. Question, Do we need allies? Answer. I believe so. And if we want them we must prepare to support them resolutely. Question, And we need an army, then—a ‘big one? Answer. Yes; of course we need ap army-—— a much larger peacetime army than we have maintained in recent years. Question, In other words, we couldn't get along with air power and sea power alone? Answer. We need a balanced force, with the proper proportion of air, sea end ground elements. Question. As a matter of fact, in the pur. suit of your enemy in modern warfare, can you actually achieve success with any two components, or would it require all three? Answer. It is very dangerous to rely on an unbalanced force. Curioucly enough, when you have an unbalanced force, it’s usually the soldier who gets hurt. During my service command in the Mediterranean recently I made a very thorough study of the Battle of Crete, in which the Germans had an army, and an atr foros, but no significant naval force, while the British had ground troops and a fleet but practically no air, The net result was that the German soldiers were slaughtered in great numbers by the British ships as they attempted to cross from. Greece to Crete. On the British side, the British soldiers received heavy casualties because of a lack of air cover. The lesson seems to be that, when you have unbalance, the doughboy is more apt to be hurt than anyone else. Question. But, from the point of view of winning victory, there is no way, realistl- cally, whereby an air force can occupy a country or a navy can occupy a country, is there? Haven't you got to have sufficient troops to occupy and to defeat the enemy on the ground? Answer, I think that our own will prove that. You will recall that after the pattle of Manila Bay our Asiatic Fleet had to remain at anchor and wait for an army to arrive before operations could be initiated. Question. And then in World War II in the Pacific, you had to have troops to take these islands, didn’t you? Answer. In the Pacific war we found that every operation called for a combination of land, sea and air forces to achieve victory. Question. You were Chief of Staff to Ade milral Nimitz during what period? Answer. I was Admiral Nimits’ Deputy Chief of Staff from November 1943 until the ‘War was finished. aupation. So that you were in on the plan- ni Answer. Under Admiral Nimite I was re- sponsible for the planning of the Central Pacific campaign. Question. That included all the island campaigns and the later campaign in Oki- nawa, and you would have been a part of the planning of the invasion of Japan if that had been consummated? Answer. I worked very hard on the plans for the invasion of Japan. Question. Did you contemplate in that fnvasion that we could do it with ses and air power alone? Answer. No. Question. Has it ever been recorded how big an army we thought we might need for that invasion, roughly? Answer. It involved all the troops that General MacArthur end Admiral Nimitz had been using, plus a redeployment of troops from the Ruropean theater. Question. Approximately how many ground troops do you think that would have involved? Answer. Over @ militon, DID THR ATOM BOME DRFEAT JAPANT Question, Would you say that the atom bomb dropped from the air won the final victory, or would you say that « serious weakening of Japan was accomplished by een, land, and air, preceding that? Answer. I think that the end of the Japa- nese war was brought about by the destruc- tion of the Japanese fleet, destruction of sea communications—in which our submarines figured very importantly and also our sir— the complete isolation of Japan ao far as sea communications went, the damage that was done to Japan by air, and the threat of an in- vasion. After the fall of Saipan and the fall of Okinawa, it was certainly obvious that the tide of war was headed for the main Japanese islands, Question. In other words, here was an island empire with lote of islands and you conquered the islands with ground troops, and forced them into a corner in thelr own homeland, and then sea power blockaded and starved them? Answer. They were cut off by sea power-— or rather by the action of ships and air- craft—aircraft figured very importanttly in the destruction of Japanese shipping. Question. Applying the same reasoning to Europe, we had there not an island enemy but an enemy with a large land mass like Germany, and we had to land and use, in the Normandy invasion, large numbers of ground troops, plus air, plus the sea blockades. That was the pattern of the last war. Now beering in mind that pattern, would you say the situation has changed, in any par- ticular, so far as Europe is concerned? Answer. Well, it has changed in detail, but not in principle. In principle you still require the combination of land and sea and air action, WHAT NAVY COULD DO TO EUROPE Question, But an enemy which controls the whole land mass of Eurepe couldn't very well be blockaded as Japan was blockaded, could it? Answer. Not if one power controlled the whole Eurasian land mass, no. On the other hand, there are certain coastal communica- tions that are quite vulnerable to action from the sea. Question, Even in the case of the largest Question. Is the Mediterranean an impor- tant defense perimeter, from the Russian standpoint—is it a vulnerable point for them? Answer. Russia is not in the Mediterra- nean now. The importance of the Medciter- ranean ts thet it 1s an avenue by which naval, air, and ground forces can be projected deep into the heart of the great land mass of Europe, Asia, and Africa. It 1s important because tt offers a means of exerting our military power readily in any of the Mediter- ranean countries where we choose to exert it. It is also important as an essential line of east-west communications with the Mid- dle Hast and because it covers the southern flank of the Kurepean peninsula, Question. Isn’t it being assumed pretty generally that the need for land armies has only to do with the march across the main continent, from Russia across to France? ‘Wouldn't land armies also be able to deploy pad operate from the Mediterranean coun- ies? i ; F : a 5 i pported by sea, even though in the continent there was an overwhelmingly strong land power, The in- APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD troduction of air has complicated the prob- lem, but it hasn’t changed the underlying principles. Q. You spoke a moment ago of tising the Mediterranean to project air, land, and sea power into two continents, Does that mean long-range Navy bombing? Answer. No. I had in mind that because it ig @ pea area, you cen move troops, in- cluding ground components of the air forces—these can be moved to the Mediter- ranean littoral, as well as to the Atlantic coast of Europe. Question. Isn't there a good deal more em- phaais being given today to the possibility of land operations being confined to the area of Germany and France with much less thought being given to the possibility of land orera- tions coming up through what 1s called the underbelly of Europe? Answer. I think that the possibility of fighting in Central Europe is more apparent. The history of these matters is that wars tend to spread and become global In char- acter. I think !t would be a mistake to aa- sume that a war which started in one area would end in the same area. The Seven Years’ War of the eighteenth century, for example, started between the British and French in the vicinity of what is now Pitts- burgh, It spread to Canada and the Weat Indies and then pretty well