IMPORTATION OF ADULT HONEY BEES

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 35
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: April 8, 2005
• Sequence Number: 1
• Publication Date: January 1, 1962
• Content Type: OPEN

Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
1962 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -SENATE
lower, not higher, prices for sugar. There
are occasions when a Senator must
think of the national interest, even if
his vote may not be popular at home.
But this, I submit, is not such an occa-
sion. This bill, I argue, is not in the
national interest. It is definitely op-
posed to ttie interest of all Pennsyl-
vanians, be use we want lower-not
higher-sugar'-,,prices.
Accordingly, r. President, I shall
vote against the conference report, in
the hope that after further consideration
a bill more in the public interest can be
It is said that we st have this bill
Immediately, lest the c ntry be flooded
with cheap sugar, since he present act
which maintains the sup rt prices has
expired. But, Mr. Presiden in my judg-
ment this would be somethf far short
of a catastrophe. The long_ -0 nge dam-
age which this measure would o to our
foreign policy far outweighs an short-
range harm to the artificial do estic
support price of sugar which would sult
from postponing enactment of this le 's-
not told us why it has abandoned its
original opposition to the conference re-
port-an opposition which was widely
circulated as late as this morning. I
hope that on further consideration the
President will decide to veto this
measure.
Mr. LAUSCHE. Mr. President, I shall
vote against the conference. report.
However, I wish to say that I highly
commend the conferees for obtaining the
best possible bill from the conference,
under all the circumstances which pre-
vailed.
For a number of years at about this
time of the year I have been subjected
to the proposition that time is running
out, and that unless we act at once,
irreparable damage will be caused the
country. Each year for the last several
years, at about June 27 or June 26, there
hurriedly comes before this body a sugar
bill which requires passage by midnight
of June 30.
I wish to be free in the exercise of my
judgment, without having presented to
At one time I taught, in law school, the
subject of agency; and I recall that there
is a principle of law that whenever an
agent Is hired, on the basis of a contin-
gent.fee, to procure the performance of
an act by an executive public official or
by a legislative body, that arrangement
is contrary to public policy, and is in-
valid.
In connection with the measure before
us, we cannot- reach into the private
agreements on a contingent basis which
have been made by various countries
with special. agents to procure the pas-
sage of the pending measure. But I will
not by my vote indirectly and impliedly
give approval to this nefarious practice.
I will vote against this measure, if on no
other basis than the fact that these
countries should be told that we do not
subscribe to such procedure.
To the nations which rely upon their
ambassadors, I express commendation;
and if I could have my way, I would give
them special benefits because of.;that
very fact.
Next, Mr. President, from the 'stand-
point of foreign relations, our' country
hich will
assigning gt36tas now, regard-
in the even
will become
In conclusion ,1 commend the confer-
ees for what was one; I think they did
a superlative Job. ut I still believe that
the allocations to i ividual nations are
not helpful to the U 'ted States. They
throw a cloud upon at is happening
in the ot)~er body and w t is happening
in the Senate. I do not w t lobbyists to
laugh while I am voting to ive approval
to whit has been done. Fro my stand
point, I notify them that th moment
they appear on the basis of c tingent
fees, that very act will stamp th 'r con-
duct and the conduct of their priipals
once, irreparable damage will come tp
the Nation. I cannot understand how it
is that this annual, identical coincide ice
occurs-that the sugar bill comes 0 us
at a late hour, making it impossible
for the Senate to exercise its volyntary,
independent judgment.
Furthermore, Mr. Presidents the very
structure of this allocation oo{ quotas to
different nations of the world creates a
flood of lobbyists who not ox y are prom-
ised fixed fees, but also/are promised
contingent fees, dependent upon their
success in procuring for their principals
assignments of sugar ?sales. I do not
wish to be in the poion of subscribing
to what I saw in a p mphlet, which was
placed on my desk,T bout the inordinate
fees-contingent And otherwise-being
earned by those who have come before -
the committees ,o present the cause of
the nations whp are so frantically fight-
ing for the as lgnment of quotas.
11619
those, who wrote this report, as well as
by those who agreed to it in the confer-
ence, that this measure will be adminis-
tered in such away that those countries
in the Western Hemisphere would be
preferred-if that can be done-in con-
nection with the purchases of sugar, be-
cause they have been our historic sources
of offshore sugar; and also we want con-
sideration given in this connection, inso-
far as possible, to countries which have
been p*rchasing U.S. agricultural com-
modities.
Mr. ANDERSON. Yes. On that point,
the,House conferees may say that the
House is very anxious to protect coun-
tries which have purchased U.S. agricul-
tural commodities, and that therefore we
should have an opportunity to do this for
those countries, if that is at all possible.
I have discussed this matter with the
Senator from Oklahoma [Mr. KERR], and
I think he also agrees that this consider-
ation should be given.
For myself, I wish to say that I hope
it will be given, because these countries
have been our historic sources of our
offshore sugar, and they have also been
purchasing U.S. agricultural commod-
ities. So I believe they certainly should
be given this special consideration.
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. And I hope
the State Department will take steps to
see to it that such special consideration
is given.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the report.
On this question, the yeas and nays
have been ordered.
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, I sug-
gest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The Chief Clerk proceeded to call the
roll.
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, I ask
unanimous consent that further pro-
ceedings under the quorum call be sus-
pended.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
The question is on agreeing to the
conference report. The yeas and nays
have been ordered, and the clerk will call
the roll.
The legislative clerk called the roll.
Mr. HUMPHREY. I announce that
the Senator from Alaska [Mr. BARTLETT],
the Senator from North Dakota . [Mr.
Louisiana [Mr. Lord, who was one of
the conferees, that I hope he recog-
nizes-as I do-that on page 4 of the re-
port there is a provision that special
consideration shall be given to the
nations of the Western Hemisphere.
The following language appears:
In authorizing the purchase and importa-
tion of sugar from foreign countries under
this paragraph, special consideration shall.
be given to countries of the Western Hemi-
sphere and to those countries purchasing
U.S. agricultural commodities.
Does not the Senator from Louisiana
believe that language was written in
carefully, prayerfully, and purposely;
and does he not agree that we do intend
that special consideration shall be given
to these countries?
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Yes, that is
definitely intended; and it is hoped by
No. 11f1-14
si i [Mr. EASTLAND ] , the Senator from
No Carolina [Mr. ERVIN], the Senator
from ennessee [Mr. GORE], the Senator
from ichigan [Mr. HART], the Senator
from InoTana [Mr. HARTKE], the Senator
from N h Carolina [Mr. JORDAN], the
Senator fr Tennessee [Mr. KEFAIIVERI,
the Senator om Washington [Mr. MAG-
NIISON],the S ator from Wyoming [Mr.
McGEEI, the S ator from Rhode Island
[Mr. PASTORE], t e Senator from Rhode
Island [Mr. PELL the Senator from
Georgia [Mr. Ru ELL], the Senator
from Florida [Mr. S THERSI, the Sena-
tor from Massachuse [Mr. SMITH],
and the Senator from labama [Mr.
SPARKMAN] are absent on official busi-
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 11620
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE July 2
On this vote, the Senator from Ala-
bama [Mr. SPARKMAN] is paired with the
Senator from Massachusetts [Mr.
SMITH]. If present and voting, the Sena-
tor from Alabama would vote "yea," and
the Senator from Massachusetts would
vote "nay."
I further announce that the Senator
from Colorado [Mr. CARROLL], the Sena-
tor from Idaho [Mr. CHURCH], the Sena-
tor from Alaska [Mr. GRUENINGI are ne-
cessarily absent.
I further announce that, if present
and voting, the Senator from Alaska
[Mr. BARTLETT], the Senator from North
Dakota [Mr. BURDICK], the Senator from
New Mexico [Mr. CHAVEZ], the Senator
from Mississippi [Mr. EASTLAND], the
Senator from North Carolina [Mr.
ERVIN], the Senator from Tennessee [Mr.
GORE], the Senator from Michigan [Mr.
HART], the Senator from Indiana [Mr.
HARTKE], the Senator from North Caro-
lina [Mr. JORDAN], the Senator from
Tennessee [Mr. KEFAUVERI, the Senator
from Washington [Mr. MAGNUSON], the
Senator from Wyoming [Mr. MCGEE],
the Senator from Rhode Island [Mr.
PASTOREI, the Senator from Rhode Island
[Mr. PELL], the Senator from Georgia
Colorado [Mr. CARROLL], the Senator
from Idaho [Mr. CHURCH], and the
Senator from Alaska [Mr. GRUENING]
would each vote "yea.
Mr. KUCHEL. I announce that the
Senators from Maryland [Mr. BEALL and
Mr. BUTLER], the Senator from Indiana
[Mr. CAPEHART], the Senators from Kan-
sas [Mr. CARLSON and Mr. PEARSON], the
Senator from Arizona [Mr. GOLDWATER],
the Senator from Kentucky [Mr. Mon-
TON], the Senator from New Hampshire
[Mr. MURPHY], the Senator from Ver-
mont [Mr. PROUTY], and the Senator
from Massachusetts [Mr. SALTONSTALL]
are necessarily absent.
The Senator from Delaware [Mr.
BOGGS] and the Senator from Texas [Mr.
TOWER] are also necessarily absent.
If present and voting, the Senator from
Maryland [Mr. BEALL], the Senator from
Kansas [Mr. CARLSON], the Senator from
New Hampshire [Mr. MURPHY], the Sen-
ator from Vermont [Mr. PROUTY], and
the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr.
SALTONSTALLI would each vote "yea."
On this vote, the Senator from Dela-
ware [Mr. BOGGS] is paired with the Sen-
ator from Kansas [Mr. PEARSON]. If
present and voting, the Senator from
Delaware would vote "nay," and the Sen-
ator from Kansas would vote "yea."
The result was announced-yeas 54,
nays 12, as follows:
[No. 110 Leg.]
YEAS-54
Aiken
Dworshak
Kerr
Allott
Ellender
Kuchel
Anderson
Engle
Long, Mo.
Bennett
Fong
Long; Hawaii
Bible
Hayden
Long, La.
Bush
Hickey
Mansfield
Byrd, Va.
Hill
McCarthy
Byrd, W. Va.
Holland
McNamara
Cannon
Hruska
Metcalf
Cooper
Humphrey
Monroney
Cotton
Jackson
Morse
Curtis
Javits
Moss
Dirksen
Johnston
Mundt
Dodd
Keating
Muskie
Randolph
Stennis
Wiley
Robertson
Symington
Williams, N.J.
Scott
Talmadge
Yarborough
Smith, Maine
Thurmond
Young, N. Dak.
NAYS-12
Case
Hickenlooper
Neuberger
Clark
Lausche
Proxmire
Douglas
McClellan
Williams, Del.
Fulbright
Miller
Young, Ohio
NOT VOTING-33
Bartlett
Ervin
Murphy
Beall
Goldwater
Pastore
Boggs
Gore
Pearson
Burdick
Gruening
Pell
Butler
Hart
Prouty
Capehart
Hartke
Russell
Carlson
Jordan
Saltonstall
Carroll
Kefauver
Smathers
Chavez
Magnuson
Smith, Mass.
Church
McGee
Sparkman
Eastland
Morton
Tower
So the conference report was agreed to.
Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, I move
to reconsider the vote by which the con-
ference report was agreed to.
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I
move to. lay that motion on the table.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the motion to
lay on the table the motion to reconsider.
The motion to lay on the table was
IMPORTATION OF ADULT
HONEY BEES
ask unanimous consent that the Senate
proceed to the consideration of Calendar
No. 1530, H.R. 8050, to amend the act
relating to the importation of adult
honey bees.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The bill
will be stated by title for the information
of the Senate.
The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. A bill (H.R.
8050) to amend the act relating to the
importation of adult honey bees.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the request of the Senator
from Montana?
There being no objection, the Senate
,proceeded to consider the bill.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
offer the amendment which I send to the
desk and ask to have stated.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment will be stated for the infor-
mation of the Senate.
The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. At the end of
the bill it is proposed to add the follow-
ing new section:
SEC. 2. (a) Section 202(c) (4) of the Sugar
Act of 1948, as amended, is amended by In-
serting "(A)" after "(4)", and by adding at
the end thereof the following new subpara-
graph :
"(B) Of the quantity authorized for pur-
chase and importation under subparagraph
(A), the President is authorized to allocate
to countries within the Western Hemisphere,
for the six-month period ending December
31, 1962, an amount of sugar, raw value, not
exceeding in the aggregate 75,000 short tons,
and for the calendar years 1963 and 1964,
an amount of sugar, raw value, not exceed-
ing in aggregate 150,000 _h_rt ton? "
the United States to fill any allocation made
to it under subsection (c) (3) (C)."
(c) Section 207(e) (2) of such Act is
amended by adding at the end thereof the
following new sentence: "The provisions of
this paragraph shall not apply to any alloca-
tion made to a foreign country under sec-
tion 202(c) (3) (C)."
(d) Section 213 of such Act, as amended,
is amended-
(1) by striking out "(4)" each place it
appears in subsections (a) and (b) thereof
and inserting in lieu thereof "(4) (A) ";
(2) by striking out "paragraph (3) of sec-
tion 202(c)" in the first sentence of subsec-
tion (c) thereof and inserting in lieu
thereof "paragraphs (3) and (4) (B) of sec-
tion 202(c)"; and
(3) by striking out "(4)" each place it
appears in the first sentence of subsection
(c) thereof and inserting in lieu thereof
?(4)(A)?
(e) The amendments made by this sec-
tion shall be effective as if they were enacted
as a part of H.R. 12154 entitled "An Act to
amend and extend the provisions of the
Sugar Act of 1948, as amended", Eighty-
seventh Congress, second session.
Several Senators addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Montana has the floor.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, not-
withstanding the title of the bill, I
should like to make an explanation of
the proposed amendment. First, I yield
to the Senator from Delaware.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. Mr.
President, I am not sure that I correctly
understand the amendment. If I cor-
rectly understand it, it would restore to
the basic quotas 150,000 tons of sugar
for foreign producers and deduct that
amount from the so-called global quotas.
Is that correct?
Mr. MANSFIELD. That is
from the global quotas.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. From
the global quotas. If I correctly under-
stand the mathematics, assuming the
Senate adopts the amendment and the
bill is enacted, we shall have established
permanent basic quotas of 7,000 tons
more than Mr. COOLEY proposed or than
was provided for in the bill as passed
by the House.
Mr. MANSFIELD. I am not at all cer-
tain about the figure. If the proposal
were adopted, it would operate on the
same basis as is operative with respect
to other countries which have been given
quotas under the conference report
which the Senate just considered.
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. As I
understand the situation, the conferees
took 143,000 tons out of the permanent,
basic quotas assigned under the Cooley
bill and added that amount to the :;lobal
quotas. This proposal viould take 150,000
tons from the global quotas and put it
back in the basic quotas column. The
net result would be, after all this debate,
premium payments on another 7,000
tons.
Mr. MANSFIELD.
the Senator's word.
(b) Section 202(e) 01 sucn Hes, tt? tration officials who denounced the
amended, amended by adding at the end Cooley bill do not now owe the gentle-
provisions the following new sentence: "The
provisions of this subsection shall not apply man on the other side of the Capitol an
to sugar exported by any foreign country to apology. I cannot support this proposal.
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
1,962 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD SENATE
Mr. MANSFIELD. I will take the
Senator's word.
Mr. PROXMIRE, Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, the
Senator from Wisconsin desires to offer
an amendment to the amendment of-
fered by the Senator from Montana.
However, the amendment of the Senator
from Montana is not printed. It is diffi-
cult for the Senator from Wisconsin to
draft an amendment in the time avail-
able.
If the President were to be given such
discretionary sugar authority it would
be greatly preferable, in the judgment of
this Senator, that the quota come not
from the global quota but from the na-
tional quota. In other words, there
should be a pro rata reduction of the
quotas which have now been. provided
to the various countries. Out of that
amount 150,000 tons could be made
available for distribution, apparently to
Argentina and the Dominican Republic.
Under those circumstances the Sena-
tor from Wisconsin would be willing to
support the bill. If the Senator from
Montana will modify his amendment to
provide that the quotas shall come from
the national quotas, I will not have to
offer my amendment. If the Senator is
not willing to do so, however, the Senator
from Wisconsin will ask the Senator
from Montana if he would be willing
either to hold the bill over until tomor-
row, so that an amendment could be
drafted, or to provide the necessary time
so that the Senator from Wisconsin
might have such an amendment drafted
accurately by counsel.
Mr. MANSFIELD. I hope the Sena-
tor, if it will not inconvenience him too
much, will try to draft an amendment of
that nature tonight, so that, if possible,
the Senate can consider it.
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi-
dent, will the Senator yield?
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield.
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. I under-
stand the problem in this regard. I have
indicated as much in the course of the
debate on the conference report.
Those of us who supported the Senate
position were supporting the position of
the administration in the conference,
when we contended that no more than
about 300,000 tons should be on a premi-
um basis, and that even that amount
should be phased out over a period of 5
years. As I have indicated, the adminis-
tration had no idea as to what the out-
come on the conference report was likely
to be.
Our friends on the House side, for
reasons best known to themselves-I
suppose for tactical reasons if no other-
insisted that there should be no admin-
istration advisers in the room to advise
the conferees on the foreign policy prob-
lems that would be created by the con-
ference. Under the circumstances, hav-
ing supported the Senate position and
trimmed the House figures to the lowest
point to which we were capable of trim-
ming them, I understand that the Presi-
dent feels that if we are to put additional
quotas in, there should be some flexibility
and discretion on the part of the Presi-
dent to allot some additional quota to
Argentina and perhaps to some other
country within this hemisphere in order
to meet the various foreign policy con-
siderations that might confront the
President and his advisers.
I point out that the House bill would
have assigned quotas to various coun-
tries. They were the quotas that were
carried into the conference. For ex-
ample, the Republic of Peru was to be
assigned 350,000 tons. We reduced that
amount to 190,000 tons, a reduction of
160,000 tons. More sugar was involved
in that reduction than the proposed
amendment would involve, , insofar as
adjusting the entire quota in the hem-
isphere is concerned.
assigned 350,000 tons. We reduced that
amount to 190,000 tons, which was a re-
duction of another 160,000 tons.
the House bill, Mexico was to be assigned
350,000 tons. That amount was reduced
to 190,000 tons.
Mauritius was to have been assigned
110,000 tons. We reduced that amount
to zero.
South Africa was to have been assigned
120,000 tons. We reduced that amount
to 20,000 tons.
India was to have been assigned 130,-
000 tons. We reduced that amount to
20,000 tons.
Australia was to have been assigned
200,000 tons. We reduced that amount
to 40,000 tons.
Brazil was to have been assigned 340,-
000 tons. We reduced that amount to
80,000 tons.
The point is that we made a reduction
of 1,635,000 tons in the amount proposed
in the bill that the House had passed,
and we reduced the premium prices as
well. While he has not personally asked
me, I understand that the President has
said that since the conference report
made the allotment of 1,200,000 tons and
added additional countries, the President
would like more flexibility to make ad-
justments.
As a practical matter, if we were to try
to do what the Senator from Wisconsin
has proposed and undertake to take the
proposed adjustments out of the allot-
ments made to countries that have al-
ready an agreed quota, the House Com-
mittee on Agriculture would not consider
it. It might be possible to bring about
the desired result the other way around.
We could give the President the neces-
sary flexibility to assign an additional
ment in the matter is vindicated by what
has happened in. the Senate. We have
had an all-day debate, even when the
question was not raised. That being the
case, it seems to me that if we would give
the President the flexibility he has re-
quested, we must keep in mind that we
are working with quotas. Neither the
President nor any of his advisers was
consulted about what the new quotas
were to be. We in the Senate were fight-
ing for what we thought the position of
the administration to be. We agreed to
no more new premium quotas than we
were forced to accept. The President
now says, "If you are going to put new
quotas in the bill, there should be some,
flexibility to make adjustments in order
to meet what might be a bad interna-
tional situation."
Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield.
Mr. HOLLAND. There have been a
good many discussions on the floor of
the Senate today. I have understood
that the proposed amendment to the
honeybee bill would allow the President
to set up the 20 million tons for Argen-
tina and provide some additional leeway
to deal with the Dominican Republic or
perhaps with other countries that had
not been, In his judgment, reasonably or
fairly treated. Is that the understand-
ing of the distinguisL- -3 majority leader?
Mr. MANSFIELD. The figures would
be at the discretion of the President, and
the countries mentioned would be given
consideration. But the whole amend-
ment would apply only to the Western
Hemisphere.
Mr. HOLLAND. I understand that it
would apply to the Western Hemisphere,
but I also understood all day, during the
various stages of the debate, that the
amendment to be offered would take care
of the Argentina problem and afford the
President leeway to deal with the Do-
minican Republic.
Mr. MANSFIELD. It is my under-
standing that the measure would give
the President such flexibility.
Mr. HOLLAND. And it is so Intended?
Mr. MANSFIELD. Yes.
Mr. HOLLAND. I am perfectly will-
ing to accept that explanation of the ma-
-jority leader, though I shall always be
glad to join in an amendment if the
Senator from Wisconsin prepares one on
the subject.
Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield?
quota to Argentina, or perhaps make _ Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield to the Sena
some increased adjustment insofar as tor from South Dakota.
the Dominican Republic is concerned.
But, as a practical matter, if we were to
try to do it the other way around, by
taking a quota away from some country
that the House held out for to the very
end, I regret to say, the probabilities are
that the House would not consider it and
the House Committee on Agriculture
would not act upon it if we did it that
way.
I personally objected, as did my senior
colleague from Louisiana [Mr. ELLENDERI
to going back to conference to consider
the question. I believe that my judg-
Mr. MUNDT. I wish to be sure that I
correctly understand the purposes of the
Senator's proposed amendment, if he de-
cides to offer it. In explaining it, he
said that his amendment would provide
that instead of taking the proposed sugar
quota from the global quota, it would
take the new quota from the national
quota, which is subject to two interpre-
tations I wish to establish for the
record that the Senator would not pro-
pose taking the quota away from the na-
tional quota so far as It applies to the
United States.
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13: A 0P64B00346R000300100001-1
11622 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE July 29
Mr. MUNDT. The quota would come United States to maintain a f
from the quotas given to foreign coun- price for sugar.
tries. There being no objection, the
Mr. PROXMIRE. The Senator is ment was ordered to be, printed
absolutely correct-the national quotas RECORD, as follows:
pended quota is authorized to be pur-
state- chased and imported from other foreign
of this year, and during 1963 and 1964,
TO the Cuban quota of 1,635,000 tons would
ambiguity. I was sure that the Senator The United States has long been a palcv tion from other foreign countries.
had that in mind. to the International Sugar Agreement. The Subsection (a) of the proposed amend-
Mr. PROXMIRE. I am grateful to latest version of the agreement was ratified I ment authorizes the President, for 1963
the Senator from South Dakota for by the Senate of the United states as re- and 1964, to allocate to countries within
Mr. MCCARTHY, Mr. President, will cation on May 13, 1959, Acting Secretary of"
the Senator yield? State Douglas Dillon stated the policy of theN
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield. United States as follows:
Mr. MCCARTHY. I wish to ask a "U.S. sugar producers have consistently,
question of Senators who handled the supported the negotiations of sugar agree-{
conference and who are now handling ments in the realization that the United;
the amendment to the honeybee bill. i States should do Its part to help avoid a
. drastic decline in the price of sugar in the,
the suspended Cuban quota, leaving a
balance of 1,485,000 tons which could be
authorized for purchase and importation
from foreign countries under the so-
called "global quota." For the 6-month
period beginning July 1, 1962, and ending
December 31, 1962, 75,000 tons could be
allocated by the President to Western
before it has been adopted. The ques- countries." _ tons assigned to the global quota for this
tion I raise is, Why do we not show full In support of this policy objective, the 6-month period.
confidence in the administration by giv- United States has agreed under the Inter- Under section 213 of the Sugar Act, as
ing the President authority to assign national Sugar Agreement of 1959 not to added by H.R. 12154, an import fee is
allocate quotas for the importation of sugar
quotas or to negotiate the necessary in- into the United States to countries that do imposed on all sugar purchased and im-
ternational agreements with regard to all not participate in the International sugar ported under the global quota. This fee
the unassigned quotas? Agreement. has the effect of eliminating the pre-
It is my opinion that something of Furthermore, the United States as a party mium price for sugar so imported The
that kind will have to be requested in to the agreement, espouses the following new section 213 also imposes an import
any case, because if we go into the world principles which are set out in article 1 of fee on sugar imported under the regular
sugar market to purchase sugar, I be- that document: quota provisions in effect for the re-
lieve we shall be in violation of at least mainder of 1962 and for 1963 and 1964.
sure to three international agreements that we tries tries The objectives ectives of sugar of this agreement
xpor r are ting n to g However, in the case of sugar imported
eqque a for sugar
and gar stable to u to ex prices and, under the regular quotas, the :import
have signed. countries and at m
equitable for First, I think we shall be in violation by these and other means to assist in the fee is 10 per cent of the full import fee
of commitments we have made in the maintenance of the purchasing power in for the remainder of 1962, 20 percent of
I United Nations. world markets of producing countfies or the full fee for 1963, and 30 percent of
Second, I think we shall be in clear areas and especially of those whose econo- the full fee for 1964, The effect of this
j violation of our commitment under the mies are largely dependent upon the pro- provision is to reduce gradually the pre-
returns export to of sugar producers by and making providing mium price for sugar imported under the
International Sugar Compact. adce auction for
Third, we shall be in violation of the It possible to maintain fair standards of regular quotas.
I charter of the Punta del Este Confer- labor conditions and wages." Subsection (d) of this proposed
ence, which we signed most recently. The United States, as a party to the agree- amendment provides that sugar imported
I believe that now would be a good time ment, has also recognized that the minimum under allocations to Western Hemisphere
for the Senate to say, "We will give the sugar price which will permit these objec- countries made by the President under
President authority to reassign quotas tives to be achieved is 3.25 cents per pound, the authority given to him under sub-
and to enter into agreements with re- as set out in article 21 of the agreement. section (a) will be subject to the import
gard to all the quotas in keeping with The United States as a signatory to the fee provided for sugar brought in. under
our commitments under the three inter- International Sugar Agreement, and in its the regular quotas and not the import
own interest and that of its friends and
national compacts." allies, must recognize that the present world fee provided for.sugar purchased. under
Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, will price of sugar, at 2.7 cents per pound, Is not the global quota. Thus, a portion of
the Senator yield? an adequate price. the premium price would be paid for,
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield. Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator would such sugar-90 percent for the balance
Mr. HUMPHREY. My colleague has of 1962, 80 percent for 1963, and '70 per=
pointed out some important develop- agree that we could adopt that kind of cent for 1964-the same as would apply
ments and facts that we must face. I language and send it to conference. In the meantime there can be some con- to sugar imported under the :regular
have in my hands a copy of the Interna- quotas.
tional Sugar Agreement of 1958. In ar- administration, with the State Department, the Subsections (b) and (c) of the pro-
ticle 21 of that agreement the United admi, and those responsible to posed amendment are in the nature of
States as a party to that agreement has see that we carry out our international technical amendments to provisions of
recognized the minimum sugar price agreements. the Sugar Act, as amended by H.R. 12154,
which will permit a realization of the SUGAR QUOTAS-EXPLANATION OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO H.R. 8050 to carry out the intent of the Senate and
objectives to be achieved. As set forth the conference committee with respect to
in article 21 of the agreement, the objec- Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, un- the 10,000 tons of sugar which the Secre-
tive is 31/4 cents a pound. The present der the Sugar Act of 1948, as amended tary of Agriculture may allocate to for-
world price is 2.7 cents a pound. We by H.R. 12154, Cuba is given a quota of eign countries for which no regular quota
have fixed our signatures to an agree- 57.77 percent of the total-quotas for all. or allocation is provided in the law,
ment, which has been adopted and rati- foreign countries other than the Repub- Subsection (b) of the proposed amend-
fied by the Senate, in which the objec- lic of the Philipipnes. Based upon esti- ment makes it clear that the provisions
tives of the act, as specifically outlined mated domestic consumption of sugar of of section 202(e) of the Sugar Act, as
in article 21, will require a price of 31/4 9,700,000 tons, Cuba's quota for 1963 and amended by H.R. 12154-relating to
cents a pound. I think the Senator has 1964 would be 1,635,000 tons. countries which export sugar-are not to
made a good point, and I think an However, under the provisions of the apply to an allocation made by the
analysis of the Sugar Agreement in my Sugar Act, as amended by H.R. 12154, Secretary under the provision referred
hand will so demonstrate. the quota for any foreign country is sus- to above, Subsection (o) of the pro-
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
12ff CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 11623
posed amendment makes it clear that INCREASING SUPPORT FOR INVEST- attached. This tabulation of returns is the
largest response
the provisions of section 207 (e) (2) of the MENT CREDIT PROPOSAL ever received by the Research
Sugar Act, as amended by H.R. 12154- Institute of America in a poll of its mem-
Mr. KERR. Mr. President, I ask bers. The nature of the cross-section of
relating to restrictions on the imports unanimous consent to have printed in the American business surveyed and the excep-
tion of direct-consumption sugar-are e RECORD two items which are significant tional number of responses makes this poll
also not to apply to sugar imported under an unusually sensitive reflection of the atti-
an allocation made by the Secretary as indicators of the increasing trend of tudes of American businessmen.)
under this new provision. support within the business and financ- The single exception to the favorable re-
Mr. DIRKSEN. I should like to make ial community for the investment sponse to the administration's tax and trade
inquiry at this time of the distinguished credit proposed by the administration packages was the significant opposition to
to stimulate modernization and expan- the provision calling for the withholding of
in as Senator f Wirch to nd sion of the Nation's productive equip- tax on interest and dividends, which was
he intends ends s to to Offer his s ame endmennt t and; ; ment. opposed by over 75 percent of the business
if so, how much discussion may be in- One is an excerpt fa report by the executives who responded to the poll by the
volved. re- Research Institute, the Nation's largest pri-
America of the vats, industry-supported, business advisory
Mr. PROXMIRE. I have discussed Research Institute from
the amendment with the majority suits of a survey it conducted among its organization.
leader. If it is agreeable, I should like more than 30,000 members, constituting These results are made all the more note-
to discuss the amendment tonight and a representative segment of American worthy rby the tfact he argesthe sa number of rvey,
re-
business. This report showed remark-
vote on it tomorrow under a time limita able support for the administration's tax sponses in the Research Institute's 26-year
tion. In this way there would be no inn- tariff proposals. In particular, it history, demonstrated that the anxiety in
convenience to Senators, because they and margin for an the business community about the admin-
could go home now. We could vote to- showed a 2 to 1 favorable istration is extremely high, and that oppo-
morrow without delaying the Senate. I 8-percent tax credit on investment in sition to a number of the nontax aspects of
believe the Senator from Montana has new equipment. As the institute's sum- the Kennedy legislative program was over-
suggested that the Senate meet at 11 mary points out, contrary to current whelming.
o'clock tomorrow morning, and that the estimates in some business and political Contrary to current estimates in some
circles, two-thirds of the responding business and political circles the business-
te at 12 o'cloc.
should like to businessmen favored the investment tax men roost dingiafasore twof the tax bell
the voMr.oMcCARTHY. Inoon
reserve the right to offer an amendment credit. Only about a quarter were op- passed by the House and currently under
also. posed and about 8 percent were non- Senate Finance Committee scrutiny; the 8
Mr. MANSFIELD. Can we arrive at committal. percent tax credit provision which was fa-
an agreement as to how much time This extensive support for the invest- vored by 65.1 percent, with 26.9 percent
Senators would like for discussion of ment credit is all the more impressive, opposing and 8 percent no opinion. The
expressed as it is by a group which provisions for taxing of foreign income were amendments? thMr. MCCARTHY. Whatever the Sen- frankly opposed many other administra- favored by14 .4p percent
no, bmitty a
ator suggests. Perhaps 30 minutes, 15 tion policies. The investment credit was recent with lated tax matter, the businessmen sup-
minutes to a side. - in fact almost as widely supported as the ported the administration's position by vot-
Mr. PROXMIRE. The Senate could Treasury's forthcoming liberalization of ing against a temporary reduction of -corpo-
convene at 11 o'clock, and vote at 12 depreciation guidelines, which was fav- rate and personal tax rates now by a margin
o'clock. That would be satisfactory. ored by 79 percent of the responding of 61.7 percent to 35.3 percent, with 3 per-
businesses. cent expressing no preference. Also, only
Me. MORSE. I would suggest that the The other significant indicator is an i out of 10 respondents expressed opposition
leadership put off the vote until until Thurs- to the coming revision of the depreciation
agreement schedules.
consent
and Finance" of Finance" which Current
day is if a desired. unanimous- article Trends in entitled "Appraisal
Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, will appeared in the Wall Street Journal of [From the Wall Street Journal, July 2, 1962]
the Senator from Montana yield? July 2. It is written by Mr. George APPRAISAL OF CURRENT TRENDS IN BUSINESS
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield. Shea, one of the most knowledgeable and . AND FINANCE -
Mr. HOLLAND. Speaking only for astute observers of the American financ- (By George Shea)
myself, I am completely satisfied with ial scene. A curious aspect of this year's debate on
Mr. Shea notes, in his lucid and.pene- the tax measure which the Senate Finance
the Senator's statement
to be that taken care ecot expects trating discussion, that the investment Committee is laying aside for the present has
the Argentine quotas n credit is in fact a specific technique of beenthe nature of the opposition to the pro-wi out of the res fail the amount this amount, and that tax reform which effectively supplements posed credit for new investment in equip-
the rest of the aucan be used in the shorter depreciable lives and liberal- ment. Sources that say they speak for busi-
the discretion of the President, with con- ized depreciation procedures to be an- ness, and sources that say they speak for
sideration, of course, of the Dominican nounced by the Treasury Department labor unions and liberals, have both op-
situation and of any other situation posed it.
which the President thinks requires con- within the next week or so. As passed by the House the credit would
sideration. There being no objection, the release let businesses deduct from their income-tax
and article were ordered to be printed bills 7 percent of what they spend on addi-
Mr. KERR. In this hemisphere. in the RECORD, as follows: tional equipment. The business, opponents
Mr. MANSFIELD. In this hemi- BUSINESSMEN FAVOR J.F.K. TAX AND TARIFF say they would rather have a reform of the
sphere. - MEASURES BUT RETAIN OPPOSITION To AD- law governing the depreciation, for wear and
Mr. HOLLAND. In this hemisphere . MINISTRATION tear of property, that may be deducted from
only. WASHINGTON, D. C., June 26.-Remarkable taxable income. The leftwing opponents say
support for the Kennedy administration's that if there's any tax reduction at all it
tax and tariff proposals was expressed by a should be in the lowest brackets of individ-
ORDER FOR SUBCOMMITTEE ON IN- representative segment of the American busi- ual income tax rates.
