PRESIDENTS STATEMENTS ON VIETNAM

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000300190008-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 45
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: October 27, 2003
• Sequence Number: 8
• Publication Date: July 29, 1965
• Content Type: OPEN

Approyed For Release 2003/11/04 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
United States
of America
Congressional Record
PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 89t12 CONGRESS FIRST SESSION
Vol. 111
WASHINGTON THURSDAY JULY 29, 1965
No. 138
House of Representatives
The House met at 11 o'clock a.m.
Rev. R. Cecil Mills, DD., Canaan Bap-
tist Church, Washington, D.C., offered
the following prayer:.
in all thy ways acknowledge Him, and
He shall direct thy paths.
Lord of every land and nation, we
thank Thee for men whose faith in Thee
has made them great in the history of
our country. Make us realize that only
those lands are truly prosperous and
happy whose leaders are led by the
spirit of God. As we give Thee thanks
for courageous Christian leadership in
the days gone by, we pray Thee for men
at the head of affairs in ow Nation dur-
ing these troubled days in whose hearts
is the fear of:the Lord and whose great-
est ambition is to serve Thee and do
Thy will. So shall our beloved land ful-
fill the mission Thou hast appointed unto
It.
Give us a consciou,sness of guilt, not
only for personal sins but also for the
great collective sins of mankind, from
which we cannot escape a share of re-
sponsibility. Help us to believe in the
saving power of the Gospel when ap-
plied through the lives of redeemed men
to the sins of society. Let us never be
complacent or at ease so long as our
fellow men are unjustly oppressed.
? And grant unto us universal peace
and good will among all men.
In His name we pray. Amen.
THE JOURNAL
The Journal of the proceedings of
yesterday was read and approved.
ls/iPSSAGE PROM THE SENATE
A message from the Senate by Mr.
Arrington, one of its clerks, announced
that the Senate had passed a bill of the
following title, in which the concurrence
of the House is requested:
S. 625. An act to authorize tile sale of
Certain public lands.
INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPRO-
PRIATION BILL, 1966
Mr. THOMAS. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's table the bill (H.R. 7997) mak-
ing -appropriations for sundry independ-
ent executive bureaus, boards, commis-
sions, corporations, agencies, and offices,
for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1966,
and for other purposes, with Senate
amendments thereto, disagree to the
amendments of the senate, and agree to
the conference asked by the Senate.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Texas?
The Chair hears none, and appoints the
following conferees: Messrs. 'TnomAs,
EVINS of Tennessee, BOLAND, SHIPLEY,
GIATMO, MAHON, JONAS, MINSHALL, RHODES
of Arizona, and Bow.
COMMI1 LE ON THE JUDICIARY
Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the Committee
on the Judiciary have until midnight,
July 29, to file reports on the bills HR.
8027 and H.R. 6964.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Okla-
homa?
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, reserving
the right to object, what are those bills?
Mr. ALBERT. The first has to do with
the Law Enforcement Association, and
the second deals with the rehabilitation
of prisoners.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I with-
draw my reservation of objection.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Okla-
homa?
There was no objection.
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD
OF COMMITTEE ON Mr..,1-LCHANT
MARINE AND FISHERIES
Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the Subcom-
mittee on Coast Guard of the Committee
on Merchant Marine and Fisheries have
permission to sit during general debate
today.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Ok-
lahoma?
There was no objection.
COM1V1ITTER ON BANKING AND CUR-
RENCY, SUBCOMMITTEE ON IN-
TERNATIONAL TRADE
Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the Subcom-
mittee on International Trade of the
Committee on Banking and Currency be
Permitted to sit during general debate
today.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Okla-
homa?
There was no objection.
COMMITTEE ON BANKING AND CUR-
RENCY, SUBCOMMITTEE ON DO-
MESTIC FINANCE
Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the Subcom-
mittee on Domestic Finance of the Com-
mittee on Banking and Currency be per-
mitted to sit during general debate today.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Okla-
homa?
There was
PRESID TATEMENTS
ON VIETNAM
Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I offer a
resolution H. Res. 492) and ask unani-
mous ,consent for its immediate con-
sideration.
The Clerk read the title of the
resolution.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Oklahoma?
There was no objection.
The Clerk read the resolution, as
follows:
H. Rm. 492
Resolved, That there be printed as a House
document the statements of the President
of the United States on July 28, 1965, on the
Nation's commitment in Vietnam; and that
fifty thousand additional copies shall be
printed, of which thirty thousand copies shall
be for the House document room and twenty
thousand copies shall be for the Senate doc-
ument room.
The resolution was agreed to.
A Motion to reconsider was laid. on the
table.
Approved For Release 2003/11/04 :CIA-RDP67B00446R000300190008-1
17991
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP671300446R000300190008-1
17992 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE July 29, 1965
COMMUNICATION FROM THE
CLERK OF THE HOUSE
The SPEAKER laid before the House
the following communication from the
Clerk of the House of Representatives
which was read and referred to the Com-
mittee on House Administration:
OFTICE or THE CLERK,
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, D.C., July 29, 1965.
The Honorable the SPEAKER,
House of Representatives.
SIR: I have the honor to lay before the
House of Representatives the contests for
seats in the House of Representatives from
the First Congressional District of the State
of Mississippi, Augusta VTheadon against
Thomas G. Abernethy, the Second Con-
gressional District of the State of Mississippi,
Fannie Lou Hamer against Jamie L. Whitten,
the Fourth Congressional District of Missis-
sippi, Annie DeVine against 'Prentiss Walker,
and the Fifth Congressional District of Mis-
sissippi, Victoria Jackson Gray against Wil-
liam M. Colmer, notices of which have
been filed in the office of the Clerk of the
House; and also transmit herewith original
testimony, papers, and documents relating
thereto, including the copy of the unsigned
notice to contest the election held in the
Third Congressional District of the State of
Mississippi and related papers.
In compliance with the act approved
March 2, 1887, entitled "An act relating to
contested-election cases," the Clerk has
opened and printed the testimony in the
above cases as seemed proper to the Clerk,
there being complete disagreement by the
parties as to the portions of the testimony
to be printed, the notice of contest, the
answer thereto and original papers and ex-
hibits have been sealed up and are ready to
be referred to the appropriate committee of
the House of Representatives.
Two copies of the printed testimony in
the aforesaid cases have been mailed to the
contestants, and the same number to the
bontestees, which together with briefs of the
parties, when received, will be laid before the
committee of the House to which the matter
shall be referred.
Very truly yours,
RALPH R. ROBERTS,
Clerk, U.S. House of Representatives.
CALL OF THE HOUSE
Mr. DEVINE. Mr. Speaker, I make
the point of order a quorum is not
present.
The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum
Is not present.
Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I move a
call of the House.
A call of the House was ordered.
The Clerk called the roll, and the fol-
lowing Members failed to answer to their
names:
Bonner
Bow
Cahill
Colmer
Conyers
Duncan, Oreg.
alleck
Harvey, Ind.
[Roll No. 210]
Jones, Mo. Redlin
Karth Resnick
Keogh
Lindsay
McEwen
Michel
Morton
Powell
Ryan
Shipley
Sickles
Toll
Vllman
Watson
The SPEAKER. On this rollcall 405
Members have answered to their names,
a quorUm.
By unanimous consent further pro-
ceedings under the call were dispensed
with.
TO AMEND THE EDERAL WATER
POLLUTION CONTROL ACT
Mr. FALLON. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to take from the
Speaker's table the bill (S. 4) to amend
the Federal Water Pollution Control
Act, as amended, to establish the Federal
Water Pollution Control Administration,
to prOvide grants for research and de-
velopment, to increase grants for con-
struction of municipal sewage treatment
works, to authorize the establishment of
standards of water quality to aid in pre-
venting, controlling, and abating pollu-
tion of interstate waters, and for other
purposes, with House amendments there-
to, insist upon the House amendments,
and agree to the conference asked by the
Senate.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Mary-
land? The Chair hears none, and ap-
points the following conferees: Messrs.
VALLON, Bi.ArNrx, JONES of Alabama,
CRAMER, and BALDWIN.
HR. 9750, H.R. 9869, AND HR. 9875
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to refer the bills, HR.
9750, H.R. 9969, and H.R. 9875, to the
Committee on Agriculture.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Arkansas?
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, reserving
the right toobject, will the gentleman
state the titles of those bills so we may
know what he is dealing with?
Mr. HARRIS. They are identical bills
to H.R. 9743 which was re-referred, at
the request of the author and the chair-
man of the Committee on Agriculture,
having to do with the utilization of cer-
tain animals on the basis of the method
that the animals are obtained.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Arkansas?
There was no objection.
ADDITIONAL CONFEREE ON
H.R. 5401
Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent to add one addi-
tional conferee to the conference with
the Senate on H.R. 5401, which is the
transportation bill.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Arkansas?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER. The Chair appoints
the gentleman from West Virginia [Mr.
STAGGERS] as the additional conferee,
and the Clerk will notify the Senate of
this action.
SUBCOMMITTEE ON IRRIGATION
AND RECLAMATION OF THE COM-
MITTEE ON INTERIOR AND INSU-
LAR AFFAIRS
Mr. ROGERS of Texas. Mr. Speaker,
I ask unanimous consent that the Sub-
committee on Irrigation and Reclama-
tion of the Committee an Interior and
Insular Affairs may be permitted to sit
this afternoon during general debate.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Texas?
There was no objection.
AMENDMENT TO SECTION 271 OF
THE ATOMIC ENERGY ACT OF
1954
The SPEAKER. The Chair recognizes
the gentleman from California [Mr.
HOLIFIELD I.
Mr. HOLLKIELD. Mr. Speaker, I move
that the House resolve itself into the
Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union for the considera-
tion of the bill (H.R. 8856) to amend
section 271 of the Atomic Energy Act of
1954, as amended.
The motion was agreed to.
IN THE COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE
Accordingly, the House resolved itself
into the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the consid-
eration of the bill, H.R. 8856, with Mr.
HARRIS in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
By unanimous consent, the first read-
ing of the bill was dispensed with.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the
gentleman from California [Mr. HOLI-
FIELD] will be recognized for 1 hour and
the gentleman from California [Mr.
HosmER] will be recognized for 1 hour.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from California [Mr. HOLIFIELD].
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I
yield myself such time as I may con-
sume.
(Mr. HOLIFIELD asked and was giv-
en permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman, this
is the second time this legislation has
been brought to the floor for considera-
tion. It was previously brought to the
floor under suspension of the rules which
requires a two-thirds vote in the affirma-
tive. The vote was 216 to 139 and, there-
fore, the bill having failed to get two-
thirds in the affirmative, it was neces-
sary to bring it up under the rule which
allows an hour for each side to present
their case.
H.R. 8856 would amend section 271 of
the Atomic Energy Act of 1954, as
amended. The five-member Atomic En-
ergy Commission unanimously supports
this bill, as does the Justice Department,
The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy
also unanimously recommends that this
bill be enacted.
Mr. Chairman, the effect of this bill,
and the reasons why the Joint Committee
on Atomic Energy recommends its enact-
ment, were explained in my statement on
the floor on July 12. In view of this fact,
and in light of the comprehensive report
on this bill filed by our committee, I will
simply point out several significant facts
about HR. 8856.
First. Because of the interest which
has been generated concerning the dis-
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
July 29,
Ageroved For ReletWalliNWRIArtilediB024Min.300190008-1
Utilization in gainful and suitable employ-
ment; and
"(2) to plan, establish, and operate an
information service, to make available to
agencies, organizations, and other groups and
persons concerfied with vocational rehabili-
tation, information on rehabilitation re-
sources useful for Various kinds of disability
and on research and the results thereof and
on ether imatters whieh may be helpful in
promoting the rehabilitation of handicapped
individuals and their greater utilization In
gainful and suitable employment.
There are autherized to be appropriated for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1965, and
each succeeding fiscal year, such sums as
may be necessary for carrying out the pur-
poses of this subsection."
? 27,Exienrrk IN STATE ADMINISTRATION
Ssc 8 (a) Subsection (a) of section 5 of
the Vocational Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C.
35(a) ) is amended by striking out paragraphs
(1) and (2) and inserting in lieu thereof the
following:
"(1) (A) designate a State agency as the
sole State agency to administer the plan,
or to supervise its administration in a poli-
tical subdivision of the State by a sole local
agency of such political subdivision, except
that where under the State's law the State
blind commission, or other agency which
provides assistance or services to the adult
blind, is authorized to provide them voca-
tional rehabilitation services, such commis-
sion or agency May be designated as the
sole State agency to administer the part of
the plan under which vocational rehabili-
tation services are provided for the blind
(or to supervise the administration of such
part in a political subdivision of the State
by a sole local agency of such political sub-
division) and a separate State agency may
be designated as the sole State agency with
respect to the rest of the State plan;
"(B) provide that the State agency so
designated to administer or supervise the ad-
ministration of the State plan, or (if there
are two State agencies designated under sub-
paragraph (A) ) so much of the State plan
as does not relate to services for the blind,
shall be (1) a State agency primarily con-
cerned with vocational rehabilitation, or vo-
cational and other rehabilitation, of disabled
Individuals, (11) the State agency adminis-
tering or supervising the administration of
education or vocational education in the
State, or (iii) a State agency which includes
at least two other major organizational units
each of which administers one or more of
the major public education, public health,
public welfare, or labor programs of the
State;
"(2) provide, except in the case of agencies
described in paragraph (1) (B) (1)?
"(A) that the State agency designated
pursuant to paragraph (1) (or each State
agency if two are so designated) shall include
a vocational rehabilitation bureau, division,
or other organizational unit which (i) is
primarily concerned with vocational rehabil-
itation, or vocational and other rehabilita-
tion, of disabled individuals, and is respon-
sible for the vocational rehabilitation pro-
? gram of such State agency, (ii) has a full-
time director, and (iii) has a staff employed
on such rehabilitation work of such orga-
nizational unit all or substantially all of
whom are employed full time on such work;
and
"(B) (1) that such unit shall be located
at an organizational level and shall have an
Organizational status within such State
agency comparable to that of other major
organizational units of such agency or (ii)
in the case Of an agency described in para-
graph (1) (B) (it), either that such unit shall
be so located and have such status or that
the director of such unit shall be the execu-
tive officer, of such State agency; except that,
In the case of a State which has designated
only one State agency pursuant to para.-
graph (1), such State may, if it so desires,
assign responsibility for the part of the plan
under which vocational rehabilitation serv-
ices are provided for the blind to one orga-
nizational unit Of such agency and assign
responsibility for the rest of the plan to
another organizational unit of such agency,
with the provisions of this paragraph (2)
applying separately to each of such units."
(b) The amendments made by subsection
(a) shall become effective July 1, 1967, ex-
cept that, in the case of any State, such
amendments shall be effective on such earlier
date (on or after the date of enactment of
this Act) as such State has in effect an ap-
proved plan meeting the requirements of
the Vocational Rehabilitation Act as
amended by subsection (a).
SPECIAL SERVICES rait THE BDLND AND THE DEAF
SEC. 9. So much of subsection (a) of sec-
tion 11 of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act
(29 U.S.C. 41(a) ) as precedes paragraph (1)
is amended by inserting after the second
semicolon "provision, in the case of handi-
capped individuals, of reader services for such
individuals who are blind and of interpreter
services in the case of such individuals who
are deaf;".
SERVICES TO DETERMINE REHABILITATION
POTENTIAL OF RECIPIENT
SEC. 10. (a) Subsection (13) of section 11 of
the Vocational Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C.
41(b) ) is amended by inserting before the
period at the end thereof: "; except that
nothing in the preceding provisions of this
subsection or in subsection (a) shall be con-
strued to exclude from 'vocational rehabili-
tation services' any goods or services pro-
vided to an individual who is under a physi-
cal or mental disability which constitutes a
substantial handicap to employment, during
the period, not in excess of eighteen months
in the case of any individual who is mentally
retarded or has a disability designated for
this purpose by the Secretary, or six months
in the case of an individual with any other
disability, determined (in accordance with
regulations of the Secretary) to be neces-
sary for, and which are provided for the pur-
pose of, ascertaining whether it may reason-
ably be expected that such individual will be
rendered fit to engage in a remunerative
occupation through the provision of goods
and services described in subsection (a),
but only if the goods or services provided to
him during such period would constitute
'vocational rehabilitation services' if his dis-
ability were of such a nature that he would
be a `handicapped individual' under such
preceding provisions of this subsection".
(b) The amendment made by subsection
(a) shall apply In the case of expenditures
made after June 30, 1965, under a State plan
approved under the Vocational Rehabilita-
tion Act.
MANAGEMENT SERVICES AND SUPERVISION OF
BUSINESS ENTERPRISES OF THE HANDICAPPED
SEC. 11. Effective July 1, 1966, section 11(a)
(7) of the Vocational Rehabilitation Act (29
U.S.C. 41(a) (7) ) as amended to read as fol-
lows:
"(7) in the case of any type of small busi-
ness operated by the severely handicapped
the operation of which can be improved by
management services and supervision pro-
vided by the State agency, the provision of
such services and superVision. alone or to-
gether with the acquisition by the State
agency of vending stands or other equipment
and initial stocks and supplies; and".
TECHNICAL AMENDMENTS
SEC. 12. (a) Section 4(d) (3) of the Voca-
tional Rehabilitation Act (29 U.S.C. 34(d)
(3) ) is amended to read as follows:
"(3) Appointed members of the Council,
while attending meetings or conferences
thereof or otherwise serving on business of
the Council or at the request of the Secre-
tary, shall be entitled to receive corapen-
18037
sation at rates fixed by the Secretary, but
not exceeding $100 per day, including travel
time, and while so serving away from their
homes or regular places of business they may
be allowed travel expenses, including per
diem in lieu of subsistence, as authorized
by section 5 of the Administrative Expenses
Act of 1946 (5 U.S.C. 73b-2) for persons in
the Government service employed intermit-
tently."
(b) (1) The last sentence of section 4(a),
the second sentence of section 5(d) (1), the
first sentence of section 4(d) (2), section
5(a) (4), the paragraphs of section 7(a) re-
designated (by section 7 of this Act) as para-
graphs (1) and (3), the portion of section
11(a) preceding paragraph (1), paragraph
(8) of section 11(a), section 11(b), and so
much of section 11(c) as precedes paragraph
(1), of such Act, are each amended by strik-
ing out "physically handicapped individuals"
and inserting in lieu thereof "handicapped
individuals".
(2) The third sentence of section 4(d) (1)
of such Act is amended by striking out
"physically handicapped" and inserting in
lieu thereof "handicapped".
(3) Section 8 of such Act is amended by
striking out "Physically Handicapped" and
inserting in lieu thereof "Handicapped" and
by striking out "handicapped individuals"
and inserting in lieu thereof "individuals".
(c) Section 11(d) of such Act is amended
by striking out "severely handicapped indi-
viduals" and inserting in lieu thereof "the
severely handicapped".
(d) Subsections (a), (b), and (d) of sec-
tion 11- of such Act are amended by striking
out "remunerative" and inserting in lieu
thereof "gainful".
FEDERAL SHARE
SEC. 13. (a) Effective for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1966, section 11(1) of the
Vocational Rehabilitation Act is amended to
read as follows:
"(i) The term `Federal share' for any
State shall be equal to its Federal share as
determined hereunder for the fiscal year
ending June 30, 1965, plus one-half the dif-
ference between such share and 75 per can-
turn."
(b) Effective for fiscal years beginning
after June 30, 1966, such section 11(1) is
amended to read as follows:
"(i) The term `Federal share' means 75
per centum."
Mr. DANIELS (interrupting reading
of the bill). Mr. Chairman, I ask unan-
imous consent that the bill be considered
as read and open to amendment at any
point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
New Jersey?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Are there any
amendments? If not, under the rule
the Committee rises.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and
the Speaker having resumed the chair,
Mr. HARRIS, Chairman of the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the
Union, reported that that Committee
having had under consideration the bill
(H.R. 8310) to amend the Vocational
Rehabilitation Act to assist in providing
more flexibility in the financing and ad-
ministration of State rehabilitation pro-
grams, and to assist in the expansion
and improvement of services and facili-
ties provided under such programs, par-
ticularly for the mentally retarded and
other groups presenting special voca-
tional rehabilitation problems, and for
Other purposes, pursuant to House Reso-
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP671300446R0003001905%129, 1965
18038 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE
luion 486, he reported the bill back to
the House.
The SPEAKER. Under the rule, the
previous question is ordered.
The question is on the engrossment
and third reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
and read a third time, and was read
the third time.
The SPEAKER. The question is on
the passage of the bill.
The bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND
REMARKS
Mr. DANIELS. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days in which to
extend their remarks in the RECORD on
the bill just passed.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from New
Jersey?
There was no objection.
AUTHORIZING U.S. GOVERNOR TO
AGREE TO AMENDMENTS TO THE
ARTICLES OF AGREEMENTS OF
THE INTERNATIONAL BANK FOR
RECONSTRUCTION AND DEVELOP-
MENT, AND THE INTERNATIONAL
FINANCE CORPORATION
Mr. TRIMBLE, from the Committee
on Rules, reported the following priv-
ileged resolution (H. Res. 494, Rept. No.
698) which was referred to the House
Calendar and ordered to be printed:
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this
resolution it shall be in order to move that
the House resolve itself into the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the
Union for the consideration of the bill (S.
1142) to authorize the United States Gov-
ernor to agree to amendments to the articles
of agreements of the International Bank for
Reconstruction and Development and the
International Finance Corporation, and for
other purposes. After general debate, which
Shall be confined to the bill and shall con-
tinue not to exceed one hour, to be equally
divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the Committee
on Banking and Currency, the bill shall be
read for amendment under the five-minute
rule. At the conclusion of the consideration
of the bill for amendment, the Committee
shall rise and report the bill to the House
with Such amendments as may have been
adopted, and the previous question shall be
considered as ordered on the bill and amend-
ments thereto to final passage without inter-
vening motion except one motion to recom-
mit.
AMENDING TITLES 10 AND 37,
UNITED STATES CODE
Mr. TRIMBLE, from the Committee on
Rules, reported the following privileged
resolution (H. Res. 495, Rept. No. 699)
which was referred to the House Calen-
dar and ordered to be printed:
Resolved, That upon the adoption of this
resolution it shall be in order to move that
the House resolve itself into the Committee
of the Whole House on the State of the Union
for the consideration of the bill (HR. 7843)
to amend titles 10 and 37, United States Code,
to authorize the survivors of a member of
the Armed Forces who dies while on active
duty to be paid for his unused accrued
leave. After general debate, which shall be
confined to the bill and shall continue not
to exceed one hour, to be equally divided and
controlled by the chairman and ranking mi-
nority member of the Committee on Armed
Services, the bill shall be read for amendment
under the five-minute rule. At the conclu-
sion of the consideration of the bill for
amendment, the Committee shall rise and
report the bill to the House with such amend-
ments as may have been adopted, and the
previous question shall be considered as or-
dered on the bill and amendments thereto
to final passage without intervening motion
except one motto it.
eiWr
(Mr. ICHORD asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. ICHORD. Mr. Speaker and Mem-
bers of the House, last month I traveled
to South Vietnam as a member of a Sub-
committee of the House Armed Services
Committee on a factfinding tour. Upon
returning from that country I made the
following observation concerning teach-
ins and demonstrations in this country
against our policy in South Vietnam:
The Vietcong, Worth Vietnam, and Red
China are able to capitalize propaganda-wise
on such activities. They create doubt in the
minds of many that America will stay. They
are detrimental to an eventual peaceful
selution. They have the effect of en-
couraging the Communists and directly con-
tribute to the prolongation of the war.
American boys are dying in South Viet-
nam. Many more will lose their lives in the
next few months. Even if I disagreed with
the policy of the United States, I would find
some other way to influence my Govern-
ment's policy rather than have the stain of
American blood on my hands. This is a
harsh conclusion, but it is true.
The St. Louis Globe-Democrat, one of
the Nation's top newspapers, has articu-
lated this problem in a very forceful and
oustanding manner in an editorial on
June 29, 1965. It is even more timely
today than when written and I com-
mend it to the Members without further
comment.
Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent
that I be permitted to insert this edi-
torial of June 29, 1965, from the St. Louis
Globe-Democrat in the Appendix of the
RECORD.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Missouri?-
There was AA?I Ion.
THE PRE
SPEEcW ON
VIETNAM POLICY
(Mr. ROGERS of Colorado asked and
was given permission to address the
House for 1 minute.)
Mr. ROGERS of Colorado. Mr.
Speaker, we in Congress are proud of the
leadership demonstrated by our Presi-
dent yesterday when he conducted his
White House press conference.
The President demonstrated his great
desire to maintain peace throughout the
world. He pointed out that we have
learned many bitter lessons during the
first half of this century. These experi-
ences have caused us to be involved in
great conflicts with other nations who do
not understand our representative form
of government.
President Johnson recognizes the am-
bitiousness of the Communist nations,
and he is taking definite steps to see that
we maintain a strong nation so that we
can be independent in the future.
Every effort was made by the President
to see that the peace of the world is
maintained. He instructed Ambassador
Goldberg to present a letter to the Secre-
tary General of the United Nations re-
questing that the United Nations employ
all of its resources, energies, and im-
mense prestige to find ways to halt
aggression and bring about peace in
Vietnam.
America has always been a peaceIoving
Nation, and President Johnson yesterday
reemphasized our desire to maintain
peace throughout the world. It is my
hope we can accomplish this objective.
SCURRILOUS POSTHUMOUS AT-
TACK BY DREW PEARSON
(Mr. WAGGONNER asked and was
given permission to address the House
for 1 minute, to revise and extend his
remarks, and include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. WAGGONNER. Mr. Speaker, on
July 12 of this year, I took the floor to
defend our colleague, the late T. A.
Thompson, of Louisiana, against the
scurrilous, posthumous attack by Drew
Pearson.
Among the responses I received, was
a letter from the vice president of Her-
cules Powder Co., Mr. J. R. L. John-
son, Jr., which establishes once again
that Pearson and the truth are strangers,
that he has no compunction against ly-
ing if it suits his ugly purpose.
Mr. Johnson's letter further estab-
lishes this well-known point and I in-
sert it now with his permission for all
to see.
HERCULES POWDER CO.,
Wilmington, Del., July 15, 1965.
HOC. JOE D. WAGGONNER, Jr.,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR M. WAGGONNER: Thank you for in-
cluding in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD of
July 12, 1965, your remarks concerning Drew
Pearson's article entitled "Chemical Com-
panies Versus Water Bill."
Hercules Powder Co. has a plant at Lake
Charles, La., which is located in the Seventh
District. I know of no water pollution prob-
lem at that location and, so far as / can
determine, no one from this company has
ever talked to the late T. Ashton. Thompson
concerning problems of water pollution or his
position on proposed water pollution legis-
lation.
Hercules has been concerned with water
pollution problems for many years and has
spent substantial sums of money studying
and eliminating these problems at its vari-
ous plant locations. This company has also
followed proposals in the Senate and in the
House dealing with this problem. We feel
that some legislation is needed but from our
study of Senator Moszm's proposal and the
revisions proposed to 8.4 by the House Public
Works Committee, we feel that the modified
bill suggested by the House version is supe-
rior and s.hould be the one adopted if any
Federal legislation is considered to be needed
at this time.
We appreciate very much your setting the
record straight on Drew Pearson's article.
Very truly yours,
J. R. L. JOHNSON, Jr.,
Vice President.
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
j? hfflroved For RelettydaNini CA-RDP67B00446R000300190008-1
A,L RECORD ? HOUSE
CHAIRMAN PATMAN cONTINTJES
THg BATTLE FOR REASONABLE
INTEREST RATES
(Mr. ANNUNZIO asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute, to revise and extend his re-
marks, and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. .ANNUNZIO. Mr. Speaker, to my
knowledge no Man has done mor- to ad-
vocate the cause of reasonable interest
rates for the American people than the
distinguished chairman of the Banking
and Currency Committee, the Honorable
WRIGHT PATMAN,
Chairman PATMAN reiterates his views
on tight money in the August issue of
the American Legion magazine in a de-
bate with the gentleman from Tennessee
tMr. 33Roaci. The title of the article
is "Should We Have Lower Interest Rates
and More Credit Available?" Chairman
PATMAN takes the "yes" position, while
the gentleman from Tennessee takes the
typical Republican "no" position. In
other words, Chairman PATMAN advo-
cates a credit policy that would expand
the Nation's ecqnomy, while the gentle-
man from Tennessee advocates a policy
? that would shut out most Americans in
their drive for a better way of life.
In the Legion article Mr. PATMAN points
out that there is no reason why a home-
owner should have to pay for a house and
then pay a second time to cover the in-
terest payments. This is sound, well-
founded, and logical reasoning; and if
our Nation follows a pattern of reason-
able interest rates such as those sug-
gested by Chairman PATMAN, we can look
forward to prolonged prosperity.
But, unfortunately, there has been an
alarming swing to high interest rates
and a tight money policy. The former
chairman of the President's Council of
Economic Advisers, Walter W. Heller,
warned in a recent speech:
Economic gains probably will slow down
during the rest of the year and in 1966 and
these developments could dampen economic
,spirits and lead to a high level stall * 5 *
not a recession but a marked slow down with
a rise in unemployment, falling profit mar-
gins, and a cutback in plans for capital ex-
pansion.
There is one guaranteed way to make
certain that Mr, Heller's prediction be-
comes a fact, and that is to follm the
advice set forth by the gentleman from
Tennessee and the rest of the Repub-
licans who Rdvoe?ate a policy of making it
hard for Americans to purchase the ne-
cessities of life.
Mr. Speaker, I would like to include
for the RECORD a copy of the American
Legion article discussing interest rates:
SHOULD WE HAVE LOWER INTEREST RATES AND
IVIORE CREDIT AVAILABLE?
The question that is posed is like asking
Whether a man who has been without ade-
quate nourishment needs food.
The Ainerican 1egion took sides on the
question when its founders wrote the pre-
amble to its constitution, which sets forth
10 purposes. No. 6 reads: "To combat the
autocracy of both the classes and the
masses."
The Fecieral Reserve System has changed
from its well-cOnceived creation in 1913 to
an absolute autocracy of the classes against
NO. 1313?.-7
the masses in 1905. Xt is now =trolled by
private bankers. The President of the
United States, the Secretary of the Treasury
and the Congress do not fix our volume of
money and interest rates. This is done by
the Federal Reserve autocracy, which pro-
claims that it is independent?independent
of the executive and congressional arms of
the Government, yes?but not independent
of the money powers in New York.
If the Fed for the past two decades had
worked in the interest of the American pub-
lic as hard as it has for private banking
interests, our interest-bearing national debt,
heading toward $325 billion, would be at
least $50 billion less today?it might even
have been cut in half. Our carrying
charges on that debt, which run pretty close
to a billion dollars a month, or $250 million
a week, or around $35 million a day, would
be halved if we were merely to revert to the
pre-Eisenhower interest rates of the Roose-
velt-Truman days.
Instead, the Fed has caused man-made re-
cessions or depressions every 3 or 4 years
by raising interest rates arbitrarily, tighten-
ing money capriciously, thereby robbing the
masses and enriching the classes.
Think of the schools and hospitals that
could be built, the area redevelopment in
city and countryside, the idle factory wheels
that could be turning and the jobs that could
ensue if the excess $6 billion annual carry-
ing charge we're paying on the national
debt were turned into the productive econ-
omy of America.
There are many reasons why we should
have lower interest rates. I think it's a dis-
grace that when we buy a house or build
a school on long-term credit, we actually pay
at least twice for them. High interest
charges on our mortgages are responsible.
And isn't it rather silly for all the folks in
town to pay once for the building of the
schoolhouse, and once again to the bankers
In interest for merely renting money for its
construction?
Americans are paying extortionate interest
rates which will aggregate over $75 billion
in interest charges during 1965. This means
that the consumer is paying far too much
for the privilege of owning an automobile,
a washing machine, or a split level.
Legionnaires, keep a sharp eye on the
autocracy of the Federal Reserve System and
those who control it. It must have its power
thwarted for the good of nearly 200 million
Americans whose packets are being picked.
WRIGHT PATMAN.
Thirty years ago a buyer virtually had to
pay cash for a car or a house, for it was al-
most impossible to borrow money at any
price. Today, almost everything is bought
on credit because the American people have
saved their money and deposited it in banks
where it can be used by others while it's
there.
In other words, because the citizens of this
country have produced for their families and
ved for their security, and because our
banking system has become so capable in
providing that these savings do not just sit
there but are used constantly and securely
for even more production and thus even
more savings, we have created a truly great
society.
The key word is savings. When you and
I save money, we put it in the bank. If
someone else wants to use it, you do not
lend these savings free. Nobody is going
to risk his money for las than he can make
in a safe investment. That is why Federal
restrictions on interest are difficult, at best,
and dangerous.
Because money is basically like any other
commodity, to make it cheap we have to
produce a great deal of it. In the 1940's we
were producing for war and consuming little
at home. We had laws limiting wages, in-
terest rates, and prices. Later, we expanded
18039
production of consumer goods while not
increasing he supply of money. The pres-
sure eased and laws on prices, wages, and
finally interest rates were repealed. If
Washington had chosen to keep a ceiling on
Interest, the Government could have done
so only by dramatically adding to the supply
of money and forcing prices of goods up.
In effect, we were required to impose
price controls because there was more money
available than there were goods on which to
spend it. Obviously, in a free economy,
prices would rise in such a situation until
the excess cash was sopped up. The result
would have penalized the poorer people who
had no savings and limited incomes. Thus,
the law was passed imposing ceilings on
wages and prices.
Higher prices literally destroy the savings
of people. Those on fixed incomes such as
social security or pensions are hurt first.
If the condition worsens, they soon find they
cannot afford even basic necessities. Wid-
ows, whose husbands had bought insurance
once considered adequate, have difficulty
meeting bills. For these reasons our Gov-
ernment decided we could not afford the
self delusion of laws setting arbitrarily low
interest ceilings. Rather, the people through
their State governments attacked excessive
charges with usury laws.
In conclusion, if we want to manage one
sector of the economy, such as the cost of
money, then we must manage the rest
- through wage and price controls. Thus, the
opportunity for all to earn and to save is
reduced. If we refuse the alternative of
wage and price controls, then we allow and
even encourage massive price increases.
Here, too, the opportunity for those less for-
tunate to live decently is reduced. The price
of wishful thinking on interest rates is too
high. Our freedom is too dear to lose
through lack of self discipline and individual
responsibility.
BILL BROCK.
(Mr. HALL asked and was given per-
mission to address the House for 1 min-
ute, to revise and extend his remarks,
and to include extraneous matter.)
[Mr. HALL'S remarks will appear
hereafter in the Appendix.]
THE 1ST CAVALRY DIVISION (AIR-
MOBILE) FROM FORT BENNING,
GA.
(Mr. CALLAWAY asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. CALLAWAY. Mr. Speaker, today
all other news is overshadowed by the
sobering reports from Vietnam. The
war has taken on new proportions and
this Nation must, as always, rise to meet
the situation. For this job, the job upon
which may well rest the future of the
free world, the President has called upon
the 1st Cavalry Division?Airmobile?
from Fort Benning, Ga. The newly
formed 1st Cavalry is a merger of two
of this country's finest outfits: the ex-
perimental 11th Air Assault, and the
famous 2d Division?"second to none."
The people of,my district are proud to
have provided the home for these units
and the proving ground for the air mo-
bile concept. We are proud to have
known their fine commander, General
Kinnard.
Approved For Release 2003/11/04 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 200_3J1J/Q_4 ?LIA-J 29 1965
RDP674W6R0003001900A80
18940 CONGRESSIONAL RECOKIJ ? Hu
The 1st Air Cavalry has been called
to Vietnam because it is trained to han-
dle the job there. The job that they do
will require the support of American
courage and American strength. Mr.
Speaker, I am confident that this Nation
and its people will pledge every resource
to aid these boys in their efforts to de-
feat communism in southeast Asia.
(Mr. HALL asked and was given per-
mission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD and the include ex-
traneous matter.)
[Mr. HALL'S remarks will appear here-
after in the Ap
?
CONCERN W PROGRAM TO
SEND COLLEGE GRADUATES TO
VIETNAM AS INTERNS
(Mr. ADAIR asked and was given per-
mission to address the House for 1 min-
ute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. ADAIR. Mr. Speaker, on June 29
of this year I rose to inform this body
of my concern with an AID program
which proposed to send some 20 college
graduate students to Vietnam as interns.
At that time I said that I was most
concerned about the safety of these
young rfien. AID, I noted, was vague
about this aspect of the matter but re-
portedly had said that the Vietcong usu-
ally do not attack AID people. I con-
trasted this alleged statement with a
statement by President Johnson to the
effect that AID workers were prime tar-
gets of the Communist terrorists.
Now I have been saddened to learn that
one of these young men, Theodore M.
Smith, of the University of California,
has been seriously wounded by a terror-
ist bomb while serving in the "intern"
program in South Vietnam.
In my original remarks I indicated
that better uses of AID funds could be
found than the financing of a highly
dangerous and poorly conceived program
such as this. I hoped that AID would
drop the program forthwith before any
Young men could be sent to Vietnam un-
der its sponsorship. Unfortunately, my
hopes were not realized.
I am sorry that this has happened.
My protest was not heeded and these
students were sent. The Agency for In-
ternational Development should recall
the remaining students immediately.
We are at war and everyone knows it.
It is high time to stop this amateurish
and ad hoc approach to the war in Viet-
nam and let our best professionals get
this job done.
Now, for those of you who missed this
item in the Washington Post of Tuesday,
I will read the item that appeared:
BOMB WOUNDS TJ.S. STUDENT
SAIGON, July 26.--An American student
from the University of California was seri-
ously wounded by a terrorist bomb last
Thursday, a U.S. spokesman announced to-
day.
He said the student was Theodore M.
Smith, 24, of Fullerton, Calif., 1 of 19 stu-
dents sent to Vietnam by the State Depart-
ment in June to familiarize themselves with
U.S. aid operations.
Smith was injured in a blast at the home
of the U.S. AID mission representative for
Lamdong Province, about 100 miles north-
east of Saigon, where he was staying. No one
else was injured.
PERSONAL EXPLANATION
(Mr. ST GERMAIN asked and was
given permission to address the House
for 1 minute and to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. ST GERMAIN. Mr. Speaker, on
yesterday afternoon at the time rollcall
208 was taken I was in conference in
my office with officials of the Urban Re-
newal Administration and the mayor of
the city of Providence on important busi-
ness having to do with the operations of
that city.
Mr. Speaker, I miscalculated on my
timing and was not present for the vote
on the motion to recommit H.R. 77.
Had I been present my vote would have
been against recommittal.
PICTURES RECENTLY TAKEN OF
MARS
(Mr MU if,PR asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. MILLER. Mr. Speaker, this af-
ternoon at 2:30, in the rooms of the
Science and Astronautics Committee,
2318 Rayburn Building, we will have an
opportunity to see the pictures that were
recently taken of Mars. I have seen
these pictures; I saw them at the White
House this morning. Dr. Pickering and
his staff are coming up to show them this
afternoon.
1 realize we have important business
to dispose of today, but those of you
who can get away to see them will be
very well rewarded. I should point out
that this invitation is to Members of the
House only, and not to the staff.
INVESTIGATION OF BANKING CON-
CENTRATION AND CONTROL IN
CLEVELAND, OHIO
(Mr. PATMAN asked and was given
permission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD, and to include ex-
traneous matter.)
Mr. PATMAN. Mr. Speaker, a resolu-
tion adopted by the Ohio State Legis-
lature indicates that the country is be-
coming increasingly aware of and
alarmed by the tremendous concentra-
tion of economic power in the hands
of little cliques which control the enor-
mous assets of huge banks.
The Ohio House of Representatives,
by a vote of 113 to 2, directed the State's
Legislative Services Commission to in-
vestigate the legality and propriety of
the officers of the Cleveland Trust Co.,
voting the bank's own shares to per-
petuate their own control, and also using
the bank's trust department to dominate
many major corporations.
Although Ohio law bans corporations
from voting its own stock, the Cleveland
Trust Co., skirts this rule by assigning
the voting rights to a third of its stock?
which it holds in trust for various es-
tates?to a dummy partnership known
as A. A. Welsh & Co.
Through this same device, using the
economic power of stock held for various
estates by its trust department, this bank
has placed its chairman, George Gund,
and its president, George Karch, on the
boards of 43 corporations. Through
these board memberships, they either
control or have a loud voice in the affairs
of companies with billions of dollars in
assets.
Through a combination of these posi-
tions and the power of their bank to
grant or deny credit, these men wield vast
economic power which would seem to be
totally out of keeping with the principles
of our economic free enterprise system.
It has long been the public policy of
the United States to curb and prevent
such concentrations of power of life and
death over whole industries and the en-
tire economy.
The Committee on Banking and Cur-
rency of the House of Representatives,
in previous investigations, has spelled out
the interlocking directorates and close
knit relationships through which the
Nation's banks and many great corpora-
tions seem to be banded together to form
a mighty confederation which, in many
economic matters, may constitute more
Power than that held by the Federal
Government.
The Ohio Legislature has taken cogni-
zance of this threat to economic liberty
and it seems to me that the appropriate
Federal agencies should join the investi-
gation.
Surely the Department of Justice has
a responsibility to see if Ohio banks are
violating Federal as well as State laws.
The Federal Reserve Board has a duty
to require the Cleveland Trust Co. and
other banks to make full disclosures of
their operations, and to determine
whether a self-perpetuating directorate
is serving the interests of the depositors,
or their own selfish self-interests.
The Federal Deposit Insurance Cor-
poration should require banks to observe
the spirit as well as the letter of National
and State laws.
State and Federal authorities should
cooperate to assure that the Nation's
big banks are law-abiding citizens, and
not a group of economic czars who con-
sider themselves above the law, and con-
stantly devise cute tricks to evade and
ignore both the letter and the spirit of
statutes enacted to regulate them.
The Cleveland Plain Dealer of July
21, 1965 and the Cincinnati Enquirer of
the same date carry excellent and timely
articles with respect to the Ohio banking
investigation.
These articles follow:
[From the Cleveland (Ohio) Plain Dealer,
July 21, 1965]
OHIO HOUSE OH'S BANK STOCK STUDY
(By John E. Bryan)
A resolution to investigate banks, espe-
cially Cleveland Trust Co., voting large blocks
of their own and other banks' and corpora-
tions' stocks was passed yesterday in the Ohio
house of representatives by a vote of 113
to 2.
The resolution was introduced in the house
by A. G. Lancione, Democrat, of Bellaire, and
will be sponsored in the senate by Senators
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
July 29, 194proved For ReekiNGIUSSIMAIcktEggit3 BacitgeN
In my opinion, to the executive depart-
ment.
My bill uses the sound, time-honored
mechanism spelled out in the Reorgani-
zation Act which permits the President
to make orders for reorganizing the exec-
utive department, but requires that these
changes be filed with both Houses of
Congress.
We ask no more than that the Presi-
dent submit to Congress any proposed fee
schedules. These shall not become effec-
tive if either House passes a resolution
against them within 60 days. I believe a
serious error was committed when this
obligation was delegated to the various
executive agencies. Congress must do
Its duty to the people by retaining some
power in it hands over this matter.
These two provisions of the bill would
make unmistakably clear that Congress
Intends to jealously guard the right of
?our people to fully enjoy public lands and
waters without undue charge. We will
be saying there is to be no tampering
With public policy unless and until Con-
gress has given the matter serious study
and review.
When he introduced similar legisla-
tion in the other body, the distinguished
Senator llamas pinpointed the contradic-
tion between, these entrance fees and the
administration's war on poverty and the
"See the USA" programs. How can we
spend hundreds of millions of dollars to
rehabilitate people, and then make en-
joyment of ow natural resources depend-
ent on wealth? How can we justify en-
couraging Americans to see their own
country first, and then force them to drop
coins in the box every time they turn
around?
Many of my colleagues have already
experienced the results of these fees.
What has happened in my district has
happened in theirs. They know of the
thousands of impoverished families who
can no longer enjoy the natural wonders
of our great country because they can-
not afford these entrance and user fees.
Mr. Speaker, let us undo the damage
that has been done. Let us revitalize the
public policy that allows everyone free
access to ow natural resources, and let
us return control of such policies where it
belongs?in the Congress of the United
States.
(Mr. GOODELL (at the request of
Mr. HALL) was granted permission to
extend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. ,pooDELL. Mr. Speaker, the
American public are rightly and dedly
concerned witb our policies in Vietnam.
It is an area of interest that must, by
Its very nature, be scrutinized fully.
It is most distressing, therefore, when
efforts at a reasonable discussion are
thwarted.
I call to the attention of the member-
ship the statement of July 16, 1965, by
the gentlenleu from Wisconsin [Mr.
LAIRD], chairman of, the House Republi-
can conference.
It deserves the attention of the House
and I insert it here;
STATEMENT FROM THE OFFICE OF REPRESENTA-
TIVE MELVIN R. LAIRD, RFXUBLICAN, OF WIS-
CONSIN
Has critical bipartisan discussion about
our policies in Vietnam been abandoned?
It would seem so but I would hope not.
Certainly rational debate and reasonable
discussion have been abandoned?not by
Republicans, but by the leader of the Presi-
deut's majority in the U.S. Senate.
This fact is inescapable, and the situation
it creates is deplorable.
