CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000300160005-7
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 10
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: September 25, 2003
• Sequence Number: 5
• Publication Date: April 6, 1965
• Content Type: OPEN

iyril 6, 1965
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300160005-7
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENAtE
H.R. 2362
Amendments intended to be proposed by
ir. JAvrrs (for himself, Mr. CASE and Mr.
)omnsfxcx) to H.R. 2362, a bill to strengthen
,nd improve educational quality and edu-
mtional opportunities in the Nation's ele-
mentary and secondary schools:
On page 8, beginning with line 3, strike out
all through line 8, and insert in lieu thereof
the following:
"(c) For the purpose of this section?
"(1) for the fiscal year ending June 30,
1966, and each of the two succeeding fiscal
years, the 'Federal percentage' am'. the 'low-
income factor' shall be 50 per centum and
$2,000, respectively, and
"(2) for each of such two succeeding fiscal
years, an additional amount shall be deter-
mined using a 'Federal percentage' of 25 per
centum and a 'low-income factor' of $3,000
but more than $2,000 (excluding children
counted under section 203(a) (2) (B)), and
added to the basic grant, if (A) such amount
is matched by State or local funds, or both,
to be used for the same purpose as such
basic grant and (B) at the option of the
State educational agency of each State, such
agency elects to receive for such year the
amount determined under this clause (2) in
lieu of a special incentive grant pursuant to
section 204.
-Any amount contributed by a State for the
purpose of clause (2) shall be in addition to
regular payments of State aid made by such
State, and any amount made available by a
local educational agency for the purpose of
such clause with respect to any fiscal year
shall represent an increase in such year in
current expenditures of local funds for ele-
mentary and secondary school education by
such agency over the amount of such ex-
penditures in the previous fiscal year."
On page 9, line 16, after "shall" insert ", if
no election has, been made to receive the
amount determined pursuant to section 203
(c) (2) in lieu thereof,".
On page 10, line 2, after "shall" insert
", if no election has been made to receive the
amount determined pursuant to section 203
(c) (2) in lieu thereof,".
ADDITIONAL COSPONSORS OF BILLS
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, on
March 8, 1965, I introduced a bili (S.
1412) for the relief of military and civil-
ian personnel for losses sustained to
property by fire on August 17, 1963, while
stored in commercial warehouses in Alex-
andria, Va.
At the next printing of this bill, I ask
unanimous consent that the name of the
junior Senator from Arkansas [Mr. Fur,
BRIGHT] be added as a cosponsor.
The PRESIDING OloriCER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
? Mr. MAGNTJSON. Mr. President, at
Its next printing, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the Wine of the junior Senator
from New Jersey [Mr. WILLIAMS], the
name of the junior Senator from Penn-
sylvania [Mr. &car], and the name of
the junior Senator from Maryland [Mr.
TYDINGS] be added as cosponsors of S.
1588 to authorize the Secretary of Com-
merce to undertake research and develop-
Ment in high-speed ground transporta-
tion, and for other purposes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE
A message from the House of Repre-
sentatives, by Mr. Bartlett, one of its
reading clerks, announced that the House
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300160005-7
had disagreed to the amendments of the
Senate to the bill (H.R. 5721) to amend
the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1938,
as amended, to provide for acreage-
poundage marketing quotas for tobacco,
to amend the tobacco price-support pro-
visions of the Agricultural Act of 1949,
as amended, and for other purposes;
asked a conference with the Senate on
the disagreeing votes of the two Houses
thereon, and that Mr. 000LEY, Mr. Mc-
MILLAN, Mr. ABBITT, Mr. STUBBLEFIELD,
Mr. DAGUE, and Mr. LATTA were appointed
managers on the part of the House at the
conference.
ADDRESSES, EDITORIALS, ARTI-
CLES, ETC., PRINTED IN THE
APPENDIX
On request, and by unanimous con-
sent, addresses, editorials, articles, etc.,
were ordered to be printed in the Appen-
dix, as follows:
By Mr. HAYDEN:
Article entitled "Legislators' Policy State-
ment on Highway Traffic Safety."
By Mr. MAGNUSON:
Statement by Hon. CHARLES MOON, Rep-
resentative, State of Washington, relating to
water plan study.
Editorial published in the Seattle Times
on February 28, 1965, entitled "Pacific Fish-
eries Competition."
Designation of March 19 as Aviation Day
by the Seattle Chamber of Commerce.
By Mr. CHURCH:
Article entitled "April a Big Month for
Idaho Author," by Carl E. Hayden, pub-
lished in the Salt Lake City Tribune, issue
of March 9, relating to COI. Glenn Balch and
his authorship of books on the West.
Mr. MANSPLEJLD. Mr. President, I
suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The Chief Clerk proceeded to call the
roll.
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for the
quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
THE ADMINISTRATION SHOULD
SPELL OUT PRE UISITES FOR
AN ACCEPT AL SET-
. TLEMENT I
Mr. CHURCH. Tr. President. I
have prepared, for delivery this week, an
extended address on the subject of Viet-
nam. In this address, I intend to reiter-
ate the plea I made in the Senate on
February 17 for a negotiated settlement
of the war in southeast Asia. I also in-
tend to emphasize my belief that if our
carrot-and-stick strategy is to succeed in
bringing Hanoi to the conference table
on acceptable terms, it is not enough to
brandish the stick only. It is equally
important to show the carrot.
Finally, I intend to emphasize the
necessity for breaking the diplomatic
deadlock?first you withdraw, then we
will talk?that finds poth sides, in effect,
demanding the surrender of the other as
the price for negotiations.
The President has just disclosed that
he will make a major speech on Vietnam
in Baltimore tomorrow evening. This
will be a policy statement of great im-
6823
portance. -Accordingly, I ' shall defer,
any statement of my own until Thins=
day, following the President's address to
the Nation.
However, in the meantime, I should
like to call the attention of the Senate to
the exceptionally fine Walter Lippmann
column, published in the Washington
Post this morning. In it, Lippmann
asks for an explanation of why the ad-
ministration has thus far neglected to
adequately spell out the prerequisites
for an acceptable political settlement in
Vietnam. He writes:
We have never had, at least so far as I
know, any straightforward explanation of
why the administration persists in keeping
its war aiins uncertain. The crucial uncer-
tainty is Whether or not the administration
intends to impose as yet undefined condi-
tions which must be met before it will agree
to a cease-fire and the beginning of negotia-
tions for an armistice.
This uncertainty has seemed to many who
are much concerned a deliberate tactic, de-
signed to make the Hanoi government sue
for peace before it learns the terms of the
peace.
Lippmann points out that it would be
easy to put an end to the uncertainty.
I agree. I believe, moreover, that this is
the missing ingredient which must be
supplied if we are to have any prospect
of soon reaching the conference table.
I strongly commend the column to my
colleagues, and ask unanimous consent
that it may 'appear at this point in the
RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
IS UNCERTAINTY NECESSARY?
(By Walter Lippmann)
We have never had, at least so far as I
know, any straightforward explanation of
why the administration persists in keeping
its war aims uncertain. The crucial un-
certainty is whether or not the administra-
tion intends to impose as yet undefined con-
ditions which must be met before it will
agree to a cease-fire and the beginning of
negotiations for an armistice.
This uncertainty has seemed to many who
are much concerned a deliberate tactic, de-
signed to make the Hanoi government sue
for peace before it learns the terms of the
peace. That this is the tactic of the ad-
ministration is the opinion, for example, of
Senator JOHN SHERMAN COOPER, a lawyer
and judge whose opinion in a matter of this
kind carries weight. This is also the opin-
ion of 17 nonalined governments which
have just addressed an appeal to the prin-
cipal powers. It is, as a matter of fact, the
very general opinion throughout the world,
and it is a principal reason why, even among
our closest allies, there are deep misgivings
about us.
Yet it would be easy to put an end to the
uncertainty. The administration's stock
formula is that Hanoi must show a willing-
ness to "leave its neighbors alone." This is a
quite ambiguous formula. It seems to say
that there can be no cease-fire, no end, that
Is to say, to the Vietcong terrorism in South
Vietnam and to the American bombing in
North Vietnam, until Hanoi does?does what?
Nobody knows what. Secretary Rusk never
says what. And supposing that Hanoi did
show a willingness to "leave its neighbors
alone," how would the administration know
whether to believe Hanoi, or how long to be-
lieve it?
This fundamental vagueness and impre-
cision is a wholly different thing from an un-
conditional cease-fire. There are indica-
tions that the administration may be think-
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300160005-7
6824 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE April 6, 19t
tug of clarifying its position. But the in-
dications are ambiguous. On Sunday eve-
'zaftig on '"Meet the Press," Mr. McGeorge
Bundy allowed that, "I didn't say anything
about specific preconditions." It is not dear
to me from studying the text whether there
are no preconditions or whether Mr. Bundy,
like Mr. Rusk, would not spell out the pre-
conditions.
We are told that there are no signs from
Hanoi that it wants a cease-fire followed by
talks. To insist on this is to labor the ob-
vious and it is beside the point. Considering
the military situation in South Vietnam, it
would be surprising indeed if Hanoi did not
think or at least say, that it was in sight
of a smashing victory. There can be no guar-
antee that if we decided to call for an un-
conditional cease-fire, that there would then
be one. .
The consequences of a. misconceived and
mismanaged war cannot be erased easily or
cheaply. But it is more important that we
save what can be saved and strengthen our
position for the future which is complicated
and entangled. The essential diplomatic
material must be provided without which our
allies cannot proceed to play their part in
saving the peace. Nor can the Soviet Union,
nor the nonalined nations, nor the Holy See,
nor the Secretary General of the United
Nations.
If the administration clarifies its position
on a cease-fire, it will be taking the first in-
dispensable step toward emerging from our
present near isolation in southeast Asia into
what could become membership in a great
diplomatic coalition for peace and order.
