THE MESS IN VIETNAM XVI--A POLICY IN SEARCH OF A GOVERNMENT

• Document Type: CREST
• Collection: General CIA Records
• Document Number (FOIA) /ESDN (CREST): CIA-RDP67B00446R000400060013-8
• Release Decision: RIFPUB
• Original Classification: K
• Document Page Count: 32
• Document Creation Date: December 16, 2016
• Document Release Date: June 21, 2005
• Sequence Number: 13
• Publication Date: April 5, 1966
• Content Type: OPEN

April 5, 1966
APproved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 7219
before in history. It must be clear to any-
one familiar with criminal law that many
of the accused do not want fair trials at all,
if those trials produce justice. What they
want is mercy; or if guilty, they want a
smart mouthpiece who can get them off on
a legal technicality and help them to beat
the rap.
Heraclitus reputedly said: "The major
problem of human society is to combine that
degree of liberty without which law is
tyranny with that degree of law without
which liberty becomes license."
The emphasis recently has been too much
on license. Court of law are courts of just-
ice, not courts of mercy. It is the executive,
the President or the governor who by law
has the power of pardon. Courts owe a para-
mount duty to the public. Judges swear to
uphold the Constitution of the United States.
The preamble of that Constitution states
that it is ordained to insure domestic tran-
quility?that is, order. Without order there
can be no blessings of liberty. It is impor-
tant that justice not only be done but that
it be seen to be done. It is not seen to be
done when the guilty escape and the inno-
cent walk the streets in fear. When courts,
out of mistaken sympathy or for any other
reason, refuse to apply the law as courts of
justice, then we are approaching the time
when there will be liberty and justice for
none.
THE MESS IN VIETNAM XVI?A
POLICY IN SEARCH OF A GOVERN-
MENT
Mr. GRUEN1NG. Mr. President, noth-
ing could more completely reveal the
falsity, the farcicality, the feebleness,
and the bankruptcy of the administra-
tion's policy in southeast Asia than What
is happening in South Vietnam.
What is happening there can best be
described as a civil war on top of a civil
war or a civil war within a civil war.
Americans?allegedly called into South
Vietnam by a friendly government?are
ordered by our own authorities to stay
off the streets of Saigon because it is
not safe for them to be out, so great ap-
pears to be the hostility of the inhabi-
tants of that city toward the United
States. That is In Saigon, not Hanoi.
Premier Nguyen Cao Ky?the U.S.
anointed leader of South Vietnam, whose
one hero is Adolph Hitler?is now at-
tempting to put down by force of U.S.
arms the growing protests against his
rule.
The press is rigidly censored?the peo-
ple are not allowed to learn what is going
on. Is this the freedom, the protection
of which we have sent American boys
to fight for and all too often to die?
Twelve years of fumbling folly-12
years of moving inexorably further into
the quagmire that is South Vietnam?
apparently has not taught successive
administrations in the United States that
political problems cannot be solved by
military might.
Mr. Tom Wicker, in a thoughtful and
thought-provoking article in the New
York Times, April 1, 1966, entitled "Di-
lemma in Vietnam" analyzes the unfor-
tunate predicament of the United States
In South Vietnam in seeking to build
upon the quicksand government of Pre-
mier Ky.
I ask unanimous consent that Mr.
Wicker's article be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
DILEMMA in VIETNAM?UNREST MAY LEAVE
UNITED STATES Wm./ CHOICE : LET KY FALL
OR BACK HIM AT ANY COST
(By Tom Wicker)
WASHINGTON, March 30.?Continuing po-
litical unrest in South Vietnam may bring
the Johnson administration face to face with
a tormenting double question:
Can it afford to let the present military
government fall or should it move openly to
keep it in power if that becomes necessary?
So far, the administration regards the situ-
ation as threatening but basically unclear.
Officials are not yet convinced there will be
a final clash between the military council
that has held power in Saigon for 9 months
and civilian elements primarily in-spired by
Buddhist leaders.
So far, it is believed here that the military
council will weather the storm. But Wash-
ington is perplexed by the council's failure
to take stronger action to sustain itself, and
It is not forgotten here that it was Buddhist
power lathe streets that led to the downfall
of the regime of President Ngo Dinh Diem in
1963.
Since Roman Catholic pressures also are
being brought on the Government in Saigon,
and a distinctly anti-American tone is be-
ginning to emerge from student demonstra-
tions, the possibility that the military coun-
cil might be unseated is not discounted here.
That possibility is taken seriously enough,
in fact, that attention is being given to the
question whether the United States could
afford to let the Ky government fall. Air
Vice Marshal Nguyen Cao Ky is Premier and
leading spokesman for the militaty council
of 10 generals.
