ISSUES RELATING TO THE CONTRIBUTIONS OF ORR TO A REPORT OF THE JOINT ECONOMIC COMMITTEE OF THE CONGRESS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP70B00338R000200160022-5
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: S
• Document Page Count: 4
• Document Creation Date: December 15, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 19, 2004
• Sequence Number: 22
• Publication Date: June 16, 1966
• Content Type: MEMO

Approved For Release 2004/05/05 : i -RD 70B00338R000200160022-5
16 June 1966
1 MORANDUM FOR: Deputy Director for Intelligence
ATTENTION : Assistant Deputy Director for Intelligence
SUBJECT : Issues Relating to the Contributions of ORR to
a Report of the Joint Economic Committee of
the Congress
REFERENCE . Memorandum to the DDI from D/ORR, Same Subject,
Dated 20 May 1966
1. The papers referred to in the reference memorandum have
been reviewed in galley proof and are ready for final submission
to the staff of the Joint Economic Committee. If we were to pro-
ceed as we did when similar contributions were made in 1962, the
corrected proofs would be returned to the JEC for final publica-
tion identifying the authors by name, but without any indication
of their Agency affiliation. However, in view of the present
concern of the Director with respect to the question of attribution,
you probably wish to call this matter to the attention of the DDCI
or the Executive Director-Comptroller. The issues involved are as
follows:
a. The General Counsel, in a letter to the Chairman
of the JEC, 30 December 1965, specifically requested that
CIA not be identified as the source of the information
furnished the Joint Committee. In a sense, this was
academic in that very few of the authors, and none of
those working for the Government, were identified with
their parent organization in the 1962 report, nor was it
planned that they would be identified in the forthcoming
publication. However, the staff of the JEC is considering;
listing the agencies whose employees have contributed.
This raises the question of whether this is acceptable to
us.
b. If CIA is mentioned in the Foreword (JEC letter of
transmittal), there will be considerable curiosity as to
which of the authors are CIA employees. This could well
present the JEC staff with inquiries from the press and
other sources. It is also possible that certain articles
Approved For Release 2004/05/05 : CIA-RDP70BOO
 Approved For Release 2004/05/0~CIArF DP70B00338R000200160022-5
would stimulate enough interest to prompt such inquiries
in any case. Therefore, the question arises as to what
instructions we should give the JEC with respect to the
linking of ORP, authors with CIA.
C. I am informed by
that a s ec 1 question has arisen with res ect to
ticle entitled
I The JEC staff is concern that
piece is provocative and will arouse considerable interest,
thereby raising the question as to )I place of business.
The JEC is also aware of Fulbright s attitude on related
matters such as the Carver article and wanted to alert
the Agency to a possible problem on the piece.
This situation requires that we consider not only the
question of the identification of as a CIA
employee, but also the extent to which the material and
conclusions presented by individual authors in this publi-
cation represent an Agency view. Speaking to the foregoing
questions seriatim, I would recommend the following:
(1) I would be inclined to accede to the
suggestion of the JEC staff that CIA be listed in
the Foreword as an Agency cooperating in this
enterprise. I recommend this in the context of
what I understand to be the Agency's new policy
with respect to attribution. While it is not
certain, I think the odds are that over the
long-run, the quality of professional talent and
research output in the DDI will be better under-
stood outside of Government and will not only
improve the image of the Agency, but will help
us on a number of specific problems, including
recruiting. If this recommendation is accepted,
you should understand that there may well be
short-run problems. The citation of CIA as an
Agency whose employees have contributed to the
JFC collection is likely to raise questions as to
which of these employees are CIA and inevitably
will bring bad publicity with the good, as well
as questions and inquiries.
(2) I recommend that we give the Joint Economic
Committee staff the authority to reveal the affilia-
tion of ORR authors with the Agency in response to
legitimate inquiries. I would do this with the
Approved For Release 2004/05/05 CIA-RDP70B00338R000200160022-5
 25X1 Approved For Release 2004/05/05 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000200160022-5
Approved For Release 2004/05/05 : CIA-RDP70B00338R000200160022-5
 Approved For Release 2004/05/0.( i4-sR)P70B00338R000200160022-5
the best pieces I have seen on the subject; it is
provocative, and there are a couple of spots where
there is colorful language, but I believe the
article can only do us credit. He has discussed
his thesis in the past with certain scholars
specializing in the Soviet economy, including 0
at Harvard, and they accept the merits of
his approach. This does raise the question, however,
as to whether authors of these articles are speaking
as responsible analysts or whether they are repre-
senting official coordinated Agency positions. I
have discussed this with and he believes
the JEC staff understands that it is the former.
However, to clarify this point, I have suggested to
that he urge the JEC staff to make this clear
In summary, these affirmative recommendations are made in the
light of anticipated long-term benefits, but are not without
certain short-run complications.
WILLIAM N. MORELL, JR.
Director
Research and Reports
25X1
25X1
25X1
Approved For Release 2004/05/05 : O4-RDP'10B00338R000200160022-5