In addition to this specific and indispensa-
ble correction of our diplomatic stance, we
can improve our position in the war by
spelling out?in general terms publicly, more
specifically through private diplomatic chan-
nels?the nature of the overall settlement in
southeast Asia which we would support.
These are the "carrots" of a peace offensive,
and in his statement of March 25 the Presi-
dent made a sketchy beginning along this
line.
A diplomatic action on a sufficient scale to
produce some results will have to include
indications?through private channels, say
of the Soviet Union and of France?of what
kind of government might be set up in Sal-
gOn, and of the possible relations between
North and South Vietnam which, according
to the Geneva agreements of 1954, are not
tWo sovereign nations but two zones of one
sovereign nation.
Almost certainly some such political un-
derstandings as these are indispensable to
the liquidation of the war. The juicier car-
rots of a large south Asian economic devel-
opment are most desirable and talking, about
them will do good. But we must remember
that on both sides men are dying for what
they regard as inalienable political rights,
and it is to that that our diplomatists must
first address their minds.
THE PROPOSED CONSERVATION
CUTS
Mr. HRUSKA. Mr. President., this
week the Senate Agriculture Appropria-
tions Subcommittee begins its annual re-
view of the justifications supinitted by
the Department of Agriculture for the
coming fiscal year. They contain many
important items, I3ut much attention will
be centered around a proposed cut of
$100 million in the agricultural con-
servation program and a $20 million cut
for the Soil Conservation Service.
The agricultural conservation pro-
gram cut is a direct but slash while
the Soil Conservation mice cutback
will be through the "back door" in that
the administration proposes to establish
a new technical assistance "revolving
fund." The new fund, if set up, will shift
up to 50 percent of the cost of the serv-
ices of Federal soil technicians and en-
gineers to the already hard-pressed
farmer, In effect, it will amount to at
least a $20 million cut.
The so-called revolving fund is addi-
tionally noxious since It fails to recognize
the contributions already being made
by farmers and county and State gov-
ernments to these programs. In Nebras-
ka alone it could mean increased costs to
the farmers of approximately $500,000.
This would be on top of the $1.5 million
in conservation cost sharing already be-
ing spent by our farmers, as my col-
league, from Nebraska, Senator CURTIS,
has previously stated on the Senate floor.
These are additional costs to be heaped
on the hard-pressed farmer who has
been caught in the cost-price squeeze as
never before.
These two programs have been on
the books for 30 years. During that time
they have been widely accepted by farm-
ers and have advanced the objectives of
conserving our natural resources as well
as making a substantial and continuing
contribution to our farm economy.
In my State of Nebraska, the agricul-
tural conservation program and SCS
programs have achieved great success.
In fact, the State ranks second in total
participation in the programs. However,
the work has just really begun. A high
official of the Department of Agriculture
recently estimated that in Nebraska only
about 13 percent of the job has been done
to date. This estimate is founded on
necessary and practical conservation ob-
jectives. These objectives are long
range, as should be the planning for all
sound conservation programs. It is a
kind of effort that is not suited for crash
projects or quick starts or stops. It needs
a steady, deliberate pace of operations so
that the landowners and operators, the
local, State, and Federal Government of-
ficials concerned with the programs can
proceed in an orderly fashion with their
planning and activities to achieve those
goals.
Now the Johnson administration
eomes forth and suggests a 40-percent cut
In the SCS budget for a single year.
Such a slash is irresponsible at the very
least and certainly not keeping good
faith with the farmers and State and
local governments who have invested
substantial amounts of time, effort, and
money in this important task.
There are many of us, on both sides
of the aisle who will oppose these reck-
less cuts. There are many of us who are
wondering if this is what the so-called
Great Society has in store for our
farmers.
My information is that the cuts were
imposed by the Bureau of the Budget
below the level of the original requests
submitted by the Department of Agri-
culture. This is another example of
budgeteers making farm policy, a duty
which should be enjoined upon the De-
partment of Agriculture rather than
upon those who would seek to do
things solely from the standpoint of
reducing appropriations in an area
where the uses have been clemoi
stntted and where they are soura
In order to make them available for
and larger areas. Perhaps this propose
is a logical extension of the kind o.
thinking that led Kermit Gordon, the Di-
rector of the I3ureau, to the conclusion in
his January article in Saturday Review
that there is no future on the farm for
21/2 million of our 31/2 million farmers.
This Senator rejects the spurious
thinking that led to the proposed cuts.
I shall do all that I can to see that the
funds are restored.
Mr. President, Mr. Gene Kemper,
editor of the Alliance Daily Times-
Herald, of Alliance, Nebr., has editorial-
ized on the proposed cuts very clearly
and forcefully in the March 30 edition of
his newspaper. I ask unanimous consent
that the article be placed in the RECORD
at this point.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
CUTTTNG ACP AND SCS Now WOULD BE
AG FOLLY
One only has to watch the Times-Herild's
farm page each Saturday to realize how
many rural people hereabouts are taking ad-
vantage of conservation services and prac-
tices offered by governmental agencies.
Farmers and ranchers have taken ad' art-
tags of the agriculture conservation program
to build terraces, ponds, windbreaks, and
otherwise prevent a return of the "dirty
thirties." The Government pays half and
the landowner half. An additional Govern-
ment service here is technical advice pro-
vided free by the Soil Conservation Service
(SOS). Surveys and other help from this
source have encouraged many a landowner
to improve his acreage and increase its 2ro-
ductiveness.
Now comes the Federal Government, which
is doing these things on the cuff in other
parts of the world, wanting to cut down on
the conservation program at home. The
Johnson administration is recommending to
Congress a $100 million cut in the agricul-
ture conservation program budget and a $20
million cut in the SCS technical assistance
program. The suggestion is made that land-
owners pay the Government for this SCS
help.
The entire recommendation is inconsis1;ent
at this time when efforts started in the
1930's are starting to really pay off. Ant at
the very moment when new programs are
being started to preserve natural resources
and beautify the Nation.
SCS was born in 1935. It has been a most
important long-range soil resource program.
The form of assistance provided is technical '
to make soil surveys and investigations, to
plan balanced use and conservation measures
designed to meet the need and land capa-
bilities of individual farms and areas, and to
draft designs and specifications and to fur-
nish supervision when conservation plans
for a farm or area are being carried out.
The agriculture conservation program was
also established in 1935, and under It the
Government pays farmers about 50 pereent
of the costs of carrying out soil conserving
practices. Through it serious soil depletion
and erosion problems have been corrected.
These programs have been supplemented
over the years by watershed protection and
flood prevention programs, by a soil bank
program, by the Great Plains Conserve tion
Act of 1956 under which a necessary effort to
fight erosion was mounted.
The 88th Congress, which President Jc hn-
son has called "the greatest conserve tion
Congress in our entire history," passed more
than 30 conservation measures including the
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300160005-7
April 6, 1965
shall welcome to our shores is unjust and
unworkable. When, 40 years ago, Con-
gress adopted the national origins quota
system, it was in effect declaring that
Immigrants from one country are pre-
ferred to immigrants from another. The
clear implication is that the quality of
a human being is dependent ?upon his
place of birth.
,To my mind, no more obnoxious, racist
idea has ever been incorporated into the
statUte books of the United States. The
inevitable result is a system which prac-
tices the most vicious kind of discrimi-
nation. Out of an annual overall im-
migration quota of 156,700. The United
Kingdom, Germany, and the Scanda-
naVian countries are alloted nearly two-
thirds of the places. Greece, Italy, and
Poland, on the other hand, account for
less than one-tenth of all quota immi-
grants. As a result, some countries have
waiting lists of qualified applicants that
will take years to process while others
use only a small portion of their annual
quota. Our present immigration policy
has been designed with a view to exclude
certain types or groups of people.
No one can 'argue ivith the concept
that Congress must regulate the flow of
immigration so as to protect the Nation's
econonly, health, 'and morals. We cer-
tainly do have a responsibility to set
rigorous-standards that will deny entry
to persons Who would not make desira-
ble citizens. But; the qualities we seek
have nothing to do with national origin.
Under the present law, however, Amer-
icans of southern and eastern European
extraction are told that more of their
kind are neither wanted or needed.
Their contributions to this country's de-
volopment and their ,nit claims to equal
treatment under the law are ignored.
? It seems strange to me that at a time
when the Congress is taking vigorous ac-
tion to insure that no -American will be
denied their full privilege of citizenship
because of race, we still maintain an im-
migration Policy'whCh reIegatei millions
of other Americans fa-second:Class citi-
zenship because of national origin.
The paradox is heightened by the al-
most universally agreed-upon fact that
the national origin quota system has not
worked in practice. Aside from being
unjust and discriminatory, it fails to
tonte to grips with the realities of the
modern world.
Time and again, Congress has been
forced to compensate for the inade-
quacies of the present system by passing
special immigration laws. In recent
years, over 60,000 quota spots have been
going unused annually. At the same
time, increasing numbers of special non-
quota immigrants have been admitted so
that our total annual immigration is run-
ning nearly twice what the quota system
is supposed to allow. Of this total only
about a third has actually been con-
trolled by the !quota system. All of
which clearly demonstrates the urgent
need for a tlioroUgh. overhauL of the
Approved For Release 2003/10/10; CIA-RDP67B00446R0003001600-05-7
CONGRESSIONAL' RECORD ? HOUSE
whole system.
There are a variety of other ways in
which the present immigration system
works to the detriment of our national
interest. White serving as director of
the Illinois Department Of Labor, I had
firsthand experience in dealing with
problems of labor shortages and man-
power recruitment, and I can emphati-
cally state that our present immigration
policies aggravate these problems.
A recent editorial in the Chicago Sun-
Times pointed out that in the Chicago
area alone there are critical labor short-
ages of hand tailors, furniture refinish-
ers, and cabinetmakers. Elsewhere in
the country, there are insufficient num-
bers of diemakers, glassblowers, ma-
chinists, chemists, teachers, medical
personnel, and many other important
occupational categories.
