CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-SENATE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000300110002-5
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: January 2, 2004
• Sequence Number: 2
• Publication Date: January 1, 1965
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Releasd 2004/02/04 CIA-RDP67B00446R000300110002-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE 1879
the situation, and that the only way to
accomplish the purpose is to give power
to Federal registrars to register voters to
finally break the iniquitous system that,
somehow or other, keeps people from ex-
ercising one, single, unquestionably cher-
ished American right-the right to vote.
1!1r. CLARK. Mr. President, yesterday
I had occasion to speak on the floor of
the Senate about the enormous growth of
public sentiment in support of voluntary
measures of population control, both in-
side, and outside the United States.
This morning's Wall Street Journal
carries on its front page a most enlight-
ening article, entitled "Birth-Control
Push: Federal, Local Agencies Begin To
Move Deeper Into Controversial Field-
Cities, Counties Open Over 680 Clinics-
United States Is Making Poverty Funds
Available-Raising a Storm in Milwau-
kee."
I ask unanimous consent that a copy
of the article which appeared in today's
Wall Street Journal may be printed in
the RECORD at this point in my remarks.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
BIRTH-CONTROL PUSH: FEDERAL, LOCAL AGEN-
CIES BEGIN To MOVE DEEPER INTO CONTRO-
VERSIAL FIELD-CITIES, COUNTIES OPEN
OVER 680 CLINICS-UNITED STATES IS MAK-
ING POVERTY FUNDS AVAILABLE-RAISING A
STORM III MILWAUKEE
(By Richard D. James)
CHICAGO.-State and local governments are
rapidly invading an area they once regarded
as strictly off limits and loaded with politi-
cal dynamite-birth control.
This week the Baltimore City Health De-
partment began operating five birth-control
clinics, providing both advice and contra-
ceptives, with $10,000 in city funds allocated
to carry the program through 1965. It's es-
timated the program will serve about 3,600
women this year.
Last year the California Board of Public
Health began urging county health depart-
ments to set up public birth-control pro-
grams. As a result, a dozen counties opened
such clinics in 1964, and another dozen are
expected to open them in the next 6 months,
says Dr. Leslie Corsa of the State health de-
partment.
These two efforts are typical of hundreds
scattered across the country. It's estimated
that cities and counties in 21 States now are
running more than 680 public birth-control
clinics, up from 410 clinics in only 11 States
a year ago. The number of mothers receiv-
ing help through these facilities jumped
sharply to 175,000 last year from 75,000 in
1963 and about 50,000 in 1960, says the
Planned Parenthood-World Population Coun-
cil.
FEDERAL EFFORT GROWS
Moving into the field, too, though at a
more cautious pace, is the Federal Govern-
ment. As part of the antipoverty war, it is
offering to pick up the tab for birth control
for the first time. Already one project has
Keen approved, and applications from three
other cities are pending. Corpus Christi,
TeX., last month was granted $8,500 in Fed-
eial funds to run birth-control clinics for
married women in poverty-stricken areas in-
habted by Negro and Spanish-speaking
'Wizens.
The growing role of governments in birth
ntrcl generally represents a major change
i polIcy. Though the dissemination of
birth-control information and devices has
not been legally barred in most communities,
the usual custom in government medical
programs has been either to ignore the mat-
ter completely or to refer patients to private
birth-control clinics. As a practical matter,
contraceptive aid was available in the main
only to women who could afford the services
of a private physician. It generally was de-
nied to women whose poverty and high repro-
ductive rate made them the most likely can-
didates for birth-control assistance.
The present effort by public agencies is
aimed mostly at promoting birth control
among welfare recipients and low-income
families. By spending tax money to run
clinics, buy and distribute contraceptives,
and supply information and counsel on fam-
ily planning for these people, public health
and welfare workers hope to save, much
greater sums now going to provide expensive
medical care for expectant mothers and to
support unwanted children who wind up on
relief rolls.
A FACTOR IN WELFARE RISE?
Public health and welfare authorities con-
tend the lack of access to modern, effective
child-spacing methods is an important rea-
son why more than half of the 7,800,000 per-
sons on relief in this country are mothers
and their dependent children. The lack of
birth-control information, it's argued, also
helps explain why this aid to dependent
children (ADO) relief group has soared to
more than 4 million persons from 2.2 million
in 1955. Total ADC payments now run over
$1.5 billion a year, compared with $639 mil-
lion in 1955.
Partly because authorities see it as a way
to reduce this huge burden, tax-supported
family planning is bound to continue grow-
ing, perhaps even more rapidly than to date.
"There is a lot of interest that hasn't yet
been put into action, so I'm sure this will be
a burgeoning affair," forecasts Dr. Johan
W. Eliot, assistant, professor of maternal and
child health at the University of Michigan.
