DESTRUCTION OF FILES OF ILLEGAL SURVEILLANCE AND OTHER ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES: ANNOUNCEMENT OF HEARING

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP77M00144R000800070108-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 12, 2016
• Document Release Date: November 26, 2001
• Sequence Number: 108
• Publication Date: March 30, 1976
• Content Type: OPEN

H 2568 Approved For RWW1N9&W&. W ZMQ -##6$1D00800070101 1xrch W, 1976
mendations involving such matters as The existence of the Kraft wiretap was the Government Information and Indi-
staffing, training, computer systems made known by Watergate investigators, vidual Rights Subcommittee and other
management, et cetera. The subcommit- but there are many thousands of Amer- committees of the Congress.
tee will not discuss those recommenda icans who are not even aware that their In light of these developments, the
tions involving legislative change, since Government opened their mail, tapped Government Information and Individual
these recommendations are under con- their phones, or otherwise had them un- Rights Subcommittee will hold hearings -
sideration by the Ways and Means Pub- der surveillance for doing nothing more on H.R. 12039, H.R. 169, and other mat
lie Assistance Subcommittee. than exercising their constitutional ters relating to the disposition of the
This hearing is the fourth in a series rights. These people have a right to be records of the agency activities in ques-.
being held at the request o hairman informed of the existence of the files on tion, beginning on April 13, 1976. The
ULLMAN.iand Acting gal ORMAN Of them so that they may exercise their hearing will be in room 2247 of the Ray-
the P blic 14 tanc ttee. The rights to have the files amended or de- burn Building and will begin at 10 a.m.
heari g w e desk So to help meas- stroyed, and H.R. 12039 would go beyond )dy letter and the agency response are
ure ore o e cial Security Mr. Levi's position by requiring that appended:
Ad tra i n improving the opera- they be so notified and informed of their OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GEN RAL1s7s. Washington, D.C., March ,
.,pion o he _ rogram. rights. Hon. BELLA 3. Aszoc,
Mr. Levi's second letter relates to the Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Government
destruction of files generally. Now that Information and individual Rights, Cont-
DESTRUCTION OF FILES OF ILLS- the Pike committee has completed its mittee on Government Operations, U.S.
GAL SURVEILLANCE AND OTHER work, albeit without its report having House of Representatives, Washington,
ILLEGAL ACTIVITIES: ANNOUNCE- been made public, and the Senate com- D.C.
MENT OF HEARING mittee chaired by Senator CHURCH is DEAR CHAIRWOMAN ABZUC: In light of your
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a about to conclude its investigation, the Interest In preservation thought It rec-
previous order of the House, the gentle- Congress is presented with the question ords o o Department, n my request it ad-
to tify dispose of feyin que t to rte
woman from New York (Ms. Aszuo). is of whether the moratorium which has oArchivist to this
recognized for 20 minutes. been in effect on destruction of docu- lating to an electronic surveillance of Joseph
Ms. ABZUG. Mr. Speaker, the Govern- ments by the intelligence agencies Kraft in 1969.
ment Information and Individual Rights should be extended. Mr. Kraft has requested destruction of
Subcommittee, which I chair, has been In January 1975, Senators MANSFIELD - these records pursuant to subsection (d) of .
studying the maintenance, dissemina- and ScoTT requested that various agen- have determined i y t of 1974, 5 U.S.C. i5 question
tion and ultimate disposition of files cre- ties and departments not destroy or ty that the t maintained u this
ated as a result of such programs as otherwise dispose of documents which may not pDepartment op rruant to that Act and must
CHAOS, COINTELPRO, IRS Special might have a bearing on the work of the therefore be destroyed or, if of historical
Service Staff, FBI and CIA mail open- - Senate and House Intelligence Commit- interest, transferred to the Archivist. As the
ings, and NSA interception of wire com- tees. attached form 115, submitted to the Arch-
munications. In addition, we have leg- The agreement reached by the Senate ives, notes, I am proposing that we destroy
islative and oversight jurisdiction over leadership with the various agencies will only the documents containing or sum riz-
the Privacy Act of 1974. expire shortly, and I believe that Con- ing the content relate the surveillan
the in%
In that connection, I have introduced gress should address the question of the not nati the documents actual ucon which of it. Much of the
H.R. 12039, which would require that ultimate disposition of some of the sell- material has already been furnished to the
individuals who were the subjects of sitive files and records held by these Senate Select Committee and information
such programs be informed of the exist- agencies. I recently sent a letter to the concerning the incident is contained in the
ence of files on them and afforded the Departments of State, Justice, Treasury, files. Thus, the historic fact of the occur-
opportunity to require that such files be and Defense, and to the Central Intel- rence of the surveillance will be preserved.
turned over to them or destroyed. H.R. ligence Agency, requesting that the not only in the files of this Department but
12039 is an expanded version of H.R. 169, moratorium on destruction of files and also in the files of the Senate Select Com-
In my view destruction of the files at this
which I introduced in January 1975. records be extended until Congress has mittee.
By letter dated February 24, 1978, I had an opportunity to act on legislation time fulfills my obligations under the Pri-
also requested that the CIA, the FBI, dealing with this matter. The text of a vacy Act and yet remains consistent with
NSA other agencies sample of the letter I sent and the re- your earlier request.
and Sincerely,
the IRS.' the
- their own. '1'o Degin wits', is is uiie auu- - The replies I received to my letters
jects of the programs, not the agencies the agencies generally state that they
which unlawfully conducted them, who have complied with their agreement, that
should have the right determine the they will "discuss the matter further"
disposition of files collected unlawfully. with the congressional leadership, and
In addition, it is important that the that any destruction will be done in ac-
--d-we n,iri, PracitlPntial order or as
considerable evidence of illegal activi-
ties by the agencies, not be destroyed otherwise provided by law. The Treasury Notification to agency: In accordance with
before committees such as mine conclude Department assures me that it has the provisions of 44 U.S.C. 3303a the disposal
tear inquiries into these programs. preserved the files and records relating request, including amendments, is approved
to its Special Service staff and the se- except for items that may be stamped "die-
Today I received two letters from At- cret Service has presreved its files and posal not approved" or "withdrawn" in col-
torney General Levi, one striking a posi- umn 10.
five note, the other quite disappointing. records relating to the assassination of Date: Archivist of the United. States.
