OTTO OTEPKA--STATE DEPARTMENT BACKLASH

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP71B00364R000500280009-4
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 9, 2016
• Document Release Date: August 16, 2000
• Sequence Number: 9
• Publication Date: March 5, 1969
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2001/07/26: CIA-RDP71600364R000500280009-4
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD? Extensions of Remarks E 1657
March 5, 1969
15, he fell into a coma. Mrs. Parker's efforts
to revive him were of no avail, and at about
1 a.m. on Noir. 16 she began to make a series
of telephone calls to physicians.
One doctor after another refused to come
to her residence. One went so far as to say
that if Parker had been in the coma for the
hours before Mrs. Parker tried to obtain
medical help he could wait a few more hours
until morning.
In desperation Mrs. Parker called the police
department. Two officers immediately were
dispatched. They thought of carrying the tall,
heavy Parker down his front steps in a chair,
but rejected the idea, fearing that they might
drop the man.
A radio call brought a third car with a
stretcher. The officers carried Parker down
stairs and put him into a neighbor's car for
a rapid trip to Oakland's Highland Hospital.
The diagnosis at ? the hospital was acute
pneumonia. Doctors told Mrs. Parker that a
delay of a few more hours would have cost
her husband his life.
Parker was in a coma for 27 days as doctors
fought for his life. The physicians had little
hope for him because antibiotic treatment
seemed to be failing, but the turning point
did come and he returned to consciousness.
Ills tbtal hospital stay ended last week,
"I'd like to extend my personal thanks to
thope three officers who came to my aid,"
Parker said, No words can express my grati-
tude for their actions.
It is indeed a pleasure to live under the
jurisdiction of such a thoughtful and com-
petent police department."
Mrs. Parker seconded her husband's senti-
ments.
PLUG LOOPHOLE IN ARMED SERV-
ICES HANDICAPPED PROGRAM
HON. DONALD W. RIEGLE, JR.
ivrignicAN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, March 5, 1969
Ur. RIEGLE. Mr. Speaker, today I a
introducing legislation which 'seeks to
plug a loophole in the armed services
'handicapped program.
'Under present law, we now provide fl-
nancig assistance for certain contracted
health-care benefits to severely men-
tally retarded or physically handicapped
dependents of active duty members of the
uniformed Services. However, the stat-
utes do not provide for continuance of
this carp if a member is killed while on
active duty or upon that member's re-
tirement. Thus, Mr. Speaker, at a time of
greatest financial need when the bread-
winneE lbses his life in service to his
ecgantry?or retires after a life career,
this urgent medical assistance for his
dependent is cut off.
I would also stress that this is the
only medical benefit provided for de-
pendents of active duty members which
Is cut off upon the death or retirement
of that member. It is ironic that rou-
tine benefits such as doctor yisits, flu
shots, vaccinations, hospital care, and
so forth are presently covered, while care
for mental retardants and ffie physically
handicapped?which is most expensive
and a great financial burden for those
people to carry?is the one medical bene-
fit that is denied.
- Mr. Speaker, the bill which I am intro-
ducing today would, therefoie, extend
o mentally retarded or physically handl-
pped dependents of first a member of
a uniformed service who was killed while
on active duty; and second, of former
members of the uniformed services, the
special care now provided to similarly
afflicted dependents of members on ac-
tive duty. I believe that this is a defi-
ciency that must be corrected so that the
urgently needed medical assistance for
mentally retarded and physically handi-
capped dependents can continue.
The Department of Defense has esti-
mated that the additional cost for the
extension of this program would be about
$5.5 million a year. This is a modest price
to pay for the great financial relief that
such an extension would bring to these
deserving people.
Mr. Speaker, 34 of my colleagues have
joined me in bipartisan support of this
measure, and I am hopeful that addi-
tional sponsorship will follow.
MAURICE H. STANS
HON. WILLIAM J. GREEN
OF PENNSYLVANIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES'
Wednesday, March 5, 1969
Mr. GREEN of Pennsylvania. Mr.
Speaker, last year I had the privilege of
serving as chairman of the Census and
Statistics Subcommittee of the House
Post Office and Civil Service Committee.
The experience impressed upon me the
important role that statistical data plays
in American' life.
Social welfare legislation We pass in
Congress is, in fact, based on the data
compiled by the Bureau of Census. We
Use ourpnial indicators to describe prob-
lems and to seek solutions to them.
In the past year there has been con-
siderable discussion about information
collected by Census and their possible in-
vasion of privacy.
On February 27, Secretary of Com-
merce Maurice H. Stans testified before
the Joint Economic Committee. He closed
his statement with a defense of the need
for census data. I thought it would be
helpful to my colleagues to read his
statement which follows:
EXCERPT FROM STATEMENT OF MAURICE H.