Another reason Dr. Eliot and others see in-
creased activity ahead is what a high U.S.
Public Health official in Washington calls a
change In attitude on a very broad base to-
ward recognizing that family planning Is a
problem.
A PRESIDENTIAL STEP
Evidence of such a change cropped up just
a few weeks ago when President Johnson in
his state of the Union message warned of the
seriousness of the population explosion and
said the Federal Government had a respon-
sibility to do something about it. This is the
furthest any President has ever gone in pub-
licly throwing Federal support behind family
planning. Some have interpreted the Presi-
dent's comment . as foreshadowing further
steps by the Government into the birth-
control field.
The moves, if they come, are certain to be
slow and deliberate in holies that major op-
position from the Nation's 45 million Catho-
lics could thus be avoided. The Catholic
Church condemns the use of artificial birth-
control methods, including pills, as immoral.
The only legitimate natural means, in the
view of the church, is the rhythm technique,
which requires periodic continence.
Even here, however, signs of a changing
attitude on family planning are to be found.
A commission of Catholic bishops and cardi-
nals is studying the church's birth-control
stand and will report its recommendations
to the full session of the Vatican Council II
when It resumes in Rome this September.
The growth of public birth-control pro-
grams has been particularly vigorous of late.
Besides the new programs in Baltimore, Cali-
fornia, and elsewhere, activity is climbing
sharply in seven southern States which have
long-standing policies encouraging counties
to operate public birth-control clinics.
Alabama, for one, has sponsored a birth-
control program at public expense for the
past 20 years, and 63 of the State's 67 counties
operate clinics. However, their major growth
has come in just the past 4 years. During
this period the number of mothers receiving
family-planning assistance "has at least
doubled to 10,000 a year," says Dr. Harold H.
Klingler of the State health department.
Florida, which has favored publicly fi-
nanced birth control for 15 years, spent
$25,000 last year to supply contraceptives to
county projects, comparied with an outlay
of only ,,$1,000 in 1961, reports Dr. David L.
Crane, a State health official. The number of
Florida counties operating clinics now totals
61, compared with only 13 in 1962.
There's plenty of evidence to show that the
number and size of family planning programs
operated by public agencies will continue to
expand. At a February 17 meeting of the
Chicago Board of Health, Dr. Eric Oldberg,
board president, will introduce a resolution
which, if adopted, will pave the way for the
city to run birth-control clinics for the first
time. Dr. Oldberg is optimistic that the pro-
gram will be approved and that Mayor
Richard Daley will support it. If so, Dr. Old-
berg expects to have the clinics operating in
the city's 34-maternal-child health centers in
second quarter of this year.
Several State legislatures are weighing re-
quests for funds to expand new birth-control
programs. Oregon lawmakers are debating a
request for $135,000 by the State welfare de-
partment for the 2 years beginning July 1 so
it can buy contraceptives for up to 4,000 wel-
fare recipients. The State's first county
birth-control clinic opened in November,
and several others are expected to open soon,
says Dr. Carl Ashley of the State health
department.
TENNESSEE EFFORT EXPANDS
Tennessee Gov, Frank G. Clement has
asked his State's legislature to vote added
funds to finance a State health department
program calling for outlays of up to $35,000
in the coming 2 years for drugs and supplies
for county family-planning clinics. The
number of county programs in the State has
increased to 19 from just 1 a year ago, and
5 more will begin shortly, says Dr. R. H.
Hutcheson, State health commissioner.
Perhaps more important because of the na-
tional precedent involved, President Johnson
has asked Congress to appropriate $85,000 for
the Washington, D.C., Public Health Depart-
ment's birth-control program, more than
double the $25,000 Congress alloted to get
the program going last April.
One reason public officials are encouraged
to seek more birth-control money is the gen-
erally widespread support shown so far for
the Government projects. "The support has
been spectacular," says Detroit Health Com-
missioner Dr. John J. Hanlon in discussing
the city's month-old birth-control program.
"We have a Catholic mayor, and'I discussed
the program with him and he publicly took
a stand in favor of it."
Before Dr. Page Seekford, county medical
director in Charleston, W. Va., started a
birth-control clinic last July-the first in the
State-he sent questionnaires to the local
politicians and the medical society. "The
response was in favor of going ahead, and
we got editorial support from both local
newspapers too," he says.
ILLINOIS FUROR SUBSIDES
In other areas, once fierce opposition is
now crumbling. It appears, for instance, that
an Illinois legislative birth-control commis-
sion will recommend next month an exten-
sion of the State's birth-control program to
all of the 52,000 woman, wed or unwed, on
the State's welfare rolls who request help.
