DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS, 1975

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP75B00380R000700040022-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 36
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: May 19, 2005
• Sequence Number: 22
• Publication Date: August 5, 1974
• Content Type: OPEN

August 5, 1974 Approved EU e"~sglMX/p6 ffC RDP R,, 80R000700040022-1 S 14313
Senate on the disagreeing votes of the veterans' pensions or benefits, which are Senator yield for an observation, with
two Houses thereon; and that Mr. EvINS fixed by law and are in a contractual and the understanding that he will not use
of Tennessee, Mr. BOLAND, Mr. WHITTEN, legal position. It would be futile to try lose his right to the floor?
Mr. SLACK, Mr. PASSMAN, Mr. MAHON, Mr. to make a reduction, and we should not. Mr. GOLDWATER. I am glad to yield.
DAVIS of Wisconsin, Mr. ROBISON of New Everything to be reduced would be re- Mr. ERVIN. I would like to pay this
York, Mr. MYERS, and Mr. CEDERBERG duced by 3 percent below what the Ap- tribute to the Senator from Arizo}1a, as
were appointed managers of the confer- propriations Committee submitted to the a result of my long service with him in
ence on the part of the House. Senate. the Senate. If he wrestles with his con-
The message also announced that the Mr. GOLDWATER. Would the Senator science, his conscience will win.
House disagrees to the amendments of be favorable to eliminating that cut from (Laughter)
the Senate to the bill (H.R. 15405) mak- NASA, which is a part of this grouping Mr. GOLDWATER. I think it usually
ing appropriations for the Department of of budgets? does, much to my disappointment.
Transportation and related agencies for Mr. PROXMIRE. No. I would be op- Mr. President, at long last, the Senate
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1975, and posed to that, for several reasons. No. 1, apepars to be making a determined effort
for other purposes; agrees to the con- the NASA request is either at or above to do its part in bringing inflation under
ference requested by the Senate on the the budget, and the others, in some cases, control. I applaud that effort.
disagreeing votes of the two Houses are far below the budget. We have one There is no question in my mind that
thereon; and that Mr. MCFALL, Mr. agency, for example, which is about 20 there is plenty of fat in the Federal
YATES, Mr. STEED, Mrs. HANSEN of Wash- percent below the budget, and we are budget-fat that has contributed to the
ington, Mr. BOLAND, Mr. MAHON, Mr. making a further cut of 3 percent. inflationary spiral.
CONTE, Mr. MINSHALL, Mr. EDWARDS of I recognize that there is great merit I certainly intend to support any and
Alabama, and Mr. CEDERBERG were ap- in the NASA position, and I also recog- all efforts to get the fat out. At the same
pointed managers of the conference on nize that the Office of Management and time, I want to make sure we cut-the fat
the part of the House. Budget has reduced it far below what and not the bone.
The message further announced that many people feel is desirable and neces- Last week we had amendments offered
the House has passed without amend- sary. We have to do this on an equal cutting appropriations for Public Works
ment the Joint resolution (S.J. Res. 228) basis, or we have great difficulty justi- and the Department of Transportation.
to extend the expiration date of the De- fying this kind of reduction. On Public Works the cuts failed, al-
fense Production Act of 1950. Mr. GOLDWATER. I ask that because though I supported them. Friday, by a
I think the Senator might agree that in- vote of 58 to 15, the Senate approved a
cluding NASA in this group is illogical. 3.5 percent reduction for the Depart-
ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED It is probably the only scientific appro- ment of Transportation, which I also
The message further announced that priation we have. Well, the National Sci- supported. In both instances, the Senate
the Speaker has affixed his signature to ence Foundation is in it. But the rest do had an opportunity to work its will on
the following enrolled bills: not apply to science. I thought that the one Department and one set of programs.
S. 3669. An act to amend the =Atomic Senator might be agreeable to skipping I submit the case is very different in
Energy Act of 1954, as amended, and the NASA, so that we could get at the rest H.R. 15572, because we have a kind of
Atomic Weapons Rewards Act of 1955, and of it, omnibus appropriations bill covering 11
for other purposes; and Mr. PROXMIRE. I am afraid not. I Departments, Agencies, Commissions,
H.R. 14012. An act making appropriations would have to resist that. I do not see and a Foundation. They are:
for the legislative branch for the fiscal year how we could do that. One could make a Housing and Urban Development;
ending June 30, 1975, and for other pur- very strong appeal to skip the National Funds Appropriated to the President:
poses. Science Foundation and to skip some of Disaster Relief;
The enrolled bills were subsequently the other very worthy agencies here. American Battle Monuments Commis-
signed by the Acting President pro As the Senator from Maryland has sion;
tempore (Mr. JOHNSTON). said, these are people-oriented programs, Cemeterial Expenses, Army;
raw all deserving programs, and good pro- Federal Communications Commission;
grams. I do not see how we can make National Aeronautics and Space Ad-
DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND an exception. ministration;
URBAN DEVELOPMENT, AND RE- The purpose of this reduction would National Science Foundation;
LATED AGENCIES APPROPRIA- be to ease the inflationary pressure. As Renegotiation Board;
TIONS, 1975 the Senator from Arizona knows far Securities and Exchange Commission;
The Senate continued with the con- better than I, NASA does use goods and Selective Service System; and
sideration of the bill (H.R. 15572) mak- materials that are in short supply- Veterans' Administration.
ing appropriations for the Department steel, chemicals, highly trained and As I noted earlier, there is quite a
of Housing and Urban Development, for highly skilled people. For us to exempt grouping of unrelated items. As one Sen-
space, science, veterans, and certain NASA under these circumtsances will be ator has alluded, most are people agen-
other independent executive agencies, extremely difficult to Justify. Gies. But it is hard to see NASA right
boards, commissions, corporations, and Mr. GOLDWATER. The Senator from now as a people agency, although I think
offices for the fiscal year ending June 30, Wisconsin puts this particular Senator it is going to become one.
1975, and for other purposes. In a bad spot, because I have voted con- The funding histories of this group
Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President, a sistently for cuts and will continue to differ, and therefore a straight across
parliamentary inquiry. vote for cuts. I have argued for years, as the board 31/2-percent cut will fall
The PRESIDING. OFFICER. The Son- the Senator knows, that spending money unequally on them.
ator will state it. we do not have has caused our inflation. In 1972, the Congress and executive
Mr. GOLDWATER. Has the Senator As to whether I vote for this 3 percent approved a constant level budget of $3.4
from Maryland relinquished the floor? or not, I will have to go out and wrestle billion for NASA. The purpose of this
Mr. MATHIAS. Yes. I am yielding the with my conscience. Right now, that is budget was to stabilize NASA's expendi-
floor now. not bein gdone, but I might try. tures over the ensuing 5 to 7 years. A mix
Mr. PROXMIRE. If anybody can of new starts were combined with exist-
Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President, I wrestle with the conscience of a con- ing programs.
should like to ask a question of the Sen- servative, it is the distinguished Sena- No sooner was the ink dry on this
ator from Wisconsin. tor from Arizona. agreement, then NASA took further cuts.
Is it true that he proposes to offer an I might point out that NASA repre- If the constant level budget that was
amendment that would cut this overall sents only part of this overall cut. The approved in the Congress had been
budget item by 3 percent? cuts would be made equitably under the carried out, the NASA budget this year
Mr. PROXMIRE. The Senator is of er agencies, too. would be $3.750 billion. In other words,
correct. My amendment would hake an Mr. GOLDWATER. I realize that. the NASA budget that we are approving
across-the-board cut on all the con- thank the Senator from Wisconsin. today is one-half of a billion dollars
trollable items. Obviously, we cannot cut Mr. ERVIN. Mr. President, will the below what the Congress and the execu-
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
S 1.4314 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE f 2t (jtl~f i i i.a
y'e agreed was a sound budget back in
1972.
Now, the 3-percent cut that is being
proposed is, in my opinion, a meat-ax
approach. It does not take into account
the funding history of the agencies
involved. NASA, for example, has had to
r.osorb most of the inflationary increases
without relief.
There are three multibillion-dollar
envies provided for in 11.R. 1.5572. They
?e: the Veterans' Administration at $14
trillion; the National Aeronautics and
5-,pace Administration at $3.2 billion; and
the Department of Housing and Urban
1 =evelopment at slightly over $3 billion.
A look at the employment records of
the three agencies involved tells part of
the story. In 1966, NASA had 35,494 em-
ployees. The Veterans' Administration
had 154,823 and Housing and Urban
Development had 14,329. In 1973, NASA
had 27,540; VA had 16,129, and HUD
had 17,780. Working the percentages
:since 1966, HUD has increased 124.1 per-
?.ent, VA increased 108.6 percent and
NASA has decreased 77.6 percent.
Mr. President, I have a table compar-
r~g NASA, the Veterans' Administration,
.laid the Department of Housing and
:trban Development employment, and I
;i.,k unanimous consent that it be printed
it this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the table
was ordered to be printed in. the RECORD,
as follows:
PAID CIVILIAN FULL-TIME EMPLOYEES WITH PERCENT
KVIATIONS FROM 1966 EMPLOYMENT
_ . _ _ _.
1966
35,494
154,823
14, 329
----
Percent
100.00
100.00
100.00
1967__________
35,703
157.576
14,618
Percenr
100.59
101.76
102.02
1968
34,318
155,174
15,574
Percent--.-
96.86
100.2.3
108.69
1969 -----------
33,707
152,230
14,713
Percent----
94.91
98.33
102.68
1970 ----------
33,062
153,913
15, 422
P.:rcent-___
93.15
99.41
107.63
'171-----
31,135
163,668
17,102
Percent----
87.72
105.71
119.35
1972_ _
28,665
163,988
10,462
Percent _
80.76
105.92
114.89
1973_ _--__
27.540
168,129
Y1,780
Pcrtent
/7.59
108. 59
124.08
Source: Pay Structure of the Federal Civil Service, table 1.
Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President, in
the fiscal year 1965 the NASA budget
was 3.79 percent of the total Federal
budget. Since then it has gradually de-
creased to a point where the estimate
for 1974 is 0.98 percent. This is less than
percent of all Federal expenditures.
For this dollar investment, the lNa-
l.ion gets untold benefits covering elec-
tronics, medicine, computer technology,
and a variety of other areas too numer-
ous to mention. The NASA programs are
an investment in the future. They will
produce taxable dollars. They will in-
crease the wealth of the Nation by pro-
viding better ways of doing things.
Mr. President, one of the better ways
it doing things Is the Earth resources
-r,nd technology satellites. They can de-
tect crop disease, monitor pollution, and
provide flood control information. They
s;an also tell the farmers who live in the
Southwest, which is my home,
arid
whether they are getting enough 1-.ec-
lamation water, or whether they are not. time in the history of many of these
A number of my colleagues would like children, they are being allowed to be
to see the Earth :resources technology educated by people who are, in soma
satellites continue tinder development. cases, thousands of miles away
If this 3.4-percent cut stands, I am Another important thing that I an
afraid that ERTS-,-, which is the next afraid we overlook is that in many c
one that we shall have to put in orbit- the Western States such as Arizona
and ERTS-B has already outlived its where 84 percent of the population is
useful life, although it is producing re- confined In two cities, we have great
markably well; we do not expect it to great areas where there is tit) medics,
be in an operable stage much past Octo- attention: where we have no aospitalr
ber. So we have to get ERTS-C up, if where it is impossible to get a doctor
this valuable service provided to all the to go and live because there arl just no
States and to foreign countries is to be enough people to take care of, We ar^
continued and improved on. now beginning to use satellites to trans;
Mr. President, in testimony received mit medical information. This informs.
before the CommiJee on Aeronautical tion will be fed to a compute:' and th
and Space Sciences last fall, markets for answer to the symptoms will be fee
space processing a-rid manufacturing in back to the parties involved.
the amount of $2 billion per year were Already we are involved in a yreenti an
ever, when the Budget Committee for-- strongly influenced by military con- amendment to the desk and ask fo; As
nially begins its duties. We must look Im- siderations. Very well, then-why does immediate consideration.
inediately for places where money can be the Defense Department not share in the The PRESIDING OFFICEF.. 'I'l}e.
judiciously withheld in order to stem the cost of developing the shuttle? Wh;r does amendment will be stated.
already too high level of Federal expen- it not even specify how the shuttle would The assistant legislative clerk react as
ditures which are a major ingredient in be useful to the military? This whole follows:
the current 12 percent rate of inflation. area of DOD involvement in the shut- On page 2, fine 9, after "$12,500,000- s i r ise
Het us take a look at a few figures. As tle raises far more questions than it the period and insert the following
I said, the committee recommendations answers. ": Provided. That none of these adndi 1 r,--_
for this year for the shuttle is $800 mil- Finally, all sides seem to agree that live funds may be used for the adri.ini r -
lion for research and development, plus the shuttle is necessary if there is to be t;'on of the section 23 leasing program, or
pro- any replacement program, unless the a ai:-
approximately $86 million for shuttle- continuation of a manned space
related facilities costs. Up to now, that is gram. Now, I was as thrilled as any other able, the Section 235 oandoSect onaaie pct -
through fiscal year 1974, the amount American citizen when our astronauts grams, or any replacement programs, is made
spent on the sou tle has been. on the went into space, and when they planted available for commitment, and con -Batted,
order of a billion dollars. But this is only the American flag on the Moon. We can concurrent with the commitment of any
the beginning. The total cost for level- all be proud of the heroic exploits of our contract authority under the Section 23 pro-
oping the space shuttle, by NASA's own astronauts. But it ms,y well be that, in gram, or any replace ment progrv,,,, in
estimates, will be $51/ billion-which the future, we will be able to obtain as ,; tted and rosaid Sect onli 23 moons c.,:. or
means the billion we have spent thus far much useful scientific information from an replacement program or
Y proerrtm."
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 August 5, 19%4 Approved CFor Release ONGRESSIONAL /RECORD DP RQ $OR000700040022-1 S 14317
Mr. DAVITS. Mr. President, the pur- which, under the Budget Reform Act, MMr. JAVITS. And section 23.
r. MATHIAS. And section 23. And, in
pose of this amendment is to zero in on must now be used.
the fact that what there is still contract I favor this action for several reasons. so mandating the balance, I think it ex=
authority available under sections 235 The administration and HUD are now, presses on the part of Congress a sense
and 236 which should be used before the as the Senator from New York has said, of what the policy should be and its im-
section 23 leasing program designed to putting all their eggs in the section 23 portance. It is important but substan-
d T th' kit is im ortant pro-
m p
l
t
replace both of those other programs is
fully utilized.
The amendment does allow for a rat-
able utilization of section 23 in propor-
tion to what is used of the contract au-
thority under sections 235 and 236.
This goes along, it seems to me, with
the general concept of the committee as
reported on page 7 of the Senate report.
Our feeling is that these programs,
especially section 236, are critically im-
portant particularly to the big cities. In
view of the fact that the Department
wishes to rely entirely on section 23, it
runs too much of a risk if it takes a long
time, for example, to install that particu-
lar program. Then you end up with a
lapse in the existing programs, which are
extremely beneficial, especially to us in
the cities, and the figures I have show
approximately $237 million left in sec-
tion 235, and $167 million left in section
236. So this amendment takes an elemen-
tary precaution to see that we are not
completely out of any program for a cer-
tain period of time which can really
stimulate housing until such time as the
expended section 23 program may be in-
stalled, financed, and administered.
It is just more of a lapse than we have
any right to invite, especially with a
tremendously falling number of housing
starts today.
I notice the committee at page 7 says:
The Department now wishes to rely en-
tirely on what is called the new Section 23
program, a program of leased housing to re-
place the conventional public housing pro-
gram, and Sections 235 and 236.
The Committee feels that it would be a
tragic error to take this course. First, Sec-
tion 23 may not work. Second, if it does
work, it could take a very long time to go
into effect. Third, even if it works, It may
not do two important things, namely, serv-
ice the kind of low income families that
public housing helped, and build in the
regions of areas where housing is most
needed.
So, it seems to me, Mr. President, for
these reasons that this would be a de-
sirable amendment to take to confer-
ence.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, will
the Senator from New York yield?
Mr. JAVITS. I yield.
Mr. PROXMIRE. I congratulate the
Senator from New York on the amend-
ment. The Senator is an amazing Sen-
ator. He served years ago on the Banking,
Housing, and Urban Affairs Committee,
but he has not served for some time on
it, and yet he is extraordinarily alert.
I have been on the Banking, Housing,
and Urban Affairs Committee ever since
I have been in the Senate. We have Just
been in conference this morning on
something very close to this issue, sec-
tion 235 and section 236 of the authoriza-
tion bill. The amendment of the Senator
recognizes there are now some $240 mil-
lion in appropriated but unspent section
235 funds, and about $170 million, I be-
lieve, in section 236 funds. These are
funds which have been impounded and
y an
lve
basket. It is a new program.
Now, section 23 may not work at all. cedurally, so I think it is a good amend-
It is an untried program. ment, and I have no doubt that it will
Second, if it does work, it may take a meet with considerable support in the
very long time to get going. HUD claims other body.
they will commit $1.2 billion in a year. They have mentioned this area in the
I do not think that is at all possible. They House report on page 7 in which they
have had this section 23 on the books now use committee language which tends to
for many, many months, and they have
yet to have one single start. There were
no starts at all.
When we approved public housing
under the 1949 act we said that 810,000
units should be built in 6 years. It took
20 years to do that.
When we passed section 221(d) (3) for
moderate-income housing in 1962, we
said we should build 45,000 units in a
year. It was not until the sixth year that
the total of 45,000 units were built. So
section 23 may take a long time to work,
if it works at all.
Third, even if it works, it may not even
reach the income groups now covered
by public housing or by section 235 or
section 236. It may not build in the
suburbs or in the central city or it may
work in one place but not in another.
It may work in the South but not in New
England; it may work in the West but
not the Midwest.
For all these reasons, it is wrong to
put all our eggs in the section 23 basket.
Section 235 was not a failure. Where
it failed, as in Detroit, almost all the
other programs failed because of corrup-
tion. In Wisconsin, less than 3 percent
have failed in a program where we ex-
pected initially as high as 15 percent
failures.
One measure of its success is that the
funds for section 235 are actuarially
sound. That means that it has. worked
as Congress intended.
People have gotten off subsidy. The
Government pays less than it did before
in subsidies to those in section 235. This
program has worked and should not be
the victim of HUD's mismanagement
and HUD's propaganda.
I, for one, am happy to accept the
amendment with a proviso as a part of
the legislative or appropriation record
for, I believe, sections 235 and 236 and
section 23 units should march together,
as the amendment provides. I do not,
think the total funds for all of them
should exceed the total originally pro-
posed by HUD for section 23. We are not
expapding funds; we are changing the
mix.
With that proviso, I am happy to ac-
support the thesis that the Senator from
New York has spoken on today. So, on be-
half of the minority, I am happy to ac-
cept it.
Mr. JAVITS. I thank my colleague very
much.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ques-
tion is on agreeing to the amendment.
(Putting the question.)
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I move to
reconsider the vote by which the amend-
ment was agreed to.
Mr. PROXMIRE. I move to lay that
motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the. table was
agreed to.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I am
happy to yield to the distinguished Sen-
ator from California (Mr. CRANSTON).
Mr. CRANSTON. I thank the Senator
very much.
I have several questions of the Senator
from Wisconsin, and I would like to dis-
cuss with the distinguished chairman of
the HUD, Space Science, Veterans' Sub-
committee of the Appropriations Com-
mittee (Mr. PROXMIRE), and its distin-
guished ranking minority member (Mr.
MATHIAS) a number of issues pertaining
to VA medical appropriations as con-
tained in the Appropriations bill reported
from committee. At the outset, I would
especially like to thank both of them and
the other members of the committee for
their continuing cooperation in working
together on VA Appropriations and other
matters of such great concern to. all of
us. Particularly, I am most grateful for
the opportunity they have provided to me
to suggest certain matters which might
be discussed in the committee report and
for their sympathetic treatment for those
items in the pending committee report.
First, I would like to call attention to
the language included in the report at
my suggestion stating the strong view of
the committee that VA medical and hos-
pital personnel must not be included in
any government-wide freeze which may
be imposed by the President. The report
clearly points out the disastrous impact
this would have on the functioning of
the VA medical and hospital program.
cept the amendment. Specifically, the report states:
I ask my distinguished colleague from The Committee is aware that the Presi-
Maryland (Mr. MATHIAS), the ranking dent recently announced plans to make sub-
Republican on the committee, for his stantial cutbacks in total Federal employ-
views. ment throughout the Government. The Com-
Mr. MATHIAS. I would concur with mittee wishes to express its very strong view
the chairman's views. that any personnel freeze or other personnel
I also thank the distinguished Sen- limitations resulting from such a Govern-
ment-wide policy should not be applied to
the medical and hospital employment within
making this valuable suggestion which, the Veterans Administration. In 1972 the VA
as I would interpret it, really seeks to hospital and medical program suffered from
mandate a balance of section 235, 236- the effects of a Government-wide freeze on
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
1.4318 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE An qu-t
ril,-lug which had an absolutely disastrous
impact on the capacity of the VA system to
provide quality patient care. Based on that
perience. it is projected that over a full
-F. ar the VA medical program could be e., -
pected to lose over 11,000 ernplovees-based
upon an attrition rate of between 10% and
i ; - -especially in the fields of pathology,
!.r.diclogy, nursing, and medical administra-
tion. Of these. the vast majority would be in
he cursing service (over 8.000), the most
ri i,wal direct patient care category, where
urinal VA attrition runs from 15% to 20w,.
would like to ask the distinguished
tor managers whether they will do
their best to see that this same language
`r; included in the joint explanatory state-
ient to accompany the conference re-
es; sr t. on this bill?
.Vir. PROXMIRE. May I say to the
cliatinguished Senator from California
that I agree wholeheartedly. In an
irnendment which I expect to offer
shortly, which was discussed in part by
the Senator from Arizona, one of the
areas I feel we could not, should not, and
must not reduce is the very area the Sen-
ator has referred to. These are strong,
ibsolute commitments we have to meet,,
and.1 would agree wholeheartedly.
Of course, I speak only for myself, and
the Senator from Maryland speaks for
himself, but we would do our best to pre-
vail on our colleagues on the Senate side,
and hope that the House would see clear
to be with us; but I think the Senator
from California is correct.
Mr. MATHIAS. As one who is unhappi-
ly all too well aware of the inadequacy of
existing VA medical services in many
regions, I could not in conscience sit still
for any chance that they would be fur-
her decreased, so I am happy to give
that assurance.
Mr. CRANSTON. It would be very use-
f'ul if the joint explanatory statement to
accompany the conference report would
contain language similar to the report,
and I was asking whether that would be
the endeavor of each of you; is that
correct?
Mr. MATHIAS. Yes.
A,1?. CRANSTON. You will both seek to
have similar language In the amend-
rent?
y, PROXMIRE. That is my position,
es.
lir. MATHIAS. It certainly is mine.
UIr. CRANSTON. Thank you very
much.
Second, Mr. President. I would like to
point out for the Information of my col--
leagues what the distinguished subcom-.
inittee chairman and I have previously
discussed with regard to the adequacy of
the amount included in the reported bill
for VA medical care. The committee has
sustained the House increase of approxi-
mately $16 million for 1,000 new nursing
personnel. I believe, however, that an ad-.
dit.ional appropriation of at least $1503
B=illion more is needed to Improve the
quality of VA medical care. I have dis-
cussed this matter with high officials at
the White House and the Office of Man-
agement and Budget and have good rea-
son to believe that a supplemental budget,
request will be forthcoming from the ad-
ministration this month. Frankly, Mr.
President, I believe that the White House
has already had ample time to submit
such a supplemental request since it has
had-for over 2 months-the report and
findings on the VA hospital system which
were submitted by the VA Chief Medical
Director, Dr. John D. Chase, on May 31,
1974.