STANS, SECRETARY OF COMMERCE, BEFORE THE
_JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE ON FEBRUARY
27,1969
OTHER MATTERS
With your permission, I wish to outline
two matters of policy which come within the
range of interest of your Committee and
which are of great concern to the Department
of Commerce.
The first is the preparation for the Nine-
teenth Decennial Census in 1970. A some-
what synthetic issue has been raised as to
whether the Census questions constitute an
invasion of the people's entitlement to pri-
vacy. The contra factor is modern Govern-
ment's needs for accurate information as a
basis for reaching economic and social judg-
ments.
The second is the development of minority
business enterprise, with both the Govern-
ment and the business community providing
assistance. The President has asked the Com-
merce Department to take a leading role in
this area.
THE 1970 CENSUS
The Joint Economic Committee has for
many years shown close interest in the statis-
tical activities of the 13ureau of the Census,
the Office of Business Economics, and other
Government agencies, and has made con-
structive suggestions for their improvement.
Consequently, I feel sure that this Com-
mittee will share my concern over the grow-
ing support for proposals that threaten to
do serious damage to the quality of some of
our most basic demographic and economic
statistics. I refer to proposals that would
sharply limit the number and nature of ques_
tions people would be required to answer in
the 1970 Decennial Census.
It is easy to understand why there should
be a certain amount of annoyance over being
asked to fill out questionnaires. Neverthelesc,
it is both inappropriate and unfortunate thy ,
this is contended to be an invasion of privay,,.
Actually, the 1970 Census will be, for most
people, less burdensome and no more in-
vasive of priVacy than previous Decennial
Censuses. For the first time, about three out
of five families will receive and be able to
return their questionnaires by mail without
ever seeing a census enumerator. Most fami-
lies will be able to fill out their question-
naires in about 15 minutes. The total number
of questions will be about the same as in
1960 and less than were asked in 1950 or
1940. A limited number of questions will be
asked of every household. Most of the ques-
tions, however, will be asked of only one
household in four, selected on a random ba-
sis. As has always been the case answers
given the Census Bureau will be strictly
confidential and cannot be published or
given to any other Government agency ex-
cept in the form of statistical totals.
The Decennial Census is the one occasion
when we try to get complete information
on certain key characteristics of our popu-
lation and the homes our people live in. This
is vital information for all levels of govern-
ment, down to local school districts, if they
are tO carry out their resphiisibilities
intelligently. -
The American people have always re-
garded the Decennial Census as one of the
least onerous obligations of citizenship. They
have cooperated willingly and taken great
interest in the results. I believe it would be
an extremely disturbing development if this
spirit of cooperation should, as a result of
a fallacious challenge, be undermined.
MINORITY BUSINESS-ENTERPRISE
In regard to the dei7elopment of minority
business enterprise, President Nixon stated
in his Inaugural Address that we must draw
into the solution of our socio-economic prob-
lems all the strength of our Nation. Govern-
ment and private enterprise will need to act
together in dealing with these problems.
Capitalism and private enterprise must pre-
sent challenging opportunities for minority
groups as well as for those who are in the
mainstream of our national economic life.
One aspect of our urban problem is the
separation of those in our minority groups
from involvement in the country's principal
economic activities. There are many different
way a of tackling this problem but one of the
most promising is to assist them in setting
up their own business enterprises.
OTTO OT.Eff, ?STATE DEPART-
ENT BACKLASH ?
HON. JOHN R. RARICK
OF LOUISIANA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, March 5, 1969
Mr. RARICK. Mr. Speaker, Otto
Otepka refuses to be silenced or com-
promised at any price. And, in the mean-
time, millions of Americans are begin-
ning to wonder what part of the promised
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP711300364R000500280009-4
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP71600364R000500280009-4
E 1658 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? Extensions
cleanup at State is denying Otto Otepka
his former position.
Mr. Speaker, I include pertinent news
articles following my remarks:
[From the Manchester (N.H.) Union Leader,
Feb. Mi. 19691
mamma NIXON FAVORED. PROTECTING
WITNESSES
/By Edith K. Roosevelt)
Wesoinorme.?When he was a young sena-
tor, President Richard M, Nixon introduced
a bill designed to protect government officials
who supply infOrtnation to congressional
committees when asked to do so.
This same bill has now been introduced by
Rep. John Rs Rarick (D-La.). In introducing
his bill on Feb. 17, Judge Ilarick indicated
that the heals would be affect:toe in exposing
security risks by protecting government offi-
cial& like Otto Otepka from departmental
reprisals.
