SUPPLEMENTAL DEFENSE, APPROPRIATION BILL, 1966

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 64
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 20, 2005
• Sequence Number: 12
• Publication Date: March 15, 1966
• Content Type: OPEN

5550
Approved For 6ZE 0004000400 ch 15, 1966
NAYS-102
Abbitt
Fisher
Passmau
Abernethy
Fountain
Pike
Andrews,
Fulton, Tenn.
Quie
George W.
Gettys
Randall
Andrews,
Gross
Reid, Ill.
Glenn
Grover
Reifel
Andrews,
Gubser
Robison
N. Dak.
Gurney
Rogers, Fla.
Arends
Hagan, Ga.
Roybal
Ashbrook
Haley
Rumsfeld
Ashmore
Hall
Satterfield
Bennett
Hansen, Idaho
Scott
Berry
Harsha
Secrest
Bolton
Henderson
Selden
Bow
Hutchinson
Sikes
Skubita
Brown, Ohio
Jones, Mo.
Smith, Calif.
Broyhill, N.C.
Jones, N.C.
Stalbaum
Buchanan
King, N.Y.
Stanton
Burton, Utah
Kornegay
Stephens
Cameron
Langen
Talcott
Cederberg
Latta
Taylor
Chamberlain
Lennon
Tuck
Clancy
McClory
Tuten
Conable
McCulloch
Utt
Cramer
McEwen
Walker, N. Mex.
Cunningham
McMillan
Watson
Curtis
MacGregor
W eltner
Derwinski
Michel
Whitener
Devine
Minshail
Whitten
Dickinson
Morton
Williams
Dole
Nelsen
Wilson, Bob
Dulski
O'Hara, Mich.
Wolff
Edwards, Ala.
O'Neal, On.
Wydier
Ei'lenborn
Ottinger
Younger
NOT VOTING-41
Adair
Fuqua
Mosher
Baring
Hagen, Calif.
Pool
Ben
Halleck
Powell
Bolling
Hanna
Reinecke
Brown, Calif.
Harvey, Ind.
Roncalio
Clawson, Del
Holifield
Roudebush
Collier
Ichord
Sisk
Conyers
Landrum
Teague, Tex.
Davis, Ga.
McCarthy
Toll
Delaney
McVicker
W aggonner
Dowdy
Martin, Ala.
Walker, Miss.
Downing
Mathias
Willis
Everett
Matthews
Wyatt
Fraser
Miller
So the conference report was agreed
to.
pairs:
On this vote:
Mr. Teague of Texas for, with Mr. Wag-
gonner against.
Mr. Downing for, with Mr. Davis of Georgia
against.
Mr. Delaney for, with Mr. Roncalio against.
Until further notice:
Mr. Baring with Mr. Harvey of Indiana.
Mr. Holifleld with Mr. Collier.
Mr. Sisk with Mr. Adair.
Mr. Miller with Mr. Reinecke.
Mr. Willis with Mr. Roudebush.
Mr. Hagen of California with Mr. Martin of
Alabama.
Mr. Brown of California with Mr. Bell.
Mr. Toll with Mr. Wyatt.
Mr. Fuqua with Mr. Mosher.
Mr. Landrum with Mr. Walker of Missis-
sippi.
Mr. Powell with Mr. Fraser.
Mr. Ichord with Mr. Dowdy.
Mr. Matthews with Mr. McVicker.
Mr.'Conyers with Mr. McCarthy.
Mr. Hanna with Mr. Pool.
Mr. RUMSFELD, Mr. LANGEN, Mr.
BROYHILL of North Carolina, Mr.
FOUNTAIN, and Mr. SKUBITZ changed
their votes from "yea" to "nay."
The result of the vote was announced
as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid oNthe
House Resolution 773, and ask for its im- time to time of shortages over in Viet-
mediate consideration. nam. We realize that there are bound
The Clerk read the resolution, as fol- to be isolated items of that nature and
lows: we want these shortages to be elimi-
H. RES. 773 nated as soon as possible.
Resolved, That during the consideration of Mr. Speaker, I have here a letter from
the bill (H.R. 13546) making supplemental a constituent of mine, a responsible citi-
appropriations for the fiscal year ending June zen, who has a son, a lance corporal in
30, 1966, and for other purposes, all points the Marine Corps in Vietnam, who is
of order against the bill are hereby waived. complaining of the lack of jungle boots
The SPEAKER. The gentleman from for the Marine Corps troops over there
Texas CMr. YOUNG] is recognized for 1 while the Army has them. I want to ask
hour, the chairman to have someone on his
Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, I yield 30 staff check on this matter, please?
minutes to the distinguished gentleman Mr. MAHON. I would say with re-
from California [Mr. SMITH] pending spect to equipment and clothing, for the
which I yield myself such time as I may men in Vietnam that I know of no real
require. shortage, no significant shortage.
(Mr. YOUNG asked and was given per- Of course, there may be a temporary
mission to revise and extend his re- shortage at a given place at a given me-
marks.)
Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, House
Resolution 773 provides that points of
order shall be waived in the considera-
tion of H.R. 13546, a bill making sup-
plemental appropriations for the fiscal
year ending June 30, 1966, and for other
purposes.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 13546 includes
$13,135,719,000, the amount of the budget
estimate for the military assistance and
economic assistance programs of the
Government directly related to opera-
tions in southeast Asia. This involves
an increase in the numbers of both mili-
tary and civilian personnel, the increases
in the operation and maintenance costs
of men, machines, and structures; the
production of aircraft, ordnance, ammu-
nition, and other materiel; military and
construction projects; selected and spe-
cialized research and development pro-
grams; and also economic assistance.
Mr. Speaker, in this connection I
would like to address a question to the
chairman of the Committee on Appro-
priations. I wonder if the chairman
would advise the House as to whether or
not this bill appropriates a sufficient
amount of money to carry on the war in
Vietnam.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield to me?
Mr. YOUNG. I yield to the gentle-
man.
Mr. MAHON. I believe so, at least for
the time being. With the funds included
in this bill we will have made available
for the current fiscal year a total of
about $61 billion for the Department of
Defense. We entered the current fiscal
year with about $30 billion in the hands
of the Department of Defense which had
not been expended. Most of those funds
had been committed for such things as
missiles, airplanes, submarines, ships,
.and other long lead time items. So I
would say certainly from the financial
standpoint the funds provided here are
adequate for the foreseeable future. Of
course, we cannot tell whether peace will
come or whether war will remain at the
present level or whether it will escalate.
So we do not know how much additional
funds may be required even this year for
the further prosecution of this war if it
merit. I shall be glad to present thls
matter to the appropriate officials in the
Department of Defense. We conferred
at great length with General Greene,
the commandant of the Marine Corps,
and discussed with him some problems
with regard to supplies, but he did not
complain of any serious problem of sup-
plies in Vietnam at this time.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. YOUNG. I yield to the gentleman
from Iowa.
Mr. GROSS. I believe the hearing
record is already clear that the commit-
tee does not preclude the introduction of
another supplemental appropriation bill
with respect to expenditures for this pur-
pose. I seem to get the very definite
impression that another supplemental is
not precluded at all.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, if the gen-
tleman will yield, I do hope to leave the
very definite impression that another
supplemental is not precluded. In my
opinion, and it would be my hope, there
will be no further supplemental for
fiscal 1966 related to the wax in Vietnam,
but there may be a supplemental for
fiscal 1967. We do not want to give to
the Department of Defense a blank
check. Last year we did not want to
give the Department of Defense billions
of dollars for which it could not define a
specific use. So we feel, as I am sure the
gentleman from Iowa feels, when funds
are required the officials of the executive
branch should come to the Congress and
request the funds, and then we will pro-
vide them, as we are undertaking to do
in this case. However, no one can pre-
dict the future. It has not been possible
to predict it in any war which we have
fought,
Mr. GROSS. I understand that, but I
am not too well satisfied, from a reading
of the hearings, that you have adequately
financed the situation as it presently
stands.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, if the gen-
tleman from Texas will yield further, we
have just done the best we could under
the circumstances.
I must say that in another supple-
mental bill which will be pending before
the House of Representatives, probably
continues. before Easter, funds will be carried al-
YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, I thank most to the extent of $1 billion because
Mr
SUPPLEMENTAL DEFENSE, APPRO-
PRIATION BILL, 1966
Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, by direc-
tion of the Committee on Rules, I call up
.
the .gentleman for that answer. I of pay increases for members of the
wanted to point out that all of us are armed services ' and civilian employees
concerned over reports that we hear from as a result of legislation passed last year.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 March 15, 19Approved For85" R/J?p kC1 1 67SQ S 00040004 0'I2-1
had they come to us on their own two
feet and in not such objectionable com-
pany.
Mr. Speaker, since I have been in Con-
gress I have protested these discrimina-
tory taxes in good times and bad-in time
of budget deficits and budget surpluses.
There is simply no right time to vote for
an unfair tax. I submit that the admin-
istration has not tried hard enough either
through economies here at home or
through recommendations for tax equal-
ity to properly provide the revenue need-
ed to fulfill our most pressing commit-
ments.
Mr. HORTON. Mr. Speaker, since the
President's state of the Union message,
which contained his request for post-
poning the repeal of telephone and auto-
mobile excise taxes, I have been on rec-
ord as strongly opposed to reinstituting
these regressive taxes as a means of
procuring the needed funds to finance
the war in Vietnam.
I was most encouraged when the Sen-
ate last week adopted the amendment to
keep the excise on residential phone
service at its present 3-percent rate.
Unfortunately, the conference commit-
tee deleted the Senate amendment, with
the result that the tax on local telephone
service will again rise to 10 percent.
Without any wavering in my strong sup-
port for well-reasoned legislation to ob-
tain the needed additional funds for use
in Vietnam, I am reluctant to support
the conference report because of the un-
necessary burden it places on people in
the lower income levels, to whom an
automobile and telephone service are
necessities, not luxuries, today.
With this hesitation, I have decided
to vote in favor of the conference com-
mittee's compromise, because of another
provision it contains. I am referring to
the provision that will provide social
security benefits to over 300,000 Amer-
ican citizens who are reaching the age
of 72 and are not covered by social se-
curity under present law. This provi-
sion is an important step in broadening
our social security system to cover those
who had retired or were near retirement
when Congress acted to cover jobs they
had held.
I have been urging the passage of this
amendment to the Social Security Act
for over a year now. Across-the-board
monthly benefits for persons reaching
age 72 who do not meet normal quarter-
coverage requirements was a major part
of H.R. 5039, which I introduced last
year-many provisions of which were
later enacted into Public Law 89-97.
Under this enlightened provision, per-
sons who are not now receiving any
State, Federal, or local pension, in most
cases persons who are most in need, will
receive $35 monthly through the social
security system if they reach age 72 be-
fore 1968. For persons reaching age 72
after 1967, this new provision provides
that fewer quarters of covered employ-
ment will be required for eligibility for
social security benefits. Thus, over $120
million will be made available to persons
who qualify under this section.
. While I have very serious reservations
about the wisdom of reimposing the
same excise taxes which Congress worked
so diligently to repeal just last year, I
cannot with conscience vote down this
very necessary and enlightened step in
the broadening of our social security laws
to cover needy senior citizens. I am
gratified at the inclusion in this report
of a major portion of my own social
security legislative program.
Thus, with noted reluctance, I am cast-
ing my vote in favor of the conference
committee's report on the Tax Adjust-
ment Act.
Mr. CLEVELAND. Mr. Speaker, I rise
to state that I will again vote, very re-
luctantly, for this tax increase measure,
called the Tax Adjustment Act of 1966:
As I stated on February 23, when the bill
was first approved by the House-sere
page 3552 of the RECORD-only the ad-
ministration's refusal to cut back on its
unprecedented high level of domestic
spending constrains me to vote for this
bill. In this absence of fiscal restraint
on the part of the administration, which
increases the dangers of inflation it be-
comes necessary to provide the additional
revenues in this legislation. The costs
of the war in Vietnam and threat of in-
flation demands it.
At the same time, I wish to add a word
of high praise for the amendment
adopted in the Senate to give older per-
sons at least some assistance by extend-
ing a measure of social security protec-
tion to many of those excluded from the
program through no fault of their own.
I am proud of the fact that my State's
senior Senator, NORRIS COTTON, played
such a prominent role in sponsoring this
amendment and getting it adopted.
With all the money being poured out by
the Government on various welfare pro-
grams, it is good to know that at least
some will now go to relieve the needs of
senior citizens directly, without Federal
controls or new battalions of bureau-
crats. This is an antipoverty measure
which I can support. It follows the
precedent we established at Republican
insistence, when we provided medical
care for the elderly not covered by social
security.
GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND
Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that all Members
desiring to do so may include their re-
marks at this point in the RECORD on
the conference report. Also, Mr. Speak-
er, I ask unanimous consent that I, the
gentleman from Missouri [Mr. CURTIS],
the gentleman from Wisconsin [Mr.
BYRNES], and others who have spoken on
this conference report may have permis-
sion to revise and extend our remarks
and to include certain tables and charts
that refer to this conference report.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. AL-
BERT). Is there objection to the re-
quests of the gentleman from Arkansas?
There was no objection.
Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, I move the
previous question on the conference re-
port.
The previous question was ordered.
The SPEAKER pro teiiipore. The
question is on the conference report.
Mr. MILLS. Mr. Speaker, on that I
demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
5549.
The question was taken; and there
were-yeas 288, nays 102, not voting 41,
as follows:
[Roll No. 361
YEAS-288
Adams
Giaimo
Murray
Addabbo
Gibbons
Natcher
Albert
Gilbert
Nedzi
Anderson, Ill.
Gilligan
Nix
Anderson,
Gonzalez
O'Brien
Tenn.
Goodell
O'Hara, Ill.
Annunzio.
Grabowski
O'Konski
Ashley
Gray
Olsen, Mont.
Aspinall
Green, Oreg.
Olson, Minn..
Ayres
Green, Pa.
O'Neill, Mass.
Bandstra
Greigg
Patman
Barrett
Grider
Patten
Bates
Griffin
Pelly
Battin
Griffiths
Pepper
Beckworth
Halpern
Perkins
Belcher
Hamilton
Philbin
Betts
Hanley
Pickle
Bingham
Hansen, Iowa
Pirnie
Blatnik
Hansen, Wash.
Poage
Boggs
Hardy
Poff
Boland
Harvey, Mich.
Price
Brademas
Hathaway
Pucinski
Bray
Hawkins
Purcell
Brooks
Hays
Quillen
Broomfield
Hebert
Race
Broyhill , Va.
Heckler
Redlin
Burke
Helstoski
Rees
Burleson
Herlong
Reid, N.Y.
Burton, Calif.
Hicks
Resnick
Byrne, Pa.
Holland
Reuss
Byrnes, Wis.
Horton
Rhodes, Ariz.
Cabell
Hosmer
Rhodes, Pa.
Cahill
Howard
Rivers, S.C.
Callan
Hull
Rivers, Alaska
Callaway
Hungate
Roberts
Carey
Huot
Rodin
Carter
Irwin
Rogers, Colo.
Casey
Jacobs
Rogers, Tex.
Celler
Jarman
Ronan
Chelf
Jennings
Rooney,N.Y.
Clark
Joelson
Rooney, Pa.
Clausen,
Johnson, Calif.
Rosenthal
Don H.
Johnson, Okla.
Rostenkowski
Cleveland
Johnson, Pa.
Roush
Clevenger
Jones, Ala.
Ryan
Cohelan
Karsten
St Germain
Coimer
Karth
St. Onge
Conte
Kastenmeier
Saylor
Cooley
Kee
Scheuer
Corbett
Keith
Schisler
Corman
Kelly
Schmidkauser
Craley
Keogh
Schneeboli
Culver
King, Calif.
Schweiker
Curtin
King, Utah
Senner
Daddario
Kirwan
Shipley
Dague
Kluczynski
Shriver
Daniels
Krebs
Sickles
Davis, Wis.
Kunkel
Slack
Dawson
Kupferman
Smith, Iowa
de In Garza
Laird
Smith, N.Y.
Dent
Leggett
Smith, Va.
Denton
Lipscomb
Springer
Diggs
Long, La.
Stafford
Dingell
Long, Md.
Staggers
Donohue
Love
Steed
Dorn
McDade
Stratton
Dow
McDowell
Stubblefield
Duncan, Oreg.
McFall
Sullivan
Duncan, Tenn,
McGrath
Sweeney
Dwyer
Macdonald
Teague, Calif.
Dyal
Machen
Tenzer
Edmondson
Mackay
Thompson, N.J.
Edwards, Calif.
Mackie
Thompson, Tex.
Edwards, La.
Madden
Thomson, Wis.
Ellsworth
Mahon
Todd
Evans, Colo.
Mailliard
Trimble
Evins, Tenn.
Marsh
Tunney
Fallon
Martin, Mass.
Tupper
Farbstefn
Martin, Nebr.
Udall
Farnsley
Matsunaga
Ullman
Farnum
May
Van Deerlin
Fascell
Meeds
Vanik
Feighan
Mills
Vigorito
Findley
Minish
Vivian
Fino
Mink
Watkins
Flood
Mize
Watts
Flynt
Moeller
Whalley
Fogarty
Monagan
White, Idaho
Foley
Moore
White, Tex.
Ford, Gerald R.
Moorhead
Widnall
Ford,
Morgan
Wilson,
William D.
Morris
Charles H.
Frelinghuysen
Morrison
Wright
Frledel
Morse
Yates
Fulton, Pa.
Moss
Young
Gallagher
Multer
Zablocki
Garmatz
Murphy, 111.
Gathings
Murphy, N.Y.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 March 15, 1 966pproved';Fbr &WAgQ 19R RBP67 M%R0004000400+2-1 5551
Mr. GROSS. That is one of the items
in your hearings here, and I am a little
bit surprised that that item is not cov-
ered in this bill.
Mr. MAHON. If the gentleman will
yield further, the pending bill includes
funds for the new rates of pay for the
additional men in the Armed Forces.
We have almost 400,000 more men in the
Armed Forces than we previously had
programed in the original 1966 budget.
However, this bill does not take care of
the supplemental required, as a result of
the pay increase, for the originally pro-
gramed numbers of military, which we
provided for at the old rates in the
regular 1966 appropriation.
Mr. GROSS. And yet this bill takes
into account expenditures, other than for
those directly related to Vietnam?
Mr. MAHON. To some quite limited
extent.
Mr. GROSS. Yes, to some extent.
This is the point I am trying to make,
that this supplemental is not all-inclu-
sive; that we are already looking at an-
other supplemental to take care of the
pay increase.
Mr. MAHON. The gentleman is cor-
rect.
Mr. GROSS. And, I cannot help but
be a little surprised that it is not con-
tained in this bill rather than another
bill yet to come to the floor of the House.
Mr. MAHON. We had thought that
we should present all the pay increases
for the whole Government in one bill. It
is anticipated that that bill may be be-
fore the House for action week after next.
Mr. GROSS. One other question:
Will the gentleman from Texas [Mr.
Yout' G] explain briefly to the House why
points of order are waived in this bill?
Mr. YOUNG. Of course, it is obvi-
ous that the points of order ' are waived
because the authorization bill has not
been passed or signed by the President of
the United States.
Mr. GROSS. Has it passed the other
body?
Mr. YOUNG. Yes; it is in conference.
Mr. GROSS. But it has not been
signed by the President?
Mr. YOUNG. No; it is in conference.
Mr. MAHON. The economic assist-
ance portion of the bill is in conference.
Mr. YOUNG. The foreign aid part
is still in conference, and the other part
of the bill has gone to the President but
has not been signed.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. YOUNG. I yield to the gentle-
man from Ohio, for a question.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, I did not
intend to raise this question at this time,
but since the chairman of the Committee
on Appropriations has raised it, I am
concerned about shortages of clothing
that have been revealed during the hear-
ings which have been held by the Com-
mittee on Armed Services of the House
of Representatives, as well as in the hear-
ings which have been held by the Armed
Services Committee of the other body.
Do I understand the gentleman to say
that there were no shortages of clothing
in the Marine Corps, or that these short-
ages were being taken care of?
Mr. Speaker, I am addressing my ques-
tion to the chairman of the Committee
on Appropriations.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, if the
gentleman from Texas will yield further,
the Department of Defense is requesting
additional funds here to meet certain
requirements for additional manpower.
We have increased manpower to the
extent of about 400,000 men in the last
year.
Mr. Speaker, insofar as I know there
are no significant shortages in South
Vietnam. There are some shortages
within the continental United States
which are of no serious import in my
judgment. And, these requirements are
being met.
Mr. Speaker, there could not be a mili-
tary effort of this magnitude without
some shortages showing up here and
there. The Department of Defense has
tried to husband its funds rather well,
in my opinion, in recent years. Officials
have not asked for supplies to last for
the next 20 or 30 years of certain items,
as has been the case in some isolated
instances heretofore.
Mr. Speaker, I believe this more accu-
rate and careful budgeting procedure is
in the public interest, and generally
would be approved. Of course, we do not
want any shortages that would be sig-
nificant, we do not want any shortages
at all, but these shortages will occur in
any war. Therefore, we have to do the
best we can to see that these shortages
are not significant or hurtful to the
fighting forces.
Mr. LATTA. Mr. Speaker, if the gen-
tleman will yield further, since the
gentleman from Texas has mentioned
General Green's testimony, his testimony
before the Committee on Armed Services
revealed that there were shortages of
clothing, but that they were being taken
care of through the medium of decreased
clothing allowances.
Mr. MAHOON. This relates to the con-
tinental United States, and not to South
Vietnam, I believe.
Mr. LATTA. There will be no de-
creased allowances as far as clothing is
concerned for our South Vietnam fight-
ing soldiers?
Mr. MAHON. Not, I believe, for the
soldiers in South Vietnam. There is no
clothing problem about which I know,
with reference to personnel in Vietnam,
except some isolated instance here or
there, but some of the clothing under
order for the increased strength of the
Marine Corps will take a little time for
delivery. But there is no serious situa-
tion here. And the gentleman to whom
the gentleman from Ohio referred, when
testifying before the House Armed Serv-
ices Committee, points out that he thinks
the Marine Corps will be able to handle
this matter without any serious effect
upon the readiness of the marines.
Mr. LATTA. Likewise I will point out
to the gentleman that General Greene
in .his testimony before the Committee
on Armed Services stated in their exami-
nation of the problem, meaning the
problem of ammunition as I recall, they
found six different types of ammunition
in which there were indications of short-
ages. This Is General Greene's testi-
mony., Are there sufficient funds to take
care of these shortages?
Mr. MAHON. The bill provides $2 bil-
lion for ammunition and associated
equipment. There are certain new types
of ammunition that are not immediately
available which would be desirable for
use in Vietnam which are not now be-
ing used. But we have sufficient fire-
power to meet the requirements. What-
ever the deficiencies are in our prosecu-
tion of the war in Vietnam, they are not
brought about by the lack of money or
of supplies, in my judgment.
Mr. LATTA. I thank the gentleman.
Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, I urge the
adoption of the pending resolution.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
Chair recognizes the gentleman from
California [Mr. SMrrH].
Mr. SMITH of California. Mr.
Speaker, I yield myself such time as I
may use.
(Mr. SMITH of California asked and
was given permission to revise and ex-
tend his remarks.)
Mr. SMITH of California. Mr.
Speaker, House Resolution 773 does waive
all points of order so far as the bill H.R.
13546 is concerned, the supplemental de-
fense appropriation bill for 1966. As I
understand it, the points of order were
requested to be waived for two different
reasons. The first is the two bills that
have been passed, I think $415 million
for the foreign aid bill, and I believe the
other one having to do with the armed
services and supplies, have not been
signed by the President of the United
States with the result that we cannot
appropriate unless there is first a law on
the books authorizing us to do so. That
is the first point.
The second point, as I understand it, is
that there is certain language in the bill
in the nature of legislation in an appro-
priation bill which is against the rules of
the House and the Committee on Rules
was asked to waive that so that we could
proceed with this legislation here today.
I think the total amount of the bill
is somewhere around $13 billion, $12.3
billion in new military spending and $415
million in connection with the foreign
aid matter that we passed here a short
time ago, the majority of which goes to
Vietnam, some to Thailand, some to Laos,
and some to the Dominican Republic.
Then there is $375 million for military
assistance projects previously authorized
and begun.
There has been some discussion as to
whether or not the World War II lan-
guage goes too far; whether that au-
thority should be given to the Depart-
ment of Defense or not. So far as I am
concerned, I feel our men are in Vietnam
and they are fighting and I, for one,
intend to give them all the equipment and
ammunition and everything that we can
to help them to do their job so that we
can get them back home as quickly as
we possibly can.
Mr. Speaker, I support the waiver of
the points of order and I support the
rule and I support the bill.
Mr. Speaker, I have no requests for
time so far as I know.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 5552
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67B00446ROO0400040012-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE March 15, 1966
Mr. YOUNG. Mr. Speaker, I move the
previous question.
The previous question was ordered.
The resolution was agreed to.
Mr. MAHON. 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. 13546) making supple-
mental defense appropriations for the
fiscal year ending June 30, 1966, and for
other purposes; and pending that mo-
tion I ask unanimous consent that gen-
eral debate thereon be limited to not to
exceed 3 hours, the time to be divided
equally between the gentleman from
Ohio [Mr. Bowl and myself.
Mr. Speaker, I do not think we will use
more than 3 hours in general debate, but
we do not want to preclude any debate
that the House desires to have on this
important legislation.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there
objection to the request of the gentle-
man from Texas?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Texas.
The motion was agreed to.
IN THE COMMITTEE Or THE WHOLE
Accordingly, the House resolved it-
self into the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union for
the consideration of the bill, H.R. 1a546,
with Mr. WRIGHT in the chair.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
By unanimous consent, the first read-
ing of the bill was dispensed with.
The CHAIRMAN. Under the unani-
mous-consent agreement, the gentleman
from Texas [Mr. MAHONI will be recog-
nized for 11/2 hours and the gentleman
from Ohio [Mr. Bowl will be recognized
for 11/2 hours.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman
from Texas [Mr. MAHONI.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield
myself 10 minutes.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Texas is recognized for 10 minutes.
Mr. MAHON. This is the first appro-
priation bill to be considered by the Con-
gress at this session. We have been re-
quested by the executive branch to ap-
propriate for the forthcoming fiscal year
about $121 billion. The bill before us
of course, is not applicable to the 1967
fiscal year but, rather, to the current
fiscal year.
There has been so much said about
the war in Vietnam through all media
and in many public places, including
this body and the other body, that there
are many who feel, perhaps, that they
have heard enough.
But this bill totals $13 billion. It is
the first opportunity of the House of
Representatives to express its will on the
urgent request of the President for all
of the additional funds to prosecute the
war in Vietnam.
This supplemental appropriation re-
quest for the Department of Defense
has occupied much of the time and ef-
fort of many Members of the legislative
branch in recent weeks. The President's
request for the supplemental funds ar-
rived here on Capitol Hill on the 19th
day of January. The House Appropria-
tions Committee began its hearings on
the measure on January 26 and con-
cluded hearings on March 3.
Three subcommittees-the Subcom-
mittee on Defense Appropriations, the
Subcommittee on Military Construction,
and the Subcommittee on Foreign Oper-
ations-were all involved in the con-
sideration of this request.
The full Committee on Appropriations
met last Friday and ordered the bill re-
ported to the House, and it was sched-
uled for consideration today.
Since some of the amounts requested
required additional authorization, several
of the legislative committees of the Con-
gress have given their attention to this
matter. The Committee on Armed
Forces of the House held hearings begin-
ning February 3 and ending on Feb-
ruary 17, having had 8 days of hearings
onmany of the matters in the bill that
is before us today.
The authorization bill was reported
from the House Armed Services Commit-
tee on February 18 and passed the House
on March 1.
In the other body, joint hearings were
held by the Armed Services Committee
and the Defense Appropriations Sub-
committee beginning on January 20 and
ending on February 3-5 days of hear-
ings.
The bill was reported to the Senate on
February 10. The Senate debate began
on that day and continued until the
Senate passed the bill on March 1.
The conference report on that au-
thorization bill was filed on March 10
.and was adopted by both the Houses
last week, as the Members know.
Since the pending bill provides sup-
plemental appropriations for economic
assistance, the Foreign Affairs Commit-
tee of the House and the Foreign Rela-
tions Committee of the Senate have con-
sidered the matter and drafted the
required authorizing legislation. The
House Foreign Affairs Committee began
hearings on January 26. The committee
held 3 days of hearings. The authoriza-
tion bill for economic assistance was
considered on the floor on February 24.
The Senate Foreign Relations Com-
mittee began hearings on January 28 and
continued hearings until March 3, hear-
ings being held on a total of 8 days. The
other body considered the Economic As-
sistance Authorization bill, as we did, on
March 10.
The conference on this economic as-
sistance part of the legislation has not
yet been concluded, and the legislation,
`of course, has not been signed into law.
Neither had the military authorization
portion of this legislation until today.
.For that reason a rule waiving points of
order was requested by the Appropri-
ations Committee last week and granted
by the Rules Committee.
So it is evident that Congress has been
preoccupied with the issue of the Viet-
nam war since we assembled in January,
and properly so, I would say.
bast year, during the consideration of
the Defense Appropriation and Authori-
zation bills, it became apparent that a
supplemental appropriation would be
needed early this year if the war should
continue. We were hoping and praying
that it would not. This view was gen-
erally taken by Members of the House
and Members of the other body who deal
in depth with military requirements.
This view was also taken by officials of
the Defense Department.
We were told that additional funds
would probably be needed, but since they
could not then pinpoint the specific
funds; they would not ask us for blank
checks for financing the war. It was
generally thought that early this year a
request for additional funds would be
presented. Early this year, on January
19, the request came. So it is no sur-
prise that we have been engaged in re-
cent weeks in debate and discussion of
this important matter.
Not only this, but during the course of
the consideration thus far of the pend-
ing $13 billion appropriation, it has been
apparent that most Members feel that
the additional amounts are required.
The truth is that there has been no
real question in the minds of the over-
whelming majority of the Members of
,this body that the funds requested are
needed. I will go further, and say that
many feel that additional funds may be
required in fiscal year 1967 for the De-
partment of Defense, that is funds in
excess of the budget request.
This certainly is my view, but no one
can tell the turn which the war will take
and, therefore, what the requirements
may actually be.
It is true that we cannot predict, as
I say, the course of the war, the chances
for peace, or the degree of intensity of
the fighting.
We do not know what the Commu-
nists might do in southeast Asia or else-
where. We have no way of knowing.
Hence, it is inevitable that some uncer-
tainties will confront us in the future, as
they have confronted us in the past in
dealing with these matters.
When and if additional sums are re-
quired, I would make bold to say for the
House of Representatives that everyone
can be sure that those additional funds
will be approved by the House of Repre-
sentatives.
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Chair-
man, will the gentleman yield?
Mr. MAHON. I yield to the able mi-
nority leader.
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Chair-
man, I am glad the chairman of the Com-
mittee on Appropriations has pointed out
that there are many, many uncertainties
as to the precise course of the conflict in
Vietnam. President Johnson, as the
elected Commander in Chief, does not
himself know exactly what decisions he
must make in the crucial days ahead. We
do not know today what the President
must do in the way of a commitment for
more strength on the ground or in the air
or on the sea.
However, I gather, from what the gen-
tleman from Texas is saying, that a
Member of the House who votes for this
Defense Department appropriation is
giving to the Commander in Chief the
day-to-day authority to carry on the
execution and implementation of our Na-
tion's position of strength in South
Vietnam. An "aye" vote on this bill
today means that one supports adequate
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 March 15, 19#*proved For ggg7t :OtMBg?000400040012-1
military strength to meet successfully
the challenge of Communist aggression
in South Vietnam.
Mr. MAHON. This, I believe, would be
a fair interpretation of a vote in favor
of the pending legislation.
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I thank the
gentleman.
Mr. MAHON. It is true that we can-
not tell the degree of the escalation, but
it is my view-and I have no inside in-
formation-that the probabilities are
that the war will escalate, that it will
grow in intensity, because I do not think
our opponents are yet ready to go to the
conference table.
We have given them ample opportu-
nity. We have had the bombing pause,
and we have been most tolerant and con-
siderate in undertaking to convince our
opponents, and the entire world, of our
desire for peace. Our efforts have not
been successful thus far. We have no
other alternative than to prosecute this
war to a successful conclusion.
It is in this context and under these
circumstances that the Committee on
Appropriations brings this request to you
today for your consideration.
I would like to say that it is due to
the foresight of Congress and to the fore-
sight of the executive branch that we
are as well prepared as we are for the
conditions which confront us in the
world at this time. Beginning in 1950
with the Korean war, we have kept our
Military Establishment in a considerable
degree of readiness. We have appro-
priated large sums of money for defense.
We have spent money for defense at a
rather higli level since the early 1950's
in order to be ready to meet aggression
if aggression came.
I should call your attention to some
significant facts:
First. We have carried more than
200,000 men and the. arms and equipment
to support them and to support our
allies' army of more than 800,000 men,
by air and by sea, more than 10,000 miles
from our shores.
Second. We have wisely protected the
lives of our flghtingmen by expending
munitions at tremendous rates. We have
the weapons and ammunition to make
this possible. If we did not, more lives
would be lost. We program the expendi-
ture of 1 billion rounds per year of small-
arms ammunition, for instance, and
1,700,000 bombs.
Third. We have been building up our
conventional forces substantially since
1961. For example:
First. We have added $50 billion to the
defense program since 1960 for this
purpose.
Second. We had achieved a 100-per-
cent increase in airlift capability.'
Third. The number of combat-ready
Army divisions has been increased 45
percent.
