PAYING CASTRO BLACKMAIL RAISES PROBLEMS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 10
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: February 13, 2004
• Sequence Number: 5
• Publication Date: June 1, 1961
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
A3924 ,
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX June 1
dis, ,trous to the economy of the New
Jersey resort areas, and I must judge
that the same would apply to all areas
catering to, this great segment of our
economy-the convention business. Pro-
fessional convention managers either
employed by corporations or trade asso-
ciations, have purposely built up the use
of resorts for, convention purposes be-
cause they have a captive audience and
are not subject to the distractions of
metropolitan. areas.
Atlantic City has the largest conven-
tion hall in the world, which has just
been completely renovated under a $4
million renovation program, and it floor
space increased by thousands of square
feet for display of merchandise and
other items, which enable an industry
to display its accomplishments from year
to year, and enables the businessman to
keep up with what is new in his line of
endeavor. I have watched these conven-
tions personally for years, and I know
that they are conducted in a business-
like manner, serve a very important pur-
pose in our domestic economy, and the
time which is given to social contacts
and entertainment does not detract from
the serious and fruitful endeavor of the
meetings and displays planned months
in advance for the convention.
I cannot conceive how any restrictions
on convention and business spending will
produce $250 million a year in additional
taxes, and such an assumption is quite
unrealistic for the following reasons:
First. The money involved is ear-
marked for sales promotion by most busi-
ness enterprise. It is unsound to think
that any business would not seek to divert
such earmarked funds to other areas
that are deductible, such as advertising,
television, et cetera. The money, thus,
will not be brought down in profits to
a taxable level.
Second. Such limitation will adversely
affect the service industries; that is,
transportation, restaurants and hotels,
which are large employers. A campaign
by Internal Revenue Service has already
reduced spending by convention people.
In this regard, in most hotels in the re-
sort areas there has been a steady de-
cline in profits for the last 3 years since
this antibusiness campaign was started
by the Internal Revenue Service. For
instance, in one hotel brought to my
attention, the income tax was, $16,000
last year as compared to $200,000 3 years
ago. It is my belief that any hope of
improving the tax collections through
these procedures, will be offset by the
reduced taxes produced for so long by
the service industries.
I take issue with the Internal Revenue
Service when it says that conventions
are evidence of willful extravagances
and conducted in an unbusinesslike
manner. I know the contrary is true
from personal observation, and it will be
a terrible loss to the Nation to let this
segment of business, the convention
business, go to pot.
Such recommendations by the Inter-
nal Revenue Department is an attempt
to introduce discriminatory price fixing
by limiting the amount that can be de-
ducted for hotel rooms and meals used
by business travelers, and is funda-
mentally unsound. If our country has
reached the point in its economy where
it demands price fixing and controls,
then it should be across the board and
not attempt it on any one industry or
business, and in no event, should one
segment of the economy be discrimi-
nated against as would occur under such
recommendations.
The inclusion of yachts, hunting
lodges, and tropical clubs as income tax
deductions by an individual or corpora-
tion is wrong, and I can agree that this
should not be permitted. However, I
do resent the Secretary of the Treasury
emphasizing these extreme tax avoiding
schemes, and implying they are typical
of all business expenditures. I am
amazed that the Secretary of the Treas-
ury can say that there should be a per-
diem limitation applicable to business
travel at $30 a day, and that he would
call this realistic. I am sure that he and
all other officers and employees in Gov-
ernment would find it very hard to get
by on business travel and lodging limited
to such an amount.
I am definitely opposed to any such
price fixing, and this is what it will
amount to, and I insist that the harm
and loss to seashore resorts and other
areas benefiting from convention and
business travel will be a hundredfold
greater than any hoped for increase in
tax collection.
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. BRUCE ALGER
OF TEXAS
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 1, 1961
Mr.~ALGER. Mr. Speaker, this arti-
cle from the U.S. News & World Report
poses some of the problems raised by
making a deal to submit to blackmail
by the Communist dictator in Cuba.
Americans should give careful study to
what is actually involved in departing
from our traditional position of refusing
to deal with bandits.
The article follows:
U.S. TRACTORS FOR CUBAN PRISONERS-WHAT
IT MEANS
Proposed: The biggest ransom deal in U.S.
history. The deal itself: Trade 1,214 Cubans
held by Castro for 500 U.S. tractors, or about
two prisoners per tractor.
Cost involved: About $15 million. At that
figure the deal would average out at $12,353
per prisoner. Source of funds: Voluntary
contributions by individual Americans.
In dispute: A question whether money
given to buy tractors is tax-deductible.
President Kennedy says it is. Some Mem-
bers of Congress disagree. A second ques-
tion is whether the transaction is in viola-
tion of the Logan Act, prohibiting private
deals with governments that are involved in
disputes with the United States. The Pres-
ident says the Act is not applicable. Some
Members of Congress disagree with this, too.
A third question, raised by Castro, is
whether the proposed transaction is to be
regarded as a payment by the United States
of an indemnity for damage caused in the
recent unsuccessful attempt to invade Cuba.
Approved For Release 2004/03/11
U.S. position: President Kennedy is giving
complete support to the fund-raising cam-
paign, but insists that this entire venture
is in the hands of private citizens and in no
way involves the U.S. Government.
Castro position: To the Cuban dictator,
acceptance of his terms must amount to an
admission by the U.S. Government of its
part in the attempted invasion of Cuba.
In charge: The Tractors for Freedom
Committee, headed by Mrs. Franklin D.
Roosevelt; Walter P. uther, president of
the United Auto Wo ers, and Milton S.
Eisenhower, brother of the former President,
has spearheaded the dealing.
Problems: How to get and check identi-
fication of the 1,214 persons Castro has sug-
gested for exchange. Then, how to make
sure that the prisoners are actually ex-
changed for the tractors. One idea is that,
as each tractor is delivered, two prisoners
would have to be freed. Just how the entire
swap arrangement is to be policed was left
unclear at the start.
Castro's concern: It dawned upon the
dictator-a few days after he made his
original offer on May 18--that a trade of
prisoners for tractors would place him be-
fore the world as one who rated machines
above human beings. It also seems to have
dawned upon Castro that he was in the posi-
tion of a common blackmailer. That's when
he switched to the idea of calling his pro-
posal in indemnity rather than an ex-
change of men for machines.
The meaning: Castro is in desperate need
of mechanical equipment. Also, Soviet
Russia either is unable or unwilling to de-
liver the needed equipment, Cuba's dicta-
tor, in trouble, has turned to an attempt
to exact tribute.
The ransom: Castro sent 10 temporarily
paroled prisoners to Washington with
orders for 200 large tractors equipped with
plowing disks and 300 equipped with bull-
dozer blades. Some of these track-type trac-
tors are more suitable for big construction
Jobs than for farming. The types specified
sell for more than $30,000 each. Fear is that
they would be used to build military bases in
Cuba.
Blackmail spelled out: If the deal falls
through, the men are threatened by Castro
with long prison terms, doing the work of
the machines. Broad hints were dropped
that some prisoners would be executed. As
talks proceeded, Castro added other ransom
conditions, talked of getting back pro-
Castroites jailed, for one reason or another,
in this country and elsewhere.
Opposition: Many Congressmen, Dem-
ocrats and Republicans, have been cool to
the idea of exchanging U.S. tractors for the
Cuban prisoners. Excerpts from debate in
the U.S. Senate on May 22, carried on these
pages, reveal the line of congressional think-
ing.
What history shows: For the United
States, the idea of paying ransom for human
lives is relatively new, forced on this country
by Communist regimes that find the United
States increasingly ready to pay tribute.
This willingness was not always the case.
Dates in history show the trend-
In 1797. To demands that United States
pay bribes of $240,000 to French officials,
Charles C. Pinckney, the U.S. Minister to
Paris, proclaimed: "Millions for defense, but
not one cent for tribute." Final U.S. reply
was an undeclared naval war on France that
continued for 2 years, led to cooperation
without tribute.
In 1904. A naturalized U.S. citizen of
Greek origin, Ion Perdicaris, was seized in
Morocco by a chieftain named Raisuli. Pres-
ident Theodore Roosevelt, told ransom was
demanded, sent the fleet to the area and
ordered this message sent to Tangiers: "Per-
dicaris alive or Raisull dead." Perdicaris
was freed.
CIA-RDP64B00346F2000200170005-1
 Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX A3923
to France, Charles Pinckney, declared with a
clear voice, "Millions for defense, but not
one cent for tribute."
Contrast our present attitude toward Cuba
today. When Castro asks tribute in ransom
for 1,200 Cuban invaders, some so-called
leaders run helter skelter to raise ransom
money to pay for tractors demanded by
Fidel Castro. These so-called leaders cam-
ouflage their softness with humanitarian and
weasel words that ransom is an exchange
of machine for men, while Castro calls these
paym47ts indemnification and reparations
for invasion. This is a demonstration of
humanism gone astray. Any payment made
by Americans for the release of Cuban free-
dom fighters is blackmail and tribute. I, for
one, do not approve such tribute. I believe
veterans do not approve of blackmail.
What has happened to the spirit of America?
Our Declaration of Independence declares
that all men are created equal, and yet the
citizens of Alabama stop freedom riders,
white and black, from traveling through
their State. Our Supreme Court in 1954
ordered desegregation and our Federal Gov-
ernment had to send troops into Little Rock
to guarantee the safety of a few Negro chil-
dren to attend school.
Today is more than a Memorial Day. It
is a.day of rededication to those high ideals
for which those men died. While we are
aware of the faults and frailties of our hu-
man makeup and the selfishness of some, let
us not forget the great heart of our great
American people when called upon for great
causes. Sometimes we are overgenerous.
This year in Washington we have sought
to help the unemployed, to feed the hun-
gry, to clothe the naked, to comfort the sick
and the aged, to house the Inadequately shel-
tered, to educate the youth, to provide the
opportunity for the brilliant and the skilled,
to attend the wounded and the disabled.
We have demonstrated, and we are demon-
strating, that ours is a Government which
cares. Just as we have helped our own, we
have shown our generosity to the peoples of
Asia, Arica, and South America by helping
them with funds to help themselves. Our
Vice President, LYNDON JOHNSON, has re-
ported that the peoples of Asia want, not
arms but funds to help their economy. We
are generous because we recognize that we
are our brothers' keepers and because it Is
right. We knew that if we cannot help the
many who are.poor, we cannot save the few
who are rich or well off.
Remember, my friends, that our Nation
has remained free because civil authority
has been always superior to military au-
thority, except in times of national emer-
gency. Our budget provides for $47 billion
for military affairs. Such great expendi-
tures are needed for defense, but they carry
with them great danger. We may be con-
fronted by a military caste and a militaristic
mentality. By the military caste I do not
mean the GI, but the professional soldier.