In the first, Mr. Levi informed me that, John K. Kennedy. I assume, in the ab- To: General Services Administration, Ne-
on the request of syndicated columnist sense of evidence to the contrary, that tional Archives and Records Service,
Joseph Kraft, he has asked the National every other agency has kept the files Washington, D.C. 20408.
Archives to destroy the content of the which comprise the subject of H.R. 12039. 1. From (agency or establishment) : De-
electronic surveillance conducted against Mr. Levi's second letter states that he partment of Justice.
2. Major subdivision: Federal Bureau of
Mr. Kraft in 1969 on the ground that the will "shortly authorize the resumption" Investigation.
continued maintenance of the informa- of the FBI's "routine destruction pro- a. Minor subdivision: Files and Communi-
tin violates the Privacy Act of 1974. Spe- gram." Mr. Levi also says that no "in- cations Division.
cifically, Mr. Levi ruled that the keeping teuigence files" are to be destroyed. I 4. Name of person with whom to confer:
of the information violates the require- do not question his good faith, but I M5. Cel. est 2059.
6. Certificate of agency representative: I
meats that Federal agencies may only suspect that we may have some differ-
maintain records on individuals that are ences as to what constitute "intelligence hereby certify that I authorized to act
relevant; timely, accurate, and complete, files," and that we may also differ on for this agency in matters pertaining to the
- and 'which do not describe how an in- the extent to which the files which he disposal of the agency's records; that the
dividual expresses rights guaranteed by does propose to destroy contain evi- records proposed for disposal in this Request
the first amendment, dente vital to the investigatory efforts of . of - page(s) are not now needed for
Attorney General.
REQUEST FOR RECORDS DISPOSITION
AUTHoRrrr
(See instructions on reverse)
(Leave blank.)
Job No.: NC 1-65-76-2.
Date received: March 8, 1976.
Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800070108-1
 March 30, 1976Approved Foie aRE at JAI Z g44R000800070108-1 H 2567
numbering system. But, you have made nations into submission and the Red sickle With Red Cuba already flanking the Wind-
progress beyond my imagination. Keep up slashes away their liberty. Angola is the most ward passage through which travels eighty
the good work. Get it done! We need it! You recent example of Communist expansion, ex= percent of the Caribbean shipping, vital car-
have the support of those who really know cept in this case the Soviet Union used an goes of strategic materials destined to or
the value of he project. expeditionary force of 10.000 Cuban trnnnc rr...., the rT.... ~._~__
`!!
will
ons as the Communists
day to recogni m distin fished fellow President Ford requested from the Con- choose. This situation along with Communist
y g grass authority to counter the Soviet Union's control of the sea lanes in the South Atlantic
Floridian, Dr. 'chael A. DeCarlo, and take-over of Angola. He was rebuffed. With and Indian oceans will deal the United States
the profound and sting contribution he a vision no farther than their long noses
a a catastr
hi
h
,
op
c strategic blo
as made For mor h 10 h
w.
.an years, Iave majority of Congress turned down the Presi- In keeping with recent examples of gov-
followed with great rsonal interest the dent in their smug satisfaction that th
ey ernment perfidy h b th
aseene use of political
professional acco lishlnents and had averted another Vietnam. Angola has blackmail by the proponents of the treaty
growth in national sta re of this sirigu- been hauled inside the ever growing sphere for surrender oo our anal Zone sovereignty
laxly talented man. H of Communist domination, The United States in order to res
esses that
ur
i
'
~
s
ze support
V for the new
of America, along with the Free World, is treaty. We are being told that if we don't
rare blend of leadership, ation, and now paying the price of appeasement in an- knuckle under, the Canal Zone will become
devotion to educational ence that other of a long series of political retreats in a scene of violence. In short the United
makes him an inspiratioll but the the face of the Communist menace. States is being asked to give away one of
most diehard reactionariWhy is a lift.,- -unt " - ---
it
-- .- -6_ ue,ow uur u,vscmporant strategic areas or suffer
I Commend the pioneeriri `achieve- the equator, on the west coast of Africa, with the consequences of violence. Instead of pur-
ments o$ Dr. DeCarlo to the %tention a population of only a few million people and suing that course, our government should
of my colleagues, the U.S. Office Edu- an area of less than a half million square be making a determined
ffo
e
rt to revive our
cation, other Federal and State UCa- miles so important to Soviet designs that they Monroe Doctrine as a counter to the Brezhnev
tional leaders, and private foundati . I cont would ntrol! but that bring
they would underwrite the Doctrine
Now, after refusing to lift a finger in sup-
also urge full support for him during ' e overseas transit of an expeditionary military port of the President's request to counter the
crucial final stages of project devel force of between ten th
ousand and twl Soviet acti i A
eveonnngola, the Congress is being
merit and implementation. It is far thousand Cuban satellite troops? The an- pressured to adopt a similar pusillanimous
important-and of too much ultimate swer to the Soviet involvement lies in the attitude towards a Communist take-over of
benefit to education thrOighOUt the trategie position of Angola. The answer to the Panama Canal. Where is it all going to
United Statesduc possibly founder now a use of Cuban satellite troops lies prob- end? With a Communist 'dominated world? t-o on the Sate of narssibly nessor selfflO m y in the opportunity to combat-train a In 1933 the great Churchill grimly warned
terest foxy Yorce for possible use in another his countrymen of the imminent danger fac-
er
it
d
-
ad
eu; -
mere may even
PANAMA CANAL: THE SIGNIFI-' gian go. To the east is northern Rhodesia; be a worse case. You may have to fight when
CANOE OF ANGOLA on th uth is Southwest Africa and to the ' there is no hope of victory because it is bet-
west ro the South Atlantic Ocean. The es- ter to perish than to live as slaves," This is
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a tablishn It of military bases in Angola will Precisely the situation which the United
previous order of the House
the gentle- enable th` Russians to project its armed States and the free: world f
t
se
,
ace
oday We are
. non fromPennsylvania
, FLOOD) is mobility in any part of southern Africa it negotiating from a position of military weak-
,eOgni7ed for 5 minutes, chooses an _ t any time it chooses. Of far Bess. The Soviets hold the blue chips. IIn-
greater impp rice h
bl
owever is controlf a
e to insist wenlyk
,, o, can o as. The Soviets
Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Speaker, in the grow- the shipping',, es along the west coast of not only can insist, the
=rig number of articles now haina n..1, Afrina y can demand-and
- - --all anti South At- a,ney do. 'rney tested us in Angola and found
Jished on the Panama Canal question, lantic oceans a between Southern Africa us wanting. We were compelled to repeat -
already a major Presidential election i
and the western' !s
h
r
N
lt
p
e
e
s
ot one shi
orY
.p-? -
, I have noted that the people of our load of strategic o, not one oiler filled Only by a resurgence of our national cour-
sue yore far ahead of their Govern- with petroleum or i by-products will tra- age with a determined will to preserve our
merit in evaluating the challenge on the verse those shipping'- es without the ac- precious liberty at all costs can we hope to
quiescence of the So t Navy:-and their }survive as a free nation.