The first attempt to scuttle bipartisan
debate occurred on June 30, 1965. It was
ignored by Republicans in the hope that the
intemperate remarks in that speech were a
mere lapse, an accident, and not a deliberate
attempt to silence the dialog, impose con-
formity, and obliterate efforts to arrive at
an informed and broadly supported policy
toward Vietnam.
It was not a mere lapse.
Any doubt that it was was erased on July
8, 1965 when the majority leader of the
Senate again launched a vituperative attack
on the minority leader of the House of Rep-
resentatives.
The natural reaction to the tone and in-
nuendo of the majority leader's two recent
speeches would be to reply in kind. This
would be the natural reaction?and it would
be fully justified.
But it would not be constructive.
Republicans could adopt similar tactics
and join personalities rather than issues.
We could attempt, for example to impugn
this particular spokeman's credentials to
question criticism of foreign and military
policy. For the Senate Democratic leader
has himself contributed to the "dialog"?
though not always in support of the Presi-
dent?and has himself participated rather
fully in publicly questioning some of the
actions taken in southeast Asia.
I suspect that the President may have
wished at times that his majority leader and
kept to himself such suggestions as the
neutralization of all of southeast Asia.
The Senator's more recent statements con-
cerning Republican contributions to the de-
bate on Vietnam are confusing.
It would seem from the Senator's remarks
that the distinction between statesmanship
and political chicanery goes no further
than the difference in party labels of those
making the remarks.
If a Republican advocates a particular
course, it is politics and irresponsible poli-
tics at that. If a Democratic President sub-
sequently adopts that course, it is instantly
transformed into statesmanship.
The President's decision last February to
go North must have shocked and alarmed
the Senator, for on "Meet the Press" just 1
month before (January 3), the Senator said:
"I feel just as strongly that we cannot carry
the war into North Vietnam because if you
carry the consequences of that action to its
ultimate conclusion, It means war with
Communist China, and a situation will be
created which will be worse than it was in
Korea."
It should be remembered that at that
time the suggestion to go north had been
made by some Republicans. It was, in short,
politics then. Only later did it become
statesmanship.
The natural and certainly justifiable re-
action to the Senator's recent statements
could proceed along these lines.
But Republicans have proceeded in a rea-
sonable and responsible manner. They have
shown a spirit of fairness in standing up
for administration policy against Democratic
critics of that policy. In this spirit, I want
to correct the blatant distortions which the
President's majority leader of the Senate
has given to Republican pronouncements.
Senator MANSFIELD. "I am somewhat at
a loss to understand public expressions from
Republicans in which it 4 advocated, in
0300190008-1
18043
view of the extent of the air and naval ac-
tivity already pursued against legitimate
military targets, what can only amount to an
indiscriminate slaughter of Vietnamese by
air and naval bombardinent?a slaughter of
combattants and noncombattants alike, of
friend and foe alike."
The truth: No Republican has advocated
the "indiscriminate slaughter of Vietnam-
ese." Some Republicans have suggested and
still suggest the more effective use of our air
and naval power against more significant
military targets in North Vietnam in order
to bring about the President's stated objec-
tive of bringing the Communists to the con-
ference table. Our suggestions were designed
to minimize the possibility of the slaughter
of American soldiers when other steps are
still available.
Senator MANSFIELD: "Now one can advo-
cate the course of the bombing of Hanoi
or Peking or even Moscow and with or with-
out nuclear weapons for that matter?in
short, a course of virtually unrestricted vio-
lence as a suitable way for the United States,
to achieve some worthwhile end in Viet-
nam."
The truth: Any resemblance between the
innuendo and the public statements of any
elected national official in either party is
so remote as to be totally nonexistent. Such
a distortion could be expected from an over-
zealous freshman assemblyman in the heat
of a bitter political campaign, but surely not
from the Majority Leader of the greatest
deliberative body in the world in a discus-
sion concerning a situation that contains
within it the gravest consequences for the
entire world.
Senator MANSFIELD: "And one can say too,
I suppose, that we want a total victory in ,
Vietnam, but we want it at bargain base-
ment rates in American lives. We want it
by firebombs or nuclear bombs and lead and
steel or whatever but we don't want any
talk about paying a bitter price in American
lives on the ground."
The truth: No Republican since the Pres-
ident's Baltimore speech of April 7, 1965
has spoken of "total" victory in Vietnam.
None has proposed using nuclear bombs.
Many Republicans have hoped for victory
there, as did President Kennedy when he
said on September 12, 1963, "We want the
war to be won"; as did President Johnson
when he wrote on December 31, 1963, to
Gen. Duong Van Minh, "We shall maintain
In Vietnam American personnel and mate-
rial as needed to assist you in achieving vic-
tory"; as did Secretary Rusk when he said
on April 29, 1963, "We have no doubt of
ultimate victory." By victory, Republicans
and these Democrats meant--not the mili-
tary conquest of Vietnam?but the estab-
lishment of conditions of peace and security
in South Vietnam and an end to aggression
against it. Republicans do want to attain
the national objective in South Vietnam
with a minimum loss of American lives. Call
this "bargain basement rates in American
lives," if you will.
Senator MANSFIELD: "And I suppose, final-
ly, Mr. President, one can say that negotia-
tions are bad; that you can't make peace by
talking with the Vietcong or the North Viet-
namese or anyone else for that matter; you
can only make peace by war and more war."
The truth: Every Republican statement to
which- the Senator's remarks refer were ut-
tered in the context of the pursuit of nego-
tiations. The Senator did not in either
statement?nor could he?directly quote
any Republican leader as having called for
"total victory" as having said "negotiations
are bad:" as having stated or implied that
"you can only make peace by war and more
This Republican would be very interested
in seeing any quote that the Senator used
upon which he based his gravely serious
implications and charges.
Approved For Release 2003/11/04 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved FoMetkiesaRVOitafftgir_26fflifIg4#6R0003001900clsay 29, 1965
18044
The Senator's statements which I havl.
quoted were all contained in his first speech.
that of June 30, 1966.
They were met by Republican silence.
It was sincerely hoped that by ignoring
this fantastically distorted presentation of
the Republican position by the President's
majority leader, responsible discusaton could
be resumed and bipartisanship in foreign.
policy could be restored.
These hopes received a setback on July
8, 1965 when the majority leader spoke out
again,---taking up where he had left off?with
the same inattention to what had actually
been said, thus making efforts at reasonable
discussion. impossible.
It would serve no useful purpose to re-
spond, point by point and item by item, to
the charges and innuendoes contained in the
second speech for they are cut from the same
artificial cloth as the first statement.
I have been listening in vain since the
speeches of the majority leader forsome voice
of moderation from someone in his party?
for calm and objective discussion of pro-
posals made by some members of the minor-
ity party.
The stakes in southeast Asia are too high
for any responsible official to seek partisan
advantage frorr. the situation there. Re-
publicans who speak out on Vietnam are
_pointing out the course of action which they
believe will promote the security of our Na-
tion. If they were motivated by considera-
tions of political gain, they would offer no
suggestions. They would simply criticize the
consequences of administration policy.
I still hope that someone in the adminis-
tration will recognize the value of debate and
discussion of foreign policy problems, and
that Members of Congress again accord to
each other the respectful hearing and the
reasoned response without which debate can-
not be conducted.
TALCOTT BILL TO AID FARM-
WORKERS
(Mr. TALCOTT (at the request of Mr.
HALL) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. TALCYTT. Mr. Speaker, I
have today introduced legislation?H.R.
10179--for the important twin goals of
first protecting U.S. farmworkers from
the depressing effects of cheap foreign
agricuitural imports, and second, im-
proving the status of foreign farm-
workers. It 'would place Congress on
record as opposing the importation of
arrY agricultural commodity which is
prOduced by low-wage foreign labor
under substandard working conditions.
Titled the "International Farm Labor
and Working Conditions Act," my bill
would authorize the Secretary of Labor,
upon request, to conduct investigations
of situations involving the importation
of foreign farm products to determine if
they were produced under depressive or
substandard labor circumstances.
If the Secretary found that the foreign
workers- had been exploited he would
determine the amount of import duty
which would be necessary to remove this
unfair cost advantage. He would submit
his report and recommendations to Con-
gress for whatever action it might deem
appropriate.
The legislation wculd add an impor-
tant nevi' dimension to our international
relations by imposing import duties on
agricultural products to encourage for-
eign nations to elevate the wages and
working conditions of their farmwork-
ers. It is a Unique and logical extension
of our foreign aid program.
Enactment of the International Farm
Labor and Working Conditions Act
would open the way to preventing for-
eign growers and processors from realiz-
ing enormous profits from the sale of
farm products, produced with low-wage
labor under substandard working condi-
tions, in the affluent U.S. market.
I urge that hearings on H.R. 10179
be scheduled at any early date.
A section-by-section analysis of H.R.
10179 follows:
SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF HR. 10179,
THE "INTERNATIONAL FARM LABOR AND
WORKING CONDITIONS ACT/f INTRODUCED IN
THE HOUSE Or REPRESENTATIVES BY CON-
GRESSMAN BURT L. TALCOTT OF CALIFORNIA'S
12114 DISTRICT
Enacting clause institutes the "Interna-
tional Farm Labor and Working Conditions
Act.
Section 2 sets forth the declaration. of
policy, wherein the Congress declares it a
policy to correct via duties those inequities
which, through the use of U.S. commerce,
have a deleterious effect on the dignity and
welfare of foreign workers and concomitantly
on domestic workers.
Section 2 authorizes the Secretary of Labor,
under certain conditions, to investigate la-
bor conditions, etc., in countries exporting
agricultural commodities into the United
States. Provides for public hearings and
report and recommendation as to remedial
action by the Secretary of Labor to the
Congress.
Section 2 sets forth the criteria (wage
rates, monetary exchange) upon which the
Secretary of Labor shall premise his report
and recommendation.
Section 2 provides that such report and
recommendation shall be submitted by the
Secretary to the President no later than 120
days after the application for investigation
is instituted.
Section 4 defines agricultural commodity
as any agricultural product imported in
any form.
Section 5 provides that the effective date
of this International Farm Labor and Work-
ing Conditions Act shall be 90 days after en-
actment.
(Mr. WIDNALL (at the request of Mr.
HALL) was granted permission to extend
his remarks at this point in the RECORD
and to include extraneous matter.)
WIDNALL'S remarks will appear
hereafter in the Appendix.]
(Mr. MOORE (at the request of Mr.
HALL) was granted permission to extend
his remarks at this point in the RECORD
and to include extraneous matter.)
IMr. MOORE'S remarks will appear
hereafter in the Appendix.!
CURTAILMENT OF POSTAL SERVICE
TO RURAL AREAS
(Mr. LANGEN (at the request of Mr.
HALL) was granted permission to extend
his remarks at this point in the RECORD
and to include extraneous matter.)
Mr. LANGEN. Mr. Speaker, today I
requested an accounting by the Gendral
Accounting Office of the actions of the
U.S. Post Office Department in their
curtailment of service to rural areas of
the United States.
I called for this accounting in view of
the many complaints that have reached
my office. There has been no one who
has expressed any favor or approval of
the changes in service.
I have been meeting with Post Office
Department officials in Washington in
an attempt to find out their reasoning
in the recent switch to star route mail
service throughout much of the country,
as well as the closing of many mail ter-
minals all over the United States and the
removal of mail from Soo Line trains in
my district.
This drastic reduction in needed mail
service to rural America has been mis-
represented as "improved service and
savings" by the Post Office Departmnt
They have stated that these changes
would result in a reduced cost of opera-
tion and provide better service. Statis-
tics supplied this office do not leave any
proof that either of these purposes has
been or is being accomplished.
I feel this investigation should include
some accounting of the additional cost
that would be required in providing the
same delivery and dispatch service that
was provided to the many rural commu-
nities throughout the Nation prior to the
July 1 change to the star system.
It should be emphasized that these
people are not asking for any improve-
ment in service but only want mail dis-
patches and deliveries to be on the same
basis as before the change was made.
I hope that a GAO investigation of
this matter would be as successful as the
last one I called for. A year ago, my in-
quiries led to a GAO investigation of the
Post Office Department's printing of
stamped envelopes. This resulted in a
$6 million saving to the U.S. taxpayer.
Bureaucracy's war on rural America
must be stopped. It just does not make
sense to deliberately try to eliminate the
very unit of our society that must be
maintained if the Nation is to continue
as the world's example of greatness
through personal initiative.
My letter to the GAO also contained a
request for an accounting of the number
of summer youth placement personnel
that have been placed on the payroll and
the total cost of the program in Minne-
sota.
MYTH OF TRADE EXPANSION
(Mr. UTT (at the request of Mr. HALL)
was granted permission to extend his re-
marks at this point in the RECORD and
to include extraneous matter.)
Mr. UTT. Mr. Speaker, there are end-
less discussions about our balance-of-
payments position, restrictions on for-
eign investments, tourist expenditures.
world liquidity, need for overhauling the
international monetary system and other
aspects of the standing of this country
in the world competitive struggle.
At the same time we are flooded with
assurances about the health of our econ-
omy, including forecasts about its growth
to unheard of heights in 5 years from
now.
Not once in these optimistic state -
ments and appraisals is anything said
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
July 29, 194proved For RektebiGIRESBIONIAICaugumBOWICEM0300190008-1
magazine. Let me say to any who may
be interested that, so far as I know,
there is nothing particularly new or
startling about the information con-
tained therein. This information has
been carried at one time or anothcr dur-
ing the past year or year and a half by,
I believe, every newspaper in Washing-
ton. Certainly, the newspapers of the
country have carried all of this infor-
mation. It simply has been brought
together in one place in one well-written
article.
-Mr. Speaker, I am sick and tired of
various manipulations in this little world
of make believe in Washington being
swept under the rug. So far as I am
concerned, I do not intend to see any
more of them swept under the rug if I,
as one individual, can prevent it.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the re-
mainder of my time.
NOMINATION OF ABE FORTAS TO
BE ASSOCIATE JUSTICE OF THE
SUPREME COURT
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Tennessee [Mr. Osumi is rec-
ognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. GRIDER. Mr. Speaker, I wish to
say, in further pursuit of the matter of
the nomination of Mr. Abe Fortes, that I
have no doubt my colleagues who have
risen and spoken against him here today
would have the courage to make the same
statements M public.
Indeed, Mr. Speaker, this element of
courage is the very thing I most respect
and admire in my friend the nominee
for Associate Justice, Mr. Abe Fortas?
the courage to take and espouse the un-
popular cause; the courage to represent
the man who, in the eyes of the public,
is already condemned; the courage, on
occasion, to represent without charge
those who cannot afford to pay for rep-
resentation and who are accused of
heinous crimes.
This Is in the finest tradition of the
America' legal system and the British
legal system. Erskine, of England, was
one of the great advocates of this system.
Without it the judicial system would
crumble in this country; and the same
men who attack Abe Fortas today be-
cause he has had that courage might be
the very people who would rely upon it
in the future.
The members of the Supreme Court
are often subjected to the pressures of
having to take positions which are not
in accord with the popular will. When
that happens it takes men of courage as
well as learning, dedication, and erudi-
tion. I am confident Mr. Fortas has that
courage. I am confident that that is the
reason, Mr. Speaker, he has achieved the
high office he has today.
Mr. Speaker, Mr. Abe Fortas in 1943
was the member of the President's Com-
mission to study changes in. the organic
law of Puerto Rico. His friendship for
that part of our land has been historic.
It long preceded the election of the Dem-
ocratic President, Mr. Kennedy. His
representation in this appointment mat-
ter, in which innuendo has ,been made,
was in the tradition of helping that
commonwealth, as he has traditionally
over two decades.
Mr. Speaker, MY objection to the at-
tack that was launched upon Mr. Fortes
today is related to some degree to the
willingness to those who made it to make
it in public; that is, it was more a matter
of innuendo than of hard fact. The
statement that he enriched himself while
on the public payroll insinutes many
things but, I suggest, Mr. Speaker, that
sort of insinuation has gone out of style
in this country in most circles, and I
would like to hope that the day will come
when it will go out of style in all circles.
My objection to the attack is based upon
that. This was a series of innuendoes a
man could make safely anywhere be-
cause they con s e.
SUPPORT
IDENT HN-
SON'S 'VIET POLICY
(Mr. ROGEHS of Florida (at the re-
quest of Mr. CALLAN) was granted per-
mission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD and to include ex-
traneous matter.)
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Speak-
er, it is clear from the decisions an-
nounced by the President concerning the
turn of events in Vietnam that those de-
cisions have been reached after one of
the most careful and exhausting reviews
undertaken by any Chief of State in the
history of this Nation.
The President has restated that it is
the Nation's position to be firm and res-
olute without being rash and bellicose.
America will beckon the Communists
toward a peaceful solution to Vietnam
with one hand while holding U.S. armed
might in the fist of the other hand.
The President has demonstrated to
the entire Nation that the gravity of
Vietnam deserves the resources of rea-
son, not yielding to the temptations of
frustration or temper. His actions dem-
onstrate the leadership which every na-
tion sees in America.
This Nation has a duty to greatness,
and in Vietnam and elsewhere on this
earth Americans will continue to walk
free because they know the consequence
of faltering footsteps.
The President's action will continue
the consensus of America that freedom
will be maintained.
DRUG ABUSE CONTROL AMEND-
MENTS OF 1965
(Mr. ROGERS of Florida (at the re-
quest of Mr. CALLAN) was granted per-
mission to extend his remarks at this
Point in the RECORD and to include ex-
traneous matter.)
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Speak-
er, this session of the Congress has ac-
complished much in terms of legislative
action, and stands as one of the most
productive in the Nation's history al-
though the first session is not yet com-
pleted.
Among the most outstanding accom-
plishments of this Congress Is the Drug
Abuse Control Amendments of 1965,
18073
signed into law by the President July 15.
With this new law we have erected a bul-
wark against a widespread menace to the
public health, especially concerning the
young people of America.
As a member of the Interstate and
Foreign Commerce Committee of the
House, I was pleased to have participated
in the formulation of this new law. The
hearings conducted by the committee
clearly showed that stronger legal ma-
chinery was needed to curb the illicit
traffic or depressant and stimulant drugs.
However, as a member of the committee,
I was surprised to learn during hearings
that the prescription drug industry itself
had taken few if any significant meas-
ures toward self-regulation.
For, example, the committee's House
Report No. 130 reads:
There is no level in the entire chain of
distribution from manufacturer to consumer
which does not today serve as a source of
supply of depressant and stimulant drugs for
the illicit trade.
With the exception of the educational pro-
grams and the programs of cooperation with
law-enforcement agencies and drug identi-
fication carried on by Smith, Kline, &
French Laboratories of Philadelphia, Pa., to
the committee's knowledge there has been
little voluntary control activity on the part
of those involved in the manufacture and
distribution of these drugs to prevent or cur-
tail this illicit traffic. Of course, many per-
sons in the business of manufacture or dis-
tribution of these drugs check on the validity
of their customers or proposed Customers.
However, there has been a virtual dearth of
voluntary self-regulation or of attempts
thereat by the industry at any level.
It was encouraging during the hearings
to note that the drug industry itself was
trying to bring about approaches toward
a solution to the problem of illegal drug
traffic in depressant and stimulant drugs.
In reference to the committee report
above, it must be noted that much can
be done by the industry such as the pro-
grams implemented by the firm cited in
the committee report. Similar measures
might well be considered by other com-
panies in the field.
The disturbing misuse of such drugs as
barbiturates and amphetamines has been
linked to the rising toll of highway acci-
dents as well as a factor in juvenile de-
linquency and crime. Only through the
cooperation and assistance of the indus-
try itself will the fullest benefits of this
law lessen the problems linked to the il-
licit drug trade. Industry cooperation is
held to carry out the intent of the Con-
gress that this law be fully operative.
THE NEGRO VOTE IN DETROIT,
MICH., AND WHAT IT MEANS IN
RACE RELATIONS
(Mr. DIGGS (at the request of Mr.
CALLAN) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. DIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I call to
the attention of my colleagues an excel-
lent report on Detroit's progress in race
relations, by Stanley H. Brown, in the
June issue of Fortune magazine, "De-
troit: Slow Healing of a Fractured City."
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
18074 Approved FoEiNtanS2SINVi?411.Erd6111912-611R9Pf?t6R000300190098* 29, 1965
DETROIT : SLOW HEALING OF A FRACTURED OFTT
(By Stanley H. Brown)
"City fair,
Shining there,
In your place beneath the sun,
All the world is watching you.
Detroit is marching on."
Thus in their innocence sang the school-
children of Detroit a quarter of a century
ago. Hardly anyone remembers, let alone
sings, that song today, and few recall the
emotions and events that made that piece of
doggerel so patently false a picture of their
city; In the 1920's a politically powerful
Ku Klux Klan, said to be the biggest in the
country, actually elected a mayor. In the
1930's the city's violent, depression-fanned
insecurities produced the xenophobic, mur-
derous Black Legion, while old Henry Ford
was financing publication of an anti-Semitic
tract called "The Protocols of the Elders of
Zion" and Father Charles Coughlin preached
"social justice" and railed against the evils
of "international Jewry." In 1937, Ford
Motor Co. guards beat bloody two young
auto union organizers, Walter Reuther and
Richard Frankensteen, in the notorious
Battle of the Overpass at the gates of the
spectacular River Rouge plant. At the end
of the decade a woman's suicide started an
investigation of gambling and prostitution
that put Detroit's mayor, the county prose-
cuting attorney, and scores of police in
prison. And in 1943 a series of racial inci-
dents finally erupted into the great Detroit
race riot, which killed at least 34 and
wounded hundred before Federal troops and
armored cars occupied the city. The kids
obviously didn't know what they were sing-
ing about.
Sometime after World War II, however, the
dreary, angry factory town began its meta-
morphosis. Detroit may still be nothing
more than a synonym for the auto industry
to people who have. never been there, and
an epithet on the lips of the traveling sales-
man looking for a good time. The social
mullets, the physical drabness, and the cul-
tural desolation have by no means vanished.
Some aspects of the transformation may be
nothing more than evanescent byproducts of
the bounteous prosperity of the auto indus-
try during the past 4 years. Others may be
long overdue for any city the size and age
of Detroit. And some of the brave plans and
prograrfis are based on unrealistic estimates
of the resources and sophistication of the
community. The avid boosters who talk of
a renaissance are surely being dazzled by
their own enthusiasm.
Still, a new consensus is abroad in the city.
All the diverse elements that make up
Detroit's power structure, once divided and
pitted against itself, are being welded to-
gether in a remarkable synthesis. Every
significant accomplishment in such major
areas as race relations, urban renewal, and
the arts whether initiated by a single in-
dividual or by one special interest?has be-
come the province of a board or committee
that includes representatives of the United
Auto Workers, one or more of the city's utili-
ties, the clergy, ethnic groups, retailers, the
auto companies, real estate interests, finance,
the press, political groups, and any other
relevant interests. And the achievement of
the city is discernible as much in the almost
palpable determination of its citizenry to
confront its problems and attempt their
solution as it is in the marked changes that
these groups have already Wrought. -
Though the consensus may appear to en-
compass a breadth of forces unlikely to do
much more than create an aura of civic
virtue, in Detroit the synthesized power
structure has surprising effect. It is true
that In most instances the names of board or
committee members are no more than names.
The presence of an auto executive or a
banker on a board offers no assurance that
his employer will supply anything More than
good wishes. Nevertheless, sufficient sup-
port from diverse and even conflicting inter-
ests?particularly from the UAW and the
automobile industry?can generally be
counted on to elicit enough lipservIce, man-
power, and money to achieve an objective.
Few of the city's leaders are willing to stand
in open opposition to the consensus.
Of all the accomplishments in the recent
history of the city, the most significant is
the progress Detroit has made in race rela-
tions. The grim specter of the 1943 riots
never quite fades from the minds of the city's
leaders. As much as anything else, that
specter has enabled the power structure to
overcome tenacious prejudice and give the
Negro community a role in the consensus
probably unparalleled in any major Ameri-
can city. So widespread is Detroit's under-
standing that the Negro's cry for equality
must be heard that in 1963, when Walter
Reuther initiated the Citizens Committee for
Equal Opportunity to relieve mounting
tensions over Negro efforts for civil rights,
every business, labor, social, religious, ethnic,
financial, and political group of consequence
in the city sent its top man. Joseph Ross,
president of Federal Department Stores, a
chain that finds most of its customers among
the city's industrial workers, has been a store
executive in New York, Newark, Dallas,
Atlanta, and Denver, and he says, "Detroit is
more sophisticated in race relations than any
other city I know."
THE PRIDE OF CITY HALL
Any effort to attribute the city's awaken-
ing to a particular event or individual would
be an oversimplification. It would ignore the
broad changes in our national life and
Federal policy that have affected every city
in the last three decades, and would over-
look the reaction inevitably generated in
Detroit by shame over past neglect. But the
new consensus has found itself a most ap-
propriate image in the city's 37-year-old
mayor, Jerome Patrick Cavanagh. His record
in office and his ability to engender pride
and enthusiasm among as disparate a group
of supporters as ever a political ?facial is
likely to acquire are impressive, And they
take on more luster in the light of the fact
that during the campaign 4 years ago Cav-
anagh was virtually unknown, a struggling
lawyer with nothing to lose and almost no
support from any part of the established
leadership. He was opposed then by both
newspapers, both political parties, all the
business leaders, and by the AFT.,-CIO.
Cavanagh came to power on a wave of
Negro votes. The Negro community had a
major grievance against his opponent, the
incumbent mayor, and it evidently gave Cav-
anagh its almost total support. His upset
election was, as much as anything, the
product of Negro concern that egregious
bungling of some recent problems could
thwart racial progress in the city. But the
margin of Cavanagh's victory (40,000 of 360,-
000 votes cast) indicated more than that.
By electing Cavanagh so resoundingly, the
community was expressing a decision that it
would not extend the string of mayors who
were at best lackluster bureaucrats, that it
wanted its change of mood and direction to
go all the way to the top. Cavanagh ob-
viously sensed Detroit's new spirit and based
his campaign on the city's needs and prob-
lems, vigorously countering the city fathers'
adamant insistence that everything was
dandy.
Once in office, the mayor quickly seized
the opportunity to establish himself as the
symbol of the city's aspirations. Abjuring
the stolid postures of his predecessors, Cav-
anagh from the outset projected energy, wit,
charm, cander, and even intellect. The
books on his desk may have their titles de-
liberately turned toward the visitor, but
the mayor reads them, and they include
works of St. Thomas Aquinas, Kennedy-
Johnson braintruster Walt W. Rostow, lib-
eral cartoonist Herblock, and Dag Ham-
raarskjoid. Heavily Roman Catholic, pre-
dominantly liberal Democratic (though
municipal elections are nonpartisan), and
eagerly seeking modernity and culture, De-
troit has found just the man to embody its
collective yearning to remake itself into an
authentic Metropolis. Significantly, the
mayor's first executive order called for equal
opportunity for Negroes in city jobs.
THE VOICE WILL BE HEARD
?
Having been instrumental in the election
of Cavanagh, the Negro community was as-
sured that its voice would be heard. Al-
though the Detroit Negro has no single
leader who acts as his spokesman, many
Negroes have long had access to the power
structure and, in fact, several are part of it
Horace Sheffield, a staff employee of the
UAW, also happens to be the founder of
the Trade Union Leadership Council. Cre-
ated in 1957 as a protest organization to get
more jobs for Negroes in union-controlled
skilled trades, the TULC is now active in
other aspects of community life as well.
Discussing Negro participation in the city's
consensus of power, he reflected, "Where
else could you arrange to meet with people
like Joe Hudson [head of J. L. Hudson Co.,
after Macy's the country's biggest depart-
ment store] or the head of the Detroit Bank
& Trust Co., or the personnel director of
General Motors on 3 or 4 hours' notice?"
Now that it is represented, the Negro com-
munity intends to play an increasingly im-
portant role in the life of the city. For as
long as most white people can remember,
Negroes have had access to Detroit's hotels,
restaurants, and other public accommoda-
tions without incident. But it is only since
the days of World War II that the Negro
has been able fully to share in the prosperity
of the auto industry, largely as a result of
UAW insistence that all production jobs in
the plants be open to Negroes at pay equal
to that of whites. So the Negroes have begun
to move out of their once clearly defined
ghettos into the middle-class white neigh-
borhoods that increasing numbers of
them can afford. Often their way has been
marked by a good deal of resistance. Many
neighborhoods were finally yielded up to
them completely by whites, who fled to the
suburbs. Other sections, though, including
some choice ones, have arrived at and main-
tained a fairly stable integrated composition.
Negroes in Detroit have deep roots in the
community, compared with the more tran-
sient populations of Negro ghettos in Har-
lem and elsewhere in the North. Homeown-
ership is high; roughly 65,000 families?more
than 40 percent of the Negro population?
own their own houses. Negroes are suffi-
ciently well organized socially and politically
to have elected a member to the Detroit Com-
mon Council in a citywide election. They
have also lected 3 local judges, 10 State leg-
islators, and 2 Congressmen (Michigan's is
the only congressional delegation in Wash-
ington with 2 Negroes) . Federal District
Judge Wade H. McCree, Jr., is a Negro who,
before his Federal appointment, sat as a
county circuit judge. Mayor Cavanagh's first
appointment went to a Negro, Alfred Pelham,
a fiscal expert on the staff of Wayne State
University.
HANDS ACROSS THE BARGAINING TABLE
Detroit's achievements reach beyond the
inclusion on decent terms of the Negro seg-
ment of the population. The consensus has
also established a profitable stability in the
community's industrial relations. Virulent
labor hating is now considered bad taste
and?in view of the UAW's pervasive social
and political power?bad tactics as well. De-
spite harsh pronouncements from both sides
during contract negotiations, once bitterly
fought wars have now become hard-played
games for high stakes at the bargaining table,
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
J11.7:
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
July 29, 1965
Phitadeiphia (NL)
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE 18087
AB
Ft
II
BI
Gonzales, et
3
0
0
Rojas, 2b
4
0
2
Callison, rf_ _ ___
2
0
0
Briggs, rf
1
0
0
Allen, 3b
2
0
0
Arnaro, 3b
1
0
0
Covington, If
4
1
1
Stuart, lb
2
1
2
Herrnstein, lb
2
1
1
Corrales, e
2
1
1
Dalrymple, c_ _ _ _______
2
0
0
Wine, ss
4
0
2
Burdett?, p
1
0
0
Johnson, p
1
0
0
Belinsky, p
1
0
0
Total_ .,
32
4
9
New York 001 023 010-7 11 0
Philadelphia 000 030 001-4 9 3
E?Burdette, Stuart, Roebuck. DP?New York 4,
Philadelphia 2. LOB?New York 5, Philadelphia 4. '
2b?Mantle, Linz, Wine, HR?Bayer, Gibbs, Pepi-
tone, Lopez, llerrnstein. S?Brenneham.
IP
E1
R
ER
BB
SO
Blanco
4%
3
3
3
0
0
Brenneman (W)
414
1
1
1
3
1
Burdette
5
5
3
2
0
1
Roebuck (L)
1
4
3
3
1
1
Bellnsky
3
2
1
1
1
3
WP?Bronneman, Burdett?. T-219. A-9,850
CHALLENGE TO THE MISSISSIPPI
DELEGATION UNNECESSARILY DE-
LAYED
The SPEAKER, pro tempore. Under
special order of the House, the gentleman
from New York [Mr. RYAN] 13 recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr. RYAN. Mr. Speaker, the Clerk of
the House has informed me that he has
transmitted to the Speaker printed dep-
ositions filed in connection with the chal-
lenge to the Mississippi congressional
delegation. This record has been re-
ferred to the House Administration Com-
mittee.
Resolution of the challenge has al-
ready been delayed unnecessarily. Un-
der rule XI, section 24, of the House, the
committee was to report its findings by
July 4-6 months after the convening of
the House. The delay in the printing of
the record made it impossible for the
committee to act by July 4. Now that
the record is before the House Adminis-
tration Committee it is time to act.
I am impatient with those who call
for additional study and committee in-
vestigation. Who among us can deny the
systematic exclusion of Negroes from
from Mississippi polls? Who among us
has not been convinced by the debate on
the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and the
Voting Rights Act of 1965 of Mississippi's
deliberate violation of the Constitution?
Have we not been shown the subtle and
the not so subtle techniques used to deny
the Mississippi Negro his right to vote?
Who can deny the fact that the white
power structure of that State has perpet-
uated itself by trapping the Negro in a
poverty of power? Never before, Mr.
Speaker, has any issue been so thor-
oughly documented prior to a committee
hearing.
According to the Congressional Quar-
terly of 1901, the following were the fig-
No. 138-13
ures for nonwhite registration In each of
the five Mississippi congressional dis-
tricts: First District, 1.3 percent of the
nonwhites of voting age registered to
vote; Second District, 6.8 percent of the
nonwhites of voting age registered to
vote; Third District, 9.1 percent of the
nonwhites of voting age registered to
vote; Fourth District, 5.1 percent of the
nonwhites of voting age registered to
vote; Fifth District, 12.3 percent of the
nonwhites registered to vote.
The exclusion of Negroes from the Mis-
sissippi polls is not an accident. As early
as 1870 U.S. Senator George, of Missis-
sippi, explained that the purpose of Mis-
sissippi voting laws is "to devise such
measures, consistent with the Constitu-
tion of the United States, as will enable
us to maintain a home government un-
der the control of the white people of
the State."
Mr. Speaker, we are all aware of the
terror, violence, and murder perpetrated
last summer upon those who attempted
to help their fellow citizens exercise their
right to vote. Mississippi tramples upon
the U.S. Constitutioli by denying citizens
the right to vote.
I have made this argument on the
opening day of Congress when I objected
to the seating of the Members-elect from
Mississippi. I have listened to those who
ask for additional study. But the issue,
Mr. Speaker, will not be resolved by sta-
tistics. The issues, frankly, are moral
and political. They are stark and sim-
ple. They involve matters of dedication
and commitment to the Constitution of
the United States by those who hold
high office in the Federal Government.
My plea, 'Mr. Speaker, is for prompt
review and prompt resolution. It is easy
to tiptoe through this session of Con-
gress keeping away from sharp corners.
But if we do so, we will adjourn without
exercising our solemn obligation to the
Constitution. We will have forfeited a
confidence in this Congress, a confidence
which depends on the courage to act on
this most fundamental issue.
Mr. Speaker, in closing I wish to read
from a message written by Mr. and Mrs.
Robert Goodman after the murder of
their son, Andrew, in Philadelphia, Miss.:
In Washington 4 weeks ago, my wife and I
In a sense made a pilgrimage to the Lincoln
Memorial In the evening and stood in that
great shrine looking down past the Wash-
ington Monument toward the soft glow of
the light around the White House. Full of
the awe of a great nation that surrounded
us, we turned to read, emblazoned in black
letters on white marble: "It is for us the
living to dedicate ourselves that these dead
shall n1t5Ve di
THE
AM
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from California [Mr. Consx.Ax],
is recognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. COHELAN. Mr. Speaker, Presi-
dent Johnson was sober and realistic
at his press conference yesterday. He
announced that we were increasing our
military commitment in order to meet
the increasing aggressive activities di-
rected by North Vietnam. He made
clear that we were increasing our diplo-
matic efforts, that we were willing to
discuss Hanoi's proposals or the propo-
sals of any other nation, and that we
were once again asking the United Na-
tions to take a larger and more active
role in achieving an early and peaceful
settlement. He also, for the present at
least, rejected the cries of the "war
hawks" for a major callup of the Re-
serves and the use of 200,000 American
troops or more.
Let me make it clear initially, Mr.
Speaker, that I support the President
in his decision to resist the terror and
aggression that denies independence of
choice and self-determination to the peo-
ple of South Vietnam.
But let us emphasize that the real
Issue in Vietnam is not our "honor" or
our "word." We did not begin our pro-
gram of aid and support in 1954 as a test
of national honor. Then and now the
real test is whether terror and violence
are to triumph over the ballot and free
choice; of whether so-called wars of na-
tional liberation, controlled and directed
externally, will supplant peaceful de-
cisions and orderly change arrived at in-
ternally.
Our proper goal has and should con-
tinue to be to help in every way we
reasonable can to insure that the people
of South Vietnam will be able to partici-
pate freely in the determination of their
own future; not that they would have it
decided for them, as is the Communist
goal today.
But our policy has raised serious ques-
tions in the minds of many Americans.
When I was at home a week ago, many
constituents whose opinions I value and
respect, were deeply troubled. They
asked many questions which I feel should
be publicly discussed and which I have
asked both the White House and the
State Department to discuss. They
wanted to know:
First. What did the 1954 Geneva ac-
cords provide with respect to the future
government of North and South Viet-
nam?
Second. Why did the United States
not sign the Geneva accords? Did the
United States state that it would follow
the Geneva accords?
Third. Was a "government" repre-
senting South Vietnam a party to the
Geneva accords? How did the first
South Vietnamese Government come
Into power? Has there been any gov-
ernment in South Vietnam chosen to
any extend by a democratic process? If
so, when and how?
Fourth. What happened to prevent
the 1956 "free election" contemplated
by the 1954 Geneva accords? Did the
United States oppose such election?
Fifth. To what extent has there been
objective verification of interference by
the North Vietnam Government?as dis-
tinguished from participation by indi-
vidual North Vietnamese?in the affairs
of South Vietnam?
Sixth. In terms of international law,
what is the basis for our present activity
In South Vietnam?
Seventh. Is there a legal basis for ask-
ing the U.N. to take action in relation to
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP671300446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP671300446R000300190008-14?
18088 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE
Vietnam? If so, are there practical rea-
sons for our not having made this re-
quest up to this time?
Eighth. What efforts have been made
by the United States to substitute nego-
tiation for military action?
Ninth. It is often said that we must
stay in South Vietnam to prevent the
spread of communism in southeast Asia.
Is the main purpose of our policy to fore-
stall a Communist government in South
Vietnam? Or is it to enable the People
of South Vietnam to establish whatever
kind of goverrttnent they want?
Tenth. Assuming that what we are
doing in Vietnam is morally and legally
justified, is it wise and sound from the
viewpoint of effectiveness? Can we,
within reasonable and practicable cost
considerations, achieve a military vic-
tory or are we in effect repeating
Napoleon's disastrous march to Moscow?
Would we be more likely to achieve the
ends we desire if we were to let the
people of South Vietnam struggle with
this problem by themselves and in the
process perhaps develop enough nation-
alism to resist control by China?
Eleventh. President Kennedy stated on
numerous occasions that the war in Viet-
nam was a Vietnamese war; that it must
be won or lost by the people of South
Vietnam themselves. Does our increas-
ing commitment of troops, planes and
supporting material mean that we have
abandoned this policy?
Mr. Speaker, many of these same ques-
tions have troubled me and I intend to
place the replies in the RECORD.
But even when these questions are con-
sidered, and I think there are reasonable
answers to most, if not all of them, I do
not believe, considering the alternatives
and their imPlications, that there is any
reasonable alternative to our present
course of action.
Major escalation on our part could
only invite increased efforts by Hanoi and
Peiping. It could mean introduction of
thousands more troops from North Viet-
nam, and quite possibly divisions or even
armies from China. It could mean
stepped up 'U.S. air attacks. It could
mean expansion of these attacks to cen-
ters of population and industry in North
Vietnam, and it could mean the commit-
menton the ground of many more Amer-
ican forces and lives.
Leaders of the Republican Party in the
House it is true, have argued that "total
victory" is possible; that the war, in fact,
can be "won" if only we were willing.
But it should be nbted that this war
could be "won" in this way only at a cost
far in excess of our goals and our re-
quirements. Such a "victory" in the
wake of the destruction, the devastation
and the countless maimings and deaths
would mark it a hollow triumph at best.
On the other hand, unconditional
withdrawal by American forces, as the
Communists have demanded, is equally
unconscionable. Independence would
not only be doomed in South Vietnam, it
would be jeopardized from Thailand to
Australia, from India to the Philip-
pines.
It would be unconscionable, as the
distinguished chairman of the Senate
Committee on Foreign Relations stated
in his thoughtful speech of June 15,."be-
cause such action would betray our obli-
gation to people we have promised to de-
fend, because it would weaken or destroy
the credibility of American guarantees
to other countries, and because such a
withdrawal would encourage the view in
Peiping and elsewhere that guerrilla wars
supported from outside are a relatively
safe and inexpensive way of expanded
Communist power."
It would be unconscionable, for if inde-
pendence is as vital as this country has
maintained for nearly 200 years, then it
should be the right of all who truly want
It and not just of the few who are
capable of defending it.
Where then do we go? If both major
escalation into a much larger war and
the abandonment of independence are
intolerable choices, what path should we
pursue?
The only reasonable course, it seems to
me, was outlined yesterday by the Presi-
dent. First, we must provide sufficient
arms to convince Hanoi and Peiping,
and Moscow as well, that wars of "na-
tional liberation" based on terror and in-
timidation and naked force will not suc-
ceed. Our arms should be used in suffi-
cient force to persuade the adversaries of
open societies that discussions and nego-
tiations, not bombs and bullets, are the
only sensible way to settle problems. Our
arms should be available for as long as
they are necessary but for no longer than
they are necessary and in no greater
strength than they are necessary.
Second, we must continue to follow
every path and pursue every opportunity
that can lead to negotiations, to a cease-
fire and to a diplomatic settlement that
can guarantee the people of South Viet-
nam independence of choice in any fu-
ture government and any future way of
life, free of outside intimidation or inter-
vention.
We should have no quarrel with this
choice so long as it is free. We should
have no vested interest save that of inde-
pendence and a better life for our fellow
men.
There can be no question that the
Communists, whether they be in South
Vietnam, North Vietnam, or Communist
China, have been deaf to all offers of ne-
gotiation which have been made to date.
Not only have they rejected our repeated
bids for "unconditional discussions."
They have refused the plea of 17 non-
alined chiefs of state for negotiations, the
French suggestion of a new Geneva con-
ference without preconditions, the Soviet
and American endorsement of a Cam-
bodian conference, U.N. Secretary Gen-
eral U Thant's offer of exploration, In-
dia's proposal for a cease-fire monitored
by an Afro-Asian force, the invitation of
the U.N. Security Council for a complete
review and discussion, the peace mission
of the British Commonwealth Prime
Minister, and others.
This record of intransigence is without
exception. But it should not and it must
not deter our continued and persistent
efforts, and our support of the efforts of
others, to bring together all of the parties
who are involved in the conflict in Viet-
nam. The so-called National Liberation
Front is certainly no more than what its
July 29, 1965
name implies, a front. But surely there
is no reason why North Vietnam could
not include its members, the Vietcong, or
any other parties it desires, or any team
of representatives it sends to the nego-
tiation table. And we should negotiate
with that team, whomever it contains.
A much larger presence and a greater
role of participation should be encour-
aged for the United Nations, the world
organization which has performed so val-
iantly and successfully in many trouble
spots of the world for the last 20 years.
I am particularly pleased that the Presi-
dent is calling on this resource, as I have
been urging for some time, and that he
has sent a special message with Ambassa-
dor Goldberg to U.N. Secretary General
U Thant. He is to be strongly com-
mended for this effort and we can only
fervently hope that the Secretary Gen-
eral will be able to utilize his offices to
good effect. Certainly we should sup-
port him in any constructive efforts he is
able to initiate. Certainly the United
Nations should be encouraged in every
way possible to provide the machinery
for bringing this matter to the interna-
tional conference table, for policing a
cease-fire, and for insuring free elections.
It may well be, Mr. Speaker, that
Hanoi and Vietcong have no intention of
lessening their aggression at the present
time. This makes two requirements on
our policy, as was suggested last month
by the Senator from Arkansas [Mr.
FULBRIGHT] and which was stressed by
the President yesterday.
First, we must sustain the Government
and the Army of South Vietnam. We
must persuade the Communists that
Saigon cannot be crushed and that the
forces of the free world will not be driven
out by force.
Second, we must practice patience and
restraint. We must continue to offer the
Communists a reasonable alternative to
war, and we must continue to press for a
peaceful settlement at the earliest pos-
sible time.
Mr. Speaker, several leading Repub-
lican policymakers have suggested that
our country would accept a continued
American presence in Vietnam, includ-
ing any necessary troop buildup, if and
only if our objective was total victory;
not if it were a negotiated settlement.
I reject this suggestion. I believe it
misinterprets and misrepresents the true
feeling of the American people. This
feeling, I believe, is one of rightful anx-
iety. It is one of willingness to contrib-
ute and to sacrifice; to pay the cost fl
freedom; to be a leader of the free world.
But it is one also which seeks independ-
ence and the other legitimate aspirations
of men through peaceful means. Our
policy and our efforts should be directed
at no lesser goal.
Mr. Speaker, in conclusion, I include
two editorials from this morning's Wash-
ington Post, one by the distinguished
columnist Chalmers Roberts, which
speak directly and thoughtfully to the
Points I have discussed:
[From the Washington Post, July 29, 1965)
THE VIETNAM POLICY
In typically Johnsonian fashion, the Presi-
dent supplemented his announcement of in-
tensified American participation in the Viet-
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Jy 6)n, aWC/ Atproved For Relea.%e2D03/11/04 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
WINURESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE 18089
'7
namhse war with an escalation of his peace
efforts. Draft calls are to be doubled in
the months ahead, and there will be a rapid
.buildup of American fighting men in the
besieged southeast Asian country. But the
aim of protecting freedom and independence
from Conirnunist aggression without resort
to general war remains the same.
