CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CONDEMNING THE SOVIET UNION FOR PERSECUTION OF THE JEWS

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000400170033-4
• Release Decision: RIPPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 6
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 28, 2005
• Sequence Number: 33
• Publication Date: February 4, 1965
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2005/07/13 CIA-RDP67B00446R000400170033-4
202$ CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
I doubt seriously that this will be a
world-shaking event. I do feel that
neither I nor anyone else will be placed
in jeopardy for making this trip. And I
should certainly hope that the State of
Alabama will profit as much as my own
State from my trip to Alabama.
Mr. Speaker, I want to repeat that I
am going at my own expense. As ? has
been indicated I voluntarily designated
myself to go to this State. There has
been no impression given that this is an
official committee of this House or that
we are speaking for any other Member
of this House. We are going merely as
observers. I hope that my colleagues
from Alabama will join us on this mis-
sion, will meet with us and join with us
in a spirit of cooperation, as that has
been expressed, so that we may bring
back something more constructive.
As I have said, this is a simple trip of
an American citizen to an American
State of this Union and as such it seems
to me it should be supported by all of us
and not condemned by any of us.
THE FARM MESSAGE
(Mr. POAGE asked and was given
permission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD.)
Mr. POAGE. Mr. Speaker, the Presi-
dent's message should set at rest the
very proper concern which has disturbed
so many of our people since the Director
of the Budget wrote his much quoted
article which many people interpreted
to indicate a desire to force some 21/2
million farm families out of their homes.
The President is a practical man and
he has repudiated any such proposal.
He realizes that even though some of
those now living on the farm will not
be able to make a reasonable livelihood
farming that it is much better for these
people to stay where they are than it is
,to move them into the big cities.
The President's message clearly out-
lines the problems of our rural people
and suggests a continuation of our pres-
ent voluntary price support and produc-
tion adjustment programs. I think this
is a'wise and a sound approach. As a
Member of Congress I shall try to help
the President keep these programs in
operation.
.1 would emphasize, as did the Presi-
dent, that every impartial study has
shown that the removal of price and in-
come supports would have a catastrophic
effect on farm income and farm income
is too vital to our entire economy to be
dealt with lightly. I am happy that the
President has again indicated his deep
concern for the welfare of those who
provide the food and fiber for America.
THE gITUATION IN SELMA, ALA.
(Mr. MOORE asked and was given
permission to address the House for 3
minutes and to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I have a
strong belief that the situation and the
circumstances in Selma, Ala., pare of such
importance' as to merit consideration by
the House of Representatives of the
U.S. Congress. The appropriate. author-
ity in this House for such an inquiry into
these facts and circumstances I believe
is the Committee on Judiciary of the
House of Representatives. I have there-
fore today requested the Honorable
EMANUEL CELLER of New York, chair-
man of the House Committee on the Ju-
diciary, to select from the membership
of that committee a number of its mem-
bers to visit Selma, Ala., for the express
purpose of determining for themselves
what the actual facts are. This com-
mittee of the House has direct juris-
diction over the legislative matters in-
volved herein. I believe we should imme-
diately determine the actual facts as
they are found to exist in Selma, Ala.
Mr. Speaker, I am hopeful that the
chairman- of the Committee on the Ju-
diciary will act promptly and accede to
my request that members of that com-
mittee be dispatched in a quasi-official
mission to Selma, Ala., so that this House
may have before it a complete recital of
the facts and circumstances as they
actually exist.
Mr. SELDEN. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield? ?
Mr. MOORE. I will be happy to yield
to the gentleman from Alabama.
Mr. SELDEN. Mr. Speaker, I would
like again to point out, as I did earlier
today, that responsible citizens of Selma
have asked that a duly appointed and
impartial congressional group come
down and ascertain the correct facts.
Day before yesterday both the gentleman
from Alabama [Mr. GEORGE ANDREWS]
and I talked with Chairman EMANUEL
CELLER of the House Judiciary Commit-
tee and made that request. We also ap-
peared yesterday before the Senate Judi-
ciary Committee with the same request.
We felt that any investigative group that
goes to Alabama should be composed of
members of Ahe Judiciary Committee of
both the House and the Senate. Al-
though no action has been taken as yet
on our request, I am introducing today
a joint resolution the purpose of which is
to set up a joint committee in the event
either Judiciary Committee chairman
feels he presently does not have the
authority to make these appointments.
Mr. Speaker, while I question the ad-
visability, I certainly do not question the
right of any Member of this body or any
citizen of the United States to visit
Selma. It should be made perfectly
clear, however, that any self-appointed
group from the Congress that goes to
Selma does not in any way represent an
investigative committee of the Congress
of the United States.
Mr. MOORE. I took note of the meet-
ings that were announced by the gentle-
man from Alabama and one of his col-
leagues. I believe as a supporter of the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 it is entirely
appropriate for me as a member of the
Committee on the Judiciary to request
that that committee which has the leg-
islative jurisdiction in this area should
move to obtain the facts and circum-
stances that exist there. I have, there-
fore, asked Chairman CELLER as a mem-
ber of the committee, to follow through
and designate Members to officially go
down and take a look at the situation.
Mr. SELDEN. I want to say to the
gentleman from West Virginia [Mr.
MOORE] that I welcome his support.
February 4
(Mr. GONZALEZ (at the request of Mr.
OTTINGER) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
[Mr. GONZALEZ' remarks will appear
hereafter in the Appendix.]
(Mr, GONZALEZ (at the request of Mr.
OTTINGER) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
[Mr. GONZALEZ' remarks^wi appe
hereafter in the AApppenj
~404Y-1 a/1,
CONCURRENT RESOLUTION CO N-
DEMNING THE SOVIET UNION FOR
PERSECUTION OF THE JEWS
(Mr. ROOSEVELT (at the request of
Mr. OTTINGER) was granted permission to
extend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Speaker, I
have today introduced a House concur-
rent resolution condemning the Soviet
Union for persecution of the Jews.