isthmus in a realistic manner. Nav
i
y
s now adequat (A N
e set the challenge.n example of such writings is a re- By the sub uganon o _'' ola, the SovietOTE. Adm, Sabin has contributed nu-
cent guest editorial in the San Die j g merous articles and lectures on global prob-
go Ex- Union has accomplished' ajor step in its !Pins. Prior to retiring to LaJolla, he was the
amirier by Vice Adm. L. S. Sabin, a dis- quest for a dominant glob trtegic advan- Chief of Staff to the Supreme Allied Com-
tinguished naval officer who has long tage. Inander, Atlantic NATO. His many sea com-
been a student of geopolitical matters, in- - Columni,t Isaac Don Lev" -,believes that rnands Included Commander, Amphibious
Chiding the Panama Canal. Soviet use of Cuban troops is' Iced to their Forces, Atlantic Fleet.) -
In this article, he includes a discussion ispheree In We later an article in the the ern Union
of the possible future use of Cuban tr
:
on Febr
oops
uary 4 1976 M Li
,,r.evne Ed that WAYS AND MEANS OVERSIGHT
in the Caribbean, describes the recent Angola is being used as a testing g "' rid for
action of our Joint Chi
Cuba's lo
SUBCO
f
TT
e
MMI
s of Staff in a
ooo man editi
EE ANNOUNCES
c-,xpeonary fo Cit- amercing with the State Department's Ing the Brezhnev Doctrine which pr us
HEARING ON SUPPLEMENTAL
drive for surrender of U.S, sovereignty the right of the Soviet Union to wag at
SECURITY INCOME PROGRAM
in any part of this planet
over the Canal Zon
h
"
w
e as
ere antiC
unbelievable"
The SPEAKERpro t
s
. under a
,- stresses the dangers in Soviet control hangs tliket a i oties; pear he a lo
d p
f th
previous ord
,
ho
e t
u
er o
e House, the gentle
th Ci
cog-
o er
earbbean fan from Ohio {Mr. VaN,Ix) is recog over South Atlantic and Caribbean sea Cuban troops are being trained for further
lanes and calls for a revival of the Mon- -
use inside the Perimeter of the United States, ed for 5 minutes.
roe Doctrine to counter the Brezhnev If Mr. Levine is correct in his assessment-
doctrine, r. VANIK. Mr. Speaker, the Ways
and this observer believe
h
s
e isthe fl an cans Oiht Sb
-ocaversgucommittee Is
In order that the Congress and execu- point of trc=ible will probably be in Panama cur ly scheduling a hearing on the
five border that
Government may have now under the dictatorship of the Leftist SoCI ecurity Administration's sup-
thle benefit of his views derived from av- Torrijos. Negotiations for a new Panama pleme security income program for
perience as well as study, I Canal treaty are now being held by which the age Iind, and disabled. The hear-
quote the the United States would surrender its soy
hear-
indicated article as part of my remarks: ereignty over the Canal Zone and its opera- rig is P1 (d for Thursday, April 8, in
MILITARY-THE .SIGNIFICANCE of ANGOLA tlonal control of the canal. An all-out drive the main ' ys and Means Committee
13y Vice Adm. L. S. Sabin, U.S. Navy, retired) has been launched by our State Department, room, from to 3 p.m. The scheduling
"He who fails to remember history with Administration approval and with, of may be than if required by the agenda wro George Santayana; "will be compelled to ree all things, the unbelievable acquiescence of of the full cam tee.
peat it." the Chairman of the Joint Chie
fs General
, The hearing , 1 concentrate on the
For more than half a century our people r ghts would ultimately bring surrender of U.S. al lega~
have failed to heed the lessons of history as to is seaway across the Isthmus of Panama reaction of thee. i t oecuuthe rrii add nhs-
thep watched the relentless advance of world which connects the Atlantic and Pacific it ativen Mari
Communism. They are now- being compelled oceans under Communist control, and his.. heSSI studyegro Lions contained in
to repeat that history as the Hammer of Com- tory has shown that no amount of safeguards January 26, 1976. Thu subcommittee is report, releasd
monism continues to pound people of other written into the treaty will prevent this. primarily concerned about the recom-
Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800070108-1
 Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800070108-1
March 30, 1976 'CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE-
the business of this agency or will not be
needed after the retention periods speci-
fied.
[K] A. Request for immediate disposal.
] B. Request for disposal after a speci-
fied period of time or request for permanent
retention.
C. Date: 3/8/76.
D Signature of agency representative:
E: Title: Attorney General.
7. Item no.: 1.
8. Description of item (with inclusive
dates or retention periods): Contents of
sealed file which include 115 documents, 48
of which are original (some are classified
Top Secret). and 67 duplicates. The contents
were ordered removed from the general files
of the Federal Bureau of Investigation by
the Attorney General and sealed. The ma-
terial relates to conversations overhead dur-
ing a 1969 electronic surveillance.
The sealed file consists of transcripts of
conversations and memoranda . describing,
summarizing and transmitting product of
electronic surveillance. Documentation of
the initiation, implementation and termin-
ation of electronic surveilalnce project Is
included in files that will be retained in the
FBI In its approved Records Control Sched-
ule. Continued maintenance of the records
covered by this disposal request conflicts
with the provisions of the Privacy Act of
1974, 6 U.S.C. 552a(e) (1), (5) and (7).
9. Sample or job no.
10. Action taken.
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Washington, D.C., March 29, 1976.
Hon. BELLA S. ABZUG,
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Government
Information and Individual Rights, Com-
mittee on Government Operations, U.S.
House of Representatives, Washington,
D.C.
