CONGRESS SHOULD PASS THE FEDERAL EMPLOYEES PAY BILL

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP91-00965R000400120008-6
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: December 16, 2003
• Sequence Number: 8
• Publication Date: January 1, 1960
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400120008-6
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 12053
tacular, and have rehearsed it with all
the skit find cunning at their command.
When I say "financed," I mean exactly
that. Let us not think for a moment
that the funds for those supercolossal
manifestations of hatred came from the
coffers of the .Japanese Communist
Party. It is not that big; it is not that
strong. It represents a miniscule mi-
nority of that country.
A report I have received from a very
reliable source states that the hard core
of the Communist demonstrators were
paid $1.65 a day-an unusually high
labor wage. In this Chamber we have
had debates about the pay rates. of gar-
ment workers, clothing workers, and tai-
lors in Japan, which are 14 or 15 cents
an hour. But the people who eligaged
in the riots were paid in excess of the
rate for a long, hard day's work-simply
to run the streets, light the fires of re-
volt and keep them burning until the
Communist objective was achieved.
That is how the Kremlin and Peiping
operate. That is how they keep boring
into freedom, like worms boring into an
apple. That is the raw technique of
Communists-the use of a well-trained
and well-rehearsed mob as a bludgeon to
beat down the forces of orderly govern-
ment, to create anarchy, on which the
Communists thrive, and gain power.
Mr. President, anyone who seeks to
make this administration a whipping
boy for this tragic Japanese situation is
closing his eyes to reality and closing
his mind to the truth.
INSURANCE VANISHES WHEN MED-
ICAL CARE NEED IS GREATEST
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President,
many of our senior citizens have taken
normal precautions for most of their
lives against the devastating effects of
high medical costs. The difficulty is that
these very people find their hospital and
surgical insurance canceled at the very
time when they need it most.
Letter after letter from senior citizens
of my State illustrate this problem. Ill-
ness is the handmaiden of old age.
When our people most need medical
care, they can least afford it; and insur-
ance is either prohibitive or all but un-
obtainable.
The cost of medical care for the aged
is 80 percent higher than the cost of
medical care for the rest of the popula-
tion, according to Secretary Flemming,
of the Department of Health, Education,
and Welfare.
Eight out of 10 of the aged suffer from
one or more chronic ailments, as com-
pared with 4 out of 10 persons of all ages.
More than one out of every four aged
persons are affected by heart disease;
while the, aged make up less than 9
percent of the total population, they
comprise 40 percent of all cases with
heart trouble. The average hospital
stay of older persons is two to three
times longer than that of persons un-
der 65. Many physical handicaps of
the aged could have been prevented if
the diseases or injuries had been treated
promptly.
Mr. President, r have before me a typ-
ical letter in regard to this aspect of the
problem of medical care for our senior
citizens. I ask unanimous consent that
the letter be printed at this point in the
RECORD.
There being no objection, the letter was
ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as
follows:
DEAR Sin.: I am writing to you in regard
to H.R. 4700 which would amend the Social
Security Act to include hospital, nursing
home, and surgical costs for persons covered
by this act after retiring.
I am 64 years old and will have to retire
,next January 1961. I have paid on insurance
since 1937 when the company took out group
insurance, but 90 days after retiring this is
all canceled. I will have to look for other
insurance to cover hospital and surgical care
because I can't afford to be without insurance
after 65. Few retired people can afford the
price the insurance company asks for pro-
tection. Therefore I am asking you to vote
for this bill or any amendments which might
be added and are favorable to the retired
'CONGRESS SHOULD PASS THE
FEDERAL EMPLOYEES PAY BILL
Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr.
President, with Congress moving rapidly
toward an early adjournment, there are
certain legislative items that must be
taken care of promptly and completely.
No amount of pressure generated by
the approaching national conventions
and campaigns can be used as an ex-
cuse to justify overlooking these meas-
ures, or merely according them perfunc-
tory treatment.
