Evening star., 1950-04-11
Curbing Our Own Reds

The main line of attack against the Mundt-
Ferguson BILL designed to curb subversive activi-
ties In this country is that the measure is care
lesSly drafted and the product of a current mood
of hysteria. Nothing could be further from the
truth. Whatever defects the bill may have, it
is based on years of congressional study and has
been written with extreme care to meet the
constitutional attacks that are certain to be made
if the measure becomes law.
This bill has been favorably reported from
the Senate Judiciary Committee by vote Of
twelve to one Senator LANCER was the dissenter.
Senator Kefauver voted to report the bill so the
Senate might consider it, but said he had mis-
givngs as to certain provisions and would vote
against the bill in the end unless those provisions
are changed.
The bill undertakes to do four things. Cd
To make unlawful conspiracy ito perform any
act which would substantially contribute" to the
establishment within the United States of
totalitarian dictatorship under foreign control.
(2) To require the Communist movement in the
United States, in view of its foreign directed
character, to operate in the open rather than
underground. 60 To cut the threads which
bind the international Communist conspiracy
together by restricting international travel of
members of the American section of the world
Communist movement "a To protect the in
tegrity of our Government by denying Govern
ment employment to members of the American
section of the world Communist movement and
by protecting the security secrets of the United
States against agents OF foreign government
or the Communist movement.
This, IN substance, is the Judiciary Com
mittees delineation of the purposes of the bill.
The controversy has to do, not so much with
the purposes, but with the specific procedures
by which the ends would be attained.
The most vocferous criticism has come,
naturally enough from the Communists, but this
can be dsregarded for their selfish interest is
self-evident. There have been other critics,
however, and some of them, at least are un-
questionably sincere. Their criticism falls into
four general categories. They say that the pro-
posed law is an unconstitutional abrdgment of
free speech, free press and free assembly; that
it seeks to establish guilt by association"
though guilt should be personal" matter;
that it defines crime in such vague terms that
an offender would not know he was violating the
law, and that its procedures violate due process
OF law.
These are points on which well-meaning
men can and generally do differ when any such
legislation as this is under consideration. In
The Stars judgment, the criticism is not sound.
The BILL of course, will be carefully debated in
the Senate. If the language can be made clearer,
IL uoTt SdIeSudIQS can De QeVlSeQ WITHOUT Vltlat.
ing the bill, that should and undoubtedly will be
done. But it should be kept in mind that the
lines on these issues are firmly drawn. What
most of the critics really object to is not the
form of this particular bill They will oppose
any measure designed to achieve the same OBJ
jectives and containing the necessary teeth. So
the essential questions are whether the Com
munist conspiracy is real enough to justify the
enactment of such measure and whether the
Constitution will permit It's enforcement if en-
acted.
The reality of the conspiracy is attested by
the fact that we are spending more than $40
billion year to defend ourselves against the
Communists and to check their encroachments
abroad In that setting, it would be an absurdity
not to do all that can be done to curb the
Communists and their sympathizers in this coun-
try Will the Constitution permit this? # not
then it follows that that document denies to
Congress the power to adopt laws to protect the
Nation against those who would use our con-
stitutional liberties to destroy u.s. It is hard to
believe that this is the case.
1t seems to The Star that Congress should
make all possible improvements in the bill, and
then pass it. After that, it can be tested in the
courts. But it should not be permitted to die
simply because some people think it is uncon-
stitutional and because some others pretend to
think so.