AMENDMENT OF FOREIGN ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1961

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP66B00403R000300080029-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 27, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 20, 2014
• Sequence Number: 29
• Publication Date: August 15, 1964
• Content Type: OPEN SOURCE

1964:
Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/05/20: CIA-RDP66B00403R000300080029-1
- CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 19117
Mr. McCLELLAN. An agreement was
reached between representatives of the
Treasury Department and the taxpayers'
representative, a certified public ac-
countant, with respect to the issues in-
volved. I realize that the Treasury
could overrule the man in the field. But
in this instance, everything appears to
be in order. Congress has asserted its
authority to enact this legislation.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the cone,elle
report.
The report was agreed
AMENDMENT OF FOREIG1 ASSIST-
ANCE ACT-OF 1961
The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill (H.R. 11380) to amend further
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as
amended, and for other purposes.
Mrs. NEUBERGER. Mr. President,
referring to the fast-becoming-famous
case of Baker against Carr, in 1962, it is
well to review some of the opinions of
the Justices. Justice Clark's concurring
opinion reads:
Although I find the Tennessee appo4tion-
ment statute offends the equal protection
clause, I would not consider intervention by
this Court into so delicate a field if there
were any other relief available to the people
of Tennessee.
This is the very point that has just
been made by the distinguished Senator
from Illinois [Mr. DOUGLAS] in his dis-
cussion with me, as to how reapportion-
ment finally- came about in Oregon.
As the Senator pointed out, the need
created the initiative, by which the
People can firid recourse if the legislature
fails to act.
Justice Clark bases his concurring
opinion on the fact that there was no
other relief to the people of ? Tennessee.
His opinion reads:
But the majority of the people of Tennes-
see have no "practical opportunities for ex-
erting their political weight at the polls" to
correct the existing "invidious discrimina-
tion." Tennessee has no initiative and ref-
erendum. I have searched diligently for
other "practical opportunities" present un-
der the law.' I find none other than through
the Federal courts. The majority of the
voters have been caught up in a legislative
straitjacket. Tennessee has an "informed,
civically militant electorate" and "an
aroused popular conscience," but it does not
sear "the conscience of the people's repre-
sentatives." This is because the legislative
policy has riveted the present seats in the
assembly to their respective constituencies,
and by the votes of their incumbents a re-
apportionment of any kind is prevented.
The people have been rebuffed at the hands
of the assembly; they have tried the consti-
tutional convention route, but since the call
must originate in the assembly it, too, has
been fruitless. They have tried Tennessee
courts with the same result, and Governors
have fought the tide only to flounder. It is
said that there is recourse in Congress and
perhaps that may be, but from a practical
standpoint this is without substance. To
date Congress has never undertaken such
a task in any State. We therefore must con-
clude that the people of Tennessee are
stymied and without judicial intervention
will be saddled with the present discrimina-
tion in the affairs of their State government.
No. 160 6
I quote next from one of the most
penetrating and fair essays available on
the issue, of federalist relations. This
has to do with the new pluralism and
the relative decline of the States. It is
an article written by Mr. William T.
Carlen, professor of political science
and head professor of social sciences at
the University of Florida. It reads:
In 1952, the theme of Dwight Eisenhower's
presidential campaign, at least in domestic
politics, was the reawakening of the 'States,
the restoration of their traditional place in
the Federal system, a return to the values
and practices of decentralized federalism.
Even scholars took another look at the Fed-
eral system, and some became moderately
optimistic about the prospects of revitalizing
the States.
Among those who shared this optimism
was the late Leonard D. White, one of our
most distinguished scholars in the field of
public administration. In a series of lectures
at Louisiana State University, published in
book form in early 1953 under the title "The
States and the Nation," Professor White set
forth the grounds for believing that the
Federal Government would relinquish some
of its tax sources to the States, among others
the gasoline tax, and that the States them-
selves would also explore new sources of tax
revenue.
Professor White believed that the States
would probably revitalize themselves in other
ways. First, they would relinquish some
Federal grants-in-aid and assume independ-
ently some of the services they now render
jointly with the Federal Government.
