CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 36
• Document Creation Date: November 17, 2016
• Document Release Date: July 27, 2000
• Sequence Number: 14
• Publication Date: January 1, 1949
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949
which I
title VI
a 60-da
I think
reasonabl
from the V
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 9317
11 continues for 60 days title I charged with the duty of executing this tion bill, to guard against any fears that
VI. about which we have had 7n... I.,~
assurance that the conference the reason .it-was
them positi
dent will si
ing title I
days.
it left the H
one respect.
ifference, because I gentleman yield?
disloyal to his coun- Mr. PATMAN. I
d title VI for at least 60 laborers working co
structinn of dams
nd electric power and everybody in the
e-War Department covered. You do not
bad now. T1
three of us m
House on this de did not sign the con-
Mr. Speaker, it app
ference report
minutes to th
[Mr. JENSEN].
Mr. Speaker, the gen-
rest of us must figh
tleman from Mi
higan has made some
weapons we have agal
reference to the
the amendment
was adopted by a
this House when
e bill was before the
stroyers.
f June.
Mr. SPENCE. Mr
Every appropri
.
an from Texas
House has passed
the Congress and
eaker, the gen-
ision as my amend-
hamper and interfere w h private busi-
ment to the housin
the language which
11 appropriation
n,. of Congress, 8
vers everything
ay it should be
ary public and
you can sell 50
Mr. JENSEN. That
with me.
thorities could not operate, t
interfere with the local housi
sume that they are just as patrio
I yield the
inutes.
gentleman
sing and
people
ust as-
c as we
woriiea 1 day The gentleman from Michiga
?lut it would WOLCOTT] in his statement that
handling the pitulated and brought hark the
law as we ordinarily do ea
propriations bills.
opportunity to Mr. JENSEN. I would
er the law nor death to have them do so.
this affidavit titles I and VI expired June 30, 1
e tickled to did contain such provision, and, in ad
tion, an authorization of $500,000,0
this small more under title II. They were out
fissions are money. So the bill not nnlu eaten
language restricting the provi ions of the
amendment to affect only the
employees of the Housing
Finance Agency and the Depa tment of
Agriculture.
an affidavit that they were
uuuar s
rojects.
Local people will have-Charge-61
it, and
we must assume that they are ho
t
d
Now I ask the. chairman of e com-
es
patriotic American citizens and
an
mittee, the gentleman from
em-
being
much opposed to them as any perso
No
a haven for left wingers and radio
every shade from pink to deep red,
sition to pinks and Reds in this co
try.
ich
Furthermore, if the gentleman
ap-
ment would apply not only to those p
ple who are permanently employed
guards can be placed on each approp
gnat Is a substantial change, and very
much in favor of the House.
Mr. WOLCOTT. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
think if you will read my remarks you
to indicate that the conference was ex-
plained many differences between the
Mr. PATMAN. I am glad to have the
understand it that way.
I know we doubled the amount for
rural housing, that is substantially, a
ise.
ould be O. K.
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384ROO1000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
9318 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
100-percent increase. We granted a of said Sadako Tatcagi, the Attorney General
$500,000,000 increase in title II. We is authorized and , irected to record the law-
f,,l admission for n rmanent residence of said
-
I think these are all substantial changes. Into the United States, upon the payment
I hope that the conference report is by her of the req fired fees and head tax."
agreed to. The amendme t was agreed to.
Mr. SPENCE Mr. Speaker, I yield 1
minute to the g ntleman from New York A motion to re onsider was laid on the
I Mr. JAVITS 1. table.
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. Speaker, the con-
troversy MINOR
on the gnference report is the Mr. WALTER. Mr. Speaker, I ask
same as the cont o rsy on the bill; thgse unanimous cone t to take from the
who were agains tY bill are against the Speaker's desk i;h bill (H. R. 3127) to
conference repo fo , ne reason or an-; authorize the aim scion into the United
other, and those ho %eforthebillare States of Jacob ross, a minor, with
publicans, including the provisi kkoot`
the extension anti added fin.anFHA, which we th:k are very :im
tained in this bill, but which was first
90 the
provided for in thebill -4 ~
similar bills introdigced by 22 Democr
Members.
I hope those whp voted for the bill
will vote for the cciiference :report and
that it will be adopt d.
Mr. SPENCE. M Speaker, we have.
conference report.
The previous quest 7n was ordere
The conference report was agrees/to.
A motion to reconsiil,er was laid ory the
table.
SADAKO TJKAGI
Mr. WALTER. Mrj Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent t take from the
Speaker's table the bill (H. R. 823) for
the relief of Sadako Takagi, with a Sen-
ate amendment and con;ur in the Senate
amendment.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The Clerk read the Serrate amendment,
as follows: b;
Strike out all after the enacting clause and
insert: "That the provisions of the immi-
gration laws relating to the exclusion of aliens
inadmissible because of rah shall not here-
after apply to Sadako Talgi, the Japanese
fiancee of Lt. William M. 14arutani, of Chi-
cago, Ill., presently a tubetcular patient at
the Veterans' Adminie,tra'tlon Hospital in
Waukesha, Wis., and a retired United States
Army officer of World War If and that Sadako
Takagi may be eligible for .n visa as a non-
immigrant temporary visit4 for a period of
3 months: Provided, That the administrative
authorities find that the said Sadako Takagi
is coming to the United States with a bona
fide intention of being matried to said Lt.
William M. Marutani, and that she is found
otherwise admissible under he immigration
laws. In the event that the marriage be-
tween the above-named parties does not occur
within 3 months after the entry of said
Sadako Takagi, she shall be required to de-
part from the United States and, upon failure
to do so shall be deported in accordance with
the provisions of sections 19'and 20 of the
Immigration Act of February 5, 1917 (U. S. C.,
title 8, sees. 155 and 1b6), In the event the
marriage between the above-named parties
shall occur within 3 months after the entry
the House {'j The Clerk r'ead` the Senate amend-
the enacting clause and
purposes of the immi-
e SP, AI`ER. Is there objection to
of the gentleman from
enate amendment was con-
OF HEADS AND ASSISTANT HEADS OF
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS AND INDE-
PENDENT AGENCIES
Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, I call up
House Resolution 274 and ask for Its
immediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as
follows :
Resolved, That immediately upon the
adoption of this resolution it shall be in
order to move that the House resolve itself
into the Committee of the Whole House on
the State of the Union for the consideration
of the bill (H. R. 1689) to increase rates of
compensation of the heads and assistant
heads of executive departments and inde-
pendent agencies. That after general de-
bate, which shall be confined to the bill and
continue not to exceed 1 hour, to be equally
divided and controlled by the chairman and
ranking minority member of the committee
on Post Office and Civil Service, the bill shall
be read for amendment under the 5-minute
rule. At the conclusion of the considera-
th bill for amendment the Com-
f
for this legislation so that, he might keep
some men who are ready to resign and
who are needed in the most important
positions of our Government. As a mat-
ter of fact, some very able men have al-
ready resigned.
Originally the bill included an increase
for employees of the District of Colum-
bia and the Foreign Service, but these
two categories have been taken care of
by the House previously. This bill will
provide an increase In salaries amount-
ing to $1,237,000. I have the list of the
increases provided for in the original
bill, and I have also the list of the re-
ductions that have been made by the
committee that reported this bill. I am
of the opinion that the committee has
done a splendid job. They have re-
duced many of the proposed increases
from $25,000 to $20,000; some increases
have been reduced by $5,000, by $3,000,
and others by $2,000. ' I think they had
in mind to try to hold down expenditures
to the utmost.
In view of the very earnest and care-
ful consideration that has been given
to this bill and the reductions that have
been made by the committee in the pro-
posed increases provided and asked for
in the original bill, I do not think that
we can do any better, as I said before.
Mr. Speaker, our Government is the
greatest organization in the world. It is
obliged to legislate for approximately
150,000,000 people, and our Government
transacted $142,000,000,000 worth of busi-
ness last year. Its President and its di-
rectors and those in charge of govern-
mental affairs in safeguarding and pro-
tecting the country's interests as well as
those of its people, are obliged to cope
daily with the most astute -and capable
representatives of our great industrial
and financial organizations. The Presi-
dent, as head of this tremendous organ-
ization, must by necessity have able and
capable men to aid him in carrying out
his duties and responsibilities.
Mr. Speaker, this bill provides for a
much-needed increase in the salaries of
the President's aids and those upon whom
he relies and trusts for the vast amount
of important duties and functions that
transpire daily. They are his household.
The increases provided for in this bill
and many others have been recommend-
ed by the Hoover Commission, which en-
gaged over 200 experts to investigate and
recommend the ways and means for
a
tnon o
mittee shall rise and report the bill to the bringing about economy in our great
House with such amendments as may have Government. This bill does not go as far
been adopted, and the previous question as the Hoover Commissoin report sug-
shall be considered as ordered on the bill gests, which Commission, incidentally,
and amendments thereto to final passage has spent almost $2,000,000 in its re-
without ti on on to Intervening motion except one mo- search and investigations. This bill pro-
vides recommit. for 244 increases. The gentleman
Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, I yield from?Kansas [Mr. REES], former chair-
myself such time as I desire. man of the Committee on Post Office and
Mr. Speaker, this resolution makes in Civil Service, feels that there should be
order consideration of the bill (H. R. at least 60 more, and I say at least 100
1639) which increases the rates of com- additional increases, for I feel that many
pensation of the heads and assistant of those not included but that should be,
heads of executive departments and in- are those that do the hardest and most
dependent agencies. It provides for 1 Important work. This also applies to
hour general debate. those attorneys employed by the Depart-
Mr. Speaker, I take it for granted ment of Justice, whose salaries should be
that most of the Members are familiar increased by virtue of the fact that they
with the bill and its purpose. The Pres- are obliged to continuously cope with the
ident has requested, urged, and pleaded most astute and able corporation law-
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 9319
yers in the country, many of whom re- I think their opposition is purely politi- I intensely dislike calling your atten-
ceive five and six times as great a salary cal because I do not feel that we are in tion to the fact that in 1947, when the
as does the Government attorney, any danger of a recession. As I have private interests attempted to kill the
I fully 'appreciate that the Govern- maintained, we are producing more than housing bill, rent-control bill, and labor
ment cannot compete with private in- we ever did in peacetime, and this, not, bills, big industry started to lay off men
dustry in that they cannot compensate withstanding the hue and cry of unem- in many instances, and started to create
their employees as much as private in- ployment
.
As
a m
a
tt
er o
f f
act
we had
,
, a recession and the resultant unemploy-
dustry can afford to pay. It is indeed un- in June 1949, 59,619,000 people employed ment. Naturally, the Wall Street stock
fortunate that many of these industries in this country, nearly 60,000,000. All speculators and manipulators have then
have and are continuously hiring many this as against 61,615,000 employed in and are taking advantage of It now in an
of our Government officials at two and June of 1948, or a drop of less than effort to hammer down the price of stock
three times the. salary that the Govern- 2,000,000, and this is one-half the aver- and even bonds. But that is all specula-
ment is paying them. I regret it is pos- age unemployment figures even in times tion and does not truly reflect the actual
sible for industry to deprive the Gov- of the greatest employment. We will business condition of our country, be-
ernment of many experienced men that always have that number and a greater cause these gentlemen are purely and
we have, had from time to time, espe- number of unemployed due to a variety solely gamblers and almost 95 percent of
cially in the Department of Justice and of conditions, such as illness, seasonal these transactions are speculative; less
the Bureau of Internal. Revenue. I have shifts, and the like. Other unemploy- than 10 percent are legitimate sales.
frequently criticized the practice of pri- ment will be brought about and has been . I promised that I would insert in the
vate industry in taking from the Govern- brought about as a result of strikes under R
EcoRn a statement showing the various
ment its most ex
eri
n
th
ed
T
ft
H
p
e
c
men, for the
purpose of obtaining information. Fre-
quently these men have information and
experience, as well as knowledge, which
private industry feels would be beneficial
to them.
I fully realize, Mr. Speaker, that some
Members feel that the salaries of many
other worthy individuals should be in-
creased, notwithstanding this bill, that
is, our district court judges, Congress-
men, and Senators. Congress, as you
all know, increased its salary a few years
ago and made allowances for additional
clerk hire.
In this bill, for example, we Increased
the salaries of the Federal Trade Com-
missioners, who for years received only
$10,000 per year, and the President was
obliged to plead with these commission-
ers to remain in the service of their
country, because their salaries have not
been Increased since' 1914, or 35 years.
There are many others whose salaries
have not been increased in 35 years, and
others in 24 years, whose salaries are
being increased in this bill, and rightly
so. Therefore, I feel that this long-
delayed and present increase Is more
than justifiable.
The only objection that will be made,
and I know it will be made by the gen-
fl-_ f
rom
h
O
io [Mr. BROWN]
is that
,
we wait until all the other Hoover Com-
mission recommendations are adopted.
In answer thereto, I will state that some
of their recommendations have been ap-
proved, but unfortunately they are con-
ditional and will require final approval by
the House and no one can tell if such
e
a
-
artley Act-which these very
gentlemen claimed would eliminate increases in this bill which I have pre-
strikes. pared and which I now insert. As I have
Our business and commerce is in splen- stated, the Committee on Post Office and
did shape. Surely we have forced down" Civil Service has brought about the re-
some of the unjustifiably high prices taiainene n of many increases that were con-
which some of the industrial leaders d in the original bill.
naturally dislike, but upon examining COMPARISONTOF SALARY CLASSIFICATIONS IN THE
living are justifiable and warranted.
I have before me figures showing the
profits of 15 of the 25 largest corporations
in America for the first quarter of 1949,
and the comparative figures for the first
quarter of 1948 as taken from Moody's
Investor's Service Report. They cer-
tainly indicate a healthy increase over
1948.
First quar
ter, 1949
First gnar?
ter, 1948
General Motors Corp____.._..
$135 763,
338
$06
491
412
United states stool ______._....
49, 928,
670
,
,
27
857
341
T. I. du Pont de Ncmours....,
43, 581,
325
,
,
30,195371
Socony Vacuum Oil Co.......
126 , 000,
000
133* 000
000
Texas Co--?---------
28, 870,
111
,
27, 974, 839
26, 973,
000
38, 517, 000
Electric i
26, 702,
978
25
389
149
irornta :
Std Oil
37, 389;
082
,
,
37
904
106
Bethlehem Steel Co-
_
33, 129,
574
,
,
15
490
331
Cities Service Co_____
_________
18, 510,
903
,
,
19
976
576
Union Carbide & Carbon
co_
p
24, 629,
410
,
,
23
010
722
P.incla
ir
1 15000,
000
,
,
121
000
000
Westinghouse Electric Co.....
10, 866,
921
,
,
780
13:135
American Tobacco Cc ---------
10, 648,
000
:
7,495,000
I Estimated,
I also have some figures that I obtained.
from the Coordinator of Information of
the House of Representatives which in-
dicate further that a recession is not
around the corner:
action will take place before we adjourn. Cash dividend payments first quarter 1949
Consequently, I feel that Mr. BROWN'S compared with same period 1948
viewpoint is not justified, especially in Cash dividend payments: .
view of the fact that this bill had been First quarter, 1948------ $1, 284, 000, 000
introduced 6 months ago and the appli- First quarter, 1949 ------ 1,384, 000, 000
cation for a rule was made last April. I There was a net increase of 8 percent
withheld action on the rule in order to in dividends paid in 1949 over 1948.
obtain the opinion of the American The net income of 52 corporations en-
people. In this regard, I received letters gaged in retail trade for the fiscal year
from a great many people all over the ending in the first quarter of 1949 was
United States who approved this legisla- $360,000,000.
tion, and approximately 2 percent from For the same period in 1948 the net
people who were opposed to it. Conse- income was $306,000,000.
quently, I have called the rule up now for The increase in net Income in 1949 over
your consideration and action on the bill. 1948 was 17.4 percent for these 52 cor-
There are some other gentlemen who porations.
feel that because of economic conditions The total assets of these same corpora-
they oppose this bill. It seems to me, tions increased in the first quarter of
however, that most of these people are 1949 to $3,064,000,000 from $2,752,000,000
opposing this bill for the purpose of in the same period in 1948.
stressing the so-called business recession. This is an increase of 11.4 percent.
pensation provided for the heads of ex-
ecutive departments and the Secretary
of Defense, $25,000 per year.
Section 2: Executives listed under this
section in the original bill were to receive
$22,500 per year. Under the committee
bill they receive $20,000.
Section 105 amended. The following
changes were made in the pay of execu-
tives listed under this section:
Two White House secretaries reduced
from $22,500 to $20,000.
Three White House secretaries reduced
from $20,000 to $18,000.
Seven White House secretaries reduced
from $17,500 to $16,000.
Section 3: The executives listed under
this section in the original bill were to
receive $20,000. The committee bill re-
duced this to $18,000.
One exception: The original bill pro-
vided $22,500 for the chairman of the
Atomic Energy Commission. The com-
mittee bill provides $18,000.
Another group of executives listed un-
der this section in the original bill were
to receive $20,000. The committee bill
reduced these to $17,500.
Section 4: The executives listed under
this section in the original bill were to
receive $17,500. The committee bill re-
duces them to $16,000.
There are two exceptions in this sec-
tion. The original bill provided $20,000
for the Board of Governors, Federal Re-
serve, and for members of the Atomic
Energy Commission. The committee bill
reduces these to $16,000.
Section 5: ? The executives listed un-
der this section in the original bill were
to receive $17,500. Under the committee
bill they will receive $15,000.
The committee bill adds the following
executives who were not included in the
original bill, to receive $15,000: Commis-
sioner of Internal Revenue; Director,
Bureau of Prisons; Director, Federal Bu-
reau of Investigation; Commissioner of
Immigration; Director, Rural Electrical
Administration; Social Security Board;
Reclamation Commissioner; Soil Con-
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 9320
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JuLY 8
Nervation Commissioner; collector of
customs; United States Forester; three
special assistants to Secretary of Defense.
Mr. Speaker, I am hopeful that this
rule will be passed unanimously for it
provides for much-needed legislation as
I said before-legislation that is pointed
in the right direction.
(Mr. BROWN of Ohio asked and was
given permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker,
I yield myself such time as I may desire.
Mr. Speaker, at the present moment
I find myself in one'of the most difficult
positions that I have experienced since
I have been a Member of this House. So
I hope I may have as much of your at-
tention as possible under the rather un-
satisfactory conditions which prevail here
in this temporary Chamber.
As many of you know, I was the author
of the legislation which created the so-
called Hoover Commission, and have
served as a member of that Commission
for the past 2 years, and up to the termi-
nation of that Commission last month.
This legislation comes here, ][ presume,
with the recommendation of the Presi-
dent, that it be enacaed into law. In
many ways it is, in substance at least,
in line with the general recommenda-
tions of the Hoover Commission.
In the very beginning I should like to
point out that the Commission did not
make any definite recommendation as
to the amounts of percentage of increases
which should be grant.ad to various high-
ranking officials in the executive branch
of the Government. However, the Com-
mission has pointed out, in its report,
that the salaries of the lower grades of
employees under the civil service have
increased from 43 to 56 percent, while
the salaries of those in the highest
grades under civil service have been in-
creased by but 15 percent.
Then, after the Commission recom-
mended that a careful study of the pay
schedule for higher Government officials
be made, it went ahead to say, and I
quote:
Similar action is considered essential for
other top positions throughout all branches
of the Government. Salaries for Cabinet
officers have not, for example, been changed
since 1925.
To continue to quote from the, Hoover
Commission recommendation:
This is indefensible. Government can
never compete on a dollar-for-dollar basis
with private industry for persons for its top
positions. It can and should, however, treat
such persons in an equitable manner. This
it is not now doing.
or is not justified. Of course, I must con-
tend it is extremely difficult for the Con-
gress, or for anyone else, to attempt to
say what a Cabinet officer should receive
in the way of compensation, or what
salary some other important official in
the executive branch of the Government
should receive. We had recommended to
us, as a Commission, a suggested pay
schedule for different public officials.
'Under the suggested pay schedule, it was
recommended the President should have
an annual salary of $150,000, Vice Presi-
dent $50,000, Justices of the Supreme
Court; $35,000, the Speaker of the House
$25,000, Senators and Representatives-
if you are interested-$20,000, heads of
executive departments, $25,000-which
Under Sec-
s
b
-
er
means the Cabinet mem
retaries $20,000, Assistant Secretaries acted, the Reorganization Act of 1949.
$17,500, heads of independent agencies cannot possibly become effective under
$17,500, and top career employees under 60 days, or before August 19, unless the
the classified service $15,000. Congress should enact a joint resolution
The Hoover Commission came to the approving such plans.
conclusion, after a great deal of con- We have a number of bills now pend-
sideration and deliberation, that it ing before the Congress to carry out, or
should not recommend to the Congress to thput e into Hoover effect, the Commission. recommendations
Jambes
just what executive officials should have
their pay increased or by how much. of the Committee on Rules, I had pro-
As you can see, this pending bill would Posed that we not bring out this bill un-
increase compensation of certain officials til we had first had the time and the op-
by as much as '75 percent, so that a great portunity to pass upon the President's
many of them would be paid consider- reorganization plans, as he submitted
ably more than Members of the House or them, and to otherwise bring about
Senate, and in many instances much greater economy and efficiency in the ex-
higher pay than the judicial officers of ecutive branch of the Government; or
the Government. at least until we have had an opportunity
to enact and send to the President legis-
But as I said a moment ago, no one lation such as, for instance, the bill for
can tell what pay any public official is the reorganization of the Military Estab-
really worth. I have known Cabinet lishment, now before the Armed Serv-
officials who, in my opinion, were worth ices Committee, which would save a bil-
50, 100, or even a thousand times as lion or $1,500,000,000 a year, follow-
much to the Government as the salary ing which we could, in good conscience,
they were receiving. I have known other point out to our constituents and the
Cabinet officials where, in my opinion, folks back home that one of the first
the Government would have been better steps we had taken was to put into effect
off to have paid $100,000 or so to have the recommendations of the Hoover
them resign their positions and go home. Commission which will bring about
it has been my contention, and I be- greater efficiencies and economies in the
lieve it was the conviction of the Com- Government, and therefore, we feel that
mission, I believe, that about the best the the men who will be responsible for mak-
Congress can do is to try to fix a pay ing these new reorganization plans ef-
schedule which will permit a Cabinet fective and workable are entitled to fair
member, or any other high official of the compensation.
executive branch of the Government, to Just one other thought. We have cov-
be self-supporting while in office; so it ered at least a great part of the water-
would not be :necessary for them to bor- front in this legislation. But not all
row money; so that they could live in a officials of the executive branch are cov-
decent way oh their salaries. In other ered. While I think the committee has
words, it should not be necessary or es- done a pretty fair job, I believe there are
,sential for a person to be either a rich some instances where perhaps some offi-
man or a crook in order to afford to hold cials have been given larger salaries than
some of these positions. deserved and have missed a few officials
I think the committee, and properly so, who are entitled to consideration. But
has fixed the salary schedule for Cabinet remember one other thing. Until the
members at $25,000. I have no objection President and the Congress have had an
to that. My whole criticism of this leg- opportunity to study and to put into
islation, and I do have criticism of it, effect the reorganization plans as recom-
is its timing. The Hoover Commission mended by the Hoover Commission,' we
did recommend an adjustment of the are not at all certain just what many of
salaries of higher officials in the execu- these officials will have to do, or what
tive branch of the Government. But their responsibilities will be. In fact,
the Hoover Commission also made a we will not know whether some of them
great many other recommendations. In will even be in office. It seems to me
fact, they made 317' other recommenda- it is only good, sound common sense to
tions as to how greater efficiency and have postponed consideration of this leg-
economy can be obtained in the opera- islation until we first had an opportunity
tion of the Federal Government, insofar to put into effect the economies and effi-
as the executive branch is concerned. ciences which the Commission proposed
Then in another recommendation the
Hoover Commission discusses the career
employees, and in recommendation No.
11, on Personnel Management, the Com-
mission says:
Congress should raise the present salary
ceiling of $10,330 for career employees. At
the same time it should increase legislative,
judicial, and executive salaries at the level of
assistant secretary, or its equivalent, and
above.
So I am not now contending that some
increase in compensation for the benefit
of the higher officials of the executive
branch of the Government is not needed
I am quite fearful that this bill is not
timed properly. I am terribly concerned
that if the first, or almost the first, of the
Hoover Commission recommendations to
be made effective is a law to increase saI-
aries, that the charge may be made that
the only interest of either the adminis-
tration or the Congress has in the Hoo-
ver Commission recommendations is in
those particular recommendations which
would increase the cost of Government
rather than decrease it.
The President has recommended this
bill. He has acted under his proper
rights and powers. But the President
has also recommended a great many oth-
er measures to us. He has sent to the
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
and which the President suggested in his
reorganization plans. Certainly the
President, who has sent us his reorgan-
ization plans, is just as desirous of hav-
ing them approved by the Congress as
he is in having this one bill enacted.
In other words, I think we are consider-
ing this bill at the wrong time. The
President, in recommending passage of
this legislation, I am sure, had in mind
that he also wanted these other reor-
ganization plans and these other Com-
mission recommendations made effec-
tive, so as to obtain the economy and
efficiency in the Government that we
desire.
Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I yield.
Mr. McCORMACK. I think my friend
will admit that the President recom-
mended increases in the executive branch
before the Hoover report was made in
its final report.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Yes; that is
correct.
Mr. McCORMACK. So I think it is
fair to say that the President probably
knew in advance what the Hoover Com-
mission recommendations would be, and
I think it is safe to say that he did this
independent of it.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. No; I do not
think so.
Mr. McCORMACK. Well, in any
event, it.was made before the final report
was made.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Yes.
Mr. McCORMACK. Furthermore, I
think the gentleman will admit-and I
want to compliment him for the excel-
lent work he did on the Commission, and
Mr. Carter. Manasco, for the way they
represented with dignity and strength
the House of Representatives. I think
the gentleman will admit that we passed
the General Property Administrative Act,
which of course is one of the recommen-
dations of the Hoover Commission.
In relation to the seven reorganization
plans, what the gentleman said in rela-
tion to affirmative action by the Con-
gress before 60 days, carries great weight.
I can assure the gentleman that if the
situation arises where that can be accom-
plished, I would be very interested in
having it done, particularly if that would
expedite adjournment of Congress.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I had that in
mind, I might add. I thank the gentle-
man very much.
Now, I want to bring out one other
thought. We now, have a number of
bills before the Congress to increase the
pay of numerous other Government
workers. The pressure for these in-
creases has been pretty strong. Such
employees have received pay increases in
the past while many individuals covered
by particular legislation have received
no pay increases. But just the minute
that this pending bill is enacted into law
the pressure and the demand for the in-
crease of pay for other Government
workers is going to increase tremen-
dously. At this moment we are faced
with a great steel strike. There are
many other demands for increased pay
in industry. So I am still wondering,
No. 122-8
and still asking the question-and it is
a question each Member of this Congress
will have to answer for himself-
whether or not this is the proper time to
.take this particular salary-increase ac-
tion. We all want to see these top-rank-
ing officials treated fairly. Perhaps they
should have some assurance given to
them that they are to receive fair con-
sideration at the hands of the Congress.
But I doubt the wisdom of passing this
bill before we are able to point out to the
American people the many savings we
have made through putting into cff2ct
the President's reorganization plans and
the recommendations of the Hoover
Commission.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I yield.
~Mr. CASE of South Dakota. I anpre-
ciate the entleman's ieldin because I
want to call t e attention of the Members
t`o-t1?e lac": Ta t7+ic biji does sa2xi
grange things: The Director. of .the Fad-
e`raT -Sureau of Investigation and _ the_
ss si ~o N the Central Intelligence
Agency today each receive x4,006 Vita-
bill proposes to give the Dire r of? Cen-
,gL
tral Intelligence an increase from $14,000
o teas the Director oft e-
I+'BI`is raised from $14,00 to only $15,000.
At ba same time h uts the
Director the Administr vg Office of
the United States Courts up t611", 00,
an ncrease from his present salary of
$I0 3 r t1Ta t uts i pirec r of the
A m nis rativ Office of a tie United
gw is .on the game level as the
erector of Central Tntr ninanc E?F the
of the Public Prin er, at 115 00
`1VIr BKN `of Ohio I' assure "the
gentleman that it is indeed a very diffi-
cult task to attempt to decide just what
salaries should be increased and what
such increases should be. As I have tried
to point out this morning, the basic issue
involved in the consideration of this
legislation is one of timing. And I do
not believe this is the proper time to
consider this bill.
Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I yield.
Mr. SABATH. As to the timing, the
bill has been reported and has been in
the Rules Committee for nearly 2 months,
held there because it was my desire to
ascertain from the country . how the
country felt about this great question.
Issues have been made and the question
was raised whether it was proper or not.
Let me say that up until now I have not
heard anyone objecting to the passage
of the bill; on the contrary, I have heard
from hundreds of people who feel that
it is justifiable and that it should be
passed at this time.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio, I appreciate
the gentleman's remarks. I might add
that I, also, have heard from literally
thousands upon thousands of American
citizens who are vitally interested in put-
ting into effect the recommendations of
the Hoover Commission and to thus
bring about greater economy and effi-
ciency In the conduct of the public: busi-
ness. I have also heard from many
9321
thousands of citizens who are saying that
in the face of present deficit in the Fed-
eral Treasury, and the decline in the
Nation's business activity, that we must
practice economy and efficiency.
My one thought has been, and still is,
that we should first demonstrate-before
enacting legislation like this-to the
people of America our great determina-
tion here in the Congress, and the desire
and determination of the President, to
get greater economy and efficiency in the
operation of the Government by actually
effectuating the Hoover Commission's
recommendations through the prompt
enactment of necessary enabling legisla-
tion.
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I yield.
Mr. MILLER of California. I wish to
call the gentleman's attention to the
fact that the first legislative considera-
tion of this question was by the com-
mittee of the Senate in the Eightieth
Congress, a committee headed by Sena-
tor Flanders.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I understand
that; I am fully informed on the history
of the legislation. I thank the gentle-
man very much for his remarks, but I
must hasten along, as I have so many
requests, for time.
Mr. REES. Mr. Speaker, will the gen-
tleman yield?
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I yield.
Mr. REES. These thousands of let-
ters received by the distinguished gen-
tleman from Ohio were.not with respect
to this measure but with respect to put-
ting into effect the Hoover recommenda-
tions, were they not?
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Absolutely, yes:
my correspondents were all interested in
getting more economy and efficiency in
the executive branch of the Government.
Mr. O'HARA of Minnesota. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. I yield.
Mr. O'HARA of Minnesota. Will the
gentleman tell us what the over-all cost
of this bill will be?
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. That informa-
tion is given on page 3 of the report. I
think it will cost about $1,237,177.
Mr. O'HARA of Minnesota. I thank
the gentleman.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. It is not the
cost of this bill which gives me the
greatest concern. It is simply the prin-
ciple involved, and the fear that many
of the good people of our country may
misunderstand our action. They are in-
terested in less public spending rather
than more. Let us first demonstrate to
them our interest in making our Govern-
ment more efficient and less costly. Then
they will gladly approve any action we
may take to fairly pay and properly com-
pensate those who can run our govern-
mental agencies in an efficient and eco-
nomical manner.
Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, I yield
5 minutes to the gentleman from Georgia
[Mr. Cox].
Mr. COX. Mr.- Speaker, at the outset
of my remarks I beg to be permitted to
congratulate our distinguished friend.
from Ohio [Mr. BROWN] for the state-
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
9322 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
ment he has made. The temper of his Mr. FULTON. Mr. Speaker, in dis- bill at the present salaries is not a theo-
remarks is splendid and I think I may cussing this bill, we are considering the retical one. It is one that has arisen
make the observation on the point he rate of compensation of the men who are many times in the past. We cannot
stresses that I get; the impression that responsible for carrying out the policies estimate how many men have turned
the President has great respect for the determined upon by this Congress, the down requests to serve because they
l
report of the Hoover Commission and men whose qualifications and ability could not afford the financial sacrifice. ave continue nt it is reasonable to suppose he which t policies ar~succeed or~fail determining whether
greatym sl-
are and who ehl ssshase beentheir acountr
to recommend legislation atioh
woululd put more of the e recommendation considering the salaries of senior officials fortune have had to resign because they
contained in that report into effect. of the largest business in the world, the could no longer afford to support them-
Obviously the whole program cannot be United States Government. selves and their families. To mention
adopted at one and the same time. You I do not need to quote figures to illus- only a few, there was the late Harold
have to do it by piecemeal. trate the discrepancies between the pres- Smith, competent and able Director of
Mr. Speaker, if, as a Member of this ent salaries of these men and those of offi- the Bureau of the Budget, who found he
House, I have not established a reputa- cers of other large businesses. This dis- could not make ends meet on a $10,000
tion for candor and independence of crepancy is so well known that the Con- salary; Gen. John H. Hilldring, former
thought, then I fear that what I have gress should have done something about Assistant Secretary of State; and Mr.
done has been of toc little consequence it sooner. How many large corporations Robert Freer, former Commissioner of
to merit attention. But whatever the have a president, who could be secured the Federal Trade Commission.
fact may be, I do feel that I have estab- for $15,000 per annum? More pertinent We now have an opportunity to rectify
lished the right to appeal to the con- perhaps is the question: How many this deplorable situation. The total cost
servative membership of this body, which qualified men could they find who would for the Government in all departments
I now do. be willing to serve for such salaries? will be $1,237,173 annually. This is, in.