The President made another graceful ap-
peal to the United Nations to exert whatever
influence it can to halt the aggression in
Vietnam. At the same time, he offered to
discuss Hanoi's proposals along with our own
and those of any other interested nation
that may care to sit down at a conference
table. His sincere desire to substitute the
conference table for the battlefield took
away any suggestion of belligerence that
might otherwise have been read into the
announcement of expanding military opera-
tions.
The gist of what the President had to
say is that the United States places such a
high value on peace that it is willing to
fight for it. The spread of Asian com-
munism by terror and slaughter is the an-
tithesis of both peace and freedom. The
United States has attempted to provide a
Shield against this menace. It is now called
Upon to demonstrate that this shield is
not an illusion.
We do not see how President Johnson could
have explained the necessity of the U.S.
course in Vietnam more effectively than he
did:
"If we are driven from the fields in Viet-
nam, then no nation can ever again have
the same confidence in our promise of pro-
tection. In each land the forces of inde-
pendence would be weakened. An Asia so
threatened by Communist domination would
Imperil the security of the United States
itself. * ? *
"We just cannot now dishonor our word
or abandon our commitment or leave those
who believed us and who trusted us to the
terror and repression and murder that would
follow. This, then, my fellow Americans, is
Why we are in Vietnam."
The President's reference to Asian commu-
nism doubtless holds special significance. His
exclusion of the Russians from his comments
was an indirect appeal for Moscow's under-
standing of why we must do what we are
doing. The Soviet Union shares at least some
of the alarm in the West over the openly
belligerent and recklessly aggressive course
of Communist China and the Hanoi govern-
ment. President Johnson seemed to be say-
ing to Moscow that the United States is doing
everything possible to avoid a general war
and that the two major nuclear powers have
a common interest in not allowing this Asian
Communist brushfire to get out of hand for
want of a rational confrontation at a con-
ference table.
Within the United States, we surmise that
the response to the President's speech will be
overwhelmingly favorable. Despite the in-
nate hatred of wax, most of the people are
aware of the kind of world we live in. They
appear to be reconciled to a hard struggle in
a faraway land because of the close relation
It has to the preservation of our own free-
dom. Many of those who are committed to
the general policy, however, retain some con-
cern over the way it is being carried out.
One would, hope that much of the discus-
sion in the White House conferences of the
last week has been given to effective employ-
ment of the additional manpower and equip-
ment that are flowing to Vietnam. It is not
enough merely to build up larger forces and
the volume of supplies. With the extension
of military might in Vietnam, there will be
increasing need for wise decisions and sound
strategy. This perceptive statement on the
part of the President also greatly strengthens
confidence that he will be as firm in pushing
for a ratieflal Settlement as he has been in
trying to teach the Communists that peace
cannot be bought with terror and aggression.
From the Washington Post, July 29, 19653
GUARDIAN AT THE GATE: WORLD SEES A
DETERMINED JOHNSON
(By Chalmers M. Roberts)
It was not a happy President Johnson the
Nation saw yesterday. But it was a deter-
mined President.
"We did not choose to be the guardians at
the gate," he said, "but there is no one else."
That single sentence explains a lot about the
man and his approach to the war in Vietnam.
Because of what he said last fall in the
presidential campaign against Barry Gold-
water, a lot of people concluded that he
wanted to liquidate the war as quickly as
possible. Indeed, it is clear that a number
of Communist diplomats here told their gov-
ernments just that.
That conclusion was based on a misunder-
standing of Lyndon Johnson. He did want
to liquidate the war?he does want to liqui-
date it now?but not on terms of surrender.
For a long time Mr. Johnson resisted say-
ing out loud that the conflict in Vietnam
was a crucial one between communism and
democracy or between China and the United
States. Only slowly and reluctantly did he
come to do so.
Like most Americans, as he emotionally
made evident yesterday, he would prefer to
concentrate on improving our domestic life.
But history caught up with him, and he is
determined to face history.
The Vietcong attacks on American person-
nel, the hard words from North Vietnam and
the shrill language from China all drove
him, however reluctantly, to conclude that
here was a place that the United States had
to make a stand.
If the Communists had offered to sit down
at the conference table, the fighting could
have stopped long ago. It is quite likely,
too, that the result would have been a gain
in the Communist position in southeast
Asia. But in rejecting the conference table,
the Communists gave Mr. Johnson no option
except to fight.
Slowly, then, a rationale for American
military activity has been developed. As
John F. Kennedy did in the Cuban missile
crisis, Mr. Johnson yesterday referred to the
appeasement of Hitler in the 1930's and the
lesson to be drawn from it.
The furious' Communist offensive in Viet-
nam, coupled with the Chinese demands to
smash the United States in that corner of
Asia, left him, he felt, no choice but to send
in more Americans to act as "the guardians
of the gate."
Lyndon Johnson is both a coolly calcu-
lating man and an emotionally patriotic
man. Both these sides of his personality
were evident yesterday.
His new military steps are calculated to
deny the Communists a military victory; his
diplomatic steps are designed to ease the
path to the conference table. But he
doubtless has no illusions that the Commu-
nists will agree to negotiate until they are
convinced that American power is fully
committed to the war and that It can be
decisive.
Slowly, as he has sought a way out of
Vietnam, Mr. Johnson has come to describe
the stakes in sharper terms. Now he has
reached the point of saying that the United
Stat? cannot escape the role of guardian
at the gate in this "remote and distant
place."
Those who have viewed the President as a
reckless plunger. should be reassured by his
efforts to avoid a rupture with the Soviet
Union. Certainly he meant it when he said
that "I don't think I have any right to com-
mit the whole world to world war III."
Those who believe he has been too cautious
In his application of military force may not
be wholly satisfied with the new decisions
he outlined yesterday. But they can find
satisfaction in the firm determination, now
that the United States is so fully committed,
to see it through to the end.
Lyndon Johnson yesterday was not a happy
guardian at the gate. But he certainly was
determined.
The purpose of yesterday's public appear-
ance before the Nation was to show that
determination. He succeeded.
A second purpose was to answer the ques-
tion of the mother who had written to ask
"why" her son had to fight in Vietnam.
Here, at least, he made a convincing case.
Finally, he sought to show that the United
States carries an olive branch as well as
thunderbolts. Here he is willing to talk
about even the Communist demand that all
Americans be withdrawn. It is hard to see
how critics could ask for more, unless they
would have the United States accept
surrender.
LAG IN FEDERAL FUNDS CURTAILS
STATE HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Missouri [Mr. HirmA, is rec-
ognized for 5 minutes.
Mr. HULL. Mr. Speaker, Missouri is
in the forefront of States in this Nation
in developing modern roads for its citi-
zens.
Planning and early construction of in-
terstate highway routes in Missouri were
under the direction of the Honorable Rex
M. Whitton, then chief engineer of the
Missouri Highway Department and now
Federal Highway Administrator_
Mr. Whitton's work has been carried
on by our present extremely able chief
engineer, Marvin 3. Snider, resulting in
continued progress in building Missouri
highways.
In a recent speech to the Ozark Chap-
ter of the Missouri Society of Profes-
sional Engineers in Springfield, Mo., Mr.
Snider outlined the programs and the
problems of highway builders in Mis-
souri.
Under unanimous consent I include
Mr. Snider's speech:
LAG IN FEDERAL FUNDS CURTAILS STATE
HIGHWAY CONSTRUCTION
It is a sincere pleasure for me to have the
opportunity to meet with your organization
this evening to discuss the progress of Mis-
souri's State highway program.
From the outset I would say that State
highway progress in Missouri is relatively
good. I use the term "relatively good" be-
cause, due to a constant lack of sufficient
highway funds, our rate of roadbuilding
improvements certainly is not what it should
be in order to provide an adequate State
road system for motorists.
However, the historical shortage of high-
way funds is a story in itself and I will not
go into it further during this meeting.
My remarks this evening will be devoted
to a twofold discussion of Missouri's highway
progress.
First, I will report briefly on the progress
being made by the State highway depart-
ment with the funds that are available.
Second, and most importantly, I want to
explain about a financial difficulty which has
arisen at the Federal level in the last few
months, and which is causing a curtailment
in State highway construction in Missouri
this year.
It is a curtailment that we can ill afford
because of the extreme importance of build-
ing and improving highways as rapidly as
possible to serve the constantly growing de-
mands of traffic. Nevertheless, the cutback
in highway work is with us, resulting in de-
lays in awarding a number of construction
contracts in many areas of the State. I be-
lieve it is important for Missourians to know
Approved For Release 2003/11/04 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP671300446R000300190000-1
18090 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? HOUSE July 29, 1965
about this situation and understand why it
Is happening.
PROGRESS IN 1964
AS to progress made in calendar 1964, it
pleases me to report that last year saw the
greatest single surge of State roadbuilding in
Missouri's history.
During 1964 the State highway department
carried on a construction and right-of-way
program amounting to about $192,500,000.
This VMS some $1'7 million larger than the
previous high recorded in 1963.
I don't want to confuse you with a lot of
figures, but I believe it will be helpful to
point out how the $192,500,000 which made
up the 1964 construction and right-of-way
program was used:
For actual highway construction, $156,-
700,000 was spent or obligated; $33,600,000
was spent to acquire right-of-way; $2,100,-
000 Was obligated for the 1965 secondary
(farm to market) system road oiling pro-
gram, work which now is going on since this
is a warm weather operation; and $115,000
was spent to install flashing light signals at
railroad croesings.
Even more meaningf?ul than money figures
is the fact that 924 miles of highway con-
struction projects were awarded to contract
last year. They included:
One hundred and seventy miles of work on
the Interstate System, the nationwide super-
highway network now under construction
throughout America, and which is made up
of highways like Interstate Routes 44 and 70.
Four hundred and thirty-one miles of im-
provements were contracted on the primary
system, which consists of conventional
trunkline highways like U.S. Routes 54, 63, 65,
and 71.
Two hundred and ninety-seven miles of
construction on the secondary system, made
up mainly of lettered State highways pro-
viding local service such as Routes M, FF,
C, or rr.
Twenty-six miles of improvements were
placed under contract on the urban system
of highways, which fire extensions of primary
and secondary system routes into urban
areas. ?
In addition, about 1,200 miles of secondary
system roads now are receiving an oil sur-
face treatment to make them dust free under
the oiling program authorized last year.
So by an previous standards, 1964 was a
banner roadbuilding year for the State of
Missouri. And another substantial year, al-
though not scheduled to be as impressive
as the one just passed, was in prospect for
1965.
At the beginning of the present calendar
year, the State highway deportment esti-
mated that it would have a construction and
right-of-way program amounting to about
$165,500,000 during 1965. This was to in-
clude $131,600,000 in construction work to
be awarded to contract; $26,300,000 for the
purchase of right-of-way; and $7,600,000 for
preliminary engineering, the obligation of
fluids for the 1966 secondary system road oil-
ing program and the installation of flashing
light signals at railroad crossings.
The estimate for 1965 was considerably
under accomplishments of 1964 mainly for
two reason. In the first place, it was pur-
posely on the conservative side and repre-
sented a figure the department felt certain
could be attained. Secondly, we knew there
would not be as much money available in
1965. In 1964 the department was antici-
pating later reimbursement by the Federal
Government of several millions of dollars
which had been tied up in right of way pur-
chases for a number of years, and therefore
was able to obligate against these funds.
LAG IN FEDERAL FUNDS BEGINS
At any rate, the department began the
1965 calendar year on a note of optimism,
With an anticipated minimum construction
and right at Way program of about
$185,500,000.
But then along in late February the Fed-
eral funds situation which I mentioned
earlier began to develop, and it has worsened
gradually ever since.
In beginning an explanation of what has
been and still is happening, I want to point
out that the financing of State highway con-
struction is a very complicated matter.
However, I will try to keep my remarks as
simple as possible in order to get this message
across.
Missouri's State highways are built with
money received from taxes levied by the
State and Federal Governments on highway
users.
Taxes levied by the State of Missouri in-
clude the motor vehicle fuel tax, commonly
called the gasoline tax; license fees for motor
vehicles; drivers license fees; and the motor
vehicle use tax, which is equivalent to a
sales tax on vehicle purchases made by
Missourians in other States.
Highway user taxes levied by the Federal
Government are those on gasoline and
other motor vehicle fuel, on tires and inner
tubes, on heavy trucks and on new trucks,
buses and trailers at the time of manufac-
ture.
The Federal Government provides a very
substantial share a the funds used in the
construct and purchase of right-of-way
for highways in Missouri, with the State
providing the remaining share.
Under Federal law, the Federal Govern-
ment pays cio percent of the cost of building
Interstate System highways, leaving the
State with 10 percent of the cost to pay.
Naturally, a State would be foolish to
finance an Interstate System project entirely
out of its own funds, since the Federal
Government offers a ratio of 9 to 1 aid for
this work.
Most primary, secondary and urban sys-
tem highways are constructed on the basis of
50 percent Federal and 50 percent State
funds. Missouri must match dollar for dol-
lar all of the Federal aid available for build-
ing these three categories of highways.
With whatever construction funds the
State still has available, after matching all
Federal funds, it finances projects on the
primary, secondary, and urban systems with
100 percent State money. The wisdom of
using all available 100 percent State con-
struction funds in this manner is readily
apparent, since the Federal Government
offers so much more aid in the building a
Interstate routes than it does for the other
three systems of highways.
That gives a fairly complete summary, I
believe, on where the money comes from
to finance the acquisition of right-of-way
and the construction of State highways.
Now let's look at how the Federal aid funds
actually are made available for use to the
States.
One thing which is important for the pub-
lic to understand is this: The Federal Gov-
ernment does not pay any Federal-aid road
funds to the State before the State buys
right-of-way for a project or constructs a
highway. The State pays for the work out
of its own pocket, and later is reimbursed a
share of the costs by the Federal Govern-
ment on Federal-aid highway projects. But
you will see how the system works as we pro-
ceed in this explanation.
There are three key words at the Fed-
eral level in the process of providing Federal-
aid road funds to the States. Those words
are "appropriation," "apportionment," and
"release."
Federal funds for highway work are ap-
propriated by Congress. Right now those
funds are totaling about $3.8 billion a year.
This money goes into the Highway Trust
Fund in Washington, D.C., the fund through
which all Federal aid road money is adminis-
tered. Under Federal law, the Highway
Trust Fund must at all times be solvent?no
deficit financing is permitted.
The next step in the process is apportion-
ment of each fiscal year's Federal highway
funds to the 50 States. This is done on a
formula basis and is handled by the Sec-
retary a Commerce and the Bureau of Pub-
lic Roads. Apportionment merely is the an-
nouncement of each State's share a Federal
road funds for a particular fiscal year be-
tween July 1 and June 30.
Neither the appropriation of funds nor the
apportionment of funds allow the States to
award a single dollar of a Federal-aid high-
way construction contract or buy one piece
of right-of-way.
The award of a contract or purchase of
right-of-way for a Federal-aid job can come
only after the release for obligation of the
previously appropriated and apportioned
Federal money. This release of the funds
to States also is done by the Secretary of
Commerce and the Bureau of Public Roads.
It is the step in which the States are, in
effect, told: "Yon may proceed to obligate
Federal-aid funds for highway projects be-
cause we now can guarantee that there will
be enough money in the Highway Trust Fund
to reimburse you the Federal share of the
cost when you present a bill for payment
at a later date for completed work."
Release of a year's apportionment of funds
is done on a quarterly basis during the fiscal
year. If a normal procedure was being fol-
lowed, this would mean the release of one-
fourth of a year's money to the States on
each of these dates: July 1, October 1, Janu-
ary 1, and April 1.
Release of the Federal money for obliga-
tion is done on a quarterly basis to insure
the future solvency of the Highway Trust
Fund. In other words, if a full year's appor-
tiornnent was released all at once, the States
would obligate so heavily against it in just
a few months that the trust fund would be
unable to meet all payments when bills for
reimbursement on completed work were pre-
sented later. Such a situation would be in
violation of the Federal law requiring the
trust fund to be solvent at all times.
That sets the stage so far as background
Is concerned. Now let me explain what has
been happening at the Federal level which
is causing a curtailment in State highway
construction in Missouri.
In a nutshell, it can be summed up as a
delay in the release of quarterly Federal
funds to the States for obligation?a delay
which has lengthened in the last few months
until we now are behind a full quarter, or
3 months. Each quarter for Missouri, under
the present apportionment, represents about
$24,425,000.
A year ago today?or on July 1, 1964?
Missouri and the other States should have
received release of the first quarter funds,
if things were going according to schedure.
However, the release did not come until last
August 20. Second quarter funds, due for
release October 1, were not made available
for obligation until November 16.
Although both these releases of money
were some 6 weeks late, no real serious dam-
age resulted since the delay in getting proj-
ect
grt
seaunder contract was not particularly
But the situation certainly has had an -
effect during the first 6 months of the pres-
ent calendar year.
The third quarter release of Federal funds.,
scheduled for January 1, did not come until
March 15, or 2% months late. And fourth
quarter funds, due April 1, were not released
until, yesterday (June 30), a full 3 months
behind schedule.
The delay in releasing the funds has been
due to a shortage of money in the highway
trust fund. Because of this shortage, the
Secretary of Commerce has had to stretch
out the release times.
You will recall that I earlier said the State
highway department expected to have a con-
struction and ritht-of-way program of about
$165,500,000 during calendar 1965.
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
jitty 29, 19bipproved For Release_2003/11/,04_: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
tAYNultESSIONAL RKORD ? SENATE 18111
Since the feasibility report was completed,
the committee also has received the revised
benefit computation from the Corps of En-
gineers reflecting the flood experience of last
December and January. The average an-
nual flood benefits attributable to Dayton
Dam are now $49,500, compared with the
$42,150 used in our feasibility report.
Local administration of recreation facilities
The port district of Columbia County,
Wash., has indicated its interest in assuming
the responsibilities required of a local public
body under section 3 of S. 1088.
Costs allocated to new purposes
? The Executive recommended to the Con-
gress allocation of costs to two relatively
novel purposes: water quality and highway
improvement.
The legislative basis for the first such
recommendation to the Congress is found in
the Federal Water Pollution Control Act
Amendments of 1961, and the iasis for the
second recommendation is to be found in the
Flood Control Act of 1962.
The committee concurred with these two
recommendations.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that the com-
mittee amendments be considered en
bloc.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With-
out objection, the amendments are con-
sidered and agreed to en bloc.
The bill is open to further amendment.
If there be no further amendment to be
proposed, the question is on the engross-
ment and third reading of the bill,
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
for a third readi ? I was read the third
time, and p
OUR P
PRESIDBN
COUNTRY
a-7v?
VIETNAM?THE
STATEMENT TO THE
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, the
President's statement to the press and
the country of yesterday and his calm
and candid answers to questions were
very helpful in making clear our purposes
in Vietnam. He is seeking an honorable
and prompt end to that conflict, not the
beginning of a new war. Whatever ad-
ditional military measures be has had
to take are Gast in that vein. He has
opened the door wide to diplomats, to
the United Nations, all nations, to join
in a quest for a prompt peace under
honorable conditions on all sides.
As one who participated in the three
discussions jie had with Members of the
Congress?discussions which covered ap-
proximately 6 hours within a 24-hour
period?I can state that they were con-
ducted on a give-and-take basis, that all
sides were heard and all sides considered.
The decision which the President arrived
at was not an easy one, but was one of
five options which he gave consideration
to and on which he did not make up his
mind until almost the last moment. I
know of no President who has discussed
a situation of this nature with so many
people to get their yiewpoints or held so
many meetings with his chief advisers in
the executive branch of the Govern-
ment, as well as with the legislative
branch. He is deeply and personally im-
mersed in what is going on and no one
worries more about the possibilities and
No, 133 16
the potentials involved. He has had
frank and candid advice which he has
sought but he has arrived at his own
decisions because they are, under the
Constitution, his responsibility.
Mr. President, to indicate the lengths
to which the President has stated publicly
he will go, I ask unanimous consent that
various excerpts from his press confer-
ence of yesterday be included at this
point in the RECORD and that following
them, the transcript of the President's
news conference be incorporated in the
RECORD en toto. Before this request is
acted on, I would urge my colleagues and
the public in general to note the nine ex-
cerpts which are taken out of the speech
so that we will all have a better under-
standing of just how far the President
is prepared to go in bringing the Viet-
namese situation to an honorable con-
clusion through negotiations based on
the Geneva accords, the proposals of the
Government of North, Vietnam, the use
of the United Nations, representation by
the Vietcong, and any other avenues
which are open or can be opened. In
my opinion, these are worthy of note and
worthy of consideration by all who can
read, who can see, and who can hear.
There being no objection, the excerpts
and transcript were ordered to be printed
in the RECORD, as follows:
Second, once the Communists know, as we
know, that a violent solution is impossible,
then a peaceful solution is inevitable. We
are ready now, as we have always been, to
move from the battlefield to the conference
table.
I have stated publicly and many times,
again and again, America's willingess to be-
gin unconditional discussions with any gov-
ernment at any place at any time.
Fifteen efforts have been made to start
these discussions, with the help of 40 na-
tions throughout the world. But there has
been no answer. But we are going to con-
tinue to persist, if persist we must, _until
death and desolation have led to the same
conference table where others could now join
us at a much smaller cost.
I have spoken many times of our objectives
In Vietnam. So has the Government of South
Vietnam. Hanoi has set forth its own pro-
posals. We are ready to discuss their pro-
posals and our proposals and any proposals of
any government whose people may be affect-
ed, for we fear the meeting room no more
than we fear the battlefield. And in this
pursuit we welcome and we ask for the con-
cern and the assistance of any nation and
all nations.
And if the United Nations and its officials
or any one of its 114 members can by deed
or word, private initiative or public action,
bring us nearer an honorable peace, then
they will have the support and gratitude of
the United States of America.
I've directed Ambassador Goldberg to go to
New York today and to present immediately
to Secretary General U Thant a letter from
me requesting that all the resources and the
energy and the immense prestige of the
United Nations be employed to find ways to
halt aggression and to bring peace in Viet-
nam.
But we insist and we Will always insist that
the people of South Vietnam shall have the
right of choice, the right to shape their own
destiny in free elections in the South or
throughout all Vietnam under international
supervision, and they shall not have any
government imposed upon them by force and
terror so long as we can prevent it.
As I just said, I hope that every member
of the United Nations that has any idea or
any plan, any program, any suggestion, that
they will not let them go unexplored.
And as I have said so many times, if any-
one questions our good faith and will ask
us to meet them to try to reason this mat-
ter out, they will find us at the appointed
place, the appointed time and the proper
chair.
I have made very clear in my San Fran-
cisco speech my hope that the Secretary
General under his wise leadership would ex-
plore every possibility that might lead to a
solution of this matter. In my letter to the
Secretary General this morning which Am-
bassador Goldberg will deliver later in the
day, I reiterate my hopes and my desires and
I urge upon him that he?if he agrees?that
he undertake new efforts in this direction.
Ambassador Goldberg understands the
challenge. We spent the weekend talking
about the potentialities and the possibilities,
our hopes and our dreams, and I believe that
we will have an able advocate and a search-
ing negotiator who, I would hope, could some
day find success.
We have stated time and time again that
we would negotiate with any government,
any time, any place. The Vietcong would
have no difficulty in being represented and
having their views presented if Hanoi for a
moment decides that she wants to cease ag-
gression, and I would not think that would
be an insurmountable problem at all. I
think that could be worked out.
[From the New York Times, July 29, 19651
TRANSCRIPT OF THE PRESIDENT'S NEWS CON-
FERENCE ON FORE/GN AND DOMESTIC AF'FAIRS
OPENING STATEMENT
South, Vietnam
President JOHNSON. My fellow Americans.
Not long ago, I received a letter from a wo-
man in the Midwest. She wrote:
"DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: In my humble way I
am writing to you about the crisis in Viet-
nam. I have a son who is now in Vietnam.
My husband served in World War It Our
country was a war. But now, this time, It's
just something that I don't understand.
Why?"
Well, I've tried to answer that question
dozens of times and more in practically
every State in this Union. I have discussed
It fully in Baltimore in April, in Washington
in May, in San Francisco in June. And let
me again now discuss it here In the East
Room of the White House.
Why must young Americans, born into a
land exultant with hope and with golden
promise, toil and suffer and sometimes die
in such a remote and distant place?
The answer, like the war itself, is not
an easy one. But it echoes clearly from
the painful lessons of half a century.
Three times in my lifetime--in two.World
Wars and in Korea?Americans have gone
to far lands to fight for freedom. We have
learned at a terrible and a brutal cost that
retreat does not bring safety, and weakness
does not bring peace.
And It is this lesson that has brought us
to Vietnam.
This is a different kind of war. There are
no marching armies or solemn declarations.
Some citizens of South Vietnam, at times
with understandable grievances, have joined
in the attack on their own Government.
But we must not let this mask the central
fact that this is really war. It is guided by
North Vietnam and it is spurred by Com-
munist China. Its goal is to conquer the
South, to defeat American power and to ex-
tend the Asiatic dominion of communism.
And there are great stakes in the balance.
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
18112 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE July 29, 1965
A Vital Shield
Most of the non-Communist nations of
Asia. cannot, by themselves and alone, resist
the growing might and the grasping ambi-
tion of Asian communism.
Our power therefore is a very vital shield.
If we are driven from the :field in Vietnam,
then no nation can ever again have the same
confidence in American promise or in Arneri-
can protection.
In each land, the forces of independence
would be considerably weakened, and an Asia
so threatened by Communist domination
would certainly imperil the security of the
United States itself.
We did not choose to be the guardians at
the gate, but there is no one else. Nor would
surrender in Vietnam bring peace, because
we learned from Hitler at Munich that suc-
cess only feeds the appetite of aggression.
The battle would be renewed in one country,
and then another country, bringing with it
perhaps even larger and crueler conflict, as
we have learned from the lessons of history.
Moreover, we are in Vietnam to fulfill one
of the most solemn pledges of the American
Nation. Three Presidents?President Eisen-
hower, President Kennedy and your present
President?over 11 years have committed
themselves and have promised to help defend
this small and valiant nation.
Strengthened by that promise, the people
of South Vietnam have- fought for many long
years. Thousands of- them have died. Thou-
sands more have been crippled and scarred
by war. And we just cannot now dishonor
our word, or abandon our commitment, or
leave those who believed us and who trusted
us to the terror and repression and murder
that would follow.
This, then, my fellow Americans, is why
we are in Vietnam.
What are our goals in that war-stained
land?
First, we intend to convince the Commu-
nist that we cannot be defeated by force of
arms or by superior power. They are not
easily convinced. In recent months they
have greatly increased their fighting forces
and their attacks and the numbers of inci-
dents.
I have asked the commanding general, Gen-
eral Westmoreland, what more he needs to
meet this mounting aggression. He has told
me. And we will meet his needs.
Increase in Strength
I have today ordered to Vietnam the Air
Mobile Division and certain other forces
which will raise our fighting strength from
75,000 to 125,000 men almost immediately.
Additional forces will be needed later and
they will be sent as requested.
This will make is necessary to increase our
active fighting forces by raising the monthly
draft _call from 17,000 over a period of time
to 35,000_ per month and for us to step up
our campaign for voluntary enlistments.
After this past week of deliberations, I
have concluded that it is not essential to
order Reserve units into service now. If that
necessity should later be indicated, I will
give the matter most careful consideration
and I will give the country due and adequate
notice before taking such action, but only
after full preparations.
We have also discussed with the Govern-
ment of South Vietnam lately the steps that
will?we will take to Substantially increase
their own effort both on the battlefield and
toward reform and progress in the villages.
Ambassador Lodge is now formulating a new
program to be tested upon his return to that
area.
I have directed Secretary Rusk and Sec-
retors? McNamara to be available immediately
to the Congress to review with these com-
mittees?the appropriate congressional com-
mittees?what we plan to do in these areas.
I have asked them to be able to answer the
questions of any Member of Congress.
And Secretary McNamara, in addition, will
ask the Senate Appropriations Committee
to add a limited amount to present legisla-
tion to help meet part of this new cost until
a supplemental measure is ready and hear-
ings can be held when the Congress as-
sembles in January. In the meantime, we
will use the authority contained in the
present defense appropriation bill under con-
sideration to transfer funds in addition to
the additional mbney that we will ask.
These steps, like our actions in the past,
are carefully measured to do what must be
done to bring an end to aggression and a
peaceful settlement.
We do not want an expanding struggle
with consequences that no one can fore-
see, nor will we bluster or bully or flaunt
our power. But we will not surrender, and
we will not retreat.
For behind our American pledge lies the
determination and resources, I believe, of all
of the American Nation.
Ready To Negotiate
Second, once the Communists know, as we
know, that a violent solution is impossible,
then a peaceful solution is inevitable. We
are ready now, as we have always been, to
move from the battlefield to the conference
table.
I have stated publicly and many times,
again and again, America's willingness to be-
gin unconditional discussions with any Gov-
ernment at any place at any time.
Fifteen efforts have been made to start
these discussions, with the help of 40 na-
tions throughout the world. But there has
been no answer. But we are going to con-
tinue to persist, if persist we must, until
death and desolation have led to the same
conference table where others could now join
us at a much smaller cost.
I have spoken many times of our objectives
in Vietnam. So has the Government of South
Vietnam. Hanoi has set forth its own pro-
posals. We are ready to discuss their pro-
posals and our proposals and any pro-
posals a any Government whose peo-
ple may be affected, for we fear the
raeetingroom no more than we fear the
battlefield. And in this pursuit We welcome
and we ask for the concern and the assistance
of any nation and all nations.
And if the United Nations and its officials
or any one of its 114 members Can by deed or
word, private initiative or public action,
bring us nearer an honorable peace, then
they will have the support and gratitude of
the United States of America.
Letter to U Thant
I've directed Ambassador Goldberg to go
to New York today and to present imme-
diately to Secretary General U Tha,nt a letter
from me requesting that all the resources
and the energy and the immense prestige of
the United Nations be employed to find ways
to halt aggression and to bring peace in
Vietnam.
I made a similar request at San Francisco
a few weeks ago because we do not seek the
destruction of any government nor do we
covet a foot of any territory. But we insist
and we will always insist that the people of
South Vietnam shall have the right of choice
the right to shape their own destiny in free
elections in the South or throughout all Viet-
nam under international supervision, and
they shall not have any government, im-
posed upon them by force and terror so long
as we can prevent it.
This was the purpose of the 1954 agree-
ments which the Communists have now
cruelly shattered. And if the machinery of
those agreements was tragically weak, its
purposes still guide our action. And as battle
rages we will continue as best we can to help
the good people of South Vietnam enrich the
condition of their life, to feed the hungry,
and to tend the sick, and teach the young,
and shelter the homeless, and help the farmer
to increase his crops, and the worker to find
a job.
It is an ancient but still terrible irony that
While many leaders of men create division
in pursuit of grand ambitions, the children
of men are really united in the simple, elu-
sive desire for a life of fruitful and rewarding
toil.
As I said in Johns Hopkins at Baltimore. I
hope that one day we can help all the
people of Asia toward that desire?and Eu-
gene Black has made great progress since my
appearance at Baltimore in that direction--
not as the price of peace, for we are ready
always to bear a more painful cost, but
rather as a part of our obligations of justice
toward our fellow man.
Painful Duty
And let me also add now a personal note.
I do not find it easy to send the flower of
our youth, our finest young men, into battle.
I have spoken to you today of the divisions
and the forces and the battalions and the
units, but I know them all, every one. I
have seen them in a thousand streets a a
hundred towns in every State in this Union?
working and laughing and building and filled
with hope and life. And I think I know, too,
how their mothers weep and how their fami-
lies sorrow.
And this is the most agonizing and the
most painful duty of your President.
-And there is something else, too. When
I was young, poverty was so common that
we didn't know it had a name. An educa-
tion was something that you had to fight
for, and water was really life itself. I have
now been in public life for 35 years, more
than three decades, and in each of those 35
years I have seen good men and wise lead-
ers struggle to bring the blessings of this
land to all of our people.
And now I am the President. It is now
my opportunity to help every child get an
education, to help every Negro and every
American citizen have an equal opportunity,
to help every family get a decent home, and
to help bring healing to the sick and dignity
to the old.
As I have said before, that is what I've
lived for, that's what I've wanted all my life
since I was a little boy, and I do not want to
see all those hopes and all those dreams of
so many people for so many years now
drowned in the wasteful ravages of cruel
wars. And I'm going to do all I can do to
see that that never happens.
But I also know, as a realistic public serv-
ant, that as long as there are men who hate
and destroy we must have the courage to
resist or we'll see it all?all that we have
built, all that we hope to build, all of our
dreams for freedom, all, all?will be swepl,
away on the flood of conquest.
So, too, this shall not happen. We will
stand in Vietnam.
Voice of America chief
Now what America is and was and hopes
to stand for, as an important national asset,
telling the truth to this world, telling an
exciting story, is the Voice of America.
classify this assignment in the front rank
of importance to the freedom of the world,
and that is why today I am proud to an-
nounce to you the name of the man who
will direct the Voice of America.
He is a man whose voice and whose face
and whose mind is known to this country and
to most of the entire world. His name is
John Chancellor.
Mr. Chancellor was born 38 years ago in
Chicago. For more than 15 years he has
been with the news department of the Na-
tional Broadcasting Co. During that time
he has covered the world, in Vienna, Lon-
don, Moscow, New York, Brussels, Berlin, and
Washington.
Since 1964 he has been with you, one of
the White House correspondents.
This, I think, is the first time in history
of the Voice of America that a working
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
July 29, 1960Proved For msmitigawAt :60667Enomoo3om0008-1 18113
newspaperman, a respected commentator,
and experienced independent reporter has
been given the responsibility of leadership
and direction in this vital enterprise. I
think he understands the challenges that
are present? and the achievements that are
passible. And I am satisfied that the Voice
of America will be in imaginative, compe-
tent, reliable, and always truthful hands.
Stand up, John, will you, please?
Fortes to Supreme Court
The President has few responsibilities of
greater importance or greater consequence
to the country's future than the constitu-
tional responsibility of nominating Justices
for the Supreme Court of the United States.
I am happy today here in the East Room
to announce that the distinguished Ameri-
can who was my first Choice for the position
now vacant on the Supreme Court has agreed
to accept this call to this vital duty. I will
very shortly, this afternoon, send to the U.S.
Senate my nomination of the Honorable
Abe Fortes to be an Associate Justice of the
Supreme Court.
For many, many years I have regarded Mr.
Fortes as one of this Nation's most able and
most respected and most outstanding citi-
zens, a scholar, a profound thinker, a lawyer
of superior ability, and a man of humane and
deeply compassionate feelings toward his fel-
low man, a champion of our liberties. That
opinion is shared by the legal profession and
by the bar of this country, by Members of
Congress, and by the leaders of business and
labor and other secters of our national life.
Mr. Fortes has, as you know, told me on
numerous occasions in the last 20 months
that he would not be an applicant or a can-
didate or would not accept any appointment
to any public office. And this is, I guess, as
it should be, for in this instance the job
has sought the man. Mr. Fortes agrees that
the duty and the opportunity of service on
the highest court of this great country is
not a call that any citizen can reject.
So I am proud for the country that he has
this morning accepted this appointment and
will serve his country as an Associate Justice
of the Supreme Court.
I will be glad to take your questions now
for a period. I'll have a little water here.
QUESTIONS
1. If Hanoi escalates
Question. Mr. President, in the light of
the decisions on Vietnam which you've just
announced, is the United States prepared
with additional plans should North Vietnam
escalate its military effort? And how do you
anticipate that the Chinese Communists will
react to what you've announced today?
Answer. I do not want to speculate on the
reactions of other people. This Nation is
prepared and will always be prepared to
protect its national interests.
, 2. Duration of War
Question. Mr. President, you haven't
talked about a timetable in connection with
Vietnam. You have said and you repeated
today that the United States will not be de-
feated, will not grow tired.
Donald Johnson, national commander of
the American Legion, went over to Vietnam
In the spring and later called on you. He
told White House reporters that he could
imagine the war over there gonig on for 5,
6, or 7 years. Have you thought of that pos-
sibility, sir? And do you think the American
people ought to think of that possibility?
Answer. Yes. I think the American people
ought to understand that there is no quick
solution to the problem that we face there.
I would not want to prophesy or predict
whether it would be a matter of months or
years or decades. I do not know that we
had any accurate timetable on how long it
would take to bring victory in World War I.
I don't think anyone really knew that it
would be 2 years or 4 years or 6 years to meet
with success in World War II. I do think
our cause is just. I do think our purposes
and objectives are beyond question.
I do believe that America will stand united
behind her men that are there. And I plan
as long as I'm President to see that our forces
are strong enough to protect our national
interests and our right hand constantly pro-
tecting that interest with our military and
that our diplomatic and political negotia-
tions are constantly attempting to find some
Solution that would substitute words for
bombs.
And as I have said so many times, if any-
one questions our good faith and will ask
us to meet them to try to reason this matter
out, they will find us at the appointed place,
the appointed time, and the proper chair.
3. Ghanaian's mission
Question. With the representative of the
Government of Ghana in Hanoi now talking
with the foreign minister of North Vietnam
about the war in Vietnam, do you see any
indication that something good will come
of these talks?
Answer. We are always hopeful that every
effort in that direction will meet with suc-
cess. We welcome those efforts, as we wel-
comed the Commonwealth proposal, as we
welcomed Mr. Davies's visit [Harold Davies
of Britain's Labor Government] as we wel-
comed the Indian suggestion, as we weclomed
the efforts of the distinguished Prime Minster
of Great Britain, and others from time to
time.
As I just said, I hope that every member
of the United Nations that has any idea
or any plan, any program, any suggestion,
that they will not let them go unexplored.
4. Guns and butter
Question. Mr. President, from what you
have outlined as your program for now, it
would seem that you feel that we can have
guns and butter for the foreseeable future.
Do you have any idea right now, though, that
down the road a piece the American people
may have to face the problem of guns or
butter?
Answer. I have not the slightest doubt but
whatever it's necessary to face, the American
people will face. I think that all of us know
that we are now in the 52d month of the
prosperity that's been unequaled in this Na-
tion, and I see no reason for declaring a na-
tional emergency, and I rejected that course
of action earlier today when I made my de-
cision.
I cannot foresee what next year or the fol-
lowing year or the following year would hold.
I only know that the Americans will do what-
ever is necessary. And at the moment we
enjoy the good fortune of having an unparal-
leled period of prosperity with us, and this
Government's going to do all it can to see it
continue.
5. Missile site in north
Question. Mr. President, can you tell us
whether the missile sites in North Vietnam
that were bombed yesterday were manned
by Russians, and whether or not the admin-
istration has a policy about Russian techni-
cians in North Vietnam?
Answer. No, we have no information as
to how they were manned. We cannot speak
with any authority on that matter. We
made the decision that we felt our national
interest required, and as those problems pre-
sent themselves we will face up to them.
6. Chiang Kai-shek's role
Question. Mr. President, sir, I, wonder if
you've had any communications from Chiang
Kai-shek that he's ready to go to war with
you.
Answer. We have communicated with
most of the friendly nations of the world
in the last few days, and we have received
from them responses that have been en-
couraging. I would not want to go into
any individual response here, but I would
say that I have indicated to all of the
friendly nations what our problems were
there, the decision that confronted us, and
asked for their help and for their suggestions.
Mr. Roberts.
7. Soviet confrontation
Question. Mr. President, given the Russian
military involvement, or apparent involve-
ment, on the side of Hanoi on the one side,
and the dialog which Mr. Harriman has
been conducting for you on the other, as
well as the disarmament talks in Geneva at
the moment, could you tell us whether you
believe this war, as you now call it, can be
contained in this corner of southeast Asia
without involving a United States-Soviet
confrontation?
Answer. We would hope very much that
we could, and we will do nothing to provoke
that confrontation that we can avoid. Ae
you know, immediately after I assumed the
Presidency, I inunediately sent messages to
the Soviet Union. We have had frequent
exchange of views by letter and by conversa-
tion with Mr. Gromyko and Mr. Dobrynin,
and we are doing nothing to provoke the
Soviet Union.
We are very happy that they agreed to
resume the disarmament conference. I went
to some length to try to extend ourselves to
make the proposals that I would hope would
meet with acceptance of the peoples of the
world. We would like to believe that there
could be some success flow from this con-
ference, although we haven't been too suc-
cessful. I know a nothing that we have in
mind that should arouse the distrust or pro-
voke any violence on the part of the Soviet
Union.
8. Reliance on Saigon
Question. Mr. President, does the fact that
you're sending additional forces to Vietnam
Imply any change in the existing policy of
relying mainly on the South Vietnamese to
carry out offensive operations and using
American forces to guard American instal-
lations and to act as an emergency backup?
Answer. It does not imply any change in
policy whatever. It does not imply any
change of objective.
9. United Nations move
Question. Mr. President, would you like to
see the United Nations now move formally
as an organization to attempt to achieve a
settlement in Vietnam?
Answer. I have made very clear in my San
Francisco speech my hope that the Secre-
tary General under his wise leadership would
explore every possibility that might lead to
a solution of this matter. In my letter to
the Secretary General this morning which
Ambassador Goldberg will deliver later in the
day, I reiterate my hopes and my desires and
I urge upon him that he?if he agrees?that
he undertake new efforts in this direction.
Ambassador Goldberg understands the
challenge. We spent the weekend talking
about the potentialities and the possibilities,
our hopes and our dreams, and I believe that
we will have an able advocate and a search-
ing negotiator who, I would hope, could
someday find success.
Miss Craig.
10. Presidential powers
Question. Mr. President, what are the
borders of your power to conduct a war?
At what point might you have to ask Con-
gress for a declaration?
Answer. I don't know. That would de-
pend on the circumstances. I can't pinpoint
the date on the calendar or the hour or
the day. I have to ask Congress for their
judgments and for their decisions almost
every hour of the day. One of the principal
duties of the office of President is to main-
tain constant consultation. I have talked
to, I guess, more than 50 Members of Con-
gress in the last 24 hours. I have submit-
ted myself to their questions and the Sec-
retary of State and Secretary of Defense
will meet with them tomorrow and they're
. Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
18114 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE duly 29, 1965
ready to answer any question that they may
need.
Up to now, we have had ample authority,
excellent cooperation, a `united Congress
behind us and as near as I could tell from
our meetings last night with the leaders
and from my meetings today, with the
distinguished chairmen of conamittees and
the Members of both parties?we all met as
Americans united and determined to stand
as one.
11. Hatfield's remarks
Question. Mr. President, in this connec-
tion, however, last night one of the lead-
ing Governors of the Republicans said some
rather strong things. Governor Hatfield, of
Oregon, said the most recent escalation of ac-
tion In Vietnam is moving all the people
of the earth closer to World War m and we
have no moral right to commit the world
and especially our own people to World War
HI unilaterally or by the decision of a few
experts. This seems to imply rather strong
oriticism of present policies. Do you care
to express any reaction? .
Answer. Yes, I don't interpret it that
way. / think there are dangers in escala-
tion. I don't think I have any right to
commit the whole world to World War m.
I'm doing everything I know how to avoid
It. lint retreat is not necessarily the best
way to avoid it.
I've outlined to you What I think is the
best policy. I would hope that Governor
Hatfield and the other Governors, when they
understand *what we are doing and when
I have a chance to submit myself to their
questioning and to counsel with them, would
share my view.
I know they have the same concern for
the American people and the people of the
world as I do. And I don't believe our ob-
jectives will be very different.
As a matter of fact, I asked the Governors.
if they could, to come here at the conclusion
of their deliberations and I will ask them?
I will have my plane go to Minneapolis to-
morrow?and I believe 43 of the 48 have in-
dibated a desire to come here.
I will give them all the information I
can?confidential, secret, and otherwise?
because I have great respect for them and
their judgment, their opinions, and their
leadership. And it's going to be necessary
in this effort. I will also have the Secre-
tary Of State and Secretary of Defense re-
view "With them all their plans and answer
any of their inquiries and we hope resolve
any doubts they might have. Miss Nancy.
12. Personal feelings
Question. Mr. President, after the week of
deliberations on Vietnam, how do you feel?
in the context of your office? We always
hear it's the loneliest iii the world.
Answer. Nancy, I'm sorry, but the camera
and the microphone?I didn't get your ques-
tion. Raise the microphone up where I can
hear, and you camera boys give her a chance.
Question. Mr. President, I say, after the
week of deliberations on Vietnam, how do
you feel personally? Particularly in the con-
text that we always hear, that your office is
the loneliest in the world.
Answer. Well, I don't agree with that. I
don't guess there's anyone in this country
that has as much understanding and as
much help and as many experts and as good
advice?many people of both parties trying
to help him as they are me. Of course, I ad-
mit I need it more than anybody else.
Question. Mr. President, would you be will-
ing to?
Answer. Nancy, I haven't been alone in the
last few days. I've had lots of callers.
13. Talks with Vietcong
Question. Mr. President, would you be
Willing to permit direct negotiations with the
Vietcong forces in South Vietnam?
Answer. We have stated time and time
again that we would negotiate with any
Government, any time, any place. The Viet-
cong Would have no difficulty in being rep-
resented and having their views presented if
Hanoi for a moment decides that she wants
to cease aggression, and I would not think
that would be an insurmountable problem
at all. I think that could be worked out.
14. Gardner appointment
Question. Mr. President, to shift the sub-
ject just a moment. Does your appointment
of Mr. Gardner suggest that there will be
less interest now in the creation of a sep-
arate Department of Education?