Second, the States would experiment more
widely with the interstate compact. Third,
they would 'make a much fuller use of their
own powers in two general ways?they would
enlarge their traditional services and keep
these abreast of the great advances being
made in criminology, penology, mental
health and education; and they would re-
sume their old role as laboratories of ex-,
perimentation by taking on new functions
such as adult education and training, goy- -
ernment aid to superior students, health in-
surance, possibly even disability insurance.
As I read again from the printed page,
I am thinking about how ideal it is and
how wonderful it would be if Professor
White's theory and projection had
prevailed.
As I read it, a smile crosses my face. I
think of how the opposite has happened,
and I wonder why.
Continuing to read:
This emphasis in 1952-53 on the bright fu-
ture of the States was, of course, a reaction
from the enormous growth of Federal power
during the 1930's and 1940's. As late as the
turn of the century, the Federal Government
had affected the national economy only
through its simple excise taxes, its protective
tariff, its uniform currency, its marketing
of Federal bonds, the limited functions of the
national banking system, and an inconclu-
sive regulation of interstate carriers. - By
1950, however, the activities of the Federal
Government had come to touch vitally every
aspect of American life. The old and origi-
nal powers of the Federal Government had
been prodigiously expanded by new demands
in foreign affairs and national defense.
And the New Deal and the Fair Deal, building
on the earlier New Nationalism and New
Freedom, had charged the Federal Govern-
ment with vast new functions so as to as-
sure a smooth functioning of the American
economy. By 1950, American constitutional
theory and practice had come to accept this
and American opinion overwhelmingly to ex-
pect it.
In 1960, it looks as if the anticipation of a
revived federalism in its old forms were un-
founded. Aside from tidelands oil, there
has been no significant return of functions or
tax sources to the States. Since 1953, it is
true, there have been demands for an en-
largement of old State functions and for the
Initiation of new State functions, but most of
the States fail to respond to the demands.
At the same time, the Federal Government
has been taking on and expanding functions
hitherto regarded as largely State or private
matters.
We all know of the wonderful Inter-
state Highway System which has now
spread its ribbons across our country.
We know the welfare, housing, slum
clearance, urban renewal, individual and
public health, hospital, and education
programs that have been undertaken.
Yet very few of those who oppose the
Federal Government and preach States
rights would change any of those pro-
grams.
Continuing to read:
The Federal Government has been con-
cerning itself more and more with these ac-
tivities, either directly or indirectly through
grants-in-aid. Older grants-in-aid are ex-
panding, new grants-in-aid are being
adopted, and Federal money appropriations
for grants-in-aid are increasing enormously.
In 1901, they amounted to less than $3 'mil-
lion. In 1931, they amounted to about $220
million. In 1941, they rose to $615 million.
By 1951, they had expanded to $2,280 million.
Today, they are running close to $7 billion,
counting the so-called highway trust fund.
In effect, the centralization-decentraliza-
tion issue has now shifted from the Ameri-
can economy to the American society. A
new rationale to justify a new expansion
of Federal, power is developing. More and
more, it Is being said that our society is
national, that as A society we are becoming
more interrelated and interdependent, that
we are a more mobile people than ever before,
that health and education in one State affect
health and education in all the States and in
the Nation.
As an experienced educator, I must
pause here and recall that I taught in
the schools in Oregon during the war
years and the postwar years, when there
was a big shipbuilding industry. There
was a great movement of families. Chil-
dren came to work in the shipyards and
in the defense industries. Those chil-
dren were immediately put into our
school system. They did not easily as-
similate.
For the first time, Oregonians became
proud and aware of their wonderful
school system. They had had a certain
feeling of inferiority about Oregon be-'
ing a State of small population, until
children came to Oregon either from
immense urban areas in the big cities
of the East, where classrooms were
crowded, or from other sections of our
country, where there had not been equal
opportunity for good education and a
good foundation, and where one side of
the population received more emphasis
In education than another.
It became necessary in every class in
our school system to set up ungraded
rolls to bring those children up to stand-
ard. That meant taking teachers and
supplies away from our own students,
who had grown up through the system.
That is when I became a real convert to
Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/05/20: CIA-RDP66B00403R000300080029-1
Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/05/20: CIA-RDP66B00403R000300080029-1
19148 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
the need for Federal aid to education
and equal opportunity for children
everywhere, because the children were
no less able to learn than Oregon chil-
dren. They merely had been denied the
opportunity. More and more we saw
the role of the 'Federal Government in
things that used to be left to the States.
