KENNEDY TELLS WORLD WE'D FIGHT FOR CUBA, BUT HE DIDN'T SAY WHEN EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF HON. BOB WILSON OF CALIFORNIA

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP65B00383R000200240064-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 2
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 18, 2004
• Sequence Number: 64
• Publication Date: November 20, 1963
• Content Type: OPEN

A7190
Approved For Release 2004/06/23 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200240064-6
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX November 20
ligation to throw good money after bad.
They are abundantly warned that they are
inviting a holdup.
Would Drive Family Farmers to the Cities
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. ANCHER NELSEN
OF MINNESOTA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, November 20, 1963
Mr. NELSEN. Mr. Speaker, Mr. John
A. Herman, of Willmar, Minn., has pro-
vided me with a copy of a letter which he
wrote to the editor of the West Central
Daily Tribune, of Willmar, Minn., in
which he commented on the recently
issued 20th Century Fund report, en-
titled "Farms and Farmers in an Urban
Age" by Prof. Edward Higbee of the Uni-
versity of Rhode Island. Mr. Herman
requested that I have his letter printed
in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD s0 that his
remarks might come to the attention of
my colleagues here in the House. I in-
clude his letter commenting on the 20th
Century Fund report in the Appendix of
the RECORD at this point in my remarks:
WOULD DRIVE FAMILY FARMERS TO THE CITIES
To the EDITOR:
Many remember the agricultural policy re-
port of the CED, a liberal group whose direc-
tors comprise many supporters of the left-
wing Committee for an Effective Congress.
This report posed a so-called solution for
the farm problem. Now another leftwing
educational front, the 20th Century Fund,
has come up with a report even more devas-
tating called Farms and Farmers in an
Urban Age, by Prof. Edward Higbee of the
University of Rhode Island. Listed as trus-
tees for the fund are such liberal pundits as
Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. (adviser to J.F.K.),
Adolph A. Berle, Francis Biddle, J. Kenneth
Galbraith (economic adviser to J.F.K., 1960
campaign), Robert Oppenheimer, and David
E. Lilienthal (also a CED trustee. The report
contends that, "There is no point in trying
to keep alive the old shopworn concept of
the family farm."
According to Farm Quarterly, "The cen-
tral theme of the author is that the usual
statement of the farm problem, even the pic-
ture of the farmer himself, is largely a hoax
contrived by creating a homogenized blend
of all farmers who qualify for that name un-
der the loose definition of the Bureau of Cen-
sus and passing off this fictitious character
as the family farmer."
The report says that 44 percent, or 1,640,-
910 farmers, should move to the city because
they and their "undercapitalized farms are
obsolete" The next group singled out by
the report are the 34 percent of the farmers
who gross between $2,500 and $10,000 per
year. These 1,271,558 farmers who produce
22.8 percent of all farm sales, Higbee says,
are on the "fringe of failure," but should be
allowed to remain In agriculture and keep
their small portion of the market. The other
22 percent of the farmers, the report claims,
produce 72 percent of all farm sales.
The report which begins "American agri-
culture never had It so good," concludes
with the statement, "If the welfare of the
American family is of real significance to the
Nation's policymakors, let them look to the
city where most of those families live, in-
stead of backward to the country."
This report, like the CED report, wants to
drive the family farmer to the city to join
the army of unemployed. From their ivory
towers these liberal intellectuals propose so-
lutions for the problems of rural America.
But their solutions would create greater
problems than the ones they attempt to solve.
Where are those who leave their farms in
such great numbers to find employment?
What are those who are dependent upon the
farmer as a market for goods and services
to do?
Kennedy ells World We'd Fight for
Cuba, But He Didn't Say When
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. BOB WILSON
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, November 20, 1963
Mr. BOB WILSON. Mr. Speaker,
under leave to extend my remarks in the
RECORD, I include the following from the
Miami Herald:
UNITED STATES WILL FIGHT To PROTECT ANY-
ONE REDS THREATEN, J.F.K. PLEDGES HERE-
BUT HE DIDN'T SAY WHEN
(By Hal Hendrix)
MIAMI BEACH, November 20.-Two and a
half years ago President Kennedy told the
American Society of Newspaper Editors the
United States would fight against outside
Communist penetration in the Western
Hemisphere.