Answer. No, not at all. My appointment
of Mr. Gardner suggests that I looked over
America to find the very best man that I
could to lead us forward to become an edu-
cated Nation where every child obtains all the
education that he can take, and where the
health of every citizen is his prime concern,
and where the social security system is
brought into needs with the 20th century.
And after canvassing some 40 or 50 possi-
bilities, I concluded that Mr. Gardner was
the best man I could get, and I asked his
board to relieve him of his duties and re-
lease him to the Government so that he
could furnish the dynamic leadership offi-
cially that he has been furnishing unofficially
to us. And he told me yesterday morning
that he was prepared to dO that. And I
remembered that I hadn't asked him what
State he lived in, where his permanent resi-
dence was, so I could put it on the nomina-
tion paper, or what party he belonged to.
And he rather?well, maybe somewhat hesi-
tatingly said, "I'm a Republican."
I don't mean that his hesitating meant
any particular significance.
But I was happy that he said that, because
a good many Republicans voted for me, and
I don't want to be partial or partisan in
this administration. And I like to see lead-
ership of that kind come from the Republi-
can ranks, and so I told him that if he had
no objection I would announce very promptly
his appointment, and I hoped that he would
give us American leadership without regard
to party, and that's what I think he will do,
and I believe all the Nation will be proud
of him, as we are of Secretary Celebrezze.
Question. Thank you Mr. President.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield.
Mr. KUCHEL. To the extent that I
may be permitted to say so, as a member
of the minority, I join the leader of the
majority party in the Senate in the state-
ment which he has made. The pain-
ful and tragic decision made by President
Eisenhower was one that was inevitable.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
HARRIS in the chair). The time of the
Senator has expired.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that I may have 2
additional minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. KUCHEL. Speaking for the
American people, the President had no
other choice. As I said in the Senate
a few weeks ago, the cause of freedom
in the world is in danger.
The people in the Government of the
United States have a responsibility for
the cause of freedom. Cringing in the
face of danger, retreat before the Red
menace facing South Vietnam will not
bring peace with honor.
There are two ways of life on this
globe: First, the way of freedom as We
know it; the other, as practiced by
communism and, in this instance, fanat-
ical, implacable Asiatic communism. In
time of danger the American people rally
behind their President. This is such a
time.
The hour is late, but the door to peace-
ful discussion remains open, as the Chief
Executive made very clear, once again.
Mr. MA_NSFIFT,D. I appreciate the
statement of the senior Senator from
California, the assistant minority leader.
Mr. AIKEN. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield to my good
friend, the distinguished senior Senator
from Vermont.
Mr. AIKEN. I should like to say, in
support of the statement of the majority
leader, that in spite of the fact that the
President has called for 50,000 more
troops in South Vietnam at this time, his
statement of yesterday was the most en-
couraging and the farthest step toward
peace, if the rest of the world wants
Peace, that we have had up to date
when he stated that we were willing to
sit down at the table, even with Hanoi, to
discuss means of settling the southeast
Asia situation.
That was a very long step toward
going at least halfway, and probably a
little more than halfway. As I see it,
much now depends upon the United Na-
tions. The United Nations has an
opportunity to demonstrate whether it
is an effective agency to bring about
peace and to maintain peace in the world.
I am optimistic over the appointment
of Arthur Goldberg as our Ambassador
to the United Nations. But whether
peace or war comes is largely a ques-
tion which is up to the Communist coun-
tries, particularly Russia, to answer. If
Russia desires peace, President Johnson
has indicated that we will meet them
halfway.
There are two countries?the United
States of America and the Union of
Soviet Socialist Republics?that can re-
store and maintain peace in the world
if they so desire. I would warn, how-
ever, that we cannot expect peace to
come overnight or reassurance of peace
to come overnight. It is necessary to
save face. There is the matter of na-
tional honor, or call it what one will. I
do not know how national honor would
be served by having several hundred
million dead people in the world, or what
it would be worth to us afterward; but
we cannot expect the nations most seri-
ously involved to back away from their
positions overnight. It will have to be
an inching operation, possibly. If Russia
is unwilling to attempt to settle this
matter, she must bear the major part
of the responsibility if a greater war
should come.
Mr. MANSFIELD. I thank the Sena-
tor from Vermont.
Mr. LAUSCHE. Mn President, will
the Senator from Montana yield?
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield.
Mr. LAUSCHE. I join in the remarks
of the majority leader, the Senator from
California [Mr. KucHEL1, and the Sena-
tor from Vermont [Mr. AIKEN).
There has been considerable talk about
the failure of the President attempting,
at a peace table, to bring to an end the
violence that now exists in South Viet-
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
July 29, 196tpproved For Ft6e_asNUR_e_2SESSIUNAL RECORD ? SENATE03/11/04 : CIA
-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
18115
nam. An examination of the record
will disclose that President Johnson has
repeatedly and strenuously attempted to
bring about an understanding that would
end the violence. It began in 1962 with
the creation of the Laos accord. The
U.S. Government yielded and agreed to
create a three-headed government in
Laos. That yielding was prompted by
the desire to restore peace in southeast
Asia.
However, instead of the accord work-
ing as anticipated by the devotees in the
free world, the Laotian border, on the
eastern side, has been used as the means
of transporting equipment and troops
Into South Vietnam.
? Since 1962, repeated evidences have
appeared concerning the efforts of Presi-
dent Kennedy and President Johnson to
bring about an understanding. I shall
not mention them all, but I shall men-
tion a few.
We used other states as a medium of
contacting Hanoi and Russia -to bring
about an understanding. We used U
Thant, of the United Nations. Hanoi re-
fused even to listen to us and did not
grant him an audience.
We used the Cambridge speech made
by the President a short time ago. The
Commonwealth Nations of Great Britain
assembled a delegation which was sent
to Hanoi to attempt to reach an under-
standing. That delegation was not
granted an audience.
I concur completely in the statement
of the Senator from Vermont. We have
gone beyond the half way mark. We
have yielded to the point where some
People can justify saying that we have
gone too far.
I have the deepest compassion for the
President with respect to the decision he
had to make. It was not an easy one.
The Nation was listening with avid ears
to what he would say upon the subject.
But there are times when cold ,reality
demands courageous action, action that
Is reflective of what needs to be done to
preserve the Nation and to guard against
future unlimited loss of life.
I listened, to the President's talk yes-
terday. I could not help having the
_deepest sympathy for him in the burden
he had to carry. But a realistic study
of the facts leads me to believe that there
was no other course for him to follow.
It was painful for him to say to the
youth of the country, "I am calling upon
an increased number of young men to
join in the national defense"; but that
was all he could do.
. I commend the Senator from Montana
for his statement. I join other Senators
who have spoken in the utterance of a
judgment that may seem heavy to the
people of the country; but it is the only
judgment that is available at this time.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr, President, I
join the majority leader and other Sen-
ators who have spoken on the President's
statement of yesterday.
I reiterate one point made by the
majority leader: For the first time, the
President said that we will negotiate,
we. Will discUSS, we will deal with the
North Vietnamese on their terms?I re-
peat on their terms?not ours, thanks.
As the majority leader indicated,
"their terms" means that the Vietcong
may be brought in. We are not neces-
sarily agreeing that the Vietcong be
given status; but we are willing to dis-
cuss the situation with them, as the
President has said, at any time, any-
where, and unconditionally.
However, at this point, one other ele-
ment of the President's speech should be
stressed. Grim and difficult as it may
be for many Senators to accept the situ-
ation, it seems to me that if peace with
the Communists is to be achieved, it is
necessary not only to speak soft words
but also to carry a big stick. It is neces-
sary to make the kind of commitment in
force that will prove that the President
means it when he says that we will fight
if we have to, however long it may take
to fulfill whatever commitment the
United States must make. Only this
kind of concrete action will really con-
vince the Communists that the losses
they will suffer?the economic devasta-
tion?if they persist in this aggression?
will not be worth while. Only this really
makes negotiations and peace sensible
to them.
The big stick was there.
The President has shown that he
means business by saying that he will
double our troop commitments and
double the draft calls. s This is just as
necessary an element in achieving peace,
in my judgment, as the constructive and
positive elements of the President's ex-
cellent speech.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I join
with my colleagues in saying a word
about the message of the President yes-
terday.
I addressed myself briefly to this sub-
ject yesterday, and my remarks today
are made upon reflection. Laying aside
the tremendous value to be gained from
congressional consideration of what is
being done?which I believe would result
In a real crystallization of sentiment be-
hind the President and behind the basic
objectives of our country in South Viet-
nam which are now very clearly shown
to be modest and restrained, and with-
out in any way repeating what has al-
ready been magnificently said?I wish
very much to associate myself with the
point made by the Senator from Ver-
mont [Mr. AIKEN] that if the Russians
willed it, they and the United States
could see that peace was brought to Viet-
nam through the assistance of NATO
countries and other organizations of
which we are a member.
I agree thoroughly with the point
raised by the Senator from Wisconsin
[Mr. PROXMIRE] that the statement of
the President is a great step forward. It
demonstrates our willingness to negotiate
even upon the proposals put forth by
Hanoi and, as the Secretary of State had
already made clear, to proceed to nego-
tiate even if the Vietcong are represented
in the North Vietnamese delegation.
I should like to add to all of those
points, with which I thoroughly agree,
and to the backing of the President es-
sentially, with which I also thoroughly
agree, that we must constantly appraise
the military feasibility of our presence
In South Vietnam. I do not wish to see
the United States get itself involved in
another Dien Bien Phu.
It is for that reason that I believe
the President of the United States acted
very wisely when he used such restraint
in limiting the amount of force to be used
In the struggle to the amount of force
required, instead of endeavoring to em-
ploy overwhelming force.
I am sure that the President had two
contrary courses open to him: to take
the restrained and modest action which
he did take or, on the other hand, to use
a vastly increased force of equipment
and men in an effort to overwhelm the
Vietcong with the determination of the
United States to win this struggle, to
declare a state of national emergency
and to call up the reservists.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
time of the Senator has expired.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that I may be per-
mitted to continue for an additional five
minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, the Senator from New
York is recognized for an additional 5
minutes.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, the Pre-
sident made one determination very
clear; at the same time, he demonstrated
our willingness to negotiate and but-
tressed his statement of willingness by
stressing the use of the United Nations
and our readiness to negotiate even upon
the proposals of Hanoi.
I believe that the President has stated
a most wise course in this respect. How-
ever, I still hope that we may have the
opportunity for a definitive debate which
would marshal the country behind a
moderate and reasonable American pol-
icy.
I hope very much that the President
will take comfort in the fact that this
moderate and reasonable policy is the
right approach, as evidenced by the fine
reception which his statement to the
country has received, and by the support
of myself and many others who have
from time to time asked questions and
expressed serious doubts concerning the
Policies being pursued.
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION OF NEW
YORK LEGISLATURE MEMORIAL-
IZING OPPOSITION TO PROPOSED
REAPPORTIONMENT CONSTITU-
TIONAL AMENDMENT
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent to have printed at
this point in the RECORD a concurrent
resolution of the Legislature of the State
of New York memorializing Congress and
the State legislatures to oppose efforts
being made to amend the Constitution
with respect to the apportionment of
legislatures.
There being no objection, the concur-
rent resolution was ordered to be printed
In the RECORD, as follows:
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CJA WIR
ADP6ZBOIDA00030019000My 29,
18116 CONGRESSIONAL REuuttv ? braNt 1965
NEW YORK SENATE RESOLUTION 168
(Concurrent resolution of the Legislature of
the State of New York memorializing the
Congress of the United States an&the leg-
islatures of all the States to oppose efforts
which are being made to promote an
amendment to the constitution which
would permit one house of a bicameral
legislature to be apportioned on a basis
other than equal treatment of citizens or
residents)
Whereas efforts are being made in the leg-
islatures of the several States and in the
Congress of the United States to promote an
amendment to the Constitution strhich would
permit one house of a bicameral legislature
to be apportioned on a basis other than equal
treatment of citizens or residents; and
Whereas such an amendment would par-
tially nullify the historic and salutory deci-
sion of the U.S. Supreme Court that people
must be given equal privileges of representa-
tion regardless of their place of residence, by
permitting an unrepresentative house to veto
the actions of a more representative house;
and
Whereas the unequal representation of
States in the U.S. Senate is not pertinent in
this connection because the States were
sovereign and indecendent entities whose
equal representation was naturally demanded
and necessary in order to create a Federal
union and there is no such sovereign status
In the dis"a',.cts of a State legislature; and
Whereas there are at least as many special
Interests requiring representation in propor-
tion to population in the thickly settled
areas of the States as in the sparsely settled
areas; and
Whereas the principle of majority rule re-
quires that districts with a minority of the
people of a State should not be able to out-
vote in a legislative body districts with a
substantially greater number of people, as
has often happened in this and other States
and will happen again if the proposed
amendment should prevail: Now, therefore,
be it
Resolved, That the legislature of the State
of New York strongly opposes the proposed
amendment and supports the decision of
the U.S. Supreme Court requiring equal
treatment of a State's people in its represent-
ative bodies as a fundamental bulwark of
democratic self-government; and be it fur-
ther
Resolved, That copies of this resolution be
sent to the Governors and the majority and
minority leaders of the legislative bodies of
all the States and to all Members of the
Congress of the United States.
By order of the senate,
GEORGE VAN LENGES,
Secretary.
RESOLUTIONS PASSED BY WEST-
ERN GOVERNOR'S CONFERENCE
RELATIVE TO WESTERN STATES
WA IT...it COUNCIL
Mr. MOSS. Mr. President, a number
of resolutions passed at the Western
States Governors Conference held re-
cently in Portland, Oreg., contained rec-
ornMendations for action by the Con-
gresS. Among the important eubiects
which were discussed and upon which
the assembled Governors offered counsel
were oil shale leasing, public lands ad-
ministration, minerals taxation, import
contrOls to protect domestic resources
Industries, and others. I assure otir
Western Governors that we in the Con-
gress will heed the words they have
written.
To my mind, however, far the most
significant resolution passed was their
first one, which was unanimously
adopted, and which established and fi-
nanced a Western States Water Council,
with a permanent staff and central office,
to effect cooperation among the Western
States in integrating water resource de-
velopment.
The resolution recognizes that the
water problems of one State or one area
of the West are the water problems of
all Western States and areas, and that
full integration may require the removal
of water from areas of water surpluses to
areas of water deficiencies. The reso-
lution, of course, recognizes the rights of
upstream users of water which originate
in their area, or which flow through it,
and these rights must be safeguarded.
But the approach is realistic and practi-
cal in the resolution. It serves no pur-
pose to have water wasting away in one
part of the West while communities and
farms are withering up in another part
for want of that water. The West can
prosper most, and best, if it prospers
together.
I ask unanimous consent that this his-
tory-making resolution establishing the
Western States Water Council be printed
in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the resolu-
tion was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
WESTERN GOVERNORS' CONFERENCE, PORTLAND.
OREG., Jerre 10-13, 1965
WESTERN STATES WATER cianascra
Whereas the future growth and prosperity
of the Western States depend upon the avail-
ability of adequate quantities of water of
suitable quality; and
Whereas the need for accurate and un-
biased appraisal of present and future re-
quirements of each area of the West and for
the most equitable means of providing for
the meeting of such requirements demands
a regional effort: Now, therefore, be it
Resolved, by the western Governors' con-
ference, That it approves the creation of a
Western States Water Council to be estab-
lished in general conformity with the or-
ganizational pattern of the attached sug-
gested rules of organization developed by
the Western Water Resources Task Force ap-
pointed by the members of this conference;
and be in further
Resolved. That the members of this con-
ference will take all feasible steps to pro-
vide the support to give effective meaning
to the creation of such a council, including
the establishment, upon recommendation of
the council of a staff and central office to be
financed in an amount not to exceed the sum
of $150,000 for the first year from appropri-
ations by each of the member States equally.
SUGGESTED RULES or ORGANIZATION
WESTERN STATES WATER CO LYNCH.
ARTICLE NAME
The name of this organization shall be
"The Western States Water Council."
ARTICLE 11?PURPOSE
To accomplish effective cooperation among
Western States in planning for programs
leading to integrated development of their
water resources.
ARTICLE III?PRINCIPLES
Except as otherwise provided by existing
compacts, the planning of western water re-
sources development on a regional basis will
be predicated upon the following principles
for protection of States of origin:
1. All water-related needs of the States of
origin, including but not limited to irriga-
tion, municipal and industrial water, stood
control, power, navigation, recreation, water
quality control, and fish and wildlife preser-
vation and enhancement shall be considered
in formulating the plan.
2. The rights of States to water derived
from interbasin transfers shall be subordi-
nate to needs within the States of origin.
3. The cost of water development to the
States of origin shall not be greater than
would have been the case had there never
been an export from those States under any
such plan.
ARTICLE TV?FUNCTIONS
1. Encourage large-scale, comprehensive
planning for regional water development by
State. Federal and other appropriate agen-
cies.
2. In the formulation of plans for regional
development of water resources, criteria be
prepared to protect and further State and
local interests.
3. Undertake continuing review of all
large-scale interstate and interbasin plans
and projects for development, control or
utilization of water resources in the Western
States and submit recommendations to the
Governors regarding the compatibility of
such projects and plans with an orderly and
optimum development of water resources in
the Western States.
ARTICLE 17?MEM5ER5HIP
1. The membership of the council shall
consist of not more than three representa-
tives of each of the States of Arizona, Cali-
fornia, Colorado, Idaho, Montana, Nevada,
New Mexico. Oregon, Utah, Washington and
Wyoming appointed by and serving at the
pleasure of the respective Governors. The
States of Alaska and Hawaii shall be added
to membership if their respective Governors
so request.
2. Member States may name alternate rep-
resentatives for any meeting.
3. Any State may withdraw from member-
ship upon written notice by its Governor.
ARTICLE VI?EX OFFICIO MEMBERS
The Governors of the member States shall
be ex officio members and shall be in addi-
tion to the regularly appointed members
from each State.
ARTICLE VII?OFFICERS
The officers of the council shall be the
chairman, vice chairman, and secretary-
treasurer. They shall be selected in the
manner provided in article VIII.
ARTICLE VIII?SELECTION OF orrIceee
The chairman and vice chairman, who
shall be from different States, shall be elected
from the council by a majority vote at a
regular meeting to be held in July of each
year. The secretary-treasurer shall be ap-
pointed by and serve at the pleasure of the
chairman and need not be a member of the
council. The chairman and vice chairman
shall serve a 1-year term but shall be eligible
for reelection.
ARTICLE IX?VOTING
Each State represented at a meeting of the
council shall have one vote. A quorum shall
consist of a majority of the member States.
No matter may be brought before the coun.-
cil for a vote unless advance notice of such
matter has been mailed to each member of
the council at least 30 days prior to the meet-
ing at which such matter is to be considered;
provided, that matters may be placed on the
agenda at any meeting by unanimous agree-
ment of those States represented at the
meeting. In any matter put before the coun-
cil for a vote, other than election of officer,
any member State may upon request obtain
one automatic delay in the voting until the
next meeting of the council. Further delays
in voting on such matter may be obtained
only by majority vote. No recommendation
may be issued or external position taken by
the council unless by unanimous vote of all
member States, except, however, on all
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
July 29, 1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
internal matters action may be taken by
majority vote.
ARTICLE X--CONDUCT OF MEETINGS
Except as otherwise provided herein,
meetings shall be conducted under Roberts
Rules of Order, Revised.
ARTICLE XI?MEETINGS
The council shall have one regular meet-
ing each year in the month of July at a time
and place to be decided by the chairman.
Special meetings may be called by the chair-
man or by a majority of the member States
upon 30 days' written notice.
samicis En?LizarraTioNs
The work of the council shall in no way
defer or delay authorization or construction
of any projects now before Congress for either
authorization or appropriation.
ARTICLE EDT?AMENDMENT
These articles may be amended at any
meeting of the council by unanimous vote
of the member States represented at the
meeting. The substance of the proposed
amendment shall be included in the call of
such meeting.
SHOWING OF FILM "AFRICA TO-
DAY" ON THURSDAY, AUGUST
5, 1965
Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, it will
be recalled that I made an extensive
trip of Africa during 1962. I took about
7,500 feet of film on that trip.
From that film I produced a full reel
entitled "Africa Today." I have shown
this film on several occasions in the Sen-
ate auditorium. I have been asked by
quite a few Senators and others to have
another showing.
So I have decided to show "Africa To-
day" in the auditorium of the New Senate
Office Building on Thursday, August 5,
at 2:30 pan. for one showing, and at
7 p.m. for another showing. I am hope-
ful that Senators who wish to see the
porturnty to do so.
film will take
*THE PRE
'S SPEECH ON
ylETNAM
Mr. CLARK. Mr, President, yester-
day I listened with keen interest to the
remarks of the President of the United
States at his press conference with re-
spect to the unhappy situation in Viet-
nam. I have not made any comment on
the President's address. I do not intend
to do so for the time being, other than to
ask unanimous consent that an editorial
? entitled "This Is Really War," which ap-
peared in today's New York Times, be
printed in the RECORD at this point as a
Part of my remarks, and to indicate my
general approval of the point of view ex-
pressed in the editorial.
There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
THIS IS REALLY WAR
The President's measured speech to the
Nation yesterday could leave no doubt about
the seriou.sness of the situation irf which this
country finds itself today in respect to the
war in Vietnam.
The United States is now fighting a land
war in Asia?a limited one so far but never-
theless a war on the Asiatic Continent. It
is a war to which more men, materiel, and
money must daily be committed?not to
achieve an evanescent victory but to prevent
further deterioration in the American mili-
tary position. It is a war in the jungles of
Asia against an ever-growing and well-
trained guerrilla force that is fighting in its
own kind of country among its own people
to overthrow a government, of no popular
standing or strength, with which the United
States is allied.
It is a war the primary goal of which
now?so far as the United States is con-
cerned?is to convince the Communists that
they cannot achieve their aims in Vietnam
by force of arms. And it is a war which, as
both the President and Ho Chi Minh have
indicated, could go on for months, years, or
decades,
Despite the deep difficulties of the present
and the tremendous implications for the fu-
ture, few Americans will quarrel with Presi-
dent Johnson's determined conclusion to
hold on in Vietnam. This is quite different
from saying we will bring the other side to its
knees.
The President is now encouraging Ambas-
sador Goldberg to see what the United Na-
tions or any member country can do to bring
about negotiations. It is vital to keep open
the door to a parley, and Mr. Johnson specifi-
cally mentioned his willingness to discuss
Hanoi's own proposals. The possibilities of
utilizing the 1954 Geneva Agreement need
further exploration, as the President again
indicated. However, it should be recognized
that the breakdown of the 1954 treaty was
as much the fault of Saigon and Washington
as it was of Hanoi.
But?no doubt because of the deteriorating
military situation which President Johnson
has just taken steps to arrest--the Commu-
nists in recent months have shown no indica-
tion whatsoever of a willingness to negotiate.
Therefore, the problem that faces the Presi-
dent and the American people today is to
convince the Chinese and Vietnamese Com-
munists that, as Mr. Johnson said, "a violent
solution is impossible." This goes for both
sides. The Government of the United States
knows this and publicly recognizes it, and is
ready "to move from the battlefield to the
conference table" without preconditions.
The President made it very clear yester-
day that he intends a controlled and severely
limited operation on the part of the United
States; and this is as important a point as
could be made. It is fruitless at this stage to
argue over errors of past policy, going back
to 1954 and even further beyond. What is
vital is that this war of the United States in
Vietnam be held down to the absolute mini-
mum necessary to prove to Hanoi and Peiping
that military aggression is not worth while
and never will be.
Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I hope
that in the conduct of the war in the
months ahead every effort will be made
to minimize American casualties without
in any way weakening our position in de-
fending those parts of Vietnam? which
are controlled by ourselves and our allies
in Saigon.
VICE PRESIDENT HUMPHREY'S AD-
DRESS BEFORE NATIONAL GOV-
ERNORS CONFERENCE
Mr, CLARK. Mr. President, an July 27,
at Minneapolis, Minn., at the National
Governors Conference, the Vice President
of the United States delivered a fine ad-
dress, which I believe should be called to
the attention of my colleagues and all
readers of the CoisrosEssroNAL RECORD.
I ask unanimous consent that a copy
of the address may be printed in the
RECORD at this point in my remarks.
There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
18117
REMARKS BY VICE PRESIDENT HUBERT HUM-
PHREY AT THE NATIONAL GOVERNORS CON-
PE6R5ENCE, MINNEAPOLIS, MINN., JULY 27,
19
Our Government, over these past few days,
has been reaching important decisions.
Such decisions challenge us. They test our
fiber.
We face adversaries who are tenacious and
strong and arrogant.
We face a new and sophisticated assault?
an assault from an enemy organized in de-
tail, trained in depth, skilled in a kind of
warfare we Americans have only begun to
understand.
South Vietnam is the testing ground for
the so-called war of national liberation?a
contest in which totalitarians believe they
can defeat the forces of the most advanced
of all democratic nations. In South Viet-
nam our adversaries seek to demonstrate de-
cisively that arrogant militancy?and not
peaceful coexistence?is the path to follow.
But, great as it is, the challenge we face
today in Vietnam is only one of many chal-
lenges which confront us.
We no longer live safe in our continental
refuge. There is no place to hide. There
is no security in isolation.
While our Nation enjoys the greatest pros-
perity in history, and possesses unequaled
power, we also live in mounting danger and
uncertainty.
The world is filled with disorder, violent
change, yes, revolution.
We must face the fact that there are
modern weapons which can destroy the civil-
ize,: world in a half-hour's time.
We must face the fact that two-thirds
of the world is poor, hungry, and sick, and
the gap between the rich nations and the
poor nations widens each year. These rest-
less, poor and yet proud people demand by
whatever means, something better. This
two-thirds of the world is the target for
those who promise quick and easy solutions
to old and complex problems.
The globe is exploding with people.
We are engulfed in great waves of scien-
tific and technological change which we do
not fully understand and which can over-
come US OT save 1.18.
We must master science and technology so
that it may serve man.
We must learn the techniques of defeating
the new tactics of aggression.
But we must also learn this truth: The
mere existence of deep poverty in the world
is not only unjust?it is an invitation to
freedom's destruction.
And we must realize that this gigantic task
of helping others to help themselves, of re-
sisting aggression and protecting freedom
can only be sustained if America, the
leader of free nations, is powerful and united.
Today in southeast Asia, and elsewhere, we
carry burdens. They require great alloca-
tion of our resources to national security and
defense.
Nevertheless, even should these burdens
grow heavier, we must still devote ourselves
to building a better society here at home.
For our wealthy Nation has resources for
both defense and social justice, for national
security and domestic well-being.
Today we face no choice between guns
and schools, ammunition and medical care.
We face instead long-term, continuing ne-
cessities on many fronts?necessities which
are within our power to meet.
For the only way we Americans will be
able to carry out world burdens in the years
ahead will be by creating today a strong,
healthy and cohesive society.
We know there are great tasks ahead in
our own country.
In 5 years, 211 million people will live here.
Half of them will be under age 25. Within
10 years we will need?each year?over 2 mil-
lion new homes, Welfare and health facilities
for 5 million more people over age 65, trans-
Approved For Release 2003/11/04 : CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
18118 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
portation systems to move- goods and peo-
ple, fresh air and light and open space.
United we can size the future and shape it
for the good of man. Divided we will be-
come the future's victim.
I have seen the great American space
launchings at Cape Kennedy. I have seen
Americans working together there?scientists
and technicians, military officers, men from
our universities, the giant prime contrac-
tors, the smaller subcontractors, officials of
Government, business, labor, and medicine.
I have seen these people?not. defending
their separate sovereignties but contributing
to a partnership, a common cause, for the
benefit of this Nation and all people. I have
seen them there?dedicated to excellence
and success.
To see Cape Kennedy Ls to know what men
can do.
It is a. great lesson for our time.
That same dedication and unity of effort
that have vaulted us into the far reaches of
space must be applied throughout all our
society.
We can no longer afford the debility of dis-
unity. We can no longer tolerate the can-
cars of hate and discrimination.
We must no longer divide ourselves by
emotional appeals and labels--northerner,
southerner, labor boss, economic royalist.
In interdependence is the new dimension
of international security, it is even more so
a fact and requirement of domestic strength.
Today there are those who take for granted
our role as leader of the free world?just as
some take for granted our democratic Amer-
ican heritage. But r ask you to consider
that role.
The mantle of leadership is not a cloak of
comfort, but rather the robe of responsibility.
Leadership does net permit a person or a
nation license or luxury.
Leadership imposes responsibility and at-
Orris few privileges.
Today, to deserve and insure that leader-
ship, we must build a nation of men and
women able to fulfill the hopes of those who
cifinee before us and to lay the groundwork
far the yet unborn generation to follow us.
Today the world asks: What is the nature
of today's America??this American being
tested as never befere.
I see today% Amertcan as the same restless,
ildvanturous, citizen as his forebears.
I see this fellow American as the son or
daughter of a rich Nation and yet a person
of conscience, With a deep concern for the
fate of his fellowman.
I see him at one Who has defeated the ene-
mies of freedom, yet extends the hand of
friendship and cooperation to build a new
and better woted community.
T see today's American surrounded by ma-
terralisan, yet questioning its value. Impa-
tient with things as they are, but not im-
petioles in remedy or judgment, Generous
but not patronizing. Motivated by ideal, but
satisfied only with accomplishment. Strong,
but not belligerent. Willing to debate, but
able to decide.
And the American of this generation be-
lieves that the world need not destroy itself
by war. He knows that the pursuit of peace
is an act of courage and that resisting aggres-
sion. is the duty of free men.
Perhaps the qualities I see in today's
American are then I wish to see. For these
are the qualities that must strengthen our
people in a time of trouble and danger.
But I believe my thinking is not wishful.
For today in America we are increasingly
agreed upon common goals, ire our States,
In our cities, In our country.
Today in our society we increasingly
recognize that what we do today will make
tomorrow.
Together, as Americans, we are forging a
society of strength and justice and oppor-
tunity. And, despite theism who would turn
us in other directions, we most move ahead
in our determination.
That all Americans will have an education
which can give them opportunity to lift
themselves,
That all Americans will have an equal
right to vote.
That older Americans will have adequate
medical care.
That we can make our cities better places
in which to live and work in saftey and
health.
That we should preserve this Nation's
beauty, history and natural resources.
That we must give the aging, poor and by-
passed hope for life and work.
That we should open our doors again to
immigrants who can enrich and lend new
vitality to our national life.
That we should help others too in less-
fortunate places to find a better life.
That we shall defend our Nation, and
those who seek freedom, against attack.
That we shall not drop the torch of in-
ternational leadership.
We will need patience. perserverance, in-
ner strength to meet the forces moving
through the world, to preserve the peace
above all, in the words of our President,
"to press forward, not for our gain and our
greatness alone, but rather for the gain and
the good of all mankind."
I believe we Americans will prove equal
to the hard tasks ahead.
We shall pursue, with resolution, the res-
toration of peace in southeast Asia. We shall
prove to the aggressors that the cost of ag-
gression comes too high and that they must
leave their neighbors alone. We shall once
again demonstrate by unequivocal action
and deed that force of arms will not drive
freedom from the field.
And, make no mistake about it, if ag-
gression, succeeds in one part of this world,
it will quickly follow elsewhere. Ti we fail
to stand today, we shall have to stand to-
morrow.
We shall uphold freedom's cause wherever
that cause is threatened?in another corner
of the world or even in a darkened corner of
our own country.
I believe that Americans will not only em-
brace, but lead, the real revolution of our
times?the revolution which took flame from
our own in America--the revolution toward
opportunity, human dignity, self-determina-
tion and self-respect for each child entering
life.
We are the progenitors of this world revolu-
tion of emancipation and liberty. It is our
obligation. In our strength and wealth, to
give it continued life.
We are the defenders and the advocates of
that immortal and continuing commitment
to all mankinds:
"We hold these truths to be self-evident,
that all men are created equal, that they
are endowed by their Creator with certain
unalienable rights, that among these are life,
liberty and the pursuit of happiness, That
to secure thee rights, governments are in-
stituted among men, deriving their just
powers from the consent of the governed."
We cannot stand aside and let totalitarians
seize and distort to their own diabolical pur-
pose the hopes and aspirations of the needy,
the poor, the weak.
We can and we will make the promise of
America come true: One nation, under God,
indivisible with liberty and justice for all.
We mut-t, with strong and active faith,
move forward. If we do, I believe that, in
the end, history will say that this was a time
when man's free spirit came under mortal
threat, and man Prevailed.
ACTION ON THE HOME HONT?AD-
DRESS BY DAVID E. PRICE, M.D.,
DEPUTY SURGEON GENERAL
Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I have for
many years been convinced that govern-
mental action as well as private and civic
July 29, 1965
action in the area of population control
was required if we are to leave our chil-
dren and grandchildren a country, and
indeed a globe, which they can inhabit.
I ask unanimous consent that a speech
entitled "Action on the Home Front," de-
livered by David E. Price, Deputy Sur-
geon General, presented to the Sym-
posium of Population Growth and Birth
Control at Boston University on April 23,
1965, may be printed in the REcORD at
this point in my remarks.
There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed in the REcoRD,
as follows:
ACT/ON ON elm Home FRONT
(By David E. Price, M.D., Deputy Surgeon
General, Public Health Service, Department
of Health, Education, and Welfare, pre-
sented to the Symposium of Population.
Growth and Birth Control, Boston Univer-
sity, Boston, Mass., Apr. 23, 1965)
I welcome the opportunity provided by
this Symposium on Population Growth and
Birth Control to discuss the domestic active-
ties of Government in this field.
Tracing the events that lead to Federal
action back to their early beginnings?or,
more exactly, attempting to trace them?is
almost certainly a futile, but nevertheless a
fascinating, exercise. Somewhere, sometime,
of course, one first person has to have rec-
ognized an existing or impending problem
and to have suggested, in broad terms et
least, the remedy that eventually will be
adopted. Typically, he will find few follow-
ers and a notable lag phase occurs.
But if the problem is real and the remedy
a sound one in the context of the knowledge
of the times, it is bound to occur to others
in due course. The discussion widens--
gradually at first, and then rapidly?and in
the process two purposes are served. Defini-
tions of the problem and of methods for
dealing with it are refined and updated, and
the public is informed of the issues.
Since we are a democracy, and since the
powers of our Government are derived from
the consent of the governed, it follows that
considerable public discussion and agree-
ment on the need for action, and on the
feasibility of the action, must occur before
a governmental program can be effective.
Unless there is something approaching a
consensus before a program is initiated, end
unless a consensus is maintained thereafter,
that program is not likely to have a long
Life. As an example, I give you prohibition.
Population problems have usually been
seen from two separate viewpoints. One sees
the problem of total population in relation to
natural resources and the state of technol-
ogy?an economic viewpoint. The other
considers the problems of individuals, wheth-
er the total population is expanding or not--
I'll call it a humanitarian approach. It has
taken some time for these separate schools
to make common cause.
The economic viewpoint, the recognition of
the problems to be created by limited nat-
ural resources in relation to an expanding
population, is usually traced back to
Thomas Robert Malthus, although (and here
I take Lord Keynes as my authority) the
principal point had been largely made by
several earlier 18th century writers, but
without creating any particular stir. It was
not an argument to impress this country dur-
ing the 19th and early 20th centuries, espe-
cially since it appeared to have been refuted,
for all practical purposes, by the industrial
revolution.
Our natural resources seemed inexhausti-
ble. American communities competed with
each other for population and boasted of
their successess. Rapid growth of popula-
tion was considered to be synonymous with
prosperity. And of course it was, at least for
some.
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP671300446R000300190008-1
'Approved For Release 2003/11/04 : CIA-RDP67B 04 \ 000300190008-1 18121
My 29, 1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD? SENATE
dent-elect Edward W. Kuhn of the ABA, At- These Conference documents demonstrate
terney General Nicholas It atzenbach and that the 8-year-old research program de-
other aw leadefs ftocIaimed the 'first World signed to collect the basic information need-
Law Day ever4to'be 'held saying: ed for the work program to strengthen the
''T11,0 foundation for the peace of mankind world's law and judicial institutions has been
Within ,and among nations is a system of law largely successful. Concrete facts and re-
and legal institutions. * * * We Seek to as- sults are thus available to undergird this
pure substance for the dream of a world that program arid to assure its future progress.
is ruled by law * * * this year, in September, The facts contained in these documents also
the leaders of the law of many nations will record the ever-growing worldwide dialog
assemble here in Washington * * * they will on improvements and reforms in the field of
confer on this most vital and most basic sub- law. From the report on newly developing
ject Of strengthening the hope for world Afghanistan and its new constitution to
peace by strengthening the rule of law among England's current drive to update its ancient
nations of the world. And so to honor this criminal law and our own dramatic advances
significant occasion, '1 am today proclaiming in the field of civil rights and individual
September 13, 1985, as World Law Day." liberties. In fact, in many nations including
President Johnson is right in his assess- Russia the major reform in law is more pro-
meat of the importance of the great World tection and rights fat the individual. And
Law Conference that is to take place in Wash- the major reform in international law is the
ington, DC., this September 12-18, 1965. It new trend toward providing protections and
will be a truly unique peace gathering and liberties for the individual under the new
a Major milestone along the ever more die- world law rules and in the new international
cernibIe road to a world ruled by law. Two courts and legal institutions now coming into
thousand leading judges, lawyers and la* being. For centuries international law and
professors from over 100 nations will sit down courts related to and were largely confined
together to consider and adopt a program of to nations and the new trend. is most mean-
research, education and cooperation designed ingful in its obvious importance. This new
to give increased momentum to the growing status under world law for the individual
initiative to make law and courts a major accounts in no small measure for the new
factor in world affairs. The greatest men of and growing interest and support which are
the law from all over the world will take part. making international law a major factor in
Concrete steps will be considered and adopted world affairs.
to translate man's age-old ideal of a World The Conference documents to the non-
ruled by law from dream into reality. A lawyer are a fascinating panorama of a little
world law code, a world court system, as well known part of civilization for today; as in
as numerous other law rules and legal in- the past, law and courts remain mysterious
stitutions are being formulated. They will to most of the world's nonlawyers. These
not be presented as a finished product at the studies further prove that everywhere law is
conference for it will take years of concen- taken for granted like the air we breathe, or
tra,teci effort to accomplish this. But My the water we drink, and that it is a new idea
story is that this work is in fact underway to consider that law can indeed grow and be
and the Washington conference will give im- expanded through concentrated research as
petus to these essential tasks. - did science in splitting the atom and con-
All nations have a law system and a court quering space. Science has proved that
system?be it weak or strong, usual or un- growth progress flows directly from the con-
usual by our standards, decreed by one man centration of sufficient manpower, brain-
or adopted by a democratically elected legis- power, and money. And public support for
lature. Law is the foundation of society and a research and development program in law,
civilization. History teaches' that in nation similar to that of the past 20 years in science,
after naticrii law has replaced force as the is a major part of the picture before the
controlling factor among each nation's peo.: legal profession at this great World Con-
pies. A handy example is shown daily on ference. These Conference law studies prove
TV where "the law" replaces the six-gun in that just as the world's peoples slowly
_western movies. A program whereby the law awakened to the benefits to them from ex-
;enlaces atomic bombs is a must if nuclear panded scientific development and then
holocaust is to be prevented. That the task wholeheartedly backed that expansion, so
is difficult should not be a deterrent to a too are the world's peoples slowly but surely
generkition that has split the atom, put a awakening to the promise and potential of
man into apace and will soon put a man on a peaceful world ruled by law.
Mars and the Moon. The collection of information in the Con-
From the four corners of the globe, speak- ference documents SB not only more com-
ing all languages, belonging to all creeds or prehensive in scope but it is also unique.
none, living under all political systems, those No such overall compilation on the law and
attending the Washington world conference courts in the world?both nationally and
will be the greatest international assemblage internationally?has ever been done before
.of high court judges, practicing lawyers, as the basis of work by such an interna-
Government lawyers and teachers of law in tional law Conference. In past Conferences
the history of Mankind, there has been a separation of national and
international law without full realization of
. Headed by the Chief Justice of the United the fact that a strong international law eye-
States, Earl Warren, and the Chief Justice of tam must be based upon strong national law
the World Court (International Court of systems and that the two go hand in hand.
Justice), Sir Percy Spender, the array of This law Conference will thus have the best
legal talent thus generated has never been broad overview of the world's law and courts
exceeded. Because of the prestige, learning ever put together to serve as a foundation for
and capacity of the participants, the actions their effort. And because they will have the
of the Conference should make a tremendous whole picture they will be able to work better
impact on the ever-accelerating program for on its- weaknesses and gaps. Further, the
World peace through law, volume entitled "Law and Judicial Systems
The Conference is private and financed of the World?Lawyer "and Law School
from private sources such as foundations and Directory" will also serve as a fund of-infor-
corporations, but chiefly by law firms and in- mation whereby the delegates may know
dividual lawyers. These contributions now what law exists in other nations, and how
add up to more than $400,000. In amount their own law systems compare. The direc-
they range from $5 to over $1,000 and more tory will enable continuous contacts with
are lacing ,received daily from all Over the each other fot further information. This
world as contribilKions from lawyers in any sharing of the la, heritage of' the world is
amount ate most welcome, The more money bound to help improve the lair- of all na-
ve have the better job we can do. If you tions as well as international la*.
are wondering whether I am asking you for That this hew private initiative is effec-
money, I am. tive worldwide is shown by the attention
governments are giving to it. As in'the case
of President Johnson, heads of State, Gov-
ernors, and mayors all over the world are
proclaiming World Law Day and encourag-
ing their lawyers and judges to attend the
World Conference. Local exhibits of law
codes and other law instruments are also
being planned throughout the world on
World Law Day.
This Conference is one of those great mo-
ments in history when men of good will
gather_ to advance the cause of world peace.
These men and women of the law will have
no trouble understanding each other. They
speak a common language. The language
found in universal principles of the law.
But sessions of the Conference will be
simultaneously translated into French.
Spanish and English. All books, work papers
and other documents will also be in these
three languages. But special arrangements
for Russian, Japanese, Chinese and other
languages have been made through use as
interpreters of foreign law students from
abroad now studying in the United States
who will serve as aids to the distinguished
visitors.
As we of the law counsel together on
specific steps to fufill the law's historic mis-
sion of assuring peace within and among
nations, we will, however, have more aids
going for us than ever existed before. We
will have more information on national and
interational law, more ways of understand-
ing each other, and more preparation work
than ever yet done on a world law conference.
The delegates will have 4 basic docu-
ments before them to assist them in their
work: (1) a workbook of 300 pages sum-
marizing existing international law and in-
ternational judicial institutions; (2) a sum-
mary of existing national law, and national
judicial institutions in 103 nations plus a
lawyer, law school, and judicial directory
covering judicial and law leaders of these 103
nations; (3) a special work paper giving
more detail than is contained in the work-
book by one of the world's leading experts on
each subject to be covered in 12 work ses-
sions; and (4) the first volume of a world
law code containing the treaties of most ef-
fectiveness on a worldwide basis.
The subjects to be covered by the 12 work
sessions are: (1) increasing use and useful-
ness of the World Court; (2) creation and
jurisdiction of regional, trial and specialized
courts; (3) existing and proposed interna-
tional arbitration tribunals; (4) interna-
tional law in domestic courts; (5) interna-
tional and satellite communications; (6) law
guarantees for foreign investments; (7) space
law; (8) laws affecting human rights; (9)
international judicial cooperation; (10) dis-
armament law; (11) protection of patents
and copyrights; and (12) law problems of
multination corporations in internatonal
trade.
But above all, these compilations for the
Conference on both international and na-
tional law prove that the rule of law is
growing stronger day by day and that law is
more used and useful day by day. For ex-
ample, the United Nations itself and its
specialized agencies have generated more law
and more legal institutions in the past 20
years than was created in all the past years
of recorded history. This contribution to
law growth alone proves the U.N.'s great
value but it is often overlooked in the dire
moaning over the veto in the Security Coun-
cil and dues impass in the Assembly. And
this fact will give Mr. Justice Goldberg a
real foundation for his law leadership
through the U.N. The facts in the work book
on the Common Market also prove the great
value of an international court for there it is
recorded that this Market's Supreme Court
Of Justice has decided over 1,000 cases over
the past few years between nations that
formerly used war as their ultimate method
of decision. The Conference documents are
Approved For Release-2003/11/04 :-CIA-RDP671300446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04 ? CIA-RDP67B00446R00030019000a-1
18122 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE July 29, 1965
literally chuck-full of similar facts proving
law's recent dramatic growth and usefulness
internationally.
The Conference has generated a number of
"firsts," all designed to bring law sources,
traditions, and heritage to bear on the work
program to expand and create more law,
.tmore courts, and more legal institutions to
further world peace. Among these are: (1)
the first world gathering of high court judges
of nations; (2) the first World Law Day; and
(3) the first World Exhibit of Law Codes
and Historic Instruments of the Law, col-
lected from all over the world including
England's Magna Carta (750 years old this
year), our own Constitution, Bill of Rights,
and similar documents from many nations.
Current law codes of nations, law books and
United Nations and other international law
documents will also be exhibited not only at
the Conference but in national and state
capitals, city halls, courthouses, bar head-
quarters, libraries and other public buildings
all over the world in honor of World Law
Day.