The bill which the pending resolution And yet those are the salaries now paid deed, a small price to pay.
makes in order is net political in char- to men who are responsible for the lives, May I point out to you that everybody
acted, and I hope it will not be treated safety, and well-being of 150,000,000 agrees tha attlth ste to aof State should
me
as such. It comes to us as a request stockholder citizens.
from the President for the increase of We do not mean to say that the salaries the Under Secretary of the Department
the salaries of members of his official of these officials should be commensurate of State would be underpaid at $20,000 a
household and others for whom he is with equivalent positions in private busi- year, considering the work and the re-
responsible, and by reason of its very ness.. This is not necessary to enable sponsibilities he has to assume. The
nature it is a request that amity and the President to obtain qualified people. Administrator for Economic Cooperation
mutual respect compel us to honor. We I like to think that every American is under this bill, to paraphrase Mr. Hoff-
need to promote harmony and concilia- anxious to serve his country when called man himself, is the biggest bargain the
tjon and to cherish mutual good will as and that we do not have to offer what United States ever got for $20,000, the
between the Executive and the Congress. he can earn elsewhere as an inducement. salary to which this key position is to be
This is not an ordinary recommenda- However, the compensation must be suf- raised.
tion for legislation. Only the question ficient to enable qualified men to accept The Assistant Secretaries of State, 10
of salary for a comparatively few people important positions with the Federal of them, and the Department of State
Government at not too great a personal counselor, are only being raised to $15,-
is involved. We pass laws which the sacrifice. 000 a year under this bill. From my own
President is compelled to execute, and General Marshall, when he was Secre- Personal knowledge as a member of the
here it is said that in the performance of tary of State,, said on several occasions Committee on Foreign Affairs, these com-
this duty, in order to keep good and that he was unable to attract the caliber petent men have responsibilities that are
people, and rered, a others, of top staff :required in the conduct Of gigantic. They have such responsibili-
salaries be i ng
we determine questions tnds our- foreign relations because of the low sal- ties, that the United States must have
we selves byfixi these qo nioroe our- aries which he was able to offer. He the best men, properly trained and de-
selves by fixing our own salaries and added that he was also unable to keep pendable, to take the far-reaching re-
those of our employees, are not the Pres- a number of able employees in the De- sponsibilities and follow them up,
ident's wishes entitled to special consid- partment because he was unwilling to Because of the far-reaching extent of
eration? To fail to honor this draft ask them to stay at the expense of their these responsibilities which carry out
which he has drawn upon the good will financial security. the administration of American foreign
of my , tthis body would, in dine a The Congress has recognized made- policies, the American public will not find
thoughtless disregard o of f oorrdinaary ry pro- quacies of top Federal salaries on numer- It out until too late if there are mistakes.
priety. ous occasions. Perhaps the most strik- Competent key men of the State Depart-
The greatest good. that we canddo our ing example, in the field of foreign rela- ment who are the real executives of
country is to do our part in promoting tions, was embodied in the Foreign Serv- American world policy which the Presi-
good will and drawing together the three ice Act of 1946. A new scale of ambas- dent, Congress, and the Secretary of
departments of Government into a sadorial salaries and allowances was au- State formulate are: the present experi-
bond of mutual understanding and good thorized. These salaries ran to $25,000 enced counselor of the Department of
will and win the confidence of all the a year for class I posts, such as London, State, George F. Kennan, Just confirmed
people in order that we may present a Paris, and so forth. The act also pro- by the Senate to succeed the able previ-
solid front to that part of the world that vided that the top class of Foreign Serv- ous counselor, Charles E. Bohlen, who is
is hostile to our way of life. ice officers should be paid $13,500 a year. to be sent to the Embassy in Paris, Dean
The office of the Presidency is a diffi- Under the provisions of this act, top Rusk, Assistant Secretary of State and
cult one to fill. While it is a place of officers are brought in from the field to Deputy Under Secretary handling sub-
splendor, fame, and power, it is also a work beside other officers receiving $3,000 stantive matters in the State Depart-
place of infinite toil'.. The present occu- less per year. ment; quiet and efficient John Peurifoy,
pant of this high station wears his hon- In the act establishing the Economic Assistant Secretary of State and Deputy
ors with becoming dignity and exercises Cooperation Administration, the Con- Under Secretary in charge of all ad-
his powers with great caution. He takes gress also provided for salaries beyond ministrative matters for the State De-
praise with great modesty and bears those which have been traditional in the partment; genial and competent Ernest
criticism and caluirmy with extreme pa- Federal service. Gross, Assistant Secretary of State for
tience. I think he is entitled to our sup- It is impracticable to deal with the congressional relations; Willard L.
port in all instances where we do not salary problem on this piecemeal basis. Thorp, Assistant Secretary of State for
divide on principle,. I think this salary Inevitably, 11; results in inequities which the involved field of economic affairs;
bill is one that we should all support. tend to aggravate rather than solve the George Allen, Assistant Secretary of
Mr. SABATH, Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 difficulty. State in charge of that important field,
minutes-to the gentleman from Pennsyl- The problem of obtaining and keeping public affairs and public liaison; John
vania [Mr. FULTON I. able men in the positions covered by this Hickerson, Assistant Secretary for the
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
expanding field of United Nations affairs;
Edward Miller, Assistant Secretary for
American Republic Affairs; George'Ma-
gee, Assistant Secretary for Near Eastern
and African Affairs; George Perkins, As-
sistant Secretary for European Affairs;
and last but not least, affable and experi-
enced Walton Butterworth, nominated as
Assistant Secretary of State for Far East-
ern Affairs. These men are a credit to
the Department of State, and the coun-
try.
Our foreign relations are so dependent
on such personnel that we may run into
a national disaster if the United States
Government does not get the proper men
in the future, and keep these invaluable
and experienced people in our State De-
partment.
We members of the Foreign Affairs
Committee in the House know of the vital
need, and can heartily recommend to
the Congress the expenditure under this
bill of only $70,000 per annum additional
for the whole Department of State.
Such recognition of key personnel carry-
ing the executive and policy load of the
State Department is in direct keeping
with the recommendations of the Hoover
Commission, and is therefore nonparti-
san. It is sound business sense and good
doctrine for the Republican and Demo-
cratic parties alike. I strongly urge your
support of this legislation as reported by
the Post Office and Civil Service Com-
mittee.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I
yield 5 minutes to. the gentleman from
Massachusetts' [Mr. WIGGLESWORTH].
(Mr. WIGGLESWORTH asked and
was given permission to revise and ex-
tend his remarks.)
Mr. WIGGLESWORTH. Mr. Speaker,
I am in favor of reasonable increases in
salaries for those in major positions in
the executive branch of the Government.
I am not in favor of unreasonable in-
creases for those in either major or mi-
nor positions.
My criticism of the bill as it now
stands, without having had. much time
to study it, is that in some instances, it
goes too far in the increase of salaries,
that in one or two other instances it does
not go far enough; and that it is poorly.
drawn in that it includes in the same
salary brackets positions which cannot
possibly be fairly considered as com-
parable, one position being far more im-
portant than another.
I believe the measure deserves far more
careful consideration and amendment
before it is enacted into law.
I admit that it is difficult to deter-
mine upon a yardstick with which to
measure executive salaries. But let us
take as one yardstick the ablest United
States Senator that anyone can think of,
who may have given the best years of life
to the service of his country and who
today commands a salary of $15,000.
This bill proposes in class 1 to pay
every Cabinet officer $25,000. I do not
object to this particularly in itself, but I
point out in passing that it means pay-
ing every Cabinet officer $10,000 a year
more than we pay any United States
Senator.
In class 2, which is to receive $20,000,
you will find the Chairman of the Coun-
cif of Economic Advisers, now drawing
$15,000, and every Under Secretary in
every executive department in the Gov-
ernment now drawing from $10,000 to
$12,000. In other words, Mr. Speaker,
every Under Secretary, who heretofore
has had from $10,000 to $12,000, is now
to receive $5,000 more than we pay any
United States Senator and, incidentally,
it is to be bracketed along with the Ad-
ministrator for Economic Affairs, Mr.
Hoffman, and with the Administrator for
Veterans' Affairs, General Gray, both of
whom fill tremendously important and
tremendously difficult positions.
The President is to pay 12 adminis-
trative assistants and secretaries a total
of $206,000 as compared with a total un-
der present conditions of $130,000-two
will receive $20,000, three will receive
$18,000, seven will receive $16,000.
In the $18,000 bracket you find the
Federal Works Administrator now
drawing $12,500, the Assistant Comptrol-
ler General now drawing $10,330, and the
Assistant Director of the Bureau of the
Budget now drawing $10,330. All will
receive $3,000 more than any United
States Senator. Moreover, Mr. Speaker,
if I read section 6 of this bill correctly, it
will be within the discretion of the Presi-
dent to put any head of any board or any
commission into that $18,000 bracket.
Surely this is a matter for the Congress
to determine in any given case.
In the $17,500 bracket you will find
the Director of the Administrative Office
of the United States Courts, now drawing
$10,330; the Public Printer, now drawing
$10,330; the Librarian. of Congress, now
drawing $10,330; the Council of Eco-
nomic Advisers, other than the chair-
man, now drawing, $15,000. All of these
will receive $1,500 more than any United
States Senator.
In the $16,000 bracket there is a whole
string of commissioners, of the Federal
Communications Commission, of the
Federal Power Commission, of the Fed-
eral Trade Commission, of the Securi-
ties and Exchange Commission, of the
Civil Service Commission, of.. the Tariff
Commission, all of whom have been
drawing $10,000; as. well as the Architect
of the Capitol, now drawing $10,330. All
are to receive $1,000 more than any
United States Senator.
Included in the financial classification
with a United. States Senator, to receive
$15,000, we find among others: The Ar-
chivist of the United States, now draw-
ing $10,000, the Indian Claims Commis-
sioners, now drawing $10,500; the War
Claims Commissioners, now drawing
$12,000; the Chief Assistant to the Li-
brarian of Congress, now drawing $10,-
330; the Deputy Public Printer, now
drawing $10,330; and every Assistant
Secretary in every executive department.
Why, Mr. Speaker, should Edgar
Hoover, with h i s t r e m e n d o u s res onsi-
bilities a n d remen ous success e c assi-
fled _ai , 00 when a re ctor o ' en-
trafTntelligence 1s ttb receive $MT500?
k'slbUM every Linder Secretary in
the executive departments receive $5,000
more than any United States Senator?
Why should every Assistant Secretary
in the executive departments be brack-
eted with a United States Senator?
9323
Why should officials with compara-
tively minor responsibilities be bracketed
with others with heavy responsibilities?
I repeat, Mr. Speaker, I am in favor of
reasonable increases in salaries for those
in major positions in the executive
branch of the Government. I repeat that
this bill in my judgment deserves most
careful consideration and amendment
before it is enacted into law.
The SPEAKER. The time of the gen-
tleman from Massachusetts has expired.
Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Speaker, I
yield such time as he may require to the
gentleman from Nebraska [Mr. CURTIS].
Mr. CURTIS. Mr. Speaker, before
salaries of the heads and assistant heads
of the executive departments are in-
creased, the economies recommended by
the Hoover Commission should be carried
out.
It is unfair to expect the taxpayers to
shoulder this pay raise recommended by
the Hoover. Commission until the other
Commission recommendations to elim-'
inate waste and duplication are adopted.
It has been reliably estimated that if
this Commission's proposals are put into
effect, the cost of government would be
cut $3,000,000,000 a year. When this
reorganization is accomplished, the
people can be assured we have executives
heading the departments. That will be
the time to present the question of their
pay increases.
I expect to vote Against this bill to in-
crease Government costs by raising sal-
aries of the heads and assistant heads in
executive departments.
Finally, if the Hoover recommenda-
tions are adopted with the resultant sav-
ing of three billions, we can then quickly
repeal the wartime excise taxes on such
items as ladies' handbags, toilet articles,
beauty and barber supplies, furs, jewelry,
transportation and communication
charges, and all other wartime excise
taxes. which are now causing undue
hardship.
These excise taxes are now forcing
businesses to the wall and are destroying
jobs.
There is, therefore, a twofold necessity
for defeating the measure before us.
Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3
minutes to the gentleman from New York
[Mr. MIULTER].
Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, I intend
to support this rule, and I intend to vote
for the bill both in Committee of the
Whole and in the House. I rise at this
time to make a very brief explanation as
to why I will not offer any amendments
to the bill as originally announced by me.
As you probably know, the gentleman
from New York [Mr. KEOGH] has intro-
duced a separate bill to increase the sala-
ries of members of the judiciary. That
bill is now before the Committee on the
Judiciary, and the distinguished chair-
man, the gentleman from New York [Mr.
CELLER], has assured me that the bill will
be considered by his committee shortly.
and that, if at all possible, it will be re-
ported to the House in time to be enacted
at this session.
My own bill for the increase of our
salaries is before the same committee
which has reported this bill and I have
been assured by the distinguished chair-
man [Mr. MURRAY] that that bill also
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
9324 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
will be called up before his committee for M' r. LYLE. Mr. Speaker, I am per- Ohio, [Mr. BROWN]. I do not agree with
early consideration and, if it is there suaded that the House has sufficient in- him, however, that it is untimely to bring
acted on favorably, it will be reported for formation to pass on this resolution and this bill to the floor. During the time I
our action shortly thereafter. that it will be adopted. It would, I have been in the legislative body, I have
I want to direct the attention of the think, be unfortunate if before the con- never found it timely, politically speak-
Members of the House to the fact that sideration of the bill, attention was not ing, to increase the salary of anyone con-
not only has the Hoover Commission and directed to the superior report accom- nected with government, but that is a
the President recommended an increase panying this legislation, which was filed responsibility I share with you, the re-
of salary both for the judges and Mem- by the gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. sponsibility of making the Government
bers of the House, but the Director of MURRAY], chairman of the great Corn- service as useful and effective as possible.
the Budget has sent a communication to mittee on Post Office and Civil Service. The positions involved in this measure
our distinguished colleague [Mr. MUa- This is a document of permanent value are charged with great responsibilities.
RAY] which he has authorized me to re- and I am sure all of you will want to keep The President has strongly urged that
fer to at this time. The Budget Director it in your office for reference. It out- they be reevaluated and reclassified,
under date of June 24, 1949, said: lines the functions of the 244 positions and compensated accordingly.
While the bill deals with the question of affected by this bill. I am pleased to The statement made by my distin-
whether this proposal-- have a copy of the report and find it guished friend, the gentleman from Gaor-
Meaning the increase of salaries for very useful. Members of the Commit- gia [Mr. Cox], eloquent and persuasive,
tee and their splendid staff are entitled should have convinced the entire mem-
Members of Congress- to a commendation for this report. bership that we should pass this measure.
is one for the Congress to resolve, it is sig- I join with every member of this body Mr. Speaker, I urge the adoption of the
nificant that the President on several occa- in a sincere desire to effect economy and rule and the immediate consideration
sions indicated his feeling that adequate
compensation should be provided fer our Fed- reorganization, in the executive branch and passage of H. R. 3191.
eral legislators. of the Government. The Hoover Com- (Mr. LYLE asked and was given per-
Mr. Speaker, this bill is a step in the mission has made recommendations mission to revise and extend his re-
similar to those proposed by this legis- marks.)
right direction. lation. In my judgment it cannot be Mr. BROWN of Ohio. Mr. Sper.ker, I
The bill to increase the salaries of rightfully said that this is a salary-in- yield the balance of the time on this side
members of the judiciary is another step crease bill. It is a measure that re- to the gentleman from Kansas [Mr.
in that direction. I submit that my bill evaluates the work and responsibilities REEs].
to increase our own salaries is also a step of the positions covered. It does result Mr. REES. Mr. Speaker, this bill has
in the right direction, if you want men in salary increases. not had the careful consideration to
and women of the high type and caliber Significantly, it is the 'first time this which it is really entitled. My attention
that we ought to have in high position in has been accomplished in a quarter of has been called to the fact that there is
our Government, you should pay them, a century. 11 could not support this only $1,250;000 involved. They say it is
and pay them well. measure if it were a question of raising conservatively small. There are only 244
I will withhold my amendments With the salaries of personalities now con- out of 2,000,000 employees involved.
reference to salary increases to judges nected with the Government, for the However, in this bill, if you had the time
and Members of Congress in reliance on philosophy of some of them is foreign to to study it, you would find that it covers
the assurances given to me that those mine. It is a healthier bill than that, only a few of hundreds more who are just
bills will be submitted to us for separate one attempting to place the position in- as much entitled to an increase as those
consideration. volved its its proper stature. in this bill. I know of a good many
An almost u eto ous press is adequately support- Your Committee on Post Office and faithf.Iil career people who are much com- Ing a in this effort mber well Civil Service held exhaustive hearings. more entitled to this consideration. As
as those the Members of Judges who are It is a conservative committee and their a matter of fact, the committee put in
now thore executives and Judges who are recommendations are entitled to the about 40 or 50 positions that were not
nbeing WN of Ohio. cst serious consideration. At ail times in the original bill.
Mr. BROWN of OhntMr. l Speaker, I I enjoy working with this committee I think the bill is untimely. To bring
New 1 minute to the gentleman from because its members, both Democratic a bill to the floor of this House and give
New York [1VIr. G. Mr.7. and Republican, sincerely give their best us 30 minutes on each side to discuss an
Mr KEATdIdG Mr. Speaker, if, i- to the. improvement of our Government important measure is wrong. That is all
the cou teter reports, t Vaughan, service. we are allowed to discuss this bill, except
s court jester, , General Vaughan, rule.
dent's
knows 300 people in Washington who are I am very fond of my Government. It under I hope the to 5-speak minute ruln later and will
selling their influence with highly placed has been very good to me. I dislike the outline but I want to call will
Government officials for 5 percent or any unfortunate attitude today of so many outline to an amendment that I call t-
other consideration, he should be re- commentators and newspaper and mag- ttion the gamtime, that al pooffer-at l reduce
the amounts th at these various categories.
ce a of the committees now engaged in look- down the confidence of the people in the
ing into these reprehensible practices. their Government and ridicule those of A grpeople
a deli has been said with respect
It is equally important, if his charges us who serve in government, whether it be
of corruption are not well-founded, that in the legislative, judicial or executive to to pressure e Wou
gis if they foul Mem-
has cast upon every procurement agency form of government in the world-so they hau tell
lhad pressure not only
Some of the assertions of this intimate in it can do :it very little lasting harm., It President of agencies but from involved. heads and assistants
of the President can safely and preferably is bigger than all of us, and this, to me The SPEAKER. The time of the
be ignored, but here is one to which this is an expression of confidence, not only in
Congress cannot shut its eyes. the form of government, but in the sin- gentleman from Kansas has expired.
If favoritism concerning the reward of cere and able people who serve in it. one Mr. SABATH. minute toSpeaker, the genIlc yield
contracts and the sale of influence have Comparatively, this is not an expensive from Kansas.
reached the gigantic proportions which bill. For example, and I do not mean this
General Vaughan indicates, and he is as an odious comparison, if you did away Mr. REES. I say to you that this bill
certainly in a position to know what he is with the potato program for 2 days, it should have had not only more careful
talking about, the public interest re- would pay for this bill for an entire year, study in the committee but also on the
quires a full and open disclosure by him The cost is insignificant. It is significant, part of the membership of this House,
of name, chapter, and verse to substan- however, to recognize the importance of because you are establishing a policy of
tiate his charges. the work and responsibilities of the 244 which this million and a half dollars is
Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 postions covered by this bill. I am often only the beginning. It has been sug-
minutes to the gentleman from Texas in agreement with my colleague in the Bested that it is very little; to the tax-
[Mr. LYLE]. Committee on Rules, the gentleman from payers it is considerable. This is only
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
part of millions more costs proposed by
Members of this House before the com-
mittee of which I am a member. Should
our committee report out the bills that
have been proposed by Members of the
House we would increase the cost of Gov-
ernment for employment more than
$2,000,000,000. Mark you, if this bill is
passed-if that is what you want-if this
bill is passed you have many more bills
just as worthy as this one. At the proper
time I shall offer a substitute bill and
ask you to reduce the payments recom-
mended in this bill.
The SPEAKER. The time of the gen-
tleman from Kansas has expired.
Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, I yield to
the gentleman from New York [Mr.
CELLER] such time as he may desire.
Mr. CELLER: Mr. Speaker, I am
happy to have this bill considered and
pleased to vote essential increases to
various members of our executive
branch. As chairman of the House Ju-
diciary Committee, I have almost daily
contact with my esteemed friend the dis-
tinguished Attorney General. Our com-
mittee and the Department over which
the Attorney General presides work in
closest harmony. I am gratified that
that is so. Permit me to express some
pertinent observations concerning the
Honorable Tom Clark and his able assist-
ants.
The Attorney General is the chief law
officer of the Government and is the
legal adviser to the President and the
heads of the executive agencies. Also,
he is the head of the Department of Jus-
tice, an organization of 27,000 persons
serving in all parts of the United States,
its Territories and possessions; and which
operates at an annual expenditure of ap-
proximately $130,000,000. He has under
him the Solicitor General of the United
States, the Assistant to the Attorney
General, the Assistant Solicitor General,
seven Assistant Attorneys General and
the heads of three major bureaus,
namely; the Immigration and NaturAliza-
tion Service, the Federal Bureau of In-
vestigation, and the Bureau of Prisons.
The office of Attorney General was
created in 1789, the annual compensation
being fixed at $1,500. There were steady
increases in compensation through the
years until 1870, when the Department of
Justice was created and the Attorney
General's compensation was fixed at
$10,000. At that time the Department
consisted of a handful of persons with
an annual budget of around $1,000,000.
In 1925 the Attorney General's compen-
sation was fixed at $15,000, the same rate
as at present. The Department at that
time comprised 3,400 persons, with an
annual expenditure of approximately
$15,000,000. Although the responsibili-
ties and duties of the Attorney General
and his subordinates have increased tre-
mendously since that time, the compen-
sation of the office has remained the
same. While the position has attraction
because of its prestige and importance,
the fact remains that men of great abil-
ity and qualifications but with limited
financial means are unable to accept it.
Others cannot remain in the position for
any length of time without great finan-
cial sacrifice. In England, the salary of
the Attorney General is fixed at 10,000
pounds-roughly $44,000 at today's rate
of exchange; furthermore, that official
has substantially fewer responsibilities
than those which rest on the Attorney
General of the United States.
It is no secret that the top men in the
legal profession in this country are earn-
ing far in excess of what the Attorney
General is paid, and very frequently get
one fee in a single case far in excess of
the Attorney General's annual salary. If
nothing more than to command respect
in the profession in which the Attorney
General is regarded as one of the out-
standing members, the compensation of
the office should be more nearly com-
mensurate to its exacting duties and re-
sponsibilities. The Department of Jus-
tice is vital to the business and welfare
of the Nation, and the security and pro-
tection of our economy rests in large
measure upon the proper conduct of its
work. No business enterprise which has
had the growth and expansion in size
and responsibilities comparable to the
Department of Justice would leave the
compensation of its executive head at
the same level as it was in its early and
formative period.
The top officials of the Department
included in the pending compensation
bill- are the Solicitor General, the Assist-
ant to the Attorney General, the Assist-
ant Solicitor General, seven Assistant
Attorneys General; the Director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, the
Director of the Federal Prison System,
and the Commissioner of the Immigra-
tion and Naturalization Service.' With
the exception of the Directors of the Fed-
eral Bureau of Investigation and the
Federal Prison System these are all statu-
tory positions requiring Presidential ap-
pointment and confirmation by the
Senate.
To raise the salaries of these positions,
including that of the Attorney General,
would amount to an additional cost of
less than $90,000 a year'as presently con-
templated, which is far less than the fee
frequently paid opposing counsel in a
single important case. The Department
is a highly organized professional and
technical office handling litigation in-
volving billions of the Government's
money and property. The heads of the
divisions and bureaus have exceedingly
heavy responsibilities, which have in-
creased enormously in the last few years.
The work of the Federal courts has
greatly expanded, and the complexity of
present-day governmental responsibili-
ties has given rise to an extended range
of legal and administrative problems.
The leading practitioners in the legal
profession are earning far more than the
heads of the legal divisions in this
Department. Naturally they are very
reluctant to give up lucrative practices
to take positions such as these, If they
do make the sacrifice, they are then
under continual temptation to yield to
the demands of society and their fami-
lies in order to earn enough to live at a
standard commensurate to their posi-
tions and 'responsibilities. This results
in a great turn-over in these positions,
with the resultant loss in continuity of
direction and policy in the operation of
the various units. Much ground is lost
each time in adjusting to new direction
and control, to the detriment of the
Department and the public.
It is urgently necessary that the sal-
aries of the top officials of the entire
Government be fixed'at a level which will
attract men of great capacity, capabil-
ity, and sound judg ent. In the case
of the Department of Justice it is fur-
ther necessary that such men have the
caliber to be recognized and respected
by the legal profession. The increase in
compensation would only partially offset
the pressures and burdens which they
must face in carrying out the duties and
responsibilities of their positions. Under
the present salary scale and conditions
now prevailing economically the Presi-
dent and his Cabinet officers are faced
with a serious problem in attracting
high-caliber, well-qualified men. The
problem facing the Attorney General in
this respect is one of particular diffi-
culty, for the reasons which have been
set forth above.
(Mr. CELLER asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, I yield
the balance of my time to the gentleman
from Massachusetts [Mr. MCCORMACK].
The SPEAKER. The gentleman
from Massachusetts is recognized for
9 minutes.
(Mr. McCORMACK asked and was
given permission to revise and extend
his remarks.)
Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I
think the remarks made by my very
able and distinguished friend the gen-
tleman from Georgia [Mr. Cox] were
not only dignified but also very effective.
He set forth the reasons why this bill
should pass. He referred to the spirit of
amity between the various branches of
Government, and certainly that is a
compelling. thought. Amity exists not
only between the two bodies of the Con-
gress but also between the branches of
Government on matters directly con-
nected either with the legislative branch
in the case of our particular branch of
governmental organization, the House
and the Senate, and matters directly
connected with the executive branch of
Government. The President, on his side,
has clearly evidenced a feeling of amity
for the House of Representatives recently
when he signed H. R. 4583, giving us the
additional clerk: At that time he said:
I have signed this act willingly-
Notice the word "willingly," a com-
plete expression of understanding and
amity-
I have signed this act willingly, for I be-
lieve that it is in the interest of the Gov-
ernment and of the people to provide for the
efficient conduct of the public business.
The President recognized that when
we passed that act that we did so in the
interest of efficiency in Government.
The President concludes his message
with this statement:
For the compelling reasons set forth, I be-
lieve that the legislation now pending to
increase the salaries of officers in the execu-
tive branch is a fundamental step toward
the more effective operation of the Govern-
ment.
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
CON GB SESSION A_L RECORD--HOUSE JULY 8
I get a good deal of amusement from
the President's message because he "will-
ingly" signed the bill which related to
the House of Representatives, but called
attention to his problem in connection
with the bill which :;s now before the
House. I hope that this will not develop
into a partisan question simply because
President Truman is a Democrat; cer-
tainly if the incumbent of the White
House were a member of the Republican
Party I would support his request; for
if the President under such circum-
stances-and, of course, it will not hap-
pen for many, many years-were to be
a Republican, I would recognize the
amity between the two branches, and I
would recognize his justification for such
a request.
Some Members have referred to the
fact that the bill has not been considered
carefully. If ever a bill was considered
carefully this bill has been. It was in-
troduced on January 20, 1949, and the
matter has been the subject of considera-
tion by a Senate committee in the last
Congress.
The bill now before us represents a
compromise. The gentleman from Ten-
nessee [Mr. MURRAY], chairman of the
committee, proposed a compromise and
the committee adopted his compromise
which reduced the amount contained in
the original bill.
The gentleman front Ohio LMr. BROWNI
admits that the legislation is justified
and does not argue against the bill. He
disagrees with the timing. Of course,
that is only a technical objection, which
means that he supports the bill, he is in
favor of the bill, because otherwise he
would be placed in. the very embarrassing
position of opposing the very recom-
mendations of a commission of which he
was a member. Repeatedly throughout
the Hoover Commission report' are con-
tained references to the fact that the
particular officials enumerated in this
bill have not received the consideration
they are entitled to. For example, in
one report it is stated:
In order to attract the most desirable types
of persons to department high commands,
the salaries of under secretaries and assistant
secretaries should be increased.
Again in the same report there is an-
other reference to it. In this .,report
there are several references to it. Here
is another report of that committee, the
report to Congress of February 1949, in
which it is stated at one place:
To all other employees whose rates of pay
are fixed on a Nation-wide basis, the Presi-
dent should be authorized to direct the Civil
Service Commission to review--
And so forth. In relation to the bill
now under consideration it calls atten-
tion to the fact that pay in the lowest
grades has been increased between 43
and 56 percent, while pay in. the highest
grades has been increased only 15 per-
cent, immediate consideration should be
,given to providing adequate salaries for
top civil-service employees, with the ex-
ception of professional, scientific, tech-
nical, and so forth. Most, if not all, of
those covered by this bill are non-c:lvil-
service people. The last time a Cabinet
officer received an increase was in 1925.
The Cabinet officers :have not received an
increase in salary since 1925. Most of
the officials covered by this bill, other
than members of the Cabinet, such as
assistant secretaries, have received no
increase in salary since 1925.
The last time the members of the Fed-
eral Trade Commission received an in-
crease in salary was in 1914 when the sal-
ary was established at $10,000. That is
still the salary of members of the Fed-
eral Trade Commission. The last time
members of the Cabinet received an in-
crease was 24 years -ago; in the case of
members of the Federal Trade Com-
mission it was not 24 years ago but 35
years ago.
So it seems to me that equity and jus-
tice calls for this change. If there is
some particular position that should re-
ceive more, that is another proposition
entirely. An amendment may be offered
to cover the matter. Reference has been
made to J. Edgar Hoover. I may say
that I offered an amendment and the
Subcommittee on Appropriations agreed
to it back 3 or 4 years ago when Mr.
Hoover got his last increase from $10,-
000 a year to $14,000 a year. I offered
the amendment on the floor of the House,
and the subcommittee of the Committees
on Appropriations on both sides accept-
ed the amendment,
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McCO]E1MACK. I yield to the
gentleman from South Dakota.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. The
gentleman would not say now that the
Director of the FBI should be put on the
same salary as the Deputy Public Printer,
would he?
Mr. McCORMACK. I was coming to
that, to say that those who feel that he
should receive more than this should of-
fer an amendment to the bill at the
proper time, and I am pretty satisfied
when that is done that the high regard
for the public service of J. Edgar Hoover
would probably be very quickly recog-
nized.
Mr. ROGER S of Florida. Mr. Speak-
er, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. McCORMACK. I yield to the
gentleman from Florida.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I might
state to the gentleman that I have pre-
pared an amendment so that he will get
at least $17,500.
Mr. STEFAN. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. McCORP?MACK. I yield to the
gentleman from Nebraska.
Mr. STEFAN. When the majority
leader offered his amendment to increase
the salary of Mr. Hoover from $10,000
to $14,000,. it was originally planned to
increase it to $15,000.
Mr. McCORM-ACK. Yes.
]\/fr. STEFAN. But because his chief,
Tom Clark, the Attorney General, was
getting $15,000, we did not think it was
fair to put the two on the same basis.
Mr. McCORMACK. The gentleman
is absolutely correct.
At that time I was going to offer an
amendment to increase his salary to
$15,000, but the Attorney General only
received $15,000, and it was felt that the
head of the FBI should not receive the
same salary as the Attorney General.
So, my special plea is that the bill
should pass. If there is dissatisfaction
with some particular classification or
position here offer an amendment to it,
but let us consider it as we have today
during general debate on a nonpartisan,
nonpolitical basis because the bill is pred-
icated upon justice and equity, and bring
about greater efficiency in government.
The SPEAKER. The time of the
gentleman from Massachusetts has ex-
pired. All time has expired.
Mr. SABATH. Mr. Speaker, I move
the previous question on the resolution.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER. The question is on
the resolution.
