THE LESSONS OF CUBA

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 32
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 29, 2004
• Sequence Number: 15
• Publication Date: April 27, 1961
• Content Type: OPEN

6388 ApprovedCFa8V1ggs (%1/1Wi1~o -RCP RqW46R000200160015-1Apri& 27
done. The first thing to recognize is that
whatever is done should not be done hastily.
There must be no repetition of the in-
credibly inefficient intelligence analysis of
the Cuban situation which preceded last
week's fiasco. To those who knew the sit-
uation in Cuba and knew the formidable
strength of the leaders and their regime,
the outcome of such an invasion attempt
was inevitable. And even had it succeeded,
the CIA concept of putting in a right-wing
government that would have been branded
as a Yankee creation was dreadfully wrong.
It is obvious that the first step must be to
reorganize the personnel and methods of
the Federal officials dealing with the Cuban
problem today. Any policy, any action to
be taken in the future must be based on
an accurate assessment of the situation.
There are certain developments that
would force the United States to act; and
such action would be fully understood by
the world at large. If the Russians, for in-
stance, were to set up missile bases or move
in with a dangerous degree of military sup-
port; if Americans were killed and the lives
of the remaining Americans were jeop-
ardized; if Premier Castro were to attack
Guantanamo Bay or mount military in-
vasions against his Caribbean neighbors-
in such cases the United States would, of
course, have to intervene directly, and
presumably so would other members. of the
Organization of American States.
Barring such obviously dangerous, al-
though unlikely, developments, the United
States should not intervene. Why not? The
grave political consequences; the blow to the
moral standards and principles by which
we live and which are a source of strength
in the cold war; the fact that armed inter-
vention without the clearest provocation
would reduce our policies to a crude con-
test in power politics; the loss of needed
allies; the perilous international complica-
tions-these are the results that would flow
from such armed intervention by the United
States in Cuba.
Even more basic than our differences in
economic system is our philosophic differ-
ence with the Communists: We believe in
freedom and the rule of law among indi-
viduals and among nations. This is the es-
sence of what America stands for in the
world, and it is our greatest source of
strength. We must preserve it.
The hegemony of the United States in the
Western Hemisphere is threatened for the
first time in a century. It can only be de-
fended by a positive, creative policy, one that
builds. Of course, we are strong enough to
crush the Castro regime, but to do so by
force would lose us far more than we could
gain. It is hard to be patient under such
provocation and defeat as we have experi-
enced. Yet it is the mark of true strength
to take both defeat and victory in one's
stride.
The chief danger to the United States and
the rest of Latin America is not Cuba by
herself, but Cuba as a possible model for
other revolutions, and Cuba as a base for
the spread of anti-Yankee or communistic
doctrines. How to counter the creeping sub-
version of the totalitarians is the great
problem for the free world, as President Ken-
nedy has recognized. It cannot be done by
adopting their methods. That would be to
surrender.
Defend the security of the United States.
Continue by all legal means to encourage
the anti-Batista, anti-Castro Cuban exiles in
their determination to establish a free and
democratic regime with social justice. They
must not be abandoned.
Above all, prove-by deeds not just words-
that we are determined ' to support the de-
mands for social reforms throughout Latin
America; that we are not merely anti-Com-
munist; that we will opose right-wing-re-
actionary military dictatorships as we do left-
wing, communistic dictatorships; that we
ask partnership and cooperation, not sub-
servience. This is the only kind of inter-
vention that can permanently succeed in
Latin America.
FEDERAL AID TO EDUCATION
Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, I ad-
dress myself to the subject of Federal aid
to education. There are several bills
pending, on this subject, and notwith-
standing what a specific bill might be
numbered or might contain, the end re-
sult will be eventual Federal domination
of our system of public education and
the absorption by the Federal Govern-
ment of one of the last remaining privi-
leges of home or self-rule and determi-
nation. For the Congress now to ac-
quiesce to the pressure demands against
which it has stood so firmly, and rightly
so, for more than a century and a half
will mean complete capitulation against
the will of a vast majority of the citizenry
of our Nation.
Mr. President, the record will clearly
show that it is not local school boards,
not the municipal or county govern-
ments, nor even the State governments
that are demanding that the Federal
Government wedge its way into this field.
And for those few who have yielded and
subscribed to the philosophy, "Let the
Federal Government do it and relieve us
of the cost," they speak with inconsider-
ate tongues and blindness over their
eyes.
Mr. President, none but the blind will
deny that, if the Federal Government is
going to pay the piper, it is most certainly
going to call the tune. There was a
salutary lesson on this subject back in
1959, when several leading institutions
of higher learning refused to accept Fed-
eral moneys under the National Defense
Act of 1958 because of certain federally
imposed requirements. Dr. Griswold,
president of Yale, one of the universities
involved, expressed the views of that uni-
versity in this manner:
Such restriction partakes of the nature of
the oppressive religious and political test
oaths of history, which were used as a means
of exercising control over the educational
process by church and state.
I do not wish to take sides in this past
controversy, but simply to use it as an
illustration. It does seem that both par-
ties were acting within a reasonable con-
cept of duty. The two universities, on
the one hand, were perfectly within their
rights to reject the funds and to guard
jealously their freedom from the politi-
cal dictates of the State. But on the
other hand, the State was certainly also
well within its rights in saying that it
will not use its governmental power to
lay taxes upon all the people and then
use the money collected to subsidize
those people who believe in or teach the
overthrow of the very Government that
is supporting them.
In any event, it is foolish to suppose
that the State will do such a thing.
Sometimes it might be reasonable in
what it asks; sometimes it might not be,
but again, if the State is going to pay
the piper, it is most certainly going to
call the tune.
The vision of the great many W?*io
advocate that the Federal Government
come to the aid and succor of our educa-
tional system runs only so far as to see
that the system is in need of money and
that the Federal Treasury is large. They
delude themselves into thinking that
somehow they. c -m tap this cornucopia
and pay no price for it.
The community of taxpayers through-
out the Nation has provided well for ele-
mentary and secondary education. The
diversity of local school boards, of local
governmental bodies, provides that these
schools shall not be run on monolithic
lines; some have more reasonable re-
strictions put upon' them by those who
support them than do other like institu-
tions, but all of them, let it be noted, are
beholden to the public that pays the lo-
cal taxes, and therefore to the political
agents of the local public. Manifestly a
great danger lurks in a single state, the
Federal Government, providing money
for all schools over the Nation. For
them diversity will be lost, all eventually
must conform to a national standard,
and there will be lost that freedom which
is most prized.
FEDERAL CONTROL UNAVOIDABLE
Now ' Mr. President, there are those
who decry the suggestion that Federal
aid to education will bring about Federal
control and restrictions. Let us exam-
ine just two of the proposed bills. In
one, S. 1021, I read that funds would be
provided for teacher's salaries and school
construction and, now hear this, and
penalties would be provided for States
whose school effort does not increase
each year at a predetermined national
percentage. In S. 8, if my interpreta-
tion of the language is correct, funds
would be available for teacher's salaries
and school construction and, now here
it is again, penalties for States whose
school effort falls below the national
average. Mr. President, rightly so, the
Federal Government cannot be expected
to make loans, grants, or gifts of money
for any program without placing restric-
tions according to national goals or na-
tional standards; and in what other
light or manner, Mr. President, can any-
one but the blind see that these national
goals and standards are nothing more
than Federal controls? The majority
of these pressure groups who so strongly
advocate Federal aid to education say
they are shocked by such accusations
and statements. They say, have no fear,
the Federal Government will not dictate
to us and our schools will continue to
operate in complete local independence
and freedom. But now, Mr. President,
let us look at the record and listen to
talk out of the other side of their
mouths. Increasingly, there have been
voices within the educational profession
that say "local control of education has
clearly outlived its usefulness on the
American scene" and that "the United
States is inexorably moving toward a
national system of education." An edi-
torial in a leading journal of school ad-
ministration stated that "the national
welfare demands the national system of
education." And yet, Mr. President,
these very same people say Federal aid
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 196 Approved For Reletbe a .(gRf&ATA 0 4 003gfK0AQ,?,J00160015-1 6387
Mr. President, the will of a great na- ians. It is essential that this initiative
tion should not be manifested by pre- be 'forwarded and that the prospective
cipitate action. Instead, its will must be program be doubled in money and man-
shown with wisdom, as well as with power, so that barriers to expansion of
power and purpose, as befits a great na-
tion. The administration must have an
opportunity to do this. It is already
clear that the administration will not
yield to any temptation that will inter-
fere with that opportunity, and will not
renounce, as the President reminded our
neighbors, freedom of action essential to
our "primary obligations which are the
security of our Nation if the nations of
this hemisphere should fail to meet their
commitments against outside Communist
penetration." So the first lesson is that
at this time our Nation should act wise-
ly-not precipitately-at a time which
we choose, not at a time when we may
feel that we are being rushed to take
action.
Second, it would be unwise and would
hamper our own national interests if
Congress were to undertake a public in-
vestigation of the CIA. The President
has acted with propriety in the appoint-
ment of a high-level review body "for
a governmentwide study of paramili-
tary operations within the Government"
to be heavily concentrated on the CIA.
General Taylor, Attorney General Ken-
nedy, Admiral Burke, and, CIA Director
Dulles comprise a body 'which should
adequately assure the country that the
review will be thorough and meaningful
and will, I believe, be undertaken with-
out reservations.
This certainly does not exclude the
consideration of the desirability of a
joint congressional committee, similar to
the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,
to oversee the operations of the CIA, sub-
ject to the full safeguarding of security.
That, too, should be done without our
engaging in a process of washing our
linen in public, with the accompanying
embarrassment arising from a public in-
vestigation. This means that the CIA
should not be made the subject of a pub-
lic investigation.
In addition to this self-examination,
I believe there are two areas in which
we can also help meet with vigor and
vision the Cuban challenge.
First. We must concentrate our ef-
forts on activities that will implement
the President's Latin-American develop-
ment program, the Alliance for Prog-
ess. An auspicious start has been made
by the House, led by its appropriations
subcommittee-heretofore unfriendly to
foreign aid-which now has granted
fully the President's request for $500,-
million to launch the project, plus an-
other $100 million to help Chile recover
from last year's disastrous earthquake.
I have urged that the 18 principal
European nations and Canada, that are
parties to the OECD, which the United
States has already joined, should make
the Alliance for Progress its first part-
nership effort, thereby doubling the
available resources to meet the urgent
need for economic development in Latin
America. I think they will do that-
in view of the way I have seen their
interests manifested in connection with
the work in the NATO parliamentar-
Lain American exports be lifted in
We,tern Europe and that the private
eco lomy in Western Europe and the
Un ted States be effectively tied into the
tot{l effort. Every expert points out
that if Communist-oriented Castroism is
to find any important support in the
Western Hemisphere, it will be because
of
in
wa
time the trade, health, education,
;er and soil resources, land use and
er economic potentials of Latin
America. In addition, the emphasis on
sel-help in the Alliance for Progress
should convince the other American re-
publics that we are a partner, not a
patron. For the people of Cuba them-
selves, the Alliance for Progress is su-
premely important. They must have
aid for adequate economic development
an4 economic justice. They can get
these and we can help enormously with-
out the totalitarian regime which they
are now suffering. The Alliance for
Progress should certainly be available
to ',them as they throw off the Castro
dictatorship. The Castro regime prom-
ise$ them only lower living standards,
deprivation of their liberties and will
confine Cuba more and more to the low
estate in terms of its economy and the
enjoy oment of life by its people-con-
dit ns so typical of a Communist satel-
lite. We must make clear that we are
opposed to dictatorships of the left as
well. as to dictatorships of the right.
Second. We must preserve the oppor-
turl:ity to proceed multilaterally. We
mist constantly keep before the eyes of
they other free nations of the Western
Hemisphere the tyranny of Castroism,
with the expectation that they will rec-
ognize it as the threat it is to their own
freedom and security, and will meet
their commitments to defend the hemi-
sphere against Communist subversion.
I believe there is a fair prospect that
the other American Republics will recog-
nize, first, that the Communists will use
the doctrine of nonintervention to mask
their subversive purposes; and, second,
that the size and weight of the Com-
mt}nist-furnished arms makes the
Castro regime far more of a threat to
the security of the other Republics in
Latin America than had been realized.
Al the American Republics must recog-
ni a the juridical as well as the moral
pr priety of invoking the authority of
th Inter-American Treaty of Recipro-
ca Assistance of September 2, 1947--
the Rio Pact, which, for the Western
Hemisphere, is tantamount to the
NANO Alliance-as implemented by the
Declaration of Solidarity adopted at
thinter-American Conference at
Caracas-the Caracas Declaration--on
March 28, 1954. A role in the informa-
tioial part of this process may well be-
co ie a most vital function of the ref-
ugees from Cuba and may be very sig-
nificant to the ultimate course of
events.
I point out again that article 6 of the
Rib Pact speaks precisely of the inviola-
bility and integrity of the "sovereignty
or political-independence of any Amer-
ican State" being "affected by any fact
or situation that might endanger the
peace of America." Under such cir-
cumstances "the organ of consultation
shall meet immediately, in order to
agree on the measures which should be
taken for the common defense and for
the maintenance of the peace and secu-
rity of the continent." The decision
may be taken by two-thirds of the sig-
natory States that have ratified the
treaty, and may result in "recall of
chief, of diplomatic missions; breaking
of diplomatic relations; breaking of
consular. relations; partial or complete
interruption of economic relations or of
rail, eea, air postal telegraph, and ra-
diotelephonic or radiotelegraphic com-
inun:ieations; and use of armed forces."
Only as to the use of its own armed
force? is such a decision not binding on
every signatory State. The other sanc-
tions must be applied, if voted under
the terms of the treaty. It is a very
tight treaty; and only two-thirds of the
nations participating are needed in
order to bring it into operation,
This treaty is supplemented by the
Caracas Declaration, which says:
The domination or control of the political
institutions of any American State by the
international Communist movement, ex-
tending into this hemisphere a political sys-
tem of an extracontinental power, would
constitute a threat to the sovereignty and
political independence of the American
State, endangering the peace of America.
The signatories to the Rio Pact are
all the 21 American Republics. Those
represented at Caracas were the same,
with reservations only on the part of
Guatemala, Mexico, and Peru.
We in the United States have a right
to expect that, at the proper time, enough
of the signatories to the Rio Pact, rec-
ognizing the immediate and present
threat posed by Castroism to freedom in
the hemisphere and-and I emphasize
this---to their own security, will make the
Rio fact effective in this instance.
In the tradition of a bipartisan for-
eign policy-as sponsored by the late
Sene,tor Arthur Vandenberg-in circum-
stances such as these, I urge support for
the balanced approach that I have here
described. I hope very much that this
may also be the view of my colleagues.
I ask unanimous consent to have
printed in the RECORD an editorial enti-
tled "A Policy on Cuba," from the New
York Times of recent date.
There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
A POLICY ON CUBA
Whit next in Cuba? The Cuban exiles
have been defeated militarily and the United
State:., which supported them, has suffered a
political defeat. However, history as not like
a bon ng match or a baseball game. It flows
like e, river. The United States and Cuba
are too much intertwined by history, geo-
graphy, economics, and strategy to be sepa-
rated. Cuba has been. caught up in the
vast etorm of the cold war. All the forces
unleashed by the Cuban revolution are still
operating..
Thfrefore, something has to happen, and
the instinct is to say: something has to be
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 1961
Approved For R aNRgf & 1Al: IZfC;C 6 B MTE 0200160015-1
of conference on the dij_.g;eeing votes
of the two Houses on the amendments
of the Senate to the bill (H.R. 4884) to
amend title IV of the Social Security
Act to authorize Federal financial par-
ticipation in aid to dependent children
of unemployed parents, and for other
purposes. I ask unanimous consent for
the present consideration of the report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The re-
port will be read for the information of
the Senate.
The legislative clerk read the report.
(For conference report, see House pro-
ceedings of April 25, 1961, pp. 6271-6272,
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD.)
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the present consideration of
the report?
There being no objection, the Senate
proceeded to consider the report.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the conference
report.
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi-
dent, I should like to make a brief
statement on the report.
There were no major differences be-
tween the House and the Senate in re-
gard to the temporary program to ex-
tend Federal assistance to the children
of needy unemployed persons in which
the Senate yielded to the House. In al-
most all instances the House receded
,to the Senate position, with these
exceptions:
The Senate receded to the House pro-
vision which requires that a State plan
for the new program must provide that
cooperative arrangements be entered
into with the State vocational education
agency looking toward maximum utiliza-
tion of its service facilities to encourage
retraining of the unemployed parent.
The program will last for a 14-month
period, from May 1, 1961, through June
30, 1962, as provided in the Senate bill.
Louisiana in asking that the Senate ap-
prove the conference report.
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask that the question be put
again.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the confer-
ence report.
The report was agreed to.
NOMINATION OF JULIUS C. HOLMES
TO BE AMBASSADOR TO IRAN
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. Mr.
President, earlier this week the Com-
mittee on Foreign Relations ordered re-
ported the nomination of Julius C.
Holmes to be Ambassador to Iran.
When this nomination is considered by
the Senate it is my intention to oppose
Mr. Holmes' confirmation.
Much has been said in recent months
by both congressional committees and
the Attorney General of the United
States about the need for higher morals
and greater integrity in private industry.
Yet by confirming the nomination of
Mr. Holmes as Ambassador to Iran the
Senate will be placing a cloak of respect-
ability upon "shady deals" maneuvered
for the purpose of making "a fast buck"
when such shady deals involve Govern-
ment officials.
Are we to establish a lower standard
of morals for Government service than
is required of private industry?
Can either the Congress or the Depart-
ment of Justice point the finger of scorn
at questionable business practices while
closing our eyes to "slick deals" involv-
ing Government officials?
In a later speech in opposition to this
nomination I will deal more specifically
with the impropriety of some of Mr.
Holmes' financial deals.
I shall then point out how by question-
The House accepted a Senate amend- able maneuvering, if not in actual viola-
ment, with a modification, postponing tion of the law, Mr. Holmes and his asso-
the effective date of the provision ciates pyramided a $101,000 investment
whereby there will be no withdrawing into a quick profit of $31/'4 million.
of Federal payments because of such But today I shall merely enumerate a
statutes for any period up to September few of the points at issue.
1, 1962. Under the conference agree- Several years ago Mr. Holmes and his
ment, States will be allowed a further two associates-Joseph E. Casey and E.
period in which study may be given to Stanley Klein-were engaged in a highly
this problem, and the Secretary of questionable tanker deal in which they
Health, Education, and Welfare can co- placed the making of "a fast buck" above
operate with the States in working out the national interest.
a solution. At the time Mr. Holmes and his as-
The Senate receded as to its amend- sociates purchased eight tankers from
ment which would have changed the the Maritime Commission there was a
name of the "aid to dependent chil- law prohibiting their sale by the Govern-
dren" to "aid to families with depend- ment to foreign-owned or foreign-con-
ent children." It is the understanding trolled companies. It was likewise illegal
of the conference committee that the for an American company purchasing
Department of Health, Education, and these tankers from the Government to
Welfare is looking into all aspects of the resell them to foreign-owned or foreign-
aid to dependent children program and controlled companies without having ob-
that the appropriateness of the change tained the prior approval of the Maritime
of name will be thoroughly explored at Commission. The purpose of this pro-
that time. vision was to guarantee that these
With those exceptions, Mr. President, tankers would remain under the control
the House receded to the Senate position of the U.S. Government.
in all other respects. By circumventing the law, or at least
the intent of the law, Mr. Holmes and
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The his two associates sold all of these tank-
question is on agreeing to the confer- ers to companies which were both for-
ence report. eign-owned and foreign-controlled.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. Mr. Mr. Holmes tries to claim that they
President, I support the Senator from did get the approval of the Maritime
Commission, but every member of the
Maritime Commission emphatically de=
Hied when testifying under oath before
a senatorial committee that any notice
had been given concerning the proposed
sale or that any approval had been ob-
tained.
I quote the Hoey committee's report
confirming this statement:
There is no credible evidence that Mr.
Morris or any other representative of the
United Tanker Corp. group made a complete
disclosure to the commission concerning the
arrangements between the Casey group and
the United Tanker group which were entered
into as early as January 1948.
What is even worse, one of these eight
tankers, the Kettleman Hills, which the
Holmes-Casey group turned over to a
foreign owned and controlled company
was subsequently leased to Soviet Rus-
sia. The tanker was then used by Rus-
sia for the purpose of transporting oil
from Romania to ports in Communist
China and North Korea.
Mr. Holmes tries to shrug off respon-
sibility for what this foreign owned com-
pany did with the tanker after his com-
pany sold it. But we must not overlook
the fact that this tanker came into the
possession of these foreign owners as
the result of highly irregular, if not
actually illegal, maneuvering on the part
of Mr. Holmes and his associates.
The Hoey subcommittee which investi-
gated these sales in 1952 strongly de-
nounced these transactions as morally
wrong and clearly in violation of the in-'
tent of the law.
Mr. Holmes and his two associates, in
violation of the clear intent of the law
and without taking any financial risk
at all received $150,000 clear profit for
each tanker they turned over to this for-
eign group. Therefore, they cannot
dodge some responsibility for what hap-
pened.
The most bitter denunciation of this
transaction whereby one of these tank-
ers was chartered to Soviet Russia for
use in transporting oil to Communist
China and North Korea came from
former Secretaries of Defense Louis
Johnson and General George Marshall.
Beginning with October 1949 and ex-
tending through October 1950 they wrote
a series of letters to the Secretary of
State bitterly denouncing the use of
these American tankers to transport
Russian oil and emphasized that such
action was definitely detrimental to the
security of the United States.
It was not until December 1950, 6
months after the outbreak of the Ko-
rean war that the use of these vessels in
Russian trade was stopped.
Now, what excuse did Mr. Holmes and
his two associates give for selling this
tanker, the Kettleman Hills, and two
other tankers to this foreign owned and
foreign controlled company?
They said they considered the com-
pany to which they sold the tankers-
the United Tanker Corp.-to be an
American owned and controlled company
because the company had only four
stockholders, three of whom were Ameri-
can citizens. Therefore they reasoned
that the company was 75 percent Ameri-
can owned.and controlled.
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 Approved For Release 2004/1 p/1 P64gQQ34000200160015-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE April 27
What Mr. Holmes, Mr. Casey, and Mr. two vessels; were engaged in Communist and that confidence is endangered when
t Klein did not disclose was that this trade. ethical standards falter or appear to falter.
company-the United Tanker Corp: at " " In concluding his message, President
the time they exercised the option to This entire investigation has demonstrated Kennedy said:
capitalized for to the subcommittee calculating how various groups of
buy these tankers was shrewd and calculating businessmen and at- Ultimately, high ethical standards can be
$2,500,006. Of this $2,500,006 capital- torneys, through an intricate series of cor-? maintained only if the leaders of Govern-
ization the one foreign stockholder, a porate and financial transactions, were able ment provide a personal example of dedica-
Chinese citizen, owned $2,500,000 while to realize substantial profits by taking ad- tion to the public service and exercise their
the three Americans had investedin the vantage of the confusion and mismanage- leadership to develop in all Government em-
company exactly $2 each or a total of $6. ment which marked the administration of ployees an in.reaeing sensitivity to the etid-
How naive can any man be? By what the surplus ship disposal program by the old Cal and moral conditions imposed be above
line of reasoning can anyone with a Maritime Commission. service. straight face claim that three men with reproach.