TERNAL SECURITY TO MEET DtJR- ness community in a detailed poll conducted Reform of depreciation can be accom-
ING SESSION OF THE SENATE among its more than 30,000 members by the plished, basically, in only one way. That's by
TOMORROW. Research Institute of America. The results allowing depreciation to be deducted faster
included a 2 to 1 favorable margin for the than is now permitted. Such will be the net
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, I ask 8-percent tax credit on new equipment, a effect of an announcement expected later
unanimous consent that the Subcommit- majority vote in favor of the foreign income this week from the Treasury, setting forth
tee on Internal Security of the Commit- section of the 1962 tax bill, apposition to a new and simplified categories of so-called
tee on the Judiciary be permitted to meet temporary, tax cut now, overwhelming sup- useful lives of various kinds of property. It
during the session of the Senate tomor- port for the trade bill and for the promised - will enable businessmen to depreciate in,
depreciation revisions. say, 15 years, property which previously could
row. (NOTE TO EDITORS.-The results of the ques- not be written off in less than, say, 25 years.
. The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there tionnaire sent to over 30,000 business execu- The argument in Congress isn't over these
objection? The Chair hears none, and tives representing every type and size of coming schedules. What the business group
it is so ordered. business firm located across the country, are which opposes the credit wants is a law that
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
11624 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE July,
would give businesses even more- freedom specifically granted by congress are difficult which had 5.8 percent of the RDT&E
than the Treasury can grant them under to repeal. contract money also had 4.8 percent of
present law. Another argument is that the credit would
Complete reform would let businesses Its be a. windfall for businesses which have been the total prime contract awards.
off facilities at any rate they liked, even writ- planning to spend money on equipment, and We do not have the figures from Mr.
ing off 100 percent of a piece of property in thus would discriminate against those that Gilpatric for fiscal year 1963, but a gen-
the year it is bought. The Government aren't planning to spend or don't have the eral idea of the Defense Department's
would lose revenue in that year, because the money. However, the same thing might be contracting pattern can be assumed by
deduction would reduce taxable income more said of depreciation reform; when such a law examining the published figures for
than now permitted. But in subsequent was passed in 1954 it was made applicable NASA's fiscal year 1963 $3.7 billion bud-
years, as long as the property was in use for only to newly purchased facilities. get request,
profitmaking activities, the Government And even if a new reform measure were Published in Missiles and
would gain revenue, because that property applied to all property, businesses purchas- Rockets, June 11, 1962. Four States will
would yield no further deductions from in- ing new facilities would get the greatest ben- get almost two-thirds of the NASA bud-
come. Assuming no change in the number efit from it; it would apply throughout the get. California is scheduled to receive
of years the property is used under either life of the new facilities but only to the re- almost $1 million-$947,767-which is
method of depreciation, the Government maining life of the old. - over one-fourth of the total NASA bud-
would neither gain nor lose in the end. Complete reform of depreciation rules get. Florida with $543 million, Louisiana
Actually, the Government, and also the would surely be desirable. The question of with $395 million, and Alabama with
economic system, would probably gain political strategy at this time is whether half $341 million, account for another one-
through such complete freedom. The rea- a legislative loaf is better than the possibil-
son is that the faster any property Is written ity of getting none at all by helping the third of the NASA budget. Texas, Mis-
off, the less tendency there is to keep it in liberal# fight the proposed credit. souri, New York, Ohio, Maryland, and
use after it becomes obsolete or even mildly Virginia will receive over $100 million
inefficient. Then, any earlier replacement each of the NASA budget. This leaves
of, say, a machine would not only stimulate DISCRIMINATION IN DEFENSE 40 States to share $1/2 billion of the
economic activity, but would also bring
earlier income-tax revenue to the Govern- SPENDING NASA budget, with only 10 States ac-
m3.2 on the profit made by the builder of Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, in counting, for over m3.2 billion dollars-a
the new machine. very heavy concentration, indeed.
However, the chances of getting the Gov- recent days Senators have received a Mr. President, we are very proud in
ernment to give businessmen that much communication from the Deputy Secre- Minnesota of the great Institute of Tech-
leeway are pretty small. For one thing, the tart' of Defense, Mr. Roswell L. Gilpatric, nology at the University of Minnesota--
Government might indeed lose a great deal releasing the results of a study of the an institute which has won worldwide ac-
of revenue the first year. ]For another, many shifting pattern of Defense prime con- claim in many fields, including those of
legislators would be vaguely afraid business- tract procurement.
autical engineering and electronics.
men might get away with something thereby. Boiled down to its essence the Gil- aeron
Thugsythee problem becomes
We also very roud of the fact tha
es one el of political difference patric report, "The Changing Patterns in heaMinnesota area we have the sec-
strate of Defense Procurement," says the fol-
in results between the credit or a more lowing; and or third largest complex of elec-
liberal depreciation law must be judged. tronics work-more than 170 firms, al-
Actually, the resemblance between the two First. Three out of four dollars of most all of them founded within the last
is greater than appears at first sight. prime contract money awarded to uni- 5 years and almost all of them heavily
The credit would work this way: A busi- versities and nonprofit research insti- engaged in both commercial and defense
ness buys $100 of equipment. That year, tutions were centered in five States-
after calculating its income tax the usual Massachusetts, California, Maryland, employed yed in the The electronic number Ind u ou people
way, it is allowed to reduce the tax by 7 New York, and Illinois-and the District stry in
percent of $100, that is, by $7. of Columbia. Over $300 million out of Minnesota by the end of 1961 had in-
Methods of fast depreciation now available the total of $431 million awarded in fis- creased 75 percent over the year 14)55.
In the law let a business write off equipment It includes such giants as Remington
more heavily In the first few years of use cal year 1961 went to these five States Rand Univac, IBM, and Minneapolis
than In later years. For instance, one such and the District. Thirty-five percent of Hone
method available In present law, if applied the total went to the State of Massa- t you. It also iployng scores ul
to a piece of equipment with a useful life chusetts alone. bright you. firms employing a handful
of 15 years, lets a business write off in the Second. Of the total research, develop- of engineers.
first year one-eighth, and in the 15th year mental testing, and evaluation contracts There is no question but that, the
only one one-hundred-and-twentieth, of the let in fiscal 1961-a total of meteoric rise of the electronics industry
value. The first-year deduction on the $100 $6 million- in Minnesota is directly
piece of equipment thus can be $12.50, which, over 41 percent went to California. New Y related to the
at the corporate tax rate of 52 percent, would York had 12 percent. The other 48 presence there of _a great university and
save the business exactly $6.50 in tax in that States shared less than 47 percent of the its superlative institute of technology.
year. total of this $6 million. Even now, industry leaders have been
Thus, the credit, which would save $7 in As Mr. Gilpatric Points out, the con- planning with the University of kin-
tax in the year of purchase, could be looked centration of this RDT&E effort in Cali- nesota a huge new Industrial research
upon as the result of extra depreciation.
The amount of fornia and the eastern seaboard States facility-
save $7 a a 52-percent tax depreciation rate which would be would is of major importance because any com- What concerns me Is that in Min-
$13.46. pany which has contracted or managed nesota, as doubtless in other areas of
A special feature of the proposed credit is the research, design, development and the country in which there are other
that it would be available in addition to the testing work on a new weapons system- great universities, the Defense Depart-
full predication deductions already permitted or major component-and has assem- . ment and the National Aeronautics and
by law. Thus, the buyer of the $100 of bled the engineering, talent, and experi- Space Administration have simply fallen
equipment with a life of 15 years could, in ence for this purpose, is obviously in an behind the times. They have evidently
the first year of using it, save both the $7 exceptionally strong position to compete taken the easy way out in the award of
through the credit and the $6.50 through for the follow-on production contracts, prime contracts, both for research and
using the depreciation method drescribed
and for new developmental development and production.
above. That's a total saving of $13.50. . And contracts, as
the amount of depreciation which would well. Mr. President, I am interested in
save $13.50 at a 52 percent tax rate is $25.96. Third. The Gilpatric report stresses knowing why the Department of Defense
As far as the taxpayer is concerned that's this latter point by listing the military feels it has to put fully half of its en-
the equivalent of a depreciation deduction prime contract awards by region and tire RDT&E money into California and
on the $100 facility of mo technically 25 percent nt
not the same thing as a new form of atheist- demonstrating that California alone, New York. I am interested in knowing
the first year. Wh Y which had 41 percent of the RDT&E con- why half of the money for RDT&E,son-
n
ated depreciation, it has the same result. tract money, also had 24 percent of the tracts awarded to schools and non-
One argument of some business opponents total military prime contract awards. profit institutions must go into the
of the credit has been that it is a gimmick New York, which had 12 percent of the States of Massachusetts and California.
which could be repealed very easily. That's total RDT&E contract money, had 12 Is it now about time that those man-
a matter of opinion, of course, the counter- percent of the total prime military con- aging the Defense Department's research
argument being that tax concessions once tract award money. Massachusetts, and development programs recognize the
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
2 C NGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 11795
PROXMIRE AMENDMENT TO SUGAR British Honduras would be out back also without running a serious risk of
BILL SAVES $8,400,000 from its present 10,000 tons by 5 percent causing that country to become un-
friendly.
or by 500 tons
.
Mr. P OXMI E. Mr. President, I Mr. President, my amendment would I should like to discuss each of those
submit -an amendment to thofield provide the President with authority to countries for Just a moment.
amendment to the bill relating ting t to the
sugar act. The Senator from Montana's allocate to Western Hemisphere coon- Australia's 40,000-ton quota would be
amendment provided additional dis- tries the 150,000 tons of premium sugar -eliminated. Australia has a Common-
amennary quotas in the hands of Presi- that he. believes necessary in the wake wealth sugar quota of 600,000 tons,
of Congress' decision to continue the 300,000 of which she sells to the United
dent Kennedy so that the situation in
Argentina and in the Dominican Re- practice of handing out quotas to var- Kingdom at a premium price compar-
public countries. able to our own. The remainder goes
public may be handled more satisfac- I propose that the 150,000 tons be to other Commonwealth countries at the
toMy. taken from quotas given new suppliers world market price, plus a favorable
My amendment would have the ad- outside the Western Hemisphere, -coun- tariff concession which comes to about
meric of saving n,40 real pay- - tries which are basically importers of 1 cent a pound. Australia sells over
American of retaining Ta an additional n sugar, and those Western Hemisphere 150,000 tons outside the Commonwealth
150,00, and in retaoa- producers who receive. premium sugar agreement at world prices. With a 00 tons tto be bought the global sugar and under other preferential sugar carryover of 700,000 tons, Australia could
available bought at world prices and kept programs. readily sell sugar to us at world prices
muns s are overthrown. the Tt Cuban In accomplishing what the President without a premium.
Communists are mnd The glob- desires, I believe my amendment is much India's new 20,000-ton quota would
ae quota under 1,635,000 amendment would closer to the spirit of- the administra- be eliminated. India has developed a
ment fails 1, it Will l b be tons. reduced t to o If 1,485,000 amend- tion's overall sugar policy and, there- domestic sugar industry which, with
meet fore, superior to the amendment offered government aid, has aimed at getting
tons. by the distinguished majority leader, the into the export business as a means of
Presidential ds betsec td_ by senior Senator from Montana [Mr. raising foreign exchange. From 1959 to
nao150,000 tons wowd be sotased is were MANSFIELD]. 1961, India's production rose over 1 mil-
a cated the following quotas which worert In the first place, my amendment lion tons, while domestic consumption
20,000-
adopted in the conference report save the taxpayers about $8.4 mil- remained almost constant. Our 20,000-
a At th present July 2. lion. The Mansfield amendment pro- ton premium quota would. be only an
At the o time Australia wos a poses to take the 150,000 tons from the aid gesture, and I think would better
ota of be comp enely eliminated. quota would 1.6-million ton global quota, thereby re- be handled in foreign aid legislation.
be for tafort India, which which chd. under the would con- ducing, by that amount, sugar upon With carryover stocks of over 1.5 million
qu of 20,000 tons. co . which the Treasury is to recover the tons, India could very well compete on
20, quota of d be allot- premium. With the quota pre- its own for part of our global quota.
South rAfrica' eport ha0 00 tons would
South , as would ld the mium today running about $56 a ton, South Africa's 20,000-ton quota would
mated, t Fiji t1G,000-ton The Nether- the Mansfield amendment would pre- be dropped. When South Africa re-
lands of the Fiji Islands.
allotment The f 10,000 vent the Treasury from collecting $8.4 signed from the Commonwealth over her
tons eliminated. woiild heits te of million. My amendment would not apartheid policies, she lost her privileges
tons In the of touch the global quota. under the Commonwealth sugar agree-
"other countries" the allotment of Second, my amendment would pre- ment, By purchasing her sugar at
11,332 tons would be eliminated. serve at 1.6 million tons, the already de- premium prices, we would just be pick-
None of the above countries is located leted quota that would be available to ing up where the Commonwealth left
in the Western Hemisphere. On the pleted effect, giving support to her
basis of the hearings and the debate, it Cuba. The Mansfield, amendment would apartheid policies, through support of
seems clear to me that while perhaps a cut this by another 150,000 tons. I wish her sugar industry.
case could be made out for premium to add at this point, Mr. President, that President, , as the distinguished
prices being paid to countries in this some Senators may believe they are do- Mr.
senior Senator from Oregon CMr.
hemisphere or to countries which tradi- ing harm to Castro by this dissection of
tionally have supplied sugar to this coun- Cuba's U.S. sugar quota. I remind them MORSE] the chairman of the Latin
try, a case for providing additional that today Castro cannot sell 1 pound American Subcommittee of the Foreign
quotas for countries outside the Western of sugar to this country. The govern- Relations Committee, said on the floor
ment that is being harmed is the one of the Senate yesterday, based on his
Hemisphere weak. that we hope eventually will replace expert experience in this field, this would
There is s at t leost one o country in the Castro and will lead Cuba back into be a very serious mistake. It would hurt
gr, is of Weal thy sugar r speculators not an exporter that couti- the free world. That government will us dramatically.at the United Nations;
try would be from Ca need the economic assistance that would and the other countries of the United
same come from being able to sell a majority Nations, especially those in Africa and
try the wo de buying selling the the Cuba
su at the premium world reme and price the 5-million-ton Cuba sugar output Asia which have supported us in the
States, thereby making n the United in the United States at world market past, and which are deeply opposed to
out, te painless, unjustified therebng a windfall, hand- prices, or better. the apartheid policies, would feel that
unjustified profit.
In addition the quota for the Republic Third, Mr. President, by eliminating they would have to oppose us.
10,000-ton quota would be elite-
of China would be cut back from its five new quota countries and one old Fiji's
mated. Fiji has a q1962 uota be th-
35,000 ton conference allotment to its quota country-which is a net importer m sugar
agreement , of
historical base of 3,000 tons or by 32,000 of sugar-all of whom are outside this 3 000 tons,
which brings her a premium
tons. hemisphere, we relieve our Government
No Western Hemisphere countries of the pressures that could develop from payment from
overt8e United oK n d m.
would be cut back, other than Canada, our support, through a premium subsidy, This covers
Our over 10,000-ton quota would ex-
which is included in the above listing of their sugar industries. ports.
with a small allotment under "other I should like to emphasize that re- almost all of Fiji's sugar export capacity
countries," with the exception of three lieving our Government of this pressure under preferential sales agreements.
dependencies which already receive is relieving us, not of just $8,400,000 a - The Netherlands would lose- its 10,000-
premium sugar prices from their mother year, but of a cost which will be a great 'ton quota. The Netherlands position in
countries: - - deal more than that, both in the first the U.S. sugar program stems from its
British West Indies would be cut back year and throughout the years, because shipments of sugar in the early twenties.
from its -present 90,000 tons byslightly we know that if anything is true, it is All the Netherlands' shipments up to
more than -5 percent or by 4,668 tons. that once a subsidy is begun and once now have been refined sugar, and appar-
French West Indies would be cut back such a commitment is made to a foreign ently - its quota is in violation of pravi-
from their present 30,000 tons- by 5 per- country, it is impossible to retract it sions in the recently passed Sugar Act
cent or by 1,500 tons. - without a great deal of difficulty, and which -bar importation of refined sugar.
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1 .
 11796
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE July 3
m addition, the Netherlands is a net
importer of sugar-over 140,000 tons in
1961, of which approximately 30,000 tons
were from Castro's Cuba.
Mr. President, Is there any sense in
that? Why in the world should we buy
sugar from the Netherlands when the
Netherlands is an importer of sugar and
is purchasing sugar from Castro's Cuba?
Does that make any sense? The
Netherlands buys the sugar at the World
price, but sells it to us at a premium
price. I think the world of the Dutch;
they are wonderful people. But talk
about a giveaway. This is the grossest
kind of giveaway, without any kind of
rational Government policy of helping
all the people. Instead, it would simply
help a few producers, who, as we have
seen, are enormously wealthy and are
characterized by two things: high profits
and the low wages they pay those who
work for them.
My amendment would also take away
the 10,000 tons that have been eased
into the Sugar Act for Ireland. I would
:note, Mr. President, that the Mansfield
amendment that is directed, supposedly,
at helping the Dominican Republic,
Argentina, and Peru, contains no less
than two paragraphs that have the ef-
fect of preserving the 10,000 tons of re-
fined sugar that are aimed at Ireland.
Apparently no one knows why the
Irish, who are net importers of sugar,
have come into this 10,000-ton bonus.
In 1960, the latest figures available to
me, Ireland imported 30,000 tons of
sugar with no less than 22,000 tons com-
ing from Castro's Cuba. For all we know,
Mr. President, Ireland may be shipping
us refined Cuban sugar at U.S. premium
prices.
The China quota would be cut from
lation to the 3,000 tons that China near future; -if not Thu ay, early Madam President, in every case the
has traditionally held in the U.S. mar- next week. ment budget estimate
would reduce in which mi ameiads
ket. There is no reason to purchase ad- My amendment would reduce the ap- well l above the 1962 level of agencys is
ditional sugar from a supplier that Is as propriations for the Department of appw although in a few cases sy 6x2
distant from us as is China, except in Health, Education, and Welfare by $247,- appropriations re ons exceeded a budget case of the Philippines. 105,000. It would cut back each ex- quest, areason the is that the
It can be said that in the case of penditure in the appropriation bill to the Department The raison for that i thadha
Formosa we are very anxious that the level requested by the administration. last year could not spend a
Formosan economy succeed and that we While my past efforts to reduce this rest of the appropriation, and as to the
help it. We are. We are providing appropriation have failed, the adminis- rest of the money, the administration
enormous help, through economic aid tration's unfortunate experience with d6cided was unwise to spend it, and
therefore restricted it. In spite of that,
and defense support, to the Chinese Re- these excessive appropriations in recent the administration requests this year are
public on Formosa, and we should do it, years should persuade the Congress that substantially larger than last year's ex-
in my judgment; but to provide this ad- the time has come to blow the whistle on penditures, and these appropriations,
ditional handout or giveaway, not on any this deliberate extravagance, nd rational basis, but merely because every- Last year appropriations over what the would even when still cut back by substantial amendment,
ad-
body else is getting it, to me makes no President requested were not only pro- vance in Federal spending a for hat
sense. tested by the administration. Secretary for health
research
The quotas of the British West In- Ribicoff properly refused to spend some . OFFICER.
dies, British Honduras, and the French of the funds. Other funds were not ex- out The objection, amendment will be
West Indies have each been cut by 5 per- pended because it was impossible to pro- d and the amendment wnl be
cent. gram the unexpected bonanza of money received and printed, and will lie on the
As a matter of fact, the British West the Congress had forced on the adminis- table.
Indies were out slightly more than 5 per- tration.
cent. On Monday the Fountain subcommit- THE CASE AGAINST AN IMMEDIATE
The reductions were made on these tee provided the conclusive reason why TAX CUT: PRICE STABILITY
three Western Hemisphere producers the Congress should stop this excessive Mr. PROXMIRE. Madam President,
since each of them already participates spending when it reported on the poor the general support that we have heard
preference market. With the management by the National Institutes throughou, the country as well as in
granting of a U.S. quota, each would of Health and declared that "Congress Congress for a tax cut was joined by
become a recipient, in effect, of sub- has been overzealous in appropriating the Governors at their conference yes-
sidies from two governments. money for health research," with pres- terday. Of course, the Governors are
I am submitting my amendment at sure for spending from skyrocketing ap- extraordinarily sensitive to the needs of
this time, and I ask unanimous consent propriations resulting in waste. their States and are in important posi-
that it may be printed in the RECORD. In a personal comment, Chairman tions of responsibility and political in-
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. FOUNTAIN added that, "until NIH is ca-
N?UBERGER in the chair). The amend- pable of ministering these research
ment will be received and printed and funds in a manner which will assure
will lie on the table; and, without objec- their careful and proper use. I believe
tion, the amendment will be printed in the Congress should hold the appropria-
the RECORD. tion for these programs at the present
The amendment, ordered to be printed level, and should not in any event, sp-
in the RECORD, is, as follows: propriate more than the President has
In lieu of the matter proposed to be in- requested."
serted by the amendment, insert the follow- The amendment, at least in part, is in
ing: response to that advice from the chair-
"SEc. 2. (a) Section 202(c) (8) of the man of the subcommittee in the House,
Sugar Act of 1948, as amended, is amended who has taken considerable time and
to read as follows:
expended much effort to study and con-
tries (A) The quotas for foreign Coun-
tries other than the Republic of the Philip- adder appropriations for the Nationa:; In-
pines determined under paragraphs (1) and stitutes of Health, and who has made
(2) of this subsection shall be prorated this outstanding report in connection
among such countries on the following basis: with the mismanagement of these funds.
"'(B) From the quantity not prorated The great difficulty is that there is
under subparagraph (A), the President is no question that it is politically un-
authorized to allocate to countries within
the Western Hemisphere all or any portion popular for anyone to vote against re-
re-
of the quantity of sugar not prorated under search in cancer, heart disease, or men-
subparagraph (A).' tal illness no matter how high. All of
"(b) The amendments made by this sec- us feel strongly that we should dc all
tion shall be effective as if they were en- we can do effectively to combat these
acted as a part of H.R. 12154 entitled 'An dread illnesses.
Act to amend and extend the provisions of However, when the administration is
the Sugar Act of 1948, as amended', Eighty- headed by a President who served, when
seventh Congress, second session." a Senator, on the Committee on Labor
Amend the title so as to read: "An act to
_ _ _
d
an
of aault honeybees, and to amend certain\ who, as we all know, has great compas-
provisions of the Sugar Act of 1948, as ion and understanding and appreciation
PROXMIRE $247,105,000 REDUCTION headed by a former Governor of-Con-
IN HEW APPROPRIATION necticut, Abraham Ribicoff, a nationally
known liberal, who also has a heartfelt
Mr. PROXMIRE. Madam President, compassion and deep interest in these
I am submitting an amendment to re- things, and they recommend a certain
duce the appropriations for the Depart- amount for the appropriation, it seems
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare. to me to make no sense for Congress; to
The appropriation bill containing appro- say that it feels even more strongly in
priations for this Department Is now on this matter and to appropriate funds
the Senate Calendar, and I understand which are not requested.
that it mill .... L,......-'-
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
11J6S0 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
President and Mrs. Kennedy attended Mass Overall, President Kennedy worked hard
in the morning. and consistently at advancing the idea that
Waving and cheering Mexicans, dressed in the revolutionary heritage of the United
holiday attire, later lined the entire 11-mile States was . similar to. that of Mexico. Ob-
route from the basilica to the International servers viewed this approach as one of the
Airport, from which the President left for factors that contributed to the success of
Washington. He left behind a triumph in the President's visit.
the establishment of better relations between VISIT TO TOMBS
Mexico and the United States.
After a final farewell at the airport, Mr.
Kennedy and President Adolfo L6pez Mateos
embraced in the traditional Latin American
abrazo. On Friday, when they had met,
they shook hands formally, and the absence
of an abrazo was conspicuous.
The change from a formal handshake to
an embrace paralleled President Kennedy's
achievement of a switch in Mexico's attitude
toward the United States from coldness to
warmth and understanding.
In the talks between the two Presidents
and in a joint communique issued yesterday
there was no overt reference to the coolness
Mr. Kennedy and his wife began their offi-
cial day early by joining in the placing of
wreaths at the tombs of Mexico's two revolu-
tionary heroes, Francisco Madero and Venus-
tiano Carranza.
Later, as they entered the Basilica of Gua-
dalupe, a crowd of about 5,000 worshipers
broke into applause. The Right Reverend
Miguel Dario Miranda y Gomez, primate arch-
bishop of Mexico, welcomed them and later
led a prayer in English for the "full success
to all the efforts" made during the Presi-
dent's visit.
KENNEDY RETURNS TO UNITED STATES
that had developed in relations over the last WASHINGTON, July 1.-President Kennedy's
few years. plane landed at nearby Andrews Air Force
President L6pez Mat?os aroused a certain Base at 5:35 p.m. today after a 4-hour flight
amount of ire when he cautioned the for- from Mexico City.
eign press to "write the truth about what President Kennedy dispatched a thank-you
has happened here in this meeting." But message expressing friendship for Mexico to
aside from this, there was virtually complete President Adolfo L6pez Mateos while flying
rapport between the two Presidents and be- back to Washington.
tween the Presidents and the press in gen- He said their talks would provide a firm
eral during the talks, basis for continued cooperation between their
The harmonious discussions also provided two countries. He then added: "I came to
a setback for extreme leftist elements that meet a President and a statesman, I have
had attempted to have Mr. Kennedy's visit left you as a, friend. Viva Mexico."
canceled.
PROBLEM NOT INSOLUBLE - [From the New York Times, July 2, 19621
a few concrete results from the visit. How-
ever, the two Presidents proved-apparently
to their mutual satisfaction-that the in-
soluble problems of the past that had barred
harmonious relations were now not as in-
soluble as they had seemed.' -
Mexico has won an assurance that Presi-
dent Kennedy would use his energy and au-
thority to help solve some of her principal
problems with the United States.
President Kennedy, on his part, appears
to have alined Mexico, with only minor
reservations, as a strong supporter of the Al-
liance for Progress, which is designed to
speed social and economic development in
the hemisphere.
The attitude of Mexico regarding Cuba
has not changed, but there appeared to have
been little hope of bringing about a change
even before the talks had started.
Mexico regards Cuba's Socialist ideology
as incompatible with democratic prin-
ciples, but she has refused to support meas-
ures that would isolate Cuba from other
nations in the hemisphere.
On the Alliance for Progress, which the
United States regards as its best long-range
weapon for defeating any spread of revolu-
tion by Cuba or the Soviet Union in the
hemisphere, Mexico agreed that the plan "is
essentially a program of mutual cooperation,
in which the greater effort should come pri-
marily from the nation which is seeking its
development."
The Mexican statement is expected to aid
the United States in its efforts to promote the
Alliance as a partnership in which self-help,
rather than one-way aid, is stressed.
During the talks, President Kennedy an-
n to
i
lt
l l
illi
cu
ura
oa
on agr
nounced a $20 m
of you will bring understanding. We pray
Mexico under
the Alliance sions also program. led to an to assure full success to all the efforts made
The Presidential discu m in the past few days you have been in the
interim settlement of the thorny problem capital of our country. We pray for the
to over the irrigate Colorado
farmland in River Mexico. wathat The are used peoples of both countries and to the peace of
x United States agreed to take measures to reduce the the hwaters' high salt content, which has ruined MEXICANS CHEER HER
many acres of Mexican cotton land. The visit to church ended the 21/2 -day state
Mr. Kennedy also pledged to use his efforts visit by President and Mrs. Kennedy. Cries
to reduce trade barriers between Mexico and of "Jackie, Jackie," and "Viva Jacqueline"
the United States. signaled the part that Mrs. Kennedy had
nedy offered a bouquet of red roses at the
shrine of the patron saint of Mexico today
and was enrolled into the Roman Catholic
order that is dedicated to spreading devo-
tion to Our Lady of Guadalupe.
Five thousand worshipers watched as
Mrs. Kennedy climbed the steps of the huge
altar of the church and knelt at the top
step with the bouquet of roses, the official
flower of the patron saint.
She offered the flowers to Archbishop
Miguel Dario Miranda y O6mez who was
blessed them and then selected three and
gave them to the wife of the President.
Kissing the medal that had been placed
about her neck, Mrs. Kennedy was inducted
as a Dame of Our Lady of Guadalupe.
SITE DATES TO 1531
The shrine to Mexico's patron saint was
built on the site where, on December 9, 1531,
the Blessed Virgin was said to have appeared
to an Indian named Juan Diego.
For a doubting bishop who demanded
proof, Diego put into his serape some roses
said to have suddenly bloomed on the bar-
ren land. When he unfolded the serape in
front of the bishop there were no roses in-
side, according to the story, but a picture
of the Virgin. This picture is displayed in
glass at the high altar of the shrine.
The archbishop addressed President Ken-
nedy and his wife as they sat in a second-
row pew:
July 2
played in the happy capture of Mexico's
capital.
Mexican women were fascinated by Mrs.
Kennedy's wardrobe. She changed her dress
several times daily during her, brief visit,
but only once did she repeat her costume,
a white outfit she wore Friday and today.
There was praise today for a First Lady,
who had apparently done her homework up
for the trip. She Impressed Dr. Eusebio
Davalos Hurtado, director of the National
Anthropology Institute, with questions that
showed some knowledge of Mexican anthro-
pological history. In fact, after her visit to
the museum she and Dr. Davalos persuaded
President Kennedy to break into his tight
schedule and sneak away late yesterday af-
ternoor for an unscheduled tour of the insti-
tute.
Perhaps Mrs. Kennedy's biggest success
with the Mexicans was her decision to speak
in Spanish at a luncheon yesterday of
scholars, writers, and industrialists.
ORDER FOR ADJOURNMENT UNTIL
TOMORROW
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that when the
business for today has been concluded,
the Senate adjourn until 12 o'clock noon
tomorrow.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection? The Chair hears none, and
it is so ordered.
ORDER FOR ADJOURNMENT FROM
TUESDAY, JULY 3, UNTIL NOON
ON THURSDAY, JULY 5
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that when the
Senate completes its business tomorrow,
it adjourn until 12 o'clock noon on
Thursday next.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection? The Chair hears none, and
IMPORTATION OF ADULT
HONEY. BEES
The Senate resumed the consideration
of the bill (H.R. 8050) to amend the act
relating to the importation of adult
honey bees.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that when the
Senate convenes at 12 o'clock on Thurs-
day next, the amendments of the Sena-
tor from Wisconsin [Mr. PROXMIRE] and
the Senator from Minnesota [Mr. Mc-
CARTHY] be acted on under a 30-minute
limitation of debate on each amend-
ment, 15 minutes to a side; and that
at the conclusion of the debate on those
two amendments, the vote be taken on
the passage of the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection?