The case of Dr. Gustavo Bounous
comes to mind in this connection. A
highly skilled medical doctor from Italy,
Dr. Bounous came to America hoping to
settle here. After a short stay in Indi-
anapolis, his temporary visa expired and
he was forced to move to Canada. Just
last month, Dr. Bounous was awarded
Canada's top national medical award for
his work in helping to discover the mys-
tery of how shock from bleeding can
cause death. Here is a man whose great
skills we turned away from our doors.
This example could be multiplied end-
lessly, and I submit that America cannot
afford this kind of brain drain.
Labor shortages could be rectified by
bringing thousands of skilled workers to
America from among the masses of peo-
ple crying for admission. Yet they are
prevented from adding their talent to our
economy and we are prevented from en-
joying the benefits of their skills by our
bigoted method of immigrant selection.
If we need an immigration policy more
suited to our modern manpower needs,
we also need one that will better serve
our Nation's foreign policy goals. Secre-
tary of State Rusk's testimony on this
point was very persuasive. Just within
the last year, no less than a dozen for-
eign ministers among our friends and
allies have personally complained to him
about America's immigration policy.
Their grievance had nothing to do with
the numbers of immigrants we admit.
Indeed, we have one of the most generous
policies in that respect of any nation in
the world. Rather, it concerned the in-
sulting, discriminatory features of our
quota system. No other law On our books
is as damaging to our nation image
,
abroad.
Surely a more rational basis for reg-
ulating immigration than our present
confused and irrational system can be
found. I believe that it has been found
and that it is embodied in the adminis-
tration bill.
By replacing national origin quotas
with a quota reserve pool, that is as-
signed on a first-come, first-served basis,
the bill puts all prospective immigrants
on an equal footing to allow them a 'fair
field and an honest race. The provisions
facilitating the .reunion of separated
families show the concern for human
factors that Must inideilie public pOlicy
in iri-y, civilized iiiiciety717-16 "WfOrifies
accorded immigrants with-eertainleieli
of skill, training, and education directly
Serve our own national interest. In sum,
the bill substitutes order and justice for
confusion and discrimination in a major
area of our national law.
6889
I can think of no more fitting step to-
ward the truly Great Society than pas-
sage of this bill, and I urge the adoption
of this vital legislation.
BRACERO LABOR FOR SUGARBEET
INDUSTRY
(Mr. RONCALIO asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks and include extraneous matter.)
Mr. RONCALIO. Mr. Speaker, today
I received a communication from a Mr.
Bruce Newkirk, superintendent of the
Holly Sugar Corp., at Worland, Wyo.,
strongly protesting the action of the Sec-
retary of Labor and indicating the dis-
appointment of all management of the
beet sugar industry to the attitude of
the Secretary of Labor regarding bracero
labor for the Wyoming sugarbeet in-
dustry. I quote from Mr. Newkirk's
communication:
We feel the entire sugar industry in Wyo-
ming is at stake in this matter and we feel
that the Secretary is taking a very dim atti-
tude and is ill-informed.
If California and the Southern States are
in trouble with their perishable crops with
their enormous labor pool, what can we ex-
pect in sparsely populated Wyoming. Do-
mestic labor just is not available in this
area of the type necessary for this kind of
work.
We are jeopardizing our second largest in-
dustry in Wyoming to satisfy theorists. Our
people at Worland have been ahead of some
areas in mechanization of field equipment,
but we know we have not perfected this to
the point of elimination of hand labor en-
tirely.
Even our union people at the plants are
agreed we are creating an impossible situa-
tion in elimination of the bracero program
at this time.
In a period of a few years the transition
may be complete to the point that braceros
may no longer be needed, but the time is
definitely not now and we are headed for
terrible and serious trouble without braceros
help.
Mr. Speaker, I put these remarks to
the attention of my colleagues in the
hope that the Secretary of Labor will
relent an attitude which may spell ruin
to the sugarbeet industry of the State
of Wyoming. It is quite possible that the
beets will be topped and loaded this fall
without braceros labor but there will be
no product to top and to load unless the
braceros labor is available for work in
the fields this spring in the State of
Wyoming.
VOTING RIGHTS
(Mr. McCLORY asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks and include extraneous matter.)
Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Speaker, I am
introducing today a bill on the subject
of voting rights which I hope will re-
ceive the careful attention of the House
Judiciary Committee as well as the Mem-
bers of this House.
_ ,
The bill which I am presenting will
apply throughout the 50 States. In other
words, where discrimination is prac-
ticed with regard to race or color in de-
priving eligible citizens of the right to
vote, or where coercion or intimidation
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300160005-7
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RD11671300446R000300160005-7
6890 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ---,ROUSE April 6, 1965
is exercised in order to prevent a citizen
from registering or voting, this new
legislation would be applicable. In addi-
tion, the bill would provide penalties for
any person who makes false representa-
tions or engages in illegal voting and
would penalize as well any who pay or
offer to pay or who accept payment for
registering or voting.
It is offensive to the American people
for any qualified person to be deprived
of the right to register or to vote. It is
likewise reprehensible to corrupt the
sanctity of the ballot by purchasing the
votes of any citizens under threat of de-
nial of public assistance or with promises
of pecuniary benefits, including benefits
from Federal appropriations.
The bill which I have introduced is
patterned after that of ray Republican
colleagues of the House, the distin-
guished gentleman from Michigan [Mr.
FORD], minority leader of the House, and
the gentleman from Ohio [Mr, Mc-
COLLOCHL ranking minority member on
the House Judiciary Committee upon
which I serve.
The penalty provisions to which I have
made reference are in addition to those
found in the measure offered by these
gentlemen.
In addition, I would like to point out
that the measure which I have presented
retains the authority of States to ad-
minister ininimum literaey tests, in which
a sixth-grade education represents a
conclusive presumption of literacy. A
requirement is, of course, that a literacy
test should be administered without dis-
crimination on account of race or color.
The complaints of 25 or more persons
alleging discrimination in any county or
voting district would require the imme-
diate appointment of Federal examiners
to register qualified voters in any area
where such discrimination is found to
exist.
While the right to appeal to the local
Federal court is assured, the measure
provides for "provisional" voting to the
end that no person shall be deprived of
his right to vote while an appeal is pend-
ing. In other words, a full and adequate,
as well as a convenient resort to the
courts, is retained, while at the same
time there is protection against delays
In voting rights when frivolous or dila-
tory appeals are filed.
Mr. Speaker, the obligation of the
Congress to debate and deliberate upon
a great public issue was never greater
than on the subject of voting rights for
all eligible American citizens. We
should provide full and adequate im-
plementation of the 13th 14th, and 15th
amendments to assure all citizens of
their equality before the law, the equal
Protection of the laws, and to guarantee
their inherent rights to register and to
vote without discrimination, without in-
timidation, and without coercion.
PROHIBIT TRADE
NIST ORTH
(Mr.
given pe
for 1 minute and to.
remarks.)
OIVIIVTU-
as - ? and was
address the House
vise and extend his
Mr., CHAMBERLAIN. Mr. Speaker,
today I am joining in e0sPenspring with
the gentleman from Florida [Mr.
RoGERS] legislaiton designed to halt ship-
ments to or from the United States
aboard ships engaged in trade with North
Vietnam. I commend him for his work
In investigating this problem, and I share
his concern for an almost incredible dis-
regard for the lives of American boys in
Vietnam and for the American shipping
Industry which we are today subsidizing
at a cost of $350 million per year.
North Vietnam is waging a brutal and
relentless war against its neighbors to
the south, but yet over 200 ships of so-
called allies and neutralist nations have
hauled cargoes of food and war materiel
into North Vietnam. We permit those
same ships to pick up the profits of our
own trade in our own ports.
Figures show that our own merchant
marine now carries less than 10 percent
of U.S. ocean trade?the least we can do
Is to deny our cargoes to foreign shippers
who help the Communist enemy solve
their biggest problem?supplying North
Vietnam. Through shipping into Viet-
cong territory, the Vietnam crisis con-
tinues to persist and Americans have
been killed in greater numbers by the
Communist Vietcong.
I frankly am surprised that the ad-
ministration and the Department of
State have not been more firm in their
requests that Britain, Japan, Greece,
Lebanon, Italy, West Germany, and other
nations involved call a halt to free world
sea trade with the Communists now en-
gaged in open aggression in southeast
Asia in defiance of their own agreements.
Since this has not been done, I see no
alternative other than Congress pro-
hibiting cargoes to or from U.S. ports
being transported aboard any vessel used
In sea trade with Communist North Viet-
nam, and I urge action as soon as pos-
sible in this regard.
PLENTY OF DOMESTICS?OF SORTS
(Mr. TALCOTT asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks and include extraneous matter.)
Mr. TALCOTT. Mr. Speaker, surely
there are plenty of domestics?plenty to
do all the jobs needed to be done in the
United States?in our restaurants,
motels, in orchards, and on our farms.
And the domestics should have these
jobs. And the jobs should pay a fair
wage for the work they do.
Unfortunately, today there simply are
not enough domestics, in the proper loca-
tion, capable and willing to do the work,
in restuarants and on the vegetable
farms.
The efforts to reorganize our society
and redistribute our work force is hav-
ing some tragic and devastating effects
on many small towns in rural areas.
The -following editorial from the
Salinas Californian touches upon one
problem which the Department of Labor
seems to ignore or intentionally neglect.
The big city police forces cannot con-
trol these transients when they stay
home? How can anyone expect small
towns to cope with these transients when
they invade the rural areas? Is it fair
to empty the slums into the small towns
under the guise of offering employment
which they cannot perform?
PLENTY OF DOMESTICS?OF SORTS
Daily it grows more apparent that &sere-
tary of Labor Wirtz should have stayed in his
nice insulated office in Washington.