around the world. There was fighting in Europe, on the West Coast of Africa, in India, and in the Philip- pines, Question. In any planning of milf op- erations for the security of this country and ite allies, would you say that we've got to be thinking flexibly in terms of land armies as an essential part of our operations—is that the sum-up of your view? Anewer. Yes. The security of the United Btates requires that we have a good army and that our forces be so proportioned that we can operate a balanced force wherever it is required. Question. By balanced force you mean a combined force, do you not? Answer. IT mean a force of all arms. REGIONAL DEFENSE OF NORTH ATLANTIO Question. Is tt better to have a force in Europe while you hold Europe, or while you have friendly nations there, or to let Europe be overrun and then try to retake the area ry Answer. It would be much better to defend Western Europe than to Jet it go and to Dave to recapture it—better for us and ex- ceedingly much better for Western Europe. Question. Well, from a atrictly military point of view, given the defense of Europe and given the defense of the United States, da it Jour view that the two things are inter- Answer. I think that they can definitely be combined into a problem called the defense of the North Atiantic region. Question. And ali our thinking is in terms of the North Atlantic region, up to now at least, rather than just the defense of the United States? Answer, Certainly we have devoted a good deal of thought to the defense of the North Atlantic region because of a doubt that we could make the United Btates secure with- out making the whole region secure. Of course, we have a similar problem in the Pacific, but less acute, because of greater Aistances. Question, Speaking of attack on the United States from other countries, would you say that the territory of the United States is definitel;” subject to attack by air and by sea wy planes and guided missiles from sib- marines? Answer. In theory, yes. But in practice there ie the qttestion of evale of attack. Question. But definitely the military man conceives of the United States as being sub- ject to attack by air—there is no question about that, is there?
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Answer, The possibility of an attack on the United States by air is great enough now to necessitate the creation of an adequate alr defense, and the prospect is that the exposure of the United States to air attack will increase as the performance of airplanes increases. Question. So that while there is no threat to us from en army coming 3,000 miles, air- planes can easily come 3,000 miles; is that the essential difference between this and the situation we faced in World War II? Answer. Yes. DIFFICULTIES WITH ENEMY BASES Question. If that’s the case, is there any defense concept better than trying to get at the operating bases from which the enemy planes come? Answer. Certainly we should keep those bases as far away from us as possible, Sim- jlarly, we should keep submarine bases as far away as possible, The most difficult times we had with submarines in the Atlantic in World War II were in the period when there were enemy submarines in the Bay of Biscay on the Atlantic coast of France. It is very necessary to keep enemy air bases and submarine bases as far away as possible. In that connection, the alr-defense prob- lem, and the antisubmarine problem have certain points of similarity. The worst place to protect a ship is where the ship is. The worst place to protect a convoy is at the convoy. The worst place to protect a cit,’ from air attack is at the city. The best place is at the bases from which the airplane or submarine comes, The next best place is en route—the worst place is at the target. Question. To get at those bafeg you’ve got to capture them or intercept at the bases? Answer. We should prevent our enemies from gotting bases nearer to us. Question, In getting at the enemy's bases, then, you have to use sea power, air power, and possibly land power? Answer. To accomplish the desired result calls for a combination 0% all three elements. Question. an the Korean Wur, we use all three, but for a brief time there was an im- pression that we could use two, and the first few days we did use sea and air and then supplemented our action with land troops. Now, why was it not possible for sea and air to win the Korean War alone? Answer. Air attack and naval gunfire alone will not drive determined soldiers out of an area. When they're properly dug in and properly dispersed, they can stay and fight. Certainly that was our experience in the Pacific war, where we poured into small islands terrific quantities of naval gunfire and terrific quantities of preliminary bomb- ing, and yet when the assault troops hit the beach they always found important fighting to do. All the way across the Pacific we demon- strated that naval gunfire and bombing and strafing can do great damage to troops that are dug in on shore, but still not destroy them completely. ENOUGH TROOPS TO DO THE JOB Question. I think in the popular argu- ment it is agreed that there should be land fighting, but the argument rather turns on whether we as a nation oan minimise par- ticipation in land fighting abroad. The ar~ gument is that Great Britain, with control of the seas and a few soldiers, dominated much of the world for a long time. An analogy is drawn that we can do the same. Is there a difference between our position and that of Britain? Answer. No; I don't think there 1s, in prin- ciple. For instance, in the Napoleonte wars the British carried on a rather protracted campaign in Spain. Question. Did they use many troops? Answer. Yes. Question. The theory is that Britain got along without a large army, and that we therefore can get along without a large army-—— Answer, But Wellington had a large army under his command in the Battle of Wa- terioo. Question, They weren't all English——~ Answer. There were enough British troops at Waterloo both to insptre their alllfes to fight and to take their own part. GROWING IMPORTANCE OF CARRIERS Question. Is there any shift in emphasis in the Navy itself, for instance, away from battleships and toward carriers, as a result of the way things are going now? Answer. I can answer that best with some statistics as to where we were in 1940 and where we are now. In 1940 we had in com- mission 15 battleships and 6 carriers of var- jous size. The program we are now en- gaged in calls for building up to 27 carriers of various sizes and only 3 battleships. Question. We are pulling battleships out of moth balls, apparently. Is there still a place for them in the fleet? Answer. Yes; but they are used for rather spocialized purposes now. It is now pretty generally accepted that the aircraft carrier is the ship of the line and the core of naval offensive power, which is the place that was held by the battleship in World War I but which passed to the aircraft carrier during World War II. Question. General Collins has spoken sev- eral times about the possibility of develop- ing atomic artillery. Is there any prospect thut the Navy could use atomic artillery— turn the 16-inch guns into guns that will shoot atom shells? Answer. There are very definite prospects of the Navy using atomic weapons for naval purposes. Question, Are you speaking of missiles or conventional weapons? Answer. Missiles. Question. The Navy has planes now big enough to carry atomic bombs—the old- style atomic bombs-—eand it also has carriers that