DEAR CHAIRWOMAN ABZUG: You have asked
me to have the Federal Bureau of Investi-
gation refrain from destroying any material
that might be, useful to a future Congres-
sional oversight committee, As you know, the
Bureau has, since the Senate leadership re-
quested a moratorium on destruction of files
January 27, 1975, refrained from destroying
any materials. It has done so in abundance
of good faith, but the logistical burden of
this policy has been very great. The Bureau,
with the concurrence (enclosed) of Senators
Hugh Scott and Mike Mansfield who made
the 1975 request, intends to renew its routine
destruction programs described in the at-
tached memorandum.
You will notice that no intelligence files are
sought to be destroyed. I believe the resump-
tion of the routine destruction program-
which is also consistent with Archival re-
quirements-will in no way impede the re-
sponsibilities of Congressional oversight
committees and will result in a considerable
savings of money. I intend shortly to author-
ize the resumption of the destruction pro-
gram.
Sincerely,
EDWARD H. LEVI,
Attorney General,
GOVERNMENT INFORMATION AND
INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS SUBCOMMIT-
TEE OF THE COMMITTEE ONGOV-
ERNMENT OPERATIONS,
Washington, D.C., march 30, 1976.
Hon. EDWARD H. LEVI,
Attorney General of the United States,
U.S. Department of Justice,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. ATTORNEY GENERAL: Thank you
for your letter of March 29,. 1976 in which
you inform me of your request that the Archi-
vist dispose of the content of the electronic
surveillance conducted In 1969 on the col-
umnist, Joseph Kraft.
I am gratified that you have taken this
action, arud want you to know that I agree
with your interpretation of Sections (e) (1),
(5) and (7) of the Privacy Act. This de-
cision, as far as I know, is the first interpret-
ing these vital provisions of the Act.
On February 24, 1976, I ,introduced a bill,
H.R. 12039, to provide that the subjects of
several programs, including COINTELPRO,
be informed of the fact that they were sub-
jected to surveillance and giving them the
opportunity of having the file on them de-
stroyed. The programs or operations covered
by my bill include mail openings, illegal en-
tries, warrantless wiretaps, monitoring of in-
ternational communications, and the pro-
grams known as CHAOS and the Special Serv-
ice Staff of Internal Revenue, as well as
COINTELPRO. I had previously, on.Janu-
ary 14, 1975, introduced MR, 169 to amend
the Privacy Act to provide for expunging of
certain. files.
I intend to hold hearings on H.R. 169, H.R.
12039 and related matters involving records
of these activiles on April 13, 1976. If possi-
ble, we would appreciate having your testi-
mony at that time. I would, of course, also
appreciate having your support for the bills.
Sincerely,
BELLA S. ABZUG,
Chairwoman.
OFFICE OF THE MAJORITY LEADER,
Washington, D.C.,-March 24, 1976.
Hon. CLARENCE M. KELLEY,
Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. DIRECTOR: You will recall that
we wrote to you on January 27, 1975, re-
questing "that. you not destroy, remove from
your possession or control or otherwise dis-
pose of documents which might be
pertinent to the investigation which was pro-
vided for by S. Res. 21. We are now advised
by Senator Church, as Chairman, that this
moratorium is broader than necessary at this
time.
Accordingly, we rescind our request of Jan-
uary 27, 1975, to the end that you may re-
sume the Bureau's routine records disposal
program. Our understanding is that the files
involved In that program do not relate to
security and intelligence matters.
With appreciation for your cooperation, we
are
Sincerely yours,
MIKE MANSFIELD,
Majority Leader.
HUGH SCOTT,
Republican Leader.
MARCH 4, 1976.
The ATTORNEY GENERAL,
DIRECTOR, FBI,
U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLI-
GENCE ACTIVITIES:
Enclosed for your approval and forward-
ing to the'committee is a letterhead memo-
randum outlining the FBI's recommendation
for the reinstitution of the Bureau's normal
file destruction program. A copy of this let-
terhead memorandum is enclosed for your
records. This letterhead memorandum is in
response to Chairman Frank Church's re-
quest that the FBI obtain the concurrence
of you in the reinstitution of this program.
The request of Chairman Church was con-
tained in his letter to me dated February 20,
1976. A copy of this letter is enclosed as well
as a copy of my letter to Chairman Church
dated January 27, 1975.
All of the FBI's file destruction programs
are approved by the National Archives and
Records Service as well as furnished to the
Assistant Attorney General for Administra-
H 2569
tion. The problems presented by the continu-
ing retention of the materials are such that I
ask that this matter be handled as expedi-
tiously as possible.
MARCH 4, 1976.
U.S. SENATE SELECT COMMITTEE ON INTELLI-
GENCE ACTIVITIES
Reference is made to the letter of Chair-
man Frank Church to Honorable Clarence M.
Kelley, Director, Federal Bureau of Investiga-
tion, dated February 20, 1976, which re-
quested the Attorney General's concurrence
in the FBI's reinstitution of the destruction
of certain FBI documents and files.
By letter to the Director of the FBI dated
January 27, 1975, from Senate Majority
Leader Mike Mansfield and Minority Leader
Hugh Scott, the FBI was advised of the U.S.
Senate's intended investigation and study of
intelligence activities by the FBI and other
Government agencies. The scope of this in-
vestigation and study was described in Sen-
ate Resolution 21 of the 94th Congress.
The aforementioned letter specifically re-
quested the FBI not to destroy or otherwise
dispose of any records or documents which
might have a bearing on the subjects under
investigation or relating to the matters spec-
ified in Section 2 of Senate Resolution 21.
That Section of the Resolution described the
Senate's extensive interest in the domestic
intelligence as well as foreign counterintelli-
gence activities of Executive Branch agencies
Including the FBI.
In accommodation of that request, Direc-
tor Kelley immediately issued instructions to
all offices and divisions of the FBI estab-
lishing a moratorium on the destruction of
all records of whatever description. In retro-
spect, the FBI now feels that the moratorium
need not have been as all-encompassing as
that, but this was done to assure that there
could be no question of its intention to com-
ply fully with the request with regard to
the preservation of relevant records in which
the Senate might develop an interest.