It is obvious that he and his advisers in
Washington had prejudged the California
farm labor situation and his widely adver-
tised survey was only window dressing.
His monotonous and unharmonious refrain
has been "there are plenty of domestics to
do the farm labor."
Of sorts, that is.
We have several hundred of them on Sa-
linas skid row, and as the city council learned
Monday night, the number of arrests of these
transients has nearly doubled in the first 3
months of this year as against the came
period last year. The same situation, which
has become acute here only in the past few
years, exists in Fresno and Stockton.
Salinas police, who have chalked up 9,269
arrests in the first 3 months of the year as
against 1,293 for the same period last year,
say the end is not in sight. Contrary to
previous years when the transient invasion
peaked in March, police believe that bee iuse
of the failure of the Department of Labor to
authorize supplemental foreign farm labor
the situation will continue to get worse as
these unfortunates pour in to fill the Libor
vacuum. Ostensibly these men are hers to
work, but usually it's only long enough for
the price of a bottle.
Although most of these available domestics
are arrested for drunkenness, there has been
a sharp increase in the number of petty
thefts, and, as the influx continues, tiere
could be an outbreak of more serious crimes.
This means an increased drain on pt blic
funds and increased taxes for an area already
uncertain about the future.
The city council plans to send these fig tires
to Secretary Wirtz, but judging from ?ast
performance we doubt if he wants facts.
He demonstrated this by labeling two labor
camps filthy although both camps had been
inspected and approved as meeting county
and State health standards. Some of the
alleged filth to which Mr. Wirtz alluded was
the discarded wine bottles and debris brot.ght
in by available domestics. Braceros generally
were clean and orderly.
He compounded his scattergtm charger; by
creating a name for one of the filthy camps
which happens to be the same as that of a
reputable firm, which has no connection here.
Meantime, while Mr. Wirtz dailies in Wczb-
ington, refusing to take action on sup ale-
mental help, the strawberry crop is ripening
and appeals to the public for labor are not
getting very far. Growers face heavy losses
and the Salinas Valley faces further economic
troubles.
JOHN FITZGERALD KENNEDY
(Mr. FOGARTY asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute to revise and extend his remarks
and include extraneous matter.)
Mr. FOGARTY. Mr. Speaker, I would
like to call the attention of the House to a
sermon in memory of the late President
John F. Kennedy which was deliverec in
St. Matthew's Cathedral at a memo 12,1
mass on the occasion of the late Presi-
dent's birthday, on May 29, 1964. As one
who was present on that occasion, I con-
sidered myself privileged when I recently
came across a copy of this remarkable
discourse. It was delivered by the Most
Reverend Philip M. Hannan, vicar gen-
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300160005-7
April 6, 1965
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300160005-7
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE
as producer of processed and manufac-
tured goods.
Aheady we have become dependent
upon foreign sources for much of our
everyday consumer needs.
It is no laughing matter when 97 per-
cent of an the thie china sold in the
United States last year was imported,
When great numbers of American kids
ride, skate, swim, 'spin, jump, dance, lis-
ten, eat, drink, write, play games, clean
their teeth, comb their -hair, and every-
thing but breathe with foreign-made
products.
I challenge any Member of this Con-
gress to take a family Christmas shop-
ping list and try to fill it without losing
his temper or at least his patience.
I was under the erroneous impression
that the, purpose of all governments, and
especially ours, was to make our Nation
strong and independent. Independence
does not mean isolationism anymore than
stopping the export of an expendable
natural resource is a violation of fair
trade relation.
Perhaps to you the relationship be-
tween the majestic and enduring Ameri-
can walnut tree and the everyday cut-
throat competition of world trade is a
figment of my imagination. Not so; and
the facts will prove my contention that
the American walnut tree is symbolic of
all our trade agreements where we as a
nation put the profit and the balance of
trade above and beyond the true needs
of the community and its peoples.
Let us look at the American walnut
tree. After 60 or more years it is cut
down and prepared for shipment. It can
go two routes; to a foreign country or
to e doniestic processor. If we ship it
overseas?the logger gets paid, the owner
gets paid, the transportation gets paid,
and finally, if it by accident happens to
be an American ship, the sailors get paid.
From the ituMP to the fariway place,
the U.S. economy benefits to the tune
of about $300 and this is from prime
veneer logs. Much less will be realized
from the run-of-the-mill-type logs. You
can bet the foreign buyers with their
wage and tax costs differentials select
only the best logs for their export.
Let us take a look at what happens
when the logs are shipped to an Ameri-
can mill. All the above get paid except
the shipping line. However, the trans-
portation from the veneer mill to the fur-
niture plant and other users more than
makes up this los; which is only a loss if
shipped American. All of you know how
slim our chances areof having logs
, ,
shipped to japan and other countries via
U.S, ships. Of course, if under the AID
prograin, maybe we will have a 50-50
chance.
Now that we are even, insofar as U.S.
economy is concerned, let us go further
with our 134 veneer produced from a
walnut clabor.
e logs shipped -to a ITS. mill are
processed along with other woods used In
making veneers or are Shipped as veneer
for other manufacturers who use the
veneer a4?.a veneer without backup lum-
ber. In either case the jobs provided
are the same. *Prom the veneer plants it
No, 61-16
moves to the furniture, cabinet, and
panel manufacturers. The cuttings not
suitable for veneers are shipped for stair
rails, trim, frames, and other items that
are fast disappearing from the American
scene.
Now, when you realize that only 2 per-
cent of veneered walnut furniture is wal-
nut, and the balance other woods, you
realize that for every walnut log con-
sumed by our furniture industry ft takes
49 other type trees to meet the needs of
the industry.
What does this mean to the U.S. com-
munity? It simply means that for every
logger that gets a job from an exported
tree, 50 other American loggers lose 3
jobs. There is no argument in the claim
that if we were not exporting the one
logger would lose his job because every
person except perhaps Secretary Connor
knows that domestic and world demand
for American walnut furniture far ex-
ceeds the supply.
Let us step further and figure how
much the export logger contributes to
the doctors, nurses, barbers, retailers,
clothingmakers, car producers, farmers,
workers in heavy and light industries
making radios, TV's, air conditioners,
and on and on and on.
And last but not least, how much does
the export logger contribute to schools,
churches, hospitals, spectator sports,
charities, and on and on and on.
Let us look at figures that might help
us grasp the situation. In 1961-62 we
exported 8.5 million board feet of walnut,
sold cut 17.5 million feet in our domestic
market.
In 1963 we reached 14.3 million feet
export and 23.5 million feet domestic.
In 1964 without controls the normal
growth use factor would have forced U.S.
producers to produce 2-6 million feet and
the exporters using the same ratio of
growth would have gone to 18 million
?
feet.
However, in 1964 even with a voluntary
cutback on thickness plus a charge
against the United States for exported
veneer we were forded to cut back to 7.3
million feet export logs and 19.5 million
feet domestic.
If we did not have controls and if we
had not allowed export of logs plus ex-
port veneer the entire cutting of Amer-
ican walnut would have only met the
needs of our own market. This certainly
proves we have and are exporting jobs,
wages, salaries, and service industries'
earnings with every log we ship out.
Let us look at the next step that took
place after only 1 year of controls.
The exporters, the people who claim they
are so necessary in our economy, had
such a demand for veneer they con-
tracted for veneer made here. However,
they had the joker up their sleeves and
export veneers were reduced to one-
fiftieth of an inch thickness.
U.S. producers had to battle American
users of veneer to try to sell our veneers
cut to one thirty-sixth inch thickness in
place of the one twenty-eighth inch for-
merly the standard for walnut veneer's.
Foreign furniture makeli thus Make
up for their higher priced veneers because
6923
they get more facings for their furniture
and the unsuspecting buyer gets hooked.
The facts are there for all to see. We
do not need to export logs. We can and
do export furniture but you can see what
Is going to happen in this area of export
trade with the ceilings off on walnut log
export.
The wily and foxy trade boys would
not quit right away but I will predict the
end of the veneer export business and
soon the furniture will go down the same
drain.
The argument of the Secretary that
this free sale and export of logs will help
Appalachia is just so much hog wash.
One good furniture plant will hire more
People, contribute more to the economy
than all the logs cut in Appalachia. If
you want to help Appalachia, let Bendix
start making their Japanese radios in
Pennsylvania; let Studebaker go back to
Indiana; let the Americans start drink-
ing from glasses made in West Virginia,
Ohio, and Pennsylvania; let the dinner-
ware makers in the pottery areas put
the plate's on our dinner tables; let our
textile makers make our cloth; let our
transistor and electronics workers put
the guts in our TVs, tape recorders, and
PA systems; let steel workers make our
steel and our coal miners heat our homes,
produce our power, and heat our institu-
tions along with our domestic gas and oil
producers.
Let Americans produce for our own
uses, let our farmers produce our food
and those of us working in our factories
will pay them for full production and
they can give away their surplus to needy
people overseas to help them get on their
own two feet.
That is where we all end up, on our
own two feet as peoples and as nations
if not we will all end up on our backs--
there is no in between.
You try to sell a free trader the pro-
posal that he run his home on the same
theory and you will find out how he is
with his own job and his own family's
welfare.
I find that when I scratch a free trader
with foreign competition he bleeds and
screams louder than any protectionist I
know.
One wonders how the same govern-
ment could issue one order restricting
sugar export sales that had not even
taken place with a worldwide supply
sufficient for all needs while in the same
breath using the same provision of
GAIT, article XX(g) in the 1947 agree-
ment to wipe out export restrictions on
walnut, a short-supply resource and
affecting no other countries' exports
since we alone produce American walnut
logs.
Testimony before the Hartke commit-
tee shows the double talk used to ac-
complish this, by no means, an amateur
trick.