Among the issues which, In my opin-
ion, must be decided is the question of
the pending pay raise for postal workers
and Federal employees under the Classi-
fication Act. Fortunately, in House
bill 9883, the Senate now has under
consideration an excellent measure that
deserves the full support of this body.
I think all of us are now familiar
with the general terms of this bill, so
it will not be necessary to discuss them
in any detail. It provides for a mini-
mum 71/2-percent increase in the salaries
now being paid to postal and classified
Federal employees and to certain other
small categories of Government workers.
All in all, the bill would be of benefit to
approximately 1,570,000 civil servants
and their families, at' an annual -cost
of about $697 million,
This is a great deal of money, and
Congress should be sure of the merit
of any legislation that commits the Gov-
ernment to expenditures of this size.
Money is important in the operations
of the Federal Government, but the peo-
ple who work for this Government are
infinitely more important.
When the facts of this case are laid
on the line, they present a compelling
case for Congress to pass this proposed
legislation.
If Federal employees are denied a
raise which they have earned-and de-
serve-on the grounds that it is too ex-
pensive, an argument raised by some
of its opponents, a great injustice will
have been committed. This line of rea-
soning assumes, in effect, that there is
nothing morally or economically wrong
in expecting these employees to subsi-
dize the functions of the Government.
When put this bluntly, I do not think
any of us will accept this argument.
An equally fallacious argument now
being directed against this purposed leg-
islation is that extensive comparative
salary data now being collected by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics might be used
as the basis for salary legislation by
the next Congress.
It is further claimed that the Classi-
fication Act contains certain inequities
and defects that are not corrected by
House bill 9883.
It must be cold comfort to the hard-
pressed Federal employees to know that
statistical data on salaries are now being
compiled and that they might lead to a
pay raise next year. These employees
deserve this increase; and because they
have already earned it, they deserve it
now. It will be simple enough at a later
date to make any adjustments that
might be desirable on the basis of the
Bureau of Labor Statistics report.
As for the alleged defects and in-
equities in the Classification Act, no-
body contends that it is a perfect piece
of legislation. But is it the law that
we have in hand to work with, and it has
proved satisfactory and workable for
11 years.
The voices of dissent that have used
these arguments miss the point. If a pay
raise is jutifled now,. it should be granted
now, even though it means a slight in-
crease in the budget. If the Bureau of
Labor Statistics study suggests the need
for new legislation, we can enact such
legislation after these data have been
presented to Congress. And why should
urgently needed salary action be. delayed
now because the Classification Act may
have some flaws In it? We have had
more than a decade to amend this law
as we saw fit. Surely that can be done
at a later date.
The point-and the only point that
carries any real weight-is that the post-
al, classified, and other groups of Gov-
ernment empolyees covered by House
bill 9883 have earned a salary increase.
They deserve it now, and they need it
now.
Regardless of what future studies may
show, there is available at this moment
more than enough adequate, objective
information to justify the immediate
passage of this bill. Let me mention
briefly some of these facts and some
fundamental issues involved in the Gov-
ernment's overall personnel program
and problems that are related to the ec-
actment of this bill.
There can be no doubt about the fact
that many civil servants are having a
very difficult time in supplying their
families with only the bare necessities
of life. They are up against the very
solid and irrefutable fact that living
costs are now at an all-time high. They
are up against the fact that Federal sal-
aries have always lagged behind those
of private industry. They are up against
the fact that, although their productivity
in recent years has kept pace with that
of employees in private enterprise, their
wage increases in many categories com-
parable in terms of function and re-
sponsibility have not.
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400120008-6
 12054
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400120008-6
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE Tune 17
This inequitable treatment goes be-
yond being just a hardship on those now
working for the Government. It also in-
tensifies the persistent problems involved
in the recruitment and retention of the
ablest people in the Federal service.
The Government must compete with
the private sector of our economy for the
most promising and competent people.