I have asked representatives from both
political parties and from all sections of
the country to join me in condemning
Russia for singling out Jews for extreme
punishment for alleged economic of-
fenses, confiscating synagogues, closing
Jewish cemeteries, arresting rabbis, and
lay religious leaders, and curtailing re-
ligious observances.
My resolution also protests the Rus-
sian practice of discriminating against
Jews in cultural activities and access to
higher education, imposing restrictions
that prevent the reuniting of Jews with
their families in other lands, and through
other acts oppressing Jews in the free
exercise of their faith.
An identical resolution has been offered
in the Senate by Senator ABRAHAM A,
RIBIcorr, of Connecticut, and 67 cospon-
sors. I have asked House Members to in-
troduce resolutions identical to mine so
that the House and Senate resolutions
would be uniform and so that by a show-
ing of significant support the Foreign Af-
fairs Committee will be encouraged to
take early action.
I am delighted to announce, Mr.
Speaker, that I have been joined by many
Members of this body, who have indi-
cated to me that they share my concern
and views. I wish to thank each of my
colleagues for their supporting resolu-
tions. Further, I call to the attention of
the House that these resolutions have
been introduced simultaneously, indicat-
ing a unanimity of concern.
PERSECUTION OF JEWS IN THE
SOVIET UNION
(Mr. MULTER (at the request of Mr.
OTTINGER) was granted permission to
extend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. MULTER. Mr. Speaker, I am
pleased today to join more than 80 of
our colleagues in sponsoring a concur-
rent resolution condemning Soviet anti-
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R00040017003374
 Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400170033-4
1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE
the President or his advisers that it will
change.
In fact on the very day the Senate Ap-
propriation Subcommittee eased the ban
on foods to Cairo, Nasser's Egyptian Gov-
ernment agreed to represent Communist
China in Burundi, after that govern-
ment closed the Peiping Embassy and in-
vited its officials to leave because of sub-
versive activities.
This "sign of our times" shows the link
that Communist China has established
with Nasser in Africa and how closely
they are working together.
If administration officials would only
look at their intelligence reports, they
would learn that Nasser is delivering to
the Congolese rebels some of the latest
model Soviet-made weapons-including
some that are even better than those in
the U.S. Army's table of organization.
One such weapon, I understand, is a
recoilless repeating bazooka, which
startled intelligence experts of both the
military and the Central Intelligence
Agency.
Mr. Speaker, certainly we do not want
to be a partner with Nasser and the
Soviet Union in putting these arms in the
hands of the Congolese rebels who are
bent on destroying all of our missionaries
of whatever faith, in the Congo.
It Is Nasser who is denying food to his
own people by helping the Soviet Union
wage their "wars of destruction"
throughout Africa.
Mr. Speaker, on February 1, 1965, Act-
ing Secretary of State George W. Ball,
testified before the Senate Appropria-
tions. Committee as follows:
We ask, therefore, that the Congress not
limit the President's freedom of action in the
conduct of our relations with this key coun-
try during the weeks ahead.
Mr. Speaker, title VII, United States
Code, section 1721 states:
In order to enable the President to furnish
emergency assistance on behalf of the peo-
ples of the United States to friendly peoples
in. meeting famine or other urgent or extraor-
dinary relief requirements, the Commodity
Credit Corporation shall make available to
the President out of its stocks such surplus
agricultural commodities (as defined in sec-
tion 1708 of this title) as he may request,
for transfer (1) to any nation friendly to
the United States in order to meet famine
or other urgent or extraordinary relief re-
quirements of such nation, and (2) to
friendly but needy populations without
regard to the friendliness of their govern-
ment.
Furthermore, Mr. Speaker, I have been
advised by the American Law Division
of the Library of Congress, that under
the law, the President may use his con-
tingency fund if he feels the good faith
and honor of this country has been af-
fected by House action on House Joint
Resolution 234.
In summary, then, Mr. Speaker, I
should like to remind Members of the
House that my amendment was limited
to title I sales under Public Law 480. It
does not affect title II, III, and IV, and
under these titles the President, in my
opinion, still has plenty of room to ma-
neuver if he sees fit, for under title II
the President has the authority to donate
surplus agricultural commodities to na-
lions to meet emergencies; under title
III, the President has the authority to
assist international welfare agencies, in-
ternational feeding programs, and to
participate in barter transactions; under
title IV, the President has the authority
to sell surplus agricultural commodities
to nations for dollars.
Now, to those who would argue that the
Congress has no right to act as we did
in this area, I would remind them that
Public Law 480 was a creation of the
Congress, and so we have every right to
amend provisions, oversee, and evaluate
its operation, or repeal it, for that
matter.
I do hope the House will stick by its
guns and stand by its original position,
by voting in support of my motion to
instruct the conferees when this matter
comes up for consideration next Monday.
PRESIDENT JOHNSON'S STATEMENT
ON AMENDMENT RELATING TO
SALE OF SURPLUS COMMODITIES
TO THE UNITED ARAB REPUBLIC
UNDER TITLE I OF PUBLIC LAW
480
(Mr. ALBERT asked and was given
permission to insert a statement of Pres-
ident Johnson at this point in the
RECORD.)
Mr. ALBEi.T. Mr. Speaker, President
Johnson's statement at his press confer-
ence on the amendment relating to sales
of surplus commodities to the United
Arab Republic under title I of Public
Law 480 is as follows:
Last week the House adopted a proposal
that would, if enacted, preclude the United
States from carrying out our present 3-year
agreement, ending this June, to sell surplus
commodities to the United Arab Republic
under title I of Public Law 480. Yesterday,
the Senate passed a modified version of this
proposal, which would permit the comple-
tion of details of the agreement if I, as the
President, determine this to be in our na-
tional interest.
It is of the greatest importance that the
flexibility provided to me by the Senate
action be sustained by the Congress. Our
relations with the United Arab Republic pre-
sent difficult problems in a highly sensitive
area of the world; the area where tensions
are high. The basic purpose of our policy
in this area has been, and will continue to
be, the protection of our vital interests. To
do this it is essential that I have freedom
of action.