You are not interested at this moment
in the export of dollars but let me quote
from a nationwide foreign products sales
group. This will give you some idea of
how the free trade boys operate. They
claim to be freetraders for the good of
mankind, maybe they are, more power to
Approved For Release 2003/10/10: CIA-RDP67600446R000300160005-7
69.4
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300160005-7
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE April 6, 1965
them if they are, but I am of the opin-
ion that mankind as they see it is the
man who faces them when they shave.
Here is a little advertising that accom-
panies an offer to sell the following
items:
1. Electric powered 8 nun, movie cameras?
no winding?drop in loader?black and white
or colored?for $4.40.
2. Jeweled calendar watch--Swiss move-
ment?tells time and date?sweep second
hand?gift box?water resistant?anti-mag-
netic?stainless band steel back?for $2.33
plus 11 cents for expansion band.
S. Tape recorder-4 transistors complete
with built-in powerful dynamic speaker?
records?plays back erases?rewinds?in-
eludes microphone, battery, tape, reels, etc.--
for $6.70.
4. Electric razor?product Swiss crafts-
mormbip?shaped to shave the heaviest
beards?maker guarantees full 2 years?com-
plete with cord?head guard and brush?for
$1.70.
These are only four of hundreds of
import bargains you can get to make
fantastic profits of over 200 percent if
you want to go into business. Here is a
few more:
Australian wool sweater
$2. 00
Transistor radio
1.70
Cigarette lighter..
.17
Electric carving knife
1. 50
Binoculars
1.20
Teakwood chest
.90
Derringer pistol
5. 74
Star sapphire ring
6. 00
Electric hair dryer_.
1. 37
Electric train set
1.36
Impossible?that is what you think.
I thought so too, but I investigated fur-
ther and then I came across the real
free trade clincher.
This is the sales pitch showing you
why it can be done, why it is being done,
why we are losing our walnut industry
and why we lost Studebaker, Bendix,
Bell and Howell, and the hundreds of
free and independent American firms
that under the guise of helping our
neighbors are bleeding our own Nation
white; they are taking the gold out of
our econ0Inic bloodstream and our kids
will have limited choices of a career.
They can go to school for life under sub-
sidy, they can produce protected subsid-
ized products, they can get a job in
government, or they can inherit or
marry accumulated wealth.
Of course it would not hurt if you
happen to own some good export-import
stock or invest in oversea American-
owned facilities.
This is all good for a few but I guar-
antee the rest of us will be pretty much
in the same ruts of poverty, not the same
kind of poverty we are attempting to
cure now, but a different type.
One of our first signs of the new pov-
erty will be when we are told "to have
only as many children as we can afford."
Prom there on it is your guess as good
as mine, maybe the child we did not have
would have been Columbus or Einstein
or Michaelangelo or for that matter you
or me.
Sorry, if I get a little away from my
Import bargains and and how it is pos-
sible so I will close by quoting verbatim
from the man's sales pitch which I have
for your inspection, if you will not or
Cannot believe me:
HERE'S WHY IMPORT PROPTTS ARE FANTAS-
TIC?TON CAN CASH IN ON THESE Low LABOR
COSTS AND POCKET THE DIPPERENCE
Compare the high cost of domestic labor
with recent oversea costs:
Overseas tabor costs so little
Per hour
United States
$2.80
Japan
. 56
Holland
. 58
Italy
. 65
Belgium
. 73
Switzerland
. 77
Great Britain
. 80
West Germany
.85
Every dollar you spend for labor on over-
seas products is worth $4 here. According
to reports furnished by the U.S. Department
of Commerce and other reliable sources, the
recent average price of skilled labor in vari-
ous countries does not exceed the amounts
shown above. Compare the U.S. cost of $2.80
with 56 cents an hour in Japan, or in other
countries. It's easy to see why import pays
so well. Compare the costs of Swiss watches,
German tape recorders, Japanese transistor
radios, hundreds of other imports, with the
same domestic merchandise. There is no
comparison. And often, the imported prod-
uct has much more painstaking handwork.
My fellow Members of Congress, need
I say more?this importer agent has said
It much more eloquently than I could
have and besides he knows what he is
talking about. "It is good for business?
his business."
ISSUES I
The SPEAKER p mpore. Under
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from New York [Mr. RossigmAt]
is recognized for 60 minutes.
Mr. ROSENTHAL. Mr. Speaker, for
the past several months I have been
deeply concerned about Vietnam. As a
member of the Foreign Affairs Commit-
tee of the House, I have had an oppor-
tunity to examine the issues which are
at the source of the crisis and have come
to appreciate their complexity. Like
many of my colleagues, I have regarded
it as important to respect the Executive's
primary responsibility in foreign affairs.
I have been moved by the President's
awesome burdens in this field. I rec-
ognize his greater command of informa-
tion.
But I suggest that we in. positions of
national trust cannot remain silent in
the face of growing national anxiety.
We have a responsibility to thoughtful
and open debate about Vietnam. I re-
spectfully suggest that it is wrong to
maintain that in our democratic society
we will do our country a disservice by
discussing our present course of action.
The absence of forthright dialog ac-
tually calls into question our national
vitality and the strength of our repre-
sentative institutions. It is clear to me
that the people of this country are dis-
turbed over the events in Vietnam. They
want to hear debate, lest they be cut
off from their leaders and the important
decisions on foreign policy.
During the vibrant period from 1947
to 1949, when the groundwork for our
postwar military and diplomatic policy
was established, debates in Congress were
frequent, spirited and enlightening.
They contributed to the formation of the
Marshal plan and the Truman Doctrine.
Why are so few voices raised now, when
nothing less than our future commitment
to Asia and world peace are at stake? To
urge debate in Congress is not to suggest
that the legislative body make foreign
policy. It is to expose a maximum of
ideas, a variety of thinking, to the open
air. We owe it to our constituents to ex-
press our views, however mistaken we
may sometimes be. I rise to speak today
then out of a commitment to a free dis-
cussion of one of the vital questions fac-
ing the American Nation.
It seems clear that when the admin-
istration decided to extend the war in
Vietnam to the north, it knew the r.sks
involved. The administration chose to
undertake a policy, the consequena of
which was, at best, uncertain. Indeed,
on a number of occasions, the President
himself suggested that nobody could
predict the future with confidence. It
was his judgment, however, that forces
on the other side?in Peiping, Moscow,
Hanoi, and the Vietcong?had to be con-
vinced of our irrevocable commitment to
South Vietnam and our refusal to be
coerced into withdrawal. This consti-
tuted the broader political grounds for
our decision to bomb the north.
Diplomatically we were determined "to
do something to the other side we cculd
stop doing" to improve the prospect; of
a settlement. I fear that what began as
a principle for improving our bargain-
ing position has simply become a blue-
print for the escalation of the limited
Vietnamese war into a general Aeian
war.
It has been 2 months since we began
bombing North Vietnam on a regular
basis. By this time, one administration
spokesman was reported to have said in
February, the Communists should by
now have backed down. But they show
no signs of doing so. On the contrary,
their will to fight appears to be stiffer
than ever and we have acquired no per-
ceptible military advantage. As a conse-
quence, I believe it is important to evalu-
ate the effects of this policy in an effort
to improve our posture in the future.
The real issue as of today looks to me
like this. The bombings have produced
very little.
A UPI news release follows:
SArsox.?American military authorities
here believe the war for control of South
Vietnam remained at a stalemate siring
March, despite the intensification of air-
strikes in the South and raids-against the
North.
Moreover, an American military spokes-
man said, "There certainly has been a con-
tinuation of infiltration in March," although
the announced intention of the air mins
against North Vietnam was to convince the
Hanoi regime to halt the infiltration of men
and arms into the South.
The spokesman said the number of Ameri-
can bombing strikes against Communist con-
centrations inside South Vietnam doubled
In March as compared with previous months.
In spite of this increased use of airpower,
however, the Government just managed to
hold its own in the provinces outside those
immediately surrounding the capital.
The point at which they would have
forced Hanoi to negotiate?if, indeed,
Hanoi does exercise its will over the Viet-
cong?without triggering direct Chinese
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300160005-7
4".
Aril 6, 1965
Approved For Release 2003/10/10: CIA-RDP67600446R0003001601305-7
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE
or North Vietnamese intervention has
continued to elude us. We seemed to
have failed to fake into account the deep
resources of Asian patience. Meanwhile,
we have risked greater escalation and
ignored viable alternative policies. There
are at least some reports which-
ted /lorth Vietnamese interest in use-
ful negotiations. Our bombing may be
suppressing that interest by making it
impossible for North Vietnam to negoti-
ate in honor.
Has the bombing then been in any way
successful? Did the north really want
to negotiate from the outset, as some
have suggested? Was Ho Chi Minh him-
self anxious t9 negotiation, actually wait-
ing to see the Chinese contention that
America was a paper tiger proven wrong?
Have the North Vietnamese been preoc-
cupied with intraparty squabbles between
moderates and Maoists and hence com-
pletely precluded from settling on any
single policy? Have the Russians been
quietly biding their time waiting to see
us call China's bluff?
These questions and many others hold
the key to our future in Vietnam. Our
policy has acknowledged their validity
but I construe President Johnson' re-
marks about the difficulty of predicting
the future to mean that we may not really
know the answers. Without knowing the
answers myself, I see us involved in a
frustrating war without apparent poli-
cies for resolving it. Something must be
done and I would like, to propose some
alternatives to our current course.
At the beginning of any analysis, we
must acknowledge that we are not fight-
ing a monolithic Communist enemy in
Vietnam. We face rather a complex, di-
vided alliance, as much preoccupied with
Its own incoherence as it is with waging
war on its enemies. That these divisions
are the consequence of conflicting objec-
tives has rendered even more difficult our
devising a logical policy for dealing with
our adversaries. But we must still devise
a policy.
We think we understand the inten-
tions of the Soviet Union, one member
of the Communist alliance. Russia, it
now seems clear, is unhappy at the ex-
tension of Chinese revolutionary influ-
ence into southeast Asia. Though I am
not deceived by Soviet objectives, I think
it is indisputable that Russia does not
want a general nuclear war.