could handle those planes, doesn’t it? So that in the event of war, the Navy as well as the Air Force would be able to deliver the atomic bombs within a certain range? Answer. We will be able to deliver atcmio bombs, if required to. Question. So atomic energy is now diffused in all three services, in the use of weapons? Answer, It definitely has become possible to develop tactical applications of atomic weapons. I think that in the future you wil] find all the services prepared to use those applications, HOW NAVY WOULD USE A-WEAPONS Question. What would tactical applica tion be so far as the Navy is concerned? Answer. Destruction of a submarine base might be an example. Question, You could cover the landing of troops, too, tactically? Answer. Yes. Question. And you could use the power of the atom to run submarines or ships, couldn't you? Answer. We're making good progress in that direction. Question, It's protty generally recognized that Russia since the war has been concen- trating her naval effort in the development of a large fleet of submarines. What would you say about the progress that we have made with antisubmarine measures? Answer. We have made great progress in our development of countermeasures against submarines; the equipment that we use, the weapons we use, are much better than they were. New equipment has been developed which we are putting into our destroyers, On the whole, ow ability to cope with sub- marines is improving. On the other hand, there is always the other side of the shield, which !s the rate at which the capabilities of the submarines develop. A1175 Question. Are there new methods that have been developed, or is it a matter of getting the teamwork? ' ‘ Answer, We've developed new equipment over the past 5 years, Also we have learned to use it. Question. Last year, wasn’t the whole fieet “gunk” in maneuvers by theoretical sub- marines in spite of the best equipment de- veloped? Answer. No. However, if a submarinor didn't believe that submarines Were capable of sinking a whole enemy fleet, he would not be as enthustastic as he should be, On the other hand, if the people who operate the surface ships don't feel that they can ac- complish their mission {n spite of subma- rines, they're not as enthusiastic as they should be. It is a mistake to accept zeal and enthusiasm as completely factual. PROGRESS IN SCIXNTIFIC RESEARCH Question. What would you say about the progress we're making in all three services in the fleld of invention in military science? Answer. I think we've made great strides. We've had a quite well coordinated program. We have converted some of our development projects into hardware and into useful stp- plies of weapons, and others are still in the development stage. I consider that the money we have invested in research and de- velopment has been well spent, and we're better equipped as a result of it. Question. Are we too gadget minded? Answer. I think not. As far as I know, the responsible senior officers in the services are thoroughly aware of the ultimate importance of personnel, that gadgets do not replace personnel. I've recently been asked a great many times how long it takes to take a carrier out of “moth balls” and get it operating. The real answer to that is the length of time it takes to assemble the crew and to train the crew to operate the ship. Personnel is the governing consideration in making divisions and armies, in making ships and fleets, and also in making air squadrons. Question. During World War I, when the country was frightened by the submarine menace, scientists and inventors went to work to try to find something to detect the submarine—detection was the great objec- tive. Is it possible to describe some of the objectives today—is science seeking a way to intercept the plane that is coming to attack us? Answer. The development both against aircraft and against submarines falls into two fields. One is the location and the other is the destruction. IMPROVING THE PROXIMITY FUZE Question. The proximity fuze, which was used widely in World War IJ, has often been discussed as one of the inventions that revo- Jutionized World War II's operations. Would you say that the proximity fuze still has great value? Answer, It's an essential device. Question. Can it be said that it has been developed for greater usage—that there have been improvements made in it? Answer. It has been improved. Question. Do you think that guilded- missile ships may replace the aircraft car- rier as the main “ship of the line” within the next 5 or 10 years? Answer. Probably not within the next 5 or 10 years. It may eventually, but that's get- ting pretty far into the realm of speculation. I think that the use of guided missiles in naval warfare will increase steadily. Question, Can you visualize the type of warfare in which a guided missile could be useful if we had war, say, in the immediate future? What part would the guided missile play in the general strategy—helping to in- terdict, helping to reduce bases? Answer. Guided missiles, of course, fall into a great many categories—for example, alr defense missiles, missiles to be used Irom
AlI6 one airplane against another, and longer- range missiles which in effect are long-range artillery. The time may come when long- sange miselles of considerable size will begin to replace bombers, Question. Is it possible that guided migsiles are so far along in their develop- ment that the Navy will be unable to operate within a range of, say, 100 to 150 miles of enemy tand bases on account of guided minsilee—can they be made that accurate Within the next few years? Answer. No. Question. Are they active enough to be & menace to navies—those missiles in the bands of the enemy? Answer. Well, guided missiles are just an- other type of weapon that we will have to realist. The more they develop the more of a problem they will be, but 1 do not think they will be a controlling weapon at any time in the near future, insofar as the opera~ tions of ships are concerned. TACTICAL ANSWEES TO ATOM BOMB Question, How vulnerable would the fieet ‘be to an atom-bomb attack in an amphibious landing such as the Normandy landing in the last war? Answer. The enemy's possession of atomic weapons forces the necessity for a greater degree of dispersal. Question. Would that dispersion have to be of such an extent that it might jeopardize the success of landings? Answer. I think not, The tactics of am- phidious operations have usually been able to respond to the charactor of the weapons that confronted them. I think that will continue. It is inevitable that tactics will conform to the situation and take into ac- count the weapons that the enemy has. Question. Won't it be necessary, if the enemy possesses guided-missile bases, to cap- ture those bases by a combination of sea power, air power, and land power—to get at them if guided-miasile bases are very exten- sive? Answer, We had on example of that in World War II, when the existence of bases for V-le and V-2s had e@ pronounced influ- enoe on the requirements for land operations on the Continent. Question. In other words, air power was not able to reduce thoee, apparently? Answer. It accomplished a lot but couldn't deliver 100-percent results. To get 100-per- cent results on the ground usually requires action on the ground. Queation. How soon will we get the big new carrier? Answer. I would estimate that as a 3%< year job. Question. In the meantime we will be de- pendent on World War IT carriers, largely, won't we? Answer. We will be dependent