Fourth. The number of combat heli-
copters, upon which the mobility of our
forces in Vietnam depends, has been in-
creased 45 percent.
Fifth. The number of Air Force fighter
squadrons has been increased 51 percent.
If the Congress and the Defense De-
partment had not had the foresight to
program these increases, we would in-
deed have had real supply problems and
American lives would have been unneces-
sarily sacrificed.
So it is as a result of this policy, that
the Members have supported, that we are
as well prepared as we are for the war in
which we find ourselves.
I should like to say this: The United
States has been better prepared for and
has acted more quickly and more effi-
ciently to cope with the demands of this
war than any other war in our entire
history. This understanding is necessary
to a proper perspective of the situation.
We hear allegations of shortages and
inefficiencies. There are some shortages
and inefficiences which should surprise
no one in an effort this large. But the
overall picture as to military strength
and readiness is amazingly good. We
have every reason to be proud of our
men, and not only of our men but of the
equipment which has been provided by
the foresight of the Government in
recent years.
I say that for all of the administrations
involved. No shortage of equipment or
supplies has adversely affected the con-
duct of the war insofar as our hearings
have been able to determine.
There is every indication that our
forces in Vietnam are being well led.
General Westmoreland seems to have
the complete confidence of military and
civilian leaders in the executive branch
of the Government, and this, of course,
includes the President.
General Westmoreland also seems to
have the full confidence of the Members
of Congress who have made on-the-spot
checks of the situation in southeast Asia.
The bravery of our troops and their
morale is without question. We have
every reason to be proud of the per-
formance of the Nation as a whole in
this time of difficulty and trial.
There seems to be little reason to
argue about the amount of money re-
quested in this bill. We are going to
need all of these funds. We have spent
24 days in hearings in the Committee on
Appropriations already this year explor-
ing our military requirements for funds.
One cannot separate this supplemental
from the fiscal 1967 regular budget for
defense. We have had Secretary Mc-
Namara before our committee on defense
requirements of the Nation a total of 5
days, and we have had many other wit-
nesses, also. We have been giving con-
sideration to this matter, and properly
so, since the beginning of the session.
We will continue to do so, and we hope
that in a couple of months we can bring
the new bill before you. However, cer-
tainly, for the moment, we should sup-
port this legislation and provide the
equipment, the clothing, the ammuni-
tion, and the other things that are
needed now.
In this bill before us we provide for
2,005 additional helicopters which are
very much needed in the type of war that
we are fighting. We are providing for
the procurement of 906 fixed-wing air-
craft. We are providing the huge sum
of $2,078 million for munitions, weapons
of war, and associated equipment. So it
is very evident to me that this is an im-
portant and necessary installment for
the active prosecution of the war in
Vietnam.
Briefly, the bill provides-
U.S. military-------------- $12,345,719,600
Military assistance to South
Vietnam----------------
375,
000,000
Economic assistance to
South Vietnam----------
415,
000, 000
Total----------------
13,135,
719, 000
Funds for about 113,000 more military
personnel than already approved for fis-
cal year 1966.
An additional $2,316,269,000 for opera-
tion and maintenance to provide gener-
ally for the increased tempo of
operations.
For procurement:
Aircraft-------------------- $3,212,400,000
Missiles-------------------- 181,400,000
Munitions-----------.------ 2, 078, 000, 000
Other procurement such as
electronic and communi-
cations equipment-------- 1, 547, 600, 000
Total----------------
For research and development effort
on weapons and equipment directly re-
quired in southeast Asia, $151,650,000.
For military construction in support
of operational requirements in Vietnam,
$1,238,400,000. The actual construction
projects, although primarily located in
Vietnam, are also located in the United
States and in other countries such as the
Philippines.
When we vote for this bill I think we
will show to the Nation and to the en-
tire world that the elected representa-
tives of the people stand firmly together
in resisting any program of appeasement
or of vacillation and are supporting a
program of unyielding opposition to ag-
gression. By our action in supporting
this bill we put the country and the world
on notice that we feel that we in this
country have a vital stake in the outcome
of the war in Vietnam. It is true that
we want to be helpful to the Vietnamese,
but we are not spending all of these
billions of dollars and the lives of'our
men only, to be helpful to the Vietnam-
ese. We are trying to obtain, peace in
the world, which happens to be very im-
portant to the welfare of all humanity.
Mr. BOW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15
minutes to the gentleman from Cali-
fornia, the distinguished ranking mem-
ber of the Subcommitee on Defense Ap-
propriations on the minority side [Mr.
LI 'scoMB 1 .
Mr. LIPSCOMB. Mr. Chairman, the
bill before the House today, H.R. 13546,
provides supplemental defense funds for
the fiscal year 1966 budget totaling $13,-
135,719,000 in new obligational authority
as requested by the President for mili-
tary functions and military and eco-
nomic assistance to support our opera-
tions in southeast Asia.
This measure is of vital importance to
our security and welfare for the United
States must remain ready and -able to
act in the national interest and to sup-
port such action fully.
As approved by the Appropriations
Committee, the Department of Defense
portions of the bill, which total $12,345,-
719,000, provide for the following:
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 5554
Approved For CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE 000400040`1M-arch 15, 1966
For military personnel, the bill pro-
vides $1,620 million which will support,
in addition to that previously approved,
a net increase of approximately 113,000
military personnel and certain additions
to the Army National Guard and other
Reserve components.
In the area of operation and mainte-
nance, the bill proposes an appropria-
tion of $2,316,269,000.
For procurement of military supplies,
the bill includes $7,019,400,000. Broadly
speaking, this includes funding for am-
munition, various types of rotary and
fixed wing aircraft, various types of ve-
hicles, electronic and communication
equipment, and for other items such as
ships, spare parts, clothing and other
consumables. In some cases the stocks
are ' exhausted or are dangerously low,
and these funds are needed to replenish
the supply.
For research, development, test, and
evaluation the supplemental request pro-
vides $151,650,000, much of which will
be devoted to special needs generated by
the Vietnam war. This includes such
programs as an increase in medical re-
search to provide new drugs to combat
a severe strain of drug resistant malaria,
for work in developing aircraft suppres-
sive fire systems, helicopter modification,
developing a fast deployment logistic
ship-FDL-and to speed up develop-
ment of advanced radar techniques for
surveillance purposes, and to modify air-
craft to increase their effectiveness in
their close air support missions in a
southeast Asia environment.
Military construction funds in the bill
total $1,238,400,000. This is for con-
struction projects both in the continental
United States and in the southeast Asia
area at bases, airfields, ports, and related
facilities.
Also the bill includes $375 million re-
lating to military assistance and $415
million for the Agency for International
Development for economic assistance in
Vietnam.
COMMITMENT IN VIETNAM
Mr. Chairman, I support H.R. 13546.
There should be no question in anyone's
mind about the necessity of providing
completely ample funds to support our
commitment in Vietnam and related
areas. Nor should there be any reserva-
tion about the need to supply our Ameri-
can boys fighting over there with the
necessary arms, ammunition, and other
requirements. Prompt passage of this
measure would also illustrate to our
fighting men, our citizens, and our ene-
mies that we are willing and able to take
the steps that are necessary to back up
our country's commitment to insure free-
dom in South Vietnam and prevent the
further expansion of communism.
At the same time, I believe that addi-
tional comments on this measure and the
defense picture generally are necessary.
The escalation of the conflict in Viet-
nam Intensified in February of last year.
But even in view of the worsening Viet-
nam situation last year the fiscal year
1966 defense budget originally submitted
to Congress was tight," as described by
Department of Defense witnesses before
our subcommittee. No amendment to
the fiscal year 1966 original request for
additional funds was made by the admin-
istration to support the increased activ-
ity in southeast Asia during the time the
House Appropriation Subcommittee on
Defense held several months of hearings
and the bill was taken up and passed by
the House in June. The only action
taken, which amounted in large part to
a token gesture as far as the amount of
funds was concerned, was the supple-
mental request for fiscal year 1965 for a
$700 million emergency fund for south-
east Asia, approved by the Congress last
May.
Because of this fact and our deep con-
cern that there must be adequate, timely
funding for the defense program, two
other members of the Defense Appropria-
tions Subcommittee and I felt compelled
to make the following statement in addi-
tional views in the committee report last
June on the regular fiscal year 1966
budget as submitted to the House:
It is our firm belief that appropriations
must be sufficient to carry out successfully
U.S. commitments anywhere in the world.
American personnel in Vietnam must be
equipped and supported in such a degree as
will give maximum assurance of safety and a
capability to carry out their duties. We be-
lieve the President should immediately revise
this fiscal year 1966 defense budget with a
view toward requesting the Congress to pro-
vide for the unplanned and unprogramed
expenditures which have resulted from his
decision to assume a greater role in southeast
Asia (H. Rept. No. 528, 89th Cong., let Bess.,
p. 63).
Despite repeated 'urgings such as this,
no change in the original fiscal year 1966
budget request was received until August
of last year, almost 7 months after the
increased action in Vietnam. Then, the
request was made for a $1.7 billion south-
east Asia emergency fund add-on which
was amended into the House version of
the defense bill by the Senate. Even
then, this added amount covered only a
fraction of the needs, to start increasing
production rates and construction proj-
ects, and some other items that were
critically needed. It was too obvious not
to be widely recognized at the time that
the $1.7 billion amendment did little
more than begin to provide the funds
needed.
The $12.3 billion supplemental request
we are considering today for Department
of Defense, military functions, was pre-
sented to Congress in January, only sev-
eral months later. We were told by wit-
nesses who appeared to testify for the
$12.3 billion defense portion of the sup-
plemental bill that the needs were not
precisely known before this time. It
is of course, understood that our needs in
situations such as this cannot be iden-
tified precisely. As a matter of fact it
is clear from the testimony that the needs
are still not precisely known., But from
the evidence on hand it seems clear also
that had the budget request been sub-
mitted earlier, it could have prevented
extensive budgetary manipulations that
have been going on within the Depart-
ment of Defense.
DEFICIENCIES IN BUDGETING AND PLANNING
Let me illustrate some of the results of
this type of budgeting and planning in
the defense program.
The Secretary of Defense has used all
of the discretionary funds he had avail-
able in the construction program for
Vietnam. He has virtually exhausted
research and development emergency
funds. In addition there has been
extensive use of his transfer authority
and reprograming of funds to meet criti-
cal needs.
As a matter of fact it was brought out
in the testimony that this bill would have
to be approved by approximately March
1, which of course passed 2 weeks ago, to
prevent further budgetary maneuvering
and the use of emergency actions.
Secretary McNamara himself stated
that if the funds were not provided by
March 1:
We might have to take certain emergency
actions to keep on schedule and those ac-
tions would not make for as orderely an
operation and as efficient an operation as we
would have if the bill is enacted by March 1.
MILITARY PERSONNEL
In the area of military personnel, for
the first time funds for military person-
nel have been requested and are in this
budget covering the escalation of activi-
ty. Also, for the first time the matter of
combat pay for our men in southeast Asia
is adequately covered since the escalation
of activity. The Department of Defense
up until this time has been handling the
increased regular personnel and combat
pay requirements by using up available
personnel funds. This is just no way to
budget and to handle financing for the
pay of our military personnel.
This supplemental does not even in-
clude funds to take care of military pay
increases approved last year. The De-
partment of Defense has submitted still
another separate supplemental request
for this purpose as part of a Government-
wide bill. That request, for an addi-
tional $863 million, was submitted to
Congress March 8, 1966. Serious diffi-
culties meeting personnel expenses can
be expected if the supplemental pay re-
quest is not approved soon.
OPERATION AND MAINTENANCE
Though the Vietnam escalation began
last February, this bill provides the first
appropriation for operation and mainte-
nance for fiscal year 1966 funds to reflect
our increased needs in southeast Asia.
Operation and maintenance includes
such critical items as fuel, logistical and
operational support, and medical sup-
port to all the services. The fiscal year
1966 budget, including the $1.7 billion
add-on for southeast Asia, which was
signed into law last September did not
include such funds. Increased require-
ments in this area have been handled by
the Department of Defense by shifting of
funds to meet emergency needs.
PROCUREMENT
Procurement for vital military equip-
ment such as aircraft, weapons, vehicles,
and ammunition at more than $7 billion
makes up the major portion of this sup-
plemental request.
Analysis of this item reveals that a
portion of the request is for replenish-
ment of war reserve stocks. This need,
in my view, should have been recognized
many months earlier, for our stock levels
were and are known and it should be
readily recognized, that any escalation
would dip further into the stockpiles.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 March 15, 19
fW
proved for 4 p
,L99fi QI f IN 000400040012-1
After the various branches of service
submitted their individual requests to
the Department of Defense for the origi-
nal. fiscal year 1966 budget, numerous
cuts were made by the Secretary. This
action is expected and generally is
neither unusual nor objectionable. How-
ever, it does become a matter of concern
when a budget is presented which should
and could more adequately have antici-
pated critical developments. This bill,
and to some extent the August 1965 $1.7
billion amendment, contain some of the
very items which were cut last year by
the Secretary of Defense from the serv-
ices' request for fiscal year 1966 in such
areas as aircraft, spares, repair parts,
and support material, all vital to the
conduct of the war.
Now we come to a situation almost
completely opposite to the examples I
have been discussing. While it is neces-
sary to have funds required for our de-
fense program requested and approved in
a timely manner, it is equally true that
responsible budgeting requires that
money requests be considered in orderly
schedules commensurate with our needs
at the time and not swept through in
supplemental bills.
Some of the items that properly should
be included in the regular defense
budget for fiscal year 1967 which will
come up later in the session have been
injected into this supplemental. A num-
ber of items amounting to hundreds of
millions of dollars were deleted by the
Office of the Secretary of Defense from
the fiscal year 1967 regular budget re-
quest by the service branches and moved
into the supplemental request that we
are discussing today.
Additionally when it is realized that
this $12.3 billion defense supplemental
request is for fiscal year 1966 which has
less than 4 months to go, other questions
must be raised. For example, consider-
ing the long leadtime needed to start
up production or to increase production
rates, this, coupled with the large quan-
tities involved, indicates that a portion
of the procurement funds could have
been included in the regular fiscal year
1967 budget request. Sufficient funds
could have been included in this supple-
mental request to accelerate the produc-
tion rate for long lead parts and toolpg
and fund production items to carry
through the 4-month period. Such a
procedure would have had the effect of
moving many millions of dollars into the
fiscal year 1967 budget with no ill effects
upon scheduled deliveries.
This is the type of budgeting taking
place in such a crucial area as procure-
ment. One could come to the conclusion
that this has been done in an effort to
make the regular 1967 budget look lower.
The picture is further clouded by the
fact that items are to be procured to fill
needed requirements as a result of attri-
tion which occurred during the previous
3- to 4-year period.
RESEARCH, DEVELOPMENT, TEST, AND EVALUATION
With regard to the request for supple-
mental appropriations for research, de-
velopment, test, and evaluation, it has
been said repeatedly that our planning
was aimed at enabling us to pursue the
type of conflict as is going on in Vietnam
in an expeditious manner. Yet it took
an escalated activity in Vietnam to pro-
duce a fund request to support a level
of effort needed to make these new find-
ings and weapons available quickly.
Though we can hopefully say that these
funds should provide a measure of im-
provement, some other research and de-
velopment programs are being funded at
a level of effort lower than a realistic
assessment of the overall threat would
indicate they should be.
LANGUAGE CHANGE
This supplemental package includes
equal to accounts payable. The new
guage change contained in section 101
of the bill with regard to the working
capital funds, known as stock funds.
The language change will eliminate the
requirement to maintain cash balances
equal to accounts payable. The new
language provides for transfer between
funds and states that balances "may be
maintained in only such amounts as are
necessary at any time for cash disburse-
ments to be made from such funds." If
this change of language had not been
proposed by the Secretary of Defense in
this bill, it would have been necessary
for the Secretary to ask for another $350
to $500 million.
From an accounting standpoint and
based on the brief look the subcommittee
had of this item, it appears to be a rea-
sonable proposal. However, because
there was not time to completely eval-
uate it, the committee is requiring the
Department of Defense to provide quar-
terly reports giving the financial status
of each working capital fund, including
information as to any adjustments that
have been made as between the working
capital funds. Congress must keep close
watch on this item and take appropriate
action if it is found that this procedure
is not working properly.
CONCLUSIONS
Our men in Vietnam are serving
bravely and with great distinction.
They are fighting to preserve and ad-
vance freedom in the world against
Communist aggression. Based on my
observations in Vietnam last fall and
from testimony in the hearing, their
morale is high, their motivation strong.
They are there to win.
Such practices as I have described
here in my view are neither good man-
agement nor do they reflect the maxi-
mum in effective planning which is so
necessary to insure that the men and
material will be where they are needed
in a manner which will afford our serv-
icemen worldwide the ability to perform
their mission and receive the maximum
protection for their safety.
The result has been patchwork defense
budgeting in many respects, which is
both unfitting of our great Nation and
not in keeping with the seriousness and
importance of the Vietnam effort.
Congress should be concerned for the
available evidence suggests efforts to re-
duce congressional control over the de-
fense budget. It suggests that better
defense planning and management could
be done. Congress should be disturbed
because the evidence also suggests that
the decisions as to when budgetary re-
quests are to be submitted and how much
5555
each of these should contain are not
necessarily determined solely by our
military requirements, but that arbi-
trarily shifting and juggling is done
to influence, impress, or convince the
public, depending en what is considered
most needed at any particular time.
A lack of effective planning could un-
dermine not only our effort in Vietnam
but weaken our national security as a
whole. We live in dangerous times that
warrant the utmost vigilance and pre-
paredness. The threat to Vietnam is not
an isolated incident, and therefore we
cannot blind ourselves to problem areas
in the rest of the world, now or in the
future.
I strongly urge the administration to
review our overall defense posture and
policies, with a broad view of our com-
mitments, not just Vietnam. Because
of the effect the conflict in Vietnam has
had upon our defense structure there is
a need for such a review immediately.
I feel confident that Congress will assist
in any way it can in such a review and
provide the necessary authority for any
legitimate increases or modifications that
appear to be warranted. In this regard,
Congress must receive the full benefit of
military judgment without constraints.
Congress must have frank discussions by
both the civilian and military members
of the Department of Defense in order
to reach objective judgments and carry
out its constitutional mandate responsi-
bly.
Mr. Speaker, I support this bill to pro-
vide additional funds for southeast Asia.
I felt it was necessary, however, to com-
ment today in some detail on the bill
and I also respectfully call attention to
the additional views contained in the
report calling for improved fiscal pro-
cedures. It is my hope that the views
expressed receive full consideration by
the House.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield
5 minutes to the gentleman from New
York [Mr. CELLER].
Mr. CELLER. Mr. Chairman and
members of the Committee, I am very
happy,to note that there is genuine bi-
partisan support for this appropriation
measure. I, of course, support this bill.
Joining 39 Governors, I support the
President on Vietnam. The $13.1 billion
fund is essential for the support of our
troops and for carrying out our commit-
ments in South Vietnam.
The direction of policy in this conflict
is far from easy. It bristles with serious
and awesome problems.
The President must make the final de-
cisions. He has his intimate advisers, yet
he is like a lonely man atop a mountain.
Many are his sleepless nights, espe-
cially when he reads the tragic dis-
patches. At times he is veritably torn
asunder with doubts and fears. But
courage and stamina are not lacking.
He knows that patience is bitter but
bears rich fruit.
Like all who are responsible and dedi-
cated, he is not insensible to criticism.
He welcomes it when it is not mordant
or abusive. Some of his frenetic critics
seem more interested in crushing him
than in our triumph against aggression
in South Vietnam.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29': CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 5556
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R00040004001 -1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD HOUSE arch 15, 1966
I do not deprecate-nay, I would en- "It is very easy indeed to make plans to
courage debate on this momentous topic win a war if you have no responsibility
of Vietnam. Only on the anvil of debate for carrying them out."
may we forge the truth. Mr. CELLER. I thank the gentleman.
belt. Some are mere billingsgate. With
the monotony of a drumbeat we hear
some of these armchair strategists and
"pinafore" admirals saying what should
be done. Ofttimes they speak in pique
and spite. For them whatever the Presi-
dent does is wrong.
Some ranted that he should have gone
to the United Nations. Although he was
told by his trusted advisers that such
action would be futile, he nonetheless
made the trek to the United Nations.
When he did that the same detractors
railed that such a move was ridiculous
and bound to fail.
These same carping critics ridiculed
his efforts at peace and said he sought
peace only halfheartedly. "Let him ap-
peal to the Pope at Rome." He did.
When his Holiness offered all in his
power and did not succeed in budging
Hanoi or Peiping, these same habitual
faultfinders said, "I told you so."
President Johnson made direct ap-
peals to 19 nonalined nations with a
view to having them persuade Hanoi
and Peiping to the conference table.
These nations did, but were rebuffed.
The President sought particularly In-
dia's intercession. The rulers of Hanoi
and Peiping again showed their fangs.
The President, you may remember,
was savagely condemned for continued
bombing of the north. He ordered the
bombing stopped. The cessation yielded
serious military disadvantage to us. The
President received no credit for his ef-
forts. The Vietcong were brought no
nearer to the conference table.
The President requested Soviet Russia
to arrange another Geneva-like confer-
ence. Russia demurred. Ho Chi Minh
and Mao Tse-tung just turn their faces
away from all who bring the olive
branch of peace. Only yesterday, our
offer of friendship, conveyed by Vice
President HUMPHREY, was branded as
the "kiss of Judas."
Yet, the incessant defamers of the
President continue to vent their spleen
against him. Never do they utter a good
word for anything he may do. They dip
their pens in venom or gargle with gall,
and write or speak "grapes of wrath."
They refuse to realize the results of
their incautious remarks, fail to under-
stand that they create the false impres-
sion abroad, that our Nation does not
support the President. Nothing is fur-
ther from the truth.
I raise my voice in clarion tones to
defend and applaud my President, and
at the same time support this appropri-
ation bill.
Mr. HAYS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. CELLER. I yield to the gentle-
congratulate the gentleman for his state- improved and developed into
ment. I think it is apropos, timely, tem capable of delivering larg
o
forceful, and to the point. I especially of supplies. Food was no pr
like what he said about the armchair Communists were living off t
b
,
be- rice crop and they still are
ls
,
dmi
ra
na
f
ore a
h
Pi
e
d t
strategists an
e
cause, as Sir Winston Churchill once said, hold most of the countryside.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield
15 minutes to the gentleman from
Florida, the chairman of the Subcom-
mittee on Military Construction, who
conducted some of the hearings on this
bill.
(Mr. SIKES asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. SIKES. Mr. Chairman, let me
stress the fact that the Committee on
Appropriations has been ready to bring
this bill to the floor for several weeks.
Under the able direction of the distin-
guished gentleman from Texas, hearings
were initiated immediately after the re-
quest for funds for the Vietnam war was
received. There is no disposition to with-
hold any funds which are needed to in-
sure victory. And ours is a bipartisan ef-
fort. This is in some measure a guess.
But it is the best estimate which is avail-
able. We have to trust someone. We are
placing our trust in the recommenda-
tions of the Nation's military leaders.
Now the gentleman from Texas has
spoken at length about the state of readi-
ness of our military forces when the con-
frontation began and it is in fact a
remarkable and commendable situation.
But let us not disregard the continued
efforts of district leaders in the Congress
like the gentleman from Texas and many
others to make this situation true.
I regret to state to the membership
that those who attempt to read the hear-
ings, will find them in considerable part
useless. The testimony has been so
heavily censored, much of it incompre-
hensible. Some of this is ridiculous. It
serves only to confuse the Congress and
the American people. Some of the cen-
sored material has subsequently been
released in uncensored form by other
committees, or even by Pentagon officials.
This makes a mockery of the efforts of
this committee to cooperate on security
matters.
Now let us talk about the bill. I shall
confine myself primarily to the con-
struction problem on which separate
hearings were held. As the House knows,
the logistics problem in the Southeast
Pacific is unbelievably large. Logistics
is and has been the limiting factor. We
are supplying large forces, 12,000 miles
away from home, halfway around the
world.
Last fall the U.S. forces were built up
to more than 200,000. This was neces-
sary to stem the tide of victory which was
rolling for Communist forces. They
nearly won the war before we realized
and acted on the threat.
But it was also thought that we were
putting enough forces into Vietnam to
permit government forces to win. We
underestimated enemy capabilities.
They were building up too
To win a war you must be prepared
to deny territory to the enemy. The
victorious sweep of United States and
Vietnamese forces into enemy held coun-
tryside are in most instances, followed
by withdrawal to secure areas, and the
Communists roll right back as we leave.
To insure the defeat of expanding
enemy forces and to secure and hold ter-
ritory now in Communist hands, we must
have additional forces in Vietnam. We
are now in the process of doubling their
number.
That means doubling the logistics
problem. We need port facilities, air-
fields, encampments, storage facilities.
In December, when I saw the area work
on some of the facilities then needed for
200,000 men, had not begun. On others,
the percentage of completion was ex-
tremely small. The overall job is running
a year behind schedule. This is not the
fault of the construction team. They
are doing an outstanding job. The
enormity of their task is the main prob-
lem and it is staggering in scope. Let us
not take away credit for the work which
has been done.
The construction of essential opera-
tional, logistical, and support facilities
are a pacing factor in the deployment
of allied forces and the conduct of mili-
tary operations in southeast Asia. The
nature of the terrain, the paucity of
operational bases and the lack of national
ports and other supply and logistical
facilities in that area have resulted in a
major construction effort if we are to
adequately support our military require-
ments. In addition, backup and train-
ing requirements have generated other
urgent construction needs in other areas
of the Pacific and in the United States..
The amount of $417,700,000 has been
made available to date in support of
this program. Additional funds in the
total amount of $1,238,400,000 are rec-
ommended in the accompanying bill.
This brings the total to date to $1,656,-
100,000 for construction.
This is broken down as follows:
Appropriations in support of southeast. Asia
to date
[In millions]
Air
Force
Vietnam -------------
$115.2
$78.2
$77.6
$271.0
Philippines ----- - ----
21.4
7.7
20.1
Guam---------------
.5
1.6
2. 1
Wake----------------
.7
.7
United States --------
7.0
7.0
Various--------------
40.0
17.6
50.3
107.8
Recommended in accompanying bill-
Program
lln millions]
Air
Force
-men and Vietnam-------------
$407.5
$207.1
$128.0
$742.6
Philippines --Philippines----------
28.2
9.0
- 37.2
Guam
5.7
8.0
13.7
---------------
a road sys-
United States --------
e quantities Other----------------
34.1
138.3
24.3
24.4
5. 0
174.1
63.4
336.8
blem. The Planning------------
29.8
14.9
(')
44.7
he Vietnam
cause they
 March 15, 1961pproved Ford f&?R W19Rf&i~$P67fiM4pR000400040012-1
Appropriation there is waste and reckless spending in
[In millions] some instances. I give you one illustra-
Army------------------------------
$509.7
Navy ------------------------------
254.6
Air Force __-----------
274.1
Defense emergency fund___________
200.0
Total ------------------------
1,238.4
tion which applies to the bill as a whole.
The Army has contracted to buy a light
observation helicopter in considerable
numbers for $19,000 each per airframe.
in the program before you the Army
But
ith
proposes to buy the same helicopter w
Appropriations and recommendations to
date slight changes from the same manufac-
d
suMMARY
[ In mlllionsl
Army ------------------------------
$671.9
Navy------------------------------
372.2
Air Force__________________________
412.0
Defense emergency fund-----------
200.0
Total---------------- -------
1, 658. 1
In the past, there has been a serious
lack of central authority and coordina-
tion in the construction efforts. Effec-
tive coordination between the construc-
tion and operational programs has been
limited. The recent establishment of a
general officer position on the staff of
the Military Advisory Command in Viet-
nam to effectuate this coordination
should assist in overcoming the problem.
Bttt vigorous efforts still must be made
to properly coordinate the construction
effort and make it fully responsive to
operational requirements.
An essential portion of the construc-
tion problem is the lack of sufficient
skilled labor forces in South Vietnam to
meet the military construction effort
which is needed. The present contractor
effort is requiring all of the available
local labor force plus generating a re-
quirement for the use of foreign labor
which naturally adds to the cost. The
construction battalions of the Navy and
the Army are doing heroic work in their
activities there. Theirs is one of the
outstanding contributions. If the es-
calated construction program is to be
successfully implemented, there is a need
for more troop construction battalions
from both the Navy and the Army. The
requirement for these troops will be ac-
centuated as additional facilities become
operational and it becomes necessary to
maintain them with troop labor. In
order to meet the overall requirement
for the construction and maintenance of
facilities, steps now are being taken to
double the troop construction units in
South Vietnam. However, this is not
enough. Through the use of only a part
of the Reserve Engineer Construction
Battalions and Navy Seabee Battalions-
for which equipment is available-the'
number of these forces in the southeast
Pacific can be doubled again. To do this
would save lives and time and money.
This is one of the most important steps
which could be taken, but there are no
indications it is going to be done.
Now, this is a costly program. This
is not the end of it.
It is no time to get careless on costs,
and there always is the temptation to do
so when money is readily available in
unlimited amounts from Congress. It
is the attitude of Congress that Ameri-
ca's fighting men must have whatever
they need to fight a war. But this is
not an invitation for the Pentagon, to
spend recklessly or wastefully. I am very
much afraid that time will reveal that
oes
turer for $47,000 each. The Army
not even seek to take full advantage of an
option to buy additional helicopters at
the contract price of $19,000. A compet-
ing firm with a helicopter which is essen-
tially the same recently offered to pro-
vide heliCO tern at $29 800 each I am
convinced that today there are is a num-
ber of firms which would welcome an op-
portunity to provide helicopters at a fig-
ure much lower than $47,000. This is
an inexcusable situation. Here is a
place where heads should roll. And
there may well be other instances. The
Pentagon should launch its own investi-
gations to determine that the specter of
waste and careless purchasing does not
belie the sacrifices of those who serve on
the fighting front. I can tell you that
this committee, through its chairman,
has notified the Pentagon of our strong
concern about the case in point.
The Committee still is deeply con-
cerned that the programed expanded
labor force and improved construction
capability will be insufficient to meet the
construction requirements. Continuing
effort must be made to provide the con-
struction capability in South Vietnam
necessary to support operational and lo-
gistical requirements. To do less would
seriously jeopardize the efforts our mili-
tary forces are making to achieve the
victory and peace desired by this Nation.
There also is a tendency to utilize
peacetime financial and programing
procedures in the military construction
program in South Vietnam. Steps have
recently been taken to broaden these
procedures so as to provide additional
flexibility in the program. The Commit-
tee is concerned that these changes
might not be sufficient to meet the re-
quirements for the proper implementa-
tion of the program. It will be expected
that the Department of Defense will con-
tinually examine this phase of the pro-
gram to insure that the necessary flexi-
bility is provided within the overall con-
struction program to meet changing tac-
tical and logistical requirements and to
provide a responsive and progressive
program.
There has been a turn for the better
in the fighting in Vietnam. The Saigon
government shows more stability than at
any time since the Diem regime. There
is now recognition of the necessity to
face up to the problem of winning over
the people of the villages and hamlets-
many of whom have been Communist-
dominated for years.
These things may well give rise to a
feeling at home that the problem of
Vietnam has essentially been solved-
that victory is near. This would be dan-
gerous thinking indeed. The biggest
casualty lists of the war are coming in
now. We have far to go. We must
never forget we are in a war-a dirty,
dangerous war which soon will involve
5557
nearly half a million American fighting
men. They must have the solid backing
of the American people and the Congress.
It also is a time for soul searching
efforts in the Pentagon to insure that the
right decisions are being made. There is
no time to hold back the forces or the
methods which can help to insure an
early victory.
Mr. DAVIS of Wisconsin. Mr. Chair-
man, I make the point of order that a
quorum is not present.
The CHAIRMAN. Evidently, a quo-
rum is not present. The Clerk will call
the roll.
The Clerk called the roll, and the fol-
lowing Members failed to answer to their
names:
[Roll No. 37]
Adair
Ellsworth
Mosher
Baring
Everett
Pool
Bell
Fraser
Powell
Bolling
Fuqua
Reinecke
Brock
Hagen, Calif.
Roncallo
Brown, Calif.
Halleck
Roudebush
Clawson, Del
Harvey, Ind.
Sisk
Collier
Holifleld
Steed
Conyers
Howard
Teague, Tex.
Davis, Ga.
McCarthy
Toll
Derwinski
Martin, Ala.
Walker, Miss.
Devine
Martin, Nebr.
Willis
Dowdy
Mathias
Downing
Matthews
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and
the Speaker pro tempore, Mr. ALBERT,
having assumed the Chair, Mr. WRIGHT,
Chairman of the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union, re-
ported that that Committee having had
under consideration the bill, H.R. 13546,
and finding itself without a quorum, he
had directed the roll to be called, when
391 Members responded to their names, a
quorum, and he submitted herewith the
names of the absentees to be spread upon
the Journal.
The Committee resumed its sitting.
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Texas [Mr. MAHON] has 54 minutes
remaining, and the gentleman from Ohio
[Mr. Bow] has 1 hour and 15 minutes
remaining.
Mr. BOW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 15
minutes to the gentleman from Wiscon-
sin [Mr. LAIRD].
Mr. LAIRD. Mr. Chairman, I rise in
support of the defense appropriation
subcommittee report on this supple-
mental appropriation for the fiscal year
1966 in the amount of $13.1 billion.
The support of those of us on the mi-
nority side of ' the Committee on Appro-
priations for this bill is predicated on the
necessity and the awareness that these
funds must be provided in order to back
up our fighting men in Vietnam.