His strongly worded declaration was de-
livered at the American Society of News-
paper Editors convention in Washington, im-
mediately following the disastrous collapse
of the U.S.-backed Bay of Pigs Invasion
attempt.
Two nights ago, addressing the Inter-
American Press Association convention here,
Mr. Kennedy said the United States would.
fight for any Western Hemisphere nation the
Russians or any other Communists try to
take over.
CUBA
Despite those bold pronouncements, the
fact remains that between the ASNE and
IAPA speeches Russia has clamped complete
control on Cuba, militarily, economically,
and politically.
So it was not too surprising that the Pres-
ident's renewed anti-Communist protection
assurance to the IAPA delegates was received
somewhat less than enthusiastically.
Reflecting on Mr. Kennedy's remarks here,
the editors and publishers agree he made it
clear the United States would help the
Cubans only after they have freed them-
selves.
REBELLION
Some of the news executives shared an
opinion that Mr. Kennedy, in effect had
Invited the anti-Castro Cubans on the island
to launch a rebellion when he said:
"No Cuban need feel trapped between de-
pendence on the broken promises of foreign
communism and the hostility of the rest of
the hemisphere. For once Cuban sover-
eignty has been restored, we will extend
the hand of friendship and assistance to a
Cuba whose political and economic Institu-
tions have been shaped by the will of the
Cuban people."
This paragraph may have been meant for
potential dissident elements in Castro's
armed forces as well as for resistance groups
in Cuba.
But considering the past record of the
Kennedy administration since failure of the
Bay of Pigs invasion, many of the editors
here wonder whether the United States would
rush to the assistance of rebellious anti-
Castro forces or permit them to suffer the
same fate as the anti-Communist patriots in
Hungary.
Apart from Cuba, the IAPA delegates gen-
erally were disappointed in the President's
speech.
POLICY ADDRESS
It had been heralded as a major policy
address on Latin America. But in the post-
mortems by the newsmen, the feeling was
nearly unanimous that the address was little
more than a rehash of earlier speeches.
It is perhaps significant that Mr. Kennedy
injected a distinct dose of criticism of the
Latin Americans in his remarks dealing with
the problems of the Alliance for Progress.
Some of the most prominent Latin Ameri-
can delegates commented that they were
aware of Latin America's shortcomings in
moving toward Alliance goals and did not
need a lecture from Mr. Kennedy.
They added they recognized many of the
platitudes punctuating Mr. Kennedy's ad-
dress and could only attribute them to his
speechwriter.
It was widely assumed that the speech-
polishing author was Richard Nathan Good-
win, former self-designated Inter-American
Affairs expert for the Kennedy administra-
tion.
That Mr. Kennedy recalled Mr. Goodwin
for the IAPA speech chore was puzzling to
the news executives. They thought he had
completely discredited himself on the Latin
American scene during the first 2 years of
the New Frontier administration.
Mayor John Babiarz of Wilmington, Del.,
Visits Poland
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. HARRIS B. McDOWELL, JR.
OF DELAWARE
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, November 20, 1963
Mr. McDOWELL. Mr. Speaker, re-
cently Mayor John Babiarz of Wilming-
ton, Del., visited Poland together with
Mayor Alex Smetka of Rochester, Mayor
Walter Waryasz of Poughkeepsie, and
Mayor Chester Kowal of Buffalo, N.Y.
Mayor Babiarz, one of Delaware's
abler public officials, told me he was
greatly impressed by what he saw in Po-
land, and the confidence shown by this
great people.
The delegation of mayors was enthusi-
astically received everywhere; the group
saw new construction, as well as the his-
toric monuments of the past including
the old cathedral in Gniezno, the seat of
the primate of Poland.
I can attest to the spirit of hope and
confidence shown by the Polish people,
for as a member of the Subcommittee
on Foreign Economic Policy, I traveled
to Poland during the 1962 Easter recess.
In Poland I had a series of conferences
with Ambassador John Cabot, members
of the American Embassy staff, repre-
sentatives of U.S. voluntary organiza-
tions conducting programs In Poland,
and Polish Government officials. Every-
where I traveled I saw a brave and con-
:fldent people, a people which has con-
tributed, and will continue to contribute,
great things to our culture and to civi-
lization.