It is now more than one year.since the in-
ception of the moratorium on the FBI's
regular records destruction program. For
your Information, the FBI's regular destruc-
tion program, as approved by the National
Archives and Records Service and the De-
partment of Justice, is designed to prevent
retention of masses of records well beyond
the period during which they may serve a
useful purpose. Further, our records destruc-
tion program, as approved by the National
Archivist, permits the destruction of those
records which are deemed to no longer
possess evidentiary, intelligence, or historical
value. The moratorium, which was not ex-
pected to last as long as it has, has created
substantial administrative burdens not only
at FBI Headquarters but throughout the_59
field offices. The suspension of sound records
management and file destruction practices
in many areas is causing very substantial
space and storage problems.
The FBI now proposes that that portion
of its records destruction programs which
do not pertain to or concern classifications
of files which would fall within the general
description of "security files" be reinstituted.
Those files which would not be affected by
the reinstitution of the file destruction pro-
gram would include all files on domestic in-
telligence matters, extremist matters, racial
matters as well as foreign counterintelligence
matters. The files which the FBI proposes to
resume routine destruction of in accordance
with its established records retention plan
Include the following: files relating to crimi-
nal investigations, suitability or applicant-
type investigations, correspondence files, and
files of an administrative nature generally.
Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800070108-1
 H 2570
Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800070108-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE March 30', 1976
SELECT COMMITTEE To STUDY Gov-
ERNMENTAL OPERATIONS WITH
RESPECT TO INTELLIGENCE ACTIVI-
TIES, -
Washington, D.C., February 20, 1976.
Hon. CLARENCE M. KELLEY,
Director, Federal Bureau of Investigation,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR DIRECTOR KELLEY: I have considered
your letter of January 12, 1976, regarding the
request of the Majority Leader and the Mi-
nority Leader on January 27, 1975, that the
FBI not destroy any records which might
have a bearing on matters specified in Sen-
ate Resolution 21.
The Select Committee deeply appreciates
your instructions issued immediately after
the request establishing a moratorium on de-
struction of all FBI files of whatever descrip-
tion. We understand that this moratorium
has been costly and has produced substan-
tial administrative burdens.
Therefore, the Select Committee would
raise no objection to the resumption of de-
struction of certain records which would
have no relationship whatsoever to the mat-
ters specified in S. Res. 21. We are concerned,
however, that resumption of routine destruc-
tion in accordance with your established
Records Retention Plan may result in de-
stroying materials which might be of use in
connection with the work of a future Sen-
ate committee engaged in oversight of the
FBI.
Consequently, we suggest that you confer
with the Attorney General so as to ensure
that he is satisfied that reinstitution of de-
struction under the Records Retention Plan
is consistent with his policies regarding the
availability of materials for future Congres-
sional oversight, as well as for effective su-
pervision of the FBI by the Attorney Gen-
eral.
I will be happy to recommend to the Ma-
jority Leader and Minority Leader that they
endorse resumption of records destruction,
upon receipt of notification that the Attor-
ney General has approved such destruction
after considering the concerns stated above.
Thank you again for your continued co-
operation with the Select Committee.
Sincerely, .
OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Washington, D.C., March 1, 1976.
Hon. BELLA S. ABZUG, -
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Government
Information and Individual Rights, Com-
mittee on Government Operations, Ray-
burn House Office Building, Washington,
D.C.
DEAR MADAM CHAIRWOMAN: I have your
letter of February 24 which requests that the
moratorium on destruction of filer.and rec-
ords be extended "until such time as Con-
gress has had an opportunity to act on legis-
lation dealing with this. matter."
I have referred your letter to various offi-
cials in the Department of Justice for a fur-
ther analysis of the effects of such a general
postponement. I realize that the postpone-
ment is related to investigations of the Pike
and Senate Select Committees, but this con-
stitutes a broad area. As soon as I have their
analysis and recommendations, I will write to
you again.
I do want to point out, however, that one
matter of special interest to the Edwards
Subcommittee of the House Judiciary Com-
mittee was the adoption of procedures for
the destruction of some material, and I
thought it was considerable progress when
our guidelines committee adopted as a mat-
ter of principle that there should be some
weeding out of files.
In addition, there are some instances where
retention of material- might be opposed by
those who were the subject of the material.
As you know, the request that the Depart-
ment retrain from destroying documents
came from the Senate leadership, and no
similar request was made by the House lead-
ership.
Sincerely,
EDWARD H.LEvr,
Attorney General.
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, GOV-
ERNMENT INFORMATION ANDIN-
DIVIDUAL RIGHTS SUBCOMMITTEE
OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERN-
MENT OPERATIONS,
Washington, D.C., February 24, 1976.
Mr. GEORGE BUSH,
Director, Central Intelligence Agency,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. BUSH: This Subcommittee has
jurisdiction of government information
policy, including the Privacy Act of 1974 and
the Freedom of Information Act.
As you know, during the inquiries con-
ducted by the House and Senate Select Com-
mittees on Intelligence, your agency agreed
to refrain from destroying files and records
relating to their investigations. The Pike
Committee's tenure has expired and the
Church Committee will report shortly.
We write now to request that the mora-
torium on destruction of files and records be
extended until such time as Congress has
had- an opportunity to act on legislation
dealing with this matter.
Please-affirm-to this Subcommittee, within
10 days, that it is your intention to honor
the ban on destruction of data in accordance
with our request.
Sincerely,
BELLA S. ABZUG,
Chairwoman.
THE GENERAL COUNSEL
OF THE TREASURY,
Washington, D.C., March 4, 1976.
Hon. 13ELLA S. ABZUG,
Chairwoman, Government Information and
Individual Rights Subcommittee, Com-
mittee on Government Operations, House
of Representatives, Washington, D.C.
DEAR MADAM CHAIRWOMAN: This responds
to your letter of February 24, to the Secretary
requesting that the Treasury Department
continue to refrain from destroying files and
records of interest to the House and Senate
Select Committees on Intelligence until such
time as Congress has had an opoprtunity to
act on legislation in this area.
In January, 1975, the leadership of the
Senate requested that we not destroy records
or documents which might have a bearing
on the subjects- under investigation. The
Treasury Department complied with that
request with certain necessary execptions of
which the SelectCommittee was made aware.