I would like to point out to the Mem-
bers of the House, Mr. Chairman, that
this is not the last supplemental appro-
priation that we will be considering for
the Department of Defense for the fiscal
year 1966. Submitted to the Congress
under a transmittal that came up here
entitled District of Columbia supple-
mental appropriations for 1966, just the
other day, there is contained almost an-
other billion dollars in appropriation
requests for the Department of Defense
for fiscal year 1966 to handle military
pay alone.
Those of us on the minority side of the
House back when the defense appropria-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R0004000400 1
5558 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE March 15, 1966
tion bill for 1966 was before the Congress
pointed out that no funds were included
in the 1966 budget statement last Jan-
uary to cover the cost of escalating the
war in Vietnam.
I would like to say today that although
this supplemental is before us today, this
coupled with the 1967 budget for the
Department of Defense will not finance
current plans and contingencies for the
fighting in Vietnam through the remain-
ing portion of the fiscal year 1966 and
the fiscal year 1967.
As the chairman of our committee so
ably said, this supplemental has to be
considered along with the 196'7 budget
for the Department of Defense. It should
be pointed out here on the floor of the
House today that the 1967 budget was
out of date 2 days after it was submitted
to this Congress. It was out of date
because the manpower ceiling so far as
the Department of the Army is concerned
was removed 2 days after the budget
__was submitted to the Congress by the
President of the United States.
Those of us working with the Depart-
ment of Defense budgets know full well
that additional funds will be needed in
1966 as well as in 1967 in order to finance
the commitment of the United States
not only in Vietnam, but to maintain our
present worldwide commitments sup-
ported by this administration which were
so ably set forth by the Secretary of
State in his appearance before the For-
eign Relations Committee of the U.S.
Senate just 10 days ago.
Mr. Chairman, on March 4, 196?, the
Department of State issued through the
office of its legal adviser an important
document entitled, "The Legality of U.S.
Participation in the Defense of Viet-
nam."
The document was prepared to com-
bat the persistent criticism from certain
Democratic Members of the Congress
that this Nation is acting illegally in
using American military power in Viet-
nam.
With the major thesis of this docu-
ment, I have no quarrel. A compelling
case for the right of the United States
under international law to use its mili-
tary forces to assist in the defense of
South Vietnam against aggression can
certainly be made.
I am grieved, however, to find that
the State Department chose to distort
history in this publication when it came
to explain the commitments which have
resulted in the involvment of the United
States in the war in Vietnam. The dis-
tortion is of two kinds. First, the docu-
ment ignores completely some highly
relevant facts. Second, it misleads by
failing to analyze fully the declarations
which it cites, sometimes conveying
thereby a false impression of their
import.
In summary, this document argues
that the present military involvement
of the Nation in Vietnam was made
necessary by pledges made by President
Eisenhower and President Kennedy. It
does not cite a single utterance by Presi-
dent Johnson. It suggests that the pre-
sent administration had nothing at all
to do with any commitment to Vietnam.
This document contains a section of
6 pages headed, "The United States Has
Undertaken Commitments To Assist
South Vietnam in Defending Itself
Against Communist Aggression from the
North." The evidence which it then
presents to prove the existence of the
commitment of the Eisenhower admin-
istration is the following: the statements
of President Eisenhower at the end of
the Geneva Conference of 1954, the
SEATO treaty, the assistance given by
the United States to South Vietnam after
the Geneva Conference, and a joint com-
munique issued by Eisenhower and Diem
on May 11, 1957. This is followed by a
citation of two statements made by
President Kennedy on August 2, 1961,
and December 14, 1961.
Then, abruptly, the State Depart-
ment's history of the commitment of the
United States to South Vietnam ends.
Equally strange is the section of this
document captioned, "Actions by the
United States and South Vietnam Are
Justified Under the Geneva Accords of
1954." The actions of the United States
which are described in this section are
the supply of "considerable military
equipment and supplies from the United
States prior to late 1961" and the estab-
lishment of an American Military Assist-
ance Advisory Group of "slightly less
than 900 men" in Saigon. Further the
document relates:
The United States found it necessary in
late 1961 to increase substantially the num-
bers of our military personnel and the
amounts and kinds of equipment intro-
duced * * * into South Vietnam.
And there, abruptly, the State Depart-
ment ends its account of the military
action of the United States in South
Vietnam.
If some future catastrophe were to de-
stroy every written record of the rela-
tions of the United States and Vietnam
during the 1950's and 1960's except the
State Department's publication, "The
Legality of United States Participation
in the Defense of Vietnam," the historian
who tried to reconstruct the facts from
this document would write something like
this:
Two Presidents of the United States-
Presidents Eisenhower and Kennedy-in-
volved their Nation in a war to defend South
Vietnam against aggression from North Viet-
nam. Their pledges of support to South
Vietnam led to the sending of military sup-
plies, to the dispatch of 900 military advis-
ers, and in 1961 to the commitment of sub-
stantial numbers of American troops.
This conflict may have been going on in
Vietnam as late as 1966 under another Presi-
dent of the United States whose name is
not recorded. in that year the Department
of State issued a document upholding the
legality of the actions of Presidents Eisen-
hower and Kennedy.
Mr. Chairman, this manipulation of
history should give us all deep concern.
When our Department of State releases
a report of this kind, I fear we are closer
to 1984 than the calendar indicates. This
is the kind of propaganda that makes it
difficult for the administration to estab-
lish its credibility. This is playing poli-
tics with Vietnam.
NO COMMITMENT OF COMBAT TROOPS UNDER
EISENHOWER
If the State Department document of
March 4 were the only instance of dis-
tortion of history on the part of the
administration in explaining why Amer-
ican troops are fighting in Vietnam, it
might be forgotten. But time after time,
administration spokesmen, including the
President, have sought to make it appear-
that the steps taken since November of
1963 were forced upon it by commitments
of earlier administrations.
President Johnson, for example, said
on August 3, 1965:
Today the most difficult problem that con-
fronts your President is how to keep an
agreement that I did not initiate-I Inherited
it-but an agreement to help a small nation
remain independent, free of aggression-the
nation of South Vietnam.
Earlier the President and others in his
administration were in the habit of cit-
ing a letter written by President Eisen-
hower to Diem on October 1, 1954, as "the
commitment." This letter was nothing
more than an expression of willingness
to discuss ways and means of aiding Viet-
nam if the Diem regime made certain re-
forms.
More recently, the administration has
been using the SEATO treaty of 1954 as
the source of the commitment.
This treaty was not a commitment to
send American troops to fight in south-
east Asia. It carefully avoided the kind
of automatic response to aggression em-
bodied in the NATO agreement, sum-
marized in the principle, "An attack up,
on one is an attack upon all."
Section 1 of article IV of the SEATO
agreement reads:
1. Each party recognizes that aggression
by means of armed attack in the treaty area
against any of the parties or against any
state or territory which the parties by
unanimous agreement may hereafter desig-
nate, would endanger its own peace and
safety, and agrees that it will in that event
act to meet the common danger in accord-
ance with its constitutional processes. Meas-
ures taken under this paragraph shall be
immediately reported to the Security Coun-
cil of the United Nations.
Secretary Dulles, testifying before the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee on
the SEATO treaty, declared:
The agreement of each of the parties to
act to meet the common danger in accord-
ance with its constitutional processes leaves
to the judgment of each country the type of
action to be taken in the event an armed
attack occurs.
Further, Mr. Dulles said:
The treaty does not attempt to get into
the difficult question as to precisely how we
act.
On the floor of the Senate in the de-
bate on ratification of the SEATO agree-
ment, on February 1, 1955, Senator
Smith, of New Jersey, clearly explained
the nature of the commitment in these
words:
Some of the participants came to Manila
with the intention of establishing an orga-
nization modeled on the lines of the North
Atlantic Treaty arrangements. That would
have been a compulsory arrangement for our
military participation in case of any attack.
Such an organization might have required
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 March 15, 19
pproved for&lN b 9 j 67M 000400040012-1
the commitment of American ground forces
to the Asian mainland, We carefully avoided
any possible implication regarding an ar-
rangement of that kind.
We have no purpose of following any such
policy as that of having our forces involved
in a ground war.
Under this treaty, each party recognizes
that an armed attack on any country within
the treaty area would endanger its own peace
and safety. Each party, therefore, agrees to
act to meet the common danger in accord-
ance with its constitutional processes. That
means, by implication, that if any such
emergency as is contemplated by the treaty
should arise in that area it will be brought
before the Congress by the President and
the administration, and will be considered
under our constitutional processes. We are
not committed to the principle of NATO,
namely, that an attack on one is an attack
on all, calling for immediate military action
without further consideration by Congress.
For ourselves, the arrangement means that
we will have avoided the impracticable over-
commitment which would have been in-
volved if we attempted to place American
ground forces around the perimeter of the
area of potential Chinese ingress into south-
east Asia. Nothing in this treaty calls for
the use of American ground forces in that
fashion.
The speaker, Senator H. Alexander
Smith, was a member of the U.S. delega-
tion to the Manila Conference and a
signer of the SEATO agreement,
One academic authority, W. McMahon
Ball, has written:
The treaty does not oblige the United
States either legally or morally to take any
course in southeast Asia than the course it
might be expected to take if the treaty did
not exist.
Article IV of the Southeast Asia Col-
lective Defense Treaty clearly reserves
to each signatory the right to determine
the nature of its response to armed ag-
gression and does not commit in advance
any signatory to use its armed forces to
deal with the aggressor.
Recognizing this fact, the Kennedy ad-
ministration did not use American forces
to repel Communist aggression in Laos.
The legal commitment of the United
States to South Vietnam is the same as
Its commitment to Laos. Both of these
countries of southeast Asia were brought
under the protection of SEATO.
Lyndon Johnson as Vice President
made it clear in 1961 that the United
States had not up to that time com-
mitted itself to an obligation that would
require employment of its military forces.
In a memorandum to President Kennedy
dated May 23, 1961, right after his return
from a tour of Asia, Johnson wrote:
The fundamental decision required of the
United States-and time is of the greatest
importance-is whether we are to attempt
to meet the challenge of Communist ex-
pansion now in southeast Asia by a major
effort in support of the forces of freedom in
the area or throw in the towel. This deci-
sion must be made in a fuil realization of
the very heavy and continuing costs in-
volved in terms of money, of effort, and of
U.S. prestige. It must be made with the
knowledge that at some point we may be
faced with a further decision of whether we
commit major U.S. forces to the area or cut
our losses and withdraw should our efforts
fail. We must remain master of this deci-
Finally, Gen. Maxwell Taylor in testi-
mony before the Senate Foreign Rela-
tions Committee on February 17, 1966,
demolished the argument that there was
any commitment to employ American
troops in combat under the Eisenhower
administration in the following exchange
with Senator BOURKE HICKENLOOPER Of
Iowa: ,
Senator HICKENLOOPER. Now, up until the
end of the Eisenhower administration, we
had only about 750 military personnel in
South Vietnam, did we not?
General TAYLOR. It was very small, some-
thing like that.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. I think that is
within 25 or 30 of the number, either way,
and they were entirely devoted to giving tech-
nical advice on training to the South Viet-
namese troops.
General TAYLOR. That is correct.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. To your knowl-
edge, did we have any commitment or agree-
ment with the South Vietnamese up to that
time that we would put in active field mill-
tary forces to conduct a war along with
them?
General TAYLOR. No, sir. Very clearly we
made no such commitment. We didn't want
such a commitment. This was the last thing
we had in mind.
Senator HICKENLOOPER. When was the
commitment made for us to actively partici-
pate in the military operations of the war
as American personnel?
General TAYLOR. We, insofar as the use of
our combat ground forces'are concerned, that
took place, of course, only in the spring of
1965.
In the air, we had been participating more
actively over 2 or 3 years.
When President Eisenhower left the
White House, there were no American
troops in South Vietnam. There were
only approximately 700 military advisers.
When President Eisenhower left the
White House, there was no commitment
to send American troops to South
Vietnam.
Under President Kennedy, the first
American combat casualties occurred in
December 1961. Although President
Kennedy increased the number of U.S.
military personnel in Vietnam to 17,000,
the American forces were there pri-
marily to advise, not to fight.
The New York Times of August 19,
1965, correctly stated the case when it
said:
The shift from military assistance and
combat advice to direct participation by
American combat troops in the Vietnamese
war has * * * been a unilateral American
decision * * * by President Johnson.
THE HONOLULU COMMITMENT
I find it unbelievable that a State De-
partment document dated March 4, 1966,
purporting to explain the commitment of
this Nation in South Vietnam could avoid
mention of the Honolulu declaration of
February 8, 1966. For part IV of that
declaration is entitled "The Common
Commitment." It reads:
The President of the United States and
the Chief of State and Prime Minister of the
Republic of Vietnam are thus pledged again
to defense against aggression, to the work
of social revolution, to the goal of free self-
government, to the attack on hunger, igno-
rance, and disease, and to the unending quest
5559
These are important and weighty com-
mitments. Yet they go unreported in
the State Department's survey of the
commitment of the Government of the
United States to South Vietnam.
Mr. Chairman, I do not mean here to be
critical of the actions of the President
with relation to Vietnam. I simply
plead that, when the administration
undertakes to defend itself against critics
in the President's party, it present the
facts and all the facts. Let the admin-
istration acknowledge is decisions as its
own and justify its actions on their
merits.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield
myself 2 minutes.
Mr. Chairman, the able gentleman
from Wisconsin [Mr. LAIRD] has made
reference to the historical background
of the war in Vietnam.
I believe that if a look backward re-
veals anything it reveals our difficulties
in South Vietnam have been nonparti-
san in nature. The actions which this
.country has taken have been actions
taken in defense of the security of the
United States and have not been moti-
vated in my opinion by political con-
siderations.
The war by the Vietnamese against the
French began in 1946. In 1950 we began
to give some assistance to the French in
an effort to try to conclude successfully
this war. The French finally capitu-
lated. We began to provide aid to the
South Vietnamese against aggression in
Vietnam in 1950. In 1954 or 1955 we
began to provide foreign aid, direct mili-
tary and economic, to the people in Viet-
nam who were fighting for freedom.
Mr. Chairman, during this time a num-
ber of negotiations took place. Mr. Dul-
les was very instrumental as Secretary
of State in negotiating the SEATO
treaty. In this treaty, to which we sub-
scribe, the United States undertook an
international obligation to help defend
South Vietnam against aggression.
The treaty said:
Each party recognizes that aggression by
means of armed attack in the treaty area
against any of the parties or against any
state or territory which the parties by unan-
imous agreement might hereafter desig-
nate, would endanger its own peace and
safety, and agrees that it will in that event
act to meet the common danger in accord-
ance with constitutional processes-
And so forth.
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the
gentleman from Texas has expired.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield
myself 2 additional minutes.
So, Mr. Chairman, we recognized early
that the security and well-being of the
United States was heavily involved in
southeast Asia.
Mr. LAIRD. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield on that point in the
treaty?
Mr. MAHON. I yield to the gentleman
from Wisconsin.
Mr. LAIRD. I would like to discuss
that point.
Mr. MAHON. I do not want to dis-
cuss it in detail, but I want to briefly re-
fer to the history of this situation in
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 5560
Approved For FGgtES~rUN/~L :67B&gf0004000400dreh 15, 1966
which we found oursieves and in which This aid continued throughout the the action expected to be taken by the
both our political parties and all admin- Eisenhower administration and then un- Defense Department in connection with
istrations have stood out against aggres- der the Kennedy administration and con- Vietnam for which we are making funds
sion, and properly so, in southeast Asia. tinues under the Johnson administratiom available in this bill.
Mr. LAIRD. If my distinguished col- The problem finally culminated in this Again, it is not because there is no
league, the gentleman from Texas [Mr. war which is being fought out of neces- money-it is because these projects, the
MAHON] will yield to me, I would like to sity, growing out of the commitments acquisition of materiel and other actions,
state that I am sure he agrees with me and the facts of life as they existed in will cost money, and we are providing
that the State Department document is 1950 and 1954 and ever since that time the money to do this job as we go along.
not correct in its interpretation of our under all administrations. There are many causes. I have served
present commitment in Vietnam. This is not a partisan war. It is a war on this committee most of the time since
I would like to quote from the testi- brought about by necessity to preserve 1943, or at least one segment Of it, and I
mony of Secretary of State John Foster the Interests of the United States in think this matter of going into the
Dulles when he discussed this particular southeast Asia. cause, while it is academic in some re-
section to which the gentleman from We want to help the people in South spects, in many ways would be well in-
Texas alludes at this point. Vietnam. That is true, but we also must sofar as deciding where we go from here.
When Secretary Dulles testified before look out after our own self-interests. It is my personal view, and may I say the
the Senate Fpreign Relations Commit- The purpose of this bill today is to safe- leaders on both sides of the aisle differed
tee on this particular section he declared: guard our own self-interests, the best in- with me then and they differ with me
The agreement. of each of the parties to terests of the United States. now-but if I were to look for the cause,
act to meet the common danger in accord- (Mr. MAHON asked and was given I would go back to the period after World
ance with its constitutional processes leaves permission to revise and extend his re- War II when we went around the world
to the judgment of each country the type of marks.) telling practically every nation which
action to be taken in the event an armed Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield would listen, "we will take care of you-
attack occurs. 10 minutes to the gentleman from Mis- we have the atomic bomb." We made
Now, Mr. Chairman, this is quite dif- sissippi [Mr. WHrTTENI. those commitments in many places
ferent from the language which is in- (Mr. WHITTEN asked and was given where, subsequently, it has become ap-
eluded in the NATO agreement, when the permission to revise and extend his re- parent we simply cannot carry out such
NATO agreement comes out as an attack marks.) promises, especially since others now
on one is an attack on all. Mr. WHITTEN. Mr. Chairman, first have the atomic bomb.
Mr. Chairman, I am placing in the may I say that it has been my privilege Yes, If I were to look for the cause, I
RECORD a discussion of the definition that to serve under the chairman of the full would remember that we went through a
Secretary Dulles made very clearly be- committee and of this subcommittee for period when the Congress and the Ameri-
tween the SEATO and the NATO agree- many years. It has been my privilege to can public thought all we needed was the
ments. serve with other members of the sub- atomic bomb. To a great degree we quit
The point of my remarks is not to ques- committee both on the minority and on producing conventional weapons and we
tion the SEATO agreement. It is to the majority side. It has been my ex- reduced our efforts for maintenance of
question the interpretation used by our perience that never has there been a time our defenses to the point where one of
State Department to justify military ac- throughout all these years when this the top people in our Air Force said we
tion in Vietnam today, on the basis of country and this Congress could not look were giving little training to our flyers
that treaty, because I believe that treaty to these gentlemen to see that finances in dropping ordinary bombs, because we
is not the basis for justifying direct mili- are provided to enable this Nation to had been lured into feeling we could
tary action by one country in the treaty meet its national defense needs In any drop a big bomb and that would be it.
organization without consent of all military area, where we may have to Unfortunately, today we are in the midst
countries, exercise our might. of a war; and we are using conventional
The CHAIRMAN. The time of the Certainly if we have erred through the weapons.
gentleman from Texas has again ex- years, it has been on the side of making If I were to look further as to the re-
pired. absolutely certain that adequate funds sponsibility, I would see that the leaders
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield are available. May I say that our hear- of both parties have followed a common
myself 2 additional minutes. ings have always been full and in great foreign policy through the years right up
We, It Is true, were not specifically detail. So that there will be no mis- until this moment.
committed by the treaty to send Ameri- understanding here, I would repeat If I looked at Cuba, I would realize
can troops to war. We all know that as again. that you know and I know that all there is enough fault to be found, looking
a result of Communist aggression the sit- of us. without exception, will be sup- backward, to include both parties and
uation in Vietnam has continued to porting and defending our men in serv- their leaders.
worsen. The SEATO agreement is, of ice whatever policy our Government de- If I looked at many other areas, I would
course, available for all to Interpret. I cides upon in Vietnam. see somewhat the same situation.
do not undertake at the moment to get I might say further, as I pointed out
into the details of the treaty. last year in our report; the matter of full A STALEMATE IS NO VICTORY
Now, in 1959 Mr. Eisenhower said-and funding of approved requests of the De- But what we have here, Mr. Chairman,
correctly, in my judgment: fence Department has many weaknesses. is more serious than that. The question
unassisted Vietnam cannot at this time But It has some advantages. Last year, is, Where are we and what are we going
produce and support the military formations for instance, as our committee reported, to do about it? Here we are half way
essential to It or, equally important, the and as it exists today substantially, we around the world, as my good friend, the
morale-the hope, the confidence, the pride-- have $30 billion in unexpended funds to gentleman from Florida [Mr. SIKEs]
necessary to meet the dual threat of aggres- the credit of the Department of Defense. said, with a 10,000-mile supply line and
sion from without and subversion within its We had some $9 billion not even obli- engaged in battle in an area where hu-
borders. gated a year ago. All of that money man life means very little to the enemy,
Strategically, South Vietnam's capture by would be subject to the decision of the and where they can carry sufficient sup-
the Communists would bring their power Congress to be reappropriated, or to be plies for guerrilla warfare on their backs.
several hundred miles into a hitherto free simply transferred, by the Department. We are engaged in a deadly conflict at
region. The remaining countries in south-
east Asia would be menaced by a great flank- The point I make is that any planning the end of a 10,000-mile supply line.
ing movement. ? * * The loss of South Viet- and any actions that may have been Both parties have followed policies which
nam would set in motion a crumbling process taken by the Department of Defense have ended in this situation, though I
that could, as it progressed, have grave con- have been for reasons other than that am sure no one intended it.
sequences for us and for freedom. funds were not available, because they We find-and the record will support
In the period 1953-57, during the have been and are now available. this-that Haiphong Harbor in North
Eisenhower administration this Gov- There is a substantial need for the bill Vietnam is an open harbor. Through
ernment provided $1,100 million in aid to that is before you, not because the money Haiphong Harbor 80 percent of the sup-
Vietnam in an effort to stop aggression. is not available if handled through than- plies being used by our enemy in South
But this was only partially successful. nels, but this represents a projection of Vietnam are passing and, with the excep-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 March 15, 19b proved For W tigW R :lL~ 67Bqa46g 2000400040012-1 5561
tion of several small countries, along of the opposition, supplies which are
with Communist nations our so-called being transported by people supposedly
friends are continuing to ship to our on our side. To me the answer is, we
enemies through Haiphong Harbor. must.
Yes, if we carry the matter a little bit My friends, there is only one side to
further, on the question of winning the this appropriation bill. As I have said,
war I agree we must win; but we must the Defense Department has money that
decide what it is to win. What does to could have been used. They have money
win mean to us? To me it cannot be a
maintenance of the status quo. Here is
a )lttle 100th-rated power, North Viet-
nam, pulling the biggest power in the
world around by the nose day after day.
It leads me, as an individual, to feel that
the Vietcong may be winning as long as
they can maintain the status quo and
actually feel that they are. This we must
stop and the first start, to me, appears
to be to stop the inflow of materiel to our
enemy.
We will supply this money. We argue
about financial budgets. We want to
keep waste down. We want to be econ-
omy minded in handling appropriations.
But in World War II I well remember
that when war materiel was sent to for-
ward theaters, it was marked off then and
there. That is not the major problem
that we have. We are reconciled to the
fact that these funds will be spent.
We are in an engagement at the end
of a 10,000-mile supply line, with our
troops slugging it out, fighting in
swamps, attacked by mosquitoes and suf-
fering from malaria; fighting under the
most trying conditions where it seems
we do not know who our friends are, but
where our leaders feel we must remain
to show that we will be in southeast Asia.
Speaking ,for myself alone, if we are
to keep our young men there-and our
leaders and our country feel not only a
commitment but a present necessity to
keep our forces there-we owe it to them
to do those things that would cut off
the supply line of their enemy, a supply
line that to a great degree is fed by
folks who are supposed to be our friends.
financing the projection of contracts to
supply material that it is apparent they
are going to need.
There are two or three other things
we might say. If we need a base in
southeast Asia, might not we have the
courage to say so and supply a base as
against saying that we are trying to let
people follow the path of their own de-
termination, with all the mixed-up in-
formation that we can get on that
subject?
I wish to say again that I am for this
country, and I know the Members of the
Congress are, too. I do feel an obliga-
tion, having questioned the Secretary of
Defense and various others, and I shall
put those questions and answers, where
they exist, in the RECORD, to question
present actions or lack of determination
to put up.
I feel we have an obligation to question
a war in which we are engaged as the
result of a foreign policy participated in
by both parties. As we do that, we do
not have to be hawks or doves. We are
in a quagmire, and we need to get out of
it. It is not for me to say or for you to
say, but it is for all of us to insist that
we take appropriate action, as long as we
are in it, to back the men who are there,
to determine what we must have for
them and take action to see that an un-
tenable situation does not simply go on
and on, with resulting loss of life.
If our friends In other parts of the
world will not stand by us, it is better to
find out such fact. To support my
views
I believe questions a
d
,
n
answers of
FOREIGN POLICY DETERIORATES the Secretary, pages 51 through 91 of the
I repeat, the record will show that the hearings would be of interest to you. I
only countries which have out off ship- read them here:
ping to North Vietnam are a relatively ADEQUACY OF MILITARY FUNDING
few minor: ones. We are not stopping Mr. WHITTEN. Mr. Secretary, we all are
that shipping because we think these interested in the overall aspects of this mat-
other countries might not give us the sup- ter, but there are two or three things I think
port we want In NATO or so I surmise, might well appear in the record,
But look what has happened, already I know last year when you were before us
France has virtually announced her with- and afterward there was quite a difference of
drawal from NATO. If you want to opinion and a difference in statements as to
second-guess our policy in the last num- whether the reduction the military funds
for the Defense Department would result in
ber of years, look at Africa. The men perhaps some injury to our defense capabili-
who had some know-how and brains to ties.
govern were forced out by us. It has The committee, in view of that, provided
drifted back to where the men with or stated In its report and I read from last
strength to run these little countries, the year's report on page 9:
men we shoved out, have had to be re- "Appropriations to finance any such items
turned for such order as they can effect. of urgent need continue available from prior
We started on our present course a years in staggering totals. For example, the
long time ago. If we look in every direC- budget in January 1965 indicated 9,-
379,000 00 total unexpended xpennde ded carryover into nto fis-
tion we can see the mortar cracking. We cal 1966, of which a total of $9,624,627,000
can see the high hopes of many of our would be unobligated."
people running out. We can see member I am certain this committee will back your
nation's failing to put up their share in request here. I am not saying it critically
the United Nations. in the least.
But all of that is beside the point. We I think it is well you are here. The point
have young men fighting in a war that is I make here is that the military effort has
not
as much'a war to them as World War II, if you suffered seen from fit the request he use of these lack of available funds
and we are here wondering whether we funds to meet your problem ne ause o
up to this
should do anything to cutoff the supplies point.
Secretary MCNAMARA. I fully support that
conclusion, Mr. Whitten.
Mr. WHITTEN. You were before us last year
in connection with the regular defense bill
and again on several supplementals, and De-
fense Department witnesses have been before
us numerous times when we have approved
a reprograming request. If you had foreseen
the need of the money you are asking for
now, you would have asked for it, would you
not?
Secretary MCNAMARA. Yes. I stated to the
committee in August that we foresaw the
need for additional funds but for a number
of reasons were not requesting them: (1)
we could not predict our needs with cer-
tainty, (2) we knew that it would be possible
to return in January with a better estimate
of those needs, and (3) we felt that the funds
which would be available to us in the original
fiscal year 1966 budget and the August
amendment would carry us through the early
part of this calendar year.
Mr. WHITTEN. The point I make is that the
defense effort has not suffered from lack of
funds either on your part or on the part of
Congress.
Secretary McNAMARA. I fully support that
conclusion.
EFFECTS OF BOMBING ON NORTH VIETNAM
Mr. WHITTEN. Now carrying it one step
further, General Wheeler, I am trying to
make clear in my mind, as I understood you
in enumerating the targets in North Viet-
nam, that in effect you indicated that insofar
as the present military effort Is concerned,
where we are having this guerrilla-type war-
far, they were what might be termed sec-
ondary targets, in that none of them are
sufficiently vital as to cripple the Vietcong
in their efforts against South Vietnam, is
that correct?
General WHEELER. That is essentially cor-
rect, Mr. WHITTEN. I pointed out the other
day when I ran over the entire target sys-
tem-I believe in response to a question from
Mr. SINES-that when we talk of industrial
targets in North Vietnam, we are really talk-
ing about something that essentially does not
exist.
Even so at the levels of conflict in South
Vietnam, and with the number of Vietcong
and PAVN troops that must be supported,
we cannot completely cut off the introduc-
tion of supplies. We can hurt them. We
can make it cost them more. We cannot cut
off the flow of supplies completely.
Mr. WHITTEN. As I understood it either
you or the Secretary said, that while there
are some changes as a result of the lull in
bombing, really it was not as significant as
we might think. That, notwithstanding our
bombing, due to the fact it is guerrilla war-
fare they could supply the troops they had
even by human beings on trails. As long as
that was true the bombing was not-in line
with what you just said-sufficient to strangle
their supply system. In other words, their
capability of supplying so far exceeds the
actual need for the present operation that
they would probably have that much if we
had kept up bombing. Am I recalling it ap-
proximately correct?
General WHEELER. I think Mr. McNamara
said the greater part of the statement you
made, Mr. WHITTEN.
Mr. WHITTEN. I am asking this to clarify it
if my recollection is not correct.
General WHEELER. (Off the record.)
Mr. WHITTEN. Is the chief value of bomb-
ing to prevent an enlargment of the Vietcong
operation as of now?
General WHEELER. (Off the record.)
Mr. WHITTEN. I am not trying to play on
words but if I could reduce it to this it
Is very important to keep them from supply-
ing a much larger force.
General WHEELER. That is my judgment,
Mr. Whitten.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 Approved For CONGRESSIONAL ~tE~OKll 67%8 0004000400 alch 15, 1966
5562
ABILITY TO PROTECT LOCAL POPULATIONS GOVERNMENT DESIRED BY PEOPLE OF VIETNAM
Mr, WHITTEN. On Wednesday, I believe it Mr. WHITTEN. Carrying that one step fur-
was stated that we had received some benefit ther, now, I keep hearing that our purpose
from the bombing in that the North Viet- in Vietnam is to allow-and I believe I
namese had become convinced that they were quote correctly-allow people to seek their
not safe. own destiny. The testimony uncontroverted
In other words, that the North Vietnamese insofar as I recall is that Vietnam has a series
Government could not protect them from air of villages . We have been told that
attacks. At that time, I could not help but the people in a village: do not know of any-
have the thought that the South Vietnamese, thething, ususually, except their village and They
that this time, should be equally convinced never have subjected themselves to a cen-
th
Yesw st terday's cannot protect
Washington them. Post-and I am teal government, do not know what it is, and
r it over do not want one.
b
I
e
remem
quoting the testimony as
a series of years--carried a story by Jack Now, when we insist that they subject
Foists of the Los Angeles Times-and I would themselves to a central government, how can
have to say that this story reflects the im- you say that is permitting people to seek
pression I have gotten from witnesses on their own destiny?
your ~ side of the table, and I read it here: Secretary McNAMARA. Mr. Whitten, a very
"SAIGON, January 26.-A U.S. spokesman substantial percentage of the people do not
today described the terrorism and sabotage live in villages. I would guess that at least
that goes on In South Vietnam every night. 15 percent live in large metropolitan areas,
He emphasized the havoc the VC inflict on perhaps more than that.
innocent villagers in the belief that they are Mr. WHITTEN. I will limitmy question to
pro-Government. But in most areas the vil- the other 85 percent.
lagers would stay neutral if they could. The Secretary McNAMARA. I would say at least
spokesman also wanted to show what dam- 15 percent. It maywell be more.
age has been done by the Vietcong to com- Second, I do not think it accurately reflects
munications that keep the Government-held the situation in Vietnam to say that the peo-
areas in touch with one another. ple, generally, do not know of anything other
.The spokesman in doing this also revealed than the affairs of their own village plus the
the Vietnamese-American inability, despite affairs of the adjacent village.
the substantial U.S. buildup that began 10 Mr. WHITTEN. I may have oversimplified
months ago, to improve the situation in the my words.
countryside for the uncommitted peasant. Secretary McNAMAR.A. I: am sure that is not
Reading from a summary of reports by the situation there.