I continue to read:
At the turn of the century it would have
taken a bold man to declare that since our
economy was national, the Government most
concerned with that economy must be the
National Government and not the State.
Today this is a commonplace. Now it is be-
ing said that because our society is national,
the Government most concerned with that
society must be the National Government
and not the State. Today this is an ad-
vanced attitude, but tomorrow it may be a
commonplace.
I can think of another example. When
hearings were being held on water pol-
lution and air pollution, especially the
latter, some representatives of Ameri-
can chemical companies who came be-
fore the Senate committee did not want
a Federal program for the control of air
pollution.
We asked them what they suggested.
They said, "Why, it should be left up to
the individual States." Then someone
asked, "Since when does the movement
of air confine itself to State borders?"
If Portland should spend a great deal
of money controlling air pollution in its
area, and our neighboring State on the
other side of the narrow Columbia River
did not do so, would we have all of their
pollution?
I never did get a satisfactory answer
from them. But, of course, the problem
is a Federal problem, as is danger of
water pollution if water crosses State
lines.
Continuing to read:
From many sides are coming,demands for
enlarged and new Government services.
Here are a few straws in the wind. In a re-
cent series of articles on urban renewal,
the Christian Science Monitor estimated that
1 out of every 4 city dwellers in the United
States live in a slum. A short time ago the
New York State Department of Labor, com-
menting on the rising costs of health serv-
ices, reported that today $2 out of every $3
spent for medical and hospital services in
the United States are still borne by the in-
dividual, that only $1 in every $3 is covered
by some kind of insurance.
That situation might change if we were
to update it., according to the insurance
companies. I am sure it would change.
Continuing to read:
The National Education Association is in-
sisting that our public schools need an ad-
ditional $8 billion each year if American
education is to be what it should be quan-
titatively and qualitatively, and it strongly
implies that all estimates of Federal aid up
to this time have been trifling in compari-
son with existing need. From all sides come
reports of skyrocketing costs for college and
. professional training.
There is the much-publicized article of
Benjamin Fine, who estimates that about
200,000 of our most gifted high school
graduates each year cannot go on for college
or technical or professional training for lack
of financial help. And the Nation is re-
acting to all this differently from what it
would formerly. Yesterday people would
have said: "But advanced education is for
the individual to provide for himself." To-
day people increasingly say: "What a waste
of national brain power."
Along that line, I remember talking to
Mr. Arthur Goldberg, ow Associate Jus-
tice of the Supreme Court, when he was
Secretary of Labor in President Ken-
nedy's Cabinet. One day we were dis-
cussing the problem of unemployment.
I have never forgotten something he
said?"More and more we are going to
find the ranks of the unemployed in the
ranks of the uneducated."
I continue to read:
These new demands are coming out of new
conditions. What are these conditions?
I do not think I have to go on and on
with Professor Carelton's comments on
that point, which have been stated many
times. It concerns our mobile popula-
tion, combining of family ,farms, grow-
ing urban areas, and demands of the
People for better health services, ex-
pecting* to have each baby born in a hos-
pital. In some parts_of our country at
one time that was never assumed.
I come back to the main theme with-
out all this background. It is:
Will the States do their part in meeting
the Nation's growing expectations? Have the
optimistic predictions about the future of
the States been borne out by subsequent de-
velopments? The evidence seeins to be that
they have not, that the States will not suffi-
ciently revitalize themselves, that the trend
to Federal centralization will continue.
True, all States are making some progress;
and a few States have taken constructive,
even heroic, measures to tap water supplies,
find new tax sources, provide regional plan-
ning, and reapportion their legislative seats.
But what was the record of most of the legis-
latures meeting during 1959? It was largely
a record of economy, retrenchment, and the
slashing of budgets submitted by the execu-
tives.
I know it has happened in Oregon.
I continue to read:
The truth is that most of theNStates are
barely able to keep the old services abreast
of increasing costs, increasing population,
and the shifts of population to the cities.
Few of the things envisaged by Professor
White have taken place. Have the States
relinquished any Federal grants-in-aid? Not
at all. Not a single grant-in-aid has been
relinquished. Here is the typical story.