There are two reasons why the ouster of
Marshal Ky and his military colleagues
would be regarded here as far more damaging
than any of the succession of government
changes that occurred between the Diem
overthrow in late 1963 and the capture of
power by the military council last June.
The first is that President Johnson and
the administration publicly embraced the
Ky government at the Honolulu conference
in February, proclaimed its leaders as part-
ners in winning the war and rebuilding
South Vietnam, and gave strong endorse-
ment to its plans for pacification and other
reform programs.
Thus, the Ky government's overthrow,
particularly by popular demonstrations such
as those going on in Hue and DaNang rather
than by a secret coup, would be something
of a South Vietnamese repudiation of the
United States. That could have strong
repercussions on public opinion in this
country, in Congress, and among other gov-
ernments.
It would bolster Communist claims that
the United States is the aggressor in South
Vietnam, rather than a defender of a coun-
try that has asked for assistance against
aggression.
The other reason is tbat the administra-
tion believes the reform programs of the Ky
government are sound, that at least the
major figures in the military council are
strongly committed to them and that politi-
cal stability in South Vietnam is vitally nec-
essary if these efforts are to have any chance
of success.
The administration now is committed to
the idea that reforms to provide a better
life for the South Vietnamese people are a
necessary part of the struggle to win lasting
control of the populace for the Saigon gov-
ernment. The Ky government is seen here
as the best hope, at least for the time being,
to carry out such reform.
Thus, the administration is desperately
anxious for the Ky government to survive
its troubles. They were set off when the
Saigon military council expelled Gen. Nguyen
Canh Thi, a Buddhist, who commanded in
most of the five northernmost provinces,
where the demonstrations are now strongest.
An informed source here likened his ouster
to a snapping rubberband that had set off
the sequence of events.
One source of' puzzlement here is why the
Ky government did not quickly get General
Thi out of South Vietnam after his ouster
from the military council. Instead, it al-
lowed him to return to the area where he had
commanded, and demonstrations have been
going on there ever since,
Nor does Washington understand why the
Ky government has tolerated such events as
the temporary takeover of radio stations in
northern cities by student demonstrators,
who then broadcast antigovernment propa-
ganda.
Marshal Ky has threatened to take "very,
very strong measures" if the unrest con-
tinues, but has not yet done so. This also
puzzles the administration, although it is
remembered here that when the Diem re-
gime responded with violence to Buddhist
opposition in 1963, the effect was only to
create even stronger sentiment against the
government.
For much the same reason, overt American
support for the Ky government would prob-
ably exacerbate the anti-Americanism al-
ready cropping up in some demonstrations?.
today in Da Nang, for instance?and further
undermine the government's position with
the South Vietnamese people.
If the situation reaches the crisis stage,
however, the administration would have to
answer the hard question whether to move
openly to keep the Saigon government in
power.
The disadvantages are obvious. The Ky
government would immediately be labeled a
"puppet" of the United States, any claims it
might have to popular standing would be
dissipated, and anti-Americanism in South
Vietnam would be greatly enhanced. On the
world scene, the U.S. position as the defender
of an Invaded country would be eroded, and
congressional critics of the war would be
mightily bolstered.
Thus, the administration policy now is to
lend the Saigon government whatever moral
and covert support and advice it can, in an
effort to help Marshal Ky and his colleagues
surmount the unrest.
Ambassador Henry Cabot Lodge and other
Americans in Saigon are working overtime to
convince dissident elements that, whatever
their problems are now, they are likely to be-
come worse if a change of government is
forced at what the administration believes is
a critical stage of the war.
Mr. Lodge was credited in reports from
Saigon with having helped persuade Roman
Catholic elements to tone down a statement
of their demands for a civilian government,
lest they undermine the Ky government.
The Catholics, a powerful minority, are
said to have warned the government not to
go too far in appeasing Buddhist demands,
however. They threatened open opposition
to Marshall Ky if he did not take vigorous
steps against the Buddhist-Inspired demon-
strators.
Marshall Ky, therefore, is caught between
conflicting pressures and so is the Johnson
administration.
A mS,jor question that no one here yet can
answer concerns the nature of any govern-
ment that might succeed the military coun-
cil. In all likelihood, it is believed here, such
a government could be "lived with" and
would prosecute the war, despite the setback
to social and economic programs that might
be caused by the upheaval.
There remains always, however, the possi-
bility that a new government would seek to
end the war. And no one here rgetends that
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP671300446R00040006001S-8
7220
the downfall of the pr s4nt, egirne would be
loss taan a serious s ack to the United
Slates in the larger wor d picture.