In 1963 Catholic criticism and controversy
over the morality of aiding the unwed forced
Gov. Otto Kerner to limit the program to
12,000 married women on relief.
Approved For Release 2004/02/04: CIA RDP67BO0446R000300110002-5
 1880
Approved For Release 2004/02/04: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300110002-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE February 3
"Personally, I still dislike the idea of giving
contraceptives to unmarried women," says
State Senator Morgan Finley, who led. the
anti-birth-control fight in the last legislative
session and who heads the commission.
"But after the hearings I find it actually
boils down to the lesser of two evils-giving
birth-control information to the unwed or
face the continuing explosion of ADC rolls."
But in at least one instance, a proposed
birth-control program has not been warmly
received. A Milwaukee request for $9.5,000
in Federal antipoverty money to run five
birth-control clinics has evoked a storm of
protest and created doubts as to whether the
Federal Office of Economic Opportunity will
approve the request. The agency has indi-
cated that local agreement on a program
would be needed before a project would be
approved.
The Milwaukee Common Council, the city's
governing body, is objecting to the plan. So
is a group of citizens called the Civic Aware
ness Committee, which is distributing a
statement urging opposition on medical
grounds, and so is another citizens' group
which is circulating petitions requesting Gov.
Warren P. Knowles, who has the final word,
to veto the plan. Catholic Archbishop Wil-
liam E. Cousins of the Milwaukee archdiocese,
whose orginal statement was widely inter-
preted as favoring the plan, has amended
that stand lately and now questions whether
there is either local consensus or need for
the program.
The expansion of public birth-control pro-
grams has provided a major new market for
drug companies selling contraceptives. It's
estimated that the industry this year will
sell $4 million worth of oral contraceptives,
measured at retail prices, to Government
birth-control programs, up from only $1.8
million last year. "This year the public
programs will be the fastest growing segment
of the whole oral contraceptive market,"
says William L. Searle, marketing vice presi-
dent of G. D. Searle, which manufactures
the contraceptive Enovid.
Though it's too early to tell definitely,
there are indications that public birth-con-
trol programs do effectively lower birth rates
among low-income families and thereby re-
duce relief spending. A State-run clinic
near Nashville, Tenn., figures it has pre-
vented at least 130 pregnancies among the
200 women served since the clinic opened
15 months ago. "We've had only 8 preg-
nancies, and the normal rate in this group
would have been 140 to 160," says Dr. Hutch-
eson, State health commissioner.
Mr. CLARK. I hope very much, as a
result of the breakthrougi which has oc-
curred in the field of population control
since the Senator from Alaska (Mr.
GRUENINGI, the Senator from Arkansas
[Mr. FULBRIGHT], and I began to speak
in the Senate with reference to this prob-
lem, we shall be able to take necessary
action both at home and abroad to bring
to every citizen of the world information
necessary to enable parents to regulate
the size of their families in accordance
with their own choice; and thus make
progress in preventing economic distress
which is already occurring, and which is
sure to increase as time goes on, result-
ing from the fact that hundreds of thou -
sands-indeed, millions-of unwanted
children are being born every year be-
cause their parents do not have the type
of information to enable them to engage
in the type of family planning they
articles by two law school professors ad-
vancing arguments for and against law-
enforcement wiretapping.
Being opposed to ' law-enforcement
wiretapping, I found the article by Prof.
Herman Schwartz most impressive.
Professor Schwartz was a member of the
Senate Antitrust Subcommittee staff be-
fore he joined the faculty of the law
school at the State University of New
York, at Buffalo.
Professor Schwartz points out with
clarity the grave dangers of law-enforce-
ment wiretapping. Believe all who read
the article will find it interesting and en-
lightening. "
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the article be printed at this
point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
REFLECTIONS IN OPPOSrrION
(By Herman Schwartz, associate professor of
law at the State University of New York at
Buffalo)
Wiretapping seems to raise one of the
sharpest conflicts between individual liberty
and effective law enforcement; specifically,
how can one fight organized crime without
unnecessarily invading the citizen's privacy?
Put this way, the problem seems resolvable
only by a compromise or "balanced" solu-
tion such as that currently being supported
by a few articulate prosecutors, a solution
which would permit a limited amount of
wiretapping, restricted to the investigation of
a few major crimes and closely supervised
and controlled by the courts in all but na-
tional security cases. Such a narrowly re-
stricted invasion of privacy seems a small
price to pay for smashing organized crime,
especially since, as is often noted, we are
dealing only with the privacy of criminals.