Otepka,? a former State Department secu-
rity Okla, was ?meted from his job after
answering questions truthfully on lax secu-
rity procedures, bedore the Senate Internal
Security Subecenmittee.
Although Nixon promised during his cam-
paign to thoroughly reexamine the (Aspire
case and see that justice was dOne. Secretary
of State William P. Rogers has refused to
reinstate Otepka ist his old job. Otepka is
now preparing to take his case to the courts
as soon at he ends a new laivyer.
OFFERED Stincisoure
The Manehester Unitin Leader and The
Vermont Htmday News reported exclusively
that Mentes lawyer, Robert Robb, had been
offered a judgeship on the Appellate Court
of the District of Calembia.
Bartok believes that by reintroducing his
bill, real insight will be provided on the
attitude of the eo-ealled "new Nixon" to-
wards the doctrine of executive privilege and
national security matters. The bill makes it
a violation for any officer of the federal gov-
ernment to dismiss or otherwise discipline
a government employe for testifying before
a committee of Congress.
Nixon introduced his bill on April 26,
1951, a few. days before the hearings on our
Far Misdeal:I policy, the conduct of the He-
reon. War, and the dismissal of Gen. Douglas
MacArthur by the Preitidente
Nilsen said in introducing his bill on the
Senate floor:
"It Is essential to the security of the na-
tion and the very lives of the people, as we
look into these vitally important issues, that
every Wittiest* have complete freedom from
reprisal, when lie is given an opportunity to
tell what hoknown
TOO MITCH' AT STAKE
"There IS too artroh at stake to permit
foreign policy and military strategy to be
established on the basis 111 half- truths and
the suppression of testimony.
"Unless protection is given to witnesses
who are members of the armed services or
employes Of the government the scheduled
hearings will amount to no more than a
parade of 'yes men' for administration poli-
cies as they exist."
Nixon pointed out that in the past, re-
prisals had been carried out against wit-
nesses employed by the 'U.S. government who
told the truth before Congress. His measure
(S. 1390) was designed to correct this situa-
tion, he said.
"The bill I have introduced is designed
to assure any member ef the armed forces
or other officer or emploge.e of the govern-
ment who can offer pertinent and construc-
tive testimony that lie can speak the truth
without suffering the fate of Admiral Den-
fold on account of such testrraony."
Mailers bin (MR. 6787r,, which is the
same as Nixon's, has been referred to the
House Judkiary Committee.
Liberty Lobby, a populist oriented, ac-
tivist organization in the national Capital,
is urging Ito more than 200,000 subscribers
to support the "Nixon-Remick" bill by a mas-
sive ratter Writing campaign to the Presi-
dent and tile Congress.
[Prom the Chicago Tribune, Mar. 4, 19691
Nurane's STATE DEPARTMENT CLEANUP STILL
MISSING
(By Willard Edwards)
Wessel-meatier, March 3.?A high ranking
state department officer was found fuming
in his office last week. He had just been
informed by friends on Capitol hill that
their entreaties on his behalf for promotion
to a. higher post had been rejected by Wil-
liam P. Rogers, secretary of state.
The .officer was a veteran with an excep-
tional_ record, held back from promotion to
higher levels under Democratic regimes,
everyone agreed-, only because he never con-
cealed his Republican party affiliations.
The office to which he aspired was held by
a Democrat of little experience but with
powerful political connections under the
Johnson administration,
With a Republican administration now
in power, influential G.O.P. senators and
representatives urged Rogers to remedy this
inequity. He sent back word that it seemed
politically unwise to remove the Democratic
incumbent.
The major cause of the officers indigna-
tion, however, was not this rebuff to his
hopes. What irked him was a postscript by
Rogers in his vote to the sponsoring member
of Congress.
"You will be happy to know," Rogers wrote,
"that -we are retaining Mr. --___. in his
present post and, are well satisfied with his
prreormance.
-That was a meaningless statement and
the secretary must have known it," the officer
remarked. "I am a career civil service officer
and the secretary can not touch me with-
oet flung charges of misconduct and prov-
ing them. He can refuse to promote me but
lie cannot demote or remove me."
This incident, plus many of similar nature,
Is being cited by disgruntled Republicans
who have discovered there is not going to
be the "house cleaning" in the state depart-
ment promised by Nixon in a campaign talk
broadcast from Dallas last Oct. 13.
PIXDOES, STATE REPARTNLENT C'T E4NITP
"I want a secretary of state that will join
me in cleaning house in the state depart-
ment," Nixon said at the time. "It has never
been done. . . . It wasn't done even during
the Eisenhower administration.