1 have discussed the recommendations
to this report with Dr. Chase and
strongly believe that the $150 million
figure I have cited as necessary in sup-
plemental appropriations for the VA
medical program is fully in line with his
findings. These funds are most urgently
needed to increase core VA hospital
staffing by at least 8,000 personnel, to
activate certain projects to provide more
ambulatory care space and facilities and
for certain crucial specialized units, such
as Intensive care units, and to ;provide
for certain maintenance and repair of
urgent electrical and other structural
deficiencies, as well as to expedite cer-
tain air-conditioning projects.
I wish to emphasize that this $150 mil-
lion figure is actually a conservative
one-amounting to less than one-half
the amount which VA hospital directors
reported to the House Committee on Vet-
erans' Affairs, in response to Its survey
just completed, as representing addi-
tional dollars which they need now and
which were not provided in the target
allowance based on the budget request.
The total amount of that deficiency, on
the basis of the House survey, is $305,-
282,000.
So, Mr. President. I am not satisfied
with the medical care or construction
amounts in the pending measure. But I
recognize the great desirability of pro-
ceeding to consider additional appro-
priations in committee, rather than on
the floor, and in connection with a sup-
plemental budget request if one can be
forthcoming. Thus, l: have agreed to the
request of the distinguished subcommit-
tee chairman not to press a floor amend-
ment at this time. It; is my intention to
proceed, however, with a supplemental
appropriation amendment at the next
available opportunity whether or riot the
administration comes forward with a
supplemental request.
My question for the distinguished floor
managers is this: Can I have your as-
surances that you will proceed to inves-
tigate the report and findings of Dr.
Chase's survey and that you will give
sympathetic consideration to any sup-
plemental request ghat may be forth-
coming based on that survey for more
VA medical care funds?
Mr. PROXMIRE. May I say to the Sen-
ator from California, that we will cer-
tainly Investigate the report and find-
ings of Dr. Chase's survey. If they send
up a supplemental request, we will have
hearings, call witnesses, give it consid-
eration.
I do not think the Senator froir. Cali-
fornia would expect us to make a com-
mitment until we know what is requested
and consider it.
I would give it high priority. but will
not make any commitment that we would
go ahead with any particular amount un-
til we know what It is, and with the in-
flation situation with what we can do.
Mr. CRANSTON. ;f did not expect a
commitment today. I am perfectly satin
fled with a commitment for higi piorit
and sympathetic consideration.
Would the Senator from Mat ylaa-
comment, also, on that point'?
Mr. MATHIAS, Well, I would cel i ainl.
feel that the report which attempted t,
give the Congress some sort of ob,ihctiv
view of the quality of veterans' incdi.cc
care would be one of the most In ix rtaan
items of business Congress could Luive.
I would cooperate in every 'l'ay wits
the chairman of the subcommittee i?
calling Dr. Chase before the ccrnmittei
calling witnesses we might need to sup
element his testimony, calling , ?itr,esse
who might even criticize his repo;-t, sa
that we can get a thorough vier Ol jus
what the levels of quality of ca -e That ought to be done, I think,, with
out any delay whatever, as socis th,
report is available, I think we out ht t
look at it.
Mr. CRANSTON. I thank the Senator
Mr. President, we all want tc, proceecl
in a bipartisan and a consensual man
ner in respect to this appropristion fo.
VA medical care.
Because of the Vietnam I. Mi
President, the problems of runnir)_c the
vast VA medical system are more stag
gering and complex than most A -neri
cans realize. The Veterans' Afif,irs Sub-
committee on Health and I-iosl_,itals
which I am privileged to chair, has com-
piled data showing the Vietnam war ha:
resulted in an increase of seriously dis-
abled veterans-more quadriplegic vet
erans, more veterans with multiple iln
juries-requiring intensive care anti re-
habilitation. A survey of Army perst?naac
released from the service demonstr.atee
the severity of the disabilities the VA
medical program must cope witl.A npu---
tation, paralysis of extremities fine::
nervous disorders comprise near!,. 6(.
percent of the 12,466 servicemen >(!pa-
rated for combat wounds and in,iuriea
from 1964 through 1972.
Of 18,556 Army personnel seam a-tec
during the same period for both combat
wounds and diseases buffered in Viet-
nam, 58 percent were caused by c ri1) )Yini;
Injuries to the bones, especial!: of the
feet and legs. This compares with 21
percent in World War II and 24 percent
in the Korean conflict. Another 13 per-
cent of these Army medical retircc; sufi'et
from mental disorders.
The number of Vietnam veterar,?; re-
ceiving medical care in VA facilities rep-
resents a substantial proportion o) the
patients. Of those veterans recoiling out-
patient care in fiscal year 1973, 2.2 mil-
lion were Vietnam veterans, or over 2u
percent of the total 10.8 million,vhc
ited outpatient facilities. In the f -st 0
months of fiscal year 1.974, 1.2 rnil,lion
were Vietnam veterans or 20.7 lie? cent
of the total 5.8 million veterans who vis-
ited VA outpatient clinics.
Admissions to VA hospitals of 'Iiet3:lan
veterans for both years ran at ai)our
13 percent of all admissions--in li ca
year 1973, 123,000 Vietnam veteran:; out
of the 905,000 total veterans athiu led
and in the first 9 months of i's,-al ear
1974, 97,000 Vietnam veterans out of the
713,000 total veterans admitted.
These statistics clearly indicatehal
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
August 5, 1974 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE S 14319
the VA medical system must have an
adequate number of neurosurgeons, plas-
tic surgeons, psychiatrists and other
highly _ skilled specialists, and nursing
and technical personnel support them.
As I have said, I believe we need at
least $150 million more for, medical care
than the administration requested in its
fiscal year 1975 budget. We have an obli-
gation to pay in full the human costs of
this war by providing a truly first-class
VA medical system for our, disabled vet-
erans.
But, at the same time I am sure that
the distinguished floor managers would
agree with me that we cannot defer this
matter much further to accommodate a
forthcoming supplemental budget re-
quest at the expense of the seriously
disabled veterans of the Indochina war
and all our prior wars who must rely up-
on the VA to tend to their wounds, treat
their illnesses, and provide for their rapid
recovery and rehabilitation. Would you
agree?
Mr. PROXMIRE. I would agree.
Mr. CRANSTON. Mr. President, the
Senator from Wisconsin referred to
the amendment that he intends to offer
shortly.
I would like to ask if I am correct in
my understanding that the amendment
to be offered by the distinguished sub-
committee chairman (Mr. PROXMIRE) to
make across-the-board cuts-of 3 per-
cent throughout the bill-in new obliga-
tional authorities will exempt from those
cuts the VA medical care, medical and
prosthetic research, medical administra-
tion and. miscellaneous operating ex-
penses, readjustment benefits, general
operating expenses, and compensation
and pension items, and thus the only
major itelfi to which it would apply would
be to amounts appropriated for construc-
tion within the overall VA budget? Am
I correct?
Mr. PROXMIRE. The Senator is cor-
rect for several reasons. One, of course,
is the overwhelming moral reason, we
have an obligation to our veterans and
will fulfill that completely.
The second reason is that we consider
virtually. all of this uncontrollable, a
matter of law, a matter of absolute ob-
ligation by the Appropriations Commit-
tee.
We have no alternative on it, so the
Senator's description is correct.
Mr. CRANSTON. I thank the Senator
very much.
Mr. MATHIAS. Since the Senator from
Wisconsin is the author of that amend-
ment, I think his statement is the best
evidence on it.
Mr. CRANSTON. Yes, that is why I
did not press for an analysis from the
Senator from Maryland.
Mr. MATHIAS. Let me say that I am
not one who is very enthusiastic about
this kind of amendment, to start with,
but that I would have to oppose it ex-
tremely vigorously if it were to cut into
these items. But the Senator: from Wis-
consin with his usual good judgment, I
think, has made it clear that it will not.
Mr. CRANSTON. I thank the Senator.
Mr. President, finally, I want to ex-
press my disappointment that the com-
mittee has eliminated totally the $30
million added by the House for assist-
ance for health manpower training in-
stitutions as authorized by chapter 82,
title 38. I believe that at least $20 mil-
lion of this amount is fully justified and
can be and will be obligated during this
fiscal year, if appropriated, for grants
to medical schools and other health
manpower institutions as well as to VA
hospitals pursuant to subchapters II, III,
and IV of that chapter. This program
has been traditionally a zero budget re-
quest by the Office of Management and
Budget since the enabling legislation
was enacted in October 1972, in Public
Law 92-541.
I consider this program vital to the
health care mission of the Veterans' Ad-
ministration Department of Medicine
and Surgery on the basis that health
education and health research programs
are an indispensible part of modern hos-
pital-based medical programs and that
these grants serve to strengthen greatly
the capacity of VA hospitals and-their
staffs to provide quality care to disabled
veterans.
I would like to urge the distinguished
floor managers to study this matter
carefully during the conference with the
House committee and to be sympathetic
in their evaluation of the $30 million
which the House has added for the pur-
poses I have just described. Would the
distinguished floor managers agree that
this matter should be carefully studied
and agree to work with the House con-
ferees to provide those funds which can
be effectively used under this important
program?
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, we
will have to do that, because of course
it is in conference, but I would like to
call the attention of the Senator from
California to page 35 of the report, two
short paragraphs at the top of the page:
The Committee has not recommended an
appropriation for Assistance for Health Man-
power Training Institutions, for fiscal year
1975. On July 23, 1974 the Committee was
informed by the Veterans' Administration
that a total of 77 grants had been tentatively
approved with a first year funding require-
ment of $25,738,000. These tentatively ap-
proved grants were chosen from 190 that had
been submitted with a first year cost of
$71,466,000.
To date only $930,000 has been obligated
for, grants for new State Medical Schools,
leaving $24,070,000 available for obligation
from the prior appropriation of $25 million.
For grants to existing affiliated medical
schools $4,311,000 has been obligated and for
grants to other Health Manpower Institu-
tions a total of $3,242,000 has been obligated,
leaving $12,447,000 available for obligation
from the prior appropriation of $20 million.
This is why we felt that there were
funds here for this program. I am sure
the Senator recognizes this is a new
program, highly controversial program,
and we should proceed with dispatch
to the extent we can be satisfied it is
workable. But also in view of the fact
that it is new, we felt there ought to be
some caution. That is why we cut it
out.
Mr. CRANSTON. I thank the Senator
for that comment. It is my information
that there now exists, in the pipeline,
grant applications that can take a total
justified expenditure of an additional
$20 million to cover these grants. I
'would like to simply read one more
paragraph which immediately follows
those paragraphs from the report which
the Senator read:
The committee is aware that a zero ap-
propriation for fiscal year 1975 will limit
the ability of the Veterans Administration
to make new grants under subchapters II,
III, and IV of chapter 82, which was added
to title 38 by that Public Law. Nonethe-
less, the committee will certainly be follow-
ing the appl'.cation process in connection
with such new first-year grants, and will
give consideration to providing funds in a
supplemental appropriations act, if the need
can be justified by those applications.
I am grateful that that language was
included.
Mr. MATHIAS. If the Senator will
yield, I believe we have given full assur-
ance of the committee's interest in this
field. It seemed to be redundant to ap-
propriate when the funds were already
on hand, unexpended and unobligated
at this time. If there is real need, a
pressing need, for further funds other
than those which have not been ex-
pended in the past, and which have
carried over, we could give very prompt
and, I think, very sympathetic consid-
eration.
Mr. CRANSTON. I thank the Senator
very much. We will do our best to docu-
ment that need. I understand there are
applications for grants that would jus-
tify an additional $20 million. I thank
both Senators very much.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I send
to the desk my amendments and ask
the clerk that they be stated.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendments will be stated.
The assistant legislative clerk pro-
ceeded to read the amendments.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that further read-
ing of the amendments be dispensed
with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
The amendments are as follows:
Senators PsoxarmE, CHILES, HOLLINGS, and
NIINN propose the following amendments
to the bill H.R. 15572, a bill making
appropriations for the Department of Hous-
ing and Urban Development; for space, sci-
ence, veterans, and certain other independent
executive agencies, boards, commissions,
corporations, and offices for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1975:
On page 2 line 9, strike out $12,500,000
and insert in lieu thereof $12,125,000.
On page 3 line 15, strike out $22,500,000
and insert in lieu thereof $21,825,000.
On page 3 line 26, strike out $200,000,000
and insert in lieu thereof $194,000,000.
On page 4 line 13, strike out $125,000,000
and insert in lieu thereof $121,250,000.
On page 4 line 24, strike out $110,000,000
and insert in lieu thereof $106,700,000.
On page 5 line 5, strike out $39,000,000
and insert in lieu thereof $37,830,000.
On page 5, line 11, strike out $50,000,000
and insert in lieu thereof $48,500,000.
On page 5, line 20, strike out $70,000,000
and insert in lieu thereof $67,900,000.
On page 5, line 26, strike out $6,320,000
and insert in lieu thereof $6,130,400.
On page 6, line 7, strike out $11,900,000
and insert in lieu thereof $11,543,000.
On page 6, line 14, strike out $5,580,000
and insert in lieu thereof $5,412,000.
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE iI1fgtt-? t d,
(In. page 6, line 17, strike cut $3,530,000
and insert In lieu thereof $8,424,000.
,. page 6. line 20, strike out $6,830,000
,co insert in lieu thereof $6,ci25,000.
.._ page 6, line 24, strike out $19,513,000
ci insert: in lieu thereof $18,927,000.
,,: page 7. line 4, strike out $29,446,000
insert in lieu thereof $28,562,000.
f nr page 8 line 6, strike out $4,512,000 and
+n ^rt. in lien, thereof $4,376,640.
r as,. cage 9 line 2, strike out $265-.000 and
in lieu thereof $257,050.
;,, page 9, line 18, strike out $46,900,000
mri insert in lieu thereof $46,759,000.
in ,age 10, line 9, strike out $2,349,080,000
Olt! insert in lieu thereof $2,278,607,000.
n, page 10, line 16, strike out $144,490,000
And insert in lieu thereof $140,155,000.
!In page 13, line 8, strike out $749,124,000
,ii d insert in lieu thereof $726,650,000.
,_W: page 14, line 8, strike out $675,000,000
and insert in lieu thereof $660,958,000.
On page 15. line 9, strike out $5,000,000
and insert In lieu thereof $4,860,000.
On page 15, line 17, strike out $5,163,000
and insert in lieu thereof $5,008,000.
in page lii, line-24, strike out $43,077,000
Slid insert in lieu thereof $42,947,000.
tin page 16, lines 9 and 10, strike out $38.-
600,000 and insert in lieu thereof $37,345,000.
On page 20, line 8, strike out $230,850,000
and insert In lieu thereof $223,924,000.
On page 20, line 20, strike out $45,150,000
and insert In lieu thereof $43,796,000.
On page 21, line 2, strike out $10,000,000
and insert in lieu thereof $9,700,000.
i71a page 21, line 7, strike out $2,100,000
and insert in lieu thereof $2,037,000.
On page 22, line 14, strike out $100,000 and
insert in lieu thereof $97,000.
+n r, PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that the amend-
roents be considered en bloc.
'rile PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
\'Ir. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I am
proposing an amendment to cut 3 per-
cent essentially from the controllable
items in this bill. The cut would not
affect three major categories of items:
First. HUD's contractual housing pay-
ments which have been reduced by $125
million by the committee; second, the
$200 million disaster relief funds given
to the President; third, those fixed items
In the Veterans' Administration budget
such as pension, veterans' benefits, and
so forth, which are fixed items and which
are paid as a right. What this means is
that only about one-fourth of the total
funds in this appropriation bill can be
subject to this further 3-percent cut
across the board. But they should be cut.
In the subcommittee and full commit-
tee of the Appropriations Committee we
worked our will and increased a few pro-
grams, cut others, and essentially
granted the funds requested to still
others.
i"ihat I am proposing now is that we
c=_it a further 3 percent across the board
iii the controllable items.
Inflation is the country's number one
problem. If we are to meet inflation, we
peed to cut the Federal budget.
's'wice the Senate has voted to cut the
budget or place a ceiling on the budget of
$295 billion, once by a vote of 74 to- 12.
That is a $10 billion cut in a $305 billion.
ladget, or about 3 percent.
are two very strong Senate votes for a ago, I believe on Thursday or kriuay,
$10 billion cut. If we mean business, we the Senate voted on the transportation
should carry out that general intention appropriation bill. Senator Bvs1 the
in the bills before us. manager of the bill brought in a. oieas-
I am therefore proposing that we cut ure that was under the budget, under
3 percent from those controllable items the House, and then in addition t that
in the bill. The amount of the controlla- he proposed a 3-percent floor cut, xr am-
ble items is $5,337,474,000, and 3 percent proximately a 3-percent cut, on ai the
of that amount is $160,124,000. controllable items in that measure '1Cha.t
Let me say that I am not proposing to passed by a 4 to 1 vote. I think the Sen-
cut veterans' benefits, pensions for vet- ate made it very clear that even t?lougti
erans, their widows, or children, would, there were programs they wante 1 arid
along with other uncontrollable items, supported, we must recognize th i,t in-
make up well over two-thirds of the flation has now reached a stage n our
funds in the bill. I am proposing we cut society where we have to act on i.
those items which are not controllable. Mr. President, I do hope thi t the
We should make no distinction between Senate will give these amencmerits,
and among programs. Every agency favorable consideration.
should have to take its fair share, Mr. DOLE. Will the Senator yield"
namely, a 3-percent cut. Mr. PROXMIRE, I yield to tl e c14-
The distinguished Senator from Arl- tinguished Senator from Kansas.
zona (Mr. GOLDWATER) made a very elo- Mr. DOLE. Mr. President. I ask irialli-
quent appeal as only he can-became he moos consent that I be joined as a co-
Is so familiar with the space program- sponsor of the amendment.
for the space program to be exempted. The PRESIDING OFFICER. ,A ithout
Mr. President, I just cannot see any objection, it is so ordered.
ground for picking them out any more Mr. DOLE, I have listened verb care-
than I can the National Science Founda- fully to the Senator. It has beer Indi.-
tion, the Securities and Exchange Com- cated in the past few days on the Sell.
mission, or any other number of ?,gen- ate floor there is nothing troubling the
ties which are absolutely essential for American people more than inflation.
the operation of our Government in a According to a recent poll, 48 erceitt
fair and equitable way, but which in my of the American people feel thzt the
view can absorb a 3-percent cut. Government is responsible for inflation
It is not as if we are cutting 50 peicent. and it is clear that Federal spen..i.ing is
We are cutting 3 percent. I think all of one of the primary contributing factors.
us have had enough experience in Gov- In this morning's Washington Post, I
ernment to know that it is possible, or in noticed an article, which was ~reatiy
business to know that it is possib'e, to heartening to me, entitled "Public Gives
cut 3 percent without cutting the real Better Mark to Congress." This leading
muscle or bone of any operation. Is especially heartening to me th-s year,
These agencies are not necessarily fat as I am sure it is to other Senators.
and lazy, but a 3-percent cut is some- However, upon reading further into
thing they can do in this period of very the article, I was dismayed to see that
serious inflation without great sacrifice, the improvement in public attitude to-
Inflation is now running at double ward Congress only reflects tha'? of 29
digit numbers. Unquestionably, it is the percent of the population. At the saane
No. 1 issue, the No. 1. problem, for 210 time, 64 percent feels that the C,ulg*, eat
million Americans. I: think they feel is only doing a fair to poor job,
overwhelmingly this Is something they One reason for the low public regard
would like to have faced. for Congress is undoubtedly inflation,
In my State of Wisconsin I recently which has become the biggest economic
sent out a questionnaire to over 100,000 issue in the country today. The people
people. I asked them whether they would are looking to us for action on this mat-
favor a $10 billion cut in the Federal ter and we should not fail them.
budget. As part of the answer, because it The time to act is now. Today we are
was part of the same questionnaire, I considering the HUD appropriation bill
indicated what they had to cut. I pointed and this measure presents an oppor'tu-
to the military budget, the Space budget, nity to reduce inflationary . eden i1
and the various other'oudgets. spending.
I was astonished by the response. By FEDERAL sPENDING RESPONSIBLE FOR ii ILA I furs
a 10 to 1 margin, 89 percent to nine High Federal spending has been icleri-
percent supported a Federal budget cut tified as one of the primary causes of
of $10 billion. I think if you can get al- inflation. The President has stati.d that
most 90 percent of the people in my a, $5 billion cut in the budget is ne ressal'Y.
State to approve anything it is astonish- Others, both in the administration and
ing. We have a State that disagrees on the Congress, have advocated cuts of $5
almost any issue you can find. I ant sure to $10 billion. The best econonlist in
if you asked 100 people whether they the Nation have stated that a reduction
loved their mother you would not get in Federal spending is absolutely es sen-
that kind of response. tial to prevent inflation from get, ing out
So I think it should be clear to the of hand.
Senate of the United States that this is As I have said many times in the past
something that the people want, some- week, the reduction of Federal saencli;cig
thing that they recognize very wisely. If is one area where we could demonstrate
we are going to do anything concrete our commitment to doing so,netii1cit
.to, voted to do that on June 13. Prior itis something we should do. So for that
to that, on May 9, we passed a similar reason I would hope this is adopted.
amendment by about a 2-to-1 vote. Those One other point is that just a few days
the Senate to reduce the budges. in tthe
past few days. Cut were nearly r chieved
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 August 5, 1974 Approved F ir AJ/OkE BDP7c 9 8000700040022-1 S 14321
in the Treasury and Public Works ap-
propriation bills last Wednesday and
Thursday. Finally on Friday, we were
able to cut the transportation appropri-
ation bill by 3.5 percent.
VA BUDGET EXEMPTED
It should be emphasized that this
amendment specifically exempts the
funds for the most vital veterans' pro-
grams. Most veterans and their surviv-
ors are having a difficult time as it is
living on the meager pension and com-
pensation they receive.
Veterans have already made a sacri-
fice for the country which we can never
totally repay. Most of the funds in the
VA budget are obligational expenditures.
These funds cannot be reduced and I do
not support cutting them.
Hopefully, the Senator's effort today
to cut 3 percent of the controllable items,
not touching the contractual or fixed
items, will be successful.
Mr. PROXMIRE. I thank the Sena-
tor from Kansas.
I would like to say one more thing be-
fore I yield to the Senator from Mary-
land, Mr. President,
As chairman of this subcommittee I
had a chance to sit in on every single
minute of the hearings on this bill. The
hearings are very substantial. I ,am. con-
vinced, on the basis of the record, that
we can make this kind of reduction with-
out any serious damage to the agencies.
In fact, I think their performance might
very well be improved. As the perform-
ance of business is improved, the per-
formance of even a family may be im-
proved, if they are careful and more
prudent about their spending.
So for that reason, too, because I
think I understand these agencies-they
all had an opportunity to appear- under
these circumstances this cut is a respon-
sible cut and a reasonable cut. It should
not cause any serious curtailment of serv-
ices to the American people.
I am happy to yield the floor.
Mr. MATHIAS. Mr. President, our sub-
committee operates, in. general, in such
harmony and operates on the basis of
consensus so often that I am very reluc-
tant to oppose the suggestion that has
been made by our chairman. But I do
feel that it is necessary to oppose this
amendment, and I think it has to be op-
posed on both practical grounds and
grounds of principle.
The practical grounds are very real.
When we consider the facts that have al-
ready been given to the Senate by the
Senator from Arizona (Mr. GOLDWATER)
about the reductions in force and the re-
ductions in level of expenditure that
have been made in NASA, and then when
we consider that by this amendment we
will require, we will mandate, the riffing
of approximately 3,000 more employees
at NASA alone, we question whether that
agency will really continue to have an
independent existence, whether it really
is worth it.