The resolution was agreed to.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Speaker, I move that the House resolve
itself into the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union for the
consideration of the bill (H. R. 1689) to
increase rates of compensation of the
heads and.. assistant heads of executive
departments and independent agencies.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly the House resolved itself
into the Committee of the Whole House
on the State of the Union for the con-
sideration of the bill H. R. 1689, with
Mr. GORE in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
By unanimous consent, the first read-
ing of the bill was dispensed with.
(Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee asked
and was given permission to revise and
extend his remarks.)
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I yield myself 10 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, the bill under consid-
eration proposes to establish the proper
rates of annual compensation for heads
and assistant heads of the executive
departments and independent agencies.
Extensive hearings were conducted by
the committee, and witnesses appearing
represented the General Accounting Of-
fice, Bureau of the Budget, Civil Service
Commission, and the Commission on
Organization of the Executive Branch
of the Government. Executives in pri-
vate industry, and representatives of
Federal and postal employee organiza-
tions support the legislation.
In its report to the Congress in Feb-
ruary 1949, the Commission on Organi-
zation of the Executive Branch of the
Government, usually referred to as the
Hoover Commission, stated that the
Congress should "increase legislative,
judicial, and executive salaries at the
level of assistant secretary, or its equi-
valent, and above." The bill approved
by the committee establishes annual
compensation consistent with the report
of the Commission's task force.
The committee has prepared an ex-
tensive report regarding this legislation
(H. Rept. 535), which not only analyzes
the legislation in detail, but Appendix
B on page 16 contains the following in-
formation regarding each position cov-
ered by the bill: Position title, present
salary and date established, proposed
salary, incumbent, responsibilities and
size of organization, including number
of employees and estimated annual ex-
penditures for fiscal year 1949. I trust
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
the Members will avail themselves of
the information contained in this report.
On January 1, 1949, the President
wrote to the Speaker of the House re-
questing "that the Congress take prompt
action to increase the compensation of
the heads and assistant heads of the
executive departments and of other
Government officers of comparable
rank." In his letter he stated that "in-
adequate salaries have long made it diffi-
cult to obtain and hold able men for
positions of greatest responsibility in the
Government service. The national in-
terest requires that we get and keep in
these positions the most capable men and
women that can be- found. To do this,
we must pay fair salaries. I ask the
Congress to give me the means which
will make it possible for me to get and
keep the men who are required for the
job ahead."
On June 23, 1949, in his message to the
Congress in connection with his approval
of H. R. 4583, relating to telephone and
telegraph service and clerk hire for Mem-
bers of the House of Representatives, the
President stated "I am urging increased
compensation for Federal executives not
primarily as a matter of equity-
although it is well justified on equitable
grounds-but primarily as a matter of
good business from the standpoint of the
Government." The President further
pointed out that the Hoover Commission
"urged more realistic salaries for Federal
executives as a means of achieving
greater economy and efficiency in gov-
ernmental activities." Finally, he stated
that "so long as the Congress fails to
take this simple and obvious step to im-
prove the Government service, there will
be an important gap in our efforts to
achieve economy and. efficiency. I again
urge the Congress to complete favorable
action upon this legislation at an early
date."
Section 1 establishes the compensation
of the head of each executive depart-
ment and of the Secretary of Defense at
$25,000 per annum. At the present time
the compensation of Cabinet members is
$15,000 per annum, and in no case has
been changed since 1925. 1 believe that
upward revisions in the compensation of
these important Government officials are
long overdue and that the bill provides
the correct adjustment in their salaries.
Section 2 (a) establishes the compen-
sation of each Undersecretary of an
executive department, the Assistant to
the Attorney General, the First Assistant
Postmaster. General, the Solicitor Gen-
eral, the Comptroller General, the Direc-
tor of the Bureau of the Budget, the
Chairman of the Council of Economic Ad-
visers, the Chairman of the National Se-
curity Resources Board, the Federal
Security Administrator, the Administra-
tor of Veterans' Affairs, and .' dministra-
tor for Economic Cooperation at $20,000
per annum. In the bill as introduced,
these salaries were generally set at
$22,500, but the committee agreed to
reduce such compensation by $2,500 an-
Section 2 (b) authorizes the President
to fix the compensation of his six admin-
istrative assistants, the Executive Secre-
tary of the National Security Council and
five other secretaries or staff assistants in
9327
the White House as follows: Two at rates duced $8,500 annually-see appendix A,
not exceeding $20,000 annually, three not page 14, House Report 535.
exceedindg $18,000 annually, and seven Section'5 establishes the annual com-
not exceeding $16,000 annually. The pensation of the Housing Expediter; the
committee reduced these, rates $2,500, War Assets Administrator; the Director
$2,000, and $1,500 respectively, under the of Selective Service; the Archivist of the
salaries provided in the bill as introduced. United States; each Assistant Secretary
Section 3 (a) establishes the annual of an executive department; the Fiscal
compensation of the Assistant Comp- Assistant Secretary of the Treasury;
troller General, Assistant Director of the each Assistant Attorney General; the
Bureau of the Budget, Chairman of the Assistant Solicitor General of the United
Munitions Board, Chairman of the Re States; the counselor of the Department
search and Development Board, Chair- of State; the Second, Third, and Fourth
man of the Atomic Energy Commission, Assistant Postmasters General; the As-
Federal Works Administrator, Housing sociate Federal Mediation and Concilia-
and Home Finance Administrator, Dep- tion Director; the D_e_put Director of
uty Administrator of Veterans' Affairs, Central Intelli e_nce he Ph lippine Alien
and Deputy Administrator for Economic "]`'ro'per y Fministrator; the Chief As-
Cooperation at $18,000. The commit- sistant Librarian of Congress;'the Deputy
tee reduced such compensation by $2,000 Public Printer; the Governors of Alaska,
annually from the salaries in the bill as Hawaii, the Virgin Islands, and the
introduced. Panama Canal; and the members of the
Section 3 (b) establishes the annual Displaced Persons Commission, Indian
compensation of the Director of the Ad- Claims Commission, War Claims Com-
ministrative Office of the United States mission, Philippine War Damage Com-
Courts at $17,500, a $2,500 annual reduc- mission, Board of Commissioners of the
tion from the bill as introduced. District of Columbia, Board of Directors
Section 3 (c) establishes the annual of the Export-Import Bank of Washing
compensation of the Public Printer, Li- ton, other than the Chairman, Board of
brarian of Congress, members-other Directors of the Reconstruction Finance
than Chairman-of the Council of Eco- Corporation, other than the Chairman,
nomic Advisers, Director of Central in- United States 'Maritime Commission,
telligencc,, Federal ediation an on- other than the Chairman, at $15,000.
c is on Director, and Assistant Federal In H. R. 1689, as introduced, TK_ ese sa -
Security Administrator at $17,500. In mites were set at $17,500, but the com-
the bill as introduced, the se" sa- a"r eis were mittee agreed to reduce such compensa-
set at $20,000 but the committee agreed tion by $2,500 annually.
o rsuch compensation by $2,500 While this legislation was under con-
to reduce ed ly, sideration the committee added the fol-
Sectlon 4 establishes the annual com- lowing positions and increased their rates
of basic annual compensation to $15,000
pensation of the Board of Governors of annually: The Administrator, Produc-
the Federal Reserve System, the Director tion and Marketing Administration;
of Aeronautical Research of the National Commissioner of Internal Revenue;
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics, the Director of the' Bureau of Prisons ;
Chairman of the Board of Directors of Director, Federal Bureau of Investiga-
the Export-Import Bank of Washington, tion; Commissioner of Public Roads;
the Comptroller of Currency, the Chair- Commissioner of Public Buildings; Com-
man of the Board of Directors of the Re- missioner of Community Facilities; Com-
construction Finance Corporation, the nissioner of Immigration and Natural-
Chairman of the United States Maritime ization; Administrator, Rural Electrifica-
Commission, the general counsel of the tion Administration; Commissioner for
National Labor Relations Board, the Social Security; Commissioner of Rec-
Architect of the Capitol, the Assistant lamation; Chief, Soil Conservation Serv-
Federal Works Administrator, and the ice; Commissioner of Customs; Governor
members of the Civil Aeronautics Board, of the Farm Credit Administration;
Federal Communications Commission, Chief Forester of the Forest Service;
Board of Directors of the Federal De- Administrator of the Farmers Home
posit Insurance Corporation, Federal Administration; the three Special Assist-
Power Commission, Federal Trade Com- ants to the Secretary of Defense.
mission, Interstate Commerce Commis- Section 5. (b) establishes the annual
sion, National Labor Relations Board, compensation of the Assistant Director
National Mediation Board, Railroad Re- of the Administrative Office of the United
tirement Board, Securities and Exchange States Courts at $15,000, a reduction of
Commission, Board of Directors of the $2,500 annually from the bill as intro-
Tennessee Valley Authority, Civil Serv- duced.
ice Commission, United States Tariff Section 5 (c) establishes the annual
Commission, and Atomic Energy Com- compensation of the legislative counsel
mission-other than the Chairman-at of the House of Representatives and the
$16,000. In the bill as introduced, the Legislative Counsel of the Senate at
majority of these salaries were set at $12,000 per annum.
$17,500, and the committee agreed to Section 6 provides that the President
reduce such compensation by $1,500 an- is authorized in his discretion to in-
nually. However, in the case of the mem- crease the compensation of any chair-
bers of the Atomic Energy Commission man or other head of a board or com-
and members of the Board of Governors mission to. $18,000 per annum, when
of the Federal Reserve System, such com- such head has important duties or re-
pensation was reduced by $4,000 an- sponsibilities not imposed upon other
nually from H. R. 1689 as introuced, and members of such board or commission.
the Chairman of the Board of Governors In the judgment of the committee, this
of the Federal Reserve System was re- discretionary authority properly belongs
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
9328 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
to the President in connection with se- spect to these salaries the committee For example, the salaries of Federal Trade
Commission members were fixed at $10,000
curing better administration and pro- made only minor adjustments a d them. in 1914 and have never been raised, although
viding adequate compensation for in- Also, such congressional action serve as In terms of real income that amount, even
creased duties and responsibilities of a guide to the committee in establishing before taxes, is less than half of what it was
public officials. the compensation of the remainder of 35 years ago. The absurdity of the present
Section 7 of the bill as approved by the positions covered by the bill, situation is illustrated by the fact that many
the committee contained annual pay in- I believe that the enactment of this Federal executives now have assistants who
creases of $330 annually for officers and legislation is necessary and consistent receive higher salaries than they do.
employees of the Foreign Service, and with a more realistic approach to good The Congress has already recognized the
pups o for greater and employees, other
classified Federal employees in the mu- administration in the Federal Govern- need
officers
e Members of Congress tin-
nicipal government of the District of ment. groups tF el
Columbia retroactive to July 1948. This SIGNING OF H. A. 4583 selves. Prior to 1925 Senators and Repre-
sectiori was approved. by separate legis- (Message from the President of the United sentatives received an annual salary of $7,500
lation, H. R. 5100, which passed the States transmitting relative to signing each. At the same time Cabinet officers
House on June 210 and the Senate on H. R. 4583, arid with the recommendation received $12,000 and members of important
June 30, and is now Public Law 160. for passage of legislation raising the sal- boards and commissions received $10,000.
Consequently, at the appropriate time, aries of executive officers of the Govern- In 1925 the salaries of Senators and Repre-
I shall offer an amendment on behalf of ment) sentatives were increased to $10,000 and
the committee to strike this section in To the Congress of the United States: those of Cabinet officers were increased to
its entirety. I have today approved H. R. 4583, relating $15,000. No corresponding general increase
to telephone and telegraph service and clerk was made in the salaries of other executive
The salary increases for these 244 hire for Members of the House of R.-pre- officers. In 1946 the Congress further in-
Government officials will cost $1,237,173 sentatives. This act provides an additional creased the salaries of Senators and Repre-
annually. This is a reduction of $156,- allowance of $1,000 a year for each Member sentatives to $12,500, and at the same time
000 annually under the cost of the bill as of the House of Representatives for clerk provided for each of them a tax-free expense
introduced. hire and authorizes an allowance of $500 a allowance of $2,500. Because this allow-
It is obvious that this small investment year for each Member for sending telephone ance is tax-free, the compensation of Mem-
and telegraph communications. bers of Congress is now equivalent to ap-
iri dollars of securing Gov and retaining I have signed this act willingly, for I be- proximately $16,000 a year. Thus, the com-
highly competent Government officials lieve that it is in the interest of the Govern- pensation of Senators and Representatives
will be beneficial to the American people. ment and of the people to provide for the has been more than doubled in the last 25
I believe,that enactment of this legis- efficient conduct of the public business. I years, while there has been no general in-
lation will provide appropriate incentive have no doubt that the benefits derived from crease at all in the salaries of the executive
in terms of annual compensation to at- this legislation will fully justify its Cost, officials here in question.
tract well-qualified and able top-level which is relatively small in the light of the Over this same 25-year period the salaries
officials in the Federal Government. magnitude of the problems confronting the of Federal judges have also been substan-
Occupying the positions covered by the Government. tially increased. The salaries of district and
bill, they should conduct the affairs of I feel constrained to point out to the Con- circuit judges have been doubled, and those
gress again, however, an opportunity which of Supreme Court Justices have been in-
our country more efficiently and more it has for a greater improvement of the pub- creased by more than two-thirds.
economically. They will bring with lie service than will be accomplished by this The Congress has also raised the compen-
them into the Federal service extensive legislation, and at approximately the same sation of the President, the Vice President,
experience in handling the affairs of cost. I have heretofore recommended that and the Speaker of the House of Representa-
companies in private industry. They the Congress enact legislation to raise the tives. The annual salary of the President
will initiate new procedures and devices salary scales for the heads and assistant was increased from $75,000 to $100,000 earlier
for decreasing the cost of Government heads of executive departments and other this year, and at the same- time he was pro-
which will result in savings of many officials of the executive branch having com- vided with a $50,000 tax-free expense allow-
parable responsibilities. Bills for this pur- ance. While this increase was made without
millions of dollars which will more than pose have been reported from committees in any recommendation or suggestion on my
offset the moderate salary increases pro- both Houses cf Congress and have been on part, I am grateful to the Congress for the
posed in the bill.. their respective calendars for weeks. Though spirit which moved it to enact the increase
Since July 1, 1945, the annual Compen- the salaries provided' in these bills are not, speedily in order that I might receive its
sation of Federal employees has been in my judgment, fully commensurate with benefits. Nevertheless, the proposed in-
substantially increased. The heads and the great responsibilities of the positions in- creases for other officers in the executive
ments and valved, they would substantially better the branch, besides resulting in far greater pub-
assistant the present demoralizing situation. The cost of lie benefit than the increase in the Presi-
agencies heads covered of by this depart bill have not this legislation would be approximately dent's salary, would actually do more to im-
received such statutory increases. Ex- $1,300,000 annually, compared with $1,314,000 prove the President's personal situation than
cept in a few cases, upward salary ad- for clerk hire alone under H. R. 4583, which the increase in his own salary. For one of
justments have not been made during I have just signed. the greatest burdens of the Presidency is in
the past 25 years in the salaries of the Important as it is for Members of the Con- finding and keeping good men for big jobs,
244 top-1 vel officials included in the bill. gress to have adequate clerical assistance, it and under present conditions that is a most
Moreover, in those instances where the is at least of equal importance to have men difficult task.
annual compensation of heads and of ability in the key executive positions in The Congress has already recognized the
assistant heads of independent estab- the Government. The best of laws can be need for increased compensation for Federal
ruined by poor administration. The success employees below the top executive level.
lishments and agencies has been fixed or failure of all the things the United States Since 1945 the rates of compensation for
since 1940, the salary adjustments have Government undertakes to do depends in these employees have been increased three
resulted in a disproportionate relation- large measure upon the wisdom and ability times, largely to meet increased living costs.
ship between those positions and similar of these executives. It is upon them that we These increases have been proportionately
positions established prior to the war must rest most of our hopes for economy and greater in the lower grades than in the
years. efficiency in the Government. Even a small higher, and in the lower grades the total in-
In establishing the annual eornpensa- improvement in the economy and efficiency creases range up to 96 percent. The salary
tion for heads and assistant heads of of the vast operations under the direction of schedules for Federal employees still need
these men is obviously of much greater con- revision, and I have recommended such re-
agencies created since World War II, a sequence than the cost of the proposed salary vision to the Congress.
more realistic approach has been made increases. The soundness of this principle i thoroughly approve of adequate salaries
by Congress, for example, the Adminis- has been demonstrated in American busi- for all our Federal employees. Increased
trator for Economic Cooperation receives ness concerns, where it is well recognized prosperity for our Nation depends upon the
a salary of $20,000 annually, the Deputy that the success or failure of an enterprise constant betterment of the living standards
Administrator for Economic Cooperation depends largely upon its executive officers, of the great body of our citizens. In the pro-
he Chairman of thie and their salaries are fixed accordingly. motion of the general welfare, Federal em-
Atom0 ic Energy annually, Commission $17,500 an- The relative salary position of Federal ployees should not be neglected. However, I
Atom executives has become increasingly worse am urging increased compensation for Fed-
nually, the Housing and Home Finance during recent years. There has been no eral executives not primarily as a matter of
Administrator $16,500 annually, and the increase in the salaries of Cabinet officers equity-although it is well justified on equi-
members of the Council of Economic since 1925. Members of important corn- table grounds--but primarily as a matter of
Advisers $15,000 annually. In view of missions whose salaries were set at $10,000 good business from the standpoint of the
the recent action by Congress with re- many years ago, still get the same amount. Government.
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
7-1
1949 CONG I
. IO~j F `i'CORD-HOUSE
It is customary in private industry for an
executive to be paid many times as much as
he would be paid for comparable work in
Government service. Salaries of $50,000 to
$100,000 a year in private industry are not
uncommon. In 1948, General Motors Corp.
paid to 53 of its officers and directors an
average salary of.$51,760 each. The 15 top
executives of the du Pont Co, were paid an
average salary of $213,176 each-an aggre-
gate amount for these 15 men greater than
the total salaries now paid to all the 250 or
so Federal officers whose salaries would be
increased by the legislation before the Con-
gress.
When it is considered that the responsi-
bilities of many top Government executives
are far greater than those of any private
executive in the Nation it is evident why the
Government has'great difficulty in obtain-
ing and keeping the best men. Even when
they are prevailed upon as a matter of public
duty to serve in the Government, too often
they find that they can afford to serve for a
limited time only. Thus men are lost to
the Government just when they have. had
the experience which brings them to the
peak of their effectiveness. Such a process
is obviously poor business and any apparent
savingein funds for salaries is obviously a
disservice to the taxpayers.
These truths were clearly recognized by
the Commission on Organization of the
Executive Branch. That Commission urged
more realistic salaries for Federal executives
as a means of achieving greater economy and
efficiency in governmental activities. The
legislation for increased executive salaries
now pending in the Congress is fully sup-
ported by the recommendations of that Com-
mission. So long as the Congress fails to
take this simple and obvious step to improve
the Government service, there will be an
important gap in our efforts to achieve econ-
omy and efficiency.
For the compelling reasons set forth above,
I believe that the legislation now pending
to increase the salaries of officers in the
executive branch is a fundamental step
toward the more, effective operation of the
Government. Therefore, I again urge the
Congress to complete favorable action upon
this legislation at an early date.
HARRY S. TRUMAN.
THE WHITE HOUSE, June 23, 1949.
INCREASING COMPENSATION FOR HEADS OF
EXECUTIVE DEPARTMENTS
(Communication from the President of the
United States transmitting his recommen-
dation for the increase of compensation of
the heads and assistant heads of the execu-
tive departments and of other Government
officers of comparable rank)
THE WHITE HOUSE,
Washington, January 6, 1949.
The honorable the SPEAKER OF THE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, D. C.
DEAR MR, SPEAKER: I request that the Con-
gress take prompt action to increase the
compensation of the heads and assistant
heads of the executive departments and of
other Government officers of comparable
rank,
Inadequate salaries have long made it dif-
ficult to obtain and hold able men for posi-
tions of greatest responsibility in the Gov-
ernment service. For most of those posi-
tions, there have been no pay increases in
many years. In the meantime, other salaries,
in both Government and industry, have risen
sharply, and opportunities for larger compen-
sation in private industry have greatly
expanded.
In recent years, the difficulties of obtaining
and holding the best qualified citizens for
official positions has definitely impaired the
Government service. This condition has now
progressed to the point where it constitutes
a serious threat to the efficiency of the Gov-
ernment.
The men who hold the offices in question
must translate into action the policies de-
termined upon by the Congress. Their ability
determines in large measure whether these
policies are to succeed or fail. The national
interest requires that we get and keep in
these positions the most capable men and
women that can be found. To do this, we
must pay fair salaries.
I recognize that the Government cannot
p0y salaries equal to those in private indus-
try for positions of comparable importance.
But it can reduce the discrepancy enough to
permit able and public-spirited citizens to
serve the Government without too great a
disadvantage.
Fortunately, the Congress is in a position
to take intelligent and considered action on
this problem without delay. Within the last
month extensive evidence on the subject has
been presented to a Senate subcommittee and
is now available to the Congress, This evi-
dence includes supporting testimony by for-
mer President Hoover, as Chairman of the
Commission on Organization of the Executive
Branch of the Government. The subcom-
mittee examined the problem carefully, fair-
ly, and without partisanship. The bill which
they developed, and which has now been
introduced in the Eighty-first Congress, is
the result of more than a year's study,
That bill establishes a salary range of from
$17,500 to $25,000 for the officials in question.
These provisions are in accordance with rec-
ommendations made to the subcommittee by
the administration. I urge their passage in
their present form. Questions concerning the
compensation of Federal officers and employ-
ees not included in this bill should not be
permitted to impede or delay its passage, but
should be considered separately at an early
date.
On January 20 a new Presidential term will
begin. During that term the executive
branch of the Government will be called
upon to bear responsibilities of great magni-
tude. Prompt action on this bill is of great
importance to me in strengthening the man-
agement of the executive branch to meet
those responsibilities. Its small cost will be
repaid many times. I ask the Congress to
give me the means which will make it possi-
ble for me to get and keep the men who are
required for the job ahead.
I hope that this legislation will be enacted
into law immediately.
Sincerely yours,
HARRY S. TRUMAN.
Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, I yield my-
self 10 minutes.
This legislation. providing for large in-
creases in the salaries of top-flight people
in Government, in my judgment, comes
at a rather inopportune time. It is ad-
mitted that it is here because it is on the
President's agenda and because of pres-
sure from the White House. Let me say,
too, that almost every Member in this
House has been called upon either by
telephone or in person to approve this
bill.
Mr. Chairman, it is' unfortunate and
unfair to bring such an important bill to
the floor of the House with only 1 hour's
time for discussion. This measure
should have opportunity for full and
complete discussion by the membership
of this House.
It provides for increases of salaries for
240 Presidential employees, all the way
from 50 to 100 percent. It has been said
that these are rece__ mendations of the
Hoover Committee. I disagree with that
statement. The committee report states
there should be increases in some of the
higher positions, but certainly did not
name 240 jobs, most of which will be in-
creased from 75 to 100 percent. In my
judgment the increases are too drastic,
At "the proper time I shall offer an
amendment that will trim these amounts
to considerable extent.
My proposal is that we reduce the
amount paid to these Presidential em-
ployees. Do not forget we are not con-
sidering employees in classified service.
These are all Presidential appointees and
can be removed at the will of the Presi-
dent.
You will observe they are named in dif-
ferent groups. The first group is the
President's Cabinet. The salary in-
creases here are lifted from $15,000 to
$25,000. I am not presently criticizing
that particular category. I realize the
members of the Cabinet are entitled to
considerable increase in salary and that
they have big expense accounts.
But, Mr. Chairman, take a look at the
next schedule in section 2, these various
Under Secretaries who are increasing
their salaries 100 percent. Just think of
it. They receive $10,000 per year, except
probably 2 or 3 who get $12,000.. You
hike the salaries of these people up to
$20,000. How are you going to justify
your approval of that. I am willing to
provide some increases, but these are
clear out of line.
The next schedule in the bill, who are
assistants in the various agencies, get
from $10,000 to $14,000 now, and yet
under the bill you pay them $18,000 a
year. It seems to me that $15,000 would
be pretty liberal.
Then in the next group are listed,
among others, the Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Director and the Assistant
Federal Security Administrator. They
get $10,000. It seems to me that $15,000
would be a pretty fair salary.
I would like to speak for a moment
about schedule 5, a group of assistant
secretaries. Many of these names were
put in by members of our committee.
They draw $10,000 now. The bill gives
them a 50-percent increase, or $15,000;
$12,500, it seems to me, would be a rea-
sonable increase.
If you will glance at the last paragraph
in the bill, you will find a provision, that
gives the President authority under cer-
tain circumstances to lift the salaries of
a number of persons up to $18,000. The
President can do it on his own account
without further authority.
Let me say, too, that many of the men
selected to fill these jobs are appointed
not because of their particular qualifica-
tions but because of political affiliations
and because of certain loyalties outside
of particular fitness for these jobs. I
regret to say that there are too many
men holding positions in Government
that are there because of political pull
and not because they are qualified.
On he other hand we have men, In--
-Government bout whom ou hear verf ,hut who are dev
f e_ un er add Amok them _
wow e Included such persons as the
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
9330
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
head,_ol' the Federal _Bureau of _ Iy.Q,gti-
gation, the head of the Central Intelli-
kenceAgency, the Comptroller General,
the Director of the Veterans' Adminis-
tration, and other persons where respon-
sibilities are great and where public
appreciation is ,.Co.cnparatively small.
Personally, I would like to single out a
number of those .lobs and p_ y them sal-
aries to which they are entitled.
Let us not forget that you cannot com-
pare salaries of these persons with the
salaries of those employed in Industry
and business. As I said, there are many
men and women who are devoted to their
work and who, because they want to
serve in these certain. capacities, are will-
ing to continue even though they may be
offered higher salaries in other fields.
Much has been said about competition
of industry. The situation is so much
different. Men devoted to these higher
positions do not work because of salary
alone, and so you cannot compare a
$100,000 a year executive in industry with
a $15,000 or $20,000 a year executive in
Government.
Only recently a lean employed in a
very high position in your Government
and mine gave all he had. In fact, he
lost his health and his life because of de-
votion to duty. Raising the salary of
that person would, as you know, make
very little difference. It just does not
work that way.
Mr. Chairman, there are more than
2,000,000 people employed in Govern-
ment.. There are several hundred em-
ployed with comparative salaries. With
this bill you reach out and pick 240 and
increase their salaries, as l: said a mo-
ment ago, all the way from $5,000 to $10,-
000 a year. You could easily pick 500
more who are just as important as some
of these included in the bill.
Mr. Chairman, I do not. believe the
President in his message to Congress is
quite as forthright and realistic as he
might be. I do not want to criticize, but
I just do not believe he will have diffi-
culty in finding men to fill these posi-
tions if he is looking for them on the basis
of qualifications for the jobs. I believe
you will find that with the exception of
perhaps a half dozen appointees, most of
them have to be qualified politically be-
fore they qualify otherwise.
Mr. Chairman, the problem of ef-
flciency in Government will not be solved
by simply increasing salaries of execu-
tives in policy-making positions. We
have got to have men in public authority
who will give first consideration to ef-
ficiency and to the best interests of our
Government and its people. We have
got to quit making appointments because
of political debts or personal friendships.
Let me repeat, there are many capable
men in Government and many of them
deserve salary increases and many of
them could make more money in private
industry. Many of them who do leave
the Government do it because of inef-
ficiency and a realization that advance-
ment in higher positions does not come
alone because they have given their best
to their jobs and to the Government they
serve.
Again I repeat I do not believe the
President will have difficulty finding men
to fill high important positions.
Mr. YATES. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. REES. I yield to the distin-
guished gentleman from Illinois.
Mr. YATES. I heard the gentleman
say on other occasions that he is inter-
ested in our (: lovernment being operated
on as business-like a basis as possible.
Does not the gentleman agree with the
intent of this bill which will certainly
permit the attraction of many more cap-
able people to the service of the Govern-
ment, even assuming that they possess
the moral and spiritual qualities which
go with it?
Mr. REES. I wish that the views. of
the gentleman were carried out, but, un-
fortunately, these jobs do not all go to
people who have qualified because of
efficient and faithful service in our gov-
ernment. You can count on the fingers
of one hand the number of men holding
high responsible positions in this group
who secured their positions because of
their faithful and efficient service in Gov-
ernment. These people, with the ex-
ception of a very few, are appointed from
the outside.
Mr. PHILLIPS of California. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. REES. I yield to the gentleman
from California.
Mr. PHILLIPS of California. I am
glad to support the gentleman's amend-
ment, but does the gentleman think his
amendment will correct the inequalities
that exist in the matter of giving the
Chairman of the Atomic Energy Com-
mission $18,000 and the Under Secretary
of Agriculture $20,000?
Mr. REES. It will not correct the in-
equalities to which the gentleman has
called attention. It will be helpful how-
ever in that direction. As I said a while
ago, this legislation is inequitable in so
many respects and yet the leadership of
the House has allowed only 1 hour's time
in late afternoon, of which we are given
only 30 minutes during which to discuss a
piece of legislation that not only involves
the expenditure of an additional million
and a half dollars a year, but provides for
the drastic increase in salaries of a se-
lected top flight few in the executive de-
partment.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Kansas has expired.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gen-
tleman from California [Mr. MILLER].
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Chair-
man, the gentleman who preceded me
said that this is an important piece of
legislation. I agree with him in that re-
gard. However, I cannot agree that it
has not received full consideration by the
Committee on Post Office and Civil Serv-
ice of the House. Deliberations on this
type legislation were started during the
Eightieth Congress by a Senate com-
mittee headed by Senator Flanders. I
was invited to sit with that committee as
a guest. I had the privilege and oppor-
tunity of observing its work. I heard
former President Hoover, Mr. Steven-
son, head of the task force of the Hoover
Commission, our former colleague, Mr.
Ramspeck, and numerous other witnesses
testify as to the necessity for this legis-
lation. The adoption of this bill means
economy and efficiency in Government
and I would like you to follow this rea-
soning for the moment:
At the present time we have a $10,000
ceiling on the salaries that may be paid
to career employees in the Government
service. That is the block that is on
the salaries and the block that is on
efficiency in Government. As you have
heard it stated, we have raised the lower
level of employees by 56 percent, yet we
have only been able to raise the upper
level by less than 15 percent. A man
who had a $9,000 a year job stopped at
$10,000; a man who had an $8,000 a year
job stopped when the increases brought
his salary up to $10,000.
The Hoover Commission recognized
this weakness in our pay system and sets
it forth in several places in its report
as follows:
That in order to release the pressure. and
to establish a well-grounded merit system,
it is necessary to raise the salaries of top-
flight Government executives in order that
the pressure may be released and we can
raise the salaries of those career people who
make the Government their life work.
On page 22 of the Personnel Manage-
ment Report recommendation 11 reads:
Congress should raise the present salary
ceiling of $10,330 for career employees. At
the same time, it should increase legislative,
judicial, and executive salaries at the level
of assistant secretary, or its equivalent, and
above.
The Commission has considered confining
these recommendations to the executive
branch alone. Although aware that it is
exceeding its charter, the Commission has
concluded that to recommend any increase
in salary without taking the total picture
into consideration, would confuse rather than
clarify an action that is essential in strength-
ening our whole Government structure.
On page 37 of the Task Force Report
on Federal Personnel it says:
The present compensation of Government
officials should be increased, and a perma-
nent plan should be established for keeping
all salary levels, fixed by law, properly
adjusted.
There must be an adjustment in rela-
tion to the salaries of the appointed
executives and the salaries of those
people who are in the career service.
The second recommendation is:
Raise the ceiling of the top civil-service
grades (CAF-15 and P-8) to $15,000.
I submit that it would not be con-
sistent to raise the salaries of civil-
service employees, career employees,
within the executive departments to
$15,000 a year, and leave that of the
assistant secretaries, the work horses
of the departments, at a salary lower
than that paid to the career employees.
Oh, we have heard a lot about the in-
fluence of politics and that sort of thing.
That may be true for the glamour jobs,
such as the Secretary of State or even
the Under Secretaries. But, how about
the Assistant Secretaries, the people that
do the real executive work in the depart-
ments, who carry out the programs laid
down for them? How many of you can
name a dozen of these Under Secretaries?
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from California has expired.
(Mr. MILLER of California asked and
was given permission to revise and ex-
tend his remarks.)
Approved For Release 2000108/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, I yield 5
minutes to the gentlewoman from New
York [Mrs. ST. GEORGE],
Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Chairman,
the Committee on Post Office and Civil
Service labored long on the present leg-
islation. When we started considering
salary increases, the finances of this
Government and of this country were
very different from what they are today.