Unfortunately, this reasonable compromise
is no compromise at all. Physical and other
inherent factors virtually preclude any
meaningful limitations; as a matter of fact,
the invasion of privacy is far greater than
at first appears. The same factors preclude
effective supervision by the courts; indeed,
experience has shown that many courts do
not even try to exercise any control. More-
over, there are indications that the so-called
dilemma is more apparent than real, and
that wiretapping may not be quite as indis-
pensable as is often claimed.
x
The bedrock assumption on which the ease
for court-authorized wiretapping rests is
that the, invasion of privacy by means of a
wiretap is no different in quality or degree
from that produced by a conventional
search. Since judicial supervision is con-
sidered effective protection for the latter,
why treat wiretapping differently? This as-
sumption is completely unwarranted, for a
tap represents an immeasurably greater in-
trusion Into the privacy of not one but many
people.
Moreover, unlike the conventional search,
wiretapping is inherently unlimitable. The
invasion of a home under a search warrant
must and can be narrowly limited to a
specific place armed or occupied by a specific
person, and to specified items therein. A
policeman is not authorized to enter any
suspicious area simply in the hope of finding
something that may turn out to be useful.
Limitation and specificity are essential to a
valid search under a warrant, and there is no
inherent reason why these restrictions cannot
be observed and enforced. A wiretap, how-
ever, cannot possibly be kept within such
bounds. Whereas a conventional search is
limited to a specified place and item, a wire-
tap catches not only all the telephone con-
he is calling or is called, but also of many
other persons and conversations.
As to the suspect, all of his calls are over-
heard, no matter how intimate, irrelevant or
even legally or constitutionally privileged
they may be. Thus, in the Coplon case in
1950, the Government tapped conversations
between the defendant and her attorney
during the trial, thereby violating her con-
stitutional right to counsel. And a Queens
County, N.Y., district attorney has wire-
tapped in abortion cases, thereby eaves-
dropping on the statutorily privileged
physician-patient conversations.
A wiretap's intrusion does not stop with
the suspect and any other persons using his
phone. It also catches all persons who are
called by the suspect and by others using the
tapped phone as well as all those who call
any of these people on that phone, regardless
of the total irrelevance of any of these con-
versations to a valid police purpose. It has
been reported that in the course of tapping
a single telephone a police agent recorded
conversations involving at the other end the
Julliard School of Music, the Brooklyn Law
School, Consolidated Radio Artists, Western
Union, the Mercantile National Bank, several
restaurants, a drug store, a real estate com-
pany, many lawyers, a stationary store, a dry
cleaner, numerous bars, a garage, the Pru-
dential Insurance Co., a health club, the
Medical Bureau To Aid Spanish Democracy,
dentists, brokers, engineers, and a New York
police station.
Wiretapping's broad sweep Is most ap-
parent where public telephones are tapped.
Of 3,588 telephones tapped by New York
City police 1953-54, for example, 1,617--al-
most half-were public telephones. It is
inevitable that in these cases only an in-
finitesimal number of the intercepted calls
were made by the suspect or by anyone re-
motely connected with him. The same holds
true for taps on the phones of hotel switch-
boards, law firms and large corporations.
All such taps invade the privacy of thou-
sands of people-and once the tap is in,
nothing can be done to curb its operation.
The inherently dragnet nature of any tap
thus precludes any meaningful limitation.
Because of the inherently unlimited
scope of electronic eavesdropping, a
court cannot control wiretapping in the way
it controls more traditional searches. Its
power is also weakened because of the fact
that the tap must necessarily remain secret
and because of certain other realities of
practical jurisprudence.
The traditional search and seizure for
tangible items cannot be kept hidden, where-
as almost all wiretaps are likely to remain
secret. As New York District Attorney Frank
S. Hogan has pointed out, most taps are
installed not to obtain material for use in
court, where they might be subject to chal-
lenge, but solely as leads to other evidence.
The defendant must find out and prove
whether any of the evidence introduced
against him is in fact derived from wire-
tapping. According to a Yale Law Journal
study some years ago, Federal judges have
been very reluctant to permit such an in-
quiry, and the rule excluding wiretap evi-
dence from Federal courts has proved an
illusory safeguard. There is no reason to
think that defendants have been more suc-
cessful In tracing wiretap evidence in State
courts.
The small probability of a challenge to the
propriety of a wiretap order invariably makes
for lax judicial scrutiny of the application,
especially where judges are overworked or
otherwise unable to make a close study Of
papers. Some judges are, of course, mom
prosecution-minded than others, and prac,
ping is one of the most important ana wide-
ly practiced skills of any successful lcw
practice. This may be one reason why lew
York district attorneys assert that althogh
recently the Christian Cen li ed ve s io s f e s ct- w t c o 1 been require
raarovecuvor e ease V Ylf i i-F 6 0~ 0 93W1 8b - y
 Approved For Reease 2004/02/04 'CIA-RCOP67B00446R000300110002-5
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
modify their supporting papers, they have
never been denied a wiretap order.