on World War It carriers, so the program of moderniz- ing the World War It carriers is of primary importance. Question. For this new carrier, can the keel of the United States be used? Answer. Nothing from the United States is useful in the new carrier, except certain de- sign Teatures. Question. Would you say that, in the in- terval that has elapsed, you have learned some new things that will make this a bet- Question, Has the idea of a flush deck been. abandoned? Answer, There is a great difference of opin- jon in the Navy about the desirability of a small island veraus the desirabtitty af @ Sush Question. Now that the Joint Chisis Staff have carried on in the postwar period for at least 6 years, can you say that the codrdination or the joint planning has un-« g dergone great changes from what it was in World War II? Answer. Yee, I think since World War IT the work of the Joint Chiefs of Staff ahd the Joint Staff has improved grestly. There are more and more offcers who understand the problema of all the armed services. At the top level I think there is a greater under- standing of the problems of the other serv- foes, I can assure you that even during the short period of time that I've been here there has been a steady improvement in the func- tioning of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and the Joint Staff. HOW JOINT COMMAND WORKS Question. Would you say the Joint Chiefs of Staff function now to some extent as an operating agency? Answer. The Joint Chiefs of Staff were never an operating agency in the accepted sense of the term. Our duties are laid down by: law and have to do with military advice to the President and the National Security Council, with strategic direction of operating forces, preparation of plans, and the alloca- tion of forces to the vartous fleld com~ manders. Question. So that the joint operations to- day are theater-of-command operations, and the Joint Chiefs are concerned with strategic planning rather than operations? Answer. Strategic planning and strategic direction. Question. So that in the far eastern thea- ter there exists at the moment the only joint operations we have? Answer. The only joint operations in com- bat—but of course we have a series of unified commands. Admiral Radford has a very important one in the Pactfic Command which, among other duties, has to support the Far East Command, We have a unified command in Germany, one in the Atlantio, & unified command in the Canal Zone, a unified command in Alaska, and several other unified commands under the Joint Chiefs of Staff. Question. And the designated commander, whether he be an admiral or general, is the representative of the Joint Chiefs? Answer. He exercises command under the Joint Chiefs of Staff and commands elements of all three services. Question. Is it regarded as important that Formosa be kept out of the hands of un- friendly nations? Answer. I consider tt important. DEFENSE LINE IN FAR EAST Question. Would you say that the defense line of this country extends to far-eastern waters, 80 far as the security of the United States is concerned? Answer, [ think the security of the United States requires that we be able to control the Pacific and prevent any action in the Pacific, by any unfriendly power, which would impair our seourity. Question. Particularly from overseas ter~ ritories that might be ocoupied by an enemy? Iu other words, the absence of an enemy fleet in the Pacific doeon’t diminish your task, does It? Answer. The Pacific Fleet has been kept pretty busy right in the Far East even though there has been very little hostile nayal action. Question. What about the impression that the Navy wouldn't have been able to accom- pitch the landings at Inchon or the opera- tions on the east coast of Koren had there been present & hostile alr force or a hostile navy’ Answer. We would have accomplished them, but with more difficulty than we actually experienced, Question. Do you make that statement on the basta of any partioular incident in World ‘War Tl, where we had the hostile navy and the hostile air force preset? Answer. We had a hostile navy and hostile alr forces all the way. APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Question. At Okinawa? Answer, At Okinawa, at Iwo Jima, in the Philippines, we had them both. . Question, But you don’t consider that the presence of a hostile air force or a hostile navy necessarily prevents us from landing troops and carrying on land, sea, and air combination operations? Answer. It makes tt more dificult, but it certainly dosen't make it impossible, Question. At what distance inland would you say that the Navy's operations have made land operations hasardous for the enemy in Lerea? Answer. All the way across the country. We've been bombing west coast ports from carriers in the Sea of Japan and we've bombed the east coast ports from carriers in the Yellow Sea. Question. Well, I meant for land opera- tions along the seacoast—how about bom- bardment of coastal points? Answer. Well, right up to the limit of naval gunfire. Quest'on. You can protect and destroy coastal communications at least 15 mites in~ land and the carriers oan destroy communt- cations farther inland? Answer. Yes, carrier aircraft have ranged all the way across Korea, Question, But your naval gunfire has made it difficult for the enemy to keep the troops on the coasts of Korea and forced the fight- ing into the eenter? Answer. It covers the whole coast, Question. You've never had any question about blockading the northern ares of Korea? Answer. We blockaded it in June and it’s been under blockade continuously. Question. How far up do you go? Answer. The whole coast is under blockade. Question. Up to the Yalu River? Answer. Yes. Question. Is there any Ruesian navy around Korean waters? Anower. The blockade is a United Nations operaticn but there are no Russians partici- pating in it, Question. Is it possible that a lot of the recent gossip about the Army's not doing well in Korea might bave been based on inftial operations with raw troops? Answer, At the beginning of the fighting in Korea we had occupation divisions at half strength and had to send them into action. They're still in there. They're still Aghting and they seem to be doing pretty well. Their morale and conduct and training and discl- pline have improved steadily. I believe that, when adequately trained, our soldiers are superior to any soldiers any- where. However, they cannot be made ready without training. The United States Army is entitled to the full support and full con- fidence of the country for which it fights. The morale of an army normally reflects the morale cf the country. OPTIMISM OVER KOREA Question, How do you feel about the long. . Tange view of the Korean operations—in a tactical or a strategic sense? Answer, Our Army 1s giving a good account of itself and will continue to give s better account of iteelf, and I think the Chinese are belug punished terribly. Whatever the next move the Chinese make, I think ‘t will be the result of their feeling that this is 8 bad show, that they've got to do something different, do something to, change the un- happy situation they find Ives in. Question. Has very important factor in Answer, It's been a very affective weapon in Korea. pe Question. Does the Navy use it, wo, or only the Army Alr Foree? Answer. The Navy and Marine Corps used it very extensively in World War ZT, and more recently in Kores. our advance,