The subcommittee concluded with this
a total investment of only $6 in a $2,- statement: I know of no stronger statement which
500,006 corporation can control its The subcommittee is of the opinion that could be me,de against the confirmation
operation? As if this claim were not there appears to be sufficient evidence of of Mr. Holmes. Certainly his conduct
ridiculous enough it developed that the violations of the civil provisions of the was not above reproach.
foreign stockholders had an option to Merchant ! Ship Sales Act in these tanker /
buy even this small amount of stock the Department of Justice. roInpaddition the VW THI4 LESSONS OF CUBA
$1from for these each man. Americans at a price of concealment ment and misrepresentation of perti-
Obvi
Obviously, these three men merely got tent of factsiby various officers and representa- Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, at this
ry In time of examination and self-examina-
inquiry n
tives
P t
$10,000 each for the use of their names their deal~e; fingarms s involved ed I n this iu with the Maritime Commis- tion of the events in Cuba, I believe it is
just as Mr. Holmes and his two asso- Sion leads the subcommittee to believe that important that those of us who hereto-
ciates got $150,000 per tanker for the use various criminal statutes may have been fore have spoken on the subject should
of their names in getting title to three violated by these individuals. make clear our present position. Happi-
tankers from the U.S. Government for * ly, we are relieved of the worry about
the purpose of turning them over to this This was a unanimous report of the sub- France, and can turn again 1-41 the Cuban
foreign group. committee. situation.
This is but one example of the many CLYDE R. HOEY, A serious reverse was suffered by the
flimsy excuses advanced tiMr. Holmes Chairman. forces of freedom in the Western Hemi-L. MCCLELLAN. and his associates to justify Mr.
series Joan H. sphere when the Cuban patriots were
of shady and highly irregular proce- THOMAS x. R. N. UNDERWOOD. repulsed 011 the shores of Cuba. But the
dures surrounding many of the trans- JOSEPH R. MCCARTHY. President has made clear, in his historic
actions involved in the purchase of eight KARL E. MUNDT. address to the American Society of
tankers, every one of which was ulti- RICHARD M. NIXON. Newspaper Editors, that--
mately transferred to foreign owned and I thinly the Washington Post in its edi- The Cuban. people have not yet spoken
controlled companies. All of these tonal of February 22, 1952, best summed their final piece.
transfers were made without the legal up this transaction when it said: Neither :have we, because, as the Presi-
approval of the Maritime Commission. The involved surplus ship negotiations of dent also slid :
I will discuss these transactions in Joseph E.' Casey and his associates seem to
greater detail when we consider the We do not intend to abandon Cuba to the
fall somewhere in between what is legal and Communists.
nomination, but today I shall close by what is proper. The Inquiry by the Senate
reading from the conclusion of the Hoey investigating committee may not show that From our experiences in Cuba we can
subcommittee which investigated these the Casey group actually violated the law. learn some valuable lessons.
transactions. The Hoey subcommittee On the other hand, the procedure whereby First and foremost, a high order of na-
report was filed on May 29, 1952. I great profits were realized on transactions tional and partisan discipline is now
which resulted in American surplus tankers ,
quote from the report: ending up under the control of foreign- called for. It is not a time for anl,ry
The clear and stated purpose in selling financed I corporations will strike at least postmortems on blunders. President
surplus tankers under the Merchant Ship some persons as a slick deal. Eisenhower, Vice President Nixon, Gov-
Sales Act was to develop and maintain an ernor Rockefeller, Senator Morton, Sen-
efficient and adequate American-owned mer- Mr. President, Iran is a very important ator Dirksen, and Representative Halleck
chant marine. In the opinion of the sub- country.] It is located in one of the have made this admirably clear to the
committee, it was never the intent of the world's most sensitive areas. It is very Nation and to the world, in the name: of
law to allow this type of profit grabbing in important that the U.S. Government be the Republican Party. Full opportunity
the allocation or sale of Government-owned represented at this important post by an
surplus tankers. Ambassador whose integrity is above must be eaforded our Government to
Furthermore, representatives of both the take stock of our own situation, and,
National Tanker Corp. and the United Tan- reproach. through channels readily available, to
ker Corp., in their negotiations with the Any individual who was connected evaluate the situation in the 19 other
Maritime Commission which resulted in with a financial transaction which was American republics, and to determine
United obtaining control of the three tan- widely recognized as a "slick deal" by the significance of the Cuban episode in
kers, did not disclose the complete facts 'shrewd ! and calculating businessmen" respect to the entire cold war struggle
concerning the transactions to the Commis- is not such a man,
in this hemdsphere. Certainly this is not
Sion." Today' Mr. President, we received a time for precipitate action.
Between July 1949 and May 1950, two fromthe President of the United States It would be very easy to yield to the
American-flag tankers owned by subsidiaries an excellent message recommending cer- perfectly natural impulse to seek,
of the United Tanker Corp. and the China tain needled legislation to deal with the by whatever means required, to rid the
International Foundation, Inc., were char- conflict-pf-interest problem. At the same Western Hemisphere of the threat of the
tered to the Soviet Government and car- time, the President emphasizes to Con- Communist-oriented Castro regime. But
ried six cargoes of petroleum and other oil gress an d to all Government officials the such a policy would also prove to be
products between Constanza, Rumania, and importance of establishing high moral shortsighted and unwise. As the Presi-
Koma, and iaports in North China, North standards in Government. I shall read dent has said, so clearly and porten-
The , sm.is of the opinion that excerpts', from this excellent- message tously:
The subcommittee ub
no American-flag vessels should have en- from the President of the United States: A nation of Cuba's size is less a threat to
gaged in the Communist oil trade. These There Can be no dissent from the prim- our survive:_ than it is a base :for subverting
were the only American-flag vessels known ciple that all officials must act with unwaiv- the survival of other free nations throughout
to have been trafficking in the Communist ering integrity, absolute impartiality, and the hemisphere. It is not primarily our In-
oil trade at that time, and it is paradoxical complete'. devotion to the public interest. terest, our security, but theirs which is now
that other vessels of the United fleet were This principle must be followed not only today in ever greater peril. It is for their
making substantial profits In the carriage of in reality but in appearance. For the basis safety as well as our own that we must show
ECA oil during the same period that these of effective government is public confidence, our will.
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 Approved For 646TE00200160015-1 April '27
gram which may be described as compre-
hensive4
In the old-age assistance programs in 1958,
49 of the 53 States and territories made
specific provision for nursing home care;
39 for drugs; 36 for dental care; 35 for hos-
pitalization; 35 for physicians' and other
practitioners' services; and 34 for prosthetic
appliances' It has been estimated that
about 70 percent of the payments made to
suppliers of medical services in behalf of
public assistance recipients in all four cate-
gories were made for old-age assistance
recipients.
The rising costs of the medical care com-
ponent of public assistance, particularly for
the 2.4 million persons on old-age asssistance,
has led to public concern, and there has
been a growing recognition of the need to
evaluate public assistance medical care pro-
grams. As a result, systematic reviews of
State and local programs have been under-
taken with increasing frequency in recent
years .0 Typically, the commissions, the
committees, and the consultants making
these reviews describe the administrative
structure of the program, the scope of serv-
ices provided, and the patterns of providing
services. Cost data are usually presented
in some detail; service or utilization data,
with few notable exceptions, are not pre-
sented, generally because they are not avail-
able.
Such program reviews are of only limited
usefulness in the evaluation of public assist-
ance medical care programs. To be sure,
some inferences concerning the quality of
the care provided may be made from de-
scriptions of administrative patterns with
respect to staff organization and respon-
sibility, the presence or absence of profes-
sional advisory committees, the scope of
services available, and the manner in which
they are provided. But such basic questions
as: How much medical care is actually being
received? and: Is it enough? cannot even
be approached without carefully collected
and properly interpreted utilization data.
Furthermore, as regards qualitative ade-
quacy, the question, To what extent do re-
cipients receive medical care meeting ac-
cepted standards of quality? must also be
answered. Measures of the quality of care
by professional service auditing ("medical
audits") would provide the answer? How-
ever, these technics, which were developed
for use in hospitals and in selected health
insurance plans, have not been used in pub-
lic welfare medical care program reviews.
A notable feature of the program re-
views mentioned above is their emphasis
on cost data. This is due to the tradi-
tionally fiscal orientation of public assist-
ance programs and is reinforced by the
prevailing method of purchasing medical
4 Bierman, P. Where Are We Going in Tax-
Supported Medical Care? Paper presented at
APWA Southwest Regional Conference (Apr.
7), 1959.
s Social Security Administration, Bureau
of Public Assistance, "Medical Care in Pub-
lic Assistance: Information Relating to
Changes, Early 1957 to January, 1958," State
Letter No. 333, Apr. 8, 1958.
0 See for example: American Medical As-
sociation, Council on Medical Service, "A
Report on Medical Care for the Indigent in
18 Selected Communities," 1955; New
Jersey Commission to Study the Adminis-
tration of Public Medical Care. The Report
and Recommendations, October 1959.
4 (a) Rosenfeld, L., "Quality of Medical
Care in Hospitals." A.J.P.H. 47:856, July
1957. (b) Daily, E. F., and Moorehead, M. A.,
"A Method of Evaluating and Improving the
Quality of Medical Care," A.J.P.H. 46:848,
July 1956.
care in public assistance programs, i.e., by
vendor payments. Dollar figures originating
in the agency's -ccounting office flow quite
naturally as a byproduct of the process of
paying physicians, hospitals, and other
vendors. Emphasis on the almost exclusive
collection of cost data stems also from
widespread lack of appreciation of the rele-
vance of utilization data for program
evaluation. Both cost and utilization data
are necessary for program evaluation. But
in assessing the relative value of each for
this purpose, it should be borne in mind
that when utilization data are available, a
conversion can readily be made to cost
data by applying prices to the items of serv-
ice. The reverse process, the conversion of
cost information into utilization data, is
more difficult, and at times, not possible.
Moreover, differences in fee schedules and
hospital charges invalidate interprogram
comparisons based on cost data alone by
obscuring variations between programs in
the volume of service rendered.
The American Public Welfare Association,
among other activities directed toward the
improvement of public welfare administra-
tion, has given special attention to medical
care programs in public welfare depart-
ments. It has recently developed a "self-
evaluation schedule for medical assistance
programs," B and is currently sponsoring, with
funds secured from the Public Health Ser-
vice, a program of research in the adminis-
trative aspects of public assistance medical
care programs. Studies leading to the im-
proved administration of these programs are
now being carried out by the Bureau of
Public Health Economics, University of
Michigan.
In reviewing research efforts to date' it
soon became evident that there is very lit-
tle information on the amount of medical
care received by recipients of public assist-
ance. A preliminary field survey indicated
that even in the relatively few States which
collect such data, there are important gaps.
Also, the limited information which was
available did not lend itself to meaningful
interstate comparisons because of differ-
ences in definitions of service and the ab-
sence of basic caseload data from which to
develop utilization rates for comparative
purposes.
Recognizing that evaluation is a critical
element of sound administration and that
adequate utilization data are necessary for
the evaluation of public assistance medi-
cal care programs, it was decided to focus
the initial phase of the research program
on the collection of such data and on the
quantitative appraisal of services received
by recipients of public assistance. Although
it is difficult to separate quantity from
quality in regard to the adequacy of medi-
cal care, studies of quality as such, e.g., the
application of medical audit technics, have
been deferred.
The selection of the public assistance
medical care programs for study in the
initial phase of the research was in part
dictated by considerations of time and cost.
It was decided to limit this phase to old-age
assistance medical care programs in a rela-
tively small number of States. The OAA
category is a more homogeneous popula-
tion group than the other three categories.
The largest proportion of total outlays
B American Public Welfare Association,
"self-evaluation schedule for medical assist-
ance programs, 1957."
? American Public Welfare Association
for medical care in
public assistance Is
absorbed by this group. Finally, the OAA
category was selected because of widespread
interest in medical care for the aged, an in-
terest which has been intensified by the
debate over the Forand bill.
No attempt was made in this study to
present a national picture of OAA medical
care programs or to estimate the amount
of medical care received by the 2.4 million
persons on old-age assistance. Attention
was directed rather toward the development
of satisfactory methods of collecting ade-
quate utilization data, solving the problems
which were encountered, and indicating the
ues of these data in program evaluation.
A word of caution regarding the limi-
tation of utilization data is in order. Rec-
ords of the use of services are limited to
those services for which the administering
agency makes a payment. In some areas,
welfare recipients may receive a broad array
of services for which no payment is made
by the welfare agency and of which the
agency will have no record. Such "free"
services vary in amount and, if they are of
some magnitude, they should be taken into
account in making interprogram compari-
sons in terms of utilization data.
Two criteria were used for the selection of
States. In order to secure utilization data
on a broad array of services, only those
States with comprehensive medical care pro-
grams for OAA recipients were considered.
The State program would have to include at
least physicians care-general practitioner
and specialist-in office and home; hospital
care; dental care; and prescribed drugs, to
be selected for the study. Second, States
were chosen whose record systems make the
collection of utilization data feasible. For
example, State programs which provide for
important elements of medical care through
money payments to the recipient, rather
than by vendor payments, present many
complex problems in the collection of utili-
zation data.
With these considerations in mind, the
old-age assistance medical care programs of
four States, Rhode Island, Connecticut,
Maryland, and Illinois, were selected for
study. The Maryland program is distinctive
in that it is administered by the health de-
partrnent; there are also some differences
among all four States in the services pro-
vided and in payment to vendors. However,
the similarities between them in terms of
the services provided, in methods of provid-
ing service, and in other administrative fea-
tures far outweigh the differences, so that
utilization data were collected in four basic-
ally similar, comprehensive medical care
programs for the needy aged. The method-
ology of data collection and the complete
findings of this study will be presented in
a monograph to be published by the Ameri-
can Public Welfare Association.10
This paper deals with some of the ways
in which utilization data can be used in
the evaluation of OAA medical care pro-
grams. Illustrative data from three of the
four States studied are presented. If the
question, How much medical care is actually
being received? can be answered, then a sec-
ond question, Is it enough? must also be
asked. In the absence of generally accepted
norms of quantitative adequacy, utilization
data, taken from published reports of the
experience of a medical care plan for an in-
sured population 65 years of age and over
(the Health Insurance Plan of Greater New
York) and of the experience of the general
and Bureau of Public Health Economics, "American Public Welfare Association
University of Michigan, "Public Assistance and Bureau of Public Health Economics,
Medical Care: Areas of Needed Research University of Michigan, "Old-Age Assistance
and an Annotated Bibliography," Novem- Medical Care: A Four-State Study," (to be
her 1959. published).
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 1961 Approved For elasESSI)NA/L ifC -]MP64 i4f000200160015-1
f,
hoping we can devise a plan for long- ciety, which is dedicated to fighting com- This cont3nti0n is supported by sta-
distance transmission of power. This is a munism. The good news is that the founder tistics on utilization data in connection
very exciting new field, so that we can trans- and head of the society has discovered each with old age assistance health programs,
fer power hundreds perhaps thousands of of the foll?wing persons to be a Communist that the percentage of eli-
miles, and do it cheaply, and that this will agent: Dwight D. Eisenhower, the former which Bible p show show s receiving physicians' care
mean tremendous efficiencies in terms of the President of the United States; Earl War- economics involved. ren, the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court; was about six times the number who had
Mr. CLAPPEI: Mr. Secretary, you have the late John Foster Dulles, who was Secre?? to be hospitalized.
threatened to George Marshall, the owner tary of State; and Allen W. Dulles, the di- I ask unanimous consent to have
of the Washington Redskins football team, rector of the Central Intelligence Agency. printed in the RECORD, with my remarks,
that you will take action if he uses the At first glance, admittedly, there Is some?? an article entitled, "The Evaluation of
federally owned Washington Stadium-the thing almost frightening in the thought that Old-Age Assistance Medical Care Pro-
new stadium being built now, next fall- so many Communists were able to creep into " wl tten by Dr. S. J. Axelrod
Mr. ROLFSON. Pete, I am sorry, I can't such high Tositions in the Government. But. g' wr
even let you finish that question. We have upon mature reflection the reader will per- and grams, p t in the Journal of Public
only 1 minute left which we would like ceive the heartening side of this disclosure. Health.
Secretary Udall to use as he will. It proves the Communists to be a piffling There being no objection, the article
Secretary UDALL. In summing up I would sort of menace. With the executive and was ordered to he printed in the RECORD,
perhaps in part repeat what I have said. I judicial branches of the Government safely as follows:
do think there is a quiet crisis in conserva- in their h nds, they were utterly unable to THE EVALOnTTOK of OLD-AGE ASSISTANCE
tion in America. I think whether we know make them designs effective upon, or even MJATlo CARE PROGRAMS
it or not that our character as a people and apparent to, the rest of the Nation. $o ICAL
our basic inner strength as a people is re- disorganized were they, indeed, that the (By S. J. Axelrod, M.D., M.P.H., F.A.P.H.A)
lated to our land and to the way we treat heads of ICommunist governments abroad In 1941, Reed and Clark, discussing the
our land. And I think in conserving and obviously lever were informed that America need for app;:ai al of public assistance medi-
wisely using and developing the resources of was under} Soviet control, and often spoke cal care programs, wrote: "Considering the
our land that we will be determining the very harshly, and by name, of their Ameri- magnitude cf these programs, surprisingly
future strength of America. After all our can agents. The conclusion seems inescap- little Is known about them." x Almost 20
strength -as a people comes in the long run able thatI America Is able to absorb any years :later, public assistance medical care
not from our arms, for example, but from number of such conspirators with no ill programs are of even greater magnitude and
our basic resources, from our land, our effects whatever. the same observation can still be made: Sur-
water, our wood, the resources that arise out Grateful as we are to the John Birch people prisingly little is known about them.
of the land itself. And therefore conserva- for so ene uraging a revelation, we neverthe- The growth of these programs can be
tion although it has been pushed into the less look jpon the group, with some irrita- gauged by expenditures of Federal, State,
background more now than in previous times tion, as a . upstart in the field. As it hap- and local funds for medical care of the needy
it is an important area of activity and I am pens, we Fare a member of a sort of semi- over the years. In 1939 annual expenditures
hoping this administration canmake one of secret organization ourself-one that has of such funds were estimated to be about $50
the finest records in the field of conservation been In continuous existence for nearly two million. By 1949 this figure had risen to
that can be made. We are going to tackle hundred years. To be-sure, its attention has $125 million. Since then, there has been
these problems aggressively and I hope we not been wholly fastened on fighting Coda- more than a threefold increase. Currently,
will have the support of the American peo- munism, but it has done quite a lot of good medical care expenditures in public assist-
ple. work, in ts way. There are some who be- ance programs, including both money pay-
Mr. ROLFSON. Thank you very much, Mr. lieve that this organization, whose members menu to recipients to-purchase medical care
Secretary. Thank you for being with us on have infiltrated every craft and profession, as well as vendor payments, are estimated to
"Issues and Answers." deserves H L u c h of the credit for America's be about $420 million a year 2 These in-
I
di
Mr. GRUENING. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Montana yield?
Mr. METCALF. I yield.
Mr. GRUENING. I merely wish to
say that I, too, heard the program in
which Secretary Udall participated; and
I agree completely with the interpreta-
tion the distinguished Senator from
Montana has made. I believe he has put
the matter into proper perspective.
Mr. METCALF. I thank the Senator
from Alaska.
THE JOHN BIRCH SOCIETY
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, much
has recently been said of the possible
dangers to our free institutions from
secret societies which take it on them-
selves to judge the best way to fight com-
munism and to determine what policies
the United States is to follow.
A recent comment in the well-known
national magazine, the New Yorker, puts
this situation in a perspective which I
believe to be most helpful, in comment-
ing on the John Birch Society.
I ask unanimous consent that the item
from the New Yorker of April 15, 1961,
may be printed at this point in the body
of the RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
[From the New Yorker, Apr. 15, 19611
THE TALK OF THE TOWN: NOTES AND COM-
MENT
The best news we have heard in the last
couple of weeks comes from a semisecret
organization known as the John Birch So-
cs care
enjoyment of the oldest unaltered system of creases are due in part to rising me
government in the world. The membership costs and In pert to the more adequate pro-
is Impressively large, and, unlike that of the vision Of medical care services to recipients
Communi~t Party or the John Birch So- of public assistance. Amendments to the
ciety, it 1$ not composed of secret cells. In Social Security Act in 1950, 1956, and 1958
fact, the only real secrecy concerns the elec- have encouraged more States to give more
tion of officers, which is performed in jeal- medical care to more recipients of public as-
ously guarded privacy. The rules of mein- sistance by :Waking possible Federal match-
bership are few and basic, but upon many ing of funds for vendor payments for medi-
matters there is an unspoken consensus. It cal care and by increasing financial partici-
is generally considered bad form, for in- pation. by the Federal Government in med-
stance, f r one member lightly and frivo- ical care expenditures for recipients of pub-
-
though It nas Deen Known mo nappen. inc
members' receive no gaudy uniforms-not
even so much as an armband-but each does
receive a! title. It is not an imposing title,
we suppo~e, but it makes up in homely dig-
nity whatever it may lack in romance, and
to some Members, at least, it has a certain
glamour of its own. The title, dear John
Birch Society, is Citizen.
marked Federal matching funds for medical
care, there were no more than 20 States with
relatively comprehensive medical care pro-
grams for recipients of public assistance. In
the other States the programs were consid-
erably limited in scope, providing, for ex-
ample, hospital care only, or there were seri-
ous limitations in financial support, ranging
from monthly maximums on the amount
allowed for medical care to no public assist-
MEIXCAL CARE PROGRAMS ance funds at all for medical care in 16
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, in all the States.g At present, largely as the result of
liberalized Federal participation in financing,
action f have taken on health care in- some medical care is being provided under
surance!for the aged, I have placed sub- one or more of the categorical assistance
stantialil emphasis on the fact that an programs in all. but two of the 53 States
adequate program to meet the needs of and territories. However, of the States
our senior citizens should give top pri- which have recently initiated or expanded
ority to preventive medical care, rather their medical care programs, none has a pro-
than hospitalization. Medical experts agree that adequate preventive care 'Re,-d, L. S., and Clark, D. A. "Appraising
would lead to sharp reduction in the oc- Public Medical Services." A. J. P. H., 31:421,
currence of chronic illness and long May 1941.
stays in the hospital. This can best be 2 Published and unpublished material
done by a first cost program, such as I available in the Bureau of Public Assistance,
have included in proposed legislation Social Security Administration, Washington,
D.C:
which II and nine of my colleagues intro- 2 American Public Welfare Association,
duced earlier this year, which would "Role of the State Public Assistance Agency
make phiysician's care readily available in Medical Care," I. General Aspects of Med-
at home or in the office. ical Assistance, September 19158.
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE April 27
Mr. CLAPPER. Mr. Secretary, you said you
would like to see an additional 15 million
acres added to the national parks. First,
where would this 15 million acres come from
and how would you pay for buying it?
Secretary UDALL. Well some of this land
would come from what is now public lands,
which would be converted into parks. Some
of this land would have to be bought, as we
are now proposing that we buy the Cape
Cod land, the Point Reyes National Park
land, the proposed national park in San
Francisco, the Padre Island off the coast
of Texas, and other lands of this kind. When
you propose buying land east of the Mis-
sissippi, it is costly. These are areas we
should have set aside a generation ago and
we failed to do so and we are paying for it
now. The cost, I might say, is going up very
rapidly. About every 10 years the cost of
these lands that would make good park lands
is doubling.
Mr. CLAPPER. I don't believe any President
has ever set aside more than about 31/2 or
4 million acres during his entire term for
national parks. You really believe that it
Is possible for the Kennedy administration
in the next 4 to 8 years to set aside up to
15 million acres?
Secretary UDALL. I think If we could lay
out a proper program and aggressively persue
it the way no administration has done re-
cently, I think that we could make that kind
of record.
Let me give you an example, here, of what
is happening in terms of our National Park
System [referring to chart] :
There were 3.5 million acres that came in
prior to Teddy Roosevelt's time. During
Teddy Roosevelt's administration, 1.5 mil-
lion acres. Here Is Taft, 2 million acres.
Woodrow Wilson, the highwater mark, over
5 million acres came in in the National Park
System. Harding, very little. Coolidge and
Hoover have pretty good records, 3.5 and 3
million. In Franklin Roosevelt's time, 3.5
million acres into the National Park System.
But look in the postwar period, during this
period of crisis that I am talking about when
we refer to a population explosion. In Presi-
dent Truman's administration only 73,000.