"There are some good men in the state de-
partment and, I know who they are. The rou-
tine men that have been the architects of
the past, they will have other assignments
and we are going to bring in new men with
a fresh approach."
Coupled with his words nine days earlier,
In an Interview at Williamsburg, Va., in
which he promised to see that "justice" was
accorded to Otto F. Otepka, Nixon's "house
cleaning" pledge led to gloomy forebodings
in the department. There was even specu-
lation that Otepka, the demoted security of-
ficer who has been waging a five-year battle
for vindicatton., might be one of the "good
men" Nixon had in mind.
When Nixon won the Presidency and an-
nounced Rogers as his pick for secretary of
state, '77 state department officers wrote out
their resignations. But when Rogers an-
nounced that Idar Rimestad would be re-
tained as deputy undersecretary for admin-
istration, the resignations were never sub-
mitted to the White House.
"611E1-UPSETS or PAST" SEEM SECURE
The "architects of the past" began to
realize they were safe in their jobs. Their
delight over this development was climaxed
of ,Remarks March 5, 1969
by Rogers' disclosure Feb. 21 that he had
rejected Otepka's appeal for reinstatement.
lie said he saw AO reason to cancel the pen-
alty (demotion, reprimand, and removal
from security assignments) imposed upon
Menke, by his predecessor. Dean Rusk, for
giving frank testimony to a. Senate subcom-
mittee about lax security in the department.
"The Otepka case has stirred up a hor-
net's nest across the country,- said Rep. Ed
Derwinski (R., IlL), a member of the House
foreign affairs committee. "I'm getting a
burst of indignant mail about it.
"I'm going to insist that our committee
question him about it and also about what
he's doing to check security in the depart-
ment. That's the first duty of a new secre-
tary of state."
Meanwhile, reports are gaining currency
here that Rogers is only an interim secretary
of state and will be appointed to the Su-
peme court when a. vaemacy is crested in
June by the resignation of Chief Justice
Earl Warren.
[Prom the Government Employees Exchange.
Mar. 5, 14769]
ROGERS-ROBB "Dorms TALK" Liesms NIXON'S
STRATEGT
A series of "branders" committed through
"doubletalk" by Secretary of State William
P. Rogers and Roger Robb. the Attorney for
Otto P. Otepka, has imperiled the Capitol
Hill strategy of President Nixon to appease
simultaneously the "hard" and "soft" fac-
tions of the Republican party, a high official
in the Department of Justice informed this
newspaper on February 28.
Under this strategy, unit] President Nixon
could "feel his way pragmatically" through
the solution of the Vietnam war, Mr. Rogers
was supposed to play the "sophisticated role"
of appeasing the "doves" while the Secretary
of Defense, Melvin Laird was to appease the
"hawks," the source said.
The Attorney General, John N. Mitchell,
and the Department of Justice were supposed
to appease both groups by 'Selected" appoint-
ments to the bench, the source commented.
"SACRIVE,t. OTEPEA
In keeping with this arrangement Presi-
dent Nixon and Secretary of State Rogers had
agreed it would be necessary to "sacrifice"
Otto F. Otepka, the foriner chief Security
Evaluator of the State Department seeking
reinstatement, to the "liberals," the source
said, by not re-examining his case and rein-
stating him to his job, a position from which
he had been ousted by Secretary of State
Dean Rusk. "It's too bad Otepka, didn't work
at the Pentagon," the source commented.
"There he could have beer, reinstated with-
out any trouble."
However, to keep Ur. Otepka's Senate sup-
porters happy by saving them embarrass-
ment, it was also agreed that the President
would nominate at a very early date in the
future Roger Robb, Mr. Otepka's Attorney,
as a judge on the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the District of Columbia. Under this arrange-
ment, Mr. Robb would have to resign as Mr.
Otepka's Attorney the moment his nomina-
tion wee sent to the Senate for confirmation.
'COBB APPOINTMENT
Mr. Hobbs appointment to the court was
expected by all parties to be approved with-
out delay because of the "high esteem" in
which he was held by the Senate Judiciary
Committee, the source said.
OTEPIC A CO MPENS A T TO N
To compensate Mr. Otepka for his "sacri-
fice" to the Nixon cause of concurrent ap-
peasement of both the "hard" and "soft" lines
in the Republican party, Secretary Elog,ers had
worked out a tentative "deal" with a major
private corporation in the "eerospace indus-
try" to hire Mr. Crteplta, at a salary almost
double he would be receiving as Chief Evalua-
tor at the State Department
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP71600364R000500280009-4
Sir
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 ? LIA-BDP711800364R00050,0280009-4
March 5, .1969 CONGRESSIONAL RECO.K.D?Extenszons of Kemarks E 1659
THE DLUNDERS
The first "blunder" committed by Secre-
tary Rogers, the source claimed was that
neither Mr. Otepka nor his lawyer, Roger
Robb, was informed about the details of .the
prospective private industry job. Instead, in
? a January 21 personal meeting, Secretary
Rogers merely informed Mr. Robb that he did
riOt wish Mr. Otepka in the State Depart-
ment at, all and would arrange for his em-
ployment in private industry.