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
LT. ( j.G.) PHILIP OWEN ROBINSON?
AMERICAN CASUAT,TIES IN VIET-
NAM
Mr. SIMPSON. Mr, President, within
a single week last month three young men
from Wyoming died in battle. One of
the three was Navy Lt. (j.g.) Philip Owen
I';,obinson, of Sheridan.
Several days ago I was in receipt of a
copy of the letter that he sent to his
father, Owen. I, Robinson, the day before
lie was mortally wounded at Quang Nghi,
Vietnam.
This young man's death came very
much as a personal loss to Mrs. Simpson
and myself. Sheridan has been more to
me than just another city in Wyoming.
it was there that I met, courted, and
married my wife, and I spent a good part
of my life in that city. I have known
Mill's parents for more years than I can
remember and I have watched this young
man, who died for a cause in which he
deeply believed, as he passed through
elementary and secondary school into
high school and, then to the University
of Wyoming: He was a student and a
fellow ATO fraternity member while I
was president of the university's board
of trustees. I know personally the fine
man that, he was and the potential he
held for his State and Nation. He fell
in battle along with two other young
Wyomingites. Army Pfc. Leonard May,
of Medicine Bow, and Marine Pfc.
Michael Beck, of Cheyenne. These fight-
in.gmen died less than 5 days apart and
brought the death toll of Wyomingites
in Vietnam to It
Mr. President? it is questionable that
'any war is worth the cost in lives, not
because the objectives of the moment are
not attained, but because history tells
us that the peace achieved at the end of
war is so short lived as to vitiate the
noises for which the blood was shed.
Those who study this war 20 years from
now may welt say of us that we could
neither win the war nor keep the peace.,
on that we can only make supposition..
But of one thing I am certain. Phil
llobinson, Leonard May, Michael Beck,
those of Wyoming and other States who
died before them, and those who will
follow, will have died in vain if com-
munism is not driven. from South Viet-
nam.
We are fighting a war in that south-
east Asian nation, which denies the polit-
teal context of the endeavor. We have
only to read today's newspapers to real-
iso that, tlIPIP. are three battlefields in-
volved in the southeast Asian war and a
loss on any one of the three can mean a
de feat ir. totality.
The hills 01111 swamps of the shooting
war are not, the only battlefi.eld,s oni
which the war for Vietnam will he de-
ef.led, There are two other fronts of
equal importance?the governmental
hatticifield. of Saigon and the political
of Washington. I have no
doubt that American fighting men, freed
of the political hobbles which restrain
them, could win the shooting war. What
causes me the greatest concern is the
war in Washington and the chaos in
Saigon, neither of which allow us the
luxury of a protracted conflict in a na-
tion which is teetering on the thin edge
of political and hence, military disaster.
Lieutenant Robinson was a iunior offi-
cer uninitiated in the intrigues of
Saigon or the machinations of high-
level, politically oriented military strat-
egy. But his plea that we "open up on
the enemy sanctuary in North Vietnam"
is being heard more and more and not
only from junior officers but by those
long experienced in the conduct of war.
I do not know that bombing Hanoi is
the answer. Nor would I commit myself
to a policy of blockading the harbor at
Hanoi. I do know that by some means?
perhaps mining the harbor or knocking
out the railroad tracks which connect
the Communist Chinese mainland to the
capital of Hanoi--we must stop repeat-
ing the tragic sanctuary blunder of
Korea.
I have no desire to see the war in Viet-
nam escalated to a degree that will
trigger a major land war in Asia. But I
am firmly convinced that no government
has the legal or moral right to send sol-
diers to fight when policy has dictated
in advance of their commitment that
they will, not be allowed to win. If we
can require that our Nation's finest
young men fight and die in Vietnam, we
must enable them to fight and wirt?f or
their sake as well as ours.
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, will the
Senator from Wyoming yield?
Mr. SIMPSON. I yield to U!e distin-
guished minority leader.
Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. Pretlident, I
would like to associate myself with the
sentiments expressed by the distin-
guished Senator from Wyoming and I
would like to add a few sentences from
a letter from the father, who writes from
Sheridan. Wyo.
He wrote:
warPhil a good boy and the whole city is
shocked. He was stationed an a ,,smiununi-
cations ship at Norfolk in charge of the code
room. A year ago he called and sad that he
would be home the following week. I asked
him what gives and he said, "Dad I've been
giving it a lot of thought?thinki a;.; of my
Mandy and friends and (my way eti life and
decided to do something about it. I think
that we had better stop the Communists in
Vietnam al ,c1 not wait until they get to the
Montana border."
Trt keeping with that conviction, he
did to Vietnam and there lost his life.