Nor does experience with a court order sys-
tem provide any basis for faith. For sev-
eral years such systems have been in effect
in New York and a few other States. An
extensive 2-year study concluded that "the
experience of the statutes throughout the
country providing for judicial supervision
has been very bad. Law enforcement officers
have had no difficulty obtaining a court or-
der when they wanted it. Judges who are
"tough" are just bypassed. In addition,
police officers have shown complete impa-
tience with the court order system and more
often have'engaged in wiretapping without
a court order than with a court order."
Ix
But what of organized crime? Surely the
urgent need for wiretapping as an investi-
gative technique overrides the unavoidable
danger to individual liberty. After all, when
criminals can avail themselves of the most
modern devices, how can one restrict the
police to horse-and-buggy methods?
Such an argument has first-blush appeal
but little more. In the first place, many law
enforcement officials do not agree that wire-
tapping is indispensable. Among such offi-
cials are the present and former attorneys
general of California, Pennsylvania, Missouri,
Delaware, and New Mexico, as well as district
attorneys from Philadelphia and from Cook
County, Ill. In a - recent congressional sur-
vey only 13 out of 45 State attorneys general
"called for wiretapping authority; most ex-
pressed no opinion and 6 were flatly opposed.
On the Federal level enthusiasm for wire-
tapping is relatively new. Although FBI Di-
rector J. Edgar Hoover now appears con-
verted to the ranks of its champions, at
various times in the past he has called it
archaic, inefficient, and "a handicap to the
development of sound investigational tech-
niques." And in March.1961, early in his
term, former Attorney General Robert F.
Kennedy in an interview published in Look
expressed a strong aversion to wiretapping.
State legislative committee in California
and New Jersey have concluded, after hear-
ings and study, that the value of wiretapping
is far outweighed by the dangers to privacy.
Several State judges with years of experience
have come to the same conclusion; for ex-
ample, New York State Justice Samuel Hof-
stadter has declared that his record of wire-
tapping results "showed some arrests and
fewer convictions and then rarely, if ever, for
a heinous offense."
There is much evidence that Federal law
enforcement is quite effective without wire-
tapping. The Attorney General's report for
the past few years show great success in the
fight against organized crime, narcotics, and
gambling, even without this power. Indeed,
wiretapping is rarely mentioned in any Fed-
eral statements on law enforcement except
in testimony in support of wiretapping au-
thority.
Even in internal security matters it has
never been shown that wiretapping is neces-
sary or even useful. As Joseph L. Rauh, Jr.,
told the Senate Judiciary Committee in 1962:
"We can be sure that if this wiretapping
which has been going on since 1939 had pro-
duced effective results, they would have been
presented to the public in support of this
request for further wiretapping authority."
An even weaker case is made for State
wiretapping. Although many of the argu-
ments for its use are couched in States
rights terms (each State should be able to
protect itself against crime), the inextrica-
bly interstate nature of a telephone system
precludes such insularity. If the State of
Illinois attempts to safeguard the privacy of
her residents by banning wiretapping, her
efforts will be frustrated by New York's
lesser concern for the privacy of her resi-
dents, Each time a conversation takes place
between Chicago and New York, regardless
of who initiates it, what its purpose is, or
how intimate and confidential its nature,
that conversation will be subject to eaves-
dropping by New York police.
The primary justification for local wire-
tapping authority is again the need to fight
gambling and organized crime, especially
traffic in narcotics. There is no evidence,
however, that where it has been used wire-
tapping has been particularly effective in
combating those evils. New York has per-
mitted its officers to tap for years, yet there
is no evidence that it has coped with illegal
gambling any better than has Philadelphia
or Chicago, where all wiretapping is for-
bidden. Indeed, it is generally acknowl-
edged that the difficulty in fighting gambling
and organized vice-the other area where
wiretapping Is widely resorted to-is not
that the investigative techniques are in-
adequate; it is, rather, that the public is
indifferent and that the police have a tend-
ency to , be lax, inept, and not infrequently
corrupt.
Hardly a year goes by without some
startling revelations of police tieups with
gamblers. The most recent revelations con-
cern the New York police, where corruption
in connection with gambling may well have
gone very high indeed and may have in-
volved a telephone company employee.
There were similar revelations in 1950, and
there have been others in numerous other
cities since then. Befofe risking our privacy
to hands so readily tempted, must we not
insist that law enforcement authorities make
better use of such weapons as they already
have?