The second "blunder" was then _made ,by
Mr. Robb, who did not reveal to Mr. Otepka
that he had had a personal meeting 'with the
Secretary Rogers, the source `said. Instead,
Mr. gobhatated that, "third partieS" told him
that Secretary Roger's had- indicated he did
nOt wish 'Mr. Otepka to re-LIM to the State
?
Department as an 'active security officer." `
These two? "blunder" were Compounded
" by a third ' "blunder," committed by "Seer-
retary Rogers, whd, FebruarY 19; in-
formed Mr. Otepka that he had "ConcIncted
'your ease had been fully and exhaustively
litigated within the Executive branch of the
Government in accordance with the applic-
able provision of law and the regulations of
? the Department of State and the Civil Serv-
ice Commission."
According to the 'source, when Secretary
Rogers signed the letter of February 19 he
was 'Under the impression that Mr. Robb had
correctly communicated to Mr. Otepka both
his own offer to And a job in private indus-
try for Mr. Otepka and that Mr.' Robb would
be nominated to- a judgeship.
TEE rtAsco
Both these; impressions were wrong, and
When Mr. Otepka and Mr. Robb had a "con-
. . .
frontation" on. FebrUary 22, it became clear
to pail that a 'fiasco" was imoillient: the
source' said. Th" fiasco" was further
creased' by the fact that both President
Nixon and Secretary Rogers had left the
country on their .European diplomatic toni
and could _not 'be reached immediately.
In the 'meantime, news had begun "teak- -
-in.g out" from the Departirient of Jiletiee
and'the Senate Judiciary Conornittee that Mr.
Robb' s name would be sent to the_ SiSnate
for confirmation Ainniediately following the
President's feting tO Washington.
On February 25, the nationally syndicated
coItunniSto, Edith Kermit Roosevelt '"broke"
?" the story of Mr. Robb's' inaminerit appoint-
meat to the Appeals Court in a 'copyrighted
-report_ published i4 the Manchester
vnion-Leader).
. .
,
-cnAo? toosz
. "All chaos has broken loose the toy
officio], at the Departinent of Justice stated
to this newspaper.
- "Something will be done to patch the ma-
ter up," he added. However, President ',axons
strategy of keeping both the "hard and soft
liners, both the 'hawks' and `doves' happy,
has suffered a serious setback," he concluded.
[From Human Events, Mar. 8, 1969]
ROGERS REJECTS OTEPKA APPEAL
"If Robert Finch is Richard NIXQIVG
Seventh Crisis, then William P. Rogers must
,be his Eighth," is the way one capitol 1-13.11
Commentator put it last week. For not only
has Rogers conspicuously failed to clean out
the State Department, as Nixon promised
would happen under his'Administration, but
the secretary of state has now lowered the axe
On..., Otto Otepka, the State Department secu-
expert who Was 'given a raw deal by the
eaocrats vutixigazjriteii promised to aid
at least three fliiiring the f9'8 campaign.
Rogers' stinging rebuke to Otepka came in
a letter dated February 19?just prior to the
secretary of state's leaving for Europe with
President Nixon. In this. letter, Rogers re-
jected Otepka's appeal for reinstatement as
a high-ranking security officer in the depart-
/Tie-At
"Having carefully reviewed the dOcninerita-
tion," Rogers wrote Otepka, "I have con-
cluded that your case has been fully and ex-
haustively litigated within the executive
branch of the government in accordance with
the applicable provisions of law and the
regulations of the Department of State and
the Civil Service Commission."
Rogers, in effect, then told Otepka he could
give up or take his case to court. Otepka's
only consolation was that the department
indicated it would grant leave pay for a short
while if he decided to make a court appeal?
which Otepka, by the way, says he intends to
do.
The shabby treatment of Otepka by Rogers
cornea as another disappointment to Nixon
supporters who were under the definite im-
pression that the Nixon Administration
would deal far more kindly with Otepka than
did the Kennedy-Johnson regimes.
No fewer than three times during the cam-
paign did Nixon agree to give a sympathetic
look at the Otepka case and in each in-
stance he indicated a partiality toward the
man, though he claimed he would not pre-
judge the evidence.