His father wrote further:
He had been an adviser to the junk fleet
with one or two other Americans- ? a lonely,
risky life. He lived with the natives, ate
with them, saw the atrocities of the Viet-
cong and was completely sold on the Viet-
nam and their cause. He said, "Dad, this
is a young moan's war?the boys under 20 are
doing a tersinc job. He had the greatest of
praise for the chopper pilots as he rode with
them. He said they know that they are
sitting ducks but if there is an American to
be gctten out, especially if wounded they go
in.
As I recall, he wrote his last letter to
his father the day before he died. So
there is not only another casualty, but
there is also another hero in the cause of
the country,
April 5, 1966
In line with all of this, Mr. President,
the first young man from Crawford
County, Ill., in the little town of Pales-
tine, who lost his life was Thomas A.
Jennings. I was struck by the fact that
the casket simply contained these words:
Thomas A. Jennings, 1945-66.
That speaks a volume, because he was
born in one war, and he came to his un-
timely end in another war this year.
That brings the war home to the coun-
try. Probably one of the tragedies also
is that his father is a retired Army ma-
jor and was at the services at the time.
So little towns and large towns, but
particularly in the small towns, the war
comes home to them when one who has
lived in the bosom of the community is
suddenly snatched out of this li:e.
Mr. SIMPSON. Mr. President, I thank
the Senator from Illinois for his remarks.
I ask unanimous consent that articles and
editorials from Wyoming newspapers
pertaining to Lieutenant Robinson's
death and the death of Pfc. Leonard
May and Pfc. Michael Beck, be printed
in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the articles
were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
"AND MAY HE NOT FAIL You"-??-Loc ,s. MARINE
IS KILLED IN VIET
(By Wanda Ban(s)
"And may he not fail you, his country, nor
his mother. Thank you, God."
Holding back the tears, Mrs. Weston Beck,
38, of 147 King Court, read again nclay the
"Mother's Prayer for Her Marine."
Yesterday, Mrs. Beck and her husband, a
railroad brakeman, were notified that their
son, Pfc. Michael Beck, 19, wa,s kil ed Tues-
day on patrol near Quan Ngni, Vietnam.
Sgt, William J. Moore, Marine recruiter.
brought the news to the Beck home, a pink
shingled house with a decal on the from;
door, "We are proud to be a service family."
Only yesterday, Mrs. Beck had received two
letters from her son.
One letter read, "I'm in good sp rite, feel
well, love you, and miss you all."
The other said, "I'm scheduled fon a patrol
in a day or two and am looking forward to
It.',
The Cheyenne marine was the second local
fatality in the war and the third Wyoniing
serviceman to die this week.
Weston Beck, a tall, slender, sof ,.-spoken
man, said, "Even though I lost my only son,
he is still my favorite subject to talk about."
"Mike was a scrapper," he said. "I or years,
I taught Mike ? * ? 'son, don't look for a
fight but if you have to fight, be therm first.'"
He said he felt his son died dol ig wha
he thought was right.
Mike was born February 24, 1947, and at-
tended Cheyenne schools. He was an out-
standing athlete and received letters in foot-
ball, wrestling, and track at Central High
School. He was a member of the Central
High C Club.
The father said three or four times "We
have no regrets ? * ? we believe the sacri-
fice of our son is necessary." Ye said,
"Others have died and there will he more
* ? * I'll worry about every one u atil it's
over."
The mother and father both sail. "Tell
every parent to write their boys * * * letters
mean so much to them * * * the kids ought
to be reassured."
Mike's dad is a brakeman for the Union
Pacific Railroad and has lived in Cheyenne
20 years. He said the thought of Mike used
to comfort him on the long passeng ,r runs
to Green River,
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
April 0, 1966
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
The boy's sister, Mary, 18, was taking her
brother's death hard, the mother Said.
Mrs. Beck said, "You don't realize hoW
close you are to your children until you lose
them."
The parents said again, "We'll miss him so,
but we have no regrets.
Beck was attached to C Company, 1st bat-
talion, 7th Marines, 3c1 Marine Division, and
had been in Vietnam less than 6 weeks. He
enlisted last August.
Besides his parents and sister, he is sur-
vived by a grandmother, Mrs. Alice Ray,
Sutherlin, Oreg.; three uncles, Carl C. Beck,
Cheyenne; Don Beck, Denver; and J.Beck in
Va Jaso, Tex.; and an aunt, Mrs. Margaret
Burt, Denver.
Mike's body will be flown home for military
services.
Janis Black, Cheyenne freshman at College
of Idaho, Caldwell, close friend of Mike's,
said today, "I've known Mike since grade
school; he was a good sport, an outgoing, fun-
loving guy. * * * We'll all miss him."