This is not to say that wiretapping is not
useful. But it is to say that a case for in-
dispensability has not been made-and in
a free society one does not give the police
drastic powers unless a need is conclusively
shown.
III
So far most of the discussion has focused
on telephone communication. This, however,
is only a small part of the problem. Wire-
tapping in itself is but one of many inves-
tigative techniques made possible by the
electronic revolution. We now have detecta-
phones which when placed next to a wall
pick up all the conversations in the adjacent
room; spike microphones that can be put in
contact with a pipe and so turn an entire
heating or plumbing system into one vast
microphone to pick up all conversations
throughout a house, from bedroom to base-
ment; parabolic microphones which require
no contact whatsoever in order to pick up
conversations hundreds of feet away.
Recent history has demonstrated that
legitimation of wiretapping leads to accept-
ance of such other devices as well. The New
York, Massachusetts, Oregon, and Nevada
statutes, originally limited to wiretapping,
now permit eavesdropping by all methods.
In 1961 Senator Kenneth Keating, of New
York, introduced a bill to permit States to
legalize not only wiretapping but all types of
electronic eavesdropping.
So far law enforcement of licals have not
been too reluctant to use these devices.
Among decisions of the past 10 years permit-
ting its use were a California case where
police installed a listening device in a sus-
pects' bedroom; a New York case in which a
jail-visiting room was "bugged" and conver-
sations between a prisoner and his lawyer
were overheard; and a District of Columbia
case where a hotel room was similarly
"bugged." There are of course many other
instances which did not reach the courts,
for the reasons earlier set forth.
Our society has much more sympathy for
the policeman trying to catch criminals than
for the individual trying to maintain an
enclave of privacy. Wiretapping and other
forms of electronic eavesdropping would con-
strict this enclave almost to the vanishing
point. As Senator PHILIP HART said in 1962:
1881
"Let's be sure that we don's make a move
which ultimately will produce a people that
never knew what privacy was [that] isn't
aware that they have lost anything."
ROA LISTS 30 REASONS AGAINST
LIQUIDATING RESERVES
Mr. YARBOROUGH. Mr. President,
Secretary McNamara's decision to elim-
inate the Army Reserve raises serious
questions about our national defense
posture which must be thoroughly ex-
plored by Congress. Any proposal as
far reaching as this one cannot be ac-
cepted by Congress without thorough in-
vestigation and establishment of the
f acts.
Many of the arguments which can be
raised against the Secretary's decision
are contained in an article appearing at
page 12, in the February 1965 issue of
the Reserve Officers Association maga-
zine, the Officer. The charges made by
the ROA are weighty indeed, and merit
Congress' close attention.
I ask unanimous consent that the ar-
ticle entitled "Thirty Reasons (There
Are More) Give Basis for Grassroots
Revolt Against Plan," be printed at this
point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
THIRTY REASONS (THERE ARE MORE) GIVE
BASIS FOR GRASSROOTS REVOLT AGAINST PLAN
ROA has sparked a grassroots drive to de-
feat the McNamara plan to destroy the Re-
serves with a brief citing 30 principal argu-
ments.
The paper went to ROA leaders throughout
the Nation, who were supplied the ammuni-
tion for developing local understanding of
the issues raised about national security.
For the benefit of all readers of the Of-
ficer, this ROA staff paper is presented here-
with in full:
1. The proposal will weaken the United
States militarily, reducing the mobilization
base by 21 divisions and discarding 150,000
trained, able-bodied reservists.
2. The plan, based on a directed decision,
was conceived in secret, studied furtively in
a limited circle which knows little about the
Reserve components, and was adopted with-
out the advice or knowledge of the Army's
responsible professional military staff, the
Army Committee on Reserve Policy, or the
Congress of the United States and its com-
mittees.
3. The plan was presented after the fact
to the Reserve Forces Policy Board, estab-
lished by law as "principal policy adviser to
the Secretary of Defense" on Reserve matters,
and was rejected by this Board.
4. Only the Congress of the United States
can make major changes in the statutory
structure and policy of the military. Yet this
decision was made before the national elec-
tion and the decision was announced after
the election and while Congress was not in
session.
5. Historically, it has been proved that
control and command of all military forces
committed to the defense of the Nation must
rest with the armed services. To propose the
fragmentation of this authority among the
52 National Guard jurisdictions will result in
organizational chaos, deterioration of combat
readiness, and the erosion of every purpose of
these men and weapons.
6. This so-called realinement places the
responsibility for military training upon the
Governors of the several States. Organiza-
tion of the National Guard does not place
authority where responsibility rests. None
of the States and territorial Governors has
I
Approved For Release 2004/02/04: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300110002-5
 Approved For Release 2004/02/04: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300110002-5
1882 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
any direct responsibility for national se-
curity; none is answerable to the National
Government. Can anyone honestly believe
that the Governors of the States, through
their political appointees, can do a better
job of training military forces than the
professionals of the Regular Forces?