On April 9, 1968, in a letter to an Otepka
supporter he wrote that he intended "to see
that justice was done to the man who served
his country so long and so well."
On October 4, Nixon told Chicago Tribune
columnist Willard Edwards: "It will be my
intention to order a full and exhaustive re-
view of all the evidence in this case with
a view to seeing that justice is accorded this
man who has served his country so long and
so well."
In late October, James M. Stewart asked
Nixon in Mount Prospect, Ill., to "Please help
Otepka." According to Stewart, who heads
the American Defense Fund which has helped
defray Otepka's legal expenses, Nixon re-
plied: "I will?you'll just have to wait until
I get into office."
? When Nixon went to the Inaugural Ball
held in the Smithsonian Institution, he re-
iterated his pledge to try to help Otepka.
If he supports Rogers' decision?which he
apparently does?then he has clearly gone
back on his campaign pledge.
_ The failure to accord Otepka justice will
be a great black mark on the Nixon Admin-
istration. Otepka, as most Human Events
readers now know (see Feb. 17, 1968, issue for
full story), was a top security officer for
the State Department during the Eisen-
hower-Nixon Administration, but he ran into
trouble when he refused to go along with
?efforp of the Kennedy regime to place peo-
ple in important jobs without proper se-
chrity "clearance. Not only were people with
highly questionable backgrounds getting cru-
cial assignments, but at one point Harlan
Cleveland, our current ambassador to the
'United Nations, asked Otepka "if there were
any prospects for the reemployment of Alger
Hiss in the United States government." Hiss
had been convicted of .perjury for denying his
role as a Soviet espionage agent.
As the Democrats began to lower the se-
curity standards at State, Otepka was de-
Muted, then locked out of his office, denied
access to his files and placed in isolation. A
secret tap, he learned, had been placed on
his phone. He was lied about and at least
three State Department witnesses?after be-
ing threatened with perjury by the Senate?
felt compelled to alter their testimony be-
fore the Senate Internal Security Subcom-
mittee (SISS). Otepka, by the way, always
told the _truth. He was, subjected to what
the SISS called "extraordinary, calculated
harassment because he attempted conscien-
tiously to _carry out the national security
program."
After accusing Otepka of criminal conduct,
the State Department, subsequent to lengthy
hearings, could conclude that Otepka's only
"crime" was his deliverance of `:two memo-
randa and [an] investigative report" to the
duly constituted Senate Internal Security
subcommittee. And all of this material, by
the way, was delivered only after it had been
requested by the subcommittee and only for
the purpose of proving that he had not lied
in sharply disputing statements made by his
superiors.
For this "crime," former Secretary of State
Dean Rusk demoted Otepka and removed
him forever from security duties. Observers
say he probably would have fired Otepka,
but realized he had too much support on
the Hill.
If the Nixon Administration refuses to
come to this man's aid, it will have conse-
quences far beyond the plight of Otepka
himself, who has already gone into debt to
defend his reputation. Surely the failure to
reinstate also signifies a continued lowering
of security standards for government, a pol-
icy that can only imperil the nation's safety.
Equally as important, it tells good, decent
Americans?who tell the truth and do their
duty?that there really is no room for them
in the - U.S. government. Both Rogers and
Nixon are in a position to change all this
with one executive order.
[From Human Events, Mar. 8, 1969]
NIXON OPPOSED TRUMAN ORDER
There's an interesting sidelight to that
Otepka decision of last week. In turning over
three pieces of paper to the Senate Internal
Security subcommittee?the only "misdeed"
the State Department ever encountered on
Otepka's part?Otepka was accused of vio-
lating a March 13, 1948, Presidential Di-
rective which forbids anyone in the ex-
ecutive branch of government to turn over
to those outside the department documents
relating to the loyalty of government em-
ployees. President Truman issued the order
because federal workers were feeding deroga-
tory information on key Democratic ap-
pointees to congressional investigating com-
mittees. (Otepka, by the way, did not turn
over information to SISS for any purpose
other than to prove that he?not his su-
periors?was telling the truth. The papers
contained information in the public domain
and did not contain loyalty or security in-
formation in the proper sense of that term.
Thus he feels he did not violate the Truman
order.)
When Truman issued his directive, Wil-
liam P. Rogers was then chief counsel of the
Senate Committee on Expenditures in the
Executive Department and taking part in an
investigation of an accused Communist.
Rogers, according to those who knew him,
denounced the Truman order as an effort to
impede proper investigation by the Congress,
Richard Nixon, who was then a member
of the House Committee on Un-American
Activities, also denounced it. When Nixon
became a California senator, he introduced
S. 1390, a piece of legislation which would
have effectively repealed the Truman order.