Place too much authority in the military
or in one man, and we pave the road to
tyranny and oppression. Deny a man equal
rights before the law or deny him the pro-
tection of the Bill of Rights, and you whittle
away at your own freedom. Liberty does not
always die from direct attack. If liberty
ever dies in America-and I hope we shall
never see the day-it will die from the decay
of the principles that gave it life: that is
justice and equality and that the rights of
man come not from the generosity of the
State but from the hand of God. But we
are determined to be free, and we are ready
to pay the cost, however great. We shall
not be stampeded by fear, prejudice, or
threats. With God's grace and the support
of all veterans and all men who are devoted
to the principles of our Nation, our democ-
racy will live and continue to flourish amid
lawlessness and tyranny.
When we adhere to the principles of jus-
tice, equality, and brotherhood, we will have
kept faith with those who died.
The Myth of Doing Something
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. J. ARTHUR YOUNGER
OF CALIFORNIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 1, 1961
Mr. YOUNGER. Mr. Speaker, in view
of the fact that we so often hear the ex-
pression about the present administra-
tion doing something, I feel that the fol-
lowing article by Richard W. Owens as
published in the June issue of the Cali-
fornia Farm Bureau Federation Month-
ly is of particular importance.
The article follows:
THE MYTH of DOING SOMETHING
The history of our country contains exam-
ples of many men who have gained fame and
fortune by "getting something done." As
a matter of fact, getting something done has
long been regarded as a mask of individual
initiative and fortitude.
Our great industries have resulted from
the efforts of those who have done some-
thing. Land has been developed, new crops
introduced, machines made available, and
many other things accomplished by men who
get things done.
Unfortunately, the Socialists and others
who favor centralization of government have
seized upon the symbol of "getting some-
thing done" to further their cause of con-
trol and regimentation. They know the
average American citizen admires action and
accomplishment. -
How often have you heard someone make
the comment-whether about a piece of leg-
islation or an international crisis-I don't
know if it's good or bad, but at least we are
doing something for a change."
Using good psychology, the centralizers de-
pict themselves as the champions of political
initiative and action. Anyone who recog-
nizes and speaks out against the evils of
socialism, they brand as "do nothings."
The top spokesman for the AFL-CIO,
which appears to be the most powerful mo-
nopoly in California, stated in a recent re-
lease that the 1981 session of the California
Legislature may go down in history as the
"do nothing session." Why? Because, in his
opinion, "there isn't enough money to meet
the needs of many important programs."
The recommended cure? Pass legislation on
which we may obtain more Federal appro-
priations.
However, this criticism is not solely of po-
litical spokesmen. Individuals if they de-
sire it enough could be their own action
change the words of their spokesman or rep-
resentative.
An insight into some individuals' way of
thinking on the matter of "doing something"
was given in a recent article in Christian
Economics by Dr. Hans F. Sennholz, who
pointed out the following:
"The advocate of foreign aid who depicts
in dark colors the misery and suffering in
foreign countries does not mean to act him-
self when he demands action and initiative
in this field of social endeavor. He does not
mean to send CARE packages to starving
Asians and Africans. And he does not plan
to invest his savings in the socialized econ-
omies of India or the Congo. He probably
knows rather well that his Investments would
soon be consumed, squandered, and confis-
cated by governments that are hostile to
capital investments. And yet, he calls on
his Government to waste billions of dollars
of the taxpayers' money.
"The advocate of more abundant and bet-
ter housing does not mean to use his own
funds to provide low-rent housing. He, him-
self, does not want to act; he only calls on
the Government for action. It Is the Gov-
ernment whose initiative and action he
would like to employ and the people's tax
money he proposes to spend. He, himself,
probably is a tenant complaining about high
rentals while shunning the tasks and re-
sponsibilities of houseownership. He is
probably aware that the returns on apart-
ment house investments are mostly meager
and always jeopardized by rising taxes and
Government controls. Therefore, he prefers
safer investments with less worry to him.
"The apostle of rapid economic growth
does not advocate personal initiative and
action. He does not mean to offer his own
effort and thrift toward economic growth.
It takes more than $15,000 in savings to
create an additional job. Even more savings
are needed if the job Is to be more produc-
tive with higher wages and better working
conditions. In his personal life the growth
apostle probably is spending next month's
income on consumption, relying mainly on
charge accounts and installment loans. He,
himself, does not save the capital that is
needed for economic growth. His call for
initiative and action is merely a call for
Government expenditures financed with the
people's money or through inflation."
When viewed In its proper perspective, the
question "Don't you want to do anything?"
becomes a myth. What is actually being
asked is "Don't you want the Government
to manage the spending of your money on
foreign aid, housing, education, economic
growth, health insurance?"
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. MILTON W. GLENN
Or NEW JEfSEY
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 1, 1961
Mr. GLENN. Mr. Speaker, as a Rep-
resentative of the Second Congressional
District of New Jersey, I am quite famil-
iar with a segment of our economy which
has grown and been encouraged as a
source of income to our resort areas. My
district includes Atlantic City and a
number of smaller seashore resorts,
which depend to a great extent on con-
vention business. This is particularly
true in the off season, when the facilities
such as hotels and restaurants are oc-
cupied and kept busy by conventions
from all over the United States, Canada,
and even the world.
These conventions draw thousands of
business representatives, and they,
naturally, use their expense accounts.
It has been estimated that over 50 per-
cent of the income of one of the larger
hotels in Atlantic City is derived from
convention people. Any curtailment of
the use of an expense account will be
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
 Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -APPENDIX A3925
In 1'~j49. Robert A. Vogeler, U.S. business-
man, was jailed In Communist Hungary and
charged with espionage. He was freed a
year and a half later, after the United States
agreed to hand over Hungarian assets seized
in West Germany, as part of the ransom.
In 1951. Soviet fighter planes forced down
four U.S. airmen over Hungary. The Amer-
icans were released after 6 weeks-but only
after the United States paid ransom of
$123,505, a Communist price tag of $30,-
901.25 on each American head.
Recent record is filled with other exam-
ples of how Communists use prisoners for
bargaining purposes-in Soviet Russia, Com-
munist Czechoslovakia, Red China.
Dangers involved: Continuing to submit
to Communist blackmail is seen by many as
a trend that must be halted. Representative
Baum ALGER, Republican, of Texas, warns
that if the Cuba deal goes through, "it will
not be many days until other two-bit ban-
dits and potential dictators will be seizing
American tourists and holding them for ran-
som * * * fair targets to a worldwide kid-
naping ring."
Others make this point: Castro is report-
edly holding at least 150,000 Cubans in jails.
Will he next try to sell them, in batches of
1,000 or so, to meet needs for U.S. trucks,
refineries, cash to consolidate his revolution?
Morals involved: Those behind "Tractors
for Freedom" -insist that Americans have a
moral obligation to help the prisoners. Sen-
ator GEORGE A. SMATHERS, Democrat, of Flor-
ida, declares: "Americans will be sickened by
this man's utter contempt of the human per-
son, but they will want to save the lives of
these men. I say, let us buy back for them
their liberty and their lives."
For V.S. citizens, as well as for U.S. offi-
cials, there was a sudden new problem:
How do free men best deal with a dictator's
demands for blackmail?
Why Investigations?
. HON. WILLIAM K. VAN PELT
OF WISCONSIN
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 1, 1961
Mr. VAN PELT. Mr. Speaker, the fol-
lowing article entitled "Why Investiga-
tions?" by Mr. Roy M. Brewer, appeared
in the June 1961, issue of the American
Legion magazine. Because of its timely
significance, I believe it should be cir-
culated widely because of the lack of
understanding by many when a com-
mittee of Congress is authorized to con-
duct an investigation. I therefore in-
clude it herewith:
WHY INVESTIGATIONS?
(By Roy M. Brewer)
Is there really a domestic Communist
menace? Is there a need for congressional
committees to investigate Communist sub-
version? Do the tactics of such committees
constitute a greater threat to freedom and
liberty than the groups they are assigned
to investigate? These are some of the ques-
tions which Americans are asking them-
selves as a result of the furor that has been
kicked up by recent agitation against the
congressional committees investigating com-
munism.
These are serious questions which deserve
serious answers. For in this area of con-
fusion rests the key to the future of the
free world. America and the free world have
suffered setbacks In recent years that have
caused us genuine concern for our future.
These setbacks arise from our failure to un-
derstand the Communist problem at home
and to equate our failures at home with our
setbacks abroad. The confusion about con-
gressional committees is evidence of this
lack of understanding.
Yes, there is a Communist menace at
home. Yes, we do need investigations. We
need investigations that will concentrate on
communism and not get sidetracked on
extraneous issues. There is no real question
of the need for, or of the conduct of, such
committees, The problem is in understand-
ing the Communist menace and how it
works. The future of our country and its
precious political. heritage depend on it.
America must learn that the fight against
communism begins at home. Unless and
until we do understand this, we will con-
tinue to lose to communism abroad.
Recently the House of Representatives
voted 412 to 6 to give the House Committee
on Un-American Activities its full appropria-
tion of $331,000 to carry on its work of in-
vestigation. The near unanimity of this vote
surprised a lot of persons. The opposition
to the committee that has recently ap-
peared not only from the Communists and
their camp followers, but in the form of
editorials in the New York Times and the
Washington Post, and from large groups of
clergymen, had caused some persons to be-
lieve, and the Communists to hope, that
this opposition would reflect itself in the
vote on the House appropriation. It is to
the credit of Congress as well as being the
good fortune of the American people that
Congress understands the tactics of com-
munism and recognizes the indispensable
work which the committees of both Houses
of Congress are doing.
The agitation against such committees is
nothing new to Congress. It has been going
on since the committees were first formed,
for it is in these committees more than at
any other place, that the sensitive nerve
structure of the Communist apparatus is laid
bare for the American people to see. It Is
through the committees that you see the
work of the periphery groups and the man-
ner in which these groups form a protective
covering around the activities of the Com-
munist Party itself and its illegal activities
in espionage and subversion. Without this
protective covering the apparatus would be
impotent and ineffectual.
Unfortunately the public does not fully
understand this. They have supported the
activities of the coniinittees in exposing the
hard-core or the card-carrying Communist,
but they have felt, in giving out information
on fellow travelers, dupes, and Innocents,
that the committee was unnecessarily smear-
ing innocent persons. Thus the Commu-
nists have been able to create opposition to
the committees, to distort their efforts and
their purpose and to divert attention from
the real Communist issue.