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, does
that mean that the honey bee bill will
not be considered tomorrow?
Mr. MANSFIELD. Yes.
Mr. DIRKSEN. It will be considered
or not?
Mr. MANSFIELD. It will not be.
Mr. DIRKSEN. What will be the
order of business tomorrow? I under-
stood that probably the Department of
Health, Education, and Welfare ap-
propriation bill, which would be bligible
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
.1962 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
huge amounts of funds into the hemisphere's
economies-is giving voice to this view.
President Kennedy's trip to Mexico this
weekend is a step in achieving wider political
acceptance of the alliance.
AIMS SPELLED OUT
The objectives of the alliance, Mr. Herrera
says, besides being economic, are also polit-
ical "since they are designed to create in
Latin America a united group of strong, in-
dependent, and progressive countries whose
presence in world affairs represents a posi-
tive force in defense of man's ethical and
spiritual values and in furtherance of inter-
national understanding."
Postponed consideration of the political
problems inherent in the Alliance is one of
its chief limitations, Mr. Herrera believes,
and may impair its chances of success.
Mr. Herrera expressed these views at a
colloquium on Latin America at George-
town University this week.
SUPPORT NEEDED
The awakening of broad political support
among the masses is a precondition for acti-
vating development policies and plans, he
said. (Provisions for a public information
program for the Alliance were turned down
at Punta del Este months ago.)
Mr. Herrera observed that a complex set of
political factors, including the fact that
there are 20 separate Latin nations often
going their own separate ways, determines
the insufficiency of a public information pro-
gram to bring about the desired climate in
hemisphere public opinion.
Often, he said, when one country received
a loan, persons in another country, instead
of realizing the overall value of the loan
to all of Latin American, carp about their
own country not receiving enough:
COOPERATION INVOLVED
In the United States, the realization is
necessary that the Alliance is a cooperative
effort of all the Americas that entails recip-
rocal responsibilities and benefits.
Mr. Herrera urged mobilization of public
Opinion in all the hemisphere's countries by
chief executives and political leaders, rather
than just by economists, who are not par-
ticularly equipped for this sort of effort.
He urged, too, the establishment of ma-
chinery for economic cooperation such as
Europe has found so useful, and which was
approved at the highest political levels, such
as the Organization for European Coopera-
tion, now superseded by the Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development, and
the European Coal and Steel Community.
BANK ROLE REVIEWED
The IADB president, who is a Chilean, re-
viewed some of the activities of the .bank
in its short period of existence, which in-
cluded the following projections:
At the time of termination of projects al-
ready approved by the bank and under active
consideration, the number of houses con-
structed will be 166,336, benefiting 1,088,437
persons.
The number of water supply and sewerage
systems installed will be 1,005 in 864 loca-
tions for the benefit of 16,686,410 people.
And the number of persons benefiting
from projects in the agricultural field will be
724,086.
RESEARCH STIMULATED
IADB also has helped the alliance stimu-
late study of Latin American economic and
social problems and preparation of national
development plans (a concept many Latin
countries have resisted for years).
The amount of foreign resources that
must be invested in Latin America in the
current decade has been determined, targets
established for the rate of growth in per
capita product and for improving significant
indices of social conditions.
Mr. Herrera urged that in the light of re-
cent European experience, "we must give se-
rious thought to the possibility of estab-
lishing institutions such as a Latin Ameri-
can parliament and executive bodies de-
signed to carry out economic integration in
specific sectors of our economy, as Europe
has done with the Coal and Steel Com-
munity."
TRAINING MUST EXPAND
To provide a solid footing for the tech-
nological revolution Latin America needs,
"We must expand our current effort to train
our national labor force and raise its cultural
and technical levels," he commented.
The total of Latin American technicians
and professionals today is about 50,000 per-
sons, or the equivalent of 0.24 professional
persons for every 1,000 population. By com-
parison, the United States has a technical
force of about 1,100,000, or the equivalent
of 6 professional persons for every 1,000
population.
A massive effort in the technical training
field Is, therefore, imperative, said Mr. Her-
rera, to raise the number of Latin American
professionals to 110,000 by. 1970, or an in-
crease of 120 percent over current levels.
[From the Washington Post, July 2, 19621
MEXICO BIDS KENNEDYS FOND "ADIOS"
(By Carroll Kilpatrick)
MEXICO CITY, July 1.-President Kennedy's
visit to Mexico ended today, as it began on
Friday, on a wave of emotion.
Several hundred thousand persons
crowded the streets to wave goodby as the
President and Mrs. Kennedy drove from the
historic -Shrine of Guadalupe, where they
attended mass, to the airport.
The crowds today, while smaller than
those on Friday that set a record here, were
largely unexpected and showed no signs of
being organized. They were as friendly as
any a political leader could wish for.
If there was any anti-U.S. senti-
ment, often advertised here, it did not show
in the smiling faces that greeted the Ken-
nedys throughout their visit.
At the famous shrine tens of thousands
of persons jammed the plaza to applaud
the Kennedys as they entered and departed.
Inside the great church Itself 5,000 wor-
shipers forgot tradition and vigorously ap-
plauded the American guests.
There were many more thousands along
the entire 10-mile route through some of the
poorest sections of the city to the airport,
where President and Mrs. Adolfo L6pez
Mateos bade their guests farewell.
Although there is strict separation of
church and state in this Catholic country
the people seemed to applaud the Presi-
dent's choice of the Shrine of Guadalupe,
the center of Catholic authority and tradi-
tion, in which to worship.
The Mexican President followed tradition
by staying away from church, and no high
official accompanied the Kennedys to the
shrine. Mexicans said it would be in viola-
tion of the spirit of the Constitution for
President L6pez Mateos to attend mass.
But the Mexican people were delighted
when the first Catholic President of the
United States went to their most hallowed
church.
Mexican and United States officials called
the weekend visit a personal triumph-and
the President took off for Washington at
11:30 a.m., Mexican time (1:30 p.m., e.d.t.) in
a mood far different from that of a year ago
as he returned from his Vienna meeeting
with Premier Khrushchev.
[The presidential jet landed at Andrews
Air Force Base at 5:30 p.m. (e.d.t.). Mr. and
Mrs. Kennedy traveled by helicopter to the
White House.]
What the visit seemed to accomplish was
not a change in the politics of either coun-
try but a change in attitude on the part of
Government and people here. Difficult prob-
11669
loins still exist and longstanding suspicions
have not been entirely forgotten.
But a new basis for discussion apparently
was established.
As one expert explained the situation, the
Government will not feel compelled to play
upon anti-U.S. sentiment but will be able
to approach difficult Mexican-Amer".can
problems with a desire for settlement.
President Kennedy began his day with a
symbolic gesture as significant as his visit
to the shrine.
He went to the Monument of the Revo-
lution to lay wreaths on the tombs of Fran-
cisco I. Madero and Venustiano Carranza,
thus identifying himself with the revolution
which the Catholic church opposed and
which Mexican history books say the United
States has always opposed.
Then the President and Mrs. Kennedy
drove to the shrine where an Indian peasant
is said to have seen the Holy Mother on Do-
comber 9, 1531.
Since that time the Virgin Mary has been
regarded as the protectress of the Indian
people and the patron saint of Mexico.
The Most Reverend Miguel Dario Miranda,
archbishop primate, met the Kennedys and
Senate Majority Leader MIKE MANSFIELD,
Democrat, of Montana, and Mrs. Mansfield at
the door and escorted them to their seats.
It was at this point that the worshipers
first broke into loud applause. Some shout-
ed "viva." Then the congregation and choir
sang the moving "Hymn of Guadalupe,"
which they sang again as the services ended.
Speaking in English, the archbishop wel-
comed the U.S. visitors and praised them for
helping to strengthen peace and good rela-
tions between Mexico and the United States.
He invoked God's blessings and said the mass
was celebrated to promote friendship be-
tween the two peoples.
After the archbishop read the Mass, Mrs.
Kennedy, kneeling, presented a bouquet of
red roses as an offering to the patron saint
of Guadalupe.
The rose is the flower of the Virgin of
Guadalupe because the Indian peasant who
is said to have seen the Holy Mother was ad-
monished by Zumarraga, to ' whom he re-
ported the vision, to return with some evi-
dence. The peasant, Juan Diego, went back
to the top of the hill where only cactus ;zad
grown and found roses.
The archbishop blessed the roses that the
First Lady presented, took them to the aa,tar
and then returned them to Mrs. Kennedy.
At this point she was inducted into the
order of our Lady of Guadalupe an the wor-
shipers applauded for the second time. They
applauded again when the Kennedys began
to leave for the drive to the airport.
In contrast to the well-guarded drive into
the city Friday, there were few people and
no soldiers guarding the route today and the
motorcade often was slowed to avoid acci-
dents.
There were no farewell speeches at the air-
port, but President Lopez Mateos embraced
Mr. Kennedy as he said goodby. On Friday,
there had been only a formal handshake.
Today's "Abrazo" signified the Mexican Pres-
ident's warmer feeling.
Mr. and Mrs. Kennedy shook hands and
with several hundred diplomats and Govern-
ment officials and the President was given a
21-gun salute before he boarded his jet-
plane.
[From the New York Times, July 2, 1912]
VIVAS FOR KENNEDY END VISIT TO MEXICO
(By Paul P. Kennedy)
MEXICO CITY, July 1.-President Kennedy
left Mexico today after having received the
applause of crowds as fervid as those that
greeted him Friday.
More than 200,000 people crowded into the
area of the Basilica of Guadalupe, where the
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 11131
for consideration tomorrow, following
compliance with the 3-day rule, might
Mr. MANSFIELD. The HEW bill will
not be taken up tomorrow.
Instead of voting on the passage of
the bill on Thursday next at the hour
of 1 o'clock, there will be a vote on the
amendment now pending, offered by the
Senator from Montana.
Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi-
dent, does the Senator have in mind in-
cluding in the unanimous-consent
agreement the usual provision about
relevancy to provisions in the bill?
Mr. MANSFIELD. That is correct.
It is intended to have such a provision
incorporated in the unanimous-consent
agreement when it is completed.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I
approve of the unanimous-consent re-
quest. For clarification, I am wonder-
ing if there are to be two yea-and-nay
votes, and 1 hour of debate, a half hour
on each amendment, if the vote on the
amendment of the Senator from Mon-
tana might not come at 1:30 o'clock. I
wanted to make certain that there would
be a full half hour on the McCarthy
amendment, the Proxmire amendment,
and the Mansfield amendment.
Mr. MANSFIELD. That is correct.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection? The Chair hears none, and
it is so ordered.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, to
clarify the RECORD, the unanimous-con-
sent request was to the effect that 30
minutes be allowed on each amendment,
15 minutes to a side; to include the Mc-
Carthy amendment, if offered; the Prox-
mire amendment, if offered; and the
Mansfield amendment, now pending; to
be followed by a vote on the bill itself.
Is my understanding correct?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there
objection to the proposed unanimous-
consent agreement? The Chair hears
none, and it is so ordered.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, un-
der the agreement which has been
reached, the time will begin to run at
noon on Thursday; and a morning hour
will be held, if need be, after the disposal
of the bill, as amended, if it is amended.
The unanimous-consent agreement
was subsequently reduced to writing, as
follows :
UNANIMOUS-CONSENT AGREEMENT
Ordered, That effective on Thursday, July
5, 1962, immediately after the Senate con-
venes, during the further consideraiton of
the bill (H.R. 8050) to amend the act re-
lating to the importation of adult honeybees,
debate on amendments by Senators MANS-
FIELD, PROXMIRE, and MCCARTHY Shall be
limited to 30 minutes, each, to be equally
divided and controlled by the mover of any
such amendment or motion and the ma-
jority leader: Provided, That in the event
the majority leader is in favor of any such
amendment or motion, the time in opposi-
tion thereto shall be controlled by the mi-
nority leader or some Senator designated
by him: Provided further, That no amend-
ment that is not germane to the provisions
of the said bill shall be received: Provided
further, That after the disposition of the
Mansfield amendment the Senate proceed to
vote on the final passage of the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
amendment of the Senator from Mon-
tana [Mr. MANSFIELD] will be receive
and printed, and will be on the table.
MESSAGE FROM THE HOUSE
A message from the House of Repre-
sentatives, by Mr. Bartlett, one of its
reading clerks, announced that the
House had agreed to the amendment of
the Senate to the bill (H.R. 3840) to pro-
vide for the conveyance of certain real
property of the United States to the
Carolina Power & Light Co.
ENROLLED BILL SIGNED
The message also announced that the
Speaker had affixed his signature to the
enrolled bill (H.R. 12154) to amend and
extend the provisions of the Sugar Act
of 1948, as amended, and it was signed
by the President pro tempore.
THE CENTENNIAL OF THE SIGNING
OF THE MORRILL LAND-GRANT
ACT
Mr. FONG. Mr. President, today our
Nation is observing the 100th anniver-
sary of the signing of the Morrill Land-
Grant Act by President Abraham Lin-
coln, In all 50 States a total of 70 uni-
versities and colleges benefit from the
provisions of that act.
Although the University of Hawaii at
Honolulu, Hawaii, did not receive a.grant
of land such as that provided for State
colleges under the Morrill Act of 1862,
today it is a Federal land-grant institu-
tion and shares in the benefits from the
Second Morrill Act of 1890, the Nelson
Amendment of 1907, and subsequent
legislation.
Earlier this spring, the University of
Hawaii, now in its 55th year, held cere-
monies marking the centennial year of
the Morrill Act at a convocation.
The University of Hawaii was estab-
lished in 1907 as the College of Agricul-
ture and Mechanic Arts by the Legisla-
ture of the Territory of Hawaii. Four
years later, in 1911, the name was
changed to the College of Hawaii.
In 1919, the territorial legislature
passed a bill creating the University of
Hawaii in 1920 and the charter provided
for two colleges. The College of Hawaii
became the College of Applied Science,
and the College of Arts and Sciences was
added. In 1931, the legislature combined
the Territorial Normal School with the
University School of Education to form
Teachers College and now the College of
Education.
-Subsequently, the College of Tropical
Agriculture was established in 1946, the
College of Business Administration in
1949, the College of General Studies in
1956, the Colleges of Engineering and
Nursing in 1959, and the East-West
Center in 1960.
Prior to 1951, all graduate work was
performed under the supervision of the
graduate division, but in that year the
name was changed and designated the
graduate school.
The Hilo campus on the Island of
Hawaii, the southernmost island in the
chain, was opened in 1947. Total enroll-
ment on both campuses exceeds 9,000
students at the present time.
The Morrill Act of 1862 provides for
the endowment of at least one agricul-
tural and mechanical college in each
State. Thirty thousand acres of land or
land scrip was offered each State for
each Senator and Representative from
that State, to be held or sold to provide
for permanent endowment for one or
more colleges providing education in the
fields of agriculture and the mechanic
arts.
Until- 1960, Hawaii was the only State
which had not received a grant under
the Morrill Act or under legislation in
lieu thereof.
Prior to becoming a part of the United
States in 1898, Hawaii was an inde-
pendent country. Unlike most of the
States, our lands in Hawaii were not
initially owned by the Federal Govern-
ment. Thus we have never had public
lands in Hawaii, as this term applied to
the Western States. Under the treaty
of annexation of 1898, the public lands
of the Republic of Hawaii were ceded. to
the United States to be held in trust for
the people of Hawaii.
If Hawaii were to be treated in similar
fashion to her sister States under the
Morrill Act, she would have been entitled
to 90,000 acres of land-30,000 acres for
each Senator and Representative. But
such lands were not available on Oahu,
where the University of Hawaii is lo-
cated, or elsewhere in the eight-island
State.
In the Hawaii omnibus bill of 1960, de-
signed to amend relevant Federal sta-
tutes so that Hawaii would be treated
on an equitable basis with her sister
States, a section entitled "Land-Grant
College Aid" provided for an appropria-
tion of $6 million to the State for the
support of the college of agriculture and
the mechanic arts to be invested pursu-
ant to the provisions of the Morrill Act
of 1862. - -
Congress authorized the $6 million
sum in lieu of a land grant in 1960 but
only $2,225,000 was appropriated - that
year. Last year I appealed to the Senate
Appropriations Committee to appropri-
ate $3,775,000-the balance of the au-
thorized funds for the university. And.
this was accomplished. Today Hawaii
is on an equal basis with other States
with respect to the Morrill Act.
I am very pleased that the University
of Hawaii, originally established as a
land-grant college in 1907, shares in this
Federal program with 69 other land-
grant universities and colleges through-
out the 50 States and Puerto Rico.
Although the University of Hawaii
held its centennial celebration earlier
this year, I am sure that today, July 2,
1962, is appreciatively and meaningfully
commemorated as the centennial of that
historic act, authored by Congressman
Justin Smith Morrill, of Vermont, pro-
viding education for all those who are
able and.willing to learn.
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
11632 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
PAN AMERICAN FLIES 100,000TH
TRANSATLANTIC TRIP
Mr. MONRONEY. Mr. President, at
approximately 8 o'clock tonight a jet
aircraft will depart from Idlewild Inter-
national Airport, bound for London,
Frankfurt, and points beyond,' around
the world to San Francisco. This will
be Pan American World Airways' flight
No. 2 and it will be particularly signifi-
cant because it will mark the 100,00th
time that Pan American will have
crossed the Atlantic.
The departure of the 100,000th flight
from Pan Am's glistening umbrella-
shaped terminal at Idlewild will be
vastly different from the takeoff of his-
tory's first flight of paying passengers
across the Atlantic on June 28, 1939.
On that day, 5,000 spectators cheered
and a brass band played as 22 passengers
filed out on a yacht-type pier in Port
Washington Bay in Long Island, N.Y., to
board the clipper Dixie, a flying boat
capable of the then considerable cruis-
ing speed of 150 miles per hour.
That plane, a Boeing 314, flew to
Marseilles, via the Azores and Lisbon,
in 29 hours, 20 minutes.
The jet clipper America, a 600-mile-
per-hour Boeing 707 that can carry, 161
passengers, will be more than three-
quarters of the way around the world in
the same elapsed flying time.
Since the historic flight of the clipper
Dixie, Pan Am has carried 3,590,000 pas-
sengers across the Atlantic and now op-
erates 204 transatlantic passenger
flights on clockwork schedule every week.
The jet clipper America will be flying
one of the two round-the-world flights
Pan Am makes every day as part of its
service to 114 cities In 80 lands around
the globe.
From New York to London, it will be
commanded by Capt. Robert D. Fordyce
of Locust Valley, N.Y. At London, Capt.
Benjamin S. Harrell of Manhassett, N.Y.,
will take over the controls, taking flight
No. 2 as far as Beirut with intermediate
stops at Frankfurt, Munich, and Istan-
bul.
Captains Fordyce and Harrell were
junior flight officers on the June 28, 1939,
trip. Their combined flight experience
equals the number of years that have
elapsed since the Wright brothers first
flew at Kitty Hawk, N.C.
Mr. President, as chairman of the
Aviation Subcommittee of the Senate
Commerce Committee, I commend Pan
American for its many pioneering ac-
complishments and feel certain that I
reflect the opinions of my colleagues.
GOVERNMENT, POLITICS, AND
STUDENTS
Mr. WILLIAMS of New Jersey, Mr.
President, through the years much has
been written about the influence and ef-
fects of politics upon the functioning of
the Federal Government. Unfortu-
nately, many people are under the im-
pression that politics has nothing but an
adverse effect on government, molding
policies to its own end, which is thought
always to be selfish.
However, it must be realized that, be-
cause of the size and complexity of our
Government, politics Is not only present
in the Government, but essential. When
a country like ours is governed by elected
representatives, politics is the method by
which varying views concerning vital is-
sues are brought to light and discussed.
Wherever there are people to be In-
structed and informed, politics plays a
large part.
Students are expressing increasing in-
terest In the operation of our Govern-
ment and are now taking part, to a
greater degree than ever, In government
activities in their municipalities and
States. Their interest is indicative of a
growing realization that they will play
an active part in the events of this criti-
cal decade.
Within recent weeks I have had direct
evidence of their interest. Each year I
invite seniors in New Jersey high schools
to participate in a competition for sum-
mer scholarships in my office. Judges
select the scholarship winners on the
basis of their achievements in school and
community, together with essays sub-
mitted by all applicants. The three stu-
dents selected by the judges spend 2
weeks at my office in Washington ob-
serving at firsthand the workings of
their Government.
This year, I asked the students to sub-
mit essays discussing the relationship
between students and politics and gov-
ernment. I was interested In seeing their
concept of the role politics plays in gov-
ernment and how they, as students
would form their own ideas and actively
work with groups whose views they sup-
ported.
Their responses were immediate and
most encouraging. I have discovered
that students do take a great deal of
interest in government machinery at all
levels, and many of the essays expressed
a desire for more high school courses
dealing specifically with the functioning
and current problems of government.
More than 200 seniors in New Jersey
high schools wrote essays which were
Intelligent and surprisingly comprehen-
sive.
Judges must have had a difficult time
In choosing the final winners. The stu-
dents wrote seriously, and in some cases,
since they were already active in their
communities, from experience.
I was once again impressed with the
fact that here, in our youth, lies our
country's greatest resources. We must
do all we can to encourage students to
develop their talents and abilities, to
formulate high ideals and strong convic-
tions, and to actively carry them out in
their professions and their communities.
The final winners were Ronald Bett-
auer of Teaneck High School; Irvin
Richter of Bridgewater-Raritan High
School in Somerville; and Ronald Wein-
stein of Trenton Central High School,
Their essays succinctly, reveal much
about them as students and Americans.
Mr. President, I ask for unanimous
consent to have the essays printed in the
RECORD.
There being no objection, the essays
were ordered to be printed In the RECORD,
as follows:
Ju
GOVERNMENT, POLITICS, AND THE SrtrezNT
(By Ronald Bettauer)
What will determine the political :future
of America? "It is just a question of how
much the people know, how much they are
called upon to do," answered Sam Rayburn.
It is necessary "to bring them face to face
with their responsibilities as citizens, or as
a part of a group of citizens, or as a party,
and let them know that their responsibility
right now is terrific," 1 How are people
brought face to face with responsibility?
What will motivate them to fulfill that re-
sponsibility? It is a question of how much
the people know. Education is the answer.
Education can instill the patriotic sense of
national destiny in the people, and it can
enable them to recognize their responsibility
to society.
Consequently, the primary political con-
cern of the student Is to educate himself.
His is the task of learning history, not just
of America, but of the world. He should
learn about the political structure of his
society-the Federal, State, and local units
of government. He should be aware of the
happenings in the world, and, moreover, he
should have a deep concern about these hap-
penings. In modern times diplomacy based
on ignorance cannot succeed. Therefore, the
student must first know his Government
well, but also must be informed about other
contemporary governmental systems.
The Government's prime political respon-
sibility to the student is to give him the
opportunity to learn about the Government
itself. He must receive the necessary train-
Ing in history, which is the foundation of
the present. Without doubt, there is much
to be learned from European and Oriental
history as well as from American history.
Political philosophy is an integral part of
the history course. These fields are surely
as important to our national destiny as are
those mentioned in the National Defense
Education Act. Why are they not included?
The success of a democracy depends just as
much on an educated voting populace as it
does on scientists and 'mathematicians, The
proposed School Assistance Act,of 1961 would
have been an assertion of Government re-
sponsibility In fields of education other than
science and mathematics, for the State could
have determined the allotment of Its share
of the aid. However. as it is, the State and
local governments have the responsibility of
expanding and heightening their standards
to include if not a more extensive, a more
intensive program of social studies--a deeper
penetration into the world situation today
and how it became what it is today, a deeper
penetration of the problems of the United
States.
Youth is the time to interest a person in
the affairs of his country. Youth is the
time to permanently dispell political apathy,
national and International. Stimulating
programs of studies in the school system are
the natural means of preparation for the
voting populace. The school is the insti-
tution best suited to give the student the
power to discuss and define issues in the light
of reason 'and to choose what is best. It can
give him an open mind, a mind focused both
on reality and on Idealistic aims,
Hence, the Government, be it local, State,
or Federal (whichever has the best facility
to do so), is charged by the precepts of our
Republic to provide the student with the
opportunity to become educated; and it i>
the duty of the student, as a future voter,
to become intimately acquainted with our
political structure. It is a question of how
much the people know. If the populace Is
educated, democracy cannot fall, for educa.,
I"Sam Rayburn Takes a Look at the
World," U.S, News & World Report. vol. LI,
No. 15, Oct. 9, 1961. P. 68,
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
Senate
The Senate met at 12 o'clock meridian,
and was called to order by the President
pro tempore.
The Chaplain, Rev. Frederick Brown
Harris, D.D., offered the following
prayer:
Our Father, God, Maker of all things,
Judge of all men, hallowed be Thy name.
As this Nation of our hope and prayer
turns from the birthday of its daring
advent among the established govern-
ments of the world, may the stern reali-
ties of the present beget in us mighty re-
solves to face without fear dangers even
more formidable than those the founding
patriots ever knew. We would solemnly
reaffirm the reverent declaration of those
who so long ago With intrepid faith
stepped upon the shores of this prom-
ised land-"In the name of God, Amen."
With the sound of that great amen as
our summons in these stirring new days,
we would be true to the vision splendid
of a redeemed earth where gnawing
hunger, blighting superstition, and
needless pain and misery will be but
haunting memories in the day of de-
liverance which draweth near for all the
sons of men. For this cause we set up
our banners in this, Thy glorious day.
We ask it in the name of the Christ
whose saving truth is marching on.
Amen.
MESSAGES FROM THE PRESI-
DENT-APPROVAL OF BILLS
Messages in writing froth the Presi
dent of the United States were com-
municated to the Senate by Mr. Miller,
one of his secretaries, and he announced
that on July 3, 1962, the President had
approved and signed the following acts:
S.3062. An act to amend the Soil Bank
Act so as to authorize the Secretary of Agri-
culture to permit the harvesting of hay on
conservation reserve acreage under certain
conditions; and
S. 3266. An act to amend section 2 of the
act entitled "An act to create a Library of
Congress Trust Fund Board, and for other
purposes," approved March 3, 1925, as
amended (2 U.S.C. 158), relating to deposits
with the Treasurer of the United States of
gifts and bequests to the Library of Con-
gress and to raise the statutory limitation
provided for in that section.
THURSDAY, JULY 5, 1962
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The
Per
question is on agreeing to the amend-
"Country: centum
ment of the Senator from Montana [Mr.
Guatemala_______________________
0.71
Panama-------------------------
- 0. 53
MANSFIELD].
El Salvador -----------------------
0.36
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, a
Paraguay-------------------------
0.30
parliamentary inquiry.
British Honduras_________________
0. 33
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The
Not prorated_____________________
4.86
Senator from Montana will state it.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Is the Senate op-
erating under allotted time at present?
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. That
is correct; and that is under the order
adopted on July 2.
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield 1 minute
to the Senator from Vermont [Mr.
AIKEN], and more if he needs it.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The
Senator from Vermont is recognized.
(Mr. AIKEN submitted an item for
printing in the Appendix of the RECORD,
which appears therein.)
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President 'I
suggest the absence of a quorum, with
the understanding that the time required
for the quorum call will be charged to
the time available to my side under the
agreement.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The
clerk will call the roll.
The Chief Clerk proceeded to call the
roll.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that the order
for the. quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, how
much time remains under my control?
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. Nine
minutes; and a total of 24 minutes
remains.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I
offer, and send to the desk, my amend-
ment in the nature of a substitute for
the Mansfield amendment, and I ask
that my amendment to the Mansfield
amendment be read.
The amendment to the amendment
was read, as follows:
SEC. 2. (a) Section 202(c) (3) of the Sugar
Act of 1948, as amended, is amended to read
as follows:
"(3) (A) The quotas for foreign countries
other than the Republic of the Philippines
determined under paragraphs (1) and (2)
of this subsection shall be prorated among
such countries on the following basis:
IMPORTATION OF ADULT
Per
"Country: centum
HONEY BEES
Cuba-----------------------------
57.77
Peru-- ----------
6.71
Without objection, the . Senate
re-
Dominican Republic--------____----
6.71
sumed the consideration of the bill (H.R.
Mexico--------------------------
6.71
8050) to amend the act relating to the
Brazil---------------------------
6.37
importation of adult honey bees.
British West Indies_______________
3.03
The PRESIDENT pro tempore.
The
Republic of China----------------
F
h W
I
di
0. 14
1
1
bill will be stated by title, for the infor-
renc
est
n
es --------------
Colombia ------------------------
.0
1
06
mation of the Senate.
Nicaragua
.
0
88
The CHIEF CLERK. A bill (H.R. 8050)
------------------------
Costa Rica--_--------.------------
.
0.88
to amend the act relating to the impor-
Ecuador -------------------------
0.88
tation of adult bees.
Haiti----------------------------
0.71
"(B) From the quantity not prorated un-
der subparagraph (A), the President is au-
thorized to allocate to countries within the
Western Hemisphere all or any portion of
the quantity of sugar not prorated under
subparagraph (A)."
(b) The amendments made by this sec-
tion shall be effective as if they were enacted
as a part of H.R. 12154 entitled "An Act to
amend and extend the provisions of the
Sugar Act of 1948 as amended", Eighty-
seventh Congress, second session.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I
yield myself 7 minutes.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The
Senator from Wisconsin is recognized
for 7 minutes.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, my
amendment is offered to the Mansfield
amendment, Under my amendment the
150,000 tons of discretionary sugar the
administration has requested would be
taken from certain national quotas, not
from the global quota which had been
set aside for Cuba. The global quota
would be purchased at the world price;
and the national quotas would be pur-
chased at the premium price. " There-
fore, my amendment would save for the
Treasury $8,400,000.
Second, my amendment would preserve
150,000 more tons in the global quota
to be made available to Cuba after Castro
is thrown out of power. Thus, it would
provide an incentive for throwing the
Communists out of power in Cuba and
it would provide an encouragement to
the people of Cuba who want a free Cuba
to seek one.
Third, my amendment would eliminate
at the very start what I think is going
to be a painful subsidy to maintain to
countries outside this hemisphere-an
artificial subsidy to countries which
could not supply us in time of emer-
gency, anyway.
This morning, I was in touch with the
experts in this field in the Department
of Agriculture; and they told me they
approve my amendment, and believe it
will work well, and say it seems to be
much more than the Mansfield amend-
ment in keeping with the basic provi-
sions of the Sugar Act, which are to pro-
vide a sure and certain supply of sugar
in the event of emergency.
AUSTRALIA
My amendment will eliminate the
40,000-ton quota of Australia, which has
a Commonwealth sugar quota of 600,000
tons, 300,000 of which Australia sells to
the United Kingdom at a premium price
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 11840
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE July 5
comparable to our own. The remainder
goes to other Commonwealth countries
at the world market price, plus a favor-
able tariff concession which comes to
about 1 cent a pound. Australia sells
over 15,000 tons outside the Common-
wealth agreement at world prices. With
a carryover of 700,000 tons, Australia
could readily sell sugar to us at world
prices without a premium. It seems to
me that one of the obvious reasons why
Australia received a quota is that Aus-
tralia's lobbyist received $20,000 in the
last 12 months for representing Aus-
tralia before our Finance Committee and
the House Agriculture Committee.
INDIA
India's new 20,000-ton quota would be
eliminated. India has developed a do-
mestic sugar industry which, with Gov-
ernment aid, has aimed at getting into
the export business as a means of rais-
ing foreign exchange. From 1959 to
1961 India's production rose over 1 mil-
lion tons, while domestic consumption
remained almost constant. Our 20,000-
ton premium quota would be only an aid
gesture, and I think would better be han-
dled in foreign aid legislation. With
carryover stocks of over 1.5 million tons,
India could very well compete on its own
for part of our global quota. India's lob-
byist will, if the bill is passed, receive
$99,000. Under his contract he may re-
ceive only $50,000 if the bill fails. He,
therefore, has $49,000 riding in opposi-
tion to this amendment.
SOUTH AFRICA
South Africa's 20,000-ton quota would
be dropped. When South Africa re-
signed from the Commonwealth over
her apartheid policies, she lost her privi-
leges under the Commonwealth sugar
agreement. By purchasing her sugar at
premium prices, we would just be pick-
ing up where the Commonwealth left
off-in effect, giving support to her
apartheid policies, through support of
her sugar industry. South Africa's lob-
byists gets $50 an hour. In February
and March he received $4,950.