When we consider the complexities of
modern government and the perilous
times we live in, the absolute necessity
for having top-caliber personnel in the
Government is so patently obvious that
the point need not be labored.
Employees of the Post Office Depart-
ment perform what may very well be the
most important day-in and day-out serv-
ice offered by this Government. They
do their job well.
I am sure that all of us in Congress
share my feeling, based on a great deal
of contact, of heavy reliance and de-
pendence upon the civil service in gen-
eral. The work of these people is char-
acterized by -a deep sense of responsi-
bility, conscientiousness, and a high
level of professional skill.
As an employer, the Federal Govern-
ment would not only be harsh and unjust,
but-also would be very shortsighted in a
practical sense, if it failed to recognize
these qualities and to reward them ac-
cordingly.
This recognition and the appropriate
action are, in the initial and most im-
portant phase, the responsibility of Con-
gress. The law prohibits Federal em-
ployees from presenting their case or
fighting for their objectives with the
techniques used byemployees inprivate
business. Civil servants cannot strike;
nor can they bargain collectively in the
usual meaning of this term.
This Congress has an inescapable ob-
ligation to the entire Federal service.
We must face up to that obligation now.
I wish to remind the Members of this
distinguished body - that there is a spe-
cial urgency in connection with our dis-
position of this bill. For reasons which,
as I indicated earlier, seem to me to be
wholly unsupportable, the Administra-
tion is apparently opposed to any pay
increase at all. It seems most likely
that any pay bill sent to the White House
will be vetoed by the President.
In these circumstances, Congress must
clear this bill rapidly, so that there will
still be an opportunity to override the
expected veto before the unusually early
adjournment which everyone anticipates.
If we delay action until such time as a
pocket veto is possible, Congress will be
powerless to attempt to override.
The reasons for the passage of this
bill are persuasive. The obligation of
Congress in this matter is clear and un-
mistakable. The circumstances under
which this measure is being considered
make speedy action on our part -abso-
lutely essential.
Let us, therefore, pass House bill 9883,
and pass it now. To do this would be no
more than doing our duty. To do less
would be a dereliction of our duty and a
breach of faith with every employee of
the Government of the United States.
LEGISLATIVE APPROPRIATION
BILL-PUBLICATION OF ITEMIZED
BREAKDOWN OF ALL EXPENDI-
TURES
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. Mr.
President, the Appropriations Commit-
tee has report:d to the Senate H.R.
12232, the legislative appropriation bill.
When this bill is brought up for con-
sideration I shall offer an amendment,
on behalf of rayself and the Senator
from Maine [Mrs. SMITH], the purpose
of which will be to make mandatory the
publication of an itemized breakdown of
all expenditure:;, either in the form of
appropriated dollars or in the form of
foreign currencies, that. are made by
Members of Congress, congressional
committees, or >taff employees, while on
official trips.
This amendment includes the publica-
tion of all expenditures made by indi-
vidual Membere, House and Senate com-
mittees, joint committees, committees on
Interparliamentary Union, all other
committees, and their staffs.
The amendment requires that each
individual Member or employee of Con-
gress shall furnish to the chairman of
his committee an itemized report.show-
inghow much was -spent and the purpose
for which the expenditures were made.
The chairman of the committee will
then have into: porated in the CONGRES-
SIONAL RECORD the consolidated reports
of the committee, but included in this
consolidated report will be an itemized
breakdown showing the actual expendi-
tures made by each individual Member
or employee, along with the purpose for
which such expenditures were made.
If a point of order is made on this
amendment, which we admit constitutes
legislation on an appropriation bill, a
motion will be made to suspend the rules.
In order to comply with the rules of the
Senate, the proper notification of this
request for sus-pension-has already been
filed with the Senate, and appears on
page 12040 of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
of June 16, 19 30, along with a copy of
the proposed amendment.
With the advance filing of this official
notice, our amendment will be in order
on this appropriation bill.