In reviewing the history of these commit-
tees since 1939, it is clear that each time a
major expose of Communist Infiltration has
been made, the Communists were able to
confuse the issue and divert the attention of
the public to an entirely different question.
A good example of this was the case of
J. Robert Oppenheimer who was let go as a
security risk. This was the only real issue.
Yet most of the people reached the conclu-
sion that he had been mistreated because he
wan not proven to be a card-carrying Com-
munist. In his own testimony he admitted
that he had consciously hired persons whom
he knew to be Communists, on the most
secret project in the history of the world.
He attempted to justify this by saying that
he thought their loyalty to America super-
seded their loyalty to the Communist Party,
which, of course, is the height of folly to one
who knows how the Communist Party works.
The ability of the Communists to confuse
the Issues involved in these Investigations
shows masterful strategy. If we understand
how and why they confuse the issue we will
clearly see that the committees are perform-
ing an important function-that we need to
support them and learn to evaluate accu-
rately the 'information which they disclose.
But to assume that you can investigate Com-
munist subversion without disclosing the
work of the periphery groups, is to con-
demn them before they start to work.
It is interesting to note how the Com-
munists have been able to get a completely
different reaction to the same basic princi-
ple when it affects them than when ap-
plied to others. For.example, it is considered
liberal or humanitarian to fight totalitarian-
ism in the form of fascism and nazism, but
it is reactionary to fight totalitarianism in
the form of communism. This is the feel-
ing which you will get subconsciously from
an average person who is not close to the
subject. By the same token they have been
able to get the American public to assume
an entirely different- attitude toward con-
gressional committees which deal with cops-
munism than toward those which deal in
other areas of public concern.
Historically the liberal or progressive line
of thought In America has always supported
the congressional investigating committee as
an instrument of the people's interest as
against that of vested interests or of special
interest groups. This was true when Sen-
ator Wheeler exposed the Teapot Dome
scandal. It was true when Senators LaFol-
lette and Norris were uncovering the ex-
cesses of industry monopolies in the 1920's.
It was certainly true when young Bob La-
Follette was Investigating the abuses of civil
rights in the 1930's, It was true of the ac-
tivities of the Kefauver committee which
scrutinized crime and of the McClellan com-
mittee Which Investigated Beck and Hoffa.
While there was great resentment against
McCarthy for his personal animosity toward
General Zwicker and others there was no
similiar resentment against MCCLELLAN and
Bob Kennedy who made no secret of their
determination to get Hoffa and Beck. It is
only when you tape on the Communists In
congressional committees that the entire
process Is given the appearance of evil.
The first great drive to discredit congres-
sional committees investigating communism
came with the Dies committee in 1939.
When its first public hearing was set up,
information began to flow to the committee
of such a sensational nature that almost
overnight the committee itself became the
issue. The public just couldn't and wouldn't
believe what we now know were accurate
accounts of infiltration into government,
labor unions, communications, the arts and
education. Taking advantage of the public's
disbelief, the Communists launched an at-
tack on the motives of the committee and
its members. Those who were embarrased
by the disclosures, many of whom sincerely
believed the charges against the committee,
joined the chorus of condemnation.
There were mistakes made by the Dies
committee. The technique of Communist
infiltration and subversion was new to most
people. The idea of boring from within was
a relatively new tactic, even to the Com-
munists. So it is understandable that per-
sons who were suddenly exposed to this
revelation of subversion would be carried
away. It Is also understandable that they
did not fully evaluate the power of the Com-
munists to deceive persons In their orbit of
influence thus assuming that many persons
were knowingly cooperating with the Com-
munists when actually they were being de-
ceived by them. The power of communism
to deceive its victims is almost unbelievably
effective.
But did the Dies committee deserve the
fate which it received? We don't think so,
for certainly the Intentions of the commit-
tee were good. Had It not been for the
program of character assassination, lies and
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
 Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
' A3926 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX
distortions that only the Communists can
so effectively Impose, it would have worked
out its problems and developed an acceptable
technique as other committees have done.
But they didn't really have a chance,
Here is an excerpt from the statement of
Congressman Dies when he called the first
public hearing to order. "The Chair wishes
to reiterate what it has stated many times-
namely, that this committee is determined
to conduct its investigation upon a digni-
fled ~pplane and to adopt and maintain
throti bout the course of the hearings a
judicial attitude, The committee has no
preconceived views of what the truth is re-
specting the subject matter of this inquiry.
Its sole purpose is to discover the truth
and report it as it is, with such recommenda-
tions, if any, as to legislation on these sub-
jects as the situation may require and as
the duty of Congress to the American people
may demand.
"We shall be fair and impartial at all
times and treat every witness with fairness-
and courtesy. We shall expect every witness
to treat us In the same way. This com-
mittee will not permit any 'character
assassination' or any 'smearing' of innocent
people. We wish to caution witnesses that
reckless charges must not be made against
individuals or organizations.
"The Chair wishes to make it plain that
this committee is not 'after anyone.' All
that we are concerned with is the ascertain-
ment of the truth, whatever it is,"
Certainly the purposes enunciated here
would meet the standards of the most crit-
ical. Those who have seen the conduct of
the Communists appearing before the com-
mittee In San "rancisco in the film "Opera-
tion Abolition" can well understand why the
committee could not function in the man-
ner outlined by the chairman at this first
public hearing under his chairmanship. It
is significant to note that the first witness
of the Dies committee was one of their in-
vestigators who had been assigned to inves-
tigate the German-American Bund. The
second witness, appearing voluntarily, was
John P. Frey, president of the Metal Trades
Division of the American Federation of La-
bor who gave voluminous testimony of Com-
munist infiltration into labor unions.
But unfortunately the public was not yet
ready for, the information that came to the
Dies committee. It was too much to be be-
lieved and the conflict over the committee
boon became a conflict between its chairman
and the New Deal. The full weight of the
Roosevelt administration was brought to
bear against the committee and its chair-
man. The committee was successfully die-
crediteo...and Chairman Dies retired from
public life for several years, returning again
in the 1950's.
The sad fate of the Dies committee dis-
couraged any such investigation for a period
of almost 8 years. During the war, of
course, we were cobelligerents with Russia
and it was the fashion to be friendly. But
in 1947 the House committee set a major
inquiry into the Hollywood motion picture
industry. Stories had been coming out of
the Tenny committee in California about
Communist influences in Hollywood but the
principal witness had been challenged as
mentally incompetent, so few people be-
lieved them.
When the small group of friendly wit-
nesses gathered in Washington in the fall of
1947, they were looked upon by the army of
press, radio and motion picture representa-
tives as a group of crackpots. The industry
under the leadership of the Motion Picture
Producers Association had called an indus-
try-wide meeting to protect itself from the
"smear campaign" of the committee. The
committee was now under Republican lead-
ership and it was alleged that its purpose
was to discredit Hollywood because it had so
strongly supported the New Deal. The
"Committee for the First Amendment" was
formed under the leadership of John Huston
and William Wyler and a "galaxy" of stars
was flown to Washington to expose and pub-
licize the evil intent of the committee,
The friendly witnesses were called. They
testified as to their experiences but their
testimony was generally discounted. How-
ever, when John Howard Lawson., who had
been dubbed the Communist commissar of
Hollywood, was called, he reacted in a way
that shocked the most skeptical. He defied
the committee, called the chairman "Hitler"
and was dragged from the hearing room
screaming invective at the committee. The
reaction was immediate. Industry leaders
met in New York and promised a cleanup.
The Committee for the First Amendment
was dissolved forthwith and its glamorous
members slipped back to Hollywood as
quietly and as unobtrusively as possible.
The Hollywood hearing gave the commit-
tees a real boost. For the first time the
public accepted the necessity for such in-
vestigations. It is significant to note, how-
ever, that this boost came as a result of
action that was taken by the Communists
themselves. It did not come because the
committee had done anything that differed
one bit from its previous method.
Shortly after this, the Hiss case broke
and all previous disclosures paled into in-
significance before the fantastic charge of
Whitaker Chambers. The very magnitude
of the accusation played into the Com-
munists' hands. It was too outrageous to
be believed. Alger Hiss a hidden Commun-
ist. This handsome, educated, cultured,
sensitive, dedicated public servant a Com-
munist-impossible. A wave of indignation
swept over the Nation and soon it was not
Alger Hiss who was on trial-it was Whit-
taker Chambers and the committee. The
tremendous pressure that descended upon
Chambers would have crushed a lesser man.
But he stood his ground and he proved that
Alger Hiss had lied.
Despite the seriousness of this charge the
realities of it were never completely ac-
cepted. No effort was made by responsible
officials of Government to determine the ex-
tent of the penetration into the State De-
partment. Logic would indicate that if one
In such a high post was a Communist there
must be others. But logic was not govern-
ing the actions of our officials, In a display
of emotion, Dean Acheson, on whom the
initial responsibility rested, said he would
not turn his back on Alger Hiss. He had
refused to accept the realities of the dis-
closure. The Nation generally accepted the
facts of the Alger Hiss case but the issue
was left up in the air.
After this the scene shifted to the Senate
Internal Security Subcommittee when Sena-
tor Joseph McCarthy took over the chair-
manship. McCarthy had not been a stu-
dent of communism but on becoming ac-
quainted with some of the fact of Com-
munist infiltration he charged into the fight
with the reckless abandon of a Don Quixote.
He was on the right track but he -didn't
understand the pitfalls. He didn't realize
how difficult it would be to make his charges
stand up. He hadn't fully appraised the
enemy he was taking on.
When the McCarthy hearings started, the
public was behind him. They were shocked
at the list of persons in the State Depart-
ment whom he charged were Communists,
but the Hiss case had taught them not to
prejudge, They were ready to be convinced.
But the proof was not sufficiently convincing
to justify the extent of the charges--at
least a substantial portion of the public
didn't think that it was. In the period of
hesitation, once more the issue was shifted-
communism became a secondary issue and
Joe McCarthy was on trial.
Few issues in American life have stirred the
emotions of the public as deeply as the Mc-
Carthy hearings. Few men in public life
. June 1
vilification that was used against Joe Mc-
Carthy. He was correct in his premile that
the Communists had great influence in the
State Department and that serious charges
were justified. But he made some mistakes
and these mistakes were pounced upon
with all the skill the Communists use so well.
The climax of the McCarthy hearings came
with testimony of infiltration into the Army
radar laboratory at Fort Monmouth, N.J.
McCarthy had uncovered evidence of a seri-
ous leak of vital, secret information. He felt
that the Army was giving him the runa-
round and no doubt he was right. Once
again the Communist issue was sidetracked
and the conflict became a fight between Mc-
Carthy and the Army. The President joined
the fight on the side of the Army and the
full strength of the Eisenhower adminis-
tration was brought to bear to suppress the
hearings successfully and to break Senator
McCarthy politically. The American people
have yet to learn who was responsible for
the promotion of Major Peress.