Under the 8 years of President Eisenhower,
19,000 acres, You can see that In terms of
the pressure of people on our remaining park
resources, that this is a very serious problem
and I think if as a people we determine to
make a real record in terms of setting aside
public lands for use by all of the people that
we can make one of the finest records that
has been made and what is more important
we can set aside for all future generations
a park system that will keep America a
spacious land.
Mr. ROLFSON. Mr. Secretary, there are
some people who are all for you on this thing,
who agree with the urgency and all the rest,
but who are nevertheless expressing some
concern and even some impatience perhaps
that things aren't going fast enough, that
perhaps you aren't moving fast enough on it.
Certainly Congress is not. For example the
wilderness bill that is now in the Interior
Committee I understand is in great danger.
This would protect some of these wilderness
areas from encroachment and from destruc-
tion.
What are you doing to help this bill?
Secretary UDALL. Well, I am doing about
all I can do. I have testified for it on the
Senate side. I am pushing it for every angle.
This bill incidentally has had rather rough
sledding in Congress. This is the third year
that the wilderness bill has been before the
Congress. I am hopeful the Senate will act
on it and this is one of the bills that, al-
though it doesn't set aside new land, it gives
wilderness status to existing public lands
and I think this is legislatibn that our
country needs and it would accomplish one
of the objectives that I have been talking
about here this afternoon.
Mr. RoLFSOn. But I understand there are
some interests, the lumber interests and the
mining interests, for example, who are
bringing'great pressure to bear on the com-
mittee, and there is some prospect that
whatever bill does come out would be se-
verely amended and watered down if there is
one. Are you-
Secretary UDALL. There has been tradi-
tionally, going all the way back to Teddy
Roosevelt's time-any time you want to set
aside lands for public use there are special
interests who oppose it. There are special
interests opposing the wilderness bill. I
don't think they conceive of it properly. I
think this is in the public interest.
But we are going to have to push, we are
going to have to drive. But the Secretary
of the Interior can't do It, the President can't
do it. The President recommended tpis leg-
islation. We are going to have to have some
help from the people too, so I would say
that the people out in the country who really
believe in this legislation had better begin
pushing it because we can't do it all at the
Washington end.
Mr. RoLFSON. Mr. Secretary, our guest
next week on this program will be the Sec-
retary of Agriculture. There is a long his-
tory of struggle between your Department
and his over-management of some 180 mil-
lion acres of forest lands. We hear that this
struggle might be revived now. Is this true?
Secretary UDALL. I don't think that it is
reviving. It has existed and I think Secre-
tary Freeman and I have the best oppor-
tunity that any Secretary of Agriculture and
of Interior have had in the last 30 years or
so to work out some solutions to partially
at least resolve this dispute.
Secretary Freeman and I happen to get
along very well. We have had some discus-
sions on this problem. Nothing would
please us more, I don't think anything would
please the President more, than for Secre-
tary Freeman and I to stop fighting and
start doing. I think this is what the Presi-
dent wants and that he is the type of Presi-
dent who we know if we don't solve this
problem, he will solve it for us, so I think
you can look for some kind of solution
emerging from our discussions and I hope
Secretary Freeman-I am sure he will-will
indicate just as I have today that we are
going to try and get agreements where the
others have failed.
Mr. RoLFsoN. Would you expect the agree-
ments might include putting in your Park
Service in the Interior Department some of
the lands that are now in the Forest Service
in Agriculture?
Secretary UDALL. I personally would hope
that this would include a sorting out of
lands. After all it is not, only a matter of
there being some lands that are now in the
Forest Service that perhaps should be na-
tional parks. We have in our Department
some forest lands that perhaps should be
in the National Forest System and it is a
matter of deciding what the proper use is
and proper administration of lands which
we have that are already public lands. This
has been the dispute and some Secretaries
of Agriculture and Interior recently couldn't
even discuss this subject without becoming
so heated that the discussions were broken
off.
Secretary Freeman and I take a different
view. As I say, I am hopeful we can resolve
some of these disputes.
Mr. CLAPPER. Mr. Secretary, would you fa-
vor a separate Department of Natural Re-
sources such as Canada has which would
include the public lands and the forests
both?
Secretary UDALL. The Canadians interest-
ingly enough have a Department of Agricul-
ture, they have a Department of Forests and
they have a Department of Natural Re-
sources.
I think that the Forestry Service, it has
been in agriculture for half a century. Al-.
though many times in the past it has been
discussed, transferring it to the Interior
Department and having a Department of
Natural Resources, I am not proposing that
at the present time. Perhaps it should be
done, but I am not urging or suggesting
that it be done. We have too many other
important problems that should be discussed
at the present time. But it does seem to
me that the real question is not this ques-
tion of jurisdiction between Secretaries, the
question is, what is good for the country
and what will best develop the resources of
the country.
This is what we should address ourselves
.to rather than to personal rivalry of Secre-
taries in the Cabinet. This is what it has
been too often in the past.
Mr. CLAPPER. I would like to ask a ques-
tion about salt water, Mr. Secretary. On the
ninth of March you told a news conference
you would have a significant announcement
to make on the progress in the program to
convert salt water to fresh water. I wonder
if you would want to make any announce-
ment on it.
Secretary UDALL. We just about have our
program ready to announce. We have had to
take a very hard look at it and this has in-
volved getting a scientific panel to look at
the program. It has also involved some very
tough questions that we have had to try to
find the answers to. We hope to have the
new direction for our program set out shortly
and I am hoping we can make some headway.
This Is, I think, one of the most challenging
problems that this Government faces. I
think it is one of the most hopeful areas of
activity.
If we can produce a solution to the saline
water program, it seems to me this would
offer a form of international cooperation for
example where we could do far more in
terms of prestige than for example adven-
tures in space will do. At least this is my
opinion.
Mr. CLAPPER. The President seemed to have
the same opinion at his news conference.
He said the same thing.
Secretary UDALL. Yes, I believe he does.
Mr. ROLFSON. Mr. Secretary, you Demo-
crats have long criticized the Republicans
for a giveaway program of public lands and
resources. Have you done anything to re-
verse this or is there any significant differ-
ence in your policy from that of the pre-
vious administration?
Secretary UDALL. Well, I think our atti-
tude generally in terms of resources is a
more positive one. I think we are going to
have more aggressive programs. I think
Secretary Seaton in the main reversed the
giveaway policies of his predecessor, Secre-
tary McKay. I think there was a very defi-
nite giveaway policy in the first 4 years of
the Eisenhower administration and I think
that Secretary Seaton in the main reversed
that policy which was not one of conserving
but of giving away resources.
I think in a time like this with our coun-
try moving in the direction that it is moving
that we have to have conservation policies
that are the wisest policies we can devise
and we have to push them aggressively and
that is what we proposed to do.
Mr. RoLFSON. Can we expect under your
administration a new burst of public power
programs? For example, may we expect
some new TVA's in some of the other great
river basins?
Secretary UDALL. Of course many of our
river basins have been largely harnessed. I
think one area where you can look for ac-
tivity is for example in the Northwest. The
Canadian Treaty, if it is approved, opens up
a whole new area of power development. We
are looking towards the development of new
sources of power, major sources of hydro-
electric power in that area, and we are also
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 1961
Approved For Release 20Q4/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
began over a year ago and President Eisen-
hower directed it. And here the actual plan
was carried out under a successor admin-
istration. I certainly think the attitude of
the former President, of Mr. Nixon, of these
other people is indicative of the fact that
we do stand together as a people and that
whether what we did was right or wrong,
that there is national unity on questions
like these.
Mr. RoLFSON. Most of our information
on involvement has come out from officials
that won't be quoted. Why isn't our posi-
tion and our exact stand in this affair pub-
licly proclaimed by the President or someone
else in public?
Secretary UDALL. Well, I don't know that
in matters of this kind which involve very
subtle and delicate questions whether the
story probably will ever be told or prob-
ably whether any particular person knows
the whole story. Certainly in the previous
administration when this particular plan
was being prepared, no one knew anything
about it. There has to be a certain amount
of secrecy in it. Obviously our role was a
very limited one and I should think because
of that reason, certainly any loss of prestige
which people are talking about should be a
minimum one also.
Mr. CLAPPER. Mr. Secretary, it is pos-
sible, isn't it, that a major reorientation is
taking place in our international relations,
that perhaps we are going from now on to
fight the Communists with some of their
own methods? Do you think this Is possible?
Secretary UDALL. I think certainly the
President foreshadowed that in his speech
to the newspaper editors last week, yes.
Mr. CLAPPER. Isn't it also possible that
the American people-there are some indica-
tions that the American people are further
ahead of the President than he may think
in their desire to take some definite action
against this threat?
Secretary UDALL. I think one thing the
President has been doing is to try to prepare
the American people for this and I think
what he was trying to say and did say very
eloquently to the American people this past
week is that we've got to be ready for new
efforts, that we aredealing with very tough
people and that we have to be just as tough
and determined as they are. And I think
the one danger in the ;past has been a certain
complacency by the American people and I
think the President is trying to arouse the
people out of it, that is what I would say.
Mr. ROLFSON. Do you think he is spelling
out specifically enough to the American peo-
ple what burdens he expects them to bear
and what sacrifices to make? We don't
really know yet what we are supposed to be
prepared for, do we?
Secretary UDALL. Well, I think if you lis-
tened carefully you should be aware of some
of the things that the President has been
trying to point out that we must do and
some of the efforts we must make. Cer-
tainly in the past 90 days, the first 90 days
of the administration, he has stepped up our
major programs. We are making a greater
effort today. We are trying to prepare for
some of these things that we are not pre-
pared for.
I think one of the things we should learn
as a result of this recent episode is that we
weren't well enough prepared, that our
methods and perhaps our determination
wasn't strong enough and I certainly do not
think that a new administration that Is
hardly in its seat should be blamed if there
was some partial failure in a situation of
this kind.
Mr. CLAPPER. Mr. Secretary, is there any-
thing political in the fact that the President
has called in former President Eisenhower
for talks at Camp David, and former Vice
President Nixon? What is the purpose be-
hind this?
Secretary UDALL. I think the purpose of
this is natio>fiial unity. After all President
Eisenhower and his Vice President conceived
this plan, they started it, they, I suppose, in
effect hand it on to the President and I
think that probably his feeling is that he
should consu~t; with them and let them know
what happened and give them the facts as
best he knows them and I think it is part
of preserving) this national unity that is so
important at time like this.
Mr. RoLFsc e, Mr. Secretary, a good many
Members of Congress who went home for
the Easter vacation came back and have
since been saing that they found very little
enthusiasm or the New Frontier at home
and Mr. Nixon, n before this consultation, too,
of course, said that he found a great deal of
support for he President as an individual,
but virtually none for the Kennedy program.
What are 3ou finding these days?
Secretary DALL. I think this is a good bit
exaggerated. I have been out around the
country a god bit myself. I think there is
strong support for the President's program.
I think there is perhaps a need for people to
vocalize it a little more.. In fact, I think
many of the American people who were the
supporters ofd the President are sort of sitting
back and saying, "Well, he is doing so well,
let him carry the ball."
I think they are going to have to realize
now that it s up to them to pitch in and
to help armies grassroots support for the
President's program. But I think the inter-
esting thing is at the same time that the
President's program is doing quite well,
really.
Mr. ROLFSQN. Are you satisfied with the
way Congress is handling it, with the speed
and all that it is going through?
Secretary UDALL. Congress in some ways
could move a, little faster, but I think gen-
erally speaking when one compares this ses-
sion of Congress with previous ones that
there is a faster pace and that certainly at
this stage of''. the game I feel that the Presi-
dent's prograpi is doing quite well.
Mr. CLAPPER. Mr. Secretary, you have been
refreshingly frank in stating several times
that you play, politics to the hilt, even now
as Secretary Of the Interior. Some of your
Republican critics say that you have been
doing this by telling Members of Congress to
vote the way the administration wants in
order to get certain public works projects
through. Is' this the way it is done?
Secretary UDALL. In the first place, the
statement about playing politics to the hilt
was with reference to Mr. HALLECK.
Mr. CLAPPE1I.. Who also does.
Secretary TDALL. Yes. I do feel and I have
always felt as a Congressman-and I am
schooled in Capitol Hill politics-that Amer-
lean politics the way both parties tradition-
ally play it is a good thing and I think when
one party is in power naturally the members
of that part, the Congressmen, the Senators,
are going td get a little preferential treat-
ment. It ha,s always been that way. I hope
it always is. This is one of the meanings, to
me, of the American two-party system. I was
perhaps a little franker than I should have fact that the number one item on our leg-?
been, but I was, I think, recognizing a reality islative ca'ienclar is the Cape Cod Seashore
that some politicians like to pretend doesn't bill. This is an area where there isn't any
exist and that is that there is a little bit of large tract of land like this land that could
old-fashioned politics and that we play It be preserved m a part of the National Park
every day and I make no bones about it and System. We hope Congress will act speedily
anything I can do to not only help in terms and this bill will become law.
of the bills that I am interested in, out of my We have other plans forthe eastern part
Department,' that anything I can do to help of the United States. I think this is where
the President's program, I will do it, pro- most of the people are and I think this is
viding it isll honorable and providing it is where most of our money and effort ought
proper. to be spent ir. the next few years because
Mr. ROLrs?rT. We have noticed you involved this - quiet crii;is that I am referring to is
in a number of these bills and moves that more in the East than in the West because
aren't real) involved in your Department. we still have: a little breathing time, we
What about your own program? It is not still have a little room for maneuver left
going through Congress very fast, is it? In the western part of the United States.
The Interior program? We don't have in. the East.
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
6367
Secretary UDALL. 'Well, I think our pro-
gram at this stage of the game is moving
about as well en most of them.
Mr. ROLFSON. You have a cut of your
budget request in the House.
Secretary UnAaL. There was a very modest
cut.
Mr. RoLe'soN. That doesn't upset you?
Secretary UDAC,L. No, no, we are not at all
disturbed with ;he cut. In fact we are hop-
ing some of it will be restored. The House
traditionally cuts all. the budgets. This is
traditional. We have several of our main
programs that are moving quite well. I
think when. this session is through that we
will have a very good performance in terms
of legislative bills enacted.
Mr. CLAPPER.:Ar. Secretary, I would like to
sit back for a minute here and listen to you
expound on sorr ething a little bit philosoph-
ical. What is this quiet crisis in conserva-
tion that you hive been talking about?
Secretary UDALL. Well, something has been
happening In the United States. Something
has been happening to our land and to the
relationship of people to land. In this post-
war period., for example, we have had a tre-
mendous population explosion. We have had
people have much more leisure time. You
can travel easier. And this has meant that
people, particularly those-and most Ameri-
cans have some liking for the out of doors-
that is, our national parks, our State parks,
our outdoor recreation areas have felt a
tremendous pressure in recent years. And
the crisis is that very little is being done
about it. City leaders-at the State level
there has been poor leadership. Nationally
we have done very little in terms of pro-
viding the type of outdoor recreation facili-
ties that are :needed for our people, and
America traditionally it seems to me has-
part of its greatness and part of its grandeur
has been that ours has been a spacious land
and Americans have always had a great out
of doors in which to test their strength and
in which to seat their understanding of
themselves.
I think we are seeing right before our
eyes, we are making a decision by default.
We are seeing the American Continent
change. The bulldozers are advancing and
the green face of America is disappearing and
I personally t link this is a very serious
crisis and I ant hopeful that this adminis-
tration can do something about it.
Mr. CLAPPER. One' thing you are hopeful
of doing from what I have read about your
program is to ;?rovide park facilities in the
East for easterners. For instance the Dela-
ware River projects and so on. Is this a
major reorientation toward the East away
from the great western parks?
Secretary UD%La.. Well, of course many of
the great scenic areas are located in the
West and inevitably this has meant that
most of our parks are in the West.
Nothing would please us more---indeed we
are bending our efforts toward that, to
have a truly national program. I think one
 6366 Approved For ADfJO0160015-1
possible to achieve a more stable and less
costly peace in the Far East, I know that the
President will leave no stone unturned In
his efforts to achieve it.
What applies to Latin America and to
southeast Asia and the Far East, applies
also to Europe and to Africa. We have been
involved deeply in the problems of the
former for a long time. In the last year or
two we have become involved significantly
in the problems of the latter. I shall not,
today, go into the details of the situation
which confronts us on these continents.
Nevertheless, I would point out by way of
example that the division of Berlin and
Germany has not disappeared with the ad-
vent of a new administration. Nor have the
weaknesses in NATO dissolved merely be-
cause we have installed a new President.
Nor have the Eastern European nations yet
obtained that degree of national freedom of
action which permits a full measure of con-
tact with Western Europe, a condition which
must prevail if there is to be a sound peace
on that Continent.
I shall not go into detail, either, on the
vastly complicated problems of trying to
bring control over the weapons of mass
destruction and a measure of reduction in
the great burden of taxation on our people
and all peoples which is entailed in billions
upon billions of armaments expenditures.
These problems were complex on the day
this administration took office. They grow
more complex as each day passes without
the beginnings of a solution.
As with Latin America and southeast Asia,
the President may be expected to bring to
bear new ideas on all of these problems of
foreign policy which he inherits. Indeed,
some ideas already have been initiated.
The process of making these ideas effective,
however, is, as I have already noted, at best
a slow one. After years of close observation,
moreover, I am personally persuaded that
the machinery of this process within the
executive branch of this Government has
grown so cumbersome and ineffective that
there is grave danger to the principle of re-
sponsible leadership by the President. I
would hope, therefore, that this administra-
tion would proceed promptly to a thorough
overhaul of the machinery of intelligence
which functions in many departments and
agencies in a fashion which deeply influences
foreign policy and its conduct.
I would hope, further, that the ma-
chinery for the countless secondary
decisions of policy through which the Presi-
dent's ideas and primary decisions are
evolved would be thoroughly overhauled and
streamlined and that the preponderant re-
sponsibility in these matters would be
lodged where it has not been for many
years-in the Office of the Secretary of State.
The difficulties which we face in the world
are immense. The responsibility of the
President in connection with them are
enormous. He carries the ultimate burden
for all of us Democrats and Republicans
alike. He has a right to expect general sup-
port in these matters, a support which must
include, may I say, constructive criticism
in matters of foreign policy.
I want to say that he has had that kind
of support in Congress for the first 3
months that he has been in office. He has
had it from Democrats and Republicans
alike. I am confident that he has it and
will continue to have it from the people of
the United States.
ON THE ANTI-CASTRO CUBAN
INVASION
- Mr. METCALF. Mr. President, I was
among those who on Sunday watched
the ABC television program, "Issues and
April 27
Answers," on which the guest was See- Panel: John Rolfson, ABC Washington
ret
ar
f t
y o
he Interior Udall.
I did not get the impression that Sec-
retary Udall, in his remarks on the anti-
Castro Cuban invasion, was criticizing
either President Eisenhower or Vice Pres-
ident Nixon. On the contrary, in re-
sponse to persistent questioning, Secre-
tary Udall pointed out that the Ameri-
can people are standing together behind
a ' policy conceived by one administra-
tion and carried out by its successor.
There has been some criticism of Sec-
retary Udall. Apparently it comes from
those who neither saw the program nor
read the transcript. Some criticism
comes from those who quote the Wash-
ington Post in this way:
Interior Secretary Stewart L. Udall said
last week's anti-Castro Cuban invasion was
conceived a year ago by President Eisenhower
and then Vice President Richard M. Nixon.
"They started it and handed it over to Mr.
Kennedy," Udall said in a television inter-
view.
Eisenhower directed it," he said. "An-
other administration carried it out."
I have read the transcript. It shows
that Secretary Udall spoke in a context
of national unity.
Following is a pertinent answer to Mr.
John Rolfson, ABC commentator, who
asked:
Do you think that the American people
support this kind of an American involve-
ment in an attack on Castro?
Secretary Udall replied:
Well, I don't think there is any question
but that they do. The fascinating thing
about this particular business is that here
was a plan conceived by one Administra-
tion-this from all I can find out began over
a year ago and President Eisenhower directed
it. And here the actual plan was carried
out under a successor Administration. i
certainly think the attitude of the former
President, of Mr. Nixon, of these other peo-
ple is indicative of the fact that we do
stand together as a people and that whether
what we did was right or wrong, that there
is national unity on questions like these.
Later in the program, Mr. Peter Clap-
per, ABC Capitol Hill correspondent,
asked:
Mr. Secretary, is there anything political
in the fact that the President has called
in former President Eisenhower for talks at
Camp David, and former Vice President
Nixon? What is the purpose behind this?
The reply from Secretary Udall:
I think the purpose' of this is national
unity. After all President Eisenhower and
his Vice President conceived this plan, they
started it, they, I suppose, in effect handed
it on to the President and I think that prob-
ably his feeling is that he should consult
with them and let them know what hap-
pened and give them the facts as best he
knows them and I think it is part of pre-
serving this national unity that is so Im-
portant at a time like this.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the transcript of the television
program, "Issues and Answers," be
printed at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the tran-
script was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
ISSUES AND ANSWERS
Guest: The Honorable Stewart L. Udall,
Secretary of the Interior.
commentator, and Peter Clapper, ABO Capi-
tol Hill correspondent.
The ANNOUNCER. From Washington
D
C
,
.
.,
the American Broadcasting Co. brings you
"Issues and Answers."
Secretary of the Interior Stewart L. Udall,
what are the issues?
Secretary UDALL. These are times when our
strength as a people and our character as a
nation are very much on trial. It seems to
me as Secretary of Interior and in fact it is
my deep conviction that the way in which
we use our national resources, the way that
we develop these resources, the policies we
adopt in treating our land and what comes
from it, that these will have much to say
about our strength in the future and indeed
that our character as a people is related to
our relationship with our land.
The ANNOUNCER. You have heard the is-
sues and now for the answers.
Here to explore the issues are Peter Clap-
per, ABC Capitol Hill correspondent, and
John Rolfson, ABC Washington commenta-
tor.
To give you the answers, Secretary of the
Interior Stewart L. Udall, former Congress-
man from Arizona.
Now with the first question for Secretary
Udall, Mr. Clapper.
Mr. CLAPPER. Mr. Secretary, you mentioned
that our strength as a nation is on trial. In
the same line as a member of the Cabinet
vitally concerned with the prestige of the
Presidency and the administration, what do
you think of the President's prestige in view
of the Cuban failure?
Secretary UDALL. Well, Mr. Clapper, there
is no question at all but that during this
episode in the past week America's reputa-
tion and prestige have been involved. It
does seem to me that since we were involved
only peripherally that certainly our coun-
try's basic position of strength hasn't been
harmed in any way. It would be my hope,
however-I think there is a great lesson out
of this, and a bitter lesson, too, and that is
what the President has been saying since the
became President and what he said during
the campaign, that there are many tough
decisions that face use as a people and that
we must in facing these questions be able to
muster the best strength our country has
and provide the best leadership. I think
these points have certainly been underscored
in the last few days.
Mr. CLAPPER. I want to give you a chance
to comment on Castro's comments of today.
He is making a long speech. I don't know
whether it is finished yet or not. He says
America put its prestige on the line and has
lost it.
Secretary UDALL. Of course Castro is prob-
ably given more to overstatement than any-
one that I know of and I am sure that he is
going to have ample time in the future to
regret any statements of that kind. But I
certainly think one could overstate our role
in what happened in the past week. I think
it is easy for a person to overstate what
America lost if we lost anything. i would
hope that what we gain in terms of what we
learn out of this would far outweigh any-
thing that we might have lost in terms of
prestige at the moment.
Mr. ROLSSON. Well, Mr. Secretary, what
about President Kennedy's standing at
home? It has been disclosed now that
our Government principally through the
CIA gave aid and advice and equipment and
transportation to the invaders. Do you think
that the American people support this kind
of an American involvement in an attack
on Castro?