Those materials which have been excluded
from operation of the destruction embargo
include general tax related information of
the Internal Revenue Service, investigative
and protective intelligence files of,the Secret
Service, and criminal investigative files of
other law enforcement units of the Treasury
Department. The common bases for exempt-
ing these materials from the destruction em-
bargo are that they are normally destroyed
routinely in accordance with records disposal
schedules and that continued maintenance
of unnecessary files in these systems will in-
terfere with the effective use of relevant law
enforcement and tax information and will
impose substantial records storage burdens.
In no case have we destroyed files or rec-
ords which we believed might be of interest
to the inquiries of the Select Committees.
Thus, for example, the Internal Revenue
Service has preserved the files and records
relating to its Special Services Staff and the
Secret Service has preserved its files and
records relating to the investigation by the
Warren Commission.of the assassination of
President John F. Kennedy.
The Treasury Department will continue to
preserve this type of files and records for
the duration of the Senate Select Commit-
tee's tenure. Arrangements for the proper
disposition of Treasury Department files and
records held by either of the Select Commit-
tees will be discussed with the Senate and
House leadership as appropriate, and the
destruction of any information will be made
in accordance with Presidential directives
and as otherwiseprovided by law.
Should the Subcommittee have any ques-
tions, they may be directed to Mr. J. Robert
McBrien, Office of the Secretary, our liaison
with the Select Committees.
Sincerely,
RICHARD R. ALBRECHT,
General Counsel.
DEPARTMENT OF STATE,
Washington, D.C., March 19, 1976.
Hon. BELLA S. ABZUG,
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Government
Information and Individual Rights,
Committee on Government Operations,
House of Representatives, Washington,
D.C.
DEAR MADAME CHAIRWOMAN: Secretary Kis-
singer has asked me to respond to your let-
ter of February 24, 1976 in which you re-
quested that Department of State files re-
lating to the House and Senate Select Com-
mittee on Inelligence not be destroyed.
In a letter to the Secretary dated January
27, 1975 Senators Scott and Mansfield re-
quested that the Department not destroy or
otherwise dispose of records or documents
which might have a bearing on the investiga-
tion conducted by the Senate Select Com-
mittee. We have complied with their request
and, at the appropriate time, intend to dis-
cuss the matter further with them. -
It Is our position that the maintenance of
files and records, and their destruction shall
be governed by the appropriate laws and reg-
ulations.
Sincerely,
ROBERT J. MCCLOSKEY,
Assistant Secretary for Congressional
Relations. -
CENTRAL INTELLIGENCE AGENCY,
Washington, D.C., March 8, 1976.
Hon. BELLA S. ABZUG,
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Government
Information and Individual Rights,
Committee on Government Operations,
House of Representatives, Washington,
D.C.
DEAR MADAME CHAIRWOMAN: This is in re-
sponse to your letter of 24 February 1976
regarding the disposition of CIA records
which are the subject of inquiry by the Sen-
ate and House Select Committees on Intel-
ligence.
The. moratorium on the destruction of
Agency documents as requested by Majority
Leader, Mike Mansfield, and Minority Leader,
Hugh Scott, by letter dated 27 January 1975
is still in effect and will be the subject of
discussion by the Agency with them.
Destruction of Agency material will be in
accordance with Presidential directives and
as permitted by law.
Sincerely,
GEORGE BUSH,
Director.
THE DEPUTY SECRETARY OF DEFENSE,
Washington, D.C., March 5, 1976.
Hon. BELLA S. ABZUG, -
Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Government
Information and Individual Rights,
Committee on Government Operations,
House of Representatives, Washington,
D.C.
DEAR MS. CHAIRWOMAN: Secretary Rums-
feld has asked me to reply to your letters to
the Secretary and the Director, National
Security Agency regarding the moratorium
Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800070108-1
 Approved-For Release 2002/01/02,: CIA-RDP77M00144R000800070108-1
March 30, 1976
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE H 2571
the investigations of the Senate and House
Select Committees on Intelligence.
The moratorium requested by Senators
Mansfield and Scott remains in effect and
the Department of Defense continues to se-
cede to that request. Moreover, arrange-
ments have been made with Representative
Pike to ensure that the material that was
made available to the House Select Commit-
tee on Intelligence will be preserved intact.
We also anticipate arrangements to that ef-
fect will be worked out with the Senate
Select Committee on Intelligence.
Sincerely,
FEDERAL ELECTION CAMPAIGN
ACT AMENDMENTS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Connecticut (Mr. DODD) is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. DODD. Mr. Speaker, I rise In sup-
port of H.R. 12406, the- Federal Election
Campaign Act Amendments of 1976. In
recent years the Ameran public has be-
come justifiably disheartened and disil-
lusioned with the political process and in
dealing with this legislation they are
looking to the Congress to pass a bill
which will guarantee fair and just ad-
ministration of Federal campaign laws
and insure an open election process.
For this reason I support the efforts
of the House to reconstitute the FEC
and plan to vote in favor of final passage.
However, the rule under which we are
considering this bill today will not per-
mit me to offer an amendment I had
planned to submit and I, therefore,
would like to take this opportunity to
explain my amendment which would add
two Independent commissioners to the
six partisan FEC commissioners already
provided for in this bill.
Let us remember that the purpose of
this bill is to insure the integrity of the
electoral system. By adding two inde-
pendent members, unaffiliated with any
organized political party, we would in-
sure that all elements of the American
electorate will be represented on this
Commission. As the Commission is pres-
ently constituted, only representatives of
organized political parties can be mem-
bers of the Commission. According to
recent studies this means` that the 41
percent of the American electorate who
identify themselves first as Independents
and are unaffiliated with any organized
party have no representation at all.
There has been a significant trend in
the last 20 years with the number of
voters identifying themselves as Inde-
pendent increasing from 22 percent in
October 1952 to 41 percent in November
1973.
We in Connecticut are particularly
aware of this trend because the registra-
tion figures In our State show that nearly
as many voters are registered as Inde-
pendent or unaffiliated with any party-
36.3 percent as are registered as Dem-
ocrats-36.8 percent-and More than are
registered as Republicans-26.9 percent.
In the four counties of eastern Con-
necticut which comprise my district, two
are even higher than the statewide figure
with New London Independent registra-
tion at 43.4 percent and Tolland County
at 40 percent. The remaining two coun-
ties each have an Independent registra-
tion of 34 percent. _
It has been argued that any effort to
add people to the Commission from out-
side the two major parties will serve to
further weaken the two-party structure.