For the pas; several years we have
been trying to get a bill passed which
will require Members of Congress or con-
gressional committees to render a public
accounting of all expenditures of public
funds that are made while on official
trips, but while the Senate has on at
least two occasions approved the amend-
ment, we have been unsuccessful in
getting it accepted by the House.
We recognize that, with the wide-
spread commitments of our Government
throughout the world, it is of times neces-
sary for Members of Congress to make
official trips in order that their commit-
tees may more intelligently legislate,
and we do not question that these trips
made on official business should be paid
for by the U.S. Government. However,
we must not overlook the fact that it is
the American taxpayers who are paying
for these official trips, and they are en-
titled to a public accounting as to how
their money is being spent. - A
H.R. 12232 is the appropriation bill
which provides money to pay the salaries
and other expenditures of the Members
of Congress and the employees of the
legislative branch, and there can be no
more appropriate bill to which our
amendment could be -attached. We
shall request a rollcall vote upon the
Senate's adopting this proposal, and we
hope that this time the House will accept
the amendment.
However, should the House refuse to
accept the amendment, and should it
result in a deadlocked conference, it will
only mean that we as Members of Con-
gress and our employees will do without
our pay until such time as we agree to
-
render a public accounting of all our
expenditures.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield?
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. I yield.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I have not
seen the amendment, or perhaps it would
be more accurate to say I have not had
a chance to study it in detail, but I have
observed it in the RECORD and I had a
conversation with the Senator about it.
As I understand the amendment, it pro-
vides that any Member traveling at
Government expense shall report that
expense, what the amount is for, and the
details for which the money has been
spent, with the chairman of his com-
mittee, and the chairman of the com-
mittee shall then make the report avai]i-
able to the public. Is that correct?
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. That :is
correct.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. - I see no ob-
jection to that amendment. Is anyone
objecting to it?
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. No. The
Senate, on at -least two occasions,
adopted it unanimously. At one timLe
there was a rollcall vote which was 68
to 0. Of those absent, 26 indicated on
the record they were for it, and not one
was against it. Unfortunately, it was
eliminated in conference. I am hoping
this time the House will be more recep-
tive to the proposal. I think the very
least we can do is tell the American
people and the taxpayers we are going
to give them a public accounting of ex-
penditures that are made on official
trips. -
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. Much of the
criticism of the Members of the legis-
lative branch of Government, and of the
executive branch, is due to the sins of
a few being passed on to the many. A
public accounting of public money would
not hurt anyone. I see no reason why
anyone should oppose the amendment,
which provides for a report showing the
spending of how much money, for what
purpose, in connection with an official
mission, and the chairman of the corn-
mittee making that information avail-
able to the general public.
Is that what the amendment does?
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. That is
it. I certainly appreciate the support of
the Senator from Texas. I have talked
with him previously. He feels, just as
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400120008-6
 1960
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400120008-6
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE ' 12055
strongly as I do, that the American tax-
payers'are entitled to an accounting of
the expenditure of their money. That
is what we are providing for in the
amendment.
I am confident the cases of abuse are
in the minority and that there are very
few of them. However, regardless of
how isolated they may be, expenditures
in connection with our official travel will
continue to give Members of Congress
a black eye until we open to public ex-
amination an accounting of our ex-
penditures.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I agree
with the Senator.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. If we do
that, and the American taxpayers will
review these records, they will find that
a large part of the expenditures are
proper.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I agree with
the Senator.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. I ap-
preciate the support of the majority
leader.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I shall not
make the request now, and may not
make it at all, but I ask the minority
leader and the Senator from Delaware to
consider the possibility of bringing up
the legislative appropriation bill, if there
is no objection, so we can get it to con-
ference. I ask them to take up the
question with Senators who may be in-
terested in it. I will discuss it with
them later. I want them to give con-
sideration to taking up that bill before
the weekend.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. Having
filed this motion last night, we are pro-
tected under the rules of the Senate.