First, a grant-in-aid is made so as to get a
necessary or desirable Government service
started and to soften opposition to it in the
States. Then it becomes a going concern,
vested interests are created, the controver-
sial becomes customary, and the opposition
vanishes. Therefore, grants-in-aid do not
diminish; instead, they multiply.
We see that happen in the Senate daily.
I remember that, in respect to title 7 in
the recently passed civil rights bill,
which suggested that not only grants, but
installations of Government activities in
certain States would be removed if there
was not integration, a great plea was
made not to allow this to happen.
Once in a while I, as a Member of the
Senate, receive a plea from a constitu-
ent of mine, not necessarily a supporter
of mine, to have the Government do
something when there is a - windstorm
or flood. All the rest of the time he be-
rates everything else I am doing and
what many of my colleagues are doing.
B.ut when there is an emergency a State
Aqua 15
cannot meet, he wants action, and we
work together at that time.
I resume reading:
What of the interstate compact? It still
remains largely a potentiality rather than an
actuality, although there is an encouraging
tendency by the States to experiment with
it more widely. The truth seems to be that
the interstate compact works most success-
fully in the noncontroversial, that is, the
relatively unimportant, areas of activity such
as the regional educational councils, the re-
turn of parolees, and so forth. In the contro-
versial areas?such as electric power, tapping
water supplies, preventing water pollution,
conserving soil and other natural resources--
it has been less successful, although longer
and wider experience May bring greater
achievement. At the present time what is
most impressive, considering the many possi-
bilities for the use of interstate compacts,
is this: how few are attempted; of the few
attempted, how many founder in the process
of negotiation and ratification; of the very
few that materialize, how prolonged and dif-
ficult the process of negotiation and ratifica-
tion. Proposed interstate compacts must be
watched closely, for they sometimes contain
built-in devices for local vetoes, disguises for
obstruction. It is instructive that one of the
reasons for calling the Constitutional Con-
vention of 1787, to form a stronger General
Government, was the failure of the Potomac
River States to conclude an interstate com-
pact. In the light of the total situation and
the many opportunities for employing this
device, the use of the interstate compact is
still negligible.
Are the States making an adequately
fuller use of their own powers? They are
not, emphatically not. This is so, chiefly
because of the realities of group politics in
the States. It is true that the groups that
press for the expansion of government serv-
ices to meet new conditions can be found
in all States, but it is only in the industrial
States that they can exert much influence.
Generally speaking, they are more numerous
and better organized on the National than
on the State level. On the State level they
frequently run into structural barriers
erected by 19th century horse-and-buggy
constitutions. Some of these are so long
and involved as to be in effect codes of law
rather than constitutions. They place
prohibitions on the taxing power, the bor-
rowing power, the spending power and rigid
limitations on the powers of the cities.
Above all they 'provide for flagrant malap-
portionment of the legislatures.
Malapportionment of State legislatures is
by now an old and a familiar story: how
the rural areas are overrepresented and the
urban areas underrepresented; how as little
as 30 or 25 or 20 percent or even less of a
State's population frequently makes a
majority in the legislature; how one vote in
a rural area often equals 100 or 200 or even
300 votes in an urban area.
? What is not so well known is the extent
of this malapportionment, how general it is,
,how flagrant, how today some of our States
are as undemocratic as Great Britain was
before the reform bill of 1832.
The consequences of all this are even less
well known. Overrepresentation of the
rural areas means not so much the rule of
the rural folk as it does the rule of the
rural politicians, who largely reflect the in-
terests and values of the county rings, the
large landowners, the small-scale and local-
minded businessmen of the county-seat
towns, and certain corporate businesses
(themselves located in the cities) which
would rather deal with a legislative oligarchy
than a broadly representative and.. demo-
cratic legislature.