The bitterness of the McCarthy dispute left
a lasting effect on the anti-Communist fight
in America. A feeling began to emerge that
you could not successfully contain commu-
nism in a free society such as ours without
destroying our basic liberties. This, of
course, is a complete fallacy, but nonetheless
it has been assiduously promoted and many
take it for granted. The effect has been to
give a certain legitimacy to communism in
America that it had never enjoyed before.
Thus the struggle had gone one more
cycle and the Communists had scored the
greatest victory of all. As a result security
regulations were relaxed-court decisions
freed the hard core of the Communist move-
ment in America. In a number of verdicts
the Supreme Court so restricted our law
enforcement officials as to make America safe,
not only for Communists, but for the
hardened criminals of the underworld as well.
As we review the struggle in retrospect
it seems clear that as each cycle of disclosure
and defeat has been completed, from Dies to
Thomas to McCarthy, our own defense has
emerged a little weaker and the Communists
have become more firmly entrenched. After
each defeat a new area has been opened up
to them to expand their influence.
The people have not weakened in their
opposition to communism, but they are
frustrated in their efforts to know how to
apply their opposition effectively. Our na-
tional leadership has failed to show them
the way, not because` they are pro-Com-
munists but rather because it is so much
easier to deny the facts than it is to face
them. This has been true of each admin-
istration since World War U. As early as
1939 Whittaker Chambers met with a high
official of our State Department in an effort
to acquaint him with the manner in which
our Government was being infiltrated. His
information, to all intents and purposes,
was ignored,
When the charges against Alger Hiss were
disclosed, President Truman said the issue
was a red herring. In 1954 the Eisenhower
administration suppressed the Monmouth
investigation rather than face the facts the
McCarthy committee had uncovered.
Are these incidents evidence of sympathy
with communism? No, decidedly not. The
percentage of persons in America who have
any real sympathy for communism is so
small as to be of no consequence. But it
is evidence of a failure to appraise our enemy
properly. It is also evidence of a certain
amount of lethargy, I repeat-it is so much
easier to derly the facts than it is to face
them.
The free world is paying a terrible price
for this attitude. All of the major problems
of the world today are directly traceable
to it: The peace treaties which gave Russia
occupation rights over those countries which
are now the captive nations; the loss of
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
 Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00 170005-1
A3890 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -
There has not so far been much of that evi-
dent generally in Washington. I believe
some of our Federal administrators, instead
of making speeches accusing the merchant
marine industry of congenital law breaking
might better spend the time considering
how they might devise a law which can be
enforced with an even hand. Or, before
sternly advising us that we bring our com-
plaints to the Board, he might inquire about
the complaints that we have brought and,
from the nature of the practical unenforce-
ability of the act abroad, the profound in-
activity that these complaints have pro-
duced.
There are notable exceptions to this, how-
ever, and fortunately there are more con-
structive speeches made in the interests of
world trade and the merchant marine than
otherwise.
WHERE ARE WE?
Whatever lack of artistry may show in the
picture I have painted, it is obvious that I
have so far chosen only the dark and somber
colors for my brush. I don't really think
things are all that bad. The facts that give
me heart are many. Among them are:
1. The shipping industry has a job to do
which is of the highest order of importance,
and challenges each of us to his utmost.
2. It is a job packed tight with danger,
and excitement, and fun. From the seaman
who risks his life in a gale to the investor
who assumes suable risks for a return about
equal to that of a Government bond, it is an
exciting and challenging way of life.
3. The Government officials, both in the
Congress and in the executive, of whom I
have been somewhat critical, are able and
conscientious men. In time, and that a
short time, they must see where they are
driving the American merchant marine.
When that is seen, they will turn their imag-
ination and their ability into the search for
ways to achieve uniform enforcement of the
law against all lines in the U.S. trades. A
merchant marine is an instrument of world
power as well as world trade. As I have in-
dicated, the Russians are beginning to see
this-so must we.
4. Lastly, but by no means least, our work
puts us at the service of the splendid men
of commerce and industry and labor, such"
as you who are here today. You need us
and we need you, and it is a pleasure to serve
you.
If I have indicated in clinical detail the
worries we face, it is because we ask your
understanding, not your sympathy.
In closing I should like to pay my own
tribute and respects to you who have cast
your lot in the challenging role of commerce
and shipping. The contribution which you
make helps to insure that our country'r
flag will continue flying on the sealanes of
the world.
I should gxpect, if you have listened with
moderate attention, that there is not a man
in the room who would trade jobs with me.
I hope that is so. For in honest fact, and
for reasons which quite defy rational ex-
planation, I wouldn't trade with any of you.
The poets say that the moon doth drive
men mad. Salt spray, I feayfwill do the
same.
/Must We Pay Ransom to RWd Castro?
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or
HON. KARL 4. MUNDT
OF SOUTH DAKOTA
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
Thursday, June 1, 1961
Mr. MUNDT, Mr. President, opposi-
tion across the country is rising by leaps
and bounds to the preposterous proposal [From the Washington Post, May 27, 19611
to involve the United States, officially, in PEOPLE FOR TRACTORS?
the unconscionable appeasement of pay- (By Roscoe Drummond)
ing ransom money to Cuba's Red Castro The Premier of the Cuban-Soviet Social-
in response to his brazen attempt to 1st Republic, one Fidel Castro, estimates that
blackmail us into submission to his the lives of 24,10 Cuban prisoners ought
demands. to be worth one bulldozer or one truck with
I am glad, to read in a recent dispatch spare parts. He gives the United States 10
days to come through-or else.
in News-Week that Secretary of the The fact that such Americans as Eleanor
Treasury Dillon is opposed to the scheme Roosevelt, Milton Eisenhower, Walter Reu-
to make this ransom payment tax ther, Joseph Dodge, and others, instantly
exempt and thus put. our Government volunteer to help raise the money to buy the
officially in the sorry business of paying freedom of the 1,200 Cubans who were cap-
blackmail with the taxpayers' money tured during the invasion shows that the
since dollars for tribute which pay no plight of the Freedom Fighters instinctively
touches the heart and conscience of this
taxes are the same as using money from Nation. The money is already coming in.
the general Federal fund to try to buy I am not sure this is the way' to help
favor from Castro. I sincerely hope that Cuba or the United States or enslaved peo-
the wise counsel of officials like Secretary ple anywhere. But if we are going through
Dillon and Senator HARRY BYRD of Vir- with it-let us recognize what we are doing,
ginia will prevail but if necessary I trust name this Castro thing for what it is and
Congress will enact a specific legislation not pretend that the U.S. Government some-
crude, e r do with it.
denying tax exemption to the funds This how has is nothing
ud brazen, high-handed inter-
which Mr. Reuther and others are now national blackmail perpetrated by a political
trying to collect for this shameful trac- dictator who is proposing to trade human
tor-for-Cubans transaction. beings for metal in order to make himself
At this point in the RECORD, Mr. Pres- stronger.
ident I ask unanimous consent to insert This is a dangerous business. Once a na-
tion
pertinent statements on this contro- tion yields to blackmail, where does it stop?
What next? If we yield up 500 trucks and
versy. One is from the Daily Plainsman, bulldozers to Castro, aren't we inviting some
of Huron S. Dak., which summarizes other country to throw a few Americans in
the situation neatly in its editorial head- prison to trade for a dozen airplanes, a steel
line entitled, "Spineless America Pays mill, or a low-interest loan?
Ransome as Cuba.. Starts Open Black- There is no way whatsoever to make this
mail" and the other is a column written Castro thing a little detached, personal deal
by Roscoe Drummond entitled, "People between a few private American citizens and
somebody or other in Havana-with the Gov-
For Tractors?" ernment of the United States involved.
It seems to me that the final para- Administration officials would like to keep
graph of the Drummond article should the Government out of it. It seems to me
give all good Americans genuine concern impossible. After a conference at the White
before they commit themselves to par- House, Speaker Sam Rayburn reported: "The
ticipate in this awesome enterprise. Mr. President said the Federal Government is
out of it and going to stay out of it."
Drummond emphasizes that- Mrs. Roosevelt said: "We have the agree-
The point is that all the Cuban people, not ment of the Government. We got permis-
just the captured invasion fighters, are sion beforehand."
Castro's prisoners. The hard fact is that the deal cannot be
By strengthening the hand of Castro do we fur for private citizens to negotiate with a
want to empower him to enslave still more foreign government "with intent to influ-
of his fellow Cubans for still longer periods ence its conduct in any disputes or contro-
of time under the guise of freeing a few in versies with the United States." President
exchange for the tools he needs to develop Kennedy says he is advised that the Logan
power enough to enslave the many. Act is not involved because the people-for-
There being no objection, the edi- tractors deal is not a controversy. But
torials were ordered to be printed in the since Castro has stated that he views the
tractor "gift" as "Indemnity" or reparations
RECORD, as follows: for the invasion, there seems to me a very
[From the Huron (S. Dak.) Daily Plainsman, real controversy here.
May 24, 1961] I cannot see how the Ameicans can go to
SPINELESS AMERICA PAYS RANSOM AS CUBA Havana to negotiate the prisoner-tractor
STARTS OPEN BLACKMAIL arrangement without breaking the law un-
It has been a long time since the United less they have the authority of the Govern-
States answered demands for blackmail with ment. If they have this authority, then the
such ringing defiance and courage as: United States makes itself a partner to the
"Millions for defense but not one cent deal.
for tribute." If this deal is to be realized, as its spon-
sors have described it, then the United States
"Perdicaris alive or Raisuli dead." will have to participate at four points: the
Today the United States is again being Government will have to issue export li-
blackmailed. This time it is Fidel Castro censes for the machinery, issue visas for the
who threatens to kill a thousand captives negotiators, authorize them to negotiate so
from the refugee forces who landed under as not to violate the Logan Act, and make
American auspices at the Bay of Pigs un- contributions tax deductible. The latter
less the United States sends him 500 trac- action means that the United States would
tors be paying for part of the cost.
And what is today's answer to blackmail? All this is why Senator WILLIAM J. FIIL-
Toda committee has formed itself in BRIGHT, chairman of the Foreign Relations
Y a Committee, has said: "I agree that our Gov-
the United States to put on a public drive ' ernment should not in any way lend itself
to raise money to pay the ransom. to this kind of blackmailing operation."