Mr. JOHNSON of Texas. I shall talk
to the Senator before I make the request.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. Very
well.
SOUND MEDICAL PROGRAM
Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, in
the preparation and drafting of Senate
bill 3503, the senior Senator from Mich-
igan has done a service for the Congress
and the American people as a whole.
It is my privilege to be a cosponsor
of this reasonable and practical approach
to meeting the medical needs of our elder
citizens.
The Honorable James T. Blair, Jr.,
Governor of the great State of Missouri,
has made a thoughtful analysis of the
problem and of the constructive way in
which S. 3503 would help meet it.
I was glad to receive a copy of Gov-
ernor Blair's letter to Senator MCNAMARA,
as well as a copy of his analysis of this
bill, and ask unanimous consent that
they be inserted at this point in the
RECORD.
There being no objection, the letter
and analysis were ordered to be printed
in the RECORD, as follows:
EXECUTIVE OFFICE,
STATE OF MISSOURI,
Jefferson City, Mo., May 25, 1960.
Hon. PAT MCNAMARA,
U.S. Senate,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR SENATOR MCNAMARA: I appreciate
very much the opportunity to send you my
comments on S. 3503, which I consider to be
an excellent bill, and one which I am sure
would prove to be a tremendous boon to all
aged persons in this country. The passage
of this bill would lift a constantly nagging
worry from the minds of our retired aged,
with respect to their medical and hospital
care, and give them peace of mind in their
declining years. I am extremely pleased to
note that both of our great Senators from
Missouri, THOMAS C. HENNINGS, Jr., and
STUART SYMINGTON, have joined you in spon-
soring this bill.
I enclose my comments in relation to your
questionnaire, which I hope will be of use
to you in your efforts to obtain passage of
S. 3503.
Very truly yours,
J. T. BLAIR, Jr.,
Governor.
COMMENTS IN ANSWER TO QUESTIONNAIRE ON
McNAMARA BILL, S. 3503
1. FINANCE
(a) The McNamara plan of financing
through the social security system, plus sup-
plementation from general revenues, is far
preferable to administration plan' of fi-
nancing entirely from general revenues. The
social security plan spreads the cost over all
employed persons and their employers
throughout their earning period, this being
the time during which they are best able to
contribute to such a fund. It uses the in-
surance principle of each person helping
to pay for his own paid-up health care plan,
available at retirement; this makes it some-
thing they have worked for, not a handout
of someone's charity. The social security
plan would make benefits available on a like
basis to all retired persons throughout the
Nation; not just in the wealthier States who
would have the resources to be able to par-
ticipate. Under the administration plan
there would be some States with a full-scale
program, but there might be others with no
program, and a number where the benefits
might be on every conceivable gradation of
adequacy.
(b) Missouri could not possibly partici-
pate in the administration program without
increasing State taxes.
(c) The legislature would, of course, have
to determine the priorities among the vari-
ous needed State services. It is very possible
that the use of increased State tax revenues
for a medical care plan such as is envisioned
by the Eisenhower administration might
make it impossible to expand or add other
needed services, and could, dependent on
action by the legislature, result in curtail-
ment of present services.
2. ELIGIBILITY
The administration's proposal, which is
nothing more than a major medical or
catastrophic insurance plan, completely
misses the crucial point at which the ma-
jority of aged in Missouri need help. It is
the first $260 or $400 which causes our major
concerns. To be fully protected, the aged
person would have to carry Blue Cross or
some commercial hospital insurance in addi-
tion to the administration's insurance pro-
posal. Our experience shows that the ma-
jority of retired aged persons in this State
(at least 60 percent having annual incomes
of $1,000 or less) are not able to carry Blue
Cross or similar insurance. in many cases
they would not be able to pay the first $260
or $400, and the result would be the same as
it is in many cases now-the aged person
would do without needed care, or would
wait until the condition became acute and
quite possibly too late for cure.
The McNamara proposal, providing initial
benefits without deductible features, would
be infinitely more effective in meeting actual
health care needs of the aged.