It is obvious that an improvement in rela-
tions between our two countries will require
efforts on both sides. It is impossible to pre-
dict whether such an improvement would be
achieved. But if there is to be any chance
of success at all, it can only be if I have
adequate flexibility to deal with this complex
and volatile situation.
RACIAL TROUBLE IN SELMA, ALA.
(Mr. HAWKINS asked and was given
permission. to address the House for 5
minutes and to revise and extend his
remarks.)
Mr. HAWKINS. Mr. Speaker, it is
not my intent to answer anything that
has been said to those of us who have
voluntarily taken upon ourselves the op-.
portunity to travel and assist a State of
this Union. I have personally been in-
vited by the Southern Christian Lead-
ership Conference and by Dr. King and.
2027
by citizens of Selma to observe what, is`
going on in that State. It is not my in-
tent to test any law, and it is not my
intent even to stay in one of the hotels
of that State. It is my intent to stay
in a Negro home when I go to Selma, Ala.,
and to return to Washington with great
dispatch. I do not consider my trip to
Alabama or to any other State of the
Union as being for the purpose of agitat-
ing or engaging in any type of activity
which would prompt anyone to be placed
in danger. It is my intent to go as an
observer. I certainly will avail myself
of the opportunity to seek information
on both sides. I would hope that the
public officials of that State would meet
with us and try to work out with us some
understanding of what is happening in
that State. A few days ago I saw a pic-
ture in the newspaper. I do not know
whether it is authentic or not, but this
was a picture of a woman, and it hap-
pened to be a Negro woman, who was
lying on the ground. Three sheriffs
were on top of her and a police stick
was upraised and used on this woman
while she was on the ground. This does
not, to me, as an American citizen, por-
tray the image of a good State nor, cer-
tainly, of law-abiding individuals en-
gaged in the proper enforcement of the
law. If this happened in my city, I quite:
assure you that there would certainly be
a great uproar. I am not judging this
and I am not saying that this woman
was right or wrong and I am not saying
that the law officials were right or wrong.
However, it certainly indicates to me that
there may be something wrong, for which
reason other Americans at least should
attempt to observe the situation so
that they will have some knowledge of
what is going on there. As I have indi-
cated, others will be going with me. I
am certainly not the chairman of this
group. I did not organize it. I am sim-
ply one who has seen fit to join it. I
certainly hope that the expressions that
have been made today on both sides will
be helpful in bringing about some type
of understanding of what has happened
in our American society.
To me brotherhood is not so wild a
dream as it is to those who propose post-
poning it pretend. Personally I believe
we can bring about brotherhood even in
the Southern States. I was born in a
southern State myself before my family
migrated to Los Angeles. So I think I
can speak as a southerner. I think I
know something of the feelings of south-
erners. I know of the great emotions
that have been aroused as a result of
some of these happenings. I know that
this Congress has passed three laws to
secure the voting rights of the citizens of
every State of this Union. I do know
and feel that some of these laws are not
being upheld. Whether the law should
be strengthened is something which is
certainly worthy of some attention. If
I shall. have observed something in Ala-
bama that might make me a better Con-
gressman or put me in a better position
to recommend something to strengthen
brotherhood in our country then I think
certainly a great mission will have been
accomplished.
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400170033-4
 Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400170033-4
1965,
Semitism and the singling out of Soviet
citizens of the Jewish faith for extreme
punishment for alleged economic crimes.
On January 4, 1965, I introduced House
Resolution 50 expressing the same senti-
ments on the part of the House alone.
The concurrent resolution in the other
body to the one the House receives today
states the unanimity of opinion on this
matter on the part of the resolution's
adherents in both the Houses of the Con-
gress.
As I stated last year, when I intro-
duced an identical House resolution, it
is clear that the Soviet Government and
the Communist Party have fostered and
encouraged religious persecution in the
Soviet Union. In the case of its Jewish
citizens, the Soviet Government has
singled them out in reporting arrests and
executions for alleged economic crimes;
it has confiscated synagogues, closed
Jewish cemeteries, arrested Rabbis, cur-
tailed religious observances and Jewish
cultural activities.
It is my hope, and I know the hope of
those others of our colleagues joining in
the sponsorship of this resolution today,
that the Soviet Government, in the name
of decency and humanity, will cease its
persecution of Soviet Jews and permit
the free exercise of religion by all of its
citizens.
NEW YORK CITY IN CRISIS PART II
(Mr. MOLTER (at the request of Mr.
OTTiNGER) was granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to Include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. MOLTER. Mr. Speaker, I com-
mend to the attention of our colleagues
part II of the New York Herald Tribune
series on New York City in Crisis.
C PIRG I-~Trhe following installment concerns the
aglc failure of urban renewal in New
York City and appeared in the New York
Herald Tribune on January 26, 1965:
NEW YORK U'ITY IN URISI BA
HOPE: PLAGUED BY INDECISION-AROUSED AND
INDIGNANT
("We're fighting all over the world to
preserve democracy and then we find our-
selves kicked in the teeth in our own city,"
said one caller to the Herald Tribune. He
was among scores of citizens responding yes-
terday to the first article of "New York City
in Crisis," and among millions of New York-
ers who feel that the greatest city in the
world may no longer be the greatest place in
which to live. The Herald Tribune is pre-
senting this special investigative series on the
deeply disturbing characteristics of a city In
crisis with the aim of ending the bewilder-
ment, frustration, rage, fear, and indiffer-
ence that have become hallmarks of city life.
It welcomes any public reaction and hopes
that out of these articles can come some
positive direction to reopen the channels of
civic creativity: Whether in terms of individ-
ual response, a banding together of citizens,
or a change in the pattern of municipal re-
sponsibility.)
(By Barry Gottehrer and Marshall Peck)
To New York and dozens of other cities,
figiiting a seemingly endless, sometimes fu-
tile war against spreading slums, urban re-
newal has become the chief-and essential-
weapon for progress. But in New York-
and elsewhere to varying degrees-it is fre-
quently a peculiar sort of progress, one that
CONGRESSIONAL
estroys slums out of necessity but one that
lso often destroys small businesses and up-
oots lower income families out of ignor-
nce, incompetence and indecision.