For that reason I, at the present time,
have very grave misgivings as to the wis-
dom of such legislation. It has been said
that this bill carries out some of the rec-
ommendations of the Hoover Commis-
sion, That is true. It has also been said
that Members of Congress are getting let-
ters by the thousands from people back
home advocating the putting into prac-
tice of the recommendations of the
Hoover Commission. But, I would like
to call your attention to one thing, the
people who are writing from back-home
have not read all of the recommendations
of the Hoover Commission. I doubt if
any Member now on the floor of this
House has read them all, and the reports
of the task force. But, the people back
home have -seen the headlines. And,
what do these headlines tell them? They
tell them that the Hoover Commission
has stated, and knows, that $3,000,000,-
000 can be saved in the Federal Govern-
ment, and that is what the people back
home are writing about.. They are writ-
ing for economy. They are worried, and
they have. reason to be worried about the
financial structure of this country and of
the western world. I do not believe that
those same people will be very happy to
see us in this House single out Just one
thing in the Hoover Commission, namely,
the increase of salaries for some of the
top brackets in the Executive branch of
the Government.
It has been said that timing is not very
important. On the contrary, Mr. Chair-
man, I believe that timing is all impor-
tant in Government and in life, and this
is not the time to increase the costs of
government.
Another thing, why do these increases
have to come at the top of the pyramid?
I admit that many of these top executives
are deserving of far higher salaries than
they are receiving, I have no doubt as to
that, but I am equally certain that they
may be in a far better position to get
along and to make ends meet, as has been
said here, on their present salaries than
many.employees in the lower brackets.
We are also constantly told that it is
difficult to get the caliber of people that
are needed in Government and especially
,in executive positions. That I believe is
a fallacy. The men and the women who
want to serve their Government do not
serve for cash. They know perfectly
well that Government can never com-
pete with private industry. But Gov-
ernment service gives us other things.
Government service gives us an inner
satisfaction. It gives us the feeling that
we are doing our patriotic duty. Not
only that, but Government service gives
prestige and many other things that no
private industry can give an individual.
Many of us have gotten to the point
where we know there,'are some things
that cannot be purchased with dollars.
Surely these men, in executive positions
feel that way.
We are certainly not worried about
Government employees leaving the Gov-
ernment when we hear that today the
Federal Government is taking in em-
ployees at the rate of 350 per day.
Therefore, that service cannot be so very
distasteful.
While I was sitting here I happened to
see a headline in a newspaper held by
one of my distinguished colleagues on
this rather spa ly filled floor. That
headline said thahere were 15,000 more
Federal jobs that had just been restored
by the Senate of the United States.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee, Mr.
Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gen-
tleman from Louisiana [Mr. MORRISON].
Mr. MORRISON. Mr. Chairman, this
bill has had a great deal of considera-
tion before the House Committee on Post
Office. and Civil Service. The committee
has had at least six meetings on this bill.
There has not been a single bill before
our committee that has had more time
or more deliberation than this bill, with
the one exception of the very involved
bill for the postal-rate increase. I can as-
sure the members of this committee that
each member of the committee had am-
ple time to give his or her reasons both
for and against each increase.
The original bill that was presented to
the committee was compromised, and
that bill which was submitted by the
chairman was finally adopted, with a few
exceptions. I can. say that this bill not
only has the endorsement and. support of'
many of those who appeared before the
committee, but it also has the approval
of, and is recommended for passage by
the American Bar Association. The
board of directors of the chamber of
commerce have endorsed this legislation.
I have a number of telegrams which were
sent to various Members of the Senate
and House recommending the passage of
this particular legislation. I will -read a
few of these telegrams to different Mem-
bers from some of the leaders in business
as well as leaders in other outstanding
organizations:
FEBRUARY 6,1949,
The Honorable HERBERT O'CorroR,
Senate Office Building,
Washington,, D. C.:
Hope it will be possible for you to support
bill to increase salaries of top Government
executives. Believe in long run it will be
economy measure. Have seen many instances
where first-rate men from education as well
as business felt they could not afford accept
important Government posts. Believe pro-
posed measure would help attract better
personnel.
Regards,
DONALD K. DAVID,
Dean, Harvard Business School.
FEBRUARY 9, 1949,
Senator HERBERT O'CONOR,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C.:
Having had the experience over the past
few years of seeing Government lose the
services of very able men because they could
no longer afford to work for the meager
salaries Government could pay, I respectfully
urge you to support Senator FLANDERS' bill
to increase salaries of 200 top Government
9331
executives. The cost will be comparatively
small and the rewards are certain to be
great.
W. L. CLAYTON,
Anderson & Clayton & Co,
FEBRUARY 7, 1949.
Senator HERBERT O'CONOR,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C.. -
I am strongly in favor of Flanders bill to
increase salaries of 200 top executives. Hope
you can give it your full support.
ALFRED C. FULLER,
Chairman, the Fuller Brush Co.,
Hartford, Conn.
FEBRUARY 7, 1949.
Senator HERBERT O'CONOR,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C.:
Understand bill, S. 498, introduced to in-
crease salary of some 200 top Government
executives is up for immediate consideration.
Government, the biggest business on earth,
needs the best administrators it can get.
Hoover is confident his recommendations
cannot be carried- out except by able ad-
ministrators and that salary increases are
fundamental in attracting right men. I agree
with him and hope you do and that you will
favor adoption of bill.
FRED LAZARUS, Jr.,
President, Federated Department
Stores, Inc.
MIDDLETOWN, OHIO, February 7, 1949.
Senator HERBERT O'CONOR,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C.:
I strongly urge your support of the bill
to increase Federal executive salaries.. After
spending a year as chairman of the;Ady,isory
Commission on service pay, which made
necessary a study of civilian business execu-
tives compensation and a comparison with
top Government executives' compensation,
I am convinced the Hoover recommendations
if approved will result in more economic
administration.
ARMCO STEEL CORP.,
CHARLES R. HOOK,
Chairman.
House Committee on Post Office
and Civil Service,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D. C.:
As a businessman,, I am happy to endorse
House bill 1689, authorizing increased pay for
heads of executive departments and inde-
pendent agencies. Efficient administration of
public business demands today payment of.
adequate compensation to policy-directing
heads in the executive branch of the Gov-
ernment. This will serve to attract to Gov-
ernment service the highest type of qualified
person and insure the retention of the experi-
enced and able public servant.
ERIC A. JOHNSTON,
President, Motion Picture
Association of America, Inc.
United States Senate,
Washington, D. C.:
As a businessman, I am happy to endorse
Senate bill 498, authorizing increased pay for
heads of executive departments and inde-
pendent agencies. Efficient administration of
public business demands today payment -of
adequate compensation to policy-directing
heads in the executive branch of the Gov-
ernment. This will serve to attract to Gov-
ernment service the highest type ct qualified
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
person and insure the retention of the experi-
enced and able public servant.
ERIC A. JOHNSTON,
President, Motion Picture
Association of America, Inc.
FEBRUARY 7, 1949.
The Honorable HERBERT O'CONOR,
United States Senate,
Washington, 1). C.:
I urge support of bill S. 498, to increase
salaries of 200 top Government officials, as it
would appear almost a governmental neces-
sity to adjust these salaries to modern con-
ditions.
JOHN D. 'BIGGERS,
President, Libbey Owens Ford Glass Co.
CANTON, N C., February 8, 1949.
Senator HERBERT O'CoNOR,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C..
I am greatly interested in Senator FLAN-
DERS' bill providing for increases in salaries
for certain keymen in Government and de-
sire to express hearty approval of Senator
FLANDERS' objectives. With all other busi-
nessmen and taxpayers, I am most anxious
to see great reductions in the cost of Gov-
ernment; but I am convinced that the Gov-
ernment cannot get and keep the type of
men it should have in positions of responsi-
bility unless it pays them salaries com-
mensurate with the skill and experience
required.
REUBEN B. ROBERTSON,
President, Champion Paper & Fiber Co.
FEBRUARY 7, 1949.
Hon. HERBERT O'CONOR,
Senate Office Building,
Washington, D. C.:
We New Englanders know value of dollar,
but hiring mediocre help is false economy.
Strongly urge your subcommittee to report
favorably S. 498. Mutt pay adequate salaries
to obtain competent men to handle biggest
business in world.
S. ABBOT SMITH,
THOMAS STRAHAN CO.,
Chelsea, Mass.
Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, I yield 3
minutes to the gentleman from Pennsyl-
vania [Mr. CORBETT].
Mr. CORBETT. Mr. Chairman, I do
not believe there is any great issue in-
volved here. We want these top execu-
tives to have an increase in salary. The
question is how much? I am going to
support the Rees amendment when it is
offered for the reason that ]: feel that the
increases granted by it are very adequate
at this time.
I know something else which I am sure
all of you also know, and that is that sal-
aries, once increased by this body, are
never decreased. If we find that the in-
creases which may be granted are not
sufficient, Congress can raise the salaries
again. But decreasing salaries is a job
that we have never been able to satisfac-
torily accomplish. The increases which
are granted by the bill are, in many cases,
simply too high to justify their adoption.
All the telegrams that have been read to
you and all of the recommendations that
have been brought out are in favor of
salary increases for these 244 executive
personnel, but they do not advocate any
specific amount. I believe you will find
on close examination of the Rees substi-
tute amendment that the Congress will,
by passing that amendment, be very gen-
erous with its executive officials.
We should :note also that everyone who
is supporting this bill is opening the gates
to all kinds of requests for salary in-
creases from the 2,000,000 or more Fed-
eral employees. So we ought to take note
of the fact that in pushing for these in-
creases ranging up to 100 percent, it is
going to be most difficult to refuse to give
increases to others who are doing the
hard job of efficiently carrying out the
functions of this Government.
So I am going to urge my colleagues
that at the proper time they support the
Rees amendment, f,?!ld if that should
prove in later years to be insufficient,
other increases can be granted.
The CHA[RMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. CoR-
BETT] has expired.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I yield 5 minutes to the gen-
tleman from Mississippi [Mr. WILLIAMS].
Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman, I
recognize the need for an increase in
salary for the heads of these depart-
ments. There has not been an increase
for these executives in quite a while. At
the same time, I also recognize the fact
that the increases should be reasonable
ones.
In the bill that is presented the House
there is a policy involved. I asked the
question of every witness who appeared
before our subcommittee whether or not
he believed that as a matter of policy,
without regard to whether or not con-
gressional salaries were adequate or in-
adequate, he would advocate more pay
for the heads of these executive depart-
ments than its received by Senator LUCAS,
the majority leader in the Senate, or
that receive,[[ by the majority leader of
the House of Representatives, who must
go home every 2 years and seek reelec-
tion at the hands of his people. I am still
awaiting an answer.
I believe the amendment that has been
offered by the gentleman from Kansas
[Mr. REES] is reasonable. I have dis-
cussed these figures with the gentleman
from Kansas. The figures that are pre-
sented by his substitute give an adequate
and reasonable raise to each of these de-
partment heads.
As was so appropriately stated by the
lady from New York [Mrs. ST. GEORGE],
people do not look to the compensation
received in Government as their only in-
centive for serving. They receive a part
of their compensation in the knowledge
that they have rendered a public service.
The way I look at it, a rich man does not
look at the salary he is to receive from
the Government of the United States for
his service as an incentive. The poor
man thinks that $10,000 or $12,000 is a
good salary and is delighted to get that
kind of job. So you are not going to help
the situation by raising these salaries 50
or 60 percent, as is called for in the com-
mittee bill. I am not willing to say, for
instance, that an under secretary of any
of the departments is worth as much to
his Government and to the people of the
United States as the majority leader or
the minority leader in either the House
or the Senate.
Mr. Chairman, I intend to speak again
when the gentleman from Kansas [Mr.
REES] has offered his substitute amend-
ment. It is my understanding that there
are available quit a number of copies of
the Rees amendment and also an outline
showing comparison between the Rees
amendment, the present bill as amended,
the bill as originally presQrlted, and the
present salaries drawn by these employ-
ees. I figured it up last night for the em-
ployees covered by the Rees amendment,
some 205, and found that their salaries
will be raised by 26.7 percent. In my
opinion, that is a reasonable increase.
Not one person appeared before our
subcommittee who could tell us of a sin-
gle instance of a man who was about to
resign because his salary was inadequate,
nor could they tell us of a single instance
in which a man would be replaced if this
new salary bill were not enacted, re-
placed by a better employee.
Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4
minutes to the gentleman from Iowa
,[Mr. GROSS], a member of the committee.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I take
this time to briefly state my opposition
to the pending bill, H. R. 1689.
I was a member of the subcommittee
that held hearings on this measure; I
voted against sending any such proposal
as this out of the Post Office and Civil
Service Committee.
I am not opposed to reasonable and
equitable salary increases, but this pro-
posal is unthinkable, unreasonable and
inequitable. What is sacred about a $2,-
000 or $2,500 annual salary increase?
Yet nearly all these increases are many
times that amount.
In the hearings on H. R. 1689 not a
single witness attempted to justify the
proposed increases on the basis of in-
creased cost of living. Over and over
again we heard the story that salaries
at the proposed figures had to be paid
to keep private industry from taking men
from Government service. Yet not a
single witness could or would produce
figures to substantiate claims that those
leaving Government service for private
employment had bettered themselves
materially.
In considering this outlandish salary
increase proposal let's also keep in mind
that many of those benefited under this
measure are supplied with automobiles,
chauffeurs and practically unlimited
expense accounts.
I say again that I am not opposed to
reasonable salaries for Government of-
ficials. But in this matter, let us start
with the little fellow at the bottom of
the list-raise these workers where in-
creases are needed. If there's anything
left then apply it at the top. In other
words, let us reverse the old procedure
of giving the crumbs to the little fellow
at the bottom of the :list.
Yesterday, President Truman told
newspaper reporters he is bullish about
the economic condition of this country.
In the same issue of the same paper-
Washington Star-Secretary of Agricul-
ture Brannan is quoted as saying the
economic situation of farmers is becom-
ing serious. The President ought to
know that in a Nation, whose basic in-
dustry is agriculture, there is no reason
for feeling bullish when the economic
situation of farmers is serious.
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
Any such salary Increases as proposed in their lines finally left the department
here are not compatible with the eco- because they could get higher salaries in
nomic and debt situation that confronts outside positions; yet it was stated they
this country. Further unnecessary ex- would have stayed if the salary were.
penditures on the part of the Govern- raised from $10,000 to $15,000. We tried
ment will only produce greater deficits to meet that situation in the Appropria-
and no mater how thin President Tru- tions Committee by allowing three sal-
man slices his bullishness the result will aries to go above $10,000, but not over
still be the same. $15,000, but another body of the Congress
This, bill will set a had precedent in the decided against this change. This does
matter of salaries and wages. It should not mean we have to take every salary in
have been amended in committee, not Washington and raise an assistant secre-
on the floor of the House. I am against tary, for example, above men who admin-
it and whether or not there is a roll ister large and important Government
call my vote is hereby recorded in op- agencies.
position. Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, I yield the
Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, I yield 4 remainder of my time to the gentleman
minutes to the gentleman from Cali- from Michigan [Mr. DONDERO].
fornia [Mr. PHILLIPS]. Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Chairman, I had
(Mr. PHILLIPS of California asked not Intended to speak on this bill, but
and was given permission to revise and there has come to my attention what is
extend his remarks.) taking place In the city of Detroit or in
Mr. PHILLIPS of California. Mr. the Detroit area. I think it worth while
Chairman, this bill should be returned to to mention it to the House. Canada has
the place whence it came and in due time repealed its wartime excise taxes. As a
returned to the lodge, and if a member result of that, the jewelers in Detroit
of the committee itself does not offer a find that people are crossing the Detroit
motion to recommit I shall do so on the River to Windsor, Canada, just i mile
basis of the inequalities which appear in away, to make their purchases. They
the bill, go to Canada and buy their jewelry
If the Members will read the bill they where there is no excise tax. We still
will-see tvhat I,. mea., The Under Sec- have an excise tax of 20 percent on
retary of any department, the Under Jewelry. People are crossing the river
Secretary of Agriculture, for instance, is 'to buy transportation tickets because
to receive $20,000 under the bill, but the they can buy them 15 percent less than
Chairman of the Atomic Energy Com- they can buy them In the city of Detroit.
mission, who has one of the most respon- Why? Because the United States has
sible jobs in the United States today, is not reduced its wartime excise taxes and
to receive $18,000. The head of the, CIA Canada has. There is no restraint on
is increased f $1n rp; we public spending. No effort toward econ-
"E'7gar Tdoover_head of the FBI, is in- omy, and there is no hope for the re-
creased from, $14000 to X15,000,
Every one of these Under tecretaries
and Assistant Secretaries will receive
more than Senators and Congressmen,
yet do not have the expenses laid upon
them that are laid upon Members of
Congress:
The Chairman of the Council of Eco-
nomic Advisers is to be rewarded with a
salary of $17,500 while, as I said, the As-
sistant Secretaries of the various depart-
ments are to receive as much as he will
get.
The head. of the Reconstruction Fi-
nance Corporation, handling billions and
billions of dollars, is to be given a salary
of $16,000 a year while the Under Secre-
tary of Commerce is to receive $20,000 a
year.
Mr. Chairman, there is no justification
for this lack of balance in the bill about
which I am speaking. I have so little
time that I cannot go into more detail,
however if the Members will take the list
of salaries in the mimeographed state-
ment, or in the bill itself, they will under-
stand what I mean by saying this bill
should be sent back to the committee for
the correction of its obvious inequalities.
Mr. Chairman, what brought up a bill
like this? At the present time there are
probably not more than a few dozen sal-
aries in the entire Government picture
that actually 'need to be increased, and
these are specialists of various kinds.
There are specialists in the Department
of Agricuture, with whom the gentleman
from Georgia, who has just risen, Is fa-
miliar, Two or three of these specialists
duction of taxes. Only a change in pub-
lic opinion or collapse of our economic
system will halt this spending spree.
I realize this is a small bill, with prob-
ably less than $1,250,000 involved, and
no doubt there are many justifications in
this bill for an increase in salary. One,
in particular, Ithink; should be increased
more than it is, and that is the salary of
J. Edgar Hoover, head of the FBI. That
agency has served this Nation, in a
splendid way" and has kept a leash on
those within our midst who would de-
stroy this Government and its way of life.
In my opinion there is no restraint on
Federal spending here in the Nation's
Capital. If one looks at the report of
the Secretary of the Treasury, he will
become alarmed. Here are his figures
which I am going to give you. It shows
that there is a change of over $10,-
000,000,000 in receipts and expenditures
of this Government in the short space of
12 months. When will Federal spend-
ing be curtailed or reduced? Not one of
us in this body nor anyone else has ever
been able to beat simple arithmetic. It
cannot be done. As an example of pub-
lie spending, take the subject of eggs.
It has cost the taxpayers of this country
$93,000,000 for the support price on eggs
alone during the last year. That Is just
one thing.
In addition to that, here are the figures
from the Secretary of the Treasury sum-
marizing budget results for the fiscal
year 1949 compared with 1948. In 1948-
and I am speaking of the fiscal year-
the receipts of this Government were
9333
$42,250,000,000; for 1949, $38,000,000,000,
a drop of almost $4,000,000,000 in re-,
ceipts.
What 'about expenditures? In 1948
expenditures were approximately $34,-
000,000,000; in 1949, approximately $40,-
000,000,000, or an increase of over $6,-
000,000,000, and the deficit we find this
year, as it ended on July 1 for the fiscal
year, was $1,810,000,000. The difference
between receipts in 1948 and in 1949,
.and the expenditures amount to $8,419,-
000,000, or a total change of over $10,-
000,000,000.
I admit that $1,250,000 provided in this
bill will not provide an enormous strain
on-the financial structure of the Govern-
ment, but it does become alarming when
we consider the trend in this country.
Mr. PACE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. DONDERO. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Georgia.
Mr. PACE. I just wanted to state
that it seems to me very unfair to grant
Mr. Hoover, who is trying to protect the
security of this Nation, a raise of only
$1,000, while you are granting men of
lesser or insignificant responsibility
raises of from $7,000 to $10,000.
Mr. DONDERO. The gentleman is
entirely correct, and I agree with him.
Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. DONDERO. I yield to the gen-
tleman from Kansas.
Mr. REES. I will say to the gentle-
man that in the original bill J. Edgar
Hoover was not even included, but the
committee put him in for an additional
$1,000.
Mr. DONDERO. Yes, I understand
that; and when we consider that in-
corded to others, I think it is Insignia-__A
cant.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Michigan has expired.
(Mr. DONDERO asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
rr_arks. )
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I yield such time as he may
desfre to the gentleman from Norta Caro-
lina [Mr. DEANEI.
Mr. DEANE. Mr. Chairman, I join
with my colleagues who look upon our
Federal budget today with concern. The
gentleman from Michigan [Mr. DONBE%Q]
spoke apparently in support of the repeal
of the excise taxes. I realize that these
were wartime taxes and we should take
wise, action in determining what is best
for our entire economy with reference to
excise taxes. However, I think the gen-
tleman needs to recall the action of the
Eightieth Congress and be frank enough
to admit that we have the excise taxes
today because they were made permanent
during the Eightieth Congress in order to
effect the Eightieth Congress income tax
cut. It Is generally conceded that the
income-tax cut made during the Eight-
ieth Congress could not have-been done
without the retention of the excise taxes.
Therefore, in a large measure the con-
dition of the Federal budget position to-
day is due to the action of the Eightieth
Congress in cutting income taxes at a
time when there was little demand for
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
9334
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
such action except; from those best able
to pay. I recognize the fact that it now
apears perhaps unwise to increase taxes,
but we should certainly orient our think-
ing in terms of what is best in carrying
out the services of the Federal Govern-
ment and not make the mistakes that
were made in the Eightieth Congress in
breaking down the tax-producing meth-
ods that are so essential if we maintain
the services demanded by the people of
this country.
I am one of those who believe in pro-
tecting our Federal economy by bring-
ing into the Federal service our best and
most able administrators. Therefore,
must we not, Mr. Chairman, take action
now in behalf of our national economy
by extending some degree of considera-
tion to those key men in the Federal
service who must have some considera-
tion from this Congress. . We certainly
will take favorable action if we believe
in good administration.
At the present moment it appears that
there is pending before the Congress for
national defense a suggested appropria-
tion of $13,000,000. I submit, Mr. Chair-
man, that we could very easily suggest
some real economy in the national-de-
fense program to the end that the
amount of money represented by the in-
crease in Federal expenditures in this
bill could easily be absorbed without in-
jury whatsoever to the national-defense
program.
Mr. Chairman, the Comptroller Gen-
eral of the United States, the Honorable
Lindsay C. Warren, is looked upon by all
of us who know him as one of the most
outstanding public servants in the Fed-
eral service. W ithin recent days Mr.
Warren appeared before the Subcom-
mittee on Compensation and Personnel,
Committee on Post Office anti Civil Serv-
ice, United States Senate, in support of
additional compensation for key per-
sonnel in the Federal service. I would
like to quote from the statement by our
able and outstanding Comptroller Gen-
eral:
I served for 16 years as a Member of the
House of Representatives. Throughout that
period and in my present capacity as Comp-
troller General, I have been deeply concerned
at the growing difficulty of attracting able
men to the service of the Government and
keeping them there. I do not intend what
is said here to be taken as criticism of any
officer now in the Government. Indeed, I
have said many times that we have some of
the finest administrators to be found any-
where. Rather it is my hope that something
will be done to keep these mean and to ob-
tain the services of others of equal caliber.
The task of administering a large and far-
flung organization is by and large one of get-
ting the right men for the right jobs and
retaining them. The necessary formula for
a successful private business :Is to get the
best men you can to run it, whether at high
cost or low. Such necessity is tenfold greater
in the Government-the biggest business in
the world-where the stakes are so high, the
operations so broad, and the pitfalls so deep.
We cannot hope to get and retain such men
if we will not pay the price. Right now I
think it will be conceded that the reward-
if it can be called that-for public service
too often is pitifully inadequate. Too often
the compensation is trivial when compared
to the job being done and what could be
earned elsewhere. It has driven out many
of those best qualified, has created hardship
on those who stay at their posts through
devotion to duty, and operated as a deter-
rent to any effective injection of new blood.
There are both rewards and penalties for
those in public office. I do not advocate
that the Government meet salaries offered
by industry, because that cannot be af-
forded. But at least the salaries should be
such as to attract and keep able public men
without too great a sacrifice on their part.
Widely in the Government service there are
spread groups of fine employees who demand
and are paid the prevailing wage scale. The
Congress requires that the same scale be
paid by those holding large Government con-
tracts. I know no justification at all for
denial of somewhat more nearly prevailing
wages for the relatively few executives who
are responsible for directing the far-flung
activities of the Government. It is obvious
that some (I repeat some) narrowing of the
widespread in executive salaries between pri-
vate and public business is called for.
I do not plead the cause of any job holder,
or ask for help or benefits for anyone, no
matter how deserving. It has been and is
my policy-though sometimes seeming to be
a voice crying In the wilderness-to speak
out for the interests of the Government,
which means fo;r the interests of the United
States as a whole. Government is called
upon to be, in a worldly sense, the savior
and protector of all of us, our bulwark for a
free economy an a troubled and confused
world. Is it not obvious we hurt ourselves,
that is, our country and its people, when we
fail to provide the wherewithal to get done
the job the people demand? Are we not be-
ing penny wise, pound foolish?
What are the facts? I know of my own
knowledge of a number of agency heads who
after fine and faithful service were forced
to leave for the greener pastures elsewhere,
and I know of many other able men whose
services the Government was denied because
in this competitive world the biggest busi-
ness of them all could not reward them ac-
cording to their worth. The fact is that in
some quarters the turn-over has been so fre-
quent that no sooner do we in our daily
contacts get acquainted with those in charge
than thej are changed and new ones come in.
The sad part its that many leave just as
they have learned to know their jobs and
are in position to render service of real
value-and sometimes even before. Some
executive positions in the Government have
gone begging for months.
In my reports to Congress I have called
to account time and time again agencies
which were poorly run, inadequately staffed,
incompetently managed. This has been done
in pursuance of my duty under the law, and
with full knowledge that the need is for bet-
ter management in the executive positions.
We have all said we must have better men
to turn the wheels of Government. But here
as anywhere else, you get only what you
pay for.
Anyone who really seeks better Govern-
ment, who opposes waste, extravagance, and
inefficiency, will further that cause by sup-
porting this legislation to give the President
the best human equipment to run this com-
plicated Government machine. I think this
bill goes far-perhaps here and there not
far enough-to supply that need. I endorse
it wholeheartedly and congratulate you gen-
tlemen for your resolution to do something
to remedy a bad situation in our Govern-
ment.
Mr. Chairman, there has long been a
compelling need to increase the rates of
compensation of heads and assistant
heads of the executive departments and
other officials of the Government who
are charged with much responsibility. I
sincerely feel that some action in this di-
rection must be taken if the Government
is to obtain and keep the services of
qualified executives. The Government
may be able to obtain the services of per-
sons to fill these responsible positions at
the present salary rates only if it disre-
gards the qualifications of such persons.
Once the services of capable persons
are obtained for these executive posi-
tions, consideration must be given to the
retention of them. Any appreciable
turn-over in top-flight executives is not
in the interest of the Government.
Many top-flight executives will remain
in these Government positions where ex-
traordinary ability is required for a lim-
ited time only unless there is some pro-
vision for adequate salaries.
The annual salaries of top executives
in outside industry, in positions compar-
able to the positions covered in this pro-
posed legislation, range from $75,000 to
$300,000 per annum.
(Mr. DEANE asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I yield the balance of my time
to the gentleman from Minnesota [Mr.
MCCARTHY].
Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, I
take this time to correct one or two of
the remarks made in debate by the oppo-
nents of this pay increase.
The gentleman from Pennsylvania ob-
served that once pay increases are given
there is no tradition of any reduction.
I would remind him of the Economy Act
of 1934, which is within the memory of
most of us, when Government salaries
were reduced by 15 percent.
The opponents of this increase are,
however, in good tradition in insisting
upon low pay for public servants. The
expression of this attitude goes back to
the Constitutional Convention in 1887.
At that Convention, Mr. Gerry, from
Massachusetts, stated:
One of the principal evils in representative
government arises from the want of due pro-
vision for those employed in the adminis-
tration of government. It would seem to be
a maxim of democracy to starve the public
servant.
For the information of the committee,
a comparison of the salaries now being
paid to the civilian employees of the Gov-
ernment with those which this House ap-
proved for the members of the armed
services points out some rather interest-
ing contrasts. At the present time, ac-
cording to the committee report, there
are slightly over 3,000 civilian employees
who receive more than $10,000 a year, out
of about 2,000,000 employees. Under the
pay bill we have just passed there will
be 27,784 members of the armed services
who will receive more than $10,000 per
year, out of slightly more than 1,500,000
members.
There has been some concern expressed
here that Government employees should
receive a good deal of satisfaction which
is nonfinancial or nonpecuniary in na-
ture. Let me say to the members of the
committee that if this pay bill is passed
Government employees will still have an
opportunity to enjoy that kind of satis-
faction. The salaries proposed in this
bill are so far below those paid in com-
parable positions in private industry that
Approved For Release. 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 1949
~T F
Approved Fbr,;ease 1 : CIA-RD P57-00384R001000090014-9
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
public servietr; will not be for sale and
loyalty ancl?`patriotism not reduced to a
cash-pay ent basis.
(Mr. cCARTHY asked and was given
permiion to revise and extend his re-
T e CHAIRMAN. The time of the
ge Leman from Minnesota has expired.
A time has expired.
The Clerk will read the bill for amend-
ent.
The Clerk read as follows:
Be it enacted, etc., That the rate of basic
compensation of the head of each executive
department and of the Secretary of Defense
shell be $25,000 per annum.
SEC. 2. (a) The rate of Itisic compensation
of the Chairman of the Atomic Energy Com-
mission, the Administrator for Economic Co-
operation, the Comptroller General of the
United States, the Chairman of the Council
of Economic Advisers, the Director of the
Bureau of the Budget, the Chairman of the
National Security Resources Board, the Fed-
eral Security Administrator, the Administra-
tor of Veterans' Affairs, the Chairman of the
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, each Under Secretary of an execu-
tive department, the .saistant to the Attor-
ney General, the Solicitor General of the
United States, and the First Assistant Post-
master General shall be $22,500 per annum.
(b) Section 105 of title 3 of the United
States Code is amended to read as follows:
"COMPENSATION OF SECRETARIES AND EXECUTIVE,
ADMINISTRATIVE, AND STAFF ASSISTANTS TO
PRESIDENT
"SEC. 105. The President is authorized to
fix the compensation of the six administra-
tive assistants authorized to be appointed
under section 106 of this title, of the Execu-
tive Secretary of the National Security Coun-
cil, and of`five other secretaries or other im-
mediate staff assistants in the White House
Office as follows: Two at rates not exceeding
$22,500 per annum, three at rates not ex-
ceeding $20,000 per annum, and seven at rates
not exceeding $17,500 per annum."
(c) The first. sentence of section 106 of
title 3 of the United States Code is amended
to read as follows: "The President is author-
ized to appoint not to exceed six administra-
tive assistants and to fix their. compensation
in accordance with section 105 of this title."
SEC. 3. (a) The rate of basic compensation
of the Housing and Home Finance Adminis-
trator, the Federal Works Administrator, the
members (other than the Chairman) of the
Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve
System, the members (other than the Chair-
man) of the Council of Economic Advisers,
the members (other than the Chairman) of
the Atomic Energy Commission, the Public
Printer? the Librarian of Congress, the
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Di-
rector, the Chairman of the Munitions Board,
the Chairman of the Research and Develop-
ment Board, the Director of Central Intelli-
gence the efs puryy"-A'diti1iiistra or_for Eco-
omie Cooperation, the Assistant Comptroller
General of the United States, the Assistant
Director of the Bureau of the Budget, the
Executive Assistant Administrator of Veter-
ans' Affairs, and the Assistant Federal Secur-
ity Administrator shall be $20,000 per annum.
(b) The- first sentence of section'803 of
title 28 of the United States Code (relating to
the salary of the Director of the Administra-
tive Office of the United States Courts) is
amended to read as follows:
"The Director shall receive a salary of
$20,000 a year."