How flabby, how mushy, how spineless can Senator STYLES BRIDGES of New Hampshire
a nation get and still hope to remain a put it this way on the floor of the Senate:
nation? "Not since the days of Hitler, when the in-
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
 1961 Approved CFor ONGRESSIONAL RECORD-R APPENDIX 000200170005-1 A3889"
tion to protect the public treasury leads to
there being a differential between what we
are paid and what is really necessary to
equalize competitive costs in the subsidized
categories of expense. (b) We are subject to
a complete governmental control as to routes
and sallings; however expert or sympathetic
this may be, and it is not always both, it
is as you can Imagine both costly and frus-
trating to reach day-to-day decisions always
subject to the delays and uncertainties of
Government approval. (c) We have to pay
over to the Government 50 percent of all
profits earned in excess of 10 percent of a
many-horned mythological beast known as
"capital necessarily employed." (d) We are
subject to intricate and detailed accounting
and audit controls, such that our accounting
costs per dollar of revenue are surely the
highest in the world. (e) Indeed, none of
our administrative and overhead expense,
though accomplished with personnel sev-
eral times as expensive as our foreign com-
petitors, is equalized.
In addition to these unequal costs of oper-
ations, and probably more serious than all
of them combined, is the fact that we be-
come bound to a fairly inflexible vessel re-
placement program. Our vessel types must
be approved by the Board and our construc-
tion dates gre fixed, years in advance, accord-
ing to the calendar age of our ships and the
industrywide scheduling of shipyard con-
struction. We have, for one example, one
trade which earns a very modest profit with
old vessels but which, as we know from
experience, would lose large sums if con-
ducted with new, expensive ships. Yet we
are being required to obtain such new and,
even after payment of the differential, ex-
pensive vessels for this service. Ours is
surely the only merchant marine in the
world which would give serious thought to
"improving" a satisfactory service into a
financial catastrophe.
THE SHIPPING OUTLOOK
The shipping industry, I am sorry to say,
thrives on international trouble and grows
thin in place times. This permits an anal-
ogy either to the undertaker or the insured.
I prefer the latter analogy.
In any case, our ships have been full and
our rates attractive during prewar and post-
war periods, and when the Suez Canal was
closed. For the last several years, the fleets
of the world have been seriously in excess
of demand and our trades overtonnaged.
An end of the present recession, which
apparently may now be expected, and a full-
scale revival of international trade would
help greatly. But even in that event, there
are still going to be many more ships on the
loading berths of the world than there are
shipments to fill them. This does not mean
that I am predicting disaster to the American
lines, but it does mean that I can see in pros-
pect no period of large earnings.
The reason for this is apparent. The par-
ticipation of American flagships in the com-
merce of the world has steadily declined since
the war until today we are carrying actually
less than 10 percent of America's world trade.
One of the basic causes of this decline, to-
gether with some accidents of litigation and
legislation, have led to a new and most serious
threat to the American merchant marine.
The demon in this picture involves the re-
current rate wars in the foreign steamship
industry which cannot be effectively pre-
vented by the government of any one coun-
try, because each movement of cargo is in
the foreign trade of two countries, not one.
In short, it is international. Since there can
be no effective governmental ratemaking, an
attempt is made to avoid chaos by the steam-
ship lines themselves entering agreements in
each trade to establish uniform rate tariffs
for that trade. This is called the conference
system.
In 1958 the Supreme Court held invalid
.the contract rate system, by which the mem-
bers of a conference give a freight reduction
of about 10 percent to those who give the
conference members all their business. The
Congress gave temporary legality to these
systems, and launched two thorough-going
inquiries. One, by the House Committee on
Merchant Marine and Fisheries, was directed
at the dual-rate problem. A second, by the
House Antitrust Subcommittee under Con-
gressman CELLER, was directed to the anti-
trust implications of steamship regulation
and to the degree to which the regulatory
statute, the Shipping Act of 1916, had been
enforced or obeyed.
Both inquiries were made with thorough-
ness and competence. The Antitrust Sub-
committee has by the nature of its inquiry
produced the most trouble for us. They sent
able lawyers into the files of American lines
who examined tens of thousands of transac-
tions over the course of a decade. They
found a few apparent violations of the 1916
Shipping Act. Curiously enough, consider-
ing this was an antitrust committee, most of
the violations complained of involved
breaches of agreements for rate equality-in
other words, the dereliction was one of reduc-
ing rates.
Chairman CELLER has declared with some
understandable vigor that his committee has
unearthed 177 "violations" of Federal stat-
utes. This, as is often the way with num-
bers, added up to 184 violations when the
Federal Maritime Board rendered a report
to Congressman CELLER as of March 1, 1961.
We find from its report that 64 of these mat-
ters were not violations at all, that 17 were
time barred or trivial, that 32 were matters
appropriate for rulemaking, not penalty pro-
ceedings, and that 14 were matters outside
the Board jurisdiction and were referred to
other agencies. This leaves only 25 matters
set for hearing and 30 still under investiga-
tion. No violation has yet been determined.
Even when reduced to a small fraction of
the congressional charges, the result is not
a happy one. The industry and Its executives,
including myself, must accept full responsi-
bility for any violation of law which may
in the end be shown. I don't want to mini-
mize that responsibility by sharing it with
the Government, but the plain fact is that
there has not from 1916 until 1960 been any
determined effort by the Federal Maritime
Board or its predecessors to enforce the law.
There are good and sufficient reasons for
this: its energies have probably wisely, dur-
ing and after two wars, been directed toward
fleet development. Secondly, In many re-
spects the Shipping Act is in the best of cir-
cumstances quite unenforcible. The fact
remains that we have been without an ef-
fective policeman for 45 years, and that the
occasional complaints to the Board of mal-
practices, made by lines who have always
tried to obey the law, which were injuring
them in the competitive struggle have pro-
duced no results whatever.
I believe the Board now intends to 1do all
that it possibly can to enforce the act, This
is, or rather should be, good news for the
American lines. We are the high-cost car-
riers, and ours is a business morality pretty
closely in tune with the 1916 act. It is to
our heavy interest that rebates, secret rate
cutting, and all other special inducements
to get cargo be completely banished from the
ocean trades.
SHIPPING REGULATIONS
Yet, paradoxically enough, the U.S.-flag
lines now face their greatest threat from the
efforts of the Board rigorously to enforce
the act.
That is because as a simple, practical fact
the Board has not the power effectively to
enforce the act against foreign-flag lines
with respect to transactions which occur
abroad. This weakness did not evidence it-
self when the enforcement of the Shipping
Act was in a somnolent state for the many
years since its passage. But now that an
attempt is being made to enforce the law,
this basic inability of the United States to
control transactions occurring abroad is be-
coming Increasingly clear to us. Thus it
cannot obtain witnesses by compulsory proc-
ess from abroad. Its power to demand
foreign-held documents is now under chal-
lenge in the courts. Even if its power be
sustained by the courts or granted by the
Congress, many of the foreign governments
have directed their nationals not to supply
these documents, leaving the issue for the
slow and uncertain disposition offered by
diplomatic negotiation. Even if the theo-
retical power is in the end achieved, it will
quite probably do the Board little or no
practical good unless the guilty line is
scrupulous enough to bundle up incriminat-
ing documents located in a foreign country
for dispatch across the ocean.
The act, in contrast, is readily enforced
against the American-flag lines. Our wit-
nesses are here and available. Our books are
open to Inspection or to production on de-
mand. Any offense by us, as Congressman
CELLER has amply proved, can readily be
substantiated.
In consequence, the American-flag lines
are, I believe, now in scrupulous adherence
to the Shipping Act of 1916, while a good
many of their foreign-flag competitors are
free to offer rebates, special privileges, sub-
agency commissions, and any other forbidden
inducement to get cargo. Thus we are ap-
proaching the incredible situation of hav-
ing the American operators subject to what
amounts to Federal price control and their
foreign competitors not. No business can
long endure on such a basis. We have only
one course to follow: to continue to lose
cargo because of virtually immune violations
of the law and the conference agreements
by our competitors until the situation be-
comes intolerable, when we must break up
the conference by opening rates or by resig-
nation.
The breakdown of the conference ma-
chinery, which prevents ruinous price wars,
is an ominous step for us to take, since we
are the high cost carriers. Yet, even that is
sometimes preferable to competing for cargo
with our own hands tied by the iron chains
of the Shipping Act while it is at best only a
gossamer thread for our competitors.
As a result of this, a dozen major confer-
ences-chiefly in the inbound trades-are on
the threshhold of a complete disintegration
because of the Shipping Act of 1916. Not be-
cause it is a bad act on the pages of the
statute books, but because any law Is bad
which can of necessity be enforced only
against some while others are immune in
every practical sense.
We have in American President Lines de-
voted much thought to this problem. On
May 12 I sent to the Chairman of the Federal
Maritime Board a proposal which I believe
would both improve enforcement of the act
and remove the present discrimination
against U.S.-flag lines. That in essence is
to encourage the establishment of a private
enforcement agency by the steamship con-
ferences, ordinarily called neutral bodies,
which would have the primary job of en-
forcing the conference agreements against
rebates and other malpractices. They would
be subject to continuous Board supervision,
and the Board would be relieved, where a
neutral body was functioning effectively of
its demoralizing responsibility to enforce an
act in situations where it cannot be enforced.
I believe legislation of this sort would
work, but recognize that there can be differ-
ence of opinion on this score. I don't on the
other hand believe there can be a difference
of opinion as to the need for thoughtful and
imaginative consideration of this problem.
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
 196!`
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX A3891
.famous Eichmann offered to trade one Jew
for one truck, has the civilized world been
confronted with such a heinous barter.
Would it not be far more humanitarian to
exchange food and medical supplies?"
The point is that all the Cuban people,
not just the captured invasion fighters, are
Castro's prisoners. It seems to me that our
objective and the objective of the Organiza-
tion of American States should be to free
the Cuban nation, not just a few of its
people.
Fifteenth Anniversary of the Founding of
the Republic of Italy
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
or
HON. CHARLES McC. MATHIAS, JR.
OF MARYLAND
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 1, 1961
Mr. MATHIAS. Mr. Speaker, we meet
in a building that we call the Capitol
in allusion to the seat of government in
ancient Rome. Our capitol is designed
and built according to the principles of
architecture that were formulated by
Andrea Palladio of Vicenza who was
born in Italy in 1518 and became one of
the greatest architects of all times.
When we pass through the rotunda our
eyes are drawn upward to the work of
Constantino Brumidi, the Italian artist,
commissioned by the Congress to deco-
rate the dome. In this Chamber of the
House of Representatives the medal-
lions bearing the faces of Gaius, Papin-
ian, and Justinian, exponents of the
Roman law look down upon our labors.