We are less clear about the nature
and intentions of Communist China.
Are the Red Chinese nationalists before
Communists?--Asians before national-
ists; is there no single a.nswer? Perhaps
by adopting prudent policies we can en-
courage them to be what we want them
to be, which is?as a minimum?peace-
loving.
Even if there is some truth in the ar-
gument that, as of now, the Chinese are
primarily Asian expansionists, it does not
follow that their expansionism is like
Germany's in the 1930's or Russia's in
the 1940's. Chinese interest and influ-
ence in southeast Asia?cultural, politi-
cal and racial?is centuries old. ft bears
li,ttleJ:esepabldkce tO Russia's concern
with, let us say,ilefan or Nazi Ger-
many's ambitions in the italkans. Mao's
revolutionary guerillas are vastly differ-
ent from Hitler's Wehrmacht or Stalin's
Red Army. We do not confront them in
the same way. Mao's revolutionaries
fight with ideological weapons, with
which we oftentimes do not know how
to deal.
However noble our motives and how-
ever reprehensible theirs, they use, along
with a dose of terrorism, hope and the
promise of a better future. Why have
we?heirs to Wilsonian idealism and a
great revolutionary tradition?forgotten
how to use the weapons of that tradition.
We know what China is, in reality, a
threat to the aspirations of the south-
east Asian countries. But we have failed
to exploit that threat and have instead
put ourselves, in the minds of many
Asians, into the positions not of de-
fenders of independence but of neo-
colonial aggressors.
We have also failed to exploit effec-
tivelY the strains within the Communist
alliance. We have an investment in
Russia's strategy of peaceful coexistence.
But we have played into Chinese hands
by making it appear as if deathlock
struggle is the reality of world affairs.
We have not sufficiently encouraged the
development of a pluralistic world com-
munism of Titoist states balancing the
two giants. Though military establish-
mntd since Caesar have operated on the
principle Of divide and conquer, we have
not sufficiently promoted such divisions.
Ironically, our Vietnamese policy, while
contributing to Communist unity, im-
poses enormous strains on our own alli-
ance. Prime Minister Wilson, himself at
work on creating a great society, faces
increased dissension in his own party.
De Gaulle's France, long a proponent of
a negotiated settlement in southeast
Asia, recognizes in our predicament a
repetition of their own troubles of ten
years ago. We demand and receive the
ostensible support of our allies. But we
do not have their confidence. There is
intense concern, deep skepticism, over
our bombings. Will they force Hanoi to
give up or will they escalate the conflict
into general war? I do not suggest that
this country base its policies on world
opinion or the private doubts of our al-
lies. I merely argue that these compo-
nents cannot be ignored.
9ur friends and allies, world opinion
generally, and my own Constituents have
a right to expect" clarification of our goal
in southeast Asia. 'Mg urgently desire
that we take the lead1n seeking-an hen-
?rabic settlement hiVietnani. I do not
acc,cpt the argument that
our negotiating position lay 'clarifying our
goals. I think we stiffer from a diplo-
macy of silence. I see no reason why
this country Cannot afford to talk openly
and directly. The climate of distrust
and suspicion?created by questionable
military tactics and? ambiguous diplo-
matic obj'ectives--is hardly conducive to
peace.
President Johnson opened a new chap-
ter in our southeast Asian diplomacy at
his 1VIarch 20 news conference. His
wQrds deserve careful attention and
highest _praise: _
The real goal of all of us in southeast
Apia must be the peaceful progress of the
people of that area. They have the right
6925
to live side by side in peace and independ-
ence. And if this little country does not
have that right then the question is, What
will happen to the other hundred little coun-
tries who want to preserve that right. They
have a right to build a new sense of com-
munity- among tliemselves. They have a
right to join, with help from others, in the
full development of their own resources for
their own benefit. They have a right to live
together without fear or oppression or domi-
nation from any quarter of this globe.
The question now being asked through-
out the world is: How do we recognize
and provide for the honorable realiza-
tion of these rights?
In my view, we must offer to North
Vietnam an alternative to its present sit-
uation in southeast Asia. Those forces
in that country which fear domination
from China must be shown that there is
an alternative other than domination
from the West. We have to make it
clear that Americans are prepared to feed
Asians rather than fight them, clothe
Asians rather than bomb them, and
teach Asians rather than gas them. And
we must show that we will promote and
support a system of security in that area
which counterbalances the threat of
China.
No one should pretend for one moment
that such a promise has a strong chance
of realization. American presence in
southeast Asia is as unnatural and re-
sented as Chinese influence is historic
and preponderant. Revolutionary com-
munism, at least in its early stages, is
often an attractive path for aspiring
nations. But it is clear that America
can produce no better policy than one
which seeks to promote an independent
southeast Asia with an ideology and di-
plomacy of its own.
There is a chance to take the first
step toward this goal right now. Ho Chi
Minh is an old Bolshevik, to whom Mao
Is as much a menace as America. He
has carefully built up an industrial base
which he is not anxious to lose.
He has interests in trade arrangements
with the economically complementary
South. He is attracted by fuller diplo-
matic recognition. The prospects of
growth through development aid and
participation in regional economic plans
is more compelling than the protracted
attrition of the past 20 years. Ho Chi
Minh is an old man, desirous of seeing
some general advancement for his coun-
try after 20 years of war.
To offer him an alternative to Chinese
domination, the United States must over-
come an enormous legacy of resentment
and hatred. Unless our offers of assist-
ance are above suspicion, they will not
succeed. We must be prepared, for ex-
ample, to join in informal cooperation
with Russia in formulating plans for the
economic development of southeast Asia.
Such coordination, besides promoting
stability in southeast Asia, will improve
relations with the Soviet Union. It will
help isolate China and certain Chinese
influence. It Will advance the prospects
for a system of international coopera-
tion to assist in the development of the
Poorer regions of the world. I think it
is crucial that this country make a com-
mitment to a new deal for southeast
Asia. We will, thereby, open up the doors
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300160005-7
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300160005-7
6926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD --- DOUSE, April 6, 10.3
to honorable negotiations for peace in
Vietnam.
I urge, as a first step, that the United
States cease, for the time being, its
bombing raids in the north. At the same
time, we might informally request from
Hanoi a significant reduction of the inci-
dent level in the south. What I suggest
is not a total cease-fire. This country
will be able to continue its air reconnais-
sance, intelligence, and antiguerrilla po-
litical pressure. Hanoi will probably be
unable to prevent isolated incidents of
banditry and some insubordination in the
Vietcong. But my plan represents a
start.
This is diplomacy by mutual example--
a process already begun between the
United States and Russia by President
Kennedy. There is no reason why such
diplomacy cannot be extended to Asia.
A temporary cessation of bombing will
allow Hanoi to receive and initiate peace
overtures without appearfng to be under
coercion. This country would be taking
no irrevocable steps. Nor would such ac-
tion cempromise any particular military
strategy since, for the most part, the
bombings have always been political and
psychological in character.
To the argument that such a Move
would demoralize the South Vietnamese
Government, it can fairly be answered
that this country has tolerated the im-
possible behavior of South Vietnamese
governments for long enough. Sooner
or later, even Saigon must come to ac-
cept peace.
During a period of a temporary mili-
tary moratorium, the United States could
pursue a full diplomatic offensive, in an
atmosphere of open conversation. Chan-
nels heretofore closed might be opened.
Proposals for settlement previously re-
pressed might now be considered. And
the talents of the country's and perhaps
the world's most skilled political negoti-
ator?Lyncion B. Johnson?could be re-
leased in pursuit of a settlement honor-
ing this country's commitments, respect-
ing Asian sentiments and promoting
world peace. -
Mr. Speaker, I fear we are in danger
of becoming the victims of our own dip-
lomatic rigidity. I respectfully call for
a policy of flexibility, a policy that will
recognize peace within a framework of
world security as our goal. I submit
that there is more than one way, to
achieve that goal. I call upon those re-
sponsible for formulating our foreign
PeliCY to consider every possible alterna-
tive to bring the war in Vietnam to an
honorable conclusion.
MA.TSUNAGA. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
ROS*TTITAL. I yield to the gen-
tleman fiorn
Mr. MATSVNAGA. 1 wish to com-
mend the gentleman from, New York for
bringing to the attention of the Congress
his thoughts on a vital igue which ap-
pear to have be-en seriously considered.
I, too, was somewhat disturbed by the
action that the President had taken in
Vietnam and raised some questions dur-
ing the briefing at the White House on
March 2 with the President and the Sec-
retary of State. At that time I was as-
sured that every diplomatic channel is
being kept open, in line with the sug-
gestion that the gentleman has made,
that we may negotiate for peace. The
question is, with whom do we negotiate?
It takes two to negotiate. We have been
assured by the administration that it has
made every effort to negotiate. But the
only reply it has received from North
Vietnam is a complete denial of any di-
rection of or connection with the guer-
rilla warfare going on in South Vietnam.
Under such circumstances, while I
heartily agree with the gentleman now
in the well of the House, that every effort
toward a negotiated peace ought to be
exerted, the question still remains, with
whom do we negotiate?
Mr. ROSENTHAL. I would call the
attention of the gentleman from Hawaii
to an interesting piece of news that just
now canie across the Associated Press
ticker. It is marked "bulletin." It says:
"United Nations, U.N. Secretary General
U Thant was reported to have received a
message frOm Red China's Premier Chou
En-lai today suggesting that a solution
to the Vietnam conflict was up to the
parties directly involved."
This is, to me, somewhat interesting.
Whether it is credible I would not even
offer a Suggestion. But there are many
countries in the world?Poland, Switzer-
land, England, France, India, Canada?
who are willing to act as middleman be-
tween the United States and Hanoi. Cer-
tainly, we have the burden of openly sug-
gesting to the world that we are willing
to negotiate with Hanoi to see if this
matter can be ended. If the Commu-
nists come forward and say they are not
interested, and If they say, "We do not
want to negotiate?we want to pursue
this matter because we are winning the
war," then our conscience is clean. We
can pursue them with our bombers or
with whatever military policy is neces-
sary with all the vigor at our command.