Let us consider the impact of this
amendment on the NASA program. I in-
quired about that over the weekend, and
I was advised that the Space Shuttle,
which is already well beyond its pro=
jected schedule, would be delayed by an
additional 18 months.
The Senator from Kansas says that
he is concerned about inflation. I am
concerned about inflation, and I think
we all ought to save all the money we
can. But if the Senator from Kansas
wants to worry about inflation, he ought
to consider the ultimate impact of this
cut on inflation.
As the Senator from Arizona has laid
it out very clearly, we have ahead of us
the prospect of saving 20 percent of the
electricity which is transmitted by long-
distance lines. If we can save 20 percent
of the electricity on long-distance lines,
we are going to do more for. inflation,
more for the international currency posi-
tion of this country, because of the sav-
ing in the oil that would have to be
bought overseas, than we possibly could
by this amendment, which would cut
very vital Government agencies and ex-
penditures.
I think the practical factor here is
that this cut is too deep. I have joined
the chairman time and again in any re-
ductions that I thought were necessary,
but- I believe that this one does go too
far. I have said that I thought it was bad
not only in practice but also in principle,
and I think the form of the amendment
demonstrates that point. It is not an
across-the-board cut. The chairman-I
salute him for that and support him in
it-has exempted certain elements in
this' bill from the cut. He has exempted
the so-called uncontrollable items. We
cannot have an across-the-board cut, by
definition, and I think it indicates that
we cannot have an across-the-board cut.
There are some uncontrollable items, and
this is not really an across-the-board cut.
It is a cut which is directed at certain
programs. It hits them so hard that it
really raises serious questions about the
viability of those programs at the levels
at which they would be left if this
amendment were adopted.
Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. MATHIAS. I yield.
Mr. PASTORE. I thought I heard the
manager of the bill say that none of the
veterans' pensions or payments to or-
phans and widows would be cut. My
question is this: Will the people who will
have to administer these programs be
cut?
Mr. MATHIAS. It is my understanding
that the general administrative expenses
of the Veterans' Administration will be
cut.
Mr. PROXMIRE. No, that is not the
case. The cut would be in construction.
It would be confined to construction, so
far as the Veterans' Administration is
concerned.
These are the amendments: page 20,
line 8, VA construction, major projects;
page 20, line 20, VA construction minor
projects; page 21, line 2, VA grants for
construction of State extended care fa-
cilities; page 21, line 7, VA grants to the
Republic of the Philippines; page 22, line
14, vocational rehabilitation revolving
fund.
There would be no reductions any-
where else. We would not cut the people
who would administer these programs,
because we felt that these were obliga-
tions of right, obligations under law, and
we are not in a position to have the au-
thority to make that reduction.
Mr. PASTORE. I have another ques-
tion for the manager of the bill or his
counterpart on the Republican side of
the aisle. We had a very scandalous rev-
elation not too long ago with respect to
some of our Vietnam veterans who had
returned. Some of them were paraple-
gics; some were quadriplegic. Some could
not even light their cigarettes. They did
not have the facilities. Many of these
hospitals are very old-from World War
I and World War II. They have not been
modernized. They do not have the equip-
ment to take care of some of the very
peculiar injuries that have been caused
by the kind of war that was conducted
in Southeast Asia.
Many of these hospitals are not air-
conditioned, and some of these young
people cannot even move, cannot even
use a fan in order to give themselves a
little fresh air. They have to just sit in
the sweltering heat.
Does this proposal mean that we cut
this out, too?
Mr. PROXMIRE. In the first place, it
is a reduction of 3 percent below what
the Appropriations Committee appropri-
ated.
Furthermore, last year $68 million was
appropriated. This year, $223 million
would be appropriated after the cut. So
we increased this by more than three-
fold over last year.
Mr. PASTORE. I realize that as to the
space program, that may be necessary.
I am not going to defend that on the
floor of the Senate this afternoon. I
think that possibly we ought to take
care of the people on Earth before we
begin to explore any more out in the blue
yonder. Why can we not exempt com-
pletely the Veterans' Administration?
We have these boys who, against their
will, have served ,their country. They
have returned maimed-some without
arms, some without legs. If there is any
money here to put a little air-condition-
ing in a hospital where they are stretch-
ed out on a bed, why do we take that out
this afternoon? Why do we not exempt
the Veterans' Administration com-
pletely?
Mr. PROXMIRE. We have exempted
about 90 percent of it. The only part we
have included is the construction of fa-
cilities, and this construction is a mat-
ter of timing. This is something that does
go right to the heart of inflation. Steel
is in short supply; many other elements
that go into construction of these fa-
cilities are in short supply. it is enor-
mously increased over last last year.
If it were a bigger cut than it is, I
would agree with the Senator. But we do
not cut any of the treatment for the
veterans, any of the direct services for
veterans, any of the pensions for vete-
rans, or anything of that kind.
Mr. PASTORE. I realize that. I am
not saying it does. I handled this budget
in the past, and the plan was to do it in
a very gradual way, to modernize some
of these veterans hospitals. Some of them
are in very bad shape.
We are saying to these veterans, "As
far as you are concerned, you suffer a
little more, because we have a little in-
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 S 14322
Approved For Re s ? Qffl iC J ffBOQJf &700040022-1 ugust 5, 1974,
flation in this country." I think we should
take it out of where we can and not put
it on the backs of these veterans who
were badly wounded.
Mr. PROXMIRE. I say to the Senator
from Rhode Island that we have given.
by far, the greatest consideration to the
veterans. Of the total amount in the bill,
$21 billion, as the Senator from Rhode
Island knows, about two-thirds, $14 bil-
lion, is for the veterans. We exempted
virtually all of that.
t appreciate the remarks of the Sena-
tor from Rhode Island.
Mr. CHILES. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. PROXMIRE. I am happy to yield.
Mr_ CHILES. Mr. President, I want to
compliment the Senator from Wisconsin.
T serve on this subcommittee. He has
worked long and hard on the appropria-
tions,
ti; seems to me that the design of this
amendment, which exempts completely
those items having to do with veterans
benefits and the hospital care, recog-
nizes what we are trying to do for the
veteran. At the same time, it recognizes
that the veteran is suffering from in-
flation as much as or more than anyone
else, especially the Vietnam veteran. He
is the victim of inflation, because he is
in the highest category of the unemploy-
ed today. He is the individual who is
having the toughest time in the economy
today. This is also true with respect to
many of our other veterans who are
drawing pensions and are trying to live
on the pittance we are giving them-fixed
funds-and at the same time we see the
cost of living escalating.
So anything we can do to try to stop
inflation is going to be of more benefit
to the people who are in this category
than anyone else.
I applaud the Senator, because I think
that he-together with other Senators-
is attempting to get a grip on inflation,
and that is the most important thing
that one can do for the veteran today.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield on that point?
I should like to reinforce what I said
to the Senator from Rhode Island and
what the Senator from Florida is saying:
Whereas we are cutting substantially in
the other areas, we are cutting less than
one-tenth of 1 percent of the veterans
budget-one-tenth of 1 percent.
We are cutting far more, in proportion
30 times more in these other budgets.
And I think that is right, because I think
the veterans deserve everything we can
possibly provide them. Therefore, to slow
down a little bit, slow down the facility
construction by 3 percent this year, it
seems to me, is just a modest step.
Mr. CHILES. If the Senator would
yield further, in the area of HUD, and
I know it is very tough for those of us
who are concerned with adequate hous-
ing. and with trying to house people in
America and provide adequate housing
for them, to consider any cuts in this
area. But I find the prime reason that
we cannot have any more housing in this
country is that the interest rates are so
high, there is no construction money and
the people cannot get funds to build
houses.
The reason for that, again, is infla-
tion. If we want to get something started
in housing in this country, if we want to
start people being able to own a house
again, we are going tc have to do some-
thing.
Mr. President, the observation that the
junior Senator from Florida is making
is that, I think, the amendment of the
Senator from Wisconsin might help in
the movement that some of us are trying
to make to reduce the deficit we are
laboring under this year. If we can cut
the spending back to $295 billion and get
back to the place where we are in a
balanced budget situation, then perhaps
we will be in a position to get something
done about the interest rates.
I think the interest rates are of more
serious concern to housing starts, which
are really affecting my State tremen-
dously. I can tell the Senator that; un-
employment is growing every day in my
State because there is no construction
money available. There are no funds for
housing available, and people have
stopped trying to buy a house or build a
house because of the tremendous inter-
est rates. So only if we can do something
about that matter can we turn this sit-
uation around in that regard.
Mr. MATHIAS. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield for a question at this
point?
Mr. CHILES. I yield.
Mr. MATHIAS. I certainly agree with
him that we have to size every avail-
able chance to economize. I think that
Government spending does play a major
role in inflation. I think the subcommit-
tee, under the leadership of the Senator
from Wisconsin, has already demon-
strated its awareness of that in bringing
the bill to the floor in its present :form.
But what about problems such as that
presented by the National Science Foun-
dation's budget? In that budget, al-
though we have already enacted a big
energy bill with separate funding for the
year that just ended, the have $98 million
in indirect energy programs, and we are
projecting for fiscal year 1975, $149 mil-
lion in indirect energy programs. That
is $66 million higher.
These are program,, that are directed
at one of the major causes of inflation,
which is a shortage of energy. If we cut
back the National Science Foundation-
and in this bill we have already cut back
the budget estimate by $6.4 million, and
we shall cut it back tinder this aniend-
ment roughly another $20 million; that
is $26 million or a little more-a:re we
not in the shape of the dog that finds
itself chasing its tail? We are making
what we hope is going to be an anti-
inflationary move at the same time, that
we are taking this step which may have
proven, itself, to be inflationary.
Mr. PROXMIRE, Mr. President, will
the Senator yield on that point?
Mr. CHILES. As I recall, we are talking
about, before the cut, an increase of
$174 million above last year. As I look
at the programs of the National Science
Foundation-and I support their pro-
grams-I think it is important that we
continue basic research and that we con-
tinue some specific research. But we all
know that there are many programs that
are now being performed by the National
Science Foundation that are certainly not
productive for next year or for 5 years or
20 years from now, for instance, if they
are studying the eating habits of the
African ant and some of the other studies
that we see are undertaken.
I think what we are saying to them
is that they have to look at their priori-
ties and, hopefully, they are not Boling
to cut anything as important as research
technology, of immediate -applica;don in
the energy field. Perhaps they will not
go out and get some of these programs
that are of such an exotic nature that
we have tremendous complaint,,: from
our people as to why we do not ,ontrol
some of that research in a better way.
So I think what we are talking about
cutting here in no way will handicap
them, and again it gets down ro this
thing that if we talk about cutting public
works, someone says, "Don't cur, here,
cut everywhere else," and if ae tallt
about cutting space, I usually feel I am
for cutting everything else, but I hate to
think about cutting space because that
is getting into the interests of the area
where I live. We all have to consider the
special interests of our constituents.
But if we are going to do something
about spending overall, we have to do
something about cutting overall.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, ;l jutst
want to reinforce what the Senator from
Florida has said so wisely.
The National Science Foundation does
not have to take a penny for any of this
out of space research.
The basic research budget for this year
is well above last year's budget, in fact,
far above it-by some 20 percent or
more. So I think the Agency can achieve
a modest cut by reducing increases in
such areas as materials research and bio-
logical sciences, and eliminating the in-
crease in funding for social scienc s.
Social science research is particularly
suspect, with projects ranging fr>ra In-
terpersonal Relations Within ti Fam-
ily" to "Ethnographic Atlas of Quadros,"
and "Conflict, Justice, and Coo,pera-
tion"-a study of traffic challenges at
intersections.
There are many other projects, as we
pointed out, costing a quarter of a mil-
lion dollars in some cases, several hun-
dred thousand dollars in others many
of which projects are simply not within
the expertise of the National Science
Foundation. They have one project, for
example, which studies hog farming,
which certainly ought to be a project
within the jurisdiction of the Depart-
ment of Agriculture. Others are clearly
within the Law Enforcement Assistance
Administration. There are many cuts
that could be made without cutting the
research which the National Science
Foundation should be making In the
energy area.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. CHILES. I yield to the Senator
from South Carolina.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, as to
the National Science Foundation, for the
information of my colleague from Ma:ry--
land, about 5 weeks ago we passed a spe-
cial research and development aun?opri-
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 August 5, 197 Approved Folt~1/L06fP75A000700040022-1 S 14323
ations bill, and within that bill, the very rather take your money away from where Budget committee chairman arose and
point the Senator from Maryland speaks your mouth is, and cut it back $10 billion." said, "We are going to staff, we are
go-
to, was an appropriation which amount- But the President asked for only a $5 lug to consult; we are going to get room,
ed, overall, to $2.3 billion. We are not billion cut. we do not have all the wisdom, we are
being puny or backward or unrealistic We also have been trying to bring out going to study."
toward the energy problem. On the con- the flaw in comparisons between the- bill Absolutely, I do not denigrate that. I
trary, we have boosted it all up. We said, as reported and the budget request. Be- am on that Budget Committee and I
"We have got a crisis, and we have got cause we must get $10 million below know we are not ready yet to act-the
to apply the funds to it, particularly in these requests, it is not enough for a bill Republican members, for example, have
the field of research and development, to be "below the budget." We in Con- not yet been appointed. But who in this
and particularly with respect to the Na-
r
ess, particularly we in the Senate-the
tional Science Foundation." g
Under that bil nd tio"ed $101 mil- beer distinguished Presiding Officer, the Sen-
, we
has
to the National Science Foundation, been a from leadeOklahoma (Mr. r er In this particular drive,
So we are not, all of a sudden, coming with with a myself and others, oterss, , Including ,
d the
here and, like the Senator says, saying Senator from Florida and the Senator
we have an energy crisis but th
en
exacer-
bating the crisis by not providing the
funds necessary to solve it.
Mr. MATHIAS. But the Senator from
South Carolina would agree that those
appropriations were for areas not cov-
ered by programs in this bill, would he
not? These are energy research programs
which are independent of the major bill,
which, as the Senator very properly says,
the Senate has already passed and
funded.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, I
would like to agree with that, but, serving
as a member of the Technology Assess-
ment Board, I have to"demur from that
judgment. They keep telling us, on the
one hand, that this covers a particular
item exclusively, and then we go through
,
ve
e manager of the bill
it on another particular program, and suggest the method of reduction, instead
we now have, at the request of both the of those of us, who do not have expertise,
House and the Senate, within the Tech- trying to do the job. Instead of saying,
nology Assessment Board, a coordinated "Do not cut off veterans, do not cut off
effort to try to out out exactly this dupli- uncontrollables" or trying to make dis-
cation. abling economies, the Senator from Wis-
It is fine to put the money to it, but it consin has gone down line for line to see
is very wasteful and contributory toward where he can effectuate the so-called 3
the inflation itself, if we are going to percent economy and make a saving
continue to duplicate, where it can be taken.
If I may say another word, I want to
commend the distinguished Senator from
Wisconsin on his leadership on this par-
ticular score. Every time we turn around,
we are asked, "What in the world are
you meat axes trying to do here on the
floor of the Senate?"
Well, in the first instance, we are try-
ing to be a meat ax, and yet, at the
same time we are trying to keep faith
with respect to actually doing something
on inflation.
This body, in great sobriety and
solemnity, met on May 9, when inflation
was crashing about us, and we voted
some 56 to 33 in favor of the amendment
of the Senator from Wisconsin (Mr.
PROXMIRE) to cut back the total of the
budget from $305 billion to $295 billion.
That was' some 3 months before the
President of the United States finally
recognized the problem on August 1.
Again, even before the President gave
his economic message, we cut back
some $5 billion; we had, on June 13, an-
other vote on Mr. PROXMIRE'S amend-
ment, and this one was 74 to 12.
I will never forget trying to listen to
the President's economic message. I
said-
logical, realistic way, to-come-down .to
this $295 billion level.
We knew of no way other than across-
the-board cuts after the bills get to the
floor-not, of course, affecting the un-
controllables.
So, as these budgets came rolling for-
ward, $500 million over last year, $620
million more than last year-you could
just see that rather than cutting back
to the $295 billion level, that we were
really going to be $5 billion to $10 bil-
lion above what the President requested.
We got the leadership and cooperation
of the Senator from West Virginia on
his bill, and it is, indeed, a better situa-
tion with respect to these appropriations
bills
to ha
th
Whether that will completely balance
us, and mean a $10 billion cut at the end
of the line, we do not know, but if we
start now-as on this bill today, and on
the Interior bill on Wednesday, as we
did on Transportation last week-we will
be able to reconcile, at the end of this
year, as we did back in 1967, when we
put in a joint resolution at the end of
the year on the continuing resolution. At
the end we can see where we did not
make cuts and where we did, and we can
put it all in order so we can come back
out of chaos, say that the Senate is run-
ning the budget once again, with only 14
dissenters in the entire body: on a $295
billion budget.
That is what the Senator from Wis-
consin is leading toward, and that is
what we, as a small group from both
sides of the aisle, are trying to apply
here today and again on Wednesday.
I think that the other leaders in the
Senate with respect to the chairmen of
the several committees should realize our
dilemma when we get to the Budget
Committee. I was not going to interject
the Budget Committee because we had
not met, but the distinguished Senator
from Mississippi, on his bill, with a
That gentleman Is going to cut us off at grand gesture to get authoritativeness,
the pass; he is going to call our hand. He is authenticity, credibility for what he was
going to say, "All right, you are over there, doing with the "pork barrel," said, We
now, asking for a $10 billion cut; sort of will hear from the chairman of the
place your money where your mouth is, or Budget Committee." And, of course, the
say, "No, not this year, not at this time."
It is at this time, in the month of Au-
gust, that we are in this terrible dilem-
ma of raging inflation-look, yesterday
David Rockefeller said that we could
have a panic-can we not have, as the
Senator from Wisconsin on his- bill, that
posture of saying, "We do mean business.
We will cut back now. This year."
On that score I commend the Senator
from Wisconsin for his leadership.
Mr. NUNN. Will the Senator from
Florida yield.
Mr. CHILES. I am delighted to yield.
Mr. NUNN. I would like to commend
the Senator from Wisconsin also, and I
would like to join the Senator from
Florida and the Senator from South
Carolina in expressing my sincere hope
that the amendment of the Senator from
Wisconsin will be agreed to.
The Senator from South Carolina, I
think, went through the history of this
movement by a bipartisan group of Sen-
ators consisting of the Senator from
Oklahoma, who is now presiding; the
Senator from New Mexico, who is not
on the floor at the moment
the Senator
,
from Kentucky, and the Senator from
Florida, I would say the group started
off as a very small group, but it has now
grown, it is now growing, thanks in large
measure to the leadership of the Senator
from Wisconsin who earlier proposed
and had passed the overall amendment
of trying to hold down Federal expendi-
tures to $295 billion this fiscal year.
One of the regrets the Senator from
Georgia has now is that we have already
disposed of 6 appropriation measures in
this body totaling $30 billion, and the
momentum was not strong enough to
carry out significant cuts as those appro-
priation bills rolled through, even though
we made every effort to do so.
. So we have already reached a total of
$30 billion in appropriations, which, ac-
cording to my calculations, is more than
15 percent of all the appropriations
requested.
According to my further calculations,
the net effect of efforts to cut the budget
estimates so far has been minor. The net
reduction I come up with is $16.6 million
out of a total of $29.9 billion. This is
a good deal less than one-half of 1 per-
cent in reductions so far.
Everyone has his own estimates of
controllable expenditures. One can get
any kind of definition, and I understand
that the current OMB definition is that
we can control only about $13 or $14 bil-
lion of the entire budget.
Well, if that is the case, I think we
might as well throw in the towel if we
have a $305 billion budget and we can
control only about $13.5 billion of it. I
believe, as do many others, that we have
a good deal more control than this. A
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 Approved For ReOlVC3Rj~,gJ A~.: J,-PB75BWp 0070004002241,tgu. 0,
3 casonable measure of our control is the
;c tal of the appropriations we must con-
;ider. I know the veterans appropria-
Lion is not in this case because most of
hat program is in fulfillment of a
n;cdemn obligation. We all want to do
,vhat we can for those young men who
a?e veterans and who have given their
nest for this country, as did their fathers
,eel grandfathers.
Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield right at that point?
Mr. NUJNN. I am glad to yield to the
senator from south Carolina.
Mr. HOLLINGS. The distinguished
Senator is aware, after working on this
veterans' problem, that of the entire $14
billion involved in this appropriation bill,
the amount involved in this amendment
is $8.8 million. I think the exact dollar
amounts in there are very appropriate in
this part of the remarks of the Senator
from Georgia, because what we are doing
is just-in that $8.8 million-really not
effectuating a large economy, but letting
the veterans themselves share in this
he will sup-
d
i
,
nce
drive which, I am conv
will not really De cu-ing -u "u-1-
.pert. anybody. We will be cutting inflation, coiiaa itte. because really it was
Mr..NUNN. I am glad the Senator from and by cutting inflation we will be re- to come out with a bill that would not
South Carolina has pointed out that it storing the budgets that inflation. has get fattened maybe we the flooblishin;; some are es
is an important part of the amendment. been eroding away. But But of the total appropriating authority So I might just summarize by s: ying kind of a pattern with that last amend-
we have about $195.9 billion out of a to the Senator from Florida, who has ment we had on transportation, and
total of $322 billion of new budget au- been so kind to yield--I will state t:zis in with this one, and as we go forth until
thority y estimated, and if we had been the form of a question for the purpose of tomorrow, and the other bills that will
able to get the momentum, which I be- discussion-if we are able to cut the in- come up, we are establishing a 7a1tern
lieve is underway now, if we had been flation rate down from 10 percent, 11 where some of us can get into a habit
able to get it going from the very out- percent, to 6 to 7 percent, will not the of voting no, and get into a habi?h of
set of this process, instead of scoring the agencies that We are talking about now, getting to cut something.
first success on Friday, thanks largely to and the recipients of Federal funds be When we can establish that pattern
the Senator from South Carolina, the better off even with a 3 or 4 percent then we have got an ability to to back
Senator from Florida, the Senator from budget cut? and look at this $30 billion we have al-
CHILES. The Senator is absolutely ready passed, and see what we should
Kansas, and the Senator from West Vir- Mr
.
ginia, on his initiative, we would have correct. We are seeing now every day
d a considerable amount of money when we start worktag with the a.ppro-
abe
if we go back to the very beginning of
the appropriation crisis, we would have
to impose a 5 percent cut on all the ap-
propriation measures. But now that we
have passed approximately $30 billion of
those appropriation measures with little
net reduction, that percentage has al-
ready moved past 6 percent. So we are
losing ground every day that we do not
make these cuts, and this failure is im-
posing more and more of a burden on
the remaining appropriation bills.
I have further remarks I would like
i;o make at an appropriate point later,
Mr. President. But, at this point, I would
like just to express my congratulations
to the Senator from Wisconsin. He has
been a real leader in this regard. It is
not easy to cut the HUD budget; it is
not easy to cut the space effort; it is not
easy to cut the Department of Defense
budget; but I think it is necessary.
I would like to point to one argument
that has been made here, not today, but
previously which I think represents the
seriousness of the present situation. I
hope that argument has faded away into amendment the other day by the distin- sumer protection. Only ao Scaia':una ., te__
the wind and we will not hear it any guished Senator from West Virginia Who against that measure even though it wa
more because, to me, it is absolutely fal- moved to cut his own appropriat'.on, but 29 percent higher than last year and ex
lacious. The argument is, and it has been at least we are star Ling a pattern. ceeded the President's estimate for thl.-,
made very simply that if we do not spend At least we are getting a habit what year. But I recall that in the next fey-
this money now on construction, if we may be a habit, to be able to vote on days the vote swelled to 26 who votes.