SEC. 4. (a) The rate of basic compensation
of the members of the Home Loan Bank
Board; the Public Housing Commissioner;
the Federal Housing Commissioner; the
Housing Expediter; the War Assets Admin-
istrator; the Director of Selective Service;
the Director of Aeronautical Research of the
National Advisory `Committee for Aero-
nautics; the Archivist of the United States;
of all members of the Civil Aeronautics
Board; the Displaced Persons Commission;
the Board of Directors of the Export-Import
Bank of Washington; the Federal Communi-
cations Commission; the Board of Directors
of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corpora-
tion (including the Comptroller of the Cur-
rency); the Federal Power Commission; the
Federal Trade Commission; the Interstate
Commerce Commission; the National Labor
Relations Board; the National Mediation
Board; the Railroad Retirement Board; the
Board of Directors of the Reconstruction
Finance Corporation; the Securities and Ex-
change Commission; the Board of Directors
of the Tennessee Valley Authority; the Civil
Service Commission; the United States
Maritime Commission; the United States
Tariff Commission; the Indian Claims Com-
mission; the War Claims Commission; the
Philippine War Damage Comnssion; the
Board of Commissioners of the District of
Columbia; of the . General Counsel of the
National Labor Relations Board; each Assist-
ant Secretary of an executive department
(including the Fiscal Assistant Secretary of
the Treasury); each Assistant Attorney Gen-
eral; the Assistant Solicitor General of the
United States; the Counselor of the Depart-
ment of State; the Second, Third, and Fourth
Assistant Postmaster General; the Associate
Federal Mediation and Conciliation Director;
t12"lZeuty Director of Central Intelligence;
the Philipp fie Alien Property Administrator;
the Chief Assistant Librarian of Congress;
the Deputy Public Printer; the Architect of
the Capitol; the Assistant Federal Works Ad-
ministrator; and of the Governors of Alaska,
Hawaii, the Virgin Islands, and the Panama
Canal shall be at the rate of L17,500peer
annum. 146standing the act of Febru-
ary 23,'1931 (5 U. S. C. 152a), the salary of
the legal adviser of the Department of state
shall not be increased as a result of this act.
(b) The second sentence of section 603
of title 28 of the United States Code (relat-
ing to the compensation of the Assistant
Director of the Administrative Office of the
United States Courts) is amended to read-as
follows: "The Assistant Director shall receive
a salary of $17,500 a year."
SEC. 5. In any case in which the chairman
or other head of a board or commission, the
rate of basic compensation for members of
which is prescribed by section 4 of this act,.
has important duties or responsibilities not
imposed upon other members of such board
or commission, the President is authorized
in his discretion to fix the compensation of
such chairman or other head at the rate
of $20,000 per annum.
SEC. 8. (a) Section 804 of the Postal Rate
Revision and Federal Employees Salary Act
of 1948 is hereby repealed effective as of July
3, 1948. No additional compensation shall be
payable by reason of the enactment of this
section for any period prior to the date of
enactment of this section for any period
prior to the date of enactment of this act in
the case of any person who is not an em-
ployee in or under the municipal govern-
ment of the District of Columbia on such
date of enactment.
(b) Effective as of the first day of the first
pay period which began after June 30, 1948,
each of the rates of basic compensation pro-
vided by sections 412 and 415 of the Foreign
Service Act of 1946 (U. S. C., title 22, secs.
867 and 870) which do not exceed $10,000 are
hereby increased by $330. No additional com-
pensation shall be payable by reason of the
enactment of this section for any period
prior to the date of enactment of this act
in the case of any person who is not a Foreign
Service officer or a Foreign Service staff offi-
cer or employee on such date.
Mr. REES.. Mr. Chairman, I offer an
amendment in the nature of a substitute.
Mr. JRRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairm n, this bill is in the form of a
comm tee amendment. The original
bill as stricken out and this language
ins ted. I think the committee amend-
m t should be perfected by any-amend
m nts before the substitute is taken up.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read
t e committee amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Committee amendment: Strike out all after
he enacting clause and insert "That the rate
of basic compensation of the head of each
executive department and of the Secretary
of Defense shall be $25,000 per aiThum.
"SEC. 2. (a) The rate of basic compensa-
tion of the Administrator for Economic Co-
operation, the Comptroller General of the
United States, the Chairman of the Council
of Economic Advisers, the Director of the
Bureau of the Budget, the Chairman of the
National Security Resources Board, the Fed-
eral Security Administrator, the Administra-
tor of Veterans' Affairs, each Under Secretary
of an executive department, the Assistant to
the Attorney General, the Solicitor General
of the United States, and the First Assistant
Postmaster General shall be $20,000 per
annum.
" (b) Section 105 of title 8 of the United
States Code is amended to read as follows:
"'COMPENSATION OF SECRETARIES AND EXECU-
TIVE, ADMINISTRATIVE, AND STAFF ASSISTANTS
TO PRESIDENT
"'? 105. The President is authorized to fix
the compensation of the six administrative
assistants authorized to be appointed under
section 106 of this title, of the Executive Sec-
retary of the National Security Council, and
of five other .secretaries or other immediate
staff assistants in the White House Office as
follows: Two at rates not exceeding $20,000
per annum, three at-rates not exceeding $18,-
000 per annum, and, seven at rates not
exceeding $16,000 per annum."'
(c) The'first sentence of section 106 of
title 3 of the United States Code is amended
to read as follows: "The President is au-
thorized to appoint not to exceed six ad-
ministrative assistants and to fix their'
compensation in accordance with section 105
of this title."
"SEC. 3. (a) The rate of basic compensation
of the Hpusing and Home Finance Adminis-
trator, the Federal Works Administrator, the
Chairman of the Atomic Energy Commission,
the Chairman of the Munitions Board, the
Chairman of the Research and Development
Board, the Deputy Administrator for Eco-
nomic Cooperation, the Assistant Comptroller
General of the United States, the Assistant
Director of the Bureau of the Budget, and
the Deputy Administrator of Veterans'
Affairs shall be $18,000 per annum.
"(b) The first sentence of section 603 of
title 28 of the United States Code (relating
to the'salary of the Director of the Adminis-
trative Office of the United States Courts) is
amended to read as follows;
"'The Director shall receive a salary of
$17,500 a year."'
"(c) The rate of basic compensation of
the Public Printer, the Librarian of Con-
gress, the members (other than the Chair-
man) of the Council of Economic Advisers,
the Director of Central Intelligence, the Fed-
eral Me a n andJonciliation Director, and
the Assistant Federal Security Administrator
shall be 17,500 Der annum.
EC. . The rate of basic compensation
of the members of the Board of Governors
of the Federal Reserve System; the Director
of Aeronautical Research of the National
Advisory Committee for Aeronautics; mem-
bers of the Civil Aeronautics Board; the
Chairman of the Board of Directors of the
Export-Import Bank of Washington; mem-
bers of the Federal Communications Com-
mission; members of the Board of Directors
of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corpora-
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 9336
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
tion (including the Comptroller of the Cur-
rency); members of the Federal Power Com-
mission; members of the Federal Trade Com-
mission; members of the Interstate Com-
merce Commission; members of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board; members of
the National Mediation Board; members of
the Railroad Retirement Board; the Chair-
man of the Board of Directors of the Re-
construction Finance Corporation; mem-
bers of the Securities and Exchange Com-
mission; members of the Board of Directors
of the Tennessee Valley Authority; mem-
bers of the Civil Service Commission; the
Chairman of the United States Maritime
Commission; members of the United States
Tariff Commission; members (other than
the Chairman) of the Atomic Energy Com-
mission; the General Counsel of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board; the Architect
of the Capitol; and the Assistant Federal
Works Administrator shall be at the rate of
$16,000 per annum.
"SEC. 5. (a) The rate of basic compensa-
tion of the Housing Expediter; the War
Assets Administrator; the Director of Se-
lective Service; the Archivist of the United
States; members of the Displaced Persons
Commission; members of the Indian Claims
Commission; members, of the War Claims
Commission; members of the Philippine War
Damage Commission; members of the Board
of Commissioners of the District of Colum-
bia; each Assistant Secretary of an executive
department (including the Fiscal Assistant
Secretary of the Treasury); each Assistant
Attorney General; the Assistant Solicitor
General of the United States; the Counselor
of the Department of State; the Second,
Third, and Fourth Assistant Postmasters
General; the Associate Federal Mediation
and Conciliation Director; the_ Deputy_ _D17_
rector of Central Intelligance; the Philip-
pine Allen Property Administrator; the
Chief Assistant Librarian of Congress; the
Deputy Public Printer; members (other
than the Chairman) of the Board of Di-
rectors of the Export-Import Bank of Wash-
ington; members (other than the Chair-
man) of the Board of Directors of the Re-
construction Finance Corporation; members
(other than the Chairman) of the United
States Maritime Commission; Administrator,
Production and Marketing Administration;
Commissioner of Internal Revenue; Director
of the Bureau of Prisons; director, Federal
Bureau of Investigation; Commissioner of
Public Roads; Commissioner of Public
Buildings; Commissioner of Community
Facilities; Commissioner of Immigration and
Naturalization; administrator, Rural Electri-
fication Administration; Commissioner for
Social Security; Commissioner of Reclama-
tion; chief, Soil Conservation Service; Com-
missioner of Customs; Governor of the Farm
Credit Administration; Chief Forester of
the Forest Service; Administrator of the
Farmers Home Administration; the three
Special Assistants to the Secretary of De-
fense; and of the Governors of Alaska, Ha-
waii, the Virgin Islands, and the Panama
Canal shall. 4p, At- the, rate of $15,000 per
annum. Notwithstanding section 30 of the
act of May 24, 1924, as amended (U. S. C.,
title 5, sec. 152a), the salary of the Legal
Adviser of the Department of State shall
continue to be at the rate of $10,330 per
annum.
"(b) The second sentence of section 603
of title 28 of the United States Code (relat-
ing to the compensation of the Assistant Di-
rector of the Administrative Office of the
United States Courts) is amended to read
as follows: "The Assistant Director shall re-
ceive a salary of $15,000 a year."
"(c) The rate of compensation of the
Legislative Counsel of the House of Repre-
sentatives and of the Legislative Counsel of
the Senate shall be $12,000 per, annum.
"SEc. 6. In any caes in which the chair-
man or other head of a board or commis-
Sion and the other members of such board
or commission receive t;)ie same rate of basic
compensation under This act, and such
chairman or other head has important duties
or responsibilities not imposed upon other
members of such board or commission, the
President is authorized in his discretion to fix
the compensation of such chairman or other
head at the rate of $18,000 per annum.
"SEc 7. (a) Section 304 of the Postal Rate
Revision and Federal Employees Salary Act
of 1948 is hereby repealed effective as of
July 3, 1948. No additional compensation
shall be payable by reason of the enactment
of this section for any period prior to the
effective date of this act in the case of any
person who is not an employee in or under
the municipal government of the District
of Columbia on such date.
"(b) Effective, as of the first day of the
first pay period which began after June 30,
1948, each of the rates of basic compensa-
tion provided by sections 412 and 415 of the
Foreign Service Act of 1946 (U. S. C., title 22,
secs. 867 and 870) which do not exceed
$10,000 are hereby increased by $330. No
additional compensation shall be payable by
reason of the enactment of this section for
any reriod prior to the effective date of this
ac in the case of any person who is not a
Foreign Service officer, a Foreign Service Re-
serve officer, or a Foreign Service staff officer
or employee on such date.
"(c) No person whose compensation is in-
creased by this section shall be entitled to
any overtime pay, or compensation for night
and holiday work, as provided in sections 201,
301, and 302 of the Federal Employees Pay
Act of 1945, as amended, based on the addi-
tional compensation provided by this section
for any pay period ending prior to the ef-
fective date of this act.
"SEc. 8. This act shall take effect on the
first day of the first pay period which begins
after the date of enactment of this act."
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee (interrupt-
ing the reading of the committee amend-
ment). Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous
consent that the committee amendment
be considered as read and that it be open
for amendment at any point.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Tennessee?
There was no objection.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I have several amendments at
the Clerk's desk, which I now offer.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendments offered by Mr. MURRAY of
Tennessee:
On page 7, line 3, insert before the word
"each", the following: "the Administrator of
General Services."
On page 7, line 25, and page 8, line 1, strike
out "the Federal Works Administrator."
On page 9, lines 17 and 18, strike out "As-
sistant Federal Works Administrator", and
insert in lieu thereof the following: "Deputy
Administrator of General Services."
On page 9, line 21, strike out "War Assets
Administrator", and Insert in lieu thereof,
the following "'Director of the Bureau of Fed-
eral Supply."
Page 9, line 23, insert after "States", the
following: "the Assistant Architect of the
Capitol."
Mr. ROGERRS of Florida. Mr. Chair-
man, a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will
state it.
Mr. ROGE:ELS of Florida. Mr. Chair-
man, I have an amendment to section 3
on page 8. 'Would it take precedence
over everything after that, or will I have
the opportunity to offer it after the gen-
tleman from Tennessee discusses these
amendments'?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Florida may be recognized to offer
his amendment after the pending amend-
ments are disposed of.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman and Members of the Commit-
tee, these amendments, with the excep-
tion of the last amendment which was
read by the Clerk are offered because of
the enactment of the Federal Property
Administrative Services Act of 1949,
which was approved on June 30, 1949.
This act transferred the functions of the
War Assets Administration, the Federal
Works Agency, the National Archives,
and the Bureau of Federal Supply to the
new agency known as the General Serv-
ices Administration.
Because of this consolidation, the
amendments are necessary to eliminate
from H. R. 1689 the following positions:
Federal Works Administrator, Assistant
Federal Works Administrator; and the
War Assets Administrator. All three of
these positions were abolished by this
act creating the Federal Property and
Administrative Services. The act also
provides for the appointment of an Ad-
ministrator of General Services. He has
already been appointed. His nomina-
tion has been confirmed by the Senate.
The man is Mr. Jess Larson. The pur-
pose of these amendments is to strike
from this bill the War Assets Adminis-
trator, the Federal Works Administrator,
the Deputy Federal Works Administra-
tor, and to put in Mr. Larson as head of
the Administrative Services Agency, put-
ting him in the $20,000 bracket, because
he has a most responsible position, hav-
ing charge of public buildings, Federal
works, ordering supplies, public roads,
and the National Archives. Since the
position of the Federal Works Adminis-
trator and the Deputy Federal Works
Administrator and the War Assets Ad-
ministrator have already been abolished
by act of Congress, I am sure there can
be no objection to striking those posi-
tions out of this bill and having the Ad-
ministrator of General Services, and also
the Deputy Administrator of General
Services included in the bill.
I propose to put the Administrator of
General Services in the $20,000 bracket
and the Deputy General Services Ad-
ministrator in the $16,000 bracket. That
is the purpose of the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendments offered by the gentle-
man from Tennessee [Mr. MURRAY].
The amendments were agreed to.
Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, I offer an
amendment in the nature of a substitute
for the committee amendment.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Chair-
man, I have a perfecting amendment to
the committee amendment, which would
take priority, as I understand it.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re-
port the amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from Kansas [Mr. REES].
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Chair-
man, I have a perfecting amendment to
the committee amendment, which would
take precedence, in my opinion, over the
substitute.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair desires
to make a statement. There is pending
before the Committee a committee
amendment. The gentleman from Kan-
sas [Mr. REES] has offered an amend-
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11: CIA-RDPi~-b038 R0D'UQ ( 1 ' 9
1949
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
other Member, can offer amendments zicie.
SEC. 3. The rate of basic compensation of
perfecting the committee amendment. the Chairman of the Munitions Board, the
The order will be, first, the amendment s Chairman of the Research and Development
perfecting the committee amendments; ,Board, the Assistant. Comptroller General of
next, on the perfecting amendments, if the United States, the Assistant Director of
any, to the substitute amendment; thef
on the substitute amendment; and tl;en
on the committee amendment.
Mr. HALLEC1 . Mr. Chairman, apar=
liamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will
state it. f .
Mr. HALLECK. If the substitute
amendment is voted down, w14-the com-
mittee amendment still by open to
amendment?
The CHAIRMAN. It will, The Clerk
will report the amendment offered by the
gentleman from Kansas.
Mr. ROGERS of Florid. Mr. Chair=
man,`a point of order. My amendment
is k perfecting amendniknt to the com-
mittee amendment. Will that not take
precedence?
The CHAIRMAN. he gentleman will
have an opportunity Po offer his perfect-
ing amendment.
The Clerk will report"the amendment
offered by the ge . tleman from Kansas
[Mr. REES].
.Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, the Cl rk did not read the last
two amendment which I have on the
Clerk's desk, w ch are perfecting com
mittee amend nts.
The CHAIR AN. After the Clerk re-
ports the ame ment offered by thegen-
tlemah from Kansas [Mr. BEES] the
Chair will dir ct the" Clerk to report the
amendment ffered by the gentleman
The Clerk/read as follows;
Substitute amendment for the committee
amendment offered by Mr. REES: "That the
rate of basic compensation of the head of
each executive department and of the Secre-
tary of Defense shall be $25,000 per annum.
"SEC. 2. (a) The rate- of basic compensa-
tion of the Comptroller General of the
United, States, the Chairman of the Council
of Economic Advisers, the Director of the
Bureau of the Budget, the Chairman of the
National Security Resources Board, the Fed-
eral Security Administrator, the Administra-
tor of Veterans' Affairs, the Administrator of
General Services, each Under Secretary of an
executive department, the Assistant to the
Attorney General,. the Solicitor General of
the United States, and the First Assistant
Postmaster General shall be $17,600 per
annum.
' (b) Section 105 of title 3 of the United
States Code is amended to read as follows:
"'COMPENSATION of SECRETARIES AND EXECU-
TIVE, ADMINISTRATIVE, AND STAFF ASSISTANTS
TO PRESIDENT
"'SEC. 105. The President is authorized to
fix the compensation of the six administra-
tive assistants authorized to be appointed
under section 106 of this title, of the Execu-
tive Secretary of the National Security
Council, and of five other secretaries or other
immediate staff assistants in the White
House Office as follows: Two at rates not, ex
ceeding $16,000 per annum, three at rates
not exceeding $15,000 per annum, and seven
at rates not exceeding $12,000 per annum.'
'(c)- The first sentence of section 106 of
title 3 of the United States Code is amended
to read as follows: The President is author-
the Bureau of the Budget, the Director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the
Deputy Administrator of Veterans' Affairs,
the Public Printer, the Librarian of Congress,
the Director of Central Intelligence, the Fed-
ei'aI-'Me-Mdtlori anUT-i/oriciliation Director,
and the Assistant Federal Security Adminis-
trator shall be $15,000,per annu_n
"SEC. 4. (a) The rate of basic compensa-
tion of the Director of Aeronautical Research
of the National Advisory Committee for Aero-
nautics; members of the Civil Aeronautics
Board; members of the Federal Communica-
tion Commission; members of the Federal
Power Commission; members of the Federal
Trade Commission; members of the Inter-
state Commerce Commission; members of
the National Labor Relations Board; mem-
bers of the National Mediation Board; mem-
bers of the Railroad Retirement Board;
members of the Securities and Exchange -
Commission; members of the Board of Direc-
tors of the Tennessee Valley Authority;
members of the Civil Service Commission;
the Chairman of the United States Maritime
Commission; members of the United States
Tariff Commission; the General Counsel of
the National Labor Relations Board; the
Architect of the Capitol; the Deputy Ad-
ministrator of General Services; the Hous-
ing Expediter; the Director of the Bureau of
Federal Supply; the Archivist of the United
States; members of the Displaced Persons
Commission; members of the Indian Claims
Commission; members of the - War Claims
Commission; members of the Philippine War
Damage Commission; members of the Board
of -Commissioners of the District of Colum-
bia; each Assistant Secretary of an executive
department (including the Fiscal Assistant
Secretary of the Treasury); each Assistant
Attorney General; the Assistant. Solicitor
General of the United States; the Counselor
of the Department of State; the Second,
Third, and Fourth Assistant Postmasters Gen-
eral; the Associate Federal Mediation and
Conciliation Director; the Deputy Director
Centrr~ intellience` theme ppi ne Alien
r]?~operty Administrator; the Chief Assistant
Librarian of Congress; the Deputy. Public
Printer; members (other than the Chairman)
of the board of directors of the Export-
Import Bank of Washington; members (other
than the Chairman) of the United States
Maritme Commission; Administrator, Pro-
duction and Marketing Administration;
Commissioner of Internal Revenue; Director
of the Bureau of Prisons; Commissioner of
Public Roads; Commissioner of Public Build-
ings; Commissioner of Community Facilities;
Commissioner of Immigration and Natural-
ization; Administrator, Rural Electrification
Administration; Commissioner for Social Se-
curity; Commissioner of Reclamation; Chief,
Soil Conservation Service; Commissioner of
Customs; Governor of the Farm Credit Ad-
ministration; Chief Forester of the Forest
Service; Administrator of the Farmers Home
Administration; the three Special Assistants
to the Secretary of Defense; and of the Gov-
ernors of Alaska, Hawaii, the Virgin Islands,
and the Panama Canal shall _l
2$0 annum, Notwithstanding l $.
on o t e"et of May 24, 1924, as amended
(U. S. C., titl(! 5, sec. 152a),'the salary of the
Legal Adviser of the Department of State
shall continue to be at the rate of $10,330 per
annum.
"(b) The first sentence of section 603 of
title 28 of the United States Code (relating
9337
to the salary of the Director of the Adminis-
trative Office of the United States Courts) is
amended to read as follows:
"'The Director shall receive a salary of
$12,500 a year.' -
"(c) The second sentence of section 603 of
title 28 of the United States. Code (relating
to the compensation of the Assistant Director
of the Administrative Office of the United
States Courts) is amended to read as follows:
'The Assistant Director shall receive a salary
of $11,000 a year.'
"(d) The rate of compensation of the Leg-
islative Counsel of the House of Representa-
tives and dl the Legislative Counsel of the
Senate shall be $12,000 per annum.
"SEC. 5. In any case in which the chairman
or other head of a board or commission and
the other members of such board or commis-
sion' receive the_ same rate of basic compen-
sation under this act, and such chairman or
other head has important duties or respon-
sibilities not imposed upon other members of
such board or commission, the President is
authorized in his discretion to fix the com-
pensation of such chairman or other head at
the rate of $15,000 per annum.
"SEC. - 6. This act shall take effect on the
first day of the first pay period which begins
after the date of enactment of this act."
Mr. CORBETT (interrupting the read-
ing of the amendment). Mr. Chairman,
I ask unanimous consent that the further
reading of the substitute be dispensed
with. It is rafher lengthy, but I under,
stand copies are available at the Clerk's
desk. -
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Pennsylvania? -
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. Would the gentle-
man from Kansas object to the - Clerk
reporting the amendments offered by the
chairman of - the committee [Mr. MuR-
RAY]?
Mr. REES. I have no objection, Mr.
Chairman. -
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will re=
port the committee amendments offered
by the gentleman from Tennessee.
The Clerk read as follows: -
Amendment offered by Mr. MURRAY of Ten-
nessee:
Strike out section 7, beginning on page 12,
line 1, and ending on page 13, line 2.
On page 13, after line 2, insert the follow-
ing new section:
"SEC. 7. The applicable appropriation for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1950, shall be
available for payment of compensation at
the rate established for any position by or
pursuant to this act unless it is specifically
provided that such appropriation shall not be
available for such purpose."
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, the first amendment strikes
out section 7, and is offered for this rea-
son: - It provided for a retroactive in-
crease to July 1, 1948, of the classified
.employees of the District of Columbia
and the foreign service, of $330 per an-
num. As the Members know, the Con-
gress has already passed a bill authoriz-
ing retroactive pay of $330 per year for
the employees of the District of Columbia
and the Foreign Service, to July 1, 1948.
So this language is not necessary and
should be stricken out, because it has al-
ready been taken care of by separate leg-
islation.
Mr. DONDERO. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 9338
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. I yield.
Mr. DONDERO. And that will reduce
the amounts specified in the report from
about $6,000,000 to $1,237,000?
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. That is
correct.
The second amendment, Mr. Chair-
man, is simply a clarifying amendment
providing that the appropriations end-
ing June 30, 1950, shall be available for
the payment of this compensation.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the committee amendments. -
The committee amendments were
agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Kansas is recognized for 5 minutes?
Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, in an ef-
fort to facilitate matters, because of the
short time during which to discuss this
measure, being only 30 minutes on our
side, I have made reprints of my amend-
ment available, also mimeographed
copies of comparative statements with
respect to the changes I propose in this
legislation.
Before beginning a discussion of this
amendment I recall that J. Edgar
Hoover's name has been mentioned
several times by other Members during
this discussion. I also hold Mr. Hoover
in the highest regard. In fact, I think
he is one of the greatest men in Govern-
ment today. Sometimes I think he has
not received the support to which he is
entitled, but let me say to you that when
the bill was first submitted, the office of
the Federal Bureau of Investigation was
not included. It was put in the bill,
however, by the committee at a salary
of $15,000. My amendment does not
change that figure. Personally, I agree
he is entitled to higher pay.
Mr. Chairman, as I said at the outset,
I am not objecting to reasonably in-
creasing the salaries of this group of em-
ployees. I call your attention to the fact
that these 240 people are not civil-serv-
ice employees. Very few of them ever
have been; so do not get them confused,
please, with career employees. These
people are appointed to jobs, appointed
by the President, some confirmed by the
Senate and others not.
My amendment does not affect the
salaries of the members of the Cabinet,
although you do increase their salaries
as much as 66 percent in this bill. Now
look at section 2 of the bill. You will
find the Under Secretaries, and there are
many of them who are presently being
paid $10,330 a year. There are about
four exceptions who get $1.2,000. Under
this bill you pay them $20,000. In other
words, you double their salaries at one
swoop. My amendment attempts to
(*mpro>nise that figure. It seems to me
that $20,000 for these Under Secretaries
Is far out of line.
Section 2 of this bill authorizes the
President to employ assistants to the
President, special counsel to the Presi-
dent, and secretaries to the President.
In section 3, you have various assistants
and deputy administrators several of
them presently receiving $10,000. This
bill would pay then $17,500 an increase
of $7,500 per year. This is an increase of
75 percent.
There is mentioned in this bill an office
that many never heard of before, the
Director of the Administrative Office of
the United States Courts, He now gets
$10,000; under this bill you give him
$17,500. I thing.$12,500 would be liberal
for that job.
Mr. COX. Mr. Chairman, will the gen-
tleman yield''
Mr. REES. I yield to the distinguished
gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. COX. I have examined the sched-
ule prepared by the gentleman and which
has been distributed pretty generally
here in the House. I am wondering if
the gentleman would not be willing to
accept an amendment to his substitute
by striking out the figure $12,500 appear-
ing in line 7 on page 5, and inserting in
lieu thereof $14,000?
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Kansas has expired.
Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to proceed for five
additional minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Kansas?
There was no objection.
Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman repeat his question?
Mr. COX. Would not the gentleman
consider amending his substitute by
striking the figure $12,500 on page 5,
line 7, and inserting in lieu thereof
$14,000? In the category you deal with
there you have members of the Federal
Trade Commission and others holding
very responsible positions and they seem
to be entitled to better treatment than
the gentleman has suggested in the
amendment he has offered.
Mr. REES. I may say to the gentle-
ma4 I realize there are a number of
public officials who are entitled to more
pay than they receive. I appreciate the
gentleman's views as I respect his opin-
ion with regard to other matters that
come to the floor of the House for con-
sideration. His amendment relates to
members of various commissions. I
thought an increase of $10,000 to $12,500
should under the circumstances, be fair.
These are appointive positions and usual-
ly extend over long periods of time. If
the gentleman will submit his amend-
ment in due time and the House wants
to approve such increase, I will, of course,
be required to submit to his proposal.
Mr. Chairman, a great deal has been
said on the floor of the House about get-
ting better qualified people for these par-
ticular jobs appointed by the President.
I do not believe you will find men of
much different caliber or qualifications
in these positions just because you in-
crease their salaries by 50 percent and
100 percent as you are doing under this
legislation. It will be interesting to ob-
serve, in the event this bill is approved,
whether there are changes in the ap-
pointments in these positions.
Men who serve in public office, which
include Members of Congress, do not
necessarily serve because of the salary
they receive. Of course, they are en-
titled to sufficient salary to carry on, but
they do not expect to make money out
of such service. There are those who
will tell you about certain individuals
here and there who have served the Gov-
ernment faithfully and well and go out
in industry and do better. I agree with
that, but they accepted such positions
because they wanted to serve their Gov-
ernment, and their country; otherwise
they would not have been in Government
at all. For instance, we read in the
newspapers about one man who served
in the President's Cabinet who could
have commanded a much higher salary
on the outside, but he stayed on the job
in devotion to his duty. You cannot pay
salaries to attract people like that to
these jobs. There are many men who
secure appointments not because pf their
particular qualifications. Too many are
appointed because of political affiliation
and by reason of service rendered to the
party and contributions made to the par-
ty, rather than because they are par-
ticularly qualified for the jobs. In other
words, political service comes first and
qualifications second. Do not misun-
derstand me. This is not true in all
cases, but in far too many. It would be
interesting if you would take the time
to look the list over and see how many
are included in this bill who are appoint-
ed because of the reasons I have indi-
cated.
I want to call your attention to one
big factor in connection with this bill.
After you have raised the salaries, as
proposed in this bill, you are going to be
confronted with additional bills that will
raise salaries clear across the board and
which will amount to not millions but
to as much as $2,500,000,000.
I make this statement for the reason
that in approving this legislation you
are, as a matter of policy, approving
much higher salaries for thousands of
employees who now receive a $10,000
salary ceiling. As a matter of fact, there
are thousands of faithful career em-
ployees who are just as much and even
more entitled to such increases than
those included in this special legislation
for a selected few you are considering
this afternoon. Again let me repeat
these are not career employees.
Mr. Chairman, much has been said
about the recommendations of the Hoo-
ver Commission. In this particular case
the Commission did recommend higher
pay in policy-making positions, but cer-
tainly did not recommend these figures.
But more important, I am sure, it was
the intent of the Commission in making
such recommendations that those em-
ployed would be appointed because of
their particular fitness for the job and
that political affiliation or obligation
would be secondary.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I hope the Members will
vote this substitute amendment down.
Your Committee on Post Office and Civil
Service gave long deliberation to this bill.
It is a compromise bill. This bill was
introduced at the opening of Congress,
and the Committee on Post Office and
Civil Service did not reach a conclusion
on the bill until March. So they had it
under consideration for over 2 months.
We had extensive hearings. We went
into the matter most thoroughly and
carefully, and, as I said, every position
in the bill as originally introduced was
lowered in salary except the salaries of
the members of the Cabinet. We lowered
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
the salaries of all other positions besides
the Members of the Cabinet as much as
$2,000 to $2,500.
I hope you will stay with the commit-
tee and vote this substitute down, be-
cause the substitute proposed is not jus-
tified by the gentleman from Kansas,
who proposes to cut the,salaries of some
of these officials from $17,500 to $12,500.
He makes a reduction of $2,500 in the
salaries of officials getting $20,000. Then
he reduces the salaries of those in the
$18,000 bracket to $15,000, a reduction
of $3,000. Then he reduces the salaries
from $17,500 to $15,000, a reduction of
$2,500. Then he reduced the salaries
of those listed at $16,000 in this com-
promise bill to $12,500. Then he reduces
the salaries of those listed at $15,000 to
$12,500.
I know that the Members present here
have not had the time, the opportunity,
or the privilege to study this matter as
the members of the Committee on Post
Office and Civil Service have. We have
worked long on this. We have brought
out a good bill. It is a fair compromise.
It is not exactly what the President asked
for. We reduced the amounts in some
cases. But I do say this, this is a non-
partisan measure; it is a bipartisan meas-
ure, and the salaries proposed are in line
with the salaries of a bill introduced by
the Republicans over in the other body
at the Eightieth Congress. So it is not
in any way a partisan matter, and I
appeal to the Members to vote down this
substitute..
Mr. MCCORMACK; Mr. Chairman,
will the gentleman yield?
-. Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. I yield
to the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. McCORMACK. The argument
advanced by the gentleman from Ten-
nessee, I trust, will commend itself to
the Members of the House. The Com-
mittee on Post Office and Civil Service
has given this matter very serious con-
sideration. The bill before us now is a
compromise bill, reducing, outside of the
members of the Cabinet, the amounts
recommended and sought for by the
President. Now, if the substitutt"is de-
feated, then, on particular positions-
such as the Director of the Federal Bu-
reau of Investigation-an amendment
can be offered to the committee amend-
ment which will be pending before the
House, and the few inequities that might
exist in the minds of some Members can
be clarified through such an amendment
offered from the floor. I join with the
chairman of the committee in expressing
the hope and urging that the substitute
offered in good faith, as it always is by
the gentleman from Kansas, will be re-
jected.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. I thank
the gentleman from Massachusetts.
Mr. LYLE. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. I yield
to the gentleman from Texas.
Mr. LYLE. I am impressed with the
fact that this is not a salary-increase
bill. I think, for the first time in the
history of this country, your committee
has studied the jobs affected and the
work that they do and the responsibili-
ti3s, and have set such salaries commen-
surate, so much as they could, with the
work and not with the personalities in-
volved. As I understand, it is not a sal-
ary increase for the people concerned
that is involved, ,it is a reclassification
of the positions, with the salaries being
changed so as to be more nearly in ac-
cord with the responsibilities of those
positions.