I merely say that a major effort on our
part must be made before any large-scale
escalation can be allowed.
Surely Russia and China have differ-
ences of opinion. There is, I believe, a
conflict between them. I do not believe
that Russia wants China to get into this
thing in Vietnam.
Our moral obligation to ourselves and
the next generation is to make a massive
effort to negotiate in an honorable fash-
ion. Perhaps we can say we will take
a week off from bombing the north, or
2 weeks off, or whatever it may be.
If we are not willing to participate in
at least a first step toward negotiation,
then we must, of course, suffer the con-
sequences.
Mr. MATSUNAGA. The gentleman is
not suggesting that every effort is not
now being made by the administration?
Mr. ROSENTHAL. I am sure that
efforts are being made, but perhaps those
efforts would be more fruitful with a re-
duction in bombing.
1, too, have been with the President
and the Secretary of State and others.
It may be that there is another al-
ternative. Perhaps if we stopped bomb-
ing for 2 weeks and announced that to
the world, starting tomorrow or the next
day, then we could put the burden on
the other side, and they would have to
carry the burden in the court of world
opinion.
We must remember that we are really
a great power, compared to the North
Vietnamese. We can eliminate them in
12 hours any time we want. I believe
that the fact that this has not happened
Is an indication the President has shown
great restraint.
Mr. MATSUNAGA. Again I commend
the gentleman in the well for having
given such considerable thought to this
matter. I hope that his thoughts will be
conveyed to the administration and that
perhaps at a conference table, even with
the President, his suggestion may be cis-
cussed.
Mr. ROSENTHAL. I thank the gen-
tleman for his participation.
Mr. TEAGUE of California. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ROSENTHAL. I am happy to
yield to the gentleman from California.
Mr. TEAGUE of California, To me it
is interesting that this apparent lack of
full confidence in the President and the
way he is handling this most difficult and
complex problem in Vietnam comes from
a Member of his own party rather than
a Member of the opposite party.
Mr. ROSENTHAL. Let me say at that
point there is no lack of confidence in
the President at all. I am offering two
suggestions.
First, there may be other alternatives,
perhaps, from the ones the President's
advisers have suggested to him.
Second, as I indicated in my opening
remarks, I welcome this kind of discus-
sion and dialog.
I ha:ve no lack of confidence. I sug-
gest that, in my judgment, the President
is one of the most skilled negotiators in
the world. I urge him to put these tal-
ents to use in a field which requires all
the skills at his command. I am offering
a suggestion. I have not, by any manner
or means, indicated I lacked confidence
in the President.
Mr. TEAGUE of California. Perhaps
I was incorrect in my interpretation. I
realize the gentleman said some very
complimentary things about the Pre si-
dent. I got the impression that by
raising this point and making these
suggestions, the gentleman had some
belief or some fear that perhaps the
President was not handling the situa-
tion in Vietnam as he should.
Mr. ROSENTHAL. That is not the
case. I am suggesting there might be
other alternatives. Perhaps this idea
has come up before, within the Presi-
dent's council of advisers.
The fact that this suggestion comes
from a Member of Congress?and other
Members of Congress indicate similar
thoughts?merely indicates that these
things should be put on the table.
I welcome the gentleman's participa-
tion. I am certain it was not inspired
by any partisan consideration in any
way at all.
The point is that this kind of open
discussion between the gentleman from
California and myself and between the
gentleman from Hawaii and myself is
really a healthy thing. We have less
information than the Executive has. We
have less experience and skill. Yet,
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP671300446R000300160005-7
Aril 6, 1965
sometimes even a novice can come up
with an idea which has merit.
Tliat is the principal reason for my
taking the floor today.
Mr. EDWARDS of California. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ROSENTHAL I yield to the gen-
tleman from California.
Mr. EDWARDS of California,. I com-
pliment the gentleman from New York
for taking this time this afternoon and
offering his ver Y thoughtful remarks on
this difficult subject which plagues all
Americans and indeed the entire world.
By our having what we believe is an
intelligent, thoughtful dialog on this im-
mensely difficult subject, we do not in-
dicate in any Way' that we do not have
the. highest respect and admiration for
our President.
But this is the nature of our way of
life, It is the nature of our 'free so-
ciety, where our citizens, certainly not
excepting Members of Congress, can
stand up and? discuss the great issues of
the day. President Johnson would be
the first one to want us to have such a
discussion.
Now I would like to ask the gentleman
from New York a question. He recently
mentioned that the administration has
come up with some affirmative sugges-
tions, insofar as the problem of south-
east Asia is concerned, so that the other
side would know what kind of a world
we have in mind for them in the event
that hostilities cease and agreem,ent Can
be reached. I am sure that the gentle-
man from New York and indeed all of
the Congress would applaud the Presi-
dent's support of the Mekong River
Basin program. This program of the
United Nations which is supported by 25
nations is an example of the type of
project which could assist these under-
developed nations of southeast Asia on
the road to economic viability. As the
gentleman from New York knows, this
project involved Cambodia, Laos, Thai-
land, and Vietnam and could be to these
nations what the Aswan Dam is to Egypt
and the Volta River Dam is to Ghana. It
seems to me that this kind of affirmative
approach to the Vietnam program would
be a considerable help in arriving at a
satisfactory solution.
Once again I want to thank the gen-
tleman from New York for yielding to
me, and I assure him of my apprecia-
tion for his reworks.
Mr. ROSENTHAL. Mr. Speaker,
thank the gentleman for participating
in this discussion. I know that.the gen-
tleman is aware of ttie fact that to-
morrow night. at 9 o'clock the President
is going to speak on national radio and
television from Johns Hopkins Univer-
sity. I am hopeful that he will amplify
American policy in southeast Asia. It
may be his remarks tomorrow night will
be the beginning of a major peace offen-
sive. There is nothing wrong in that.
It is the man with all of the strength who
call in good grace say to the other fellow,
"Well, we can stop fighting." They
know as well as we do that they do not
measure 'up in the balance of power.
There is no contest between Ira. But
certainly the gentleman from California
knows as well as I do, that the major
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300160005-7
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE
threat to this society is a nuclear con-
frontation. Nobody really -wants that.
Maybe the Chinese would like to have
some action along those lines, but so long
as we in this Congress participate in
making every effort to assure that this
civilization is not ended by that kind of
a confrontation, then We have done our
job, and I think part of that job is once
in a while talking about it as we are doing
here today.
Mr. KASTENMEIER. Mr. Speaker,
will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ROSENTHAL,. I will be happy to
yield to the gentleman from Wiscon-
sin.
Mr. KASTENMEIER. Mr. Speaker I
would like to join my colleague from Cal-
ifornia [Mr. EDWARDS], in compliment-
ing the gentleman from New York in
making his presentation. I think it is
a notable contribution to the dialog on
this subject. I know in my own mail
from home in the comments there and
in the editorials in the newspapers and
from a questionnaire that I have sent
out it tends to suggest a consensus which
would certainly support some of the
provocative and, I might say, forward
looking ideas that the gentleman has
presented here today in connection with
a peaceful resolution of a very painful
choice for you and the President and
our Nation and indeed the world, I
want to thank the gentleman for his con-
tribu,tion this afternoon,
Mr. RO,SENTHAL, Mr._ Speaker, I
thank the gentleman.
STATEMENT ON FILING OF BILL ON
TAX-EXEMPT MUNICIPALS
. .
(Mr. KEITH (at the request of Mr.
TEAGUE of California) was granted per-
mission to extend his remarks .at this
point in the RECORD and to include ex-
traneous matter.)
Mr. KEITH. Mr. Speaker, today I have
filed legislation which will put a stop
to certain abuses in the area of munici-
pal industrial financing. The bill amends
the Internal Revenue Code of 1954. It
denies to a corporation a deduction for
payments?rental, lease, and so forth?
made to municipalities on industrial
plants financed by tax-exempt obliga-
tions. It also denies a deduction for in-
terest payments made on mortgages
which are so financed.
Under the code, the Fedgral Govern-
ment does not tax the.incorne.received hy
the holder of o municipal obligation.
This, is as it should be in arsivrto pro-
tect the fiscal independence of local,g0Y-
ernmental units from control by tire Fed-
eral Government. However, in recent
years, there have been permitted, in a
number of States, an extension of mu-
nicipal financing into new areas. In,
28 States, it is now permissible for
municipality to issue an Obligation?
generally a revenue bond?in a few
States they can be backed by the gen-
eral credit of the municipality?and to
use the proceeds for the purchase and
construction of industrial sites. The
procedure then is to fease or make some
other arrangement with an industrial
firm to use the facility.
Many communities using this type of
6927
financing do so in order to attract new
industry. It has become a competitive
proposition in some areas. The pro-
ceeds are never intended to be used for
a bona fide governmental purpose, but
solely to enable the community to offer
a better "deal" to a corporation. The
municipality permits its governmental
tax exemption to be used for the expan-
sion of a private company.
Mr. Speaker, in my view, such use of
municipal financing is not in accord with
the original intent of the exemption.
This financing was to be used for genu-
ine municipal projects, not for the bene-
fit and subsidization to private industry.
In most cases, it is not a question of
financial need as far as the corporation,
is concerned. Some of this country's
largest and most financially stable cor-
porations have become involved in this
type of financing with a municipality.
Mr. Speaker, in a speech delivered on
December 1, 1964, to the Investment
Bankers Association, Mr. Frank L.