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD Question. With respect to Korea, would you say as & military man that Korea is of vital importance to Russia and Communist China, the Communist world—that it is im- portant to them strategically to hold Korea? Answer. I don’t think that Korea in the hands of only the Koreans is very much of a threat to the Russians or the Ohiness. I don’t think Korea in the hands of only the Koreans would be much of a threat against Japan or against ourselves. Question. But, conversely, the possession and occupation of Korea by a power un- friendly to us would be a menace to us? Answer. Occupation of Korea by forces un- friendly to Japan would be a menace to Japan or to anyone charged with the defense of Japan. EFFECTIVENESS OF BLOCKADE Question. Hase there been any naval inter- diction of enemy supply lines to Korea? Answer. A naval blockade of Korea was established in June. It has been almost completely effective and has been respected not only by the nations who have been fight- ing in Korea, but also by the Russians. It’s & United Nations blockade, and as far as I know it has been respected by all the members of the United Nations. Question. Admiral, we have talked about land forces, air forces, and sea forces. There is one force often described as a mobtle force. Do you see in the future picture of our strategy a more important place for such @ mobile force—the Marine Corps—than it has had before? Answer. It is pretty generally believed that the Marines are an indispensable part of the naval service. I certainly believe, in connection with my own responsibilities, that we must have a strong fleet marine force in each fleet. It must include not only its ground elements but also its own air ele- ments. I think the effectiveness of such force has been demonstrated once more in Korea, as it has many times before in the existence of the Marine Corps. The Marine Corps is a necessary part of the naval service. Question. The President has said we have now in the armed services about 2,500,000 men, and the goal is 3,500,000. What is the Navy's share in that figure? Answer. The present program involves something over 800,000 officers and men in the Navy and around 200,000 officers and men in the Marine Corps. Question. Can you tell us, Admiral, very briefly, what the Navy’s Reserve policy is now? Answer. Our program is to call only those we need and to try to let them know well in advance when they are to be called up. However, our program is only as good as the assumption on which it is based. It is based on carrying out the planned program of ex- pansion and not having an increased emer- gency during that time. Voluntary Rent Control EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. CARL HINSHAW OF CALIFORNIA IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Thursday, March 1, 1951 Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Speaker, the Pasadena Property Owners Committee, a nonprofit California corporation, is en- deayoring to create a plan of selfcontrol of rents through the cooperation of busi- ness and civic groups, tenants, and prop- erty owners. The following I present for the Recorp: a letter addressed to me by Robert H. Aarons, general counsel; a typical letter soliciting the cooperation of a chamber of commerce; ani also a letter addressed Ly the president of the Property Owners Committee to the Pres- ident of the United States. In this con- nection I present also the following news- paper items referring to this subject. PASADENA PROPERTY Owners COMMITTEE, Pasadena, Calif, January 29, 1951. Hon, Cart HiInsHAw, Twentieth District, Caltforria, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C. Dear Mr. HinsHaw: On January 4, 1951, a copy of letter addressed to the President of the United States, together with copies of news items appearing in the Los Angeles, Pasadena, and surrounding areas press, were sent you. There was also copies of the en- closures sent to Allen Valentine, economics stabilizer, and other Government offictals in charge of economic controls. No replies to these letters have been received. There is enclosed herewith a copy of letter sent to 170 chambers of commerce tn the Los Angeles defense area. The replies have been gratifying, and there is manifested every- where a spirit of cooperation. There is going forward an invitation to all of the realty boards in the Los Angeles de- fense area to join in the participation of this program. Most of the people whom we have con- tacted on the subject appear to be pleased with the program, and are happy to ald in an endeavor that it may be successful in avoiding distasteful Government controls. It also appears that their experience with Gov- ernment controls have left them in no mood for its reimposition. However, as above stated, the President and his appointees hrve not shown any interest in the matter, and by such lack of response, it is indicated that they have no confidence in the people, It is our opinion here that Congress should be informed of our efforts, and citizens and groups throughout the country likewise in- formed, and perhaps by such publicity some- thing worth while can be accomplished, Respectfully yours, Ropert H. Aarons. ‘ — Tux PASADENA PROPERTY Owners’ COMMITTEE, Pasadena, Calif., January 5, 1951. Sierra Madre CHAMBER OF COMMERCE. GENTLEMEN: We enlist your cooperation and support in connection with our endeavor to carry out a plan for self-control and self- discipline on the part of residential income property owners of housing accommodations which have been released from rent control since April 19, 1949. We are confident that our purpose can be accomplished if the plan is properly publi- cized and cooperation from substantial and reputable organizations of your type is ob- tained. We believe that your organization stands for the preservation of the way uf life, which has made our country the in- herently wonderful nation that it is. These are not mere words and to many of us, as it must be to you, they have a profound mean- ing. With more and more economic controls followed by regimentation, the free enter- prise system, must necessarily be stifled. It 4s therefore highly advisable to curb and prevent such inequities unless the country is in such actual danger, that the imposition of all such controls is unavoidable and our war effort or preparedness program would be endangered or placed in Jeopardy. How- ever, lest thete be any misunderstanding, we emphasize that we are for all proper methods so that patriotic duty in all respects may be discharged. ANIT7 We have no politics to play and have. not the slightest or most remote motive in that Girection, therefore let us find out ff we cannot employ methods of public meetings and the like to bring about fair und har- monious dealings with landlords and tenants. However, we don’t concede that thus far there has been anything unfair. But, the precipitant action of some few irate land- lords may furnish the persons seeking rent controls for political purposes, a claimed cause for relmposition of such rent controls. With the above end in view, will you therefore, join in our program? You are hereby requested to nominate either yourself or some other person of your organisation and one or two public-spirited income property owners, preferably in your vicinity to attend a meeting of many such persons to map out and execute plans to attain the aime above described. May we hear from you with your nominations at the earliest possible moment. Thanking you for your cooperation, we are, Yours truly, Pasapena Property Ownars’ ComMittTEs, Wrritiam Curisten, President, emmenemete. Drcrmpzr 27, 1050. Hon. Harry 8, TRUMAN, White House, Washington, D.C. Your Excriiency: Enclosed please find some news items in reference to the efforts being made by owners of residential rental property, in southern California, to prevent unreasonable rent increases. We believe that cases of undue rent hikes are in the small minority. However, we do know that it is the example of the few un- wise landlords, that may make out a case for new rent control. We would like for you to believe that our effort to moderate the actions of those few unreasonable landlords is not only for the purpose of alleviating the situation and making new rent control un- necessary, but also, it stems from a patriotic duty and feeling so that the war effort would not be impeded, We firmly believe that given a chance, the vast majority of Ameri- cana, yes, even landlords, are good citizens and sincerely desire to aid the war effort in every way by the exercise of self-restraint on the part of such landlords, and the desired ends could be accomplished without the ne- cessity of rent controls. This 1s particularly so, since so many of the owners of property are small people, and in the light of the past, they really would ap~ preciate an opportunity of proving their loyalty to their country and practice of jus- tice to their fellow man. We know that you are a busy and hare rassed man, and we know that you have sug- gested rent control to the Congress, but we feel that inherently you do have faith tn the millions of Americans who happened to have placed their life savings and other small meager funds in investments in residential income property. Will you help us give our plan a falr trial? Respectively yours, {From the Pasadena (Calif.) Star-News of December 21, 1950] Paoperry Owners Pian Sats-Conrno, Rent Board A resolution authorizing the formation of @ rent control board to help stabilize econ- omy and aid the war effort was adopted by the board of directors of the Pasadena Property Owners’ Committee at a meeting last night. The board will be formed with the pur- pose of creating a plan of self-control of rents and will be composed of a group of rerital property owners, representatives of
Al1178 Business and civil groups, and tensnts, the seaciution said. TO ADOPT SCHEDULES Under the plan, the board will set up sched- wiles and rules for the conduct of the board and of ownets of residential property in con- nection with rents and rental conditions. In the resolution, owners of rental unites were urged to exercise self-restraint in fix- ing rente and to cooperate with the Prop- erty owners’ Committee on plana to prevent any unreasonable increases in rente. Through such cooperation, landlords not only will be cooperating with the Govern- ment's request for voluntary price freezes but also will eliminate the need of any reimpoei- tion of rent controls during future emer- genotes, Robert H. Aarons, Pasadena attorney, told the committee directors at the meet- ing. SUPPORT URGED Directors expressed the hope that other ayeas throughout the Nation which have campaigned successfully for rent decontrol would take similar steps in forming self- control organisations. The present rent-control law, which ex- pives December 81, recently was extended by the Government for 90 days and applies to all areas which did not take the initiative to decontrol rents before the December 31 ex- piration date. — [From the Pasadena (Calif.) Independent of December 22, 1950) Paorxary Owness Unos Votunrary Renta. Parezz Members of the board of directors of the Pasadena Property Owners Committee yes- terday adopted a resolution to voluntarily stabilise rents and urged other organizations throughout the country to follow suit to forestal] the return of rent controls. The resolution suggests that landlords ex- ercise restraint tn fixing rents so that the Economic Stabilization Authority in Wash- ington will include rent control tn its con- templated voluntary price-wage freeze plan. Creation of a board to draw up a self- control rental plan was called for in the res- olution which ordered inclusion of repre- sentatives of business, tenants, and property owners on the board. At the directors meeting, Attorney Robert Aarons discussed Effects and Advantages and a Voluntery Price-Wage Freeze. He said that if landlords could restrain themselves from making abnormal increases in rents, possibly thare need not be recon- trol of previously decontrolled areas. ae reaolutions adopted by the board reads: “Whereas the existence of a national emer- gency has been declared by the President of the United States under congressional au- thority given last spring; and whereas the Government, through the agencies set up by the President, have requested the people of the country to set up a self-controlled and voluntary system to the end that inflation be halted and that prices be stabilized so that the war effort would be aided; and whereas controls and regulations are gen- erally abhorent and obnoxious to the Ameri- can people, exeept only in the case of real necessity; and whereas the residential in- come property owners, as well as other real estate owners, desire that there be stability in the American and desire to aid the war effort, and desire further to cooperate and heed the request of the Government with the end that there be no reimposition of rent controls; and whereas heretofore, the unexplained cases of a few landlords who aought large increases have been wnjustly the of controls on the : , and such action has been found to be intolerable: Be tt “Resolved as follows: That the Pasadena ty Owners’ Committes ite sup- port of & plan for the stabilization of the economy of the Nation on a fair and equita- ble basis; and to that end, te it further “Resolved, That a voluntary board be, and is hereby, established for creation of a plan for self-control of rents, and rentai end kin- dred conditions for dwe’ ings commensurate with price index and wages: be it further “Resolved, That the board shall be com- posed of rental property owners, representa- tives of business, tenants, and public-spirited persons: be it further “Resolved, That the board set up sched- ules and rules for the conduct of the board and conduct of ownors of residential prop- erty in connection with rents and rental conditions. Be it further “Resclved, That owners of rental units, as- soctations of owners of property or individual owners, be requested and admonished to ad- here to the suggestions contained !n the fore- going and to exercine self-restraint in the fixation of rents and by so doing and joining, with representatives of the Pesadena Prop- erty Owners’ Committee or tts representa- tiv 3, to work out and follow through on plans tn order to prevent any unreasonable increases in rents, and to hold the line on all prices and Ifiving cost; be it further “Resolved, That the boards which may be set-up tn cities throughout the Nation will, by fair and impartial and patrtotic conduct, obviate any alleged reasons which may be interposed for the reimposition of controls.” Reaolution adopted December 19, 1950, Pasadena, Calif. PasaDina Psorenty Owners’ CoMMITTEX. {From the Los Angeles (Calif.) Times of December 23, 1950] LANDLORDS = OrreR VOLUNTARY CONTROL— Pasapena Prorsaty Owners Svocesr Puan To Serrzz RENTAL ProsieM Now comes the suggestion of a voluntary Fent control set-up by landlords. The idea originated and ig being promoted by the Pasadena Property Owners’ Committee. The