Secretary UDALL. Well, I don't think there
is any question but that they do. The fas-
cinating thing about this particular business
is that here was a plan conceived by one
administration-this from all I can find out
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 Approved For COW a 22ppUp44/110~/1 CIA RDP~d~p3d68000200160015-1 6365
1961 CONGRESSIONAL FCoKU =- 5~~1A'r~
office on January 20. But -foreign policy the entire country. There was no aid pro- America is by dafinition beyond the control
does n )t come to an end with one adman- gram to speak of and, may I add, no Lao- of this Nation.
istrati n and begin anew with the next. tan army to speak of, to aid. But 7 years If it is to our interests-and it is--to pre-
The slate is not; wiped clean every 4 years. later, by the time the Laotian crisis broke vent the spread of a divisive and hostile to-
There a a continuity of the problems which in full force in the very last days of the talitarianism throughout the hemisphere,
confro it the Nation from abroad and a con- Eisenhower administration, there were in there is one point at which a check may be
tinuit of the responses of our Government Laos hundreds of U.S. officials of several feasible. That point 13 where a cooperative
to these problems from one administration agencies and departments. We had ex- effort with others renders the soil of the
to another. pended hundreds of millions of dollars on Americas infertile to the seed of totalitarian-
This is not to say that a particular adman- aid, largely for military purposes. We had ism before it takes root. And in substance,
istratio n will not stamp the course of foreign financed the training of thousands of that is the idea which the President ex-
policy with the brand of its own ideas. Laotian soldiers. And, finally, our own pressed in such comprehensive form a few
.The p ocess,? however, is a slow one. It is naval and other forces had converged in the weeks ago in his speech on an Alliance for
slow tly because the problems which we general vicinity of Laos because of the Progress in the Western Hemisphere. It is
face abroad are not of our exclusive creation steady advance of Communist-oriented one thing to advance this idea. It is another
and, hence, are not amenable to our exclu- Laotians in the country. This vast com- to bring it to fruition--to promote that eco-
si.ve r medics. And, partly, it is slow be- mitment of our resources, not unlike that nomic and social progress which alone prom-
cause """tit ~~he innpact of the Ideas of a new ad- of the Communists, had little to do with ises the removal of the acids of mass dis-
ministiration must permeate a large and com- either the needs or realities of the situation content from the soil of this hemisphere.
plex bureaucracy within our own Govern- in Laos. It had much to do with. winning There was much to do with respect to
ment before they make themselves felt in hollow propaganda victories in the cold ASocial and merica before this o is conditions Ino Latin
action on the problems to which they are war. fice. After the recent develo ments in Cuba
direc d. 'Co this situation, too, President Kennedy p
Wean grasp the significance of this con- brought new ideas. In specifics he worked there is still much tc do. Time was short
tinuit in foreign policy by reference to re- with the United Kingdom and India in an wh may be inorteation took over. Now
cent vents In Cuba and in Laos. In the effort to bring about a cease-fire and the Y h eve
one i stance, President Kennedy had urged neutralization of Lacs. In other words, he If the situation in Latin America is to be
an alliance for progress of all the American sought to take Laos out of the cold war. altered. so that it will no longer provide an
Repu tics. 'Within this concept, he presented Left to their own devices, the Laotian peo- incubus for totalitarianism then a great ef-
a bro d and cohesive outline for a coopera- ple would ask for nothing more. From the fort must be made along the lines of the > 1-
tive avane in. the relations of the nations point of view of the great powers this solu- liance for progress prcposal which the Presi-
of the Western Hemisphere. The presenta- tion would mark a significant step toward dent has advanced and that effort must be-
tion as well-received by other Republics of a more rational world situation, one which gin to take concrete form in the very near
the A nericas? New vistas of common bene- anyone of them could take in the interests future. The effort, moreover, must be a cb-
fit we -e opened by it. of peace with little, if any, sacrifice of rig- operative one because the stake of Latin
Nevertheless, within 90 days of the Presi- nificant national interests. Americans is far greater and more direct
dent' taking office we were not yet at the The initial Soviet reaction to this pro- than our own and, in great part, the situa-
begin ling of this peaceful advance but posal seemed favorable enough. Neverthe- tion is amenable to change only as Latin
rather face-to-face with a military crisis in less, in the working out of the details Americans are willing to change it. Butt if
Cuba brought about by the launching of an through the existing channels of diplomacy, they are willing to do what must be done
invas' n of anti-Castro forces. Instead of weeks of delay have ensued. for freedom and progress within their on
being in a position to move forward on a All the while, professions of the desire countries, then the stake of this Nation :in
new onstructive approach to all of Latin for peace in Laos have continued and all the future of this hemisphere is such that
Amer ca, the administration was compelled the while, the fighting has continued in we must be prepared to join with them 'in
to direct its attention to a critical juncture that country. All the while, the jockeying the effort. I know that the President is so
in our relations with one nation of the for some assumed advantage has gone on by prepared. Are the rest of us also prepared?
region. much the same responses with which this If we, no less than the Latin Americans, are
Th
Th a ation juncture was reached during it ad- situation has been dealt for years. willing to face the dimensions of the dif[ictfil-
and act in concert on them, then the
mini tration. But the roads leading to it The crises in Laos and d Cuba reveal vividly ties and
begs many months ago. The juncture rep- the continuity of both the problems and presidentcan be 's and will ideas be of i aan All Allianciance i faor Pro Progrgress
resented the culmination of an accumula- responses in foreigr. policy and the difii- action.
tion of hostility on the part of Cuba to this culties of altering ether overnight. With- Cuba, the crisis in boos is ut;
Nation and an accumulation of our re- out wishing to downgrade the seriousness of Not the visible ti unlike p of a vast iceberg involving the
spon es to that hostility. either situation, I must emphasize, however,
on the other side of the globe, in Laos, that they are but a fractional part of a mainland of western Asia. It 1s not only! in
some hang similar has transpired. In fact, larger picture. Behind Cuba stands the Laos that the conditions of peace do not yet
this Situation had already reached the point vast panorama of continuing difficulties and exist. We may see them, there, now in
of crisis even before the new administration a continuing inadequacy of response to striking form. But if we look beneath the
took office.. It had reached this stage be- them with respect to all of Latin America. tip, we will see that the difficulties which
taus in preceding years a peaceful land, Yet this far more significant picture can confront us, particularly, fork out from Laos
onceiremote from the rest of the world, had be overlooked in a fixation on the sensa- into Thailand and even more so into V et-
beenC turned into a bone of contention in tional developments within the troubled ram. Nor do they end at the sea off sou h-
the larger clash of ideologies and power else- island just 90 miles off our shores. We east .Asia. The conditions of peace in y
wheli. in the world. As a result the people have managed to live with a militantly reliable sense do not exist at Formosa oiii in
of L os who until recent years had scarcely hostile Cuba for 2 years. I do not believe Korea any more than in Vietnam or Laos.
ever eard. a shot fired in anger found them- we could live very well for 2 days with In all of these situations, the new admiin.-
sely the focal point of steadily converging a militantly -hostile Latin America. istration begins with what may best', be
military forces from outside. Military Yet, what has happened in Cuba under described as the response of the holding
clasljes in Laos which produced the imme- Castro can occur in other Latin. American action. Such stability as exists in them] In
diata} crisis involved but a handful of men. countries. The seed of Castroism is com- part, is knitted together with huge aid pro-
But these clashes opened fissures with large pounded of ruthless totalitarian technique grams of one kind or another, backed With
imp cations for world peace. plus messianic indigenous leadership, plus a heavy deployment of our own military The direct involvement of the Soviet support from outside this hemisphere. It forces in the general area.
hese situations will remain {in-
Union in Laws as a supplier of military aid is doubtful that this seed can grow except At time t come. best, the
given
to llaotian factions was one factor in pro- In the soil of social and economic discon- certain for , heretofore iducing the crisis and a factor of compara- tent. Unfortunately such soil covers much rerponse certain best, which some time
tiveljy recent vintage. But it was preceded of Latin America, from the Caribbean to them will have to be continued for some
by ? he involvement of the Chinese-sup- shores down the great spine of the Andes. time to come. It is not yet clear to what red port~d North Vietnamese Government for a It is at least conceivable that this hemi- extent these situaticris can be al ere s i costly
lob time in a similar role. The sum total sphere can be insulated from a flow from direction effmore ective diplomacy durable e and ,am
of t is outside Communist involvement in without of material. support to totalitarian peace by more effective but I
the local Laotian situation and its progres- forces within but the 'task would be im- confident that the :President will not hesi-
siveo enlargement is not measurable. But mensely difficult and costly and of only lim- tate to bring to bear new ideas to that end.
our 1 own progressive involvement will give ited efficacy. It is not conceivable, however, We ;shall not know the possibilities until
us some insight into the process by which that in this day and age of instant and easy idea have been tested and, I may add, that
the Laotians were plucked from the ob- communications, this hemisphere can be this testing has already begun in Laos.
scu sty of remote Southeast Asia and stead- isolated from the transference of totalitarian It will be a cautious process-this testing--
fly moved into a focus of worldwide sig- techniques from elsewhere. Nor can the because the President is a prudent man who
nifi ance. appearance of messianic indigenous leader- has uppermost in mind the security of this
hen r first visited Laos in 1953, there ship in Latin American countries be fore- nation. It will be a slow process for reasons
were only two American junior officials in stalled because what is indigenous to Latin which I have already set forth. But If It is
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
6363
Number
Potential replacements enrolled in col-
Number
Potential replacements enrolled in col-
regis-
Number
leges of pharmacy 2
regis-
Number
loges-of pharmacy 2
tered
replace-
tered
replace-
pharma-
ments
pharma-
ments
casts
needed
For 1960
For 1961
For 1962
For 1963
casts
needed
For 1960
For 1961
For 1962
For 1963
engaged
annu-
senior
senior
junior
sopho-
engaged
amm-
senior
senior
junior
sopho-
as such
ally, 3.5
students,
students,
students,
more
as such
ally, 3.5
students,
students,
students,
more
Jan. 1,
percent
fall of
fall of
fall of
students,
Jan. 1,
percent
fall of
fall of
fall of
students,
19601
10592
1060 3
1960 3
fail of
19661
1959 2
1960 3
1960 3
fall of
1960 3
1060 3
Alabama-------------
1,387
48.5
94
96
143
179
Nevada --------------
251
8.8
0
0
0
0
Arizona--------------
861
30.1
20
24
27
37
NewJersey ----------
3,840
134.7
56
60
63
109
Arkansas- ____-------
884
30.9
21
22
29
31
New Ilampshire_-___
332
11.6
0
0
0
0
California ---------- __
9,439
330.4
143
225
187
199
NewMexico ---------
627
18.4
19
16
18
,52
Colorado-------------
1,824
63.8
20
23
7
45
New York -----------
13,094
489.8
424
493
532
677
Connecticut---______
1,958
68.5
77
74
91
108
North Carolina------
1,618
56.6
48
48
81
120
Delaware------------
235
8.2
0
0
0
1)
North Dakota -------
355
12.4
54
55
65
99
District ofColumbia-
1,583
55.4
47
69
66
50
Ohio_________________
-
5,560
194.6
190
207
230
286
Florida______________
2,976
104.2
58
63
70
202
Oklahoma -----------
1,658
58.0
76
87
98
137
Oeorgia______________
2,422
84.8
124
110
126
199
Oregon ---------------
1,241
43.4
38
49
40
88
Idaho________________
437
15.3
40
32
23
40
Pennsylvania________
9,400
329.0
334
310
372
424
Illinois_______________
7,231
253.1
89
90
125
212
Rhode Island --------
710
24.8
15
15
19
39
Indiana______________
2,795
97.8
128
137
152
203
South Carolina ---- -_
1,008
35.3
51
51
58
118
Iowa_________________
1,507
55.9
109
90
86
126
South Dakota_______
480
10.8
43
53
48
68
Kansas______________
1,462
51.2
25
29
24
30
Tennessee -----------
2,126
74.4
57
63
90
10o
Kentucky ------ -----
1,244
43.5
48
60
20
37
Texas_______________
5,663
194.7
140
164
156
321
Louisiana ------------
2,167
75.8
69
82
117
119
Utah-___------------
617
21.6
47
31
43
44
Maine______________
417
.14.6
0
0
0
0
Vermont -------------
176
0.2
0
0
0
0
Maryland___________
1,618
56.6
44
38
55
68
Virginia______________
1,644
57.5
56
b9
75
84
Massachusetts_______
4,400
154.0
170
160
168
240
Washington----------
2,740
95.9
87
37
42
70
Michigan____________
5,650
197.7
220
172
158
220
West Virginia________
620
21.7
17
20
35
, 32
Minnesota -----------
1,886
66.0
24
33
32
39
Wisconsin -----------
2,284
79.0
68
67
82
125
Mississippi ----------
1.,291
45.2
1
7
4
46
1
47
51
61
1
Wyoming____________
278
9.7
28
15
23
30
Missouri-------------
Montana ------------
3,070
407
.
0
14.2
08
26
96
15
112
22
89
20
Total ----------
116,707
4,084.7
3,645
3,691
4,091
5,624
Nebraska ------------
920
32.2
49
14
36
54
1
~
I Census and license data compilation, NABP proceedings, 1960,
2 AAC]' report on enrollment, fall term, 1959.
3 AACP report on enrollment, fall term, 1900.
Replacements: This tabulation prepared by the National Association of Boards
AMENDMENT OF SECTION 314 OF
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT
OF 1944-ADDITIONAL COSPON-
SOR OF BILL
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the name of
the distinguished Senator from Cali-
fornia [Mr. ENGLE] may be added as a
cosponsor of the bill (S. 1467) to amend
section 314 of the Public Health Serv-
ice Act of 1944, which I introduced-
for myself and other Senators-on
March 29, 1961.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
AMENDMENT OF TARIFF ACT OF
1930, RELATING TO DUTY ON
SHRIMPS-ADDITIONAL COSPON-
SOR OF BILL
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent that the
name of the junior Senator from Alas-
ka [Mr. GRUENING] may be added as a
cosponsor of the bill (S. 1571) to amend
the Tariff Act of 1930 to impose a duty
on shrimps and to provide for duty-free
entry of unprocessed shrimps annually
in an amount equal to imports of
shrimps in 1960, which I introduced-
for myself and other Senators-on April
13, 1961.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
DEPARTMENT OF URBAN AFFAIRS
AND HOUSING-ADDITIONAL CO-
SPONSORS OF BILL
Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the junior Sen-
of Pharmacy, indicates that the number of pharmacy graduates will hardly be
enough to meet the replacement needs of the profession this year and next * * * but
will be sufficient in 1963. The replacement need figures are based on the assumption
that 3.5 percent of all pharmacists die, retire, or leave the profession each year.
ator from Ohio [Mr. YOUNG] and the
junior Senator from Colorado [Mr. CAR-
RoLL] be listed as additional cosponsors
of S. 1633, the bill to establish a Depart-
ment of Urban Affairs and Housing,
and that at the next printing of the bill,
their names be added,
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
RULES FOR SAFETY PRESCRIBED
BY INTERSTATE COMMERCE
COMMISSION-ADDITIONAL CO-
SPONSOR OF BILL
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr, President, I ask
unanimous consent that my name be
added as a cosponsor on S. 1669, a bill to
provide that the Interstate Commerce
Commission shall prescribe rules, stand-
ards, and instructions for the installa-
tion, inspection, maintenance, and repair
of certain parts on railroad cars, and to
require carriers by railroad to maintain
tracks, bridges, roadbed, and permanent
structures for the support of way, track-
age, and traffic in safe and suitable con-
dition, and for other purposes. This bill
bill was introduced on April 18 by the
distinguished Chairman of the Com-
merce Committee, the Senator from
Washington [Mr. MAGNUSON].
-The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
IMPROVEMENT OF NATIONAL
TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM-AD-
DITIONAL COSPONSOR OF BILL
Mr. ENGLE. Mr. President, on April
18, 1961, the distinguished senior Sena-
tor from Washington [Mr. MAGNUSON]
introduced S. 1670, to amend the Inter-
state Commerce Act, as amended, so as
to strengthen and improve the national
transportation system, insure protection
of the public interest, and for other pur-
poses. On behalf of the Senator from
Washington, I ask unanimous consent
that the name of the distinguished senior
Senator from New Jersey [Mr. CASE] be
added as a cosponsor at the next print-
ing of the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
CREATION OF SELECT COMMITTEE
ON CONSUMERS INTERESTS-AD-
DITIONAL COSPONSOR OF RESO-
LUTION
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that the name of
the Senator from Tennessee [Mr. KE-
FAUVER] may be added as a cosponsor of
the resolution (S. Res. 115) to create the
Select Committee on Consumers Inter-
ests, submitted by Mrs. NEUBERGER on
March 24, 1961.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
STANDARDS FOR CERTAIN PARTS
ON RAILROAD CARS-ADDITION-
AL COSPONSORS OF BILL
Under authority of the order of the
Senate of April 18, 1961, the names of
Senators CARROLL, SMITH of Maine, Moss,
MCCARTHY, NEUBERGER, MCNAMARA,
MORSE, HART, HUMPHREY, YouNG of North
Dakota, COOPER, BURDICK, MCGEE,
CHAVEz, and BIBLE were added as addi-
tional cosponsors of the bill (S. 1669) to
provide that the Interstate Commerce
Commission shall prescribe rules, stand-
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
6464
I
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
ads, and instructions for .l,c i.i3talla-
tion, inspection, maintenance, and repair
rquire carriers by railroad to maintain
tacks, bridges, roadbed, and permanent
structures for the support of way, track-
(uced by Mr. MAGNUSON on April 18, 1961.
r
i
ISTABLISHMENT OF DEPARTMENT
OF CONSUMERS--ADDITIONAL
COSPONSORS OF BILL
Under authority of the order of the
Senate of April 20, 1961, the names of
Mr. LONG of Missouri and Mr. CANNON
were added as additional cosponsors of
the bill (S. 1688) to establish a Depart-
ment of Consumers in order to secure
within the Federal Government effective
representation of the economic interests
of consumers; to coordinate the admin-
istration of consumer services by trans-
ferring to such Department certain func-
tions of the Department of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare, the Department of
Labor, and other agencies; and for other
purposes, introduced by Mr. KEFAUVER
(for himself and other Senators) on
April 20, 1961.
AMENDMENT OF THE FEDERAL AIR-
PORT ACT-ADDITIONAL COSPON-
SORS OF BILL
Under authority of the order of the
Senate of April 24, 1.961, the names of
Senators LONG of Missouri, THURMOND,
SAL'rONSTALL, and MORSE were added as
additional cosponsors of the bill (S. 1703)
to amend the Federal Airport Act so as
to extend the time for making grants
under the provisions of such act, and for
other purposes, introduced by Mr. MoN-
RONEY (for himself and other Senators),
on April 24, 1961.
EMERGENCY LIVESTOCK LOANS-
ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS OF BILL
Under authority of the order of the
Senate of April 24, 1961, the names of
Senators LONG of Missouri, CHURCH,
METCALF, CHAVEZ, HICKEY, JACKSON,
RAN-DOLPH, ENGLE, MAGNUSON, and YAR-
BOROUGH were added as additional co-
sponsors of the bill (S. 1710) to amend
the Act of April 6, 1949, as amended, so
as to authorize the Secretary of Agri-
culture to make emergency livestock
loans under such act until July 14, 1963,
and for Other purposes, introduced by
Mr. Moss on April 24, 1961.
NOTICE OF HEARING ON INTERNA-
TIONAL TELECOMMUNICATION
CONVENTION AND RADIO REGU-
LATIONS
Mr. FULBRIGI3T. Mr. President, I
desire to announce that the Committee
on Foreign Relations will hold a hearing
at, 10 o'clock Tuesday morning, May 2,
in room 4221, New Senate Office Build-
ing, on the International Telecommuni-
cation Convention-Executive J-and
the Radio Regulations-Executive I.
Persons interested in these conventions
should contact the Committee clerk.
NOTICE CONCERNING CERTAIN
NOMINATIONS BEFORE COMMIT-
TEE ON THE JUDICIARY
Mr. EASTLAND. Mr. President, the
following nominations have been re-
ferred to and are now pending before
the Committee on the Judiciary:
James B. Brennan, of Wisconsin, to
be U.S. attorney for the eastern district
of Wisconsin, for a term of 4 years, vice
Edward G. Minor;
William J. Andrews, of Georgia, to be
U.S. marshal, for the northern district
of Georgia, for a term of 4 years, vice
William C. Littlefield;
Keith Hardie, of Wisconsin, to be U.S.
marshal, for the western district of Wis-
consin, for a term of 4 years, vice Ray H.
Schoonover;
Fred F. Bob, of Ohio, to be U.S.
marshal, for the southern district of
Ohio, for a term of 4 years, vice Howard
C. Botts; and
Peyton Norville, Jr., of Alabama, to be
U.S. marshal., for the northern district
of Alabama, for a term of 4 years, vice
Pervie L. Dodd, retired.
On behalf of the Committee on the
Judiciary, notice is hereby given to all
persons interested in these nominations
to file with the Committee, in writing,
on or before Thursday, May 4, 1961, any
representations or objections they may
wish to present concerning the above
nominations, with a further statement
whether it is their intention to appear
at any hearings which may be scheduled.
ADDRESSES, EDITORIALS, ARTI-
CLES, ETC., PRINTED IN THE
APPENDIX
On request, and by unanimous con-
sent, addresses, editorials, articles, etc.,
were ordered to be printed in the Ap..
pendix, as follows:
By Mr. CASE of New Jersey:
Statement by him on the 26th annual
convention of the Catholic War Veterans
of the United States of America.
By Mr. CLARK:
Article entitled "Human Relations Goes
to Washington," written by Senator PHILIP
A. HART and published. in the Committee
Reporter of March 1961.
By Mr. KEATING:
Address on the Electoral College recently
delivered by James J. Flynn, chairman of
the department of social studies of the
Fordham University School of Business.
By Mr. YARBOROUGH:
Address entitled "The Nation's Stake in
Atomic Power," delivered by Representative
CIIET HOLIFIELD, of California, chairman
of the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy,
at the 1961 convention of the American
Public Power Association at San Antonio,
Tex., on April 25,1961.
By Mr. BENNE: T:
Editorial entitled "How To Catch Pneu-
monia," published in the Wall Street Jour-
nal of April 19, 1961, which will appear
hereafter in the Appendix.
Editorial entitled "When the Poor Sup-
port the Rich," published in the Salt Lake
Deseret News of April 21, 1961.
By Mrs. NEUBERGER;
Editorial entitled "Bye, Bye Blowby," pub-
lished In the Washington Post and Times
Herald of April 22, 1.961.
Article entitled "Astor Land," written by
Don Carlos Miller and published recently
in American Forests magazine.
April 27
By Mr. JAV ITS :
Editorial entitled "One Hundred Years of
the Times," published in the Watertown
(N.Y.) Daily Times of April 22, 1961; letters
from President Kennedy, Vice President
Johnson, and Governor Rockefeller on same
subject.
By Mr. BARTLETT:
Editorial entitled "Freedom Fight Needs
Strong Alaska," published in Jessen's
Weekly, April 2, 1961.
By Mr. DO;DD:
Editorial entitled "The Unbalanced View,"
published in the Pilot, the., archdiocesan
newspaper: of Boston, of recent date
By Mr. FONG:
Article entitled "U.S. Taxes Cost Ss $230
Million," written by Frank Hewlett and
published in the Honolulu Star-Bulletin of
April 21, 1961.
Essay entitled "Jobe for the Handtcapped-
A Community Challenge," written by Kimo
Douglas and winner of first prize In the 1961
essay contest, State of Hawaii.
By Mr. RANDOLPH:
Article from the Dominion-News, Morgan-
town, W. Va., April 25, 1961, concer ing West
Virginia University's rifle team victory in
the national intercollegiate to m. rifle
championship competition.
Article from.. Washington Evening Star,
April 27, 1961, "The Rambler Is Taken for
a Ride," concerning Roy Swanigan, West
Virginia. legislator, who has overcome a
severe physical-handicap.