Despite the city's extravagant claims, the
5-year-old slum-clearance program In New
ork has consistently failed to live up to its
riginal purpose-"the realization as soon as
easible of a decent home and a suitable liv-
ng environment for every American family."
The slum-clearance program officially came
nto being in 1949 with the passage of the
itle I section of the Federal Housing Act.
rider the legislation, the Federal Govern-
ent agreed to pay cities for slum clearance
rid redeveloping by putting up two-thirds
the other third to be paid in full by the
ity or split between the city and the State)
f the cost of buying up and clearing slum
treas. The cleared land was then to be
urned over to builders and developers at a
onsiderably lower price than they would
ave had to pay If they had cleared the land
hemselves.
WHEN IT BEGAN
The term "urban renewal" was brought
nto use in 1954 when the Federal Housing
ct was extended to provide Federal assist-
nce on a similar basis for conservation, re-
abilitation and comprehensive planning and
edevelopment.
Since 1949, the U.S. Government has ap-
roved more than $4 billion worth of urban
enewal contributions nationally, with more
an $263 million allocated for New York
ity, Out of this, after 15 years, the city
ow has 41 federally aided projects totaling
3,074 apartment units in varying stages
f planning or construction.
Through last month, however, only 3
f these 41 projects and only 24,052 of these
3,074 apartments were listed as completed
y the housing and redevelopment board,
n a city in which the slums and ghettos con-
inue to spread and where there is a des-
erate need for more public and middle-in-
ores housing, 16 years of urban-renewal
ork and money have not made notably im-
ressive headway.
The failure of the city's urban renewal
rogram-coupled with a severe shortage of
ublic housing (New York voters rejected 2
mendments last November that would have
rovided 2,600 additional public-housing
nits)-has made the housing problem one
f the most critical facing the city.
Some 1.2o million New Yorkers live in sub-
tandard housing today and more than
00,000 need to and can't get into public
ousing.
The white, middle class continues to desert
he city (more than 800,000 have left since
950) because the apartments in Manhattan
re, for the most part, too small or too ex-
ensive.
And the city's Negro and Puerto Ricans, the
rincipal victims of urban renewal, continue
to be pushed from one slum to another.
One of the most outspoken and articulate
ritics of haphazardly administered and poor-
y planned urban renewal is Representative
oHN V. LINDSAY, whose 17th Congressional
District includes the Bellevue South area. To
the Republican Congressman, urban renewal
s necessary for progress. But he seems to
eel that in New York City urban renewal
as unfortunately been allowed to become a
necessary evil instead of a necessary good in
any instances.
"The purpose of the Housing Act of 1949
is not served when we indiscriminately erase
whole communities from the map," says Mr.
LINDSAY. "We must stop destroying neigh-
borhoods in the name of urban renewal. We
must stop ruining businesses, scattering the
families we should keep and creating greater
pressure on deteriorating housing-all in the
name of urban renewal. Past programs have
CPYRGH
2029 T
been urban removal rather than urban re-
newal."
PAYING THE PRICE
To a great extent, New York City today is
paying for the capricious manner in which
the urban renewal program was run through
the years. Under the direction of master
builder Robert Moses and his committee on
slum clearance, the urban renewal or title I
program-as it was originally called-was the
subject of criticism and the object of con-
troversy almost from the beginning.
Unlike other cities, which would relocate
the residents and then clear the land before
turning the sites over to private developers.
New York insisted upon turning over the
sites with the buildings still standing and
the tenants still paying rent. This was done
because Mr. Moses said it was the only way
he could get firm commitments from de-
velopers. And what Mr. Moses wanted, Mr.
Moses got.
It was precisely this policy, which allowed
developers to delay relocation and clearance
almost indefinitely while collecting rents
from their slum tenants, that led to the
start of the program's troubles. By mid-
1956, with 10 projects approved but all run-
ning far behind schedule, hints of scandal
and criticism of the way many slum resi-
dents were being treated were commonplace.
But the biggest explosion-centering around
the Manhattantown project, a six-block area
between Amsterdam Avenue and Central
Park West and 97th and 100th Streets-was
yet to come. -
The plan, calling for the construction of
17 apartment houses with 2,720 units, was
approved by the board of estimate in Sep-
tember of 1951 and scheduled for completion
by August of 1956. Manhattantown, Inc.-
a group of developers headed by a builder
named Jack Ferman and Samuel Caspert,
who previously had been appointed a city
marshal by Mayor William O'Dwyer-ob-
tained the six-block area, which the city
had condemned for $16.3 million, for $3.1
million, putting up only $1 million in cash.
THE MANHATTANTOWN STORY
But it wasn't until the fall of 1954 when
the U.S. Senate Banking and Currency Com-
mittee held a 1-day hearing in New York that
the story began to leak out.
Mr. Caspert disclosed how he had set up
a separate firm headed by his son-in-law
which bought all the refrigerators and gas
ranges in the Manhattantown tenements for
$33,000.
The son-in-law then rented the exact same
refrigerators and ranges back to Manhattan-
town which, in less than a year, paid him
$115,326. Though the Senate committee re-
ported that $649,215 had been siphoned out
of the Manhattantown project by similar
methods in its first 18 months of operation,
no official action was taken by either Mayor
Wagner or Mr. Moses.
When charges of irregularities continued
and the project's scheduled completion day
came in August of 1956 without a single
building having even been started, Mr. Moses
blamed the Federal officials for taking too
much time in underwriting a loan for the
developers. Yet even when the loans were
approved the Manhattantown developers did
not pick them up. The situation became so
bad in the Manhattantown tenements that
one tenant complained she had no hot water
for 3 months and no water at all for 1
month.
By mid-1957, the dimensions of the prob-
lem no longer could be evaded or denied.