Earlier in my remarks, I cited the case
of my friend, a seatmate in the Oregon
Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/05/20: CIA-RDP66B00403R000300080029-1
71964-
Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/05/20: CIA-RDP66B00403R000300080029-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
Legislature, who had 2,000-plus constitu-
ents. What was the effect of his attitude
toward some progressive legislation? He
was prevailed upon by the rich landown-
ers who controlled the big wheat ranches
to do everYthing possible to keep taxes
down. At that time our State was more
dependent upon the property tax than it
is now. Now it is dependent on the in-
come tax. That was the only purpose in
life of some representatives from the
wheat country and cattle country?keep
property taxes down. How are property
taxes kept down? In those areas it was
done by keeping schools small and in-
adequate. When I was going to normal
school, training to be a teacher, a horror
which members of my graduating class '
had was to be stuck in one of the schools
in that county. No provision was made,
for a place in which the teacher could
live. She had to live at the home of a
school board member or a rancher. She
had a long distance to travel to get to
school. She was never provided with
janitor service. I am not talking about
the 1800's. I am talking about when I
started to teach. That was not too long
ago. It was pitiful to see the conditions
under which teachers had to teach.
Those youngsters were never privileged
to go to college because they did not have
the necessary background or training.
Lo and behold, one of the members of
the legislature who came from this area
finally saw that his children, attractive
and intelligent, and exposed to the
schools in the State capital when he
brought them there during the session,
were not getting the education that he
had long espoused in the little red school-
house. He sent his wife and four chil-
dren into the nearby city of The Dalles,
where they spent the winter, so that the
children could go to school and have edu-
cational opportunities. He is now con-
verted to the need for a reexamination of
the "rotten borough" legislature.
Reading further:
It is the legislatures dominated by rural
politicians that favor the unrealistic pro-
posals to amend the U.S. Constitution so as
to limit the .Federal income tax, particularly
in the higher income brackets. It is these
legislatures which spawn the so-called right-
to-work laws and other legislation designed
to hamper the legitimate aspirations of or-
ganized labor. It is these legislatures which
have a pecularly tender regard for the small
loan companies. (Recently, a bill sponsored
by no one except the small loan companies
was passed by the Legislature of Florida; the
"aye" votes in the house represented con-
stituencies totaling 600,000 persons, while the
"no" votes, which failed to stop the bill, rep-
resented constituencies totaling over 2 mil-
lion people.)
Domination of the legislatures by rotten-
borough rural politicians is especially dan-
gerous in the one-party States, where these
politicians become still more inbred and
form a ruling clique unchecked by even a
rival party clique. Nor does this situation
prevail only in the South. About one-half
of all the States can be called one-party
States, at least so far as State matters, espe-
cially the legislatures, are concerned.
These conditions are all roadblocks on the
way to making the changes that would have
to be Made before the States could embark
on that fuller use of their powers that was
predicted by Professor White. Let us list
some of these necessary changes: constitu-
tional revision; genuine reapportionment;
the exploration of new sources of taxation;
the establishment of adequate civil service
and merit systems in the States so that they
could compete with private enterprise and
the Federal Government for administrative
personnel; emancipation of the cities from
neglect and exploitation.
Thus the formidable task in most of the
States is a twofold one. First, the structural
barriers must be removed. Then the con-
structive battle must be fought to expand old
services and introduce new ones.
The chances are that it will be another
case of "too little and too late" since in the
meantime the Federal Government will be
moving in with new or epanded services
which are given either directly, or indirectly
through additional grants-in-aid. In fact,
we may be nearer than many of us suspect
to another great spurt in Federal expansion.
If the present Congress were not checked by
Presidential veto, we would be in the midst
of it right now. After January 1961, a Mr.
Veto may no longer be in the White House.
This work goes on at some length to
quote from other eminent political sci-
entists, to bring out the picture of our
antiquated State legislatures.
Serious students of State government
tend to believe that reform of most State
legislatures is overdue.
In all the writings which deal with this
subject, going back over the past 20
years, writers from various viewpoints
and from various sections of the country
seem to agree on the same answer.
A fascinating article along this line is
"Inflation in Your Ballot Box," by Mr.
John Creecy, in which he takes a dif-
ferent viewpoint from the one that I had
grown up with and worked with. The
style is at variance from the tomes from
which I have been quoting. I hope Sell7
ators will like the change of pace, as I do.
He writes in Harpers for 1053:
As a city dweller, I'm becoming rather
piqued at my rural neighbors' stolid convic-
tion that I'm not fit to be trusted with a full
vote in matters of State government.