FIJI
Fiji's 10,000-ton quota would be elimi-
nated. Fiji has a 1962 quota, under the
Commonwealth sugar agreement, of
134,000 tons, which brings her a premi-
um paymentfrom the United Kingdom.
This covers over 80 percent of her ex-
ports. Our 10,000-ton quota would put
almost all of Fiji's sugar export capacity
under preferential sales agreements.
Fiji's lobbyist receives $2,000 a month.
NETHERLANDS
The Netherlands would lose its 10,000-
ton quota under my proposal. The
Netherlands' position in the U.S. sugar
program stems from its shipments of
sugar in the early twenties. All the
Netherlands' shipments up to now have
been refined sugar, and apparently its
quota is in violation of provisions in
the recently passed Sugar Act which bar
importation of refined sugar. The Neth-
erlands' lobbyist is a New York sugar
broker.
The result is that the Netherlands
can buy Cuban or other sugar on the
world market at 3 cents a pound and sell
to us at a 3 cents a pound profit. It
makes no sense, particularly when the
quota apparently is in violation of the
recently passed Sugar Act barring im-
portation of refined sugar.
In addition, the Netherlands is a net
importer of sugar-over 140,000 tons in.
1961, of which approximately 30,000 tons-
were from Castro's Cuba.
Mr. President, is there any sense in
that? Why in the world should we buy
sugar from the Netherlands when the
Netherlands isan importer of sugar and
is purchasing sugar from Castro's Cuba?
Does that make any sense? The Nether-
lands buys the sugar at the world price.
but sells it to us at a premium price. 1.
think the world of the Dutch; they are
wonderful people. But talk about a give-
away. This is the grossest kind of give-
away, without any kind of rational Gov-
ernment policy of helping all the people.
Instead, it would simply help a few pro-
ducers, who, as we have seen, are enor-
mously wealthy and are characterized
by two things: high profits and the low
wages they pay those who work for them.
IRELAND -
My amendment would also take away
the 10,000 tons that have been eased into
the Sugar Act for Ireland. I would note,
Mr. President, that the Mansfield amend-
ment that is directed, supposedly, at
helping the Dominican Republic, Argen-
tina, and Peru, contains no less than two
paragraphs that have the effect of pre-
serving the 10,000 tons of refined sugar
that are aimed at Ireland.
Apparently no one knows why the
Irish, who are net importers of sugar,.
have come into this 10,000-ton bonus,.
In 1960, the latest figures available to
me, Ireland imported 30,000 tons of
sugar, with no less than 22,000 tons com-
ing from Castro's Cuba. For all we
know, Mr. President, Ireland may be
shipping us refined Cuban sugar at U.S.
premium prices. Ireland's lobbyist gets
$35 an hour.
REPUBLIC OF CHINA
The China quota would be cut from
the 35,000 tons granted in the new legis-
lation to the 3,000 tons that China has
traditionally held in the U.S. market.
There is no reason to, purchase addi-
tional sugar from a supplier that is as
distant from us as is China, except in
the case of the Philippines.
It can be said that in the case of For-
mosa we are very anxious that the For-
mosan economy succeed and that we help
it. We are. We are providing enormous
help, through economic aid and defense
support, to the Chinese Republic on For-
mosa, and we should do it, in my judg-
ment; but to provide this additional
handout or giveaway, not on any rational
basis but merely because everybody else
is getting it, to me makes no sense.
China's lobbyist gets $500 a month and
is on a $2,000 retainer.
FOREIGN POSSESSIONS
The quotas of the British West Indies,
British Honduras, and the French West
Indies have each beencut by 5 percent.
As a matter of fact, the British West
Indies were cut slightly more than 5 per-
cent.
The reductions were made on these
three Western Hemisphere producers
since. each of them already participates
in a preference market. With the grant-
ing of a U.S. quota, each would become a
recipient, in effect, of subsidies from two
governments.
The British West Indies' lobbyist gets
$20,000 a year and $5,000 expenses.
The French West Indies' lobbyist gets
$40,000 a year, but he is handling other
business for the French West Indies.
The British Honduras' lobbyist is as-
sociated with American interests which
plan to build a sugar refinery if an addi-
tional premium quota is received.
To summarize, the facts are that my
amendment would:
First, save $8,400,000 by enabling us to
buy sugar at the world price, instead of
at the premium price, and pay the differ-
ence into the U.S. Treasury.
Second, it would preserve an additional
150,000 tons for Cuba when the people
throw off the Castro yoke.
Third, it would do this by cutting off
quotas outside this hemisphere. There
is no excuse at all for quotas outside the
Western Hemisphere. Some of these
countries are anything but underdevel-
oped. There is no reason why we should
provide premium payments on sugar to
countries which could not deliver the
sugar to us in the event of emergency,
because they are so far away.
Finally, the fact is that the lobbyists
have been the main beneficiaries of this
legislation. As the chairman of the For-
eign Relations Committee pointed out,
the lobbying on this bill has been uncon-
scionable.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The
time of the Senator has expired.
Mr. PROXMIRE. I yield myself 1
more minute.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous con-
sent that an excellent editorial from this
morning's Washington Post in support
of the Proxmire amendment be printed
at this point in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the editorial
wad ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows: -
As THE BEE FLIES
The Senate has an opportunity today to
modify some of the most eccentric features
of the newly adopted Sugar Act and thereby
calm the uproar among outraged neighbors.
The method at hand is irregular, but then
so is the problem. Amendments will be of-
fered to a bill dealing with the import of
adult honey bees, and If this hitchhiking
succeeds the President can be given dis-
cretionary power to reallocate 225,000 tons
of sugar among aggrieved Latin American
producers.
As it now stands, the new Sugar Act is
laced with indefensible discriminations.
The export of sugar Is not a life-and-death
matter to the Netherlands, to Ireland, to
South Africa, or to the Fiji Island;-areas
that have unaccountably been added to the
premium price quota market. Sugar is a
matter of national survival to the Dominican
Republic, a prime producer whose economy
is 70 percent dependent on sugar Bales.
It may be that some of the protests from
Santo Domingo seem overwrought and un-
reasonable. But Dominican unhappiness
must be seen against the record of the past
when Congress seemed to go out of its way
to help the Trujillo dictatorship. The prob-
lem is as much political' as economic, and
reports from the Dominican Republic all
agree that a moderately oriented government
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
1962 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
will be in serious peril if the present Sugar
Act is not modified. If a case for favoritism
exists, it surely can be made for the Domini-
can Republic.
Senator PROXMIRE is offering an amend-
ment that makes a good deal of sense even
in the Alice-in-Wonderland realm of sugar
politics. He would obtain thtb additional
225,000 tons by eliminating most nonhemi-
spheric producers from the present list, by
cutting Nationalist China to it historic allot-
ment, and by deducting 5 percent from the
quota awarded to the British West. Indies,
British Honduras, and the French West In-
dies. This would be far preferable to the
alternate method of chopping another
225,000 tons from the already shrunken Cu-
ban quota reserved for the time when Havana
changes its course.
If the Senate accepts the Proxmire amend-
ment, and if the House concurs, President
Kennedy would be able to remedy some of
the patent inequities of the Sugar Act. He
could not only give a needed lift to the"Do-
minicans; he could also restore Argentina to
the list in place of the distant areas now in-
cluded. Argentina, be it noted, is the only
country concerned with sugar that did not
have an American lobbyist; although it al-
ready has a substantial sugar export trade,
Argentina was excised from the Sugar Act.
Congress can take some of the sting out of
ill-considered legislation by using the honey-
bee bill; an improvised cure is better than
none. at all.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I
reserve the remainder of my time.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, the
difference between the amendment of-
fered by the Senator from Wisconsin
[Mr._. PROXMIRE] and the Mansfield
amendment can be simply stated. Both
amendments have the same general end:
to authorize the President to allocate
150,000 tons in 1963 and 1964, and 75,000
tons during the remainder of 1962, with-
in the Western Hemisphere. Both
amendments proceed from the assump-
tion that the President ought to have
greater flexibility in meeting certain
foreign policy objectives of the United
States than was provided by the re-
cently adopted sugar bill. But the Mans-
field amendment would draw this ad-
ditional tonnage from the global quota,
set at 1,635,000 tons under the sugar bill;
the amendment of the Senator from
Wisconsin would. draw it from quotas
assigned under the sugar bill to various
countries not within the Western Hemi-
sphere. The amendment of the Senator
from Wisconsin would eliminate those
quotas-indeed, would result in the
elimination of all quotas for countries
outside the Western Hemisphere, except
the Republic of China.
I must say, Mr. President, that I have
a considerable degree of sympathy with
the Senator's amendment. But in my
opinion the amendment, if adopted,
would stand little or no chance of pas-
sage by the House of Representatives.
The attitude of the House on this mat-
ter is well known. It was only after the
most vigorous representations by the
(Senate conferees that. the quotas for
(many countries outside the Western
Hemisphere were - reduced.
In the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD for July
2, 1962, the distinguished Senator from
Louisiana [Mr. LONG], one of the con-
ferees on the sugar bill, makes note of
the fact that, outside the Western
Hemishphere, there were some reduc-
tions-plenty of reductions, may I say.
Mauritius, -under the House bill, was
to have been assigned 110,000 tons.
That was reduced to zero.
South Africa was to have been as-
signed, under the House bill, 120,000
tons. That was reduced to 20,000 tons.
India was to have been assigned
130,000 tons. That was reduced to
20,000 tons.
Australia was to have been assigned
200,000 tons. That amount was reduced
to 40,000 tons.
The resulting bill retained the princi-
ple of a global quota, by providing that
the 1,635,000 tons eliminated from var-
ious country quotas would constitute
such a global quota. Further than that
the House would not go, and, as a conse-
quence, a number of countries outside
the Western Hemisphere were granted
allotments.
There is no reason to expect that the
House would be any more sympathetic
to the further reduction-indeed, A he
elimination-of these quotas now, than
it was In connection with the basic sugar
bill just passed.
Consequently, the approach I have
suggested-of reducing the global quota
by 150,000 tons-seems the only pracr
tical way to try to grant the President
this much needed discretion. There
would remain a global quota of 1,485,000
tons; the House is likely to agree to the
Mansfield amendment; and the foreign
policy objectives we seek to obtain in
the Western Hemisphere would be more
readily obtainable. I do not believe the
Proxmire approach can gain accept-
ance by the other body, and as a conse-
quence these objectives would be rend-
ered more difficult to achieve. I urge the
rejection of the Senator's amendment
and I do so reluctantly because it has
much merit.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield to me?
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield 1 minute to
the Senator from Oregon.
The PRESIDENT pro tempore. The
Senator from Oregon is recognized for
1 minute.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, the
other evening, after the adoption of the
conference report on the sugar bill, I
spoke briefly about the amendment of
the Senator from Montana to reassure
some Latin American countries that the
United States will continue to buy su-
gar from them in large amounts.
I expect to support the amendment:
But I think it is necessitated only be-
cause we have not properly come to grips
with the whole subject of sugar imports
from other countries.
Those of us who have been active in
Latin American relations and in the Al-
liance for Progress are familiar with the
commodity stabilization problem facing
many, if not most Latin American coun-
tries. All too many of them are one
product countries, extremely dependent
upon its export. Their economies lean
so heavily on a single agricultural com-
modity or raw material that a slight
shift In its price in the United States or
in the world can wreck a whole nation.
It can completely undo whatever prog-
ress might be underway through the
financing of the Alliance for Progress.
We recognized the Importance of com-
modity prices in the Western Hemisphere
during the work of my subcommittee,
published in 1960. One of the special
studies of my subcommittee was done
by International Economic Consultants,
Inc., on "Commodity Problems in Latin
America."
It is true that one of the greatest
problems of Latin America is that of
diversifying the economies of its nations,
one also found in many States and areas
of the United States. But until that is
done, we cannot underestimate the im-
pact of price variations upon individual
nations and sometimes on groups of
nations.
The tenor of the report by Interna-
tional Economic Consultants was rather
unsympathetic to commodity stabiliza-
tion agreements. It indicated that too
often they shelter uneconomic produc-
tion and encouraged specialization in-
stead of diversification. But insofar as
the United States maintains its own
program of commodity stabilization for
sugar, I think it is time. we opened the
matter of foreign quotas to international
proceedings, at least within the Western
Hemisphere.
Representatives of the nations of the
hemisphere are already meeting to try
to work out some agreement on coffee.
Other commodities which could be ap-
proached In this fashion are tin, cocoa,
copper, oil, bananas, and sugar.
There is no doubt that we have a cer-
tain interest in seeing to it that Ameri-
can consumers of these products are
able to get them at reasonable prices.
It has in part been to assure American
consumers of low-cost supplies of these
commodities that we have been un-
responsive to the idea of commodity
agreements, especially where the com-
modity is not produced in the United
States.
But sugar is produced in the United
States. It is produced in the form of
beets and cane.. We pay a price here
for domestic sugar that is higher than
the world price. But we pay a premium
because we have conditioned the pre-
mium upon the observance of many min-
imum wage and hour regulations for
American workers.
This is why I am very unhappy about
paying the same premium to foreign
producers, as we have been doing in the
past. There is all too little evidence that
any of it has trickled down to the bene-
fit of the agricultural worker in Latin
America, where all too often he "is little
but a serf to the soil.. Yet the owners
of these great sugar plantations are
socking their profits away in foreign
banks, and now they say that if we
stop their premium price and their spe-
cific allotment, the bottom will'drop out
of their economy and the Alliance for
Progress will be a failure.
This is the whole problem In north-
eastern Brazil. It is the land of the
great sugar plantations, the hordes of
miserable farmworkers, and of Commu-
nist agitation which threatens the sta-
bility of all of Brazil.
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE July 5
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
METCALF in the chair). The time of
the Senator from Oregon has expired.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield me an additional 2 min-
utes?
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield another 2
minutes to the Senator from Oregon.
Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, there-
fore, I offer the suggestion that the
United States sound out the nations of
the Western Hemisphere on a commod-
ity stabilization program for sugar. It
would not be just any stabilization agree-
ment. But I would like to urge an
agreement that would tie the allotment
of quotas and the payment of any pre-
mium price to some minimum wage
standards. Or it might tie the allot-
ments and premiums to provision of ade-
quate housing, sanitation, and education
for the sugar workers and their families.
These, after all, are the objectives of
the Alliance for Progress. They are also
the reasons why we pay our own sugar
producers a premium price. I see no
reason why we should not use the pre-
mium price to accomplish the objectives
of the Alliance for Progress in Latin
America.
We have made clear that funds pro-
vided out of the Alliance for Progress
must be matched with some needed re-
forms by the recipient country. I say
we should do the'same with sugar quotas.
I think some of these reforms could
be accomplished faster, in fact, in the
case ofsugar workers, if we conditioned
our allotments and price premiums upon
compliance with some of the same types
of working conditons we require of our
own producers.
I have not explored all the possibili-
ties or ramifications of this type of sugar
stabilization agreement. It may be there
are some obstacles I have not taken into
account.
But there is one obstacle I am taking
into account, and that is the increasing
reluctance many of us are feeling to
paying foreign growers a premium price
for their sugar when it appears to be
having little or no effect upon the condi-
tions of work in the exporting country.
This belongs in the realm of the Or-
ganization of American States, and pos-
sible even in the realm of the Alliance
itself. It belongs in the realm of nego-
tiation on what standards will be met
if quotas are assigned or premium prices
paid, or both.
Above all, I share the view of the
chairman of the Foreign Relations
Committee that the subject of sugar
quotas should be taken out of the hands
of high-priced lobbyists, whose fees are
so often contingent upon how many tons
they are able to obtain for their foreign
clients.
I address these remarks to my col-
leagues, to the administration, and to
the officials of Latin American countries
who may read the CONGRESSIONAL
RECORD.
I say, in closing, - that, in my judg-
ment, the American people are catching
up to the problem, and I think the Amer-
ican people are going to make clear to
the Congress, before another sugar act
is passed by Congress, that they are fed
up with paying premium prices to en-
rich the oligarchs of Latin America and
their lobbyists in the United States.
They are fed up at not having American
money put to work in Latin America, in
keeping with the objectives and ideals of
the Alliance for Progress program,
which is to help raise the standard of
living of the masses of Latin America,
so they will be and stay on the side of
freedom, and not be victimized by com-
munism. The sad fact is that much of
our sugar expenditure in Latin America
strengthens communism, and not free-
dom, because to the extent that these
premium prices are not used to raise the
living standards of the sugar workers,
they help the Communists.
I think this will be the last sugar act
to be passed by Congress unless we get
some agreement which will assure that
the premium prices are going to benefit
the workers that raise the sugar, and
not the oligarchs, who will take the
profits made from exploiting the workers
and invest them in Swiss and New York
banks.
In my capacity as chairman of the
Subcommittee on Latin America, I wish
to make this official announcement re-
garding what will be my position on this
problem and on similar ones.
Mr. CARLSON subsequently said: Mr.
President, earlier today in the debate on
the Mansfield amendment providing for
increased sugar quotas to various coun-
tries, there was a limitation of debate.
Therefore, I did not have an opportunity
to discuss one amendment in the Sugar
Act as it was passed by the Congress last
week, and would also apply to the
amendment that was agreed to today. I
refer particularly to a statement in the
conference report on the Sugar Act
amendments of 1962, page 4, as follows:
In authorizing the purchase and importa-
tion of sugar from foreign countries under
this paragraph, special consideration shall
be given to countries of the Western Hemi-
sphere and to those countries purchasing
United States agricultural commodities.
Mr. President, I call the attention of
the Senate to that statement in the re-' port for the reason that in the Mansfield
amendment additional sugar quotas
were allocated to various countries in
the Western Hemisphere and other sec-
tions of the globe. I feel it is impor-
tant to note-and I think that the State
Department and the Department of
Agriculture should again be notified-
that we are going to follow with great
interest and very close consideration the
operation of the amendment in making
trades or in furnishing quotas for sugar
to other countries. I think it is impor-
tant from our agricultural and foreign
aid program that we do give special con-
sideration to these points. These sugar
quota allocations are of great value to
the countries where they are assigned
and certainly we as a Nation should not
hesitate to ask that they buy someof our
surplus agricultural products in return.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
reserve the remainder of my time. How
much time do I have remaining?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Montana has 8 minutes
remaining.
Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, I ask the
Senator from Wisconsin to yield me
3 minutes.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I
yield 3 minutes to the Senator from
Pennsylvania.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Pennsylvania is recognized
for 3 minutes.
Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, it is never
a gracious task for a Senator on this
side of the aisle to oppose his majority
leader, but I find myself regretfully com-
pelled to do so today.
.I believe the Proxmire amendment is
proper. I believe it is in accord with
what the Senate did in respect to the
original bill when it was passed some
time ago. I believe we shouldnot yield
to the other body our unrestricted right
to determine for ourselves what is the
national interest.
We know that the bill as passed by the
Senate pretty much eliminated national
quotas. We know that the House con-
ferees insisted, as the price for having
any bill at all, on national quotas for
23 countries, many of which have not the
slightest claim on the bounty of the
United States. We know that this was
the result of one of the most gigantic
lobbying exercises in recent history.
Mr. President, an article of interest in
the New York Times of Tuesday, July 3,
is entitled "Secret Trujillo Papers Dis-
close Intense Sugar Lobbying in United
States." This article takes the mask off
the massive lobbying done for only one
country. I ask unanimous consent that
the article, written by Tad Szulc, be
printed in the RECORD at this point.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
SECRET TRUJILLo PAPERS DIscLosE INTENSE
SUGAR LOBBYING IN UNITED STATEN
(8y Tad Szulc)
WASHINGTOR, July 2.-Secret documents of
the Trujillo dictatorship, now published for
the first time, tell a story of intensive Do-
minican lobbying in Congress to frustrate the
sugar policies of the Eisenhower and Kennedy
administrations.
The documents were obtained by the New
York Times in Santo Domingo from the se-
cret archives of the late dictator, General-
issimo Rafael LeonidasTrujillo Molina.
The focus of the lobbying was sugar, but
U.S. foreign policy and domestic politics were
involved. The lobbying was similar to the
kind that lobbyists for more than 20 foreign
countries have carried on here in recent
weeks in connection with a new sugar bill,
which went to the White House today.
This bill has already created a crisis in the
U.S. relations with the new dernocra sic re-
gime in the Dominican Republic.
Mentioned again and again In the reports
of the Trujillo agents is Representative
HAROLD D. COOLEY, Democrat, of North Caro-
lina. Mr. COOLEY is chairman of the Agri-
culture Committee of the House of :aepre-
senatives and the most influential man in
Congress on sugar legislation.
Mr. COOLEY was informed of the docu-
ments and appraised of their contents. He
rejected any implication that his conduct had
been in anyway improper. It was pointed
out that the documents present only the
Dominican side of the picture. There was
no evidence to support any charge of specific
wrongdoing,
Although Mr. COOLEY's name was men-
tioned most frequently in the Dominican
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 1962 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 11843
documents relating to sugar, there were Eisenhower's request for authority to ban This money is paid in competitive bidding
references to Other members of the House such imports. by domestic refiners who buy the imported
Agriculture Committee, Including Represent- On January 7, 1961, Senor Pefla reported raw sugar at ports of entry. Domestic sugar
ative W. It. POAGE, a Texas Democrat. Mr. COOLEY "reiterated to us his previous production fills little more than half the
The names of several other Agriculture promise of working firmly in favor of our annual demand and is limited by law. Thus
Department officials dealing with sugar mat- sugar." Mr. COOLEY, according to the re- sugar imported under the quotas is eagerly
ters, including Lawrence Myers, Robert Case, port, said that he had gone to New York to sought by refiners and other users, who bid
and a J. Murphy, were also mentioned. So discuss the matter with President-elect Ken- up the price to the subsidized domestic
were those, of former Under Secretary of. nedy but that he had been unable to do so price level.
State Chester Bowles and Adolf A. Berle, for lack of time. The so-called quota premium, which the
Jr., a special consultant to the Secretary of On February 3, 1961, Representative refiners pass on to the consumers, has been
State. COOLEY discreetly told Senor Pefia that an justified on the ground that it assures this
Mr. Myers heads the Sugar Office in the approach to "a party suggested by a friendly country of an infailing supply of sugar at
Agriculture Department. J. Murphy is ap- person" should await official, reaction to his steady prices, from both domestic and for-
parently an erroneous reference to Tom new sugar bill, according to Senor Pefia. eign sources.
Murphy, deputy to Mr. Myers. Robert Case On February 15, 1961, Consul General With $220 million-in "sweetening" at stake,
apparently is an erroneous reference to Wil- Pefia wired the Dominican Foreign Office the lobbyists for foreign sugar interests
liam Case
an official in th
D
'
,
e
epartment
s
Sugar Division.
The reports cover conversations and meet-
ings in recent years in which, the Dominican
informants said, Mr. COOLEY assured them
he would firmly support Dominican sugar
interests, gave them advice on how to go
about their lobbying and informed them of
his efforts to favor Dominican sugar in the
U.S. market. Sugar entering the United
States under the quotas fixed by law brings
a big premium over the world market price.
Even after the United States had broken
diplomatic relations and applied economic
sanctions against the Trujillo dictatorship in
1961, the Dominician agents remained in
touch with Mr. COOLEY.
They reported-and the public record
bears them out-that Mr. COOLEY worked
hard in Congress for repeal of the sanc-
tions and for reimbursement to Dominican
sugar interests of a punitive tax imposed on
imports of their sugar by the Eisenhower
administration.
Dealing with the points made in the docu-
ments, Mr. COOLEY said he had never given
Dominican representatives any advice "other
than when I said they should get rid of
Trujillo" if they wished better treatment
for their sugar in the United States.
DENIES GETTING FEES
He denied he had ever received fees or con-
tributions of any kind. There had been
some conversations at his office with Do-
minican diplomats, he said, but only because
they had no Washington lawyers at the time.
"But I told them I could give them no spe-
cial advice," he said. "I cannot be respon-
individual conversations yesterday with The man in whom they are inevitably most
Bowles, Berle, and Mufioz-Marin, and said deeply interested Is the chairman of the
that it is urgent to send immediately a House Agriculture Committee, because all
person of the highest confidence of the sugar legislation must originate in that
illustrious superiority (General Trujillo) to, committee.
treat basic aspects of the work he is carrying And they are especially interested in Mr.
out together with our other friends." CooLEY because he has shown himself to be'
The references were to Chester Bowles, a powerful and resourceful man. For years
who was at the time the Under Secretary of he has usually had his way on sugar legisla-
State, to Adolf A. Berle, Jr., who served as tion, not only in the House but also in differ-
special consultant to the Secretary of State, ences with the Eisenhower and Kennedy
and to Gov. Luis Munoz-Marin, of Puerto administrations.
Rico.
The Dominican documents were found by
this reporter while studying the dictator's
archives for clues to the operations of the
Trujillo regime. The arrangements to 'ex-
amine the files were made through personal
contracts several months ago, before the cur-
rent difficulties over the sugar bill arose in
Congress. The discovery of documents on
sugar lobbying was fortuitous.
All the agents who sent the reports to the
Trujillo regime have .disappeared with the
collapse of that regime, which occurred fol-
lowing the dictator's assassination in May
1960.
The present Dominican Government,
therefore, bears no responsibility for the
kind of lobbying activity described in the
Moreover, he has frequently succeeded in
imposing his will on the Senate, where
strong sentiment has grown up for abolish-
ing, or at least simplifying, the complicated
system of import quotas and premiums.
The Dominicans were given a special in-
centive for lobbying by events connected
with the rise of the Castro dictatorship in
Cuba and the fall of the Trujillo dictator-
ship in the Dominican Republic.
Early in 1980, after the Eisenhower ad-
ministration had concluded that the Castro
regime was a Soviet satellite, President Eisen-
hower asked Congress for authority to reduce
the import quota of Cuba. Normally the
United States imported about 3 million tons
a year from that country.
Mr. COOLEY successfully resisted this re-
ports. ? quest until July. Then Congress passed a
In recent weeks and months, however, bill that enabled President Eisenhower to
lobbyists representing sugar interests of at out imports from Cuba.
least 22 foreign countries have been engaged The Dominican Republic was one of the
in similar activity on capitol Hill, exporting nations that joined in the scram-
Speaking in the Senate debate on the cur- ble for a share of Cuba's former quota.
rent sugar bill Senator J. W. FULBRIGHT, But in August, the Organization of Amer-
Democrat, of Arkansas, said: ican States called on the American republics
Re
-
follows: `where there is sugar, there you will find the public and apply limited sanctions against
In February 1960, Dr. H. E. Prfester, prin- flies.' Mr. President, the lobbyists on Capi- that country because the Trujillo govern-
Opal financial adviser to General Trujillo, tol Hill working on the sugar bill are thick ment had tried to assassinate President
suggested that Mr. COOLEY and his family be as files'" Romulo Betancourt of Venezuela.
given an all-expenses-paid vacation in the THE KEY TO SUGAR POLITICS In this situation, President Eisenhower
Dominican Republic, but said a direct in- Three things explain this intense interest asked Congress for authority to reduce im-
vitation might be embarrassing to the Rep- of the Dominican Republic in Mr. CooLEY: ports of Dominican sugar. The Senate gave
resentative. The complexities and rewards of sugar him what he asked, but Mr. COOLEY blocked
"The undersigned is convinced in view of politics, the power structure of the House action in the House.
Mr. COOLEY's background," he went on, "that of Representatives, and the skill of Mr. As a result, the administration had no
he would not refuse any financial aid that COOLEY in political maneuver. choice under the law but to license for im-
may be offered to him to defray the expenses The key to sugar politics is the American port 321,857 tons of Dominican sugar, the
of his vacation in the south, without obligat- consumer. Though the American housewife Dominican share of the previous Cuban
ing him or his family to spend all his time may not know it,. she is paying a handsome quota, in addition to the regular Dominican
exclusively in the Dominican Republic." premium over the world price for sugar, quota of 131,000 tons.
On June 22, 1960; Representative COOLEY The premium on foreign sugar entering The administration reacted, however, by
attended a meeting in the Washington home this country under the quotas established applying a 2-cent-a-pound penalty on the
of Marco A. Pefla, head of the Dominican by law amounts to 2.8 cents a pound, ac- Dominican sugar, thus depriving the Tru-
sugar office here, and informed his host of cording to testimony in recent congressional jillo sugar companies of a substantial profit.
new amendments that were being planned hearings. During this period, when the United States
for the Sugar Act. This seemingly insignificant 2.8 cents adds had no diplomatic relations with the Domin-
On November 23, 1960, Senor Pefia, now up to about $550 million a year or more scan Republic, Mr. COOLEY is reported to
promoted to consul general, reported assur- than $2.5 billion in the 5-year period cov- have given assurances to the Dominican
ances from Mr. COOLEY "that he will work ered by the pending sugar bill. sugar agents that he would try to have
hard not only to put an end to the tax on The $550 million is used by the Federal Dominican exporters reimbursed for this
our sugar but also to see whether it Government to make subsidy payments aver- penalty.
would be possible to reimburse us the sum aging 70 cents a hundred pounds to domestic PUSHED REIMBURSEMENT
that we have not received because of this sugar producers, for a total of about $330 As late as last month he inserted a pro-
arbitrary Executive decision." million a year. vision in the House version of the current
This was a reference to a 2-cent-a-pound The remaining $220 million flows to for- sugar bill to pay the Dominican Government
penalty that the Eisenhower administration eign producers-those fortunate ones from and one American-owned and one Domin-
had imposed on imports of Dominican sugar the countries allotted import quotas under ican-owned sugar company $22,755,367 in re-
after Mr. COOLEY had blocked President the sugar law. imbursement of this penalty.
.Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
11844 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE July 5
The Kennedy administration and the Sen- that he had accepted gifts and favors from The Senate agreed, but when Representa-
ate opposed this reimbursement provision, Bernard Goldflne, a New England manu- tive COOLEY blocked action in the House the
and it was dropped from the bill. Instead facturer. special session of Congress adjourned with-
of giving the money to the sugar companies, DENIES TAKING FAVORS out acting. Then the Agriculture Depart-
the administration argued, a grant should The Trujillo archives made no further ment licensed imports of Dominican sugar
under the windfall quota diverted
be made to the Dominican Government as mention of this proposed offer. Mr. COOLEY from Cuba
part of a constructive foreign-aid program. never took a vacation in the Dominican Re- and the 2-cent-a-pound penalty was im-
part Trujillo documents show that the public, and he denies he ever took favors of thest me over theewinorgldhmarket ricepail at
interest of the regime in the House Agricul- any kind. In these circumstances Consul General
ture Committee dates to at least 1955. At On June 16 Ambassador Thomen reported
that time-2 months before hearings on the Pefia wrote on November 23 to President Mr. 1956 Sugar Act were to open in the commit- over that
a bill presented presewas by "extremely a Republican Repre- disturbed" Joaquin Balaguer of the Dominican Repub-
tee-the Dominican Government invited the e lie-then a puppet for ruler Generalissimo
s i giving the President power to cut Trujillo-that he had established a new con-
entire committee and Its staff to visit the sugar ugar import quotas when Congress was not tact with Representative COOLEY.
country at its expense. In session. He wrote that the interview had been ar-
but COOLEY chose not to go, The bill was aimed at Cuba. Representa-
but his sister, Mrs. Mabel Downey-then a tive COOLEY had opposed the grant of au- ranged by Mrs. Asuncion Eckert, a former
committee clerk-and his daughter and his thority to the President from the time Presi- employe of the Cuban sugar lobbies and >ub-
son-in-law went. dent Eisenhower asked for it early in the requently connected with the Dominican
sugar office. Mrs. Eckert is a close friend of
The Trujillo archives include a letter year.
dated April 18, 1955, written to Generalissimo "I have no intention," Mr. COOLEY said the Cooley family.
Trujillo by Representative POAGE, who is vice publicly at the time, "of surrending to the Senor Pena reported that "during the in-
chairman of the committee, stating that executive branch the responsibility and au- terview, COOLEY was very cordial, reiterating
"our oustandin hos italic to the Agri- his wishes of cooperating with us." It was
ep to create ." at that time, according to Senor Pella, that
y g p y a sugar of r, nor do I intend
culture Committee of duo Congress has again a sugaczar in sa the executive d dep Representative COOLEY promised to "work
strengthened the bonds which unite our re- But Ambassador Thomen was able to Domini- hard" to bring about the lifting of the 2--cent
would dispatch benefit if that the Cuba''s s quota - penalty on Dominican sugar and the refund-
sp"You, sir, are countries." to be congratulated upon can port in the Republi c c same
"You,
the achievements of the last 25 years." was cut. ing of the money collected.