Though developers were collecting millions
of dollars in rent from slum tenements
throughout the city, some of them had not
even bothered to pay their taxes or Interest
to the city. Of the $1 million owed the city,
Manhattantown owed more than $414,000.
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400170033-4
 CPYRGH E
2030
Approved For Release 2005/07/13: CIA-RDP67B00446R0004001.70033-4
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
THE MAYOR'S VIEW
Finally, on June 11, 1957, the slum clear-
ance committee recommended ' that the city
start foreclosure action to repossess the Man.-
hattantown site. Nearly 6 years after the
project had first been approved, Manhattan-
town had not paid its taxes (which now
totaled $620,000), had not cleared its land,
bad not started construction of its first
apartment, and had not even picked up its
Federal commitments.
At a city hall press conference, Mayor Wag-
ner, who had steadfastly supported the slum
clearance committee and its chairman and
would, continue to do so, was asked why he
had done nothing but deny all charges In-
volving Manhattantown In the past.
"We were misled," said the mayor.
"You mean to say you were conned for 5
years?" asked one reporter, who had been a
persistent critics of the Manhattantown set-
up.
"Well, if you want to put It that way-
yes," he said. "I guess you could say we
were conned for 5 years."
Ultimately, under a new sponsor (Webb
and Knapp, later related by Alcoa Residences,
Inc.) and under a new name (Park West
Village), the Manhattantown project became
a reality. Today; 2,525 units are occupied
(at rents between $28 and $55 a room) and
another 140 are underway.
Manhattantown, however, wasn't the only
urban renewal project tainted with scandal
and dotted with irregularities. In others, it
also became obvious that urban renewal
might not always work for the benefit of the
slum residents, but it certainly didn't harm
the developers.
At one point, the program was being run
so haphazardly that a Federal Housing Ad-
ministrator in Washington reportedly de-
cided to do something about it. According
to the story, the Administrator sent word to
the slum clearance committee in New York
that further funds would be withheld until
the city cleaned up its program, eliminated
the scandal, and started providing better
housing and relocation for the people pushed
out.
Within a week, the Administrator reported-
ly received a call from a superior. The mes-
sage was supposed to have been loud and
clear: "Leave Bob Moses and New York
alone."
The administrator is said to have taken
the advice and Mr. Moses, whose own hon-
tioned, continued to administer New York's
urban renewal program in the way he saw
fit.
(The Tribune repeatedly has attempted to
interview Mr. Moses about his role in the
city's urban renewal program and Its his-
tory, but has been told that Mr. Moses would
under no condition speak, to anyone from
this newspaper about anything.)
Finally In 1960, the Housing and Rede-
velopment Board was established to take over
the duties of the slum clearance committee
and six other municipal programs. Un-
fortunately in New York, unlike several
other cities (Boston, for one), the urban
renewal program and the city's planning
unit, both of which overlap in many areas,
were not brought under a single administra-
tion,
A PLANNING DECISION
It is still up to the city planning commis-
sion, which has received $3.7 million from
the Federal Government under a new urban
renewal arm called the community, renewal
program, to hold preliminary hearings and
designate specific areas for urban renewal.
It is then up to the HRB to request addi-
tional funds from the Federal government
for further study of these designated areas
and, perhaps someday, for ultimate condem-
nation and clearance. Theoretically the
HRB cannot initiate an urban renewal proj-
ect and the planning commission cannot
complete one.
Caught up in this massive bureaucracy and
this needless duplication of time, money, and
effort, hundreds of thousands of New York-
ers must wait-unable to move because
there is no place to move to and. unable to
repair their homes or businesses because
banks are extremely reluctant to extend
credit to someone whose business or home
might be torn down in the next few years.
What then is the difference between the
city's urban renewal program 5 years ago and,
today? Essentially, the difference seems to
be that the people running the program now
have their hearts in the right place. There
are still occasional whispers of scandal, but
they are infrequent and unsubstantiated.
Under Chairman Milton Mollen,, who last
week was named to coordinate all of the
city's housing programs, the HRB picked up
the cry of other cities in following the lead-
ership of New Haven Mayor Richard Lee
and his emphasis on human renewal. Mr.
Mo1len tactfully avoids criticizing the old
Slum Clearance Committee ("I'd rather not
talk about the past," he says), but believes
that the entire emphasis of the program has
changed for the better-"from simply clear-
ing slums to a concern for the problems they
symptomize."
"I think urban renewal is the hope of many
areas of the. city," he says. "Without it,
there's uncertainty. As it is, there's in-
action on one hand. In certain areas, such
as Bedford-Stuyvesant, private enterprise
won't go in. On the other hand, in other
areas, private real estate interests are mov-
ing in. They only disrupt the neighbor-
hood and they provide no relocation for the
people."
Ii New York now, the department of re-
location, which was set up in November of
1962, has taken the job of urban--renewal
relocating away from the builders. And the
city itself-and not the builders-remains in
control of the apartments and stores, col-
lecting the rents until everyone is relocated
and the site is cleared. Then-and only
then--is the land turned over to the de-
velopers.
These are decided improvements---steps
In the right direction-but the administra-
tion of the program and its accomplishments
remain far from impressive.
One need look no further than Lincoln
Center for a vivid example of the city's
yet at the same time, still not satisfyin
everyone.
At its best, the Lincoln Center projec
cleared away a seriously blighted area an
provided the city with a cultural core-In
eluding a new theater, a new philharmonl
hall, and an opera house-that any city i
the world would be proud to possess.
Yet even here-where the beauty an
worth of the cultural center so clearly dem
onstate a step forward from the slum it re-
placed-there has been criticism-and, to
degree, the criticism is valid.
CAUSE FOR CRITICISM
In the place of the low rent, admittedl
slum housing, a string of expensive apart
ment house has been built-far out of th
price range of the people these building
have dispossessed. This is the continuing
failure of urban renewal-this aimless traffic
and removal of lower income people from
one slum to another-and it is one that New
York officials have been unable to solve.