Mr. COX. Mr. Cl*Ddrman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. I yield
to the gentleman from Georgia.
Mr. COX. I have no quarrel with the
position taken by the gentleman from
Kansas, but I do wish. to make this ob-
servation. The gentleman will be able
to get the same consideration on the
committee bill that he could get if his
substitute were adopted. In other
words, I cannot see the importance of
the adoption of the gentleman's substi-
tute in order to get ' onsideration for
the changes he desire .
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr.
Chairman, I move to strike out the last
word.
Mr. Chairman, a great deal has been
said about timing in this bill and a great
deal has been said about compromises.
The bill us it now stands is a compro-
mise. ' The original bill as introduced by
me called for salaries of $17,500 for those
positions which are fixed in the bill at
$15,000. In the spirit of compromise in
the committee, I accepted that. We
fought that all out, and I thought that
we were through.
May I read what Mr. Hoover had. to
say in connection with the original Flan-
ders bill, from which the original bill,
H. R. 1639, was taken. Appearing be-
fore the Flanders committee he said in
part:
I have seen the question raised that this
means a vast increase in the expenditures
of the Government and the advocacy of such
a measure on the part of such a commission
as the Commission on Reorganization is a
contradiction of its purpose-reduction of
expenditures.
As the Commission has recommended it,
it somewhat conflicts with the idea of reduc-
ing expenses; but, as a matter of fact, there
is no greater economy in the Government
than the attraction of greater ability and
greater skill.
That is what this 'proposes. Let me
reiterate what I have said before. The
Hoover Commission has recommended in
Appendix A of the Task Force Report
that grades CAF-15 and P-8 be set at
$15,000. Those are merit service jobs.
These are the civil service jobs. It is
said the level should be raised to $15,000,
and this bill places the assistant secre-
taries, who will supervise these high-
ranking Government officials, at the
same level that that it is proposed to pay
them. I submit it is not good business,
if we are going to carry out the Hoover
Commission report, to pay civil-service
employees $15,000 a year, and pay the
executives who will administer and 'di-
rect those people, $14,000 a year, or $12,-
500 a year. Verily, I say to you this is
penny-wise and pound-foolish. We have
hard this argument about the salaries of
Members of Congress, and that they
should not be paid more than that. Let
us be factual. Our salaries are $16,500 a
9339
year. We-pay ourselves $12,500, and we
take $2,500 in non-taxable expenses. If
you figure it out, it comes very dose to
$16,500 a year. So we would be paying
the servant more than the master. But
if that argument holds good, and you
adopt the Rees amendment, then you
are falling in the position of paying the
employee, the servant, more than the
master.
In respect to timing, may I say I quoted
that from Appendix A of the Hoover
Commission Report, the very first one
to be filed. I feel that the schedule of
bringing this bill out, a bill wr;ch will
give us the proper type and encourage
the proper type of Federal employee to
administer the affairs of Government, is
in. good keeping and in consonance with
the best- thought and recommen,?a','on of
the commission for which we appropri-
ated $2,000,000.
. Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Chair-
man, I offer an amendment. The Clerk
read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. Rooms of
Florida: On page 8, line 19, after the word
"Administrator", insert "Director, Federal
Bureau of Investigation."
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Chair-
man, I ask unanimous consent to speak
for five additional minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Florida?
There was no objection.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Mr. Chair-
man, the consideration of thiss bill at
this particular time disturbs me some-
what. There is always a time for
everything. The Good Book says there
is a time to mourn and a time to re-
joice. There is a time to laugh and a
time to cry. There is a time to do this
and a time 'to do that. But I want to
say to the membership of the House
I doubt seriously. whether in our Na-
tion's financial and economic condition
at the present time we ought to increase
the expenses of government. I want
you to consider yourselves as directors
of a great corporation. You are direc-
tors of a great corporation. You repre-
sent the stockholders of this great Gov-
ernment of ours. You have the duty of
taking care of the interests of the people
and of taking care of the Government,
I appeal to your business sense and
judgment. If you were called together
to a meeting to pass on the policy of a
corporation in which you were directly
interested and where your money was
being expended, and if there was facing
you a deficit of $1,867,000,000, and an
indebtedness of $252,000,000,000, if your
corporation faced the possibility of going
into the red more than $5,000,000,000 for
the next fiscal year, what would you do?
Would you increase the salaries of the
employees of that corporation? Would
you do it? That is what we are doing.
We are here as representatives of the
people of the respective States who are
stockholders in this great Government
of ours. We are here expending their
money. We are asking them, in face of
the facts which I have related to you, to
increase the salaries of the heads and
assistant heads of executive departments
and independent agencies of this Gov-
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
9340
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
ernment. Is it fair to them? Is it
right? Do we know where we are going?
When the President sent his letter to
the committee on January 6, 1949, the
picture was a great deal different than
what it is now. It looked like we had
to deal with the problem of inflation.
But since that time where have we gone?
The members of the Council of Eco-
nomic Advisers do not know where we
are going. Mr. Nourse says we are in
a state of disinflation. One of the other
members says he does not know where
we are. But we do know we are in a
period of declining prices and business
and in a period of increasing unemploy-
ment, which you may call recession, dis-
inflation, or deflation.
I appeal to the common sense of your
best judgment as to whether or not this
is the proper time for us to consider in-
creasing the expenses of Government by
increasing the rates of compensation as
provided in H. R. 1689. I say to you we
should put this off until we find where we
are. There is an economic storm brew-
ing. I think it is unsafe for us to go on
a spending spree now, not knowing where
we are going.
Mr. MURRAY' of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentlemaal} yield?
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I yield.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. I under-
stood the gentleman to offer an amend-
ment. I understood that your amend-
ment would give the Director of the FBI
an increase to $17,500.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. Yes.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Let me
ask the gentleman this question. If we
agree to amend the bill In accordance
with the gentleman's amendment, will
he then support the bill?
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. This is the
only increase in salary that appeals to
me, this increase to J. Edgar Hoover. I
do not think we should go overboard and
ask this Congress to increase salaries
$1,237,000 at this particular time.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I yield.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. If we
agree to your amendment and the
amendment is adopted, will the gentle-
man then support the bill?
Mr. ROGERS of Florida. I say to the
gentleman that, this is no time for us
to launch into the expenditure of money
for this program. It is not the time,
because we do not know whether. we are
fr going into a depression or a recession or
what not. Every man included in this
bill, when he took his job, knew what he
was going to get at the time he took the
job. You cannot increase salaries dur-
ing your term of office. Now, why not
let this roll along for the time being, and
then later on, in 1950, we will know pos-
sibly where we are going. We are float-
ing somewhere. We all talk "economy,
economy," but we do not practice it in
a single way, in a single piece of legisla-
tion that this House has enacted. This
legislation should be postponed.
However, should this bill pass, I think
It should be amended to increase the
compensation of J. Edgar Hoover. I am
ceris'n you will ccc.cu,r, if you will refer
to l." c 64 of the report on H. R. 1589
and read the responsibilities of the di-
rector, Federal Bureau of Investigation.
We raised the salaries from anywhere
from $5,000 to $10,000 at one swoop, at
one stroke; yet here is a man looking
after the national security-he looks
after your security-who has been
meagerly paid all the time he has been
Director of the Bureau of Investigation.
The thought struck me as having merit,
that his salary should be increased. I
therefore prepared an amendment
transferring the Director of the Bureau
of Investigation from page 10 to page
8, where I place him in a class with the
Public Printer. The Public Printer will
get $17,500; the Librarian of Congress
will get $17,500; and I feel sure that
the Members of the House believe that
J. Edgar Hoover should get $17,500. Let
me say to your that while he is no special
friend of mine I do know him and know
that he has clone a splendid job for the
people. If this bill is to be passed I think
he should be placed in the class of those
receiving $17,500. The adoption of my
amendment would be a vote of confi-
dence in J. Edgar Hoover and the
splendid work he is doing for our Nation.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Florida has expired.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I move to strike out the last
word.
Mr. Chairman, I have no objection to
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Florida; in fact, I think it
is praiseworthy. We have no more
faithful or more valuable public servant
In America today than the present in-
cumbent of the office of Director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation, J.
Edgar Hoover.
The reason this office was not in-
cluded in the original bill was because
he was not an appointee of the Presi-
dent. Mr. Hoover is appointed by the
Attorney General, not by the President.
For that reason that office was not in-
cluded; the bill, in its original form, did
not include any official not appointed by
the President.
I am disposed to accept the amend-
ment, and I hope the gentleman from
Florida will then vote for the bill.
Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to extend my re-
marks at this point in the RECORD.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mr. FORD. Mr. Chairman, I support
the amendment of the gentleman from
Florida because my examination of the
bill and the committee report reveals
certain inequalities that are perfectly
obvious to everyone. In fact, I have an
identical amendment on the Clerk's desk.
The Committee on Post Office and Civil
Service has made the proposed salary
adjustments on the basis of duties and
responsibilities, but in my estimation
they have missed the boat in evaluating
the position of the Director of the Fed-
eral Bureau of Investigation.
Let me make a concrete comparison,
and I have assembled the necessary data
from the committee report on this bill.
Mr. Tighe Woods is the Housing Expe-
diter. He has the responsibility of ad-
ministering the Rent Control Act. J.
Edgar Hoover is the Director of the
FBI-the organization that so ably pro-
tected our domestic security during the
last war. Mr. Woods' present salary is
$12,000 per year, while Mr. Hoover's is
$14,000 annually. Under the proposed
bill Mr. Woods will receive a salary of
$15,000, an annual increase of $3,000,
while the head of the FBI will receive
only a $1,000 boost, making his salary the
same as Mr. Woods'.
According to the committee report Mr.
Woods, as Housing Expediter, will super-
vise 4,836 employees and manage a budg-
et of $22,972,000 during fiscal year 1949.
In contrast, J. Edgar Hoover, as head of
the Federal.Bureau of Investigation, in
the same period supervises 9,664 employ-
ees and manages a department budget of
$47,461,800. This comparison, using fig-
ures from the committee reports, shows
that Mr. Hoover has approximately
twice as many employees in his depart-
ment and handles over twice as much
money during a 12-month period, yet
the committee recommends the same
salary for both department heads. It
does not make sense and if the commit-
tee has been as illogical in other specific
cases I believe the bill should be returned
to the committee for further study. In
passing, I might add that the duties and
responsibilities of Mr. Hoover, leaving
aside the number of employees and ex-
penditures, seem to be infinitely more
Important than those performed by the
Housing Expediter.
Let me make another comparison.
TI e_ free or or the Central Intelligence
Agency holds'a position in many ways
comparable to the head of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation. Under the pro-
posed bill the present salary of the Di-
rector of the Central Intelligence Agency
is $17,500 annually, an increase of $3,500
from the present salary. Since Mr.
Hoover's work is equally important I
firmly believe his salary should be identi-
cal. This amendment will accomplish
that result.
The question of domestic security is of
vital importance. We need the best per-
sonnel obtainable to insure the protec-
tion of our citizens. Mr. Hoover's record
for the past 25 years is unassailable. The
monetary reward proposed by my
amendment, after long years of faithful
and devoted service, is small compensa-
tion for his invaluable contribution.
Mr. CORBETT. Mr. Chairman, I
move to strike out the last word.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Pennsylvania is recognized.
Mr. CORBETT. Mr. Chairman, I wish
to call attention to the Rees substitute
amendment. This amendment provides
for liberal salary increases; it provides
for increasing the salaries of Cabinet
members to $25,000; it provides generous
increases for all of the 244 individuals
covered by this bill.
Over all, Mr. Chairman, the Rees sub-
stitute would provide $700,000 a year in
annual increases. We should therefore
divorce from our minds the thought
that this is a bill which does not increase
salaries, for there are $700,090 worth of
increases in the Rees substitute bill. As
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 1949
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
was pointed out during general debate,
it is always easy to increase salaries; it
is almost impossible to decrease them.
As the gentleman from Florida, who
preceded me, stated, this country is
demanding economy from this Congress.
In the days just ahead we are going to
have an increasing avalanche of mail
and public insistence that we cut the cost
of Government. But here it is proposed
that we grant increases up to 100 per-
cent, according to the original bill. I say
now, as I did before, there is no sharp
controversy as to whether or not there
should be increases but there is contro-
versy as to what is a reasonable increase.
Mr. Chairman, I am going to urge the
committee to support the Rees substitute,
support it as a generous. salary increase
for executive officials, support it as a
step toward improving the efficiency of
the Government. And because the Rees
substitute is justified is no reason why
you should continue these increases up
and up. You can accept the argument
that a salary increase is. In order but that
does not mean that you have to jump
some individuals $10,000 a year.
With the economic condition of the
country as it is today, it would be, in my
opinion, a very bad thing for us individ-
ually to send word out to the country,
to the growing ranks of unemployed, that
we upped the salaries of Government
officials as much as $10,000 a year.
Mr. Chairman, I hope the Rees amend-
ment will be accepted. In years to come
if we find it necessary and desirable we
can provide further increases.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Pennsylvania has
expired.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that
all debate on the substitute amendment
offered by the gentleman from Kansas
[Mr. REES], and all amendments thereto,
close in 20 minutes.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, I wonder if the gentleman will
not extend that. There are a great
many Members on their feet. The Rees
substitute is the most orderly amendment
that has been offered.
. Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. This
will not close time on amendments to the
committee bill itself, just on the sub-
stitute.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. I recog-
nize that is true, but the gentleman from
Kansas has worked out an orderly and
systematic approach to amending the
bill. Mr. Chairman, I object.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman,.I move that all debate on the
substitute amendment and all amend-
ments thereto close in 30 minutes,
The motion was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog-
nizes the gentleman from Iowa [Mr.
JENSEN].
Mr. JENSEN. Mr. Chairman, I am
sure that every good American in and
out of Congress recognizes and appreci-
ates the great job that J. Edgar Hoover
has done in peacetime and in wartime,
and every day and many nights. For
that reason I certainly feel, as do many
Members of this House, and'I am sure
I bespeak the feelings of the overwhelm-
ing majority of the American people, that
the salary of J. Edgar Hoover should be
commensurate with the great responsi-
bility and the great risk and the wonder-
ful job he has done. I would like to ask
the gentleman from Kansas if he will not
accept an amendment to his substitute
providing that the Chief of the Federal
Bureau of Investigation be raised to
$17,500.
Mr. REES. Mr, Chairman, I will say
to the gentleman that if he will offer
an amendment increasing the salary of
the Chief of the Federal Bureau.of In-
vestigation to $17,500, there will be no
objection to it. It was not included in
this substitute because the original bill
provided only $15,000, and I was trying
to keep in line with that bill. So, if the
gentleman will offer such an amendment
I will accept it, so far as being the author
of the substitute is concerned.
Mr. JENSEN. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that the amendment
which I have just suggested be considered
as a part. of the Rees substitute and be
adopted.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will
state it.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, was not the amendment offer-
ed by the gentleman from Florida [Mr.
ROGERS], which, in effect, increased the
salary of the FBI director to $17,500 an
amendment to the original committee
amendment, or was it an amendment to
.the substitute offered by the gentleman
from Kansas?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Florida offered his amendment as
an amendment to the committee amend-
ment.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. And that
has been adopted and is a part of the
committee amendment?
The CHAIRMAN. The amendment
has not been voted upon. No amendment
has been voted upon. There is pending
before the Committee the committee
amendment and a substitute, and the
amendment offered by the gentleman
from Florida. Does the gentleman from
Iowa desire to offer his amendment now?
Mr. JENSEN. I offer this amendment
to the Rees substitute to increase the
salary of the Chief of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation to $17,500.
The CHAIRMAN. Will the gentleman
reduce his amendment to writing and
send it to the desk?
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr,
Chairman, a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will
state it.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Would it
be in order to propound a unanimous-
consent request that both the committee
amendment and the Rees substitute be
modified to place the Director of the
Federal Bureau of Investigation in the
class receiving $17,500, in accord with
both of the amendments that have been
proposed?
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
may submit such a unanimous-consent
request, but the Chair would like to sug;
9341
gest that in the opinion of the Chair it
would be better parliamentary procedure
to submit the amendment in writing.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. This was
simply a unanimous-consent request that
both the committee amendment and the
Rees substitute be modified to place the
Director of the Federal Bureau of Inves-
tigation in the $17,500 category.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
South Dakota?
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. I object,
Mr. Chairman.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog-
nizes the gentlewoman from New York
[Mrs. ST. GEORGE].
Mrs. ST. GEORGE. Mr. Chairman, I
rise in support of the Rees substitute
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, it has been well said
on the floor of this House today that in
the Committee on Post Office and Civil
Service there is little partisanship, -and
that is true. That is a good thing.
There is also a spirit of compromise. I
feel that this amendment is offered in
a spirit of compromise. Some of us are
alarmed at the trend toward greater ex-
pense at this time in our country's finan-
ces. I am one of them. I have grave
misgivings as to how this kind of legis-
lation is going to strike many of the
people back home who have been wait-
ing impatiently and longingly for some
economy.
This amendment offered by the gen-
tleman from Kansas does cut the amount
down a little bit. Of course, the. total
amount,is negligible when we arethink-
ing.in terms of billions, but we have to
make a start somewhere. Personally I
would prefer not to see the Under Secre-
taries or the Assistant Secretaries paid
more than the Members of Congress of
the United States. However, if this is the
best compromise that can be made, and
I am sure the distinguished gentleman
from Kansas has explored every possi-
bility, I hope the House will vote for this
substitute amendment.
[Mr. BUCKLEY of Illinois addressed
the Committee. His remarks will appear
hereafter in the Appendix.]
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog-
nizes the gentleman -from California
[Mr. PHILLIPS].
Mr. PHILLIPS of California. Mr.
Chairman, I shall vote for the Rees
amendment. I think the amendments
increasing the Director of the FBI,
offered by the gentleman from Florida
and the gentleman from Iowa, respec-
tively, are good, but I rise to ask a ques-
tion of my colleague, the gentleman from
California [Mr. MILLER], or of any mem-
ber of the committee. Rather than have
my time run out before the question is
answered, I want to say that upon this
question I base my reason for offering a
motion to recommit, if the committee it-
self does not offer one. The gentleman
who spoke for the committee said this
had been carefully considered, and that
the gradations between salaries in the bill
had been carefully considered. I want to
find out, and I think the House is en-
titled to know, Mr. Chairman, why an
.Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : C1A-RDP57-00384R00100009a014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
9342
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
Under Secretary of; shall we say, the De-
partment of Commerce, is entitled to
more money than the Administrator of
the Veterans' Administration, or is en-
titled to more than the head of the Re-
construction Finance Corporation, which
is one of the largest financial institu-
tions in the world; or is entitled to more
money than the chairman of the Atomic
Energy Commission, who is recognized
as holding one of the most difficult,
strenuous, and responsible jobs in the
Federal Government. What is there
about the under secretaryship of the
Department of Commerce, or the De-
partment of Agriculture, or the Depart-
ment of Labor, or any other department,
which is worth $4,000 a year more than
the chairmanship of the Reconstruction
Finance Corporation?
Since the committee is on record as
saying that was carefully considered, I
feel we should have the answer. Again
I say, Mr. Chairman? this is the reason, if
the committee does not offer a motion to
recommit, I shall offer a motion to re-
commit in order to reconcile these
salaries.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog-
nizes the gentleman from Illinois [Mr.
PRICE].
Mr. PRICE. Mr. Chairman, I desire to
speak briefly on the pending measure,
H. R. 1689, increasing rates of compensa-
tion of the heads and assistant heads of
executive departments and. independent
agencies.
In the committee report it is stated
that "failure to take action on this
measure on the grounds that the annual
appropriation of a, little more than a
million dollars is too exorbitant will be
'penny wise and pound foolish'." I
endorse this statement wholeheartedly.
As a member of the Armed Services
Committee, I have had the opportunity
to observe the varied activities of the
largest component in our Government,
which itself is the largest single enter-
prise in the world, the National Military
Establishment. The National Military
Establishment is presently the employer
of over 2,500,000 military and civilian
employees and will. have an annual ex-
penditure estimated at $13,1300,000,000 for
the current fiscal year. The Navy, by
itself, represents capital investments, ex-
penditures, personnel, plants, and opera-
tions almost three times the size of the
United States Steel Corp. Torun such
a huge establishment we now pay 20 top
officials a total of $230,000 a year-an
average salary of $11,500. Compared to
salaries paid to officials in even the
smaller corporations in private business,
this is a ridiculously low average,
If we really want to effect economies
in the operation of the Government, it is
apparent that one of the best opportu-
nities would be in the Military Estab-
lishment. Such economy, however, is
not going to come about automatically-
it is going to have to be done by hard
work on the part of competent people.
Until compensation commensurate with
responsibilities involved can be offered,
it is most difficult to obtain and retain
competent officials who can put into
effect the sort of constructive recom-
mendations for economy made by the
Commission on organization of the Ex-
ecutive Branch of the Government. If
we are going to expect real economies
now being discussed incident to the con-
sideration of the measure to amend the
National Security Act of 1947, we must
provide the Military Establishment the
means for doing a top-flight manage-
ment ,job.
Due to my ifamiliarity with the Military
Establishment, I have emphasized this
phase of the problem, but I am sure the
same is true in all Government agencies.
Again I want to stress that this measure
is really an economy measure that should
return many, many times its cost in in-
creased efficiency and economy through
intelligent, Competent management of
our complex Government structure.
I support this measure as a means
whereby the President will have better
opportunities to secure the competent
officials required to run the many import-
ant functions of our Government.
In these days of cold wars, we are all
very much aware of the work being
done by the National Military Estab-
lishment in supporting the domestic and
foreign policies of our Government. The
Berlin airlifts probably the best known
example of this.support.
Let us reflect a moment on the situa-
tion with which the President is now
faced in securing competent officials to
runs this -establishment-officials who
every day must make decisions and take
actions that will directly affect the lives
of those present and of our children and
of our children's children for years and
years to corrie. Officials on whose judg-
ment we must depend to a large extent
to keep us out of war by providing the
means whereby there can be no doubt in
the minds of possible aggressor nations
that we have the ability to defend our-
selves.
The Secretary of Defense who is the
person primarily responsible for all mat-
ters relating to the security of this Na-
tion, on whose shoulders falls the tre-
mendous burden of operating the M'li.-
tary Establishment of over 2,500;000
military and civilian employees, whose
every action and every decision might
well mean the difference between life
and death for our sons and grandsons-
yes, and for us, too, since in any future
war there will be no lines of battle and
the civilian population will be in the bat-
tle area, too-for this tremendously im-
portant position we pay $15,000 a year.
The Secretaries of the Army, the Navy,
and the Air Force with responsibility for
running establishments many times
larger than our biggest corporations also
receive only $15,000 a year. The man re-
sponsible for managing the financial af-
fairs-involving approximately $14,000,-
000,000 for the current year-of the
National Military Establishment receives
only $10,0010, a year. Other officials with
similar responsibilities receive similar
small salaries.
I, for one, say that we should pass this
measure without hesitation. If the ad-
ditional expenditure of a little over a mil-
lion dollars a year will assist in any way
in assuring that the best possible men
are obtained in these positions of respon-
sibility so fateful for all of us, we would
indeed be derelict in our duty if we de-
nied this possibility.
Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous con-
sent that the balance of my time may
be granted to the gentleman from Cali-
fornia [Mr. HOLIFIELD].
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Illinois?
There was no objection.
Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Chairman,
about 2 years ago we formed what is
known as the Hoover Commission. They
appointed a Personnel Policy Committee
to consider this question of govern-
mental salaries in the executive
branches. Among the people who were
on that Personnel Committee were men
like Mr. John' Stevenson, president of
the Penn Mutual Life Insurance Co.;
Mr. Lawrence Apley, former vice presi-
dent of Montgomery Ward; Senator
Harry Byrd, of Virginia; Franklin
D'Olier, former president of the Pru-
dential Life Insurance Co. of America;
Robert Ramspeck, a former Member of
Congress, and chairman of the House
Committee on Civil Service; A. W. Rob-
ertson, chairman of the board of West-
ern Electric Co.; and various other fa-
mous men from industry, science, and
the professions.
They made a complete tasks report
study of the salaries and personnel con-
ditions of the men in key positions in
the executive branch. Now, what did
they say, among other things, along this
line, and it is in support of the commit-
tee bill that I am speaking.
They said :
The failure to lift the salary ceiling for
top Federal positions has created serious in-
equities and forced many career officials to
leave the service.
They said further:
The gravity of this problem is demon-
strated by the fact that an income of $10,-
000 is the equivalent of less than $5,200 In
1939, after allowing for increased income tax.
The 'result has been made repeatedly clear
by the stream of resignations from top posi-
tions in the past 3 years and by the problem
of attracting well-qualified individuals into
positions in the top-pay brackets. One study
of the earnings increase secured by 170 in-
dividuals who left the Government in the
year 1945 revealed the average increase ob-
tained over their Government pay was 92
percent.
President Truman gave special atten-
tion to this problem in his address at
Princeton in June 1947 when he said,
and I quote:
Salary limitations prevent the Government,
in many instances, from securing the kind of
executives required to maintain its vital ac-
tivities.
I want to point out that the business
of the Government of the United States
is the biggest business in the world. We
are entitled to have men at the head of
these different departments handling
over 2,000,000 personnel and millions and
millions of dollars who know what it is
all about and who are men of caliber to
do the job and do it well. No one con-
tends that the Government can pay the
same rate as industry pays, but at least
we should establish such salaries so that
we can retain good men in the jobs. The
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE 9343
record shows that they are leaving at the pay increase for the members of Con- The gentleman from Mississippi [Mr.
rate of 170 key positions in 1 year. gress. I WILLIAMS] is recognized.
Mr. RAYBURN. Mr. Chairman, will The Rees substitute is an orderly sub- Mr. WILLIAMS. Mr. Chairman, 1lis-
the gentleman yield? stitute for the pending bill. It recog- tened with much interest to my dis-
Mr. HOLIFIELD. I yield. nizes the need for a modern pay sched- tinguished Chairman a few minutes ago
Mr. RAYBURN. Does. it not seem to ule in the executive branch and in the as he discussed the Rees amendment and
to the gentleman from California, as a independent agencies of the Govern- compared it with the bill. I know that
legislator, that the orderly way to pro- ment, but it does not make the excessive he did not intend to, but I am afraid
teed here is to take up the committee jumps proposed in the committee bill. he left the impression that the Rees
amendment and perfect that committee Most of the $10,000 people step up to amendment is a salary-cutting amend-
amendment after voting down the sub- $12,500. Most of those who receive ment. It does, not cut the salary of a
stitute? eleven or twelve thousand step up to single one of these executives; it in-
Few Members have had an opportunity fifteen thousand. Those at fifteen or creases substantially the salaries of every
to examine the substitute. They do not sixteen thousand go up to seventeen one of them.
know whether it is fair or not. If we thousand five hundred or eighteen thou- Let us look at, this thing just a minute
vote down the substitute, then anyone sand. But the Rees substitute does not and see which one provides the. reason-
who wishes to offer an amendment to make the 50-, 60-, and 80-percent in- able increase in salary. For instance,
the committee bill may offer it, and we creases which characterize the commit- the Assistant Comptroller General pres-
can proceed, as it appears to me, in a tee's proposals. ently drawing $10,330 a year is given
much more orderly fashion and do the The gentleman from Kansas has of- $18,000 under the Committee bill, an
thing that ought to be done. The Presi- fered an orderly, systematic substitute, increase of approximately 80 percent,
dent of the United States has never ve- and I hope you will support it. Under the Rees substitute he is given
toed any increase in salary for Members The CHAIRMAN. The time of the an increase of approximately $5,000,
of Congress, any increase in clerk hire, gentleman from South Dakota has ex- bringing his salary up to $15,000, or an
or anything of the kind. Do you not pired. Increase of approximately 50 percent. Is
think we are doing little enough for him The Chair recognizes the gentleman a 50-percent increase a reasonable in-
when some of us know the distress he is from Illinois [Mr. VURSELL]. crease?' In my opinion that is the way
in, trying to keep the good men that he (Mr. VURSELL asked and was given to increase salaries, increase them reas-
has to carry on this reorganization work permission to revise and extend his re- onably.
in the Government departments? Do marks.) There is one case of a man presently
you not think we should give him prac- Mr. VURSELL.' Mr. Chairman, I have drawing $9,700 who is increased by the
tically what he asks, in order that he been looking over the figures as quickly bill to $15,000; the Rees amendment cuts
can conduct his office in an, orderly fash- as I could with reference to the reduc- him back to $11,000. That gives him a
ion and do the job that we expect him tion of certain salaries, as covered by the nice increase, from $9,700 to $11,000,
to do? Rees substitute. If I read the figures. which would appear to me to be more
Mr.. HOLIFIELD. I certainly agree correctly, the Under Secretary of the reasonable than to give.him an increase
with the honorable Speaker in every- Department of Labor, under the Rees to $15,000.
thing he has had to say. I hope this substitute, would receive an increase Frankly, I do not see anything to the
committee will vote down the Rees from $10,330 to $17,500. The Under Sec- recommendations of the committee, and
amendment and then we can proceed to retary of the Department of Commerce I so expressed myself in the committee,
make such perfections in the committee would receive an increase from $10,000 to except to call the bill as presented a
bill as are necessary. $17,500, and so on. These are large in- bureaucratic joyride at the taxpayers'
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the creases, but not nearly so large as. the expense. I hope the Rees amendment
gentleman from California [Mr. HOLI- committee bill provides. will be adopted.
FIELD] has expired.. We will set a bad precedent if we pass The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
The Chair recognizes the gentleman this increase salary bill. If some increase gentleman from Mississippi has expired.
from South Dakota [Mr. CASE]. is necessary it would seem to me that we The Chair recognizes the gentleman
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr. are making substantial increases if we from Minnesota [Mr. MCCARTHY].
Chairman, the frankest statement about adopt the Rees amendment. I find that Mr. McCARTHY. Mr. Chairman, the
this bill that I have heard made today everyone throughout the country.is ask- gentleman from Mississippi and the gen-
was the statement. made by the gentle- ing the Congress to economize; the Con- tleman from Kansas argue that you can
man from New York [Mr. MULTER]. gress is saying. they cannot economize, help a man drowning some 20 feet off-
The gentleman from New York called but they are going to try to persuade or shore more by throwing him a rope 15
attention to the fact that there is a bill insist upon, or compel the President to feet -long rather than by throwing one
pending before this same committee to cut the cost of government; and the Pres- 10 feet long. I should like to make one
give another increase in salary to Mem- ident, very justly, comes back and says or two observations: First of all, that
bers of Congress. Then the gentleman that that is largely the responsibility of there is no increase proposed in this bill
said: the Congress. This is a small amount to which is too high; there may be some
The pending bill is a step in the right add to the cost of government, but it sets salaries proposed which are too low, some
direction. a precedent that will start leaks in the ' which should be brought up.
And in that connection said that con- arks all along the line. Itf would seem to the Cabinet $25 000pa year. Ge eral Mo-
sideration had been promised for the me that we ought to curb it at least to tors Corp. in 1946 had 10 vice presidents-
pay-raise bill for Members of Congress. the extent of holding it down to the Rees one might call it the cabinet of General
My people may be a little different amendment. Motors-and, according to statistics
t
try. I do not know. han people in other parts of the coun- The facts are no increases of salaries available to the Legislative Reference
o e theme that is running through the cannot reduce the r cost of government if Paid, cre ei received vice $1 3,775, president, the
correspondence. I am getting today it is we continue to raise salaries. It is unfair of the 10 vice presidents of General Mo-
that we must stop the spiraling cost of to the overburdened taxpayers who will tors received $73,100. The "cabinet" of
Government. The actual dollars in this have to pay the bill. The financial con- the Montgomery Ward Corp. consisted
bill are not large, but if this bill is to be dition of the Nation and the general bus- of nine members. The highest paid re-
the forerunner of another salary increase mess conditions of the country do not ceived $101,700 and the lowest about
for Members of Congress, then your justify these enormous raises in salaries $35,000 per year. We propose to pay
hands are going to be stayed against to those in government who already en- $25,000 to members of the Cabinet of the
voting for other increases here and there joy the highest salaries in government. United States. The comptroller of the
all along the line. There is nothing, in We should be reducing the cost of gov- Standard Oil Co. received $40,000 a year.
my judgment, that would cause greater ernment, rather than increasing as this We propose to pay the Comptroller Gen-
revulsion against the Congress as an in- bill will do. eral of the United States of America
stitution today, and against individual The CHAIRMAN. The time of the .$20,000. The president of the General
Members thereof, than to pass another gentleman from Illinois has expired. Motors Acceptance Corp., the credit de-
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
partment of General Motors, received
$71,500 a year. We propose to pay the
Chairman of the Reconstruction Finance
Corporation $16,000 a year. Is that too
much? The general counsel of General
Motors received $101,000, according to
this report. The Attorney General, ac-
cording to our proposal, would get $25,000
a year.
