page_title: Mundt–Nixon Bill
section_title: Public debate
hierarchical_section_title: Mundt–Nixon Bill / History / Public debate
caption_attribution_description: English: Communist Party leader William Z. Foster.
context_page_description: The Mundt–Nixon Bill, named after Karl E. Mundt and Richard Nixon, formally the Subversive Activities Control Act, was a proposed law in 1948 that would have required all members of the Communist Party of the United States register with the Attorney General.
context_section_description: On May 31, 1948, at 10:00 PM, Representative Mundt and Communist Party chairman Foster debated for an hour live on WJZ-ABC radio (now WABC (AM)).  Foster was speaking from New York City; Mundt was speaking from Yankton, South Dakota (his home state).  Foster stated that not only would the Mundt–Nixon Bill outlaw the Communist Party but also "knife organized labor, undermine American democracy, clear the way for a police state, and speed us into war."  Mundt stated first that Communism was labor's "worst enemy" and that, rather than drive the Party underground, the bill would expose it so it could not "undermine the country by conspiracy."
  On June 4, 1948, attorney Dana Converse Backus wrote to the New York Times a strongly worded letter "The Mundt-Nixon Bill: Suggestions Given for Revision of Proposed Legislation."  With regard to American Communists, he stated, "a sense of proportion" is necessary so Americans might "realize that we are dealing more with a microbe than a menace."  In his opinion, "the best weapon against a Communist is to know that he is one," while preserving civil liberties.  The Mundt–Nixon Bill would outlaw communist parties in the U.S. and thus "encourage a multiplicity of Communist front organizations." "I suggest scrapping this whole attempt to register Communist front organization."  Instead, he recommended that any organization which solicits funds should have to declare any officer or director or equivalent is a communist; if the organization has communists, then it should then have to declare so when soliciting funds, while it should also lose its tax exemption.  Backus considered this proposal a temporary, "cautious experiment" for extraordinary times.
  By June 5, 1948, the New York Times noted, the Mundt Bill's future was "clouded."
  
  On June 6, 1948, ACLU lawyer Raymond L. Wise's letter to the New York Times appeared, asking for "careful study" of the provisions of the Mundt–Nixon Bill.  Summarizing the bill's spirit and intent, he wrote:  
  It is contrary to our fundamental theories of government to penalize or put pressure on expression of opinion or on free association in advance of personal criminal guilt, established after arial by due process of law.  No political groups are singled out for special criminal laws. We do not recognize 'guilt by association.'
    As late as June 20, 1948, letters continued in the New York Times as the public debated the bill.
caption: William Z. Foster, CPUSA head
exif: {}