A SECOND LETTER "On the other hand," he said, "I have to Mr. COOLEY was also reported to have ex-
A similar letter, on behalf of the staff of report that Mr. Lawrence Myers of the De- pressed istration the would opinion be "m that ore the Kennedy beneficial admin-
the the committee, was written to General Tru- partment of Agriculture, who has shown cause."
himself to be our good friend, said confl-
jillo on April 20 by Mrs. Downey, Mr? dentially that if the Secretary of Agriculture On January 7, 1961, Senor Pefia reported
Cooley's sister. is authorized to modify the quotas to benefit to President Balaguer that he had again seen
"You afforded us a rare opportunity," she North American consumers, the Dominican Mr. COOLEY, "who reiterated to us his pre-
said, "and we shall cherish for many years Republic will receive a substantial increase vious promise* * ? of requesting an ex-
to come your thoughtfulness and generosity." even if it is indirect." tension until December 31, 1961, of the Sugar
There are several references to Mr. COOLEY Myers was, and is, head of the Sugar Act... Mr. and his committee in subsequent years. Office of the Agriculture Department. This Senor Peria's letters reflect the adulation
These references became more frequent in office sets the consumption quotas for the accorded Generalissimo Trujillo by those in
the records for 1960, the year the Sugar Act United States. his government.
came up again for renewal and the cancella- Informed of this Dominican dispatch to- Dr. Balaguer is addressed as "His Ex-
tfon of the Cuban sugar quota opened uP day, Mr. Myers said: cellency, Honorable President of the Re-
prospects of a windfall import quota for "It is completely untrue that I ever made public," and as "Distinguished Dr. Balaguer."
the Dominican Republic. " Generalissimo Trujillo is referred to
Early in February, Luis Thomen, Domini- such a commitment." in Senor Pefia's letters, as "the
can Ambassador in Washington, formally Consul General Pefia's next letter, written Highest Authority," and "the Illustrious
recommended to General Trujillo that an 2 days after the one that referred to Mr. Superiority." Other Dominican documents,
invitation to visit the Dominican Republic Myers, reported that after a session of the addressed directly to Generalissimo Trujillo,
be extended to Mr. COOLEY and his family. House Agriculture Committee the consul bear this salutation:
The matter was referred for comment to general had invited to his home Representa- "His Excellency, Generalissimo Dr. Rafael
Dr. Priester, economic adviser of the Central tive Cooley, Mr. Myers, and two other De- Leonidas Trujillo Molina, Benefactor of the
Bank and the dictator's financial wizard. partment of Agriculture officials-Robert Fatherland and Father of the New Father-
In a lengthy memorandum, Dr. Priester Case and J. Murphy-to discuss the prob- land: Illustrious and Dear Chief."
fast remarked that Mr. COOLEY "is the key lem. On February 2, Senor Pefia reported to
man in everything concerning the U.S. Sugar He telephoned the Foreign Office that Mr. President Balaguer a-new meeting with Mr.
Act" and that he "can be considered a friend COOLEY had advised him that a new amend-' Cooley in which they discussed the bill of
of the Dominican Republic," ment to the bill would be adopted, granting the committee chairman to,extend the exist-
He recalled their work together at a sugar the President of the United States power to ing law for 21 months, without changes.
conference in Tangier in 1959 and reported redistribute the Cuban quota in a manner This was the solution favored by the Do-
that at the time Mr. COOLEY had "reiterated that would benefit, among others, the Do- minicans, who feared a change in the law.
his appreciation for the technical help given minican Republic. Senor Pefia quoted Mr. COOLEr as having
him by the Dominican representative in the Consul General Pefia also reported that "I said that "he is trying to convince the Ex-
development of the formula of the Sugar Act secured a promise from Mr. Myers, who will ecutive of the convenience of accepting his
of 1956, and expressed the hope of maintain- testify today before the committee, that he bill in full and that he has great hopes in
ing an equally close cooperation in the next would specifically mention the Dominican that sense."
revision of the said sugar law in 1960." Republic as a country friendly toward the Senor Pefia then wrote:
United States and a sure supplier of sub- 'Regarding the question of approaching
s GESTURE stantial quantities of sugar." the party suggested by a friendly person, to
Dr. Priesterw wrotrotee: : After weeks of conflict between the House which reference was made in our communi-
"There is no doubt that Mr. COOLEY'8 fl- and the Senate, a bill was passed at the cation No. 111, dated the day before yester-
nancial position is not very good, and the beginning of July. President Eisenhower im- day, CooLEY discreetly suggested that it
family problem that he had to face recently mediately used his new powers to reduce would be prudent to wait more time until we
in connection with the illness of his wife re- the Cuban sugar quota. As a result, the can evaluate the reaction to his bill in high
quires all his attention. The idea of Am- Dominican Republic was granted, in ac- official spheres."
bassador Thomen of inviting him, his wife, cordance with the new legislation, a- quota No identification was given of the "party"
his daughter, and the latter's husband to en- of 321,857 tons in addition to its normal to be approached.
joy a vacation in the Dominican Republic as quota of 131,000 tons. Less than 2 weeks later, on February 15,
ture OAS Ass En SANCTIONS Senor Pefla sent a semicoded telegram ad-
guests of the Government constitutes a ges-
that he will surely appreciate as a dean- vising the Foreign Office of the conversation
onetratfon of good will." In August, however, the Organization of with Mr. Cooley in which he had spoken of
Dr. Priester raised the question whether American States called for the breaking of his talks with Mr. Bowles and Mr. Berle at
Mr. COOLEY could accept an individual invita-, diplomatic relations with the Dominican the State Department.
tion-without the whole committee's being Republic and the application of limited sane- It was this telegram that reported a :recom-
also invited-and remarked that "it would tions. mendation from Mr. COOLEY to send to Wash-
be unlikely for Representative COOLEY to no- President Eisenhower asked Congress for ington immediately a person enjoying the
cept such an individual invitation after the authority to free the United States from the "highest confidence" of Generalissimo
Sherman Adams case" "seriously embarrassing" situation In which Trujillo to study the "basic aspects" of the
Mr. Adams, an assistant to President Eisen- it was required under the law to import activities together t the with others of our "carry -
hower, resigned in 1958 after it developed Dominican sugar. lag out
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
1962 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
BANK HEAD ARRIVES
Early in March such a person arrived in
Washington. He turned out to be Oscar
Guaroa Ginebra Henriquez, the chairman of
the Dominican Central Bank.
In a letter to Generalissimo Trujillo dated
March 7, Senor Ginebra wrote that immedi-
ately after his arrival the had made contacts
in Washington and "in this connection * * *
I held a; long conference with Congressman
HAROLD D. COOLEY."
In that interview," he wrote, "I had the
opportunity to offer very interesting argu-
ments to Mr. COOLER, who appreciated them,
and said they deserved to be brought before
the Agriculture Committee,in order to fore-
stall the imposition of drastic measures
against Dominican sugar."
Senor Ginebra then wrote:
"In that sense, at the suggestion of Mr.
COOLEY, I prepared a short memorandum
explaining in general terms the traditional
position of the Dominican Republic; the
artifices that had been used to obtain arbi-
trary resolutions by the Organization of
American States; the uncertain position of
the United States before Latin America; the
perverse ideas of President Betancourt which
he used through Mr. Berle and Thomas
Mann (then Assistant Secretary of State for
Inter-American Affairs), and the unexpected
change, as well as the rebuff made by Presi-
dent (Janio) Quadros of Brazil to the De-
partment of State, by establishing defini-
tive relations with countries of the Iron
Curtain."
A MEETING WITH LAWYERS ?
Senor Ginebra reported that in a meeting
the following day with the Washington
lawyers of the Dominican sugar interests a
formula was drafted for the new sugar bill,
leaving "the door open for an opportunity
to obtain the sale of the extra quota of our
sugar if we simply obtained an administra-
tive decision, thus avoiding a new amend-
ment to the law."
Senor Ginebra said that "we have suc-
ceeded in introducing new changes * * *
In the amendment in order to avoid any spe-
cifie mention of the Dominican Republic
in the powers that are being granted to the
President" for cutting the quotas of other
countries in the national interest of the
United States.
On May 17 Senor Ginebra wrote again to -
Generalissimo Trujillo, advising him that
hearings on the new Sugar Act would open
the following day but that "I have been
assured by Congressman COOLEY that * * *
the basic quotas of the exporting countries,
including the Dominican Republic, would
not be touched at all"
Then the communications to Generalis-
simo Trujillo ceased. He was assassinated
on May 30.
Mr. CLARK. The majority leader has
in fact stated, I believe-and I agree with
him-that as an ideal matter the Prox-
mire amendment is preferable to the
amendment he supports. I believe the
Proxmire amendment would carry out
the principle of the action of the Sen-
ate in passing the administration bill
some time ago.
I say that if we ignore the situation
in the House, there is not a shadow of a
doubt that the Proxmire amendment
merit represents what the administra-
tion really would like to have, if it were
not concerned about acceptance of the
proposal by the other body. I say that
the failure to adopt the Proxmire amend-
ment will be a yielding by the Senate
of the United States to the most gigan-
tic lobby which has hit this Congress this
year.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time
of the Senator from Pennsylvania has
expired.
Mr. CLARK. Mr. President, will the
Senator yield me an additional half
minute?
Mr. PROXMIRE. I yield an -addi-
tional half minute to the Senator from
Pennsylvania.
Mr. CLARK. I am not one who be-
lieves that the other body will stage a
? strike against the national interest. I
ask Senators to support their convic-
tions, to do what they know is right-
to support the Proxmire amendment.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
yield 4 minutes to the Senator from Lou-
isiana [Mr. ELLENDER].
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Louisiana [Mr. ELLENDER]
is recognized for 4 minutes.
Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, I rise
to support the amendment offered by
the majority leader. Like the majority
leader, I believe there is much merit in
the amendment suggested by the Sena-
tor from Wisconsin [Mr. PROXMIRE], but
I believe we must be realistic in dealing
with the problem at hand.
All of us know of the difficulties which
our conferees had last week in settling
with the House the questions in dispute.
It is my considered judgment that should
the Proxmire amendment be added to
the pending bill, the bill will hot even
be considered by the House.
I believe the bill as passed by the Sen-
ate should have been adopted insofar as
foreign allotments were concerned. I
think it was a grave mistake to provide
permanent quotas for new countries. I
also believe it was a mistake to provide
permanent quotas for countries in the
Eastern Hemisphere.
However, this is all behind us now.
We must deal with the situation as it
faces us today. It is my hope that when
the Sugar Act is again considered 21/2
years from now, we shall be able to study
the question of permanent quotas for
foreign countries more realistically. If
we are to allocate quotas, I would like to
see us allocate sugar quotas only to coun-
tries in the Western Hemisphere.
The main purpose of the Mansfield
amendment, as I understand it, is to do
justice to one of our friends to the south
of us. One of the largest producers of
sugar to the south of us is Argentina.
Somehow, in the legislative process of
writing a new Sugar Act, Argentina has
been left out entirely in consideration
of sugar quotas. We must take steps to
rectify this situation. It is my belief
that the President of the United States
should be given this leeway.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, a
parliamentary inquiry.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator will state it.
Mr. MANSFIELD. How much time is
remaining to me?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator has 5 minutes remaining.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
yield the remainder of my time to the
Senator from New Mexico [Mr. ANDER-
SON].
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from New Mexico is recognized
for 5 minutes.
Mr.. ANDERSON. Mr. President, I
oppose the Proxmire amendment, not
because it Is not well intentioned, but
because I think that it would be a seri-
ous mistake. I agree completely with
what was said by the distinguished
chairman of the Committee on Agri-
culture and Forestry, the Senator from
Louisiana [Mr. ELLENDER]. I think the
conferees should have taken the Senate
bill. The Senate bill was a fine piece of
sugar legislation. I was not a cospon-
sor of the measure, so I can say freely
that I commend the Senators who in-
troduced it. It was a good piece of leg-
islation. As it, passed the Senate, the
bill was still 'a good piece of legislation.
Therefore it should have been accepted
in conference. But it was not accepted.
As frequently happens in conferences,
the conferees did the best they could.
Time after time, it was suggested to the
conferees that they leave, break up, and
forget about it. To do so would have
posed some very great problems, not only
to the domestic sugar producers of our
country, but to producers throughout
Latin America who recognize an ex-
tremely attractive market. Therefore,
I agree with the Senator from Louisiana
in his appraisal of the Senate bill. I say
only that I know the conferees did the
best they could at that time.
Mr. PASTORE. Mr. President, will
the Senator yield for a question?
Mr. ANDERSON. I am happy to
yield.
Mr. PASTORE. Some Senators do
not have too much heart for any sugar
bill. But an accusation has been made
on the floor of the Senate today that if
the Senate should agree to the Mans-
field amendment, we would support the
lobbyists, and if we should agree to the
Proxmire amendment, we would defeat
the lobbyists. I think the Senator from
New Mexico, who is conversant with
questions of agriculture, ought to answer
that question for the benefit of Senators.
Mr. ANDERSON. There is absolutely
nothing of substance in that charge that
could be seriously regarded. The con-
ferees did not pay any attention to the
lobbyists. We tried to come as close to
the Senate bill as we could. The confer-
ees paid no attention to what the lobby-
ists had done. I know that those who
worked on the bill. recognized that we
cannot stop lobbying or prevent people
from discussing various subjects. The
conferees were not in any way influ-
enced by the lobbying. Agreement to the
Mansfield amendment would be no boon
whatever to those who are interested
primarily in lobbying.
I believe I am correct in the state-
ment that the Government of Argentina
had no lobbyist of any kind here. It did
not try to lobby at all. As a Senator sit-
ting in the conference, although not of-
ficially designated as a conferee, I can
say that the proposal to drop Argentina
from the bill was made on the basis of
representations that the Argentine Gov-
ernment was not now interested in this
particular iharket and that it had
No. 113-5
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1.
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE July 5
plenty of markets for sugar elsewhere American taxpayers, who have been for-
and would not be offended if it were left gotten quite a bit during the present
out of the bill. When we find that the session of Congress. The argument has
Argentine Government is offended, I been made that the House would not
want to do something to correct the situ- accept the Proxmire amendment. I
ation. That is why I support the major- think we ought to give the House an
ity leader in his amendment. I think it opportunity to act upon it. If that
would be a serious mistake to leave argument should hold true, I cannot see
Argentina with a cause of complaint, much point in the Senate's debating the
particularly when we included in the bill medicare proposal for a week because
areas which I do not think should ever it is common knowledge that the House
have been included, and which I tried my will not accept that measure.
best to keep out. Mr. President, I believe that the Prox-
In taking care of the situation in Ar- mire amendment should be agreed to.
gentina, the Mansfield amendment Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, the
might lead to many other problems. only argument made against the Prox-
Some might say, "You are going to ex- mire amendment is that the House will
pand the quotas." I point out that there not accept it. The statement of the ma-
is a strong possibility that there will be jority leader is that it would have little
deficit areas. Deficit areas probably or no chance of passage in the House
will correct most of the things that seem of Representatives. Why? We agree
to be wrong with the measure. I have that the amendment has merit. We
tried, as others have tried, to obtain agree that it makes sense. We agree
a large quota that could be regarded as that it would save money. We agree
a global quota so that sugar could be that now is the time to eliminate sub-
used as an instrument of foreign policy sidies. It would be far more difficult to
and be of great value to our country. I eliminate countries from the program
believe we have taken a step in the 3 years from now. Countries named in
right direction. If we had agreed to the the conference report will adapt their
Douglas amendment as originally stated, economy to the premium price. After
we would have taken a better step. But they had increased wages, purchased
the Senate had to take the action that facilities, and built refineries, it would
it could this year. It thereupon reduced then be extremely difficult to eliminate
the amount only 10 percent, whereas those countries.
the President had asked for 20 percent. We agree that the amendment makes
We did the best we could with the op- sense from the standpoint of providing
portunities we had. an instrumentality for the overthrow
We should accept the conference re- of Castro. It must be recognized that
port. We should accept also the Mans- the experts in the Department of Agri-
field amendment, thus leaving in the culture stated, as . they told me this
hands of the President the opportunity morning, that they support my amend-
to correct on a temporary basis what I ment. The Senator from New Mexico
think was improperly done in regard to has said, in answer to, the Senator from
the sugar bill. Rhode Island [Mr. PASTORE], that lob-
if representations had been made to byists are not a consideration in connec-
the conferees with respect to the na- tion with the bill.
ture of the Argentine operation, I doubt The fact is that, with the exception
very much that the conferees would have of the lobbyist from Mauritius, every
agreed to the sugar bill. Therefore, lobbyist has prevailed in his efforts and
while we have hurried a bit, I say that has secured at least something in the
the Senate should agree to the Mansfield bill as it was passed in conference. Fur-
amendment, which is a reasonable thermore, depending on the outcome of
amendment, one which can be handled; this amendment the Indian lobbyist has
and that we should go on about our $49,000 coming to him. If the Senate
business and not worry about it. I know should agree to the Proxmire amend-
that I was not supporting lobbyists. If ment, he would lose that amount. If the
any lobbyist appeared in behalf of the Senate does not agree to the Proxmire
Mansfield amendment, I do not know amendment, the lobbyist will receive an
who he is or where he came from. additional $49,000, or a total of $99,000
The measure is a good proposal. It for the year.
should be accepted by the Senate. I Why collapse under those circum-
hope it will be accepted by the Senate. stances? The Senator from Montana
I hope that when it is accepted by the says there have been no changes on
Senate, good will be done for the benefit this situation since the conference. The
of our foreign policy, which might have Senator is wrong. There have been
been badly damaged by the previous changes in the past few days. The New
adoption of the conference report. York Times article has been spread all
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I
yield 2 minutes to the Senator from
Iowa.
Mr. MILLER. Mr. President, I intend
to support the Proxmire amendment. I
do not believe concern for Argentina is
any less on the part of those who sup-
port the Proxmire amendment than
among those who oppose it. It is merely
a matter of how we should handle the
problem. The Proxmire amendment
seems to me to represent a more suitable
approach because of the saving to the
2,600,000-ton global sugar quota reserve..
The House figure was zero. My posi-
tion is that we should stand fast for the
global reserve. The position of the Sen-
ator from Montana is that we should
give in and reduce the global reserve
by the total amount to be set aside for
Presidential discretion. I see no reason
why we should not stand by our posi-
tion and, if necessary, go to a confer-
ence on the honey bill. Perhaps on
the basis of the conference we can come
to an agreement.
At any rate, Mr. President, on the
merits the amendments make sense.
This is the first time in the Senate
that I have ever heard as the only argu-
ment against an amendment that has
clear merit is that it will not be accepted
by the House. Why in the world should
we not adopt the amendment on its
merits and then go to conference, if
necessary, and try to come back with an
-agreed report?
Mr. President, I reserve the remainder
of my time, unless the majority leader
wishes to yield back the. remainder of his
time, in which event I will surrender my
remaining time.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
yield back the remainder of my time.
Mr. PROXMIRE. Mr. President, I
yield back the remainder of my time,
and ask for the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
question is on agreeing to the amend-
ment of the Senator from Wisconsin
[Mr. PROXMIRE] to the amendment of-
fered by the Senator from Montana [Mr.
MANSFIELD]. On this question the yeas
and nays have been ordered, and. the
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, a
parliamentary inquiry.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator will state it.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Is the Senate now
voting on the Proxmire amendment?
The PRESIDING OFFICER.. The
Senate is now voting on the Proxmire
amendment.
The rollcall was concluded.
Mr. MANSFIELD. I announce that
the Senator from Alaska [Mr. BARTLETT],
the Senator from Nevada [Mr. B]:BLE],
the Senator from North Dakota 'Mr.
BURDICK], the Senator from Virginia
[Mr. BYRD], the Senator from Tennessee
[Mr. GORE], the Senator from Indiana
[Mr. HARTKE], the Senator from Minne-
sota [Mr. HUMPHREY], the Senator from
North Carolina [Mr. JORDAN], the Sena-
tor from Ohio [Mr. LAUSCHE], the Sena-
tor from Louisiana [Mr. LONG], the Sen-
over the country. Yesterday I read in ator from Washington [Mr. MAGNDSON],
a Wisconsin newspaper the story about the Senator from Minnesota [Mr, Mc-
the sugar bill. A similar story has ap- CARTHY], the Senator from Virginia [Mr.
peared in Chicago newspapers. Many ROBERTSON], the Senator from Georgia
Americans have been reading about the [Mr. RUSSELL], the Senator from Florida
activities of Congress in respect to the [Mr. SMATHERS], the Senator from Mis-
Sugar Act, and realize the kind of lobby sissippi [Mr. STENNIS], the Senator from
pressuring and high fees that has been Georgia [Mr. TALMADGE], the Senator
going on with respect to the Sugar Act. from Texas [Mr. YARBOROUGH], and the
It seems to me that if we collapse Senator from Massachusetts [Mr.
on the measure, the Senate will have SMITH] are absent on official business.
completely surrendered. Our position I further announce that the Senator
basically was that we should have a from Colorado [Mr. CARROLL], the Sena-
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD- SENATE 11847
tor from Idaho [Mr. CHURCH], and the
Senator from Alaska [Mr. GRVENING]
are necessarily absent.
I further announce that, if present
and voting, the Senator from North
Dakota [Mr. BURDICK], the Senator from
Indiana [Mr. HARTKE], the Senator from
Minnesota [Mr. HUMPHREY], the Sena-
tor from Louisiana [Mr. LONG], the Sen-
Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, I Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, in
move that the Senate reconsider the view of the fact that the Senator from
vote by which the amendment was Arkansas wishes to offer an amendment,
rejected. and notwithstanding the agreement
Mr. MANSFIELD. I move to lay that reached, I suggest to him that I make
motion on the table. the unanimous-consent request that he
The motion to lay on the table was be allowed to offer his amendment, and
agreed to. that 5 minutes be allotted to each side
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, it is for debate on the amendment.
ator from Minnesota [Mr. McCARTHY], my understanding that the Senator from
the Senator from Alaska [Mr. GRUEN- Minnesota [Mr. MCCARTHY] will not offer
ING], the Senator from Nevada [Mr. his amendment. I therefore call up my
BIBLE], the Senator from North Carolina amendment.
[Mr. JORDAN], the Senator from Wash- Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, I
ington [Mr. MAGNUSON], the Senator wish to offer an amendment to the
from Georgia [Mr. RUSSELL], the Sena- Mansfield amendment.
tor from Mississippi [Mr. STENNIS], the Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, will
Senator from Georgia [Mr. TALMADGE]; the Chair have read the unanimous-
and the Senator from Colorado [Mr. consent agreement entered into on last
CARROLL] would each vote "nay." Monday?
Mr. KUCHEL. I announce that the The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Connecticut [Mr. BUSH], unanimous-consent agreement will be
the Senator from Maryland [Mr. BUT- read.
LER], the Senator from Indiana [Mr. The Chief Clerk read as follows:
CAPEHART], the Senators from Kentucky Ordered, That effective on Thursday, July
[Mr. COOPER and Mr. MORTON], the 5, 1962, immediately after the Senate con-
Senator from Kansas [Mr. PEARSON], the venes, during the further consideration of
Senator from Vermont [Mr. PROUTY], the bill (H.R. 8050) to amend the act relat-
the Senator from Massachusetts [Mr. ing to the importation of adult honeybees,
SALTONSTALL], the Senator from Pennsyl- debate on amendments by Senators MANS-
vania [Mr. SCOTT], and the Senator from PTELD, PROXMIRE, and MCCARTHY shall be
limited to 30 minutes, each, to be equally
Texas [Mr. TOWER] are necessarily divided and controlled by the mover of any
absent. such amendment or motion and the ma-
The Senator from Nebraska [Mr. jority leader: Provided, That in the event
HRUSKA] is detained on official business. the majority leader is in favor of any such
If present and voting, the Senator from amendment or motion, the time in opposi-
Nebraska [Mr. HRUSKA] would vote tion thereto shall be controlled by the
"nay." minority leader or some Senator designated
the Senator from Penn- by him: Provided further, That no amend-
On this vote, ment that is not germane to the provisions
sylvania [Mr. Scowl is paired with the of the said bill shall be received: Provided
Senator from Kansas [Mr. PEARSON], if further, That after the disposition of the
present and voting, the Senator from Mansfield amendment the Senate proceed to
Pennsylvania would vote "yea," and the vote on the final passage of the bill.
Senator from Kansas would vote "nay." Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, a
The result was announced-yeas 26, parliamentary inquiry.
nays 40, as follows: The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
[No. 111 Leg.] Senator from Montana will state it.
YEAS-26 Mr. MANSFIELD. Is my interpreta=
Beall
Engle
Murphy
Boggs
Fuibright
Muskie
Byrd, W. Va.
Goldwater
Neuberger
Chavez
Hart
Proxmire
Clark
Hickenlooper
Smith, Maine
Cotton
Javits
Wiley
Dodd
Keating
Williams, Del.
Douglas
Kefauver
Young, Ohio
Dworshak
Miller
NAYS-40
Aiken
Hickey
Monroney
Allott
Hill
Morse
Anderson
Holland
Moss
Bennett
Jackson
Mundt
Cannon
Johnston
Pastore
Carlson '
Kerr
Pell
Case
Kuchel
Randolph
Curtis
Long, Mo.
Sparkman
Dirksen
Long, Hawaii
Symington
Eastland
Mansfield
Thurmond
Ellender
McClellan
Williams, N.J.
Ervin.
McGee
Young, N. Dak.
Fong
McNamara
Hayden
Metcalf
Bartlett
Gruening
Prouty
Bible
Hartke
Robertson
Burdick
Hruska
Russell
Bush
Humphrey
Saltonstall
Butler
Jordan
Scott
Byrd, Va.
Lausche
Smathers
Capehart
Long, La.
Smith, Mass.
Carroll
Magnuson
Stennis
Church
McCarthy
Talmadge
Cooper
Morton
Tower
Gore
Pearson
Yarborough
So Mr.
PROXMIRE'S amendment was
rejected.
tion of the unanimous-consent agree-
ment reached by the Senate on Monday
correct when I state that under that
agreement only the amendments to be
offered by the three Senators mentioned
were to be considered, and that upon the
conclusion of the action on the Mansfield
amendment a vote would be taken on the
passage of the bill?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator's interpretation is correct. The
unanimous-consent agreement is limited
to three amendments: The amendment
of the Senator from Montana [Mr.
MANSFIELD], the amendment of the Sen-
ator from Wisconsin [Mr. PROXMIRE],
which has just been acted upon; and the
amendment of the Senator from Minne-
sota [Mr. MCCARTHY].
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, a
Mr.FULBRIGHT. Mr. President,-that
is certainly agreeable.
Mr. MUNDT, Mr. President, a par-
liamentary inquiry.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from South Dakota will state it.
Mr. MUNDT.. Does this proposal in
any way affect the limitations on the so-
called medicare bill?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. No; this
proposal affects only the bill now under
consideration.
Is there objection to the request of the
Senator from Montana? The Chair
hears none, and it is so ordered.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, I
offer an amendment which I send to the
desk, and I ask that it not be read. I
can explain it in a few minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, the amendment will be
printed in the RECORD.
The amendment is as follows:
On page 2, after line 10, it is proposed to
insert the following:
"(c) Section 204(a) of such Act, as
amended, is amended to read as follows:
"(a) The Secretary shall from time to
time determine whether, in view of the cur-
rent inventory of sugar, the estimated pro-
duction from the acreage of sugarcane or
sugarbeets planted, the normal marketings
within a calendar year of new-crop sugar
and other pertinent factors, any area or
country will be unable to market the quota
or proration for such area or country. If
the Secretary determines that any domestic
area or foreign country will be unable to
market the quota or proration for such area
or country, he shall revise the quota for the
Republic of the Philippines by prorating to
it an amount of sugar which bears the same
ratio to the deficit as the quota for the Re-
public, of the Philippines determined under
section 202(b) then in effect bears to the
sum of such quota for the Republic of the
Philippines and of the prorations to foreign
countries named in section 202(c) (3) (A)
then in effect; and shall allocate an amount
of sugar equal to the remainder of the deficit
to foreign countries within the Western
Hemisphere named in section 202(c) (3) (A) :
Provided, That no part of any such deficit
shall be prorated or allocated to any country
not in diplomatic relations with the United
States. If the Secretary determines that
the Republic of the Philippines will be un-
able to fill its share of any deficit determined
under this subsection, he shall allocate such
unfilled amount to foreign countries within
the Western Hemisphere named in section
202(c) (3) (A) Provided, That no such al-
location shall be made to any foreign country
not in diplomatic relations with the United
States. In making allocations to foreign
R
The PRESIDING OF it r
. i e under this subsection, special consideration
Senator from Montana will state it.. shall be given to those countries purchasing,
Mr. MANSFIELD. I gather from a United States agricultural commodities. If
reading of the unanimous-consent agree- the Secretary determines that neither the
ment that an amendment could be of- Republic of the Philippines nor the countries
feted, but that very likely no discussion within the Western Hemisphere named in
of it could be had. section 202(c) (8) (A) can fill all of any such
deficit whenever the provisions of section 202
The PRESIDING OFFICER. No time (c) (4) apply, he shall add such unfilled
has been allocated for debate on other amount to the quantity of sugar which may
amendments. be purchased pursuant to section 202(c) (4),
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
11848 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - - SENATE
and whenever section 202(e) (4) does not
apply he shall apportion such unfilled
amount on such basis and to such foreign
countries in diplomatic relations with the
United States as he determines is required
to fill such deficit.' "
Reletter succeeding subsections accord-
ingly.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Mr. President, the
amendment is a simple one. The Presi-
dent Is given discretionary power to re-
allocate to Western Hemisphere coun-
tries the amount of sugar which
domestic or foreign areas are unable to
market of their assigned quotas. That
is all the amendment deals with.
Under the current law, such shortfalls
are to be proportionately distributed to
the Philippines and to all other coun-
tries having basic quotas, using their
percentum entitlements as listed in the
act.
Under this amendment, the Philip-
pines would retain its prorated short-
falls, but the remainder would be dis-
tributed only to Western Hemisphere
countries, taking into consideration
those countries which purchase U.S.
agricultural commodities.
The amendment does not go nearly as
far as the amendment of the Senator
from Wisconsin [Mr. PROXMIRE]. It
deals only with the tonnage which the
domestic and foreign areas are unable
to deliver. It is estimated that the
shortfall this year will be' about 300,000
tons, and next year probably 200,000
tons. But this amount wilj gradually
diminish under the effect of the bill.
The amendment does not disturb the
allocation of the basic quotas already in
in the law of countries outside the West-
ern Hemisphere. It simply reallocates
to Western Hemisphere countries the
shortfall of the domestic areas. It would
have the effect of depriving non-West-
ern Hemisphere countries of any addi-
tional quotas because of the shortfall.
That is all the amendment provides. I
am quite confident it is in accord with
the administration's view.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Arkansas yield?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I yield.
Mr. MANSFIELD. First, will the
Senator from Arkansas define what he
means by "shortfall"?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Let us take an
arbitrary illustration. Assume that the
beet growers of the United States are
allocated 2,500,000 tons, but are unable
to produce more than 2 million tons.
The shortfall would be 500,000 tons.
The amount below their allocated quota
is what I refer to as a shortfall. The
amount they cannot produce of their
quota assigned under the bill would be
a shortfall. Actually, in many cases
throughout the years, the domestic grow-
ers, particularly in Puerto Rico and
Hawaii, have not been able to produce
all that has been allocated to them; but
the amendment would not deprive them
of any amount to which they are en-
titled under the law. The amendment
merely provides for the disposal of the
tonnage which American producers fail
to produce.
I think this amendment Is in accord
with the administration's position. it
would do no harm to the domestic beet
July 5
producers, either in Hawaii or anywhere Mr. MANSFIELD. I shall yield to the
else; and it also would preserve the pres- Senator from Missouri; but, first, I wish
ent situation of the Philippines. to ask the Senator from Arkansas
The only effect of the amendment is whether I am correct in assuming that
that the so-called shortfall would not be on the basis on which the amendment
allocated to non-Western Hemisphere is offered, the Senator's amendment ap-
countries. plies only to domestic production which
amount of the shortfall to Western
Hemisphere nations would be at the dis-
cretion of the President. He would not
have to allocate it to any nation; but he
would have discretion to give it to any
Western Hemisphere countries, but only
within the amount of the shortfall.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
have been making inquiries about the
amendment offered by the distinguished
chairman of the Committee on Foreign
Relations. I find that there have been
no shortfalls; that, as a matter of fact,
there has been overproduction in the
domestic beet industry during the past
several years because of the limitations
which have been imposed. I do not
know what to say at this time in re-
sponse to the Senator's statement.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Under the new
bill, their quotas have been greatly ex-
panded. If it develops under the ex-
pansion provisions of the bill that there
are no shortfalls, then the amendment
would have no effect, because it deals
only with shortfalls.