I would like to remind some of the
men who have spoken here and who are
horrified at an increase of $5,000 to
$10,000 per year in salary that the effect
of the income-tax reduction which they
voted last year increased many take-
home salaries $40,000 to $50,000, and
more. This was the salary increase en-
gineered by the gentleman from Minne-
sota, whose memory is perpetuated in his
absence by the picture on the wall of
this Chamber.
I ask the membership to vote down the
Rees amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Florida [Mr. ROGERS] to the
committee amendment.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, a parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will
state it.
Mr. MURRAY' of Tennessee. Is the
vote on an amendment to the committee
amendment? I thought we were con-
sidering the substitute and amendments
thereto.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair will
state the parliamentary situation.
There is pending before the Committee
an amendment by the committee. 'There
is pending a substitute offered by
the gentleman from Kansas thereto.
There is also pending an amendment to
the committee amendment offered by the
gentleman from Florida.
The parliamentary rules require that
amendments to the committee amend-
ment be voted upon first, then amend-
ments to the substitute be voted upon.
After both are perfected, then the sub-
stitute amendment will be voted upon.
Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Chairman, a
parliamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will
state it.
Mr. McCORMACK. The parliamen-
tary inquiry is whether or not the amend-
ment of the gentleman from Florida is
the one that relates to J. Edgar Hoover?
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair so
understands.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent that the Rogers
amendment be reread.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
California?
There was no objection.
The Clerk reread the Rogers amend-
ment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Florida [Mr. ROGERS] to the com-
mittee amendment.
The amendment to the committee
amendment was agreed to.
Mr. JENSEN, Mr. Chairman, I offer
an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. JENSEN.
On page 2, line 5, of the Itees substitute,
before the period insert: "and the compensa-
tion of the Director of the Federal Bureau of Federal narcotic laws. He is also the
Investigation shall be $17,500." United States representative, without
On page 3, line 3, strike out "the -Director compensation, to the Commission on
of the Federal Bureau of Investigation." Narcotic Drugs of the United Nations
The CHAIRMAN.. The question is on and actively participates in the drafting
the amendment offered by the gentle- and implementation of the various con-
man from Iowa [Mr. JENSEN] to the sub- ventions limiting the international traf-
stitute amendment. fic in narcotic drugs to medical and
The question was taken; and on a divi- scientific uses.
sion (demandled by Mr. JENSEN) there Under existing law and pursuant to
were-ayes 92, noes 89. the treaty obligations he closely super-
So, the amendment was agreed to. vises the importation, exportation, and
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on domestic distribution of narcotic drugs
the substitute offered by the gentleman by over 200,000 doctors, pharmacists,
from Kansas [Mr. REES]. manufacturers and wholesale dealers, to
The question was taken; and on a divi- the end that these dangerous drugs shall
sion (demanded by Mr. REES) there be available only for medical and scien-
were-ayes 813, noes 106. tific needs and not for the perpetuation
Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, I demand of drug addiction. -
tellers. The Bureau of Narcotics is recognized
Tellers were ordered, and the Chair- as one of the outstanding law enforce-
man appointed as tellers Mr. REES and ment agencies of the Government, as is
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. demonstrated by the fact that while it
The Committee again divided; and the has in its employ only 2 percent of the
tellers reported that there were-ayes Federal law enforcement agents, it is re-
109, noes 152, sponsible for the conviction and confine-
So the amendment was rejected. ment of 9 percent of the present Federal
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I prison population. -
offer an amendment to the committee The position requires unique qualifica-
amendment. - tions in view of thegreat measure of re-
The Clerk :read as follows: sponsibility involved in the problems of
Amendment offered by Mr. HINSHAW to the vigorous enforcement of the narcotic
committee amendment: On page 10, line 22, laws and discharge of the international
after "Naturalization", insert "Administrator obligations under the several narcotic
of Civil Aeronautics."
conventions. The salary of the position
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, in should be commensurate with this large
searching this bill to find whether or not responsibility.
all of the Presidential appointees were Mr. CANFIELD. Mr. Chairman, will
included, I could not find anywhere in- the gentleman yield?
clusion of the Administrator of Civil Mr. VAN ZANDT. I yield.
Aeronautics. This officer is an appointee Mr. CANFIELD. As a member of the
of the President of the United States sub- Subcommittee on Appropriations for the
ject to Senate confirmation and operates Treasury Department and one who has
a very important agency of the Govern- listened to Dr. Anslinger for, the last 4
ment now under the direction of the Sec- years, I hope the gentleman's amendment
retary of Commerce pursuant to a reor- is adopted. He is not only one of Amer-
ganization plan of some years ago,- I be- ica's great administrators but one of the
lieve 1940. finest administrators in the world.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr. Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield? Chairman, will the gentleman 'yield?
Mr. HINS:EHAW. ? I yield. Mr. VAN ZANDT. I yield.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. The - Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. The
committee has no objection to the committee will not oppose the gentle-
amendment offered by the gentleman man's amendment. We have no objec??
from California. tion to it.
Mr. HINSHAW. Mr. Chairman, I Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the
thank the gentleman, and I am glad gentleman yield?
that he will not oppose the amendment. Mr. VAN ZANDT. I yield.
The Civil Aeronautics Administrator has Mr. GROSS. I am glad the gentleman
under his direction more than 17,000 per- told us what the salary is. We did not
sons and an annual budget of about $100,- know about the other one when we voted
000,000. The Administrator is surely en- on it.
titled to receive a salary of at least The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
$15,000 per year. the amendment offered by the gentleman
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on from Pennsylvania [Mr. VAN ZANDT].
the amendment to the committee amend-
ment amendment offered by the gentleman from Cali-
fornia. Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
The amendment was agreed to. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent that
Mr. VAN ZANDT. Mr. Chairman, I all debate on the committee amendment
offer an amendment. and all amendments thereto close in 10
The Clerk: react as follows: minutes.
Amendmen; offered by Mr. V,(N ZANDT to The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
the committee amendment: On line 25, page to the request of the gentleman from
10, after the words "Commissioner of Cus- Tennessee?
toms" insert "Commissioner of Narcotics." Mr. SCRIVNER and Mr. COOLEY ob-
Mr. VAN 2;ANDT. Mr. Chairman, the jected.
Commissioner of Narcotics heads the Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Bureau of Narcotics of the Treasury De- Chairman, I move that all debate on the
partment and is responsible for the ad- committee amendment and all amend-
ministration and enforcement of the ments thereto close in 10 minutes.
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
Mr. LECOMPTE. Mr. Chairman, a
parliamentary inquiry. Does that mean
all debate on the entire bill?
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair under-
stood the gentleman from Tennessee to
move that all debate close in 10 minutes
on the. committee amendment and all
amendments thereto.
. Mr. TACKETT. Mr Chairman, a par-
liamentary inquiry.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will
state it.
Mr. TACKET1. How many amend-
ments are there on. the Clerk's desk now?
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is ad-
vised there are four amendments on the
Clerk's desk.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to
modify my motion to make the debate
close in 20 minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Tennessee?_
Mr.. COOLEY. ? Mr. Chairman,. reserv-
ing the right to object, I have an amend-
ment which I desire to offer. Is it in
order to offer that amendment at the
present time?
The CHAIRMAN. There is pending
before the Committee a unanimous-con-
sent request of the gentleman from Ten-
nessee to revise his motion; that all de-
bate on the amendment and all amend-
ments thereto close in 20 minutes. Is
there objection?
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I have
reserved the right to object to propound
a parliamentary inquiry as to whether or
not it is in order forme to offer an
amendment on page 2 at this time.
The CHAIRMAN. The motion of the
gentleman from Tennessee [Mr. Mua-
RAY]. must be disposed of first, and then
it will be in order for the gentleman. from
North Carolina to offer his amendment.
Without objection; the request of the
gentleman from Tennessee' [Mr. MuR-
RAY] to amend his motion will be
granted.
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the motion offered by the gentleman
from Tennessee [Mr. MURRAY] that all
debate on the committee amendment
and all amendments thereto close in 20
minutes.
The motion was agreed to.
Mr. LECOMPTE. Mr. Chairman, a
parliamentary inquiry.'
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will
state it.
Mr. LECOMPTE. How much time
does that allow each one, Mr. Chairman?
The CHAIRMAN. Approximately one
and one-third minutes.
Mr. GREEN. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to extend my remarks
at'rnis.point in the RECORD.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Pennsylvania?
There was no objection.
Mr. GREEN. Mr. Chairman, I would
like to speak briefly in behalf of the
measure, H. R. 1689, which Is now before
the House for consideration. This mea-
sure is intended to raise the compensa-
tion of the heads and assistant heads of
No. 122-11
the executive departments and independ-
ent agencies of the Federal Government
to levels which, in the opinion of the
committee, are in keeping with the duties
and responsibilities borne by these offi-
cials.
I believe that the House, after consid-
ering this measure, will agree that the
proposed salary increases are fully justi-
fled, in view of the grave responsible du-
ties borne by the executive heads of the
departments and agencies involved. In
many cases, it will be the first major ad-
justment of salaries for these key offi-
cials since 1925, for, as the committee's
report states, there has been no con-
gressional revision of the salaries of most
of these executive heads since that time,
although recognition has been granted
by the Congress to the heads of new ma-
jor Federal agencies created since World
War II.
The most obvious cases are those of the
department heads and of the Secretary
of Defense.. It has been recommended
that these key officials be paid at a rate
of $25,000. per annum, and in view of the
heavy workload of responsibility devolv-
ing upon these men, I feel that the com-
mittee's recommendation is fully justi-
fled:. Many of the Federal departments
are equal:to or far larger than-the largest
comparable private business In this
country, yet these Cabinet officers, for
example, draw far less than the. vice
president of.the smaller private corpora-
tions. The Secretary of Defense heads
an organization. employing a combined
civilian and military staff of over 2,500,-
000. The Postmaster General heads a
huge postal communications organiza-
tion employing over 500,000 people, while
the Director. of Aeronautical' Research
of the National Advisory Committee for
Aeronautics has a larger and more
complex research assignnient than his
alter ego in any private aircraft firm
in the Nation. The departments and
agencies which they head often carry
on large and complex businesses, em-
ploy great numbers of people, and
are responsible for the proper annual
expenditure of extremely large sums.
It is obvious that such. positions
should be filled by highly competent men,
yet, during the past years, a considerable
number of these experienced and com-
petent executives have. been forced to
leave these key Federal positions because
of the inadequate salary paid. These
salaries, which were fixed years ago, are
unrealistic in terms of the present-day
responsibilities of " these key executive
posts.
I feel' that, it is absolutely essential
to provide incentives, in the form of
suitable annual compensation, in order
not only to retain in the Federal service
its remaining experienced and com-
petent administrators, but also to attract
able and well-qualified personnel into
the government to fill.these key posts.
I believe that a policy of staffing these
top positions with able administrators
will return the additional, cost-esti-
mated at approximately $1,5500,000 per
annum-to the Nation many times over
each year through greater efficiency and
improved operation of the Federal agen-
9345
ties affected. Without competent per-
sons in thesekey posts, we can expect
only mediocre performance by the de-
partments and agencies so staffed.
The committee's recommendations on
this measure are based not only on the
principles of good management and effi-
cient administration, but also on the
fact that the responsibilities of the occu-
pants of these posts have increased
greatly in recent years and have placed
a very heavy burden on such officials.
We had a recent and. tragic illustration
of the pressures and strains to which key
officials can be subjected in the perform-
ance of their duties.
It is my belief that only the ablest and
most competent personnel should be
asked to carry on, as heads and assist-
ant heads of executive departments
and agencies, the administration of the
affairs of our country. I feel that you
will agree .with me that an adequate. sal-
ary will provide one of the incentives
which will attract such competent offi-
cials into the Federal service and that
it is our. responsibility to see that this is
done.
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I offer
an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. COOLEY: On
page 11, line 2 of the Committee amendment
after. the words "Farmers' Home Adminis-
tration" insert the following: "Manager of
the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation."
. The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from North Carolina is recognized in
,support of his amendment.
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Chairman, I hope
the committee will accept this amend-
ment.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, the committee has no objec-
tion to the amendment.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from North Carolina.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. SCRIVNER. Mr. Chairman, I
offer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. SCRIVNER to the
committee amendment: On page 11, line 18.
strike out all of section 6.
Mr. SCRIVNER. Mr. Chairman; I
hope the committee concurs in this
amendment to. strike out section 6. It
does not add any particular person to,
the pay roll, but it may save many
dollars.
This section gives arbitrary power to
the President to increase the salary of
the chairman or head of a board or com-
mission to $18,000 per annum if he has
important duties or responsibilities not
imposed upon the other members of
the board. There is.not a word concern-
ing this section in the committee hear-
ings, nor is it discussed anywhere in the
report. You are going to wake up some
morning shortly after this bill is passed
and find unknown numbers of these peo-
ple increased to $18,000 a year. Look at
this chart. It shows that there are 1,819
boards, bureaus, and agencies running
this Government. Each has a chairman.
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
9346
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
but all may not be affected by this
section.
Mr, MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. SCRIVNER. I have only a min-
ute and a half, but I yield to the chair-
man, of course.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. The
language states, "Not more than
$18,000."
Mr. SCRIVNER. Yes.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. And it
Is also required that such chairmen be
given additional important duties..
Mr. SCRIVNER. The gentleman
knows these boards and commissions.
Every one of them are going to give the
chairman a little important work to do
whatever "important work" may be;
the gentleman knows, furthermore, that
immediately that individual will be en-
titled to have his pay upped to $18,000
a year.
The gentleman may say that this is
not a pay increase. Maybe it is not In
the opinion of the members of the com-
mittee, but to the taxpayers who will
have to pay the bill it is a pay increase
and you cannot get away from it. If
the folks at home were here they would
not vote for this bill, As their repre-
sentative I will not support it. All it
will do is freeze the present jobholders
tighter in their chairs.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Kansas has expired.
(Mr. SCRIVNER asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his
remarks.)
The CHAIRMAN. The -question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Kansas.
The question was taken; and on a
division (demanded by Mr. SCRIVNER)
there were-ayes 93, noes 116.
Mr. SCRIVNER. Mr. Chairman, I ask
for tellers.
Tellers were ordered, and the Chair
appointed as tellers Mr. SCRIVNER and
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee.
The Committee again divided; and the
tellers reported there were-ayes 95, noes
115.
So the amendment was rejected.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog-
nizes the gentleman from Arkansas [Mr.
TACKETT ] .
Mr. TACKETT. Mr. Chairman, I of-
fer an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. TArxETT:
Page 11, line 17, strike out the period, sub-
stitute a semicolon, and insert the following
language: "and effective with the commnence-
ment of the Eighty-second session of Con-
gress the compensation of Senators," Repre-
sentatives in Congress, Delegates from the
Territories, and the Re ddent Commissioner
from Puerto Rico shall be at the rate of
$20,000 per annum each."
Strike out section 8 and insert the follow-
ing-"SEC. 8. Except as otherwise provided here-
in this act shall take effect on the first day
of the first pay period which begins after
the date of enactment of this act,"
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, a point of order.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman will
state it.
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Mr.
Chairman, I make the point of order
that the amendment is not germane in
that this is a bill to increase the rates
of compensation of the heads and assist-
ant heads of executive departments and
independent agencies. This amendment
relates to the ]legislative branch of the
Government and consequently is not ger-
mane to a bill applying to executive de-
partments and independent agencies.
Mr. MONRONEY. Mr. Chairman, I
make the further point of order that this
is a bill reported by the Committee on
Post Office and Civil Service which does
not have jurisdiction over the salaries of
Members of Congress.
The CHAIRMAN. Does the gentle-
man from Arkansas desire to be heard
on the point of order?
Mr. TACKETT. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
I seek to arriend section 5 (c) which reads
as follows:
The rate of compensation of the Legisla-
tive Counsel of the House of Representatives
and of the Legislative Counsel of the Senate
shall be $12,000 per annum,
My amendment is germane to the very
subject matter that I seek to amend.
The legislative, branch of Government
is covered by this very bill, and I seek to
amend that portion pertaining to the
legislative branch of our Government.
The Architect of the Capitol is also cov-
ered by this bill.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair is ready
to rule. This bill seeks to increase the
rates of compensation of the heads and
assistant heads of executive departments
and independent agencies. Under the
Constitution there are three. distinct
branches of government. The legislative
branch cannot be classed as either an
executive department or an independent
agency. Therefore, the Chair sustains
the point of order made by the gentle-
man from South Dakota.
Mr. WALTER. Mr. Chairman, I offer
an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. WALTER: On
page 8, line 13, strike out "$17,500" and insert
"$16,000"; and on page 11, line 17, strike out
"$12,000" and insert "$10,000".
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I have no objection to the
amendments. I think they are all right.
The committee accepts them.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
Mr. HORAN? Mr. Chairman, I offer
an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. HORAN: On page
13, line 3, strike out all of section 8 and in-
sert a new section as follows:
"Sec. 8. This act shall take effect July 1,
1950."
Mr. HORAN. Mr. Chairman, I think
we have had a sample this afternoon of
how the floodgates can be opened. We
are setting a pattern that Is going to be
difficult for the responsible Representa-
tives of the people of this Nation of ours
to control. My amendment simply puts
off until the beginning of the next fiscal
year the date of enactment of what you
are working on this afternoon. I think
the people of America are looking for
some results from the Hoover Commis-
sion's report, but this bill you are work-
ing on today will put fire into the bu-
reaucracy here and make it very, very
difficult to reduce the cost of Govern-
ment at a time wher_?we are not on very
safe ground.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I rise in opposition to the
amendment.
Mr. Chairman, I appeal to the Mem-
bers to stand by the committee and let
this act take effect on the first day of
the first pay period which begins after
the date of enactment o [ this act. The
amendment offered b$f the gentleman
from Washington would defer the time
of taking effect of this bill for a year,
until July 1, 1950. I hope the amend-
ment will be voted down.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentle-
man from Washington [Mr. HORAN].
The question was taken; and on a di-
vision (demanded by Mr. HORAN) there
were-ayes 94, noes 141.
So the amendment was rejected.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog-
nizes the gentleman from Minnesota
[Mr. JUDD].
Mr. JUDD. Mr. Chairman, there are
provisions in this bill which doubtless
seem to every person here to be unjusti-
fied or inequitable. Certainly there are
a good many that are not in accord with
the way I would rate the relative im-
portance of various positions. However,
we cannot dispute that present salary
rates are obsolete, and have been so for
a long time. It seems to me the passage
of this bill by the House even with its
admitted inequities and defects and
sending it to the other, body where ad-
justments can be made should produce
benefits to our governmental service that
will far outweigh its relatively small cost.
Therefore, I intend to support the bill.
Take as an example, the Department
of State, to illustrate the urgent neces-
sity for revision of these salaries. Since
World War II, the United States has
assumed the leading role among the na-
tions of the world. Other nations look
to us for leadership in practically every
field of endeavor. Notwithstanding this
fact, however, our Secretary of State
today receives the same salary as he did
23 years ago. Correspondingly, his prin-
cipal assistants, namely, the Under Sec-
retary and Assistant Secretaries, are still
receiving salaries very little above what
they received then. They are subject to
the Civil Service Classification Act and,
hence, are restricted to salary ranges
applicable to the Government as a whole.
In many instances, this brings about sit-
uations where salaries of Assistant Sec-
retaries are no higher than those of
their subordinates.
The fact that the present salary rates
of top officials are obsolete is especially
emphasized by the fact that, legislation
enacted in recent years creating newly
established Government organizations
provides higher salaries for the heads of
those agencies than are received by the
old departments and agencies. For ex-
ample, both the Administrator and Dep-
uty Administrator of the Economic Co-
operation Administration are paid more
than the Secretary of State. Ten indi-
viduals in the National Military Estab-
lishment, each of whom is doing import-
tant work, are authorized to receive a
salary equivalent to that of the Secretary
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384RO01000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL: RECORD-HOUSE.
of National Defense and substantially
more than the Administrator of Veter-
ans' Affairs. The salary scale for the
Federal Government is completely dis-
proportionate to the salaries paid by a
number of State and municipal govern-
ments. In the State of New York, for
example, the attorney general and State
auditor receive $20,000 annually. Simi-
larly, in the field of municipal govern-
ment the mayors of 12 cities of over 500,-
000 population receive between $10,000
and $25,00, annually, with a median
salary of $18,000. In New York City
alone eight city officials, including the
mayor, receive $20,000 or more annually
in salary. Six city managers of cities
between 250,000 and. 500,000 population
receive salaries averaging $19,000.
One constantly hears the criticism,
and too often it is justified, that. many
Government officials are second-rate
men, or even worse. That really is ,an
argument for the bill, not against it,
How many first-rate men can we expect
to get unless we pay them something
more, adequate than the levels of 10 to
25 years ago?
The additional cost of this legislation,
if enacted, would be only $1,237,173 an-
nually. I do not know where else in our
'expenditures so little relatively, can be
expected to bring as much to our Govern-
ment in value received.
(Mr. JUDD asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks,)
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog-
nizes the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. LE-
COMPTE].
Mr. LECOMPTE. Mr. Chairman, about
a year ago the Congress increased the
salaries of all Government employees in
the lower brackets by $330 per year, about
a dollar a day. Today, in this bill, it is
proposed to increase the salaries of the
folks in the higher brackets of from 25
percent to 100 percent. I feel very deeply
that high salaries Is not the thing that
attracts able men to public service. The
opportunity to serve one's country and
serve the people well is the thing that
makes public service attractive to able
men and women. I believe sincerely that
the passage of this bill is going to let us
in for a great deal of pressure to increase
the salaries of all other employees of the
Federal Government, and perhaps rightly
so. We are not going to find the country
very happy over this salary increase for
the top-bracket folks at'a time when the
income of the average taxpayer is shrink-
ing and receipts of the Government de-
clining each day.
As to the suggestion for an increase
in salaries of Congressmen and Senators,
I am unalterably opposed to this sug-
gested amendment, as I was when the
reorganization bill-Public Law 601, Sev-
enty-ninth Congress-was adopted, al-
though there are many good provisions
in this law. We were unable to obtain
a yea-and-nay vote, but the RECORD shows
that I stood up and was recognized by
the Speaker and asked for the yeas and
nays.
The bill we have today starts at the
wrong place. It raises the higher sal-
aries and in the end will cost the tax-
payers. a vast sum of money every year.
I oppose the measure.
9347'
(Mr. LECOMPTE asked and was given feel free to call, if necessary, the best
permission to revise and extend his re- men for these jobs, and that no Ameri-
marks.) can, in view of the great issues our Na-
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog- tion faces domestically and In the world,
nizes the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. arid under the new pay scale, will feel
HAYS], that he has a right to reject any such
. Mr. HAYS of Ohio. Mr. Chairman, I public job for which he is fitted when it
offer an amendment. is offered to him.
The Clerk read as follows: The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
Amendment offered by Mr. HAYS of Ohio: gentleman from New York has expired.
On page 10, line 1, after the word "Commis- The Chair recognizes the gentleman
sion", strike out "members of the Board of from Texas [Mr. LUCAS].
Commissioners of the District of Columbia." Mr. LUCAS. Mr. Chairman, in a few
[Mr. HAYS of Ohio addressed the weeks we are going to be called upon to
Committee. His remarks will appear answer to our constituents as to what we
hereafter in the Appendix.] have done about economy. After you
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on have voted for this bill, by which you
are raising
the amendment offered by the gentleman Federal he salary of the Assistant
from Ohio [Mr. HAYS]. FeSecurity Administrator from
e question was tand on a $10,000 to $17,500, you will have to ex-
The question was taken; Mr. MURRAY my. plain what you have done about econo-
division
Tennessee) there were-ayes 132, He is the man who ying to in-
flict socialized medicine up potn this coun-
noes 48.
So the amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. For what purpose
does the gentleman from Pennsylvania
[Mr. WALTER] rise?
Mr. WALTER. Mr. Chairman, I ask
unanimous consent to amend line 14; on
page 11, referring to the amendment
that was just adopted, by striking out
$15,000 and inserting $10,060, and to
vacate the proceedings by which that
amendment was adopted.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Pennsylvania?
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. Reserv-
ing the right. to object, Mr. Chairman,
when the gentleman from Pennsylvania
referred to the amendment adopted just
a moment ago, was he referring to the
amendment which struck out the mem-
bers of the Board of the District of Co-
lumbia or the prior amendment offered
by the gentleman from Pennsylvania?
Mr. WALTER. The line was not cor-
rectly stated in the amendment which
I offered,
Mr. CASE of South Dakota. In other
words, the gentleman is leaving the item
for the legislative counsel as it appears
in the bill and making the change in the
Assistant Director for the Administrative
Office of the United States Courts?
Mr. WALTER. The gentleman is cor-
rect.
The CHAIRMAN. Is there objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Pennsylvania [Mr. WALTER] ?
There was no objection.
The CHAIRMAN. The Chair recog-
nizes'the gentleman from New York [Mr.
JAVITS].
Mr. JAVITS. Mr. Chairman, I take
this time to express what I think must
be felt by a great many Members with
respect to this bill. It looks like the bill
will be passed. The reason we are do-
ing what we are doing is because we want
to keep or get the best public officials to
deal with the problems of depression or
prosperity, and peace or war. I hope, we
will cease to see so many of the items In
the newspapers which we have been see-
ing, that a particular public servant feels
he must resign in order to rehabilitate
his personal fortune, or that another
feels he cannot accept a Government
position offered because he cannot afford
it financially. I hope the President will
try. He has written a book about it.
He is doing all he can to foist socialized
medicine upon the American people. By
raising his salary you are not only con-
doning his activities, you are endorsing
them. If you favor that kind of econ-
omy, go back and explain it to your
people. I certainly cannot.
You are shedding crocodile tears for
these fifteen- and twenty-thousand-dol-
lar-a-year men and at the same time
doing nothing for the worker, who is
presently covered by a minimum-wage
bill which provides for only 40 cents an
hour. Do you think $16 a week is enough
for a workingman? Do not you think
it is high time some consideration be
given to the man at the bottom of the
economic scale? My minimum-wage
bill will tie the pay of the worker to the
cost-of-living index, so that he will have
a constant steady income of the same
value, no matter depressions or infla-
tions.
Until something is done for the man
at the bottom of the heap, I cannot con-
scientiously vote for the man at the top.
I oppose this bill.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Texas has expired.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Kansas [Mr. REES].
Mr. REES. Mr. Chairman, at the
proper time I shall offer a motion to re-
commit this bill to the Committee on Post
Office and Civil Service. It contains the
amendment that I offered earlier in the
day and includes amendments that have
been approved by this committee. It
will also strike out the provision in the
bill that authorizes the President at his
own desire to raise the salaries of certain
individuals up to $18,000.
I make this explanation so that when
the time comes I will not have to take
extra time to explain It any further. I
still think' the salaries in this bill are
inequitable and are too high.
In line with what the distinguished
gentleman from Texas [Mr. LUCAS] just
said, I believe you are going to find it a
little difficult to explain to the people
back home if you permit the. approval
of the bill reported by the committee.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Kansas has expired.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Arkansas [Mr. TACKETTl.
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384RO01000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9,.
9348
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
Mr. TACKETT. Mr. Chairman and
Members of the Committee of the Whole
House on -the State of the Union, you well
know that my record to date during-my
short tenure as a Member of this House
has been very conservative-in fact, the
more liberal Members would consider my
record as that of a reactionary; and I
will admit that I have been and shall
continue to be very conservative where-
in the principles of democracy are in-
volved.
I came here with the intention of rep-
resenting the masses and not to speak as
a "pollyparrot" of any power contrary
to what I honestly believe to be the wishes
of those who have entrusted me with the
duties and responsibilities of this office.
Speaking in rather general terms con-
cerning the economy of this democracy,
I have felt that the founding fathers
formulated our system of democracy
upon the theory that supply and demand,
with free enterprise, individual initia-
tive and open competition being afforded
within the ranks of capital, business,
labor, and all the other Government and
individual essentials would govern our
economy.
Even though the aforementioned the-
ory exemplifies a pure democratic econ-
omy, trial and experience found us fac-
ing an unbalanced economy with most of
the wealth of this country drifting into
the hands of a few. Antitrust and anti-
monopoly laws, along with other business
restrictions, were enacted to assure com-
petition, aid supply and demand to pro-
duce a more equitable return upon in-
vestments, and to assure a more equal
distribution of this country's wealth.
Likewise, it has been necessary to im-
pose and maintain restrictions upon
labor for the purpose of affording a bal-
anced relationship between the employer
and the employee, and in order to stabi-
lize individual initiative, -free enterprise,
and open competition within. the ranks
of labor so as to afford supply and de-
mand an opportunity to regulate the
over-all economy.
If democracy is to prevail, I firmly be-
lieve that free competition must remain
intact and allowed to operate with cap-
ital and the investor who supply the com-
modity as well as with the ernloyee who
performs the labor, with the assistance of
capital, to bring the commodity and in-
vestment into existence. . Supply and
demand, with individual initiative, free
enterprise, and open competition being
afforded, should therefore regulate our
economy wherein capitalistic trusts are
suppressed, and labor controlled to the
extent of allowing fair relations to exist
between the affected parties. Then, we
must allow for necessary restrictions that
will tend to bring about a wider distribu-
tion of the country's wealth.
Only restrictions for the purpose of
producing a balanced economy are nec-
essary, and we can well see that to cur-
tail the efforts of business and individ-
uals with restrictions and controls that
remove the individual incentive to pro-
gress will eventually lead to the regimen-
tation of our people to such an extent
that we will no longer have any reason
to advance our persons or businesses.
Sooner or later unless Government con-
trol is brought to a minimum, every
business will be, told by the Government
how to operate, what prices to charge
for commodities, and the manner in
which the business shall be conducted.
The fees of professional men and women,
the specialists, and the laborers, will,
under such circumstances, be eventually
set by the Government, and the ability
of an individual to perform services will
be of little consequence. I have felt
that to vote for restrictions and controls
unnecessary to the balancing of our econ-
omy is no less than to vote a socialistic
ticket that tends to remove the funda-
mental prerequisites of a democracy. I
have in the past and I shall continue to
oppose legislation wherein the Govern-
ment is allowed to compete with private
enterprise, except in cases where private
enterprise cannot or has not performed
the requirements.
My maiden speech on the floor of this
House a few days after I took my oath
of office was in favor of the reorganiza-
tion and coordination of the existing
Federal agencies and departments, at a
saving to the taxpayers rather than to
bring into existence new agencies and
expand those now in existence. It is dif-
ficult to understand how we shall ever
expect to become solvent if we are to
continue the practice of employing an
average of 271 new people every day the
sun rises, and if we are to continue estab-
lishing new agencies and expanding those
in existence every time the Congress
meets. I feel that every department and
agency should have ample personnel to
administer the affairs involved as per
the demands of the people, minus Fed-
eral administration of affairs that should
be administered by the States. I have
followed the economy move in this Con-
gress, believing that this Government
could be operated with the same full force
and effect on behalf of the people with
much less money; but, gentlemen, we all
know that it is false economy to pay a
person less for their services than that
to which they are entitled. One never
gets any more that what he pays for.
It is generally believed by the public
that the public officials actually receive
more money for their services than is
authorized by 'law. It would be difficult
to convince any reasonable person that
a Member of the President's Cabinet
actually received in the past only $15,000
per year. No man or woman can imagine
a Member of this Congress surviving the
expenditures imposed upon him or her
with the salary authorized by law; and
it cannot be done if the respective Mem-
ber actually renders the service to which
his constituents are entitled. A $20,000
salary to a Member of Congress would
amount to no more than seven or eight
thousand dollars to a Member in his
home communiity. Actually he could stay
at home on $5,000 as easily as serving in
Congress for $20,000.
Every Member of Congress is required
to have two homes-one in Washington
and one within his district. His home
expenses are practically as high while he
is in Washington as while he is at home.
It is necessary to expend more money in
the performance of his duties than he is
paid by the Government.
Unless a Member of Congress has an
outside income from a business, profes-
sion, or some other source, he cannot
properly serve his people with the salary
now authorized by law, unless he comes
here a rich man.
Why, gentlemen, a Member is re-
quired to run for office every 2 years, and
the general public well knows that it is
necessary to expend in each election at
least the amount of his first year's salary.
A poor man cannot even Venture to run
for such public office without the finan-
cial assistance of his close friends and
those expecting favors. I cannot imagine
that the membership of this Congress is
to be made up of the rich in this great
democracy of competition, which can
well lead to a capitalistic government
detrimental to the middle and lower
classes of our country. For the member-
ship of Congress to receive an adequate
salary will be most beneficial to the poor
and middle classes of this United States
of America.