With all of these tangible and visible re-
minders of the contributions of Italy
and the Italian people to the culture and
civilization of the world it is trite to re-
view the accomplishments of that great
nation as it celebrates the centenary of
unification and as its approaches the
15th anniversary of the Republic of Italy.
I am, however, moved to speak briefly
upon those intangible benefits that have
been bestowed upon the United States
by her sons and daughters of Italian
origin. The Taliffero family has made
a distinguished record in America since
colonial times. William Paca, a Mary-
land Governor, was one of those who
pledged his life, his fortune, and his
sacred honor by signing the Declaration
of Independence. The role is long and
the debt incalculable.
In the centennial year of the unifica-
tion of Italy and tomorrow, June 2, the
15th anniversary of the founding of the
Republic of Italy, I salute our fellow
Americans who enjoy the great heritage
of our sister republic and send particular
greetings to the 150,000 Marylanders who
join their relatives and friends in Italy
in commemoration of this significant
anniversary.
I particularly extend best wishes to
Samuel A. Culotta, grand venerable of
the Grand Lodge of the State of Mary-
land and the members of the Order of
Sons of Italy in. America, for an inspir-
ing and significant commemoration of
June 2.
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
.OF
HON. JOHN W. DAVIS
OF GEORGIA
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 1, 1961
Mr. JOHN W. DAVIS. Mr. Speaker,
under leave to extend my remarks in
the RECORD, I include the following
editorial from the Chattanooga Times of
Monday, May 29, 1961, which sets forth
and discusses the views of the able and
distinguished new president of the
Medical Association of Georgia, Dr. Fred
H. Simonton, of Chickamauga.
Dr. Simonton's position bespeaks an
original, refreshing, and courageous ap-
proach to the relationship of the medical
profession with the general public. I
wish to commend Dr. Simonton, whom I
have known for many years, and for
whom I have great respect, for his
honesty and forthrightness, and I enter-
tain the hope that his views may have a
wholesome effect upon the profession
which he so ably represents.
A DOCTOR ADVISES DOCTORS
Dr. Fred H. Simonton, of Chickamauga,
Ga., has been installed as president of the
Medical Association of Georgia. A former
health director for Walker, Dade, and Catoosa
Counties, he gave some new slants on what
he considers should be the policies of the
medical association when he delivered his
installation address. He strongly criticized
the public relations system of the medical
profession.
He wants the association to correct in the
public mind some of the opinions held by
some people about the medical profession.
He is orthodox and wishes to retain the
independence of the great profession, but he
says "I want to warn you against the com-
mon practice of name calling. Every pro-
posal for the medical care of the aged and
indigent which we do not like is not neces-
sarily Marxist, nor even undesirably social-
istic. To denounce it as such is to place our
profession in a most. indefensible position
before the public-not much better than
that of the John Birch Society."
Dr. Simonton went on to say: "It is incon-
ceivable to the American public that the
medical profession should oppose any kind
of public medical care for the aged. What
we need to do is to tell the public what
kind of program the profession thinks should
be inaugurated, why we think so and why we
oppose programs which we are against. The
public is not convinced that we have any
interest whatever in any patient who can-
not afford our services."
Of course, though Dr. Simonton did not
mention it, the public would applaud the
medical profession if the people realized how
extensive is the charity work of the pro-
fession. But the profession could not with
dignity blow its own horn.
However, on welfare policies, Dr. Simon-
ton proposed what may be a remedy for the
lack of appreciation of the profession's mo-
tives. He flatly proposes: "If we have a story
to tell, why don't we go ahead and tell it
from the grassroots level, the county medi-
cal societies, instead of from the level of the
American Medical Association?"
The new president of the Medical Associ-
ation of Georgia seems to go along with the
majority of the profession on general policy,
for he says: "Let me in conclusion remind
you that we are in a rapidly changing
world-political, social, economic, and tech-
nological, and we must continue to fight
thess to check the undemocratic and bu-
reaucratic tendencies which accompany the
inauguration of new procedures."
He urges that every society in the associ-
ation start at once to try to implement the
Kerr-Mills medical assistance plan for the
aged and to see that it is operated at maxi-
mum efficiency throughout the State.
To do that, of course, will bring about a
change in the public relations program of
the State association. The inaugural address
by the new president 'of the Medical Associ-
ation of Georgia will be widely discussed, and
many of his ideas will be brought before
the people by the profession itself.
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
OF
HON. STEVEN B. DEROUNIAN
OF NEW YORK
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 1, 1961
Mr. DEROUNIAN. Mr. Speaker, the
significance of the Texas Senate election
results are well discussed in the follow-
ing editorial, which appeared in the Wall
Street Journal on May 31:
MESSAGE FROM TEXAS
Any election result, we suppose, can be
minimized almost to the point of meaning-
lessness by noting the special factors that
influenced it. And certainly there were spe-
cial factors in the Texas Senate election.
This was a contest between a conservative
Democrat and a conservative Republican. In
that situation, many liberal Democrats ap-
parently protest voted by not voting at all
or by voting for the Republican, John Tower.
As Mr. Novak notes on this page this morn-
ing such liberals preferred defeat to victory
with a conservative Democrat. Even so, the
balloting was close.
Still, the fact the political experts in Wash-
ington and elsewhere can't dodge Is that a
Republican did win the seat vacated by Vice
President Johnson, the first such occur-
rence In nearly a century. At the least, the
outcome is a considerable boost to Repub-
lican hopes, for a two-party system in Texas,
and even in other parts of the South. At
the least, it strengthens the conservative Re-
publican hand in what has been an increas-
ingly liberal U.S. Senate.
Surely there are more than local implica-
tions in such a result. In general the GOP
has often suffered from ineffective organiza-
tion, but in Texas the party, though small,
is vigorous with people really willing to work
at politics. That would seem to suggest that
poor organization is not necessarily an in-
curable Republican illness.
Nor can the conservative aspect be com-
pletely dismissed. Maybe conservative is
too vague a term; but unquestionably Mr.
Tower, like his opponent, stands for individ-
ual initiative and self-reliance against the
overpowering expansion of the Central Gov-
ernment. And this straightforward stance
for personal freedom was not without appeal.
It would undoubtedly be stretching things
to say this one election proves an upsurge of
such sentiments nationally. What can be
fairly said, we think, is that a profreedom
mood has long existed in this country but
that the Republican Party has too often
failed to present itself to the voters as the
party of freedom.
So, despite the special factors, we think
there are lessons here that go beyond the
confines of Texas-not least, lessons for Re-
publican politicians.
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
 A3892ppproved For Release (03/llI IA- RECORD 46 APPENDIX 05-1
ONAL AEE JUN 1
Control Will Follow Aid We hope the House can resist the pressure use of mob psychology-either to thwart'the
being exerted in behalf of the bill. if it democratic process or to create martyrs for
FXTT. TTQTl1TT AL1 T11T1 r . r-~.. Can't. 1961 will be a sad year for
HON. GEORGE MEADER the act. That is why American Reds and
fellow travelers are now screaming-just as
of MICHIGAN they have been since last May. They say
Don't Miss "Operation Abolition" they were grievously wronged by "police bru-
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES tality" and "deliberate distortion" In the
Thursday, June 1, 1961 EXTENSION OF REMARKS movie. Actually, they were caught with
Mr. MEADER. Mr. Speaker, under OF In g. This This is the down and
truth, an theird truth treason is sho one
ne
leave to extend my remarks in the REC- HON. thing no Communist can stand.
ORD, I include the following editorial KARL E. MUNDT Says Evans in his article in justification
from the Jackson (Mich.) Citizen Pa- OF SOUTH DAKOTA of keeping the bright light of truth con-
triot of Sunday, May 28, 1961: IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES stantly shining.
CONTROL WILL FOLLOW Am Thursday, June 1, 1961 "The film, an official HUAC document, de
The drive for a full-scale program of Fed- Mr.
sc the , Intermittently si as Coot o n or
eral aid to education has reached a high . MUNDT. Mr. President, a num- inspred, intermittently singling out one or
water mark wih passage of the school ber of chambers of commerce, Legion, another of the dramatis personae as a 'pro-
financing bill by the Senate. and VFW Posts, and enterprising worn- the episode nal Communist agitator.' It sums up
Capitol observers agree that, while the bill ens' organizations have been purchasing the eas a frightening example of how
may face considerable trimming in the and showing the highly popular dOCU- Communist guileless
unist Past Partnty can be copies of the l the
House, the chances of approval of the -prin- mentary film, "Operation Abolition," circulation, yand -7 some 15 of the film are
ciple of Federal aid are better now than at which has been sweeping the country haveseenIt by and large,nviewerspreact
any time in the past. with its objective portrayal of the Tokyo- strongly to what they see; most find the film
Carefully shorn of controversial Issues like riots which the Communists inspired a startling presentation of what can happen
that might inspire resistance from areas with in San Francisco.` These riots were SO
special interests, the bill is moving along, even in America under Communist auspices.
This might be the year, arrogant and destructive that the rioting "The net effect is to alert the viewer to the
We still are fearful, however, of the even- mob virtually took over city hall in San dangers of internal communism, to demon-
tual results. Here we see the beginning of Francisco disrupting court sessions and strate that the House Un-American Activi-
a school system which Is controlled by other official business. ties Committee is doing a needed and often
Washington rather than by the people of Every American should see this film, mittee job, and that enemies of the us in
the States and the local districts. itteo are sometimes less than courteous in
The aid which Michigan may receive under Mr. President, and form his own CoriClu- their opposition to it."
the formula found In the Senate bill would
sions as to whether communism at home Evans' conclusions are above question.
be rather expensive. is a danger we should curtail while Three men most intimately connected with
You, the taxpayers of the State, will be stepping up our defenses against Com- the situation involved testify to the veracity
sending more money to Washington than you munists abroad. I ask unanimous con- of the film: FBI Director J. Edgar Hoover,
will be getting back. While you have shown sent that an editorial entitled "Don't San Francisco Mayor George Christopher,
a willingness to support your own schools, Miss `Operation Abolition"' from the and San Francisco County Sheriff Matthew
you will be called on to help out States which Daily Plainsman, a great newspaper Carberry. So sure are they that they have
have been less willing-and which are at- published in Huron, S. Dak., be printed the u the unending atta attac ks ks from all the sides b despite
tempting to lure away your industrial as- in the Appendix of the m n udin bq quite a
seta with such gimmicks as lower taxes. RECORD. munists and their dupes, including quite a
Why Senators HART and lower
voted There being no objection, the editorial few newspaper and magazine editors who
for the school aid bill is something that can was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, have swallowed the party line along with the
be explained only by assuming that they go as follows: hook and sinker.