-3. ADMINISTRATIVE ORGANIZATION
An evaluation of the medical care plans
for public assistance recipients, as now op-
erated by each of the 60 States, will show
a variation in scope and adequacy from zero
to full and complete coverage. The same
variations would undoubtedly exist under
the administration's insurance proposal.
On the other hand a plan operated as your
bill proposes will provide medical care for all
aged persons; the care would be reason-
ably comparable whether the aged person
lived in a rich. State or in a poor State. In
addition, there would not be the drastic
change in plans or benefits when the aged
person wished to move from one State to
another.
4. THE MEANS TEST
(a) The means test is not a pleasant ex-
perience, and to many aged persons the idea
is repugnant. From an administrative
standpoint it is a very difficult task to try
to make a fair and objective decision. If an
income tax return would be used auto-
matically without verification the task would
not be particularly difficult; the problem
then would be in the inequity which might
be possible due to the great premium
placed on having a low reporting of income.
If an actual verification of income would be
required, this would present a tremendous
administrative problem in connection with
the thousands of aged in Missouri who are
not receiving public assistance.
(b) If actual verification of income is
necessary, it would mean that a huge num-
ber of additional employees would have to
be hired for this purpose.
5. THE PROBLEM OF COMPULSION
The administration proposal is voluntary
only for these aged persons who are still em-
ployed, or for those who are in the upper
income brackets. Much as those in the
lower income brackets may want to have in-
surance coverage, they really have no choice
when the available income does not decently
provide for food, shelter, utilities, clothing,
medicine, and the other absolute necessities
of daily living. In Missouri the average
OASI recipient receives about $72 per month;
the average OAA recipient receives about $59
per month. The average person. in these
circumstances has no choice to make. If the
voluntary plan is followed, those who are
able to pay the cost of the premiums (and
therefore the least needy) will be covered;
those least able to pay the premiums (and
therefore the most in need of such coverage)
will not have coverage, and a full program of
additional supplementation would continue
to be necessary to cover this group.
S. COST TO THE STATES
(a) We believe the cost to the State for
the first $250 would be very high, but have no
basis at present for making an estimate. As
one indication, however,, out of Missouri's
470,000 persons over age 65, about 116,000 are
receiving old-age assistance. Using Mr.
Flemming's figure of $177 as the average an-
nual expenditure of persons in this age group
for health and medical expenses, it' would
cost the State $20,532,000 for that group of
aged presently receiving public assistance.
During the past year the division of welfare
has had only $1 million in both Federal and
State funds available for hospital care for all
assistance programs.
(b) We have no way of estimating how
many persons not now on old-age assistance
would apply and be found eligible, due to a
desire to qualify for medical care benefits.
7. OTHER COMMENTS
The administration plan requires the aged
person to pay an extremely high proportion
of his medical care costs after he has retired.
This means that often he is unable to make
payments, or payment is required at a time
when he is least able to do so. The Me-
Namara proposal, on the other hand, requires
contribution from the person during his
working days, when he Is most able to make
such payments
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400120008-6
 Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400120008-6
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE -.;June 17
Mr. SYMINGTON. Also, Mr. Presi-
dent,-I commend to the attention of the
Senate the Walter Lippman column en-
titled "Medical Care for the Aged."
With his customary objectivity, Mr.
Lippman points out the soundness of the
McNamara approach as compared with
that of the President.
I ask unanimous consent that this
analysis by Mr. Lippman, as it appeared
in the Washington Post of June 16, be
inserted at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the analysis
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
MEDICAL CARE FOR rHE AGED
(By Walter Lippmann)
Almost everyone realizes that a great mass
of the old people do not have the savings,
and cannot depend upon their children to
pay for the doctors, hospitals, nursing
homes, and drugs which because they are
aging, they need more than do younger
people.