By Mr. CHURCH:
Article entitled "Stevenson Cutting Large
Figure," written by Roscoe Drummond and
published in the New York Herald Tribune
recently.
By Mr. KUCHEL:
Memorandum in Bulletin No. X28 of the
Press and Information Office of the Federal
Republic of Germany.
. Release by Public Health Servie, Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare,
in regard to research project on air pollution.
By Mr. CARLSON :
Article on Kansas, written byj John Bird
and published in the Saturday Evening Post.
By Mr HUMPHREY :
Article entitled "Peace Corps Exciting Op-
portunity for Dedicated, Committed Serv-
ice," written by J. A. Reirne, president of
the Communications Workers f America,
and published in the CWA News for May
1961.
Article written by Richard T. Greer, As-
sistant Librarian of the Senate Library, and
published in the Catholic Reporter of March
17, 1961.
By Mr. MUNDT:
Bulletin No. 12 of the Press dnd Informa-
tion Office of the Federal Republic of
,peyroany.
ADMINISTRATION
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent to have printed
in the RECORD, a speech I delivered on
April 24, before the Duquesne Univer-
sity Law School Alumni Association, at
Pittsburgh, Pa. The speech was en-
titled "Foreign Policy and the New Ad-
m.inistration. "
There being no objection, the speech
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
FOREIGN POLICY AND THE NEW
ADMIAIISTRATION
(Speech delivered by Senator MANSFIELD at:
Duquesne University Law Alumni Banquet?
Apr. 24,, 1961, Pittsburgh, Pa.)
The responsibility for the !conduct of our
relations- with other nations rests only with
the administration in power.! The President
assumes this responsibility !when he takes
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 remaining Americans were jeopardized; if day. To some it is synonymous with be which party could do the same thing
Premier Castro were to attack Guantanamo radical-and to these people a radical in better.
Bay or mount military invasions against his government Is one who advocates great and The lack of coherent philosophies and
Caribbean neighbors-in such cases the sweeping changes with the least possible clear-cut party traditions in our two major
United States would, of course, have to in- delay. The others, the word "liberal" simply political parties has produced some very
tervene directly, and presumably so would means a forward-lrxoking attitude .-A
o
e
ican States.
""
Barring such obviously dangerous, a1-
though unlikely, developments the United
States should not intervene. Why not? The
grave political consequences; the blow to
the moral standards and principles by
which we live and which are a source of
strength in the cold war; the fact that
armed intervention without the clearest
provocation would reduce our policies to a
crude contest in power politics; the loss of
needed allies; the perilous international
complications-these are the results that
would flow from such armed intervention
by the United States in Cuba.
Even more basic than our differences in
economic system is our philosophic differ-
ence with the Communists; we believe in
freedom and the rule of law among individ-
uals and among nations. This is the es-
sence of what America stands for in the
world, and it is our greatest source of
strength. We must preserve it.
AN ANALYSIS OF THE DIFFERENCE
BETWEEN MODERN LIBERALISM
AND CONSERVATISM IN AMERI-
CAN POLITICS
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, a
week ago last Saturday the distinguished
junior Senator from Utah [Mr. Moss]
spoke at Fort Atkinson, Wis., and gave a
scholarly and thoughtful analysis of the
difference between modern liberalism
and conservatism in American politics.
It is such an excellent address that I ask
unanimous consent that it be printed in
the body of the RECORD at this point.
There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
SPEECH OF SENATOR FRANK E. Moss, DEMO-
CRAT, OF UTAH, AT ANNUAL WISCONSIN
SECOND DISTRICT DINNER, FORT ATKINSON,
SATURDAY, APRIL 15,. 1961
Mr. Chairman, distinguished guests, thank
you for your warm welcome to Wisconsin. I
return it_in kind. All Democrats feel warmly
toward Wisconsin these days because we re-
member it was your fine State which gave
Senator Kennedy one of his early primary
victories, which started him on the road to
the Presidency. And putting Jack Kennedy
in the White House will, I am convinced,
prove to be one of the great events of our
times.
After I had accepted this invitation to
speak in the Second Congressional District,
I was delighted to learn that I was coming
to the heartland of Wisconsin democracy and
leadership. I understand the district is
not only the home of your distinguished
young Congressman, Bob Kastenmeier-who
incidentally has become a real influence in
the House of Representatives in only one
short term, but is also the home of your
great Governor, Gaylord Nelson, and of my
esteemed Senate colleague, Bill Proxmire,
who is showing himself to be cast in the
image of Wisconsin's famous Liberal, Bob
LaFollette.
Because I am speaking tonight in the
shadow of these outstanding Wisconsin
Liberals, I have, with some trepidation,
chosen as the subject of my talk "The Con-
science of a Liberal."
I say "trepidation," becuse the very word
"liberal" is one of the most misunderstood
and misused words in our vocabulary to-
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
old problems. ""? UO1O1~~~+ +us soucnstone in
the 1850's. Theodore Roosevelt bolted the
Similarly, the word "conservative" has Republicans as a Progressive and found his
many connotations. It all depends on what inspiration in the Federalists who were Jef-
you want to conserve. The American Con- ferson's opponents.
servative today, by his own admission, wants "This kind of turnabout is traditional
to return to the forms and usages of the ` American procedure," Cushing Strout ob-
past, even those of the 18th and 19th cen- served in the Virginia Quarterly Review in
tury. To some this attitude can only be the summer of 1955. "Although it drives
labeled by the word "reactionary." the tidy-minded to despair," he continued,
It is with a clear recognition of this prob- "it is powerful testimony to the ingenuity
lem of labels-of the fact that the very terms of our political leaders, the vitality of our
I shall be using are equally as controversial tradition, and the moderation of our poli-
as the ideologies they represent-that I ap- tics."
proach this discussion. For the purpose of this discussion, I do
The recapitulations which followed the not propose to define conservatism and lib-
Republican nominating convention last eralism in neat, one-sentence statements.
summer, and the Monday-morning quarter- No dictionary definition could ever be ade-
backing which has gone on ever since elec- quate, for one thing, and for another, as I
tion day, stirred up a lively discussion of have pointed out, the words mean different
conservatism and liberalism and their ise, things to different people. I shall there-
pact on the results. That impact, of course, fore take the essence of brief statements of
is hard to calculate. The influence of faith from two Liberals, the late President
specific issues can be pretty well weighed, Franklin D. Roosevelt and Gov. Adlai Stev-
partly because the number of people affected enson, and two Conservatives, former Pres-
by that issue can themselves be counted. ident Herbert Hoover and Senator Barr
But the influence of a philosophy is less Goldwater. y
tangible. The statements cover a 25-year period of
So it has always been with American poll- time. Each spokesman has combined the
tics. Political history in this country has result of his practical
never been shaped by abstract doctrines or political experience
theoretical dogmas. Original political theory with an awareness of the implications in
here, as in the mother country of England, his own position, and each is an accepted
has developed chiefly in time of national representative of his philosophy.
trouble when thinking men, seeking to solve In his volume "20th Century Political
urgent problems, have been forced to reex- Thought," Joseph S. Roucek says of President
Hoover:
basic principles. :
For exam le, when we were hammering "Herbert Hoover speaks for many modern
p American conservatives when he identifies
out our American democracy, we produced
statesmen like Adams, Madison, Hamilton, the extension of governmental economic conf
and Jefferson, who were also political phi- trols with the regimentation characteristic of
losophers. foreign dictatorships, and when he ascribes
Then, the debate between the North and
South in the mid-19th century produced
Webster and Calhoun. And the problems of
the first half of the 20th century gave us
Woodrow Wilson and Robert Taft, two very
practical political theorists.
Today, as we try to cope with grave situa-
tions both at home and abroad, it has again
become evident that we must go back to
first principles, and examine the problems
of the sixties in the light of today.
Russell Kirk has said that "doubt and
violence are the parents of political specula-
tion," while "prescription, legal precedence,
and muddling through suffice for ages or na-
tions that experience no serious threat to
things established."
"Prescription, legal precedence, and mud-
dling through" have carried us just about
as far as they can in today's world, and the
time has come for some good, stiff thinking our people, extinguish equality of oppor-
I welcome, therefore, the upsurge of interest tunity, and dry up the spirit of liberty and
in Conservative and Liberal philosophies the forces which make progress."
which this election, engendered and trust Let us now hear the liberal case as pre-
that it has laid the brickwork for a debate sented by Franklin Roosevelt:
on fundamental principles. "One great difference which has charac-
My discussion here today of political phi- terized this division (between the liberal
losophy is not essentially partisan. Both and the conservative groups) has been that
major political parties have liberals and the Liberal Party-no matter what its par-
conservatives in their ranks. Perhaps it ticular name was at the time-believed in
would make the choice at the polls easier the wisdom and efficacy of the will of the
if all liberals were lumped together in one great majority of the people, as distinguished
party and all conservatives amalgamated from the judgment of a small minority of
firmly in the other one. But I doubt that either education or wealth.
this day will ever dawn. Republican and "The other great difference between the
Democratic Parties are both sturdy institu- two parties has been this: the Liberal Party
tions which show little interest in being is a party which believes that, as new condi-
dissected, and reassembled. tions and problems arise beyond the power
One of the best arguments for continued of men and women to meet as individuals,
representation of a wide range of political it becomes the duty of the Government it-
ideologies in each party is that a change self to find new remedies with which to meet
of party control doesn't produce revolution- them. The Liberal Party insists that the
ary shifts in policy. One of the major issues Government has the definite duty to use all
in our recent political campaign seemed to its power and resources to meet new social
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
our high-living standards to the American
system of free enterprise he combines al-
most all of the favorite conservative themes:
We must cling to the Bill of Rights; any
necessary alterations must be made only by
formal constitutional amendment; govern-
ments have an insatiable appetite for power;
society cannot remain partly regimented and
partly free, and even partial regimentation
will eventually destroy democracy. To at-
tempt to solve the problem of distribution
of a hard-won plenty by restrictions will
abolish the plenty."
Moreover, the conduct of business by Gov-
ernment would only give us the least effi-
ciency. President Hoover states: "It would
increase rather than decrease abuse and cor-
ruption, stifle initiative and invention, un-
dermine the development of leadership,
cripple the mental and spiritual energies of
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1 6429
d; CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
191
managers. But, they must know the on unpaid balances, the average borrow- Federal officials dealing with the Cuban
er or user of credit is Completely con- problem today. Any policy, any action to
truth. be taken in the future must be rased on an
The purpose of the Douglas bill is to fused and quite often misled. He often accurate assessment of the situ l ate.
bring the true price of credit out from falls into a cleverly camouflaged trap There are certain developments that would
under the disguises and camouflage un- from which, without ruin and degrada- force the United states to act;! and such
nd his family cannot escape. action would be fully tinderstcjod by the
h
e a
der which it often hides. Some of these tion,
. If
were to set largap missile bases or mf ove instancen with
before the Presiclont, there
Senate 1a billw, world
Russians might add, are very interesting-and, 1. Second. Mr.
Y
miFhi; add, quite misleading. pending a dangerous degree of military support; if
For example, sometimes the consumer which if enacted and sagned, would sub., :Ives of the
is quoted a price of so many dollars stantially increase the existing legal in., Aremmainingericans P. were ere killed and were j the e Iveizof i
down, and so much more per month. tercet rates that may be charged by Premier Castro were to attack uantanamo
Immediately, the question arises: For small loan companies to a point, I am Bay o:r mount military Invasions against his
how many months? Many advertise- told, making the rates in Ohio the high-- Caribbean neighbors-in. such ! cases the
ments fail to say. There is no statement est in the Nation. Under the guise of United States would, of course, hive to inter-~ so
w of the price of credit. The true annual lowering interest rates on the first brack?- vehe dllrriemb rsand presu able zati Would
rate, which may vary from as low as 6 et of loans of $150 or less, the bill would or of th
states.
percent to more than 100 percent, is substantially increase the existing high Amer"-can Barring each obviously dangerous, a1-
never disclosed. The whole truth is not rates on unpaid balances of larger though unlikely, developments the United
being told. amounts. As an example, the bill would States should not intervene. Why not? The
Another disguise is quoting the price of increase the rates on the amounts in ex- grave political consequences; they blow to, the
credit as a monthly rate. The true an- cess of $300 but less than $500 from the moral standards and principles by which we
nual rate is 12 times the monthly rate. present 8 percent per annum to 32 per- live and which are a source of strength in
A. monthly rate of only 5 percent thus cent per annum. This is an increase of the cold war; the fact that armed interven-
t'llrns out to be a true annual rate of 400 percent. The bill also raises the stat- tion without the clearest aprovoca ion would
60 percent. utory ceiling on small loans to $2,000. preduce our policies to ower polities; the loss a needed allies; the
Then, there is the discount disguise. I am hopeful that the Ohio Legislature perilous international co need'tions-these
Suppose you borrow $100, agree to pay it will finally defeat the proposal. It has are the results that would flow from such
off in monthly installments, and pay the been estimated that if the bill is enacted armed intervention by the United States in
lender $6 in advance. This looks like a it will result in draining from $10 to $15 Cuba.
6-percent loan. Often, it is advertised as million annually from the purchasing Even more basic than our differences in
power of the citizens of Ohio. economic system is our philosppphie differ-
use o of In only fa an naverage average of of you about $50 have overe pShould the bill be enacted however, ence with the Communists: vie believe in
us and I hope it will not be, the citizens of freedom and the rule of law among individ-
the course of a full year, because you have uals and among nations. This Is the essence
paid off half the $100 in 6 months. The Ohio should be told in simple language of what America stands for in the world,
true annual interest rate therefore is the exact interest rate they will be and. it is our greatest source of strength. We
nearly double the advertised 6 percent- forced to pay. Mr. Pl?esident, the Doug- must preserve it.
the
to be accurate, it is about 111/2 percent. las bill will require that and I support WesThe +herhe a Hemisphere onof he tUnited hreatened tates in the is for
Some of the case histories brought be- it wholeheartedly. first time in a century. It car. only be de-
creative policy-one
ositive
d b
,
y a p
fore the Senate committee last year were fende
startling. In one instance, a man par- CUBAN POLICY that builds. Of course, we are strong enough
a listed cash to crush the Castro regime, but to do so by
chased an automobile for
price of $550. This is what it said at one Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, the force would lose us far more than we could
corner of the bill of sale. In another lead editorial in today's issue of the New gain. It is hard to be patient under such
corner, it stated: York Times was a very wise and thought- provocation and defeat as we ! have experl-
Balance including finance and insurance ful one on our policy in Cuba. It con- enced. Yet it 1s the mark of true strength
charges to be paid in 16 payments of $60. Ceres not only what has happened, but to take both defeat and victory in one's
stride.
That comes out to $960, yet the so- what Senators, Representatives, and the President of the United States should The chief danger to the United States and
the rest of Latin America is not Cuba by
called cash price was $550. think about in the future. I ask unani- here.elf, but Cuba as it possible model for
Almost everyone learned how to com- mows consent that the editorial be other revolutions, and Cuba as a base for
puts true annual interest when in either printed at this point in the RECORD. the spread of anti-Yankee orl communistic
grade school or high school. A study There being no objection, the editorial doctrines. How to counter theIcreeping sub-
:made by the Library of Congress last year was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, version of the totalitarians is the great prob-
as follows: Iem for the free world, as President Kennedy
some a 20 that a random
books sampling use Of has recognized. It cannot be done by adopt-
current A POLICY ON CusA ing their methods. That world be to sur-
still~ e0 teach inmetit books simple annual
ratl teWh e the e a majority next in Cuba? The Cuban exiles render.
rate. Where the great majority the have been defeated militarily and the United Defend the security of the United States.
American people are familiar with h this States, which supported them, has suffered Continue by all legal means to encourage
method of computing interest, it seems a political defeat. However, history is not the anti-Batista, all anti legal Castro Cuban a exiles ge
difficult, to justify the retention of all of like a boxing match or a baseball game. It their determination to est O a free and
the confusing and misleading methods flows like a river. The United States and democratic regime with social Justice. They
that are currently being used. Cuba are too much intertwined by history, mu not be abandoned.
The Douglas bill requires that the geography, economics and strategy to he must no ,be prove, a deeds and not just
cold war. All caught the e in the forces words ,mathatnds we for soarecial determ redoi ed to support
truth, the understandable truth, be told vast storseparated. m of Cuba the has
!
about the price of credit. Surely, this is unleashed by the Cuban revolution are still the demands nd we are r not s merely throughout,
most reasonable. I Urge Senators to operating. LCadre Amer sfor so ; that tt that will oppose rely anng!
Support this measure. Therefore, something has to happen, and dictator ips as we doI
'Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, I am the instinct is to say: something has to be rea.ctiona;ry military
, communistic bile orships; that',
pleased to join with the distinguished done. The first thing to recognize is that leftwing ask partnership
Senator from Illinois [Mr. Charge as a There must be no repetition of the incredibly subservience. This is the only kind of inter-
Coauthor of the Finance DOUGLAS] Dis- inefficient Intelligence analysis of the Cuban vention that can permanently succeed in'
closure Act. I am prompted to do so situation. which preceded last week's fiasco. Latin America.
for two reasons: To those who knew the situation in Cuba ROXMJiRE ? I should like to:!
briefly XMI that shoul: m
First. The public, who are the users of and knew the formidable strength of the Mr.
edito credit facilities offered by the various leaders and their regime, the outcome of read P There are cfroain developments that would',
finance companies and institutions, have such an invasion attempt was Inevitable. And even had it succeeded, the CIA con- farce the United States to act' and such!
a right to know, in terms of simple an- cept of putting in a rightwing government action would be fully and rstood by thel
noel interest rates, what they are re- that would have been branded as a Yankee world at large. If the Russians, for instance,
witl
quired to pay for such services. Regret- creation was dreadfully wrong. It is ob- were to set up missile bases r move in
tably, because of the complexity in stat- vious that the first step must be to reor- a dangerous degree of military support,
ing interest rates on a monthly basis and ganize the personnel and methods of the Americans were killed and the lives of the
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 Approved ONGRESSIONALIRECORD RDSSENATE 468000200160015-1 April 27
At the same time, they are appre-
hensive lest we be connected with any
bungling.
Published press reports alone provide
a damning indictment of the entangle-
ments, the timing, and the fumbles in
the recent invasion of Cuba. Let me
cite a few:
First. The Cuban Revolutionary Coun-
cil was not aware of the time and
date of invasion. In fact, the Council's
Minister of Defense, Dr. de Varona, was
conferring with his Naval staff over in-
vasion plans when he was told the in-
vasion had already taken place.
Second. When Cuban naval officers
commanding the landing craft were
given their destination once at sea, they
nearly mutinied. They knew the troops
would be landed in mangrove swamps,
waist deep in water.
Third. When they did land, Castro
tanks and heavy weapons were waiting-
obviously aware of the landing point.
Fourth. An air umbrella which Cuban
exile flyers promised the invasion force
never materialized because aircraft they
anticipated, at the fields where 150 pilots
waited, never arrived.
Fifth. Help from the anti-Castro un-
derground in Cuba failed because the
underground was crippled badly a whole
month earlier. Most of its top leaders,
including Gonzales Corzo, the anti-Cas-
tro military coordinator for all Cuba,
were arrested by Communist secret po-
lice during a meeting in Havana March
17. Castro forces also moved rapidly
at the time of invasion to round up other
underground and sabotage units.
Right now we are having a lot of glori-
fied self-recrimination. I suggest we
stop trying to fix any blame. Let us, in-
stead, learn what lessons we can, act
swiftly and decisively to prevent any
repetitions, and then move ahead in our
fight for freedom.
The President has made a commend-
able beginning by naming Gen. Maxwell
Taylor and his small committee to re-
view America's capabilities. The group
is small enough to act quickly, and yet
represents a divergence of background,
which is healthy. Communism has
established a strong base in Cuba. So
long as Cuba is controlled by a hysteri-
cal demagog, it poses a direct threat
to our shores. Additionally, it is fast
becoming a nesting place for Red spies
and firebrands infiltrating throughout
Latin America.
Must we wait for all other Latin
American nations to awaken to this
peril? Or, should we act unilaterally
in our own interest? And if so, how?
This is one question which this commit-
tee and the Nation must resolve shortly.
I pray the committee recommendations
and the decisions will both be prompt
and correct.
For myself, I do not propose the use
of American military force in Cuba at
this moment. I do propose a continua-
tion of the firmness evidenced after the
ill-fated invasion.
I conclude with just one thought.
When we speak with strength, we must
be prepared to act with strength. When
we act with strength, we must act de-
cisively. We must be prepared to com-
mit every resource, if need be, with but
one thought-and that is to win.
OIL DEPLETION ALLOWANCE
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, big
oil has scored again in this administra-
tion by winning conspicuous omission
for its fat 271/2 percent depletion loop-
hole from the President's recent tax
message.
This is another reminder to those
naive enough to need one that the one
big private interest that can throw its
weight around in this administration is
oil.
Oil has become the special interest
Achilles' heel of an administration that
otherwise has a splendid public interest
record.
Undoubtedly, the most notorious loop-
hole in our Federal tax structure is the
provision that singles out oil for a fat
271/2 percent of gross income exclusion
from income taxes on grounds of deple-
tion. Most minerals enjoy only a 15
percent depletion allowance at most.
Recommendations to bring oil down to
this more moderate level would restore
hundreds of millions of dollars of reve-
nue to the Treasury.
For years this special consideration
for oil has been the target of those who
have sought greater equity in the tax
structure. The administration has just
made a series of far-reaching recom-
mendations that have as their express
purpose greater tax equity. But was the
oil depletion allowance included? No.
Dividends, foreign earnings, and expense
accounts are hit hard and directly. But
oil continues its political charmed life
and escapes once again. In fact, oil de-
pletion is the one ripe and obvious tax
loophole to escape the President's
recommendation.
Unfortunately, this exception for oil
is becoming a steady pattern. The ad-
ministration's nominations for top office
were excellent, public-interest selec-
tions-with a single exception. Big oil
succeeded in placing their men in the
two critical positions in our Government
that can benefit the industry.
The nomination of oilman John Con-
nally as Secretary of the Navy has placed
an executor of the will of one of the
richest oil fortunes in the world as the
man who will buy the oil for all the
Armed Forces and who determines the
Navy's critical research program in oil's
dangerous competitive fuel-atomic
energy.
The nomination of John Kelly as
Assistant Secretary of the Interior for
Minerals was even more incredible. It
has placed a man who still holds millions
in oil interests at the head of the OR
Import Administration, the Office of Oil
and Gas, and virtually every significant
program of the Federal Government
affecting the industry.
Consider that the oil-gas industry
alone of all American industries has won
such control over the body that regulates
it-the Federal Power Commission-that
for years the FPC has refused to follow
the direct order of the Supreme Court to
regulate the price of natural gas at the
wellhead, and still does.
Also the oil-gas industry alone enjoys
the exceptional privilege of approval of
their rate increase requests before the
regulatory body considers them. Of
course the request may later be denied
and refunds required, but meanwhile the
public, not the industry, has suffered the
full weight of the years of delay now
required to complete an FPC hearing.
PEACE CORPS ASSISTANCE TO
TANGANYIKA
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, the
Peace Corps has just announced its first
pilot project-it will send 28 American
engineers and surveyors to Tanganyika
to assist the government of that country
in the development of an adequate road
system.
While I was on a visit to Africa last
year on a study mission with several
Members of the Senate, we stopped in
Tanganyika. It is a new country. Like
the United States did in its early stages,
Tanganyika needs a system of feeder
roads running into the interior of the
country to enable the small farmer and
rancher to bring his produce and his
herds to the main market centers.
Those roads do not exist now. Con-
struction cannot proceed until critical
surveys have been made.
Sir Ernest Vasey, Minister of Finance
for Tanganyika, has pointed out that the
government can only train two land sur-
veyors in the next 5 years. They will be
hopelessly inadequate, he explained, for
the basic planning needed in many of the
road development schemes.
The request for 20 surveyors, 4 geol-
ogists, and 4 civil engineers came di-
rect from the Government of Tan-
ganyika. I think it is indicative of the
kind of response the Peace Corps has in-
voked in newly developing regions of the
world.