HRB officials are quick to point out that
the Lincoln Center apartment houses are in
telrated, but they usually fail. to mention
that they are integrated by upper middle
class Negroes and not by Negroes and Puerto
Ricans who had been driven from the are
by the bulldozers. These houses, where 9
percent of the 4,271 apartments rent for $61
CPYRGH
February 14
a room, have at best token integration an4
the project, despite HRB denials, is a prime
example of what civil rights leaders call
"Negro removal"
"It's unfortunate that someone has to be
hurt and suffer but you have got to think
of the greater need and the greater good,"
says one city official. "And, for a city the
size of New York, the greater need is the
elimination of slums."
Few people- even those uprooted by urban
renewal-would dispute this. Everybody
knows slums are bad and everybody knows
slums must go. But what troubles these
people and the many, many others is the
lack of leadership from city hall, the inde-
cision and the bureaucracy of the planning
and urban renewal units, the corruption, the
politics, the inhumanity, and the irration-
ality that have plagued this city's clearance
program throughout the years of Its exist-
ence.
DESPERATION OR DECISION?
It makes little sense to clear one slum
merely to start another one somewhere else.
New housing is desperately needed, but, un-
fortunately, those who are the most desper-
ate have, for the most part, been the last to
get it.
Anyone can tell you that Harlem and Bed-
ford-Stuyvesant both need immediate and
far-sweeping urban renewal programs and
low and lower middle income housing, but,
because of the magnitude of the problem
and the uncertainty of where to house the
people while the areas are being rebuilt, the
city chooses to look and rebuild elsewhere.
"I'm absolutely committed to making New
York a slumless city, a city In which every
family, regardless of race, color, or creed,
will live in a decent home, at a price it can
afford to pay, in a good neighborhood with
soundly planned community facilities,"
wrote Mayor Wagner in a series of syndi-
cated articles last summer.
The mayor obviously meant every word
he wrote, but, to those people forced to
move out of Bellevue South, Lincoln Center,
and dozens of other renewal areas and those
people unable to move out of Harlem, Bed-
ford-Stuyvesant and the city's other slums,
the mayor's inaction speaks louder than his
words. No matter what name you call it-
he it human renewal or human removal-
the city's housing problems are extreme and
in desperate need of remedial action.
(Mr. MULTER (at the request of Mr.
OTTINGER) was,granted permission to ex-
tend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
[Mr. MULTER'S remarks will appeal'
hereafter in the Appendix.]
ANNOUNCEMENT TO MEMBERS OF
THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTA-
TIVES CONCERNING REPRINTING
OF STATEMENTS MADE ON
THE 47TH ANNIVERSARY OF
UKRAINE'S INDEPENDENCE
(Mr. FLOOD (at the request of Mr.
OTTINGER) was granted permission to
extend his remarks at this point in the
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
ter.)
Mr. FLOOD. Mr. Speaker, I would
like to announce that reprints will be
made of statements of Members of the
House of Representatives on the occa-
sion of the 47th anniversary of the in-
dependence of Ukraine. The reprinting
has been requested by the Ukrainian
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400170033-4
 1994
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400170033-4
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE February 4
union dues paid under such circum- a bar association in order to practice gress will not abandon or ignore the
stances will not be used for purposes for- his profession. sound principles which it represents.
e
fld t th t fw
n
eign to a union's function as collective- However, I am co en a
bargaining agent. Members of Congress-and surely no
Those who advocate compulsory liberals-would oppose a proposition
unionism and oppose State right-to- to preclude the bar association, where
work laws frequently advance the "free membership is compulsory from, first,
rider" argument. Within limits, this discriminating against Negroes or, see-
t
Under the law, when a union is selected
by the majority of employees in a bar-
gaining unit, that union is required by
law to represent, not just those employ-
ees who voluntarily join the union, but
all employees in the unit. Since the
union must represent all employees, and
since all employees theoretically benefit
from the union's services as bargaining
agent, it is only fair that all employees
should be required to pay dues. Employ-
ees who do not pay dues are referred to
as "free riders."
This argument has considerable appeal
in the case of a union which uses its dues
only for those purposes for which it is
required by statute to represent all of
the employees. However, it is very im-
portant to note that section 9(a) of the
National Labor Relations Act provides
that a labor organization selected by a
majority of employees "shall be the ex-
clusive representative of all the employees
in such unit for the purposes of collec-
tive bargaining in respect to rates of
pay, wages, hours of employment, or
other conditions of employment."
Obviously, the "free rider" argument
rings hollow when it is sounded by
spokesmen who vigorously oppose any
effective legislation to prevent the use of
union dues for political or other pur-
poses not related to a union's statutory
function as bargaining agent.
As for me, I agree with Mr. Justice
Douglas, of the U.S. Supreme Court,
when he stated:
The collection of dues for paying the costs
of collective bargaining of which a mem-
ber is a beneficiary is one thing. If, how-
ever, dues are used, or assessments are made,
to promote or oppose birth control, to re-
peal or increase the taxes on cosmetics, to
promote or oppose the admission of Red
China into the United Nations, and the like,
then the group compels an individual to sup-
port with his money causes beyond what gave
rise to the need for group action.
And Mr. Justice Douglas went on to
say:
I think the same must be said when union
dues or assessments are used to elect a Gover-
THE CIVIL RIGHTS SITUATION IN
ALABAMA
(Mr. SELDEN asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. SELDEN. Mr. Speaker, the po-
tentially explosive situation in Selma and
other communities in my home State of
Alabama is a cause for growing national
concern.
There are many conflicting reports re-
garding the true state -of affairs in these
Alabama communities, but of this much
we are certain: further exacerbation of
existing tensions in these areas might
well result in a complete breakdown of
law and order and consequent violence
and bloodshed.
As an Alabamian, I am, of course, deep-
ly concerned with the welfare of my State
and its citizens. As a Member of Con-
gress, I believe some measure of respon-
sibility to avert such a tragedy devolves
upon the Congress in this case.
Those who last year supported the
Civil Rights Act of 1964 did so in the
belief-as one advocate of that legisla-
tion phrased it-that passage of the bill
would "elevate the civil rights movement
from the streets to the court."