E
do not spend this money now on other this floor once to cut soa~teinmg. ~u~v
Government programs, that, my good- many years it been since that habit dr s
ness, we going have to spend irore prevailed? next year rbecau etinflat on is going up Carolina gives a us something about 196'?.
so high. I was not here then, but maybe it h s
To me this is a laughable proposition. been that long since the Senate ever di,d
This is something that Art Buchwald anything, and Congress ever did an ???
ought to write an article about, that we thing to decide they could cut some him ?.
better go ahead and speed it now because The habit has been over all these
we have got such an inflationary rate years that on the floor you only add at id,
that if we do not spend it now, next year of course, many times we know----and
it is going to cost more. What the argu- I applaud the Committee on Appropnia-
ment overlooks is that we are the ones tions-many times for saying, "We had
who are causing that inflation, in large better add something in this committee
part by the expenditures. I would like because if we turn it loose on the floor
the people inHUD and the people in the we know that that addition will be nius'h
Space Agency and the people in the De- higher."
partment of Defense to understand what So the Committee on .Appropri atica'i
we are doing to them every year when has only sort of reflected what ha.;aeeia
we see 10 and 12 percent inflation. This the will of the Senate, and I think if
is the equivalent not of a 3 percent they think the will of the Senate-- know
budget cut, if you have 10 or 12 percent the distinguished chairman of tha: corn-
inflation: This is the equivalent of a 10 mittee, the Senator from Arkansas, if he
or 12 percent budget cut. So if we can get knows the will of the Senate is to hold
a grip on excessive Federal spending, if down, you watch and see what he wilt
we can indeed cut $10 billion out of the do with that committee. He will be a
budget this year on an equitable basis, we cutter as fast as anyone. He has been
ing to fight a. battle of delay in that
.. .. .
-1 tr
t
y
Then I think we also have the ability
of having the real experts, and the
junior Senator from Georgia and the
junior Senator from Florida readily ac-
and we know it is different for different knowledge, I think, we are not experts.
areas. If it is the military we know that We do not know much about fiscal mat-
we have got to add the salary factor for reaction that
inflation, the weapons cost factor .or in- terswe. We think is coming a from gut our reactio e that
flation, the installation cost factor for in- we ought to do something about this
flation; and that is different depending spending.
upon whether you are talking about con- We do not know the best way to do it,
struction or you are talking about wages. so we come up here and stumble and
So if we reduce that automaticaly, the blunder with a meat ax or whatever
Senator is right. The same with a cut of else you want to call it, just crying out
dollars, they would 'oe getting the same to get the experts' attention so that they
thing they are paying for. I think the will do it in the proper way.
Senator is so right, it is kind of like Pogo, But I think if there has to ke a pat
who said, "We have discovered the enemy tern, and if the Senate does in a couple
and they are us." That is kind of where of these amendments, then the expert=s
we are now. will be patterned to see what we need to
Thank goodness vre are at that stage, do and what the will of the Senate is. I
or I hope we are, and I want to asso- think they will come up with a better
ciate myself with the Senator's remarks. way of doing it than we are doing at
I think he has given us a very good present.
scorecard of where we are today, and Mr. NUNN. I would agree wiithh the
how many budgets we passed, and cer- Senator from Florida, if the Senator will
tainly we cannot really pat ourselves on yield for a minute. Talking a'xut thi
the back and say we have done anything pattern, I think it isinteresting to note
with, hopefully, tae success of this what happened last week when we started
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 August 5, 1974 Approved FQ,i-"RJ/O*EBDP7RQR000700040022-1 S 14325
against the bill when it came back from ToN) and the Junior Senator from Okla- from Florida for giving me the oppor-
conference. homa (Mr. BARTLETT) may be added as tunity to express these remarks.
I know the Senator from Florida, the cosponsors to this amendment. . Mr. CHILES. I thank the distin-
Senator from South Carolina, and I, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without guished Senator from Wyoming. I would
could not be more involved in any bill objection, it is so ordered. like to associate myself with his remarks
than with agriculture. Mr. HANSEN. Mr. President, I am the and I think he has always been one who
Mr. CHILES. It was not easy to vote ranking Republican on the Committee has tried to practice what he preaches
against that measure. on Veterans' Affairs and I am certain and not only vote for a cut in spending
Mr. NUNN. No; although I would say many veterans will be wanting to know and a ceiling of $295 billion, the bill that
the farmers are getting a good deal less why it is I shall be supporting an amend- was first introduced by the distinguished
money out of that bill now-I think they ment which, among other things, cuts Senator from Wisconsin who is now the
get about $2 out of every $10 spent in that certain items in this budget by 3 %2 per- proposer of this amendment, but has
appropriations package-but I could not cent. also been willing to back up that vote
look my farmers in the eye in Georgia It has already been pointed out that with voting for specific cuts.
and say that I have done anything for there is appropriated by the committee, I think for too long too many of us,
them by increasing this bill if at the of recommendations reported, in excess including the junior Senator from Flor-
same time we are taking 10, 12, and 13 of $14 billion to the Veterans' Adminis- ida, sometimes voted against the debt
percent, out of their pockets with infla- tration. I call attention to the fact that ceiling or voted for some kind of spend-
tion. only $8.4 million is being cut by this ing ceiling as a public relations gesture,
Nobody, except possibly the consumer, amendment which means that the cut but never really seriously thinking that
has been hurt more than the agricultural will be about one-twentieth of 1 percent. we had to come up and pay off that vote
community by inflation because fertilizer I say that because we are all concerned by voting to cut some kind of project
prices have gone up 100 percent and the about the veterans, for those young men that might influence or affect us at all,
gasoline prices and the propane prices and women who have served our country like a vote on an agricultural appropri-
that they have to pay for have gone up gallantly and who deserve the very best ations bill, or a public works bill, or even
at a staggering amount. we can give them. this bill, because certainly this affects us
Tracing this history again, as I said But I think the fact remains that by all. We are all concerned with housing,
as we voted on the agriculture and en- taking the action which I hope the Sen- Many of us are specifically concerned
vironment and consumer protection ap- ate will take here today in approving this with space and the National Science
propriation, there were 26 negative votes. 3-percent cut it will not hurt the veteran Foundation and other portions of this
We next had the Treasury and postal or any other person in America, but bill.
appropriations, and. 42 Senators voted rather will be of help to him. But if we are going to talk about com-
unsuccessfully to cut the amount of the I say that because I am convinced that ing down to a balanced budget, if we are
bill. Then, on the next vote, 41 Senators if there is one thing that concerns the willing to vote and be one of those that
voted for a 5-percent cut in the public typical American today, it is runaway voted $295 billion, then that takes more
works appropriation knowing it would inflation. The only way, Mr. President, than that vote.
affect all of us. It affects Georgia; it af- that we can get a handle on that is to It takes being willing to, in some way,-
fects me. I have been to the chairman do precisely what we propose here this scale that down.
of the Committee on Public Works and afternoon to do, and that is, to take each As the distinguished junior Senator
other people and asked for projects in and every one of these budgets and to from Georgia has recited, regardless of
Georgia and I intend to go back, but I cut them back so as to bring down the whose kind of figure of controllables you
do not think there is anything in Georgia excess of expenditures over receipts to come up with, that means that you have
in that bill that would survive the 5- a reasonable, workable amount. to make some serious cuts in a number
percent cut. Unless we do that, despite the fact of places if you are going to be able to
Nevertheless, 41 Senators voted against that we may propose to pay more to get down to that figure.
that, knowing it would affect us. everyone in true purchasing power, they Mr. HANSEN. If the Senator from
And our ranks rose to 44 on the next know as most Americans already know Florida will yield for a further observa-
vote to cut that measure by 3 percent. that it is a sham and a charade and tion-and I know the Senator from
So the handwriting was on the wall at money does not buy as much as it did Utah is anxious to speak-let me say
point. last year. this: There is not a single item in this
I think the Senator from West Vir- The concern of Americans today is whole budget that does not have a con-
ginia made a very notable achievement that we stop this erosion of their pur- stituency. By that I mean there is not
in leadership here on the floor of the chasing power. Unless we do that, there any place you can cut where a cut would
Senate by next offering to cut his own is serious concern in the minds of many be popular.
bill, the transportation appropriation, leaders in America today, including those Mr. CHILES. It is over here because
by 3 %2 percent. in the Finance Committee as well as in it had a constituency that put it here to
At that stage, 58 Senators joined in. government and in business, that there start with.
I believe this demonstrates the build-up is grave danger for this Republic. Mr. HANSEN. Precisely. Every dollar
of a significant momentum. I believe the The alternatives that we have to ex- in here had someone interested in that
Senator from Wisconsin today is going amine as we reflect upon ways of doing dollar. I know of no fairer way to try to
to add to that. otherwise, or what would the effects be reduce total expenditures than to pro-
I commend the Senator from Florida if we do not make the cut that has been ceed in the fashion indicated here this
and the Senator from South Carolina as proposed now, are frightening indeed. afternoon.
members of the Committee on Appro- I am very proud that there is the I thank my colleague.
priations and, I believe, the Budget Corn- support that is evident here today to Mr. CHILES. I yield to the Senator
mittee, for the leadership they have dis- take this step. I wish that it might have from Utah.
played in this regard. started sooner. It has been recounted on Mr. MOSS. I thank the Senator.
Mr. MOSS. Will the Senator yield? the floor earlier that efforts were made, I commend him and the others who
Mr. NUNN. The Senator from Florida at first unsuccessful efforts, but I think have spoken on this floor about fiscal
has the floor. that instead of people trying to impute restraint and the attempt to cut the
Mr. CHILES. I promised to yield to the any other one motive to what manifests budget. I, too, would like to be in that
Senator from Wyoming, and then I would itself here today, I must say in all candor group. I voted to cut the Transportation
be delighted to yield to the Senator from that I believe that a majority of the budget. I was one who voted to have a
Utah. Senate of the United States has become ceiling on expenditures when that came
Mr. HANSEN. I thank my colleague for aware of the fact that this in the No. up. But I am a little fearful of the way
his courtesy. 1 problem, and unless we meet this in which we are going about it.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con- problem, unless we overcome this def- In the first place, in listening to the
sent that the name of the junior Sena- icit spending, then every other problem debate, the ideas conveyed to we were
tor from Wyoming (Mr. HANSEN) , the cannot be handled. that cutting the budget just automati-
senator from Kentucky (Mr. HUDDLES- I thank my distinguished colleague cally cuts out inflation, that that is the
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B00380R000700040022-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
1 426 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE August D? 1 v ,f
solution; that if we should cut the budg- selves on the back, because it is our au- crease is about 3 percent, and the R ,SA
et, if we bring it into balance, there thorization bills and the increase that increase is 6 percent. It is true t.aat the
would be no more inflation. we pass in those over the years which veterans budget is so much larger that
1 wish that were so. If so, I would be have added to these budget requests. it is a very, very large sum. When you are
clad to cut very deeply into all of the Mr. MOSS. I agree that any app:ropri- dealing with $14 billion, of course, an
budgets across the board. But as a prat- ation that is made is made in response to increase of $400 million is relatively a
tical matter, it will not out inflation any an authorization bill that is passed. The modest amount.
appreciable amount. It will cut it some; bill has to be passed in Congress, but it Mr. MOSS. Whether you put it in Aer-
ie will have some effect on it. But there also has to be signed into law by the centages or in dollars, over fiscal 1974
::.re so many other factors which enter President. He has to ask for the size it is a $662.8 million increase, and
ie,to our inflation now that the size of budget that he needs in order to carry $461.8 million of that is for veterans.
the Federal Budget is only one small. out the terms of that legislation, or what Of course, In dealing with the total figure
factor. he thinks he needs. to be paid out to veterans, I am riot ar? u-
tra fact, in a meeting which we held I do not want the impression to be ing that right at the present time.
with some of the top economists during given that the Congress never cuts. I ap- What I would like to return t) is the
the latter part of last week, their esti- preciate the explanation of the Senator discussion of NASA. NASA has been cut
idiate was that if we cut $10 billion from from Florida. well below half of its peak perioc. There
the budget, it would only affect the in- Most amendments that come on the is no program in the Federal Govern-
hation rate by about one-half of 1 per-- floor are budget increasing amendments. ment that has been cut more in the Last
cent. At the rate it is galloping along now It is the Appropriations Committee that few years than has NASA.
in two digit figures, that is not a very has had the brunt of holding the budget Two years ago, as the Senator will
iicep cut in the inflation. There are many, down, which they have done in this in- recall, we passed the constant level budg-
many other things that have to be done. stance. In this particular bill, which is et for NASA, and we have not lived up
The other thing that concerned me a rather a conglomerate of several agen- to that in one year since. We are far 'be-
little is that the Senator from Florida cies, the big increase comes In the vet- low that now. Consequently, we h;ive-
w,vas saying, in effect, that the Congress erans section of the bill. That is because abandoned that position alread:i.
or the Senate always added on to the of changing the formula as to what a Mr. PROXMIRE. The Senator knows
budget, that we always loaded it on, that veteran is entitled to by reason of has why the NASA program has been re-
we never did cut. military service. duced. We were spending an overwhelrn-
As a practical matter, Congress has cut Judgments have been made that that Ong amount of the NASA budget on
the President's budget request every sin.. is what is needed and that is what is fair. the Moon shots. We were going to the
"le year during the term of this Presi- Mr. PROXMIRE. If the Senator will Moon, in a project that President Ken-
dent, and every year since I have been yield, the biggest percentage increase in nedy set for this country many years
in the Congress; save possibly one. the bill is in NASA, not veterans. It is a ago. It was given top priority. This en-
I give great credit to the Appropria- $207 Million increase for NASA. compassed a very large proportion of
Lions Committee, on which the Senator Mr. MOSS. No, that is not correct. the NASA budget. That is over now. To
serves, for doing that. As a matter of Mr. PROXMIRE. I am talking about say that the NASA budget has laeen cut
fact, this budget we are considering to- the $207 million Increase over last year. is to say that we are no longer trying
day is $139.9 million below the budget Mr. MOSS. That is right. It is an to go to the Moon.
request, if we should pass this without increase over last year of about 34 per- Mr. MOSS. We are no longer going to
ry change at all. cent, which Is less than the inflationary the Moon, but we are doing a number
Mr. CHILES. I think the Senator is factor that has been plowed in this year of things that are carrying It cn. alter
correct. If I gave him some false feeling over last year. the Apollo project was out of the way? we
of my attitude on that in my statement, Mr. PROXMIRE. It Is an Increase of set this constant level budget as to what
I want to correct that. What I was say- about 6 percent over last year, an In- we would do in NASA. We went; from
-ng is generally the Appropriations Com- crease of $200 million over $3 billion last 35,000 to 25,000 employees in NASA.
roittee was fighting a holding battle be- year. This cut would probably result in 2,500
cause any cuts that they were trying to Mr. MOSS. No, it Ras $96.7 million over more being dropped.
make in the budget they had to be care- last year. Mr. GOLDWATER. Mr. President, will
ful about because it was on the floor that Mr. PROXMIRE. I refer the Senator the Senator yield?
we added to their budget. What I was to page 50 of the report. The first column Mr. MOSS. I yield.
crying was in my experience, in just the shows the obligationael authority for 1974. Mr. GOLDWATER. To keep the record
Lew years that I have been here, it is that The fifth column shows the app:..opria- straight, the hardware and the material
f have never seen, before this year, any tions increase, and Is $207 million on a for the Moon shots have beer. bought
cut on the floor, on the floor of the Sen- $3 billion base. That calculates out to and paid for many budgets ago. We still
;ate, that was successful. It was always more than 6 percent. have vehicles that can go to the Moon,
an addition on the floor of the Senate to Mr. MOSS. But the Senator has Ig- and the costs are not reflected in this
the appropriations bill. pored entirely that $111 million of that budget.
The Appropriations Committee has, I is carryover from Isst year, which re- I still maintain along with the chair-
think, cut the budget request. duces the increase to $97.7 million. which man, under whom I serve, that NASA
There is one other thing that I want is 3.1 percent. has taken as big cuts as any agency in
to add because I think it is something Mr. PROXMIRE. I am informed by this Government. When we cut an or-
that Congress really fails to talk about. Lite staff that there is no carryover here. ganization such as this, which is not
We like to talk about how we cut the Mr. MOSS. It is $111 million. only on the verge but also in the procese
President's budget request, and how we Mr. PROXMIRE. That Is not included of making greater material advances for
:cave done that over all these years. And in the figures I gat^e_It~was $3 billion our population than any other agency,
For us to say that and not take any kind coati.
fS a responsibility for the authorization Mr. MOSS. But the Appropriations
bills that we pass, which are the bases in Committee had to add $96.7 million or
most instances for the budget request. 3.1 percent, which In not even the infla-
So where we continue to pass higher tionary figure. Therefore, it is less in real
and higher authorization bills, whether purchasing power.
A is this President, the past one, or the The point I was going to make, is that
:resident before that, the President must this particular budget has been increased
submit a budget message to us based on largely by the veterans amount, which
the authorization bills, in most instances, is $586 million over last year. This Is
that we pass. about 70 percent of the amount it has
'Then if we say we cut that back, we been increased over last year's budget.
cannot exactly automatically pat our- Mr. PROXMIRE The veterans in-
Chamber, I imploredthe chairman of the
committee, the Senator from NVisconsin.
to vote on each one of these items. For
example, I could cut the daylights out
of HUD, not just by 3 percent; and there
are others in which we really could snake
cuts. Instead of taking 3 percent from
an agency that has been doing an excep-
tionally fine job, I suggest that we take
these one at a time, and I will have a
shotgun out for HUD. Three percent of.
that is sort of laughable.
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 August 5, 1 J71Approved Fo 8 Of .E9M9P7gENA, 8000700040022-1 S14327
Mr. CHILES. Mr. President, I would lead to increased productivity and to in- sociations, banks, commercial issues, and
like to comment on that. Therein is the creased spending, and that would stop we will reduce that much competition
problem, the pattern that seems to have inflation. for the American dollar. Liquidity will
developed, since we started with Agri- Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, will be up and the cost of credit will be down.
culture and went to Treasury and Public the Senator yield? Much of the reduction in the civilian
Works and Transportation, and now this. Mr. CHILES. I yield, budget, in DOD, or space, can be handled
There is some constituency for each Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I ask by attrition. That cannot be done with
project, and each one feels as the distin- for the yeas and nays. small businesses, homebuilders, con-
guished Senator from Arizona does: I The yeas and nays were ordered. tractors going broke each day, because
will cut the daylights out of everything, Mr. MOSS. Mr. President, I share the they simply cannot get the money they
but do not cut mine. concern of the Senator from Florida need to carry on.
The only problem with that is that so about whether there may be a feeling I do not think we ought to forget when
long as everyone is honored in that re- approaching panic in the country. I do we are talking about which is the greater
quest, that is how we got to $311 billion. not think we are that close yet, but we problem, unemployment or inflation, that
That is how we get to the $10 billion to may be. I ask the Senator If he does not the two go hand in hand. If we do not
$12 billion over the amount of money we think we are more likely to get that kind do something about inflation, we are
have. Each one of us is willing to do of panic out of a spurt in our unemploy- going to have massive and growing un-
everything-except. The junior Senator ment rolls than from continuing infla- employment. By the same token, if we
from Florida has been one of the excep- tion. They are both bad, but if we are do not do something about the liquidity
tions in that. going to have a panic, I think it is going crisis that is perhaps our most immediate
I think the only way we are going to to come when unemployment goes over problem-and I do not know any way
get to this thing now is that there cannot 6 percent and keeps climbing. of measuring the seriousness of these two
be any exceptions. We will have to face Mr. CHILES. Unemployment is very things, as they are all serious. If we do
up to the fact that if we are going to do bad, and I am not one of those who want not do something about it, we are not
something about it, we have to do it now, to ring out inflation by just letting un- going to be able to come to grips with
I want to comment on the distin- employment skyrocket. I think unem- inflation or unemployment.
guished Senator from Utah's observa- ployment is skyrocketing now and is Mr. CHILES. Mr. President, the dis-
tions that many of the economists now going up now, while inflation is con- tinguished Senator from New Mexico
say that when we make a $10 billion cut, tinuing. It is doing so in my State, be- had requested that I yield to him.
we are not going to affect inflation too cause much of my State is geared to con- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
much. I believe that we can get all kinds struction, and that has come to a halt. ator from Utah is recognized.
of experts to give us all kinds of answers I had 20 or 30 calls last week from Mr. MOSS. Mr. President, just by way
on that. I do not know what it will do contractors or building suppliers or peo- of comment, it is very unusual to have
with respect to the percentage of ple in the building business who told me unemployment and inflation going up at
inflation, they are stopping, that they have to lay the same time. That does not fit the
We are dealing with two things; We off people. They said, "You are going to classic pattern. But I think that if we
are dealing with inflation on one hand see the largest form of unemployment In cut back too hard and too quickly on
and with a recession that possibly can your State." That is occurring today, and Federal expenditures, we will find un-
be the start of a depression on the other I think that kind of employment is going employment spurting.
hand, to continue. - Mr. CHILES. I yield to the distin-
I have a strong feeling that whether Perhaps there would be some kind of guished Senator from New Mexico (Mr.
that happens or not, in large part, is go- employment with what we are talking DOMENICI).
ing to depend upon the people panic. about in this cut, but I think it is small Mr. DOMENICI. I thank my distin-
Right now, I think there is sort of a near compared to what it is going to be in guished friend from Florida.
panic occurring, and part of the reason the present path we are traveling. At the outset I wish to state that it
for it is the feeling people have as to how Mr. NUNN. Mr. President, will the is with reluctance that I support this
in the world we can be running this kind Senator yield? amendment. My reluctance is not based
of deficit budget. They see that over the Mr. CHILES. I yield. upon my firm commitment to cut the
years it has affected inflation. All the ex- Mr. NUNN. I say to the Senator from budget this year, but, rather, stems from
perts will agree to that, regardless of how Utah that one thing that appears to be the only way that I see that I can have
they say a cut will affect Inflation now. happening-although I am not an eco- any impact. That is to do precisely what
Congress is continuing to allow that to nomic. expert-is that the liquidity prob- we have been doing for the last 10 days
happen, and the Executive is continuing lem we have in this country has perhaps to 2 weeks; that is, come to the floor of
to allow that to happen. With interest become even more severe than either the the Senate with as many people as we
rates what they are, with the recession inflation problem or unemployment, al- can gather around us, either in support
gaining, with productivity coming down, though they are all interrelated and are of our own motion to recommit, or to
still no one is doing anything about it. all part of the same vicious circle. cut, or to support amendments proposed
I think the feeling people have that no What is happening with respect to the by others.
one is minding the store is leading to the liquidity problem? One thing is that As my distinguished friend from
near panic. My feeling is that if we every day people-those who still have Florida said, and as my distinguished
could show that we are going to do money-are refusing to put their money friend who is presiding, the Senator from
something about the one thing we can do in higher yield securities, because they Oklahoma (Mr. BARTLETT), has said a
something about, Government spending, are beginning to feel that these securi- number of times, if we do not do it this
it would help. We cannot pass a bill that ties are not safe. Banks are having dif- way, what we have is just more and more
will stop inflation. We cannot stop in- ficulty in issuing certificates of deposit. of what we have had for the last 10 or
flation throughout the world. We cannot Bond issues are not being funded. Each 15 years. Everybody votes against pro-
do something immediately about the day, they have to come off the bond grams that he does not want, and there
food shortages or the energy crisis and market. What is the reason? People are are only a few programs that 15 or 20
the like. But we can do something about putting their money in Government Senators do not want. Then everybody
Government spending. bonds. Where do those bonds come from? votes for those that he wants. As a re-
I feel that if we were to give evidence They come from the necessity of having suit, we have 20 Senators on every side
to the people that we were going to do to finance the deficits that we pass here, of every issue, and the American people
something about that, then we could do that the President proposes each year. sit back there confused, because they
something psychologically for the peo- Does it mean that we -should not issue think their Senator has voted the right
ple that would stop this near panic and Government bonds? I do not think it way. But all of a sudden, as we add it
perhaps reverse the whole situation. means that. But its does mean that if we up, nobody has voted for a budget cut
That could be more important than any can get the Government's $7 billion, $8 because never are there enough Sen-
two-tenths of 1 percent or any other billion, or $10 billion deficit out of the ators all on one side.
figure in regard to the stopping of Infla- market, there will be that much more Therefore, I have no alternative de-
tion. It could be the stimulus that could money to go into savings and loan as- spite the fact that I agree with many of
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 1.* 2 Approved For R l ~~? r~L? 9& 5B( $ 440700040022 ttgtts `, . 3 14
the statements that the distinguished if that is true or not. We are being told our authority to handle the fiscal affairs
`ienator from Arizona (Mr. UoLDWATBR) by some experts that the uncontrollables of this Government through the proc-
ca.vc3e this morning about the tremendous are in such preponderance that we could esses I have described and which Sena-
c evaney of the space program., about only cut a few million dollars, realists- tors far more eloquent and experienced
1,5 tremendous technological advances, tally, out of a budget. than I, have described in the past 2
'.bout what it offers for the future of I say, here and now, that if that Is weeks.
le. aer_icans in education, in health, in where we are, then we ought to tell the To repeat, it is with reluctance that
cc ray. Because I have been part of the American people that. If, in fact, this I vote for a cut in the space proirosn.