There are a few eccentrics, professing to
be conservatives, who think that in a truly
rugged individualism these ailing old people
would do without medical care if they can't
pay for it, or would make their children
mortgage the future to pay the medical bills.
But the country Is not that ruggedly
obtuse to the facts of life, and accordingly
both the administration and the Democratic
opposition are agreed that the need, which
is obvious and urgent, must be met by
Government measures.
Thus, this administration has prepared a
program which the director of the budget,
Mr. Stans, says will cost $1.5 billion by 1964
and $2.5 billion by 1970. For the Democrats,
Senator McNAMARA and some 19 Senators, in-
cluding KENNEDY, SYMINGTON, and HUM-
PHaEY, have introduced a bill that would
add medical insurance to the existing old
age insurance. After the first year, the cost
of this program would be $1.5 billion. Thus
the two programs are approximately of the
same size.
But between the two programs there is a
basic issue of principle. On one side are
the President and his advisers. On the other
side are the preponderant mass of the Demo-
crats and also a considerable minority of the
Republicans led by Governor Rockefeller.
They differ essentially on how the program
shall be financed.
Shall it be financied by compulsory insur-
ance, which means that throughout a per-
son's working life he and his employer will
be taxed to provide an insurance fund for
his medical needs when he is retired and is
no longer earning an income? This is the
principle of the McNamara, bill in the Sen-
ate, as it was of the Forand bill In the
House, and it has the support of the leading
Democrats and of Governor Rockefeller.
Or shall the program be financed, as the
administration proposes, by charitable doles
to the very poor, paid for out of compul-
sory taxes collected by the National and
State Governments?
For reasons which he has never explained,
the President regards compulsory social se-
curity taxes as unsound, socialistic, and
rather un-American; on the other hand he
regards compulsory taxes to pay for doles
based on a means test as somehow more
"voluntary," sounder, more worthy of a free
society and more American.
Under the McNamara bill, medical insur-
ance would be added to the existing old-
age insurance system. During his working
life, each person covered by the social se-
curity system would contribute an addi-
tional amount, as would also his employer, to
supplement his :retirement income to include
medical services.
It is true that during the first few years
benefits would be received by persons who
had not contributed because the system did
not exist when they were earning their liv-
ing. These benefits would be paid for by
the younger people. But as the younger
people would be buying their own insur-
ance, there is little inequity in this. No-
body will lose mything, although those who
are already to') old to have been contribu-
tors to an. Insurance plan will benefit. In a
few years everyone receiving the benefits will
have paid his snare.
Why does the: President feel so strongly op-
posed to the principle of compulsory insur-
ance for medical care to supplement the in-
surance, whicl. already exists, for old age?
What is wron? about its being compulsory
that a man would insure himself against
thg needs of his old age? What is so won-
derful about a voluntary system under
which a man who doesn't save for his old
age has to have his doctors and his hospital
bills paid for by his children or public wel-
fare funds? there is nothing un-American
in the principle that the imprudent shall be
compelled to rave so that they do not be-
come a burden to their families and the
local charities, so that they can meet the
needs of their old age with the self-respect
which comes from being entitled to the
benefits because they have paid the cost
out of their own earnings.
The President has been led to think, he
says, that compulsory insurance is "a very
definite step in socialized medicine." Why?
In a system of compulsory insurance the
Department of Health, Education, and Wel-
fare, which would administer the program,
could and should use as its agents private
organizations Ike the National Blue Cross
Assoicatio:n in negotiating with hospitals
and nursing homes and in dealing with
claims and complaints. The system would
be financed as insurance. But it would be
worked not by a new Government agency
but by the kind of private voluntary asso-
ciation which the President otherwise be-
lieves in.
In this connection it is interesting to re-
member that in the early 1930's when volun-
tary health insurance plans were inaugu-
rated, our old friend, the American Medical
Association, w is declaring that they were
communism and socialism and socialized
medicine. Tocay, the American Medical As-
sociation is pointing to these same voluntary
insurance plan 3 as the solution of our pres-
ent needs and the proper alternative to com-
pulsory old ago medical care insurance.