committee made its suggestion in the form of @ resolution which it adopted at a meeting Thureday night. Directors of the Pasadena group called upon similar organizations throughout the Nation to follow thetr plan as a méans of heading off possible new control of rents and “for the stabilization of the Nation's economy.” They proposed a Federal board composed of representatives of business, property own- ers and tenants to draw up «@ self-control Tent plan. OOPY TO TRUMAN Copies of the Pasadena committee's reaolu- tion were sent to President Truman, Con- greesmen, Price Administrator Allen 8. Vale entine, and Housing Expediter Tighe Woods. Meanwhile, decontrol of rents in Los An- geles atill failed to create the big splash many expected. Typical landlord operation was that of the owner of a b containing furnished apartments and which is located near the Ambassador. The owner of the apartments reported that 60 percent of his tenants will get no rent raise. The other 40 percent will be rateed from 5 percent to 25 percent, the aver- age being about 15 percent. These iIncroases @re not for eviction purposes, the owner said, but to bring those units in line with the other 60 percent. For the moment, the increases will range from 82 to $19.50 a month. ONLY TWO DIBKATIONIFD The landlord reported that, of his 60 ten- ants, only 2 have signified a tentative de- aire to move. So he hung otit the vacancy sign. And, sithough oe of the apartmexites ‘was not indicated, he Poa no takers, APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD nary survey geles revealed that the over-all rent increase after ceilings were lifted here has averaged 11% percent, Meanwhile, the Apartment, Hotel, and Motel Ascociation of California called for investigations by the county and Federal grand juries of reports that certain persons were advising tenants to disregard rent in- crease and eviction notices. Too Much Expansion EXTENSION OF REMARKS HON. LAWRENCE H. SMITH OF WISCOMBIN IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March 5, 1951 Mr, SMITH of Wisconsin. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my re- marks, I am including an article that appeared in Barrons on February 19, 1951. The writer of this article points out that our economic system is being expanded way out of proportion and this has been done because of practices initiated by Leon Keyserling, the Presi- dent's No. 1 economic adviser. Mr. Truman is leading this country to eco- nomic disaster, I am including the article in question: Too Mucm Exrancron—Is THE UnTreD STATES Burinc Mr. Exysentina me Uniroam? The latest plan to come out of Washington, and certainly the most important for United States business, is what for want of & better name, but at the risk of some injustice, may be called the Charles E. Wilson plan for the expansion of the American economy. The essence of this plen, as often reported in the press, is that by making capital exz- penditures today at the expense of the con- sumer, the United States by the end of 1952 can achieve a new plateau of prosperity. On that plateau it can afford military expendi- tures of $50,000,000,000 (as against $20,000,- 000,000 today) and at the same time restore the lush civilian economy of mid-1950. So stated, the plan is extremely enticing, ylelding the American people some definite goals and providing the administration with what the London Economist in a happy turn of phrase once called the Carrot and the Stick. Today, the stick of controls, exhorta- tion to sacrifice, and appeals to patriotism But ahead, the carrot, the glistening goal of heavy tanks rolling off, or capable of being rolled off, the ion Itne at the new tank arsenal building in North Carolina, as well as Dynafiow Buicks and Cadillacs coming off the production lines of Detroit. Nevertheless, despite its enticement, and its boldness, we believe that this plan de- seryes the utmost scrutiny. That scrutiny should begin with asking just how much in- vestment the administration contemplates this year and next in order to meke the miracie of late 1052 possible. It may be con- ceded that the military do need a new tank arsenal, since 50-ton @annot be made with present facilities, The same may well be true of new weapons of various kinds. But this ts by no means the only kind of ezpension contemplated, Through the ia- sue of over $2,000,000,000 worth of 6-year de- Certificates, the crease in copper output, the that theee raw material bottlenecks must be
APPENDIX TO THE CONGRESSIONAL RECORD hroken,, Moreover, and this is the critical paint. the expansion of these so-called basio austries 1a apparently going hand tn hand with other types of capital expenditures. There is a special program for petroleum, freight cars, locomotives, merchant ships, and farm machinery to mention but a few, A: the Wilson plan is working out (what- ever its theory), one type of capital growth ts net displacing another, but rather there fg already an over-all upsurge in private plant and equipment expenditures. In 1051 these may well reach an all-time peak of Over €25,000,000,000. While there will be a reduction in housing, a vast investment boom is in the making. Once this point is grasped, the plan to hoist America by {ts bootstraps to a new production plateau looks a lot less attrac- tuve. Ita immediate cost is a tremendous increase in inflationary nressures. It is a trulam to say that it takes steel to make steel, so that each ton of new capacity butit temporarily increases the steel short. age. But it is also true that where total investment pushes ahead of real savings the result is an upward price pressure on the whole system. Since the Korean War began inventories have leaped up by 87,000,- 000,000, financed not by savings but largely by bank credit, ¢. g., new money. Now plant expansion is taking the plac* of this inventory spree. The immediately inflationary implications of overinvestment are, of course, recognized by the planners. Hence the need today for price controls which are, however, to drop off in the benign year of 1953. But will they? And with what result? Politically, controls once invoked are difficult to got rid of (wit- Ness rents). Moreover, as the American post- war experience shows, price controls, if ef- fective at all, do not eliminate inflationary pressures; they aimply bury them. During World War II the Government created a vast amount of new money through deficit spending just as now new money is being created by overinvestment. In the end this new money, as it always must, burst the bounds of controls and the Americar price level Openly moved up to accommodate it. Such is bound to rapprn tn 1983 when and as controls are taken off, eo that the promise of avoiding inflation through increased pro- duction is really a phony one. This suggests one further comment on the so-called Wilson plan. By a process of leg- erdemain and juggling wit: inflated gross national product figures it is always possl~ ble to prove that by doing this or that, total American output can be vastly increased. That perpetual optimist, Mr. Leon Keyser- ling, is forever citing wartime statistics to this end. Alas, for Mr. Keyserling. De- bunked for inflation, and the deterioration of the dollar, the Department of Commerce has shown that between 1941 and 1949, for instance, gross production in real terms moved up very slowly by only 2 to 3 percent per year—its normal increase over the dec- ades. Washington planners, according to our calculations, are counting on a sub- stantially bigger increase