I'm from Michigan where Joe Smith, who
traps muskrats in the Keweenaw Peninsula,
has nine times as much representation in the
State senate, and three times as much in the
house, as his brother Jim, who moved to De-
troit a couple of years ago and got a job in
an auto plant.
Before you squander any sympathy on me
or Jim, allow me to point out that if you
live in a big city you're probably in pretty
much the same fix. In most States our coun-
try cousins have the legislature sewed up
tighter than Joe Smith's winter underwear
and seem to regard this as a natural and
socially desirable condition. In many cases
the framework of -representative democracy
with which the States began has been subtly
wrenched and prodded out of shape, the bet-
ter to protect the special interests of the
rural people. City dwellers pay an increas-
ingly major share of the taxes, but the bene-
fits they receive therefrom seem gaged by a
sort of State law of diminishing returns.
'URBAN "IMMORALITY"
Perhaps the most candid expositor of the
rural viewpoint in Michigan is State Senator
Alpheus P. Decker, of Deckerville (popula-
tion 719, including numerous Deckers). He
has argued that "it would be a crime to the
State of Michigan to give Detroit full,repre-
sentation on a population basis."
In seeking to prevent this misdeed he has
zealously circulated, among citizens ponder-
ing reapportionment, reprints of an article by
Roger W. Babson uttering the complaint
that "Large cities are the main sources of
poverty, gangsters, and immorality" and that
19149
"most big city voters are ignorant about
government and are controlled largely by
unscrupulous ward heelers."
On the other hand, the author concludes,
"rural people have much better character and
more time to think and read than do large
city people. * * * the votes of people in
small cities and rural communities should
count more than the vote of the ordinary
city man."
This statement, with? its apparent impli-
cation that full franchise might be permis-
sible for the extraordinary city man, ap-
pears rather on the daring side when con-
trasted with usual apportionment practice
as followed by our rustic lawgivers.
LEGISLATIVE REAPPORTIONMENT
Most legislatures are supposed to be re-
apportioned every few years on a population
basis. Actually this seldom gets clone, de-
spite great and continuing shifts from rural
to urban areas.
Of the 29 States whose constitutions re-
quire reapportionment after each decennial
census, only 8 have complied since 1950. Six-
teen have not compiled since 1940; 10 not
since 1930. Seven States have not been re-
apportioned in half a century.
Even where the constitution are obeyed the
city people are often deprived of an even
break by sly clauses foresightedly inserted by
the country slickers. Sometimes?as is Cali-
fornia, New York, and Pennsylvania?it is an
arbitrary limit on the amount of representa-
tion any one city or county can have. Some-
times?as in Michigan?it is the granting of
a seat to any county or group of counties
which can muster half the regular popula-
tion ratio.
Such gimmicks add up to a form of ballot
box inflation, which cuts the value of a vote
as effectively as monetary inflation cuts the
value of a dollar.
And if, as a desperate measure, the issue
is carried to the voters as it was in Michigan
last fall, it becomes cleat that the embattled
farmers still have a trick or two up their
sleeves to pull on the city voters.
THIS HAPPENED IN MICHIGAN
It also becomes disillusioningly clear that
full representation for city dwellers is the
last thing that some city dwellers want, and
that when the chips are down the farmers
are able to find powerful allies in the camp
of the enemy.
Wherever plans for balanced legisla-
tures have been proposed in many States
besides mine, the newspapers showered
them with abuse and took the side of the
rural-dominated legislatures. But in
many of those cases, after an educational
program, they always came around.
There are enough urban citizens Mich-
igan, not closely connected with top-level
business management, to have adopted the
plan which would have given us full repre-
sentation. If the fact that we failed to sup-
port it is not to be written down as a tri-
umph of the rural strategy of confusion, it
would seem we are entitled to be credited
with a high minded, philosophical renuncia-
tion of our selfish interests?an acceptance
of the arguments that we are not rightfully
entitled to equal representation.
Aren't we? What is there to these argu-
ments?
It was claimed that city voters are often
influenced by labor leaders, and it is true.
It was claimed that city voters are often
less well informed and less thoughtful about
the candidates and election issues than are
rural voters. This could be disputed on the
ground the city voter generally has more
candidates to select from, and less oppor-
tunity to know them.