Peace Corpsmen who go to Tanganyika
will not be advisers, working at a high
level. They will be doers-they will be
working on the job, actually doing the
surveying in the interior of the country.
But they will also be teachers. The
Government of Tanganyika will assign
young Tanganyikans to each Peace Corps
team to learn methods of surveying.
When the Americans return home, they
will leave behind a cadre of local people
who will be able to carry on the work.
Mr. President, this is the kind of hard-
headed, realistic approach which is ur-
gently needed in tackling barriers to de-
velopment in new countries. It is assist-
ance, but it is more than assistance-it
is cooperation and education and con-
crete progress all rolled into one project.
Most importantly, it is on the people-
to-people level that will give Tangan-
yikans the opportunity to learn from,
and to share with, Americans who are
vitally interested in them and who will
represent the very best our country can
produce.
The eyes of our Nation, and of the
world, will be on the 28 Americans who
are selected for this project.
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 6375
while at the same time reducing defense
expenditures below the levels that would
otherwise be faced.
Over the years, we will continue to make
major changes in the pattern of defense
spending. We cannot :afford to modify these
decisions to accommodate local or private
interests, no matter how legitimate, But we
have an obligation to take steps to mitigate
their consequences for the people affected.
At this point I want to mention two com-
mon assumptions which are, in my judg-
ment wholly fallacious.
First is the assumption that our economy
is not strong enough to maintain large de-
fense expenditures over a protracted period.
I have no doubt that, if required, we can
continue to sustain defense expenditures at
their present levels, or, indeed, at increased
levels, if this should be necessary. We can
and must expend whatever is needed to pro-
tect the lives and substance of our people.
Second is the assumption that our econ-
omy is dependent upon large defense ex-
penditures. I am equally certain that this
assumption is false. We all earnestly hope
that the day will come when we can sub-
stantially reduce the portion of our national
wealth devoted to the production of instru-
ments of war. I am confident that when
that clay arrives, far-sighted planning will
permit that portion of our wealth now com-
mitted to national defense- to be shifted to
the improvement of the well-being of our
people without serious disturbance of our
economic life.
The future is, of course, uncertain. But
of one thing I am sure-whatever the future
may bring, our economy is strong and re-
silient enough to meet any challenge that
may arise.
Defense spending represents more than
one-half of the Federal budget, and nearly
10 percent of the gross national product.
Aside from the 21/2 million men in uniform
and the more than 1 million civilian em-
ployees of the Department, there are 3 to 4
million people in the United States who sup-
port themselves and their dependents on the
paychecks of private defense contractors.
The scale of defense spending is multiplied
in importance by the shifts in where and
how the money is spent.
As one weapons system is- phased out and
another one developed, defense business
moves not only from one contractor to an-
other, but from industry to industry and
from State to State.
The shift from manned bombers to mis-
siles has meant that an increasing volume
of defense production has been moving to
the electronics industry and away from the
old aircraft plants. Similarly, although we
are accelerating the procurement of Polaris
submarines and increasing the share of the
defense dollars being allotted to shipbuild-
ing, a major part of that work is going out-
side the shipyard into nuclear power plants
and electronics companies.
These specific shifts in our defense plans,
however, tend to obscure an even more im-
portant development-the rate at which
shifts in defense planning are increasing,
both in size and frequency.
The rate of change is largely a function of
our rapidly advancing technology and the
growing uncertainty about what research
and development will produce. The uncer-
tainties that surround all of us are com-
pounded for the defense planners by uncer-
tainties about how the technology of our
potential enemies may develop-and indeed,
about how it has already developed. We
must try to match our defense systems still
in the development stage to enemy missile
systems on the drawing board.
As our choices become more complex, their
consequences extend farther and farther
into the web of our economy. The shift
from the longbow to the crossbow involved
only the prime contractors. In the typical
weapons system today, there may be as
many as six or eight layers of subcontractors.
The difficulties of rational planning are
enormous. But we must meet them with a
corresponding effort. There are a number
of steps we can take, some of them within
the Department of Defense, and some of
them involving the country as a whole.
Within the Department, our planning
must extend further into the future in order
to provide a leadtime sufficient to permit
adjustment to the future consequences of
present decisions. Our choice of weapons
must reflect the most imaginative explora-
tion of all the choices available to us. Our
budgeting procedures must be revised to
show us all the costs of alternative weapons
systems, not only for research and develop-
ment, and for initial construction, but for
operation and maintenance as well.
We must be bold enough to grasp distant
opportunities, but we must be prudent
enough to hedge our bets. Where we can,
with reasonable assurance of success, buy
time by committing ourselves now to long-
lead items, or to production facilities, we
must do so. We are proposing to contract
now for facilities to double our Minuteman
production capacity, thereby providing in-
surance against a future requirement.
This kind of planning - will enable us to
predict a little better the pattern of defense
spending, but it will not avoid shifts in the
spending pattern. The purpose of our plan-
ning is not to produce a Maginot Line, even
in outer space. It is rather to maintain the
kind of alert, flexible posture that can re-
spond immediately to new developments in
technology at home, or to new insights into
the plans and capabilities of our potential
enemies abroad.
We can continue to expect, therefore, that
there will be major shifts in our defense
program from year to year, and perhaps
more often. Indeed, I think there would-be
real cause for concern on your part if you
saw that our defense program over the next
4 years was following precisely the pattern
that has just been set for it.
Given the inevitability of frequent and
major changes, our defense planning must
extend beyond the Defense Establishment,
to help the American economy absorb the
Impact of these changes without breaking
stride. All the major problems that chal-
lenge the flexibility and resiliency of the
total economy find a focus in defense con-
tracting-automation, rapid shifts in de-
mand, jurisdictional conflicts between craft
and industrial unions, and the like.
We, in the Department of Defense, have
already taken the first step in the direction
of a working partnership with other agencies
of government and with private groups to
attack this congerie of problems. It has
traditionally been the policy of the Depart-
ment of Defense not to begin planning for
shifts in resources within the United States,
base closings, plant sales, and the like, until
the last possible moment before the change
is actually due to take place.
The basis of the previous policy has been
the fear that decisions taken upon sound
military grounds may be upset by the pres-
sures of local and private interests. I expect
to make it clear that our decisions, once
taken, will not be subject to reversal, ex-
cept for changes in the facts on which they
were based originally.
Once our position has been made clear,
however, I anticipate that we and the com-
munities affected by these decisions will join
together to use the time between the an-
nouncement and the action to develop plans
to reduce the impact of the change.
We have organized a special unit just for
this purpose in the Office of the Assistant
Secretary for Installations and Logistics.
This unit will not only draw on theresources
of the Department of Defense; it will seek
help for those affected from the Departments
of Labor and Commerce, the General Serv-
ices Administration, the Civil Service Com-
mission, and the Small Business Adminis-
tration.
The help that we can offer includes finding
jobs for displaced Government employees in
other instal:.ations, arranging for surveys of
business opportunities in communities that
are losing payrolls, and providing a variety
of technical services.
But more important than any of these is
the encouragement we can givei, these com-
munities tc help themselves, not only by
advance planning, but simply by spreading
accurate, advance information to everyone
concerned, spiking rumors and deflating ex-
aggerations.
Any decision that comes out of Wash-
ington and falls on a particular commu-
nity a long way off, is likely to be fright-
ening until it is explained and understood.
We propose to take enough time to try to
explain it. With your help, I think we
cannot only explain the move but develop
an orderly adjustment to it.
If change is the law of the universe, it
is a law enforced with par titular strin-
gency in military planning. The penalties
for failure to observe it are unavoidable and
harsh. The President's defense program is
designed to improve the capacity of the
military establishment to adju 't to chang-
ing military needs. It is also designed to
reduce the impact of these changes on the
economy as a whole.
SPECIAL REPORT ON CUBA
received so much mail, so many ques-
tions have been - asked, so many sugges-
tions on the Cuban situation have been
made, that I feel it is proper for me to
make some remarks at this';ime.
The gravity and importance of what I
want to say is such that I wa t to be ab-
solutely certain of two thing :
First, that I cover a number of points
in as short a time as possible.
Second, that the language I use is
carefully considered so it will not be mis-
construed.
I cannot say too strongly r too often
that the American people mist and will
unite behind any action necessary to
preserve our freedoms.-and to help oth-
ers preserve theirs. There is no time or
place for partisanship. This s a time of
national emergency. From ll reports,
the American people are fa ahead of
many in Washington in relining that
we are at war with communism. This
war, hot or cold, shooting or silent, at
home or in far off lands, has taken and
will continue to take- many strange
forms. It is truly total war. Economics,
propaganda, politics, and diplomacy are
just as important tools of this total war
as armed might, which is becoming more
and more of a last resort.
We traditionally abhor he use of
armed might. We do not life to extend
our influence through a gun barrel. But,
we also ascribe to the slo an "Don't
tread on me," and the American people
are sick and tired of being made to look
ridiculous by a bearded fanatic who has
created a Communist stronghold just 90
miles from our backyards.
In short, the American people are
ready to accept constructive nd forceful
leadership. They are preps ed not only
for strong words, but for str ng deeds if
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 1961 ApRr?Md1fL9? " 0ffiRW _CAlf P6f00346R00020016001 A2931
The Agricultural Situation Is a It breaks down to this: If American ship, we propose a program that will end the
Man -Sided Thing farmers are given some assurance of rela- current paradox in which productive success
y -Sided tively favorable prices and incomes in the has led to economic distress. This happens,
1960's, and if we provide a sound program in-a large measure, because of the inelasticity
EXTENSION OF REMARKS for adjusting our production to that which of the human stomach, hence the Inelasticity
of can be used, we will have a highly produc- of the demand for food. A little too much
tive and flexible agricultural plant-one in the way of food supplies leads to dramatic
HON. LESTER R. JOHNSON capable of responding to any foreseeable farm price declines-hence to a farm income
food production emergency. This Is the kind problem. And a little too little in the way of
of WISCONSIN of an agriculture we want. food supplies leads to skyrocketing food
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES But, in the absence of such a program, prices and a real income squeeze on con-
Wednesday, April 26, 1961 results could be disastrous. What are the sumers-this is the food problem so often
potential consequences? encountered in wartime.
Mr. JOHNSON of Wisconsin. Mr. Farmers could, in the absence of such a
speaker, the urgent need for enactment program, use their productive capacity in- In fact,
discriminately. In that event, If support paradoxical it may seem, these
7.)f long-range and forward-looking farm the gyrations and this ti instability a ity can same both
.
_egiS1at10ri was emphasized b Agricul- PI 'ograms were continued, the burden on the prod by Federal budget would become intolerable, The inst and con caddy to the the same tim ime,
rural Secretary Orville Freeman when and the stockpiles of surplus completely un- and r The risk kability adds to the risk . farming,
le testified before the House Agricul- manageable. Or-and more likely-the pub- a always noreases costs. And the
-lure Committee April 24 on the pro- lie would refuse to continue such supports, make for an uncertainties of inefficient ups and uowve
nosed Agricultural Act of 1961. He cited and prices and incomes would be driven plant the i farmerhas, use and of the pros must
-he current technological explosion in down so low that results could be catastroph- me has, which he must
ic. Millions of farmers, their incomes de- maintain whether prices are good or bad.
agriculture and the magnitude of the This, too, increases costs.
=torage problem as two of the reasons pressed below subsistence level, would swell
the ranks of the unemployed, would crowd This leads to my final l point with regard
vhy this bill should be enacted into already crowded areas of our cities, seeking on to the both farmer technological and exp ume and its If we
osion effect
~,w as soon as possible. Under leave to jobs. And many of them would be neither gram that Only d In
-xtend my remarks, I would like to in- trained for jobs or adjusted to city life. The adjusting seffect a program that succeeds in
-lude this portion of his testimony in the economic problem would be complicated by use and that at tdat t the e to that which visaa
MCORD: the social problem. same time provdes a
'ECHNOLOGICAL EXPLOSION HAS INTENSIFIED This is not all. I should like to point out fair income for the farmer, only if we thus
THE FARM PROBLEM here how such a development would in the Promote economic and price stability in
lia UHOENCY OF THIS LEGISLATION IS FURTHER prices to its unfortunate results. Further nological improvements in production be
EMPHASIZED BY THE CURRENT TECHNOLOGICAL rlenlir, '- a,~.,......... F,... . - expected to remit in
EXPLOSION IN AGRICULTURE lead to a corporate type agriculture Con- of prices to consumers while maintaining
The magnitude of the technological revo- trolled by outside capital. Hired labor would farm incomes. Without such a program the
-ition in agriculture is too little recognized, Increasingly replace work done by the farm farmer must pay the cost of risk, and of
aid its consequences-in the present and operator, and the costs of management, su- inefficient use of his productive plant, as
1r the future-are not sufficiently realized pervision and labor would go up. For one I have described. Without it he must main-
- understood. of the major reasons why the American fam- twin greater financial liquidity than would
Agricultural efficiency and productivity ily farm has become the most efficient agri- otherwise be the case; he must pay more for
nvt advanced so- rapidly during the past cultural producer in history is that the credit; he is forced to use older and less
acade that agriculture has tripled its out- owner-operator is on hand, to do the work efficient methods than he would otherwise
tit per hour of labor while industry's out- and to supervise the work. Neither collective use.
Kit has only doubled. Output in agricul- farms nor large corporate landowners are able Supply adjustment programs that serve
are increased much more rapidly than the to mtach the efficiency that results. to reduce and minimize the extreme and
3mmercial market increased. During the If low incomes squeeze out all but a few uncertain price fluctuations in agriculture
050's farm output increased by 28 percent corporate-type farms, there would doubtless would reduce the costs borne by the farmer.
bile population Increased only 19 percent. result the kind of supply control that would They would mean a gain in production ef-
nee the domestic demand for food is tied result in high prices, without regard for the ficiency, and this in time would mean a
bsely to population changes this means public interest, or the consumer interest, or reduction of the per unit cost of produc-
?at supplies have outrun demand. Sup- interest in our programs to expand the use tion. This would really set the stage for
ies have pressed against population needs of food abroad in the interest of peace and both the maintenance of farm incomes and
_ the United States and given rise to a con- economic progress. an eventual orderly lowering of prices to
ant downward pressure on farm prices. We deplore the collectivization of farms consumers, consistent with the march of
This increase in output has been accom- in a part of the world, and we would en- technological advance.
ished with the use of only 2 percent more courage land reform in those other areas The urgency of this legislation is demand-
sources than were used 10 years ago. The where huge landholdings have-like the ed by the magnitude of the storage prob-
mposition of these resources has changed Communist collective farms-proved so in- lem.
_arply, with about one-third less labor and ferior to our family farm economy. How The cost of the storage is so great that
percent less cropland. But the use of ma- ironic it would be if we allowed that family we cannot expect it to be long continued.
.finery, fertilizers, pesticides, and other farm economy, that has proved its superior- This is an immediate and pressing burden.
archased inputs has risen sharply. Overall ity socially as well as economically, to be Eight years ago, agriculture's house was in
3ciency, in terms of output per unit of destroyed for want of the tools it needs to order. Commodity carryovers were at rea-
put has gone up by 25 percent. These meet conditions of today. sonable levels. Producers had no burden-
anges in resource needs have had a sharp The family farm in this Nation has reached some surpluses hanging over their heads.
.pact on declining farm employment, in- a pinnacle of success in Its primary func- These were the quantities, held In public
eased capital requirements, and the de- tion, the production of an abundance of food and private hands, of principal crops car-
sasing opportunity for young people to and fiber to meet human needs. It has ried over into the marketing year of 1952
ter farming. made this abundance available to the con- 53:
This technological revolution in agricul- sumers of this nation at a lower real cost Feed grains: 20.1 million tons which was
m7e has only just begun. Only a few of than ever before in history. The consumer 18 percent of the amount used in that year.
r farmers are using all of the new tech- now spends about 20 percent of his dispos- Wheat: 256 million bushels, or 26 percent
logy to the best advantage. Economists able- personal income for food, as compared of the amount used in that year.
the Department of Agriculture recently with more than a fourth in 1947. The con- Cotton: 2.8 million bales, or 22 percent of
=imated that a population of 230 million sumer in America works fewer hours to feed the amount used In that year.
ople in 1975 could be provided better hiimself and his family than in any other The coming marketing year confronts us
its, and our export markets readily satis- country. The American public should pay with a different picture: -
_1, from a crop acreage no larger than that tribute to the farmer for his contribution Feed grain stocks will be around 84 million
use just prior to the start of the Conser- - to our standard of living. Even Khrushchev tons, or half of a year's needs. Over 85 per-
ion Reserve program, simply by using pays that tribute. A little over a week ago cent will be Government owned or under
ssently-known methods of production on he was quoted as saying that the Soviet CCC loans.
ast farms. If all farm production in 1975 triumph in space "must not detract the Wheat stocks next July 1 will amount to
se to be carried on with only the best attention of the Soviet people from other about 11/2 billion bushels, or more than a
-hniques in use in the late 1950's, not all targets, and these Include catching up with year's expected domestic and export needs.
the cropland acreage now in use would the United States in the standard of living." About 90 percent will be under CCC loan or in
needed for food and fiber production. To insure our continued superiority in this CCC Inventory. Cotton stocks, at 7%Z million
* * ? field In which we have unquestioned leader- bales, largely In
private hands, will be down
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 _ - - - Approved For Release 200 OQ lg :, (Z[A-fZDP,6AP.Q 46PARkWA X015-1
sharply from recent highs, but almost 3 times
as large as in 1952.
The growth of feed grain and wheat stocks
did not occur overnight.
Feed grain stocks have increased in every
year since 1952, as a result of excessive pro-
duction. Wheat stocks have increased in 6
years out of 9.
How can we convey the magnitude of the
storage problem?
Taxpayers should know that Government
costs of carrying and handling commodity
stocks have risen from $238 million in fiscal
1953 to $1 billion in the current fiscal year.
These costs include storage, transportation,
and interest. The CCC investment in price
support at the end of this fiscal year will be
about $8.5 billion. Wheat and feed grains
will account for 87 percent of this.
We must face the problem of working down
these large stocks. As long as they exist,
they pose a threat to markets and to price
stability that extends beyond these com-
modities to the livestock industry.
We cannot reduce stocks as long as the
supplies that come out of inventories are
more than replaced from excess current pro-
duction. Each recent year has added an
average of 7 million tons of feed grains to
stocks. Annual additions of wheat have
been about 130 million bushels. We cannot
expect to reduce CCC inventories until we
have the legislation and programs that will
effectively adjust production below total
annual needs. This is ay major goal of legis-
lation-here proposed.
~J ~ More About the CIA the Press
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. WILLIAM FITTS RYAN
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, April 27, 1961
Mr. RYAN. Mr. Speaker, under leave
to extend my remarks in the RECORD, I
include the following article from the
New York Post for Tuesday, April 25,
1961, by the able Washington column-
ist, Mr. William V. Shannon. I am
bringing this item to the attention of
my colleagues in another effort to point
out that we are getting our information
on this super secret organization only
from the press. From the press we learn
of the ineptness of the CIA in the Cuban
invasion. We were given no advance
notice that our Government was involved
in the plan. Mr. Shannon's article
again points up the need for this body
to exercise some direct control over what
has become something of an autonomy-
an overseer of our foreign policy-inside
the executive branch:
CIA KEPT ITS SECRET-EVEN FROM THE
REBELS
(By William V. Shannon) -
WASHINGTON, April 25.-The strange story
of how the Central Intelligence Agency mis-
managed last week's misadventure in Cuba
can now be pieced.
According to information from exile Cuban
sources which has been reluctantly con-
firmed by Administration officials, the lead-
ers of the Cuban Revolutionary Council had
no part in directing the actual military op-
eration and no opportunity to- coordinate
with the Cuban underground.
The CIA held the six leading members of
the Council incommunicado near an. aban-
doned airfield somewhere in Florida while
the "invasion" was underway. They were
not permitted to join the rebel forces or
speak in their own name. Statements were
issued in their behalf of which they had no
knowledge.
Only after it was clear the invasion was
going to fail were they consulted by top-
ranking U.S. officials.
HIrD 3 DAYS
The story began on Sunday, April 15, when
members of the revolutionary council in New
York received word that they should go to
Philadelphia. They were then flown from
Philadelphia to an abandoned airbase some-
where in Florida. They were quartered in
an o'd, rambling house in a deserted area.
Armed guards were posted outside.
Provisional president Jose Miro Cardona,
defense minister Antonio de Varona, and
Manuel Ray were among the six civilian exile
leaders kept incommunicado in this house
for the next 3 days.
The reason for holding them in this
fashion was apparently a desire on the part
of U.S. intelligence officials to maintain tight
security.
OFF GUARD
The Cuban exile leaders first heard of the
invasion from radio news bulletins on Mon-
day. The timing of the operation caught
at least some of them off guard. It provided
no opportunity to work out plans with the
underground inside Cuba to set off sabotage
and diversionary incidents. The coordinator
of the Cuban underground had a few days
earlier journeyed from the island to Miami
in order to make such plans. The invasion
caught him flatfooted and as a result, there
was no sabotage or uprising. Some of the
Cuban exiles blame the CIA for this failure.
The CIA explanation is that it did not wholly
truss the underground and chose not to rely
upon it.
On Tuesday, the exile leaders were briefed.
on the military situation in Cuba by a U.S.
Army colonel. They grew restive, clamored
for more information, and demanded to be
allowed to confer with their supporters.
At 1 a.m. Wednesday morning, Adolph A.
Berle, coordinator of the State Department
task force on Latin America, was routed
from his bed in Washington by an urgent
call from the White House and directed to
fly to Florida. He was told the invasion
seemed definitely to have failed. He ar-
rived at the guarded house in Florida shortly
after daybreak and spent the morning can-
vassing the situation with the Cuban exiles.
COMPLETE DISASTER
That afternoon, he flew with them back
to Washington where the group met twice,
once in the late afternoon and again early
in the evening, with President Kennedy.
The President meanwhile was working be-
tween conference on an entirely new draft
of the speech he made the next day to the
American Society of Newspaper editors.
After conferring briefly with him a third
time the next morning, the Cuban exiles
were released from the CIA's protective cus-
tody and allowed to go their own ways.
The only member of the revolutionary
council to participate in the invasion was
Capt. Manuel Artime, the youthful ex-Castro
follower whom the CIA had developed as a
protege. He broadcast appeals to the Cubans
to overthrow Castro, speaking from a ship off
shore. This ship was subsequently sunk by
Castro's planes and Artime's whereabouts are
now unknown.
The landing itself was apparently a dis-
aster from first to last. There was only one
landing, not several. It took place on a
mile-long strip of the coast of Cochinas Bay.
April 27
Three roads lead inland but Castro's forces
succeeded in blocking them all. The United
States provided air cover against the attacks
by propeller planes, not jets, used by Castro's
air farce. The rebels captured an airstrip
near he coast, but the plan to use it t bring in supplies went wrong because Oas-
tro's men had rendered the strip useless' by
heaps:lg mounds of gravel on the runway.
Abcut 1,200 or 1,300 men were landed,
More than one-third were captured by Cas-
tro's troops and most of the rest were killed.,
Castro's forces apparently did not fight with
any great distinction but they had so many
natural advantages of position and terr;air
they were able to crush the landings in less
than 3 days. Very few, if any rebels
made their escape to the Escambray Moun.
tains,
FOUR BIG MIS'T'AKES
The CIA is known sarcastically in Miam
as the Cuban Invasion Authority. 1t'hs
more liberal wing of the Cuban exile move.
ment is convinced the disaster took plats
because the CIA, overestimated Castro'
weak:aess, refused to cooperate wholehe ,rt.
edly with the undergrou d, put too mtlcl
reliance on sheer military force-and the-t
did not provide enough of that.
The Cuban exiles believe that the CIA'
treatment of them: during the invasion as s,
many puppets was the natural outcome o
this basically contemptuous, paternallsti.
approach. U.S. officials deny that all of ; th
Cuban complaints are justified but they pon
cede that the CIA's attitude contributes
heavily to the making of the fiasco.