American field representatives, the spokes- Mr. WHITTEN. I do not want to change the
man estimated that no more than 10 per- meaning of witnesses who are supposed to
cent of the entire Vietnam railroad system be equally well informed.
is operative because of guerrilla cuts in the Secretary McNAMARA. I do not know which
line. If true, this is worse than the previous witnesses you are speaking of, but I would
low point of last July, when it was officially be happy to review their testimony. Based
reported only 30 percent was so protected." on my own knowledge of the situation that
Is that approximately correct? is not an accurate assessment of the breadth
of concern and awareness of the people in the
General WHEELER. Mr. WHITTEN, that anti- countryside. I have visited literally hun-
cle is a series of generalized statements dreds of villages there, and I can testify from
drown from (off the record). personal experience that some of the people
- Mr. WHITTEN. General, that is all right. In the villages, at least those that I have
I do not mean to appear to be abrupt. We talked to, are informed of and aware of af-
have been briefed at the White House. We fairs far beyond the limits of their villages.
are of the kind of
th
d
ey are aw
In particular,
have been on this committee listening an
we have had details. I have yet to hear an environment in which they would live that had beenpreventedor hindered by lack
witnesses say that there is any place where were North Vietnam to come to dominate of supplies.
people are perfectly safe. It may be that you their area, and they do not wish to live in It was stated, however, that the level of
are willing to so state. I am asking these that kind of environment. We have other supplies in some areas or in some fields was
questions after listening to a lot of people evidence to support that conclusion, not the dropping significantly because of the heavy
and I have yet to hear anyone say that there least of which is the movement of people consumption of supplies and the difficulty
Is any place there where we are safe from the out of these villages when the Vietcong come of resupplying.
guerrilla warfare or from bombs or anything into the area. Has that situation been reversed?
else. Are you willing to say it? There are hundreds of thousands of refu- General WHEELER. I would not say it is
General WHEELER. I am not saying that, gees who have left Vietcong-controlled areas reversed yet, Mr. SIRES. I know that with
sir. because they do not wish to live under that the improvements that we have obtained
But what I am saying is that this article kind of control. over the last couple of months in unloadi}Yg
is an overstatement, a generalization of Mr. WHrrTErr. I think it well to say right and in port clearance and so on, the situa-
things that can happen anywhere, the same here that the specific witness I was quoting tion is being corrected and we should get up
thing that can happen in Washington, D.C. was- to a very satisfactory operational level of
When you go out here at night to get into I want to say again I am speaking from backup in the very near future. In fact,
your car, you can get mugged. But generally recollection. I would not want to tie pre- I am thinking in terms now of March for
speaking, Washington, I believe, is a rea- ceding witnesses to the impression or the some items and probably June for others.
sonably safe area. understanding I have, but that is where my MILITARY BASE CLOSINGS
Mr. WHITTEN. Lots of folks in my area understanding came from. I also would like
kind of draw an analogy between Washing- to say to you, as secretary of Defense, I Mr. WHITTEN. We have been going to great
am somewhat doubt that you saw too many villages in limits to let the world know that if the Viet-
cong do not make peace we are prepared to go
ton and Vietnam though I person.
surprised at your drawing the same one. Secretary MCNAMARA. On the contrary, I all out for whatever is required to get them
USE OF HUMAN TRANSPORT have seen a large number of villagers. I visit- to the peace table. I listened to Secretary
There is no need of pursuing that further. ed Vietnam six times in the last 5 years, and Rusk Sunday afternoon. I have listened
I was trying to get this quite clear. It is I have visited the countryside widely. I do here. Since it is very apparent that we are
my understanding that this supply line not pretend to be an expert on Vietnamese putting on a show of force and a threat of
which we were talking about to the north affairs, but I do say that based on my per- force and a willingness to use it, is there any
is something like a thousand miles long. sonal knowledge it would not be correct to concern that when you announced a cutback
Of course, one man could not carry 50 state that the typical villager's knowledge of of military bases, that it had any bad effect
pounds a thousand miles. How many points his national government or its programs is upon our image in the world?
of exchange would there be if the supply negligible or that his knowledge is limited At that time there were many people, In-
lines are so much as a thousand miles long, to the affairs of his own and nearby villages. eluding me, who, whatever the merits and
or do we know? ADEQUACY OF BOMB INVENTORIES however it might have been done, wondered
General WHEELER. We have a feel of it, Mr. WHITTEN. I probably should have pref- if to announce this curtailment to the world
let me say that. aced what I said by saying that I just want would indicate that we were weakening.
(Discussion off the record.) to understand this. Did you see any sign of that result?
I am trying to find out where we are and
where we are going, and I think the Ameri-
can people are, too. I have the utmost sym-
pathy for you folks because it is your prime
job. Is there any credence to the claim that
we stopped this bombing because we were
short of bombs?
Secretary McNAMARA. Absolutely none. I
will give you the bomb inventories.
(The Information requested is classified
and was furnished to the committee.)
SUPPLY SHORTAGES
Mr. WHITTEN. Or other supplies?
Secretary MCNAMARA. Absolutely none.
General WHEELER. May I add something
to that?
Mr. WHITTEN. I asked the question so you
can get the answer in the record.
Secretary MCNAMARA. I appreciate that.
General WHEELER. I would like to make
a comment, if I might, because,I think it is
pertinent. -
I spent 5 days during the Christmas sea-
son visiting Vietnam. I visited Army, Navy,
Air Force, and Marine units both in Vietnam
and in Thailand, and I also visited one of the
carriers, staying overnight.
I asked every responsible commander that
I saw-and I saw a great many of them
down to battalion level-if their operations
had been hampered by shortages or defici-
encies in consumables. I am talking about
ammunition, POL, et cetera. The answer
invariably was no, that they had been able
to carry out their combat operations.
Secretary MCNAMARA. May I make a fur-
ther comment, Mr. WHITTEN, in order to
throw light on this subject? I Issued an
order to the commanders . So every
bomb that we would have consumed had we
continued to bomb North Vietnam has been
consumed. It is our estimate or it was our
plan, I should say, that during the month
of January we would drop 150,000 bombs
That plan was not limited in the slightest
degree by bomb shortages.
Mr. SIKES. May I ask one very brief ques-
tion? I asked the same question of many
field commanders and in each instance I was
told that there was no essential operation
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 March 15, 196,,~pproved Fot itIFSkele P67, 4 R000400040012-1
Secretary MCNAMARA. Mr. WHITTEN, I have
seen no evidence of such a feeling on the part
of any foreign power or in the foreign press.
Mr. WHITTEN. I do not want to cut you off
but let me ask you one thing that you might
reply to. Is that possibly one of the reasons
that they have refused to take advantage of
our lull in bombing and come to the peace
table. Could that be one of the reasons?
Secretary MCNAMARA. No sir, it could not
be one of the reasons.
Mr. WHITTEN. Why do you say it so flatly?
Secretary MCNAMARA. Because we do have
indications of the kinds of information get-
ting through to them and the kind of infor-
mation that influences their actions. I have
seen no evidence that the elimination of sur-
plus and obsolete military bases-at a time
when we are rapidly expanding our budget
by announcing a supplemental of $12.3 bil-
lion to the existing budget-has, in any way
influenced them.
Mr. WHITTEN. Couldn't they take it that
we are now waking up and rectifying a
mistake?
Secretary MCNAMARA, Are you speaking
about the base reduction program as rectify-
ing a mistake?
Mr. WHITTEN. And planes, et cetera.
Secretary MCNAMARA. I do not see how it
would be possible for them to interpret clos-
ing obsolete bases as rectifying a mistake.
In any event, I can tell you, Mr. WHITTEN,
that no expert that I have talked to has ever
even raised this point much less put any
weight on it. As a matter of fact, I had one
brought over here from London just last
week to discuss with me the reaction of the
North Vietnamese.
PREVIOUS JUDGEMENTS ON VIETNAM
Mr. WHITTEN. Let me ask two or three
questions and then I shall pass the witness
on, Mr. Chairman. Last spring we saw no
need for this supplemental. I have in front
of me your prior statements, Mr. Secretary.
I would not want to read them to you. I
would not want mine read to me. I know
they were sincere and honest and based on
the best information you had. This has not
worked out like you folks hoped it would
and we had hoped it would. Where have we
miscalculated, in your opinion?
Secretary MCNAMARA. There is an indirect
reference, and I know you were very gentle
even in the indirect reference. With respect
to my prior statements-
Mr. WHITTEN. Let me say this, that this
committee has backed your judgment so we
are in it, too. I am just asking now with
hindsight, where can you point your finger
and figure that we miscalculated as a group,
not just you?
Secretary MCNAMARA. Mr. Chairman, be-
cause of the reference to prior statements
and in anticipation of such a reference, I
went through my prior statements a few
weeks ago, and I have extracted all the per-
tinent parts relating-
Mr. WHITTEN. That is all right. Where
would you say we miscalculated? That is
my question. Don't get away from my ques-
tion.
Secretary MCNAMARA. I will come to the
question. But the question carries an im-
plied reference to prior statements, Mr.
Chairman. Therefore, I would ask the per-
mission of the committee to introduce into
the record my previous statements on the
war in Vietnam. There are 59 of them.
Mr. WHITTEN. I have no objection to that.
Mr. MAI ON. Yes. They will be included at
this point.
(NOTE.-This information appears in vol.
I, pp. 57 to 87 of the hearings.)
Mr. WHITTEN. I am making no condemna-
tion for prior opinion.
Secretary MCNAMARA. I understand. I ap-
preciate that your reference was gentle. Mr.
Chairman, the question was, Where was it
that we miscalculated?
Mr. WHITTEN. In your opinion.
Secretary MCNAMARA. I do not know if you
should call it a miscalculation. I think it is
perfectly clear that the North Vietnamese
have continued to increase their support of
the Vietcong despite the increase in our effort
and that of the South Vietnamese. I say
that I do not know whether or not this was
a miscalculation. If you go through these
statements that I have just inserted in the
record, or the statements of President Ken-
nedy or those of President Johnson, you will
find that they repeatedly refer to this point,
namely, that the response required from us
will depend to a considerable degree upon the
action taken by the aggressor, in this case,
the North Vietnamese. We simply cannot
predict their actions accurately. We cannot,
therefore, predict the amount of force that
we will have to bring to bear in order to
achieve our political objective. What has
happened is that the North Vietnamese have
continually increased the amount of re-
sources, men, and material that they have
been willing to devote to their objective of
subverting and destroying the political insti-
tutions of South Vietnam. Whether or not
you describe the evolution of the situation in
Vietnam as a miscalculation, I think is a
question of semantics.
Mr. WHITTEN. It has not turned out like we
thought it would. That is a homely way of
putting it, but it has not turned out like
we thought it would. Where were we wrong
in our thinking? That is bringing it down
to a level where we all can understand it.
Secretary MCNAMARA. I think it was hoped
that the South Vietnamese by their own
efforts could contain the insurgency that the
North Vietnamese has initiated inside South
Vietnam. Later, when it became very clear
they couldn't, it became necessary for us to
supply advisers and substantial amounts of
equipment to improve their capability for
containing the insurgency. Even with this
assistance they couldn't contain the Viet-
cong, because the North Vietnamese were
continuing to expand their program of send-
ing men and material into the south.
Mr. WHITTEN. Let me ask one other ques-
tion.
(Off the record).
Secretary MCNAMARA, Let me go back be-
cause I did not finish-
Mr. WHITTEN. What is the plan for
winning?
Secretary MCNAMARA. Let me go back to
the previous question because I did not
finish my statement with respect to the
changes that have occurred during the past
several years which in turn, affected the
amount of effort that we have had to put into
the struggle.
Mr. WHITTEN. Don't let us forget my ques-
tion.
Secretary MCNAMARA. I won't. I want to
answer one question at a time, however.
I think that one event that significantly
influenced the course of the conflict was the
overthrow of Diem which was the result of
many forces, most of them not within our
control. But the Diem overthrow, as much
as anything else, affected the course of the
conflict in the following year or two.
This factor, plus the continuing increase
in the amount of effort that North Vietnam
applied to their objective caused a Continu-
ing increase in the amount of force which we
have had to apply in South Vietnam.
Now your second question, How do we hope
to win?
Mr. WHITTEN. How do we plan to win?
Secretary MCNAMARA. I am answering the
question as it was phrased.
PLAN FOR WINNING THE WAR
Mr. WHITTEN. Let me change my question,
What is our plan to win?
. Secretary MCNAMARA. All right, what is
our plan to win? We plan with the help of
the South Vietnamese to apply sufficient
force against the Vietcong and the North
Vietnamese military units in the south to
5563
prove to them that they cannot win in the
south. While doing so, we have applied
bombing to the north to increase the cost
of their operations in the south and to re-
duce their capability for expanding their
operations in the south.
Mr. WIzrrrEN. Have we not already tried
that and failed, Mr. Secretary?.
Secretary MCNAMARA, No. We have not
failed, we have not lost.
ECONOMIC COST OF THE WAR
Mr. WHITTEN. We have not lost, but we
certainly have not won. I think you are do-
ing as well as you can with what you have
to do in the situation we are in, so I am not
being critical-I have yet to find anybody
who has a plan to win. We cannot do it by
bombing these targets in North Vietnam, I
do not know what the relative cost of the
war per day in money is to us as compared
to them. I do know their standard of liv-
ing. They carry supplies on their backs.
Human beings are almost unlimited in that
area of the world. I know it is way around
the world from us. Let me interrupt to ask,
Have you any comparative dollar cost?
Secretary MCNAMARA. No.
Mr. WHITTEN. You do not figure war in
money, but I am talking about the drain on
your economy. Could you give us any kind
of comparison as to the relative per day cost
to the United States as compared with them?
Secretary MCNAMARA. There is no possible
means of developing that financially.
Mr. WHITTEN. It would be tremendously
greater, would it not?
Secretary MCNAMARA. The cost in economic
terms is far greater to them than it is to us.
One simple indication is that the intelli-
gence estimators conclude that they have
diverted from thousand men from
other pursuits to rebuild the roads and the
bridges which our bombing has destroyed.
And that particular diversion of the work
force is but a minor part of their cost of
carrying on their operations against the
south. Out of a society that has a total
adult male population of perhaps 4 or 5
million, that is a tremendous drain for just
one part of their war activity. So there is
no question but what the relative economic
cost to them is far greater than it is to us.
PLAN FOR WINNING THE WAR
General WHEELER. May I answer your
question about what is our plan? You said
you do not know of a plan.
Mr. WHITTEN. I would be glad to have you
do so.
General WHEELER. Before I do, though, I
Would like to put in one remark that is
perhaps not completely germane to this.
(Off the record.)
Mr. WHITTEN. The closing of bases and
cutting back of the military.
General WHEELER. No, sir.
That is my point. Now let me go to the
other one if I might. We have actually had
in South Vietnam substantial numbers of
U.S. and free world combat forces for about
6 months. You should recognize that even
then the weight of effort has been available
only within about the last 2 months.
The Republic of Korea division, for exam-
ple, was only available to General Westmore-
land in a combat configuration late in the
month of November. General Westmoreland
has achieved to date, precisely what we esti-
mated he would have achieved with these
accruals of force; namely, he has reversed
an adverse trend of military events. While
he has not yet achieved a momentum which
will give him "victory," he actually has just
begun his campaign. His concept, which is,
I believe, a sound concept and one to which
I subscribe, is this-
Mr. MAHON. You mean the South Viet-
namese?
General WHEELER. Yes, sir. (Off the rec-
ord.) It is not going to be a quick process,
but it has been successful to date.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67B00446R600400040012-1
 5564
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67BOO446R00040004001
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE arch 15, 1966
Mr. WHITTEN. You use the word "win" the their actions that they are carrying out that
war, and it Is natural. What do you mean pledge. The actions that we would like to
by "win" the war? see are: the withdrawal of their military
General WHEELER. I mean, sir, the political units from South Vietnam and the cessation
objective set for us by the President; namely, of their direction and support of the Viet-
a free and independent Vietnam which can cong and the guerrillas who are attempting
pursue its own destiny unhampered and un- to subvert the political Institutions in the
pressured by outside forces, has been met. south.
EVENTS WHICH WOULD FOLLOW PEACE INDICATIONS OF NORTH VIETNAMESE STOPPING
AGREEMENT AGGRESSION
Mr. WRITTEN. This is the last question, Mr. WHITTEN. At this stage, having had
Mr. Chairman. As you can imagine I could your experience and having at least been
go on all day and we all could. What if thwarted in our high hopes-if you do not
tomorrow Hanoi and the North Vietnamese like the word "miscalculate"-what evidence
Government would say that we will agree is there in the actions of the Vietcong,
that the South Vietnamese may go their own Hanoi, or the North 'Vietnamese Government,
way and follow their destiny, whether it is in that leads you to have any hopes that they
a local village or in a central government; we will change their attitude?
will agree that each village that does not Secretary MCNAMARA. We see signs of dis-
want to be subjected to any central govern- sension among the political leaders of the
went be like it wants to be? If they send north. We see signs of strain on their econ-
us that message through channels and it omy. We know that they see the buildup as
reached you and it reached the White House, General Wheeler mentioned a moment ago,
what would we do? Of our capability to inflict even higher levels
Secretary MCNAMARA. I am not clear what of casualties on the Vietcong and the North
you said about each village. Vietnamese. I think it is a reasonable con-
Mr. WHITTEN. I said if they agree. clusion that at some point theserising casu-
Secretary MCNAMARA. Pardon me? alties, and these higher costs, and these in-
Mr. WHITTEN. You said you did not under- creasing strains are going to become so great
stand. I want to make it clear, Mr. Secre- that they will conclude that they cannot win
tary. If they agreed that they would do in the south. When they reach this con-
what we claim we want them to do. elusion, they will be unwilling to continue to
Secretary MCNAMARA. That is not the way bear the costs of a program that cannot
it was phrased. achieve their objectives.
Mr. WHITTEN. I will change it because I Mr. WHITTEN. I keep wanting to end my
am not playing on words. This situation is questions because I tun taking too much
serious and I think the American people are time. You say they cannot win and you say
like me, I do not think they believe that we we can win because we have not lost.
have a plan to win.
Secretary MCNAMARA. Let me say this: If THE BUDGET-NOT THE MAJOR CONCERN
tomorrow, North Vietnam says they will agree So far as arguments about budgets are
to do what we want- concerned, I served in my State legisla-
Mr. WHITTEN. What will we do? ture when I was 21. I learned then that
Secretary MCNAMARA, Then, we would plan a budget represents the highest hopes of
to withdraw our forces from South Vietnam the administration for income from
as soon as the North Vietnamese demon- taxes and the greatest expectation for
strated that they were sincere and had a real
plan of action for the withdrawal of their holding down expenditures; and the
subversive forces and would allow the South other side never accepts such estimates
Vietnamese Government to develop, unham- and is usually right. I have not seen any
pered, stable political institutions in areas difference here in Congress, either under
.now controlled by the Vietcong. As soon as the Democratic Party or the Republican
it was evident that the North Vietnamese Party. It works the same as State ad-
were carrying out such a pledge, we would ministrations.
withdraw our forces and allow the Govern-
ment of South Vietnam to work with Its This argument has very little to do
people as any other government does. with this bill before us now, where we
-Mr. WHITTEN. Pending that time we would are in trouble up to the ears and where
insist keeping our people there to enforce it. we are going to have to take firm steps
Secretary MCNAMARA. To enforce what? to back the men in the service. This
Mr. WHITTEN. To enforce the carrying out money will be gone when we appropriate
of the agreement.
Secretary MCNAMARA. We would stay only it, but it will be used for an absolutely
.to protect the Government and the people of essential and necessary purpose.
South Vietnam against a violation of the Mr. BOW. Mr. Chairman, I yield 10
agreement. minutes to the gentleman from Ohio
Mr. WHITTEN. At this stage, and this is my [Mr. MINSHALL]. -
last question: Haven't they convinced you Mr. MINSHAhL. Mr. Chairman, I
that there will never be any agreement as
long as a part of it is that you insist that you rise to support the supplemental appro-
keep your people there to enforce such priation of $13.1 billion to back up our
agreement? commitment of men and material in
Secretary MCNAMARA. No; I do not think South Vietnam.
Secretary MCNAMARA. In the first place we
do not insist that we keep Our forces there,
as you put it. The enforcement of an agree-
ment is not part of our proposal, nor have we
ever made any public statement to that
effect.
Mr. WRITTEN. I thought you told me that
is what you would do.
Secretary MCNAMARA. No, I simply said-
Mr. WHITTEN. Mr. McNamara, what would
we do then?
Secretary MCNAMARA. I said that if tomor-
row the North Vietnamese pledge that they
will do what we want them to do, we will
withdraw our forces as we see evidence In
panying the report on the bill before us.
The debate thus far has not given these
views the attention they deserve.
In these additional views Congress-
men LIPSCOMB and LAIRD and I point out
the diminishing effectiveness of the ap-
propriations system under the heavy-
handed practices of the Department of
Defense. -
Within the last few years we have
grown increasingly concerned as the De-
fense Subcommittee and the Congress
are relegated more and more to the role
of rubberstamp in approving the dic-
tates of the Department of Defense.
The appearances of the Secretary of
Defense, the Secretaries of the Army,
Navy, and Air Force, the Joint Chiefs of
Staff and their backup witnesses, grow
more perfunctory each year. The abuse
of the "top secret" stamp to blank out
politically sensitive portions of their
testimony before the subcommittee is
evermore in evidence. It has reached
the point-where witnesses have in effect
withheld their own views from the com-
mittee unless pressed, and, when pressed,
argue against their own position if it is
contrary to top level Department of De-
fense policy.
We three minority members of the
subcommittee feel that a blackout on
much essential information was reached
some time ago as far as the American
public is concerned. It is approaching
a critical point as far as the Defense
Subcommittee is involved.
I call to the attention of the House that
there were only 2 days of hearings on
the bill we will pass today.
It is our strong conviction that insuffi-
cient attention was paid tomaintaining
sufficient forces to meet U.S. commit-
ments in portions of the world other than
Vietnam. We are convinced that de-
fense needs have been underestimated
in the 1967 budget now under considera-
tion, just as they were underestimated
last year, and that there will be supple-
mental requests later this year similar
to the one before us this afternoon.
For those of you who have not had an
opportunity to carefully read the addi-
tional views in the report, let me quote
from the summary:
The growing frequency of reprograming
actions Is of particular concern because it
represents, in effect, a bypassing of Congress
on matters that are often of critical concern.
The financing of the war by supplemental
demonstrates a growing lack of planning
which could, if not altered, produce serious
risks for the future security of the United
States, and, indeed of the free world.
The growing tendency on the part of com-
mittees of Congress to consider grave mat-
ters in perpetual haste can only insure a con-
tinued and rapidly increasing loss of control
by the Congress over executive decisions and
that these funds would be required. I This committee has a vital role to play
strongly urge unanimous and anticipate in insuring an adequate defense posture for
quick approval by the House. Nearly the United States. That role cannot be dis-
300,000 of our American troops in the charged without full cooperation from the
Far East are looking to us for prompt executive branch.
support of their efforts to defeat Com- Nor will it be discharged properly and
munist aggression. effectively until the Congress and its com-
But, as a member of the Department mittees reassert their traditional powers.
of Defense Appropriations Subcommit- I strongly subscribe to these senti-
tee which took initial action on this sup- ments.
plemental request, I would be remiss if Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield
I did not call the attention of my col- to the gentleman from California [Mr.
leagues to the additional views accom- CORMAN] such time as he may consume. -
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 March 15, 19 66 Approved FR /~~MBDPgy@ 6R000400040012-1 5565
~~~~~~/ ~
Mr. CORMAN. Mr. Chairman, I rise In pursuance of that policy, massive Then there is the question of the con-
In duct of t appropat of the supplemental defense n tions fromrCommunistconquess bWe blockade, qe war. uarantine, the bombing of
appropriation for 1966.
opportunity followed the same policy successfully in various targets. I am not a military
Last November I had an a
to visit Marine units in Vietnam. Much Lebanon. Soviet Russia eventually satis- strategist, but I do believe that the air
than has
of my time was spent with the 3d Marine fied itself that we would not permit fur- and sea power of the United States could ployed Division, S, the same division I served with ther expansion in beennthe mtoore
i we can
in the Second World War: East and turned its attentions elsewhere.
Unfounded reports have been circu- The war in Korea was part of the same and should bring this conflict to a speedy
lated concerning the adequacy of sup- pattern. Our resistance halted Commu- conclusion. Moreover, I believe that
plies for our troops. I found that our nist expansion in that part of Asia. The great improvements can be made in the
servicemen were well equipped with every Chinese have shown an appreciation of support of our troops. We can and
necessary item for the conduct of their our firm intentions and our power with must make certain that they have every-
operations. In fact, they are better respect to Formosa, and have refrained thing that is required for the success of
equipped than we were in World War II. from attacking in that area even though their mission and for their personal
The fact remains that the Marines are it must be the prize they desire above all safety and comfort insofar as either can
responsible for the pacification and se- others. Now we are resisting the effort be provided under the conditions of war.
curity of vast land areas in the vicinity to expand into southeast Asia. Many We have suffered many casualties in
of Da Nang, Chu Lai, and Hue Phu Bel. people fear that we risk war with China South Vietnam. This heart-rending loss
Their objectives cannot be achieved or that we are on a course that will lead can be justified only if we achieve the
without more men and support. inevitably to such a war. In my opinion, objectives we have set. If aggression
The funds we are asked to approve the lessons of history show that war with is rewarded in Vietnam the same tactic
today will serve a vital function in sup- China would be far more likely if we will be tried elsewhere and the cost of
plying more men, supplies and construc- permit them to succeed in their aggres- overcoming it may be far greater than
tion in Vietnam. In addition, this ap- sion in Vietnam. If we stand firm in the price we are paying today. Nations
.propriation will speed the activation of Vietnam, history leads me to believe that that seek peace at any price usually find
the 5th Marine Division at Camp Pen- the Chinese in Asia, like the Russians in the price is a downpayment on a bigger
dleton, Calif. This division, in turn, con- Europe, may turn from unrewarding ag- war.
stitutes an essential support for our gression to more peaceful endeavors. i believe it is necessary that we pass
Vietnamese efforts. Recent discussion has centered about this supplemental today. I would hope
American and allied personnel in Viet- two questions. The first is: Who should that it would pass unanimously so that
nam deserve our strongest backing. The participate in a peace conference? The we can demonstrate to the world the
supplemental defense appropriation is second is: What should be the govern- solidarity of the representatives of the
required if the United States is to main- ment of South Vietnam during and after people in the conflict in which we are
tain our firm policy in resisting Corn- a conference? Related to these ques- now engaged.
munist aggression. That firm policy is tions are various suggestions to submit There will be other supplementals in
our best hope of achieving a negotiated the whole problem to the U.N. or to pro- the near future, not involving Vietnam,
settlement. pose arbitration by the countries who support as I am support-
Marine specific appropriations for the participated in the Geneva conferences. which ing this will one. not And it teems am m that
Marine Corps are: $184,600,000 for per- In my opinion, these are artificial and tngs h a pAnd time to add a word
sonnel, $102,600,000 for operation and academic questions. this is as proper the terrific burden we are
maintenance and $516,600,000 for pro- The United States has made clear, time caution as the shoulders of. The in-
to say that our Appropriations Commit- conference. We are ready to negotiate. terest on our national debt is costing
tee has recommended the full amount We have asked the U.N. to help. We us almost $25,000 every minute.
requested by the Department of Defense. have said that there will be no difficulty We cannot continue to build this great
CORMAN asked and was given resented at a peace conference. This is public debt and avoid inflation, which
permission to revise and extend his re- not an insurmountable problem. is not just threatening us, but which is
marks.) The insurmountable problem is the actually here. It would seem to me
self Ms. such BOWtime . as I may cons may cons I ume. yield my- fact that North Vietnam will not agree to that two courses lie ahead. Either we
(Mr. BOW W asked and was given per- a peace conference. It will not agree cut down this excessive spending in
many of the Great Society areas or we
Mission to revise and extend his re- to arbitration. It will not agree to a may of the increase taxes. I shall not
marks.) U.N. settlement of the dispute. North substantially spell out specific items time Mr. BOW. Mr. Chairman, many peo- Vietnam has said repeatedly that it will at ththis if not spell o eliminated tems
pie ask why we are in South Vietnam. would recognize the Vietcong as the solwe whi e future consideration, should be delayed
outh we agreed to fish help representative of South Vietnam and if at this period when we are engaged in
the are people there o because
Viet-
the pn wof South Vietnam m establish we will withdraw our troops. These are a conflict such as the one in South Viet-
until l North doingh conditions that North Vietnam insist nam. It is not difficult for my colleagues
with new
remaxrnation. kable kable This they h progress were
with to know the areas where these cuts can
Vietnam, in violation of the Geneva ac- upon before any conference, arbitration to made.
National organized, ion armed, and directed Front-Vietcong- other discussion can begin.
North Vietnam ithe un- It would also seem to me, Mr. Chair-
come when a
in a al Liberation r V
and aggress
ion campaign of terror a a thhe apeople io of and its allies including the United States. careful review eshtime ould be made as to the
naWe communism
are a t people
It is fruitless for us to have a domestic extent of our commitments in Europe
helping go South h
South Vietnam. o impose
Vietnam to resist that aggression. It is argument over this issue. Our Govern- and careful consideration should be
fruitless to debate now whether or not ment has explored and continued to ex- given to the withdrawal from Europe of
we should have undertaken this course. plore every possible avenue for settling many of our troops. If President de
We did so. If we fail to honor our pres- the conflict. North Vietnam is not will- Gaulle seems so confident that NATO is
ent commitments, we will encourage sim- ing? no longer necessary, then it would seem
liar Communist aggression elsewhere. The second question, What shall be to me that it is time that we bring many
Vietnam is the latest of many efforts the government of South Vietnam during of our forces and their dependents now
by the Communist nations to expand and after a conference? is the central living abroad home. This not only would
their territory, and it must be viewed in issue of the conflict. South Vietnam is reduce these great expenditures, but
its proper historical perspective. a nation recognized by 70 other nations would also help solve our balance-of-
In 1947 President Truman enunciated of the world. We cannot and do not payments problem.
the Truman doctrine as follows: wish to impose a government on this na- We cannot and should not continue
I believe that it must be the policy of the tion and we are fighting to prevent the down the road we have been traveling
United States to support free peoples who Communists from doing so. We have these many months and years, but we
are resisting attempted subjugation by said that we will abide by the results of fiscal again responsibility embark if upon
ara e rotra dof
armed minorities, or by outside pressure. a free election.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 Approved For Re /09 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
5566 M~( SI6 2NAL RECORD - HOUSE March 15, 1966
stroy at home that which we are fighting have been. But be that as it may, with in the picture that it would be almost im-
to preserve in southeast Asia. the problems getting more and more possible for anyone to prognosticate what
Now, Mr. Chairman, I yield 5 minutes critical in Vietnam and elsewhere, it is is going to happen 6 months, a year, or
to the gentleman from Michigan [Mr. my strong belief that the Commander in 2 years from now In that part of the
GERALD R. FORD], our distinguished mi- Chief should to the maximum degree fol- world.
nority leader. low the recommendations of the Joint I think the gentleman would agree
(Mr. GERALD R. FORD asked and Chiefs under the leadership of our able with me that it would be the part of
was given permission to revise and ex- Chairman of the Joint Chiefs, General wisdom to base estimates of needed ex-
tend his remarks.) Wheeler. penditures on facts that are known, or
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Chair- Mr. Chairman, it seems at the present reasonably known and reasonably pro-
man, at the outset I would like to com- that our Nation is following a course of jected, rather than simply upon un-
pliment the Committee on Appropria- action of strength against Communist reviewed future possible requirements
tions and its various subcommittees that aggression in southeast Asia. It appears that are-not within the reasonable knowl-
have had jurisdiction over the consid- to me our Nation is meeting the chal- edge of those who are making the esti-
eration of this bill. lenge of communism in South Vietnam. mates. I am sure the gentleman does not
Mr. Chairman, I believe that the full This legislation we have before us today want the Congress to make available for
committee and the subcommittee have will give substance to the ability of our military spending huge and unreviewed
done a first-class job in responding to troops and our military leaders to meet sums of money.
the request of the executive branch of this challenge. The gentleman will recall that during
the Government. Also I wish to com- Mr. Chairman, the approval of this the Korean war defense appropriations
pliment those three Members of the mi- legislation today will back up the policy, increased $35 billion in 1 year, durable
nority who did write excellent minority the posture, and the position that I goods manufacturing industries' volume
views setting forth the minority's view- think our Government is taking in Viet- of unfilled orders increased by $34 bil-
point on certan aspects of defense policy nam today. It may not be enough and lion in 1 year, and wholesale prices sky-
and the carrying out of the programs there may be more required in the rocketed by 11.4 percent between 1950
thereunder. months ahead. But this is a tangible and 1951.
Mr. Chairman, I believe the record is way for every one of us to indicate our Mr. GERALD R. FORD. In response
clear that the Department of Defense in support for what appears to be our Na- to the observations of my good friend,
the past year has been uncertain as to tion's policy at the moment. the able majority leader, I do not believe
what its, needs were. This uncertainty It is crystal clear to me that anyone that we can compare the circumstances
has resulted in their underestimating who votes for this legislation is endors- of June 1950 with the circumstances of
the expenditures which have developed Ing the policy currently being executed the last 6 or 12 months. In 1950, as I
in the prosecution of the conflict in by the Commander in Chief. recall, we had had submitted to us a
Vietnam. Let me add this postscript. When military budget for $13 billion, and all of
This underestimating of expenditures, the roll is called today-and I trust there a sudden, in late June of 1950, we were
Mr. Chairman, has to a substantial de- will be a unanimous vote for this legis- faced with a very grave and critical mili-
gree created some of our economic prob- lation-I do hope there will not be quali- tary situation in Korea. Almost over
leans which we are facing domestically fying statements made outside of the night the Congress, as I recall, went from
today. The uncertainty as to the course Chamber. I hope there will not be peti- the budget that had been submitted by
of the war and our policy and the under- tions signed which would, in effect, with- the Secretary of Defense, Mr. Johnson,
estimation of expenditures by the De- draw the kind of support that an "aye" of $13 billion, to a military budget of
fense Department has created to a very vote gives to the position, the posture, $70 to $80 billion.
significant degree the inflationary pres- and the policy that I think our Nation Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Chairman, will
sures which we face in the United States has and ought to have in this crisis. the gentleman yield further?
at the present time. I think the President, if he is to follow Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I yield.