Seniority plays a big role in the opera-
tion of Congress. In fact, a freshman
Member such as myself has little to do
with the legislative machinery and
actually participates only to the extent
of a single vote. Other than a rich
Member of Congress must look to the
future general welfare of his family and
cannot afford to sacrifice the required
years in Congress upon the salary now
being paid to gain a position with enough.
seniority to be as helpful to his people
as he would like.
The Hoover Commission has foreseen
the need for adequate salaries to public
officials as a guard against the destruc-
tion of democracy, as a guard against a
capitalistic form of government, and as
an assurance of honest administration
on behalf of all the people.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from California [Mr. MILLER] is recog-
nized.
Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Chair-
man, I wish to read into the RECORD an
excerpt from a statement made by Mr.
Beardsley Ruml in support of the prin-
ciples of this bill :
If we are to have efficiency in public ex-
penditure, two measures are obviously neces-
sary. First, the President must have an in.
creased scope of authority in the organiza-
tion and reorganization of the agencies in
the executive branch of the Government.
And second, a higher level of compensation,
as has been recommended, should be estab-
lished for top Government officials in order
to hold in the Federal service and to attract
to the Federal service the talent that is neces-
sary for efficient managerial operation of the
essential services of the executive branch of
the Federal Government.
I wish also to read into the RECORD the
following telegram in support of the bill
from Eric Johnston, president of the Mo-
tion Picture Association of America, Inc.:
WASHINGTON, D. C., February 8, 1949.
Hon. GEORGE P. MILLER,
House Committee on
.Post Office and Civil Service,
House of Representatives:
As a businessman I am happy to endorse
House bill 1689 authorizing increase pay for
heads of executive departments and indepen-
dent agencies. Efficient administration of
public business demands today payment of
adequate compensation to policy directing
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
heads in the executive branch of the Govern- The bill was ordered to be engrossed
ment. This will serve to attract to Govern- and read a third time, and was read the
ment service the highest type of qualified third time.
person and insure the retention of the ex-
perienced and able public servant. Mr. REES. Mr. Speaker, I offer a
ERIC JOHNSTON, motion to recommit.
President, Motion Picture The SPEAKER. Is the gentleman op-
Association of America, Inc. posed to the bill?
In conclusion I wish to leave with you Mr. REES. I am, Mr. Speaker.
the thought that when such men as The SPEAKER. The Clerk will report
Beardsley Rum] and Eric Johnston sup- the motion to recommit.
port legislation of this kind they do not The Clerk read as follows:
do so lightly. Mr. REES moves to recommit the bill to
This bill has merit and is the first step the Committee on Post Office and Civil Serv-
in the reestablishing in the Government fee with Instructions to report it back forth-
service the balance between the several with with the following amendment sert
out all after the enacting clause clause and Insert
levels of activity so essential to good the following:
management and high-efficiency. "That the rate of basic compensation of
gentleman from California has expired;
all time has expired.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I ask unanimous consent for
the consideration of a clarifying amend-
ment and permission to make a very brief
statement explaining the reason for it.
The gentleman from Florida intro-
duced an amendment changing the sal-
ary of the Director of the Federal Bureau
of Investigation from $15,000 to $17,500.
The item appears again at page 10, line
19, "Director, Federal Bureau of Investi-
gation." I would like to strike that out
since the salary of.the Director of the
Federal Eureau of Investigation has al-
ready been increased to $17,500 by the
adoption of the amendment of the gen-
tleman from Florida [Mr. ROGERS].
The CHAIRMAN. Is there. objection
to the request of the gentleman from
Tennessee?
There was no objection.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Chairman, I offer the following amend-
ment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. MURRAY of
Tennessee: Page 10, line 19, strike out "Di-
rector, Federal Bureau of Investigation."
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Tennessee.
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The question re-
curs on the committee amendment as
amended.
The committee amendment as
amended was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the rule, the
Committee rises.
9349
the Tennessee Valley Authority; members of
the Civil Service Commission; the Chair-
man of the United States Maritime Commis-
sion; members of the United States Tariff
Commission; the General Counsel of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Board; the Architect
of the Capitol; the Deputy Administrator
of General Services; the Housing Expediter;
the Director of the Bureau of Federal Supply;
the Archivist of the United States; members
of the Displaced Persons Commission; mem-
bers of the Indian Claims Commission;
members of the War Claims Commission;
members of the Philippine War Damage Com-
mission; each Assistant Secretary of an
executive department (including the Fiscal
Assistant Secretary of the Treasury); each
Assistant Attorney General; the Assistant
Solicitor General of the United States; the
Counselor of the Department of State; the
per annum. masters General; the Associate Federal Med-
"SEC. 2. (a) The rate of basic compensation iation and Conciliation Director; the Deputy
of the Comptroller General of the United Director of Central Intelligence; the Philip-
States, the Chairman of the Council of Eco- pine Alien Property Administrator; the Chief
nomic Advisers, the Director of the Bureau Assistant Librarian of Congress; the Deputy
of the Budget, the Chairman of the National Public Printer; members (other than the
Security Resources Board, the Federal Se-
curity Administrator, the Administrator of Export-Import Bank of Washington; mem-
Veterans' Affairs, the Administrator of Gen- bers (other than the Chairman) of the
eral Services, each Under Secretary of an United States Maritime Commission; Admin-
executive department, the Assistant to the istrator, Production and Marketing Adminis-
Attorney General, the Solicitor General of tration; Commissioner of Internal Revenue;
the United States, the Director of the Federal Director of the Bureau of Prisons; Commis-
Bureau of Investigation, Director of Cen- sioner f . Public Roads; Commissioner of
tral Intelligence, and the First Assistant Public ?uildings; Commissioner of Com-
Postmaster General shall be $17,500 per munity Facilities; Commissioner of Immigra-
annum. tion and Naturalization; Administrator,
"(b) Section 105 of title 3 of the United Rural Electrification Administration; Com-
States Code is amended to read as follows: missioner for Social Security; Commissioner
ADMINISTRATIVE, AND 61AFT ASSISTANTS TO Service; Commissioner of Customs; Governor
PRESIDENT of the Farm Credit. Administration; Chief
Forester of the Forest Service; Administrator
"'SEC. 105. The President is authorized to of the Farmers Home Administration; the
fix the compensation of the six administra- three Special Assistants to the Secretary of
tive assistants authorized to be appointed Defense; and of the Governors of Alaska,
under section 106 of this title, of the Execu- Hawaii, the Virgin Islands, and the Panama
tive Secretary of the National Security Coun- Canal shall be at the rate of $12,500 per an-
cil, and of five other secretaries or other im- num. Notwithstanding section 30 of the act
mediate staff assistants in the White House of May 24, 1924, as amended (U, S. C., title
Office as follows: Two at rates not exceeding 5, sec. 152a), the salary of the Legal Adviser
$16,000 per annum, three at rates not exceed- of the Department of State shall continue
ing $15,000 per annum, and seven at rates to be at the rate of $10,330 per annum.
not exceeding $12,000 per annum.' "(b) .The first sentence of section 603 of
"(c) The first sentence of section 106 of title 28 of the United States Code (relating
title 3 of the United States Code is amended t
th
l
f
o
e sa
ary o
the Director of the Adminis-
to read as follows: The President is au- trative Office of the United States Courts) is
thorized to appoint not to exceed six ad- amended to read as follows:
ministrative assistants and to fix their com- "'The Director shall receive a salary of
pensation in accordance with section 105 of $12,500 a year.'
this title.' "(c) The second sentence of section 603
"SEC. 3. The rate of basic compensation of title 28 of the United States Code (relating
of. the Chairman of the Munitions Board, to the compensation of the Assistant Di-
the Chairman of the Research and Develop- rector of the Administrative Office of the
ment Board, the Assistant Comptroller Gen- United States Courts) is amended to read
eral of the United States, the Administrator
A_-- as follows: 'The Assistant Director shall re-
ef General Services th
ss
e
Ac
Ji
l
co
ng
y talc l./Vlllllalttee ruse; and the Bureau of the Budget, and the Deputy
the Speaker having resumed the chair, Administrator Of Veterans' Affairs, the Pub-
Mr. GORE, Chairman of the Committee of lic Printer, the Librarian of Congress, the
the Whole House on the State of the Administrator of Civil Aeronautics, Manager
Union, reported that that Committee, of the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation,
having had under consideration the bill the Commissioner of Narcotics, the Federal
(H. R. 1689) to increase rates Of COM- Assistant Federal Conciliation
pensation of the heads and assistant shall be $15,000 per annum.
heads of executive departments and in- "SEC. 4, (a) The rate of basic compensa-
dependent agencies, pursuant to House tion of the Director of Aeronautical Research
Resolution 274, he reported the same of the National Advisory Committee for Aero-
back to the House with an amendment nautics; members of the Civil Aeronautics
adopted in the Committee of the Whole. Board; members of the Federal Communica-
tion Commission; members of the Federal
The SPEAKER. Under the rule, the Power Commission; members of the Federal
previous question is ordered. The ques- Trade Commission; members of the Inter-
tion is on the amendment. state Commerce Commission; members of the
The amendment was agreed to. National Labor Relations Board; members
The SPEAKER. The of the National Mediation Board; members
question is on of the Railroad Retirement Board; mem-
the engrossment and third reading of bers of the Securities and Exchange Commis-
the bill. sion; members of the Board of Directors of
"(d) The rate of compensation of the
Legislative Counsel of the House of Repre-
sentatives and of the Legislative Counsel of
the Senate shall be $12,000 per annum.
"SEC. 5. This act shall take effect on the
first day of the first pay period which begins
after the date of enactment of this act."
Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I
move the previous question on the motion
to recommit.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER. The question Is on
the motion to recommit.
Mr. REES. Mr. Speaker, I demand the
yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were refused.
Mr. REES. Mr. Speaker, I ask for a
division on the motion to recommit.
The House divided; and there were-
ayes 71, noes 165.
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
9350
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE JULY 8
So the motion to recommit was re-
jected.
The SPEAKER. The question is on
the passage of the bill.
Mr. H. CARL ANDERSEN. Mr.
Speaker, onthat I demand the yeas and
nays.
The yeas and nays were refused.
The bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on
the table.
Mr. MURRAY of Tennessee. Mr.
Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that
all Members may have five legislative
days to extend their remarks on the bill
just passed at this point in the RECORD.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Ten-
nessee?
There was no objection.
FEDERAL PAY STRUCTURE--RELIC OF THE PAST
Mr. HAYS of Arkansas. Mr. Speaker,
in the past quarter century, the map of
the world has been redrawn. World
War II has been fought and won. Atomic
energy has been released. The United
Nations Organization has come into
being. The hope of the world for peace
and prosperity has become Centered in
the Government and the people of the
United States of America. This kind of
responsibility in the modern age in which
we live calls for the most capable men
our Nation can produce. And how shall
we go about getting men of that caliber?
By offering them salaries on a pay scale
established by Congress as far back as
28 years ago? This is what we actually
offer to. men expected to be leaders not
only in the United States but the world.
Members of the Cabinet, for example,
received $15,000 per annum in 1925.
They are paid precisely the same today.
The Director of the Bureau of the Budget
receives $10,000 today. That is the
identical salary that was fixed for the
position June 10, 1921-and which re-
cently caused a Director of the Budget,
with long and valuable experience, to re-
sign in the interests of his family.
Nothing in the Federal Government is
quite so out-dated as the pay scales of
many of its top officials.
Because Government salaries for top
executives are completely out of balance
with industrial scales, Government agen-
cies are constantly losing valuable per-
sonnel. Moreover, it is extremely diffi-
cult to find competent replacements for
these positions.
It is difficult to understand why a man
who is worth $50,000 to private industry
is considered to be worth only $10,000 or
$15,000 to the great institution that is the
Government of the United States. In-
dustries with far fewer assets than some
Government corporations -- industries
whose functions for national health,-
peace, and prosperity hardly merit men-
tion in the same breath as these Govern-
ment corporations--nevertheless, pay
their officials holding comparable posi-
tions anywhere from half again to 10
times as much as Government is author-
ized to offer.
Industry, wisely and rightly, has ad-
justed salaries to meet changing condi-
tions, increasing responsibilities, or the
rising cost of living. Such procedure
makes for efficiency. It holds experi-
enced personnel.
Government pay policy in the upper
brackets has been precisely the opposite.
In many agencies, the top official now re-
ceives the same salary as the next three
or four officials under him. In some
cases, the top man actually receives a
few hundred dollars less than his princi-
pal assistant. It would be almost mi-
raculous if this situation did not under-
mine efficiency? break down confidence,
and cause a much more than normal
turn-over of top personnel.
This is a most serious problem. The
men who execute the policies of our Gov-
ernment bear the weightiest responsibil-
ity of any citizens of the United States.
Upon their competent execution of their
duties depends not only the efficiency of
Government, but possibly even the peace
and prosperity of the world. We dare
not be satisfied with anything less than
top-flight personnel.
The enactment of this bill might not
bring to Government the best personnel
in the land, but it would surely remove
one of the principal. reasons why service
in the Government has become less at-
tractive.
There is no dearth of patriotic citizens
in the United States.. But can we blame
a citizen who does not feel called upon
to sacrifice permanently the interests of
his family upon the altar of a Govern-
ment Job? Can we blame a worker for
throwing in the sponge when he sees his
associates and sometimes his assistants
accepting better- paying jobs in private
business?
Can we blame even the long-time
career man when he takes a second look
around-because he sees every now and
then some faithful, patriotic servant of
the people cracking up under the fear-
ful strain that these postwar days put
upon all conscientious Government
officials?
We must have competent people in
Government. To get them we must en-
deavor to make our salary structure fit
the needs of the times. True, Govern-
ment cannot expect to match the pay
scales of industry. But this is not
necessary. Al[ that most Government
officials ask is a salary which will place
them in the same position relative to
their assistants and relative to the cost
of living that they occupied in the days
before the war.
The executive pay bill would assure
them of that kind of position. It would
restore confidence in the fairness of
Government to its own servants. It of-
fers the type of recognition that will
bring forth the best in Government
efficiency.
Mr. KARST. Mr. Speaker, supposedly,
we are considering a bill to increase the
salaries of certain key executives and ad-
ministrators of Federal departments and
agencies. In reality we are debating the
question, how great a financial sacrifice
can. we ask from men of top-flight ability
because they are Government servants?
This bill does not pretend to pay sal-
aries that match or even approach the
rewards that private concerns offer men
with similar talents and carrying equal
responsibilities. Judged by any such
standard it is common knowledge that
Government salaries are pitifully inade-
quate.
It is common knowledge that all too
often years of training and experience in
Government serve only as a proving
ground for well-paid fobs in private in-
dustry. And this trend is increasing at
the very time when Government has
need of every top-flight person it can
muster.
Look at the duties and responsibilities
these Government officials must meet.
In terms of money spent, in terms of na-
tional policy and national welfare, their
task Is staggering. How much can we
ask them to sacrifice in the public serv-
ice? At best we can only limit the fi-
nancial loss they inevitably take.
But there is a much more serious as-
pect to this problem than next year's
budget or the pay of certain Govern-
ment officials. It concerns the longer
future and the type of executives and ad-
ministrators who will be available for
Government service in the years ahead.
We are not legislating solely or pri-
marily for the next fiscal year.
We must consider how Government
service will look to the :really able mem-
bers of the rising generation. We can
invite them to consider such a career or
we can cold-shoulder them with salary
scales that are pitifully inadequate. If
we make the sacrifice look too great, we
will lose most o` the really able people
that we want and need in Government.
We will lose them because they will not
even consider a career in Government,
much less point toward it. Moreover, we
will have great difficulty in recruiting
mature, able men from private life.
Who will pay for that loss of talent,
vision, and ability? Your constituents
and mine-if we have the good fortune
to remain In Congress. All of us, will
foot the bill if we so underpay our Gov-
ernment officials that we screen out the
very ones who could serve us most effi-
ciently and economically.
Mr. BRYSON. Mr. Speaker, it is to
be regretted that we are considering
H. R. 1689 at this time.
Since many of our people are insisting
upon the adoption of considerable por-
tions of the Hoover Commission report,
surely it is untimely to add to Govern-
ment expenditures rather than to reduce
them.
Assuming that there ara inequities in
the pay of heads of Government depart-
ments and agencies, we cannot afford to
increase salaries and wages of said Gov-
ernment officials In the face of a known
growing deficit.
The latest report reaching Congress
reveals the fact that we are operating
now with a deficit of some $2,000,000,-
000. It appears that this deficit will
increase. With this acknowledged fact
before us, we must reduce Government
expenditures, raise taxes, or operate with
a deficit. We cannot in justice to the
taxpayer increase taxes with incomes on
the decline. We should not operate with
a deficit. The logical thing to do is to
reduce Government cost.
One hears little talk of economy in
Congress. We have grown too accus-
homed to increasing expenditures. The
clamor of the taxpayers for relief is
seldom heard, If ever.
It is a great honor to serve our Gov-
ernment in any capacity. Most every-
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
1949 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE
one In public office must of necessity
serve at a financial sacrifice. One ca-
pable of successfully filling a public office
could easily earn more money In private
industry. The real compensation accru-
ing to a public official is intangible. The
satisfaction of knowing that one has had
the privilege of serving his country is,
and should be, adequate pay.
In my judgment, unless there is a
change in the attitude of those now in
charge of our Government toward pub-
lic expenditures the people will ultimately
rebel against extravagance.
On a recent trip to my district I was
greatly impressed by the attitude of
everyone toward economy.
Let us send this measure back to com-
mittee for additional study with the hope
that by the time it comes up for further
consideration our domestic affairs will
have been improved.
When the idea of increasing salaries,
such as is provided for in this measure,
was first presented to the Congress some
6 months ago, the financial horizon was
much brighter than now. Let us hope
that in the not distant future our eco-
nomical affairs will improve.
This is no time to add additional and
unnecessary burdens to our already over-
burdened taxpayers.
I regret to find myself in disagreement
with those who are sponsoring this legis-
lation, but have no hesitancy in voting
against its passage.
FURTHE ESSAGE FROM THE S E
A furt M= age from the S e, by
Mr. Carrel% one of its clerks, Pounced
that the S ate agrees to t report of
the commit ee of confereno on the dis-
agreeing vo s of the two Houses on the
amendment of the House to the bill
(S. 1070) en tied "An act to establish a
national hou ng objective and the policy
to be followe in the attainment thereof,
to provide F deral aid to assist slum-
clearance pr ects and low-rent public
housing proje s initiated by local agen-
cies, to provid for financial assistance
by the Secreta of Agriculture for farm
housing, and f other purposes."
EXTENS N OF REMARKS
Mr. TACKE asked and was given
permission to r ise and extend the re-
marks he made in Committee of the
Whole today a include extraneous
Mr. HART askell and was given per-
mission to extend his remarks in the
RECORD and inclu an article appear-
Mr. ADDONIZIO ked and was given
permission to exten is remarks in the
RECORD and include editorial appear-
ing in the New Jersey ecord.
Mr. HAGEN asked d was given per-
mission to extend hi remarks in the
RECORD and includ a newspaper
Mr. MARCANTONIOsked and was
given permission to ext d his remarks
in the RECORD and elude certain
extracts.
Mr. FEIGHAN asked Ind was given
permission to extend his marks in the
RECORD and include an ed orial.
Mr. DAVENPORT as lied and was
given permission to exten his remarks
any enrolle
duly passe
truly
T
t
reaues
Mr. BATTLE a ked and was given per-
mission to exten his remarks in the
RECORD and inclu e a speech.
SPECIAL 0 DER GRANTED
Mr. PHILLIPS California asked and
was given perms sion to address the
House for 40 min es on Friday, July 22,
at the conclusion f the legislative pro-
gram of the day a d following any spe-
cial orders hereto re entered.
ADJOUR ENT OVER
Mr. MCCORMA K. Mr. Speaker, I
ask unanimous co sent that when the
House adjourns to y it adjourn to meet,
at 12 o'clock on Mo day next.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request. of t e gentleman from
There was no obj ction.
SIGNING OF ROLLED BILLS
Mr. McCORMA . Mr. Speaker, I
ask unanimous co sent that notwith-
standing the adjou ment of the House
until Monday the C erk be authorized to
receive messages f in the Senate and
that the Speaker b authorized to sign
There was no obje tson.
SENATE ENROLEE BILLS SIGNED
The SPEAKER an ounced his signa-
ture to enrolled bills the Senate of the
following titles:
S. 230. An act for the Belief of Mrs. Sonia
S. 322. An act for the elief of Mrs. Ger-
trude H. Westaway, legal uardian of Bobby
S. 1138. An act for th relief of John
W. Crumpacker, comman r, United States
S. 1359. An act to repeal a provisions of
the Alaska Railroad Retire nt Act of June
29, 1936, as amended, ands tions 91 to 107
of the Canal Zone Code a to extend the
benefits of the Civil Service etirement Act
of May 29, 1930, as amende to officers and
employees to whom such rovisions are
S. 1688. An act to provide r certain ad-
justments on the promotion 1 t of the Medi-
cal Service Corps of the Reg r Army.
BILLS AND JOINT R LUTION
PRESENTED TO THE PR SIDENT
Mrs. NORTON, from th Committee
on House Administration, r orted that
that committee did on this ay present
to the President, for his ap royal, bills
and a joint resolution thIl House of
the following titles:
H. R. 20. An act to amend the t of August
1, 1947, as amended, to authors the crea-
tion of 10 professional and sci tific posi-
tions in the headquarters and r earch sta-
tions of the National Advisory ommittee
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
9351
H. R. 52. An act
County, Calif.;
H. R. 596. Afl~ act to confer jurisdiction
John E. Parker,
assigns, against
H. R. 703. An
upon the Unite
hear, determine,
the claim of Mrs
oral Engineering
H. R. 1009. An
Central Bank, a
assignee of John
operating under,
trade style of
Oakland, Calif.;
H. R. 1042. An
Wong;
H. R. 1116. An
Fred Girdley an
H. R. 1173. An
H. R. 1297, An
G. Patton;
H. R. 1470. An
estate of James
H. R. 1496. An
H. R. 1676. An
M. Bates;
H. R. 2349. An
Wlodzimierz On
H. R. 2785. An
contributions to
H. R. 2848. An
Nikolaivich Volk
H. R. 3017. An
G. Hunter and A
H. R, 3077. An
Rebecca Levy;
H. R. 3151. An
Food, Drug, and
1938, as amended,
cation of batches
thereof;
H. R. 3313. An
estate of the late
Claims to hear, determine,
ent upon a certain claim of
is heirs, administrators, or
t conferring jurisdiction
States District. Court for
ict of South Carolina to
nd render judgment upon
teen Foxworth;
for the relief of the Gen-
Dry Dock Corp.;
California corporation as
C. Williams, an individual
the fictitious name and
ntral Machine Works, of
, Inc.;
of for the reliek of James
Percy Bridgewater;
t for the relief of Florence
E. B. Peters;
Delahanty, deceased;
it for the relief of Mrs.
nd of aureomycin, chlor-
citracin, or any derivative
H. R. 3321. An ac for the relief of Gloria
Esther Diaz, Lydia elez, and Gladys Prieto;
H. R. 3323. An ac for the relief of the
estate of Rafael Re llo;
H. R.3680. An act o authorize the Secre-
tary of Agriculture o quitclaim 51/Lo acres
of land in Washingt County, Miss., to the
Mississippi State Col e;
H. R. 3717. An act t repeal the act of July
24, 1946, relating to t Swan Island Animal
F. Earl;
H. R. 3812. An act for Tihe relief of Myrtle
Ruth Osborne, Marion its, and Jessie A.
H. R. 4252. An act to tr sfer the trawlers
Alaska and Oregon from t Reconstruction
Finance Corporation to the Wish and Wildlife
H. R. 4373. An act for the elief of Ray G.
Schneyer and Dorothy J. Sc eyer;
H. R. 4559. An act for the elief of Louis
H. R. 4807. An act for the lief of Robert
A. Atlas; and
H. J. Res. 228. Joint resoluti authorizing
an appropriation for the wor of the Presi-
dent's Committee on Nations Employ the
 Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9
9352
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-HOUSE J ULY 8
ADJOURNMENT
Mr. McCORMACK. Mr. Speaker, I
move that the House do now adjourn.
The motion was agreed to; accordingly
(at 4 o'clock and 28 minutes p. m.) the
House, under Its previous order, ad-
journed until Monday, July 11, 1949, at
12 o'clock noon.
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS, ETC.
Under clause 2 of rule XXIV, execu-
tive communications were taken from the
Speaker's table and referred as follows:
744. A letter from the Secretary of De-
fense transmitting a letter by the Acting
Secretary of the Navy recommending the en-
actment of a proposed. draft of legislation
entitled "To authorize the allowance of leave
credit to officers of the Army, Navy, Air Force,
Marine Corps, Coast Guard, and the Reserve
components thereof, who were denied such
credit as the result of certain. changes In
their status between September 8, 1939, and
August 9, 1946"; to the Committee on Armed
Services.
745. A letter from the President, Board of
Commissioners, District of Columbia, trans-
mitting a draft of a proposed bill entitled
"To amend the District; of Columbia Teach-
ers' Salary Act of :1947"; to the Committee
on the District of Columbia.
746. A letter from the Secretary of Com-
merce, transmitting a draft of a proposed
bill entitled "To increase the number of
examiners in chief in the Patent Office, and
for other purposes"; to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
747. A letter from the Postmaster General,
transmitting a report of claims paid by the
Post Office Department under the provisions
of the Federal Tort Claims Act during the
liscal year 1948-49; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
748. A letter from the Acting Secretary of
the Interior, transmitting a draft of a pro-
posed bill entitled "A bill to amend the act of
August 8, 1948, relating to the payment of an-
nual leave to certain officers and employees";
to the Committee on Post Office and Civil
Service.
749. A letter from the Archivist of the
United States, transmitting a report on rec-
ords proposed for disposal and lists or sched-
ules, or parts of lists or schedules, covering
records proposed for disposal by certain Gov-
ernment agencies; to the Committee on
House Administration.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PUBLIC
BILLS AND R;SOLUTI:ONs
Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of
committees were delivered to the Clerk
for printing and reference to the proper
calendar, as follows
Mr. WHITTINGTON: Committee on Public
Works. H. R. 3071. A bill to authorize the
Secretary of the Army to purchase certain
property in Morgan County; with an amend-
ment (Rept. No. 1000). Referred to the Com-
mittee of the Whole House on the State of
the Union.
Mr. WI3ITTINGTON: Committee on Public
Works. H. R. 3197. A bill relating to the sale
of the old Louisville Marine Hospital, Jeffer-
son County, Ky.; with an amendment (Rept.
No. 1001). Referred to the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union.
Mr. COOLEY: Committee on Agriculture.
H. R. 2392. A bill to provide for the liquida-
tion of the trusts under the transfer agree-
ments with State rural. rehabilitation corpo-
rations, and. for other purposes; with an
amendment (Rept. No. 1003). Referred to
the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union.
Mr. HARRIS: Committee on Interstate and
Foreign Commerce. S. 1278. An act to fix the
United States share of project costs, under
the Federal Airport Act, involved in installa-
tion of high intensity lighting on CAA des-
ignated instrument landing runways; with-
out amendment (Rept. No. 1004). Referred
to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union.
Mr. ROGERS of Florida Committee on In-
terstate and Foreign Commerce. S. 1279. An
act to amend the Federal Airport Act so as to
provide that minimum rates of wageg need
be specified only in contracts in excess of
$2,000; without amendment (Rept. No. 1005).
Referred to the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union.
Mr. SULLIVAN: Committee on Interstate
and Foreign Commerce. S. 1280. An act to
amend the Federal Airport Act so as to limit
to 10 percent any increase of the amount
stated as a maximum - obligation under a
grant agreement; without amendment (Rept.
No. 1006). Referred to the Committee of the
Whole House on the State of the Union.
REPORTS OF COMMITTEES ON PRIVATE
BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Under clause 2 of rule XIII, reports of
committees were delivered to the Clerk
for printing and reference to the proper
calendar, as follows:
Mr. WHITTINGTON: Committee on Pub-
lic Works. H. R. 5356. A bill to provide for
the conveyance of land to the Norfolk County
Trust Co. in Stoughton, Mass., with an
amendment (Rcpt. No. 1002). Referred to
the Committee of the Whole house.
PUBLIC BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Under clause 3 of rule XXII, public
bills and resolutions were introduced and
severally referred as follows:
By Mr. I3ARTLETT:
H. R. 5549. A bill relating to the exemption
from payment of income tax of certain com-
pensation payable to Federal employees sta-
tioned in the Territories and possessions of
the United States; to the Committee on Ways
and Means.
By Mr. C!OLMER:
H. R. 5550. A bill to amend the act entitled
"An act to expedite the provision of housing
in connection with national defense, and for
other purposes", as amended, to permit the
sale of war housing to State and local hous-
ing agencies; to the Committee on Banking
and Currency.
By Mr. FARRINGTON:
H. R. 5551. A bill to authorize the President
of the United States, under certain condi-
tions, to appoint boards of inquiry with
power to make binding recommendations
with respect to labor disputes in trade be-
tween the continental United States and the
Territory of Hawaii, and for other purposes;
to the Committee on Education and Labor.
By Mr. LANE:
H. R. 5552. A bill to amend the act of Au-
gust 8, 1946, relating to the payment of an-
nual leave to certain officers and employees;
to the Committee on Post Office and Civil
Service.
By Mr. LODGE:
H. R. 5553. A bill to authorize payments by
the Administrator of Veterans' Affairs on the
purchase of automobiles or other conveyances
by certain disabled veterans, and for other
purposes; to the Committee on Veterans'
Affairs.
By Mr. SADOWSKI:
H. It. 5554. A bill to require the United
States Civil Service Commission to establish
a regional office for the State of Michigan
at Detroit, Mich.; to the Committee on Post
Office and Civil Service.
By Mr. WOOD:
H. R. 5555. A bill to repeal the act of March
31, 1949, suspending certain import taxes on
copper; to the Committee on Ways and
Means.
By Mr. MORRIS :
H. R. 5556. A bill to make available for In-
dian use certain surplus property at the
Wingate Ordnance Depot, N. Mex.; to the
Committee on Public Lands.
By Mr. GATHINGS:
H. R. 5557. A bill to provide for coordina-
tion of arrangements for the employment of
agricultural workers admitted for temporary
agricultural employment from foreign coun-
tries in the Western Hemisphere, to assure
that the migration of such workers will be
limited to the minimum numbers required
to meet domestic labor shortages and for
other purposes; to the Committee on Agricul-
ture.
By Mr. HOFFMAN of Michigan:
H. R. 5558. A-bill declaring a portion of the
Paw Paw River, in the city of Benton Harbor,
in the city of St. Joseph and Benton Town-
ship, county of Berrien, State of Michigan, to
be nonnavigable; to the Committee on Inter-
state and Foreign Commerce.
By Mr. BATTLE;
H. R. 5559. A bill to amend the Federal
Trade Commission Act with respect to the
advertising of alcoholic beverages; to the
Committee on Interstate and Foreign Com-
merce.
By Mr. BROOKS:
H. R. 5560. A bill to terminate the war-tax
rates on certain miscellaneous excise taxes,
and for other purposes; to the Committee on
Ways and Means.
By Mr. CROSSER:
H. R. 5561. A bill to create an independent
Air Safety Board; to the Committee on In-
terstate and Foreign Commerce.
By Mr. DAVIES of New York:
H. R. 5562. A bill to amend the Agricultural
Act of 1948 and the Agricultural Adjust-
ment Act of 1938, as amended, to provide
price support for Angora-rabbit wool; to the
Committee on Agriculture.
By Mr. PRICE:
H. R. 5563. A bill to amend Public Law 49,
Severity-seventh Congress, for the purpose of
preventing loss of life, impairment of health,
and endangerment to the safety of coal mine
employees; to the Committee on Education
and Labor.
By Mr. CELLER :
H. J. Res. 295. Joint resolution to erect a
memorial to the memory of Mohandas K.
Gandhi; to the Committee on House Admin-
istration.
By Mr. LODGE:
H. Con. Res. 101. Concurrent resolution re-
lating to refund of premiums on national
service life insurance -policies; to the Com-
mittee on Veterans' Affairs.
MEMORIALS
Under clause 3 of rule XXII, memorials
were presented and referred as follows:
By the SPEAKER: Memorial of the Legis-
lature of the State of California memorializ-
ing the President and Congress of the United
States relative to the construction of navi-
gable channels on the Sacramento and
Feather Rivers; to the Committee on Public
Works.
PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS
Under clause I of rule XXII, private
bills and resolutions were introduced and
severally referred as follows:
By Mr. BOLLING:
H. It. 5564. A bill for the relief of Wilcox
Electric Co., Inc.; to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
Approved For Release 2000/08/11 : CIA-RDP57-00384R001000090014-9