along with those who believe that all good DoN'T Miss "OPERATION ABOLITION" Against allthis onslaught of calumny and
Comes from Washington and that the people "Just who's distorting what," asks M. untruth, "Operation Abolition" stands as a
of the States are not to be trusted to handle Stanton Evans, editor of the Indianapolis beacon. Everyone who considers himself a
their own affairs. (Ind.) News in an article In National Re- se this and proud American owes it to himself e It Is Ironic that the Senate acted on the view magazine. The subject: "Operation Christian tfHigh l, Princil James E.
ilm, and owes the James Valley
measure, which will cost the Federal tax- Abolition," the authoritative documentary Lewis, and PTASPresid nt James Hohm a
payers an average of $850 million per year film of the Communist-inspired and COm-
for the next 3 years (and heaven only knows munist-led student riots in San Francisco loud cheer for having the forcefulness and
how much after, that) on the day that the May 12, 13, and 14, 1960. purpose and y to sp of loyalty h won aIn
President recomended new spending pro- We of central South Dakota ourselves will their country to sponsor Its ts showing in
grams for other purposes which, if approved, have the opportunity to see this story Of
Beadle County.
would bring the Federal deficit for the year disgrace of our own Nation, Monday evening,
up to around $3.5 billion. when it will be p.m. In
There Is something almost dishonest in presented at 8 y C riian
this lighthearted attitude toward Federal auditorium of the James Valley Chrstian
deficits. Is it rig ht for the States to take High School. Abel Garner Honored by Congregation
handouts from ashington which are based Last May, the House Un-American Activi-
h red ink Washi while they have red ties Committee held a hearing In the San Zichron Ephraim
on relfinancing, w - -te Francisco city hall. Professional Communist paci c
le do We aps ity to
they will handle only their own so? sc schoolthinkhopt, agitators took the opportunity to promote a EXTENSION OF REMARKS
student demonstration which ended In vio-
As for that matter of eventual control of lence, willful disregard of law, and supreme of
the schools by the Federal Government, we disre*pect to the democratic system. HON. HERBERT ZELENKO
don't buy the line that the money will be Leading this rat pack, among others with
forthcoming for all time with no strings Red connections so tight that they baffle the or NEW YORK
attached, credulity of loyal Americans, was'one Doug- IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
In the first place, a legislative body which las Wachter, a University of California stu-
hands over $2.55 billion (the cost of the 3- dent who was an official delegate to the 1959 Thursday, June 1, 1961
year program) without taking control of how convention of the Communist Party. Mr. ZELENKO. Mr. Speaker, under
it will be spent, is abdicating its respon- While the HUAC was going about Its unanimous consent I take pleasure in
sibility. duties, jeering students maligned the- com- informing - the House of a significant
In the second place, if the States start mittee, attacked police, stormed the com- community event which took place in
abusing the manna which may be forth- mittee chambers, and were finally brought New York City on April 16, 1961. On
coming, there will be demands for control under control only, after patience had long that day the Congregation Zichron
from the top. Let one big scandal develop since worn thin, by the use of fire hoses.
and Congress will start callirfg the shots This is the story "Operation Abolition" Ephraim celebrated its 71st year at a
on how the money is spent. Those who tells how the internationalCommunist con- dinner at the Waldorf Astoria Hotel.
believe otherwise are trying to put sugar on splracy does every thing possible to disrupt The guest of honor was Mr. Abel Garner,
pill that is very bitter to those who be- proceedings which would expose it, to fill one of the civic leaders and leading
lieve that local and State control of educa- the scene of the hearings with demonstra- philanthropists of the city, and a trus-
tion is essential. tors, to agitate them to violence through the tee of the congregation.
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
 Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP6 346R000200170005-1 A3885
lYIATr"RESSIONAT. RECORD - APPE1V
MAY 26, 1961.
The Honorable ADLAI E. STEVENSON,
U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations,
New York, NY.
DEAR MR. AMBASSADOR: I read in the morn-
ing's Washington Post that the governing
council of the U.N. Special Fund had given
preliminary approval to a $3,035,600 agricul-
tural research project for Cuba.
The article went on to point out that the
special fund would furnish over $1,157,600
on a matching basis with the Castro govern-
ment. It also went on to assert that the
United States contributes between 40 and
45 percent of the special fund.
The only indication of objection on the
part of this country was the statement that
there were "reservations by the United
States."
Our Government has made many mistakes
in relation to Cuba and the Castro govern-
ment, but we certainly would compound all
the others by failing to prevent this ridic-
ulous action. Castro has clearly shown that
he is anti-American and he is doing every-
thing possible to establish a Communist
beachhead in this hemisphere. For the
American people to provide him with nearly
a half-million dollars to help make his
regime more palatable to the Cuban people
substantially to the general public welfare.
Direct mail advertising and order solicitation
is the very lifeblood of this industry. It is
unfortunate that some men, even those in
high places, have seen fit to apply such a
phrase to such a well recognized and effec-
tive business producing medium.
In recent years we have heard and read
a great deal about the surplus of agricul-
tural products. Particularly in the dairy
industry, we have been asked by Govern-
ment leaders to do more in the way of self
and rely less on Federal subsidy. I have
pointed out how in the past 20 years we
have created an entirely new market for
cheeses as gifts and have built that market
to over 5 million pounds from ' our State
alone. More than that, we have, by this
method, introduced cheese into the diet of
hundreds of thousands of potential new
regular customers for the product. No other
segment of the dairy industry, or of agri-
culture generally has done so much to
promote the sale and use of its products as
has the gift cheese industry.
A few years ago the senior Senator from
Wisconsin, the Honorable ALEXANDER WILEY,
speaking about a rate bill then before Con-
gress said that postal rates "must be judged
from the standpoint of how well we are
serving the needs of our expanding econ-
omy." We ask now that you judge the re-
quested third-class mail rates on that basis.
It is our earnest hope that you will not en-
act a measure imposing such new and added
costs on small businesses such as those
which make up the Wisconsin Gift Cheese
1Mus' t Funds Go to Ca
HON. JOHN S. INONAGAN
OF CONNECTICUT
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
Thursday, June 1, 1961
Mr. MONAGAN. Mr. Speaker, I call
your attention to a story appearing in
the May 26, 1961, edition of the Wash-
ington Post under the headline "U.N.
Backs Cuban Aid Despite United States."
The story reported that the governing
cpuncil of the U.N. Special Fund has
given preliminary approval to a $3,035,-
600 agricultural research project for
Cuba, despite reservations by the United
States and with some members of the
council reportedly supporting the United
States reservation.
The story in the Post said that Paul
0. Hoffman, American managing direc-
tor of the fund, submitted the project
to the 18 member governing. council
along with 41 other projects calling for
a total budget of $77 million with the
fund to supply $34.6 million. All were
approved.
Under leave to extend my remarks, I
call to the attention of my colleagues the
following letter which I addressed to
the Honorable Adlai E. Stevenson, U.S.
Ambassador to the United Nations, on
May 26, 1961, in which I urged him to
use his influence to block approval of
the allocation of the United Nations
funds to Castro's Cuba, particularly
since 40 to 45 percent of the U.N. Special
Fund is provided by the United States.
My letter to Mr. Stevenson follows:
would be the height of folly.
I am not sure as to the jurisdictional ques-
tions that are involved as between yourself,
as Ambassador, and Mr. Hoffman, as Ameri-
can managing director of the Fund, but I
hope that you will immediately use your in-
fluence to see to it that this project is not
approved.
Sincerely yours.
JOHN S. MONAGAN,
member of Congress.
Interview of Senator Magnuson on CBS
Program "Capitol Cloakroom"
EXTENSION OF REMARKS
HON. JOHN 0. PASTORE
^
signments is Aeronautics and Space Sciences,
and Alan Shepard's rocket ride has made
us all space conscious these days. You are
also Chairman of the Interstate and For-
eign Commerce Committee which, among
other things, follows the activities of the
Federal regulatory agencies.
So we also want your comments on FCC
Commissioner Minow's recent observations
about the networks.
But the overriding news today is the ap-
parent meeting next month in Vienna, when
President Kennedy and Soviet Premier
Khrushchev get together.
So let's begin with this question:
.Should President Kennedy go to a summit
meeting with Mr. Khrushchev?
Senator MAGNUSON. Well, I, of course, be-
lieve, Mr. Von Fremd, that any time we can
sit down with someone, we don't have too
much to lose. We might be able to gain
some of our objectives, particularly if the
conference is prepared, the agenda, where
they will discuss certain important matters
and not be thrown off as to other matters
that maybe cannot be solved, and get into
some kind of a dispute or lack of agreement
and completely miss some things where
there might be an agreement.
President Kennedy is a very persuasive
fellow, and a very likable fellow. And I am
sure that Khrushchev will find a certain
spirit of flexibility and understanding, more
than he suspected he might have gotten
when they set up the other summit confer-
ence, you know, that failed.
Mr. PIERPOINT. Well, Senator MAGNUSON,
is it your understanding that this confer-
ence will be one where there will be a fixed
agenda of certain problems to be solved, or
will they simply talk over a lot of different
world troubles?
Senator MAGNUSON. Well, it's my under-
standing that they will have a pretty fixed
agenda to get right at, and to see if there
can be some solution to-to some of the
problems we now have that are pressing and
are immediate.
I don't suppose there would be any re-
striction or suggestion that they couldn't,
after they got at these problems, to see
where we could, or how it might be worked
out, where they might discuss many a va-
riety of things.
Mr. CHURCH. It seems to me, Senator
MAGNUSON, that the administration appears
to be going toward the idea of just general
discussion at such a summit meeting, and
then letting the specifics be handled by, on
the ambassadorial level.
Senator MAGNUSON. Well, the specifics, of
course, would be the major reason for the
conferen^e. And then they would have
general discussion, but surely there wouldn't
be any reason to go to the ambassadorial
level unless we found out, Mr. Kennedy and
Mr. Khrushchev found out at the original
summit meeting that there was a possi-
bility of the ambassadors or the other level
to arrive at some solution.
So therefore the whole program would
have to be discussed, some of the pressing
problems. I suspect Laos, Cuba, the Geneva
Disarmament Conference, many of those
questions that are immediately pressing-
Vietnam.
Mr. voN FREMD. Well, it seems to me,
Senator MAGNUSON, though, that in most
of these cases, the ones you have men-
tioned-Cuba, Laos, Berlin, and so forth-
that the lines are so tightly drawn now be-
tween the two countries that one side or the
other would have to make some kind of a
break, unless we were to have another stale-
mate.