I believe that the Department of De- this course of action, must have our sup- Mr. ALBERT. I agree with what the
fense could have done a better job in the port in its execution, in its Imple- gentleman is saying. The circum-
last 12 months in forecasting what their mentation, and in the funding require- stances are certainly different. But the
expenditures would be. It is my hope ments to carry out that policy. effects of overfunding and overappro-
that their forecast of expenditures for People cannot vote "aye" today and priating are not different; and that is
the next 12 months are more accurate. then issue a statement tomorrow with- the point I am trying to make. Requests
If these estimates are not more accurate, drawing support. An "aye" vote means for appropriations should be based on
we will be faced with an even more.seri- just one thing-that the elected Com- careful consideration of needs and re-
ous inflationary problem than we have on mander in Chief of our country, whether sources. Appropriations should be re-
our doorstep at the present time. we voted for him or not, will have $13 quested when needs are known and not
Mr. Chairman, this' country has had billion to use for the purpose of support- when we do not know how much might
during my time here in the Congress Ing a position of firmness against Com- be needed. It is not the part of wisdom
outstanding men on the Joint Chiefs of munist aggression. to overappropriate and to permit exces-
Staff. It has been my privilege over the If more is needed, this House and the sive funding.
years to know many of them intimately. other Chamber will make it available. Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Let me re-
I was annually privileged from 1953 Mr. Chairman, I trust that the vote spond and then I will yield to my friend
through 1964 to hear the testimony of today will be unanimous. from Wisconsin. It does not seem to me
the able members of the Joint Chiefs Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Chairman, will the that the Congress, in light of the fact
for a period of 12 years. I think this gentleman yield? that we have had three supplemental
country is blessed that men of their Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I yield to the bills, and in light of the probability that
caliber and their experience are giving the distinguished majority leader. we are going to have another supple-
us the kind of military advice and leader- Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Chairman, of mental in the next month or so, has
ship that is so essential in the crisis we course, with most of what the 'distin- overappropriated. It hardly seems fair
face at the present time. It is my most guished minority leader has said I am to say that we have overappropriated.
sincere hope that the Commander in certainly in agree-event, particularly with Mr. ALBERT. I am not saying that
Chief, who was elected by the American respect to the last part of his fine speech. we have overappropriated. I am merely
people, will follow the wise and sound I believe the gentleman has said that advising that it would not be the part of
recommendations of these men who over the Defense Department has been uncer- wisdom to do so. I am trying to defend
the years have dedicated their lives to tain as to what its requirements are. I the position which the administration
giving this country the kind of military would like to comment briefly on that has taken. I think Its course under the
strength and leadership that we need in one statement. Of course, there has facts known at the time requests were
this crucial hour. been an element of uncertainty In what made has been sound.
At times in past months I have felt the problem was going; to be in Vietnam, Mr. GERALD R. FORD. There Is
that our military leaders' advice has not and there is still that element of uncer- quite a difference, as the gentleman
been followed to the degree that it should tainty. There are so many possibilities knows, between making obligation au-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDPBg77g~pp4446R000400040012-1
March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE 5567
thority available and actual expendi- ular and stable government in South my request to pay this money to the right
tures. Vietnam. For at least 11 of those 12 men. Our current course of action will
Mr. ALBERT: Yes, that is true. years they, and we, have failed. not produce the result we seek unless we
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I do not As a result, today our youth are slog- rebalance our efforts.
believe that the Defense Department has ging through the mud in South Vietnam, Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield
asked for an adequate amount of obliga- killing-and dying-in order to preserve myself 2 minutes.
tion authority. for this Nation a longer time, the oppor- Mr. Chairman, there are certain lan-
Mr. ALBERT. I think that is a ques- tunity, the possibility to try once again. guage provisions in the legislation be-
tion of judgment. For that is all our soldiers can accom- fore us, and I would call your attention
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. And for this plish. That is all this apropriation can specifically to section 102. The version
reason, they have had to come back peri- accomplish-to gain time and to hold of the bill before us contains the lan-
odically for their various supplementals. open an opportunity. guage proposed by the President in his
But, leaving that aside, even with the We owe these brave and uncomplain- budget estimate. However, the confer-
obligation authority they had available ing men and the Vietnamese people on ence version of the bill authorizing our
and that which they anticipated the whose land they fight-the greatest pos- military procurement items, and so forth,
Congress would give them, they have sible effort on our part to form, to build, provided language somewhat different
not accurately forecast their expendi- to secure a government in South Viet- than that which had been proposed.
tures. Military expenditures which have nam which is popular enough to quell the I shall offer an amendment to make
been underestimated have created or conflict, and to build an economy there the language in this bill comport not to
caused the serious inflation to a sub- which is productive enough to support the budget language, but to the language
stantial degree in the circumstances its peoples. which has been agreed to and which, I
of our economy today. Hundreds of American civilians have understand, has become the law. I shall
Mr. ALBERT. Of course they have committed their energies, some even offer an amendment which will strength-
not always accurately forecast what was their lives, in South Vietnam in the past en the position of the Congress insofar
going to happen. Had they done that, months, to build the base and structure as the control of these funds is con-
they undoubtedly would have asked for of social and economic and political life cerned. It will be submitted, of course,
exactly what they needed, which would needed in that land in order that a gov- during the reading of the bill.
be ideal. Again, however, I commend ernment, in those famous words, "of the Mr. Chairman, I now ask that the
the gentleman on the balance of his people, by the people, and for the people" Clerk read.
remarks. can be created and then prevail. Mr. SHRIVER. Mr. Chairman, I in-
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. I appreciate Thousands of American troops are tend to support the Department of De-
the kind comments made by the gentle- needed there now, to provide protection fense supplemental appropriation for
man from Oklahoma on other portions for the harassed and fearful Vietnamese fiscal year 1966 in the amount of
of my remarks. As he well knows, people villagers and farmers.' $13,135,719,000.
probably far wiser than we and more But can only a few hundred civilians My support is based upon the neces-
knowledgeable than we on these intri- complete this enormous task: the recon- sity and the awareness that these funds
cate problems of the economy and in- struction of a society, in a reasonable must be provided to back up our Nation's
flation have honorably disagreed. So time, so that the opportunity for which commitment of men and material in
on this issue I do not mind disagreeing our 220,000 soldiers fight is not simply Vietnam. In recent days we have learned
with my friend from Oklahoma. I am wasted? Are we not failing our troops that another 20,000 American military
delighted that on the other areas there men have been committed to Vietnam
tragically, by hoping that this small band which will bring our total forces there
is a high degree of unanimity on the of only a few hundred can untangle the to approximately 235,000 in the near
position of our country and the policy inheritance of centuries of misrule? future.
we ought to follow. Our record for the past 12 years is not
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield There is included in this supplemental
1 minute to the gentleman from Alabama impressive. The reasons are many. But appropriations bill $375 million in for-
[Mr. GEORGE W. ANDREWS]. one stands out. eign military assistance funds and $315
Mr. GEORGE W. ANDREWS. Mr. In earlier years it was difficult for us million for economic assistance to South
Chairman, as a member of this subcom- to accept the necessity for military in- Vietnam, Thailand, Laos, and the
mittee, I support this bill. tervention in South Vietnam. Today, It Dominican Republic. Another $100 mil-
There has been a lot of argument about remains difficult for us to accept that we lion is allocated to the contingency fund.
how we got into Vietnam and whether must participate and intervene far more The minority members of the Defense
or not we should be there, and so on. aggressively, not only in the economic, Appropriations Subcommittee have ex-
In my opinion such arguments are aca- but also In the social and political fields. pressed a deep concern, which I share,
demic. The fact remains that our peo- If we are not prepared to do this, then about "the growing disregard evidenced
ple are committed in South Vietnam to- we should get out of South Vietnam at on the part of the executive branch
day, our men are being wounded and once. Yet, while many of our citizens toward the appropriations process."
killed in South Vietnam, our flag is being strongly support the conscription of our They cited the fact that a massive $12.3
fired upon in South Vietnam. It be- young men to service with gun and flame- T
on-
bi The supplemental ited thfact request a con3
hooves Americans to support those men thrower, sadly enough we find very few billion e short span of 2 days c by
In South Vietnam all the way, and that of those citizens willing to go to South the Defense Aor span Subcom-
is all this bill does. It provides the tools Vietnam to serve in a civilian capacity: mittee.
of war for our men in the hope-in the to rebuild and build anew.
prayerful hope-Mr. Chairman, that this The Agency for International Develop- It Foreign should ld a also lso be be S pointed out ubcommittee, that the
he
war can soon be terminated. ment needs men in Vietnam. The Inter- Foreign pr day tt e, on
ec held
I hope that there Is not a single vote national Voluntary Services, a nongov- which I tserve,
onomic but
and 1 mditar hear-
assist-
against this bill, on a rollcall, so that we ernmental organization similar to the ings on requests contained in this byl.
let the world know that this Congress Peace Corps, needs men for Vietnam. ante In the area o tained nit the admin~
is supporting our fighting men in South I ask that all of us here, and the lead-
Vietnam. ers in our administration, urgently em- istration has promised new directions of
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I yield phasize the great and immediate need of this massive assistance program. Such
4 minutes to the gentleman from Michi- this Nation for courageous men and redirection and reevaluation of the pro-
gan [Mr. VIVIAN]. women to serve in these absolutely essen- gram should be undertaken deliberately
(Mr. VIVIAN asked and was given per- tial roles. I am certain that our citizens and not through deficiency fund requests.
misson to revise and extend his remarks.) desire to live some day in peace, as In this supplemental request there are
Mr. VIVIAN. Mr. Chairman, for the brothers, with the peoples in Asia. certain programs which are worthy of
past 12 years this Nation has had the I will support this appropriation of our support. One of these is civil police
opportunity to aid in establishing a pop- money, but I ask others here to support programs in Thailand and Vietnam.
No. 45-5
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 5568
Approved for Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1 -
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE March 15, 1966
A substantial amount of the supple-
mental request for Thailand will go for
this police program including such equip-
ment as radios and transmitters. It is
my understanding that approximately
$27 million will be allocated for public
safety and police in Vietnam.
On the recent trip which I made with
the distinguished chairman of the For-
eign Operations Appropriations Subcom-
mittee [Mr. PASSMANl, I had the oppor-
tunity of seeing firsthand the police
training program in Thailand. I was
impressed by the work of Mr. Jeter L.
Williamson, the Chief of the Public Safe-
ty Division of our U.S. Operations Mis-
sion in Thailand and of other American
experts assisting the Thais in this impor-
tant.program. This is a practical kind
of program conducted by the United
States to help the Government of Thai-
land increase the security of its border
area and rapidly develop the counter-
insurgency capability of the Thai civil
police. This same kind of program is
being conducted in Vietnam and I was
advised that it will cover 72,000 men
there.
There are questions which await an-
swers as we consider this further funding
to support the American commitment in
Vietnam.
Why does not the administration
more aggressively pursue necessary ef-
forts to bring about a halt to free world
shipping to North Vietnam?
When I questioned the Administrator
of the Agency for International Develop-
ment last month regarding this problem,
he advised me, and I quote from the
hearings:
Last November, the only ships that called
at North Vietnam outside of the Communist
bloc countries were several flying the British
flag but actually based in Hong Kong. We
are not, of course, providing any U.S. assist-
ance to Britain.
Mr. Chairman, the American people
are disturbed, as am I, by the continuing
trade by our allies with North Vietnam
when American lives are being lost in far-
off Vietnam.
The American people are puzzled by
administration policy which calls for in-
stant cooperation with Great Britain in
its difficulties with Rhodesia; but deals
softly with the British regarding their
trade with North Vietnam.
Last year I made a motion at the time
we had the conference report on foreign
aid appropriations before the House to
stop aid to the countries shipping mate-
rials to North Vietnam. That motion
was defeated, and the President retained
authority to use his discretion in giving
such aid. In recent months, there has
been legislation introduced to bar coun-
tries serving North Vietnam from send-
ing their ships to U.S. ports. The admin-
istration has blacklisted certain ships
from carrying Government-financed
cargoes; but this action does not go far
enough.
Another question which many Ameri-
cans are asking: What is being done to
secure the cooperation and participation
of our allies in the Vietnam conflict?
The American people have poured bil-
lions of dollars into aiding our European
allies, both militarily and economically,
since World War II. Now that the
United States has gone to the aid of
South Vietnam, it is obvious that the re-
sponse for meaningful assistance from
our allies has not been deafening.
We will, however, examine very care-
fully and with interest the administra-
tion's 1967 foreign aid budgets for
respective countries around the world.
We will keep in mind the 235,000 Ameri-
cans who are on the frontlines fighting
communism in southeast Asia, and in the
political vernacular, we will ask the
administration spokesmen:
"What have these countries we are
aiding done for us lately?"
Mr. EDWARDS of California. Mr.
Chairman, I believe my position is clear
on our commitment in southeast Asia.
I have been opposed to our military
policy in Vietnam. I am strongly op-
posed to escalation of the war, and I
am distressed by the deterioration of our
foreign and domestic policies which has
been brought on by our Vietnam opera-
tions.
I will vote for H.R. 13546, the supple-
mental southeast Asia appropriation
measure before this House today. I will
do so because I feel it is unwise to decide
policy issues through the appropriations
process. Itis the job of the authorizing
committees to debate policy matters.
It is the job of the Appropriations Com-
mittees to oversee the administration of
duly authorized funds.
A year ago, I opposed the $700 million
supplemental appropriation for Viet-
nam. I oppose that appropriation be-
cause it was used only as a ruse to obtain
approval of administration policy in
Vietnam. The $13.1 billion appropria-
tion before us today-19 times as much
money as we approved on May 5, 1965-
has been duly authorized. My policy
reservations have been stated earlier.
Today I can but remind my colleagues
of them.
My vote for this appropriation means
two things. It does not alone mean that
I do not believe it is proper to express
my policy preferences in an appropri-
ations measure. It also means that an
appropriations measure should not be
used by anyone else to express their pol-
icy preferences. My vote today is not
an endorsement of our past policy in
Vietnam. It is not an endorsement of
our future policy in Vietnam. It is not
an endorsement of miltiary escalation.
It is not an endorsement of the mining
of Haiphong Harbor. And, it is not an
endorsement of any increase in troop
commitments. It is merely a certifica-
tion of prior House action on authoriza-
tion measures.
In supporting this measure and dis-
cussing it with my colleagues in the
House today, I am compelled to make
certain observations about its contents.
In voting $13.1 billion today, we are
doing many things, and must be aware
of them.
We are appropriating $275 million for
economic assistance programs within
Vietnam. However, we are in this same
bill appropriating $742.6 million for mil-
itary construction within Vietnam
alone. Thus we will spend in the com-
ing fiscal year 270 percent more money
for military construction than for socio-
economic reconstruction. And, we are
spending $3.2 billion for aircraft pro-
curement and $2.1 billion for procure-
ment of munitions and associated equip-
ment. All of this money, as the report
of our able Committee on Appropria-
tions states, is "the amount of the budget
estimates for the military, military as-
sistance, and economic assistance pro-
grams of the Government directly re-
lated to operations in southeast Asia."
Thus, in the coming fiscal year, our
country will spend $1.1 billion to build
in Vietnam, and $5.3 billion for the air-
craft and munitions which will destroy
the resources of Vietnam. As I told this
House only 13 days ago, we will continue
to see destruction outpacing develop-
ment. We will continue to see our mili-
tary commitment make a mockery of
our calls for economic development; for
a policy of millions for development and
billions for destruction cannot succeed.
My colleagues should also be aware
that, despite the opening disclaimer of
the Appropriations Committee report,
not all the money in H.R. 13546 is going
to programs related to southeast Asia.
Twenty-five million dollars is going to
the Dominican Republic in the form of
economic aid.
Finally, we should be aware that the
$375 million appropriated for foreign
military assistance will, according to the
committee report, "be recorded on the
books of the military assistance program
and paid to the applicable procurement
appropriation accounts of the military
services, to reimburse those accounts for
the value of goods already delivered to
military assistance recipients." A
minority of the Defense Appropriations
Subcommittee noted that this "was given
scant attention by this committee." I
would only note that in our debates over
the misuse of foreign military aid, we
should not allow such aid to be awarded
through the military appropriation
proper. Foreign military aid is a sepa-
rate issue with distinct problems, and
should be considered separately.
Mr. CLEVELAND. Mr. Chairman, I
shall vote for this massive, supplemental
defense appropriation bill. The Nation
is engaged in a critical war and our mili-
tary efforts must be fully supported.
Nevertheless, I am deeply concerned
about the manner in which this legisla-
tion is being handled. We are here act-
ing on a bill appropriating $12,345,719,-
000 for the military functions of the
Department of Defense, $375 million for
the President to allot in military assist-
ance, and $415 minion for him to allo-
cate in economic assistance.
This vast total is being handled in a
supplemental appropriation bill on which
the Appropriation Committee held only
2 days of hearings. In that time, of
course, only the most cursory considera-
tion could be given. In effect, Congress
is unable to perform its constitutional
task of carefully scrutinizing the admin-
istration's requests and weighing them
in detail.
In view of this haste, one must ques-
tion the wisdom and foresight of a gov-
ernment which, Just a few months ago,
did not conceive of these enormous extra
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 Approved. For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
expenses, reduced taxes and said we
could afford them but now has to raise
them and seek from Congress an addi-
tional $13 plus billion.
Either the Government has not been
honest in telling us what the war in Viet-
nam was going to cost or its planning
has been extremely bad.
One does not wish to think that the
Government does not know what it is
doing nor does one wish to think that
it is deliberately concealing facts from
the public. It is hard, however, to avoid
reaching either one conclusion or the
other or, indeed, both.
Mr. RYAN. Mr. Chairman, this is the
first supplemental defense appropriation
bill in this session for the prosecution of
the war in Vietnam. It embodies the
$4.8 billion which the House authorized
on March 1.
When the $4.8 billion authorization bill
was before'the House, I pointed out that
a basic issue of policy was involved. It
was, I said, a bill to finance escalation,
not to finance an existing policy. I
spelled out in my speech on March 1 my
reasons for opposing what I called a
policy of mindful escalation and my view
that a policy of stabilization should be
pursued. What I said then applies today.
Mr. Chairman, the heart of this ap-
propriations bill is the $4.8 billion which
was authorized on March 1. In effect,
the appropriation contains an escalation
rider. It is not simply an appropriation
to support the present effort in Vietnam.
The funds are intended to escalate the
war. As the distinguished chairman of
the Committee on Appropriations, the
gentleman from Texas [Mr. MAHON],
said earlier this afternoon that "the war
will escalate and grow in intensity."
This is not simply an appropriation to
provide supplies and equipment to the
courageous American fighting men who
are engaged in combat. If that were the
purpose, there would be no argument.
As long as they are committed to battle,
our dedicated forces must be adequately
equipped, supplied, and protected in
carrying out assigned missions. The real
issue is the policy question embedded in
the authorization and now in the
appropriation.
In my speech on the supplemental de-
fense authorization on March 1, I dis-
cussed what I understood to be the im-
plications of our vote. I said then that a
debate was raging between those who
believe that we should stabilize the war
and those who believe that we should
escalate it mindfully. That debate still
continues.
The only opportunity the House has to
express its views on foreign policy is
when we are asked to authorize or ap-
propriate funds. If we are to participate
in this debate on Vietnam policy, we must
do so this afternoon. An affirmative
vote, no mater how individual Members
of the House may regard it, will be in-
terpreted by the administration and the
public as a full endorsement of adminis-
tration policy. A vote for this bill is a
vote for the escalation rider as well.
My vote this afternoon is not an easy
one to cast. My thoughts are very much
with the gallant American fighting men
in Vietnam. They should not be denied
anything they need. I too fought in a
jungle war in the Pacific some 20 years
ago. However, the administration has
asked us to appropriate funds to allow
the President to escalate the war. Once
again the crucial question is not whether
we will support the men in the field, but
whether we will give the President the
funds to commit hundreds of thousands
of additional young men to this war on
the Asian mainland. As the Vietnam
war stands today, this I am unwilling
to do.
Mr. Chairman, instead of pursuing a
policy of extended escalation leading to
an unlimited war in an "open-ended"
military situation, as Senator MANS-
FIELD's report described it, the adminis-
tration in a stabilized situation should
explore realistic alternatives to escala-
tion. As I have said so often, the con-
flict in Vietnam is not susceptible to a
wholly military solution. It must be re-
solved politically and diplomatically.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will read
the bill for amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
ECONOMIC ASSISTANCE
Supporting assistance
For an additional amount for "Supporting
assistance", $315,000,000.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I move
to strike the requisite number of words.
(Mr. GROSS asked and was given per-
mission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I rise at
this time to ask a question or two con-
cerning the emergency fund of $200 mil-
lion.
Is this in the nature of a blank check
to the Department of Defense or to the
Executive, or what is it?
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, if the
gentleman will yield, is the gentleman
talking about the funds for military con-
struction or the contingency fund?
Mr. GROSS. I am talking about the
language as shown in the report on page
12-Secretary of Defense, $200 million
for an emergency fund.
Mr.MAHON. This is military con-
struction. As the gentleman knows, this
bill contains $1 billion, plus, for military
construction, most of which is in Viet-
nam. The course of the war is rather
unpredictable. This is the sum of money
made available in order to meet the situ-
ations as they may arise.
Mr. GROSS. Then, this is for the spe-
cific purpose of construction?
Mr. MAHON. Yes.
Mr. GROSS. Now, how about the $100
million for the contingency fund? This
seems to be a blank check to the Presi-
dent.
I was disappointed in reading the hear-
ings of the gentleman's committee on this
bill in that there was no indication as
to how this money is to be expended.
Mr. MAHON. If the gentleman will
yield further, it is a contingency fund.
It is impossible to predict how a contin-
gency fund will be used. It may all be
used in Vietnam and some of it might be
used in Africa. It might be used else-
where. However, it is available to pro-
tect the interest of the United States in
this area of activity.
5569
I do not believe anyone can tell us
how it might be used. I wish it would
not be necessary to use it at all.
Mr. GROSS. The gentleman from
Texas suggested another question when
he said "Africa."
Does the gentleman have any idea as
to how much money has been expended
from the contingency fund for the pur-
pose of joining with the British in the
outrageous boycott of Rhodesia-in
other words, using contingency funds to
pay for the airlifting of oil and gasoline
into Zambia, which has been cut off
from its normal supply through Rho-
desia?
Can the gentleman from Texas bring
us up to date on how many millions have
been expended up to this point in financ-
ing the British boycott?
Mr. MAHON. If the gentleman will
yield further, I am not able myself to
give the gentleman the answer as to
what funds may have been expended in
connection with this problem.
Mr. GROSS. Does the gentleman
have any part of the fear that I have
that through this action in which we are
presently engaged-this boycott of a
friendly government-we may be com-
mitting ourselves to another war, this
time on the continent of Africa?
Mr. MAHON. I do not have any fear
that we are committing ourselves to an-
other war. It may be that not all of us
fully support the actions with respect to
Rhodesia, but this is one of the facets
of our foreign policy, on which people
may differ. However, the purpose of this
fund is certainly not primarily for use
in Africa, but to be available if necessary
principally for activities associated with
the war in Vietnam.
Theoretically, of course, it could be
used in other places.
Mr. GROSS. Well, the contingency
fund voted for the President is being
used for this purpose. My question went
to how much has been used and how
deeply are we being committed. The
Queen of England served notice as late as
last week that if necessary the British
would send troops to invade Rhodesia,
and already we are hearing talk of the
same tactics being applied to the Re-
public of South Africa.
Just how deeply we are being commit-
ted is a grave question that should be
of concern to every American.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, if the
gentleman will yield further, the gentle-
man from Iowa is himself an important
member of the Committee on Foreign
Affairs of the House of Representatives,
and I assume he is familiar with this
matter and could possibly give a better
answer to his own question than I could.
Mr. GROSS. I will say to the gentle-
man that the Foreign Affairs Committee
has just started hearings on the regular
authorization bill today, and it will be
my purpose to try to get full information.
It is not always easy to obtain informa-
tion, as the gentleman from Texas well
knows, from certain individuals in this
Government.
I thought, perhaps, the gentleman
from Texas and his committee had de-
veloped information that I did not find
in the hearings.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 5570
Approved For R 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
WRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE March 15, 1966
Mr. MAHON. I know of no plan to
use these funds for this purpose.
Mr. GROSS. I thank the gentleman.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clerk will
read.
The Clerk read as follows:
SEc. 102. Appropriations available to the
Department of Defense during the fiscal
years 1966 and 1967 shall be available to
support Vietnamese and other Free World
Forces in Vietnam and for related costs on
such terms and conditions as the Secretary
of Defense may determine: Provided, That
unexpended balances, as determined by this
Secretary of Defense, of funds heretofore
allocated or transferred by the President to
the Secretary of Defense for military assist-
ance to support Vietnamese and other Free
World Forces in Vietnam shall be trans-
ferred to any appropriation available to the
Department of Defense for military func-
tions (including construction), to be merged
with and to be available for the same pur-
poses and for the same time period as the
appropriation to which transferred.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I have
several amendments to section 102 at the
desk and I ask unanimous consent that
they may be considered as one amend-
ment.
The CHAIRMAN. Without objection,
it is so ordered.
There was no objection.
AMENDMENT OFFERED BY MR. MAHON
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I offer
an amendment.
The Clerk read as follows:
Amendment offered by Mr. MAHON: On
page 8, line 3, insert "(a)" immediately after
Sec. 102.".
On page 8 line 5 insert "for their stated
purposes" immediately after "available".
On page 8, after line 16, insert the follow-
ing:
"(b) Within thirty days after the end of
each quarter, the Secretary of Defense shall
render to the Committees on Armed Serv-
ices and Appropriations of the House of Rep-
resentatives and the Senate a report with
respect to the estimated value by purpose, by
country, of support furnished from such ap-
propriations".
The CHAIRMAN. The gentleman
from Texas [Mr. MAHON] is recognized.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, the pur-
pose of this amendment is to make the
language of the bill compatible with the
language in the authorization bill which
I understand was signed into law today.
It undertakes to improve in a measure
the actual wording of the authorization.
It tightens up and make a little clearer
the intent of the Congress with respect
to this matter. The language in section
102 as reported reads:
SEC. 102. Appropriations available to the
Department of Defense during the fiscal years
1966 and 1967 shall be available to sup-
port Vietnamese and other free world
forces in Vietnam and for related costs
on such terms and conditions as the Sec-
retary of Defense may determine: Provided,
That unexpended balances, as determined
by the Secretary of Defense, of funds here-
tofore allocated or transferred by the Presi-
dent to the Secretary of Defense for mill-
When the amendment is agreed to, it
will read:
SEc. 102. (a) Appropriations available to the
Department of Defense during the fiscal years
1966 and 1967 shall be available for their
stated purposes to support Vietnamese and
other free world forces in Vietnam and for
related costs on such terms and conditions as
the Secretary of Defense may determine:
Provided, That unexpended balances, as de-
termined by the Secretary of Defense, of
funds heretofore allocated or transferred by
the President to the Secretary of Defense for
military assistance to support Vietnamese
and other free world forces in Vietnam shall
be transferred to any appropriation available
to the Department of Defense for military
functions (including construction), to be
merged with and to be available for the same
purposes and for the same time period as
the appropriation to which transferred.
(b) Within thirty days after the end of
each quarter, the Secretary of Defense shall
render to the Committee on Armed Serv-
ices and Appropriations of the Senate and
House of Representatives a report with re-
spect to the estimated value by purpose,
by country, of support furnished from ap-
propriations authorized to be made under
this subsection.
The point is to require reports to the
Congress, through the appropriate com-
mittees, within 30 days after the end of
each quarter, with respect to the esti-
mated value by purpose and by country
of support furnished from these appro-
priations.
The basic section 102 provides that
funds which would otherwise be labeled
"Military Assistance" may be spent as
direct military funds. To some extent,
in the future, comparability of funding
levels will thus be distorted for both reg-
ular military functions and military as-
sistance. It is the purpose of this amend-
ment to require that Congress be in-
formed of the best estimates of the uti-
lization of these funds.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. MAHON. I yield to the gentle-
man.
Mr. GROSS. The purpose of section
102, and I wonder if the gentleman agrees
to this, is to provide that these funds are
to be expended for the purpose for which
the bill and the Congress intends that
they shall be spent; is that correct?
Mr. MAHON. That is correct.
Mr. GROSS. The gentleman used the
words "stated purpose."
Mr. MAHON. Yes, for stated purposes
such as procurement-providing certain
funds for procurement-or for person-
nel-and otherwise to support our allies
including the Vietnamese. The Viet-
namese have'about 850,000 men, includ-
ing local police forces, under arms. This
language is designed to enable our Gov-
ernment to support appropriately the
efforts of those who :fight with us.
Mr. GROSS. And that is, in Vietnam?
Mr. MAHON. In Vietnam-yes, of
course.
tary assistance to support Vietnamese and Mr. GROSS. That is the intent?
other free world forces in Vietnam shall Mr. MAHON. Yes, that is the intent.
be transferred to any appropriation-available Mr. GROSS. The intent is to support
functions the Department of Defense for military the forces-whatever they may be-there
functions (including construction), to be
merged with and to be available for the same are too few there--but to support the
purposes and for the same time period as forces in Vietnam and not -somewhere
the appropriation to which transferred, else in the world?
Mr. MAHON. That is certainly the in-
tent of this amendment.
Mr. RUMSFELD. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. MAHON. I yield to the gentle-
man.
Mr. RUMSFELD. Did the gentleman
say that the reports were to come di-
rectly to the Committees on Armed Serv-
ices and Appropriations in the House and
in the Senate?
Mr. MAHON. That is with reference
to the funds that are used for this pur-
pose under the provisions of section 102.
Mr. RUMSFELD. I do not intend to
raise the point, but I believe this would
be subject to a point of order and is a
violation of rule 40 of the House of Rep-
resentatives which requires reports to
come to the Speaker and to the House as
a whole rather than to a specific com-
mittee. It seems to me the reports
should come to the House of Representa-
tives and to the Senate, and to the ex-
tent that they go directly to a committee
and bypass the membership as a whole
that the prerogatives of the Speaker of
the House and of the membership as a
whole are set aside. I think it is. an
important point although, as I say to the
gentleman, I am not going to raise the
point of order. But I would hope that
the Committee on Appropriations and
the Committee on Armed Services would
bring their bills in, when they call for re-
ports, with the reports to come to the
Speaker and to the President pro tem-
pore of the Senate rather than going di-
rectly to a committee.
Mr. MAHON. I think the gentleman
has made a good point. But, of course,
anything that is made available to the
committees is made available to the
Speaker and to the Congress. What we
are doing here is to tie it in with the au-
thorization language which has already
been included in the law and which is the
basis for the language in the amendment.
Mr. -RUMSFELD. I do not quarrel
with the intent of the amendment.
Mr. LIPSCOMB. Mr. Chairman, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. MAHON. I yield to the gentle-
man from California.
Mr. LIPSCOMB. Mr. Chairman, the
gentleman from Texas has talked this
over at great length with the minority.
We certainly agree as to the necessity
for this amendment and heartily sup-
port it.
The language of section 102 as pres-
ently contained in H.R. 13546 can readily
be interpreted to give extremely wide
latitude to the Secretary of Defense.
The provision relates to military assist-
ance type funds. But within the context
of military assistance the present lan-
guage could be interpreted to permit the
merger of unexpended balances of fiscal
year 1966 and prior year military assist-
ance funds and future funds in fiscal
year 1967 for South Vietnam with the
accounts for military functions to be
mingled between purposes. In other
words the present wording of the bill
was susceptible of being interpreted as
unlimited transfer authority.
This provision is required because
there is now no authority to use funds
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 March 15, 1966 Approved FCORlftyS?Iffly/2 EE&FP6 ff6R000400040012-1
appropriated to the Department of De-
fense for any purpose other than support
of U.S. forces. Military assistance funds
are now appropriated to the President
and allocated to the Department of De-
fense.
The proposed amendment does not re-
ject the request for authority to merge
military assistance for South Vietnam
with military functions but adds limiting
language to that authority in two re-
spects.
First. It limits the transfer of author-
ity to the extent that Department of
Defense appropriations for a particular
purpose must be kept within that pur-
pose. For example, personnel funds
would be used for personnel, operation
and maintenance for operation and
maintenance, procurement for procure-
ment, and so forth. This limitation is
provided by the addition of the words,
"for their stated purposes."
Second. The amendment adds a new
subsection intended to assure that the
Congress be kept informed on a timely
basis of the use of these funds that may
be made available for the support of the
South Vietnamese and other free world
forces under the authority granted in
section 102. The amendment also states
that the information be broken down by
purpose and country in order to insure
that the intent now expressed in section
(a) be adhered to, and in the form that
Congress will have the capability to over-
see that it is.
There is no intent to create any con-
dition that will prevent our troops and
the troops of the free world that are
assisting us, from acquiring the neces-
sary equipment and funds in a timely
manner. This amendment will not jeop-
ardize this process in the least. Its pur-
pose is to make sure that congressional
control is not diluted. The conditions as
proposed in the amendment are that
these fiscal transactions not violate the
under consideration the bill (H.R. 13546)
making supplemental appropriations for
the fiscal year ending June 30, 1966, and
for other purposes, had directed him to
report the bill back to the House with an
amendment with the recommendation
that the amendment be agreed to and
that the bill, as amended, do pass.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without
objection, the previous' question is or-
dered.
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the amendment.
The amendment was agreed to.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the engrossment and third
reading of the bill.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
and read a third time, and was read the
third time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The
question is on the passage of the bill.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, on that I
demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The question was taken; and there
were-yeas 389, nays 3, not voting 39, as
follows :
[Roll No. 381
YEAS-389
Abbitt
Cleveland
Fulton, Tenn.
Abernethy
Clevenger
Garmatz
Adams
Cohelan
Gathings
Addabbo
Colmer
Gettys
Albert
Conable
Giaimo
Anderson, Ill.
Conte
Gibbons
Anderson
Cooley
Gilbert
Tenn.
Corbett
Gilligan
Andrews,
Lerman
Gonzalez
George W.