:,u,c program, I am aware that in the whole process we are going through is and for some of HUD's programs, but 1.
a,t Yew years they have been the victim meaningless because we are going to can commit that I will consistently do it
if cuts. spend $30 billion because we cannot con- in programs oven more firmly tied to my
in another way, because their budget trol the budget, then I think we ought to state, to its economy, to its scientific
almost always an annual budget, they say, all in unison, we deplore it, we are community. I have done that. I do hope
suller each year a cut and this year they going to change it, but it is a fact of life. that in the long run, the message will
c ave suffered another. I am not yet convinced that it is. get across that we want, in a bipar1 lean
omit to those who want to listen I am not yet convinced that we cannot manner, once again to take con;rol of
a at one can get up and talk about all cut 2.5 percent, 3 percent or 3.5 percent this monstrous process which feR? of us,
rods of economic aspects of the infla- on every budget that hits the floor, let can understand but which the American
tionary period that we are in. They can the conference iron out the inconsisten- people, in their own way, understand
hear the pros and cons of high interest: ties, and give a clear, resounding signal tremendously today.
they can talk about unemployment and to the American people that we are will- In fact, I am convinced that they blame
underemployment and all the others. But ing to bite the bullet on special projects Congress more for inflation than they
almost all economists now agree that an for our States, for our constituents, for blame business or labor, and I sc y they,
excessive r'ederal budget, excessive Fed- our kind of thinking about the country's are right. I say that we ought to do some-
eral deficit spending is the one ingredient future, so long as everyone is willing to thing about it, even if it is only to speak
that is common to all of their thinking. bite the bullet to some: extent, across the up loud and clear for some kind oof con-
?''or that reason, today I am going to be board, in an equitable manner. gressional control.
e. onsistent. I know none of us is expert enough to So I state with reluctance onco again
f want everyone to know that I am not have the capacity that the Of ce of that I will support the reduction on this
picking on the Shuttle. I support it. I am Management and Budget has and that measure.
trot picking on NASA. I support it. other entities have that can be very Mr. DOLE. Mr. President--
On the other hand, I started, 2 weeks precise on what we can and cannot do, The PRESIDING OFFICER. Does the
ago, voting with 17 other Senators on what would be prudent under these Senator from Florida yield to the Senator
ac;_+,inst the budget for agriculture and circumstances or under that. I arc left from Kansas?
are im- in the posture that I am convinced that Mr. CHILES. Mr. President, I ,told to
environmental protection 'Those
portant matters to me, to nay State, and inflation is the most serious problem the Senator from Kansas, and then yield
to my committee. But it was $2.9 billionn, facing our land. It is creating anger, the floor.
1nore than last year, and I wondered, frustration; people are now giving up in Mr. DOLT:'. Mr. President, there are a
when we add them all up, where will we small businesses. We wonder why pro- number of approaches to cutt:ng the
i::e this year? ductivity is down. It is because there is a budget, as I pointed out the other day.
So that those who wonder why I voted fear about the future. I commend, as previously, the Apl,ropria-
gainst NASA will know that I am not I want to do my share as a Senator to tions Committee and its leadership for
,:sicking on it, I voted for a 5-percent and let the signal Out that that aspect of their efforts to hold down spending.
then for a 3.5-percent cut in Public this inflationary spiral is out for the There is probably no other group of more
Works and AEC. To those who wonder budget of the United States, that I am fiscally responsible men in this Congress
whether I have some special interest that willing, to the extent possible, to do what than the Appropriations Committee..
7. pick on, I would like them to know that I can. But it must be recognized tilt since
'no budget that we vote for in the Senate I am also aware, with regard to this the Appropriations Committee hearings
t'as more impact on my state than the budget, that perhaps HUD Is not getting started in January, there has been a sig-
,AEC. indeed, the AFC budget had $43 the benefit of the act, that they have nificant change In the rate of i:mflati.on,
iailifon for my State. i nevertheless voted been cut back for a few years, that their Therefore a great number of us Derno-
1o cut it 5 percent; that tailed. I voted impoundments have been held legal, that crate and Republicans, are involved In
cut it 3.5 percent, and it failed. they are now expected to use any initia- trying to catch up with the American
supported the cut in the transporta- tives and thus need new personnel. I am people. We feel it is necessary to provide
t. .en budget. Yes, I know that it was aware of that problem with reference to leadership in the Senate to make a mod-
ather meager when compared to others, this budget. But I ask what budget is crate cutback in each appropriat=ion 'bill.
ird yes, I know that the budget com- going to come before us-military, HEW, I believe that in this case 3 p'r ent is
aaittees are now trying to shave therh and the rest-that does not have that a responsible cut and that it is rep:pon-
before they come to the moor. kind of situation where, if we look at it sive to holding down Inflation. Certainly
s, I also know that the chairman of minutely, we can justify everything in it? there may be other ways to approach it.
Lie Committee on Appropriations has a I have items in this budget that I Cutting the Federal budget is not the only
1, a:rrrrment when he says we will not have asked for that have been put in by cure for inflation, but it is one Thing we
,?t them down. in fact, we shall add to the committee. Ye.s, indeed. I expect can do. It is about the best thin:t we can
uteri and let the Senators take them of them to be cut 3 percent or 3.5 percent. do as Members of Congress, and it is
,n the floor. I respect his advice, and I And I do not say that I relish that. But something that can be done on a clay-
ia erstand the problem that he has, but I say I relish the opportunity ,o say, by-day basis.
said the other day, it appears to rue loud and clear, that we must get this So, as I Indicated earlier, if the 3 per-
+i.i,t the American people are looking fc'r budget somewhere between $255 and cent cut ofered by the distinguis;ted Sen-
;nal, a signal that we are committed $300 billion, and if it cannot be done ator from Wisconsin is not ace eptable,
the proposition of coning up with a because of the past 20 years of back- maybe there is some other way 4o give
idget that is as close to Being balamed door and uncontrollable budget items, us a total Spending cut. We have p sse,_l
scsss ale. i:aen I think we ought to call it what it some bills without cuts. But there Is a
have just a few more comraments. As is. We ought to commit to the American strong momentum now in the Senate,
clamber of us-Senator BARTLETT, den- people that we are going to take it back which started a little over a week ago,
t;-2 (HTLES, Senator NUNN, Senator within our control. I believe there is a majority new in the
,e;. and myself-acs we get together For those in this Congress who speak Senate, of Democrats and Republican
EI try to talk about how we can cut the of giving away our authority to Press- all concerned about inflation and fscal
+ let, we are told by experts that we dents-there has been much tall: about responsibility, so that these cuts will be
-iLI t be at a point in history where we that in the past. I do not .think there is sustained in this appropriation bill. canel
i"'?snot control the budget. I do not knew any question that we have given away any future appropriation bills.
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 August 5, 19 74pproved FoCONGRE2005/06/06 IOCORD P7 SENATE 8OR000700040022-1
S 14329
To the junior Senator from Kansas, Ing in the Senate today Is support that Nonetheless, it occurs to me there is all
that indicates a responsible attitude on will help bring about fiscal restraint and the more reason why we should look for-
the part of the Senate. help bring about a reduction in the rate ward to adopting some changes in the
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I sug- of inflation. future that would make it easier to ad-
gest the absence of a quorum. Also, I think that here today we are just the outflow of money to the Inflow,
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Do- also actually helping bring about control and we have passed a very important bill
MENICI). The clerk will call the roll, of spending on various budget items. Cer- earlier this year toward that end.
The assistant legislative clerk pro- tainly this can improve efficiency as well Nonetheless, there are other changes
ceeded to call the roll. as show the American people that there that need to be made, changes in the
Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. President, I ask are a number of Senators who are will- structure of our bills and in the manner
unanimous consent that the order for ing to cut back. I might stress, as I look in which we approach spending in Con-
the quorum call be rescinded. across the Chamber at my friend from gress.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without Georgia, my friend from Florida, and my It was my pleasure several weeks ago to
objection, it is so ordered. friend from New Mexico now in the chair, join with the Senators from Georgia,
Mr. BARTLETT. Mr. President, I wish that they have expressed willingness to Florida, Kentucky, and New Mexico, and
to join with others in support of the cut back programs that benefited their Senators from South Carolina, Nebraska,
amendment by the Senator from Wiscon- States, and programs of which they have Kansas, and many others, on a bipartisan
sin. It has been brought out in the de- a particular knowledge and interest, pro- basis echoing the feeling of the Senator
amendment, and certainly cutting back
expenditures Is not without problems.
But if the basic problem were under-
spending, we have solved that prob-
lem many, many times down through
the years, because we have been over-
spending for a long time.
Nonetheless, there is a problem, and
we realize that we are on the horns of
a dilemma; that we have, on the one
hand, rising unemployment, and on the
other runaway inflation. But certainly
the economists, almost unanimously, are
agreeing that inflation must be brought
under control if we are going to have a
strong, reasonable economy and one
which will provide for the needs of the
people of this Nation.
The momentum on the floor of the
Senate has been mentioned as growing
in favor of fiscal restraint, in favor of
balancing the budget and cutting back
the deficit spending. I believe that this
momentum cannot help taking the mo-
mentum out of inflation. In fact, I cannot
think of anything that would have
greater psychological impact, because I
do not believe that the people of this
country believe that the U.S. Senate will
vote for reductions in the budget, or vote
for significant cutbacks. But I think this
apparently is being done, and there is
a growing number of Senators who are
expressing themselves with votes to cut
back on spending.
So I think this can have a tremendous
psychological Impact, and the American
people are going to be saying, "If the
Members of the Senate can do this, then
certainly the bankers, the businessmen,
and the union leaders can take the steps
that they must take in order to
strengthen the economy and bring it un-
der control that will provide opportuni-
ties for the citizens of our country."
We are all concerned about the high
interest rates. Certainly I do not think
we can expect, on any kind of quid pro
quo basis, that if we reduce expenditures
there automatically will be a reduction
of interest rates; but I do believe there
is ample evidence from economists to in-
dicate that control by the Senate would
be a big step toward the possibility of an
easing of interest rates. Certainly at this
time the chairman of the Federal Re-
serve Board is pretty much fighting the
battle singlehandedly. He has been get-
ting little support from Congress and lit-
tle support from the administration; and
I think -that this support that is grow-
grams which they know are good pro- from Virginia, the Senator from Wis-
grams and sound programs. consin, and their concern about spend-
I am a member of the Committee on ing.
Aeronautics and Space Sciences, and am I am glad that there has been a mo-
a strong supporter of the space effort and mentum created, a real concern. I com-
the various programs that have hereto- pliment the Senator from Wisconsin for
fore been financed. I am aware' that his leadership not only today, btlt par-
NASA has been reduced rather sharply ticularly today, when he Is the floor man-
In the appropriations coming its way, ager of the bill and sponsoring an amend-
and it has been stretching the dollar for ment to not make an across-the-board
several years. But nonetheless, I think it cut but to make a specific cut of the vari-
is only proper that if we make adjust- ous items. Certainly this is a preferable
ments in spending downward, that they way of operating.
be made on a basis that covers as many I know that in the steps that have been
of the various areas of spending as Is taken they have not always been the
possible, prudent manner in which to operate,
To do this, and do it by just tightening sometimes because of time, sometimes
someone else's belt, I found a long time because of lack of ability and knowledge
ago, is impossible. We must agree that on my part, perhaps that of others, but
we are going to tighten our own belts. In certainly there has been a desire to ac-
voting to cut the budget of the Depart- complish a goal and, I believe, that it is
ment of Agriculture, for example, it was possible today to see that we are making
a vote in my case and I know in the case some progress, and I am hoping that this
of many other Senators against programs momentum will increase, and more and
that are strongly desired and popular in more people will join, particularly those
our States. But If we are going to get the who have the ability to really do the job
job done, we are going to have to be will- properly, so that in our eagerness to
ing to tighten our belts as well as see accomplish a goal we will do it in the
them tightened on the other 49 States' proper way, in the best way, In a respon-
When I was Governor I had the con- sible way.
stitutionaI duty to present a budget, and On many occasions this year the mem-
It was sort of an interesting exercise in bers of this body have expressed their
dividing up a piece of pie and, as this was concern about spending, concern about
finally divided, presenting that to the inflation, and concern about the econ-
members of the legislature for their con- omy.
sideration and their approval. I was re- Today they have an opportunity of ex-
quired to divide up the pie. pressing themselves again on an appro-
.
Unfortunately, the Members of Con- priation bill, a very important one and,
gress in the past have not been required as I said, one which I strongly support.
to divide up the pie but merely to create So, in my vote I will be voting to reduce
the pieces, and then look around for a expenditures in areas that I strongly be-
pie pan big enough to put it all in, and lieve in, in areas that I know are deserv-
then raise the debt ceiling limit, exercis- ing of an ample appropriation. But I be-
ing little restraint and exercising poor lieve that if we are to accomplish the
economic judgment in many years. But purpose of reducing the deficit, we must
with people today who know banking, be willing to cut out a number of areas,
who are familiar with economic trends, a number of programs that are valid, a
international and national, saying 'that number of programs that are desired by
we may be looking toward a panic, this the American people, a number of pro-
could have the consequences that we grams that are good but to do this in the
could be in real trouble, that we may not overall interest of ridding ourselves of
be able to control the economy and then, runaway inflation that could just eat up
I think, it is time for us to take steps this country, doing it with a recognition
to put the brakes on and look around that inflation hits hardest at those of
for many other areas that can be Im- modest means, those of fixed incomes, the
proved. poor, and that It destroys the real
Certainly as we have looked at the strength and fabric of a nation.
budgets recently, I, as a neophyte, as an We seem to have gotten away from a
economist-I am not one at all-but I saving economy to one of a borrowing or
have learned a lot, and I have learned a spending economy, and I cannot help but
lot about the difficulties of reducing the believe-not that I am opposed to bor-
expenditures of the Federal Government. rowing, which I have done on many oc-
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 14330
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE August 5, 116-141
(')sions-that savings should be accen- because they involve store of a long- Mr. President, I yield the floor.
biated, and that the old idea that a penny range projection, because the question Mr. McCLELLAN. Mr. President?
s'sved is a penny earned is still a good of national security is an intangible ques- The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen?-
6 4n and something we should support. tion, and we cannot clearly say what ator from Arkansas.
V(r. CHILES. Mr. President, will the good the military budget has done, as Mr. McCLELLAN. I would ask uaan-
=cnator yield? long as we prevent war, except it is a imous consent that I may request and
,Tr. BARTLETT. I yield to the distin- deterrent and it is essential. suggest the absence of a quorum without
; uisfaed Senator from Florida. I would just like to ask the Senator if losing my right to the floor.
Mn CHILES. I want to compliment he does not think the way we are going The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
Senator from Oklahoma on his re- about this now in terms of trying to take objection, it is so ordered. The clerk will
irks and also on his actions which, I something out of every budget, will mean call the roll.
ink, indicate our desire to try to do that when we get to the later budgets, The assistant legislative clerk pro-
>;mething about the fiscal situation of and when we get to the Department of ceeded to call the roll.
ire country. Defense budget, that we will have set a Mr. PERCY. Mr. President, I ask
I had the pleasure of being a cospon- standard that we can apply equitably unanimous consent that the orde.: for
+n', along with the Presiding officer, the across the board, and we will not be jeop- the quorum call be rescinded.
aunior Senator from Georgia, and the ardizing the national security, by pisc- The PRESIDING OFFICER iMr.
limior Senator from Kentucky, of a ing the burden of a balanced budget BARTLETT). Without objection, it is so
resolution that was trying to call atten- solely on our defense effort. Instead we ordered.
tion to the plight, trying to get a domes- will be in a consistent posture of trying Mr. PERCY. Mr. President-
tic summit meeting which would bring to save across the board so that every- Mr. McCLELLAN. Mr. President, 1,
together all the parties as sort of parts body who is a beneficiary of Federal pro- believe I have the floor.
to this puzzle, labor, management, the grams sacrifices to some extent, but The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
President, the Chairman of the Federal equitably, with the exception, of course, ator from Arkansas is correct.
Reserve Board, together with a biparti- of completely uncontrollable items. I be- Mr. McCLELLAN. How much time
r.an membership of the leadership of lieve this is a lot more sensible than get- does the Senator want?
+i'ongress from both sides of the aisle and ting down to the DOD budget and Space Mr. PERCY. Five minutes.
both ends of the capitol, and to try to budget and saying, "Look, here is a great Mr. McCLELLAN. I yield 5 minuses to
3,et something working toward a plan of big hunk, let us take it all out of that." the Senator from Illinois.
doing something about the economy. I would just like to ask the Senator's Mr. PERCY. I thank my distinguished
I am delighted with the response that reaction to that proposition. colleague.
w-,e received in this body by the over- Mr. BARTLETT. Yet, I concur With Mr. President, I would like to express
whelming passage of that resolution, and the Senator. my deep appreciation for the work of the
is know that it is working in the House, Mr. NUNN. I know the Senator who is Appropriations Committee, particularly
and it has a number of different resolu- Chairman of the Armed Services Com- as it has dealt with a very difficult bill
;Ions, similar or identical, which have mittee would be interested in this as he before us. I speak with particular ref?-
oeen introduced in the House, but to date faces this situation every year, I would erence to the Housing and Urban Devel-
it has not come up for a vote there, and suggest that the Senator from Mississip- opment appropriations.
t know the Senator from Oklahoma pi listen to the colloquy here, and give Mr. President, on pages 6, 7, and 8 of
wishes that we could initiate that kind the Senator's response. the report that is before us, the com-
iA meeting. Mr. BARTLETT. I agree with the Sen- mittee deals with title I, the Depar';nient
But I agree with him that, barring ator from Georgia. of Housing and Urban Development ap-
that, we have got to try to do something I know there are those who would look propriations. Particularly reference is
here to signal to the American people to the defense and space budgets, and made to sections 235 and 236, programs
that we are going to be willing to do our others, for cuts, also those who look to which were enacted in the Housing Act
part and that that cannot happen by the social programs for cuts and retain of 1968. At that time we set out a housing
just voting for a spending cut or even the items in the President's budget, on goal of 2.6 million housing units ?, year
are provision of $295 billion unless we the military, but it is obviously going to for 10 years, of which 600,000 were to be
are willing to make cuts that hurt and, affect us and it must be done on a very for low- and moderate-income families.
of course, across all of the areas. broad-based method as much as -pos- A portion of that program add-:-essed
We are not going to be successful-and sible, cutting everywhere we possibly can, itself to offering housing opportunities
d want to associate myself with his re- recognizing, unfortuncAely, that t:-sere to families who, instead of moving into
marks and his leadership which he has are many uncontrollables that cannot public housing or rental housing, would
displayed in this regard. be cut. be given the opportunity to own their
Mr. BARTLETT. I thank the junior So I think the proposed cuts which own home. This is an opportunity that
Senator from Florida. I am very happy have been advanced by the floor man- the Federal Government has offered to
to work with him and the junior Sena- ager and the chairman of the Appropria- GI's and has offered to families of rnid-
for from Georgia and the Senator from tions Subcommittee are cuts that make die income America for many, many
New Mexico and the Senator from Ken- sense, that are spread around, and as I years through VA-guaranteed and FELA-
tucky in trying to expand this nonofficial said earlier, are cutting out good items. insured mortgages. 0
group. But the more we can cut the spending The program that was developed in
ALA. NUNN. Will the Senator yield? which leads to more and greater deficits, the Housing Act of 1968 was a direct re-
Mr. BARTLETT: Yes. if we can reduce that spending a .ittle suit of a bill entitled "The National
,ttr, NUNN. I know the Senator from here and there, then it is better than Homeownership Foundation Act" that I
Oklahoma has done a great deal of work when the deficit Is :financed by new introduced on April 20, 1967.
on the overall problem of the economy money, when thereis a rapid growth in That bill was sponsored by the follow-
today. I know he has had a lot of dis- the money supply, as there has been, ing Senators:
cussions on the problem-I have had a which produces serious inflation. Mr. Aiken, Mr. Allott, Mr. Baker, W. Bert
lot with him. I know he is concerned with So if we can reduce that need for nett, Mr. Boggs, lytr. Brooke, Mr. Carlson?
the overall situation. I also heard him rapid growth in new money supply by Mr. Case, Mr. Cooper, Mr. Cotton, Mr. Curtis,
m eld
Mr. ention that he serves on the Aeronau- the actions taken here, this will certain- FoDiMsen, i Dominick, Mr, Fannin,
Fong, Mr. Griffin , Mr. Hansen, Mr. Hatfield,
,
tics and Space Committee- The junior ly be a big step in the right direction. Mr. Hickenlooper, Mr. Hruska, Mr. Javrts, Mr.
Senator from Georgia serves on the I heartily concur with the Senator from Jordan of Idaho, Mr. Kuchel, Mr. Magnuson,
Armed Services Committee. One of the Georgia that the more it can be spread Mr. Miner, Mr. Morton, Mr. Mundt, Mr. Mwr-
rr,hings that has happened here in the around, the smaller the decrease will phy, Mr. Pearson, Mr. Prouty, Mr. Scott of
oast, I think, is that when it gets around haveto be, but I do believe that there is Pennsylvania, Mrs. Smith, Mr. Thurmond,
=,o the Space budget and when it gets the opportunity of bringing about some Mr. Tower, Mr. h Dakota. of of Delawaae, artct
Around to the Armed Services budget, restraint in spending, bringing about' Young of Nor tth Da
nearly everybody wants to get the bulk some reduction in deficits and bringing Identical legislation was introduced in
A the savings out of those two budgets about some stability in our economy. the House of Representatives by Con-'
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 August 5, 1974 Approved F(oFiFdqpLsIS?W&6/f&~M15Wg? WPOR000700040022-1 S 14331
gressman WILLIAM B. WIDNALL, the rank-
ing minority member of the Banking and
Currency Committee, and was cospon-
sored by 111 Members of that body, 66
of whom are still in the House.
I ask unanimous consent that the
names of the 66 House Members who are
in the House of Representatives today,
and who introduced legislation to pro-
vide homeownership opportunities for
low-income people, be inserted in the
RECORD at this point.