Unfortunately and irresponsibly, lead-
ers of the civil rights movement have
otherwise interpreted the meaning of en-
actment of the civil rights bill. In
Selma, in Marion, and in other com-
munities of Alabama, these irresponsible
leaders have, in effect, taken their move-
ment from the courts into the streets,
defying normal processes of justice, law,
and order.
What are the true facts regarding the
events now transpiring in Alabama?
The people of the United States want to
know and are entitled to know. And
the people of Alabama not only willingly,
but eagerly, await an honest, impartial
investigation of these events.
In this regard, on Tuesday I received
a telegram from Mr. Roswell Falken-
berry, publisher of the Selma Times-
Journal, a leading citizen of that com-
munity. Mr. Falkenberry said:
SELMA, ALA.
Hon. ARMISTEAD SELDEN,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
In view of continued provocation of local
Negro citizens by professional agitators, de-
spite conscientious efforts of a responsible
white community to comply with the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, this newspaper respect-
fully requests that you urge the- Immediate
appointment of a joint congressional com-
mission to investigate the actual conditions
existing in Selma at this time. We urge that
an unbiased, responsible group representing
both the House and the Senate be dispatched
to this city immediately as factfinders to ob-
serve the situation in which the city of Selma
is being thwarted in an attempt to observe
all existing local, State, and Federal statutes.
We believe that the Congress should de-
termine for themselves the true facts with-
out regard to race traditions or propaganda.
You must agree that firsthand, on-the-scene
knowledge of tragic conditions in any com-
munity is equally as important to the na-
tional welfare as any of the various surveys
which have been conducted by the Congress
nor, a Congressman, a Senator, or a President, with his own flag flying, whether it be re-
it may be said that the election of a Franklin ligious, political, or philosophical; nothing
D. Roosevelt rather than a Calvin Coolidge that the group does should deprive him of
might be the best possible way to serve the the privilege of preserving and expressing
cause of collective bargaining. But even his agreement, disagreement, or dissent,
such a selective use of union funds for whether It coincides with the view of the
political purposes subordinates the individ- group, or conflicts with it in minor or major
ual's first amendment rights to the views of ways, and he should not be required to
the majority. I do not see how that can be finance the promotion of causes with which
done, even though the objector retains his he disagrees.
rights to campaign, to speak, to, vote as he
chooses. For when union funds are used I believe my bill is fair and reasonable.
for that purpose, the individual is required It recognizes merit in the arguments for
to finance political projects against which union security, but it does not sacrifice
he may be in rebellion. (International Ma- basic individual rights which are at least
chinists v. Street, 376 U.S. 740.) of equal importance.
It is worthy of note that other forced It may be that extreme partisans in
associations are not altogether uncom- the ranks of management and labor will
mon or alien to our American way of life. not applaud this bill. However, I am
For example, in many States an attor- confident that the vast majority of
ney is compelled to join and pay dues to thoughtful Americans in and out of Con-
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400170033-4
re-
ond, using its dues for purposes no
lated to its professional function or,
third, penalizing members for exercising
constitutional or other legal rights.
Finally, the safeguards in my bill re-
flect a serious concern about the ability
of a union member to exercise the con-
stitutional and legal rights available to
other American citizens.
Unfortunately, there seems to be a
noticeable trend on the part of the
NLRB and some courts to downgrade
and subordinate the legal and constitu-
tional rights of individuals when they
become union members subject to union
discipline. It is disturbing when any
union member is relegated to the status
of a second-class citizen. However, this
is an alarming and intolerable situation
as it affects those who are compelled to
be union members in order to work.
Union members have been penalized
by union officials for speaking out on po-
litical issues in opposition to union
policy.
Union members have been fined for
not engaging in concerted activities of a
union even though section 7 of the Na-
tional Labor Relations Act specifically
confers upon every employee "the right
to refrain from any and all such activi-
ties."
According to the strange rationale re-
cently applied by the NLRB, such rights
are protected when exercised by an em-
ployee-but not when exercised by an
employee who is a union member.
Under recent Board decisions, a union
member who is fined for violating union
policy is not necessarily left with an
option to pay the fine or drop out of the
union. He can be compelled to pay the
fine, even if it means garnishment of his
wages or attachment of his property.
Surely, if compulsory unionism is to
be sanctioned by the Federal Govern-
ment throughout the 50 States, the right
of dissent without reprisal must be guar-
anteed. The words of Justice Douglas
speak eloquently to this point:
If an association is compelled, the indi-
vidual should not be forced to surrender any
matters of conscience, belief, or expression.
He should be allowed to enter the group
 Approved For Release 2005/07113 : CIA-RD067B00446R000400170033-4
1965 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE
Jerry Graham and - Rudy Ruderman
have performed a most constructive pub-
lie service in producing the program
"The Film You Can Not See." I,urge
all my colleagues to act favorably on the
CONDEMNING SOVIE
PERSECUTION
(Mr. RYAN asked and was given per-
mission to address the House for 1 minute
and to revise and extend his remarks.)
Mr. RYAN. Mr. Speaker, today I join
with several of my colleagues in the
House and Senate in again introducing
a resolution condemning Soviet persecu-
tion of her citizens of the Jewish faith.
It is known that religion is not looked
upon favorably by the Soviet Union. It
is also known that those of the Jewish
religion have a particularly difficult time
in practicing their religion. The power
of the Soviet state consistently has been
used to prevent the free exercise of the
Jewish religion; synagogues and semi-
naries have been closed; religious pub-
lications suppressed; the baking and
distribution of matzohs during Passover
prevented; numerous "economic crimes"
have been charged against Jews; and
various other state-encouraged depriva-
tions have occurred. I do not have to go
into greater detail concerning this reli-
gious persecution, as the facts have, be-
come well known.
On December 19, 1963, in a speech on
the floor of the House I delivered a de-
tailed account of the situation in the
Soviet Union. At that time I submitted
facts which showed that restrictions on
Jewish. worship were far greater than on
other minority religions.