Magee, chairman of the executive com-
mittee of the Aluminum Co. of America,
indicated the dangers involved in con-
tinuing on the present course of abusing
the exemption. I quote from his speech:
First off, I believe municipal industrial fi-
nancing is an abuse of the right of munici-
palities or States to issue tax-free bonds
when these bonds are issued primarily for
private benefit * * this could well serve
as the opening wedge for the Federal Gov-
ernment to eliminate the Federal income tax
exemption for all State and municipal
bonds * * *.
A second danger I see in municipal indus-
trial financing is that it is unfair to indus-
trial neighbors and especially to other com-
panies in a competitive industry.
A third danger I see in the use of munici-
pal industrial financing is the threat of Gov-
ernment ownership of industrial facilities.
I firmly believe that Mr. Magee knows
from where he speaks. He heads one of
the most prominent industrial establish-
ments in the United States. As firm
believers in an unsubsidized private en-
terprise system, I agree with him that
there is no need for healthy and growing
companies to force municipalities into
providing financing for their private use.
It might be asked, Mr. Speaker, why
I am favoring this approach, denying a
tax deduction to the private company oc-
cupying industrial plant financed by tax
exempt bonds, rather than removing the
Federal tax exemption for such bonds.
The reasons are these: My bill does not
deny tax exemption to interest on bonds
issued by a State or local government,
which would be objectionable to local
governments and to many organizations
which repognize that tax exempt local
government credit should not be used
for the benefit of private companies. My
bill would close the tax loophole by deny-
ing a Federal tax deduction to the pri-
vate company which otherwise would
benefit by the misuse of the tax exemp-
tion of a local government. This ap-
proach will not raise the constitutional
issue of determining whether, the obliga-
tion was incurred for a genuinely gov-
ernmental function. The unfair ad-
vantage of a corporation being financed
through municipal bonds would be re-
moved.
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP671300446R000300160005-7
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300160005-7
6928 CONGRESSIONAL itECOAD ? }OUSE
Mr. Speaker, I firmly believe that if
we are to stem the headlong competition
that is now going on in this field, the
Congress Must act soon to insure the
Integrity of the original tax 'thteniption.
It must be available for- genuine muni-
cipal or goVer*ental projects. We
should not allOvs, flits 'distortion of the
exemption tb centinue. -"t urge my Col-
leagues to join me in support of this
legislation.
,
A MORE EFFEOTTVE VOTING RIGHTS
LAW
(Mr. KEITH (at the request of Mr.
TEAGUE of California) was granted per-
mission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD and to include extra-
neous matter.)
Mr. KEITIT. Mr. Speaker, I today
have the privilege of joining the distin-
guished minority leader and ranking
minority member of the Committee on
the Judiciary in sponsoring a bill which
is the product of their leadership and ex-
perience and the efforts of many other
able Republican Members of the Rouse,
the Voting Rights Act of 1965.
This proposal is offered as a compre-
hensive and effective substitute for the
administration bill, which has been rec-
ognized froiri the outset to be a proposal
handicapped by many serious deficiencies
and omissions a,./.14 wfxich, It is Widely
agreed, dangerously oversteps constitu-
tional bounds.
The Ford-McCulloch bill, to which lam
proud to add my name, is a fair and
speedy remedy to racial discrimination in
voter registration, and it will effectively
insUre the constitutional right to vote
without overturning other important
constitutional principles, and without
penalizing areas which are not guilty of
discrimination.
Its ehattluellt wOUld give 11S the tools
to 1ei11alc reasonable standards for
rstration voting without inter-
fOring With the reasonable requirements
and constitutional prerogatives of the
various States.
I ask that the text of the bill, as! have
today introduced it, be reprinted in the
REcose at the conclusion of my remarks.
In brief terms it would.provide Ter the
alVoIntinent oi a Federal examiner When
the Attorney General receives 25 or more
cOmplaints from residents of a county al-
leging denial of the right to vote on ac-
count of race or color. The examiner
would be empowered to disregard literacy
test requirements for persons who possess
Sixth-gratie education, or more, and
conld administer such, tests for these not,
possessing this iniitinium education, so
long as it was fair and reasonable.
,Drailse tits administation bill on this
vital subject, our bill would reach dis-
crimination wherever it exists, and would
not, for example, exclude the entire
State of Texas from ita jurisdiction?a
Widely noted oversight in the adminis-
tration-supported bill.
Our bill would also avoid the arbitrary
Percentage formula, whereby only those
States and their subdivisions having lit-
eracy requirements where less than 50
Percent of the voting-age Population
registered or voting in 1964 would be af-
fected by the proposed law. This would
mean that we would miss serious pockets
of discrimination on the one hand, and
on the other would unfairly penalize
other areas where, perhaps, apathy, one-
party domination or deceptive census
figures may account for low registra-
tions.
The Federal examiner under our pro-
posal Would be appointed by the Civil
Service Commission. He would imme-
diately determine whether complainants
are qualified to vote. The States could
challenge these determinations to a Fed-
eral hearing officer, also appointed by
the Civil Service Commission, within
10 days. The hearing officer could be
required to render his decision within 7
days.
Determination by the hearing officer
that 25 or more persons are denied suf-
frage because of race or color establishes
a "pattern" or practice of discrimina-
tion under the bill. Immediately there-
after additional Federal examiners and
hearing officers would be appointed as
necessary to register all other persons
within the county who may be subject
to discrimination.
All persons found qualified to vote
would be entitled to vote. Those who
are challenged would be allowed to vote
provisionally until the appeal is decided
by the hearing officer and court.
The administration bill does not pro-
vide the authority for provisional voting,
which is included in our bill to encour-
age prompt determination of appeals.
The administration bill would elimi-
nate literacy tests in some States, no
matter how reasonable or how fairly
applied, and would prohibit the future
adoption of literacy test requirements
by other States,
This is unnecessary and it goes too
far. There is no reason for the Federal
Government to attempt to invalidate
the laws or ordinances of a State or
local government in contravention of
established constitutional principles.
There is nothing evil or illegal about a
literacy requirement, so long as it is not
in violation of the 15th amendment?so
long as it does not involve an element of
discrimination, intimidation, or coercion.
This new bill deals with the funda-
mental problem of physical and eco-
nomic coercion and intimidation, and
In addition it provides for civil and crim-
inal penalties against those officials who
engage in such activities.
In conclusion, this bill offers a con-
stitutional, comprehensive, prompt and
effective remedy for disenfranchisement
because of race or color. It is a strong
and sound bill and in my opinion it is
more thoughtfully drafted than the ad-
ministration bill. It deserves enthusi-
astic, nonpartisan support.
Mr. Speaker, I insert the text of this
bill at this point:
E.R. 7196
A bill to guarantee the right to vote under
the 15th amendment to the Constitution
of the United States
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of
Representatives of the United States of
AiDeriee In Congress assembled, That this Act
shall be known as the "Voting Rights Act
of 1865."
April 6, 19'165
SEC. 2. (a) The phrase "literacy test" titan
mean any requirement that a person as a
prerequisite for voting or registration for
voting (1) demonstrate the ability to read,
write, understand, or interpret any matter,
or (2) demonstrate an educational achieve-
ment or knowledge of any particular subject.
(b) A person is "denied or deprived of the
right to register or to vote" if he is (1) not
provided by persons acting under color of law
with an opportunity to register to vote or to
qualify to vote within two weekdays lifter
Pan.king a good faith attempt to do so, (2)
found not qualified to vote by any person
acting under color of law, or (3) not notified
by any person acting under color of law of
the results of his application within seven
days after making application therefor.
(c) The term "election" shall mean any
general, special or primary election :held in
any voting district solely or in part for the
purpose of electing or selecting any candi-
date to public.of5ce or of deciding a proposi-
tion or issue of public law.
(d) The term "voting district" shall mean
any county, parish, or similar poltical sub-
division of a State in which persons, acting
under color of law, administer the regirtra-
tion and voting laws of the State.
(e) The term "vote" shall have the same
meaning as in section 2004 of the Revised
Statutes (42 U.S.C. 1971 (e)).
SEC, 3. (a) Congress hereby finds that large
numbers of United States citizens have been
and are being denied the right to register or
to vote in various -States on account of race
or color in violation of the Fifteenth
Amendment.
(b) Congress further finds that literacy
tests have been and are being used in various
States and political subdivisions as a mans
of discrimination on account of race or calor.
Congress further finds that persons with a
sixth grade education possess reasonable lit-
eracy, comprehension and intelligence and
that, in fact, persons possessing such educa-
tional achievement have been and are being
denied or deprived of the right to register or
to vote for failure to satisfy literacy test
requirements solely or primarily because of
discrimination on account of race or color.
(c) Congress further finds that the require-
ments that persons as a prerequisite for vot-
ing or registration for voting (1) -poisess
good moral character unrelated to the com-
mission of a felony, or (2) prove their quali-
fications by the voucher of registered voters
or members of any other class, have 'been
and are being used as a means of discrimina-
tion on account of race or color.
(d) Congress further finds that where in
any voting district twenty-five or more per-
sons have been denied or deprived of the
right to register or to vote, as determined in
section 6, there is established a pattern or
practice of denial of the right to register or
to vote on account of race or color.
SEC. 4. (a) Whenever the Attorney Gen-
eral certifies to the Civil Service Commis-
sion (1) that he has received complaints in
writing from, twenty-five or more residents
of a voting district each alleging that (1)
the complainant satisfies the voting quali-
fications of the voting district, and (ii) the
complainant has been denied or deprived of
the right to register or to vote on account of
race or color within ninety days, and (2) that
the Attorney General believes such com-
plaints to be meritorious, the Civil Sei vice
Commission shall appoint an examiner for
such voting district.
4b) A certification by the Attorney Gen-
eral shall be final and effective upon publi-
cation In the Federal Register.
(c) The examiner shall examine tiose
persons who have filed complaints certified
by the Attorney General to determine (1)
whether they were denied or deprived of the
right to register or to vote within ninety
days and (2) whether they are qualified to
Vote under State law. A person's statement
Approved For Release 2003/10/10 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300160005-7