Mr. HOLLAND.. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Arkansas yield?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I yield to the
Senator from Florida.
Mr. HOLLAND. Suppose there be a
shortfall in the beet industry, but sup-
Pose the cane sugar industry happens
to have an excellent year and overpro-
duces. Does the Senator mean that
none of the shortfall could be assigned to
the cane sugar industry?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. My interpretation
of the new Sugar Act is that it could not
be. All domestic deficits automatically
go to foreign growers. My amendment
directs these deficits to countries in the
Western Hemisphere. I would inter-
pret this amendment to mean that it
could be reallocated anywhere in the
Western Hemisphere. All the amend-
ment means is that the shortfall, both
domestic and foreign could not be allo-
domestic and foreign, could not be allo-
cated to a country outside the Western
Hemisphere.
Mr. JACKSON. Mr. President, will
the Senator from Arkansas yield?
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
HICKEY in the chair). Does the Senator
from Arkansas yield to the Senator from
Washington?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I yield.
Mr. JACKSON. I take It that by
"shortfall," the Senator means to include
both cane sugar and beet sugar?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Oh, yes. I used
cane sugar only as an illustration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time
available to the Senator from Arkan-
sas has expired.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, has
all time for debate expired?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Five
minutes remain available to the
opponents.
Mr. SYMINGTON.
the Senator yield?
falls short of filling the quota, and that
the remainder would go to the countries
of Latin America?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. It applies only to
countries in the Western Hemisphere.
Under the present law, as I understand
it, whatever shortfall developed would
be prorated among all foreign coun-
tries with basic quota allocations.
Therefore, the other countries-those
outside the Western Hemisphere, such as
Fiji, Australia, and the others-would
get their percentage.
All I am trying to do-and I believe
this amendment does it-is preserve for
the Western Hemisphere countries the
so-called shortfall, if there is one.
Mr. MANSFIELD. But none of this
would go to the Fijis or to Australia or
to the Netherlands or to South Africa
or to the other nations-
Mr. FULBRIGHT. They would not
get any part of the shortfall; they would
get only what they are given under the
bill.
Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President-
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield 2 minutes
to the Senator from Missouri.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
Senator from Missouri is recognized for
2 minutes.
Mr. SYMINGTON. Mr. President, I
have respect for the amendment of the
Senator from Arkansas. Does he think
there would be any danger that the coun-
tries which would get any of the short-
fall, later would be irritated to the point
where we would have a problem on our
hands if they did not get it after the
shortfall was made up?
Mr. FULBRIGHT.? I do not think so.
The shortfall concept has been in the
law, and we have had experience in the
past with it, and there has never been
any idea that it was a permanent quota.
Mr. SYMINGTON. I thank the Sena-
tor from Arkansas.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. It will be a grad-
ually decreasing amount; and if there
is a deficit, it will be only because there
has been a very substantial Increase in
quotas for the domestic producers.
Mr. CANNON, Mr. President, will the
Senator from Arkansas yield?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I yield.
Mr. CANNON. What is the present
status of the Philippines, and what would
be the effect on them?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. They get about
one-third of it now, and will continue to
get it; the amendment does not disturb
them.
Mr. CANNON. So the amendment in-
cludes the Western Hemisphere coun-
tries, plus the Philippines?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Yes; plus the Phil-
ippines.
Mr. KUCHEL. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Arkansas yield?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I yield.
Mr. KUCHEL. Let us assume that a
Mr. President, will Latin American country to which an al-
lotment has been made has a shortfall.
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
1962 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 11849
Does the Senator's amendment cover that 1964, and was reallocated to Mexico or Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
situation? to some other country in the western yield back my time.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. I was not thinking Hemisphere, would not in any way be Mr. BEALL. Mr. President, I yield
of that, but it does cover that possibility. binding for the next year? back the time on this side.
In other words, suppose Guatemala, with . Mr. FULBRIGHT. That is correct, The PRESIDING OFFICER. All
a quota, does not produce its full particularly because there might not be time has been yielded back. The ques-
amount- any shortfall the next year. tion is on the Mansfield amendment, as
Mr. KUCHEL. Precisely. Mr. KERR. That is all I wanted to amended.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Under existing law know. The amendment, as amended, was
that has to be prorated, among all for- Mr. FULBRIGHT. The Senator from agreed to.
eign producers with basic quotas as I Oklahoma is entirely correct. question is on the engrossment
understand the act. If my amendment is Mr. KERR. I should like to have the The
of the amendment and third reading of
applied, the shortfall would be lin}ited to Senator from Arkansas say, "Yes; that is of bill.
en-
the countries in the Western Hemisphere. the correct answer." The amendment was ordered to be en-
Mr. KUCHEL. The Senator's amend- Mr. FULBRIGHT. Yes, that is the
ment applies only to a shortfall in the correct answer. The only effect of the grossed ed and the bill to be read a third
domestic production in the United States, amendment is to limit the distribution of
does it? the shortfall, whenever one might de- The bill was read the third time.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. That was the sit- velop, to countries in the Western The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
uation I had in mind but it would also Hemisphere. bill having been read the third time, the
cover foreign shortfalls. Mr. KERR.. For that year? question is, Shall it pass?
Mr. KERR. Mr. President, will the Mr. FULBRIGHT. Yes; for that year. The bill (H.R. 8050) was passed.
Senator from Montana yield? In the following year there might not be The title was amended so as to read:
Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield. a shortfall; or if there were one, the "An act to amend the act relating to
Mr. KERR. As I read the amend- allocation of the preceding year is not to the importation of adult honey bees, and
ment, it applies not only to the fall- be regarded as a precedent in any re- to amend certain provisions of the Sugar
out- , spect, and the President will be entirely Act of 1948, as amended."
Mr. FULBRIGHT. To the shortfall. free to reallocate it in some other way. dent, I
Mr. KERR. Very well-to the short- Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, will Mrmove. to reconsider MANSFIELD., the Mr. vote Presisi which
fall in the case of either domestic pro- the Senator from Arkansas yield? the bill was s
duction or that of a foreign country. Mr. FULBRIGHT. I yield. the bi RR and Mr. HOLLAND made a
motion E y and the Htable OLLAND made
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Does the Senator Mr. MANSFIELD. Would the Sena- Mr. KE
motion
mean if a shortfall were to occur? tor's amendment in any way affect my motion
Mr. KERR. If the Secretary deter- amendment? The motion to lay on the table was
mines that any domestic area or foreign Mr. FULBRIGHT. I do not think so. agreed to.
country will be unable to market the I think it is consistent with the purposes
quota or proration for such area or of the amendment of the Senator from
country-- Montana, in my view, but it goes a small THE JOURNAL
Mr. FULBRIGHT.. If it has a short- step farther, and provides that this dis-
fall; On request of Mr. MANSFIELD, and
yes. cretionary power of the President on by uconsent, the reading of the
Mr. KERR. In other words, if what shortfalls shall be limited to distribution Journal unanimous
the proceedings of Tuesday,
the Senator from Arkansas refers to as to countries in the Western Hemisphere. July 3, 1of the was proceedings of T.
a shortfall, and what I referred to as a Therefore, I think it is consistent with
fallout, were to occur, either by reason the amendment of the Senator from
of inability of the domestic area or a Montana. LIMITATION OF DEBATE DURING
foreign country- Mr. MANSFIELD. That was my im- MORNING HOUR
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Yes; the Senator pression.
s and
Is correct. Mr. KERR. Mr. President, will the On by una request nimous of Mr. consent, MAANSFIELNSFIELD, d u
limit-
Mr. KERR. Then that shortfall could Senator from Montana yield? by the morning hour were Cement r-
be reallocated by the President, at his MMr. r. KERR. MANSFIELD. Iink I the amendment ed to 3 minutes.
discretion?
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Within the West- of the Senator from Arkansas is an ex-
ern Hemisphere. cellent one. It augments the amend- COMMITTEE MEETING DURING
Mr. KERR. Yes, within the Western ment of the Senator from Montana, SENATE SESSION
Hemisphere. That is for any 1 year at without creating a deficit or a penalty On request of Mr. MANSFIELD, and
a time? anywhere. by unanimous consent, the permanent
FULBRIGHT. Yes, that is my Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President- Subcommittee on Investigations of the
purpose. It would be impossible to tell Mr. MANSFIELD. I yield to the Sen- Committee on Government Operations
what the shortfall would be, except year ator from Florida. was authorized to meet during the ses-
by Year. Mr. HOLLAND. Mr. President, I am sion of the Senate today.
Mr. KERR. I understand; but having perfectly willing to have this amendment
reallocated-- adopted if the following condition be un-
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The derstood: that in the event it appears EXECUTIVE SESSION
time under the control of the Senator that this amendment would do violence Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
from Montana has expired. to the provisions of the conference re- move that the Senate proceed to the
Munanimous MANSFIELD. consent Mr. the debate nt President, I port which we adopted as to the realloca- consideration of executive business.
otion of a domestic shortfall to some other The motion was agreed to, and the
on un this amendment may y proceed for 5 domestic area, I would hope our con- Senate proceeded to consider executive
additional minutes.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there ferees would be instructed to eliminate business.
the amendment.
objection? Without objection, it is so Mr. FULBRIGHT. If the amendment
ordered. is so poorly drawn that it has that of EXECUTIVE MESSAGES REFERRED
Mr. FULBRIGHT. We are not doing feet, I would agree with the Senator. The PRESIDING OFFICER laid be-
rangefngabort the sugar bishortfall ll, except to ato That certainly is not its purpose. fore the Senate messages from the
limit range its menu of about
distribution su to r countries in the Mr. HOLLAND. I thank the Senator President of the United States submit-
Western Hemisphere. That is the only from Arkansas. ting several nominations, which were re-
effect sought to be brought about by this The PRESIDING OFFICER. The ferred to the Committee on the Judici-
amendment. question is on agreeing to the amend- ary.
Mr. KERR. And the fact that a short- ment of the Senator from Arkansas. (For nominations this day received, see
fall occurred in the domestic area in The amendment was agreed to. the end of Senate proceedings.)
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
11850 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE
EXECUTIVE REPORT OF A
COMMTITEE
By Mr. FULBRIGHT, from the Committee
on Foreign Relations:
Executive D, 87th Congress, 2d session,
the International Wheat Agreement, 1962
(Ex. Rept. No. 6).
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If there
be no further reports of committees, the
nominations on the Executive Calendar
will be stated.
RAILROAD RETIREMENT BOARD
The Chief Clerk read the nomination
of Howard William Habermeyer, of Illi-
nois, to be a member of the Railroad Re-
tirement Board.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, the nomination is confirmed.
DIPLOMATIC AND FOREIGN
SERVICE
The Chief Clerk proceeded to read
sundry nominations in the Diplomatic
and Foreign Service.
Mr. MANSFIELD, Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that the nomi-
nations in the Diplomatic and Foreign
Service be considered en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, the nominations will be con-
sidered en bloc; and, without objection,
they are confirmed.
PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE
The Chief Clerk proceeded to read
sundry nominations in the Public Health
Service.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask unanimous consent that the nomi-
nations in the Public Health Service be
considered en bloc.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, the nominations will be con-
sidered en bloc; and, without objection,
they are confirmed.
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
ask that the President be notified imme-
diately of the nominations confirmed.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, the President will be notified
forthwith.
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, I
move that the Senate resume the con-
eration of legislative business.
The motion was agreed to; and the
Senate resumed the consideration of leg-
islative business.
EXECUTIVE COMMUNICATIONS,
ETC.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr.
HICKEY in the chair) laid before the
Senate the following letters, which were
referred as Indicated:
REPORT ON PRIME CONTRACT AWARDS TO SMALL
AND OTHER BUSINESS FIRMS
A letter from the Assistant Secretary of
Defense, Installations and Logistics, trans-
mitting, pursuant to law, a report on prime
contract awards to small and other business
firms, for the period July 1961-April 1962
(with an accompanying report) ; to the Com-
mittee on Banking and Currency.
REPORT Or SMALL BUSINESS ADMINISTRATION
A letter from the Administrator, Small
Business Administration, Washington, D.C.,
transmitting, pursuant to law, a report of
that Administration, for the period July 1,
1961, to December 31, 1961 (with an accom-
panying report) ; to the Committee on Bank-
ing and Currency.
REPORT ON BACKLOG or PENDING APPLICATIONS
AND HEARING CASES IN FEDERAL COMMUNI-
CATIONS COMMISSION
A letter from the Chairman, Federal Com-
munications Commission, Washington, D.C.,
transmitting, pursuant to law, a report on
backlog of pending applications and hearing
cases in that Commission, as of May 31, 1962
(with an accompanying report); to the
Committee on Commerce.
REPORT ON REVIEW OF RECLAMATION OF SPARE
PARTS FROM EXCESS AIRCRAFT ENGINES IN
DEPARTMENTS OF THE ARMY, NAVY, AND AIR
FORCE
A letter from the Comptroller General of
the United States, transmitting, pursuant to
law, a report on the review of reclamation
of spare parts from excess aircraft engines
In the Departments of the Army, Navy, and
Air Force, dated June 1962 (with an accom-
panying report) ; to the Committee on Gov-
ernment Operations.
REPORT ON REVIEW OF OPERATIONS OF UNLIM-
ITED SALES AGENCIES UNDER THE 1959 AND
1960 COTTON PURCHASE PROGRAMS
A letter from the Comptroller General of
the United States, transmitting, pursuant
to law, a report on the review of operations
of unlimited sales agencies under the 1959
and 1960 cotton purchase programs, Com-
modity Credit Corporation, Department of
Agriculture, dated June 1962 (with an ac-
companying report); to the Committee on
Government Operations.
REPORT ON REVIEW OF SUPPLY CONTROL AND
INSPECTION ACTIVITIES OF THE MILITARY
CLOTHING AND TEXTILE SUPPLY AGENCY,
PHILADELPHIA, PA.
A letter from the Comptroller General of
the United States, transmitting, pursuant to
law, a report on the review of supply control
and inspection activities of the Military
Clothing and Textile Supply Agency, Depart-
ment of Defense, Philadelphia, Pa., dated
June 1962 (with an accompanying report);
to the Committee on Government. Opera-
tions.
REPORT ON EXAMINATION OF ROYALTY
CHARGES BY HAZELTINE ELECTRONICS DIVI-
SION, LITTLE NECK, N.Y., UNDER DEPART-
MENT OF DEFENSE CONTRACTS
A letter from the Comptroller General of
the United States, transmitting, pursuant to
law, a report on the- examination of royalty
charges by Hazeltine Electronics Division,
Hazeltine Corp., Little Neck, N.Y., under
Department of Defense contracts, dated
June 1962 (with an accompanying re-
port); to the Committee on Government
Operations.
REPORT OF JUDICIAL CONFERENCE OF THE
UNITED STATES
A letter from the Chief Justice, Supreme
Court of the United States, transmitting,
pursuant to law, a report of the proceedings
of a special meeting of the Judicial Confer-
ence of the United States, held at Washing-
ton, D.C., March 8-9, 1962 (with an accom-
panying report); to the Committee on the
Judiciary.
RELIEF OF CERTAIN ENLISTED MEMBERS OF
COAST GUARD
A letter from the Secretary of the Treas-
ury, transmitting a draft of proposed legis-
lation to provide for the relief of certain
enlisted members of the Coast Guard (with
July 5
an accompanying paper); to the Commit-
tee on the Judiciary.
SUSPENSION OF DEPORTATION OF A CERTAIN
ALIEN
A letter from the Commissioner, Imm:lgra-
tion and Naturalization Service, Department
of Justice, transmitting, pursuant to law, a
copy of the order suspending deportation In
the case of Wa Kwork Tak, together with a
statement of the facts and pertinent provi-
sions of law pertaining to the alien, and the
reasons for ordering such suspension (with
accompanying papers); to the Committee on
the Judiciary.
NOTICE of PUBLIC HEARING BY DELAWARE RIVER
BASIN COMMISSION
A notice of the Delaware River Basin Com-
mission, Philadelphia, Pa., signed by Brinton
Whitall, Acting Secretary, giving notice, pur-
s'oant to the Delaware River Basin compact,
of the public hearing relating to municipal
water supply and waste disposal facilities,
Federal, State, and local nonurban recreation
areas, river stage and stream gaging station,
and interstate water quality standards, to be
held in the Pennsylvania State Office Build-
ing, Philadelphia, Pa., on July 25, 1982; to
the Committee on the Judiciary,
PETITIONS AND MEMORIALS
Petitions, etc., were laid before the
Senate, or presented, and referred as in-
dicated :
By the PRESIDING OFFICER:
A concurrent resolution of the Legislature
of the State of Louisiana; to the Committee
on Finance:
HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 41
Concurrent resolution relative to the dis-
charge petition for H.R. 3745
Whereas H.R. 3745 is "bottled up" in com-
m3tee before the U.S.. Congress and a dis-
charge petition therefor is on the desk of
the Speaker; and
Whereas H.R. 3745 provides much-needed
increases in the pensions of veterans; and
Whereas the small pensions now being re-
ceived by veterans are inadequate to meet
the increased cost of living; and
Whereas it is only appropriate that ade-
quate provision be made for those who gave
so much on behalf of their country: There-
fore be it
Resolved by the House of Representatives
of the Legislature of Louisiana (the Senate
concurring), That the Members of the House
of Representatives of the U.S. Congress are
hereby memorialized to take immediate
action on the discharge petition for
H.R. 3745 now on the Speaker's desk; be it
further
Resolved, That a copy of this resolution
shall be sent to the Presiding Officers of each
House of the U.S. Congress and to the mem-
bers of the Louisiana delegation in the Con-
gress of the United States.
Speaker of the House of Representatives.
Lieutenant Governor and President of
the Senate.
A resolution adopted by the Church of
God, of Maryland, Delaware, and the District
o Columbia, protesting against the deci-
sion of the U.S. Supreme Court in the New
York State Board of Regents prayer case;
to the Committee on the Judiciary.
RESOLUTION OF BOARD OF
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS, LA-
BETTE COUNTY, KANS.
Mr. CARLSON. Mr. President, the
Labette Board of County Commissioners,
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
12764 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE July 16
personality, with ability, with knowledge,
with love of man and a fine spirit of
dedication to the commonweal.
Mr. Speaker, I congratulate Mayor
Celebrezze and his wonderful family as
he steps into the position as Secretary
of Health, Education, and Welfare. I
wish him well in this new and challeng-
ing post.
CAPTIVE NATIONS WEEK
(Mr. BROOMFIELD asked and was
given permission to extend his remarks
at this point in the RECORD.)
Mr. BROOMFIELD. Mr. Speaker,
this is the beginning of 7 days of sadness
as we join in the observance of Captive
Nations Week. At this short moment
in history, we pause to register our pro-
test at the Red conspiracy which has
swallowed up entire nations and entire
populations behind its curtain of cap-
tivity.
For the first time, the world is be-
ginning to realize that freedom is more
than a word. For the first time, the
world is beginning to take note of the
fact that without incentive, without mo-
tivation, man's works are meaningless.
We are seeing rifts develop in the
Communist camp, rifts and schisms
which Red-doctrine states are impossible.
We are seeing the inability of the Com-
munist world to even feed itself ade-
quately, much less provide its popula-
tions with the other material necessities
of life which were claimed to be the rea-
son for the creation of this doctrine.
On the other hand, we and our friends
in Europe are moving forward through
freedom. The Common Market is pull-
ing together in a show of strength and
vigor which far surpasses that of the
Soviet Union and almost equals our own
considerable productive effort.
This strength, and Soviet weakness,
should give heart to those who find
themselves imprisoned behind the walls
of hate and hypocrisy. The trumpeting
voice of freedom will destroy these walls
of ignorance as completely as the walls
of Jericho tumbled to the ground, never
to rise again.
At least, we see hope for the cause of
freedom, for the cause of those held
captive behind the Iron Curtain. At
least, we can offer the words that the
wait will not be too long, that the day
will arrive when these people who have
suffered so much at the hands of their
oppressors will be free and whole again.
Let us take heart in this week of
mourning and look forward confidently
to the crumbling of this oppressive im-
perialist empire and its replacement with
government of the people, by the people,
and for the people.
The SPEAKER. This is Consent Cal-
endar day. The Clerk will call the first
bill on the Consent Calendar.
PRINCE GEORGES COUNTY SCHOOL
BOARD, MARYLAND
The Clerk called the bill (H.R. 6759)
for the relief of the Prince Georges
County School Board, Maryland.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unan-
imous consent that the bill be passed
over without prejudice.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from Iowa?
There was no objection.
BRIDGE AT CAPE HATTERAS NA-
TIONAL SEASHORE, N.C.
The Clerk called the bill (H.R. 8983)
to authorize the Secretary of the Interior
to participate in financing the construc-
tion of a bridge at Cape Hatteras
National Seashore, in the State of North
Carolina, and for other purposes.
Mr. FORD. Mr. Speaker, this bill is
scheduled for consideration under sus-
pension this afternoon. I ask unanimous
consent that it be passed over without
prejudice.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Michigan?
There was no objection.
LAND FOR THE OGLALA SIOUX
INDIAN TRIBE
The Clerk called the bill (H.R. 10485)
to declare that certain land of the
United States is held by the United
States in trust for the Oglala Sioux In-
dian Tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservation.
There being no objection, the Clerk
read the bill, as follows:
Be it enacted by the Senate and House
of Representatives of the United States of
America. in Congress assembled, That all
right, title, and interest of the United States
in and to approximately 4,923.58 acres of
land in South Dakota that have been used
for the benefit of the Oglala Community
School and have been determined excess to
the needs of the Bureau of Indian Affairs,
together with the improvements thereon,
are hereby declared to be held by the United
States in trust for the Oglala Sioux Indian
Tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservation. Such
land is described as follows:
(a) 1,040 acres; northeast quarter section
15; west half section 16; south half and
the northeast quarter and the south half
northwest quarter section 17, township 35
north, range 43 west, sixth principal
meridian.
(b) 180.47 acres; lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, section
20, and lot 4, section 21, township 35 north,
range 43 west, sixth principal meridian.
(c) 80 acres; south half northeast quarter
section 15, township 35 north, range 44 west,
sixth principal meridian.
(d) 36.32 acres; lot 3, section 21, town-
ship 35 north, range 43 west, sixth principal
meridian.
(e) 602.67 acres; lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, east
half west half, southeast quarter section 18;
lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, section 19, township 35
north, range 43 west, sixth principal
meridian.
(f) 683.81 acres; south half, northeast
quarter section 13; lots 1 and 2, section 23;
lots 1, 2, 3, and 4, section 24, township 35
north, range 44 west, sixth principal
meridian.
(g) 960 acres; all section 8; southwest
quarter section 9, north half northwest
quarter section 17, east half northeast
quarter section 18, township 35 north, range
43 west, sixth principal meridian.
(h) 266.79 acres; southwest quarter north-
west quarter, west half southwest quarter
section 14, east half southeast quarter, sec-
tion 15; lot 1 section 22; lot 4 section 23,
township 35 north, range 44 west, sixth prin-
cipal meridian.
(1) 760 acres; east half section 10; west
half section 11; northwest quarter northwest
quarter section 14; north half northeast
quarter section 15, township 35 north, range
44 west, sixth principal meridian.
(j) 153.62 acres; east half southwest
quarter, southeast quarter northwest quar-
ter section 14, lot 3, section 23, township 35
north, range 44 west, sixth principal
meridian.
(k) 160 acres; southeast quarter section
14, township 35 north, range 44 west, sixth
principal meridian.
With the following committee amend-
ment:
Page 3, after line 9, add a new section to
read as follows:
"SEC. 2. The Indian Claims Commission is
directed to determine in accordance with the
provisions of section 2 of the Act of August
13, 1946 (60 Stat. 1050), the extent to which
the value of the title conveyed by this Act
should or should not be set off against any
claim against the United States determined
by the Commission."
The committee amendment was agreed
to.
The bill was ordered to be engrossed
and read a third time, was read the third
time, and passed, and a motion to recon-
sider was laid on the table.
PAYMENT OF MONETARY AWARD
TO RECIPIENTS OF NATIONAL
MEDAL OF SCIENCE
The Clerk called the bill (H.R. 4055)
to amend the act of August 25, 1959, to
authorize the payment of a monetary
award to recipients of the National
Medal of Science.
Mr. FORD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unani-
mous consent that this bill be passed
over without prejudice.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Michigan?
There was no objection.
The SPEAKER. This concludes the
call of the Consent Calendar.
IMPORTATION OF ADULT
HONEY BEES
The SPEAKER. The Chair recog-
nizes the gentleman from Virginia [Mr.
SMITH].
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker,
I call up the resolution, House Resolu-
tion 726, by direction of the Committee
on Rules and ask for its immediate con-
sideration.
The Clerk read the resolution, as
follows:
Resolved, That immediately upon the
adoption of this resolution the bill H.R.
8050, with the Senate amendments thereto,
be, and the same hereby is, taken from the
Speaker's table, to the end that the Senate
amendments be, and the same are hereby,
agreed to.
The SPEAKER. The gentleman from
Virginia ,is recognized for I hour.
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker,
I yield 30 minutes to the gentleman from
Ohio [Mr. BROWN] and now yield my-
self such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, this is the so-called
honey bee bill which was passed by the
House and sent over to the Senate. It is
a noncontroversial bill in itself. How-
ever, in the other body there were some
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
July 16, 1961 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE
Senator MILLER added:
The problem would be greatly relieved if
there was not so great a tendency on the
part of the Senate Appropriations Committee
to increase the appropriations approved by
the House.
And in reply Senator ROBERTSON said
that since the war we had increased the
deficit by $32 billion.
Every other statement in the resolu-
tion is verified by official statistics on
file in the committee and open to in-
spection by anyone-including the
columnist.
The account further relates that a
member of the committee asked me if I
wrote the resolution and I said:
I am responsible for the wording of the
resolution.
No such question was asked and, of
course, no such answer was made, as
every member of the committee present
on that occasion will testify. Both state-
ments are pure fabrication.
Just as inaccurate is the statement
that "CANNON snorted that the resolu-
tion was not open to general discussion."
Mr. Speaker, I hope no one thinks
that after being here as long as I have,
I know so little about parliamentary
procedure as to make a ruling like that-
or that the Committee on Appropriations
knows so little as to accept such a ruling.
Even the title is misleading. The title
reads "CANNON Blasts HAYDEN" but no-
where in the entire article, with all its
vivid imagination-untrammeled by any
regard for facts-is a blast against Sen-
ator HAYDEN mentioned.
Now a word about Drew Pearson. Mr.
Speaker, I regard him as an indispens-
able adjunct of our de facto govern-
ment. He has become an American in-
stitution. In the language of the English
Parliament he would be denominated as
"Her Majesty's Opposition." In ec-
clesiastical parlance he would be termed
"The Devil's Advocate." Of course, a
man who must write a column every day
of the year must at times embellish pro-
saic annals of uneventful days with a
little sensationalism in order to make
them readable. But he arouses interest
and sometimes throws the needed light
of publicity on otherwise unnoted phases
of American life and consequently is al-
ways entertaining. I take off my hat to
him. And I hereby express admiration
of the very efficient job he did on me.
In the language of Rip Van Winkle,
May he, in the risible camaraderie of
Mark Twain, Josh Billings and the
Baron Maunchausen, live long and
prosper.
COMMITTEE ON PUBLIC WORKS
Mr. WRIGHT. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the Committee
on Public Works and its subcommittees
may sit this week during general debate.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from
Texas?
There was no objection.
COMMITTEE ON THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA
Mr. WHITENER. Mr. Speaker, I ask
unanimous consent that the special sub-
committee of the Committee on the Dis-
trict of Columbia may be permitted to
sit during the deliberations of the House
today.
The SPEAKER. Is there objection to
the request of the gentleman from North
Carolina?
There was no objection.
APPOINTMENT OF MAYOR ANTHONY
J. CELEBREZZE AS SECRETARY OF
THE DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH,
EDUCATION, AND WELFARE
(Mr. VANIK asked and was given per-
mission to address the House for 1 min-
ute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. VANIK. Mr. Speaker, I want to
take this time to praise President's ap-
pointment of Cleveland's Mayor Anthony
J. Celebrezze as Secretary of the Depart-
ment of Health, Education, and Welfare
to succeed Governor Ribicoff.
Mayor Celebrezze comes to Washing-
ton as no stranger. He comes to Wash-
ington as an old friend. As president
of the U.S. Conference of Mayors and as
former president of the American Mu-
nicipal Association, Mayor Celebrezze has
appeared before many of the committees
of Congress and is well known to most of
the Government agencies.
He faces the heavy responsibilities of
the new office with wide experience in
State and municipal affairs. He has
proven to be a tireless, dedicated leader
in Cleveland and in Ohio. He will prove
to be a great Secretary of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare.
Mayor Celebrezze will bring added
-color to the President's Cabinet. He is
filled with love of humanity, and yet, if
a policy position calls for firmness he can
be as tough as the steel for which Cleve-
land is famous. His long experience as
mayor of Cleveland, and as a legislator,
should prove him a successful advocate
of the program of the administration.
Members of Congress will be pleased with
his forthright, direct and no-holds-
barred approach.
Cleveland is proud of the achievement
of its favorite son and wishes him well on
this new challenge.
Mr. LATTA. Mr, Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. VANIK. I yield to the gentleman
from Ohio.
Mr. LATTA. I should like to asso-
ciate myself with the remarks of the gen-
tleman from Cleveland. I know Mayor
Celebrezze very well and consider him a
friend. I think he is one of the out-
standing citizens of.Ohio. He certainly
will make a good administrator.
APPOINTMENT OF MAYOR AN-
THONY J. CELEBREZZE AS SEC-
RETARY OF HEW
(Mr. FEIGHAN asked and was given
permission to address the House for 1
minute and to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. FEIGHAN. Mr. Speaker, I wish
to associate myself with the remarks of
the gentleman from Ohio, concerning
Mayor Anthony J. Celebrezze. I con-
gratulate President Kennedy for his
praiseworthy choice. Serving his un-
17163
precedented fifth term as mayor of the
city of Cleveland, Mayor Celebrezze has
a record of progressive and sound ad-
ministration. He has proven his ca-
pacity for heavy responsibilities and his
tenacity and perseverance in working out
difficult problems until amicable solu-
tions have been reached. He has made
a most commendable record as mayor of
the thriving industrial city of Cleveland.
Mayor Celebrezze is an honest, sincere,
and industrious man of boundless en-
ergy. By experience and knowledge, :he
is eminently qualified to administer the
important duties that he will assume as
Secretary of the Department of Health,
Education, and Welfare. I believe our
Nation is fortunate to have such a man
in the President's Cabinet.
(Mr. BOLAND asked and was given
permission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD.)
Mr. BOLAND. Mr. Speaker, I con-
gratulate President Kennedy on his
choice of the Honorable Anthony J.
Celebrezze as Secretary of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare.
I associate myself with the remarks
of my distinguished colleagues from Ohio
[Mr. VANIx and Mr. LATTA]. They have
well expressed the feelings of those who
know Mayor Celebrezze. I came to
know this man just a few years ago. It
was my good fortune to spend a consid-
erable amount of time in Ohio and par-
ticularly in Cleveland. I was deeply im-
pressed with the respect and admiration
that has been and is being showered up-
on this man. As all of us know, the task
of being the mayor of any city is a dif-
ficult job. It is all the more difficult
when one manages the affairs of a big,
cosmopolitan center with all of its at-
tendant problems. Cleveland is that
kind of a community-typically Ameri-
can and the eighth largest city in the
Nation. It was a good city before Mayor
Celebrezze occupied the chair of the
chief executive of - the city. Because of
him, it is a greater and better city to-
day. Under his leadership, great plans
have moved into action that will give a
breathtaking and magnificient appear-
ance to its downtown. Better housing,
better schooling, greater emphasis on
culture, a deep and abiding concern for
the welfare of the people of the city he
loves so much-these have been the hall-
marks of Mayor Celebrezze's activities.
Mr. Speaker, I am sure that the de-
cision to leave the office of mayor of
Cleveland, Ohio, did not come easy to
Anthony Celebrezze. His whole political
life and love have been wrapped up in
this great community; its history and
its growth and its activities bestirred the
best that was in him.
But I am confident that, despite the
challenge of his native city, he saw the
opportunity of greater challenge in the
National Government.