If the experience of the last 30 years
teaches anything, it teaches that we
cannot be silent in the face of anti-Semi-
tism. As the Representatives of the
people, we have a special obligation to
express the conscience of America on
this important issue. The resolution I
have introduced today states:
That It is the sense of the House that
persecution of any persons because of their
religion by the Soviet Union be condemned,
and that the Soviet Union in the name of
decency and humanity cease executing per-
sons for alleged economic offenses, and fully
permit the free exercise of religion and the
pursuit of culture by Jews and all others
within its borders.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to
support this resolution. Let us pass it
before Passover, which falls on April 16
of this year. On February 3, the Rab-
binical Council of America representing
900 rabbis in the United States and Can-
ada appealed to the new Soviet leaders
to permit the baking of mataohs. If this
resolution is adopted by April 16, it would
aid in this appeal and further the cause
of religious freedom.
Mr. RUMSFELD. Mr, Speaker, will
the gentleman yield?
Mr. RYAN. I yield to the gentleman
from Illinois.
Mr. RUMSFELD. I congratulate the
gentleman on his statement and the res-
olution he has introduced. I introduced
earlier this week a similar resolution
which I had also introduced in the 88th
Congress, but which was not acted upon-
I join with the gentleman urging sup-
port of these resolutions.
Mr. RYAN. I thank the gentleman
for his support in this great cause.
'EMPLOYEE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF
1965
(Mr. GRIFFIN asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. GRIFFIN. Mr. Speaker, none of
the legislative issues confronting the
89th Congress is likely to stir more con-
troversy or generate more heat than the
proposal to repeal section 14(b)-that
provision of the Taft-Hartley Act which
leaves with the several States the au-
thority to outlaw compulsory union shop
agreements.
What promises to be a debate of major
proportions is already raging in and out
of Congress, ignited by President John-
son's reference to 14(b) in his recent
state of the Union address. As this de-
bate proceeds toward an historic climax,
it is my purpose today to focus attention
upon certain fundamental legal and civil
rights which are inextricably involved in
any thoughtful consideration of legisla-
tion to sanction compulsory unionism-
legal and civil rights which, in this con-
text, the modern-day "pseudoliberal"
seems eager to Ignore or brush aside.
It is my firm conviction that repeal of
14(b) must be conditioned upon the
enactment of certain fundamental safe-
guards for the workers who are, or would
be, compelled to join and make payments
to a union in order -to hold their jobs.
If such safeguards are included, along
with meaningful provision for effective
enforcement, I am prepared to support,
and to advocate, the repeal of section
14(b).
I have today introduced a bill, H.R.
4350, which would accomplish these pur
poses. It is entitled the "Employee Civil
Rights Act of 1965."
It is a bill which ought to rally the en-
thusiastic support of true liberals in both
parties.
My bill would strike the existing; pro-
visions of 14(b), and would extend the
privilege of negotiating union shop
agreements to labor organizations in all
of the 50 States, However, my bill would
not take away State power to check union
abuses in this area without substituting
Federal power to protect the basic legal
and civil rights of individual workers
who would be affected.
Briefly, under my bill it would be un-
lawful for a union which makes an
agreement requiring membership as a
condition of employment-
First, to discriminate on account of
race, color or creed;
Second, to use the dues collected for
political purposes or for any other pur-
pose not related to the union's statutory
function as collective bargaining agent;
or
Third, to fine or penalize a member for
exercising any legal or civil right guar-
anteed by the Constitution or laws of the
United States.
1993
Of course, the enumeration of such
basic individual rights would be mean-
ingless without provision for effective en-
forcement. Under my bill, a union
which violates any of these fundamental
employee rights could not enforce a con-
tract provision which imposes union
membership as a condition of employ-
ment. Those who suffer damages as the
result of a violation could file a civil suit
in Federal district court, or they could
file an unfair labor practice charge with
the National Labor Relations Board, in
order to obtain appropriate relief.
As my bill indicates, I join the chair-
man of the Committee on Education and
Labor in the call for an end to discrimi-
nation in union membership and union
apprenticeship programs. And, I share
his recently expressed concern that 14(b)
should not be repealed unless "assur-
ances" are provided that unions which
enforce compulsory membership require-
ments will not discriminate.
Of course, I assume that the chairman
is also contemplating "assurances" in
the nature of accompanying legislative
safeguards with effective enforcement
provisions. Surely, responsible legisla-
tors could accept nothing less.
While impressive strides have been
made toward political equality in recent
years, this progress has not been alto-
gether comforting for the American who
cannot get a job because of his color. To
be sure, the "Equal Employment Oppor-
tunity" title of the 1964 Civil Rights Act,
despite its limitations, can be a useful
instrument in the eventual attainment of
its stated goal. However, the way pro-
vided by title VII of the Civil Rights Act,
which requires discrimination charges to
be filed first with a State agency, must
look like a long and almost hopeless road
to Negroes in a number of States.
It is unfortunate, but true, that dis-
crimination by labor unions is often a
more serious problem for the Negro than
discrimination by employers. This I.
particularly true so far as apprenticeship
and training programs are concerned.
Where compulsory union membership is
not a requirement, Negroes can often
find it easier to obtain-a job, or an op-
portunity for training.
Obviously, if Congress, without pro-
viding effective safeguards, should re-
peal 14(b) and thereby sanction com-
pulsory unionism in the 19 States which
have so-called "right-to-work" laws, the
Congress, by its action, would actually
reduce the economic opportunities for
Negroes and increase the difficulties they
face.
Surely, a Congress that is truly con-
cerned about poverty and the economic
plight of the Negro, will not deliberately
extend compulsory unionism into the
very States, in some cases, where dis-
crimination problems are the most se-
rious-unless individual workers are ef-
fectively protected against discrimina-
tion.
My deep concern for another funda-
mental civil right is appropriately re-
flected in the safeguards of this bill. In-
dividual citizens-including those com-
pelled to join a union-are entitled to
political freedom. Moreover, they are
entitled to meaningful assurance that
Approved For Release 2005/07/13 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400170033-4