Graley
Grabowski
Andrews,
Cramer
Gray
Glenn
Culver
Green, Oreg.
Andrews,
Cunningham
Green, Pa.
N. Dak.
Curtin
Greigg
Annunzio
Curtis
Grider
Arends
Griffin
Ashbrook
Dague
Griffiths
Ashley
Daniels
Gross
Ashmore
Davis, Wis.
Grover
Aspinall
Dawson
Gubser
Ayres
de ]a Garza
Gurney
Bandstra
Delaney
Hagan, Ga.
Barrett
Dent
Haley
Bates
Denton
Hall
Battin
Derwinski
Halpern
Bekworth
Dikinson
Hamilton
Belcher
Diggs
Hanley
Bennett
Dingell
Hanna
Berry
Dole
Hansen, Idaho
'
Betts
Donohue
Iowa
Hansen,
Bingham
Dorn
Hansen, Wash.
Blatnik
Dow
Hardy
Boggs
Dulski
Harsha
Boland
Duncan, Oreg.
Harvey, Mich.
Bolton
Duncan, Tenn.
Hathaway
Bow
Dwyer
Hawkins
Brademas
Dyad
Hays
Bray
Edmondson
Hebert
Brooks
Edwards, Ala.
Hechler
Broomfield
Edwards, Calif.
Helstoski
Ohio
Brown
Edwards, La.
Henderson
,
Broyhill, N.C.
Erlenborn
Herlong
Broyhill, Va.
Evans, Colo.
Hicks
Buchanan
Everett
Holifleld
Burke
Evans, Tenn.
Holland
Burleson
Fallon
Horton
Burton, Utah
Farbstein
Hosmer
Byrne, Pa.
Farnsley
Howard
Byrnes, Wis.
Farnum
Hull
Cabell
Fascell
Hungate
Cahill
Felghan
Huot
Callan
Findley
Hutchinson
Callaway
Fino
Ichord
Cameron
Flood
Irwin
Carey
Flynt
Jacobs
Carter
Fogarty
Jarman
Casey
Foley
Jennings
Cederberg
Foro: Gerald R. Joelson
Celler
Ford, Johnson, Calif.
Chamberlain
William D. Johnson, Okla.
Cheif
Fountain Johnson, Pa.
Clancy
Fraser Jonas
Clark
Frelinghuysen Jones, Ala.
Clausen,
Friedel Jones, Mo.
Don H.
Fulton, Pa. Jones, N.C.
existing appropriations structure, it
makes clear that this provision does not
authorize any unlimited transfer au-
thority, and that Congress be kept in-
formed on a timely basis.
Mr. Chairman, I urge support of the
amendment.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I want
to make it clear to my colleagues that
the gentleman from California made the
suggestion with respect to this amend-
ment. I think it is a good amendment
and I am pleased to offer it.
The CHAIRMAN. The question is on
the amendment offered by the gentleman
from Texas [Mr. MAHON].
The amendment was agreed to.
The CHAIRMAN. The Clem- will read.
The Clerk concluded the reading of
the bill.
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Chairman, I move
that the Committee do now rise and re-
port the bill back to the House with an
amendment and with the recommenda-
tion that the amendment be agreed to
and that the bill, as amended, be passed.
The motion was agreed to.
Accordingly, the Committee rose; and
the Speaker pro tempore (Mr. ALBERT)
having assumed the chair, Mr. WRIGHT,
Chairman of the Committee of the Whole
House on the State of the Union, re-
ported that that Committee, having had
5571
Karsten
Hatcher
Selden
Karth
Nedzi
Benner
Kastenmeier
Nelsen
Shipley
Kee
Nix
Shriven
Keith
O'Brien
Sickles
Kelly
O'Hara, Ill.
Sikes
Keogh
O'Hara, Mich.
Skubitz
King, Calif.
O'Konski
Slack
N.Y.
King
Olsen, Mont.
Smith, Calif.
,
Utah
King
Olson, Minn.
Smith, Iowa
,
Kirwan
O'Neal, Ga.
Smith, N.Y.
Kluczynski
O'Neill, Mass.
Smith, Va.
Kornegay
Ottinger
Springer
Krebs
Passman
Stafford
Kunkel
Patman
Staggers
Kupferman
Patten
Stalbaum
Laird
Pelly
Stanton
Landrum
Pepper
Steed
Langen
Perkins
Stephens
Latta
Philbin
Stratton
Leggett
Pickle
Stubblefield
Lennon
Pike
Sullivan
Lipscomb
Pirnie
Sweeney
La.
Long
Poage
Taloott
,
Md.
Long
Poff
Taylor
,
Love
Pool
Teague, Calif.
McCarthy
Pucineki
Tenzer
McClory
Purcell
Thompson, N.J.
McCulloch
Quie
Thompson, Tex.
McDade
Quillen
Thomson, Wis.
McDowell
Race
Todd
McEwen
Randall
Trimble
McFall
Redlin
Tuck
McGrath
Rees
Tunney
McMillan
Reid, nl.
Tupper
Macdonald
Reid, N.Y.
Tuten
MacGregor
Reifel
Udall
Machen
Reuss
Ullman
Mackie
Rhodes, Ariz.
Utt
Madden
Van Deerlin
Mahon
Rivers, S.C.
Vandk
Mailliard
Rivers, Alaska
Vigorito
Marsh
Roberts
Vivian
Martin, Nebr.
Robison
Waggonner
Matsunaga
Rodino
Walker, N. Mex.
May
Rogers, Colo.
Watkins
Meeds
Rogers, Fla.
Watson
Michel
Rogers, Tex.
Watts
Miller
Ronan
Weltner
Mills
Rooney, N.Y.
Whalley
Minish
Rooney, Pa.
White, Idaho
Mink
Rosenthal
White, Tex.
Minshall
Rostenkowski
Whitener
Mize
Roush
Whitten
Moeller
Roybal
Widnall
Monagan
Rumsfeld
Williams
Moorhead
Satterfield
Wlson, Bob
Morgan
St Germain
Wilson,
Morris
St. Onge
Charles H.
Morrison
Saylor
Wolff
Morse
Scheuer
Wright
Morton
Schisler
Wyatt
Moss
Schmidhauser
Wydler
Multer
Schneebeli
Yates
Murphy, Dl.
Schweiker
Young
Murphy, N.Y.
Scott
Younger
Murray
Secrest
Zablocki
NAYS-3
Burton, Calif.
Conyers
Ryan
NOT VOTING-39
Adair
Fisher
Moore
Baring
Fuqua
Mosher
Bell
Gallagher
Powell
Bolling
Goodell
Price
Brock
Hagen, Calif.
Reinecke
Brown, Calif.
Halleck
Resnick
Clawson, Del
Harvey, Ind.
Roncalio
Collier
McVicker
udebush
Ro
Davis, Ga.
Mackay
k
Devine
Martin, Ala.
Teague, Tex.
Dowdy
Martin, Mass.
Toll
Downing
Mathias
Walker, Miss.
Ellsworth
Matthews
Willis
So the bill was passed.
The Clerk announced the following
pairs:
Mr. Toll with Mr. Mathias.
Mr. Teague of Texas with Mr. Roudebush.
Mr. Davis 'of Georgia with Mr. Adair.
Mr. Downing with Mr. Harvey of Indiana.
Mr. Brown of California with Mr. Reinecke.
Mr. Gallagher with Mr. Ellsworth.
Mr. Fisher with Mr. Halleck.
Mr. Fuqua with Mr. Collier.
Mr. Price with Mr. Martin of Massachu-
setts.
Mr. Sisk with Mr. Bell.
Mr. Matthews with Mr. Walker of Missis-
sippi.
Mr. Mackay with Mr. Moore.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R006400040012-1
 5572
Approved For Re
ftivaM niz/ : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
S ,AI, RECORD - HOUSE March 15, 1966
Mr. Baring with Mr. GoodelL
Mr. Willis with Mr. Devine.
Mr. McVicker with Mr. Martin of Alabama.
Mr. Hagen of California with Mr. Brook?
Mr. Resnick with Mr. Mosher.
Mr. Powell with Mr. Roncalio.
Mr. Dowdy with Mr. Del Clawson.
The result of the vote was announced
as above recorded.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
PREMISSION TO REVISE AND EX-
TEND REMARKS
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that Members speak-
ing on the bill just passed may revise and
extend their remarks and include perti-
nent extraneous material.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
There was no objection.
GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND
REMARKS
Mr. MAHON. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days in which to extend
their remarks on the bill just passed.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
There was no objection.
ELECTION OF HON. CARL ALBERT,
REPRESENTATIVE FROM THE
STATE OF OKLAHOMA, AS SPEAK-
ER PRO TEMPORE
Mr. KEOGH. Mr. Speaker, I offer a
privileged resolution and ask for its im-
mediate consideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as
follows:
H. RES. 779
Resolved, That Hon. CARL ALBERT, a Repre-
sentative from the State of Oklahoma, be,
and he is hereby, elected Speaker pro tempore
during the absence of the Speaker.
Resolved, That the President and the Sen..
ate be notified by the Clerk of the election
of the Honorable CARL ALBERT as Speaker pro
tempore during the absence of the Speaker.
Mr. KEOGH. Mr. Speaker, I want to
mention that this resolution is being
offered at the request of the distinguished
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.
MILLS). The question is on the reso-
lution.
The resolution was agreed to.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
SWEARING IN OF SPEAKER PRO
TEMPORE
Mr. ALBERT assumed the Chair and
from the State of New York.
CONFERENCE REPORT ON SUPPLE-
MENTAL FOREIGN ASSISTANCE
AUTHORIZATION, FISCAL YEAR
1966
Mr. MORGAN submitted the follow-
ing conference report and statement on
the bill (H.R. 12169) to amend further
the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, as House for 1 minute, and to revise and
amended, and for other purposes. extend his remarks.)
CONFERENCE REPORT (H. REPT. No. 1328) Mr. OLSEN of Montana. Mr. Speaker,
The committee of conference on the dis- I have introduced a bill to provide for
agreeing votes of the two Houses on the the Surgeon General, with the approval
amendments of the Senate to the bill (H.R. of the Secretary of the Department of
12169) to amend further the Foreign Assist- Health, Education, and Welfare, to estab-
ance, Act of 1961, as amended, and for other lish in the Public Health Service a Na-
purposes, having met, after full and free con- tional Eye Institute for the conduct and
ference, have agreed to recommend and do support of research and training relating
recommend to their respective Houses that
numbered 1 and 2.
THOMAS E. MORGAN,
CLEMENT J. ZABLOCKI,
EDNA P. KELLY,
WAYNE L. HAYS,
FRANCES P. BOLTON,
PETER H. B. FRELINGHUYSEN,
WM. BROOMCFIELD,
Managers on. the Part of the House.
JOHN SPARKMAN,
B. B. HICKENLOOPER,
Managers on the Part of the Senate.
STATEMENT
The managers on the part of the House at
the conference on the disagreeing votes of
the two Houses on the amendments of the
Senate to the bill (H.R. 12169) to amend
further the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961,
as amended, ana for other purposes, report
that the accompanying conference report
recommends that the Senate recede from its
amendments.
The managers on the part of the House
pointed out that the amendment before the
committee of conference dealt with matters
which had not received consideration by
the Committee on Foreign Affairs during its
consideration of the bill nor had there been
any discussion during debate in the House,
but they recognized that this question de-
served careful consideration. Because there
has not been adequate opportunity to review
in detail the full impact of the Senate pro-
vision, the managers on the part of the
House were unwilling to accept the Senate
language, but they agreed that the Commit-
tee on Foreign Affairs should look into the
whole question during the consideration of
the pending foreign aid bill.
In view of the general feeling that hearings
should be held on this whole question, the
managers on the part of the Senate receded.
THOMAS E. MORGAN,
CLEMENT J. ZABLOCKI,
EDNA F. KELLY,
WAYNE L. HAYS,
FRANCES P. BOLTON,
PETER H. B. FRELINGHUYSEN,
WM. BROOMFIELD,
Managers on the Part of the House.
SENATE
A further message from the Senate
by Mr. Arrington, one of its clerks, an-
nounced that the Senate agrees to the
report of the committee of conference
on the disagreeing votes of the two
Houses on the amendments of the Sen-
ate to the bill (H.R. 12752) entitled "An
act to provide for graduated withhold-
ing of income tax from wages, to re-
quire declarations of estimated tax with
respect to self-employment income, to
accelerate current payments of esti-
mated income tax by corporations, to
postpone certain excise tax rate reduc-
tions, and for other purposes."
orders, including research and training
In special health problems relating to
the mechanism of sight and visual func-
tion.
Surveys disclosed blindness ranks sec-
ond to cancer as the affliction most
feared by American people, more so than
heart disease, polio, and tuberculosis or
loss of limbs.
More than 1 million Americans over
40 have glaucoma, these being prime tar-
gets for eventual blindness. Most of
them have never heard of the disease.
More than 10 million throughout the
world are totally blind.
One million Americans cannot read
ordinary newspaper type with the aid of
glasses, while 11/2 million are blind in one
eye.
Ninety million Americans suffer from
oculas malfunction.
The National Health Education Com-
mittee discloses that incidence of cat-
aract among people age 60 is nearly 60
percent, at age 80 almost 100 percent.
A Gallup survey disclosed that one out
of five people have no idea what a cat-
aract is, and even the most educated
have only a vague conception of what is
involved in this disease. OLSEN stated
lack of public knowledge results from
the fact so little has been done in the
field of eye research.
More than 80 percent of all loss of
vision in the United States results from
diseases whose causes are unknown to
science. Five percent are the result of
accidents.
Visual disorders constitute one of the
Nation's leading causes of disability.
One-tenth of all patients seen in Ameri-
can hospitals are eye patients.
In 1963 the cost of caring for the blind
was more han $1 billion. Moneys In-
veste in eye research by both Govern-
me
t and private sources amounted to
I IV Ilion that same year.
SOUTH VIETNAMESE EXECUTION
(Mrs. MINK asked and was given per-
mission to address the House for 1 min-
ute, and to revise and extend her re-
marks.)
Mrs. MINK. Mr. Speaker, a grave
travesty on justice has been perpetrated
by the Government of South Vietnam in
the name of social and economic reform.
The public justification for this execu-
tion was, and I quote yesterday's Wash-
ington Post; to fulfill Ky's pledge to
President Johnson at the Honolulu Con-
ference to put South Vietnam's social
and economic house in order." For all
the influence that we have on this re-
gime, we did nothing to stop this sense-
l
bli
t
ess pu
c execu
ion which makes a
NATIONAL EYE INSTITUTE
mockery of our whole system of justice.
(Mr. OLSEN of Montana asked and Out of the Honolulu Conference came
was given permission to address the a display of unity of purpose of our two
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/29: C111 - P6 R000400040012-1
PID
RECO
1. CONGRESSIONAL
1966
March 15,
Governments. There was renewed good Emerson called Kossuth, "Freedom's
succeed in their own efforts to secure a
better life, but this recent spectacular ex-
hibit of totalitarian edict to secure cer-
tain ends points to the vastly different
worlds we truly live in.
General Ky's goals and ours may be
the same, but can we, in the eyes of the
Asians whom we seek to influence and to
save from communism, embrace his
methods of the firing squad by our si-
lence and our acquiesence?
I urge the President and the Vice Pres-
ident to quickly intercede to prevent
these extreme measures from becoming
the means by which all of his social and
economic problems are solved.
Lest we make a mockery of our valiant
and tragic sacrifice of the lives of our
American youth who need to have com-
plete faith in the integrity of the South
Vietnamese Government, we must force-
fully insist that its leadership under-
stand and apply to its own people the
same moral and ethical code of conduct
that has caused our American soldiers to
give their lives for the sake of the ideals
of a democratic society.
This barbaric act must not be allowed
to be repeated. To accept this kind of a
solution to an economic phenomenon is
to invite the easy road to ultimate ruin
without treating the cause at all. A
thousand executed profiteers will not
buy a stable economy or a new social
order.
THE 118TH ANNIVERSARY OF HUN-
GARIAN INDEPENDENCE
(Mr. PATTEN asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. PATTEN. Mr. Speaker, it is with
special pride that I speak today-on the
118th anniversary of the Hungarian up-
rising for liberty against the Hapsburg
dynasty.
It is special for several reasons.
It is special because my dear friend of
many years, Bishop Zoltan Beky, presi-
dent of the Hungarian Reformed Federa-
tion of America, delivered the beautiful
and moving prayer heard this noon in
the House of Representatives.
It is special because people who love
and cherish freedom throughout the
world have a particular respect for the
Hungarian people. They have always
been champions of liberty.
And it is also special because one of
the greatest fighters and leaders that
freedom ever had-Louis Kossuth-in-
spired the Hungarian revolution for free-
dom we are observing today.
These revolutionaries for freedom were
successful in their fight against tyranny
and Louis Kossuth became head of the
Government. But their freedom did not
endure and the revolution was over-
throw by the Hapsburg dynasty.
After Kossuth fled to Turkey, he later
visited the United States, where he re-
ceived many honors is a hero of free-
dom.
Judging not only from his deeds, but
from the words of praise that came from
some of America's greatest men, Louis
Kossuth was indeed great.
Greeting him at Concord, Ralph Waldo
Horace lxreeiey, u.iiv~iaci uui.=cc=,,
mortal, said of Kossuth:
Of the many popular leaders who were up-
heaved by the great convulsions of 1848 into
the full sunlight of European celebrity and
American popular regard, the world has al-
ready definitely assigned the first rank to
Louis Kossuth, advocate, deputy, finance
minister, and finally Governor of Hungary.
Whittier lauded him as "the noblest
guest."
And as we near recent history, we note
that Woodrow Wilson in 1918 praised
Kossuth and said:
I know the history of the gallant Magyar
nation.
Tribute was not restricted to Ameri-
cans of renown. The famous English
economist and statesman Cobden de-
clared:
Kossuth is certainly a phenomenon: he is
not only the first orator of his age, but he
unites the qualities of a great administrator
with high morality and an indefatigable
courage.
Because he loved freedom so deeply,
Kossuth recognized despotism and always
fought it vigorously-with sword and pen.
As far back as October 27, 1851, he ob-
served:
The principle of evil on the Continent is
the despotic and encroaching spirit of the
Russian power. Russia is the rock which
breaks every sigh for freedom.
5573
And Daniel Webster delivered an ad-
dress of welcome to Louis Kossuth on
January 5, 1852. His words express the
feelings I have for the Hungarian people
on this day of remembrance-and I be-
lieve the feelings of many of my col-
leagues. Said Webster:
Hungary stands out far above her neigh-
bors in all that respects free institutions,
constitutional government and a hereditary
love of liberty.
How true these words are even 114
years later.
The free world will always remember
and admire the courage of the Hun-
garian people in 1956, when they rebelled
against the tyranny of communism.
Their courage was an inspiration to the
entire world.
I visited Hungary last November and
I observed with my own eyes that the
people there have no freedom under
communism. Russian soldiers with ma-
chine guns make the whole country a
jail. The people seem lethargic-almost
as if life is not worth living.
Mr. Speaker, on the 118th anniversary
of the Hungarian uprising for liberty, let
us pray to God that once again-soon-
Hungary will be free.
OREGON COUNTY, MO., MOVES
AHEAD WITH NEW CONSERVA-
TION DISTRICT
(Mr. JONES of Missouri asked and
was given permission to address the
House for 1 minute.)
Mr. JONES of Missouri. Mr. Speaker,
this month the Missouri State Soil and
Water Conservation Districts Commis-
sion authorized the people of Oregon
County to move ahead in the protection
and sound development of their soil and
water resources by approving a soil and
water conservation district for that
county. This action resulted from a ref-
erendum in which the people of Oregon
County voted for a conservation district.
Incidentally, this vote of approval was
382 to 20.
I have been extremely pleased with the
stepped-up interest in soil and water
conservation districts in Missouri.
Thirty-one have been formed in the last
6 years, accounting for nearly half of the
68 that have been formed since 1944.
I believe that this indicates recognition
of the benefits of sound conservation and
development. I believe that it also in-
dicates recognition of the value of the
district mechanism through which the
Department of Agriculture and other
Federal agencies can channel help to
rural individuals and communities. It is
a healthy trend and I hope will continue.
Conservation districts have proved to
be a sound way for communities to work
together and plan for not just the pres-
ent but for the long-term needs of the
community. Their objectives to manage
the land and water resources soundly
.while developing them assures a commu-
nity of resources that will remain an
asset for future economic growth. The
reasons for supporting this vital con-
servation movement are valid-whether
viewed from the point of the care of re-
sources themselves, or whether from the
point of the economic value these re-
sources have in the community.
Louis Kossuth knew the threat of
Russia even then but he also knew the
promise of America. For about 116 years
ago, he warned a gathering in Massachu-
setts that, "From Russia, no sun will ever
rise."
But he had faith in America's purpose
and dream, for he also told that group:
To find the sunlight where it most spreads
and lightens the path of freedom, we must
come to America.
In 1852, Kossuth was presented to the
United States Senate and also to the
House of Representatives. He did not
speak long, but, as always, spoke with
eloquence. He said:
It is remarkable that while in the history
of mankind, through all the past, honors
were bestowed upon glory, and glory was at-
tached only to success, the legislative au-
thorities of this great Republic bestow the
highest honors upon a persecuted exile, not
conspicuous by glory, nor favored by success,
but engaged in a just cause. There is a
triumph of republican principles in-this fact.
Later, Louis Kossuth, in heavy demand
as a brilliant speaker, gave almost 300
public addresses, all unforgettable.
Mr. Speaker, on this day of tribute to
the Hungarian people, it is hard to con-
clude, because our hearts and thoughts
are full of gratitude and love.
Since Louis Kossuth will always be the
symbol of the courageous and freedom-
loving Hungarian people, I would like to
quote from the poem written by James
Russell Lowell, named "Kossuth."
Land of the Magyars, though it be
The tyrant may relink his chain,
Already thine the victory,
As just future measures gain.
Thou hast succeeded, thou hast won
The deathly travail's amplest worth,
A nation's duty thou hast done,
Giving a hero to our earth.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 5574
Approved For RV8`1S JESSI~WAL CIE ORD7B00446RF 0040004001 - M_ 7,
The congressional district which I
represent-in which this new conserva-
tion district is located-is a highly pro-
ductive area and represents a large part
of the agricultural income of the State.
I have observed some of the conserva-
tion work that local people have done to
overcome water management and flood
problems. Some of these problems the
individual farmer can handle by him-
self. Many require broader technical
assistance such as is available through
soil and water conservation districts.
Many of the resource problems are of a
community nature where a group ap-
proach is required. Here again, the con-
servation district provides coordinated
action. Its farsighted and comprehen-
sive resource inventories and programs
are responsive to the needs and desires
of the community because they are
planned and carried out by local people,
I commend soil and water conserva-
tion districts for the vital role they have
taken in community development and I
am gratified that Oregon County has
joined their ranks, and am hopeful that
the few remaining counties in the 10th
district which do not have soil conserva-
tion districts will give serious considera-
tion to the benefits which they might
derive from the creation of such districts.
OPPORTUNITY CRUSADE
(Mr. GOODELL asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. GOODELL. Mr. Speaker, hear-
ings are now underway on the poverty
program. Congressman QUIE and I are
pressing for consideration of our pro-
posal to substitute an opportunity cru-
sade for the misfiring war on poverty.
Last week, Mr. Shriver testified rather
superficially on a variety of issues.
Among other things, In his prepared test-
imony, he made the incredible statement:
Since last summer fewer than 50 ineligibles
have been discovered in the Neighborhood
Youth Corps.
The very next day, Secretary Wirtz
contradicted Mr. Shriver by admitting
that at least 5,090 to 6,000 enrollees in
the Neighborhood Youth Corps have been
found ineligible and dropped since last
summer; 1,700 were dropped in Chicago
alone since January 1. Now they are
saying that these are welfare cases,
barely exceeding the strict poverty stand-
ards. Well, a quick spot check of widely
'dispersed records in Chicago gives quite
a different picture. Although arbitrary
handling of the hearings prevented me
from questioning Mr. Shriver on these,
here are some samples. I have removed
the names of the enrollees to spare them
embarrassment; however, they are avail-
able to officials who may be interested:
Male enrollee, 17, family of four, father
head of household, income $11,000 a year.
Male enrollee, 19, family of five, father
head of household, income $10,200 a year.
Female enrollee, 19, family of two-
housewife with no children-husband
head of household, income $5,000-plus a
year.
Female enrollee, 18, family of three-
an only child-father and mother both
work, earn jointly $150 per week.
Female enrollee, 20, family of three-
an only child-fatl: idr head of household,
income $7,500 a year.
Male enrollee, 17, family of six, father
head of household, income $7,000-plus a
year.
Male enrollee, 19, family of five, grand-
father head of household, income $7,000-
plus a year.
Male enrolee, 18, family of six, father
and mother both work, earn jointly $500
a month.
Male enrollee, 20, family of five, father
head of household, income $5,400 a year.
This is the program supposed to help
poor youngsters who are school dropouts
or likely dropouts for reasons of poverty.
Obviously, a full investigation would re-
veal many times more than Mr. Shriver's
50 ineligibles in Chicago alone. And no
wonder. Last November the public rela-
tions representative for the Chicago
poverty program stated:
We don't know what the families of kids
make. No straight flat figure on what an
applicant family should make has been set.
We have no statistics on incomes of the fam-
ilies of the kids in the Corps. We assume
that, when we receive a name from the
Illinois State Employment Service, the candi-
date named is qualified.
At that time, the executive director of
the Chicago program was quoted as
follows:
It is absolutely correct that, until today,
no means test was given in recruiting.
Almost one-quarter of the total en-
rollees in Neighborhood Youth Corps in
Chicago had to be dropped because they
exceeded the income requirement. At the
same time, the poverty director in
Chicago admits that there are at least
35,000, and others estimate up to 60,000,
young people between, the ages of 16
and 22 in Chicago who fully meet the
poverty standards for Neighborhood
Youth Corps but weren't given a chance.
Mr. Speaker, these are not isolated
cases; they prevail all over the country.
In addition to the 1,700 dropped in
Chicago, Mr. Jack Howard, director of
the Neighborhood Youth Corps, admitted
that about 2,000 in New York City and at
least 1,000 in Los Angeles were ineligible.
That is close to 5,000 ineligibles from
three cities alone.
In the next few days, I will discuss
other serious violations in the poverty
program in Chicago. In the meanwhile,
let me emphasize that the Quie-Goodell
opportunity crusade would correct these
deficiencies and put 50,000 youngsters
into productive jobs in private enter-
prise through a new Industry Youth
Corps.
DEFENDING FREEDOM WITH
FREEDOM
(Mr. SAYLOR asked and was given
permission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD, and to include ex-
traneous matter.)
Mr. SAYLOR. Mr. Speaker, last
month Roger M. Blough, chairman of the
board, United States Steel Corp., and a
native of my hometown, delivered an ad-
dress at the Founders Day Banquet of
Washington University in St. Louis, Mo.
Since a portion of it deals with the fiscal
responsibilities of Congress, I commend
Mr. Blough's presentation to my col-
leagues.
Without question, lack of restraint on
the part of the administration in re-
questing appropriations and lack of re-
straint on the the part of Congress in
making such funds available are the ma-
jor provocations in an inflationary trend.
They are the principal impediments to
holding onto the value of our money.
Providing the finest equipment and
tools of war is the topmost consideration
at this time. As Mr. Slough has estab-
lished, however, this cost has not reached
a point where it can be tagged as the sole
reason for the growing excess of Federal
expenditures over Federal income. The
real culprit is bureaucratic waste, and it
cannot be tolerated if Congress has any
intention of holding the line against the
destructive forces of inflation.
Under unanimous consent, Mr.
Blough's address appears herewith:
Founders day in any university provides a
welcome opportunity to indulge in recollec-
tions of past achievements. It serves to re-
call the humble beginnings of what, in this
case, has proven to be a monumental educa-
tional venture that was undertaken more
than a century ago. Everyone associated
with Washington University may well be
proud of its history, its traditions, and of its
past performance which weighs so heavily as
a promise for the future.
People have come to expect great things,
of this university and of its graduates; and
if I do not dwell, tonight, upon the com-
mendable degree to which these expectations
have been fulfilled, it is only because I am
understandably reluctant to do anything
which might contribute to, inflation-even
of the ego.
But founders day, as you observe it on this
campus, has a current purpose which trans-
cends the mere recognition of a fine and
noble tradition. It provides a unique oc-
casion to contemplate contemporary issues
of mounting importance. Many of you will
recall that last year, the Chief Justice of the
United States discussed with you the
"foundations of freedom" as those founda-
tions are imbedded in the law, the Constitu-
tion and the Bill of Rights. And in doing
so, he shed much penetrating light upon an
4ssue of profound importance to the future
of this Nation.
Tonight, I should like to consider with you
another aspect of freedom which seems to
me to be of imminent importance and which
certainly touches the lives of all of us. It
concerns the preservation of economic free-
dom in America while we seek to defend the
political freedom of other peoples through-
out the world.
As we meet here, we, are confronted by
the fact that despite prodigious efforts to
reach a negotiated peace, our Nation is en-
gaged in what might-if you wish-he called
a negotiated war. Two hundred thousand
American men are now fighting in Vietnam.
Each month, some thousands of others are
receiving their "greetings" from Uncle Sam.
And present indications are that before the
year is out the number of American troops
engaged in this conflict will have more than
doubled.
So for the fourth time in this century,
American youth has answered the call to
repel aggression in foreign lands, to protect
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67B00 6R000400040012-1
March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOU
a foreign people against subjugation, infiltra- would have to mount to an astronomical $100
tion, and subversion, and to help them find billion In order to reach the 1311/2 percent
a solution to their own problems. rate that prevailed at the height of the
In this effort our men are heavily handi- Korean war. That Is far beyond any pro-
capped by a jungle-type existence, by a cli- jetted requirement of the action In Vietnam.
mate and terrain that is alien to anything As for manpower, it must be noted here
they have known, by extended supply lines, also that the national labor force has sub-
reaching halfway around the world, by in- stantially increased in numbers during the
adequate help from most of the other free
nations; and by extreme barriers to under-
standing.
Meanwhile, among our people here at
home, there are some who question vehe-
mently the necessity, the wisdom or even
the morality of our involvement in this war.
And this, too, is an exercise of freedom that
few of us would seek to deny, I suppose, how-
ever deeply we may disagree with such ex-
pressions.
But there is one basic point, I believe,
upon which true Americans can never dis-
agree: That everything needed to protect
the lives of our soldiers in Vietnam
shall be provided to the limit of our na-
tional resources, both material and human.
If the sacrifice of economic freedom will, in
fact, hasten the winning of the peace in
Vietnam and reduce our casualties there,
there can hardly be any loyal opposition to
such a sacrifice. But if, on the other hand,
the economic freedoms which have made
this Nation the most productive in the
world are-as I believe them to be-a unique
source of our military and economic
strength, then we should, and must, defend
and preserve them in the national interest.
In short, the question before us is: To
what degree may we assist in the fight for
freedom by relying upon freedom-freedom
in production, freedom to buy and sell, and
freedom in occupation? Or must we revert
to wartime types of wage controls, or price
controls, materiel controls and even controls
of movement among occupations in order, as
a nation, to wage the defense of freedom?
The question is a grave one; and it Is none
too early to explore it now in the cool, un-
emotional light of reason and fact; for the
good sense and the patriotic endeavors of
the American people will have much to do
with determining its solution. What the
people think, and what they say to their Rep-
resentatives in Congress, is certain to Influ-
ence the final decision since eventually-
under our ' system of laws-Congress must
make that decision.
Let us consider, then, three aspects of this
question. Do the pressures generated by the
war in Vietnam, plus those created by. a
rapidly growing economy, make controls nec-
essary now or in the foreseeable future? Do
the economic disruptions caused by controls
themselves negate or outweigh the benefits
to be expected from them? Are other, less
disruptive means available for use in dealing
with these pressures?
Turning first to the question of necessity,
we recall that in World War II and again
during the Korean conflict controls were im-
posed upon production, distribution, wages
and prices in order to channel the necessary
portion of our Gross National Product into
the war effort. How then do conditions
today compare with those that existed be-
fore?
At the end of World War IT, there were
11,500,000 men in our Armed Forces-or
171/2 percent of the total labor supply. Dur-
ing Korea, there were 3,500,000 men In the
military, representing over 5 percent of the
labor force; and about 475,000 of these were
actually engaged in Korea.
Last year, some 2,800,000 men were in the
armed forces and this accounted for only
3.6 percent of the labor supply. Future re-
quirements, as presently projected, could call
for an additional 300,000 men In the services;
but even if that number were to rise to 500,-
000, the military drain on the national labor
force would amount to only about 4 percent
as compared to more than 5 percent during
the Korean conflict.
And as for Vietnam itself, the 200,000 men
now stationed there constitute only one-
fourth of 1 percent of our national labor sup-
ply; and President Johnson reports that the
total production of goods and services for
the war "accounts for less than 11/a percent
of our gross national product."
So it is evident, I think, that Vietnam is
not the primary source of the economic pres-
sures we are experiencing. Vietnam may
provide an excuse for the advocacy of con-
trols. But it is not a reason for them; and
if we seek out the major cause of these pres-
sures, we must look to the unusually rapid
rate of our economic growth In the non-
military areas.
Last year, the American economy grew at
a greater rate than that of any other major
industrial nation in the world. After cor-
recting for rising prices, the real rate of
growth was 51/2 percent; and all of this new
activity increased the demand for manpower,
and the upward pressure on wages and prices.