Mr. Speaker, every Member of the
Congress recognizes the heavy and diffi-
cult task that faces any Secretary of
Health, Education, and Welfare. In the
time in which we live, this job and this
department daily assumes more and
more importance.
Mr. Speaker, Mayor Celebrezze brings
to this post a wealth of experience in the
areas in which this department func-
tions. He combines the right kind of
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
196-2 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
amendments-desirable, according to of sugarbeets as a main crop. Until 1933
that body, to the sugar bill, that had just the production of this crop was concentrated
passed and that had just been signed mainly in counties Carlow, Kildare, Laoighis,
and Wexford, which together, in 1933, ac-
by the President modifying and changing counted for 80 percent of the total crop of
some of the allotments of sugar. The 15,000 acres. The acreage under sugarbeets
Senate attached that to the honey bee reached a peak of 85,000 in 1945, but fell to
bill, a procedure that I personally dislike 54,000 in 1952. In 1954 the acreage rose
very much. However, it was done and again to 74,000 but fell to 55,000 acres in
this bill was sent back to the House by 1955. There was a sharp increase to 71,000
in 1957 and with a still further in-
cre
a
s
the other body asking the House to con- crease to 85,000 acres in 1958 the acreage
cur in the Senate amendments. I be- reached the peak 1945 level. There was a
lieve that the two committees that have sharp decline to 69,000 acres in 1959 and in
had charge- of this sugar legislation, in 1960 a further decline to 68,000 acres was
agreement, at least-whether in accord recorded. Cork (14,600 acres), Wexford
or not-but I understand they are in (7,500 acres), Laoig (7,200 acres), Galway
acres), Carlow
agreement to the Senate amendments to
500 acres) are
,
and Kilkenny (5
,
res)
ac
0
00
,
6
ht up
brou
g
s
d it
wa
the seven leading producing counties; to-
the honey bee bill, an
here at the request of the chairman of gether they account for 79 percent of the
the Committee on Agriculture, with an sugarbeet crop in 1960, while Kildare, Offaly,
unanimous consent request that the bill Waterford, and Kerry account for 16 percent"
be taken from the Speaker's table and (p.65).
the Senate amendments concurred in. The following table shows, in greater de-
There was objection to that procedure tail, the development in the past 8 years:
by, one Member. The Committee on Irish beet sugar: Acreage and production
Agriculture then applied to the Commit-
tee on Rules for a resolution which I am
presenting here this morning to take this
bill from the Speaker's table and agree
to the Senate amendments. That will
be the final action upon the honey bee
bill and the amendments to the Sugar
Act. That is the situation. I believe we
are, more or less, in general accord on
it. I do not think there is any objection.
May I ask the distinguished gentleman
from North Carolina, the chairman of
the Committee on Agriculture, whether
there was any objection in the minority
of your committee-your committee was
unanimous? Mr. Speaker, I am told by
1965-56--------------------
1956-57--------------------
1957-68----??------------
1958-59--------------- - - ---
1959-60--------------------
1960-61--------------------
1961-62--------------------
1962-63--------------------
Sugarbeets
(acres)
55, 238
58,000
70,900
83,593
68,464
67,553
78,317
78, 859
Sugar
produced
(short tons,
raw value)
106,000
110,000
132,000
125,000
157,000
146, 000
139,000
' 185,000
12765
the United States. This moderate retail
price has provided the Irish consumer with
one of the highest consumption levels in the
world.
Consumption and price of sugar: Ireland
compared with leading Western European
producing countries and the United States
Consumption
per capita,
1959
Retail price
per pound,
Jan. 1, 1960
Ireland--------------------
101.0
8.7
Franco--------------------
74.3
1 t. 5
Germany (West)----------
67. 5
13. 5
Italy
-------------
45. 0
17. fi
--------
United States-------------
103.8
it. C.
Source: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Statistical
Bulletin 293, table 86; latest available data.
This efficiency has been coupled with labor
standards in the refineries for above the aver-
age of other manufacturing industries in Ire-
land. In December 1960 (the last refining-
season period for which data are published),
the average wage in the refineries (converted
to U.S. currency) was $30.04 per week, com-
pared with $21.69 for all manufacturing in-
dustries. Out of 46 industrial categories
used in Irish statistics, sugar refining was
fifth highest in weekly wages paid.
The Irish sugarbeet industry can be said
to have attained maturity in the 1959-60
sugar year. Despite a sharp curtailment of
beet acreage from that harvested in 1958-59,
production of sugar from homegrown beets
reached the level of 157,000 short tons (raw
value), providing a surplus over domestic
consumption of about 15,000 tons, which
was exported to the United Kingdom as re-
fined sugar.
It has long been the practice in Ireland,
as in many other countries, to protect ex-
port markets in manufactured products con-
taining sugar (e.g., confectionery, baked
goods, preserves, etc.), which typically en-
counter severe tariff tariff and other barriers, by
permitting the importation of cheap raw
sugar for refining and reexportation in the
form of such manufactured products. About
28,000 tons of raw sugar were so imported in
1980, and a like quantity exported in the
form of confectionery products, etc.
In the 1960-61 season, domestic produc-
tion from the same acreage fell off slightly,,
but was still ample to cover all of Ireland's
domestic requirements. Stocks permitted
the authorized 15,000 tons of exports to the
United Kingdom. Requirements for manu-
facture for export increased sharply (about
20 to 25 percent above the previous year),
and imports of raw sugar therefore also in-
creased, with some rise in stocks of imported
sugar.
in the 1961-62 season, delayed sowing due
to weather conditions resulted in a drastic
fall in sugar yield per ton of beets. The crop
fell slightly short of domestic requirements,
and stocks had to be drawn on for domestic
requirements and to maintain exports to the
United Kingdom. The high level of exports
of manufactures containing sugar again was
met by imported raw sugar.
For the current, 1962-63 season the crop is
expected to meet all requirements for do-
mestic consumption and for exports to the
United Kingdom and the United States, and
still leave a surplus.
It is interesting to note that the last
contract placed by the Irish Sugar Co. for the
purchase of sugar from Cuba was made in
May 1959, and that the last shipment of
sugar from Cuba to Ireland was made
months before exports of sugar from Cuba
to the United States ended. Indeed upon
Castro's takeover of U.S. property in Cuba,
the Irish Sugar Co. publicly announced its
refusal to purchase any sugar from Cuba.
The practice of importing sugar for
processing and use in manufactured prod-
I Estimated.
Sources: Acreage from Irish statistics; production
from U.S. Department of Agriculture; estimated pro-
duction (1962-63) based on acreage planted, historical
yield per acre and historical sugar content of beets
harvested.
tt
Commi
ee on in its advocacy- of this resolution, which 1960-61 was, unfortunately, compelled, in
will conclude our very troublesome sub- order to hold sugar production down to the
ject of the sugar allotments, quantity which could be marketed. In 1961-
Mr. Speaker, will the 62, and again in the current year, plantings
Mr. COOLEY. of 78,000 acres were authorized. The acre-
gentleman yield? ages in these recent years amount to about
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. I am glad to . 2 percent of the total land under tillage in
yield as much time as the gentleman and in the United States devoted to sugar
may need. -
Mr. COOLEY. I just want a minute. crops (beet and cane), now at its alltime
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. I yield 1 peak, is less than one-half of 1 percent.
minute to the gentleman, The growing of sugarbeets hold a high
(Mr. COOLEY asked and was given priority in Ireland's agricultural planning,
not only because of the efficiency achieved,
permission to revise and extend his re- but also because beet culture as practiced
marks.) in Ireland is peculiarly adapted to the main-
GENERAL LEAVE TO EXTEND tenance of the small family farm. Beet ag-
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I also ask riculture and beet processing have matured
unanimous consent that all Members de- together, a striking example of the type of
economic development which offers the
siring to do so may extend their remarks greatest promise for raising Ireland's
in the RECORD at this point concerning standards of living.
the. matter now being discussed. The Irish Sugar Co., government con-
The SPEAKER. Without objection, it trolled, has developed into one of the most
is so ordered. efficient sugar processing enterprises in the
There was no objection, world and has played a major part in help-
Mr. GALLAGHER. Mr. Speaker, ing the beet growers develop high yields,
notably by plant breeding which has de-
there has been considerable misunder- veloped a distinctive beet seed specially
standing concerning the sugarbeet cul- adapted to Irish conditions, efficient pest
ture in Ireland. In the hope of clarify- control measures, and a novel and strikingly
ing any misunderstanding that might successful harvester. Two American experts,
exist, I am making part of the RECORD detailed to Ireland under a technical as-
the following statement that I received sistance program in the early days of the
from the Irish Export Board: Marshall plan, rendered immeasurable as-
sistance, and for this help Ireland will always
IRISH SUGAR be grateful.
The development of sugarbeet culture in The high degree of efficiency achieved is
Ireland is described in the Statistical Ab- strikingly illustrated by comparing the price
stract of Ireland, 1961, as follows: at which homegrown sugar is supplied to
"One of the most important changes in the Irish consumer, compared with the re-
root and green crops since the beginning tail prices which prevail in the major Euro-
of the century was the introduction in 1926 pean beet sugar producing countries, and in
Approved For Release 2009/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
12766 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE Jul p 16
ucts for export is authorized, and practiced,
in the United States. Section 211(a) of the
Sugar Act permits such imports, outside
quota restrictions, and free of duty and tax,
for reexport in the form of manufactured
products.
The Irish sugar industry is now in its
fourth consecutive year of plantings planned
to be fully adequate to meet home consump-
tion requirements (at a high level equal to
that of the United States), with a modest
surplus for export to markets which are
open, and which are, not based on low-priced
residual tropical suar. Only in the 1961-62
season did output fall short of domestic
requirements, due to disastrous weather con-
ditions.
Ireland has no desire to enter into the
scramble to dump residual sugar on the un-
controlled international market, and, there-
fore, seeks only outlets which can absorb its
production at the very modest prices at
which it can sell profitably. It has had such
a market in the United Kingdom for about
15,000 tons per year, and would be happy
to be able to continue to ship to the United
States at the rate of 10,000 tons per year.
(An initial authorization of 5,000 tons for
the first half of 1962 has been supplied.)
Beyond such market opportunities, Ireland
has no choice but to restrict acreage, and
has been forced for some years to deny
farmers any acreage allotments beyond those
which can be covered by sales opportunities.
Ireland is one of America's good customers.
In recent years, Ireland has been buying
about $59 million of American goods, against
$30 million In trade the other way, a favor-
able balance for the United States of about
$20 million, All of these purchases are on
commercial terms. Ireland has had no
foreign aid of any kind for over 10 years.
Except for a very small program In the early
days of the Marshall plan (including the
technical assistance noted above which
proved so fruitful for Irish beet culture),
Ireland has had no assistance from the
United States, and has asked for none.
Over half of Ireland's purchases here have
been of agricultural products, notably
tobacco (over $13 million in 1960) and corn
(almost $6 million). Ireland's purchases of
American agricultural products alone ag-
gregate almost $10 per capita, one of the
highest figures in the world, and Ireland also
purchases almost an equal quantity of
manufactured
r
d
t
o
uc
s from the United 4iun date on dune 30, 1962.
States. p
Jte. 10, 1962. Our committee worked for days and
weeks and months on this bill. We first
Mr. COOLEY. Mr. Speaker, I would heard spokesmen for our domestic cane
like to say we are in complete accord and sugarbeet producers and for domes-
so far as the House Committee on Agri- tic consumers and processors. We lis-
culture is concerned. This procedure tened to spokesmen for the State De-
was discussed in the committee and partment present a listless argument for
there was no objection. Every member their global quota, world price, proposal.
of the committee agreed not to object to Then we heard representatives of sugar
the consideration of the bill although producers of friendly nations, princi-
some of us are greatly disturbed over the pally In the Western Hemisphere, who
procedure being followed, and we hope want to participate to the largest extent
that hereafter this will not b
e a prece- possible in supplying our markets with
dent. I am quite sure that the gentle- sugar.
man from Virginia [Mr. SMITH], chair- V--- _- _____,.__, _ _ _
SAIJUI U1 tale Loummit;i;ee on
Rules
and
our shores from foreign suppliers. This
was an abject departure from our suc-
cessful sugar program of the past. This
in effect would abandon the sugar pro-
gram, as it relates to foreign suppliers,
that has worked for so many years to
guarantee a dependable supply of sugar,
in wartime and in peacetime, at reason-
reasonable prices to our domestic con-
sumers.
In our first executive session on the
administration's bill, our Committee on
Agriculture voted unanimously to reject
the principle of global quotas and to re-
ject the premium recapture proposition.
We then proceeded to write a bill mak-
ing specific assignments of quotas to
friendly foreign suppliers, as in years
past, after taking care of the needs of
our expanding domestic mainland pro-
duction.
Subsequently the House approved
overwhelmingly the bill drawn by our
committee. This House-passed bill dis-
tributed our sugar market as follows:
First. Increased the quotas for domes-
tic sugar-producing areas at current
levels of sugar consumption-9.7 million
tons-about 625,000 tons and provided
that those areas receive 63 percent of in-
creases in consumption as compared to
55 percent under current legislation.
The quotas for each of the domestic
sugar-producing areas at the sugar re-
quirement level of 9.7 million tons under
current legislation and under the com-
mittee bill were as follows:
[Short tons, raw value]
Present
legislation
Domestic beet sugar-----------
Mainland cane sugar -------- _
Hawaii---------------------
Puerto Rico-------------------
Virgin Islands_________________
Total-------------------
2,110,527
649,460
1,117, 986
1,231,682
16, 795
2,650,000
895,000
1,110,000
1,140, 000
15,()00
Second. The basic quota was allocated
in the House bill as follows:
Domestics ---------------------- 5, 810, 000
Cuba---------------------------- 1,500,000
Philippines --------------------- 1, 050, (100
Peru---------------------------- 200,000
Dominican Republic------------- -200, (100
Mexico-------------------------- 200,(100
Brazil--------------------------- 190,000
British West Indies --------------- 100, ()00
Australia ----------------------- 50, 000
Republic of China_____________ 45
000
,
French West Indies______________ 40,000
Colombia----------------------- 35,000
Nicaragua ----------------------- 30, Coo
Costa Rica ---------------------- 30,000
India--------------------------- 30,000
Ecuador ------------------------ to nun
,
na itii- ---- - -------- -- ?- ---- - ---- -
a chance to be heard, openly and freely. Guatemala ---_____-______-_ _
other members of his committee will TL __
ece
published in our printed hearings. And, South Africa___________
dent-to take a bill such as the honey I might add, our committee, in contrast Pa Salvador ---
bee from
the other end back here i the d pi- to what took place elsewhere, spent the Paraaguay-------------_----_----
tol and d sen on it e ba with here
amendment time available to it In studying the capa- British Honduras________________
winch is very a is at. I mane ent bilities of the various foreign areas to Fiji Islands ----------------------
serve as a dependable source of sugar Netherlands --------------------
the Senate amendment is a step in the supply-not in questioning the motives Mauritius_______________________
direction of the position of the House. of the 't
25, 000
20,000
20, 000
20, 000
15, 000
10, 000
10,000
10, 000
10, 000
10, 000
10, 000
As I stated the other day, when we The admi
nesses nistrations reommeenndedt to
Total--------------------- g, 700, 000
were discussing the matter under a us a system of global quotas and recap- Third. The Cuban quota of 1.5 mi:f-
reservation, this bill provides allotments ture of premiums on sugar delivered to lion tons was authorized for purchase
to the Dominican Republic and to
Argentina, and makes certain provisions
in reference to the allotment of deficits
in the Western Hemisphere and other
parts of the world. In my prepared re-
marks I discuss at some length the prob-
lems involved in this legislation.
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman from Virginia yield that I
may ask a question of the gentleman
from North Carolina?
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. I yield.
Mr. GROSS. Is there a sugar quota
for Ceylon?
Mr. COOLEY. No, there is no quota
for Ceylon.
Mr. Speaker, in supporting this honey-
bee bill, sweetened up by the Senate
sugar amendment, I do so out of extreme
compulsion of circumstances and not
from the better judgment, or the logic
or the wisdom or the wishes of our Com-
mittee on Agriculture, nor of the House
itself.
On April 2, 1962, the House passed
H.R. 8050, a bill to amend the act re-
lating to the importation of adult
honey bees. We had no forewarning or
foreboding of what was to come, al-
though I do recall that at the time there
were some questions as to why we would
restrict the importation of grown-up
bees and still let their children come in.
The simple answer there was that adult
bees carry diseases that are not trans-
mitted by immature bees. I wish there
was so easy an explanation of this bill,
as it now comes back-all sugared up-
from the Senate.
As I was saying, Mr. Speaker, we
passed the bee bill on April 2, in all in-
nocence, and sent it along to the other
body.
Then, along with consideration of
general farm legislation, the Committee
on Agriculture turned its attention to a
bill to adjust the Sugar Act to changing
domestic and world conditions and to
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
1962
from other countries on a temporary
basis through December 1963, as follows:
Philippines ----------------------
150,000
Peru------------------------ ---
160,000
Dominican Republic-------------
160, 000
Mexico__________________________
150,000
Brazil ---------------------------
150, 000
British West Indies--------------
160, 000
Australia -----------------------
150,000
Republic of China ---------------
150, 000
India -
100,000
South
100,000
Mauritius-----------------------
100, 000
Total---------------------
1,500,000
All the sugar from foreign supplies
would have been entitled to a premium
payment. That is this sugar would have
commanded the American price and not
the distressed world price.
Subsequently, the other body did not
choose to follow the wisdom of the
House, and it swallowed whole the global
quota-premium recapture propositions
advanced by the State Department. The
other body held out a 2,600,000-ton re-
serve quota for Cuba, to be purchased in
other countries-until Cuba returns to
free-nation status-on a first-come, first-
served basis at world prices and not at
the better American price that has made
ours the most attractive sugar market
in the world and by which other nations
have been able to maintain friendly and
profitable trade with the United States.
The bill passed by the other body pro-
vided for a 20-percent reduction in the
premium payments on assigned quotas,
which would have eliminated the pre-
miums completely in 5 years.
Mr. Speaker, there are aspects of the
proposals of the State Department and
the instances of the other body, with
respect to the reserve quota for Cuba,
that I am unable to fathom. The State
Department urged upon us a Cuban re-
serve in excess of 2,500,000 tons. The
other body held out in conference for a
larger Cuba reserve quota than the
1,500,000 tons provided by the House.
At the same time the State Department
was calling for an end of premium pay-
ments on sugar from foreign supplies,
and the other body supported-this posi-
tion. Now I ask: Does a quota reserve
for Cuba of any size have any meaning
whatever, without the premium price in
the American market? It would seem
to me that those who advocate a Cuban
reserve quota and recapture of premiums
are not letting their left hand know
what the right hand is doing. It seems
to me that if we proceed to recapture all
premiums any Cuban reserve becomes
absolutely worthless, and we have lost a
very potent inducement to the develop-
ment of a free government in Cuba.
The House, Mr. Speaker, set up a
1,500,000-ton reserve for Cuba, with pre-
miums, with the thought of aiding that
unhappy country to establish a firm eco-
nomic base under a democratic govern-
ment, when it has shaken off the shackles
of communism.
We went to conference with the Sen-
ate, to adjust the differences in the ver-
sions of the legislation passed by the
two Houses. We found the Senate con-
ferees adamant, unwilling to yield to the
House position which was vigorously
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
12767
against global quotas and premium
recapture.
In order to get a sugar bill at all-
and this was imperative-the House
conferees were forced to give ground, and
we came out with a conference agree-
ment.
The major provisions of the agreement
on quotas and supplies follow:
First. Extends the Sugar Act to De-
cember 31, 1966, with respect to' domestic
areas and the Philippines and to Decem-
ber 31, 1964, with respect to quotas for
other foreign countries.
Second. Provides that, when domestic
requirements are at the present level of
9.7 million tons, the U.S. sugar market
will be supplied as follows:
(a) By increasing the quotas for do-
mestic sugar-producing areas by about
625,000 tons and in addition assigning
those domestic areas 65 percent of in-
creases in consumptions as compared to
55 percent under current legislation.
The quotas for each of the domestic
sugar-producing areas under current
legislation and as provided in the con-
ference agreement are as follows:
[Short tons, raw value]
Present
legislation
Conference
agreement
Domestic beet sugar -----------
2,110,627
2,650,000
Mainland cane sugar -________-
649, 460
865,000
Hawaii----------------------- -
1,117,936
1,110, 000
Puerto Rico___________________
1,231,682
1,140, 000
Virgin Islands_________________
16,795
15,000
The quotas for the domestic areas
were identical in the House and Senate
language.
The assignments to the domestic areas
are effective during the life of this act,
to December 31, 1966.
(b) By assigning a quota of 1,050,000
tons to the Philippines, effective until
December 31, 1966. There will be no
premium recapture on the Philippine
quota.
(c) By assigning quotas totaling
1,205,000 tons to foreign suppliers, other
than Cuba and the Philippines, to be
effective to December 31, 1964, on ap-
proximately the following basis:
Tons
Peru------------------------------ 190,000
Dominican Republic-------------- 190, 000
Mexico ---------------------------
190,000
Brazil____________________________
180,000
British West Indies________________
90, 000
Australia -------------------------
40, 000
Republic of China________________
35, 000
French West Indies_______________
30,000
Colombia -------------------------
30, 000
Nicaragua_________________________
25,000
Costa Rica ------------------------
26,000
India------------------------------
20,000
Ecuador --------------------------
25,000
Haiti_____________________________
20,000
Guatemala________________________
20,000
South Africa______________________
20,000
Panama --------------------------
15,000
El Salvador_______________________
10,000
Paraguay -------------------------
10,000
British Honduras__________________
10,000
Fiji Islands_______________________
10,000
Netherlands_______________________
10,000
Other countries___________________
11,332
With respect to these foreign country
quotas, there will be a cumulative reduc-
tion of 10 percent each year in the pre-
mium permitted over world prices. The
import fee will be 10 percent of the dif-
ference between the world price and the
U.S. price in the period during 1962 in
which this provision is effective, 20 per-
cent in 1963, and 30 percent in 1964.
(d) By reserving a quota of approxi-
mately 1,635,000 tons for Cuba when
that nation again becomes a free and in-
dependent nation. In the meantime,
while the United States and Cuba are not
in diplomatic relations, the amount of
this Cuban reserve will be purchased from
any countries with which we are in dip-
lomatic relations on a "global quota"
basis with full recapture of the difference
between the world price and the U.S.
price, with special consideration to coun-
tries of the Western Hemisphere and to
those countries purchasing U.S. agricul-
tural commidities.
Mr. Speaker, those were the provisions
of the bill finally enacted by the Con-
gress. I was not proud of this bill. I
do not believe the global quota and pre-
mium recapture propositions are good
for this country nor for the good-neigh-
bor nations to the south of us, nor for
the friendly nations in other areas of
the world which participate in our sugar
market.
We, in conference, were forced to ac-
cept, as the price of any bill at all, a
large part of the global quota and pre-
mium recapture business. Moreover, in
the process and at the insistence of the
conferees for the other body, we re-
duced-regretfully for the House con-
ferees-the quotas for several of our
good neighbors to the south, in order to
meet the other body's persistence that
we build up the Cuban reserve quota
which can be purchased from other
nations without a premium payment.
The House had provided a quota of
20,000 tons for Argentina. This was
knocked out completely, and cuts were
made in the House-approved quotas for
Peru, the Dominican Republic, Mexico,
Brazil, British West Indies, Colombia,
Nicaragua, Costa Rica, Ecuador, Haiti,
and some of the countries outside the
Western Hemisphere.
Mr. Speaker, I warned at the time
that this was action without wisdom and
that it would cause unrest among our
good neighbors to the south of us. We
all know now what happened. We are
aware of the voices that were raised
against the bill by these good neighbors,
because of the unwise action that we of
this House tried so desperately to fore-
stall.
Only in this chorus of protesting
voices did the other body and the ad-
ministration realize the mistake. The
other body quickly picked up the nearest
bill at hand relating to agriculture, and
tacked on an amendment to try to undo
some of the damage inflicted upon our
good relations with ? our friends to the
south.
That, Mr. Speaker, is why the honey-
bee bill is before us today.
I abhor this way of conducting the
business of the Congress-it does, indeed,
make us look ridiculous-but I am
pleased to inform the House that the
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
12768
honey bee bill, with the sugar amend-
ment attached, represents a straightfor-
ward admission of error by the other
body and, moreover, It is a vindication
of the House position on the philosophy
and the purpose of the Sugar Act.
This amendment by no means corrects
all the wrongs in the Sugar Act exten-
sion legislation so recently passed by the
Congress. The gentleman from Iowa
[Mr. HOEVEN] and I conferred on Tues-
day with the leadership of the House and
Senate on this amendment. We wanted
assurances on this bee bill amendment.
Following these conferences, I received
on yesterday a letter from the President
of the United States. Here is the letter
from the President:
THE WHITE HOUSE,
Washington, D.C., July 12, 1962.
Hon. HAROLD D. COOLEY,
House of Representatives,
Washington, A.C.
DEAn HAROLD: If H.R 8050 should be en-
acted into law in substantially the same
form as it was returned to the House of Rep-
resentatives from the Senate, it will, as you
know, afford the President authority "to al-
locate to countries within the Western
Hemisphere, for the six-month period end-
ing December 31, 1962, an amount of sugar,
raw value, not exceeding in the aggregate
seventy-five thousand short tons, and for the
calendar years 1963 and 1964, an amount of
sugar, raw value, not exceeding in the ag-
gregate one hundred and fifty thousand
short tons."
This sugar would be entitled to a premium
payment.
It is my intention to use this authority to
allocate 130,000 tons annually to the Domin-
ican Republic, in recognition of that na-
tion's economic dependence upon sugar and
its problems of transition from the Trujillo
regime; and to allocate 20,000 tons annually
to Argentina. Argentina is the only Western
Hemisphere nation which requested a quota
but was not granted one by the Sugar Act
amendments of 1962. Since the allocable
amount for the remainder of calendar year
1962 is one-half the annual allocations, it is
my intention to reduce the calendar year
1962 allocations to the Dominican Republic
and Argentina proportionately.
Sincerely,
JOHN F. KENNEDY.
The House will note that the President
gives assurances that the sugar tonnage
in this honey bee bill will be assigned
specifically, 130,000 tons annually to the
Dominican Republic, and 20,000 tons to
Argentina. These are assurances sought
on Tuesday by Mr. HoEVEN and Myself
In our talks with the Senate leadership.
It is my hope that fallback sugar, that
part of quotas which various countries
may not be able to meet for unforeseen
causes, will be reassigned in such a way,
with premiums, that will further remedy
the situation created among Western
Hemisphere friends by the ill-starred
Sugar Act extension approved a few
days ago.
You will note, Mr. Speaker, that the
President emphasizes the Dominican Re-
public's economic dependence upon sugar
and its problems of transition from the
Trujillo regime to a democracy.
In the bill passed by the House, we
provided allotments aggregating 350,000
tons for the Dominican Republic-
200,000 tons In permanent quota and
150,000 tons in temporary allotment out
of the Cuban drawback-all at the full
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -HOUSE July 16
premium price. The Senate assigned
the Dominican Republic a quota of only
96,308 tons---263,692 tons less than the
House bill-and even this small quota
would have been reduced in value by 20
percent each year, until at the end of 5
years it would be worthless.
Moreover, we provided for the pay-
ment to the Dominican Republic of ap-
proximately $23 million, representing
fees collected on Dominican sugar in the
last months of the Trujillo regime, and
which sum now is so desperately needed
by the forces struggling there to estab-
lish a democratic government. At the
inisistence of the other body, this pro-
vision was stricken from the Sugar Act
extension bill.
That bill, as It came from conference,
provided definitely only 190,000 tons for
the Dominican Republic and it is under-
standable that the people there let their
voices be heard.
I am pleased now that the President
assures us that the Dominican quota Will
be raised, through the action on this
honey bee bill, by 130,000 tons to a total
of 320,000 tons--still 30,000 tons less than
was provided in the House bill. There
also no doubt will be some nonpremium
purchases from the Dominican Repub-
lic.
Mr. Speaker, there is one other section
of this bill which my committee feels
is worthy of comment so that there will
be no misunderstanding on the part of
the Secretary of Agriculture when he al-
locates to the Western Hemisphere
countries the short falls under this
amendment. I refer to the directive of
the amendment which requires the Sec-
retary, In making allocations to foreign
countries within the Western Hemi-
sphere, under section 202(c) (3) (a), to
give special consideration to those coun-
tries purchasing U.S. agricultural com-
modities.
In the past our committee has tried
to encourage the Secretary to follow a
procedure in giving out these allocations
which would give preference to those
countries purchasing our agricultural
commodities in addition to their normal
commercial transactions. We were faced
with opposition by the State Department
when they took the position that there
was nothing in the law that would per-
mit the Secretary of Agriculture to use
this criterion.
Last year when we amended and ex-
tended the Sugar Act we included this
provision in the act, but I am sorry to
say only minimum use was made of this
important avenue by which we might ex-
pand our exports of agricultural com-
modities in keeping with the foreign
trade objectives of the act.
Members of Congress have known for
some time that several foreign countries
have indicated a willingness to use most
of the proceeds of their sugar sales In
the United States to purchase U.S. agri-
cultural commodities.
Perhaps the State Department, or at
least the administration, has seen the
light. This provision to which I refer
was included in their draft of the amend-
ment which the House is now accepting.
So, again, I think that we in the Con-
gress in voting for this amendment are
expressing the clear intent of this Con-
gress and there should be no further mis-
understanding on this point-that in
passing this amendment to the Sugar
Act the Congress clearly intends that of-
ficials of the U.S. Government and of
foreign governments, understand that
it is the desire of this Congress and the
intent of this Congress that special con-
sideration or preference be given in the
allocation of the short falls to those
Western Hemisphere countries which
agree to purchase additional U.S. agri-
cultural commodities over and above
their normal commercial transactions.
Therefore, the intent is that the Secre-
tary of Agriculture shall consider and
shall give preference in making the short
fall sugar allocations under this section
to those countries in the Western Hemi-
sphere who submit bona fide proposals to
use a substantial part of the proceeds of
their sugar sales to purchase U.S. agri-
cultural commodities.
These words should be given their nor-
mal meaning. This provision is consist-
ent with the position of the Committee
on Agriculture that countries permitted
to sell is sugar, especially at premium
prices, should purchase our agricultural
commodities in return.
When H.R. 12154 was debated the gen-
tleman from Texas [Mr. PoiGE] empha-
sized that the Committee on Agricul-
ture expected to review the record of
purchases of our agricultural commodi-
ties in establishing quotas for foreign
countries in the future. In its report on
that bill, the Agriculture Committee
pointed out that after 1963 Congress
would review the temporary allocations
from the Cuban reserve quota and take
into consideration among other factors,
the purchases by the various sugar pro-
ducing countries of agricultural com-
modities in the United States, and will
give special consideration also to good-
-neighbor countries of the Western Hemi-
sphere. The amendment now before
you therefore Is consistent with the posi-
tion taken by our committee on the orig-
inal bill.
However, special consideration does
not mean exclusive consideration.
In considering the need of a country
for an increased quota, consideration
should be given to the degree of its de-
pendence upon sugar for the support of
its national economy. Also, in the pur-
chase of our agricultural commodities,
special consideration needs to be given
to the extent to which such commodi-
ties are purchased for dollars as con-
trasted with purchases through aid pro-
grams and for local currency.
Each time this problem has come up I
have emphasized that the final deter-
mining factor must be the ability of this
country to assure itself of sugar supplies.
Therefore, the availability of adequate
supplies in the foreign country and the
ability of that country to get the sugar
here promptly as needed to meet our
seasonal requirements must always be
the overriding bases for reallocations of
quotas.
Mr. Speaker, I have taken this time
of the House in order to make a record
for the legislative history to guide the
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
19 6T CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
administration of the Sugar Act in the
immediate years ahead.
Now, in conclusion, I must tell the
House that I am proud of this legisla-
tive body and particularly am I proud of
the record of wisdom and courage we
have made in dealing with this difficult
and sometimes emotional problem relat-
ing to sugar.
It is my expectation that, due to the
compulsions that have so warped the
Sugar Act in the recent legislation-
which damage is softened but by no
means healed by this honey bee bill-the
next Congress no doubt will be called
upon to take further action in 1963, to
adjust and refine and perfect this act
as an instrument of profitable trade re-
lations and friendship with our neigh-
bors in this hemisphere.
Mr. Speaker, I shall look forward to
working with you and with each Mem-
ber of this House in this purpose.
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker,
I yield to the gentleman from Hawaii
[Mr. INOUYE] for a consent request.