Controversial Committee
EXTENSION OF, REMARKS
OF I
HON. CLYDE DOYLE
OF CALIFO$NJA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, April 20, 1961
Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker, by reasso
of unanimous consent heretofore gratite
me so to do, I wish to call to your at
tent [on, and the attention of my oche:
distinguished colleagues, an editorial',ap
pearing in the Christian Science Monitc
on Wednesday, March 1, 1961, entitle
"Controversial Committee":
CONTROVERSIAL COMMITTEE
The life of the House Un-American Ac,tiv
ties Committee continues to be a stormy', on
Riots have attended some of its hearings an
new efforts have been launched in Congre
to curb it. Yet a great many Americans, fe
its work is necessary to keep the N8tic
ales: as to Communist infiltration. And tl
Supreme Court, in a narrowly split deci'sio
has just upheld Jail terms for two witness
who refused to answer the committee's que
tions.
The chief significance of these cases is
their confirmation of the Barenblatt feet
sion in 1959. That ruling signaled a halt
the Court's trend following the MCC4rtl
era. In the Watkins case and some othe
it had castigated the abuse of investigstil
committees' power and set up stern limb
But then in the, Barenblatt case and'' nc
in t:ae Wilkinson and Barden cases, the you
has supported wide authority for such is
quiries.
The majority, speaking through Mr. Ju
tice Stewart, specificallyd, declares it is Ina
Ing no judgment as to the wisdom of "t:
creation or continuance' of this committee
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 A2926
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX April 27
Further, he said, Communists should look
toward the formation of a super peace or-
ganization "possibly of the type of the Brit-
ish Peace Council" which "is linked with
peace movements in all other countries
through its association with the World
Council of Peace." (WPC has been cited
as a Communist world front organization.)
An analysis of Gus Hall's lengthy policy
statement shows that we can expect these
main features of the attack:
They will charge that the system of U.S.
oversea bases is "needless and useless for the
defense of the United States and a waste of
the taxpayers money."
They will praise the policy of peaceful
coexistence, and propose plans "for the use
of the billions being squandered on arms
for houses, hospitals, schools, roads, and
other social service and social welfare needs."
They will demand universal disarmament
as a panacea to end the threat of war. And
they will continue a day-to-day harassment
of the "big brass" for stepping up the arma-
ments race and for "provocative warlike
moves" in regard to Cuba and other
countries.
Above all they will carry on a running
attack, charging that the "monopolies, the
Pentagon, and their political henchmen are
sacrificing the national interest, hurting our
national prestige, degrading our democratic
heritage, undermining the security and lib-
erty of every American, and jeopardizing
the very existence of the American people."
While this is going on inside the United
States, similar campaigns will be launched
in other countries of the free world. For
this drive is worldwide. It is based upon
an agreement made by 81 of the world's
87 Communist Parties in Moscow last fall,
an agreement which Gus Hall quoted as
his guide in launching such activities here.
Communists obviously are aiming to whip
up public mob hysteria against the U.S.
defense establishment both here and abroad,
thus gain their real goals of weakening U.S.
ability to defend herself and her allies against
the rising tide of Communist "peaceful" ag-
gression.
What can be done? Counteraction must
take into account the fact that the vast ma-
jority of people in peace groups think of
themselves as non-Communists and even as
being opposed to Communist tyranny.
For this reason, counteraction must avoid
attacks against individuals, and must avoid
any blanket statements about a particular
peace group or about the peace movement in
general.
What veterans can do, however, is to in-
form fellow citizens in peace groups, in
unions, in fraternal, women's and youth
groups correctly and repeatedly on issues of
vital importance to our national security.
All of the people in peace groups which
Communist hope to exploit for their own
ends must be made aware how Communists
are working to use their idealistic views to
speed the destruction of free institutions and
the means to defend them.
Only by a constant flow of information on
the role of the defense establishment in de-
fending free institutions and in furthering
man's hope to live in a world at peace can
Communist agitation be counteracted and
defeated.
What Communists are trying to do, in ef-
fect, is to use a chain forged in Moscow to
harness American peace groups to haul the
Communist chariot ahead. You have it in
your power to break that chain.
HOW REDS ARE MOVING IN LATIN AMERICA
In an unimpressive building in Mexico
City on March 5, Red Chinese Delegate Chou
Erh-fu wound up a ringing speech that had
been punctuated by shouted slogans of,
"Long Live China" and "Long Live Mao Tse-
tung."
The audience was made up mostly of
Latin Americans, including a large delega-
tion from Fidel Castro's Cuba, attending the
Latin American Conference for National
Sovereignty, Economic Emancipation and
Peace.
The conference was called by former Mexi-
can President Lazaro Cardenas, a 1959 visi-
tor to Peiping and a top member of the
Executive Bureau of the World Peace Council
which is run by the Chinest and Soviet
Communists.
As was expected, the meeting ended with
a string of resolutions condemning alleged
U.S. aggression in Cuba, seeking repeal of
hemisphere treaties for mutual defense and
cooperation, opposing U.S. military missions
to Latin America, opposing all U.S. aid, and
supporting efforts to "liberate" territories
held by Western countries in Latin
America.
The real importance of the meeting is
the fact that it was held in the first place.
It was at an Afro-Asian Solidarity Congress
in.Cairo in December 1957 that campaigns
were launched which have brought us the
Congo and the turbulence in Africa.
We can expect that the meeting in Mex-
ico City means the launching of an intensi-
fied effort by Communists to create chaos
in Latin America, to break up the unity
of the Western Hemisphere, and to further
isolate and weaken the United States.
Action to counter such a Communist
campaign can be taken by trade unions, by
other private organizations which have
regular relationships with friends in Latin
America. The most effective action, how-
ever, can only be taken throught the offices
of the U.S. Government.
In the case of Africa there was a time lag
of about 2 years between the Afro-Asian
Solidarity Congress and the outbreak of
chaos. There are some signs in Latin
America that we might not have that much
time left there in which to act.
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Tuesday, April 25, 1961
Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, I com-
mend to the attention of our colleagues
the following article which appeared in
the April 3, 1961, issue of the New Re-
public. Mr. T. K. Quinn here concludes
his enlightening discussion of the price-
fixing case involving the electrical man-
ufacturing companies. On March 23,
1961, and April 26, 1961, I inserted arti-
cles by Mr. Quinn on this same subject.
The importance of the matter commends
it to our attention:
THE DILEMMA OF BUSINESS
The decision, the jail sentences, the fines,
and the disillusionment following the elec-
trical machinery price collusion case in
Philadelphia could mark the beginning of a
new understanding of the economic and po-
litical issues involved if the actual condf
tions are frankly faced. This is much more
vital than the passing, publicized settle-
ments and new Federal lawsuits against the
price fixers promised by the Attorney Gen-
eral.
We are obliged to begin, as Judge Ganey
said in Philadelphia, with the conclusion
that the chief officers of 21 corporations had
guilty knowledge of "the vast conspiracy."
After all, price control is a common prac-
tice in many industries. General Electric,
the principal offender, has a long record of
antitrust violations dating back 50 years.
On an average of once every 2 years for half
a century the company has had some gov-
ernmental action brought against it. The
policy of violation is well established.
Similar indictments, although not so regu-
lar or quite so often, have been brought
against such other giants as General Mo-
tors, Du Pont, A.T. & T., Westinghouse.
There have been a number of convictions
despite almost insurmountable obstacles the
prosecution must overcome.
The plain fact is that the big corporations
are caught in an impossible dilemma. On
the one hand, they know from experience
that unrestricted price competition is de-
structive and that if it actually prevailed
markets could be disrupted, profits reduced
or eliminated, and industrial instability re-
sult. They could, of course, crush smaller
concerns because of their capital advantages
but would in time be themselves broken up.
When giants fight there is bloodshed.
Adam Smith is outdated in this modern
age largely because fixed overhead has be-
come a principal factor in total cost, and
because corporations have swollen so big
as to make our whole society dependent upon
them. They simply refuse to take price
chances wherever they can be avoided, often
regardless of the law.
On the other hand, anything less than
seemingly enthusiastic support of competi-
tion as a constructive force would be inevit-
ably interpreted as an attack against free
enterprise, so faithfully advocated . and
guarded by its honest believers and practi-
tioners as well as by those who, being in posi-
tions of capital and market advantage, insist
upon the license to charge and do as they
please, free from all governmental interfer-
ence or public controls of any kind, and
regardless of inflation or any other harmful
effects. What they really want are easy
profits, assured, continuing and increasing.
So big business, preaching one thing and
practicing its opposite, is obliged to pretend
that it favors competition and the antitrust
laws while it secretly opposes them, estab-
lishes uniform and administered prices, sets
up barriers against the entry of new com-
panies into its fields, stalls costly technolog-
ical innovation and curtails production.
Thus. otherwise respectable businessmen-
the conforming bureaucrats in big corpora-
tions-become the carriers of misrepresenta-
tion and falsehoods and degrade themselves.
They are victims of a dilemma most of them
don't understand.
In about one-third of the national econ-
omy-an area that includes automobiles,
steel, cigarettes, cement, oil products, chem-
icals, roofing materials, electric light bulbs
and machinery-price competition has been
eliminated by mutual understanding, legally
or illegally, among the corporations repre-
sented. They have taken the position, in
practice, that prices should be substantially
uniform and profits so made secure.
Now, if the American public is ready to
accept this condition then the only re-
maining question is who should fix the
prices and what standards should be
adopted. Shall we permit these and other
private collusive interests themselves to de-
cide what their "take" is to be? If so, then
the laboring man should also be permitted
to set his own wages.
Before pursuing this absurdity further, let
us quickly say that obviously the public
interest must come first, and it becomes the
duty and responsibility of the people, acting
through government, to set the prices which
would otherwise be under private collusive
control. The situation is not changed in
the least by resorting to name calling-i.e.
"socialism." We would simply be recogniz-
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX A2925
offer economic aid to Cuba providing the
Government of Cuba will cease its
build-up of Soviet armaments in this
hemisphere, and
Third. The American people are eager
to extend the helping hand of a good
neighbor and accept the Cuban people
as :full partners in the inter-American
society of nations, providing the Gov-
ernment of Cuba will stop to serve as
a base for Soviet penetration into this
hemisphere.
I am suggesting that there is roomfor
exploration of alternative accommoda-
tions. I am not suggesting, however,
that this Nation can stand quietly by
while Cuba builds up a base hostile to
our way of life and dedicated to support
Soviet Union penetration into this hemi-
sphere. What I am, saying is that we
should give Castro one more opportunity
to demonstrate to the world and to the
United States that he is not a tool of
Soviet subversion, If he is willing to do
this, he has nothing to fear from the
United States.
President Kennedy, in his inspira-
tional inaugural address, addressed him-
self most eloquently to the problem
which faces us today. He said:
Finally, to those nations who would make
themselves our adversary, we offer not a
pledge but a request: that both sides begin
anew the quest for peace, before the dark
powers of destruction unleashed by science
engulf all humanity in planned or accidental
self-destruction.
The question then is, Should we make
one more try to find an acceptable rap-
prochement with Cuba? If we succeed
in this try, we will have demonstrated to
the world our own greatness and a
leadership truly worthy of the New
Frontier. If we fail, then we will have
shown the world that Castro is,. in fact,
a madman condemned to his own
destruction.
Mr. Speaker, before we support an-
other invasion of Cuba, an invasion
which ultimately can be expected to in-
volve our own military forces, let us
pause to ponder the words of our great
President :
So let us begin anew--remembering on
both sides that civility is not a sign of
weakness, and sincerity is always subject to
proof. Let us never negotiate out of fear.
But let us never fear to negotiate.
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. ROBERT H. MICHEL
OF ILLINOIS
IN THE HOUSE OF :REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, April 27, 1961
Mr. MICHEL. Mr. Speaker, under
leave to extend my remarks I would like
to insert the following editorial by Mr.
C. L.. Dancey of the Peoria Journal Star
in the Appendix of the RECORD:
LIBERALISM Is AMERICAN TRADITION
(By C. L. Dancey)
Dear anti-Communist friends, Sunday, we
urged you not to hunt subversives, since that
is a very difficult task even for professionals
and is no place for us amateurs.
Today we'd like to talk about liberals, the
people that we believe some of you confuse
with the real enemy.
Liberals should not be confused with Com-.
munists. (The Reds aren't liberal at all.)
A genuine liberal has a liberal or generous
and open-minded approach to all problems.
He is opposed to prejudice or discrimination
on the bass of race, religion, color, eco-
nomic status, or social status.
He believes that every person involved in
a crime is entitled to the benefit of the doubt;
until proven guilty by processes assuring
him every :right and safeguard under our
great liberal. Constitution. And he further
believes that the convicted criminal should
be treated with no thought of punishment
but in a manner best calculated to salvage
and rehabilitate that human being.
These are all noble sentiments.
You have no quarrel with liberals.
However, there are also some mixed up
folks who call themselves liberals, usually
loudly. And this is where the confusion
comes in.
You might say they usually exhibit a vio??
lent underdog complex and. a "McCarthy
syndrome."
These are the folks not satisfied and not
emotionally cut out to be liberals, so in-
stead of no prejudice they specialize in re-
versing the historic prejudices.
They are usually violently prejudiced up
the social or economic scale, instead of
down. Sometimes, instead of maintaining
an absence of prejudice and a liberal view
even on matters of race and religion, they
develop a passionate prejudice on behalf of
minority groups against majorities.
(NOTE.-This is understandable, and in
some circumstances commendable, but it
certainly is not liberal.)
Finally some of them are so thin-skinned
and jittery about their supposed liberal be-
liefs that they are scared to death they will
be linked with Communist philosophies, so
they strike out with passion and prejudice
at the very idea of people being curious
about Communist activities.
They are afraid of where it will lead, and
history has given them some cause for this.
That's why they aren't the least bit lib-
eral toward anti-Communists. The word
knocks them off balance.
So remember that the liberal tradition is
part of America from the days of the Found-
ing Fathers, and is part of the true charac-
ter of our Nation.
Be liberal yourselves. Study with objec-
tivity, not emotion. Study with an open
mind, not prejudice.
If you still have outspoken enemies, ignore
those who are mixed up liberals. Don't
confuse any special personal enemies with
the great enemy of us all. Don't be dis-
tracted by jittery people.
The more you learn to know your enemy
and his real nature, the less time you'll
have to waste on these other folks.
C. L. Dancey.
A Realistic Approach to Our Educational
Problems
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. HAROLD R. COLLIER
OF ILLINOIS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, April 12, 1961
Mr. COLLIER. Mr. Speaker, a joint
resolution adopted by the 72d General
Assembly of the State of Illinois might
be of keen interest to the Members of
the House deliberating on the proposed
Federal aid-to-education legislation. It
is interesting to note that the resolution
was originally offered by 29 :members of
the Illinois Legislature who are closest
to the problems in education in my
State.
I submit that this resolution, as placed
in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of April 17
by Congressman ROLAND LIBQNATI, is a
realistic approach to the real problem
which faces the parents and taxpayers,
not only in Illinois, but across the other
49 States.
Editorials Appearing in the V 'W Ameri-
can Securlity Reporter for March 1961
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. CLYDE DOYLE
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, April 20, 1P61
Mr. DOYLE. Mr. Speaker,I by reason
of unanimous consent heretofore grant-
ed me so to do, I wish to call to your at-
tention, and the attention of my other
distinguished colleagues, two articles ap-
pearing in the March :1961, is ues of the
VFW American Security Rep;rter, pub-
lished monthly by the Veterans of For-
eign Wars of the United States.
Mr. Speaker, it is my own personal
experience over a long ter of years
that the Veterans of Foreign Tars is one
of several national organizations of dis-
tinguished veterans of wars in which the
United States has been involved which
is doing a vigorous and valiant and nec-
essary patriotic service to the cause of
our national security.. The! editorials
follow:
COMMUNDSTs ANNOUNCE OPEN WARFARE
The Communist Party, U.S. ., has now
disclosed openly that destruction of the
U.S. defense establishment is a major ob-
jective of its "peace policy."
General Secretary Gus Hall rolled out the
broad outlines of the campaign) at a meet-
ing of the party's 60-member National Com-
mittee in New York January 2b.
He said that Communists' biggest job in
the immediate future is to agitate both in-
side and outside of established eace organ-
izations to destroy public confl.cence in the
U.S. defense establishment. He declared:
"It is our task to reveal to every American
that big business and big brags are today
the chief force for war. We must make
clear that :,heir talk of defending freedom
is a fraud."
Moreover, he said, Communists must step-
up their work inside peace organizations
and work to "widen the struggle for peace,
to raise its level, to involve far greater num-
bers, to make it an issue in every!icommunity,
every people's organization, every labor
union, every church, every house, every
street, every point of gathering of our peo-
ple. It is imperative to bring everyone-
men., women, youth and, yes, even children-
into the struggle. The fight for peace is
basic to the cause of progress and socialism."
He indicated that this would mean many
more "mass marches, demonstrations, peace
walks, picket lines, postcard campaigns, let-
ters to Congressmen and Senators, delega-
tions, meetings, and many others:
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
1A2924 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX
quate. It was no match for the defend-
ing forces available to Castro.
The invasion failed also because it was
ill conceived, poorly planned, and lacked
necessary military capability. It is diffi-
cult to believe that the Pentagon was
very pleased with the operations. I am
inclined to think that our military lead-
ers were skeptical onlookers, thoroughly
amazed at the ineptness of amateurs
playing at war. It would appear that
on the American side, the invasion was
encouraged essentially by a group of en-
thusiasts who really believed that Cubans
by the thousands would leap to arms in
support of the counterrevolution. They
were wrong and our position must be
reoriented. ,
But most important, the counterrevo-
lution failed because it had no roots in
the people of Cuba. It failed because it
had no appeal for the farmer and the
worker. It failed because it appealed
mainly to the dispossessed-those who
had and lost. Unfortunately, there were
many, many more of those who had
nothing and were promised much.
There is strong evidence today that
the recent invasion of Cuba was only a
probing action, that there will be other
invasions of Cuba, supported and encour-
aged presumably by the United States.
Before we support other invasions of
Cuba, let me caution the sponsors of
future invasions to read carefully the
lessons on revolution written by Che
Guevara in his manual on guerilla fight-
ing in the Castro uprising. Whatever
Americans may think of Castro, he is
nonetheless a living example of a suc-
cess revolutionist. He understood and
still thoroughly understands the Cuban
farmer and worker. He won in Cuba,
because he fanned the burning desire .of
the peons for land and reform. He has
maintained himself in Cuba, because he
fans the great pride of Cubans in Cuba
and in themselves. Unless the archi-
tects of future invasions ignite a similar
spark in the hearts of the Cuban farm-
ers and workers or crush them outright
with overwhelming military power, it is
doubtful that these recent guerilla fight-
ers will desert the Castro revolution.
So much for the invasion which failed.
We have also failed to starve Castro
into submission. The sugar embargo has
failed and so have our efforts to isolate
Cuba. As a matter of fact, these efforts
have aroused sympathies for the Cubans
throughout South America and in many
parts of the world. The great Yankee
democracy is pictured as a heartless co-
lossus crushing the little people of Cuba.
But why are we so overwrought about
Cuba?
Historically, the United States has al-
ways feared the presence of an alien
force on Cuba. In the Castro regime we
have a hostile government which has ac-
cepted foreign military and economic
assistance of great potential danger to
the United States. Cuba is being built
up not only as a hostile military base,
but a stepping stone for international
communism-a friendly door inviting
Soviet penetration into this hemisphere.
This we cannot permit. What frustrates
us in Cuba is that we are unable to come
to grips with the real culprit, the Soviet
Union.
The United States has every right, un-
der international law and under the
inter-American treaty arrangements, to
defend itself and the hemisphere from
external attack, direct or indirect, when-
ever such an attack has occurred or is
being prepared. It has no right, how-
ever, under international or domestic
law, and no moral justification for taking
action but pretending that it is not do-
ing so.
Moreover, as long as the pretense ex-
ists, any such action must be covert, in-
effective, and doomed to failure. We
thereby compound cynicism with defeat.
Before we took action in Cuba or sup-
ported others, in so doing we should have
ascertained whether we had full legal
and moral justification for what we did.
Our experts in international law know
that frequently there is a legitimate con-
flict of legal principles which creates
doubt as to our legal rights. However,
we have the right and duty to apply
those principles which sanction actions
essential to protect ourselves and to
oppose aggression if such a threat in fact
exists. If the facts did not justify such
action, we had no course but to with-
hold action.
We have always stood before the world
as the defenders of international law.
We therefore cannot afford to be vulner-
able to a charge of violating it.
Nevertheless, the conclusion seems to
be that we must destroy Castro and his
regime. We could crush him with our
military power like an elephant might
crush a mouse, but we dare not. And
so we have decided to sympathize with,
support, and encourage a counterrevolu-
tion in Cuba.
In the light, of this decision, other in-
vasions of Cuba are coming. Who will
be the invaders? Reliable sources have
suggested that they will be Social Demo-
crats, Each one of us will have his own
views of what is a Social Democrat, but
it is reasonable to assume that the United
States will support Cuban patriots with
liberal views. The invaders can be ex-
pected to support progressive social and
land reform programs. The funda-
mental political objective of the invaders
will be to reestablish freedom and de-
mocracy in Cuba.
The last invasion failed to communi-
cate its objectives to the people of Cuba;
and future invasions, I regret to observe,
will have the same difficulties. For in
a popularity contest in Cuba, Castro is
the hero. It was Castro who seized the
sugar lands. It was Castro who seized
the banks and factories from foreigners
and wealthy Cubans. It has been Castro
who has seized the imagination of the
Cuban people.
As Americans, we hope patriots will
find a way to ignite the spark of desire
for freedom which could destroy Castro,
but I doubt that the peons and the
bearded ones can really understand the
noble intricacies of a social democratic
counterrevolution. I must reluctantly
conclude that in any future invasion as
Avril 27
in the past one, they will remain loyal
to Castro.
It has been reported that during the
last invasion, great masses of people
were armed and ready to fight off the
invaders. Accordingly, if an invasion
of Cuba by "Social Democrats" or any
other group is to succeed, it seems
quite certain that U. S. military forces
will have to play a determining role.
The invaders must be strong enough
militarily to destroy sizable Castro
forces on the beaches and in the in-
terior. This will require the recruit-
ment, training, and equipping of major
rebel invasion units. It will require
naval and air support. Bluntly, it will
require at least limited military inter-
vention by the United States. This
course will lead us to horrible bloodshed
and slaughter.
We might get some other South or
Central American country or countries
to do the recruiting, training, and equip-
ping for us, but this is a doubtful ex-
pedient. It would certainly entail the
possibility of the inherent danger that
the countries of South America might
choose up sides.
Is there then an alternative, or must
we take the calculated risk of support-
ing with military power a counterrevo-
lution against Cuba? There must be
an alternative.
If negotiations, cease fire, and a neu-
tralist government are preferable to war
in Laos; if endless meetings and dis-
cussions on control of nuclear weapons
are more acceptable than unilateral nu-
clear testing; if insults and abuse can be
endured better in the United Nations
than a clash in the Congo, then surely
reason dictates, even though emotions
cry otherwise, that the United States is
big enough to talk to Cuba.
"It's too late for that now," the cry
echoes every time negotiations are sug-
gested.
Yet, if this is a sincere statement,
then one ventures hopefully that there
might have been a time in the past
when the United States might have
negotiated with Castro. And, if we
could have negotiated in the past, then
why not now? How will we know
whether some acceptable rapproche-
ment is not possible unless we try?
I am inclined to think that this
country might well exercise a little re-
straint and patience with Cuba. Gov-
ernments and regimes have come and
gone in Central and South America. We
have weathered storms before. Castro
may be an unpleasant irritant, a thorn
in our side, but I certainly hope no one
believes Cuba is a serious challenge to
the United States.