In the April 26, 1951, Congressional Record,
Nixon urged adoption of his measure by say-
ing: "I have introduced in the Senate today
a bill to make it a violation of law for any
officer of the federal government to dismiss
or otherwise discipline a government em-
ploye for testifying before a committee of
Congress." That was Otepka's only "fault,"
so why won't Nixon now come to his aid?
A SENSIBLE CHANGE IN THE
DEBT LIMIT
HON. SILVIO 0. CONTE
OF MASSACHUSETTS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, March 5, 1969
Mr. CONTE. Mr. Speaker, the question
of the debt ceiling receives periodic at-
tention. In fact, we read about how the
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP71600364R000500280009-4
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP71600364R000500280009-4
E 160 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? Extensions of Remarks
Federal Government seems continually
to be asking for an increase in that fa-
mous ceiling. On February 26, 1969, the
Berkshire Eagle of Pittsfield, Mass, ran
a fine editorial on this very subject. I
recommend that it be inchided in the
RECORD because of the importance of the
problem both from a fiscal and from a
pragmatic point of view:
A Saisatant CHANGE IN THE DEBT LIMIT
The fellow who regularly goes on the wagon
every New Year's Day and just as regularly
falls off it a week later is doubly pathetic.
He not only hasn't kicked the habit; he also
suffers the ignominy of having tried and
failed.
The federal government's annual charade
with the debt ceiling is somewhat similar.
Every year Congress solemnly sets a new
ceiling which is supposed to last forever. And
every time a new year with its new budget
rolls around, the ceiling has to be lifted
again.
But now comes President Nixon with a
proposal for a whole new approach to debt-
ceiling ritual?an approach that seems to
make good sense. In a message to Congress he
has asked -that the ceiling be made to apply
only to that part of the federal debt which is
held by the general public?thus eliminating
from the total the large quantities of gov-
ernment bonds held as investments by federal
"trust funds," most notably the Social Secu-
rity Administration.
For all practical purposes these trust funds
are money which the government owes to
itself and, to that extent, can reasonably be
excluded from the debt ceiling. Furthermore,
excluding them would substantially erase
the need for perennial lifting of the ceiling:
It is the trust fund debt, currently rising a
the rate of about $10 billion a year, which
has made it necessary to increase the total
debt Emit even in years when the over-all
budget is in balance. Under the President's
proposed accounting system a debt limit of
We billion (as compared to the present
statutory limit of $365 billion) could be put
into effect with reasonable assurance that it
would last ter many years.
One could easily argue, to be sure, that a
better approach would be to forget about try-
ing to set limits altogether Since there is not
the slightest evidence that setting a limit
has ever had a deterrent effect upon increas-
ing the debt. But this is a fact which neither
Congress nor the public likes to acknowledge.
If nominal debt ceilings are a political neces-
sity, as they apparently are right now, the
Nixon proposal at least makes them less
nonsensierd,
BURKE- BILL WOULD PREVENT FU-
TURE TRAGEDIES
NON. J. HERBERT BURKE
OF FLORIDA
IN THE ROUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, March 5, 1969
Mr. BURKE of Florida. Mr. Speaker, in
November of 1968; the mercy killing and
suicide of an elderly couple who resided in
my congressional district, shocked not
only the people of my area but the entire
Nation itself and served to illustrate the
urgent need for national reform of our
medicare and private insurance pro-
grams.
Floyd P. SIusher, who lived in Holly-
wood, Fla,`, fired a bullet into the head
of his 81-yeaz-old bed-ridden wife and
after killing her, he then took his own
life with a bullet from the same gun.
This tragedy spotlighted the attention on
the thousands of our "forgotten people"
who, like the Blushers, can become pau-
pers overnight when long illnesses attack
one or the other.
Floyd Slusher, who was 74, was a,_prond
man. He paid all of his bills promptly as
they became due, but after paying a bill
of $1,943, he saw his life savings dwindle
to a meager $1,600. And, he faced more
expenses if he was to give his wife, to
whom he had been married for 49 years,
the custodial hospital attention she so
badly needed for the arthritic condition
and pain that had made her a hopeless
cripple.
Mr. Speaker, I can easily see how the
life savings earned by the work and sweat
of so many other elderly Americans can
be completely wiped out with one illness
and how thousands of other families
might wish to end their lives, at a time
when they should be enjoying their twi-
light years, because they find them-
selves paupers and without hope, un-
wanted charity cases, in a society which
fails to recognize their plight. How easy
it is for them to suddenly find their funds
gobbled up by the high cost of today's
medical and hospital care and the con-
stant depreciation of the value of the dol-
lar which they carefully saved for their
retirement.