Approved For Release 2004/06/23 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200240064-6
 Approved For Release 2004/06/23 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200240064-6
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX A7189
He came to New York, where he had at-
tended Seward Park High School as a youth,
taught himself to type and operate a dicta-
phone and passed a civil service test. As a
result he was appointed to a typing job in
the welfare department in 1952.
The same year, he married Elba Velez. She
had graduated from the University of Puerto
Rico in 1949, despite the fact that she had
been blind since the age of 5, following an
attack of typhoid fever. They have four
lively, fully sighted children: Iris, 10 years
old; Gilbert, 8; Cynthia, 4; and Ellie, 3.
In 1953, Mr. Ramirez began studying law
at night at Brooklyn College. He completed
the 4-year evening course In 3 years, passed
the bar examination, quit his job as typist,
and opened a law office at 140 Bergen Street.
Brooklyn, in November 1957.
For the first few days, there were no call-
ers. Then a friend referred a woman who
wanted a divorce.
Mr. Ramirez had never been in a court-
room before. "I walked into a dark room,
heard mumbling and voices, and called
everyone 'Your Honor,' because I didn't
know where the judge was, or who the clerks
were," he said, with amusement.
Now, with the help of his 7-year-old female
german shepherd, Dell, Mr. Ramirez finds
his way around courthouses not only In
Brooklyn, but also in Manhattan, the Bronx.
and Queens.
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
of
HON. GLENARD P. LIPSCOMB
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, November 20, 1963
Mr. LIPSCOMB. Mr. Speaker, the
trade publication, Broadcasting maga-
zine, recently published an editorial en-
titled "Who's Boss?"
The editorial summarizes some of the
primary issues involved in the contro-
versy surrounding the harassment of the
broadcasting industry by the Federal
Communications Commission which I
believe will be of interest to Members of
Congress.
Under leave to extend my remarks in
the RECORD, I include the editorial at this
point:
WIIo's Boss?
We make the flat charge that the Federal
Communications Commission is not serving
the public Interest. convenience, and neces-
sity. These are the counts:
It is overcommercializing Its regulation of
broadcasting, to grab headlines and euchre
bigger appropriations.
It is neglecting regulation of telephone,
telegraph, and other common carrier services
which are more Important to the consumer
economically but which lack the glamor of
broadcasting.
It is squandering taxpayers' funds through
"made work," such as the Inane hearings in
Chicago and Omaha on local programing,
the harassment of stations on license re-
newals, unnecessarily prolonged freezes, and
other contrived devices to force stations to
bow to Its will.
It is defying congressional Intent by seek-
ing to arrogate control over broadcast ad-
vertising (which is really ratemaking that
would transform broadcasting Into common
carrier status) and by seeking to impose
filing fees without legislative authority.
It is spending so much time-an estimated
80 percent-on its broadcast crusades which
it thinks have publicity value that many
policy determinations are being relegated
to the staff.
It is violating its own fairness doctrine
(which is of doubtful legality) by demanding
on the one hand that licensees determine
their public's programing needs and, on the
other, ignoring the views of elected represent-
atives of the public, to wit, Members of
Congress.
Since Chairman E. William Henry's "huck-
ster" barrage in New York 2 weeks ago, three
influential legislators have spoken. Chair-
man OREN HARRIS, Democrat, of Arkansas, of
the House Commerce Committee, Chairman
WALTER RoGERS, Democrat, of Texas, of the
House Communications Subcommittee, and
Senator GORDON ALLoTT. Republican, of Colo-
rado, of the Senate Appropriations Commit-
tee have challenged the FCC's authority to
place limitations on advertising, and to
otherwise interfere with control over pro-
graming and business management of sta-
tions.
The commercial time Issue is one-on which
all stations, large and small, and the net-
works, see eye to eye. This has stimulated
more activity through State associations and
by Individual broadcasters with Congress than
than any other regulatory issue In recent
memory.
Two bills, introduced by Representative
RoGERs-to prohibit the FCC from making
rules on broadcast advertising and to pro-
hibit it from assessing filing fees-are In the
hopper. Mr. ROGERS wants hearings "as soon
as practicable."
We suggest that, in the abs'tnce of Imme-
diate action by the FCC withdrawing the
commercial time rulemaking and postpon-
ing indefinitely from the January 1 effective
date the filing fee rules, broadcasters encour-
age Mr. ROGERS and his committee to convene
hearings forthwith.