7. The State militia, as now constituted,
provides ample force for the Governors to
deal with disasters and riots in their States;
to add to the size of these forces at the pres-
ent time defies logic. What possible justifi-
cation is there for State Governors to com-
mand units equipped with high-powered
atomic cannons, high-performance and long-
range aircraft, and the heavy armor with
which our modern divisions are equipped?
TWO RESERVE ELEMENTS REQUIRED
8. There is historic and practical legal
basis for two separate elements in the Re-
serve Forces. Congress established the Na-
tional Guard with two functions, State and
Federal, but the State function--action on
strikes, insurrections, and emergencies--is
primary; its Federal function secondary. Re-
serves have the exclusive function of aug-
menting the Regular Forces in emergencies.
A Federal Reserve supported, trained, and
controlled by the service concerned is vital
to national survival.
9. Reserve units are inherently more flexi-
ble and responsive than Guard units. Trans-
fer of units and transfer of individuals,
weapons, and equipment between units in
different States presents no problem in the
Reserve. Nor do activations and inactiva-
tions among Reserve units as requirements
change. All of these actions run into almost
insurmountable obstacles in the National
Guard.
10. There is a great problem in connection
with the obligated Reservists who comprise
50 percent of the strength of many Reserve
units, if their units are transferred to the
State guard. Since a State oath or enlist-
ment is required, this would provide an ex-
cellent opportunity for all of them to abro-
gate their obligation and escape service.
Even thoughthey might be required to train
with the guard unit, they will not belong to
the unit and cannot be called up by the
Governor for State functions. The unit, in
reality, would be at half-strength.
11. The decision does not take into account
the personnel composition of the compo-
nent involved. The facts are that the Re-
serve is manned with a hard core of active-
duty-experienced noncommissioned officers
and ROTC-trained company officers. On the
other hand, the National Guard is predomi-
nantly manned with superficially trained
enlisted personnel, with no previous active-
duty military experience, who cannot pos-
sibly be effective without extensive post-
mobilization training.
12. Any decision to transfer all units to
the National Guard reduces the entire Re-
serve to a stagnant pool. This means that
highly trained active-duty-experienced of-
ficers and men will be denied continuing
training, but will be subject to callup in a
mobilization emergency and condemned to
slaughter in early combat. Such a system
turns the clock back 40 years, actually de-
stroys the military services' most valuable
backup asset and reverts to a system in-
ferior even to that of pre-World War II.
13. The 1961 callup provided an eloquent
example. Three divisions were called up;
one Reserve division and two National Guard
divisions. The Reserve division mobilized
quickly, relieved a Regular Army division for
combat availability and performed quietly
and competently with high morale during the
entire period.
The National Guard divisions were not
self-sufficient and had to be reinforced by
Army Reserve "fillers" who had not been
drilling. They had been left dormant in a
pool. This element of the Army Reserve was
integrated into the National Guard. divisions
under the leadership of the National Guard
officers. They found conditions so intoler-
able as to cause them to reach a point of
near rebellion; some actually picketed while
on active duty.
The Secretary of Defense's proposal will
destroy the element of the Army Reserve that
performed so well and turn the entire Army
Reserve into a dormant pool of the type
found to be so unready.
LAW REQUIRES RESERVE TRAINING
14. The law of the land says:
"Whenever units or members of the Re-
serve components are ordered to active duty
(other than for training) during a period of
partial mobilization, the Secretary concerned
shall continue to maintain mobilization
forces by planning and. budgeting for the
continued organization and training of the
Reserve components not mobilized, and make
the fullest practicable use of the Federal fa-
cilities vacated by mobilized units, con-
sistent with approved joint mobilization
plans" (title 10, United States Code, see.
276(a)).
15. The Reserves themselves were not
granted their "day in court" on this matter,
although leaders of the National Guard
actually helped to draft the, decision and
to join In the campaign to '`sell It" to the
public.
16. The Reserve components represent
a prudent and wise investment by the
American taxpayers, with hundreds of thou-
sands of officers and men organized in a mod-
ern system, carefully worked out under laws
enacted on the basis of long experience.
This system of laws keeps modern the Re-
serves of the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marine
Corps, and Coast Guard, with qualifications
the same as for the active services. The op-
eration of these laws-not dicta from the
Pentagon-is the basis of our system of na-
tional security.