Copies of the provisional program-, and
brochures in three languages, on World Law
Day and the World Exhibit of Law Codes, and
Historic Instruments of the Law have been
released. There have been all kinds of world
exhibits on everything from airplanes to
waste disposals for kitchens but this is in
fact the first law show ever held on a world
basis. It should be interesting to view the
law codes of nations in their native lan-
guages and thrilling to see the great histortc
law instruments which have meant so much
in humankind's slow crawl upward from
caveman to-the space age. All the "golden"
, eras of history where man benefited most
from improvements in his economic and so-
cial status have been eras of great advances
in law. From the oldest known law code,
Hamxnurabi's Babylon law code in 2000 B.C.,
,to the Law of Moses in 1450 B.C., to Jtisti-
nian's Roman Law Code of AD. 6, to our own
Constitution in 1787, growth in the field of
law has been synonymous with recognition of
human liberties and advancement of the
status of the individual.
While the conference is the major legal
event of International Cooperation Year, this
agenda Of research, information, and cooper-
ation contains ideas of advance law in the
world which have been 8 years in the making.
This program was launched by the American
Bar Association during its historic meeting
in London in 1957. Since then the interest,
support, and cooperation has been secured of
the leaders of over 1 million judges and
lawyers in 120 nations. A meeting has been
held for the lawyers on each Continent, i.e.,
in Tokyo for Asia, Lagos for Africa, Rome for
Europe, and San Jose, Costa Rica, for the
American Continent, and a World Conference
attended by over 1,000 delegates from 102 na-
tions was held 2 years ago in Athens, Greece.
At the World Conference the World Peace
Through Law Center was created to serve as
the secretariat for the work program there
adopted and is entirely self-sustaining from
dues paid by lawyers. The center, now has a
worldwide membership, a staff of 27, monthly
and other publications and will shortly open
a world headquarters in Europe for which it
has been given a grant of $100,000 to erect
a building. Already the 60 working com-
mittees of the center have generated a plan
for a new court system, new law rules and
similar programs. Ideas talked about for
centuries are being hammered into concrete
programs by these committees. The volume
containing the Athens proceedings?a veri-
table storehouse of fact and history on inter-
national law?was published by West Pub-
lishing Co., and is available to anyone who
wishes to purchase it.
To the past conferences heads of state
sent over 100 messages attesting to their
belief in the ultimate goal of a world ruled
by law. Already similar messages are being
received for the September conference.
The friendship created at these confer-
ences among law leaders of the world and
the resulting ever-accelerating worldwide
dialog on law, its processes and institu-
tions, and their aid to world peace, have
been major contributions to the advance
of world peace through law.
I would like to stress that this new initia-
tive for the triumph of the age-old idea of
world peace through law has become more
than an American initiative, it has indeed
become the program for peace of the world's
legal profession.
The Washington world conference will
consider and adopt a program to give sub-
stance to the towering ideal that a world
ruked by law will be a world at peace. This
means expansion and acceleration of the
work program adopted at Athens 2 years
ago. It also means approval of concerete
steps to match our words with a program
to give them substance.
This is a once-in-a-lifetime conference for
the lawyers of the United States. Future
world conferences will be held in other na-
tions. So be sure you attend. I remind
that every judge, lawyer, or law professor
may attend. ? Laymen may also attend as
observers. Advance registrations from 96
countries now total over 1,200, insuring that
our goal of 2,000 judges, lawyers, and law
professors from over 100 nations will be
achieved.
The eyes of the legal world most certainly,
and perhaps those of the lay people of the
world as well, will be focused hopefully on
this Washington World Law Conference. I
believe that this is the time and we are the
people to give reality to the great ideal which
is our goal. As the Conference labors to cre-
ate conditions for world p,eace by strength-
ening the world's law and judicial institu-
tions no One can wish it ill. Every man,
woman, and child is bound to benefit, and
no one can be hurt by its endeavors. Dele-
gates will not seek St. Thomas More's utopia
or offer their program as a panacea. The
rule of law allows man diversity and differ-
ences in a framework of peace. These work-
nrs for peace under law are practical and
down to earth, not dreamers. Lawyers and
judges realize that nations are run by men
and disputes are inherent in human nature.
A lawyer or judge lives a life attuned to the
fact that the very nature of society is such
that it creates divisions, struggles, differ-
ences, and conflicts.
So the delegates at the Conference will not
seek impossible perfection but merely strive
to create a legal harness for man's great new
power which will cause its use for mankind's
benefit rather than his death. They know
that where law rules exist disputes are less
likely to occur, and that if disputes can be
directed into courthouses the bloodbath of
the battlefield can be avoided. This fact is
proved by every area where law is both world-
wide and universally observed. Good illus-
trations are the law of the sea, diplomatic
immunity, and the postal convention. All
over the world in nation after nation and
Internationally, all a law and judicial sys-
tem consist of are law rules to avoid conflict
and a forum for peaceful resolution of those
conflicts that do occur. So the effort of the
Washington Law Conference will be to in-
crease the amount of law rules and to start
the building of a world court system. Thus
-will law and courts perform more and more
the same function internationally they now
perform within nations. By action to gener-
ate more law and more courts, the delegates
at the Conference will draw mankind close
to the towering ideal of a world ruled by law.
Their initiative will thus give concrete mean-
ing, validity, and continued forward move-
ment to the age-old aspiration for a peaceful
world order under the rule of law. All men
must concede that whenever the rule of law
becomes strong enough to be a controlling
factor in the world community, then, and
then only, will any man be able to go any-
where on the face of the earth (or travel in
endless space) in freedom, in dignity, and in
peace.
I summon each of you to this the greatest
endeavor of our stofession.
T'S SPEECH
ON VIETNAM
Mr. MOSS. Mr. President, I ask unan-
imous consent that I may proceed for
5 minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. MOSS. No American who saw
President Johnson on television yester-
day as he discussed our commitment in
Vietnam could doubt his personal con-
cern, his reluctance to escalate further
our military involvement there, or his
earnest search for a nonmilitary solution
to the conflict through the United Na-
tions or otherwise. Neither could any
American doubt the dedication of the
President firmly to make good the com-
mitment of this Nation to keep its word
to a small country now cruelly attacked
by its neighbor and torn internally by
defections of its own citizens. To keep
our word, we must send still more troops,
spend more money, and risk increased
reprisals. As the President said "We did
not choose to be the guardians at the
gate." But since there was no one else,
we stepped forward to aid a beleaguered,
friendly, free nation. And we will not
be driven out, nor quit the field in weari-
ness or fear. We earnestly seek a peace-
ful settlement and will sit at the confer-
ence table anytime with North Vietnam,
or "any government whose people may
be affected." This is broad enough to
include the whole world. We fear no
meeting, in fact, we welcome any such
opportunity to discuss a settlement.
With touching eloquence, the Presi-
dent answered the groping question,
"Why are we in Vietnam?" Our citizens
who honestly are puzzled or uninformed
now have, once again, a clear answer.
And those who refuse to listen or who
seek to stir division and dissent, must do
so in face of the simple, clear, and mov-
ing explanation of our President.
We are in Vietnam to fulfill our pledge
to support freedom and resist aggression.
Our national word is at stake. We seek
no selfish gain. We yearn for peace.
We will do any honorable thing to termi-
nate combat.
Like most Americans, I have deep mis-
givings about our involvement in Viet-
nam. I feel frustration with shifting
succession of governments. I recognize
the perils for our soldiers. With all my
heart I wish that this ordeal would pass
from us. But there is a greater need in
this world, pointed out by President
Johnson?a need for governmental free-
dom from aggression, a need for world
order and world law, a need for honor-
able commitments honorably, kept, a
need to halt world lawlessness.
So I give to President Johnson my full
support in this dangerous time of trial.
I applaud his motives. I commend his
search for a peaceful solution. I back
Approved For Release 2003/11/04 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300190008-1
July 29, 1 roved For ReLeondfiggini4A:LCIMENBOIALINW300190008-1
18123
his firmness with the aggressor. I take
pride in his integrity.
Ew sEcritnuty ANTHONY J.
CELEBREZZE
Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr.
President, in July 1962, when Anthony J.
Celebrezze moved into the Cabinet post
of Secretary of Health, Education, and
Welfare, a newspaper article commented
cm "Tony's Impossible Task."
This month, July 1965, having secured
3 years as Department head of one of
our Nation's busiest, most diverse gov-
ernrnental agencies, he is leaving to
con-
tinue his public service as a Federal
fudge?after having worked longer at
his "impossible task" than any of his
predecessors.
As a commentary on the good will, in-
tense energy, and devotion to duty with
which Mr. Celebrezze discharged his re-
sponsibilities, President Lyndon B. John-
son stated "I have both a feeling of pride
In Secretary Celebrezze's accession to
this high court?and a reluctance in see-
ing him depart the Department he has
guided so skillfully."
I, personally, shall remember with ap-
preciation his sympathetic understand-
ing of my hopes to bring an environmen-
tal health center to my own State of
West Virginia. He, at all times, was
mindful of the needs of West Virginians
and desirous of meeting those needs as
best possible within the scope of his
Agency. I feel that the final determina-
tion to place an Appalachian Regional
Environmental Health Center in West
Virginia owes much to his realization
a its value in the rejuvenation of the
State, and the Appalachian region, as
well as to his assessment that the State's
attributes are peculiarly adapted to ac-
commodate a center of this type.
I feel, too, that because Secretary Cele-
brezze is a man who understands well
that America is a land of ever-expanding
opportunity, he worked to give all Amer-
-leans a better chance, through the pro-
grams of his Department, at the dignity,
health, self-respect, and economic well-
being which are a part of the basic prom-
ise of our Nation to its citizens.
SEVEN YEARS OF PROSPERITY
WITHOUT INFLATION
Mr, PROX1VIIRE. Mr. President, an
article entitled "U.S. Inflation Discount-
ed in Chase Report," published in the
financial section of the Washington
Post, is an extremely interesting news
item. It reads, in part:
The chase Manhattan Bank says the wide-
ly held belief that we are living in an era
of price inflation is erroneous.
In its publication, Business in Brief, the
bank notes that the United States had no
significant inflation during the past 7 years.
This Is A most remarkable economic
aChleVelnent The United States has
had 7 years of prosperity and has en-
joyed the highest income the country
has ever had. The economy has had a
tremendous surge in the past 4 or 5 years
without price inflation. This is a great
tribute to our Government Ikricl to Mem-
bers of Congress on both sides of the
aisle.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the article in its entirety be
printed in the RECORD. ,
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
U.S. INFLATION DISCOUNTED IN CUASE REPORT
Nzw Yoila.?The Chase Manhattan Bank
says the widely held belief that we are living
in an era of price inflation is erroneous.
In its publication, Business in Brief, the
bank notes that the United States had no
significant inflation during the past 7 years.
It cautions, however, that "we must be con-
stantly alert to the danger of inflation and
that excessive Government spending, credit
expansion, and wage increases can lead to
serious inflation."
The report suggests that the major reason
why people think prices have been rising is
that they fail to take account of the upgrad-
ing of their purchases. The bank says peo-
ple are eating better, buying better clothes,
spending more on travel and recreation. In
the sense, however, that monthly spending
has increased, the bank adds, the cost of
living has climbed,
STATUS OF WOMEN
Mrs. NEUBERGER. Mr. President, as
an outgrowth of President Kennedy's
Commission on the Status of Women, 44
States have set up continuing studies in
the form of Governor's Commissions on
the Status of Women.
Representatives of these State com-
missions are now meeting in convention
in Washington and their opening meet-
ing was highlighted by an address by
the Vice President. In his remarks he
said:
The talent of the American woman is an
important _resource in this Nation.
He further pointed out the efforts of
President Johnson to find qualified
women for appointment to high Govern-
ment positions.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent to have the text of the Vice Presi-
dent's remarks to the opening session
printed in the Rrcoxn.
There being no objection, the address
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
ADDRESS BY VICE PRESIDENT HUBERT B. 1m-
PHREY, CONFERENCE OF GOVERNORS CO S-
SIONS ON STATUS OF WOMEN, JULY 29, 1965
It is my honor to addrw leaders in Gov-
ernors' programs for strengthening oppor-
tunities for American women.
You represent an outstanding cross-sec-
tion of civic leadership in every aspect of
American life.
The very increase in the number of Gov-
ernors' commissions?now 44?shows the
vital interest in your mission.
In State after State you have held up a
public mirror to the legal framework which
can foster or hinder women's rights. And
where the mirror has revealed flaws?archaic,
discriminatory statutes, or gaps in protective
law?commissions have served as catalysts
for improvement.
At the same time you have broadened the
abridges" of education, training and coun-
seling, so that more and more women can
realize their highest potential.
Most important, you have helped bring
about a new climate of public opinion.
Step by step, you have helped translate
Anto reality, more and More of the goals en-
Approved
visioned in the historic report submitted to
President Kennedy by the Commission on
the Status of Women in 1963.
We owe a great deal to the Chairman of
that Commission, Mrs. Eleanor Roosevelt,
who did not live to see the report completed.
Today, more Americans than ever before,
in public and private life, are committed to
helping women achieve their birthright as
citizens.
The talent of the American woman is an
important resource in this Nation.
But I must be frank.
All too often it is a wasted resource.
Only 14.1 percent of working women are
in the professions or in technical work.
And only 4.5 percent are managers, officials,
and proprietors.
The worst of it is that there has been an
almost continuous decline in the percentage
of women working in these jobs.
One of the reasons, of course, why
women's employment opportunities are lim-
ited is that their education is too often
Women comprised 51 percent of the 1964
American high school graduating class.
But when it comes to college the girls,
their parents and even their teachers and
counselors have some second thoughts. And
so, looking again at te 1964 record, we find
that while 51 percent of the June high
school graduates were girls, in the fall, only
45 percent of the students entering college
were girls.
' Nor has the American woman's record in
college been as high as we would like.
There has been an actual decline, since
1930, in the percentage of higher degrees
earned by women.
But education isn't the only factor limiting
woman's opportunities.
There are restrictive hiring practices and a
disinclination to promote women or to give
them the same on the job training men re-
ceive.
The President's Commission on the Status
of Women has taken the lead in opening
more opportunities to women. IM work has
continued under President Johnson through
the interdepartmental committee and the
Citizens' Advisory Council on the Status of
Women. Your Governors commissions are
working to improve the status of women at
the State level.
These commissions and committees are
concerned with a good deal more than job op-
portunities for women. They are interested
in the education of girls and in continuing
education for women. They are stressing the
need to strengthen the home by providing
more community services. They are particu-
larly concerned that working mothers have
adequate facilities for child care while they
work. They are investigating the possibility
of more work opportunities for women who
must also maintain their homes.
In 1962 the Attorney General reviewed an
1870 law which Government hiring officers
used as the basis for specifying man or
woman in filling vacancies. The Attorney
General held that the old law did not give
appointing officers that prerogative and that
the President had authority to regulate the
right of appointing officers in this matter.
Immediately the President directed heads of
agencies to make future appointments solely
on the basis of merit.
But it was President Johnson's talent
search for qualified women which really
opened the doors for women in Government.
Shortly after the President took office he
announced that Government would no longer
be for men only.
Since January 1, 1964, he has appointed
more than 115 women to high-level Govern-
ment positions. In addition, Government
agencies have appointed or promoted more
than 2,800 other women to Jobe paying $10-
000 or more a year.
For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04 ? CIA-RDPUB004.46R0003001900Q8 1
18124 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SELN h Jtily 29, 1965
In the President's words: "We tan waste
no talent, we can-frustrate no creative power,
we can neglect no skill in our search for an
open and just and challenging society."
Private industry is following the Presi-
dent's example.
One factor helping this trend is a shortage
of skilled workers in such fields as engineer-
ing, science, mathematics and business ad-
ministration.
Qualified women can fill these jobs. Those
not today qualified can become qualified
through study and work.
Private employment practices also are
being affected by steps being taken by the
U.S. Employment Service. The Employment
Service is urging acceptance and use through-
out the country of hiring specifications based
exclusively on-job performance factors.
There is other progress:
Last year the Equal Pay Act established the
principle of equal pay as national policy.
Now it rules out all discrimination in em-
ployment on the basis of sex and applies in
Interstate commerce.
But the greatest barriers are the psycho-
logical barriers.
The U.S. Civil Service Commission has
done research on widely held views and at-
titudes. It has defined a whole series of
myths?some held by men, others held by
women, some by both.
I refer to myths such as "women do not
make good bosses," or "it is inefficient to
train women because of high turnover." The
facts prove otherwise.
If we would clear the road ahead for both
men and women, we must clear all of our
minds of these mental cobwebs.
An open mind, like an open heart, is the
prerequisite for an open door.
And here we might recall the words of
America's first woman Cabinet member, Mrs.
Frances Perkins. She used to say that her
grandmother had taught her: "If anyone
opens a door, one should always go through."
The doors of opportunity are opening to-
day.
Working together we can reach our goal:
full and equal opportunity for all the wom-
en of America in all parts of American life.
Presiffent Johnson is committed to that
goal. r join him in that commitment. With
your continued help we will succeed.
RUSSELL: FIT AND READY
Mr. TALMADGE. Mr. President, on
the day of the return to the Senate after
an illness of my warm friend and dis-
tinguished colleague, the senior Senator
from Georgia, many Members of this
body rose to extend their congratulations
and to salute DICK RUSSELL for his long
and dedicated outstanding service to his
State and Nation.
Since his return, Senator RUSSELL has
resumed his position of leadership and
responsibility in the Senate and his vital
duties as chairman of the Armed Serv-
ices Committee. As the Atlanta Journal
commented editorially on July 27, Sena-
tor RUSSELL is indeed "fit and ready."
I ask unanimous consent that this edi-
torial, which is a well-deserved tribute
to a Senator who already has done so
much and who is prepared to do more, be
printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the editorial
was ordered printed in the RECORD, as
follows:
RUSSELL: FIT AND READY
Senator RICHARD B. RUSSELL'S resumption
of command (or chairmanship) of the Sen-
ate Armed Services Committee is timed pro-
pitiously inasmuch as military business
and Georgia politics are concerned.
He returns to the leadership of his com-
mittee just as a vital and controversial piece
of legislation comes up for consideration?
the military pay bill.
And his return to active chieftanship
should be one more indication that he is
ready and willing and able to handle the
duties incumbent on a U.S. Senator.
The military pay bill has passed the House
of Representatives, but not in the form re-
quested by the Johnson administration. The
House increased it beyond the admminis-
tration's limits. And the administration has
made no secret that it hopes to gain support
for limited raises within the Senate.
But Senator RUSSELL has made it plain
that he is prepared to do battle with the
administration on this point. He advocates
raises more in line with those approved by
the House.
His point is that if the Reserves must be
called up and if those already in the Armed
Forces must be held beyond their discharge
point, then there should be some compensa-
tion in the form of a sizable increase.
It is a point well made.
Senator RUSSELL could have taken it easy.
He could have gone on record as supporting
the administration's stand on military pay.
He could have done so in the name of
loyalty. He could have rationalized such a
stand with no trouble. And in so doing he
could have assumed leadership of his com-
mittee in name, and faced no great task or
problem.
But Senator RUSSELL obviously feels a
great responsibility for his nation and for
the men already in uniform and those who
will be in the near future. And so he is
choosing to do battle with the administra-
tion's position.
If any evidence were needed to show that
Senator RUSSELL is fit and ready for his job?
fit and ready for a long time to come?then
his resumption of active leadership has
eliminated that need.
He has shown he is ready, and the men in
uniform may well be grateful that he is.
"A MOMENT OF TRUTH"?ADDRESS
BY JUSTICE EDWARD F. CARTER
Mr. HRUSKA. Mr. President, the
preservation of the liberties and privi-
leges of every citizen of this Nation de-
serves our Continuing attention.
A thoughtful speech was recently
made on this subject by Edward F.
Carter, an associate justice of the
Supreme Court of Nebraska. Justice
Carter is one of our State's leading jur-
ists. He is the dean of the Nebraska
Supreme Court on which he has served
since 1935. Ift 1947 and 1948 he was one
of the judges on the 5th Military Tri-
bunal at Nuremberg, Germany, presiding
at the trials of major German war
criminals.
During his long experience on the
bench, he has seen many disquieting
trends in our Government.
Speaking before the South Platte
United Chambers of Commerce in North
Platte, Nebr., on July 13 of this year,
Justice Carter recounted the worries of
some .drafters of the Constitution. He
described the extent to which these
prophetic worries have come about.
While drafting the Constitution, and
during the debates in Virginia on ratifi-
cation, patriots Eke Patrick Henry,
George Mason, and Edmund Randolph
voiced many doubts about the new Con-
stitution. They feared that the Central
Government would become so powerful
that it could destroy the States by ab-
sorbing the powers reserved to them.
These men realized that the very gen-
eral words used in the Constitution could
be given meanings totally different from
those intended by the framers. These
men saw tyranny approaching, not in
the form of a foreign nation, but in the
very government that they were creating
for themselves.,
The 10th amendment was added to
the Constitution to prevent encroach-
ment by the Federal Government, but,
as Justice Carted showed, many of these
gloomy predictions have become reality.
Mr. President, we should all consider
Justice Carter's speech, for his remarks
reach to the heart of one of this Nation's
most dangerous problems. I ask unani-
mous consent that his speech be printed
in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the speech
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
A MOMENT OF TRUTH
(By Edward L. Carter, Justice, Supreme
Court of Nebraska)
Nearly two centuries ago an embryo na-
tion of a little more than 3 million people
occupied part of the eastern coastal area ex-
tending from southern Maine to northeast-
ern Georgia. All but 10 percent of the peo-
ple lived in small villages and remote agri-
cultural areas, connected only by trails that
for the most part were passable only for men
on foot or horseback. Only six cities had a
population exceeding 8,000; the largest,
Philadelphia, numbered only 42,000.
The industrial revolution had hardly
reached this side of the Atlantic. The first
cotton mill in America had not been estab-
lished, and other industries were in a primi-
tive handicraft stage. For manufactured
goods the people were dependent almost en-
tirely on imports from England. To the
north of this little country was Canada,
a colony of Great Britain; to the south
and southwest a vast area held by
Spain; and shortly the whole Mississippi
Valley area was claimed by the French un-
der Napoleon. Compared with those giants
of their times, the new nation was but a
pygmy with a total population about that of
the city of Chicago today.
Nevertheless, the people of this little na-
tion refused to tie up with any of the great
powers of their day and found the courage
to stand alone. They raised their own food,
made their own clothes, and hewed their
homes from native timber. Times were
hard, but they were free. To become free
they fought a war with Great Britain, the
most powerful nation in the world at that
time. They determined to create a govern-
ment that would guarantee freedom and lib-
erty for its people and the generations that
were to follow them. A written constitu-
tion was formulated, finally adopted and rati-
fied, and the United States was born.
They had lived many years under the
tyranny of British Kings, primarily George
III. They had lived a dozen years under
the Articles of Confederation which was
nothing more than an alliance of the sov-
ereign States, without an executive head or
a system of courts. The Congress of those
times was so limited in power that it was
almost nonfunctional as a governing agency.
They well knew of the tendency of all men
In places.of power to exercise more author-
ity than was lawfully given to them. They
knew also that there was a general tendency
for governmental powers to gravitate toward
a central authority and to become dictorial
and tyrannical. The conceived a new phi-
losophy of government, generally referred to
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
July 29, iPtAibproved For RigiONCRIEWAINALWARKWEDSIAWN0300190008-1
Electronic engineering company, Cumber-
land County?NASA project: Inventory?Re-
sult: Declined (three times).
Electronic laboratory company, Cumber-
land County?NASA project: Inventory?Re-
sult: No response (twice).
Plastic company, York County?NASA
project: Inventory?Result: Declined.
Major engineering company, Cumberland
County?NASA project: Track and data sys-
tem, in-house R. & D. project?Result: De-
clined first; no response second.
Manufacturing company, York County?
NASA project: In-house R. & D. project?
Result: No response.
College, Aroostook County?NASA project:
Research?Result: No response (twice).
Science foundation, Knox County?NASA
project: Research?Result: No response (five
times).
Major engineering company, Cumberland
County?NASA project: Data not available?,
Result: No response (twice).
Machine company, Cumberland County?
NASA project: Data not available?Result:
Declined.
College, Cumberland County?NASA proj-
ect: Research?Result: No response (twice).
Now that the National Aeronautics
and Space Administration has been
convinced that Maine industry is space-
capable, I hope that Maine industry will
respond more to invitations to bid and
provide greater participation, having in
mind the huge business potential that
will accrue to Maine as a result of the
new space Center being constructed in
Boston.
TWIST AND RESPECT
Mr. BARTLET,T. Mr. President, it is
an easy thing to clobber a Secretary of
State. It is an old American pastime.
Cordell Hull, Dean Acheson, and John
Foster Dulles did not escape criticism
when they held the office and Certainly
our present Secretary is having his
share.
What makes it easy to attack a Secre-
tary of State is what makes his job so
hard. He is charged with the direction
of our foreign policy to see that it con-
forms with our long-range, overall na-
tional interests and ambitions. In line
with this is the responsibility of keeping
our allies friendly and our enemies from
War; the maintenance of our allied
shield and the preservation of peace.
And so the Secretary must place a re-
straining hand on the adventurers who
would risk long-range welfare for short-
range gain; the traders who would de-
stroy an ally to get rich quick, and the
war hawks who call for gunboat diplo-
macy abroad for political advantage at
home. All of these must be restrained
if our Nation's long and lasting interests
are to be served. It is not a simple job.
The Secretary is exposed to well-nigh
unijnaginable pressures from both with-
out and within the Nation.
To support him in withstanding this
pressure, the Secretary has but the sup-
port of the President, which is unswerv-
ing, the support of the bureaucracy,
Which is unavailing and the Congress.
It is important the Congress give the
Secretary its confidence and its trust.
We are ,fortunate to have Dean Rusk
as Secretary of State. For over 4 years
he has borne the mankilling responsi-
bility of his office, With calm high in-
telligence and quiet good judgment he
has acted with balance and restraint
through the Berlin crisis of 1961, the
Bay of Pigs, the Cuban missile crisis, the
Dominican crisis, the collapse of Laos,
and the deepening tragedy of Vietnam.
He has no flair for or interest in
drama, publicity or quick, false solu-
tions. He does a job and he does it well.
We are lucky, Mr. President, to have
such a man as Secretary of State.
By now no doubt he has learned to
cope with the slings and arrows and the
potshots to which he is exposed. But
for once I would like to say?clearly and
for the record?that Secretary Rusk has
my respect, admiration and trust. I am
certain the great majority of the Con-
gress and of the country join with me in
this statement.
EFFECTS OF SUPREME COURT
DECISION ON APPORTIONMENT
HAVE BEEN GOOD
Mr. DOUGLAS. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that a very able edi-
torial published in the Chicago Ameri-
can on Monday, July 26, 1965, be printed
in the RECORD.
There being no objectioh, the editorial
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
DIRKSEN'S UPHILL FIGHT
Illinois' Senator EVERETT DIRKSEN plainly
intends to light one of the major campaigns
,of his career on the issue of the Supreme
Court's reapportionment ruling. DnucsErT
is trying to push through the Senate a pro-
posed constitutional amendment that would
overturn the Court's one-man, one-vote
ruling, which required that both houses of
a State legislature must be elected from dis-
tricts of substantially equal population.
We find ourselves sympathizing with DIRK-
SEN, while feeling no enthusiasm at all for
his resolution. When the Supreme Court
handed down its one-man, one-vote ruling,
we criticized it on the same grounds as
DIBKSEN: that it was an unwarranted and
dangerous extension of power on the part
of the Court to start tampering with the
political makeup of States. That we think
is still true, but some further practical con-
siderations need to be added.
One is that, whether or not the Supreme
Court had any business making such a de-
cision, the ruling did put an end to an
unfair situation that could not have been
ended in any other way. In many States,
the majority of the senate represents a mi-
nority of the population; rural districts rep-
resenting, say, one-fourth of the population
may have a greater voice in the senate than
urban districts representing half of it. Un-
less you can argue convincingly that State
senators should represent something other
than people, this is plainly inequitable.
One often-heard contention is that State
legislatures must be patterned after Con-
gress, where each State is entitled to two
Senators and elects them without regard to
population. But there is no necessary par-
allel here. The States were in existence be-
fore the Federal Union was (as the name
"United States" implies), and have a political
entity of their own. That is not true of
senatorial districts of other subdivisions
within States.
Moreover, the unfairness of the old sys-
tem was built into it and is self-perpetuat-
ing. Obviously, no majority of a State sen-
ate would ever vote to become the minority;
only some outside agency could change
the system. And now that the Supreme
Court has done so, we see no reason why the
majorities that benefited from its ruling,
18129
should penalize themselves by backing DIRK-
SEN'S amendment.
In short, even if the Supreme Court acted
wrongly in making this decision, its effects
are good. Congress no doubt should act to
curb the Supreme Court and reassert its
own lawmaking authority; but it will have
a better chance of success if it concentrates
on court rulings that have bad results.
Mr. DOUGLAS. The editorial ex-
presses sympathy with my colleague
[Mr. DIRKSEN1, although declaring no
feeling of enthusiasm for his joint reso-
lution. While the writer was not enthu-
siastic about the fact that the Supreme
Court made its rulings on reapportion-
ment, it concludes that the effects of
those decisions were good.
The editorial states that Congress
"will have a better chance of success if
it concentrates on court rulings that
have had bad results."
Since the editorial states that the rul-
ings of the Supreme Court on reappor-
tionment have had good results, I as-
sume that it is a polite way of opposing
the so-called Dirksen amendment.
ADDITIONAL SUPPORT FOR SLEEP-
ING BEAR DUNES
Mr. HART. Mr. President, on July, 13
and 14 hearings were held by the Sub-
committee on Parks and Recreation of
the Senate Committee on Interior and
Insular Affairs on S. 936 providing for
the establishment of the Sleeping Bear
Dunes National Lakeshore in Michigan.
This year's hearings showed increas-
ing and significant Support for this pro-
posal reflecting the growing desire in
Michigan that this bill be enacted into
law in the present Congress. Among the
important additional evidences of sup-
port was a letter from the American
Automobile Association received after
the hearings. I ask unanimous consent
that it be printed In the RECORD.
There being no objection, the letter
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
AMERICAN AUTOMOBILE ASSOCIATION,
Washington, D.C., July 15, 1965.
Hon. ALAN BIBLE,
Chairman, Subcommittee on National Parks
and Recreation, Committee on Interior
and Insular Affairs, U.S. Senate, Wash-
ington, D.C.
DEAR, SENATOR BIBLE: The American Auto-
mobile Association supports and calls for
early enactment of S. 936, by Senator HART,
Democrat, of Michigan, and Senator MONA-
IvIARA, Democrat, of Michigan, providing for
the establishment of Sleeping Bear Dunes
National Lakeshore in the State of Michigan.
AAA policy, as established in annual -con-
vention, calls for an expansion of recrea-
tional facilities:
"Development of recreation and vacation
areas has not kept pace with the require-
ments of the American people, nor can these
regions continue to meet the needs of an
expanding population. The AAA believes
that government?State and Federal?must
place increasing emphasis on the creation of
new recreational travel resources throughout
the country."
Development of Sleeping Bear Dunes Na-
tional Lakeshore will provide 46,100 acres of
scenic land and 31 miles of shoreline. High
dunes, inland lakes, and green forests make,
this area outstanding in terms of scenic
beauty. This area will provide excellent
swimming, sun bathing, fishing, water ski-
Approved For For Release g003./11/04 :ZIA-RDP674300446R000300190008-1
Approved FoggitisfsinilliliOtk.INVP6K0A141R000300190001-4/y
18130 zo 1965
lug, boating, camping, and picnicking for
.American people on vacation.
- Within a 300-mile radius are the great
midwestern cities of Chicago and Detroit. It
is also estimated that some 20 million people
reside within 1 day's drive of the Sleeping
Bear Dunes National Lakeshore.
In 1964, according to the National Park
Service, a total of 102,375,100 people visited
U.S. national parks and other areas admin-
istered by the National Park Service. Of this
total, it is estimated that 98 percent visited
these national parks and recreational areas
by automobile.
The AAA supports the establishment of
Sleeping Bear Dunes National Lakeshore be-
cause we feel it will help fulfill the need for
additional recreational service facilities such
as boating, swimming, fishing, hunting,
touring, camping, picnicking, etc.
It is requested that this letter be made a
part of the official hearings of your subcom-
mittee.
Sincerely,
-CORNELIUS R. GRAY,
Director, Legal Department.
HYRUM DAM PROJECT IN UTAH
PROVIDES BENEFITS TO PUBLIC
Mr. MOSS. Mr. President, 30 years
ago valuable irrigation water was first
released from behind Hyrum Dam in
northern Utah to begin feeding a highly
productive farm area along the Little
Bear River in Cache County.
Since that time, millions of gallons
of almost priceless water has been cap-
tured in the relatively small Hyrum Res-
ervoir, where it could be held and released
as needed.
Construction of the Hyrum project was
approved by the President in 1933, with
funds made available under the National
Industrial Recovery Act of 1933 in the
amount Of $930,000.
Hyrum Reservoir holds 18,700 acre-
feet of water and in its 30 years of op-
eration there has never been a year
when the reservoir did not fill to over-
flowing. Three canals take irrigation
water from the 116-foot-high dam to
delivery points to the north and south.
The Hyrum project is the primary
source of water for about 4,000 acres of
productive farmland, and a supple-
mental source of water for an additional
3,000 acres.
As many of my colleagues are aware
the Mormon pioneers, led to the Utah
territory by Brigham Young, are credited
with devising the first system of irriga-
tion applied by Anglo-Saxons to arid and
semiarid lands. This was an absolute
necessity, since the springs and rivers
along the mountains did not provide
water for enough farmland to feed a
growing population in this desert area.
Planning and investigation of reclama-
tion and irrigation projects came early
in Utah's modern history. The Hyrum
project was first studied shortly after the
turn of the century.
Now, the number of subscribers to the
Hyrum project increases annually as at-
tempts to dry-farm prove futile. The
subscribers are repaying the cost of the
Hyrum project in annual payments based
on crop valuation.
Other benefits are now accruing to the
public because of the Hyrum project.
Recreation features of the reservoir have
been administered by the Utah State
Park and Recreation Commission as the
Hyrum State Park. A boat ramp and
campgrounds had almost 19,000 visitors
last year, a figure which is small in num-
ber but highly important to the northern
part of Utah.
The Hyrum project is one, of the Bu-
reau of Reclamation's smaller projects,
but its 30-year-old success story is a
prime example of beneficial Federal,
State, and local cooperation which has
provided an improved economy and mul-
tiple benefits to an important segment
of our population.
While the reclamation work Congress
considers today often runs into cost
figures in the millions of dollars, the
compensation we receive through more
usable water, better flood control, and
greatly increased recreation for a grow-
ing population will be measured in the
billions of dollars in years to come.
Mr. President, I am proud to call to
the attention of the Senate this success
story, and I will continue working for a
better America through conservation of
one of our most important natural re-
sources?the water in our streams and
APPRA.T.SA NINGS IN
THE DOMINICAN REPUBLIC
Mr. GRUENING. Mr. President, it is
Important that we keep up with what is
going on in the Dominican Republic.
Three interesting presentations?one by
Juan Bosch, the deposed President in
whose behalf the current revolution
started, which appeared in the July 24
issue of the New Republic; and another
one by Tad Szulc, probably one of the
most knowledgeable experts among
newspapermen on Latin America, which
appears in the-July 31 issue of the Satur-
day Evening Post; and the leading com-
ment in the current issue of the Vision
Letter, of which the former President of
Colombia, Dr. Lleras Camargo, is an edi-
tor, are of interest and value.
I ask unanimous consent that these
three articles be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the articles
were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
THE DOMINICAN REVOLUTION
(By Juan Bosch)
In most Latin American capitals newsmen
writing about the Dominican crisis are still
asking: "Why didn't Juan Bosch return to
his country?" Some say that in the first
moments of the Dominican revolution a rebel
plane landed in San Juan in Puerto Rico to
take me home and I refused to use it. This
is a lie.
The constitutionalist revolution began at
noon on April 24, in the city of Santo
Domingo; the so-called government of Reid
Cabral immediately closed the international
airport at Punta Caucedo. Because San Isi-
dro, General Wessin y Wessin's base, lies be-
tween Punta Caucedo and the city of Santo
Domingo, Wessin y Wessin's base, lies between
Punta Oaucedo and the city of Santo
Domingo, Wessin y Wessin's control over the
airport was complete from the very begin-
ning. By 4 in the afternoon Wessin's
tanks were blocking entrance to the city
via Punta ?tamed?, which is the same as
the route from San Isidro; and it was only
after 4 in the afternoon that I received
my first news of the revolution. I received
it through a radio station in San Juan.
Thus, from 1 in the afternoon of April 24,
to this day, Wessin y Wessin's forces, which
control the Dominican Air Force, have com-
pletely controlled the airways and the roads
to the airport.
Two Dominican Air Force planes came to
Puerto Rico?the first a Mustang P-51 fighter
which landed on Monday, April 26, I believe,
In Mayaguez, and a Douglas transport which
landed next day in San Juan. Both were
grounded by U.S. military authorities and
have remained grounded.
I did try to reach my country. I made
such efforts with Abe Fortes, the well-known
American lawyer, who in the first days was
unofficial liaison between the U.S. Govern-
ment, and Recto- Jaime Benites of the Uni-
versity of Puerto Rico. On Saturday, May 1,
Mr. Fortas informed me that a battle was
imminent between U.S. Marines and Domini-
can constitutionalist forces. I explained to
Mr. Fortas that all I could do in these cir-
cumstances was to go to my country and
I asked him for a plane to take me there
immediately. Mr. Fortas did not reply. Early
on May 2, in the presence of Rector Benites,
I made the same request to Ambassador John
Bartlow Martin and he refused even to con-
sider the matter, saying that if I went to
Santo Domingo I would be killed. Accord-
ing to him, that should not be allowed to
happen as it would leave my country with-
out leaders.
During its initial phase, for 2 months, the
minican revolution was confined to the
apital of the Republic; as it entered its
third month, the movement began to spread
to the interior of the country. This was
inevitable, since a revolution is not a uni-
fied military operation which can be con-
tained within set boundary lines by military
forces. Washington has remained inex-
plicably unaware of what is really happen-
ing.
In bottling up the revolution and keep-
ing it confined to a portion of the city of
Santo Domingo, the United States Govern-
tient was appraising the situation in terms
of force: The revolutionary element repre-
sents a given number of men with a given
number of weapons; therefore, we can sub-
due them and knock them out with a given
number of soldiers and a given amount of
arms.
It is easy to think in terms of force in
this day and age, especially in the United
States, where a battery of electronic com-
puters comes up with plausible answers to
problems of this type in a few minutes, per-
haps even in a few seconds.
A revolution, however, is an historical de-
velopment which is ill-adapted to this type
of automated reasoning. Its force is de-
rived from the hearts and minds of people.
Neither of these can be measured by elec-
tronic computers.
The Santo Domingo uprising was?and
is?a typical people's democratic revolution
In the historic Latin American manner, gen-
erated by social, economic, and political fac-
tors at once Dominican and Latin American.
It is like the Mexican revolution of 1910.
The United States reacted to the Dominican
revolution of 1965 almost exactly as it did to
the Mexican revolution of 1910. Why? Be-
cause, traditionally, the official world of North
America has been opposed to democratic
revolutions in Latin America. With the ex-
ception of the Kennedy years, the policy has
been to reach a meeting of minds with local
power groups, and to use force to back them
up. During the Franklin Roosevelt era the
use of armed intervention was abandoned,
but the policy of supporting local power
groups was continued, and in the case of
the Cuban revolution of 1933 North American
warships made their appearance in Cuban
waters as an ominous reminder. It was
John Fitzgerald Kennedy who transformed
outmoded concepts by putting new policies
into practice; but after his demise the old
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
July 29,196pproved For ftaggiaNgt:fittNtjupportifffp00300190008-1 18131
idea once more took hold that power can
only be exerted by means of force.
Yet this idea has been disproved by his-
tory. A revolution is not a war. Tradi-
tionally, the defeated ones in revolutions
have been those who were stronger in weap-
onry. The 13 American colonies were weak-
er than England, yet they won the War of
Independence; the French masses were
weaker than Louis XVI's monarchy, yet the
people won in the French Revolution; Boli-
var was weaker than Ferdinand VII, yet he
won the South American revolution; Mad-
der? was Weaker than Porfirio Diaz, yet he
triumphed in the Mexican revolution of 1910;
Lenin was weaker than the Russian govern-
ment, yet he won the revolution of 1917 in
Russia. Without a single exception, all the
retolutions which have been victorious
throughout the course of history have been
weaker than the governments against which
they were rebelling. It is clear, therefore,
that revolutions cannot be measured in terms
Of military power; other values must serve
as their yardstick.
To distinguish between a true revolution
and a mere disorder or struggle for power
among rival contenders, one must study the
Underlying causes of the uprising, and the
Stand taken by the various sectors of society
as it developed. It must also be viewed in
its historical context. The U.S. officials
felled to consider any of these aspects of
the Dominican revolution. In Washington,
Word was received that at noone on Sat-
urday, April 24, there had been some rest-
lessness in certain quarters of Santo Domin-
go and among the people of the city; a little
later it was learned that the commander-in-
chief of the Ariny had been taken prisoner
by his subalterns. Immediately, plans to
land U.S. Armed Forces in the little Carib-
bean country were contemplated. President
Johnson himself so stated when, at a press
conference on June 17, he affirmed that as
a matter of fact, we landed our people in
less than 1 hour from the time the decision
was made. It was a decision we considered
from Saturday until Wednesday evening."
Since Saturday, therefore, the U.S. Gov-
ernment had considered it necessary to land
troops in Santo Domingo; and we may be
sure that at the time the U.S. Government
did not know what kind of revolution was
developing or was going to develop in the
Dominican Republic. It was obvious that the
policy of the North American government
was to defend the status quo in Santo Do-
mingo, without any regard for the will of the
Dominican people. The reaction in Wash-
ington was, therefore, the usual one: The
controlling group in the Dominican Republic
Was threatened, and had to be defended.
This controlling group was pro-United
States, without a doubt; but It was also
anti-Dominican Republic, and this to an ex-
treme degree. During its 19 months of gov-
ernment, this preferred regime of Washing-
ton had ruined the Dominican economy,
established a system of corruption and daily
ridiculed the hopes of the people for a
dramatic solution to the country's problems.
The Dominican revolution of April 1965,
was not an improvisation. It was an his-
torical event, the origin of which was clear
to see. It had been developing since the end
, of 1959, through the death of Trujillo in May
1961, the elections of December 1962; and
finally the strike of May 1964. The coup
d'etat of September 1963, was unable to
stamp out this revolution. It was a delusion
of sociological and political ignoramuses that
when the government over which I was pre-
siding 'had been overthrown, the revolution
would be vanquished. It was a delusion to
believe, as did those responsible for formulat-
ing Dominican policy in Washington, that
a man of "good" social and business back-
ground was the kind of person to handle the
Dominican situation.
From the time of the 1963 coup cretat, the
country was returned to the same lack of
freedom and contempt toward the mass of
the people which prevailed in the days of
Trujillo. Corruption of the Trujillo type
became more widespread and more shameless
than under the tyrant himself. The Cabral
regime sought a return to Trujilloism with-
out Trujillo, an historical absurdity which
could not be continued. The middle classes
and the masses came together as allies, united
in a common cause, to restore the country to
a regime of lawfulness.
In April 1965, a second Cuba could not have
been in the making in Santo Domingo. What
erupted was?and is?a democratic and na-
tionalistic revolution. No Latin American
nation today can accept a democracy which
does not also offer social equality and eco-
nomic justice. It was a costly political
blunder to look on it as a revolution which
was in danger of drifting toward commu-
nism.
The United States will pay a high price
for this blunder and, in my opinion, it will
be paid within our time. A measure of the
grossness of the mistake is the size of the
forces originally deployed to bottle up the
revolution. In April, the United States had
23,000 men in Vietnam; it landed 42,000 in
Santo Domingo. Washington officials looked
upon events in the Dominican Republic as
so fraught with danger that their prepara-
tions seemed like those of a nation waging
a life-and-death war. A tiny, impoverished
nation, making the most heroic effort of its
history to achieve democracy, was over-
whelmed by huge quantities of cannons,
planes, warships, and by a propaganda cam-
paign which presented completely distorted
facts to the world. The revolution did not
shoot a single person; it decapitated no one,
burned down not a single church, nor raped
one woman. Nevertheless, allegations of
these horrors were proclaimed to the world
at large.
The Dominican revolution had nothing to
do with Cuba, or Russia, or China. It would
have ended in April had the United States
not intervened. Instead, it was bottled up
and consequently began to generate a force
of its own, alien to its nature, and including
hatred of the United States. It will be a
long time before this anti-U.S. feeling dis-
appears. When democratic nationalism is
thwarted or strangled, it becomes a breeding
ground for communism. I am certain that
the use of force by the United States in the
Dominican Republic will produce more Com-
munists in Santo Domingo and in Latin
America than all the propaganda of Russia,
China, and Cuba combined.
It will be difficult to convince the Domini-
cans that democracy is the best system of
government. They were paying for their de-
mocracy with their lives and with their blood,
yet North American democracy represented
their tremendous and heroic struggle to the
world as a work of bandits and Communists.
Force was used to prevent the Domini-
cans from achieving their democracy. Many
Americans may not believe this is true, but I
am expressing here what the people of the
Dominican Republic feel and will continue
to feel for many years to come, rather than
trying to describe what the intentions of
the United States were.