There being no objection, the listing
of Members was ordered to be printed in
the RECORD, as follows:
*H.R. 8822. Mr. Anderson; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
"H.R. 8823. Mr. Arends; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8824. Mr. Bell; April 30, 1967 (Bank-
ing and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8825. Mr. Betts; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8826. Mr. Biester; April 20, 1967,
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8829. Mr. Broomfield; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*HR. 8830. Mr. Brotzman.; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8831. Mr. Brown of Michigan; April
20, 1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
"H.R. 8832. Mr. Brown of Ohio; April 20,
1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
-H.R. 8833. Mr. Broyhill of North Carolina;
April 20, 1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8838. Mr. Carter; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8839. Mr. Cederberg; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R.8820.
*H.R. 8840. Mr. Chamberlain; April 20,
1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R.8820.
*H.R. 8841. Mr. Don H. Clausen; April 20,
1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8842. Mr. Conable; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8443. Mr. Conte; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*HR. 8847. Mr. Dellenback; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8848. Mr. Derwinski; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*HR. 8849. Mr. Duncan; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8851. Mr. Erlenborn; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8852. Mr. Esch; April 20, 1967 (Bank-
Ing and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8853. Mr. Eshleman; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8854. Mr. Findley; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8855. Mr. Frelinghuysen; April 20,
1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8859. Mr. Hammerschmidt; April 20,
1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8860. Mr. Hansen of Idaho; April 20,
1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8862. Mrs. Heckler of Massachusetts;
April 20, 1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8863. Mr. Horton; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8864. Mr. Hunt; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R.8820.
*H.R. 8866. Mr. King of New York; April 20,
1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*HR. 8868. Mr. Laird; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*FI.R. 8869. Mr. Latta; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8871. Mr. McClory; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8873. Mr. McDade; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8876. Mr. Mathias of California;
April 20, 1967 (Banking and Currency)..
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8878. Mr. Mayne; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8880. Mr. Michel; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R.8820.
*HR. 8881. Mr. Minshall; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8884. Mr. Nelsen; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of HR, 8820.
*H.R. 8885. Mr. Pelly; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8888. Mr. Quie; April 20, 1967 (Bank-
Ing and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 8889. Mr. Quillen; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R.8820.
*H.R. 8890. Mr. Railsback; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8891. Mr. Reid of New York; April
20, 1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8893. Mr. Riegle; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8895. Mr. Rhodes of Arizona; April
20, 1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R.8820.
* H.R. 8896. Mr. Robison; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8897. Mr. Ruppe; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8898. Mr. Sandman; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8900. Mr. Smith of New York; April
20, 1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8901. Mr. Snyder; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8904. Mr. Steiger of Wisconsin; April
20, 1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R.8820.
* H.R. 8906. Mr. Vander Jagt; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8907. Mr. Wampler; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8908. Mr. Whalen; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8909. Mr. Williams of Pennsylvania;
April 20, 1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R.8820.
* H.R. 8910. Mr. Wyatt; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 8911. Mr. Wydler; April 20, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 9134. Mr. Andrews of North Da-
kota; April 25, 1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 9135. Mr. Blackburn; April 25, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
* H.R. 9136. Mr. Cleveland; April 25, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 9139. Mr. Gude; April 25, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R.8820.
*HR. 9140. Mr. Johnson of Pennsylvania;
April 25, 1967 (Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R.8820.
*H.R. 9124, Mr. Mosher; April 25, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 9144. Mr. Schneebeli; April 25, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*HR. 9145. Mr. Stanton; April 25, 1967
(Banking and Currency),
See Digest of H.R. 8820.
*H.R. 9147. Mr. Wylie; April 25, 1967
(Banking and Currency).
See Digest of H.R.8820.
Mr. PERCY. As I have noted with
regret on previous occasions, section 107
of the Housing and Urban Development
Act of 1968, authorizing a National
Homeownership Foundation, was never
implemented. In retrospect I think it can
be said that a great deal of the misman-
agement which has plagued the 235 pro-
gram could have been avoided if the
Board of the Foundation had been ap-
pointed in timely fashion and if the
Foundation's oversight function, as
specified in the law, had been fully
implemented.
I think it would not be inappropriate
at this point, Mr. President, to indicate
that the Senator from Illinois Inquired
of the White House a few years back why
this particular portion of the law had not
been implemented, why the board had
not been appointed after a number of
calls had been made by the then Vice
President of the United States to people
to get them to accept membership and
after the Senator from Illinois had been
asked to approach certain people who
had indicated a reluctance to take on
added responsibilities, and was urged to
get them to accept membership on the
board. Mr. Ehrlichman advised me, first
through my own staff and then directly
notified me, that the reason this board
was not being appointed and that that
particular provision of law was not being
implemented was because of the vote of
the Senator from Illinois on the ABM.
The Senator from Illinois was stunned
at this kind of a response, so much so
that I not only wrote a letter confirming
this action to Mr. Ehrlichman, but also
asked for an immediate meeting with
him.
I went to the White House and asked
why any appointee of the President would
fail to implement a law of Congress and
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 Approved For Release 2005 5BOQ 0700040022- -
ffl t ztg test F ,~ L4
CONGRES L .5
acm to appoint a board for oversight of
homeownership opportunities for low-
income people because of a totally un-
related vote on an ABM system that the
Senator from Illinois felt ill-advised,
and which subsequent events have cer-
tainly indicated to be ill-advised.
11. was said to the Senator from Illinois
that this was the way the ballgame was
played. I was left with only one conclu-
sion: that no matter how you phrased it,
that it was the vote on an ABM system
that was being taken out of the hide of
the ooor.
e PRESIDING OFFICER. The time
of the Senator has expired.
Mr, PERCY. May I have 2 additional
minutes?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
a-,or is recognized for 2 more minutes.
Mr. PERCY. As we know, there have
been scores and scores of indictments
growing out of grand jury investigations
of FHA programs.
As the Appropriations Committee
aptly points out in its report, a great
deal of the fraud that was involved in
this program was not as a result of the
type of program that was designed by
Congress. but by the mismanagement of
the program, the lack of oversight, the
lack of responsibility, and the lack of
administrative care taken in implement-
ing a program which has otherwise
proven highly successful.
Mr. President, my further remarks will
support fully the success the program
has had despite the fact that its imple-
mentation has been dreadful and its
management has been chaotic in many
respects. Despite those facts, the pro-
gram and the quality of the program was
such that, as is pointed out on pages 6,
7. and 8 in the report before us, better
than 350,000 families, incorporating well
over 1 million people, are today regularly
paying monthly payments to own their
own home.
Some 50,000 families originally sub-
sidized under section 235 so that they
could become homeowners, have actually
gone off the subsidy altogether.
?t'hat was the intent and purpose of it,
to give people incentive to say that,
"Here is a start in life so that you can
own something, be a somebody and have
something. But our whole purpose is to
use this as a carrot so that you can be
weaned away from the subsidies, so that
you can upgrade yourself, and have the
incentive to do so."
Oven in the face of this conspicuous
failure in implementing the law, the 235
program has been highly successful. Be-
cause the future of this program now is
a matter for decision in a conference be-
tween the Senate and the House on the
terms of the Housing and Community
Development Act of 1974, I think it
would be helpful to my colleagues-espe-
cially to the 27 present Members of the
Senate and the 66 present Members of
the House who cosponsored the National
forneownership Foundation Act-to
provide them at this time with an up-to-
date report on the benefits of this pro-
gram.
The program provided homeowner-
ship opportunities to 434,000 families to
,June 1973 since its inception in 1968.
With a median income of about $(,500,
few of these families could otherwise
have enjoyed the benefits of homeovmer-
ship.
According to HUD's statistics for 1971,
the average monthly income of 235
families was $432; the family's share of
the monthly mortgage payment was $95
while the average monthly subsidy was
$79.
Initial experience with the program
indicates, as I noted a moment ago, that
a significant percentage of households
which start receiving these subsidies
earn their way out of them through
higher incomes. In one recertification of
income for 235 families, 8 percent
stopped receiving any subsidy, 65.8 per-
cent received a reduced subsidy, 13.4
percent had no change, and 20.8 percent
received a larger subsidy.
"Housing in the Seventies," the com-
prehensive study commissioned by the
Department of Housing and Urban De-
velopment attempting to justify the sus-
pension of several housing programs, in-
cluding section 235, reached the follow-
ing conclusions about that program:
First. The program enabled a num-
ber of low-to-moderate income families
who desired to own homes to achieve
that objective;
Second. Only a third of all home-
owners nationally have incomes below
$7,000, but close to two-thirds of all
235 beneficiaries had incomes below that
level;
Third. The 235 program provided sub-
stantial benefits to recipients. Housing
quality, the study estimated, improved
by 35 percent and nonhousing expendi-
tures increased by 8 percent.
Fourth. The study did not demonstrate
that section 235 housing cost more than
comparable privately built units.
The 235 program has also received
high marks in other studies. Dr. An-
thony Downs, vice-president of the real
Estate Research Corp., came to the fol-
lowing conclusion:
On balance, we believe that both the Sec-
tion 235 and Section 236 programs are effec-
tive instruments for meeting the key ob-
jectives of housing subsidies. . We be-
lieve their basic design are sound, although
some modifications car. Improve they i. The
major inadequacies so far encountered in the
execution of these programs stemmed
mainly from either pox administration by
HUD or the inherently higher risks of in-
vesting capital in housing for relatively low-
income households in relatively deteriorat-
ing areas.
During the last 2 or 3 years newspapers
and magazines have from time to time
given prominent coverage to the real but
nonetheless limited cases of fraud and
other abuses which have been associated
with the 235 program. Seldom did stories
of the program's successes find their way
into print.
I want to tell you about one successful
effort from the city of Chicago.
The Bickerdike Redevelopment Corp.
is a nonprofit community housing cor-
poration on the near-northwest side of
the city. The corpora;ion was responsible
for the building of new single family
homes and their sale to the community.
These were the first new single :family
Homes built in the community in over 60
years. Most homes were sold to families
who qualified for interest subsidies under
the 235 program.
From 1970 to 1973, Bickerdike, along
with two general contractors, b lilt fry
single family homes. Sixty-three of these
were sold under section 235 and is o were
sold under the 203(b) program.
Seventy percent of the buyer; were
Latin American. The majority of the
families were in the $7,000 to $9,900 in-
come range and most of them had two,
three, or four children. Three ftrailies
have now lived in their homes for over
3 years; 24 families 2 to 3 years, 32 fam-
ilies 1 to 2 years, and 5 families fo about
a year.
As of February 1974, two of the homes
had been turned back to HUD. One was
owned by a single woman with adopted
children who simply walked away from
the property. The other was turned back
because the divorced mother of fi='e chil-
dren died. Two families in danger of
foreclosure survived the crisis because of
counseling from Bickerdike.
Beside coordinating the development.
of the homes, arranging financing, and
selling them, Bickerdike worked with the
buyers so as to help them become knowl-
edgeable homeowners. Meetings were
held on insurance, maintenance, and
budgeting for home improvements. A
homeowners' association was formed to
work on common problems, such. as high
taxes.
I submit, Mr. President, that success
stories like this one exist in every part
of the Nation. We should not allow our-
selves to be swept away by a few reports
of failures. I believe the bill we passed
here in the Senate in March, S. 3066,
amended the program so that we can be
confident of even more and greater suc-
cesses in the future.
I believe the homeownership program
for low- and moderate-income families
must be retained in the bill currently
being worked out in conference..
Mr. President, I ask unanimo Is con-
sent that a table indicating the distrib-
ution of 235 units by States be included
in the RECORD at this point.
There being no objection, the table
was ordered to be printed in the 7ZECORD,
as follows:
State and number insured:
Alabama --------------._
12? 994
Alaska ----------------------------
688
Arizona --------------------------
7, 521
Arkansas ------------------ ---_.,..
6,1398
California --------- ..------------ _-
31,439
Colorado ------------------- ...---- .-
6,719
Connecticut --_-----------.----_-----
1,019
Delaware -------------------------
434
District of Columbia--------------
759
Florida --------------------------
31,361
Georgia --------------------------
20.397
Hawaii ----------------------------
1, 746
Idaho -- ---------------------------
2, 210
Illinois ----------------------------
16,911
Indiana --------------------------
9, 340
Iowa -----------------------------
7,232
Kansas
3,309
Kentucky -------------------------
9, 2,58
Louisiana ------------------------
23. 010
Maine ------------------------------
9'27
Maryland ---------------- ---------
1, 655
Massachusetts --------------------
4, 360
Michigan --- ---------.--------------
20. 082
Minnesota -------------------------
3, 220
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 August 5, .1974 Approved F@C pS /g&A&DP?P ROR000700040022-1 S14333
Mississippi -----------------------
11,026
Missouri --------------------------
6, 096
Montana -------------------------
1, 652
Nebraska -------------------------
4, 543
Nevada ---------------------------
5, 980
New Hampshire____________________
1,098
Now Jersey________________________
3, 293
New Mexico_______________________
5, 176
New York_________________________
4,364
North Carolina--------------------
7,244
North Dakota______________________
811
Ohio ___________________________
- 16, 676
Oklahoma ------------------------
11,465
Oregon __________________________
6, 6,326
Pennsylvania ---------------------
5, 880
Rhode Island_____________________
744
South Carolina____________________
16, 571
South Dakota_____________________
1,498
Tennessee ------------------------
17, 227
Texas _-_
37, 37,755
Utah -----------------------------
6,689
Vermont --------------------------
340
Virginia --------------------------
3, 777
Washington ----------------------
13, 751
West Virginia______________________
711
Wisconsin ------------------------
10, 440
Wyoming -------------------------
921
RICO ______________________
9, 661
Virgin Islands _________________
0
Guam ----------------------------
129
the cuts that would
r
su
e
lt
,
th
e amount
-- in housing fraud cases of reduction that would occur, if _ this
U.S. Total____________ ______ 434, 814 Over 10 percent of the total defaults in the
Mr. PERCY. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the RECORD the section of the Appropria-
tions Committee's report to which I have
referred, because I concur with every
statement made in that section.
There being no objection, the excerpt
from the report was ordered to be printed
in the RECORD, as follows:
TITLE I, DEPARTMENT OF HOIIBING AND URBAN
DEVELOPMENT
The Committee is distressed and deeply
concerned by the Administration's action to
abandon our nation's historic housing pro-
gram. In 1949, the Congress declared our pol-
icy to provide a decent home in a suitable
living environment for every American
family.
In 1968, Congress set a housing goal of 2.6
million housing units a year for 10 years of
which 600,000 were to be for low and moder-
ate income families.
In January 1973, the Administration froze
virtually all new starts for low and moderate
income families. Some 17 housing programs
or programs closely associated with housing
were stopped. Except for units already in the
pipelines, programs for low income housing
were abandoned, and programs for moderate
income housing were abandoned as well. This
has resulted in additional families in the
lower 40 to 50 percent of American income
groups being denied access to public housing
or the ability to buy a new home.
Exacerbating this situation, due to exceed-
ingly high interest rates, approximately 70
percent of the American people under private
enterprise and conventional housing pro-
grams have been unable to purchase new
homes.
Instead of a total of 2.6 million housing
units a year, the annual rate for the first
half of 1974 was about 1.5 million units, or
over a million units below the national hous-
ing goals promulgated by the Congress.
Homebuyers, builders, thrift institutions,
and those associated with the housing indus-
try-furniture, durable goods, heating and
cooling, among others-have felt the housing
moratorium pinch.
The Committee feels that the Administra-
tion has justified its actions for a variety of
by no stretch of the imagination is that cor- For all these reasons, we should not accept
rect. the abandonment of the traditional programs
Public housing, for all its particular difii- as the price for Section 23. The traditional
culties, is highly popular and a badly needed programs and Section 23 should be imple-
program. The waiting lists are exceedingly mented concurrently.
long. The vacancy rates are exceedingly low. Hopefully this will be the result of the
Thus, it may be concluded that public hous- legislative conference now taking place be-
ing provides better housing to millions of tween the House and the Senate concern-
Americans, than they could otherwise afford ing future housing policy and programs.
or are now getting. When the pending-legislation is finally agreed
The Sections 235 and 236 programs suf- to, this Committee will examine the Ad-
fered from both HUD management, and ac- ministration's funding request to carry out
tual corruption, rather than from any in- the will of the Congress.
herent defects in the programs. In cities with Mr. MCCLELLAN. Mr. President, I rise
good HUD management, and actual corrup-
tion, rather than inherent defects in the to discuss briefly the pending anlend-
programs. In cities with good HUD manage- rent, which I understand is the amend-
ment, such as Milwaukee, the program was ment of the distinguished Senator from
a great success. In cities with rampant cor- Wisconsin. Is my understanding correct?
ruption among housing officials, it, along The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sen-
with other HUD programs, failed. But the ator is correct.
failures in certain cities were not peculiar Mr. MCCLELLAN. It is an amendment
to Section 235 and 236 and, in fact, these pro- that contains, I believe, some 23 separate
grams were not the main ones affected or
which failed, contrary to the opinion of the and distinct proposals with respect to
Department and some judicial mistakes of cuts in the pending bill.
fact. The Department blamed the programs Mr. President, I may state at the be-
instead of its own mismanagement. As a ginning of my remarks that I am not
consequence of this mismanagement, over primarily concerned about the amount of
400 indictments have been handed down
Section 235 program were in two cities, Seat- amendment were adopted. I think I have
tle and Dallas where there was serious un- been fairly consistent throughout the
employment stemming from cutbacks in the years in advocating economy in Govern-
air and space industries. In the State of Wis- ment. I - have repeatedly stood on the
consin, 97 percent of those assisted have been floor of the Senate and pointed out that
successful. one of the causes-the prime cause, real-
In the country as a whole, HUD studies ly-for deficit budgets and for increased
show that the Section 235 program is actu- spending originates and stems from au-
arially sound. There are now 350,000 Section thorization legislation. Appro rf'ati
235 homeowners making their monthly pay- p
ments. The actual number of defaults has cannot be made unless Congress has au-
au-
not exceeded the number anticipated and thorized the expenditure.
the insurance reserves have covered antici- One of our problems-it is a problem
pated claims. By any measurement, the pro- to all of us-in trying to meet our re-
gram has been a major success in attaining sponsibilities here is that once a program
the objective of assisting those with incomes is authorized, once Congress says this is
well below the national median, something that should be done and we
More than two-thirds of those receiving authorize it to be done and we author
assistance receive lower subsidies each year
because their incomes are rising, which was a ize the expenditure of such moneys as
major aim of the program. Some 50,000 Sec- may be necessary to carry out the pro-
tion 235 homebuyers have gone off subsidy gram, or we authorize so many million
altogether and, in the Committee's opinion, dollars or billion dollars to get the pro-
these are distinct measures of program suc- gram carried out, then Congress, itself,
cess. has put in motion the expenditure when
The Department has argued that if not it makes the appropriation.
everyone could be subsidized under the pro-
gram, no one should be subsidized. Evidently, The issue that comes before the Appro-
they halted the program out of policy dis- priations Committee, notwithstanding
taste rather than from factual evidence, that Congress has directed that this be
We are now awaiting action for new and done, is, shall we refuse to make the ap-
substitute programs. These were delayed by propriation? That is what it often
HUD's failure to finish its studies in a timely- amounts to. Especially is that true if a
fashion and to recommend any program at budget request comes down for it.
all until September, 1973. I know that we are all concerned, and
The Department now wishes to rely en- rightly so. The country is concerned. We
tirely on what is called the new Section 23
program, a program of leased housing to re- are distressed about the fiscal situation
place the conventional public housing pro- that pertains in our Government. We
gram, and Sections 236 and 236. agonize about the economic situation
The Committee feels that it would be a that prevails in this country. Therefore,
tragic error to take this course. First, Section it does behoove this Congress, as it did
23 may not work. Second, if it does work, it the last and the one before, to try to
could take a very long time to go into effect.
Third, even if it works, it may not do two im- bring down expenditures, certainly
portant things, namely, service the kind of within the amount of revenue our Gov-
low income families that public housing ernment will - take in. In other words, it
helped, and build in the regions or areas is our duty to try to achieve a balanced
where housing is most needed, budget; and as to that objective and on
Under Section 23, the builders become the that score, I yield to no Senator and to no
housing managers. It would seem that since Representative. I will continue to strive
they must rent out the units, they will seek to do that.
the elderly, those without children, and the
upper reaches of low and moderate Income As chairman of the Appropriations
families. Committee, I have set in motion and
The large poor families and the very poor have made an effort to bring.about a
families
-for whom public housin
h reduction in expenditures last
was su
d
,
g
c
year an
, It has claimed. that the programs were not a great program, may well be left out in the this year,
achieving the goals set by the Congress, but cold. Last year, particularly-we can speak
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 133 Approved For Release F 0IQEQ700040022-1 August 5, 1974
about that, because we got a response- tee on recommendation of the subcom- that the only way I could be ce-tairi of
I suggested that each subcommittee ttee. that was to make provision in the bill.,
weigh the budget, analyze it, particularlI supported the recommendations of which the subcommittee approved, arid
the part that that subcommittee hacf the committee. In fact, there is one item which I regret was not called to the
jurisdiction over, and suggest a target, in the bill that I would not have sup- specific attention of the chairman.. But,
a cceiling, within which it would submit ported that has been called to my atten- as I say, it appears at two different places
its appropriation request or make ap- tion. But again, I as chairman of the full in the report, and appears also in the bill
proval of the appropriations. In other committee, and the members of that itself.
words, we undertook to set a target in committee are undertaking to cooperate Mr. McCt.,ELLAN. It is not !ust the
the beginning, each subcommittee, and with our leadership to the end that we chaiman; it is the committee. I just rep-
t h-,.ii we tried to meet that target. We may, if we can-and we are makingg every resent a committee as its chairr_ian and
diet that, with some measure of success. effort to do it-get these appropriations its agent. It Is nothing personal. Kith': me
the greatest success achieved in that bills finished before the Senate becomes and it is nothing personal again,; me.
ort was by the defense appropriation preoccupied with another problem, Mr. PROXMIRE. I realize that,
i eominittee. The greatest cuts were another issue that will command its con- Mr. McCLELLAN. I am talkir;a about
uie there. Some of those savings were tinuing attention and occupy Its full proper procedures in the Senate the in-
lust because other functions of govern- time until that matter shall have been tegrity of the corn fttee system. If there
meat were appropriated far in excess of disposed of. Is no money in the bill and the Senator
Use budget, and thus we lost that advan- When we do these things hastily, we feels that, notwithstanding t.ha.1, fact.
gage to some extent. We were not able to do not do as efficient a job as we would provision ought to be made, I am per-
-.duce.as much as we targeted because like to, with the Government as big as feetly willing for the committee to pass
some appropriations exceeded the it is and these appropriations as large on it, to decide whether it should be in
l.,tidget. as they are, with as many items in them or not. I am not arguing about t7.iat. Had
t:nu a way, we are trying again this year, as there are. In fact, as I recall, there are i known that it was in the bill I would
Mr. President. Just what measure of suc- some 16 or 18 thousand items in research certainly have sought to have it c'=iscuused
++ess we will have ultimately, I do not and development alone-each one of and considered-and I apologizo for not
!-now. them could stand some examination. All knowing, but I make no explana'Ion fur--
,
we have a committee system in Con- of the items for which we make appro- ther than the fact that we are so sus, and
press. Perhaps it is failing. Perhaps the priations run into the hundreds of so occupied with these bills--trying to
committee system should be abolished. thousands. It is absolutely impossible process them, trying to get them out. I;
Perhaps we do not need it any more. to give attention to each one of them. would assume that when a chair nan of a
p
,':A: hops the way to handle these matters In the limited time that we have, and subcommittee presents his bill, if there
is just on the floor of the Senate. fn an effort to expedite this matter, one is anything in there that he can conceive
I want to say for the record that I section of the bill was overlooked. It did might be controversial, we would take
regard myself as a servant, an agent of not come to our attention and was not it up in the full committee and c iscuss it,
the Senate, as I serve on the Appropri- called to our attention when the matter Maybe that is my responsi>i itv to
u,i,ions Committee, particularly because I carne to the full committee. Notice only have these bills checked and scrutinised
;;erne as chairman of that committee. If came that morning, when the committee most carefully before we ever bring them
I- can ascertain what the policy of the met that afternoon, That is the item to to the full committee for consi.ic.ration
Senate is, how it wants to proceed on prohibit funds for the CIA. If that is correct, I must do the t. I shalt
these appropriation bills, if I can get in- I mention at this time, Mr. President, do my best to do it. But I do fe?l that bi
.truction along that line, I will try to that there are no funds in the appropria- a circumstance where we are f iperatinc
conform. If it were the policy of the tion bill for the CIA. Only one sill has under such stress of pressure and haste t+>
senate to proceed in a way that I simply funds for the CIA. That is the defense try to meet the conditions that we have
could not follow, then I would yield my appropriations bill. daily here, it would have been well. for
position on that matter-at least ter- I do not know if people want to dis- the Senator to mention this to he ful
porarily-to someone else, who could de- continue the CIA. If we want to east as- committee so that we might cell, icier i?
feud and undertake to sustain whatever persions on it, we can do it in a bill like At any rate, those things happen, tom=.,
,ir9 policy is. this. That is our right, if that is .he way i am not laying to cast any asps sion o;
./[r. President, the Appropriations we want to do it. But I do not think that the Senator. I am talking now i oaai th
('r,ramittee this year, as in the past, is necessarily to our credit. integrity of the committee s y s+9 nr aitc
s functioned in good faith. The sub- Mr. PROXMIRE, Mr. President, will what we reed to do. That is the purpose_
committees have held long hearings. the Senator yield at that point? primarily, of my concern at the moment
hey have marked up the bills and have Mr. McCLELLA.. I am glad to yield. although thought I would mention, a
hi-ought them to the full committee. Mr. PROXMIRE. This was put into the Mr. President, before we went into thi
Almost without exception, I have de- committee report, on page 6, and, of other aspect.
i s reed to the judgment and recommends- course, it is included in the bill. The rea- Mr. Pre ~ ident, I wish to talk t.ow coo
lions of the subcommittees. Perhaps son why it was included is that there was the pending amendment. There is al-
there have been one or two exceptions, information which this Senator received amendment pending that has been ee
lNtit I do not recall one at the moment. I that a number of appropraiticns bills fered by the distinguished Sen at or f.ro:
have generally supported the Appropria- might have funds for the CIA. Wisconsin. who is chairman of the ui.