I suggest that:
First, The American people can ac-
cept the land reform program and
the social and economic changes inau-
gurated in Cuba, providing the Govern-
ment of Cuba will undertake to reim-
burse the original owners for the prop-
erties taken from them.
Second. The American people are
ready to consider the reestablishment of
normal trade and commercial relations
between our two countries, and even to
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 1961
overly timid in
credit.
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD APPENDIX, A2923
following them, witness recent Presi-
dential messages and legislation-the
tax recommendations, area redevelop-
ment bill, the housing message, and the
like.
Lesson: Government regimentation,
Federal bureaucratic planning, taxing,
and control is no match for free private
enterprise and people left alone by
Government.
When will our people wake up to the
dangers which our Nation faces and re-
member the lessons learned by our leav-
ing the Old World, our revolution and
formulation of our form of limited con-
stitutional Government?
(ermany has continued to guard against
inflation 1'as successfully, in. fact, as any
industrial country) and has kept a tight rein
on the expansion of credit.
The report called for easy money and said
that a rate of interest high enough to stimu-
late any large volume of personal savings
would seriously curtail investment.
Germany has kept a high rate of interest.
The report said that tax concessions
gr$nted to industry, such as depreciation
allowances, were being abused and that in
anti case they represented only an expendi-
ture of tax funds which would otherwise
hajve been collected by the Government. Ac-
cordingly, the report said, a compulsory
investment program would be more effective.
U$Ider the recommended program, all indus-
tries were to be assessed for the fund and
the government was to distribute the money
t4 industries where there was a crying need
for expansion.
The Government did nothing of the kind.
The key bottleneck in German industrial
expansion, the report said, was an inadequate
supply of coal. it recommended vast Gov-
ernment programs for stimulating the pro-
duction of coal.
Little was done along this line. Coal has
become a drug on the market and the prob-
lem has been how to dispose of the sur-
plus.
The report proclaimed that "the nostalgic
)ropes * * * looking toward a revival of the
19th century role of the capital market are
{loomed 'to disappointment. The capital
knarket plays no such role in any modern
country and there is no prospect that It
will."
I The capital market is still functioning
much as it always did, here as in Germany,
,in spite of persistent attempts to dislodge
I it.
Finally, the report drew a distinction be-
tween Germany, squeezed between too great
a demand for imports and not enough ex-
ports, and the United States, "where there
has never been any fear of a squeeze or an
external, drain."
Today.. having disregarded all of Mr. Hel-
ler's recommendations, Germany has turned
the tables on us. It has built up an enor-
mous trade surplus, accumulated nearly $8
billion in reserves, and the squeeze is on
the United States-to such an extent, indeed,
that we are begging Germany to help us
out.
What actually happened just couldn't hap-
pen, according to Mr. Heller and others.
They go on pretending that the United States
must take the same medicine they pre-
scribed for Germany even though Germany
recovered precisely because it poured the
nasty stuff down the drain.
Now, what are the dangers and les-
sons?
First. Danger: Security classification
by the State Department which with-
holds information from our people.
Lesson: Public knowledge and discus-
sion will show up the fallacies of regi-
mented bureaucratic thinking, foreign to
a free enterprise constitutional Govern-
merit society.
Second. Danger: The gentleman whose
views are so thoroughly discredited, Mr.
Heller, is now the top economic adviser
to the President.
Lesson: A President can surround
himself with fuzzy thinkers.
Third. Danger: While Germany disre-
garded these fallacious economic
theories, of no need to worry over in-
flation, easy money, Government aid to
industry, misunderstanding the capital
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or
HON. JOHN J. FLYNT, JR.
OF GEORGIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, April 27, 1961
Mr. FLYNT. Mr. Speaker, on Mon-
day and Tuesday, April 24 and 25, 1961,
Quimby Melton, Sr., publisher of the
Griffin Daily News, Griffin, Ga., initiated
a campaign entitled "Confidence in
Uncle Sam: Unlimited." I personally
endorse the thoughts of this patriotic
American, and it is with personal pleas-
ure that I include an editorial written
by Mr. Melton, which appeared in the
Griffin Daily News issue of Tuesday,
April 15, 1961:
CONFIDENCE IN UNCLE SAM UNLIMrrED
The suggestion made Monday, in this
column, that every family in Griffin and
Spalding County show their confidence in
Uncle Sam, by buying a U.S, savings bond,
is beginning to "snowball," There are indi-
cations that this suggestion may catch on as
a nationwide campaign.
Today, the city commission has issued a
proclamation calling May a month for show-
ing "Confidence in Uncle Sam: Unlimited."
In this proclamation the city fathers urge
everyone to buy a bond during the month of
May. If every family in Spalding does this
it will mean $150,000 they are investing in
a fund to help preserve democracy and free-
dom in this Nation.
Numerous persons have called, not only lo-
cally, but several from out of the county,
approving the plan. Today we are featuring
the proclamation of the city commission in
another story. Tomorrow we will comment
on what folks are saying in support of this
campaign.
It all started when we were impressed
by the statement of President Kennedy, that
he was determined that our freedoms should
not be curtailed by communistic aggression.
We asked ourselves, "What can I do to
help?" Then came up with this idea of
buying a bond-taking stock, as it were, in
the "Confidence in Uncle Sam Unlimited"
organization.
To fill out the column today, we'll just
recount a conversation with two men.
One, a businessman, said, "I'm going to buy
a bond for each of my three grandchildren.
I want to do my part to help guarantee that
they never live under the rule of a totalitar??
fan dictator."
The second man, a large property owner
and a man who owns many gilt-edge stocks
and bonds, said:
"I have never bought a Savings Bond. For
I can earn more interest with my money by
other investments. But this can be called. a
national emergency. I'm going to buy at
least $1,000 worth of bonds, not as an in!'est-
merlt, but as a contribution to my Govern-
ment. I realize, looking at this from a hard-
boiled business viewpoint, that if the Com-
munists take over, all the property I! own
and all the stocks and bonds in my safety
deposit box will not be worth a dime.?'
There you have two viewpoints.
The businessman, who wants to j help
guarantee that his grandchildren will enjoy
the same freedoms as he enjoys; and the
hard-boiled investor, who wants to guard
the value of his property, stocks and bonds.
Few of ue; can buy $1,000 bonds--but each
faintly can well afford to put $18.75 into one
bond and have a part in saving this Nation
of ours from Communist domination.
Come on Gritz and Spalding County--
let's all buy bonds.
Another Try at Cuba
EXTENSION OF REMARK
HON. FRANK KOWALSKI
OF CONNECTICUT
IN THE HOUSE OF- REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, April 27, 1961
Mr. KOWALSKI. Mr. Speaker, I ap-
plaud the leaders of the Democratic and
Republican Parties for supporting Presi-
dent Kennedy's foreign policy at this
crucial time. There can be only one
foreign policy of the United States, and
the President is solely responsible for
its execution. Certainly history has
shown that once a decision is made the
people of this great democracy have
never flinched. from the consequences of
that decision.
Past events, however, have also dem-
onstrated that the American people do
not have closed minds. They peek in-
formation and even welcome debate.
They are eager to explore alte~'natives.
They have faced up to war, but over-
whelmingly they desire peace.
Because we are an intelligent people,
I believe, Mr. Speaker, there Is room and
indeed a need for an objective appraisal
of the Cuban situation.
The invasion of Cuba was a horrible
fiasco. The American people join with
those who grieve for the young Cubans,
so uselessly sacrificed on the beaches of
their beloved land. Furthermore, it is
no secret that many Americans., have lost
confidence in those who conceived and
led this unfortunate invasion. Most sig-
nificantly, the American people) are deep-
ly disturbed by the terrible blow which
the invasion. debacle has dealt; the pres-
tige of the United States.
It matters little whether the United
States did or did not finance,' organize,
and arm the invasion forces. The cold
fact is tha+; the world believes we did.
And so, Mr. Speaker, we cannot escape
the indictment that the failure of the
anti.-Castro counterrevolution was an
American failure.
But why did the invasion fail?
As a military action, it was doomed
to failure from the beginning because
the invasion force was militarily inade-
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX A2921
parts of the country came complaints
against the electoral college. Every 4 years,
the months after the presidential election,
becomes open season on the machinery for
choosing the Chief Executive.
Senator MIKE MANSFIELD is the spearhead
of the current attack on the electoral col-
lege. He argues that the college is anti-
quated and that only the popular vote
should decide our choice for President and
Vice President. This position, so soon after
one of the closest elections in our history,
only helps to confuse the issue for the aver-
age citizen.
The members of the Constitutional Con-
vention in 1787 found the decision on the
mode of choosing a President one of their
most difficult. James Wilson, a delegate,
stated it this way:
"The subject has greatly divided this
House. It Is In truth the most difficult of
all on which we have to decide."
The final decision to permit, the State
legislatures to choose the method of picking
their electors for the President and Vice
President was based on the thesis that the
right of appointment was not to be exclu-
sively vested in the people.
What was the intention of the delegates
to the Constitutional Convention in decid-
ing on this method of electing a President?
One suggestion is that they wanted to keep
the people from all participation in choos-
ing the Chief Executive. Another sugges-
tion is that they wanted the electors to be
completely free agents without any control
by the people. The Founding Fathers would
have denied both of these suggestions.
James Madison constantly stated "the Presi-
dent is to be elected by the people." Ed-
mund Randolph said "the electors must be
elected by the people at large." Such state-
ments clearly refute the view of those who
argue that the Founding Fathers feared the
people and distrusted their judgment.
It has never been quite understood that
under the Constitution State legislatures
have the uncontrolled and unrestricted
power to fix the manner of appointing the
presidential electors. With this great power
at their disposal State legislatures have
nevertheless, under a kind of moral persua-
sion, given up their prerogative of changing
the present system. By the adoption of
similar laws in each State there has devel-
oped a uniform method of appointment.
The method of choosing electors in pres-
ent use is called the general ticket-plurality
system. In the election just completed
there were 537 electors to be voted on. The
breakdown of the number is arrived at by
assigning 100 electors to the States on the
principle of equality, each State being en-
titled to 2. The remaining 437 electors
(to be reduced to 435 as the result of the
census of 1960) are distributed according
to the principle of population, each State
being assigned as many electors as it has
Congressmen. To be elected a presidential
candidate must capture a majority of the
total electoral vote. In the election just
completed an electoral vote of 269 was needed
for a nominee's victory.
The Constitution says that electors may
be chosen, "in such manner as the [State]
legislature may direct." Under the present
general ticket-plurality system a citizen. en-
ters his voting booth to choose a nominee
for President. In fact he is voting for every
elector to which his own State is entitled.
For example, if you voted in New York State
on November 8, you would have faced a vot-
ing machine listing the names of Kennedy-
Johnson and Nixon-Lodge yet as you pulled
the lever for either team you would have
been voting, not for your candidates, but for
a list of 45 electors previously approved by
his political party.
As a result of this system the candidate
who wins the largest popular vote in the
State receives all of the electoral vote of
that State. This makes possible the situa-
tion in which the candidate with the total
popular vote of the country could lose the
electoral vote and the election. An extreme
example might be as follows:
Alabama________________
California _____________
Massachusetts--------___
----------------
Montana
New York __-_-______..__
Ohio ---------- .. -----
Pennsylvania ----------
Nortli Carolina ------- .___
Texas ----------------
Wisconein------- ________
Popu-
lar
vote
Elec-
toral
vote
Thou-
sands
25
2,100
1,100
DO
3,100
1,000
1,000
80
600
401
II' 4 _
Popu-
lar
vote
Elec-
toral
vote
Thou-
sands
200
2,000
1,000
100
3,000
2,000
2,000
700
400
400
11
0
0
4
0
2.5
32
14
0
0
The Constitution makes electors free
agents who may vote for any qualified man
or woman that they feel should be President
and Vice President. Our Founding Fathers
did not fully recognize the possibility of
political parties and thought of the electors
as free agents. This myth persists. For
example, as late as 1952 in Ray v. Blair (343
U.S. 214,) the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that
a California law requiring an elector to sign
an affidavit to support the candidates nomi-
nated at the national conventions was un-
constitutional. Custom and party pressure
almost invariably make electoral delegations
vote as a unit. The last exception to this
occurred in Alabama in 1956 when 1 of
the 11 Democratic electors did not cast his
ballot for Stevenson.
Some of those who have agreed that the
above system has outlived its usefulness re-
fuse to support the thesis that some system
not using the electoral college should be
devised. A method called the single-mem-
ber district system has been suggested as a
more democratic way of choosing electors.
In this method the candidate receiving the
largest popular vote in each congressional
district would get the electoral vote for that
district. The candidate receiving the great-
est popular vote in any given State would
garner the two additional electoral votes for
the State. For example:
Candidate A:
Won 23 congressional districts-23 elec-
toral votes.
Popular vote-3,240,600-2 electoral votes.
Total electoral votes: 25.
Candidate B:
Won 20 congressional districts-20 elec-
toral votes.
Popular vote-2,301,306-No electoral
votes.
Total electoral votes: 20.
While the single-member district system
has gained some momentum, the most ef-
fective argument against it is that it would
inevitably degenerate into a gerrymandering
system. A gerrymander is an artificial ar-
rangement of districts designed to give the
political party making it (that is the party
in power) a guarantee of electing its can-
didate to a representative or electoral body.
With all the undemocratic overtones to
"gerrymandering" it would seem that the
single-member district system would be a
weak solution to the electoral problem.
However, it is generally agreed that this
system is superior to the present general
ticket-plurality system.
Following the election of 1948, Senator
Henry Cabot Lodge and Congressman Ed-
ward Gossett introduced a resolution for a
constitutional amendment. It was approved
by the Senate, but later failed in the House.
This resolution would have translated popu-
lar votes into electoral votes, and alloted
a State's electoral quota among the candi-
dates in proportion to the statewide popular,
votes polled. All that would be necessary
to win would be a 40-percent plurality which
would practically obviate the chance of an
election being thrown Into the House. This
proposed amendment would have operated
as follows:
NEW YORK
Present System:
Candidate A, 3,260,362-45 electoral votes.
Candidate B, 2,167,367-No electoral votes.
Lodge-Gossett resolution:
Candidate A, 3,260,987-22.6 electoral
votes.
Candidate B, 1,999,999-22.4 electoral
votes.
The strong argument against a change
by means of the Lodge-Gossett resolution is
that both State and National Legislatures
presently overrepresent rural interests. The
present electoral college system, conversely,
is the only way to assure that presidential
candidates will listen to the ? demands of
urban majorities and minorities in America.
The chief interest of southern sponsors of
electoral reform is to diminish the alleged
power of urban minorities, particularly the
northern Negro, in national politics.
It is to be noted that all suggestions for
change mentioned in this article are alike
in that they modify the electoral college.
If the change is to come it must be by
amendment, for State reform is unlikely
especially in the big industrial States. The
same considerations of interest and pride,
chiefly the increased weight accruing from
an undecided block of electoral votes, which
originally induced one after another of them
to give up the earlier district system plan
can be counted upon to frustrate any at-
tempt, within their own boundaries, to re-
vive it or anything resembling it.
One thing Is certain. The elimination of
the electoral college system is practically an
impossibility. The use of the popular vote
as the sole determinant is not practical.
Our representative system is based on a com-
promise between population and regional
needs.
From a practical point of view, since the
polls closed on November 8 some Republican
leaders thought that there should be a re-
count in 11 States. Some of these recounts
were started. A recount in all 11 would
have provoked considerable uncertainty and
political passion.
But, If the Presidency depended on a ma-
jority of the popular vote in the entire
Nation, we would then have a recount of the
votes. in all 50 States. This would open the
door to extensive opportunities for fraud in
every area where one party had decisive
control of the election machinery.
The electoral college system, if it does
nothing else, restricts the area of argument
to a limited number of States. It does not
put the whole country at the mercy of
political machines determined to grab
everything in sight.
No one really questions that the electoral
college system is cumbersome and anachro-
nostic. But it is still very much a question
as to whether the change should be made
now. The real issue has been posed by Presi-
dent John F. Kennedy: "If we are consider-
ing a radical shift in the balance of power
in the United States, it should not be under-
taken lightly." The cure is often worse than
the disease.
Approved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
 bved For Release 2004/10/12 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200160015-1
A2922 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX
he Ad Hoc Committee on Cuba
T_~"EXT,NSION OF REMARKS
HON. CLEMENT J. ZABLOCKI
OF WISCONSIN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, April 27, 1961
Mr. ZABLOCKI. Mr. Speaker, on
February 2, under leave to extend my re-
marks, I included in the RECORD an ex-
change of correspondence with the ad
hoc committee, composed of Milwaukee,
Wis., residents, who were critical of our
Federal Government for its alleged fail-
ure to take any steps to seek peace in
Laos.
The other day, I received another open
letter from the ad hoc committee. In
this letter, the committee has in effect
urged the Government to give the Coln-
munists a free hand in Cuba.
Under leave to extend. my remarks, I
would like to place in the RECORD the
text of the ad hoc committee's letter, as
well as my reply to them. The two let-
ters follow.
AN OPEN LETTER
To President John F, Kennedy, Secretary of
State Dean Rusk, Ambassador Adlai
Stevenson, Senators Alexander Wiley,
'William Proxmire, Congressmen Henry
Reuss, Clement Zablocki, Robert Kas-
tenmeier, editors of the Milwaukee
Journal, and the Milwaukee Sentinel:
We strongly support the declaration of
President John Kennedy at his news con-
ference on April 12, 1961:
"There will not under any conditions be an
intervention in Cuba by U.S. Armed Forces.
This Government will do everything it pos-
sibly can, and I think it can meet its ro-
sponr,ibilities, to make sure that there are no
Americans involved in any action Inside
Cuba. I wish to make clear also, that we
would be opposed to the use of our territory
for mounting an offensive against any for-
eign government."
We affirm this stand because:
1. We see in armed Invention the risk of
orld war III.
2. We do not wish to adopt the methods of
he Soviet action in Hungary or the British-
reneh action in Suez.
3. We have faith that there can be nego-
iated solutions to international disputes.
4. We believe that intervention would for-
eit the confidence and friendship of the
entral and South American Nations.
While many of us may look upon the
astro regime with disfavor, puzzlement,
nd disappointment, we are no less concerned
ith the folly of our Cuban policy which
ow causes the American people so much
f
nguish. Now is the time for open dis-
ssion. It is our conviction that an in-
f public opinion will. make its influence
f It upon those who are in positions of
1 adership.
There are questions deserving serious and
I amediate attention. For example: (1)
hat are the minimum conditions for re-
e tablishment of diplomatic relations with
C ba? (2) What should be our attitude
t ward social and economic upheavals In
C ntral and South America? (3) In what
s ecific ways does the social revolution in
C ba threaten the fundamental interests of
t e American people as a whole? (4) Is
t ere anything in American policy toward
C ba which has contributed to her depend-
e as on the Soviet bloc? (5) What are our
o ligations under the Charter of the Organi-
ze ion of American States?
We think that James Reston, political,
analyst of tae New York Times, has clearly
stated the principle involved:
"`Everywhere in. the world the United States
is trying to defend or establish a simple
overriding principle: That force shall not
be used, directly or indirectly, to achieve
political ends, and that all international dis-
putes shall be settled by negotiation. This
is the principle we are trying to sustain in
Laos, where we are arguing against the ship-
ment of Soviet arms for use against a gov-
ernment we support. This is the principle
we supported even against the British and
French in the Suez war. This is the prin-
ciple we are trying to defend in the Congo
in Indonesia, in the Middle East, In Algeria,
and in Berlin.
Surely that same principle applies in our
relations with Cuba and the other Central
and South American nations.
People striving for economic betterment,
political free torn, and national independ-
ence, sometimes use methods we abhor or
go to extremes we deem unwise. Even in
such cases we must uphold the principle of
nonintervention. Our claim to moral lead-
ership demands it. Intervention points to
disaster.
Sincerely yours,
The ad hoc committee: Rev. Roy Agte,
W. Robert Brazelton, Louis Becker, Dr.
Neal Billings, William Brown, Dr.
Gladys Calbick, Dr. Martin Cohn-
staedt, Wilma Ehrlich, Jack Eisen-
drath, Rev. Roger Eldridge, Dr. Hugo
Engleman, Donald Esker, Mrs. Maxine
Franz, Richard Franz, Wayne Gourley,
Dr. Alan Grossberg, Mrs. Ruth Gross-
berg, Mrs. Leon M. Hamlet, Dr. Dor-
othea HL;rvey, Rev. Herbert J. Huebsch-
mann, Edward-Jamosky, Harvey Kitz-
man, Dr. David Luce, Dr. Willie Mae
Gillis, Mrs. Virginia Parkman, Mrs.
Louise W. Peck, Dr. Sidney M. Peck,
Mrs. Annette Roberts, Mort Ryweck,
Dr. Gordon Shipman, Dr. James W.
Skelton, Rev. Kenneth L. Smith, Max
Taglin, Mrs. Thelma Taglin, Corneff
Taylor, Arthur Thrall, Nick Topping,
Frieda Voigt, Rev. Lucius Walker,
Theodore Warshafsky, Jack Weiner,
John Werner, Rev. Herbert Zebarth,
Leonard Zubrensky.
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, D.C., April 26, 1961.
Dr. S. M. PECK,
Milwaukee, Wis.
DEAR DR. Pseaa : This will acknowledge your
open letter of April 25, outlining your ad
hoc committee's views on the situation in
Cuba.
I have noted your views and I wish to re-
assure you that, as In the past, I will con-
tinue to support efforts made by our Gov-
ernment to restive International problems
through peaceful negotiation. However, we
can only expecr constructive results from
such negotiations if we negotiate from a po-
sition of strength, not of weakness.
I must add thet I am amazed at your com-
mittee's apparently unshakable faith in the
peaceful intentions of the commies and
their willingness to reach negotiated settle-
ments. It would. seem to me that your belief
in the sincerity of Communist statements
and pledges should be wearing thin. What
do you find in the record of the past
15 years-and in the record of recent devel-
opments in Cuba, Laos, Vietnam, and other
areas-to sustain your faith? I would be
interested in receiving your reply.
There, is one last comment that I would
like to make: Apparently history has failed
to persuade you about the true nature and
the real objectives of communism. You are,
of course, puzzled and disappointed with
Castro; according to your letter, many mem-
bers of your committee even look upon
April 27
him with disfavor. But the last paragraph
of your letter indicates to me that you
still consider Mr. Castor, and others in his
category as basically well-meaning agrarian
reformers, social reformers, or political re-
formirs who-on occasion-may go to ex-
tremias which you consider unwise. Your
advice In. those instances is that we should
sit tilht and do nothing.
I CO not believe that we should try to
run he affa(rs of any nation other than
our cwn., or $tempt to rule the world. At
the same time, we should not sit back and
watcl. the Communists swallow up the free
world bit by bit until they accomplish their
objec;:ive--world domination. As a free
nation, as a responsible world power, and
as lea: lei in the free world, the United States
has a responsibility to Its neighbors which
goes beyond sitting back and engaging In
intellrctually stimulating discussions, or in
passing resolutions, or in composing open
letters, I am confident that the vast ma..
jority of the American people are conscious
of that responsibility and are determined
to live up to it.
Yours sincerely,
CLEMENT J. ZABLOCAI,
Congressman, Fourth District.
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. BRUCE ALGER
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, April 27, 1961
Mr. ALGER. Mr. Speaker, there are
many Dangers and lessons in the article
here presented-Human Events, April
21, 1961:
GERMAMY IGNORED ECONOMIST HELLER, AND
PROSPERED
Imposing evidence has only recently come
to light to show that leading New Deal
economsts, including Prof. Walter W. Heller,
are capable of giving some mighty bad ad-
vice. This is important because Mr. Heller
Is now Chairman of President Kennedy's
Council of Economic Advisers.
The State Department has declassified a
1951 rer ort in which Mr. Heller, Prof. Alvin
Hansen, and several others solemnly warned
that the German economy could not possibly
improve without a thorough immersion in
Keynesi