Meanwhile, it would seem prudent for Mr.
Henry and his like-minded "give-em-hell"
colleagues to take a new look at the law
and the congressional Intent and not accept
as gospel that which the staff masterminds
serve up to them.
Congress created the FCC nearly 30 years
ago. It can, If it wishes, abolish the seven-
man Commission and create a new one of
three, five, or nine men. Unless the pres-
ent FCC sees the light glaring red from
Capitol Hill, we predict the Congress will
take strong measures to bring the FCC back
under control.
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. EDWARD J. DERWINSKI
or ILLINOIS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, November 20, 1963
Mr. DERWLNSKI. Mr. Speaker, an-
other great triumph for the spineless
foreign policy of the Kennedy admin-
istration is seen as we witness the failure
of the State Department to protect legit-
imate American investments in the
Argentina oil Industry.
I place into the RECORD at this point
an editorial which appeared in this
morning's Chicago Tribune entitled "The
Other Check," which effectively points
up the basic errors of the New Frontier
in international relations.
It would be well for us to face the
facts of life-that coexistence with com-
munism and retreat behind unwarranted
activities of nations in any part of the
world against the United States bring
international disrespect for our country
and have reduced our foreign relations
to complete chaos.
THE OTHER CHEER
President Kennedy at Miami affirmed that
the United States will take no retaliatory
action against Argentina because of its revo-
cation of contracts with 12 privately owned
oil companies, 8 of them American. Mr.
Kennedy's pronouncement made it clear that
he intends to persist In the pursuit of his
twin fetishes of foreign aid and the so-
called Alliance for Progress in Latin America.
The Argentine Government technically
stopped short of outright expropriation of
the $227 million worth of American-owned
properties, but the effect is substantially
the same. While there is vague talk about
compensation, the foreign companies are to
be required first to hand back any profits
of the last 5 years and to be accountable
for "damages" for taxes waived under the
previous contracts and for "irrational ex-
ploitation" of Argentine resources.
The Government's decrees were couched
in Insulting terms and took no account of
contentions that American contributions
had enabled Argentina to triple production
in 4 years and virtually to attain self-suf-
ficiency in petroleum. The jingoistic lan-
guage of the decrees served as a further
irritant to Members of the U.S. Senate, who
had just been through a long wrangle over
the continuation of foreign aid to Ingrate
nations.
At Miami, however, Mr. Kennedy refused
to heed their demands that economic aid be
suspended. He professed still to be hopeful
of the eventual success of the Alliance for
Progress, stating that this $20 billion aid
program, largely to be financed by the United
States, does not dictate to any member na-
tion how it must organize its economic af-
fairs.
"No country," said Mr. Kennedy, "can tell
another how It must order its economy."
Yet, when the Alliance for Progress was
proclaimed in August 1961, the text of the
declaration, under American Inspiration, laid
down a series of specific contractual obliga-
tions which were to condition the receipt of
U.S. aid. These provided not only rules to
order Latin American economies, but also
the political and social organization of Cen-
tral and South American states.
These countries were to formulate "na-
tional programs for the development of their
economies"; to foster "agrarian reform" in
order to eliminate "unjust structures of land
tenure and use"; to "reform tax laws, de-
manding more from those who have most,
punishing tax evasion severely"; to "stimu-
late private Investment," etc., etc.
If these draft conditions submitted by the
United States were not plainly designed to
tell other countries how they must order
their economics, what were they? Yet Mr.
Kennedy now misrepresents, If he has not
forgotten, the fundamental precepts of his
Alliance for Progress. He Ignores his earlier
demand that the Latin American countries
encourage private investment and, in fact,
condones what amounts to the robbery of pri-
vate American enterprises which are to be
stripped of their Interests.
As usual, Mr. Kennedy chooses to play from
weakness. After submitting to Castro's un-
compensated raids on American holdings in
Cuba, to Brazil's seizure of the American
telephone system in that country, he offers
encouragement to more Latin American
brigandage. And, after $371 million in eco-
nomic aid pumped into Argentina already,
he Intends to follow up $78 million in hand-
outs given to Argentina last year with simi-
lar amounts this year and next.
If the administration is capable of this
folly, U.S. private Investors are under no ob-
Approved For Release 2004/06/23 : CIA-RDP65B00383R000200240064-6