The United States was obliged to have
recourse in Santo Domingo to an expedient
which would permit it to use force without
exposing itself to world opprobrium. This
explains the military junta headed by An-
tonio Imbert. This junta was the brainchild
of Ambassador John Bartlow Martin?of the
United States, in other words. Rarely in
modern history has so costly an error been
committed in terms of U.S. prestige as
placing in the hands of Imbert the power of
armed Dominican troops, then advancing as
an excuse for his crimes the argument of
fighting communism in Santo Domingo. The
brutal killings of Dominicans and for-
eigners?including a Cuban priest, and a
Canadian priest?which were committed by
Imbert's trdops on the pretext of wiping out
communism will, in Dominican history, be
forever laid to the account of the United
States, and particularly to Ambassador
Martin. These killings occurred while North
American forces were in Santo Domingo;
moreover, Ambassador Martin knew what
kind of man Imbert was before inviting him
to /cad the junta. Imbert's tyranny_ was
established beyond a doubt, and following
as he did on the heels of Trujillo, there was
no pretext strong enough to justify setting
up the tyranny of Imbert.
Under the revolution, no one was shot or
decapitated; but Imbert's forces shot and
decapitated hundreds of persons. These
crimes were not given the publicity they
should have had in the United States, but
they are cited in the documentation of the
Commission on Human Rights of the
Organization of American States and of the
United Nations, with all their ghastly de-
tails of skulls crushed by gun butts, of
hands lashed behind backs with wire, of
headless corpses floating in rivers, of women
executed by machine guns, of fingers smashed
with hammers to prevent identification of
the dead. Most of the victims were mem-
bers of the Dominican Revolutionary Party
(a party recognized as democratic), since the
function of Imbert's "democracy" is to wipe
out all democrats in the Dominican Republic.
It is a bloody irony Of history that the crimes
Imputed to the Dominican revolution were
actually committed by Imbert. The blame
will also fall on the United States and, un-
fortunately, upon democracy in general as a
system of government. If I know my people,
when the day of reckoning comes, it will be
hard for the Dominicans of today and of
tomorrow to be indulgent toward the United
States and harsh only in their judgment of
Imbert and his soldiers.
The Dominican people will not soon forget
that the United States brought into Santo
Domingo the Nicaraguan battalion named
for Anastasio Somoza, that Central American
emulator of Trujillo; that it brought in
Stroessner's Paraguayan soldiers, of all ele-
ments those least qualified to represent
democracy in a land where thousands of
men and women had just died fighting to
establish democracy; that it brought in the
soldiery of Lopez Arellano who, so far as the
Dominicans are concerned, is a sort of Hon-
duran Wessin y Wessin. A highlight in all
future history texts of the Dominican Re-
public will be the bombardment of the city
of Santo Domingo for 24 hours on June 15
and 16.
All these flow from the use of force as an
instrument of 'power in the handling of
political problems. An intelligent evalua-
tion of the events in Santo Domingo would
have prevented them. President Johnson
said that his Marines went into Santo Do-
mingo to save lives; what they really did was
to destroy the democratic image of the
United States throughout the South Ameri-
can continent.
[From the Saturday Evening Post, July
31, 1965]
WHEN THE MARINES STORMED ASHORE TN SAN-
TO Dommco, U.S. OFFICIALS DIVED yort
COVER
(By Tad Szulc)
This spring the United States became en-
gaged in one of the most hectic, bizarre and
controversial diplomatic and military opera-
tions in recent history, highlighted by the
landing of 22,000 troops in the Dominican
Republic to protect American lives and to
prevent what the Johnson administration
feared might be "another Cuba" in the
Caribbean.
Approved For Release 2003/11/04 : CIA-RDP67B0044614000300190008-1
18132 Approved Fora5MailgaclipitpArRDP67BD0446R000300190008-1
WKD ? SkNATE July 29, 1965
By late June, after the United States had
bounced back and forth several times be-
tween contradictory policies, at commission
from the Organization of American States--
heavily influenced by its American member,
white - haired, professional diplomatic
troubleshooter Ellsworth Bunker?finally
came up with the compromise proposals de-
signed to satisfy two sides in the civil war.
But looking back at the massive bloodshed
and wild confusion of that savage Dominican
spring, one finds it hard not to wonder why
the same ideas could not have been advanced
at the outset of the crisis, or shortly there-
after.
The story of the Dominican intervention
would have been merely a comedy of errors
and inconsistencies, a mixture of Hamlet and
the Marx Brothers, if it were not for the
thousands of Dominican dead and wounded
In the 8-week civil war and for the deep in-
volvement of American prestige.
The direct cost to the United States was
some 25 lost lives of marines and para-
troopers, over 100 casualties and many hun-
dred of millions of dollars. It is impossible
to estimate the cost to America in lost con-
fidence among people throughout the world
who regarded the episode?rightly or
wrongly?as an imperialist military move by
the United States. The Dominican crisis
created sharp divisions within the Adminis-
tration in Washington. How the Govern-
ment handled that crisis?with apparent
confusion at the local embassy, at the State
Department and in the Central Intelligence
Agency?deserves close scrutiny, for Ameri-
can embassies are everywhere much the same,
and similar problems may erupt anywhere
at any time. The Dominican experience is
not the sort that it would be beneficial to
undergo more than once.
A good part of the reason for this drawn-
out torture of the ancient city of Santo
Domingo and its 460,000 inhabitants, if not
the, whole reason, seems to lie in the nature
of the initial reporting on the Dominican
crisis to the administration in Washington
by the U.S. Embassy in the Dominican capital.
This frequently overemotional, exaggerated
and partisan reporting went far to influence
decfeionmaking at the State Department and
the White House, thus becoming the prime
cause of most of the subsequent events.
Later, the embassy's recommendations played
a part in undermining, in effect, the peace-
making efforts of special White House envoys
on the scene.
For this reason, much of What happened
111 the Dominican Republic is essentially the
story of the American 'Embassy in Santo
Domingo, the people in it and its "special
guests" from Washington. It is the tale of
au embassy that was at first caught unawares
by events and then seemed panicked by
them, and of otherwise competent diplomats
who allowed themselves to lose contact with
the real facts of the situation and then made
it a policy to ignore them. No definite re-
port can be provided on Washington's role,
but it is plain that during the initial period
no effective brake on the wild procession of
events was applied by the State Department,
which seems to have let itself be stampeded
by reports from the field.
In this atmosphere of unreality and in-
trigue there inevitably arose episodes that
served almost as comic relief in the impos-
sibly tense and chaotic situation. There was
the picture of American Ambassador W.
Tapley Bennet, Jr., sitting under his desk
throughout a strafing by friendly planes and
the scene in which a White House emissary
climbed through a window for a secret meet-
ing, with the rebel chiefs.
And, as the constant counterpart to the
political and diplomatic maneuverings, there
were the sounds and the smells of the civil
war. From the moment that I landed in
Santo Domingo on Thursday, April 29?hav-
ing been ferried by a marine helicopter from
the U.S.S. Boxer along with other reporters?
I lived for 5 weeks with the barking of ma-
chin.e guns, the thud of mortars and the
sudden dry crackling of snipers' rifles. There
was the sweet, sickening smell of death in
the overcrowded hospitals and the pungent
odor of decay in a city which for weeks had
no water and no garbage collection; and
there was the quiet heroism of American
Peace Corps nurses working under fire in the
hospitals, the taut discipline of marines
holding fire until the last possible moment.
But for the sake of coherency, this complex
story of the U.S. involvement in the Domin-
ican Republic must be told chronologically.
It began with the revolt in Santo Domingo
on Saturday, April 24, by a group of civilians
and young military officers, who set out to
overthrow the provisional government of
Donald Reid Cabral and to bring back de-
posed President Juan Bosch.
But it is really necessary to go back even
further, for the recent history of the Domin-
ican Republic is a confused mesh of tawdry
events. The country was for 31 years the
personal fief of Rafael Leonidas Trujillo
Molinas, an iron-fisted dictator whose rule
ended with his assassination on a lonely
Santo Domingo boulevard in May, 1961.
After seven confused months, a Council of
State was installed with U.S. support and
with the intention of preparing democratic
elections. Some council members subse-
quently lost interest in holding elections,
and it was largely through the efforts of
Donald Reid Cabral, a slim but wiry automo-
bile dealer, that the elections took place in
December 1962. But "Donnie" Reid was
surprised by the victory of Dr. Juan Bosch,
an idealistic writer, social reformer and self-
taught political scientist who had lived in
exile for 24 years. Reid refused to partici-
pate in the Bosch government and instead
alined himself with the rightwing opposi-
tion.
On September 25, 1963, Dr. Bosch, the Re-
public's first freely chosen President in 38
years, was deposed by a military coup. The
Trujilloist generals and colonels who over-
threw Bosch explained their move as a nec-
essary counter to the President's alleged?
but never proved?Communist proclivities.
Reid Cabral became Foreign Minister under
a new triumvirate--in a government un-
recognized by the United States, for Presi-
dent Kennedy angrily broke .diplomaticre-
lations after the coup and withdrew all aid.
The Johnson administration reestablished
the relationship 3 months later, and not long
thereafter Reid was elevated to the top post
in the trilunvirate. Reid became known in
Santo Domingo ad"el Americana" so closely
was he linked with U.S. interests.
Reid Cabral meant well, but somehow he
never impressed his fellow Dominicans who
became increasingly impatient for the de-
mocracy, jobs, and bread that had been
promised since Trujillo's death. His rule,
though authoritarian, was not dictatorial as
Dominicans knew dictatorship, and he even
tried to put a rein on the armed forces.
This helped seal his fate. Resentment
among old-line military, wistfully remem-
bering the easy Trujillo days, converged with
active plotting by young .officers who were
weary of the triumvirate and wanted democ-
racy reinstituted under President Bosch.
It was the "young Turks" group that set off
the crisis. The conspiracy of these officers
and of civilians from Bosch's Dominican
Revolutionary Party (P.R.D.)?mainly mid-
dle-class persons?began last September.
The target date was June 1, but the capital
grapevine became active in March with
rumors that a coup was in the works.
After Easter Sunday, April 18, the coup
rumors grew more persistent. A few days
later, Santo Domingo's newspaper El Caribe
published a front-page story reporting un-
usual military movement around the presi-
dential palace. And finally on Thursday,
April 22, Donnie Reid himself heard enough
details of the plot to fire seven air force
officers involved in it. This move shocked
the conspirators into acting.
Rebel civilians suddenly captured the city's
main radio and television station in the early
afternoon of Saturday, April 24, and an-
nounced?prematurely?the government's
fall. Two army camps on the outskirts of
town declared themselves in rebellion.
Crowds poured into the downtown streets to
celebrate what they thought had already be-
come a victorious revolution, but loyalist
forces soon recaptured the radio station and
arrested eight rebels there. Although the
rebels at the two army camps ignored a 5
p.m. ultimatum to surrender, Reid Cabral
broadcast that evening an announcement
that the uprising had been stamped out.
The American Embassy, which had been
completely surprised by the original revolt,
dutifully passed on to the State Department
the announcement that the revolt was now
over, along with its own conclusion that, in-
deed, Donnie Reid had weathered the storm.
A possible explanation for the Embassy's
failure to properly assess what was happen-
ing may be found in the absence of Ambas-
sador Tapley Bennett, who had left Santo
Domingo on Friday, April 23, the day before
the rebels made their move. Mr. Bennett
later explained that he had expected trouble,
and for precisely that reason had gone to
Washington, feeling that it was his last
opportunity to discuss the Dominican prob-
lem before trouble came. However, on
Thursday Bennett had sent his regular
weekly report to the State Department, and
in it he mentioned new talk in Santo Do-
mingo that some generals might try to oust
Reid during the weekend. But, Bennett
noted, this seemed to be one of those "usual
Santo Domingo rumors."
From Santo Domingo the Ambassador went
to Georgia to visit his mother. It was there
that he first heard of the Saturday revolt,
and only the next day did he go to Washing-
ton, where the initial plans for a large-scale
U.S. intervention were already being consid-
ered?partly on the basis of increasingly
nervous reports from Santo Domingo that
leftists and Communists were dominating
what was supposed to be a pro-Bosch move-
ment. -
Also absent from Santo Domingo that cru-
cial weekend were 11 of the 13 officers at-
tached to the U.S. military assistance advis-
ory group, whose job it was to train Do-
minican troops and be in touch with their
leaders; they were in Panama attending a
routine conference. The Embassy's naval
attache had left Friday for a weekend of
dove shooting in the Cibao Valley with Brig.
Gen. Antonio Imbert Barreras, one of the
two survivors of the group that ambushed
Trujillo in 1961?and a man who was to play
a vital role in the days ahead. The senior
American present in Santo Domingo was
Bennett's deputy, William Connett, a thin,
bespectacled diplomat who had arrived 15
months before. At 46, he had served in four
Latin American posts during his 14 years in
the Foreign Service.
In Washington it was a quiet spring week-
end. Secretary of State Dean Rusk on Sat-
urday made a statement about U.S. policy on
Cambodia. President Johnson's top Latin
American adviser, Thomas Mann, was re-
laxing at home. And Jack Hood Vaughn,
who only a few weeks earlier had succeeded
Mann as Assistant Secretary of State for In-
ter-American Affairs when Mann was elevated
to the post of Under Secretary, was attending
,a conference in Cuernavaca, Mexico. As far
as anyone in the administration seemingly
could determine, this was one of the quietest
periods that Latin American politics had
undergone in a long time.
By any standards Tap Bennett's Embassy
was a good Embassy, staffed by about 30
Foreign Service officers. All were career men
with good records, and most had Latin
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
July.: 29, 19
proved For Rel5miaggi114A4f; iiftim97_3(wacw000190008-1
American experience. Its only visible weak-
ness was that all ranking officers, including
Bennett, had served there for a relatively,
short time. This was because 'diplomatic re-
lations with the Dominican Republic were
restored only late in 1963, and a whole new
team was assigned there with' the new Am-
bassador. Bennett, serving in his first am-
bassadorial post, had been in 'Santo Do-
mingo 13 months, as had the chief of the
Embassy's political section. Only the CIA
contingent, operating out of the political
section as an independent unit, had been
' in the Dominican Republic longer.
Bennett was the classic State Department
career ambassador?with all that this im-
plies in advantages and drawbacks. At the
age ,of 48, his ambassadorial appointment
to Santo Domingo climaxed 24 years of a
Foreign Service career that had not been
spectacular, but, in State Department par-
lance, had been a good one. A tall, amiable
man from an established Georgia family,
Tap Bennett graduated from the University
of Georgia, then spent a year at the Univer-
sity of Freiburg in Nazi Germany between
1937 and 1938 before obtaining his law degree
from George Washington University. His
first Foreign Service post was, interestingly
enough, in the Dominican Republic. After-
ward lie specialized in Caribbean and Cen-
tral American affairs, becoming in 1951 the
Deputy Director of the State Department's
Office of South American Affairs.
This backlog of experience made Tap Ben-
nett a Latin American old hand, and in
1953 he was picked as personal assistant to
Dr. Milton Eisenhower, who then was suf..
veying hemispheric problems on his brother's
behalf. Doctor Eisenhower described Ben-
nett as "an engaging, sensitive, tireless work-
er." Married to the daughter of a well-
known former ambassador, Bennett carried
a pleasant social cachet, and in time he
was sent on pleasant assignments to Vienna
and Athens.
After his arrival in Santo Domingo last
year, the new ambassador established close
and cordial relations with President Reid
Cabral and with businessmen, landowners
and military officers who supported the
regime. While this was entirely proper, the
ambassador and his top associates seemingly
maintained few contacts or friendships with
the followers of Doctor Bosch, other opposi-
tion politicians or any of the young officers.
As a high administration official in Wash-
ington said later, wondering aloud about the
ambassador's selectiveness in his contacts,
"Tap didn't seem to know anyone who was
to the left of the Rotary Club."
? Bennett was conscientious in carrying out
his ambassadorial functions, and he traveled
almost everywhere in the Dominican Repub-
. lic, dutifully 'visiting aid projects and Peace
Corps centers. But, as one of his embassy
associates once remarked, "Tap seemed ill
at ease with people who were not well dressed
and to whom he had not been properly in-
troduced." When the revolt broke out, Ben-
nett almost reflexively gave his full commit-
ment to people whom he knew. And he sub-
sequently found himself in a maelstrom set
in motion by men he had never met and by -
powerful forces that he had never discovered.
After reporting Saturday night that the
rebellion seemed to have fizzled out, Ben-
nett's deputy, Bill Connett?whose views ap-
parently coincided largely with the ambassa-
dor's?found out Sunday morning that the
situation had changed?although quite un-
draraaticaliy. Not only had the government's
planes and tanks refused to attack the two
yebellious, army garrisons, but the old-line
commanders had apparently decided to finish
off in their own way what the young officers
had started the day before. By Sunday
morning Reid Cabral's term in office had
ended?an the military leaders, rebels as
well as loyalists, agreed on that. Donnie
Reid signed his resignation onthe under-
standing that a junta would be formed and
that elections would be held soon.
Then developments became more confused.
The young military officers who hoped to
bring Doctor Bosch back to power refused to
go along with t14 junta plan. Instead they
and their followers moved into the presi-
dential palace, announcing that they were
establishing a provisional regime until Doc-
tor Bosch could return from exile in nearby
Puerto Rico. Because most of the troops
under command of officers favorable to the
Junta were across the Ozarna River at San
Isidro Air Force Base, the pro-Bosch officers
momentarily had the upper hand. They im-
mediately swore in as provisional president
a mild-mannered P.R.D. politican named
Jose Rafael Molina Ureria, who had been
president of the Dominican Chamber of De-
puties which became extinct at the time that
the military overthrew Bosch in the 1963
coup. Under the 1963 constitution, sus-
pended at the same time, Molina Ureria was
next in line for the presidency in the absence
of the vice president and the president of
the senate, both of whom were in exile. Be-
cause Bosch's supporters regarded the 1963
coup as Illegal, they claimed that the con-
stitution was still in effect and that Molina
Urefia was the rightful provisional president.
The rebels' characterization of their move-
ment as "constitutionalist" proceeds from
this interpretation.
The installation of Molina Urefia that
sunny Sunday marked the real beginning of
the Dominican civil war. The other military
commanders who had helped to dismiss Reid
Cabral a few hours earlier now felt betrayed.
And the most indignant among them was
Brig. Gen. Elias Wessin y Wessin, the officer
who had himself led the coup against Doctor
Bosch 19 months before and who was not
now prepared to see him brought back to
power. General Wessin had the allegiance
of the officers of the aviation infantry and
armored brigade, as well as of most of the
air force. Wessin's troops?who at peak
strength numbered aliout 2,500 combat sol-
diers?were the elite of the Dominican armed
forces, and now they were poised to smash
the rebels.
Early Sunday afternoon two of General
Wessin's P-51 fighters came out of the sun
over the sea beyond George Washington Bou-
levard and strafed the sprawling yellow pal-
ace. A Gloster Meteor jet followed in a
screaming dive, hurling rockets. Across the
Ozama River Wessin's tanks rumbled toward
the bridge leading into town. Simultane-
ously the San Isidro radio station broadcast
that the pro-Bosch rebels were Communist-
dominated.
Although Doctor Bosch had formerly been
one of Fidel Castro's favorite targets as a
"Yankee puppet," the American Embassy ap-
parentlY concurred in General Wessin's as-
sessment of the revolt. In one of his earliest
cables to Washington, Connett acting as
charg?'affaires in Bennett's absence,
warned that Doctor Bosch's return would
mean extremism in the Dominican Republic
within 6 months?by which he presumably
meant communism and, therefore, "another
Cuba" in the Caribbean.
The rebels had by now ofiened the arsenals
at the two army camps they controlled and
at the few downtown ,police stations they had
captured. A truck loaded with guns pulled
up at the tree-shaded Perque Independencia.
Men, women, and teenagers?Communists
and non-Communists alike?were allowed to
help themselves to anything they wanted.
Suddenly the city turned into an armed
'camp. Connett cabled Washington that
there were armed leftists on street corners.
Tere were unquestionably Communists and
pro-Castro elements in the revolution from
the outset, but there seems to have been no
'basis for the embassy's warnings that ex-
tremists were about to capture the move-
ment. The leaders at this early point were
18133
Career army officers and Molina Ureria?none
of whom are regarded as Communists.
In Santo Domingo, at 5:45 p.m. on Sun-
day, a delegation of top officials of Bosch's
party went to the embassy to ask that the
United States use its influence to halt the
Wessin air attacks. The group included Sil-
vestre Antonio Guzman, a wealthy planter
and former minister of agriculture in the
Bosch cabinet, who was to emerge a few
weeks later at the administration candidate
to end the Dominican civil war. (
The charge, Bill Connett, did not see them.
Instead they were received by the embassy's
second secretary, Arthur E. Breisky, who, ac-
cording to Guzman's subsequent account,
called the rebels irresponsible and said
they were Communist-dominated. When
one of the visitors heatedly denied any Com-
munist link, Breisky reportedly responded
that "now you ask for U.S. help after having
sent your people in the streets. If I had
Wessin's power I would use it."
We,ssin. did. On Monday his tanks con-
tinued their assault upon the Duarte Bridge,
where they were resisted for hours in what
was virtually hand-to-hand combat. Occa-
sionally a Wessin tank succeeded in reaching
the city end of the bridge, but then rebel
bazooka and machinegun fire turned it back.
Near the bridge rebel soldiers and civilians.
some of them teenagers, crouched behind
barricades among exploding missiles. By
now automatic weapons were being handed
out to anyone who asked for them. Aircraft
bombed the city, where armed bands?not
necessarily connected with any political
movement?fired at anything that moved.
There was soon a complete breakdown of
order, and the city had no government. Pres-
ently, serious fears developed for the safety
of the 2,500 Americans living in Santo Do-
mingo. Embassy officials monitoring the
rebel-controlled radio and television began
to discover a leftist-revolutionary accent
creeping into the programs. The rebel an-
nouncers began broadcasting the names and
addresses of "enemies of the revolution," an
apparent invitation to violence. Though no
anti-American incident had occurred, the
embassy feared this as a predictable next
step in the chaotic situation. Late on Mon-
day the embassy recommended that the 'U.S.
Navy, which had a task force standing off-
shore, immediately evacuate those Americans
who wished to leave. Nobody in Santo Do-
mingo, on any side, questioned the wisdom of
this decision.
Because logical analysis cannot prove a
negative argument?e.g., there are no snakes
in Manhattan?there is no way of estab-
lishing that the pro-Bosch revolution would
not have become dominated by the Commu-
nists. They are, however, a small minority in
the Dominican Republic. And many for-
eign diplomats in the capital?even some
officials at the Embassy?point out that the
United States, while fearing a Communist
takeover, did nothing in the revolt's early
days to encourage democratic elements
among the rebels. Instead the Embassy be-
came increasingly identified with the Wessin
forces, even though the San Isidro general
personified, to a great many Dominicans, the
threat of a new dictatorship.
Returning to Santo Domingo from Wash-
ington on Tuesday, April 27, Tap Bennett
immediately passed to Washington, along
with his own endorsement, the Wessin com-
mand's urgent request for radio equipment.
The Wessin forces had still not managed to
break into Santo Domingo, and the San
Isidro leaders pleaded for U.S. walkie-talkies
and other radio equipment to help provide
tactical control of their tanks and aircraft.
Even before Bennett returned to his post,
the administration in Washington was?quite
properly, in a situation of such extreme un-
certainty?already actively considering both
a landing of marines, to protect the evacua-
tion of Americans, and a large-stale military
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300190008-1
18134 Approved FotWitsfsg981141A1LOIrtieliftlipL6gRpAlitiR000300190009.-ly 29, 1965
Intervention. Intervention was planned to
fend off what the Embassy had represented
to Washington as the imminent danger of a
Communist takeover. (The Embassy warn-
ings, however, were still couched in general-
ities, and none of the alleged Communist
leaders in the rebel command had been posi-
tively identified.) At 4 o'clock on Tuesday,
therefore?before the Navy began evacuating
the first Americans from Santo Domingo?
the 82d Airborne Division at Fort Bragg, N.C.,
Was placed on alert. Briefing his officers,
division commander Maj. Gen, Robert York
said the mission would be a parachute as-
sault to secure San Isidro, the highway lead-
ing to the Ozaina River and the Duarte
Bridge.
On Tuesday afternoon the military pic-
ture in Santo Domingo shifted?the Wessin
troops appeared to be gaining the upper
hand. The tiny Dominican Navy, which had
until then remained neutral, suddently went
to the side of the San Isidro generals, and its
frigates lobbed a few shells at the rebel-held
presidential palace. Then a new act in the
Dominican drama?and in the Embassy's
drama?began. A group of rebel military
commanders suddenly appeared at the Em-
bassy and requested an interview with Am-
bassador Bennett. After checking their
weapons at the door, they were ushered into
the ambassadorial office. They were told the
Ambassador that it was now necessary to end
the bloodshed, and they asked him to mediate
In negotiations with General Wessin.
Tap Bennett replied that he had no au-
thority to mediate. But he said that because
he was in contact with San Isidro, he would
be glad to transmit messages there. Some of
the officers, apparently believing their own
entreaties lacked sufficient force, then sug-
gested that the Embassy help persuade Acting
President Molina Urefia that the time had
come to seek a truce. Bennett assented. He
instructed Benjamin J. Ruyle, head of the
political section, to drive to the palace and
deliver the message to the Acting President
from his military associates.
Ruyle found the sprawling palace deserted.
There were broken windows everywhere.
Bits of masonry lay strewn around where
rockets and machinegun bullets had hit.
Walking through the building, Ruyle finally
came upon a room off the main corridor
where Molina Urefia sat dejected in a stuffed
armchair. He was surrounded by a number
of rebels, some in uniform and some in ci-
vilian clothes. At first the Acting President
refused to consider giving up the fight, but
his companions persuaded him to give it
some thought. Ruyle left him and drove
back to the embassy.
An hour later Molina Urefia and 18 rebel
officers arrived at the white stucco, one-
story embassy. This time the group included
Lt. Col. Francisco Caamafio Defid., one of the
top rebel leaders and a 32-year-old graduate
of a Florida high school and of U.S. Marine
Corps schools. Again Tap Bennett was asked
to mediate, and again he refused?but there
are two contradictory versions of what hap-
pened. Colonel Caamafio insists that the
ambassador told the group that "this is the
time to surrender and not to negotiate."
This, the colonel said later, was an insult
to the rebel's honor.
Bennett denies that he either demanded
a surrender or intended to insult anyone.
However, Colonel Caarnafio's?and most
other rebels'?personal abhorrence of the
ambassador is associated with this incident.
But on one point both sides agree: When
the conference finally broke up, Colonel Caa-
mafio turned to Tap Bennett, just before
leaving his office, and said, We shall go on
fighting." (The ambassador did not report
this remark in his cable to the State Depart-
ment that night, nor had there been any
mention of Caamafio in embassy messages
during the first 4 days of the rebellion.)
The rebels left the embassy one by one,
some hanging back as if they were reluctant
to leave. Finally Molina tfrefia decided that
his side had lost and drove to the Colombian
Embassy to request aSylum. As far as the
U.S. Embassy was concerned, the pro-Bosch
rebellion had collapsed. An army battalion
from out of town, uncommitted to either
side until then, entered the city from the
west and marched on the palace. In the
east, General Wessin's tanks were smashing
their way into Santo Domingo over the
Duarte Bridge against heavy resistance. The
U.S. Navy evacuation of the first 1,175 Amer-
icans had been safely completed. There had
been an early incident at the Hotel Embaja-
dor, where evacuees had congregated, when
rebels lined terrified people up against a wall
in the lobby and fired a submachinegun
burst overhead. But nobody was hurt. In
Washington, administration officials ex-
pressed relief that the revolt had collapsed.
But to everybody's surprise?the embassy's
second major surprise in 5 days?the rebels
not only did not give up but they found a
second breath. Colonel Caamafio, whose
promise to fight had been ignored by Tap
Bennett the evening before, took command
of the rebellion and eventually mustered
perhaps 3,000 supporters?although he later
claimed to command 10,000 armed rebels.
Caamafio became the rebel leader almost
by accident, after many of his fellow plotters
had vanished into diplomatic asylum. A
somewhat paunchy man of unpredictable
mood, he has none of the magnetism of a
typical revolutionary leader such as, say,
Fidel Castro. If he has any political, eco-
nomic, or social ideas, beyond his proclaimed
support for democracy, he has failed to
make them clear. He alternates between
rages, when he swears to die alongside his
men to preserve their honor, and a kind of
gay insouciance that he displayed recently
at an improbable crepes suzette luncheon
at one of his hideouts. He could scarcely
be regarded as anything more than a transi-
tional leader.
By Wednesday morning, in any case, Caa-
mario's rebels had barricaded themselves
into an area of narrow streets and ancient
houses in old Santo Domingo. They placed
machineguns on the roofs and posted snipers
at windows. Molotov cocktails were stored
In houses, many of which became small
fortresses. Captured tanks and trucks, with
the painted word Pueblo [People] fanned
out into the city.
Now both the Wessin command and the
United States had to respond to a renewed
rebel threat. The Embassy decided that in-
tervention was necessary, but a legalism had
to be satisfied: Someone had to request U.S.
military help. Accordingly in mid-morning
a three-man junta was established at San
Isidro with Embassy guidance. Because Gen-
eral Wessin was so objectionable to many
Dominicans, an unknown air force officer,
Col. Pedro Bartolona6 Benoit, was named head
of the junta.
Colonel Benoit immediately appealed to
Tap Bennett for help. At 1:48 p.m., on
Wednesday the Ambassador cabled Washing-
ton that the junta's communications prob-
lem?the lack pf radio equipment?was
critical. He cabled that the military was
facing leftist forces and raised a question
about the effect on the morale of the air
force and the others if the United States
denied them aid.
Shortly after lunch Colonel Benoit radioed
the Ambassador from San Isidro that the
recently formed junta could no longer as-
sure order in Santo Domingo or protect for-
eign lives. He asked for U.S. intervention.
Tap Bennett passed this request to Wash-
ington, then drafted another message which
explained that he regretted that the United
States might have to impose a military solu-
tion to a political problem. While leftist
propaganda could be expected to character-
ize the revolt as a fight between the military
and the people, Bennett said, the issue really
was between those who wanted a Castro-
type solution and those who opposed it. He
went on to make clear that while he did not
want to overdramatize the situation, he be-
lieved that if the United States denied the
requested communications equipment and if
the opposition to those he called leftists lost
heart, the United States might be required
in the near future to stage a Marine land-
ing. What, he asked, did Washington prefer?
Messages whipped frantically between
Washington and Santo Domingo that after-
noon, and the State Department replied that
the United States would not intervene mili-
tarily unless the outcome was in doubt--
but that the walkie-talkies were being got
ready.
At that point the administration was
nearing the decision to land a contingent
of marines whose mission would be the pro-
teetion of the continuing evacuation of
Americans. About 2 p.m. a group of Marine
Corps "pathfinders" came ashore at the sugar
port of Haina, 7 miles west of the capital,
to survey the beach for an amphibious land-
ing.
At this point the United States identified
hree men among the Rebel leadership as
aving possible Communist ties. None of
them were the visible top leaders. The
identification was sent by the CIA from
Santo Domingo Wednesday morning, and
Vice Adm. Willian F. Raborn, Jr., retired, who
had been sworn in as CIA Director at 12:30
p.m. that same day, brought this information
to President Johnson.
Shortly before 5 p.m., Santo Domingo time,
Tap Bennett received from Colonel Benoit
a written note confirming the earlier radioed
request for "a temporary intervention." Ben-
nett telephoned the White House and talked
to the President. Then he sent his "emer-
gent" message, the highest..-priority commu-
nication in the U.S. Government, recom-
mending that the junta intervention request
be honored. Within minutes the first heli-
copters took off from the deck of the Boxer
to ferry marines to the Hotel Embajador.
The "limited intervention" had begun.
For the first time since 1916, U.S. troops
had set foot in the Dominican Republic. In
his televised announcement that night, Pres-
ident Johnson emphasized that the marines
had gone ashore in Santo Domingo to assist
in the evacuation of Americans and other
foreigners. Nothing was said of a feared
Communist takeover or of U.S. help to the
junta forces.
While the original landing by the marines
on April 28 brought no more than 500 U.S.
troops to Santo Domingo, the administra-
tion almost immediately moved toward a
major buildup. By the end of the first week,
there were 5,000 marines and paratroopers
ashore. During the May Day weekend, the
forces were more than doubled to 12,000.
At the end of the second week, on May 8,
the peak was reached with 22,000 U.S. troops
in the Dominican Republic and 8,000 sailors
manning 40 ships offshore. The U.S. mili-
tary spokesmen were never entirely precise
about the need for such a large force. But
State Department officials, briefing newsmen
in Santo Domingo, gradually escalated the
nature of the U.S. purpose in the Dominican
Republic from the initially declared evacua-
tion mission to one of assisting Dominicans
"to find a democratic solution to their poli-
tical problems."
When the landings began on Wednesday,
however, the first marine contingent soon
secured its perimeters. At '7:30 p.m., after
a marine platoon had been driven over to the
Embassy, Bennett sent a telegram marked for
Under Secretary Mann. Snipers had been
firing at the Embassy building from across
the street, and the marines shot seven of
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
ly 29, /roved For Re topc6IINBO 0?16Mpli 30 0 1 90008-1
18135
them. Tap Bennett's cable told Maim that
U.S. lives were in danger and conveyed an
oral message from Colonel Benoit that the
situation was deteriorating rapidly. He
cabled his hope for an urgent reply to his
official request for assistance to the Wessin
forces.
Thirty minutes later the Ambassador sent
off yet another telegram to Washington. It
said that the junta forces were incapable of
resisting and added Bennett's recommenda-
tion that serious thought be given to armed
intervention to restore order, beyond the
mere protection of lives. If the loyalist
efforts failed, he said, power would go to
groups' whose aims were identical with those
of the Communist Party. The United States
might have to intervene in force to prevent
another Cuba.
In Washington, a stunned Council of the
Organization of American States was in-
formed of the U.S. landing. The Latin
American ambassadors were told that the
marines went ashore to protect lives of for-
eign residents and that the administration
had had no time to consult beforehand with
Other governments, Several ambassadors
protested that the U.S. action violated the
OAS Charter, which bans unilteral interven-
tion. But, again, they were assured that the
United States desired only a cease-fire.
But in Santo Domingo events were pro-
ceeding on a somewhat different basis. News-
men preparing to land behind the marines
from the Navy's amphibious task force hap-
pened to turn on their transistor radios and,
quite accidentally, tuned in radio exchanges
between Tap Bennett and Colonel Benoit,
chief of the newly formed junta.
One message, at 9:25 on Thursday morning
said: "This is Shade Tree 1 [the Embassy's
radio call]. The Ambassador to Colonel
Benoit. Do you need more? Believe that
With determination your plans will succeed."
Another message from Tap Bennett:
"Could you open Punta Caucedo [the inter-
national airport] for air traffic to bring in
food and medicine? Uniformed marines can
operate there If civilians are not there."
Another exchange between the Embassy
and an American voice at San Isidro Air
Force Base spoke of need for batteries, com-
munications equipment, and rations for the
Wessin troops.
A message from San Isidro reported that "a
significant morale boost is evident here since
the arrival of rations." Then, San Isidro
informed Shade Tree 1 that "I've got a
message that the suppression attack is being
initiated at 08-45 local." A message from the
Embassy asked Colonel Benoit whether he
had enough supplies against "the Castro
forces facing you." The message then was
changed to say "rebel forces" instead of
"Castro forees."
Aboard the Boxer the task force commo-
dore, Capt. James A. Dare, dispelled any
doubts about why the marines had landed
in Santo Domingo. Briefing newsmen, he
said that American forces would remain
there long enough "to keep this a non-Corn-
munist government." But the official story
at the Santo Domingo Embassy and in Wash-
ington continued to be that the troops had
gone ashore to provide safety during the
evacuation.
That Thursday evening Tap Bennett
briefed the group of newsmen who had come
ashore from the Boxer. He told them that
there was evidence of Communist domina-
tion in the rebel movement, then distributed
typewritten copies of a list ef 54 Commu-
nists or Communist sympathizers who, Ben-
'nett said, were active in the rebel leader-
ship.
Simultaneously the Embassy cabled Wash-
ington the text of a rebel leaflet that called
for a fight "to death" against the Wessin
forces. It was signed by eight rebel leaders,
No. 138-19
beginning with Colonel Caamano. The
Embassy message, signed by Bennett, said
that two of the signers might have Commu-
nist connections but that no Information
was available about the others. In Wash-
ington, State Department oil:deals began
hinting to newsmen, on the strength of the
Bennett telegram, that seven or eight of the
top rebel leaders might be Communist-
oriented.
Bennett also told newsmen that night of
rebel atrocities?of several heads paraded on
pikes, of mass executions, and of how Colonel
Caamaflo personally had machinegunned
Colonel Calderon, the aide-de-camp to
President Reid Cabral. The reporters had
no reason to doubt Bennett's accounts, which
were also being cabled to Washington.
But it subsequently developed that none
of these reports was accurate. Nobody could
be found in the rebel zone--where reporters
went but Embassy officials did not?to con-
firm the stories of executions or of heads on
pikes. Colonel Caldertm emerged a few days
later at a hospital with a slight neck wound
received at the palace during the first day
of the revolution. A newsman had a beer
with him later on.
As days passed It became evident that,
deliberately or because of faulty informa-
tion, the Embassy was passing out inaccu-
rate reports. One evening an official State
Department spokesman announced that the
Embassy had received the intelligence that
Colonel Caamafio had met with five Com-
munist leaders the night before and prom-
ised them cabinet posts if the revolution
succeeded. If it failed, Caamafie was sup-
posed to have said, he would negotiate safe
conduct out of the country for them. The
spokesman did not have the names of the
leaders, and several days later he acknowl-
edged that the Embassy was not at all sure
of this information.
At his staff meetings, Bennett referred to
the rebels as "that Communist scum" or
"that bunch downtown." Requests from
Dominician professional groups?business-
men, lawyers, doctors, and engineers?for
contacts with the Embassy to explain their
contention that the "constitutionalist" revo-
lution was not Communist, were not
granted. When a reporter asked Bennett if
he did not fear that this policy of isolating
the rebels might push them into Communist
hands, he replied, "They are already in Com-
munist hands."
This was also the quickly reached conclu-
sion of John Bartlow Martin, the former
Ambassador to the Dominican Republic
during the Bosch regime whom President
Johnson sent to Santo Domingo to establish
contact with the rebels and to take a fresh
look at the situation. Martin, who had the
reputation of being a liberal and had many
friends in Bosch's P.R.D., spent an afternoon
conferring at the Caamailo command post
and immediately announced at a news con-
ference that the revolution had been taken
over by Communists. He said flatly that all
"democratic elements have been destroyed."
But neither Martin nor the Embassy is
known to have made any effort to encourage
democrats against the Communists. For 10
days there were no further contacts between
the United States and the rebels. The Em-
bassy clearly demonstrated partiality for the
'forces of the junta?which it began to call
"the Government of National Reconstruc-
tion."
To head this "government," the Embassy
picked Brig. Gen. Antonio Imbert Barreras,
one of two survivors of the group that killed
Trujillo. To assist General Imbert, the
United States made available $750,000 on
-May 9 to pay the salaries of public employees
in areas not under rebel control. No similar
offer was made to Colonel Caamafio.
Santo Domingo was a city governed by
confusion. While the United States was still
proclaiming "strict neutrality," technicians
from the U.S. Information Agency and the
CIA jammed the rebel radio station. News-
men and television cameramen recorded
truckloads of Imbert troops passing freely
through American checkpoints en route to
battle the rebels.
On the rebel side, Colonel Caamafio's an-
nouncers vilified Ambassador Bennett in the
worst imaginable terms. Snipers, who ac-
cording to Caamafio were not under his con-
trol, fired nightly at American positions,
often causing casualties. Amid all the con-
fusion, an Organization of American States
team negotiated a shaky truce on May 5.
The Johnson administration determined
that a new approach might be needed to
bring matters to a settlement, and that the
reporting and the recommendations from
Bennett and Martin were no longer ade-
quate. In the same way that Martin had
been sent in because of doubts about Tap
Bennett's reporting, McGeorge Bundy, the
President's Special Assistant for National
Security Affairs, was dispatched to reinforce
Martin. With him came the State Depart-
ment's two top Latin experts, Mann and
Vaughn.
Just before the Bundy mission's arrival,
Imbert aircraft broke the OAS-arranged
truce. Guns blazing, they made strafing
runs on rebel-held Radio Santo Domingo. In
Making their approach, the planes roared
over the Embassy, spraying bullets into ad-
joining streets. Tap Bennett and many of
his aids dived under their desks, the Am-
bassador. shouting, "I shall protest this."
For reasons never explained, Bundy's pres-
ence in Santo Domingo was kept secret for
12 hours while officials denied that he and
other high-ranking envoys were there.
Newsmen were now barred from the Em-
bassy building, largely because the small,
green-shuttered structure was so full of
generals and top-level "special guests" that
it was almost impossible to move about in-
side or find privacy for confidential con-
versations.
Bundy's mission was to negotiate a com-
promise constitutional government. Se-
lected to head it was Antonio Guzman, the
former agriculture minister under Dr.
Bosch and the man reportedly received so
coolly by Second Secretary Breisky on that
first Sunday of the revolution. Gunman's
name was suggested by Bosch, whom Bundy
had stopped off to consult in San Juan. He
was basically acceptable to the United
States and to the Caarnafio command. The
only remaining problem: was to win Gen-
eral Imbert's agreement to resign in favor
of the compromise candidate.
It was not a small problem. When Under
Secretary Mann suggested to Imbert that he
resign, Imbert flatly refused. He told the
Americans that since the United States had
helped him to become the head of the junta,
he now intended to keep the post. To do
otherwise, he said, would be "to turn every-
thing over to the Communists." General
Imbert told reporters, "I won't be played for
a sucker." One reporter described the situ-
ation by writing, "General Imbert is the U.S.
puppet who is pulling his own strings."
It was at this time that Lt. Gen. Bruce
Palmer, commander of U.S. military forces,
had to order half of the marine howitzers?
which had until now been aimed at the rebel
stronghold downtown?turned around to
face Imbert's troop emplacements. Some of
Palmer's troops appeared to be confused
about their mission, and some wondered
where the enemy was.
During the Guzman-Bundy negotiation
and while the OAS-arranged truce was still
in effect, the Imbert forces mounted another
offensive against the rebels, this time In the
northern section of Santo Domingo. Im-
bert's tanks and artillery made a full-scale
Approved For Release 2003/11/04.: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
118136 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE jury 29, .1965
assault that cost hundreds of Dorninioan
rives, mainly of women and children.
The rebels could not counter imbert's at-
tack in the north because the U.S.-controlled
security corridor, bisecting the city from
east to west, kept them hemmed tn down-
town. At one stage the 'United States pre-
pared to open another corridor, running
north from the rebel area, to halt the Imbert
? advance. But this idea, advocated by Bundy,
was vetoed In Washington. At the embassy,
Under amatory Mann said that he hoped
Castro would recognize the Caamato regime
arid prove once and for all that the rebels
were Communist-oriented.
Then "the Guzman formula"?for which
Bundy had worked for 10 days with all the
prestige of his White House post?collapsed
on orders from Washington. The FBI had
intercepted a telephone conversation between
Dr. Bosch and a friend. The conver-
sation reportedly included a statement that
if the Guzman regime were installed there
could be a new government in 5 days. About
this time the State Department sent a memo-
randum to the White House recalling that in
1933 the United States had been accused of
imposing a government on Cuba and that
the Johnson administration should beware
of opening itself to such a charge.
The breakdown of the Bundy-Guzman ne-
gotiation marked, for many of those on the
rebel side, the end of hopes for a "constitu-
tional" regime. The Imbert regime was al-
lowed to go on consolidating its position in
the governmentless country, while another
OAS commission, the second inter-American
group to try mediation, arrived in Santo Do-
mingo to seek a settlement.
On the day before his return to Washing-
ton, 5 weeks atter the United States found It
had a tiger by the tail, Bundy arranged to
meet with Colonel Caarnafio and his asso-
ciates. It was to be their first encounter, for
the rebel chief had canceled an appointment
a week earlier when one of his top aides was
killed by gunfire, apparently shot by U.S.
troops manning the security corridor. The
meeting place was to be the Music Conserva-
tory, a modern white building on a seaside
boulevard in the no man's land between the
marine and rebel lines. Arriving there at
345 pan., Bundy and his associates found
the building locked, but assumed that Colo-
nel Cashaafio's men had made arrangements
to have the conservatory opened. It turned
out, however, that Colonel enemalio had
made a like assumption. After unsuccess-
fully trying to find an open door or window,
one of The rebels produced a knife and pried
loose some Window panes. Chairs were
brought into position and the two delega-
tions climbed in through the window.
The meeting lasted 4 hours, with Bundy
using his fluent Spanish in the confereme.
Near the end of the session, violent gunfire
broke out not far from the conservatory.