But, assuming the claim to be valid?what
of it? Is the extent of our franchise to be
Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/05/20: CIA-RDP66B00403R000300080029-1
Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/05/20 : CIA-RDP66B00403R000300080029-1
19150 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
governed by the degree to which we can be
expected to vote wisely? Is a citizen's vote
to be cut in half or less because he is likely,
to vote Democratic, or Republican, or Vege-
tarian? Or because ,he belongs to the
United Auto Workers or the Detroit Board
of Commerce? And if so, who is to be the
arbiter of these qualifications?
It was claimed that area and socio-eco-
'nomic factors, rather than population,
should be the base at least one house of the
legislature, in order to provide the checks
and balances which are essential to good
government.
If the legislature were merep a business or
industrial council this might make a good
deal of sense. But it Is of course far more
than that. It deals with interests that
transcend area and economic classification.
If interests, rather than numbers of peo-
ple, are to be fairly represented, some defi-
nite formula would have to be found for do-
ing so. But how would you go about it?
Everybody has legislative interests and many
of them have no connection with the way in
which he makes his living.
It is true that the city taxpayer in States
such as Michigan, if given representational
equality, could outvote the country taxpayer.
And it may be true that rural interests
-would suffer. But I still can't see why this
entitles the rural minority to a majority
vote.
Obviously a fine solution for the problems
of any minority is for it to acquire a major-
ity voice in the Government. It is a solu-
tion that has been employed effectively in
many lands, in many centuries; but I do not
believe it is one to be thoughtfully endorsed
by many people in this century, in this land
where men are created free and equal.
*
Changing the rules to remove antiurban
bias will probably turn out to be a good deal
harder. Such a proposal would, of course,
have to be tailored to the individual State.
One generalization can be made. The pro-
? posal should be as simple as possible.
As rural people move to the cities, they
find they are no different than they were
when they lived in the rural areas, and
that they are just as intelligent, they can
figure out just as well how to vote, and
they jolly well want their votes to count.
With respect to the decay of State
governments, which has been referred to
in some of the other articles from which
I have quoted, my husband wrote in
Harper's magazine that State govern-
ment in America has fallen upon such
sorry days that a substantial body of
public opinion regards any ,natural re-
sources interests of the State as prac-
tically gone forever. Opponents of the
Eisenhower administration used the op-
probrious term "giveaway" on the as-
sumption that State governments lack
both the will and the capacity to hold
the people's heritage in escrow for the
next generation.
We in- the West remember, somewhat
to our sorrow, that we had to look to the
great populous areas of the East, espe-
cially to Pennsylvania and its Governor
Pinchot, to save our forests, which now
are the backbone of the great national
forest system, from the local politicians
and legislators who could not see the
broad national viewpoint, and who
moved into those forests and cut indis-
criminately until it was almost too late
to save some of the virgin timber.
There is now a constant fight in our
State to preserve our other natural re-
sources, until today, in 1964, the value
of the national forests has been estab-
lished; and now it is the recreational and
scenic beauties of our State which we
have to save from our own citizens.
The obvious alarm among campers,
sportsmen, fishermen, and botanists over
the transfer of some of these Federal
lands to our own State, supposedly so
righteous, so close to the people, can
mean only one thing. The people who
revel in the outdoors fear destruction-by
sawmills, and livestock operators of their
last tree and blade of grass. They be-
lieve that the State government should
replace the Federal Government *as the
custodian of our woodland reserves.
Several Senators have joined me in in-
troducing in the Senate bills for the crea-
tion of national seashore parks. Why
should we have to come our colleagues
to set aside these beauty areas of our
own States, in desperation to save them
from the encroachment of unrestrained
civilization?
One would think the asset?the tour-
ist-attracting qualities?of the Oregon
dunes would of itself induce the Gov-
ernor and the legislature to set stakes
around the dunes, to prevent their demo-
lition. But there is something about un-
willingness to confront the local gasoline
station operator and the local signboard
painter that makes us have to turn to the
Federal Government, so that these scenic
spots can be preserved for all the people.
I always like to think, when I am fight-
ing for such preservation in my own
State, that some taxi driver in Brooklyn,
N.Y., whose taxi will help pay for the
natural resource being preserved, takes
great pride in it, and that even though he
may never see it, his children may some
day have an opportunity to enjoy some
of America as it was a century ago.