Senator MAGNUSON. That is correct. But
that break-supposing there was evidence
that somebody might make a break in this
particular case. That would have to come
OF RHODE ISLAND
IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES
Thursday, June 1, 1961
Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, on
May 18, 1961, Senator WARREN G. MAG-
NUSON, chairman of the Senate Com-
merce Committee, was interviewed on the
CBS program "Capitol Cloakroom."
In view of the many significant ob-
servations made by Mr. MAGNUSON on the
subject of broadcasting, I ask unanimous
consent to have the transcript of the
program printed in the Appendix of the
RECORD.
There being no objection, the tran-
script was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
INTERVIEW OF SENATOR MAGNUSON, DEMOCRAT,
OF WASHINGTON, BY CBS NEWS CORRE-
SPONDENTS CHARLES VON FREMD, ROBERT
PIERPOINT, AND WELLS CHURCH ON CBS
PROGRAM "CAPITOL CLOAKROOM"
Mr. VON FREMD. Senator MAGNUSON, should
President Kennedy go to a summit meeting?
Mr. PIERPOINT. Does our space program
need more money?
Mr. CHURCH. Is the broadcasting industry
fulfilling its obligation, Senator MAGNUSON?
Mr. VON FREMD. Senator Magnuson, wel-
come once again to "Capitol Cloakroom."
Your appearance today is particularly timely,
for among your important committee as-
Approved For Release 2004/03/11 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
 A3886 Approved For Relea 04/03/11: CIA-RDP64B00346R000200170005-1
O RESSIONAL RECORD - APPENDIX
between Mr. Kennedy and Mr. Khrushchev,
because the other level wouldn't be author-
ized to make those breaks.
Mr. PrERPOINT. Are you optimistic, Senator,
that there actually will be breaks in some of
these trouble spots?
Senator MAGNUSON. I think there will be
breaks. I think sometimes that, say Mr.
Khrushchev states a position and Mr. Gro-
myko states a position, that sometimes the
details are not quite understood, and there
could be an understanding of details in
these particular cases that- might lead to a
break. And then you might go from one
step to another.
Mr. PIERPOINT. Specifically on Laos, sir,
which of course is the subject of another
conference, the one at Geneva, is it not true
that the administration has, in effect, writ-
ten off Laos, and that the Geneva Confer-
ence is simply a nice way of handing it over
to the Communists?
Senator MAGNUSON, I don't have that im-
pression, that we have written off Laos. I do
have an impression that we have suggested
that there should be some changes maybe
made in Laos to make it closer to being
neutral than might have been suggested by
either Mr. Kennedy in the- first instance, or
Mr. Khrushchev in the first instance.
Mr. PIERPOINT. We do have some hope that
it will be neutral then and not immediately
slide from neutralism into communism.
Senator MAGNUSON. And the two of them
in a summit conference may come to some
agreement to not necessarily discard the one
extreme or the other extreme, but at least
get them to come together toward a more
neutral point in the country.
Mr. VON FREMD. On another world trouble
spot, nearby Cuba, it seemed to me, Senator,
after the ill-fated invasion last month, that
there was a strong body of opinion here on
Capitol Hill, among the legislators, that this
country should use force, if necessary, to get
rid of Castro and get rid of him soon. And
then since then, this atmosphere seems to
have subsided a bit.
Senator XAGNUSON. Well, I think, of
course, for about 48 hours following the so-
called fiasco in Cuba, and the abuse that
was being heaped upon the United States, to
what extent we took part in it, how much
prestige we lost, there was a strong feeling
of resentment up here, and I'm not so sure
that if somebody suggested we go down
there and do something about it in a mili-
tary way, that on that particular day they
might have said, "All right."
But, I do think that Kennedy stopped a
lot of that loosely formed opinion when he
stood up and said, "I'll take the sole blame."
So we, in Congress, said, "Well, the Presi-
dent has assumed the blame, the sole blame;
now we must sit down and let him proceed
in such a way as he sees possible."
Well, now, it seems to me that no decision
can be made regarding Cuba until we get
the Organization of American States, at
least the majority of them, or a substantial
majority-I don't suppose we will ever get
them all-but a substantial opinion on our
side, because it might be just as ill-fated for
us to go in there if all the other-.American
states disagreed with it.
Mr. VON FREMD. Senator MAGNUSON, you
are also a member of the Senate Space
Committee. Certainly Commander Shepard's
flight was a badly needed shot in the arm,
but as President Kennedy himself said, we
have to do more. Rather than just raise the
question of, Do we have adequate appropria-
tions for our space program, I wonder what
you think should be added to it to make it
adequate?
Senator MAGNUSON. Well, Von, of course
I have handled the space appropriation in
the Senate for some time now, and we have
always recommended to the Senate just
about what the experts down there ask for.
In some instances we have prodded them a
little more and said, "Well, now, can't you
proceed faster if we give you more money?"
In many cases they discouraged us giving
them more money because they said, "We
can't proceed any faster for one reason or
another," it may be personnel, it may be the
following through of technological problems
involved that take some time.
Now, it's my understanding that because
of the success of the Mercury and Shepard's
great achievement that they are going to
ask us for a little more to speed up, they
think now they can speed up the time of
putting a man up in space, clear in orbit.
Now, if they do ask us for that, why, I
am sure there would be very little opposi-
tion to the request.
Mr. PIERPOINT. How much do you think
they might ask you for, Senator?
Senator MAGNUSON. Well, I've heard in
terms $60 or $70 million more that could
do the speedup in this particular project.
Mr. VON FREMD. What about some of the
other programs, though, like Centaur, Sa-
turn, looking even further ahead to Pluto
and some of the others. Do you think that
you are going to be asked to step up ap-
propriations substantially in these fields? I
have heard the figure of $600 million around
town.
Senator MAGNUSON. I don't think so, be-
cause they feel that they are proceeding as
rapidly as possible. Now, there may be
some further appropriations asked by the
Defense Department as the Polaris; I think
we can do more on Polaris, so let's use that
as an example.
But in the Space Agency itself, I think
they think they are proceeding as fast as
they can, and that money, extra money,
wouldn't make much difference in the end
result. And Ithink what we always ought
to understand is that we-we have a 10-year
program in the space scientists. We hope
to come out at the end of that time with
the things we want to know. We hope to
come out looking as well as any other coun-
try involved, the Soviets or others, in this
great new space development and space
research. And sometimes it's a question of
where you put the emphasis. There are
so many facets to it.
Now, as we move along, we find that in
one line of space activity, by the expendi-
ture of more money, we can speed up the
program. Maybe that would be completed
by 7 years, but the whole program envisions
a 10-year-a 10-year activity.
Russia, of course, has placed-the Soviets
have placed the emphasis on rockets in
space, not as much as we have on some of
the other aspects of space, the scientific,
pure scientific aspects.
But that's not unusual for Russia, be-
cause I think people also should realize
that way back in 1900, what little scientific
work they were doing in Russia under the
czars was in the rocket field. We were mak-
ing automobiles, combusion engines, we were
going into refrigeration and all these con-
sumer things that make a better way of life.
They weren't doing anything about that.
Even farm implements we were having re-
searched. They weren't doing anything.
But, way back in 1898, there was a major
rocket society of which the Czar of Russia
was the chief sponsor.
Mr. VON FREMD, Senator MAGNUSON-
Senator MAGNUSON. And then after the
Germans came along, in World War ft, and
got into this rocket field. Naturally, they
moved some of their men, some wag said
the other day, I heard that the question
of whether there is a.gap between the So-
viets and Russia and this missile and space
field is just how many Germans we got and
how many they got, because they [laughter]
they made practical application.
Now, Russia may be emphasizing, we don't
know exactly, this particular phase. But we
are hopeful that over the long pull that our
June 1
achievements and our objectives will be just
as sound and just as worthwhile as any
other country or combination in the world.
Mr. VON FREMD. Senator MAGNUSON, you
mentioned at the start of your answer to
that question that on occasion the Congress
had had to prod the Civilian Space Agency.
When you have prodded, their answer has
always been this 10-year plan that you are
referring to?
Senator MAGNUSON. Yes.
Mr. VON FREMD. And they say that it's the
orderly, step-by-step, proper way of doing
things.
But is it going to be good enough just to
have this paper plan over a 10-year period?
Isn't there any way in this entire decade
that we can find some way of leapfrogging
or are we just going to have to resign our-
selves to Russia's continued lead?
Senator MAGNUSON. Oh, I think we can do
some leapfrogging, but we'll have to
change-we'll have to rearrange, you see, the
priorities.
Now, world conditions or situations may
dictate that we rearrange a priority, that
we maybe even slow down one aspect and
beef up another aspect. Now, this is where
the Space Committee, and the committee
I'm on, Appropriations, too, I think can con-
tribute-something to this.
Mr. PIERPOINT. Are you considering some
projects like this?
Senator MAGNUSON. Well, I think we are
going to quiz them quite a bit in great de-
tail on whether or not we Can leapfrog the
man in orbit, push that a little more, be-
cause of the dramatic aspects, the world, the
psychological effect on the rest of the world,
because it is dramatic.
Mr. PIERPOINT. When would you lilke to
see this achieved by the United States?
Senator MAGNUSON. Well, I think if we
can do it this year, we are in good shape.
And if we can then do more about it and get
the one to the noon, which is also another
dramatic thing, I think it will all be helpful
and then maybe we can proceed in an or-
derly fashion on our missile problem because
as yet the relative military value of all the
missiles we have, the great collection of mis-
siles in some cases hasn't been exactly
proven, whether one is better than the other,
whether we should abandon one or go ahead,
we have those constant arguments. And the
military often changes their mind. They
might be halfway in a program and decide
well here is something new, something bet-
ter, and this is the sort of guidance that we
as armchair generals, as it were, could give
them within the framework of what we can
spend.
Mr. VON FREMD. When you sit there in the
committee room and you hear all these mil-
itary officials come up and testify about this
program and that program and the other
program, do you sometimes get the feeling
that there are too many programs being put
forward, that it might be better to empha-
size, say, half a dozen major programs rather
than going off in all directions?
Senator MAGNUSON. Well, there seems to be
a lot of them, when you sit there and listen
to them. I mean it gets a little confusing.
But I do think that there has been sug-
gestions that we consolidate the efforts or
the thinking on maybe four or five rather
than all of us-a great, a great spread of
this missile program. I agree with you,
there is some-but sometimes a lay member
who tries to look at it objectively can offer
some suggestions in this space race that we
have and missile race that are better than
the scientists who is working on them be-
cause he gets so involved in what he is doing
he sometimes loses sight of the overall.
Mr. PIERPoINT. Senator MAGNUSON, are you
going to continue to support this very ex-
pensive antimissile missile program, the
Nike-Zeus program?
Approved For Release 2004/03/11: CIA-R1DP64B00346R00020017000511