I certainly do not accept this argument
because I ardently support our two-party
system. Furthermore, I think that this
argument belies the facts and statistics
because figures demonstrate that people
are increasingly refusing to identify
themselves with any organized party.
The trend over the last 20 years shows
that this Is more than a passing phe-
nomenon, and I believe we must face the
reality of the situation by recognizing
the existence of this large segment of the
American electorate.
I also believe that the independent
and unaffiliated voters make a healthy
contribution to our election process, and
I think it is only just that we recognize
their participation by giving them repre-
sentation within the system. It is for this
reason that I offer my amendment to
provide -them representation on the
Federal Election Commission.
VOTING ON NUCLEAR POWER
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from California (Mr. TALCOTT) is
recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. TALCOTT. Mr. Speaker, it is not
often that I can applaud a Washington
Post editorial for commonsense, under-
standing of faraway California Issues, or
special appreciation for future genera-
tions. When I can, I must; and I there-
fore applaud and recommend for your
consideration the editorial of March 27,
1976, entitled "Voting on Nuclear Pow-
er." Proposition 15 is designed to impose
a moratorium on nuclear powerplants
until they are determined to be risk-free
by two-thirds of the State legislature.
This issue, of course, is complicated
and emotional and many advocates are
using the debate to obscure, rather than
clarify, the issue.
I thank the Washington Post for ex-
panding the debate by thoughtful ana-
lysis which avoids the emotional rhetoric
and the scare tactics which were mount-
ing daily in California.
It is useful to step back, look ahead,
and think through. It is too easy to miss
the forest for the trees and become en-
gaged in very narrow arguments which
serve mostly to reinforce our long held
positions which may have little objectiv-
ity and perspective.
The Post has made a valuable contri-
bution to the debate on the Proposition
15 by giving perspective to the underly-
ing issues.
How do we assess risk-present and_
future?
How do we satisfy needs-now and in
the future?
What lifestyle do we want-for our-
selves and the next generations?
Do we wait and see, stop and stand
still?
Do we narrow our choices and alterna-
tives or do we expand and pursue them?
We can improve the safety, we can
develop the technology, we can continue
the research, we can expand our future,
we can maintain our standard of living-
but not if we vote for the moratorium.
If the Post can vote "no," I guess I
should. I urge you to read the Post edi-
torial before you vote.
I insert the editorial at this place in
the RECORD:
VOTING 9x NUCLEAR POWER
The California primary early in June will
have more of national interest to it this year
than presidential politics. On the ballot is
another of those proposals-this one known
as Proposition 16-with very broad implica-
tions. If it is adopted and subsequently held
constitutional, Proposition 16 may be the
death knell for nuclear power plants in Cali-
fornia. And, if this turns out to be the case,
opponents of nuclear power are likely to re-
gard it as a signal that voters and politicians
everywhere can be persuaded that such
plants are too dangerous to be allowed.
The campaign for Proposition 16 is not be-
ing cast in such sweeping terms, The pro-
posal on the ballot is called a Nuclear Safe-
guards Act and is being promoted as a safety
measure or, at most, a moratorium on nu-
clear plants until they meet certain safety
standards. The trouble is that the standards
are such that almost by definition they could
not be met. One, for Instance, requires that
the state legislature, after a complicated
hearing process, determine by a two-thirds
vote to each house that nuclear wastes can
be stored so that there is no reasonable
chance of any of its radiation ever escaping
and hurting anyone or anything in Cali-
fornia. Among the kinds of radiation escapes
to be considered are those that result from
improper storage, earthquakes, theft,-sabo-
tage, acts of war or government or social in-
stabilities. We don't see how conscientious
legislators could vote that there was "no
reasonable chance" nuclear radiation from
such wastes could not escape during, say, a
war or revolution.
The real issue, then, on the California bal-
lot Is a yes or no to nuclear power plants.
That, in our view, Is not only too simple and
stark a question to pose, it is also the wrong
question being addressed to the wrong audi-
ence. The basic question that needs answer-
ing now is whether this country wants to
have available over the next 25 or 30 years
more electricity than it now has or whether
it wants to go with what there Is. If the
answer is more electricity, as we believe it is,
the choice is whether such additional elec-
tricity will come from nuclear fission, the
burning of more coal, the importing of more
oil or some combination of all three. If the
answer is that there is to be no substantial
increase in generating capacity-decisions
must be made on how to allocate what Is
available (rationing or higher prices?) and
how to change the nation's lifestyle to reduce
substantially the present per person usage of
energy. These are questions that have to be
answered nationally and not on a state by
state basis.
Too much of the debate on energy issues
these days is too narrowly focused. Nuclear
plants, we are told, are too dangerous to be
permitted; coal mining is too destructive to
people and countryside to be expanded; off-
shore oil presents too serious a threat to the
coastal environments to be allowed; im-
ported oil makes the nation too dependent
on the whims of others. None of these mat-
ters can be considered adequately in such
splendid Isolation. The risks of nuclear power
plants, for instance, need to be judged
against the risks of the alternative power
sources and, in the case of coal, these involve
everything from black lung disease to air
pollution.
The easy answers, of course, are the claims
that solar, thermal and fusion power will
Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800070108-1
 Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800070108-1
H 2572 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE
provide the new energy we really need and
that the nation can cut its energy usage sub-
stantially if it wants to. But no one we have
encountered in the energy field believes that
sources other than oil, coal, gas or fission will
provide much of our energy needs in this
century. And the evidence of the last two
years is that conservation and even enormous
price increases do not reduce energy con-
sumption; they merely lower the rate at
which its use increases.
Underlying much of tle effort being made
in California against ;',xclear power is a be-
lief that the nation uld be better off-
physically and morally .f it adopted a life-
style in which energy kos less important.
That is a belief that des eaves to be argued,
tested and explored on its Own merits. But it
is not one that we should hack into blindly
because of public rejectiorr one after an-
other-of individual energy sources until no
alternative to a change in lifestyle and living
standards is available.
We do not think all the answers are in yet
to legitimate questions that haie'been raised
about the safety of nuclear pd v4 plants-
particularly about theplanned e t genera-
tion of breeder reactors. But war~p uld not
like to see this option for Americkn's future
energy needs ruled out, until it, i! much
clearer that the comparative risks o other
energy alternatives are substantia y -lower
or that the national is ready for clastic
change in the way its people live an Work.