During the 1960's, the expansion of the
supply of money and credit has been at twice
the rate prevailing in the late 1950's. Gov-
ernment expenditures at all levels-Federal,
State, and local-have increased 65 percent
since Korea even though there has been no
appreciable rise in military outlays. Thus
virtually all of this increase has occurred on
the nondefense side of the ledger.
As a result, a head of economic steam is
building up to a point which is beginning
to cause national concern lest it break out
in a burst of rising wages and prices. And
this concern is understandable at a time
when we are confronted by a stubbornly
continuing imbalance of international pay-
mets, a worrisome outflow of our dwindling
gold supply, the need to widen the narrowing
gap in our favorable balance of trade, and the
necessity of preserving the integrity of the
dollar as a medium of international ex-
change.
Trying to find out how long we can con-
tain this mounting head of steam while con-
tinuing to heat up the boiler is something
like playing Russian roulette. Certainly we
cannot continue indefinitely no matter how
Well, aU U.~c NGan
expenditures 'averaged about Y$81 billion a hard we try to hold back the hand on the
year and exceeded 40 percent of the total pressure gage. For the present we are pin-
GNP. At the height of the Korean war, they ning our faith upon the willingness and the
were almost $49 billion and accounted for ability of both industry and labor to comply
131/3 percent of the GNP. Last year they voluntarily with the governmental guide-
amounted to $50 billion; but they repre- posts established some years ago; and while
sented only 71/2 percent of the GNP. That a considerable degree of price stability has
is because the GNP itself has more than been achieved during this period-especially
trebled since World War IT, and has nearly In the more visible industries where a certain
doubled since the peak Korean year of 1953. amount of "persuasion" could be applied-
During the present year it is estimated the boiler is clearly beginning to leak.
that our total defense expenditures may rise For the entire nongovernmental sector of
to $60 billion which would still be less than the economy, employee compensation per
8%2 percent of the anticipated GNP; and they man-hour has risen more than output per
No. 45-6
5575
man-hour in each of the past 3 years; so unit
labor costs have kept mounting. Across the
economy generally, labor settlements last
year exceeded the guidepost limits of 3.2 per-
cent; and a recent release by the Department
of Labor reports that in the construction In-
dustry, for example, wages and benefits rose
4.8 percent during the past fiscal year, while
their study of a limited number of these
labor contracts negotiated in 1965 revealed
increases averaging 6.1 percent and ranging
up to 8.3 percent.
Under the pressure of these rising costs
and of the increased economic activity gen-
erally, the Consumer Price Index has risen
11 percent since 1957-59, and the tempo has
accelerated recently. In fact I might add,
parenthetically, that during the 7 years since
the end of 1958, the cost of living has gone
up about six times as much as the price of
finished steel. But I mention that only in
passing.
Further energizing this trend toward
higher wages and consequent rising prices
is the fact that we now have practically full
employment, and there is an actual shortage
of skilled workers. Only about 4 percent of
the labor force is presently classified as un-
employed, and the Council of Economic Ad-
visers reports that this figure will drop to
33/4 percent for the current year and will be
well below that level at year's end. Among
married men, unemployment is now down
to 2 percent and is still declining.
Under all of these circumstances, it will
clearly become increasingly difficult to main-
tain an acceptaale degree of wage and price
stability through the publication of guide-
posts and the powers of Presidential persua-
sion; and the question arises: "What next?"
So the situation that confronts us today
is much like that which prevailed at the
end of 1960, when the United States had
started down the road to wage and price
controls. Then, as now, the road was paved
with requests for a voluntary freeze; and
standards for the freeze were being drawn
up. Under the pressures of that day, the
prices of many products were rising; and the
prospect of price control, itself, added greatly
to these pressures as producers and mer-
chants sought to cover their rising costs
before the freeze hit them. Production
shifted from lower price lines to more ex-
pensive, and more profitable goods; and re-
tailers built their inventories to a record
high, thus adding to demand in an already
overheated economy.
But before we travel that road again, let
us stop, look, and listen, for it is one thing
to talk of controls and quite another thing
to survive them. There is no doubt that
for a limited period they can and do hold
down the lid on prices. There is also no
doubt, however, that they create scarcity
and thus add to the economic pressures that
caused their adoption in the first place.
Some of us whose memory goes back to the
controls of 20 years ago will recall the butter
that was sold from under the counter to
favored customers, and the deterioration in
the quality of merchandise that occurred as
producers and merchants were often forced-
at the peril of their own survival-to pay
higher-than-ceiling prices on purchases in
order to get the materials to keep their busi-
nesses running.
Then, too, there is a wasteful deployment
of manpower at a time when a shortage of
manpower already exists. Under the normal
operation of a free market, the people them-
selves-as buyers-determine what man-
power will be allocated to what production.
If they do not choose to buy a certain
product, then that product will no longer
be made and the manpower will go elsewhere
to produce what is wanted and needed.
Controls not only wipe out this self-
adjusting, competitive mechanism, but-by
their almost unbelievable complexity-they
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 5576
.Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
CONGRESSIONAL, RECORD - HOUSE March 15, 1966
create enormous new manpower demands in
the administration and the application of
the regulations.
To illustrate, let me recall that during the
Korean war, United States Steel's operations
were under control by eight different
Federal agencies, the most important of
which were the National Production Author-
ity and the Office of Price Stabilization.
Regulations and directives of the National
Production Authority aggregated about 300,-
000 words and underwent approximately 400
amendments, supplements, revocations, and
directions.
The Office of Price Stabilization issued 37
different regulations applying to our business.
One ceiling price regulation alone consisted
of almost 30,000 words and was amended 41
times with 20 supplemental regulations. So
estimate if you can the number of account-
ants, lawyers, engineers, and ohers required
to keep up with these regulations; expand
that to cover all the businesses in the coun-
try, big and small; add the thousands em-
ployed in the administration of these con-
trols on the Government side, and you come
up with some idea, at least, of the great
wastage of manpower that is inherent in the
mere application of controls themselves.
But, you may ask, can the Defense Depart-
ment-in the absence of controls-get what
it needs to carry on its military efforts? The
answer is that it can and it does. We already
have a system of priorities under which De-
fense has first claim on essential production.
But will not the Government have to pay
more than it should? And the answer to
that is also s}mple; for the Government is
the sole buyer of war material while there
are many sellers competing for its business.
Thus we have the opposite of a monopoly-
a monopsony. And as a monopsony, the
Government imposes conditions of purchase
under which it exercises the right to rene-
gotiate contracts and to reclaim an adjudi-
cated part of the purchase price if the profits
on the sale are deemed too large.
But then, you may ask, how about the
average fellow, the pensioner, or widow liv-
ing on a fixed income. Without controls, is
there any better way of keeping prices from
skyrocketing? And here, I can only think
of the ardent young suitor whose proposal
of marriage had been firmly rejected by the
girl of his dreams.
"Tell me," he pleaded, "is there anyone
else?"
"Oh, Elmer," she replied, "there must be."
So it is with controls. There must be bet-
ter solutions; and I believe that there are.
In the first place we must recognize that
our productive capacity in America is ex.
panding substantially every year; so there
is an ever-increasing supply of goods and
services to meet our Nation's demands, both
military and civilian.
The President has called upon business to
exercise restraint in its pricing policies; and
has asked labor unions to keep their demands
within certain bounds. Here it must be
said that the two problems are somewhat
different, Among businesses there is a high
degree of competition which tends to repress
prices; but among unions there is also a
high degree of competition-more in the
nature of political competition-which tends
conversely to escalate wages.
For example, transit workers in New York
recently won wage and benefit increases far
in excess of guidepost limits; and now it is
announced that the New York City Police
will seek pay boosts that will also shatter
the guideposts concept.
It goes without saying that among labor
unions you will find just as many patriotic
and dedicated men as in any other segment
of our society. These men, however, have a
real problem. They feel compelled by force
of circumstance to demand "more" in behalf
of the individuals they represent. That is
their function and their job; and it is asking
much of them when they are called upon to
exercise restraint.
Similarly it is the inescapable obligation
of business managers to keep their enter-
prises healthy and to generate the profit
necessary to keep America's industrial facili-
ties modern and competitive-not only in the
interest of the owners but in the national
interest as well. So there must be some
wage and price flexibility to accommodate
the myriad changes that occur from day to
day. Yet I believe that the wiser heads in
the leadership of both labor and business will
recognize that the exercise of restraint in
the highest possible degree is imperative at
a time when the probable alternatives are
rising costs and runaway prices or disruptive
controls.
But restraint is not a, one-way street, and
no matter how diligently and patriotically
business and labor may try to plug the leaks
in the economic boiler, they cannot succeed
unless someone stops pouring on the coal.
And that, I believe, is where Congress comes
in. On the monetary side, the Federal Re-
serve Board is authorized and equipped to
retard the expansion of currency and credit;
and I would not anticipate that Congress
would seek to oppose the necessary exercise
of these powers.
On the fiscal side, Congress can ease the
pressure by the judicious use of taxation;
and the President has already recommended
the reinstatement of certain excise taxes
and a speed-up in the payments of personal
and corporate income taxes.
But it is in the area of restraint in appro-
priations and other legislation that the hard-
working men on this Hill face both their
most difficult problems and their greatest
opportunity to prevent a further heating up
of the economy; for it is they who control
the purse strings.
Today we dream of an America where there
will be no slums, no pockets of poverty, no
illiterates, no unemployed, no discrimina-
tion, no lack of medical facilities for all, and
a minimum of crime. And, being Americans,
we are impatient to reach those shining
goals--which is as it should be. But exces-
sive impatience at a time of great economic
pressure can be disastrous and produce the
wage and price explosion which neither
guideposts nor controls can permanently pre-
vent. And it is up to all of use to recognize
that we cannot have what I call instant
affluence.
Certainly it should be possible to defer a
number of programs which call for pouring
of additional dollars into the economy from
Government sources, however meritorious
those programs might be under other cir-
cumstances.
Is it necessary, for example, to press for-
ward with make-work types of projects at
a time when manpower is already scarce and
growing scarcer?
Is this a time to undertake other large
governmental expenditures which will divert
manpower from more immediately necessary
production? No one discounts the value of
training the youth of this Nation and pro-
viding jobs for them; but is it not better
for them to be trained on the job while
earning their own keep and doing useful
work? And does not the growing shortage of
skilled workers create new opportunities for
the unskilled to acquire skills?
Then, too, is this the year to enact, for
example, a law increasing the minimum wage
by 40 percent, and at the same time talk
about a 3.2-percent limit on increases un-
der the guideposts? Will this not tend to
elevate the entire wage structure when the
increased social security and medicare taxes
that went into effect last month have already
added at least two-thirds of a percent to em-
ployment costs generally-an addition, in-
cidentally, which the guideposts do not take
into account?
Is 1966 the year in which to federalize un-
employment compensation by legislation
that will add still further to the cost of em-
ployment in hundreds of corporations all
over the country?
In short, is this the time to enact-in the
name of social progress-far-reaching pro-
grams that are costly, inadequately managed
because of the lack of trained manpower,
and in many instances designed to correct
situations that the present economic buildup
is already tending to correct without gov-
ernmental intervention?
The answer is up to the Members of Con-
gress. It is their prerogative to authorize
expenditures. It is their obligation to view
the economic picture as a whole and act in
their own best wisdom.
Summing up, then, this is a plea for rec-
ognizing where we are as a nation-a na-
tion which necessarily must meet its com-
mitments abroad and maintain its economic
strength at home.
It is a plea for practical restraint by both
business and labor.
It is equally a plea for restraint on the
part of Congress which will finally determine
the extent of the pressures unleashed in our
economic system.
It is even more a plea to recognize that the
most effective way to help our Government
achieve its purposes is not through the im-
position of controls-and that even the sug-
gestion of controls breeds apprehensions
which induce scare buying and, in turn, in-
crease the upward tendency of wages and
prices.
Above all, this is a plea to recognize the free
market economy for what it is: the most ef-
ficient, productive source of our material
freedom; and to acknowledge that interfer-
ence with the markets operation leads to
inefficiency, inequity, and to shortages.
In a word, it is a plea to defend freedom
with freedom.
ANNOUNCEMENT
(Mr. FISHER asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute.)
Mr. FISHER. Mr. Speaker, on the
vote which was just concluded on the
appropriation bill I was unavoidably de-
tained and arrived in the Chamber im-
mediately after the conclusion of the
vote. I should like to announce that had
I been present, I would have voted "yea."
THE ARMY ARSENAL SYSTEM AND
THE SPRINGFIELD ARMORY-
NO. II
(Mr. BOLAND asked and was given
;permission to extend his remarks at
this point in the RECORD and to include
extraneous matter.)
Mr. BOLAND. Mr. Speaker, yesterday
the gentleman from Massachusetts, Con-
gressman CONTE, and I addressed the
House for the purpose of bringing to the
attention of Congress the extreme seri-
ousness, to the security of this country,
of current steps being taken by the De-
partment of Defense and the Army to-
ward closing out all operations and fa-
cilities at the Springfield Armory.
Today, we are providing more basic in-
formation in opposition to this most in-
advisable and fateful decision on the
part of the Secretary of Defense. It is
a decision which, in our opinion, gam-
bles-first in the name of disproved cost
reduction and now in the name of private
enterprise-with the long-range security
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 X94 Approved For Releep #Wlei-gpe~6j 9OA4 00040012-1/March 15, 1966
Cleveland Trust; Arthur W, Steudel, chair-
man of Sherwin-Williams Co.
[From the Cleveland (Ohio) Press, Feb. 16,
1966]
THE BANK EXAMINERS
If the special bank investigating commit-
tee created by the 1965 legislature has the
best interest of all Ohio in mind, there will
be no whitewash of any bank practice, nor
of any particular bank or banks.
Under its chairman, State Senator Charles
W. Whalen, Jr., of Dayton, the committee
has opened its hearings in Columbus. The
legislator responsible for its creation-Sen-
ator Oliver Ocasek-was not shown the
courtesy of being named to the committee.
But Ocasek has said he will be present.
Certainly the committee can do no less than
hear him explain in detail just why he be-
lieved Ohio needed such a probe into its
State-chartered banks at this time.
If he suggests, as he has indicated he
would, that there are dangerous signs of ex-
treme concentration of power in State bank-
ing circles, then let's see if such concern is
justified.
The banking community of Ohio Is in need
of no whitewash. It is sound enough to
take without a quiver a searchinsg examina-
tion into its methods of operation-and its
interlocking interests.
We in Cleveland, home of the State's larg-
est banking institution-the Cleveland Trust
Co.-will be watching the work of this com-
mittee with great interest.
[From'the Cleveland Press, Feb. 17, 1966]
BANK'S CHIEF SKIPS LEGISLATURE'S HEARING
(By Gordon C. Raeburn)
COLUMBUS.-The first legislative study of
Ohio's banking laws and regulations since
1933 is off to a slow start because of the State
commerce department's division of banks.
The six senators and nine representatives
wanted to discuss the State's problems in
regulating and examining Ohio's banks at
yesterday's first hearing.
Neither Banks Supt. Clarence C. Luft nor
any of his employees appeared as requested.
State Representative William L. Elliott,
Democrat, of Malta, the committee's vice
chairman, said "It is extremely relevant that
we have someone here from the banking de-
partment."
State Senator, Anthony O. Calabrese, Demo-
crat, of Cleveland, said the committee could
not go ahead until the superintendent of
banks appeared to discuss problems in the
banking industry.
Meantime, the legislative service commis-
sion has been asked to gather information
it can in two areas:
Adequacy of the State division of banks
to conduct regular examinations of banks as
required by law.
Advisability of changing the method by
which the superintendent of banks is se-
lected.
Dave Johnson, acting head of the legisla-
tive service commission, told the committee
that present Ohio law makes no reference
to experience requirements of the superin-
tendent. He is appointed by the Governor.
He suggested a look into the method of se-
lecting the superintendent and scrutiny of
the bank examination requirements and
whether they are being met as part of a
six-point study of the banking industry and
laws.
Other points on the Johnson recommenda-
tion, which the committee temporarily ac-
cepted, were:
Legality and propriety of any bank voting
its own shares of stock.
Adverse effects of interlocking directorates
and holding of stocks.
,Appropriateness of standards used in
granting charters and branch bank permits.
Enlarging the powers of the banking ad-
visory board.
State Senator Charles W. Whalen, Jr., Re-
publican, of Dayton, chairman, asked the leg-
islative research commission to obtain a
transcript of all testimony concerning Ohio
banking which has been given before the
House Banking Committee, headed by Con-
gressman WRIGHT PATMAN, Democrat, of
Texas.
The executive manager of the Ohio Bankers
Association, O. E. Anderson, said his organi-
zation welcomes the study.
"We have complete confidence in your
ability in not allowing this to become a
witch hunt," Anderson said.
He said the association is sure the com-
mittee would "approach it [the study] on
an industry basis and not be swayed by ex-
traneous matters and personalities."
Although the committee is primarily con-
cerned with State banks, it will 'compare
regulations affecting national banks with
State laws.
There are 548 banks in Ohio, of which 332
are State banks.
"The largest bank in Ohio Is a State bank-
the Cleveland Trust Co.," Anderson said.
"The second largest is a national bank, the
National City Bank of Cleveland."
[From the Cleveland Press, Feb. 18, 1966]
.UNJUSTIFIED ABSENTEEISM
The leisurely probe of State-chartered
banks by the legislature's bank investigat-
ing committee got off to a sorry start. Nei-
ther State Banks Superintendent Clarence
Luft nor any of his employees appeared as re-
quested.
This uncooperative attitude gives added
weight to those speculations that the probe
will accomplish little. So does the date of
the next public meeting, March 14.
This investigation is important. Ohioans
should know how much financial power is
concentrated in State-chartered banks.
Luft and his staff insult the legislature and
the public by their uncooperative attitude.
Governor Rhodes should be sure his em-
ployees are present when the committee re-
sumes March 14.
FREE AIRMAIL SHIPMENT TO
SERVICEMEN IN VIETNAM
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from New York [Mr. HALPERN] is
recognized for 15 minutes.
Mr. HALPERN. Mr. Speaker, today
I Introduced legislation to provide free
armall shipment of parcels to our serv-
icemen in Vietnam.
I have had the privilege of visiting our
fighting men in Vietnam, and I can at-
test to the fact that there is nothing like
a gift from home, to boost the morale of
our GI's at mail call. Whether it be
knitted socks from a GI's girlfriend, a
box of cookies from mother or an inter-
esting book from father, it makes a GI
feel more remembered.
I firmly believe that this is the least
we can do. The sending of gifts on a
large scale will reflect to our fighting
men, a gratified public; and the free use
of the mail will reflect a grateful govern-
ment. Campaigns urging the public to
send books and other gifts of interest
have been gaining considerable support,
but they would be given a real impetus
if we allowed these modest mailing
privileges.
The bill would, among other things,
allow for the free airmail shipment of
parcels weighing up to 10 pounds to our
servicemen in Vietnam. In addition, the
language is broad.enough to cover any
similar future situations in which U.S.
forces are engaged in hostilities with any
foreign force.
I believe that those who donate, col-
lect and wrap these gifts, and carry them
to their local post offices perform a truly
laudable service, and the least the Fed-
eral Government can do is absorb the
three or four dollars it costs to ship one
of these gifts.
I invite my colleagues to join in spon-
soring this legislation, and I urge the
Committee on Post Office and Civil
Service to accord full considdr6,tipk to
FREE WORLD SHIPPING TO NORTH
VIETNAM
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Michigan [Mr. CHAMBERLAIN],
is recognized for 10 minutes.
. (Mr. CHAMBERLAIN asked and was
given permission to include lists.)
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. Mr. Speaker,
from time to time during this past year,
I have endeavored to keep my colleagues
of the House informed about the serious
problem of free' world shipping to North
Vietnam. Just recently I received the
report on this shipping for the month of
February and take this occasion to make
this information available to the Mem-
bers of the House.
The unclassified information for the
month of January shows that seven free
world ships called at North Vietnamese
ports during that month as follows:
NAME OF SHIP, FLAG, GROSS TONNAGE, AND
DATE ARRIVED
Agenor, Greece, 7,139 gross tons, January 25.
Amon, Cyprus, 7,229 gross tons, January 28.
Hellas, Greece, 7,176 gross tons, January 19.
Kanaris, Greece, 7,240 gross tons, January
19.
Milford, United Kingdom, 1,889 gross tons,
January 4.
Shienfoon, United Kingdom, 7,127 gross
tons, January 9.
Shirley Christine, United Kingdom, 6,724
gross tons, January 31.
During the month of February, there
were six such arrivals, all of United
Kingdom registry, as follows:
NAME OF SHIP, FLAG, GROSS TONNAGE, AND
DATE ARRIVED
Ardtara, United Kingdom, 5,975 gross tons,
February 15.
Greenford, United Kingdom, 2,961 gross
tons, February 19.
Milford, United Kingdom, 1,889 gross tons,
February -.
Shienfoon, United Kingdom, 7,127 gross
tons, February 2.
Shienfoon, United Kingdom, 7,127 gross
tons, February -.
Wakasa Bay, United Kingdom, 7,040 gross
tons, February 7.
While the volume of this trade has
decreased substantially from what it was
during the first 2 months of 1965, I
hasten to point out that the secret re-
ports show more than twice the number
of vessels just mentioned.
While it is regrettable that this traffic
was permitted to flourish for so long, the
administration officials responsible for
finally acting to bring about a reduction
of this trading with the enemy are cer-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 March 15, YJ66 Approved CONGRe 1ONOALORECOJIllA-RDfi67f0446R000400040012-1 55Q
State Senator Charles Whalen, Jr., of Day- of stock held in trust for widows and or- "This uncooperative attitude gives added
ton, chairman of the Ohio Bank Study Com- phans. I would welcome an opportunity to weight to those speculations that the probe
mittee, told the Journal: discuss this with your committee." will accomplish little. So does the date of
"We start today * * ? and we must have The initial 21/4-hour session of the 15 the next public meeting, March 14.
an outline of what we are going to investigate member committee proved somewhat of a "This investigation is important. Ohioans
and study." "feeling out" period in which the scope of should know how much financial power is
Asked whether the committee will explore the study was discussed. concentrated in State-chartered banks. Luft
the Cleveland Trust situation, Whalen said: The committee agreed to take up three of and his staff insult the legislature and the
"Yes, we will bring up the Cleveland Trust the less controversial areas first: public by their uncooperative attitude. Gov-
situation and the adequacy of the present Adequacy of the State division of banks ernor Rhodes should be sure his employees
law, especially in light of Federal laws deal- to conduct regular examinations. are present when the committee resumes
ings with concentrations of power * * * and Standards and methods used in granting March 14."
about banks voting their own stocks, and charter and branch permits.
anything else." Advisability of changing the method of CLEVELAND TRUST RESOURCES Top $2 BILLION;
Under a headline, "Predict Whitewash of selecting. the superintendent of banks. OHIO FIRST--EARNINGS GREATEST OF NA-
Banks That Vote Their Own Stock," the (Now, he is appointed by Governor.) TION'S BANKS
Cleveland Press said yesterday: The three hot items on the agenda will The Cleveland Trust Co., which is under
"And the political betting in Columbus is be taken up last, later this year, and pos- fire for its immense concentration of eco-
the committee will come up with little, if sibly not in time for the next session of nomic power, today reported that it had be-
anything; to comply with the original intent the legislature in January. They are: come the first bank in Ohio to achieve $2 bil-
of the legislative resolution." The legality and propriety of any bank lion in total resources.
A large stockholder in the Cleveland voting its own shares of stock. The annual report also showed that 1965
Trust-but unfriendly to its management- The possible adverse affect upon competi- was the year in which net operating earnings
told the Journal that the bank was hoping tion and other public interests of interlock- increased 19.8 percent-the greatest Improve-
to be able to vote its stock at the March 23 ing holding of stocks among; various banks meat reported by any of America's top 25
meeting and then try for a change in the of the State. banks.
Ohio law during the next session of the The possible need for enlarging the pow- Two Ohio legislators-State Senator Oliver
legislature. ers and responsibilities of the State bank- Ocasek and State Representative Carl
Chairman George Gund of Cleveland Trust ing advisory board. Stokes-want the new Ohio Bank Study
was not available for comment since yester- Committee to challenge the property and
day morning. CLEVELAND TRUST FLAYED FOR SECRETIVE ethics of the Cleveland Trust voting its own
TRUST OPERATION stock and dominating major corporations
CARL STOKES AND SENATOR OCASEK DEMAND The Cleveland Trust Co. came under new and banks. The next meeting of the legis-
ACTION: CLEVELAND TRUST UNDER FIRE AT criticism today for operating a trust "secret- lative bank committee is March 14 at
HEARING ON OHIO BANKS ly" and "restrictively" Columbus.
(By John Saffell) While the bank was under attack, State In the Cleveland Trust's notice to stock-
COLUMBUS.-The Cleveland Trust Co., big- Banks Superintendent Clarence Luft was holders Of the annual meeting March 23,
gest bank in the State, has become a storm criticized for not cooperating with the State 1966, . at 1:30 p.m., at 916 Euclid Avenue,
center at legislative hearings that could lead bank study committee, which is taking a Chairman George Gund and President George
to changing Ohio's banking laws, hard look at the Cleveland Trust and other Karch pointed out that its dummy part-
Several legislators are calling for a close financial institutions in t'ze State. nership, A. A. Welsh & Co., holds 602,329
look into what they describe as a Cleveland Cleveland Trust holds the purse strings shares (33.48 percent) of the outstanding
Trust practice of voting its own stock and for Kingwood Center, a flower garden and stock of the bank.
some it holds in trust, beauty spot which the late C. K. King left Stewart Anthony, secretary of the bank,
Representative Carl Stokes, who just in trust for the benefit of the people of explained that A. A. Welsh & Co. Is a partner-
narrowly lost the race for mayor of Cleve- Mansfield and Ohio. ship organized by the bank for the sole pur-
land to Ralph Locher, sent this telegram to In an editorial, the News Journal of Mans- pose acting to as "nominee" anew rarities ndd hold
registered
State Senator Charles W. Whalen, Jr., chair- field said:
man of the bank study committee. "As corporate trustee, the Cleveland bank the bank in various trust capacities.
"The Lorain Journal has published this has never revealed publicly the amount of The bank officers vote this stock, along
week a series of articles highly critical of the trust, nor has it revealed the amount of with another 25,278 shares held by the bank
the policies and practices of the Cleveland annual earnings from which Mr. King desig- in other capacities, including F. J. Haffner &
Trust Co., the largest financial institution nated that Kingwood Center be operated and Co. and Custo & Co.
in Ohio. I urge you to bring these articles maintained. Much of the criticism leveled by legislators
to the attention of all members of your corn- "The public has no way of knowing whether and others boils down to the charge that the
mittee at the beginning of your investiga- the trust is being capably and wisely man- bank officers vote the stock to perpetuate
tion of Ohio banks." aged. It appears to be the attitude of Cleve- themselves in office and to dominate and
State Representative Stokes added: land Trust that this is none of the public's control other corporations.
"I was deeply disturbed to read in the business even though Mr. King clearly in- Here's how the voting of 527,560 shares are
Cleveland Press a story which predicts that tended that the center be operated for the held in the bank's trust capacity:
your committee will whitewash the banks in benefit of the people of Mansfield and Ohio. One: 12,994 shares were registered in the
their practice of voting their own stocks and "Recently when it was sought to deter- names of principals of agency or custodian
in other acts that many consider to be il- mine if a theater could be built, as Mr. King accounts and the bank as fiduciary has no
legal and improper. The common man has suggested for part of the center's develop- power to vote the shares.
a deep interest in the ethical standards of ment, the answer came back from Cleveland Two: 61,309 shares were held in agency or
our financial institutions and I am confident Trust: "No chance for at least 5 years. Plan- custodian accounts where the direction of
that your committee will do a good job in ning requires knowledge of funds on hand the principal is required before voting.
the important study which the senate and and reasonably anticipated. When the knowl- Three: 3,931 shares were held in trusts
the house have instructed you to under- edge is withheld, so is the opportunity to where the direction of the donor, cotrustee, or
take." outline future progress. other person is required before voting.
State Senator Iliver Ocasek, of Nortfield, "Inasmuch as C. K. King began planning Four: 51,607 shares were held in trusts or
was responsible for the resolution which for the establishment of Kingwood Center estates where the approval of the donor,
started the probe in Columbus. He kept off for many years before his death, it appears cofiduciary, or other designated person or
the study committee. unlikely that he ever envisioned such restric- persons is required before voting.
Senator Ocasek, nevertheless, also sent a tions upon scheduling of future growth and Five: 152,351 shares were held in trusts
telegram to the committee, saying: development as now exist. or agency where the bank as fiduciary may
"The Cleveland Trust Co. stockholders "Legally and technically, the Cleveland determine the manner of voting only in the
meeting to elect directors, for a year occurs Trust may be entirely correct. As a matter absence of instructions from one or more
next month. It is reported that the bank of public relations It is dead. wrong." designated persons.
again intends to vote some 35 percent of its State Banks Superintendent Luft was Six: $245,368 shares (16.36 percent of the
own stock for a board of directors selected chastised by the Cleveland Press and Gov- total shares outstanding) were held in trusts,
by its chairman. In my opinion, the laws ernor Rhodes urged to make sure his em- estates, or agency where the bank as fidu-
of Ohio forbid an Ohio bank to vote stock ployees cooperate with the legislature. The ciary has sole voting power.
Issued by it. editorial said: The bank management solicited proxies
The senator also said: "The leisurely probe of State-chartered from stockholders to vote for new directors.
"The public interest demands that your banks by the legislature's bank investigat- The Cleveland Trust appointed to handle and
committee investigate and report prior to ing committee got off to a sorry start. Neither vote the proxies the following of its own
their impending annual meeting on the le- State Banks Superintendent Clarence Luft directors:
gality and ethics of insiders in banks per- nor any of his employees appeared as re- Herman L. Vail, president of the Cleveland
petuating themselves in office by voting quested. - Plain Dealer; George Gund, chairman of the
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 March 1 _1966 Approved tffrMg,6(RRT6y9C RD ff3R~446R000400040012-1 5595
tainly to be commended for their efforts.
That this trade has been reduced clearly
shows that effective measures can be
taken to discourage our friends from
such shipping activities.
In recent weeks there have been re-
ports that Norwegian shipowners have
privately agreed to stop plying the North
Vietnamese trading lanes. In addition,
King Constantine of Greece signed a de-
cree effective as of March 10 forbidding
the use of Greek-flag vessels in carrying
cargoes to or from North Vietnamese
ports, except for those already under
charter before the decree was effective.
These actions are most encouraging.
Nevertheless., the attitude of our own
Government remains decidedly less than
fully satisfactory. The gap in our official
efforts has invited, and perhaps required,
the independent initiative of non-Gov-
ernment organizations to bring full pres-
sure to bear to dry up this trade such as
the threatened boycott proposed by the
Maritime Unions of the east and gulf
coast ports. As I join those who com-
mend the Maritime Unions for their
concern I must at the same time express
disappointment with the administra-
tion's abdication of the conduct of for-
eign policy in this field.
Now, however, is not the time to relax
our efforts. Our momentum must not
be lost. It must be accelerated to elimi-
nate entirely the possibility of even one
free world ship going to North Vietnam.
To accomplish this there must be fuller
information provided to the American
people and to the world about this trade.
If free world ships are helping to supply
the enemy, why should our people be
told half the truth-why not the whole
truth?
A good measure of the success achieved
in curbing this trade has been due to an
aroused and informed public opinion
both within and without the Congress.
If we are to keep faith with the hun-
dreds of thousands of boys we have sent
to Vietnam, we must not fail in giving
them our full support. I call upon the
administration to be more forthright in
reporting the true extent of this aid and
comfort to the enemy.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I am happy to
yield to my colleague from Iowa.
Mr. GROSS. Again I commend the
gentleman from Michigan for bringing
this information to the Members of the
House. I ask the gentleman if it is not
also important that pressures be applied
to these various countries, including
Britain, which are shipping to Red
China? By this devious route they can
still provide the sinews of war to North
Vietnam.
This involves' not alone the question
of shipping to Haiphong, but also the
question' of shipping to Red China.
Why should there, also, shipping to
Communist Cuba, which has become the
spawning ground and the training
ground for subversion in the Western
Hemisphere?
It seems to me that the State Depart-
ment and the officials of this Govern-
ment ought to be applying pressure not
only with respect to North Vietnam but
also with: respect to trade with Red
China and with Communist Cuba.
Mr. CHAMBERLAIN. I thank the
gentleman for his contribution. I share
those views completely.
The administration certainly should
be looking at these areas.
I have called attention to North Viet-
nam because this is such a flagrant case.
Hundreds of thousands of our boys are
there tonight, in combat with the enemy,
while our friends are carrying material
to keep the war going. This should not
be tolerated.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under ,a.
previous order of the House, the gentle-
man from Massachusetts [Mr. BOLAND]
is recognized for 30 minutes.
[Mr. BOLAND'S remarks will appear
hereafter in the Appendix.]
CHICAGO TRIBUNE'S SPECTACU-
LAR REPORT ON CHICAGO
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under
a previous order of the House, the gen-
tleman from Illinois [Mr. PucINSHI] is
recognized for 15 minutes.
(Mr. PUCINSKI asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks, and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Speaker, the
Chicago Tribune has begun a spectacular
series on the history, growth, and the
present magnitude of Chicago as a world
center of commerce, industry, .science;
religion, education, sports, and culture.
I am taking the liberty of putting this
series in the RECORD as it unfolds be-
cause I would like to share with my col-
leagues and the distinguished readers
who follow the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD
the real story of how Chicago-once
called the Crime capital of the world-
today stands as a model city of the
world.
The Chicago Tribune deserves the
highest commendation for its fair and
impartial writing of one of the great
stories of our time-the renaissance of
America's second largest city.