(Mr. INOUYE asked and was given
permission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD.)
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. Speaker, included
in the sugar bill recently approved by
the Congress and now being reconsid-
ered in certain aspects is a little-noted
provision that extends the Sugar Act
controls to products containing sugar-
section 206.
Because of the complexity of the sugar
quota problems and the elements of con-
troversy that arose with respect to sugar
allocations and premium prices, perhaps
too little attention has been given to the
scope of the new provisions affecting
sugar products and mixtures.
Virtually all manufactured food prod-
ucts contain some amounts of sugar.
Obviously, it was not the intent of this
committee or of the Congress to apply
Sugar Act controls to all such products.
It is the intent of this committee that
the authority vested in the Secretary of
Agriculture will be exercised with re-
gard to products and mixtures that can
have a discernible impact on sugar con-
sumption and sugar prices in the United
States. This authority would thus be
limited to food products or mixtures
which are primarily made of sugar, or in
which sugar Is the component of chief
value, or from which sugar is commer-
cially extractable to be sold or used as
sugar. With these standards, the Sec-
retary has sufficient authority to correct
any, abuses of the Sugar Act controls
without intruding Sugar Act regulations
into the broad field of food products that
do not directly affect the sugar market.
Mr. Speaker, it should be noted , that
the majority and minority leaderships
of the House Committee on Agriculture
concur with the contents of this state-
ment.
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speak-
er, I yield to the gentleman from Ohio
[Mr. BROwx].
Mr. BROWN. Mr. Speaker, I yield
myself such time as I may use.
(Mr. BROWN asked and was given
permission to revise and extend his re-
marks.)
Mr. BROWN. Mr. Speaker, this res-
olution, as has been explained by the
chairman of the Rules Committee, the
gentleman from Virginia [Mr. SM rx],
simply provides, if it is adopted, that we
take from the Speaker's table the bill
H.R. 8050, which is the so-called honey-
bee bill, which some time ago passed the
House and went over to the other body
where they added a rider or an amend-
ment that would not have been germane
in the House under our rules to amend
the present Sugar Act.
In my opinion, and I am speaking very
frankly because I have seen a little too
much of it recently-the violating more
or less of the unwritten rules of the
House-the entire procedure in connec-
tion with thie resolution is somewhat
peculiar. A meeting of the Rules Com-
mittee was called to consider this res-
olution on about 15 minutes' notice late
last Friday afternoon. Because of other
commitments a number of Members on
the minority side of the Rules Commit-
tee could not be present at this meeting.
I do not know, of course, just what
went on in that meeting of the Rules
Committee, but I do know this resolu-
tion, House Resolution 726, was reported
from the Rules Committee. It provides
that upon the adoption of this resolution
the House will have agreed to this Sen-
ate amendment, and has thereby
amended, in a rather substantial way,
the so-called Sugar Act which we just
passed under rather peculiar circum-
stances only a few days ago.
There has been a great deal of con-
troversy and discussion in the national
press and elsewhere over just how that
particular piece of legislation happened
to be forced through Congress under
draft, on the basis there was a great
emergency existing, and so forth-we
had to rush it through before midnight
on June 30, although actually the other
12769
Do you know how I obtained a copy
of the Senate amendment? Through
one of the clerks of this body who was
kind enough to go across to the Senate
and get me an engrossed copy of the
Senate amendment as printed, ready for
the signature of the Secretary of the
Senate. That was the only way I, as the
ranking minority member of the Rules
Committee, representing the minority in
this House, was able to find out just what
was in this particular amendment that
we are being asked to rubberstamp to-
day by the adoption of this resolution
which provides for the taking of the Sen-
ate amendment from the Speaker's table
and agreeing thereto, once the resolu-
tion is adopted.
I want to say that in my opinion that
is a very poor way to legislate.
What does this amendment do? I
have tried to read, as hastily as I could
the provisions of this amendment. There
are members of the Agriculture Com-
mittee who have studied it more care-
fully than I, perhaps, after the Senate
adopted it. But in substance, the main
provision of the Senate amendment pro-
vides that out of the 1,600,000 tons of
sugar to be purchased at world market
prices-is that correct?
Mr. COOLEY. No; 1,635,000 tons.
Mr. BROWN. And this amendment
does not tell us what the rest of the al-
lotments are unless you add it up.
Mr. COOLEY. I am not arguing with
the gentleman. I agree with him.
Mr. BROWN. Perhaps the gentleman
agrees it is a poor way to legislate.
Mr. COOLEY. I do.
Mr. BROWN. I think any reasonable-
minded person will have to agree these
things should not be done, and, as far
as I am concerned, in the future I am
going to object to rushing these legis-
lative matters through without the
House membership knowing what on
body did not take action on the sugar bill earth they are voting on, or the Com-
until after the June 30 deadline had "mittee on Rules knowing what it is voting
come and gone..
I do not know just what information
was submitted to the Rules Committee
in connection with this resolution and
its adoption, but I do know that when I
came to the floor here that I-as the
ranking member of the Rules Committee,
in order to obtain information on the
Senate amendment this particular reso-
lution would approve-was unable to
even get a copy of the Senate amendment
that this resolution will make law if this
resolution is adopted. In other words,
this resolution would have us take from
the Speaker's table and agree to the par-
ticular language contained in this Senate
amendment, put on as a rider by the
Senate to amend and to change the
present and latest edition of the Sugar
Act.
So it has been almost impossible to
find out just what is in the Senate
amendment. It seems to me just a bit
of commonsense that any Member of
the House who might be desirous of be-
ing slightly informed as to how he is
voting on some subject or other like this
one would like to have before him printed
copies of the Senate amendment he is
being asked to approve and to accept by
the adoption of this resolution.
on, for that matter. I do not intend to
stand for it any longer.
Let me get back to this amendment.
It provides that 75,000 short tons of this
sugar, that was supposed to be purchased
in the world market at world prices will
now be allocated by the President to
certain Latin American countries during
the balance of this year. Then 150,000
tons of that amount-the gentleman
from North Carolina has just mentioned
that, is-will be made available for the
President to distribute as he sees fit to
Latin American countries in the calen-
dar year 1963, and in the calendar year
1964, an equal amount of 150,000 tons.
Upon that 375,000 tons we will pay a
subsidy of anywhere from 2 to 3 cents a
pound, according to the price of sugar
on the world market. I doubt that will
be a benefit, but I have never had an
opportunity to read and study the way
this amendment fits into the Sugar Act.
I hope the members of the Committee
on Agriculture, the Members on both
sides of the aisle, at least those on this
side of the aisle, will be able to shed
some light on exactly what this amend-
ment will do, an amendment, I want to
point out to you, which could not be
attached to this honey bee bill under
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
12770 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE Juli' 16
House rules, but under the rather tain Western Hemisphere nations on a Mr. AVERY. But the Cuban quota in
strange rules which exist in the other premium basis. As the President's let- the bill that the President signed would
body can be placed as a rider on a bill ter indicates this will be earmarked in have been placed on a global basis; is
that has no relationship In any way with a manner similar to that in the original that not right?
sugar, the production of sugar, the pur- House bill. Mr. COOLEY. chase of sugar, or any Other thing con- The bill also gives the President dis- Mr. AVERY. Andato be Procured
nected with sugar, except the sweetness cretionary authority to reallocate to world market prices. at
and light that may involve honey bees. Western Hemisphere nations deficits Mr. Speaker, we go back here to pre-
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the which may occur in other foreign or in mium prices in this bill. So, the end
gentleman yield? domestic producing areas. It also con- result under any definition or construe
Mr. BROWN. Briefly. tains a provision which states: tion is the fact that this is costing the
Mr. GROSS, This is in the nature of In making such allocations to foreign taxpayers $10 million more than it would
still another foreign aid bill is it not? countries within the Western Hemisphere if we had not passed the bill.
Mr. BROWN. Well, it is a foreign under this subsection. special consideration Mr. Speaker, I do,not have any objec-
aid bill of about $56 or $57 a ton on shall be given to those countries purchasing tion to that per se, but as I said in the
375,000 tons of sugar. United States agricultural commodities,
Mr. GROSS. By the same token, a well of the House last week we should
pretty good tariff, too, the is. it not? This is a provision, Mr. Speaker, that not spread the mutual security program
Mt BROWN. Oh, hope the administration will follow into other legislation. If this is going
yes. And, Of with scrupulous care. It is a provision to be a mutual security aid, let us put
course, it is in addition to the Alliance which I believe is extremely meritorious it in the mutual security program. Let
for Progress funds we are setting up, and can be of substantial assistance in us not tie it to the sugar program. I
and may be in line with the new agree- expanding exports of our surplus farip agree with the gentleman from Ohio, and
ment I understand is in the works to commodities. It seems to me only just the other members who have spoken,
raise the price of coffee to $1 a pound or that the foreign nations which seek so that this is bad procedure and there is
more, to the American consumer. avidly the opportunity to participate in no precedent for such procedure in the
Mr. GROSS. Is there any danger of our bonus sugar market should be will- history of the House.
this bill being rejected by the free- ing to give our farmers and our tax- Mr. Speaker, I want to say just one
traders, both as to votes in the House payers an opportunity to sell our agri- more thing: I think our domestic pro-
and when it gets to the other end of cultural abundance in return. ducers should view their expanded pro-
Pennsylvania Avenue? In summary, Mr. Speaker, I would duction with a considerable amount of
Mr. BROWN. That I do not know, point out that the Committee on Agri- caution. When - you stop to realize-
Mr. GROSS. Would the gentleman culture has considered this bill thor- when the sugar producer stops to real-
think that there is any likelihood of oughly and voted to accept It with the ize-that his expansion, although ap-
t Presidential veto because it is in effect Senate amendment.
a high tariff? pearing to be on a sound basis at this
Mr. BROWN. I cannot answer that Mr. BROWN. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 time, this basis upon which he is expand-
minutes to the gentleman from Kansas ing his production Is in repudiation of
question. I understand the President [Mr. AvEny]. the Reciprocal Trade Act; it is adverse
has asked for and insisted upon having Mr. AVERY. Mr. Speaker, I would to our balance-of-payments proposition,
this legislation. like to make two Points, very briefly. because every acre extra that is produced
Mr. Speaker, I now yield 5 minutes to One, I would like to reiterate what the will be the gentleman from Iowa [Mr. HOEVErr]. this country produced at is a
(Mr, Hasked and was given gentleman from Iowa [Mr. G>tossl said. Premium price. I think the producer is
Permission HOEVEN
to revise and extend his r given According to my calculations, this is just in jeopardy if he concludes that there
pe miss simply a $10 million add-on to the mu- will be a continuing policy to allocate
Mk. HOEVEN. Mr. Speaker, s every- tual security bill that this House ap- this sugar to domestic producers at a
One knows this is a honey-bee bill with a proved last week. As I understood it, premium price; whereas sugar is going
we had made allocations and Identifica- begging at the world price for half of
s ugar older. Sugar and honey should
make a iweet combination. tion for all of our sugar needs for 1963 that amount and a premium purchase
What w et o combination. this bill in in the sugar bill that the President-the will account for further deterioration of
my opinion is the method uby the compromise sugar bill-signed just last our gold reserve.
my o body in taking this used
meritorious by thSaturday. Is that not right, could I Mr. Speaker, I am grateful that the other and totally unrtakinbil and attaching ask the gentleman from North Carolina final outcome of the bill which the Presi-
avsubstantive ed bndmedt [Mr. COOLEY] ? dent signed allocated permanently 60
a very r While I realize that the sugar other Mr. COOLEY. The President signed Percent of our domestic production, and
boto It. is not e handicapped that the rule of the sugar bill last Saturday and we made it further increased from 55 to 65 per-
body is not diapp d hke to ex certain allocations in the House that cent the annual increase to domestic
perm ne es I f one would y il this type - were changed in the Senate. Producers. I want to make the record
Press
Procedure. personal d on
dure. It is the same type of Mr. AVERY. The effect of the sugar clear that I think our domestic pro-
of pr ce re. being used a the pe f bill was to identify all of our sugar needs ducers should be extremely cautious in
care oc bill and the House should soon put for 1963 and several years hence? acreage and facility expansion. This
a to
c stop 11 it. Mr. COOLEY. To identify them? allocation, as I see it, is in direct con-
The sugar provisions of this bill repre- Mr. AVERY. To provide for and to flict with all the policies which have
sent a reversal of position by the ad- identify all of them? They were entirely been laid down by this , and I mion
ministration. Just 2 weeks ago the compensated for in that bill; is that in respect to foreign trade, and might
administration was plugging hard for right? say to some extent in the previous ad-
the global purchase and complete quota Mr. COOLEY. In the House bill we al- ministration. I would hate to see them
premium recapture concepts of the Se?_ located every pound of sugar, 9.7 million put their production and financial posi-
ference on H.R. 12154 reachedWa tom- Mr. AVERY. M
y Mr. BROWN. Mr. Speaker, I yield the
1rA
o
promise on these issues and gave the 000 tons in this bill c
in excess Of our remaining time on this side to the gen-
President some 1,635,000 tons of the anticipated sugar needs for next year. tleman from Minnesota [Mr. was given
Cuba quota a complete general purchase Mr. COOLEY. No. What happened (Mr. LANGEN asked and was given
basis. permission to revise and extend his re-
Today In this honey-bee rider, the ad- l
was this: ion tons fore Cureserved in our ba, to go back to Cuba sin marks.) LANGEN. Mr. Speaker, as one
ministration is asking for authority to the event she returns to the free world. of those who raised some objection the
take 150,000 tons per year, or 375,000 In the other bill they insisted on reserv- other day to bringing this item up under
tons for the 21/2-year duration of this ing more than that. We ended up by unanimous consent, I feel impelled at
portion of the act away from the annual setting aside 1,635,000 tons, but that was this moment to offer a remark or two.
1,1335,000-ton Cuban global purchase within the overall allocation of 9.7 mil- It has already been identified, the very
quota and to redistribute it among cer- lion tons. This is not in addition. unusual procedure that is involved here.
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
1962 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
It has been admitted that it is a most
unusual manner in which to legislate.
Almost everyone has expressed his feel-
ing in this regard. May I point out to
you, however, that there are some fur-
ther unusual circumstances that sur-
round this procedure and the legislation.
Let us recall for just a moment that
this Congress only about 2 weeks ago
passed a sugar bill that had the agree-
ment of both bodies. Somehow or other
that sugar bill did not find the approval
of all the foreign countries that are in-
terested in sugar. And so what did they
do? They raised some complaints.
When they raised those complaints what
happened? Within a matter of less than
10 days we find these two bodies re-
sponding to those requests in a manner
that is going to grant a substantial favor
to them. I ask you, if you will, to com-
pare that to the requests that have been
made by the farmers throughout this
Nation for the past 20 years, literally
begging for the opportunity of raising
a few sugarbeets and producing a little
larger share of our sugar needs. As a
matter of fact-and I can attest to this
by my own actions-whets we wrote to
the Department of Agriculture and to
the Committee on Agriculture, request-
ing some attention to this matter, and
we did not get any results in 8 or 10
days; we did not get any results in
months, nor did we get any results in
years. As a matter of fact, and I be-
lieve the chairman has attested to this,
the Department of Agriculture never got
ready to offer a recommendation of any
kind until they had to start holding
hearings without them.
Here now is a matter of 150,000 tons of
sugar and the sugarbeet growers
throughout this Nation would have wel-
comed an opportunity by adding 150,000
tons to their quota. And they have been
in the process of trying to do so, not for
a few days, but they have been in the
process of trying to do so for a matter of
years. It is to this principle, when we
think of the circumstances that surround
it and the actions that have taken place,
that I would surely be remiss in my
duties were I not to call the attention of
this House to the degree to which the
American farmer had been sidetracked
again.
I am wondering just how long we are
going to continue to show this kind of
favoritism to foreign countries at the
expense of the American farmer and at
the expense of the agricultural economy
of this Nation, if you will.
Mr. MEADER. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
Mr. LANGEN. I yield to the gentle-
man from Michigan.
Mr. MEADER. I tried to make a cal-
culation, and possibly the chairman of
the committee has the figure in mind,
of just how much it is going to cost the
American housewife in paying for sugar
if we pass this bill here today. I under-
stand that 375,000 tons in the 21/2-year
period will be taken out of the world
price quota and put under the subsidized
quota.
That means an increased cost at least
for the first year of $56 a ton. I under-
stand there are some reductions in the
second and third years. From a quick
calculation here it appears that the in-
creased cost of the 375,000 tons of sugar
to the American housewife will be on the
order of $17.5 million if we pass this bill.
Mr. LANGEN. I thank the gentle-
man for his contribution. I think he has
made a significant point. In the first
instance, he has pointed out the degree
of the cost. Second, he has pointed out
the degree to which all of us in the
House are unaware of what we are doing
at this moment, because we do not have
the amendments before us nor do we
have a complete explanation of what
they do.
Mr. DOLE, Mr. Speaker, will the gen-
tleman yield so that I may ask a question
of the chairman of the committee?
Mr. LANGEN. I yield to the gentle-
man from Kansas.
Mr. DOLE. According to the Presi-
dent's letter which was read here the
other day, 130,000 tons will go to the
Dominican Republic and 20,000 tons to
Argentina for each of the next 21/2 years.
'Mr. COOLEY. That is right.
Mr. DOLE. In the original bill we had
in the House there was a claim by the
Dominican Republic for $22 million.
This is not an attempt to take care of
the $22 million, which was knocked out
on the other side?
Mr. COOLEY. No, it is not.
Mr. DOLE. This claim is still pending
in the Court of Claims, and this bill has
nothing to do with that?
Mr. COOLEY. That is correct.
Mr. DOLE. This bill was never before
our committee, therefore we had no
unanimous agreement, _ but most of us
agree. Is not this a receding from the
original position taken by the adminis-
tration? Did not they want global
quotas?
Mr. COOLEY. This is in accord with
the position taken by the House and our
committee. May I point out to my
friend that the sugar bill was signed on
Saturday. The gentleman is aware that
the quota was increased by more than
600,000 tons.
Mr. LANGEN. I am aware of what
the original bill contains. I made no
reference to that. The reference I was
making was that here it became neces-
sary to make an adjustment in the
quotas relating to the foreign scene. I
should like to ask the chairman at this
point if after the passage of the bill the
sugar growers had come in and said, "We
do not think you have treated us right,
you ought to add 150,000 tons to our
quota," I am wondering whether they
would have got the kind of action that
your foreign countries got in this in-
stance with regard to their quotas, and
receive an additional 150,000 tons.
Mr. COOLEY. As far as I am con-
cerned, they could made it 250,000 or
350,000. It would be in keeping with my
philosophy. I do not want to take this
sugar program and make a worldwide
relief or welfare program out of it.
Mr. LANGEN. Your statement does
not change the principle I was talking
about in the least.
Mr. QUIE. Mr. Speaker, will the
gentleman yield?
12771
Mr. LANGEN. I yield to the gentle-
man from Minnesota.
Mr. QUIE. In the bill that passed the
House and that came back from the
Senate, which we agreed on, there was a
provision to prohibit net importing coun-
tries from selling sugar to the United
States, but this bill provides that Ireland,
even if she is a net importing country,
can buy sugar from some other coun-
tries, she can buy sugar from Cuba, and
sell it to us. I wonder what the reason
for that is.
Mr. LANGEN. I certainly agree with
the gentleman. I thank him for his
remarks.
Mr. BROWN. I want to say to the
gentleman that the Irish are pretty good
people. I want to ask this question and
I am serious when I ask this question, it
is not a facetious question: Does the
gentleman have any information as to
whether or not any well-connected lob-
byist will receive any compensation on a
contingent basis for any sugar that may
be purchased under this new legislation
from some Latin American country?
Mr. LANGEN. Let me respond to the
gentleman in this manner, that this cer-
tainly has been exposed by the press in
the past several days, and, I hold before
the House a newspaper article which is
an example of the degree to which lobby-
ing has been participated in and the
amount of money involved is directly
related to the number of tons in these
respective quotas, and on the basis of
that I would have to say "yes"-there
must be a direct relationship here to
these lobbying activities.
Mr. BROWN. Then you believe that
the pocketbook of some well-connected
lobbyist may be fattened as the result of
the adoption of this particular amend-
ment?
Mr. LANGEN. This cot
be the case. V
Mr. BEERMANN. Mr. a
the gentleman yield?
Mr. LANGEN. I yield to
man.
Mr. BEERMANN. On 1
tons that is a windfall, of
discretion of the President
if all of us here realize it i
tons a year production for o
in the United States. This i
that three mills could be bu
would take somewhere arot
or 30,000 acres of sugarbeet
this much tonnage for a mill.
whether perhaps, we should
an alternate provision insteal
this sugar or these 150,000 to
we ought to try to trade 150,0,
modities and if we do that, it w~
be quite so objectionable to ot,
payers.
Mr. LANGEN. The gentlemai
quite correct. Certainly, this is
equivalent of three sugar plants within
our own country, sugar plants for which
there is the demand in any number of
areas and which have been conveyed to
us in, I suppose, a good many different
instances by the respective groups that
are representing the desires of the sugar-
beet growers throughout the country.
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 CIA-RDP64BOO346ROO0300100001-1
12772 rnrT!'n leC0r.-%-.T I ?- - __ _
i
ey Stratton
Mr. LANGEN. I Nedz! Rodino " ' Sullivan C1R Scocnerer ranton Thomson, Wis. . Whalley
yield to the gentle- Nix Rogers, Colo.
man from Iowa, Norblad
u Taber Walter errs Yates
Rogers, Fla Taylor
Calif. Taber Walter Zelenko
Norrell ey s
Mr. GROSS. Has there now devel- Rooney Thomas
aped swell-heeled lobby in behalf of O'Brien, Ill. Roosevelt Thompson, N.J. So the resolution was agreed to.
hone bee? O'Brien, N.Y. Rosenthal Thompson, Tex.
y Does the gentleman know? O'Hara, 111. Roush Toll The Clerk announced the following
Mr. LANGEN. I should have to say O' a a. Mich, Ryan, Mich. Trimble pairs:
to the gentleman that my remarks have Ryan, N.Y. Tuck
been nnnflnert +r, +1- O'Neill Scott Udall Mnrria On this vote:
And the odd part of this-is that I-have Perkins Sherry Ullman
not heard anything about the honey bees Peterson Sheppard Vinson
other than it being the title of the bill. Pikebin Shipley Watts
:I wonder whether someone had not Pilcher Sikes Short Weaver
er
ought to explore what the honey bee Poage Sisk Whitten
off
ce Smit Wickems
matter is that is involved in this bill. Prri
Mr. GROSS. I think we can both Purcell Smith, , Iowa WillisrY
agree, it is the American Producer and Randall Smith, Va, Wright
e,ss odes, Ariz. Staggers Zablocki
the American consumer who is going to Rh
be stung by- this bill. - Rhodes, Pa. Stephens
Mr. LANGEN. Yes; the American NAYS-142
producer and the American consumer Adair Dwyer Nelsen
will be stung by this bill, I agree with the Alger Ellsworth Nygaard
gentleman from Iowa. Andersen, Feighan O'Konski
The SPEAKER. The time of the A Minn. Ill. Findnton ley Passman
gentleman has expired. Arends Ford Pelly
Mr. SMITH of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, Ashbrook Fulton Pillion
I move the previous question on the Auchincloss Garland Pirnie
resolution. Avery Gavin Pucinski
Baldwin Goodell The previous question was ordered. Baring Goodl iing Ray
Barry SPEAKER. The question is on Becker Gubser Reece
agreeing to the resolution. Beckworth Hall Rivhlman
Rivers,
The
question
was taken; and on a di- Bell Beermann Haller Roberts, onTex,
vision (demanded by Mr. CONTE) there Has Rog
Bennett, Mich. Harrison, errWyo. Rogers, Tex.
were-ayes 59, noes 39. Betts Harsha Rostenkowski
Mr. CONTE. Mr. Speaker, I object Bow Bolton HHoamer Ruthefo d
to the vote on the ground that a quorum Bray Jensen Rutherford George
is not present and make the Brewster Johansen Saylor
point of Bramwell Jonas Schadeberg
order that a quorum is not present. Broomfield Kastenmeler Schenck
The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum Brown Keith Schneebelli
is not Broyhill Kilburn Schweiker
present. The Doorkeeper will Bruce Kilgore Schwengel
close the doors, the Sergeant at Arms Byrnes, Wis. Knox Seely-Brown
will notify absent Members, and the Cahill Kunkel ke1 Shrivel
Clerk will call the roll. Ch
sibs
enoweth Laid
r 'The--Question was taken and there Chiperfield Langen Smith Calif
Coiner
[Roll No. 157] Conte
ibbitt Dent
abernethy Denton
iddabbo Diggs
klbert Downing
ilexander Doyle
indrews Edir_Jndson
Ashley Elliott
Ashmore Everett
9spinall Fallon
Bailey Fascell
Barrett Finnegan
Bass, Tenn. Fisher
Bates Flynt
Belcher - Forrester
Bennett, Fla. Fountain
Blatnik Friedel
Boggs Gallagher
Boland Gary
Bonner Gathings
Boykin Gialmo
Brademas Gilbert
Breeding Grant
Burke, Ky. Gray
Burke, Mass. Green, Pa.
Burleson Hagan, Ga.
Byrne, Pa. Hagen, Calif.
Cannon Haley
Carey Harding
Cederberg Hardy
Celler Harvey, Ind.
Chamberlain Harvey, Mich.
Chelf Hechler
Cohelan Hemphill
Colorer Henderson
Cook Herlong
Cooley Hoeven
Corman Holifleld
Dague Holland
Daniels Huddleston
Davis, John W. Hull
Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the Murray R
l
Inouye
Jarman
Jennings
Johnson, Calif.
Johnson, Md.
Johnson, Wis.
Jones, Ala.
Jones, Mo.
Judd
Karsten
Karth
Kee
Kelly
King, Calif.
King, Utah
Kirwan
Kitchin
Kiuczynski
Kornegay
Landrum
Lankford
Lennon
Libonatl
McFall
McMillan
Mack
Madden
Magnuson
Marshall
Mathias
Matthews
Miller, Clem
Mills
Monagan
Montoya
Moorhead, Pa.
Morgan
Morris
Morrison
Murphy
Lipscomb Tolleson
McCulloch Tup er
p
Corbett McDonough Vtt
Cramer Mahon Van Pelt
Cunningham Martin, Nebr. Van Zandt
Curtin Mason Waggonner
D
erounian
Derwinski
Devine
Dingell
Dole
Dorn
Dowdy
Durno
Michel Weis -~?
Milliken Wharton
Moeller Widnall
Moore Wilson, Calif.
Moorehead, Wilson, Ind.
Ohio Young
Mosher Younger
NOT VOTING-97
Alford Flood Loser
Anfuso Fogarty McDowell
Ayres Frazier McIntire
Baker Frelinghuyaen Mosween
Bass, N.H. Garmatz McVey
Battin Glenn - Macdonald
Berry Gonzalez MacGregor
Blitch Granahan Mailliard
Bolling Green, Oreg. Martin, Mass.
Brooks, Tex, Griffin May
Buckley Griffiths Merrow
Clark Hansen Miller,
Coact Harris George P.
Curtis, Mass. Harrison, Va. Miller, N.Y.
Curtis, Mo. Hays Minshall
Daddario Healey Morse
Davis, Hiestand Moss
James C. Hoffman, Ill. Moulder
Davis, Tenn. Hoffman, Mich. Multer
Dawson Horan Garners
Delaney Ichord, Mo. Pfost
Dominick Joelson Powell
Donohue Kearns Rains
Dooley Keogh Reifel
Dulski King, N.Y. Roberts, Ala.
Evins Kowalski Rousselot
Farbstein Lane St. Germain
Fino Lesinski Santangelo
sLgainst.
Mr. Thompson of Louisiana for, with Mr.
Relfel against.
Mr. Keogh for, with Mr. Kearns against.
Mr. Horan for, with Mr. Berry against,
Mr. Buckley for, with Mr. Hoffman of
Illinois against.
Mr. Garmatz for, with Mr. Hoffman of
Michigan against.
Mr. George P. Miller for, with Mr. Miller of
New York against.
Mr. Multer for, with Mr. King of New York
against.
Mr. Daddario for, with Mr. Taber against.
Mr. McIntire for, with Mr. Curtis of
Missouri against.
Mr. Davis of Tennessee for, with Mr.
Scranton against.
Mr. Donohue for, with Mr. Glenn against.
Mr. Lane for, with Mr. Osmers against,
Until further notice:
Mr. Alford with Mr. Whalley.
Mr. Joelson with Mr. Dominick,
Mr. Brooks with Mr. Fino.
Mr. McSween with Mr. Dooley.
Mr. Macdonald with Mr. Baker.
Mr. Yates with Mr. Rousselot,
Mr. Lesinski with Mr. Scherer.
Mr. Anfuso with Mr. Westland.
Mr. Delaney with Mr. Ayres.
Mr. Santangelo with Mr. Bass of New
Hampshire.
Mr. Farbstein with Mr. Thompson of Wis-
consin.
Mr. Powell with Mr. Martin of Massachu-
setts.
Mr. Healey with Mr. MacGregor.
Mr. Zelenko with Mr. Hiestand.
Mr. Fogarty with Mr. Battin.
Mr. St. Germain with Mr. Curtis of Massa-
chusetts.
Mr. Loser with Mr. McVey.
Mr. McDowell with Mr. Mailliard.
Mr. Harrison of Virginia with Mr. Minshall.
M
r Dulski with M M
.r.errow.
Mr. Elvin with Mr. Griffin.
Mrs. Granahan with Mr. Morse.
Mr. PASSMAN changed his vote from
"yea" to "nay." The result of the vote
Nvas announced as above recorded. The
doors were opened.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the
table.
CORRECTION OF ROLLCALL
Mr. O'NEILL. Mr. Speaker, I under-
stand on roIlcall No. 157 I am not re-
corded. I was present and voted "yea"
and I ask unanimous consent that the
RECORD and Journal be corrected accord-
ingly.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. AL-
BERT). Without objection, it is so
ordered.
A THIRD JUDICIAL DISTRICT IN
FLORIDA
Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, I move to
suspend the rules and pass the bill (S.
1824) to create an additional judicial
district for the State of Florida, to be
known as the "middle district of Florida,"
with amendments.
Jwwy, 16
Teague Tao trr
__
?~
estl
d
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64BOO346ROO0300100001-1
 Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1
WASHINGTON POST
19 JULY 1962
WiQ bets Stun
e fin chatter of the Sugar Act controversy
was written under _ the rubric ? "Importation of
Adult Honey Bees" in the Congressional Record
on Monday. The absurdity resulted from an un-
usual parliamentary maneuver whereby the Sen-
ate repaired some of the mischief in the sugar
legislation by amending a bill on adult honey
bees. "I abhor this way of conducting business,"
Chairman Harold Cooley of the House Agri-
culture Committee was moved to -observe, "-it
does indeed Make us look ridiculous .."
It certainly does, but Mr. Cooley's rectitude
Is a 'bit unctuous. Everyone knows that the
legislative confusion resulted from the deliberate
tactic of Mr. Cooley's committee in dumping
complex legislation on the floor at the last pos-
sible minute. The original House bill was so
questionable, so freighted with the, scent of fa-
voritism, that the,: Senate adopted a far different
measure. In the 'confusion of splicing together a
compromise, inequities resulted that led to the
improvised cure on the back of a bumblebee.
Let there be no mistake about the final result.
Whatever virtues it may have are offset by its
gaping blemishes. Countries that have never sold
sugar in the, United States-indeed, some that
have no export capacity at all-have suddenly
been brought, into' the premium-price American
market. In effect, the legislation creates new
'sugar industries that can have but a single market:
the United States. Moreover, under the law, a
country like Ireland could conceivably refine the
raw sugar it now imports from Cuba and resell
it at inflated prices in America.
Let it be clear who is really getting stung.
1 *,,,tlp.ys ' a bag 'of sugar, she
e,payirga surcharge to supporta managed
#ugaf economy. She will be paying to maintain
it none. pef' tive domestic sugar industry that.
has now increased its share of the melon from
56 to 60 per cent of the total market. She will
also be paying for premium-priced foreign pur-
chases that in some cases enrich a handful of
owners in places where very little trickles down
to the worker in the cane field.
In the next two years, the total bill to the con-
sumer will be over $1 billion in the form of an
indirect taxation sanctioned by Congress. And in
the process, by shrinking the standby quota re-
served for. Cuba, Congress has riveted that un-
happy island even more solidly into the Soviet
jD& make the United States C.on
?a
ss'foo xi lcgious~
Approved For Release 2005/04/13 : CIA-RDP64B00346R000300100001-1