Today, I have, therefore, introduced
legislation which I hope will prevent fu-
ture occurrences of tragedy such as that
which happened to Mr. and Mrs. Slusher.
My bill would remove the present limit on
the number of -days for which medicare
benefits may be paid thereunder to an
individual on account of post-hospital
extended care services.
Certainly, it is our responsibility to
strive to bring about national reform in
our medicare and private insurance pro-
grams. It is our responsibility also to
insure for our older citizens a more inde-
pendent and sound economic future?not
by words or by plaudits, but instead by
our deeds, to show our respect for the
contributions they have made in their
younger years to making our country
strong.
LAUNCHING OF THE SS "HONG
KONG MALL," NEWPORT NEWS,
VA.
HON. THOMAS M. PELLY
OF WASHINGTON
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Wednesday, March 5, 1969
Mr. FELLY. Mr. Speaker, our colleague
from Virginia (Mr. Dowbuica) called for
a meaningful maritime policy in a speech
at Newport News, Va. The occasion was
the launching of the SS Hong Kong Mail
on February 8, 1989, at the Newport
News Shipbuilding & Dry Dock Co.
Since so many Members want a mari-
time program that will meet the needs of
the United States, I inelude hereinafter
the text of Congressman Dowruarc's
speech:
REMARKS OF HONORABLE THOMAS N. DOWNING
For someone who was born and reared just
a few blocks away from here, this is a mo-
ment of understandable pride for me. This is
1111.trek 5, 1969
my hometown and I will iirsvays feel at home
in it.
We build ships here-sestod ships and the
whole world knows it. And when a good ship
goes down the ways. ,,As Hong Kong Mail
will, in a few minutes, it carries with her
the hopes, prayers, and nest wishes of the
thousands of men and wi imen who gave her
life.
I feel a definite kinship with everyone who
does business with this : hipyard because it
says to me that they too, have recognized
what we here in Newport News have known
all along that this is the greatest shipyard
in the world.
It is a pleasure to be here today and to
join in welcoming Worth Fowler and his as-
sociates to this yard once again. This is the
fourth time in less than a year that one
of the American mail line ships has been
launched here. And I knsw that he and his
vice-president, Ted Somme*, Bill Baptie, chief
of the planning division and designer Jim
Henry are as proud of the occasion as I am.
The fifth and final cargo iiner in the present
contract the SS Ameri,'an Mail, will be
launced here in the middle of April. That
will make five in one year. a record of great
shipbuilding accomplishment?and a justi-
fication of the faith and confidence of the
American mail line.
All five of those ships will continue the
great tradition of this line in plying the
established trade routes which are so vital
to the continued development of American
business and industry. It is imperative that
we maintain these trade route services. It
is imperative that our co-entry do all it can
to maintain them. If we do not, other nations
will move in; the American flag would con-
tinue to disappear in the harbors of the
world; and we would continue along the part
to oblivion as a maritime nation that we, for
some unknowing reason seem destined to
follow.
The maritime life of this Nation is depend-
ent on a great partnership; a four-way co-
operative effort among idle shipping com-
panies, the shipbuilders, fhe men who man
them on the high seas, and the Federal Gov-
ernment.
I find no fault generally with the first
three members of this quartet. But the same
is not true about the Government. We have
no . meaningful maritime policy today. This
lack of concern on the-part of the Govern-
ment is nothing' new. Rot since Franklin
Delano Roosevelt has ant, President of the
United States made a significant contribu-
tion to the U.S. flag merchant marine.
This has not been the fault of the repre-
sentatives of the people. The maritime lead-
ership in both Houses. of the Congress has
shown the way and has drawn the support
from both aides of the political aisle. Un-
fortunately we have been rebuffed by Presi-
dent after President. It was with dismay
that I read in the budget most recently sub-
mitted that once again our Government pro-
poses to subsidize new ship construction at a
rate which will not even keep pace with the
retirement rate of our ever-aged merchant
vessels.
I call upon our new President as I have
called upon his three inunediate predecessors
to reverse this trend; to follow the leader-
ship of the Congress; and to give this Nation
a shipbuilding program which will relieve
the dreadful situation in which we find our-
selves; that of being at the mercy of other
nations of the world s carry our inter-
national commerce:
As a. nation, we cannot survive on 8-10 new
ships a year. At a bare minimum, we must
have a program of 35-40 ships for a number
of years to come. Mr. Fowler and his com-
pany and other progressive operators have
demonstrated their willingness. Mr. Holden,
Mr. Ackerman and the men and women of
this great yard have proven their capability.
We have enough men on the bench now to
Approved For Release 2001/07/26 : CIA-RDP71600364R000500280009-4