UNEMPLOYMENT IS STILL WI
tieman from Michigan (Mr. RuPPE)
the vetoed $6.1 billion Public Works Em-
ployment Act, may be dead, but our un-i=
employment problem is still very much
with us. The national unemployment
rate was 7.6 percent in February, and
preliminary figures indicate that 29
States had jobless rates of more than 8
percent during the month of January.
Like many of my congressional col-
leagues, I feel that concrete action to
combat this problem is long overdue; but
I am reluctant to imperil the economic
recovery which has already occurred by
applying too much stimulus to the econ-
omy. On February 26 I therefore intro-
duced a $3 billion compromise public
works employment bill, H.R. 12166,
which resurrects two portions of the
vetoed bill-title I and section 303 of the
title Ill-while allowing its costliest and
most controversial portions to rest in
peace.
Like the vetoed measure, this bill au-
thorizes $2.5 billion through Septem-
ber of 1977 for 100 percent grants to
State and local governments to speed
the construction of local public works
project. This grant program would only
be in effect when the national unemploy-
ment rate exceeded 6.5 percent for 3
consective months, and 70 percent of all
grant moneys would be earmarked for
areas in which unemployment surpass-
ed the national average. In addition,
this bill would authorize $500 million to
extend title X of the Public Works and
Economic Development Act for another
9 months to fund small job-creating
projects through various Federal agen-
cies and departments. H.R. 12166 does
not include authorizations for coun-
tercyclical aid or wastewater treat-
ment plant construction-authorizations
which the House did not approve in the
first place-for a savings of nearly $3
billion.
The AFL-CIO Building Trades Coun-
cil has estimated that title I of this bill
will generate approximately 250,000 jobs
in construction and related industries,
and the Commerce Department has esti-
mated that $500 million in title X grants
will provide immediate work for an addi-
tional 100,000 people. As a result, this bill
should provide Jobs for more than half
of the individuals who would have been
employed under the vetoed bill at less
than half the cost.
Moreover, this bill was specifically de-
signed to avoid the long leadtlmes some-
times associated with public works Jobs.
It compels the Secretary of Commerce to
approve or disapprove grant applications
within 60 days of their submission and
specifies that grants can only be awarded
to projects which can get underway
within 90 days.
The jobs created by this bill would be
in the private sector, in industries which
have been particularly hard hit by the
recession. We would therefore be adding
real-strength to the economy at the same
time that we would be providing the un-
employed with meaningful and produc-
tive public works jobs. The schools, hos-
pitals, libraries, courthouses, and other
public buildings which would be con-
structed or repaired as a result of this
legislation will benefit American com-
munities for decades to come.
In my view, this bill would give us a
sensible, effective, and efficient way to
si eeach portion of the vetoed bill on
i n merits. '
reintroducing this bill today with
a n ` er of cosponsors from both polit-
ical aes and plan to introduce it again
in ture with additional cosponsors.
% urge any Member who
I wo th
is int eted in adding his or her name
to thi ompromise public works employ-
ment N1 to contact my office.
TZMAN addressed the
rks will appear here-
A BILL TOGNATE A HOSPITAL
!
AS THE J. S A. HALEY VETER-
ANS' ADMINISTRATION HOSPITAL
(Mr. SIXES asked and was given
permission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD.)
Mr. SIKES. Mr. Speaker, on behalf of
the entire Florida congressional delega-
tion in the House, I am introducing a
bill today to name the Veterans' Admin-
istration hospital located in Tampa, Fla.,
the "James A. Haley Veterans' Adminis-
tration Hospital."
March 30', 1976
Such an honor will be a proper and
fitting tribute to JIM HALEY who has
championed the rights of veterans all the
years he has been in the Congress.
Through his tireless efforts and years of
dedicated service on the Veterans' Affairs
Committee, the veteran population
throughout the Nation now has access to
greatly improved medical programs and
significantly expanded hospital facilities.
Prior to Mr. HALEY'S service in Wash-
ington, he was an outstanding member
of the Florida Legislature and his leader-
ship talents were directed in Consider-
able measure to legislation benefiting
veterans and their families, -
When Mr. HALEY Came to Congress in
1953, he was assigned to the House Com-
mittee on Interior and Insular Affairs
and the Committee on House Adminis-
tration. In 1955, he accepted an assign-
ment to the House Committee on Vet-
erans' Affairs. As a veteran, he had a
deep and sincere interest in all veterans
and their dependents. As a Floridian, he
felt that Florida's rapidly growing vet-
eran population should have representa-
tion on a committee which is so very
important to his State. He served on the
Hospitals Subcommittee for 18 years and
was chairman of the subcommittee the
last 8 years. This subcommittee has
oversight over the 166 VA hospitals and
the entire VA medical program through-
out the United States.
After becoming chairman of the Inte-
rior and Insular Affairs Committee in
1973, Mr. HALEY relinquished his seat on
the Veterans' Affairs Committee. His new
responsibilities would leave him but little
time for any other committee assignment,
and, in his characteristic unselfish way,
he wanted to provide an opportunity for
another Member with fewer responsibili-
ties to devote more time to the needs of
the Nation's veterans.
During his service on the Hospitals
Subcommittee, Mr. HALEY helped bring
about the construction of three new
Florida Veterans' Administration hospi-
tals-Gainesville, Miami, and Tampa-
and the modernization of the VA hospi-
tal facilities at Lake City and Bay Pines.
During this same period, Florida's VA
hospital beds were increased from 1,353
to 3,501. Congressman HALEY's work na-
tionwide was equally important. He
helped to build needed hospitals and to
improve veteran facilities in other areas,
and he was instrumental in preventing
the closing of VA hospitals and regional
offices in areas where he considered their
contributions essential.
In short, Mr. Speaker, JIM HALEY fully
deserves the recognition I now propose.
His many years of hard work and con-
centrated efforts on'behalf of all veter-
ans has earned their respect and ad-
miration. I am very hopeful that the
Veterans' Affairs Committee will expedite
a favorable report on this proposal to
bestow the name of a very distinguished
Floridian on a needed veterans' hospital
as proper recognition for his long years
of service to America's veterans and their
families. This bill should have the unani-
mous approval of the Congress during
the current session. I know that all of
you join me in wanting Jim HALEY to be
able to smell the flowers he so richly
deserves.
Approved For Release 2002/01/02 : CIA-RDP77M00144R000800070108-1