Among the Dpponents of medical insur-
ance there seems to be a vague and un-
comfortable feeling that it is a newfangled
theory, alien tc the American way of life and
imported, presumably, from Soviet Russia.
The Founding Fathers were not subject to
such theoretic;d hobgoblins. In 1798 Con-
gress set up the first medical insurance
scheme under the U.S. Marine Hospital Serv-
ice. The scheme was financed by deducting
from seamen's wages contributions to pay
for their hospital expenses.
If that was socialized medicine, the gen-
eration of the :9ounding Fathers was blandly
unaware of it.
CITATION O:' HUMBLE REFINING CO.
FOR EXCELLENCE OF STANDARDS
IN OPERATION
Mr. CASE of New Jersey. Mr. Presi-
dent, it is particularly gratifying when a
leading American industrial organiza-
tion furnisher, proof of the -excellence of
its standards in operation. Such a dis-
tinction has lust been achieved by the
Esso Standard Division of Humble Oil &
Refining Co., as evidenced by an award
of the Special Citation of the Public
Health Service. Particularly noteworthy
is this recognition because Esso received
the award for the fourth .time, and the
third consecutive year.
The Special Citation represents one of
the Government's top awards for excel-
lence in sanitation, and was presented
to John D. Rogers, General Manager of
the Esso Standard Division, by Wesley
E. Gilbertson, Chief, Division of Engi-
neering Services of the Public Health
Service, at a ceremony in the New York
Yacht Club, New York City, on Tuesc,ay,
June 7, 1960.
Mr. Rogers, who, in addition to other
important connections, is a member of
the Board of Directors of the American
Merchant Marine Institute, has long
since demonstrated his interest in ele-
vating standards connected with the
maritime industry. His fellow members
of the Esso Standard Division have com-
bined their efforts successfully in achiev-
ing the most desired results. How well
they have acquitted themselves is
demonstrated by the fact that each of
the 39 tankers of the Esso Standard Di-
vision achieved -a rating of 95 or higher
on an official PHS inspection involving
166 separate items of sanitary construc-
tion and maintenance.
The previous citations to the Esso
Standard Division were awarded in Sep-
tember 1955, June 1958, and March 1959.
Tankers of Esso call at all Atlantic
and gulf coast ports and at river ports
along the Mississippi and Ohio Rivers.
THE PHILOSOPHY OF COMMUNISM
Mr. MURRAY. Mr. President, I have
been reading with great interest a lecture
on "The Philosophy of Communism" de-
livered at Gonzaga University in Spo-
kane, Wash., by the Reverend-Francis J.
Conklin, S.J.
Father Conklin's lecture is so illu-
minating that I believe it should be
brought to the attention of all Members
of the Congress. Therefore, I ask unan-
imous consent that it be printed in ;he
RECORD.
There being no objection, the lecture
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
The works of Karl Marx and Friedrich Eng-
els have been read and reread, quoted and
misquoted, understood and misunderstood
for over a century. In this series of lectures
we hope to provide the student with a back-
ground so that the works of Marx and Engels
may be read with understanding. There Is
no substitute for direct contact with these
original works. But this reading may be fa-
cilitated by a knowledge of the context in
which the writing was done. Our purpose is
to supply footnotes, so that the student will
not have to stop every few minutes and seek
a point of reference.
During the course of these lectures our
main emphasis will be upon Karl Marx be-
cause Marx is more difficult to understand
and once Marx is understood, Engels is quite
easy to grasp. By reading their works you
will ascertain what Marx and Engels said.
So far as is humanly possible we want you to
know why they said what they did say. To
understand why we must try to create for
ourselves the context of the times in which
they spoke. We must endeavor to under-
stand the political, economic and social con-
ditions that existed during the 19th cen-
Approved For Release 2004/05/13 : CIA-RDP91-00965R000400120008-6