Mr. President, in my summation and
conclusion, I believe I could quote from
no better authority than Anthony Lewis,
when writing in the Harvard Law Re-
view:
V. THE COURT SHOULD ACT
Unequal districts have been part of the
American political scene, as Mr. Justice
Frankfurter observed in Colegrove, for gen-
erations. Why, then, should the Federal
courts undertake at this time to deal with
the problem? The preliminary observation
may be made that no legitimate interests or
expectations have become settled as a result
of past judicial inaction. But there are af-
firmative reasons for intervention now by
the Federal courts.
First, the provisions of a Constitution
drawn with purposeful vagueness have
always been interpreted and enforced by the
Supreme Court in accordance with the
changing needs of government and society.
Interests which at one time received no ju-
dicial protection have been given that pro-
tection when their importance emerged. It
was almost 60 years, for example, before the
Supreme Court found any protection for free
speech in the 14th amendment.
The effects of malapportionment are
much graver today than they were a century
ago. In a day when the Federal Government
subsisted primarily on tariff revenues, un-
equal representation could be regarded as an
Insignificant evil; government itself has a
less significant impact on society. But when
the Federal and State Governments spend a
third of the national income, when they are
relied upon to regulate every aspect of a com-
plex industrial civilization, the consequen-
ces of unequal- representation are corre-
Augu-st 15?
spondingly more severe. The rapid growth of
our population and change in its character
make even more urgent the need for regular,
equitable adjustment of representation.
Second, in weighing the appropriateness of
judicial intervention, courts consider not
only the gravity of the evil assailed but the
unlikelihood of its correction by other
means.
As I earlier quoted from Mr. Justice
Clark:
This is the teaching of the Supreme Court's
tentative efforts to outline a modern phi-
losophy of judicial review. These efforts at
articulation began with the suggestion by
Mr. Justice Stone, in his footnote to Carolene
Products, that courts should be "more ex-
acting" in their view of restrictions on po-
litical liberties. Just before he went on the
Court, Robert H. Jackson commented:
"[W]hen the channels of opinion and of
peaceful persuasion are corrupted or clogged,
these political correctives ? can no longer be
relied on, and the democratic system is
threatened at its most vital point. In that
event the Court, by intervening, restores the
processes of democratic government; it does
not disrupt them. * * *
"[Al court which is governed by a sense of
self-restraint does not thereby become
paralyzed. It simply conserves its strength
to strike more telling blows in the cause of a
working democracy."
Particular formulations have been the sub-
ject of dispute, but there would seem to be
general agreement in the Supreme Court to-
day that what Mr. Justice Frankfurter has
called "the indispensable conditions of a free
society" deserve special judicial protection.
Perhaps the most useful conception sug-
gested so far is that the courts should be free
to step in when the political process provides
no inner check, as in the case of legislation
affecting interests which have no voice in the
legislature.
The Supreme Court has applied these prin-
ciples especially in the area of free speech.
If speech by a dissident minority is of suf-
ficient importance to the political health of
society to deserve special judicial protection,
surely there is greater warrant for interven-
tion by the courts when "the streams of leg-
islation * * * become poisoned at the
source." Of what use is the right of a minor-
ity?or a majority, as is often the case in
malapportioned districts?to apply persua-
sion if the very machinery of government
prevents political change?
Mr. President, I yield the floor.
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE
A message from the House of Repre-
sentatives, by Mr. Hackney, one of its
reading clerks, announced that the
House had passed the bill (S. 1006) to
amend the act of June 12, 1960, for the
correction of inequities in the construc-
tion of fishing vessels, and for other pur-
poses, with amendments, in which it re-
quested the concurrence of the Senate.
The message also announced that the
House had passed the bill (S. 3060) to
amend and extend the National Defense
Education Act of 1958 and to extend
Public Laws 815 and 874, 81st Congress
(federally affected areas) , with an
amendment, in which it requested the
concurrence of the Senate.
The message further announced that
the House had passed the following bills,
in which it requested the concurrence of
the Senate:
H.R. 2500. An act to equalize the treat-
ment of Reserves and Regulars in the pay-
ment of per diem;
Declassified and Approved For Release 2014/05/20: CIA-RDP66B00403R000300080029-1