I funs Committee on the door of the Sen- As chairman of the subcommittee, I committee which handles the Dull, an
tit.e. Perhaps in one or two exceptions I thought I had a duty to make sure of who is also the manager of Lila biii U!,
did not. what was in the appropriations bill on the floor. I have a copy of this a:rtenc
I do that not because necessarily I which I.was acting. Furthermore, I asked ment. I believe this is a correoi: cols.
always fully agree with what the Appro- the agency heads under HUD, Space, and contains :,ome 23 separate an-, iidnien'.
-lotions Committee has recommended. Science, when they appeared before the to items iti the bill, striking the all glut again I point out that unless it is subcommittee, whether they would mind reducing the amount.
so adverse and so greatly violates my con- if I put in this prevision, and they said I am advised by the dirt is u.li :
aiction that I simply cannot compromise, they would not. Senator from Wisconsin that the tots ,
1, still try to go along, in the interest of I have a letter from Mr. Ash of the the aggregate of these amount:, is aboi
rderly procedure, because we do have Office of Management and Budget, in $160 million in round numbers.
the committee system, and I do it in an which he states that there are no CIA Mr. President, I do not quarrel with
-sort to make this system work. funds in the bill. It was my very strong further reduction in this bill of th~a t:
We have a bill before us today. We went feeling that I had a responsibility to the amount, if we are given the ol^portunit;
through the due process. the procedures Senate and to the :full committee to find in committee to examine these propose !
that are established by the rules of the out what was in the bill and to make cuts and take committee action. on theit
Senate. which were followed and adhered sure that if there were funds for the CIA, If the committee then does n A recess--
This bill came before the full commit- those funds would be identified. I felt mend the cuts, when the bill cones to till'
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 August 5, 197 pproved For ?Y /P6 fd P7_ A 000700040022-1 S 14335
floor, of course, the Senate can work its tion, and often without having any evi- cutting process, by more than 31/''2 per-
will. But if there are amendments that dence presented, with offers to increase cent. We did a pretty good job last year
the committee feels are meritorious, the by a large amount. of cutting beyond that. I think we can
committee should not be bypassed. It Every Senator has the right, on this do it again: We are going to try, and I
should have an opportunity to consider floor, to offer any amendment he wants think we will succeed.
them. to. I concede that right. I defend that But I might say, if this practice is go-
Mr. President, I ask the distinguished right. I would do it myself if I felt a ing to be established, to do away with the
Senator from Wisconsin if these amend- strong enough conviction. But I think I committee consideration of these things
ments which are offered here today were would undertake, especially before the on their merits and let the bill come to
presented by him to his subcommittee. Appropriations Commitee-and I am the the floor, as they work it, and take items
Mr. PROXMIRE. I say to the chair- chairman of that committee-to have that seem to be too much and reduce
man that the amendments I offered to the issue clearly.presented to the com- them, or items that seem to be not
the subcommittee were far deeper than mittee, and give them an opportunity enough and increase them, I hope we do
the amendments here. I offered amend- to reject it on its merits, or for some not establish a precedent where every
ments in total of $1.4 billion, other reason, if there was reason for re- time a bill comes up here, we are going to
I offered a number of other amend- jecting it, or to approve it, as the case cut it 31/2 percent, because anyone who
ments. We had considerable discussion may be. wanted to be sure he got about what he
in the subcommittee meeting. Mr. President, I compliment the Sen- wanted could increase his appropriation,
Mr. McCLELLAN. Were they accepted? ator to this extent: This amendment is and then come to the floor, receive the
Mr. PROXMIRE. Some of the recom- a marked improvement, in my judgment, cut, and he would have lost practically
mendations of the chairman and the over the one offered, I believe last Fri- nothing; whereas another subcommittee,
ranking member were accepted and day, to the Department of Transporta- working faithfully and diligently, and
some were rejected. Some of these tion bill, with a 3.5 percent cut across examining the items and making reduc-
amendments were offered in the sub- the board. This, is my judgment, is the tions on the basis of merit and on the
committee. Many of them were not of- way to do it. basis of priorities as they see them,
fered in the subcommittee. And I might say, Mr. President, that would be terribly penalized. So would the
Mr. McCLELLAN. If they were ac- I have no doubt that upon these amend- function of the department or agency,
cepted in the subcommittee, why did ments being presented and discussed, I and so would the service to be performed,
they not appear in the Senator's report will find some of them that I shall want and those who benefit from it, if we are
on the bill? to support; because I want to cut, if to follow that procedure.
Mr. PROXMIRE. I say to the Senator we can, this budget and appropriation I do not think the emergency is such
that some of the amendments that I in every way we can do so consistently today that we cannot make reductions to
brought up in the subcommittee were and where it represents the best inter- bring these appropriations within the
rejected, and those amendments that ests of our country. revenues, and thus avoid a deficit. I do
were rejected, in some cases, are offered I do not like, as I said the other day, not believe there is a situation where we
here. I am not saying that any of the the meat=ax approach which is pre- cannot function responsibly in that
amendments that were accepted are sented across the board. Someone sug- fashion. Maybe we have lost that ability.
here. - gested a while ago that maybe we ought Maybe we will not face our responsibili-
Mr. McCLELLAN. Will the Senator to establish that precedent here, so we ties, but I believe we will. I do not believe
identify them for the record when he will all know that we are going to cut the process of a 3-percent cut, as such, is
has the floor directly? I would like to them percentagewise across the board. really facing up to the issue.
know which ones were considered there. But what would that do to the com- I hope that we will get some order and
I ask the Senator, were any of these mittee system, Mr. President? If that is some orderly process est will knowe e, what
particular amendments presented to the what we are establishing here, we need
full committee? to know it; but what does it do to the to do when we try to work on appropria-
Mr. PROXMIRE. The NSF, HUD, committee system? tion bills, and we will be able to feel that
NASA-we are going to identify the ones If I were handling a committee and i the efforts of the subcommittees and the
that were presented to the subcommittee. did not want my projects cut much, I full committees are going to be respected,
and then weighed and examined, rather
In the full committee, we had some would not do any cutting on them in the than just, in effect, discarding the ~om-
eight or nine specific amendments that committee; I would wait and let them get mittee's just, work and saying, "W are going
were offered. I think the Senator will re- their 3-percent cut up here, if they were m cut across the board. r"
member that. They were voted on en going to get it. And some could well in- Mr. President, the aiew of the situation,
bloc. We had two or three series of two crease their amounts, Mr. President, an- I want re find out, and I think this will
or three amendments each referring to ticipating that they would get a 3-per- give us t find pretty good idea, about how the
NASA voted en bloc; some of them are cent cut. Senate wants to proceed. I intend to
included here. We had one referring to I do not think a 3-percent cut, as such, move-others may have discussed it-to
the National Science Foundation, and as a firm and fixed formula, is neces- recommit the bill to the Appropriations
then three, I think, referring to HUD. sarily the best way to do it. But if we are Committee so that we will have the op-
We will be happy to identify those at a going to do that, let us take, for exam- portunity to discuss these proposed
later time. ple, the Defense bill. It is yet to come up, amendments, weigh them, and again re-
Mr. McCLELLAN. Were they pre- My distinguished friend here is a mem- port the bill out with the recommenda-
sented just as they are presented here? ber of the Armed Services Committee. tions of the committee.
Mr. PROXMIRE. No, they were pre- We hear demands here on the floor I yield to the distinguished Senator.
sented in somewhat different form. sometimes, "Cut it $10 billion." Maybe Mr. PROXMIRE. The Senator from
Mr. McCLELLAN. They were presented it can stand that; maybe it cannot. But Nevada.
in different form. whatever percentage it would be-81/2 Mr. BIBLE. I want to make a brief
Mr. President, this is the point i want percent would cut it $10 billion, or 12 statement.
to make, and I do not want to belabor percent, or whatever it is that would Mr. McCLELLAN. I yield.
Lt. If the committee system is to function make a cut of $10 billion-I think it Mr. BIBLE. I just wanted to make a
with integrity and efficiency, it must ought to be considered before we slash brief observation. I want to associate
have the opportunity-and the Senate, I that way. I do not know what it would myself with what the distinguished
think, should want it to have the oppor- come out of. chairman of our committee is saying,
tunity-to screen proposed cuts or pro- I do not think that is the way to do it. and I shall support him right down the
posed amendments-not only cuts, but Let me point this out: I think I can say line.
amendments that offer to increase the without any qualification-though I can- I hope the motion to recommit it to
amount of the bill. We have that ex- not absolutely guarantee it, as everyone the committee is agreed to so that we can
perience, too, Mr. President; we come knows-speaking of what I think the at- study these new amendments. They are
to the floor sometimes, without the evi- titude and disposition of the subcommit- new to me, and they may be well taken.
dence having been presented to the Ap- tee handling the defense bill is, I think it I have not had the opportunity of look-
propriations Committee for considera- will be cut, if we are left to the selective Ing at them.
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 14336 Approved For 75B; 000700040022~l -1
ugust 5, 1974
I am privileged to handle the Interior of our committees then, of course, the ing power with the House because, first,
appropriation bill, and that is supposed only alternative is to d3 it here on the either we have to Persuade them to ac-
-o be calendared for action on the floor loor. I know that the great masses of cept our percentage cut or else subject
on Wednesday afternoon, the American people want this budget ourselves to other cuts, mostly imposed
We heard from I do not know how cut, and they want a balanced budget, by the House,
many Senators, but they had 182 amend- and I am willing to work with my col- It is difficult to explain this cc>cafer-
rnents. Every one of them was an amend- leagues to that end, and if we do not get ence procedure unless a Senator has
rnent to add dollars. There was not a it the first round-that is where we have served on a conference committee with
.ingle amendment to take any dollars this Budget Committee, and I hopes it the House at one time or another.
-;way. works; I have some doubt about it--we I know there are many of these pro-
w hope the proponents and leaders in will make some further cuts until we do grams that can be cut, but it would be
this effort to cut back-and I am sure get it. We can pass a resolution after a serious mistake if we followed this per-
they are going to make an attack on the these bills are all in, weigh it, and make centage cut route. On Defense Appro-
Interior bill as well, I do not know why certain then that we treat everything priations we will probably cut over $4
but I think they might do it-will be alike, treat them all fairly, and let them billion this year. If another 5 or 10 per-
pecific and designate whose projects we take their reductions where they may, if cent were made on the floor of the Sen?-
take the money out of. That is what I we do not achieve it by the due process ate it would cripple the Defense Depart-
,,-would like to have them do, whether long established and lorg practiced and ment. For those who have not listened
they come from Florida or Georgia or now followed, undertaken to be followed to the hearings-and most of the Sen_
wherever, Wisconsin or Kansas, wher- by those to whom we have entrusted the ators have not listened to the hearing,,.,
over they might come from, and I would responsibility as our representatives and we could do serious harm not only it, the
hope they would specify which projects as our agents. Defense Department but most other, de.-
we should take It out of, whichever State I yield to the distinguished Senator partments of Government,
they want to take it out of, and I will from North Dakota (Mr. Youx(;). The committee chairman and the
re happy to oblige. But I hope they are Mr. YOUNG. I am in favor of this new ranking member, oftentimes many of the
specific when we come to consider this economy move In the Senate. For years other committee members, sit for months
problem on Wednesday, I believe. I think now for every amendment offered to cut listening to the testimony of the various
an is the day the leader is attempting an appropriation bill on the Senate floor departments.
1,a calendar it. that have been 10 offered to increase it. We know better where cuts can be
S thank the Senator for yielding. I have 1'his is with the exception of Defense made and where they cannot be n: Me.
very important appointment this after appropriation bills. I have seen amend- If more amendments had been offered
noon and I must keep it. relent after amendment offered on the in the full committee to cut this budget
Labor HEW bill that raised the bill by or this bill further I would have voted
Mr. McCLELLAN. I wish to observe, as much as one-half billion dollars. This for it. As I said before, I am willing to
as chairman of the Appropriations Corn- increasing appropriation bill has been cut $160 million or more, but it should
mittee, nearly all of the letters-it is un- going on for years, so I welcome this be by the Appropriations Committee
usual when we get one wanting us to cut new economy move. item
one, although we do get some of them I am willing to cut .8160 million or want to by do item it , it to em if there are tthhe e who
Senators of them are to increase, and the by item on t Sen-
rrrSenators who write and ask us to in- more if the subcommittee chairman roe- ate floor there is nothing wrong a'3eut
ommends it. In fact, I voted in the corn- that. But this percentage cut business
c:aease sometimes are the ones who are mittee to-there was only one motion Is just not the right way of doing things.
voting for these across-the-board cuts, offered, as I recall to cut $43.3 million. It reduces respectability, and even the
a ad so forth. It is difficult for us to op- I would like to have ,his Inserted in effectiveness, of the Senate A
crate, as I say, intelligently, efficiently, bills inpthis
r,xrd conscientiously where we do not the RECORD, Mr. President. tions Committee to handle bills in this
and and ie are not privileged w to know There being no objection, the state- way. At least Members supporting this
what the rules are going it be and how, ment was ordered to be printed in the kind of move ought to tell the Senate
what the
are are going to to be and
and how, RECORD, as follows: Appropriations Committee how much
wh n, they RECOMMENDED CUTS BY SENATOR PROx eipE they want to cut, and offer some sug,;es-
I want to say this before I conclude: IN SUBCOMMITTEE tion as to where to cut.
I said in the beginning this is not per- NASA Mr. MCC7.>;:r LAN. Will the Senator
ss=r,bjection, it is so ordered.
t)RDER FOR TRANSACTION OF ROU-
TINE MORNING BUSINESS TO-
MORROW
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD_ Mr. President.
ask unanimous consent that following
llie recognition of Senators on tomor-
?ow, under the order previously entered,
here be a period for the transaction of
'nutine morning business of not to ex-
,ieed 15 minutes, with statements therein
,rnited to 5 minutes each.
U
ORUM CALL
Q
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD, Mr. President,
I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk
will call the roll.
The second assistant legislative clerk
proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President,
I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
r)biection, it is so ordered.
ORDER FOR TRANSACTION OF
ROUTINE MORNING BUSINESS
Mr. ROBERT C. BYRD. Mr. President,
I ask unanimous consent that there be
a period for the transaction of routine
morning business with statements lim-
:aed to 15 minutes therein.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
.,ray a silalor pare in the strictly ecnrlomiie
side of inflation, but it also has 1; tre-
mendous impact on the thinking c f the
people-what has been called "inflation -
ary psychology."
Put it this way:
It is not realistic to ask the peooic
to pinch pennies while the Government
plays Diamond Jim Brady.
And the Government must act soon.
The principal reason why this is so es-
sential is that inflation has rooted itself
-:4, deeply.
inflation has come to feed on itself : the
expectation that prices will continue to
rise artificially spurs demand, strains ce-
iaacity and forces prices still higher.
Every American knows prices are ';oar-
ing. But not everyone understands how
widespread are the ravages of inflation.
Let us look at what is happening ill the
looney market. To do that, we ha',e to
look first at the national debt.
The huge deficits which the Govern..
'neat has been running have Pushec the
fNFLATION: THE BURDEN AND "l'HE
('HALLFNGE
Mr. HARRY F. BYRD, Jr. Mr. Presi-
dent, the United States has had its first
,'ear of double-digit inflation, and no re-
lief is in sight.
Consumer prices are rising at an an-
nual rate of 10 percent.
Personal income rose $97 billion In
paper dollars during the year ending
April 30, but in real income, the Ameri-
can worker is 4.8 percent worse off than
a year ago.
These are staggering figures, but in- ]During the 8-mor thh period from No-
flation is not a new concern for the Sen- vember 1, 1973, to June 30, 1974, for ex-
ator from Virginia. ample, the Treasury issued securities tca-
On January 8. 1970. in a speech before tiling $42 billion. Government agencies
national debt up to $475 billion. It wi)
pass the half-trillion-dollar mark in less
than a year.
The interest on the debt durinr, Cllr=
fiscal year that ended June 30 was $21i
billion. It took 1.7 cents of every 'indvid-
ual and corporate income tax dollar.iusl
to pay the interest Ce the Public deb`.
In this situation, the Government t lus
go into the money, market-mar svely
and frequently. In fact, 82 percen of
all funds available ,for lending is :or-
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 S 14334 Approved For RGVY U1 R5~ kI; ~1~5_R kW0700040022August
about that, because we got a response-
I suggested that each subcommittee
weigh the budget, analyze it, particularly
the part that that subcommittee had
jurisdiction over, and suggest a target,
a ceiling, within which it would submit
its appropriation request or make ap-
proval of the appropriations. In other
words, we undertook to set a target in
the beginning, each subcommittee, and
then we tried to meet that target. We
did that, with some measure of success.
The greatest success achieved in that
effort was by the defense appropriation
subcommittee. The greatest cuts were
made there. Some of those savings were
lost because other functions of govern-
ment were appropriated far in excess of
the budget, and thus we lost that advan-
tage to some extent. We were not able to
reduce as much as we targeted because
some appropriations exceeded the
budget.
In a way, we are trying again this year,
Mr. President. Just what measure of suc-
cess we will have ultimately, I do not
know.
We have a committee system in Con-
gress. Perhaps it is failing. Perhaps the
committee system should be abolished.
Perhaps we do not need it any more.
Perhaps the way to handle these matters
is just on the floor of the Senate.
I want to say for the record that I
regard myself as a servant, an agent of
the Senate, as I serve on the Appropri-
ations Committee, particularly because I
serve as chairman of that committee. If
I can ascertain what the policy of the
Senate is, how it wants to proceed on
these appropriation bills, if I can get in-
struction along that line, I will try to
conform. If it were the policy of the
Senate to proceed in a way that I simply
could not follow, then I vstould yield my
position on that matter-at least tem-
porarily-to someone else, who could de-
fend and undertake to sustain whatever
the policy is.
Mr. President, the Appropriations
Committee this year, as in the past,
has functioned in good faith. The sub-
committees have held long hearings.
They have marked up the bills and have
brought them to the full committee.
Almost without exception, I have de-
ferred to the judgment and recommenda-
mittee. ~1R C C 1. .L14M :
ported that has been called to my atten-
tion. But again, I as chairman of the full
committee, and the members of that
committee are undertaking to cooperate
with our leadership to the end that we
may, if we can-and we are making every
effort to do it-get these appropriations
bills finished before the Senate becomes
preoccupied with another problem,
another issue that will command its con-
tinuing attention and occupy its full
time until that matter shall have been
When we do these things hastily. we
do noE?'do as as we would
e vern e s g s
as ere are. In fact, as I recall, there are
some 16 or 18 thousand items in research
and development alone-each one of
them could stand some examination. All
of the items for which we make appro-
priations run into the hundreds of
thousands. It is absolutely impossible
to give attention to each one of them.
In the lied time that we hav d
~'4fdL
n
rtrm~et ~~= an was
5, 1974
c 'attention of_the chairman. Butte
gay, it app~ ears al wo i eren aces
e report. a -a-18ZLIn trip-bill
chaiman; it is the committee. I just rep-
resent a committee as its chairman and
its agent. It is nothing personal with me
r.~R_OXMIRE. I ealize that.
r. McCLELLANI am talking about
proms he Senate, the in-
tegrity of the committee system. a reis no money in the bii and _the Seem of F
Hawn a was the 11 ou
certainly avid sou hi have discussed
and cum~ e1 -a-nc ap9 n
process them, trying to get them out.
ld assume that when a chairman o a
su comm ee Dill, Ir"MM
up In Me JW1 comma tee IT.
aliecL to our attention when Me l1latLer aye a Is my respons y, to
have these bills checked and scrutinized
most carefully before we ever bring them
me a Item - o to the full committee for consideration:
proFii it ands or e A? If that is correct, I must do that. I shall
T mention aT, Tnis me, Mr. President, do my best to do it. But I do feel that in
ti- a circumstance where we are operating
bill for
under such stress of pressure and haste to
funds for the CIA. That Is the try to meet the conditions that we have
daily here, it would have been well for
jaw if neopl want to is the Senator to mention this to the full
con roue t . I ' as committee so that we might consider it.
rnmns on it, we can d it in At any rate, those things happen, and
is. a is our ri '1 a the wa I am not trying to cast any aspersion on
we want to doIT, u do the Senator. I am talking now about the
naecessari_ o our C_r ,t. integrity of the committee system and
r, Mr. President, will what we need to do. That is the purpose,
the Senator yield at that point" primarily, of my concern at the moment,
am glad to yield. although I thought I would mention it,
/T ROX
c
comma ee report, on page 6, and, of other aspect.
course, it is included in the bill. The rea- Mr. President, I wish to talk now about
son why it was included is that thereS the pending amendment. There is an
information which this Senator received amendment pending that has been of-
MET, -a ffU?T=1 UT fered by the distinguished Senator from
might have funds for a Wisconsin, who is chairman of the sub-
s chairman nittee, I committee which handles the bill, and
thought I had a duty to make sure of who is also the manager of the bill on
what was in the appropriations bill on the floor. I have a copy of this amend-
which I was acting. Pd urthermore. I asked ment. I believe this is a correct copy. It
thg en h er H S ace an contains some 23 separate amendments
Scien e. w en they appeare a ore a to items in the bill, striking the items and
tions of the subcommittees. Perhaps
there have been one or two exceptions,
but I do not recall one at the moment. I
have generally supported the Appropria-
tions Committee on the floor of the Sen-
ate. Perhaps in one or two exceptions I
did not.