17. Service in the Reserve forces is a re-
quirement for national defense, not some
sort of picnic. - The philosophy cited as the
basis for this decision to abolish the Re-
serves is fallacious, and reflects a failure
to recognize what Congressfound to betrue
subsequent to World War II and Korea, that
men and women must be persuaded that
their services in the citizen-reservist forces
are needed, and are appreciated by the Na-
tion's leadership. Denunciation of their
records does great harm to the cause of na-
tional defense.
18. During World War II, the victorious
U.S. Army was composed of: 95 percent citi-
zen-soldiers, 2 percent Regular Army, and 3
percent National Guard. This is our future
reliance. The experienced elements must
not be discarded.
19. The late President Kennedy warned the
people of this Nation (as has-every other en-
lightened leader in modern times) that free
and open debate on all issues is essential
to maintenance of freedom in this free re-
public. Dissent in the Pentagon already has
ended. This must not be extended through-
out the citizenry.
20. While it is obvious that, if the Penta-
gon spends the $150 million to be saved on
Reserve personnel to equip the National
Guard, the claim that the taxpayers will save
$150 million annually is not true. On the
other hand, if the Defense Department's aim
is to save money-it can lop off three Active
Army divisions and put a billion dollars an
the Reserves, or it can save $50 billion by
simply disbanding.
21. How do you "increase the combat
readiness of our Ready Reserve Forces" by
eliminating- the 150,000 trained men and 21
divisions? The Secretary of Defense himself
testified to the Nation's specific need for
them earlier this year, and very recently the
Chief of the Arley Reserve components
claimed they represent minimal needs.
February 3
"WHAT'S THE HURRY?"
22. The rarely seen haste to put this deci-
sion into effect in itself should suggest cau-
tion. Careful investigation should be made
of the entire Reserve structure to avoid
adoption of this hasty and radical decision
which has only one goal, destruction of the
Army Reserve.
23. The American people have a right to
know what political considerations entered
into this decision.
24. If another general war should occur,
we all know who would be ordered Into uni-
form first. To repeat an ageless slogan, "The
Reserves ask only the right to be ready."
25. This decision not only reflects unjus-
tifiably upon the Reserves, it sets aside the
basic philosophy of this Nation that every
citizen has a responsibility for national de-
fense, and must be encouraged in every way
to make this commitment.
26. This proposed abolishment of the Army
Reserve has been interpreted in many places
as the first step toward complete elimination
of our Armed Forces Reserve. Throughout
all history civilizations which have aban-
doned the citizenship responsibility for de-
fense and depended solely on professional
forces (mercenaries) completely divorced
from the mainstream of society, have been
destroyed by their enemies.
27. President Lyndon B. Johnson stated in
a letter dated October 24, 1964, addressed to
all members of the Army Reserve:
"Defense of our great Nation is every Airier-
loan's business. We rely heavily on the Army
Reserve as a significant part of our country's
defense team. * * *
"I am confident that the Nation can rely
upon the Army Reserve today and In the
future as it has so often in the past." (From
the Army Reserve magazine.)
(The decision to abolish the Reserve was
forwarded to the Army Secretary on Octo-
ber 6.)
28. Deputy Secretary of Defense Vance
said recently:
"Under the concept of flexible response,
the Nation's Reserve components assume a
degree of importance unsurpassed at any
time in our history * * + It is opposite
from the truth to say that America's Reserve
components have lost their usefulness in
this era of nuclear deterrence." (Address to
ROA Fort Monroe chapter, July 1964.)
PERSHING'S WARNING
29. General of the Armies John J. Pershing,
before the let ROA convention in 1922 said:
"Of special importance is a stimulus in the
organization of Reserve units throughout the
Nation. Before the war, there was no con-
ception of such a society. But the war
brought home to us in a striking manner
the advisability of * * * precaution. The
experience has awakened the country so that
a resolve has gone forth embodied in the law
of 1920 (National Defense Act of 1920 setting
up an organized Reserve) that never again
shall our untrained boys be compelled to
serve their country on the battlefield under
leadership of new officers with practically no
conception of their duties and responsibili-
ties."
30. Gen. Curtis E. LeMay, Chief of Staff of
the Air Force, stated:
"During the buildup of the Cuba crisis,
the argument was frequently heard through-
out the Pentagon that we should call up the
Reserves, so that they would have time to
really get themselves ready. I expressed the
opinion that the Air Reserve Forces were
ready, and that they should not be called
until they were actually needed. - On
the night of Saturday, October 27, 1962, the
order went out from the Pentagon at 2100
hours to selected Air Force Reserve units.
At 0900 hours the next morning, these units
were reported 93 percent manned, with an
optimum In-commission rate on aircraft at
75 percent. At the 30-hour mark, the Secre-
Approved For Release 2004/02/04: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300110002-5