Swearing in anger, Colonel Caamailo rushed
to telephone his forces to stop firing. Bundy
knitted for a phone to contact U.S. corn-
mangers. But there was no telephone in the
It might be said that the missing tele-
phone symbolized the entire Dominican
tragedy, where there wee a general break-
down--in conununications between Americans
and Dominicans attempting to end the civil
war 'without further loss of life, and where
no fornmia seemed to offer a peaceful solu-
tion. It maybe that there was no alternative
to the U.S. intervention in Santo Domingo,
but the 5 weeks I spent there at the height
of the crisis failed to ecnivinee me that there
Waer a real risk of 'another Cuba." As exiled
President Jhan Bosch, sitting out his coun-
ting agony in Puerto Rico, Observed sadly,
"Perhaps the United States should have
taken a chance with Dominican democracy."
Tim 'TIMM Lerma
(The weekly analysis of Latin American
affairs)
The Dominican crisis hangs like a dark
cloud over the upcoming second special Inter-
American Conference of Foreign. Ministers,
scheduled for Rid on August 4. The longer
the Caribbean deadlock endures, the more
prejudicial it becomes. The U.S. unilateral
intervention, the subsequent creation of an
Inter-American Peace Force and the de facto
OAS trusteeship have raised fundamental
questions which completely overshadow the
agenda, mostly pegged to reorganizatIonal
and economic matters.
Lacking a consensus on the OAS role in
the Dominican Republic, some members tried
.to Postpone the meeting. However, Brazil,
with important elections around the corner,
pressed for holding the meeting on schedule
and received key support from Argentina and
Chile. Now, rumors of postponement, which
seem unfounded at the moment, are on the
wing again.
Washington had hoped that Rio would be
a forum to discuss the setting up of a per-
manent inter-American police force to deal
with Communist flareups, and President
Johnson, Secretary of State Dean Rusk and
OAS Ambassador Ellsworth Bunker all talked
it up. But the kickback has been so strong
that the ides has been quietly put aside, for
the moment at least.
As a sign of Latin American discontent
over the Dominican affair, Secretary General
Jos?. Mora came under some sharp ques-
tioning from OAS ambassadors last week at
a closed-door briefing he defended himself
well, but still he was under the gun for
such picayune consideration as unfurling an
interatimerican flag in Santo Domingo with-
out authorization. Chilean President Edu-
ardo Frei gave a foretaste of the kind of talk
which may be heard in Rio when he stated
in Paris this week: "We want an inter-
American system without hegemony."
'In avoid polemics, some nations would like
to make the Rio conference as short as possi-
ble. Such questions as an inter-American
force would be thrown into some future
conference called to amend the OAS Charter.
Events in the Dominicau Republic have been
no help. Loose ends keep appearing after
the mediators reportedly have bagged a solu-
tion. The whole involvement has stretched
the OAS to the limit, and Secretariat officials
find themselves deeply immersed in a myriad
of unfamiliar tasks in Santo Domingo. Tech-
nically speaking, the OAS may have two
conferences on the fire simultaneously next
August In addition to the Rio conference,
the tenth. Meeting of Consultation of For-
eign Ministers, convoked to handle the Do-
minican explosion, is in force until the crisis
is solved.
MIDWES rhatN STATES REFUSE TO
BACK ROTTEN BOROUGH
AMENDMENT
Mr. TY-DINGS. Mr. President, the
indications are growing every day that
the rotten borough amendment is los-
ing ground not only in the Senate but in
the country. One after another colum-
nists, editorial writers, and other lead-
ers of public opinion are recognizing the
grave dangers which the rotten borough
amendment poses to our democratic sys-
tem. Perhaps the most significant indi-
cation that the rotton borough amend-
ment is losing support throughout the
country is the fact that the Midwestern
Conference of the Council of State Gov-
ernments refused to adopt a mesolution
calling for the passage of Senator DIRK-
BEN'S proposed amendment.
According to a report in the Wash-
ington Post of July 22, the Dirksen
amendment failed for lack of a majority
in the 12-member Council of State Gov-
ernments just as it failed for lack of a
majority in the Senate Judiciary Com-
mittee. The Washington Post reports
that 6 of the 12 Midwestern States fa-
vored the resolution calling on Congress
to approve the rotton borough amend-
ment. But six States refused to lend
their consent to this resolution. Three
of these six?Indiana, Iowa, and Michi-
gan?voted against the resolution.
Three others?Minnesota, Wisconsin,
and Illinois?abstained. I find it highly
significant that the mntority leader's
own State should fail to endorse his pro-
posed constitutional amendment and
that his proposal should fail to carry
in the heartland of this great coun-
try.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the Washington Post article
be inserted in the RECORD at this point.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD.
as follows:
(From the Washington Post, July 22, 19651
MIDWESTERN STATES FATL To Asia APPORTION-
ING AMENDMENT
COLUMBUS, Ouro.?A resolution asking
Congress to submit a Constitutional amend-
ment allowing one house of State legisla-
tures to be apportioned on a basis other than
population failed by one vote yesterday at
the closing session of a conference of 12 mid-
western States.
Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio arid
North and South Dakota voted for the reso-
lution which needed a majority of the 12
States to carry. Indiana., Iowa, and Michigan
voted no, and Illinois, Minnesota, and Wis-
consin abstained.
The delegates to the Midwestern Confer-
ence of the Council of State governments
voted '7 to 2 with three abstentions against
a proposal to commend the U.S. Supreme
Court for its one-man, one-vote rule or
reapportionment
A PARATROOPER IN VIETNAM
Mr. FANNIN. Mr. President, one of
the thousands of young Americans who
are defending the interests of the free
world in the jungles and rice paddies of
Vietnam is a 22-year-old paratrooper
from my home city of Phoenix, Ariz.?
Pfc. Jerry P. Linsner.
That this young soldier knows very
well why he is fighting in that far-away
Asian nation is demonstrated by a letter
to the editor which he wrote to the
Arizona Republic newspaper in Phoenix.
The thoughts which he so eloquently ex -
pressed in that letter are like a clear
fresh breeze compared to sortie of th3
juvenile demonstrations and protests b sr
students of his age on campuses through-
out the country.
In the belief that this dedicated young
serviceman's letter deserves wider eh-
culation as a forceful answer to advo-
cates of appeasement, I ask permission
to have it printed in the body of the
RECORD.
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
July 29, 194proved For Rd1eNCRGDZ/fONALDMRD/RD7-B09114ER0110300190008-1
the part of the House, to the conference Mr. McGEE. Mr. President, no one in
asked by the House on the disagreeing his right mind wants war or looks upon
votes of the two Houses on the amend- it with a light heart?least of all the
ment of the Senate to the bill (H.R. kind of dirty, ugly, brutal tactics which
5401) to amend the Interstate Commerce
Act so as, to strengthen and improve the
national transportation system: and for
other purposes - ,
VIETNAM SPEC v E?WHY
WE ARE THERE
Mr. McGEE. Mr. President, yester-
day President Lyndon Johnson went to
the American people to describe again
the critical nature of the crisis in south-
east Asia and what its dimensions re-
quire of us. He made clear two funda-
mental points that must be understood
everywhere and by everyone. The first is
that, in adversity or in success, we do not
intend to abandon Vietnam to the ag-
gressors?that we are there to stay
Whatever the price may be; and second
that we stand ready at all times to talk
to anyone in the hopes of negotiating a
peaceful settlement. That these basic
concepts of our policy in that troubled
part of the world may become more
costly, more risky, and more troubled he
left no doubt. Eut it was a candid ap-
praisal which no American could mis-
read, nor from which no American
would dare retreat. President Johnson
Made it abundantly clear, moreover, that
we intend to prosecute the struggle in
Vietnam within the context of stopping
aggression and protecting smaller na-
tions from their enemies outside with-
out, on our part, resorting to general
war.
The response to the President's mes-
sage has been heartwarming and, in fact,
very strong. I ask unanimous consent to
have printed in the RECORD following my
remarks the editorial comment appear-
ing in this morning's Washington Post
applauding the President's statement.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. McGEE. I also ask unanimous
consent to have printed in the RECORD
at the conclusion of my remarks the lead
editorial in today's Washington Daily
News entitled "Everything That Is Nec-
essary." The editorial commends the
President for his courage and the forth-
--rightness of his statement.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 2.)
Mr. 'McGEE. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent to have printed at
the conclusion of my remarks the lead
editorial published in today's issue of the
Washington Evening Star captioned "No
Surrender?No Retreat."
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 3.)
Mr. McGEE. I also ask unanimous
are an intrinsic part 9f guerrilla combat.
Whether it be as bloody and cruel as the
jungles or rice paddies of Vietnam com-
mand or a nice "clean" little crisis like
Berlin or Cuba where the nerves of the
giants on the political chessboard of
power politics were tested by air power
alone, the central issue remains the
same?that of the willingness of those
with power but bent upon peace to use
that power in behalf of peace. History
has thrust us into this role. We did not
seek it. We do not want it. But the
tides of change in our time have swept
us up with these alternatives and these
requirements. We have no choice save
one. That is to forfeit both the respon-
sibility and the opportunity for reshap-
ing the balance of power of the new
20th century world to governments and
philosophies and forces hostile to the
basic principles of peace and human
freedom.
The fact of American military and
political power in the wake of World
War II no one can deny. But the price
of that power, with those attendant risks
and sacrifices, would be avoided or
evaded by some of our people at the
present time, if they had their way.
We?and we hope they?are learning,
however, that the price of peace is not
a cheap one and that peace does not just
"happen." Both World War I and It
should have taught that peace has to be
waged as vigorously as we wage war.
This means the willingness to risk the
use of the tools of war in order to achieve
the goals of peace.
It is in pursuit of this harsh fact of
International life that the United States
went to Vietnam in the first place. How
we got there and why we must stay are
better viewed and understood from the
perspective of what has preceded our
policy there.
For a few brief moments then, Mr.
President, I would like to recast the for-
eign policy of the United States since
World War II in the setting of stress and
pressure and threat which required it
and to spell out some of the conditions
which shape it. For it can be seen that,
against the backdrop of the cold war
years, our policy in Vietnam is but an-
other logical and necessary commitment
within the same framework of national
interest and international responsibility
as were Iran, Greece, Berlin, Korea,
and?in one sense?even Cuba.
Ever since the end of the Second World
War the United States has followed two
general lines of foreign policy at one and
the same time. There is nothing incon-
sistent in this. Indeed, we could not
avoid it, for we faced a world with a split
personality.
On the one hand the world has been
Consent' tohave printed at the conclusion made one by the discoveries of scientists
,. . , ,
of in.-3 re,marks a copy of a newspaper and the inventions of technicians.
advertisement published by Freedom The old barriers of space and time
}louse entitled "The Silent Center Must which once cut off nations one from the
Speak Up." other had been wiped out. The indus-
The 15RESIDING OFFICER. Without trial revolution and the agricultural rev-
objection, it is so ordered. olution and the power revolution and
(See exhibit 4.) the revolutions in, communications and
, .?,
18161
transport together have given us the
means to conquer the environment and
to raise standards of living to levels of
decency throughout the planet?to lib-
eralize and to humanize life for all man-
kind.
Plainly the way to sdeal with this world
of new opportunity?of progress and
color and excitement?was the way of
international cooperation.
Our Nation rose splendidly to the chal-
lenge of the world of opportunity. We
did well in matching scientific invention
with social invention. We invented the
Marshall plan. We invented the point
four program. We launched the AID
program and the Alliance for Progress
and food for peace and atoms for peace
and the Peace Corps, to cite a few ex-
amples.
We have shared our resources and our
technology and our know-how. We
have cooperated with all who would co-
operate with us.
And we have organized for permanent
cooperation in this world of opportunity
in one way after another. We are mem-
bers in good standing of every useful in-
ternational organization in the world.
We send delegations to almost every in-
ternational conference?and there are
half a thousand of them every year. We
participate in cooperative regional or-
ganizations wherever it is appropriate
for us to do so. We take part in the
World Bank and the International De-
velopment Agency and the Inter-Ameri-
man Bank and have offered to do the
same in the Asian Development Bank.
We have lent more support and pro-
vided more leadership in the United Na-
tions than has any other member. And
not just in the Security Council. Not
just in the General Assembly. As the
whole family of United Nations agencies
has come into being and then gone into
operation, the United States has been in
the forefront of the initiators, the con-
tributors and the leading supporters of
these agencies in which the nations share
their resources and talents cooperatively
to help make good the opportunities
opened up by science and technology.
I could go on and on with examples.
Taken together they comprise the first
line of our postwar foreign policy. We
have done all this partly out of com-
passion and partly out of enlightened
self-interest; for-the cooperative path
Is the path to peace and order, to prog-
ress and justice, in a world made one by
science.
But alas, Mr. President, these actions?
this preferred course of our leaders and
our people?could not be the whole of
our foreign policy. For there was an-
other aspect of the world which had to be
dealt with too?another face to world af-
fairs. This was the face of danger, of
threat, of force, of violence, and of war.
This face of the world was not de-
signed by us; it was designed by others.
By the very nature of our society we
could only react to it. But to defend our
society?and our kind of society else-
where?and the very hope of our kind
of society anywhere?we were obligated
to react to it. And we did. Taken to-
gether our reactions to force and the
_ Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
a
18162 Approved Foo5s1ftsfsiliehallpitiBid91:_'?MpA4IfER000300190009-ay 29,
1965
threat of force make up the second gen-
eral line of our postwar foreign policy.
When our offer to turn over to the
United Nations full control of the dan-
gerous aspects of atomic energy was re-
jected by the Soviet Union?in one of the
most tragic decisions in history?we had
no choice but to build up an arsenal of
nuclear weapons.
And when it became indisputably evi-
dent that our wartime Russian ally was
more imperialist than the czars, we or-
ganized to defend ourselves and our
friends?and indeed all who were pre-
pared to resist aggression to preserve
their national independence.
That policy was laid down for all the
world to see in this very Chamber on
March 12, 1947, by President Harry S.
Truman. It is well worthwhile to re-
call here today the key passage of that
historic proposal which came to be
known as the Truman doctrine. The
President pointed out that the survival
of Greece was threatened by terrorists
led by Communists?that Greece must
have our assistance?that there was no
other place to turn except the United
States?that the future of Turkey as an
independent state likewise was threat-
ened. And then the President enunci-
ated the policy he was recommending to
the Congress and the people in these
words:
I am fully aware of the broad implications
involved. * * * We shall not realize our ob-
jectives, however, unless we are willing to
help free peoples to maintain their free in-
stitutions and their national integrity
against aggressive movements that seek to
impose upon them totalitarian regimes. * * *
Mr. President, I would remind Senators
that when President Truman spoke the
Greek Army was in no shape to put up
much of a fight. The terrorists con-
trolled most of the countryside and gov-
ernment forces had retreated to a
shrunken area around the capital. Lines
of communications were broken.
Refugees from burnt-out villages were
shuffling into Athens. Foreign exchange
was exhausted. Prices were out of con-
trol. And a deep sense of panic infected
the people.
That doctrine, laid down in this Cham-
ber in 1947, has been in force ever since.
It was tested first in Greece and Turkey.
Then it was tested in Berlin. Then it
was tested in Korea.
To support that doctrine has cost our
Nation dearily in time and effort?yes, in
treasure and in lives. But it worked.
Not since Korea-15 years ago?has an
nation marched its armies across another
nation's frontiers.
The Truman doctrine in action taught
the world that the United States meant
exactly what President Harry Truman
said?that we were in fact prepared "to
help free peoples to maintain their free
institutions and their national integrity
against aggressive movements that seek
to impose upon them totalitarian
regimes."
Moreover, it taught the former
masters of the Soviet Union that armed
aggression simply does not work because
it will not be allowed to work. That was
an important?perhaps essential?lesson
in the search for world peace.
But unfortunately mainland China is -
still in the hands of men who believe?
as Mao Tse-tung has said again and
again?that "all political power grows
out of the barrel of a gun." And his
disciples have turned to a new form of
aggression which they offer to the world
behind a false face called "wars of na-
tional liberation."
These are, of course, neither liberating
nor national. They are aggressions un-
disguised by the fact that they begin
without bugles or banners, that their
agents may dress not in uniforms but
in the work clothes of peasants, that
they strike not at dawn but after sunset,
that their tactics are not those of con-
ventional armed forces but of noncon-
ventional guerrilla bands.
Mr. President, the organization, train-
ing and equipping of murderers and
marauders, the clandestine infiltration
of such bands across interiiational
frontiers, the arts of guerrilla warfare
practiced in the name of "national lib-
eration"?this is merely the most modern
form of aggression, of conquest, and of
empire.
And the greatest threat to the peace
of the world today lies in this, insidious
doctrine of wars of national liberation,
this clandestine form of international
aggression which is facing its climatic
test in Vietnam today.
If it succeeds in Vietnam, it will be
taken as proof that it can succeed
elsewhere.
If it succeeds in Vietnam, it will be
taken as hard evidence that militant
violence is a better way to promote com-
munism than competitive coexistence.
But if it fails in Vietnam, the policy
of promoting "wars of national libera-
tion" will be dealt a body-blow every-
where. So let us be very, very clear
what may be well at stake here and
now.
The world is still dangerously over-
stocked with atomic weapons and the
threat of spreading atomic power has
by no means receded. Yet it is my view
that when the great atomic powers stood
on the edge of that awful abyss in the
Caribbean in the autumn of 1962, a
tacit agreement against nuclear war
took silent hold in the capitals of the
nuclear powers. We have reason to
hope that nuclear weapons, by their very
destructiveness, have outlawed their use.
And when old-fashioned aggression
with conventional arms was at last
stopped dead in its tracks along the 38th
parallel in Korea, one and all could see
that there was no mileage left in that
kind of attack against a neighboring
state.
Now clandestine aggression is on trial
in Vietnam. If that, too, can be shown to
be futile, is it too much to hope that the
day of the aggressor will be over for all
time? I would not expect the sudden re-
form of Mao Tse-tung or Fidel Castro
and some of their followers. But the evi-
dence would be in. Armed aggression?
nuclear, conventional or guerrilla?does
not belong in the second half of the 20th
century. There is nothing to be gained?
nothing in it for anybody.
So Vietnam could well be the last
chapter in the long, long story of mili-
tary conquest. The stakes could be just
that high.
In any event, Mr. President, the fact
that Vietnam is halfway around the
world is no better reason for not stand-
ing against aggression there today than
it was in Korea a decade and a half ago.
The fact that aggression in Vietnam is
dressed up in the false doctrine of "wars
of national-liberation" does not make the
Truman doctrine any less relevant than
it was in 1947.
We stand in Vietnam now for the
same reason we stood in Greece and
Turkey. That reason is right. It is just.
It is moral. And if we have the endur-
ance?which I know we have?it will turn
out as it has turned out in the past--
successfully.
And let us not be deluded by Commu-
nist propaganda, or by statements made
in other capitals for domestic political
purposes, or by uninformed pleas from
people who are genuinely frightened, that
we stand exposed and isolated in Viet-
nam. For we are not alone in that far
land.
Outside of Communist China and North
Vietnam, there is hardly a nation in this
world which in truth wants the United
States to withdraw its support of the
Republic of Vietnam. Outside of those
places, there is hardly a responsible
leader who does not privately hope that
aggression will be stopped in Vietnam.
And more than 30 nations, in one way
or another, are providing some kind of
help to the Republic of Vietnam in in;
hour of agony. Some have provided
money and relief and school supplies:
some are training young Vietnamese in
their own countries; some are offering
technical assistance in such fields as
agriculture, forestry, dairy practices, and
engineering. Others have sent nurses
and medical and surgical teams and
mobile military hospitals. Several have
sent psychological warfare experts.
Military units are on the scene from
Australia, New Zealand, Korea, and
Thailand in addition to U.S. forces from
the United States.
Whatever may be said by hostile or
irresponsible critics, the world knows
well what we want and do not want in
Vietnam. It has been said by President
Eisenhower and by President Kennedy
and by President Johnson in turn. It has
been said by others, including the late
Adlai Stevenson. More than a year ago.
on May 21, 1964, Mr. Stevenson told the
Security Council of the United Nations:
The United States has no, repeat, no, na -
tional military objective anywhere in south-
east Asia. U.S. policy for southeast Asia is
very simple. It is the restoration of peace
so that the peoples of that area can go about
their own independent business in whatever
associations they may freely choose for them-
selves without interference from the outside.
Later in the same address, Governor
Stevenson stated?as others had before
and have since?what is needed to bring
peace to Vietnam:
There is a very easy way to restore order
in southeast Asia. There is a very simple,
safe way to bring about the end of U.S. mil-
itary aid to the Republic of Vietnam.
Let all states In that area make and abide
by the simple decision to leave their neigh-
bors alone.
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Ow;
juty 29, /*proved For ReLermirAN?Altalk:SketglittiBOGyiNINCL0300190008-1
When their neighbors decide to leave them
alone?as they must?there will be no fight-
ing in southeast Asia. * * * Any time that
decision can be put in enforceable terms,
my Government will be only too happy to
put down the burden that we have been
sharing with those determined to preserve
their independence. Until such assurances
are forthcoming, we shall stand for the in-
dependence of free peoples in southeast Asia
as we have elsewhere,
So we are not yet finished 'with the
'task faced up to by Harry Truman in
1947. We are still obliged to pursue that
second general line of foreign policy
which is helping others to stand against
those who, would impose totalitarian re-
gimes upon them from across their bor-
ders. This has been a heavy burden and
at times a lonely and thankless task.
Yet I shudder to think of what this
world would look like today if the United
States had not stood firm in Greece and
Turkey, in Berlin and Korea, as we are
standing firm in Vietnam today.
Mr. President, we have worked hard
these ?past two decades to make the
point that armed aggression no longer
pays. When that point is made once
again in Vietnam, it should be made
once and for all.
And until it is?until the aggressor re-
gains enough of his senses to leave the
battlefield for the conference table?I
shall support without reservation every
effort that is needed to finish-the job for
good.
I yield the floor.
Exi-nBrr 1
[From the Washington Post, July 29, 1965]
? THE VIETNAM Potaar
In typiCally Johnsonian fashion, the Presi-
dent supplemented his announcement of
intensified American participation in the
Vietnamese war with an escalation of his
peace efforts. Draft calls are to be doubled
In the months ahead, and there will be a
rapid buildup of American fighting men in
the besieged southeast Asian country. But
the aim of protecting freedom and independ-
ence from Communist aggression without
resort to general war remains the same.
The President made another graceful ap-
peal to the United Nations to exert whatever
Influence it can to halt the aggression in
Vietnam. At the same time he offered to dis-
cuss Hanoi's proposals along with our own
and those of any other interested nation that
may care to sit down at a conference table.
His sincere desire to substitute the confer-
ence table for the battlefield took away any
suggestion of belligerence that might other-
wise have been read into the announcement
of expanding military operations.
The gist of what the President had to
say is that the United States places such a
high value on peace that it is willing to fight
for it. The spread of Asian communism by
terror and slaughter is the antithesis of both
peace and freedom. The United States has
attempted to provide a shield against this
menace. It is now called upon to demon-
strate that this shield is not an illusion.
We do not see how Pre'sident Johnson
could have explained the necessity of the
U.S, course in Vietnam more effectively than
he did:
"If ,wc are driven from the fields in Viet-
nam, then no nation can ever again have
the same confidence in our promise of pro-
tectioP. In each land the forces of inde-
pendence would be weakened. An Asia so
threatened by Communist domination would
hnpril the security of the United States
Itself.
"We just cannot now dishonor our word
or abandon our commitment or leave those
who believed us and who trusted us to the
terror and repression and murder that would
follow. This, then, my fellow Americans, is
why we are in Vietnam."
The president's reference to "Asian com-
munism' doubtless holds special significance.
His exclusion of the Russians from his com-
ments was an indirect appeal for Moscow's
understanding of why we must do what we
are doing. The Soviet Union shares at least
some of the alarm in the West over the openly
belligerent and recklessly aggressive course
of Communist China and the Hanoi govern-
ment. President Johnsen seemed to be say-
ing to Moscow that the United States is do-
ing everything possible to avoid a general
war and that the two major nuclear powers
have a common interest in not allowing this
Asian Communist brushfire to get out of hand
for want of a rational confrontation at a
conference table.
Within the United States, we surmise that
the response to the President's speech will be
overwhelmingly favorable. Despite the in-
nate hatred of war, most of the people are
aware of the kind of world we live in. They
appear to be reconciled to a hard struggle
in a faraway land because of the close re-
lation it has to the preservation of our own
freedom. Many of those who are committed
to the general policy, however, retain some
concern over the way it is being carried out.
One would hope that much of the discus-
sion in the White House conferences of the
last week has been given to effective employ-
ment of the additional manpower and equip-
ment that are flowing to Vietnam. It is not
enough merely to build up larger forces and
the volume of supplies. With the extension
of military might in Vietnam, there will be
Increasing need for wise decisions and sound
strategy. This perceptive statement on the
part of the President also greatly strengthens
confidence that he will be as firm in pushing
for a rational settlement as he has been in
trying to teach the Communists that peace
cannot be bought with terror and aggression.
EXHIBIT 2
[From the Washington Daily News, July 29,
1965]
EVERYTHING THAT IS NECESSARY
At his televised press conference yester-
day, President Johnson was about as clear
as anyone could be about why we are in
Vietnam and what we propose to do about it.
We are there, in short, because we have to
be. Our national security is at stake. If
we have learned anything in our frustrating
and costly experience with communism the
last 20 years, It is that nonresistance is the
quickest way to our own downfall.
And what we are going to do about Com-
munist terrorism and aggression in Vietnam
is everything that is necessary. This may
be a lot. To start, the President is doubling
the draft and immediately adding 50,000
troops to our forces in Vietnam.
These are the choices forced upon us.
Every retreat from Communist attack has
resulted in. defeat, in more peoples losing
their freedom. Every evidence of weakness
merely has served to egg on the Communists.
The President spoke of commitments of
three Presidents to defend Vietnam. But
even more essential is our national inter-
est?for if we should quit Vietnam we re-
treat a long step toward subjugation of our
own freedoms to Communist domination.
All that we have built in this country, and
all that we hope to build, would be jeopard-
ized. We are fighting, even though in a dis-
tant land, for our own security.
Mr. Johnson said he had asked the com-
mander in Vietnam what he needs to meet
the situation, and that these needs will be
met.
The only question here is whether enough
is to be done now: -
For many months we have hoped the drag-
18163
'ging war in Vietnam woud lead to a negotia-
tion table. That hope has been grounded.
There are risks in whatever we do. But
the risks if we do not stop the Vietcong are
far greater, in terms of our own safety, than
the risks in using our power (all of it, if
necessary) to force a decision in South
Vietnam.
It is, as the President said, agonizing. But
that's the way it is. We didn't make the
situation. But it is up to us, primarily, to
settle it, as completely and as rapidly as
possible.
It is war, and, let every American see it as
such.
EXHIBIT 3
iFrom the Evening Star, July 29, 1965]
NO SURRENDER?NO RETREAT
The Presient's report to the Nation on
Vietnam was perhaps his best performance
since taking office.
He was careful to explain?again?why we
are fighting in Vietnam. It boils down to
this: First we have made a commitment
there which we will not dishonor. Sec-
ond, to let Vietnam go would merely whet
the appetite of the aggressors. If we do not
see this fight through, we will surely have to
fight later under even less favorable condi-
tions at some other place.
Mr. Johnson also?again?held forth the
olive branch. He said he would welcome
any effective intervention by the United Na-
tions. He repeated his readiness to go to
the conference table at any time. Our goal,
he stressed, is a free election, internationally
supervised, "in the south, or throughout all
Vietnam." In short, our record in this re-
spect is as clear as clear can be?for any-
one who wants to read it.
Some disappointment has been expressed
because the military buildup announced by
Mr. Johnson stopped short of what, in one
view, is needed. An additional 50,000 Amer-
ican troops will be sent immediately to South
Vietnam. But the buildup will not stop
at that level. "Additional forces will be
needed later," the President said, "and they
will be sent." He is not now calling up the
Reserves, although the implication is plain
that this, too, will be done if and when
needed. The monthly draft call is to be
raised at once from 15,000 to 35,000?presum-
ably in preparation for the time when more
units will be shipped to the battle scene.
Taken together, these Measures are a sig-
nificant enlargement of the effort that we
are making and will make.
Everything will depend upon the reaction
of the other side. The President sought to
allay apprehensions by saying that "nothing
we have in mind should arouse any distrust
or provoke any violence" by the Soviet Un-
ion. The only immediate response has been
a Moscow radio broadcast, in French, which
was monitored in London. It said that the
United States is taking a "colossal risk" in
boosting its strength in Vietnam.
The President, however, had already given
the appropriate answer: "We do not want an
expanding struggle with consequences no one
can foresee. Nor will we bluster or bully or
flaunt our power. But we will not surrender.
And we will not retreat."
Well said.
EXHIBIT 4
THE SILENT CENTER MUST SPEAK UP
"I hope that others who feel as you do
may be willing to join in this expression."
(From President Johnson's letter to Freedom
House.)
The defense of our Government's efforts
in South Vietnam should not be left solely
to the President or to officials of the admin-
istration. The critics of the President have
had the field to themselves. ,This monolog
is a disservice to the American people. The
great majority of our people have been
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300190008-1
18164 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE duty 29, 1965
silent too long; their voices must now be
heard.
The distorted picture of American public
opinion given by the critics has undoubtedly
affected the decisions of the Communist
rulers in Hanoi and Peiping. Few of these
rules have ever visited Western countries:
they do not realize that the strength of the
small ad hos groups calling for American
withdrawal from Vietnam is grossly exag-
gerated. This misunderstanding has im-
peded the administration's effort to achieve
a durable peace. The notion that the Ameri-
can people are gravely divided against their
leaders has helped to create the illusion that
in the end the United States would capitu-
late to the aggressor.
It is not surprising that a recent full-page
advertisement, signed by several hundred
artists and seeking to persuade the country
to abandon the defense of South Vietnam,
Included the names of avowed Commu-
nists?men whose articles have appeared in
the Communist Worker and whose books are
official Communist publications. But more
noteworthy is the long-list of those others
who are not Communists and have neverthe-
less added their signatures; believing they
are striking a blow for peace, they have
allowed themselves to become parties to an
insidious propaganda campaign.
One of the many things the advertisement
forgot to mention is that both Peiping and
Moscow have rejected all appeals for nego-
tiations by our President, by United Nations
Secretary General U Thant, by the mediation
committee of the 17 nonahned Afro-Asian
nations, and others.
We believe most Americans know that if
aggression against South Vietnam?disguised
as a war of liberation?is not successfully
resisted, more aggression and perhaps even
larger scale war will follow. That is the
,
lesson of Ethiopia. That is the lesson of
Munich.
We believe that at this moment of peril
and challenge the American people would
like to see their real views proclaimed in a
forthright declaration of national unity.
This is why Freedom House offers the fol-
lowing credo of support for our national
purpose in Vietnam:
1. Our withdrawal from Vietnam under
present circumstances cannot be sustained
on moral grounds. Such a decision would be
morally indefensible. Having freely accepted
responsibility as a world power and a cham-
pion of freedom, the United States would dis-
honor that role by defaulting on its promises
and commitments. Such default would not
only abandon men, women, and children to
cruel reprisals; it would seriously undermine
the credibility of our commitments to other
nations.
2. The decision to halt Communist aggres-
sion?whether in Vietnam, Laos, or the
Congo?is clearly in the interest of the
United States and the other nations of the
free world.
S. We welcome the recognition of a com-
mon interest which has prompted Australia,
New Zealand, and South Korea to take an
active part in the present struggle. We hope
other allies will join in the defense of the
free world areas threatened by Communist
"wars of national liberation."
4. The United States is not embarked on
a military crusade against Communist na-
tions. Our record in dealing with the Iron
Curtain nations of Europe and living peace-
ably with their Communist-controlled socie-
ties is our credential.
5. It is equally important to recognize that
our military effort is only part of the sub-
stantial U.S. program to enlarge the eco-
nomic, social, and political future of the
Vietnamese people.
6. We regret the world is still racked by
force rather than run by reason. But we
also see no hope for reason until the force of
lawlessness is checked, Our troops and arms
are not mere engines of destruction; they
are instruments of prevention. We mean to
use them as judiciously as possible. But we
do mean to use them effectively.
There is nothing new in what we confront
today, either in the challenge from the ag-
gressor or in the timid voices that would
yield. Nor is there any blinking the fact
that the necessary responses are both difficult
and dangerous. The very nature of the great
challenges we as a nation must face requires
not only wise decisions but prompt and ef-
fective action. We believe the present policy
of the United States meets these tests and
deserves the wholehearted support of the
American people.
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE?
ENROLLED BILLS SIGNED
A message from the House of Repre-
sentatives, by Mr. Hackney, one of its
reading clerks, announced that the
Speaker had affixed his signature to the
following enrolled bills, and they were
signed by the Vice President: ,
HM. 1771. An act to establith a 5-day
workweek for postmasters, and for other
purposes;
HR. 6622. An act to exempt the postal field
service from section 1310 of the Supple-
mental Appropriation Act, 1952; and
H.R. 6675. An act to provide a hospital in-
surance program for the aged under the
Social Security Act with a supplementary
medical benefits program and an expanded
program of medical assistance, to increase
benefits under the old-age, survivors, and
disability insurance system, to improve the
Federal-State public assistance programs,
and for other purposes.
NATIONAL AMERICAN LEGION
BASEBALL WPWIK?LEGISLATIVE
REAPPORTIONMENT
The Senate resumed the consideration
of the joint resolution (S.J. Res. 66) to
provide for the designation of the period
from August 31 through September 6,
1965, as "National American Legion
Baseball Week."
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, I feel
compelled at this time t,o question a
statement made by the distinguished
senior Senator from Hawaii [Mr. FoNu]
on the floor of the Senate on September
15, 1964, during the last days of the 88th
Congress. concerning the effects of the
Supreme Court ruling on reapportion-
ment.
It is quite possible that in the last few
hectic moments of discussion prior to the
vote on the so-called Javits-Humphrey-
McCarthy modified amendment on re-
apportionment during that session, the
implications contained in the short
speech by my distinguished colleague
were not fully grasped nor understood.
I believe that it is highly imperative
that the statement be challenged in order
to have the record set straight. This is
especially so in the light of the new move
to push through the constitutional
amendment proposed by the distin-
guished junior Senator of Illinois, an
amendment designed to continue mal-
apportionment in our various State
legislatures.
If Senators recall, my colleague stated
that "the logical extension of the Su-
preme Court's decision would be an
amendment to the U.S. Constitution or
a Supreme Court decision requiring re-
apportionment of the U.S. Senate on the
basis of population in spite of the prohi-
bition that no State without its consent,
shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in
the Senate under article V."
Drawing upon rather questionable
logic and upon even more questionable
constitutional interpretation, my col-
league was led to remark that ultimately
small States such as Hawaii would be
deprived of representation in the U.S.
Senate. By the Senator's own logic and
Interpretation, the list could conceivably
have included some score or more of the
other smaller States of the Union.
I most respectfully feel that the state-
ment by the senior Senator from Hawaii
is a rather misleading one.
First, even a superficial reading of the
reapportionment cases decided by the
Supreme Court would show that it
specifically excluded the theory of rep-
resentation underlying the U.S. Senate
from the principle of one-man, one-
vote as applied to State legislatures.
There is no question in the Court's mind
that the Senate of the United States
would always have two Senators repre-
senting each State of the Union, regard-
less of size or population. The point
made by the Court is that this Federal
fc)rm of representation cannot be ex-
tended to State legislatures which often
over-represent rural areas and under-
represent metropolitan areas.
For example, the city of Honolulu,
containing more than 80 percent of the
State of Hawaii's population, is very
much underrepresented in the Hawaii
State Legislature. The decision would,
in effect, redress that imbalance.
Mr. Chief Justice Warren, in deliver-
ing the opinion of the majority in Rey-
nolds against Sims, June 15, 1964, stated:
Much has been written since our decision
in Baker v. Carr about the applicability of
the so-called Federal analogy to State legisla-
tive apportionment arrangements. After
considering the matter, the Court below
concluded that no conceivable analogy could
be drawn between the Federal scheme and
the apportionment of seats in the Alabama
Legislature under the proposed constitu-
tional amendment. We agree with the Dis-
trict Court, and find the Federal analogy
Inapposite and irrelevant to State legislative
districting schemes. Attempted reliance on
the Federal analogy appears often to be little
more than an after-the-fact rationalization
offered in defense of maladjusted State ap-
portionment arrangements. And the Found-
ing Fathers clearly had no intention of
establishing a pattern or model for the ap-
portionment of seats in State legislatures
when the system of representation in the
Federal Congress was adopted. * * * The
system of representation in the two Houses
of the Federal Congress is one ingrained in
our Constitution, as part of the law of the
land. It is one conceived out of compromise
and concession indispensable to the estab-
lishment of our Federal Republic. Arising
from unique historical circumstances, it is
based on the consideration that in estab-
lishing our type of federalism a group of
formerly independent States bound them-
selves together under one National Govern-
ment.
That is what the Supreme Court said.
How can we possibly infer from this that
the Court may ultimately require re-
apportionment of the U.S. Senate on the
basis of population?
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
opg roved For Reimaggmettpsprpoogiwppool90008-1
July 29 , 18173
Wisconsin is a real one, but I am con-
vinced that it can be solved, especially if
it is a choice between increasing capac-
ity and letting millions starve.
Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. MONDALE. I am pleased to yield
to the outstanding expert on Food For
Peace in this country, the distinguished
Senator from South Dakota.
Mr. McGOVERN. I thank the Sena-
tor for his overly generous words.
The Senator from Minnesota has de-
livered the finest statement I have heard
on challenge of world hunger and what
our response to that challenge ought to
be.
The Senator has described in moving
terms the world food gap. I regard it as
? the most important single problem in
? the world today. I use those words ad-
visedly. If we cannot figure out some
way to deal with the problem that faces
half of all the people on this globe to-
day?and that is the problem of ade-
quate food, either too little food or the
wrong kind of food?we are in for very
serious tirries.
Hutt= hunger, human misery and
disease, all of which are interconnected,
are at the bottom of a good many of the
tensions, instability, and explosive sit-
uations that exist all over the world.
The Senator from Minnesota is ad-
dressing himself to an absolutely crucial
problem. It is crucial from a moral
standpoint. It is crucial from a polit-
ical standpoint. It is crucial from an
economic standpoint.
The Senator has also described in ef-
feetive terms the rough outline of what
ought to be our response to that prob-
lem, which is to harness the bountiful
productive capacity in this country?
capacity that we have been trying to
Idle at great expense to our taxpayers?
and put that bounty to work in the cause
of health and peace all over the world.
I fully appreciate, as does the Senator
from Minnesota, that until we find a
More effective way of using this food
overseas, we must have some kind of con-
trol program at home to keep the sur-
pluses from destroying our agricultural
economy.
The time has come, however, particu-
larly if we look at the dwindling food
reserves in this country, to do what the
Senator from Minnesota recommends to-
day, and that is to take an imaginative
and careful look at the possibility of
using our ability to produce to take care
of the needs of hungry people overseas.
. Today I was talking with one of the
world's leading nutritionists, Dr. Zabrel.
He told me that there are now 3 million
children who will die before the end of
this year because of malnutrition or out-
right hunger; and that rate has con-
tinued annually for some time.
It may be that the cause of death is
not list,e0 as hunger. It may be that a
child will be said to have died from
chickenpox, influenza, or any one of the
disemeOliat take the lives of children
all over the ,world, but the reason chil-
dren die from those diseases?diseases
youngsters in this country would throw
off?is that they are so undernourished
and poorly fed that they have no
resistance.
If today the American people were told
that 3 million children were about to
die because of some dramatic catas-
trophe, perhaps an earthquake or fam-
ine or flood, they would respond
quickly.
We would do everything we could. We
would have our globemasters flying food
to them. We would make our military
forces available to help distribute it.
We would bring ships out of the moth-
ball fleet and do whatever we could to
make that food available.
But we do not see the silent death
occurring all over the world. Millions
of men, women, and children drag out
their lives undernourished and under-
fed, dying premature deaths, not being
able to make a contribution to society
because of the lack of energy that stems
from bad diet. It is to that question that
we must address ourselves as a nation
that has been blessed and can produce
food beyond our own needs.
I commend the Senator from Minne-
sota for helping to open up this subject
on the floor of the Senate. This is really
the kind of war we ought to fight. We
can win a war against hunger. It is
the kind of wax the United States is
better equipped to fight than any country
in world history.
The challenge is greater to meet than
in the past.
I welcome the opportunity to join the
Senator from Minnesota in the magnifi-
cent effort he has made in the Senate
this afternoon.
Mr. MONDALE. I am highly grate-
ful to the distinguished Senator from
South Dakota for his comments. He is
universally regarded as the Nation's
leader in this great fight. He was the
first Food for Peace Director, receiving
one of the first appointments made by
the late President Kennedy, and thus he
was responsible for shaping much of to-
day's program. Incidentally, he incor-
porated many new and creative ideas in
the use of food to help children, to help
build roads and schools by using food
for wages, and to expand and encourage
the participation of private charitable
and religious organizations in food dis-
tribution. Our Nation will forever be in-
debted to him for his contributions, and
also for the literature that he has
written. This literature has helped more
than that from the pen of any other
man to develop this Nation's understand-
ing of the great problem which we con-
front in facing what can only be de-
scribed as a hunger explosion.
The point that the Senator from South
Dakota has made about seeing for the
first time this silent hunger, as he so
aptly described it, is the very core of
the problem. If we have a neighbor
down the street who is starving, every-
one responds. If people in American
society are starving, and we see it, we
respond without question. It is what a
decent person does without question. If
there is a disastex overseas?an earth-
quake, a tornado?time and time again
our Nation has responded without ques-
tion to make available any resources we
have to help those people in their hour
of need. What is different with this
silent hunger; this hunger that takes the
lives of at least 10,000 people a day? It
is silent; it is unseen; it is unknown.
And it is not only death that we must
prevent; we must relieve bodies and
minds from malnutrition, not merely in
the thousands, but in the millions.
Mr. McGOVERN. The Senator knows
that one of the unfortunate, permanent
aspects of malnutrition is that when a
youngster lives out the period of life
after weaning until he is perhaps 5 or 6
years old, with a bad diet, a diet lacking
in protein, minerals, and vitamins, there
is nothing that can be done in later life
to correct the permanent damage that
has been done to the physical and emo-
tional life of the child. That youngster
will be warped for the rest of his life.
The most critical period is from the age
Of 1, after the child has been weaned,
until he is 6 or 7 years old.
One of the reasons why it is critical
is that the child at that age is not old
enough to fight for his share of -the food
that is available. There is a mistaken
notion- in many underdeveloped coun-
tries that the father ought to have the
major share of the food because he Is
working in the field and is doing the
physical labor. The mother will care-
fully set aside the largest portion of food
for the father.
Actually, it is the little child that suf-
fers the greatest damage; it is the child,
more than adults, that requires the most
food and requires a balanced diet. So
what we are talking about here is per-
haps most acutely the problem of chil-
dren.
The Senator from Minnesota is quite
correct in saying that if the American
people had their way about solving this
problem, they would perhaps be ahead
of Congress. The American people are
generous, moral people. What they need
is more aggressive leadership from Con-
gress and more aggressive leadership
from our policymakers downtown. They
will quickly respond to the kind of pro-
gram that will harness our abundance in
the cause of peace and freedom.
I feel certain that the Senator's dis-
tinguished predecessor, who is now the
Vice President of the United States, and
who in many respects Is the father of the
food-for-peace program, a man who
stood on the floor of the Senate 10, 12,
and 15 years ago, talking about the pos-
sibility of greater use of our food abun-
dance overseas, would be proud to hear
the junior Senator from Minnesota, his
successor, speak out as he has done to-
day.
Mr. MONDALE. I deeply appreciate
the Senator's kind comment. I cannot
Imagine a program in which more in-
terests of Americans converge than this.
It is not merely, our moral responsibil-
ity, which, in my opinion, ought to be
enough. But we stand as the richest
Nation in the world, the major surplus-
food-producing nation in the world,
with incredible unused agricultural pro-
ductive power and surpluses being held
at Government expense, while thou-
sands of people starve and millions have
stunted physical and mental growth be-
cause of malnutrition. I do not believe
we can live in that kind of world and
respond in that way without being
hated, just as our neighbor would hate
Approved"For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R0003001900081
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
18174 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE July 29, 1965
us if we did not help him when he was
starving.
Second, at a time when we are in a
titanic struggle with the forces of com-
munism and other forces of dictatorship
for the minds of men, surely we must
know that it is hunger, illiteracy, dis-
ease, and poverty together which are our
main enemies. It is the desperate acts
of frustrated people who reach out for
fanatical leaders that are our major
problems. The use of American food in
an enlightened, creative manner, and in
the fullest sense, can help to destroy the
very basis of our major enemy.
Third, if we would use our best agri-
cultural productive power to help to
meet the needs of the people of the
world for food, we would give to our
agricultural economy the lift it desper-
ately needs.
Any Senator who represents a farm
population cannot help being struck by
the fact that farm people are fine, hard-
working Americans, investing their lives
in their chosen profession, while receiv-
ing less than almost any other group
for all they have contributed to the rest
of American society. That is not fair.
In addition, by using the surpluses to
help nations to get on their feet, to build
strong, viable economies and, hopefully,
democracies, we have already demon-
strated that we can create new markets
for industry and for farm products, as
we have already done in Japan, Taiwan,
Italy, Spain, and elsewhere.
Thus, by helping them, in the long run,
we will create markets that will
strengthen our economy.