I do that not because necessarily I
always fully agree with what the Appro-
priations Committee has recommended.
But again I point out that unless it is
so adverse and so greatly violates my con-
viction that I simply cannot compromise,
I still try to go along, in the interest of
orderly procedure, because we do have
the committee system, and I do it in an
effort to make this system work.
We have a bill before us today. We went
through the due process, the procedures
that are established by the rules of the
Senate, which were followed and adhered
to. This bill came before the full commit-
they would not. Senator from Wisconsin that the total,
of Management and u ge , n $160 million in round numbers.
Mr. President, I do not quarrel with a
I'M f t t
th
feeling that I had -a responsibility to the
Senate and to the full committee to find
out what was in the bill and to make
sure that if there were funds for the CIA,
those funds would be identified. I felt
is o ba
further reduction in
amount, if we are given the opportunity
in committee to examine these proposed
cuts and take committee action on them.
if the committee then does not recom-
mend the cuts, when the bill comes to the
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 l~tt,g~~.st, 5~ Ig;~4pproved Fob l ~~~2 1 ~/~06 ~CI8 P7WRI 8000700040022-1 yelp,
~ri,sisslppi ________ _________..__-_-. 11, 026 by no stretch of the imagination is that cor., For all these reasons, we should pot accept;
Mtuouri ____ _________ _____.. -_.__ 6, 096 rect. the abandonment of the traditional program';
Montana ____ -_. _- __-_ --- --- 1, 652 Fublic housing, for all its particular diffi.. as the price for Section 23. The traditiot:si.
Nebraska _--____________ 4. 543 cnlties, is highly popular and a badly needec. programs and Section 23 should be imp. e..
Nevada ______________________._._-__ 5.980 program. The waiting lists are exceedingly mented concurrently.
New Hampshire---__._______________ 1.098 long, The vacancy rates are exceedingly low. Hopefully this will be the result of the
flea Jersey_____...._________________ 3, 293 Thus, it may be concluded th.it public hoes- legislative conference ow taking place be..
\1ew Mexico.__________________-_____ 5, 176 trig provides better housing to millions of tween the House a d the Senate concern-
New York_____.._ _ _ _____________.. 4, 364 Americans, than they could otherwise afford ing future hou policy and programs.
Nor~h Carolina__. -___ 7, 244 or are now getting. When the pendin legislation is finally agreed.
horr;h DDakota__ _ -_---\. -_-_ 811 The Sections 235 and 236 programs suf- to. this Comm tee will examine the A~3-
ihio __ _ ____ ___ __-_ 16, 676 fered from both HUD management, and a-c- ministration's, unding request to carry out.
3~l;thoma __ _ ___ _ _ 11.,455 tua'_ corruption, rather than from any in- the will of date Congress,
t egon __._____ __ __. 6, 326 her2nt defects in the program::, In cities with
nnsylvania _ ._____ 5, 880 good HUD management, and actual corrup- Mr. M LELLAN. Mr. President, I rise
i rnde Island - __ _-_ ___ 744 tior., rather than inherent defects in the to disc>j s briefly the pending amend-
t,~ou'aI Carolina________________. `4_ 16, 571 programs. In cities with good HUD manage- ment, Which I understand is the amenli-
ionrh Dakota___-____--_-__--.______ 1,498 meat, such as Milwaukee, the program was ment of the distinguished Senator from
T .:naessee 17, 227 a great success. In cities with rampant cor- Wisconsin. Is my understanding correc''?
i ,xlls ___-_-_--_- 87, 755 ruption among housing officials, it, along ` he PRESIDING OFFICER. The Sell-
ai 'alt . -- --___-___--_ --_ 6,689 With other HUD programs. failed. But the
V rinont _-._ `340 failures in certain cities wer-e not peculiar clod is correct.
--__ Mr, MC ins, I b N. It is an amendment
r;inia _-__ __ . ___ ___ ___ 3, T77 to Section 235 and 236 and, in :'act, these pro-
Washington _- 13, 751 grams were not the main ones affected or that contains, I believe, some 23 separate
West Virginia______________________ 711 which failed, contrary to the opinion of t_he and distinct proposals with respect `:a
Wsconsin ._________ _,_. ____----.____ 1.0, 440 'Department and some judicial mistakes of cuts in the pending bill.
Wyoming ____ --_._ __-_ __-.- 921 fact. The Department blamed the programs Mr. President, I may state at the be-
'uerto Rica__ ____ _____ ___-- 9,661 instead of its own mismanagement,'As a ginning of my remarks that I am not
Virgin Islands--------______-__-__ 0 consequence of this mismanagemei$, over primarily concerned about the amount of
t~uaan --------------.--_-----____.___ 129 400 indictments have been handed down the cuts that would result, the amount
- in housing fraud cases of reduction that would occur, if this
U-d. Total--___-_____________ _ 4,34, 814 Over 10 percent of the total deflults in the
Section 235 program were in two cities, Seat:- amendment were adopted. I think I have
Alr. PERCY. Mr. President, I ask tie and Dallas where there was serious un- been fairly consistent throughout tie
unanimous consent to have printed In employment stemming from cutbacks in the Years in advocating economy in Goverr.-
the RECORD the section of the Appropria- air and space industries. In the State of Wis- meat. I have repeatedly stood on tk. e
l~iolis Committee's report to which I have cousin, 97 percent of thoseassi;3ted have been floor of the Senate and pointed out thf:t
referred, because I concur with every successful. one of the causes-the prime cause, real-
statement made in that section. In the country as a whole, HUD studies ly-for deficit budgets and for increased
I":sere being no objection, the excerpt show that the SectIo i 235 program Is actu- spending originates and stems from au -
a35 h sound. rs ma in the 3 5ont Section thorization legislation. Appropriatior..s
from the report was ordered to be printed 235 homeowners making their monthly pay-
in the RECORD, as follows: ments. The actual number of defaults has cannot be made unless Congress has au-
'1~r`rt.;i: 1. DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND URBAN not exceeded the number anticipated and. thorized the expenditure.
11R.VELOPMENT the insurance reserves have cavered antici- One of our problems-it is a, problem
'fhe Committee is distressed and deeply pated claims. $y any measurement, the pro- to all Of Us-in trying to meet Our re-
oncerned by the Administration's action to gram has been a major success in attaining sponsibilities here is that once a prograri
abandon our nation's historic housing nrto the objective of assisting those with incomes iS authorized, once Congress says this is
well below. the national media:a:
;;ram. In 1949, the Congress declared our pol- something that shduld be done and w-
iacy to provide a decent home in a suitable kista ere. two-thirds of those reh year authorize it to be done and we authcr-
living environment for ever American becaus tee receive lower subsidies each year
r,in;,y Y because their incomes are resin;;, whl~h was a ize the expenditure of such moneys a
ar Ises, Con ress set a housin majol' aim of tihe program. Some 50,000 See- may be necessary to carry out the pro-
g g goal of 2.6 tion '235 homebuyers have gone off sW sidy gram, or we authorize so many million
mi lion housing units a year for 10 years of altogether and, in the Committee's opinion, dollars or billion dollars to get the pro-
; ~tiicZ 600,000 were to be far low and mooed- these are distinct measures of program she- gram carried out, then Congress, itsell
ate income families. cess. has put in motion the expenditure when
i'u January 1973, the Administration froze The Department has argued that if note, it makes the appropriation.
virtually all new starts for low and moderate everyone could be subsidized under the pro-
income families. Some 17 housing programs gram, no one should be subsidised. Evidently. The issue that comes before the ApprO -
or programs closely associated with ltouslug they halted the program out of policy die- priations Committee, notwithstanding
were stooped. Except for units already In the taste rather than from factual evidence. that Congress has directed that this bo
pipelines, programs for low income housi',ng We are now awaiting action for new and done, is, shall we refuse to make the ap-
were abandoned, and programs for moderate substitute programs. These were delayed by propriation? That is what it often
income housing were abandoned as well. This HUD's failure to finish its studies in a timely amounts to. Especially is that true if a
bas resulted in additional families in the fashion and to recommend any program at budget request comes down for it.
lower 40 to 50 percent of American income all until September
197x
,
. I know that we are all concerned, anti
groups being denied access to public housing The Department now wishes to rely en-
or. the ability to buy a new home. tirely on what is called the new Section 23 rightly so, The country is concerned. We
Exacerbating this situation, due to exceed- program, a program of leased housing to re- are distressed about the fiscal situation
itlglp high interest rates, approximately 70 place the conventional public housing pro- that pertaibs in our Government. Wi'
ercent of the American people`under private grain, and Sections 235 and 286. agonize about the economic situation
;atterpriso and conventional'' housing pro- The Committee feels that i would be a that prevails n this country. Therefore:
.....,. _.__ ''____ `__._ _ __ _ tragilc error t'/, fn ke fhis coursn .... .... ...... .. _ _
,~.,< '.0 CPIs was about 1.U million units, or low income families that public housing ernment will take f. In other words, Il.
over a million units below the national hous- helped, and build in the regions or areas is our duty to try to hieve a balances
ix,#!' goals promulgated by the Congress
h
h
i
. w
ere
ous
ng is most needed.. budget' and as to. tha objective and or
.?oniebuyers, builders, thrift institutions, Under Section 23, the builders become the that score, I yield to no nator and to no
iui. those associated with the housing indus- housing managers. It would seem that since Representative. I will cd tinue to strive
irk-'ttrniture, durable goods, heating and they must. rant out the ,,,,try .,.A....,,,, ..,,_,_
:ncaratorium pinch. upper- reaches of low and moderate income As chairman Of the Appropriations
t he Committee feels that the Administra- families. Committee, I have set in motion and
;:tort has justified Sts actions for a variety of The large poor families and the very poor have made an effort to bring about a
;5-1t?.upported reasons. Among other things, families, for whom public housing was such reduction in expenditures, last year and
it has claimed that the programs were not a great program, may well be left out in the this year.
lcle jing the goals set by the Congress, but cold. Last year, particular)
y-we ca.n speak
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 : CIA-RDP75B0038OR000700040022-1
 August ?5, Y9~proved For ggt~g~/q~ :~~~z5.00700040022-1 S 14335
floor, _of cS~rse, the Senate can work its
wi11M But if there are amendments that
the committee feels- are meritorious, the
committee should not be bypassed. It
should have an opportunity to consider
them.
Mr. President, I ask the distinguished
Senator from Wisconsin ff these amend-
ments which are offered here today were
presented by him to his subcommittee.
Mr. PROXMIRE. I say to the chair-
man that the amendments I offered to
the subcommittee were far deeper than
the amendments here. I offered amend-
ments in total of $1.4 billion.
I offered a number of other amend-
ments. We had considerable discussion
in the subcommittee meeting.
Mr. McCLELLAN. Were they accepted?
Mr. PROXMIRE: Some of the recom-
mendations of the chairman and the
ranking member were accepted and
some were rejected. Some of these
amendments were offered in the sub-
committee. Many of them were not of-
fered in the subcommittee.
Mr. McCLELLAN. If they were ac-
cepted in the subcommittee, why did
they not appear in the Senator's report
on 'the bill?
Mr. PRO,XMIRE. I say to the Senator
that some of the amendments that I
brought up in the subcommittee were
rejected, and those amendments that
were rejected, in some cases, are offered
here. I am not saying that any of the
amendments that were accepted are
here.
Mr. McCLELLAN. Will the Senator
identify them for the record when he
has the floor" directly? I would like to
know which ones were considered there.
I ask the Senator, were any of these
particular amendments presented to the
full committee?
Mr. PROXMIRE. The NSF, HUD,
NASA-we are going to identify the ones
that were presented to the subcommittee.
In the full committee, we had some
eight or nine specific amendments that
were offered. I think the Senator will re-
member -that. They were voted an en
bloc. We had two or three series of two
or three amendments each referring to
NASA voted en bloc; some of them are
included here. We had one referring to
the National Science Foundation, and
then three, I think, referring to HUD.
We will be happy to identify those at a
later time.
Mr. McCLELLAN. Were they pre-
sented just as they are presented here?
Mr. PROXMIRE. No, they were pre-
sented in somewhat different form.
Mr, McCLELLAN. They were presented
in different form.
Mr. President, this is the point I want
to make, and I do not want to belabor
it. If the committee system is to function
with integrity and efficiency, it must
have the opportunity-and the Senate, I
think, should want it to have the oppor-
tunity-to screen proposed cuts or pro-
posed amendments-not only cuts, but
amendments that offer to increase the
amount of the bill. We have that ex-
perience, too, Mr. President; we come
to the floor sometimes, without the evi-
dence having been presented to the Ap-
propriations Committee for cansidera-
tion, amd often without having any evi-
dence presented, with offers to increase
by a large amount.
Every Senator has the right, on this
floor, to offer any amendment he wants
to. I concede that right. I defend that
right. I would do it myself if I felt a
strong enough conviction. But I think I
would undertake, especially before the
Appropriations Commitee-and I am the
chairman of that committee-to have
the issue clearly presented to the com-
mittee, and give them an opportunity
to reject it o~n its merits, or for some
other reason, if there was reason for re-
jecting~ it, or to approve it, as the case
may be.
Mr. President, I compliment the Sen-
ator to this extent: This amendment is
a marked improvement, in my judgment,
over the one offered, I believe last Fri-
day, to the Department of Transporta-
tion bill, with a 3.5 percent cut across
the board. This, is my judgment, is the
way to do it.
And I might say, Mr. President, that
I have no doubt that upon these amend-
ments being presented and discussed, I
-will find some of them that I shall want
to support; because I want to cut, if
we can, this budget and appropriation
in every way we can do so consistently
and where it represents the best ixxter-
ests of our country.
I do not like, as I said the other day,
the meat-ax approach wlxich is pre-
sented across the board. Someone sug-
gested awhile ago that maybe we ought
to establish that precedent here, so we
will all know that we are going to cut
them percentagewise across the board.
But what would that do to the cam-
mittee system, Mr. President? If that is
what we are establishing herB, we need
to know it; but what does it do to the
committee system?
If I were handling a committee and I
did not want my projects cut muc7x, I
would not do any cutting on them in the
committee ; I would wait and let them get
their 3-pex?cent cut up here, if they were
going to get it. And same could well in-
crease their amounts, Mr. President, an-
ticipating that they would get a 3-per-
cent cut.
I do not think a 3-percent cut, as such,
as a firm and fixed formula, is neces-
sarily the best way to do it. But if we are
going to do that, let us take, for exam-
ple, the Defense bill. It is yet to come up.
My distinguished friend here is a mem-
ber of the Armed Services Committee.
We hear demands here on the floor
sometimes, "Cut it $10 billion." Maybe
it can stand that; maybe it cannot. But
whatever percentage it would be-8x/z
percent would cut it $10 'billion, or 12
percent, or whatever it is that would
make a cut of $10 billion-I think it
ought to be considered before we slash
that way. I do not know what it would
come out of.
I do not think that is the way to do it.
Let me point this out: I think I can say
without any qualification-though I can-
not absolutely guarantee it, as everyone
knows-speaking of what I think the at-
titude and disposition of the subcommit-
tee handling the defense bill is, I think it
will be cut, if we are left to the selective
cutting process, by more than 3'/z per-
cent. We did a pretty good job last year
of cutting beyond that. I think we can
do it again. We are going to try, and I
think we will succeed.
But I might say, if this practice is go-
ing to be established, to do away with the
committee consideration of these things
on their merits and. let the bill come to
the floor, as they work it, and take items
that seem to be too much and x?educe
them, or items that seem to be not
enough and increase them, I hope we do
not establish a precedent where every
time a bill comes up here, we are going to
cut it 31/z percent, because anyone who
wanted to be sure he got about what he
wanted could increase his appropriation,
and then come to the floor, receive the
cut, and he would have lost practically
nothing; whereas another subcommittee,
working faithfully and diligently, and
examining the items and making reduc-
tions on the basis of .merit and on the
basis of priorities as they see them,
would be terribly penalized. So would the
function of the department or agency,
and so would the service to be performed,
and those who benefit from it, if we are
to follow that procedure.
I do not think the emergency is such
today that we cannot make reductions to
bring these appropriations within the
revenues, and thus avoid a deficit. I do
not believe there is a situation where we
cannot function responsibly in that
fashion. Maybe we have lost that ability.
Maybe we will not face our responsibili-
ties, but I believe we will. I do not believe
the process of a 3-percent cut, as such, is
really facing up to the issue.
I hope that we will get some order and
some orderly process established here, or
reestablished, so that we will know what
to do when we try to work on appropria-
tion bills, and we will be able to feel that
the efforts of the subcommittees and the
full committees are going to be respected,
and then weighed and examined, rather
than just, in effect, discarding the com-
mittee's work and saying, "We are going
to cut across the board."
Mr. President, in view of the situation,
I want to find out, and I think this will
give us a pretty good idea, about how the
Senate wants to proceed. I intend to
move-others may have discussed it-to
recommit the bill to the Appropriations
Committee so that we will have the op-
portunity to discuss these proposed
amendments, weigh them, and again re-
port the bill out with the recommenda-
tions of the committee.
I yield to the distinguished Senator.
Mr. PROXMIRE. The Senator from
Nevada.
Mr. BIBLE. I want to make a brief
statement. ,
Mr. MaCLELLAN. I yield.
Mr. BIBLE. I just wanted to make a
brief observation. I want to associate
myself with what the distinguished
chairman of our committee is saying,
and I shall support him right down the
line.
I hope the motion to recommit it to
the committee is agreed to so that we can
study these new amendments. They are
new to me, and they may be well taken.
i have not had the opportunity of look-
ing at them.
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 :CIA-RDP75B00380R000700040022-1
 ~43~6 Approved For~l~~~~~~6 R~~75~~300070004002~:~~~,ust r5, 1' 9 i 1~
I am privrleged to handle the Interior
=~?zprapriation bill, and that is supposed
,o be calendared for action on the floor
osl Wednesday afternoon.
~~e heard from I do not know how
rzlany Senators, but they had iti2 am.end-
?uents. Every one of them was an amend-
e~Ient t;o add dollars. There was not a
-'i.-isle amendment to take any dollars
~+.vay.
I hope the proponents and leaders in
iiiris effort to cut back-and I am sure
]rt3ey are going to make an attack on the
1 t,eriar bill as weIi, I do not know why
but I think they might do it-wfll be
~?;ecific and designate whose projects we
]sake the money out of. That is what I
would like to have them do, whether
they come from Florida or Georgia or
~aherever, Wisconsin or Kansas, wher-
e=aer they might come from, and I would
iic~pe they would specify which projects
~: a should take it out of, whichever State
i;iley want to take it out of, and I will
be happy to oblige. But I hope theg are
+; leciii.c when we come to consider this
?abiem an Wednesday, I believe. I think
d~~lat is the day the leader is attempting
i.+l calendar it.
1 thank the Senator for gieldirlg. I :have
veryy important appointment this after-
s~~,on and I must keep it.
?iZr. McCLELLAN. I wish to observe,
;; chairman of the Appropriations Com-
rlit?tee, nearly all of the letters-it is un-
11=ua1 when we get one wanting us t,~ cut
;~13e, although we do get some of them-
ftzast of them are to increase, and the
'-=~natars who write and ask us to in-
=~~?ease sometimes are the ones who are
i~c-tiny for these across-the-board cuts,
.>rid so forth. It is difficult for us to op-
?~?aae, as I say, intelligently, efficiently,
;;.f,d conscientiously where we do not
_~ow and we are not privileged to know
i~'lllit the rules are going to be and how,
3vhen, they are going to change and be
i::ans;ed.
1 vs=ant to say this before I conclude:
i :;aid in the beginning this is not per-
alanal, and it is not, that every Senator
~: entitled to vote his conscience and his
,,>nviction, and I am not pleading today
"err myself as chairman of the Al>propri-
;;t:.cns Committee; I am pleading for each
r3.~nator here, for the people he repre-
_~?lts, to maintain and to make operate
:r, :ys=:~~m that has been tried and tested
?,i:_d proven over 190 years that we :have
~,.~~i tt~i~s Government. Sure, it is not per-
`~ ~~t. l~~?t'amend the rules if chanties must
ma,~ae?
h:ol~e we will understand that it
..::-::dies no personal difi'erence to me if
;,r rut this bill 3 percent or 30 percent
-,: Sept insofar as what is best for our
~~~> entry. l will feel the same way when
~+ have the defense appropriation bill
at bore. Do what is best for the country,
~.r:~d if it takes a 3-percent cut or a 5-per-
a cut, if the Senators will single out
>~ items where they ought to be cut,
';~~~>p those that have a priority. that de-
:~,?ve the full financing and reduce the
+ri.hers, I will be satisfied.
't am n.ot insisting on budget appropri-
:a ,ions. I am not only willing to cut, but I
ai,l~~i cutting. Taut we need cooperation, we
~u;tid the Senate's.. understandintr. and
i ~: ve a.re not going to recognize the work
of our committees then, of course, the
only alternative is to do it here on the
floor. I know that the great masses ~~f
the American people want this budget
cut, and they want a balanced budget,
and I am willing to worle with my col-
eagues to that end, and if we do not get
it the first round-that is where we ha~~e
this Budget Committee, and I hope it
works; I have some doubt about it-vae
will make some further cuts until we do
get it. We can pass a resolution after
tYlese bills are all in, weigh it, and make
certain then that we treat everything
alike, treat them all fain:~, and let them
take their reductions where they may, it
we do not achieve it by the due process
long established and long practiced and
now followed, undertaken. to be followed
by those to whom we have entrusted the
responsibility as our representatives and
as our agents.
I yield to the distinguished Senator
from North Dakota (Mr. Yotrxc).
Mr. YOUNG. I am ixl favor of this new
economy move in the Senate. For years
now for every amendment offered to cut
an appropriation bill on the Senate flag
That have been 10 offered to increase '.t.
This is with the exception of Deferl;>e
alpropriation bills. I have seen amend-
ment after amendment offered on the
T a.bor HF.W bill that raised the bill by
as much as one-half billion dollars. This
increasing appropriation bill has been
fining on for years, so 1: welcome this
new-economy move.
i am willing to cut $160 million or
more if the subcommittee chairman rec-
ommends it,.7n fact, I voted in the coni-
mittee to-there was only one motion
offered, as I recall to cur; $43.3 millio~l.
I would like to have this inserted in
the Rscoxn, Mr. President.
There being no objection, the stati;-
ment was ordered to be printed in tyre
Recoan, as follows:
i~,IiCOMMENDED (,UTS SY SE::TATOR PROXMIILB'i
TN .SUBCOMMITTEE
Npsa
(:n millions)
lte~search and Development. ________
$12. 8
t;t~astruction of Facilities___ ________
5. 0
Research and Program Mant~gement_
1.0
_
Total --------------- --------
...~ _ __
18. 8
x.;F ------------------------------
a.a
IIUD
t~t>.mprehensive Planning Grants___-
10.0
Research and Technology___________
5.0
Salaries--Research and Technology_
1.35,0
.
Tonal -----??------------------
-_.~~
16. 3:0
>_
4~rand total------------------
- _---
43.3
Mr. YOUNG. Mr. President, I am fc~r
this bigger cut. I am willing to make a
bigger cut, $200 million, if necessary. Bl:.t
I believe it, should be on an item-by-item
basis.
This business of going to conference
with the House with a "rr.eat-ax" cut of
3 percent or 5 percent causes the Sen.-
ate to lase all of its bargaining ~owcr
with the House. The Senely
and frequently. In fact, 62 per+~ent. of
all funds available for lending is hull?-
rowed by the Federal Government.
During fire 8-month period front 1va-
vember 1, 1973, to June 30, 1974, for ex:-
ample, the Tl?easw?y issued securities t;o-
t~ling $42 billion. Government agel~~~~ic~s
Approved For Release 2005/06/06 :CIA-RDP75B00380R000700040022-1