Mr. Dave Halvorsen has magnificently
captured the spirit of Chicago, 1966.
I hope those around the world who
are so quick to criticize this thriving
metropolis known as Chicago will read
Mr. Halvorsen's penetrating series.
Recently I said that the second half
of the 20th century belongs to Chicago.
This dynamic series in the Chicago Trib-
une fortifies my contention; and it gives
a new spirit of pride and dedication to
31/2 million people who live in Chicago.
The Chicago Tribune is performing a
most significant public service in bring-
ing to all Americans-through its influ-
ential and widespread national circula-
tion-the real story of Chicago as it
exists today.
The first articles of the Chicago Trib-
une series follow. It is my plan to in-
clude the rest of the articles as this im-
pressive series unfolds:
[From the Chicago (Ill.) Tribune, Mar. 5,
. 19661
CHICAGO SHAKES OFF OLD LABEL OF SECOND
CITY-"PRAIRIE TowN" ADDING NEW FRONTIERS
(By David Halvorsen)
(NOTE.-Chicago has come alive in the last
10 years and is experiencing the greatest
prosperity in its history. Its citizens see its
municipal development not as problems but
as challenges. The Tribune begins today a
comprehensive and exhaustive series of arti-
cles analyzing Metropolitan Chicago's resur-
gence and what it will mean in years to
come.)
Chicago forged a giant structure of pros-
perity in the last decade to place the city at
the threshold of the greatest era in its his-
tory.
The midwestern metropolis is fulfilling the
dreams of those who believe in it.
Once called a prairie town because it was
one, and later called a prairie town in spite,
because it was not one, the city has come
alive and is one of the most vibrant, pro-
gressive cities in the world.
Thomas H. Coulter, chief executive direc-
tor of the Chicago Association of Commerce,
has called it "the most enlightened city in
the world today."
HAS YET TO HIT PEAK
The city has yet to reach the peak of its
current resurgence, and chances are it will
not for a long time, asserts Mayor Daley.
Chicago is not advancing in the wake of
a prosperous economy; it is leading the surge.
It has shaken off the. inferiority complex of
the crime-ridden prohibition era and the
era's legacy of civic doldrums which set in
after the depression and lasted for nearly
25 years.
"For years we believed what everyone said
about us," said a city hall official. "We kept
comparing Chicago with perfection. Now
we have changed. We are comparing it with
other great cities, and we are coming out
first.
"Perfection is the ultimate goal. We are
closer to it than anyone else."
Civic leaders are calling this the "sensa-
tional sixties," outstripping even the great
rebuilding era following the Chicago fire
of 1871 which burned out 2,124 acres of the
central city and caused property damage of
$200 million.
PRODUCT IS HUGE
Metropolitan Chicago's shame of the gross
national product, the sum of all services and
manufactured goods, is $34.4. This is six
times more than the national output of
Austria and greater than that of all the
Scandinavian countries combined.
The area's industrial development is twice
that of its nearest competitor-&nd that in-
cludes New York City. More than 4,000 new
factories have been constructed here in the
last 20 years, most in the last decade.
"At one time the industrial center of the
United States was just west of New York
City," Coulter pointed out. "Now it is in
Chicago and will be for a long time to come."
Studies by Coulter's association show the
average family income of metropolitan Chi-
cago to be $11,400. This is 30 percent more
than the national average and $1,000 more
than New York City.
T4 e association places the Indiana coun-
ties of Lake and Porter and the Illinois coun-
ties of Cook, Lake, McHenry, Du Page, Kane,
and Will in the metropolitan area.
LOOP IS FOCAL POINT
The drama of the pity's prosperity is per-
formed in the central business district with
the Loop as a stage for all the world to see.
Here are giant buildings, some with revo-
lutionary forms of architecture.
The erection of the Prudential Building in
1955 was the breakthrough. It was the first
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 5596
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
CONGRESSIONAL, RECORD - HOUSE Marc.-151966
major structure built on the Loop since the
Field Building in 1932.
New York City experienced an extraordi-
nary post-World War II construction boom
while little was happening in Chicago. Now,
New York is beset with major municipal
problems while Chicago and its suburbs leap
ahead.
Daley, a Democrat, first was elected in 1955.
Chicago's revival closely parallels the emer-
gence of his leadership.
Businessmen, industrialists, labor and civic
leaders all give their respective professions
much of the credit for this new vitality, but
they point to Daley as the perso'h who
brought all the forces together.
BRINGS ABOUT RAPPORT
"The mayor has brought about an amalga-
mation of the best of labor, politics, religion,
education, and business," said Edward Loge-
lin, vice president of the United States Steel
Corp. and chairman of the Chicago. plan com-
mission. Logelin is a Republican.
"When he gets us around the conference
table, It is not to talk about differences but
the common interests of Chicago."
In pinpointing the reasons for Chicago's
resurgence, 1959 is a vintage year.
After 7 years of discussions, work com-
menced on O'Hare International Airport.
The St. Lawrence Seaway opened, making
Chicago an international port. Chicago was
host to the Pan-American games. The city's
first international trade fair took place and
the Queen of England came to visit.
Her reception was quite different from
that of the first royalty to visit the city.
PRINCE WAS INVITED
That was in 1860, when Long John Went-
worth, the mayor, invited Albert Edward,
Prince of Wales and later to become Edward
VII, to visit Chicago.
The prince accepted on the condition he
could come incognito as Baron Renfrew.
There was to be no fanfare.
Edward underestimated Chicago's resource-
fulness. When he started to tour the city,
shiny fire engines fell in behind his carriage.
Then came numerous floats representing the
city's industries, and 50,000 persons lined his
route along Wabash and Michigan Avenues.
This sort of spirit always has been a char-
acteristic of Chicago.
It is with this same energy that Chicago is
beating the drums for new business. The
city's emissaries have been well received in
New York City and other cities by business-
mgn anxious to learn of the advantages of-
fered here.
COMPUTER TELLS STORY
When Chrysler Corp. decided to build a
new plant, it collected basic information
from probable sites throughout the country.
This data was put on 1,600 tabulating cards
and fed to a computer. The answer came up
Belvidere, east of Rockford, and only 75 miles
northwest of Chicago.
A key reason was Chicago's vast transpor-
tation network. It is the center of the
world's air, rail, and truck systems and is
rapidly developing as a seaport.
Businesses are finding that the prestige
address of New York City may be costing
them thousands of dollars in extra operating
costs.
An accountant association in New York
City made a survey of operation costs in
Chicago. The association found it could
save $70,000 annually in air fares alone by
locating here.
A confectionery company discovered it's
more economical to import cocoa beans,
needed for chocolate, through Chicago and
market the finished product from here than
to import the beams through east and west
coast ports. The company closed down its
coast operations.
FOUNDED AS TRADING POST
Chicago Is only 129 years old. It was
founded as a frontier trading post. It is now
the greatest trading center in the world.
Its image has been given a big boost be-
cause of the misfortunes that have befallen
New York City.
New York has a per capita bonded debt
of $446.07. Chicago's is $145.90. Further-
more, Chicago's bonded debt is of short
duration and represents 42 percent of the
city's constitutional limit of indebtednes.
New York's heralded World's Fair fell short
of expectations. The city has experienced
crippling newspaper strikes and the recent
transit strike. It was the victim of a power
surge which blacked out the New England
States.
The east coast metropolis faces another
severe water shortage this summer unless
New England gets above-normal snowfall the
rest of this winter.
Crime publicity, which had made Chicago
a favorite whipping boy for three generations,
has tapped a lucrative source in recent years
in New York City.
Chicago has not had a newspaper strike
in. 17 years. It last had a mass transit strike
in 1922. Commonwealth Edison has said
that the massive blackout which hit New
England is unlikely :here.
WATER SUPPLY IS EXCELLENT
The water supply in Chicago is excellent.
A city resident can get unlimited water for
approximately $30 a year. This includes
garbage pickup. Chicago provides water to
61 suburbs. The city put into operation a
year ago the world's largest and most modern
water filtration plant.
Jarred by the Surnmerdale police scandal
in 1961, Chicago :reacted positively to reform.
Police Superintendent O. W. Wilson stream-
lined the police communications system, in-
creased the number of squads on the street,
boosted the prestige of the policeman, and
instituted Operation Crimestop, a program
encouraging citizens to report crimes and
suspicious activities.
Last year. crime on Chicago streets de-
clined 12 percent although every other metro-
politan city and the Nation as a whole re-
ported substantial increases. Chicago's
police administration has become a proto-
type for other municipalities, both foreign
and national.
The summer before the great fire of 1871,
Chicagoans were paying more in fire insur-
ance rates than they were contributing in
municipal, county, and State taxes combined.
By contrast, Chicago today has a class II
rating from the National Board of Under-
writers for fire insurance. What makes this
remarkable is that no city has a class I
rating and only :11 cities have class II. Chi-
cago is the only city of more than 1 million
population among the 11.
HAS LOW DEATH RATE
The city had the lowest metropolitan
traffic death rate in 1960, 1962, and 1964, and
earned the honor again in 1965. Chicago
has received the cleanest city award in 5 of
the last 6 years.
The resurgence reaches far beyond the
boundaries of the city or the 7.5 million
persons living in the eight-county metro-
politan area. Chicago's influence on the en-
tire Midwest is probably greater than is
actually realized, civic leaders point out.
For example, a truck pulling out of a Chi-
cago terminal tonight with a cargo of manu-
factured goods will be unloading at a ware-
house in Charles City, Iowa, 360 miles
distant, tomorrow morning.
Many producers have found it more eco-
nomical to export overseas from the port of
Chicago than through the coastal cities of
New Orleans and Baltimore.
A canning factory in Madison, Tenn.,
which exports canned corn to northwestern
Europe, has found it cheaper to ship through
Chicago than New Orleans.
GET FAVORABLE RATES
Minnesota, Nebraska, and Kansas pro-
ducers are discovering more favorable ship-
ping rates through the Chicago port.
Businessmen are continually revising the
boundaries of the Chicago trade area. Now
they think in terms of a 500-mile radius
which includes a population of 63 million.
The revitalization of the railroads, the
completion of the Interstate Highway Sys-
tems and city expressways, and the expan-
sion of the seaport make all of this realistic.
Historians have called Chicago the most
American of all cities. Some have been
critical of the premium put on the dollar by
Chicagoans.
MANY BECOME WEALTHY
The society of other great cities was based
on heritage. Chicago's society was deter-
mined by bank accounts. Great personal
fortunes have been made here, and in many
different ways.
The Palmers, Armours, Fields and others
became some of the world's wealthiest
families.
In assessing the drive behind Chicago's
current prosperity, history may offer a lesson.
At the very beginning, Chicago's wealthy
leaders found private gain and public in-
terest were compatible.
A healthy city meant a prosperous busi-
ness. The formula is still working today.
[From the Chicago (Ill.) Tribune, Mar. 6,
1966]
CHICAGO GROWTH TO GREATNESS IS ONLY
BEGINNING
(By David Halvorsen)
The wagon trains trundled regularly into
the dirt streets of Chicago in the 1830's.
They set up temporary camp south of Fort
Dearborn along what is now Michigan Ave-
nue.
Most were fortune seekers heading west-
ward, but some assessed, quite accurately,
that the frontier town had a future and
therefore was a place to make a lot of money
and make it fast.
Indian trails had led to the confluence
of the Chicago and Des Plaines Rivers, and
for much the same reason the pioneers fol-
lowed these routes. It was a logical way to
get across the country.
GEOGRAPHY TRUMP CARD
Soon followed the steam locomotive. Chi-
cago became the terminal between the East-
ern and Western railroads. Later came the
highways bearing motorcars, the waterways
to the Mississippi River and the sea, and the
airlines.
Geography has been Chicago's trump card
since the city went after the high stakes of
becoming one of the world's great urban
centers.
In the last decade the city has been dealt
a handful of aces.
1. Metropolitan Chicago is the industrial
center of the world. The area, with 3.8 per-
cent of the national population, produces
5.1 percent of the gross national product.
NEAR POPULATION CENTER
2. The population center of the United
States is on a 160-acre farm, 6.5 miles north-
west of Centralia and about 1 mile south-
southwest of the community of Shattuc in
Clinton County.
3. - Illinois is the leading agricultural prod-
ucing State in the union.
4. Chicago is the center of the world's
greatest transportation network.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 Q proved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
March 15, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
FOUR PREVIOUS POINTS
The North Vietnamese National Assembly
on April 10, 1965, had posed these four points
as conditions for negotiations:
1, All U.S. troops must withdraw from
South Vietnam. (It was not stipulated that
withdrawal would have to take place before
a negotiated settlement rather than after,
so this point was apparently left open for
bargaining.)
2. Pending peaceful reunification of Viet-
nam, the 1954 military agreement must be
respected and both North and South remain
neutral.
3. Internal affairs must be settled by South
Vietnamese themselves, "in accordance with
the program of the National Liberation
Front," without any foreign interference.
4. Peaceful reunification of Vietnam to be
settled by Vietnamese people in both zones
without foreign interference.
These conditions are subject to long and
tortured interpretation, but they are not a
complete bar to discussions. They are not
irreconcilable with the 14 points set forth
by President Johnson on January 3, 1966.
The President's offer of negotiation terms,
however, quickly drew the new and impos-
sible fifth point from Ho Chi Minh. He
,knows of course that we could not refuse a
place at the conference table to the govern-
ment we have supported in Saigon. To do
so would be to surrender the people we have
Made our allies to the Communists, fully
and finally. It would be to seal the fate of
South Vietnam without an expression of the
will of the people.
It is a familiar technique in a dispute for
one side to offer to talk, but set conditions
it knows its opponent cannot conceivably
accept. The Soviet Union has played that
game in the long struggle for disarmament.
Now Hanoi makes negotiation unattainable,
while loudly accusing America of bad faith
in its efforts toward peace.
The Intransigence of Hanoi does not mean
that America should abandon all efforts to
negotiate. If anything, it increases our duty
to maintain and strengthen our peaceful
intentions.
But in the meanwhile there is no use
blinding ourselves to what is happening in
Hanoi and Peipig. The Communist leaders
believe they are going to win, and they will
at present accept no compromise short of
total victory.
The House voted approval of the additional to extend his remarks at this point in the
$4.8 billion by 392 to 4, the Senate by 93 RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
to 2. ter.)
Approval of the money was inevitable, for
Congress could hardly vote in effect to aban- Mr. KING of Utah. Mr. Speaker, the
don the more than 200,000 American troops Washington Evening Star editorially
now engaged with the Communists on the praises the President's recommendations
ground in South Vietnam. made in his message on pollution and
But the vote might not have been so over- conservation.
whelming, and it need not have been pre- His recommendations included trans-
Senator by such a smashing Senate defeat of
Senator WAYNE MoRsE's effort to repudiate fer of the Water Pollution Control Ad-
the 1064 resolution pledging congressional ministration from the Public Health
support for "all necessary measures" to resist Service to the Interior Department, and
Communist agression in southeast Asia. establishing a National Water Commis-
on a motion to table (kill) Senator sion "to review and advise on the entire
MORSE'S motion, only 4 Senators joined
MoasE, with 92 in effect voting to reconfirm range of water resources problems."
the resolution. The Star concludes that:
NO ESCALATION MANDATE Perhaps the great conservation task that
A minority of House and Senate liberals- so badly needs doing is at last about to shift
put at 77 in the House and 17 in the Senate- into high gear.
deny the vote for more Vietnam funds was a The timely appraisal will interest my
mandate for unrestrained escalation of the colleagues, and I therefore make the edi-
war. tonal a
Of course it wasn't. And only a small part of the RECORD:
minority of Americans advocate such escala- `Too MANY CooKs
tion, just as only a small minority advocate Two things emerge from President John-
American retreat. son's message on pollution and conservation
Even Senator FuLBRICmT, chairman of the that may have more long-range significance
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, who that the specific requests he has made.
voted with Moasx on the 1964 resolution These are his recommendations to transfer
repudiation, did not advocate withdrawal in the Water Pollution Control Administration
explaining his vote. He rather simply from the Public Health Service to the In-
pointed to the need for seeking a "general terior Department, which controls most
accommodation" in southeast Asia for "neu- water programs, and to establish a National
tralization of the entire region as between Water Commission "to review and advise on
China and the United States." the entire range of water resources prob-
But as Peter Lisagor, of the Chicao Daily lems."
News Service, points out, administration At the moment there are far too many
spokesmen have supported a neutral Laos cooks at the Federal level involved in the
and Cambodia, and have agreed to a non- field of conservation. For example, in our
aligned South Vietnam If the Communists own Potomac Basin a White House-backed
will call off their aggression. It is Commu- than the specific requests he has made.
nist China, not the United States, which has for the Nation is confronted with coordinat-
consistently rejected neutralization. ing antipollution planning among four
Despite the continued negative attitude of agencies. The President's recommendation
both Communist China and North Vietnam, would at least narrow this to three.
President Johnson again extended the olive What is really needed, of course, is a much
branch. While the Senate was debating the greater concentration than this. The Hoover
increased aid bill, he called again on Hanoi Commission recommended that total con-
to "negotiate peace" and renewed his offer servation responsibility be concentrated in a
for a "massive effort of reconstruction" after Department of Natural Resources. And a
a settlement in both North and South Viet- bill sponsored by Senator Moss, of Utah,
nam. UNDER C REFUL CONTROL aimed at this desirable goal even now is be-
fore Congress.
While this was balanced by a promise to The political complexities in any such re-
SUPPORT OF POLICY continue the measured use of force," the organization are great and there can be no
White House said the President would "con- quick and easy solution. But the proposals
(Mr. KING of Utah (at the request of tinue to act responsibly" and it reiterated to transfer antipollution responsibility and
Mr. Pucriss :I) was granted permission his New York pledge to use "prudent firm- coordinate water resource planning look like
to extend his remarks at this point in the ness under careful control." steps in the right direction: Perhaps the
It seems to us that this is all anyone can great conservation task that so badly needs
RECORD and to include extraneous mat- ask, and that Congress acted responsibly- doing is at last about to shift into high gear.
and in accordance with the views of most
Mr. KING of Utah, Mr. Speaker, the Americans. They desire, no more than the VV_
Salt Lake Tribune states editorially that President, unrestrained escalation of this VIETNAM
In voting additional funds to conduct the war. They want a peace settlement which
war in Vietnam "Congress acted respon- will permit the orderly and honorable with- (Mr, KING of Utah (at the request of
sibly-and in accordance with the views drawal of American troops. They are ready Mr. PucleisKi) was granted permission to
of most Americans." for unconditional negotiations toward that extend his remarks at this point in the
end anywhere, under any auspices. RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
The paper believes that most Ameri- It is not new American policy to support ter.)
cans do not want an "unrestrained es- people resisting Communist aggression, nor
calation," but that they do want an hon- to uphold the basic principle of self-deter- Mr. KING of Utah. Mr. Speaker, the
orable peace and that they are ready, for urination of people. American policy in Viet- congressional dialog on Vietnam con-
"unconditional negotiations toward that nam is simply a continuance of a firm U.S. tinues apace, and few there are, by now,
end anywhere, under any auspices." stand against Communist aggression which who have not spoken out. My own posi-
Because the summation made by this this country has followed for nearly 20 years tion is that we must continue to resist
newspaper will be of interest to many, at a dozen points along the vast periphery of Communist aggression and terrorism. I
the Russian and Chinese Communist em- have affirmed, and reaffirmed this pro-
I am making the editorial available by pires. And we believe that fundamental
offering it now for publication in the policy has the same basic American support position on occasions too numerous to
RECORD: today that it had when it first took form mention.
.There seems little doubt that the over-
whelming approval in Congress of additional
funds to finance the war in Vietnam is a vic-
I willingly concede that we have made
mistakes. If it were possible to unravel
the tangled fabric of the past, no doubt
a better fabric could then be rewoven,
But that is not our present option. It
was Adlal Stevenson, I believe, who said:
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 5622
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE IarcrC 15, 1966
"If the present persists in setting in
judgment on the past, the future is lost.,,
The time is now for action. The sig-
nals have already been called, and the
ball is in motion. America has no other
choice than to execute the play, and to
smash forward to a touchdown. This
does not mean that our policy or methods
are no longer open to discussion, or even
to criticism. Far from it. On several oc-
casions I myself have raised my voice
against sloppy and inefficient practices
which I felt were militating against our
success in the field. I shall continue to
do so.
It is one thing, however, to offer con-
structive criticism, in order to improve
the war effort. It Is another thing to
embarrass, or obstruct, or to deliberately
weaken our national will to fight. With
an? such effort I have no sympathy.
There has been so much said about
what we are doing wrong, and so little,
comparatively speaking, about what we
are doing right. It is with a view to
strengthening our will, and putting our
present posture into a truer perspective
that I am taking this time to review,
briefly, the splendid work of our JUSPAO
organization, and the success it has had
In the field of psychological warfare.
We hear so much about the conventional
battles that are raging in Vietnam, and
about the statistics on casualties suf-
fered, lives lost, and planes and materiel
destroyed. The real war however, is
being fought, not for the bodies but for
the minds of the Vietcong. The work
of JUSPAO is no less significant because
It receives so little recognition. In my
opinion It is our ultimate weapon.
SELECTIVE ACHIEVEMENTS OF JUSPAO
GENERAL
Just as crucial as, and in the long run
more important than, the current mili-
tary effort in Vietnam is the struggle for
the hearts and minds of the Vietnamese.
At the heart of this psychological task is
communication-particularly communi-
cation between the populace and their
government. In the U.S. mission, the
agency with primary responsibility for
counseling and assisting the Government
of Vietnam--GVN-in the field of
psychological action is the Joint United
States Public Affairs Office-JUSPAO.
JUSAPO was created In May 1965 as a
result of President Johnson's decision
giving the Director of USIA authority
over all U.S. psychological operations in
Vietnam. The majority of the American
staff are USIA officers, but others come
from the Department of State, AID, and
the U.S. military. Headed by a senior
USIA official-who is also Minister Coun-
selor of Embassy for Information-
JUSPAO Is a U.S. mission organization
which provides unified direction for all
U.S. psychological action in Vietnam.
Having directly integrated the com-
munication media functions of USAID
Vietnam, JUSPAO Is the U.S. civilian
channel for providing communication
equipment and technical advice to the
GVN. Through policy direction given to
the psywar operations of MACV's Politi-
cal Warfare Directorate, JUSPAO helps
assure close coordination between U.S.
civilian and military psywar personnel in
provincial operations.
JUSPAO has three main psychological
objectives: First, to strengthen the Viet-
namese will to support GVN/US mutual
objectives; second, to strengthen the gov-
ernment's communication media and
programs to increase popular support of
its overall objectives; and third, to
strengthen free world support for Viet-
nam and of Vietnamese support for U.S.
worldwide policy objectives.
In pursuit of these objectives, JUSPAO
has over 150 American officers and nearly
400 Vietnamese employees. Ideas, per-
sonal contact, media materials, and com-
munication equipment are tools and
channels in this war for men's minds.
The impact of various JUSPAO programs
very often is localized. The successes
may not lend themselves to newspaper
headlines. They are the backside of
news, and some of these are capsulized
below.
RADIO
In a country like South Vietnam where
literacy rate is low,, particularly in the
rural area, radio is a vital link between
the Government and the people. In the
past, the Radio Vietnam-VTVN-with a
station in Saigon and several regional
transmitters was not fully utilized or co-
ordinated because of poor organization,
lack of trained personnel and program-
ing skills. As a first step toward helping
the GVN develop a more truly national
radio network, JUSPAO convinced and
assisted the GVN in December 1965 to
restructure Radio Vietnam into a semi-
autonomous broadcasting corporation.
Steps are now being taken to link the
existing stations into a national network.
Two JUSPAO radio advisory teams are
actively engaged In training Vietnamese
in program production, station and net-
work management and administration,
and central and regional programing.
One of the teams is assigned to the VTVN
while the other is assisting the Vietna-
mese Defense Ministry's Voice of Free-
dom Station which broadcasts to North
Vietnam.
JUSPAO also produces locally between
60 and 75 hours of radio programs every
week for placement with Vietnamese
stations. From Washington, the Voice
of America broadcasts to South and
North Vietnam 61/2 hours daily in Viet-
namese. The Voice maintains a trans-
mitting and relay complex in Hue, South
Vietnam, just south of the 17th parallel.
The 50,000 watt, medium-wave relay
transmitter has directional antennas
capable of providing strong signals to
both North and South Vietnam. Over
the past year and a half, incidentally,
the site has been shelled by the Vietcong
several times.
OTHER MEDIA
JUSPAO effort Is not confined to radio.
A publication adviser is working with the
Vietnamese Ministry of Psywar in the
production of pamphets, leaflets and
posters. In the GVN's National Motion
Picture Center, a JUSPAO adviser helps
in all aspects of the conception and pro-
duction of newsreels, documentaries and
feature films. To help the GVN improve
its press output and thus to facilitate
coverage of Vietnam developments by
foreign newsmen, a JUSPAO press ad-
viser is assigned to the Vietnam Press,
the Government's national news agency,
to provide on-the-job training and class-
room Instructions on journalism.
PSYCHOLOGICAL OPERATIONS IN THE PROVINCES
JUSPAO operates extensively in rural
South Vietnam, and some 40 American
JUSPAO field representatives are sta-
tioned in the provinces to give assistance
and support to cadres of the Vietnamese
Information Service-VIS-in psy-
chological operations. The tasks of
JUSPAO field representatives cover a
wide spectrum; namely, stimulating
action by provincial psychological oper-
ations committees in every province; as-
sisting in the publication of 24 provincial
newspapers and programing of re-
gional radio stations; showing GVN and
JUSPAO films made for provincial
audiences; developing posters, pamph-
lets, leaflets and other publications de-
signed for audiences in a particular pro-
vince or even district; employing air-
borne loudspeakers and leaflet drops
for fast exploitation of local issues; and
deploying VIS and JUSPAO cultural
troups which present a government mes-
sage via entertainment.
A considerable part of the JUSPAO
effort in the Provinces has gone into
supporting the Government's Chieu
Hoi-Open Arms-program which en-
courages Vietcong and their followers to
return to government-controlled areas.
Where local Chieu Hoi programs are
imaginatively and vigorously pursued
and where especially effective leaflets
and othe. ? messages are employed, the
psychological tasks of persuasion has
yielded results. The following incidents
show this by the extent of Vietcong re-
action and counteraction.
In August, 1965, 150,000 copies of a
JUSPAO-originated leaflet were air-
dropped into parts of Vinh Binh Prov-
ince in the Delta. According to re-
turnees who defected on the basis of it
as well as captured Vietcong documents,
within 3 days every Vietcong found
picking up or holding this leaflet was
immediately transferred to another re-
gion so that he would not "contaminate"
others. Also around this time, in Vinh
Long Province nearby, the Vietcong
were driven to holding public meetings
to counter the Chieu Hoi appeal. The
villagers in these public meetings were
warned that anyone found with a leaflet
was liable to be shot. They were also
told that anyone going over to the gov-
ernment side in response to the appeal
would be tortured.
That Vietcong threats and intimida-
tion have not been fully effective can be
seen in the number of individuals who
have responded to the Chieu Hot appeal
since the program was launched in Feb-
ruary 1963. From that time to date,
some 30,000 Vietcong and their followers
had returned to the government side;
11,000 of them came back during 1965
alone. The monthly returnee rate last
year is particularly notable for its sharp
upward trend. In January 1965, there
were 406 returnees; by December the
number had climbed to 1,482. In Janu-
ary 1966, the 1,672 Chieu Hot returnees
who came back set an alltime record.
These statistics reflect the impact of U.S.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400040012-1
 -. o proved For Mgq?J 9RfiMBP67 March 15, ftR000400040012-1
military buildup, upswing of Vietnamese
morale and the series of GVN-US mili-
tary successes. Since JUSPAO psycho-
logical operations were aimed at rein-
forcing and exploiting these favorable
trends, the Chieu Hoi statistics are in
part a measure of JUSPAO accomplish-
ment.
Statistical profile aside, there have also
been instances of specific reaction to the
GVN/US psychological operations aimed
specifically at the Vietcong.
On October 24, 1965, copies of eight
different leaflets were airdropped in a
coordinated psywar campaign into Viet-
cong strongholds in the IV Corps area.
In the next week, a check of Vietcong
defectors indicated that of the 86 coming
in from the areas covered, 62 carried
copies of the leaflets dropped on October
24. Reacting to other media used, the
Vietcong in one instance moved into a
village and removed all anti-Vietcong
slogans and banners and warned the peo-
ple not to take part in any demonstra-
tion being organized as part of the psy-
war campaign. Yet in another village,
as a result of demonstrations held, the
villagers drew up a letter stressing their
determination to resist Vietcong pressure.
The letter was signed by 65 villagers-
an act of considerable courage since it
could easily turn into a Vietcong death
warrant.
A complete unit defection, that of a
22-man Vietcong guerrilla platoon oc-
curred in mid-December 1965, in Binh
Tuy Province, as a result of a coordi-
nated military-psychological warfare
operation. JUSPAO played an active
role assisting the Vietnamese in carrying
out the psychological phase which in-
cluded ground and air loudspeaker oper-
ations and leaflets. Wives of. known
Vietcong were permitted and encouraged
to cross the frontline positions to con-
tact their husbands and assure them
that they would be well treated and that
they should surrender. The surrender
appeals specified that the Vietcong
should come via roads, with their shirts
,il', hands over their heads and' with
their rifles slung, muzzles pointed down-
ward. Within a week of the operation,
Vietcong defectors began to come in,
.isually in two's and three's. The 22-
nan platoon, however, brought with
;hem 9 rifles and, as a group, followed the
Ixplicit instructions mentioned above.
JUSPAO SUPPORT TO SOCIAL REFORM
Compared to the immediate impact of
3sywar efforts, the JUSPAO role in sup-
aort of social improvement and reform
programs In South Vietnam is, of a
onger range nature. To assist the Gov-
~rnment to win and maintain the loyal-
~ies of its people, particularly in rural
areas, JUSPAO exploits the economic
and social progress which the GVN with
AID support has been able to achieve in
the countryside. There, military secu-
rity must precede economic and social
developmental efforts, but such develop-
ment is directly related to a favorable
psychological climate which JUSPAO
activities aim to create. This involves
more than publicizing GVN projects car-
ried out with AID assistance; it involves
No. 45--i2
instilling confidence in the benefits of
self-help on the part of the villagers as
well as confidence that the Government
is sincerely interested in helping the peo-
ple and in fact is doing so in various
fields; and of great importance, In help-
ing the GVN communicate to its people
its plans for a social revolution.
Media products on AID activities are
produced by JUSPAO for use not only
in Vietnam but-through USIS posts-
in many third countries as well. A series
of photos packets are periodically sent to
some 78 USIS posts worldwide for place-
ment in the indigenous press and period-
icals; these contain a substantial num-
ber of AID stories. Two USIA officers
are assigned full time to maintain liaison
with USAID in Saigon; they help develop
media materials on AID projects and
facilitate third-country coverage of
these projects. In motion pictures, the
JUSPAO biweekly series of news maga-
zines deals with U.S. aid to South Viet-
nam, among other topics. And between
one-third and one-half of the regular
radio series-produced by JUSPAO in
the field or USIA in Washington-are
frequently on AID topics; such as, round-
table discussion on economic develop-
ment programs, documentary coverage
of AID projects, interviews with "un-
common people," among whom are AID
technicians and experts.
AID stories and articles on agricul-
tural hints and self-help projects are
featured prominently in the JUSPAO
mass-circulating magazine, Rural Spirit.
A monthly magazine written in simple
language designed principally for a peas-
ant audience in support of the GVN
rural construction program, Rural Spirit
is distributed in 350,000 copies per issue.
The Vietnamese edition of Free World
magazine also carries the story of eco-
nomic development and nation building
to a more sophisticated audience of
school teachers and students. Its
monthly circulation is 235,000 copies.
POSTSCRIPT .
As James Reston wrote in the New
York Times of February 18, 1966:
Vietnam is the first American war ? +
fought with the television cameras right on
the battlefield. The advantages are obvious.
These * * * scenes of our men under fire
are taking some of the silly romance out of
war, but inevitably they portray only one
side of the story.
The Vietnam struggle is indeed many
sided. The material herein represents a
quick review of some aspects of the U.S.
nonmilitary effort in South Vietnam, in
which USIA is directly and intimately
involved.
INCREASE DAIRY PRICE SUPPORTS
(Mr. KASTENMEIER (at the request
of Mr. PucINsxx) was granted permission
to extend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. KASTENMEIER. Mr. Speaker, I
have introduced a bill today to amend
the Agricultural Act of 1949 to give the
Department of Agriculture the addi-
tional authority it needs to increase
dairy support levels.
5623
The falloff in milk output, which be-
gan last year, has hastened the disap-
pearance of a national surplus that al-
ready was dwindling. The total milk
production for 1965 fell to some 125 bil-
lion pounds, a drop of 11/2 percentage
points from the 1964 level. The January
1966 figures indicate an even more
drastic decline. The reports for that
month show that the total U.S. milk pro-
duction fell 5.3 percent below the year
ago level. The decline was far more
alarming in the top two milk producing
States-a 7-percent drop in Wisconsin,
the No. 1 producing State, and a 14-per-
cent decline in the No. 2 producer, Min-
nesota.
The Department of Agriculture's count
of the Nation's dairy herd reported a
January total of 16.6 million. This is
5.6 percent less than the previous year
and the largest year-to-year percentage
decline on record.
The current dairy price support is 75
percent of parity-some $3.24 a hundred
for 3.7 milk. This price has been in
effect since April 1, 1965. A new support
level will be announced for the new mar-
kei