between now and 1963, We doubt if they will get it, especially as much of the new plant they are bringing into production ts essentially high cost and hence inefficient. To sum up, the Wilson plan, as it is un- folding, is not only inflationary now, but its longer term premises are at best dubious. This ig not to say that Mr. Wilson’s heroic efforts to emphasize production are mis- placed. It is to say that his press agents may be doing him a bad turn by holding out promises that cannot be honored. The immediate task is not to push the country into a general investment splurge, but to expand plant where it clearly must be ex- panded, and for the reat, put on the damp- ers, It is not to male business borrowing easy, but to make it hard. Above all, tt is to keep our eyes fixed on the present rather than on a gilded future. The United States, in this year of déclsion in Asia and Europe, needs arma now, riot 2 years from now. For this the people will make real sacrifices, What they will not sacrifice for, and should not be asked to sacrifice for, is a newfangled Keyserling plan which is no less suspect because it happens to have put on a mili« tary uniform. Justice for Poland EXTENSION OF REMARKS or HON. JOHN W. HESELTON OF MASSACHUSETTS IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES Monday, March.5, 1951 Mr. HESELTON. Mr. Speaker, under leave to extend my remarks in the Rrc- orp, I include a speech by William Henry Chamberlin, uf Cambridge, Mass., as one of a series entitled “Justice for Poland” over WSR in Springfield, Mass. These programs are under the sponsorship of the Polish American Congress, western Massachusetts branch. Mr. Chamberlin was for 18 years for- eign correspondent for the Christian Sctence Monitor. He is editorial writer of the Wall Street Journal and a contrib- uting editor of the New Leader. He has been the author of eight books, includ- ing European Cockpit and Russian Enig~ ma. Justicr ror PoLanp There is a relentiess unbroken line of connection between the appeasement of Stalin, which was a cardinal policy of the Roosevelt administration, and the fact that American soldiers are dying today in the snow-struck fields of Korea. The most glaring example of this appease~ ment was Anglo-American acqulescence in the destruction of Poland's independence and territorial integrity at the Tehran and Yalta Conferences 1n 1945 and in the many intermediate diplomatic steps which made Tehran and Yalta possible. New, as the eleventh anniversary of the beginning of World War II approaches, we should remem- ber that the global conflict started with the German-Russian invasion of Poland. One wonders what would have happened if the British Government, when it offered its guaranty against aggression to Poland in, the spring of 1939 had added this warning: “You must understand that this guaranty is valid only against Germany. If the So- viet Government proposes to take almost half of your territory and to impose a Com- munist-dominated government on what is left of Poland you cannot count on our help. On the contrary, we will make no serious effort to prevent the Soviet Government from accomplishing these designs and will even support its case against yours.” One may also wonder as to how the Yugo- slav Government of 1241, pushed and prodded by the Roosevelt administration into enter- ing an unequal struggle against Germany, would have reacted if some candid and far~ sighted American diplomat had sald: “Your country will experience all the suf- ferings of foreign occupation. More than that, there will be & savage civil war. In this war the Moscow-trained Communist, Josip Broz Tito, will win the support of America and Creat Britain. You and other Yugoslav non-Communist patriote will be lucky {f you save your lives tn exile or in obseurity et home.” ALLIS And it would be interesting to know how the American people would have felt if aorhe correct prophet would have said: “Our policy of inflexible support for Chiang Kat-shok's regime in Ching will al- most certainly lead to war with Japan. This war will be prosecuted to the ruin of Japan and its destruction as a great power. But ‘we will not worry about Soviet and Commu- nist aggression against China, In fact, wo will bribe Stalin, at China's expense, to fotn in our crusade against Japan. As late as 1945 high State Department officiale will be giving Communist sympathizers access to confidential informatton. The upshot of all this will be that China will fall under the domination of Communists, disciples of Mos- cow, who will show the bitterest hostility ‘to this country.” Such things were not said by people in positions of influence in the years of decision about America’s entrance into the war. But they are a faithful preview of whet has hap- pened, of what a reasonably intelligent stu- dent of foreign affairs might have expected to happen. The betrayal of Poland was the greatest and most flagrant of the three, because the Second World War began ostensibly over the issue of Poland’s independence and tere ritorial integrity. The Soviet Government, in fullest agree. ment and complicity with the Nazi dictator- ship, set out to blot Poland forever from the map of Europe. The record on this point is unmistakably clear. The Soviet-German so- called nonaggression pact of August 1939 was really a pact of mutual aggression against Poland. Its secret clauses, providing for a partition of Poland and@ for the in- clusion of the Baltic Republics in the Soviet share of the spoils, are now well known. Molotov made the Soviet attitude plain when he declared at a session of the Soviet parliament on October 31, 1999: “Two swift blows to Poland, one from the German Army, the other from the Red army, and nothing remained of the ugly offepring of the Ver- sailles Treaty.” Annexing and incorporating into the Ukraintan and Byelorussian Soviet Republics almost half of Poland’s territory, inhabited by about one-third of the Polish population, the Soviet Government tried to insure its position by the usual brutal totalitarian methods. About a million and a quarter people were deported to the Soviet Union, the majority being sent to siave-labor camps, When the Polish Government was able to investigate what had happened to these de- portees, during the period of Soviet-Polish rapproachement which followed Hitler's ine vasion of Russta, it reached the conclusion that about 300,000 human beings had pere (shed of hunger and maltreatment. Especially sinister was the mysterious dis- eppearance of some 10,000 Polish officer war prisoners, Letters from these men stopped abruptly in the spring of 1940. For almost 2 years Polish diplomatic representatives in Russia, furnished with detailed liste of names, sought vainly for information about what had become of these prisoners. ‘ The case was repeatedly taken up with the Boviet Miniatry of Foreign Affairs, and was brought to the attention of Stalin himself, Thia matter came to a head when the Ger- man radio announced that thousands of bodies of Polish officers had been discovered in the Katyn Forest, near Smolensk, in western Russia. The Poliah request that the matter be investigated by the Interna- tional Red Cross was seized on by the Soviet Government as an excuse for breaking off diplomatic relations with the Polish Gov- ernment. The virtual certainty that the Soviet authorities were responsible for this massacre of war ets was confirmed when the International Tribunal at Nurem- berg, certainly not lenient in its attitude toward the accused German wer criminals,