Finally, I do not believe any nation,
any strong Christian society such as
ours, can forever ignore its moral re-
sponsibilities and remain fat in a starv-
ing world. We cannot fail to respond
to the growing voice of humanity crying
out for enough food to survive and get
started.
For all these reasons, I believe the time
has come for our Nation to open its eyes
and to take the steps necessary to be the
kind of compassionate, humane Nation
that I believe we can and must be.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING
Senator fro - oatudip ? ognized.
NW'
OFFICER,. The
PEAR
STAKE} ON
=NAM
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President,
what I am about to do is not a pleasant
task. It is probably not a wise task for
anyone engaged in politics.
Two of the outstanding columnists
and the most widely read and respected
columnists in the country are Walter
Lippmann and Drew Pearson.
Drew Pearson supplies something that
is very badly needed. He is a muck-
raker. He does an excellent job. He ex-
poses scandals and situations involving
weakness, inefficiency, incompetency,
and dishonesty in our Government. He
is a columnist who is widely read in my
State.
I regard him as a man of great in-
tegrity and ability, as a man of compas-
sion, and a fine human being.
Like everyone else, Drew Pearson can
be mistaken. It seems to me that in his
column of Tuesday, July 27, he was very
much in error in what he had to say.
What he had to say can have a most
unfortunate effect, I believe, on the atti-
tude of our people toward the war in
Vietnam.
I believe that he must be answered.
Pearson made a series of statements
about the situation in Saigon. I was
deeply concerned aboUt those state-
ments.
have sought, through my staff, to dis-
cuss the matter with members of the
executive branch and the various de-
partments to find out what the facts are,
or what our most competent and knowl-
edgeable people understand them to be.
One of the assertions made by Drew
Pearson was as follows:
The South Vietnamese Army is suffering
from such, wholesale desertions that it is
risky to arm it The arms go over to the
Vietcong.
There is no evidence that the deserton
rate is up. It has been fairly constant
for years and is related generally to such
factors as low pay or no Pay, poor com-
manders, difficulty of fighting, and un-
pleasant conditions.
In the southeast Asian context, the
desertion rate is not abnormally high.
The Vietcong desertion rates, on the
other hand, may very well be higher.
However, this is very difficult to judge
or to measure.
The better index of the Vietnamese
fortitude is casualties suffered by South
Vietnamese armed forces: 26,000 have
been killed in action in the past 4 years,
and 51,00(1 have been wounded.
In relation to population, this is 10
times the rate of loss the United States
of America suffered in Korea, and it is
substantially above our total losses in
World War II.
The South Vietnamese have fought
and endured for a long time. Pessi-
mistic out-of-context emphasis on a
problem like desertion gives a mislead-
ing impression.
The second assertion in Pearson's col-
tunn of July 27, 1965, is:
The Saigon Government, always corrupt,
always ineffective, might just as well be
scrapped.
This undocumented assertion does not
reflect the views of our mission in Saigon,
or of policymakers in Washington. Ky
himself is not known to be personally
corrupt, nor was his predecessor, Dr.
Quat. Certainly no one here or there be-
lieves that the present government
"ought to be scrapped."
The third assertion by Drew Pearson
Is as follows:
American popularity once reasonably high,
has nose-dived. It is now on a par with the
anti-French feeling during the long civil
war in French Indo-China.
Mr. President, that is nonsense. There
is no evidence to support this view. All
signs, except Communist propaganda,
point in the opposite direction. Ameri-
cans live as individuals or in small groups
of two, three, or four all over Vietnam,
working on AID projects, schools, in-
formation programs, and so forth, or, as
military advisers. We would know
quickly enough if they were no longer
welcome. Quite the opposite is the case.
Villagers and the local population are at
pains to help and care for Americans.
The Americans are, of course, targets
for the Vietcong terrorists, but the rela-
tively low number of successful attacks
against U.S. civilians proves that this
Vietcong tactic does not have widespread
popular support.
Americans are working and fighting
with the South Vietnamese for a cause
defined and supported by them?not, like
the French, against the Vietnamese to
maintain a fading colonial empire.
The fourth charge made by Drew Pear-
son was:
Sixty percent of South Vietnam is now in
the hands of the Vietcong, with many villages
still supposedly loyal to the government prob-
ably actually disloyal.
Mr. President, that is a misleading
statistic. The Communists have vary-
ing degrees of control of substantial
parts of the Vietnam land area, including
much of the mountainous and less popu-
lous areas. Their control is largely
negative in character. They can dis-
rupt and harass efforts by the South
Vietnamese Government to exercise
governing power in such areas. They
can cut roads and bomb bridges. How-
ever, their control is not positive in the
sense that they could not build bridges,
repair roads, or carry on the normal
processes of government unless the South
Vietnamese Government permitted them
to do so.
The Vietcong do not have a single city
or province capital.
The strength of the Vietcong, such as
it is, is among the peasants and rural
population, a group that, in southeast
Asia, as elsewhere, even in the rural
United States, is traditionally mistrust-
ful of Central Government authority.
Communists have exposed this trust,
but have not shown that they, in turn,
would have the positive support of the
peasants if they sought to rule.
When they try, and try to collect taxes,
for example, the peasants quickly turn
against them. The South Vietnamese
Government has the support of virtually
all the more educated people, and this is
not to be written off lightly. All the
major groups in South Vietnam: Cath-
olics, Buddhists, sects, labor unions,
political parties like Dai Viet?oppose the
Communists. They may have their dif-
ferences about the kind and complexion
of government they want in Saigon, and
their inability to unite behind a strong
one is one of the chronic problems of
South Vietnam. But this does not mean
they prefer the Communist alternative.
The last assertion by Drew Pearson is
that the policy of bombing North Viet-
nam has been a complete failure. Mili-
tary supplies have continued to come
down from the north.
This is not the view of Pentagon ex-
perts and others who have studied the
situation. Carefully pinpoint bombing
has taken out a larg- portion of North
Vietnam's logistical and military capa-
bility, especially as it relates to the war
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
_ Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300190008-1
July 29, 195 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 18175
in the south. There is very reason to
think this has,made it significantly more
difficult for Hanoi to supply and support
the Vietcong. The shrillness of North
Vietnam and Peiping propaganda?in-
cluding protestations that it has not af-
fected their will to fight?should not be
taken at face value, any more than
should their charges that we bomb hos-
pitals and civilian facilities?which we
have not done. North Vietnam is a tight-
ly organized totalitarian society, with
leadership concentrated in a few hands
at the top. Those few, such seasoned
Communists as General Giap, Le Duan,
the party theoretician, and, of course, Ho
Chi Minh himself, would be unlikely to
tip their hand except for a purpose. And
they are under no meaningful public or
popular pressure at home, since they so
totally control the means of communica-
tion and personal expression. Pearson
seems to have made the elementary-mis-
take of taking Communist propaganda
at its word. If North Vietnam really was
not bothered by the bombing they would
not devote so much of their diplomatic
and propaganda effort to branding us as
villians precisely because we bomb, and to
trying to have pressure brought cn us by
other countries to make us stop.
There Is one other point mentioned
by Drew Pearson. He states:
The above facts show the contrast between
war In Vietnam and war in Korea. In the
Korean war, the United States was supported
by a strong patriotic civilian population that
gave full cooperation. We also had the ad-
vantage of a Korean army, much of it well
trained and willing to fight. There was no
problem of an enemy constantly disappear-
ing into the jungle.
Pearson's memory in this respect is
short. With all due respect to the valiant
Koreans, things were not all that rosy
then, either. The enemy was often hard
to find, the South Koreans sometimes got
tired of fighting, the ROK Army was not
well trained or prepared when the war
started?that was one reason North
Korea invaded when they did?and to
this day it is necessary for two U.S. di-
visions to stay there to protect Korean
security and independence against fur-
ther or renewed Communist encroach-
ment. Even the origins of that was were
not thought to be all that clear at the
time. Has Pearson forgotten the exten-
sive Communist effort to make it appear
South Korea started the war? This is
a point ,the Communists, by the way,
have never conceded. And the charges
of germ warfare against us that were
so widely believed among the neutral
countries? Also, granted this was a
splendid example of collective security
under the U.N., let us not blind ourselves
in retrospect by forgetting that this too
was largely a U.S. effort in terms of
numbers of forces and size of military
coMmitrnent.
? At a time when sq many of us are
supporting the President in his efforts
to persuade the United Nations to come
into the South Vietnam situation, we
should recognize that getting the U.N.
involved will not be the end a our South
'Vietnam fighting and dying. It re-
quired a long time after the U.N. came
No. 138-24 I
Into Korea to end that situation. It will
be a help, but of limited military help.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent to have the appropriate part of the
article by Drew Pearson entitled, "Bad
News From Saigon" to which I have
made reference printed at this point in
? the RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
BAD NEWS FROM SAIGON
Here is some of the distressing news from
Saigon that has caused the series of White
House huddles over future policy.
The South Vietnamese army is suffering
front such wholesale desertions that it is
risky to arm it. The arms go over to the
Vietcong.
-The Saigon Government, always corrupt,
always ineffective, might just as well be
scrapped.
American popularity, once reasonably high,
has nosedived. It is now on a par with the
anti-French feeling during the long civil war
in French Indochina.
Sixty percent of South Vietnam is now in
the hands of the Vietcong, with many villages
still supposedly loyal to the Government
probably actually disloyal.
The policy of bombing North Vietnam has
been a complete failure. Military supplies
have continued to come down from the north.
The above facts show the contrast between
war in Vietnam and war in Korea. In the
Korean war, the United States was supported
by a strong patriotic civilian population that
gave full cooperation. We also had the ad-
vantage of a Korean army, much of it well
trained and willing to fight. There was no
problem of an e rcriltsantly disappearing
into the jungle
LIPPMANN Re ON VI TNAM
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr/President, as
for Walter Lippmann's criticisms, Mr.
Lippmann's charges are less specific, and
more generalized, but I think I can dis-
cuss them a little more briefly.
Mr. Lippmann states that no Asia or
NATO nation, supports us in the effort
to help South Vietnam in its fight
against Communist aggression. Is this
the case? The answer is emphatically,
"No."
Great Britain has stated its support
and has a police advisory team in Viet-
nam. Her prior commitments in
Malaysia against 'similar aggression pre-
cludes her doing more. She is a member
of NATO. Italy, a NATO member, sup-
ports us in Vietnam. It has sent a sur-
gical team there. West Germany, a vital
NATO link, supports us. It has extended
economic aid.
The Government of Japan supports
this stand against Communist imperial-
ism and has given considerable economic
aid to South Vietnam. Korea, the
Philippines, and Thailand support our
action and have sent assistance as have
Australia and New Zealand.
Lippmann then goes on to say no vital
American interest is involved in the de-
fense of Vietnam. It is not the same, he
says, as when Hitler was in sight of the
conquest of Britain or when Japan
threatened the whole Pacific. Mr. Lipp-
mann ignores the fact that if the West-
ern Powers had stood firm in such places
as the Rhineland, Munich, and Man-
churia, Hitler would not have stood in
sight of Britain's conquest, nor would
Japan have threatened their own western
coast. But, unfortunately, there were
people then who said that those places
were not vital. People in authority
listened to these councils and we paid a
terrible price. Fortunately, Mr. Lipp-
mann's views do not command a similar
following today.
South Vietnam does not want to ac-
cept Communist domination. Ten years
ago this country asked us to help them
avoid this fate. We said yes to this plea;
now Mr. Lippmann says it was a mis-
take. He forgets that a lot of other
countries from Japan to France have
made the same request and received the
same reply. These "countries are now
watching Vietnam to see just how much
that reply was worth. The world is too
small for us to make second class com-
mitments.
This does not mean as Lippmann sug-
gests, that we are "policeman for man-
kind." It does mean that we should
honor our commitments to assist a small
country to resist aggression. It also may
mean that in some cases we will carry a
substantial part of the burden of resist-
ing such aggression, though I am confi-
dent we will continue to have the sup-
port of those everywhere who believe in
peace and honest self-determination.
Vietnam is not a decisive test, says
Mr. Lippmann. Again, people said this
about Czechoslovakia and Manchuria.
Korea did not stop the defeat in Indo-
china, says Mr. Lippmann. Korea did
onvince the Communist world that con-
ventional aggression was too risky. That
is why they advocate now the type of
aggression that won for them in Indo-
china in 1954. They must be made to
realize that this type of aggression is
also too risky. I fail to see how aban-
doning South Vietnam to the Commu-
nists of North Vietnam can do anything
but encourage Communist reginles in
North Vietnam, China, and Cuba in their
belief that subversive aggression is
profitable.
I agree with Mr. Lippmann that these
so-called revolutionary wars are difficult
to deal with. I agree that it would be
nice if we could cure the vulnerabilities
that the Communists exploit rather than
have to use military force to counter the
aggression that takes advantage of these
vulnerabilities. But to build a strong,
viable state takes time. When the Com-
munists do not give the victim enough
time, and resort to military aggression
and subversion, then we will respond.
This was the case in Greece and in
Malaya. I cannot agree that we can
leave to the Communists all those coun-
tries that suffer from the vulnerabilities
of underdevelopment.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the article of July 27 by Mr.
Lippmann to which I have referred be
printed at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67B00446R000300190008-1
Approved For Release 2003/11/04 ? CIA=_ROnnam6R0003001900JON 2,,
18176 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SEN 1965
ASIAN WAR
(By Walter Lippmann)
We are about to pit Americans against
Asians on the continent of Asia. Except
for the diminishing and disintegrating South
Vietnamese army, we have only token or
verbal support from any Asian country.
No great Asian power, Japan, India, or Pak-
istan, is aimed with us. None of our Euro-
pean allies is contributing anything beyond
scattered verbal support. We have no man-
date from the United Nations as we had in
Korea, none from NATO, none from the
nations of this hemisphere.
The situation in which we find ouselves
Is unprecedented, and the best the adminis-
tration has been able to achieve by way of
approval and support from our own people
is a reluctant and depressed acquiescence.
For there has been no proof, not even a real
attempt to prove, that the security of the
United States is vitally threatened in this
war as it was, for example, when Hitler was
in sight of the conquest of Britain and the
capture of the British fleet, or when Japan
with a great navy threatened to command
the whole Pacific Ocean including Hawaii
and the coast of California.
Nations fight well when they are defend-
ing themselves, when, that is to say, they
have a vital interest. It is the lack of an
American vital interest which explains the
current mood of depression and anxiety,
which explains why our intervention in
southeast Asia has for 10 years been so
gingerly, so furtive, so inadequate.
There are in truth two main reasons why
we are becoming ever more deeply involved
in Vietnam. The first, much the more
powerful of the two, is a proud refusal to
admit a mistake, to admit the failure of an
attempt, begun 10 years ago, to make South
Vietnam a pro-American and anti-Chinese
state. More than anything else we are fight-
ing to avoid admitting a failure?to put it
bluntly, we are fighting to save face.
There is a second reason which weighs
heavily with many conscientious people. It
is a respectable reason. As stated by the
New York Herald Tribune on Sunday:
"We're in Vietnam at the express invita-
tion of the Vietnamese Government; we're
fighting there for the Vietnamese people.
But we're fighting also for the millions of
people in the other threatened lands beyond,
people who haven't the power to defend
themselves from the Chinese colossus, and
whose lives, safety, and freedom depend on
the strong arm of the policeman?which only
we can provide."
My own view is that the conception of
ourselves as the solitary policeman of man-
kind is a dangerous form of self-delusion.
The United States is quite unable to police
the world, and it is dangerous to profess and
pretend that we can be the policeman of the
world. How many more Dominican Repub-
lics can the United States police in this
hemisphere? How many Vietnams can the
United States defend in Asia?
The believers in America as the world
policeman get around these practical diffi-
culties by making an assumption?that what
happens in Vietnam will determine what
happens elsewhere in Asia, that what hap-
pens in the Dominican Republic will de-
termine what happens all over Latin Amer-
ica. This notion of the decisive test is a
fallacy. The Korean war, in which we suc-
cessfully defended South Korea, did not de-
termine the outcome in Indochina. What
we have done in the Dominican Republic will
not protect any other Latin American country
from the threat of revolution.
Revolutionary wars are indeed dangerous
to order and it is baffling to know how to
deal with them. But we may be sure that
the phenomenon of revolutionary wars,
which is latent in all of the underdeveloped
regions of the world, cannot be dealt with by
American military intervention whenever
disorder threatens to overwhelm the consti-
tuted authority. On the contrary, it is more
like that in making Vietnam the test of our
ability to protect Asia, we shall in fact
provide revolutionary China with just the
enemy it needs in order to focus popular
hatred against us?a white, rich, capitalistic
great power. We are allowing ourselves to be
cast in the role of the enemy of the miserable
and unhappy masses of the emerging
nations.
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, if
there is no further business to come be-
fore the Senate, in accordance with the
order previously entered, I move that the
Senate stand in adjournment until 12
o'clock noon tomorrow.
The motion was agreed to; and (at
5 o'clock and 35 minutes p.m.), under
the previous order, the Senate adjourned
until tomorrow, Friday, July 30, 1965, at
12 o'clock meridian.
NOMINATIONS
Executive nominations received by the
Senate July 29, 1965:
IN THE MARINE Coin's
The following-named officers of the Marine
Corps for temporary appointment to the
grade of major general, subject to qualifi-
cation therefor as provided by law:
Wood B. Kyle Norman J. Anderson
Joseph 0. Butcher Keith B. McCutcheon
CONFIRMATIONS
Executive nominations confirmed by
the Senate July 29, 1965:
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
Hiram R. Cando, of Puerto Rico, to be
U.S. district judge for the district of Puerto
Rico for the term of 8 years.
Edmund A. Nix, of Wisconsin, to be U.S.
attorney for the western district of Wiscon-
sin for the term of 4 years.
FEDERAL COAL MINE SAFETY BOARD OF REVIEW
George C. Trevorrow, of Maryland, to be
a member of the Federal Coal Mine Safety
Board of Review for a term expiring July 15,
1968.
NATIONAL COMMISSION ON TECHNOLOGY,
AUTOMATION, AND ECONOMIC PROGRESS
Thomas J. Watson, Jr., of New York, to
be a member of the National Commission
on Technology, Automation, and Economic
Progress.
NATIONAL SCIENCE FOUNDATION
The following-named persons to the office
indicated:
Dr. Mary I. Bunting, of Massachusetts, to
be a member of the National Science Board,
National Science Foundation, for term ex-
piring May 10, 1970.
Harvey Picker, of New York, to be a mem-
ber of the National Science Board, National
Science Foundation, for term expiring May
10, 1970.
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
Approved For Rifttstiffi.1/44KJe hcEk5ske?_zAytoonooi900081tidy
18136 29, 1965
ansault that nod hundreds of Dorninicen
lives. mainly or women and children.
The rebels could not murder ImberCe at-
tack in the north because the U.S.-controlled
ecurity oorrliclor. bisecting the City from
east to west. kept them hemmed hi down-
town_ At one stage the United States pre-
pared to open another corridor. running
north from the rebel area, to bait the rmbert
.iciviance. But this Idea, advocated by Bundy.
was vetoed In Washington. At the onlxusey.
Under. elecretery Mann said that he hoped
Castro would recognize tbe Cseinatio regalia
and prove once and for all that the rebels
were Communist-oriented.
Then "the Ousanan formula'?for which
Bundy had worked for 10 days With all the
prestige or his White Boum post?ootinimed
on orders from Washington. The PM hall
,itercepted a telepborie ecerrereation between
lir. Bosch and a !Mod. The convert-
.Attion reportedly included a statement that
4, the Gunmen regime were Metalled there
be ? new government tit 5 days. About
this time the State Department went a Mama.
ranclum to the White Nolan reesiting that in
1033 the United States had been accused cd
Imposing a government on Cuba and that
the Johnson attodnistratien should beware
of opening iteatil to such a charge.
The breakdown of the Bundy-Ousimen ne-
gotiation marked, for many of those on the
rebel side, the end of hopes for a "constitu-
tional" ragtime. The rmturt raglans *as al-
lowed to go on camiondattng tin position la
the governmentlein country, while another
OAS commlasion. the acme inter-Anierican
group to try ntedlation. arrived 11110t0 Do-
=Ingo to seek a Metiellient.
On the day before his seinen to Washing.
ton, 4wesbs after the Uviewe Mess loon/ it
had a lager by tbe tell, Dandy arranged to
meet with Colonel Calonafte and bib moo-
eintart It wee to be tbeir Sod eneountsr, for
the rebel chief had canceled an appointment
a week garlic when one of his top a/dee wee
'killed by gunfire, apparently Mot by VS.
troop* manning the security corridor. The
meeting place was to be the Ifinile Conaerts-
tory, a modern whits bundling on a elessids
boulevard In the no mares had between the
marine and meet lines. Anteing there at
345 p.m.. Bondy and his iwIlleteees found
the building leaked. but awanased that Cot
net Cedunatiolt men had made ervangements
to have the consereatory opened. n turned
out, however, that Colonel Claimmtke had
made a Me amasinplion. After tutenceesio
hilly trying to find en opon door or window.
one of the rebels produced a Mitre meg pried
loose some wind panes. Mars Were
brought into position and the IMO delegle-
time climbed in through the window.
The meeting bated 4 home, with Bundy
using his fluent Spanish in the sonlerenee.
Near the end of the Illeteart, violent gunfire
broke out not ? far from the conserratory.
nvelaring in anger, Colonel Cisaanano rented
to telephone his forces to stop &LW Bellay
worried for a phone to contact U.B. wen-
/unmet's. But there was no telephone in the
building.
ft might be said that the misekig tele-
phone symbolized the entire Dorninjoan
tragedy, where there was a general break-
down in communicatione between Americans
ind Dominioene attempting to and the civil
.441Z without further low of lifh and where
Th) formula DIMMed to offer a peaceful solu-
tion. It Mae be that there was no alternative
to the U.S. Intervention to Santo Domingo.
nut the ff weeks I spent there at the height
of the erlsla felled to CIMI.VMMS Me that there
was, real risk of "another Cuba." As sailed
President Juan Bomeh. Mating out his MID-
try's agony ho Puerto Moo, obseread sadly.
"Perhapa the 17nited Metes should have
c&ken a chine* with Dominican democracy.-
Tog Unarm/ Lerma
(The weekly analysis of Latin American
affairs)
The Dominican crisis hangs like a dark
cloud over the upcoming Wend spectra Inter-
American Conference of Pareign Minietera.
scheduled for Rio on August 4. The longer
the Caribbean deadlock esultoee, the more
prejudicial It becomes. The U.S. unilateral
Intervention. the subsequent creation of an
Inter-American Peace Pores and the de facto
OAS trusteeship neve raised fundamental
questions which completely overshadow the
agenda, manly pegged to reorga.niestional
and economic matters.
Lacking a consensus on the OAS role in
the DcwilAtcan Republic, some members tried
to postpone the meeting. Mowsver,
with important shicakina around the corner.
premed for holding the mastiug on schedule
and received key support from Argentina and
Chile. Bow, rumors of partpanetnent. which
seam anfoustaled at the moment, are on the
wing wane.
Wtugton had hoped that Rio would be
a ten= to Mecums the setting up ad a per-
manent Inter-American police farce to deal
with Ocennaunist heraine, and President
Johnson, Reetutary of Slate Dean Dusk and
OAS Ambassador Illeworth Bunker all talked
it up. But the kickback ben been so strong
that the ides bee been quietly put aside, for
the morneat at least.
As a gin of Lan American discontent
Deer the nosiloteso Mar, Beendary General
Ant A. Mora cants mar mane deem gum-
timing from bee Isebeseadore last week at
? ateeed-door brig he defended lihrisoll
wi41, but lain be wee Buster the tun for
ends picayune emsdideradart as unfeeling an
inter-American gag In IMMO Domingo wIth
out authorliation. Cedlemi President !du-
.do Pre' gave a foretaste of tite land of talk
which may be bard In Ino when be stated
in Porte Mb week: "We went an Inter-
American system lett:hoot ttegemooy."
To avoid peteeniee Wei twigs' !mid like
$O MOM the Rio fifOlfirence at aeon as poled-
bin. Such guar.-dam as an inter-Amarican
Mem would be ftwim' into Mins Altar,
coofeeents mike efleanind the ChM Manse
Resale in the trominlesa Bepublio hie* bens
no UV. Loess lode up appeartes after
the Inediattel repOraM bare bawd a ago-
non. The whole Mvolvement has Metalled
use ow& to Oa Limit. aM lhatetietlat Mails
dad teemense 1y tma.ettA a112=4
ft untanillier taste 111111101DOMingo. -
Weeny speaking, the pAii Mai ham two
conterences on the fire idinultansOusly nut
Input. In addition to the JIM conference,
the tooth. Meeting of ConaullAtioo of For-
eign Minfeters. convoked to handle the Do-
minican expiation. is In force until the ceilidh
Ix solved.
bfIDWESTIRN STATES REFUSE TO
BACK ROTTEN BOROUGH
AMENDMENT
Me. TIT/INGS. Mr. Preeddeut, the
Indications are growing every day that
the rotten borough amendment is los-
ing ground not only In the Senate but in
the country. One after another colum-
nists, editorial writers, and other lead-
ers of public opinion are recognizing the
=IVO dangers which the rotten borough
amendment poses to our democratic sys-
tem. Perhaps the most significant Indi-
cation that the rattan borough amend-
ment is losing sUPOort throughout the
country is the foot that the Midwestern
Conference of the Council of State Gov-
ernments refused to adopt a resolution
calling for the passage of ecnator Linea-
MN'S proposed amendment
According to a report In the Wash-
ington Post of July 22. the Dirksel
amendment failed for lack of a majority
in the 12-member Council of State Gov-
ernments oist as It faued for lack of a
Majority in the Senate JUDI/WM Com-
mittee. The Washington Poet reports
that ti of the 12 Midwestern States fa-
vored the resolution calling on Congress
to approve the rotten boroUgh &Mend-
ment. But six States refused to lend
their consent to this resolutIon. Three
of these six?Indiana, Iowa, and Michi-
gan?voted against thr resolution.
'Three o the rs--Minn eso ta Wisconsin.
and IllinOls--abstained I find it highly
significant that the n3rdority leader's
own State ahould fail to endorse his pro-
Posed constitutional amendment and
that his proposal should fall to carry
In the heartland of this great coun-
try.
Mr. President. I ask unanimous con-
sent that the Washington Post article
be Inserted In the Recoils at this point,
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RarditD.
as follows:
!Prom the Weehington Post. July MI, line 1
Mrovionuter &arts Pan To dew Arecernow-
AenneniellIft
COLT73MIIII, rieolutIon leaking
Congress to submit a Constitutional amend-
ment allowing one house or State legtela-
titres to be apportioned on a heats other than
population failed by one vote yesterday at
the closing mouton of a conference o112 mid-
western, States.
Loma, /amour!, Nebraska. Ohio and
north and South Dakota voted for the moo
lutIon which needed a majority of the 12
States to carry. Lwow* Imre. and Michigan
voted no. NW Illinois, Minnesota. and WIS-
oonitzt abstained.
The delegates to the Midwestern Confer-
ence of the Council of Stem esvaraminte
voted '7 to It with three abstentions against
a propane/ to commend the U.S. Supreme
Goon for Its ens-men, one-vote rude or
reapportionment.
A PARATROOPER pi VIETNAM
Mr. RAMAN. Mr. President, one of
the thousands of young Americans who
are defending the interests of the free
world in the jungles and rite paddies of
Vietnam is a 22-year-old paratrooper
frcen my home city of Pl.oenlx, Ariz.?
Pfc. Jerry P. Limner.
That this young soldier knows very
well why he is fighting in that far-away
Asian nation Is demonstrated by a letter
to the editor which he wrote to the
Arizona Republic newspaper In Phoenix.
The thoughts which he so eloquently ex-
pressed In that letter are like a cleat
fresh breeze compared to acme of the
juvenile demonstrations and protests by
students of his age on campuses through-
out the country.
In the belief that, this dedicated young
serviceman's letter deserves wider cir-
culetion as a forceful answer to oho-
sates of appeasement. I WM permission
to have it printed In the body of the
RSOORIi.
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1
July 291 1965.
f There being no objection, the letter to
the editor was ordered to be printed in
the RECORD, as follows:
[From the Arizona Republic, July 16, 19651
A PARATROOPER IN VIETNAM PENS LEITER TO
STonsmrs
EDITOR, THE ARIZONA REPUBLIC:
I am a 22-year-old paratrooper now serving
with the 1'73d AirbOrne Brigade (Separate).
My home address is 2412 North 37th Way, in
Phoenix. I am writing this letter from the
perimeter defense position around Bien Hoa
Airbase, South Vietnam, and its question-
ing aspects are directed at a select few who
are helping to fight this war on the home
front.
I must say though, that I am a little con-
fused as to which side is being supported,
and whose cause upheld by some of our
young and upcoming "intellectual soldiers"
whose bases of operations are located at
several of our institutions of higher learn-
ing.
One of our most precious possessions is
the freedom to challenge the policies of our
Government, and keep those policies within
the limits of our society's national feel-
ings. This freedom was borne to us from our
Nation's birth through the careful actions
and watchful minds of dedicated leaders and
protected by the blood of thousands.
It now seems evident that this freedom
can be, and is being, undermined and abused
in an ignorant display of rash actions, which
do nothing but confuse the public and place
a doubt in the minds of countries on the
verge of communism as to the soundness of
America's promise to defend them against
ComMunist aggression.
The un-American aspects of these demon-
strations, which are carried out by those who
might occupy positions of leadership and re-
sponsibility in the near future, carry the
traits of a possible dupe by an outside force.
You would think that the countless broken
Communist treaties, lies and anti-American
attacks, and the stark nakedness of public
Communist announcements, which state
openly and coldly their intentions to crush
us, would awaken minds and open eyes.
From the Lao Dong Party in Hanoi, the
Communist cry that the fighting in the south
Is a matter for the South Vietnamese, has
been heard all over the world. Seized Viet-
cong caches of Communist-supplied arms and
ammunition, the extremely elaborate mili-
tary and political machine aimed at conquer-
ing South Vietnam, and the high pro-
portion of northern trained officers, enlisted
men, specialists, and secret agents, reveal the
Communist line_to be a giant mockery. It is
a useless attempt to hide the fact that Hanoi
Is behind the continuing campaign of aggres-
sion aimed at conquering South Vietnam.
There exists in South Vietnam a large scale,
careful11 directed, and Communist-supported
program of armed attack on a sovereign state
and a free people.
Obviously, some students are so entangled
In their efforts to reform: our international
policies that they fail to see the danger. As-
sured by social and intellectual freedoms,
they strike out viciously and defiantly at our
National Government. Not only do they lack
diplomacy, they infringe upon the rights and
freedoms-of other citizens, and either do not
care or have no conception of the ill effects
our Nation suffers in the world spotlight.
I only hope that when the demonstrations
finally terminate, these students will add to
their store of knowledge a recognition of the
truth along with a valuable bit of experience.
. Students should use their freedoms, take
advantage of their rights, pry, disapprove, and
question our Government's actions and make
them conform to the will of the people. But
before they pass judgment, they should take
another look at our country's foundations,
what we have fought and died for in the past,
and what we stand for today. They should
Approved FtrAtegiVeNt/OttEat-BDPEgglR4i4fR000300190008-1
open their eyes and see who is trying to take
this away from us.
I have watched America's youth swelter on
the decks and in the holds of troop ships and
IST's. I have watched them rise from
muddy pup tents, to construct through long,
laborious days as clean and healthy a place
to live as is possible in this environment.
I've watched their bodies burn and tan under
a merciless sun as they dug bunkers and
mortar shelters. And at night they keep a
vigilant watch in these same positions.
They have dropped in convulsions from
the heat, and died from Communist steel.
They are fighting a dirty and nasty war, and
they board helicopters willingly to hunt out
an elusive enemy in their own territory.
There is one thing I haven't slightest
doubts about, Mr. Student, and that is these
men's determination to stop communism
here, on their own back doorstep. They
know the score and this realization shows in
their mental and physical willingness to
fight.
However, when I turn my eyes homeward,
I see something ugly, and I don't like it.
Where is the moral support enjoyed by other
men in wars past won? Where is determina-
tion to stop communism? Don't sell us
down the river, Mr. Student, you might re-
gret it.
Pfc. JERRY P. LINSNER,
APO, San Francisco, Calif.
THE VAN ALEN SIMPLIFIED SCOR-
ING SYSTEM IN TENNIS
Mr. FELL. Mr. President, recently in
Newport, R.I., a lawn tennis tournament
was conducted under VASSS the Van
Alen simplified scoring system. This
tennis tournament, which had in it such
world famous professions as Rod Laver,
Ken Rosewall, Pancho Gonzales, and
Butch Bucholtz, was an experiment that
may well pave the way to making tennis
an even more generally enjoyed, watched,
and participated-in sport than is pres-
ently the case.
The VASSS system basically calls for
scoring on a point system somewhat like
table tennis with the first person to reach
31 points winning the set. By previous
stipulation a set can be decided by 21
points or 41 points or any variable of 5
plus 1, the unknown being divisible by 2.
The VASSS system provides that the
server shall stand 3 feet behind the base-
line, thus eliminating the advantage of
the big server who normally would rush
the net in order to put away the defen-
sive return on the first volley. Rather,
there is substituted the longer rally
which requires more emphasis on strat-
egy, experience, and precision as the
players seek to maneuver each other out
of place so that one of them can get in
position for a winning shot. This longer
rally also, I believe, provides the spec-
tator with a great deal more enjoyment.
An additional advantage of the VASSS
system is that it provides for the possi-
bility of handicaps, like golf. This means
that an exciting game can be played be-
tween two players of very different abil-
ity. For example, one would start out
with a 10-point advantage over the
other; but the winner of the set would
be the first one who reached 31 points.
This could make tennis far more enjoy-
able and would end the necessity of try-
ing to find people of almost equal ability
with whom to play as is now so often
the case.
18137
Finally, the frank relationship in this
professional tournament of the points to
money added to the excitement of the
audience. In fact, on the scoring board
where the points were listed, the scoring
board also multiplied the points by 5,
preceded by a dollar sign, to indicate the
amount of dollars that had so far been
won by each of the participants.
The success of this tournament is
shown by the number of people that it
drew both in the day and at night. In
fact, another trailblazing result was the
Introduction of outdoor tournament
night tennis playing.
All told, I am glad to rise and com-
mend James Van Alen, president of the
Newport Casino, for his efforts in cre-
ating a new scoring system and I hope
paving the way for a further populari-
zation of tennis. I am particularly
happy to congratulate him on his elec-
tion to membership in the National Ten-
nis Hall of Fame. James Van Alen has
always been an activist and a doer and
Is particularly qualified in the world of
sports, having for many years been the
court tennis champion of America.
THE PROPOSED CONSTITUTIONAL
AMENDMENT TO REAPPORTION
STATE LEGISLATURES
Mr. TYDINGS. Mr. President, in re-
cent weeks a number of editorials oppos-
ing the Dirksen amendment have come
to my attention. I ask unanimous con-
sent to have inserted in the RECORD an
editorial entitled "Thoroughly Bad Leg-
islation" from the Washington Afro-
American of July 20, 1965, and an edi-
torial entitled "Wait a While" from the
Toledo Times.
There being no objection, the editorials
were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
[Prom the Washington Afro-American,
July 20, 19651
_ THOROUGHLY BAD LEGISLATION
No matter how ardently its reactionary
proponents try to dress it up, the so-called
Dirksen amendment would still be bad legis-
lation.
For one thing It rests on the erroneous
premise that people who live in rural dis-
tricts must be presumed to be more intelli-
gent, more patriotic, and overall better citi- ,
zens than those who dwell in the cities.
It is on this faulty foundation, not sup-
ported by fact, that Senator DIRIESEN, the
Illinois Republican, is asking Congress to
overturn last year's Supreme Court decision
that both houses of State legislatures must
be apportioned on the democratic principle
of one man, one vote.
Mr. DIRKSEN'S proposal calls for one branch
of the legislature to be apportioned on land
area, cows, chickens, or other factors than
people. It is an arrow aimed directly at the
'70 percent of the Nation's population living
in the cities.
It is unabashedly designed to allow the 30-
percent minority of county dwellers to per-
petuate the rotten borough system of frus-
trating the legislative aspirations and needs
of the urban majority.
As much as they argue for its passage,
backers of the amendment cannot justify it
as being in the democratic tradition. It is
patently discriminatory and does wholesale
violence to majority rule.
Moreover, as Maryland's Senator TYDINGS
has so aptly pointed out, it would "carve out
Approved For Release 2003/11/04 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000300190008-1
18138 Approved For RVismaggibli/ MR687B0g3446%)0300190008-1,
July 29, 1965
an exception to the equal protection clause
of the 14th amendment."
Thus it would lower the safeguards at this
constitutional bulwark on which a majority
Of Supreme Court decisions outlawing racial
discrimination rests.
More directly, it would permit hard-core
Southern States, faced with a growing col-
ored electorate under the newly enacted vot-
ing rights bill, to water down their voting
strength under the Dirksen formula of
counting factors other than people in allot-
ting legislative seats.
It is not difficult to envision States like
Alabama and Mississippi enacting apportion-
ment legislation brazenly designed to again
disfranchise citizens on the basis of land-
ownership, wealth, education or race.
There is nothing in the Dirksen amend-
ment, once enaeted, that would prevent such
action, which no doubt explains why all of
the old Confederate States are so enchanted
with the scheme.
Thus our stake in the impending Senate
battle over the Dirksen amendment is even
more vital than that of other citizens.
For, if it is jammed through, we stand to
lase not only our political strength in the
=ajar northern cities, but in the Southern
States as well.
That is why it is so important for you to
keep reminding your Senators that a vote
for the Dirksen amendment is a vote against
you and yours and one which you will not
soon forget.
[From the Toledo Times, July 14, 19651
WAIT A WHILM
The Dirksen. amendment over which the
TJ.S. Senate soon will be fighting a battle
royal is a watered down, spruced up version
of the same name proposal that Minority
Leader Evxarrr DIRICSEN first introduced last
year to minify the Supreme Court's one-
man, one-vote ruling on State legislatures.
As approved by a Senate subcommittee the
proposal still would allow one house of a
legislature to be apportioned on factors other
than population. But it no longer would
bar Federal courts from hearing suits chal-
lenging apportionment plans. And it would
require a vote of approval at least every 10
years by the people of a State which used
nonpopulation factors for one of its legisla-
tive houses.
The changes have brought the proposed
amendment considerably more support than
it originally commanded. Its passage is still
uncertain, but the vote is bound to be close,
since even such liberal spokesmen as Sena-
tors Jams of New York and ICuener. of
California are now endorsing it.
Part of this widespread sympathy for the
amendment?which we are tempted to
share?arises from recognition that fair rep-
resentation in a legislative body does not
always COMA solely from numbers. This is
most easily seen in States like California,
Illinois, New York, arid others where the
bulk of population is massed. in one or two
great metropolitan centers. The Court's
ruling, strictly interpreted, could create a
tyranny of majority in which vast areas of
a State had no voice in legislative affairs at
all.
What restrains us from wholehearted sup-
port of the Dirksen amendment is the evi-
dence?and there is plenty?that most of its
supporter's are not really interested in fair
solutions to apportionment problems. They
want simply to salvage the old status quo of
entrenched rural power that drove the Su-
preme Court reluctantly to get into the
political thicket it had long avoided.
It should not be forgotten?though the
Courts' critics never mention it?that the
tribunal invaded this field only because
those in control of the States' apportionment
machinery refused to do anything about the
gross imbalances that had developed. Many
of the same people who now leap to the de-
fense of the States' own laws and constitu-
tions showed no such high regard for them
when reapportionment provisions were being
violated decade after decade to protect vested
political interests.
So the' Supreme Court has, in effect, re-
stored to the States the right to devise sys-
tems of legislative representation which are
fair now and can be kept so in the future.
Of course it is not easy, especially for those
with freakish distributions of population,
But they should at least be given the chance
before an amendment is added to the U.S.
Constitution whicb, might only perpetuate
abominations on the representative form of
government.
If experience shows the difficult problems
of apportionment cannot always be worked
out on the basis of population alone, that
will be the time to consider a basic con-
stitutional change.
GOV. NELSON A. ROCKEFELLER'S
ANNOUNCEMENT REMOVING HIM-
SELF AS A CANDIDATE FOR nil,
navmaLicArt PRESIDENTIAL NOM-
INATION IN 1968
Mr. SCOTT. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent to have printed in
the RECORD as a part of my remarks an
editorial entitled "Clearing the Air," pub-
lished in the Philadelphia, Inquirer of
JUly 27, 1985, dealing with Gov. Nelson
A. Rockefeller's announcement removing
himself as a candidate for the Repubh-
can presidential nomination in 1968;
also an article entitled "GOP and 1968,"
written by Roscoe Drummond. and Pub-
lished in the Washington Post of July
28, 1965, praising Rockefeller's decision.
There being no objection, the editorial
and article were ordered to be printed
in the RECORD, as follows:
[From the Philadelphia Inquirer, July 27,
1965]
CLEARING THE AIR
Gov. Nelson A. Rockefeller's announcement
removing himself as a candidate for the Re-
publican presidential nomination in 1968
clears the political air and should prove
helpful to the Republican Party.
Until he made his statement on a "Face
the Nation" program on Sunday, there had
been doubts as to the Governor's political
plans, and whether he intended to run for
another term in Albany preliminary to tak-
ing a future stab at the presidential nomina-
tion which had eluded him twice before.
His statement in Minneapolis, where he
has been attending the Annual Governors'
Conference, was straightforward and un-
equivocal. He will definitely seek a third
term as Governor. He will not be a candi-
date for President.
The Governor could have delayed his an-
nouncement for many months. By making
his position clear now, he will give the Re-
publicans that much more time to pull their
party together, in the hopes of avoiding a
repetition of the 1964 disaster.
Rockefeller served his party well by trying
manfully to head off the nomination of Barry
Goldwater. He might very well have ob-
tained the nomination himself if it had not
been for the unfortunate lapse of judgment
In the timing of his remarriage. Coming
just as the presidential campaign was about
to get underway, that event severely dam-
aged his political chances, especially among
women voters.
From then on, his drive for the nomination
was an uphill and, as it proved, a losing
struggle. While other moderate Republican
leaders did nothing to stop the Goldwater
surge except to lament it, Rockefeller and
fought it out in the grueling heat of the pri-
maries.
It is possible that certain of the Republi-
can leaders hoped that Rockefeller and
Goldwater would knock each other off in the
preoonvention battles, opening the door to
their own nomination as compromise candi-
dates. The result in California dispelled that
illusion, and the New York Governor found
another act of courage called of him when
he faced the roaring radicals of the Gold-
water galleries in the convention, and made
his appeal for a decent platform on civil
rights
Governor Rockefeller has fought hard and
well to keep the Republican Party where
it belongs, and where it must stand if it
is not to distintegrate, out of the hands of
the extremists. He has made mistakes of
political judgment, but not of the heart.
He has never been short of that quality called
courage.
[From the Washington Post, July 28, 1965]
GOP AND 1968?Romaerearseres DECISION
PRAISED
(By Roscoe Drummond)
Muneraporas.?Three consequences flow
from Gov. Nelson A. Rockefeller's action re-
moving himself?now and forever?as a pres-
idential candidate:
1. It make it nearly certain that the 1968
Republican nominee will be a political mod-
erate.
2. It virtually rules out the danger that
the remaining rivals for the GOP nomination
will again get into such a lacerating contest
that the moderated forces within the party
would end up helplessly divided?as they
were in 1964.
3. Barring the emergence of another Wen-
dell Winkle who is less visible today than
Mars, it narrow the probable choice to Gov.
George Romney of Michigan, Gov. William
W. Scranton of Pennsylvania, and perhaps
former Vice President Richard M. Nixon.
Each is qualified personally and politicedly.
Any of them could get it. One of them al-
most certainly will.
The potential cardidates of the two ft r-
therest apart wings of the party have both
taken themselves out of the running. Barry
M. Goldwater has said he would not seek re-
nomination. Now Rockefeller follows suit.
These decisions in themselves shift the eyes
of the party to its political center.
It is no accident that Rockefeller chose the
Governors' conference here in Minneapolis
as the occasion to make his political an-
nouncement. He picked it deliberately ard,
thereby, underlined the powerful role the
GOP Governors have played in the past and
can again play in deciding the party's presi-
idential nominee.
All the most influential Republican Gov-
ernors are in the moderate-to-liberal wing.
They include Volpe of Masschusetts, Chaff ee
of Rhode Island, Rhodes of Ohio, Hatfield of
Oregon, Smylie of Idaho, as well as Rocke-
feller, Scranton, and Romney. And, signifi-
cantly, they take in most of the populous
States.
This is a lot of political power at the
center of the party. These Governors have
probably learned enough from their pie-
convention experience of 1964 to realize that
they cannot influence the presidential nomi-
nation at the last minute, that their power
as leaders must be concerted?or dissipated.
With both Goldwater and Rockefeller re-
moving themselves, the prospect is that the
long-exercised power of the Governors will
not be dissipated, that most of it will be
mobilized behind a candidate who will re-
flect the moderate consensus.
Rockefeller gave a good reason for taking
himself out of the picture earlier than e as
necessary.
"I think," he said, "that in order to pull
the party back together, to unite it, to make
Approved For Release 2003/11/04: CIA-RDP67600446R000300190008-1