Janis said that friends of Mike at the Uni-
versity of Wyoming had stayed up late last
night in the dormitories at Laramie, talking
about their friend.
Cheyenne's first casualty was Navy man
Robert Guthrie, 21, son of Mr. and Mrs. Vern
Guthrie, 2217 East 13th, attached to the ma-
rines, who was killed on a patrol at Da Nang.
Two other Wyoming men died last week
after they were wounded in action in Viet-
nam.
Navy Lt. (jg.) Philip Robinson, 28, of Sheri-
dan, died aboard a helicopter Friday after he
was wounded while on patrol 5 miles east
of Quang Mgai city.
Army Pfc. Leonard May, 21, son of Mr. and
Mrs. Albert May of Medicine Bow, died
Thursday when he was shot while on duty
With the 1st Infantry Division.
Services are in charge of Wiederspahn
Chapel of the Chimes.
[From the Cheyenne (Wyo.) State Tribune,
Mar. 28, 19663
A TIME FOR REASSESSMENT
In this election year of 1966, there are
signs of restiveness among the American
people over the way the Johnson adminis-
tration is running the war in Vietnam, and
over its domestic programs.
Perhaps the people have no one to blame
but themselves, for it is with them that the
ultimate power lies.
Perhaps, too, the American people des-
perately need today, as peacenika march in
the streets of our cities and chant slogans
calculated to serve the purpose of our enemy,
to make a reassessment of their Government
and its current conduct of the wax against
both the North Vietnamese and against pov-
erty; and also to make a reevaluation of their
own attitudes.
This past weekend, It was announced that
a young Navy lieutenant from our own State
had been killed only last Friday in Vietnam.
The story of Lt. Philip Robinson, who was
28 years old, is a deeply moving account of
dedication to the cause of this country, and
of personal sacrifice.
"A year ago in April" said his father, Owen
Robinson, "he called us and told us he had
asked for a year's extension in Vietnam.
He said he had been thinking of his family
and his friends and our way of life?and
since he was single, he thought he should do
something about it."
He said, Mr. Robinson recounted, "that
if we were to stop communism we'd better
do it there than on the Montana border."
This past weekend, too, Ronald Reagan,
a movie and TV actor who is a candidate
No. 59-4
for the Republican nomination for Gov-
ernor of California, told a meeting in Ne-
braska: "If our sons are going to be al-
lowed to die for their country, they ought
to be allowed to win."
While the story of the death of Lieutenant
Robinson was being told, and Reagan was
making his speech in Lincoln, Nebr., and
thousands of anti-Viet war demonstrators
were marching across the country, there was
mounting evidence that the real professional
military leaders of the United States were be-
coming increasingly dissatisfied with the
manner in which the Johnson administra-
tion is running the war.
Gen. Earle Wheeler, Chairman of the Joint
Chiefs of Staff, the five generals who are top
servicemen in the Military Establishment,
made it known through all but direct quo-
tation that the Joint Chiefs are concerned
over the prospect of an intensification of
the war in Vietnam not through a more
aggressive waging of that conflict by the
United Statea, but by lack of it.
For one thing Wheeler and the Joint Chiefs
have noted intelligence reports indicating a
greater buildup of North Vietnamese regular
forces in South Vietnam. For another, they
also are worried about fuel oil storage sites
In North Vietnam that they have not been
allowed to bomb.
But President Johnson has subordinated
the advice, based on the professional skill
and training of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, to a
civilian industrialist, Robert S. McNamara.
Furthermore, under this wholly civilian op-
erational setup, he has subordinated a
strictly military concept of the war to a po-
litical basis.
Our military analyst, Gen. Ira Baker, one
of our most capable and thoroughly profes-
sional combat leaders of World War II, de-
cries this tendency on the part of the John-
son administration in an article printed in
an adjacent column today. General Baker
points out that for the first time in the his-
tory of this country, we have placed almost
total reliance on strategy as well as tactics
in the hands of civilians who are amateurs.
He might have said, one civilian: Mr. Mc-
Namara. This civilian with the possible as-
sistance of the State Department has enun-
ciated the concept that one cannot go too
far in war?at least in this war?because it
might bring on greater war, a specious theory
which overlooks the stark fact that war once
commenced must be waged with vigor be-
cause the only other alternative Is defeat.
As for the American people themselves,
they too must come to realize that they are
in this as much as the Lt. Philip Robinsons,
and the young men who already have given
their lives in sacrifice in this deadly struggle,
and their families.
It is not enough that these alone must bear
the brunt of saving our way of life, as Lieu-
tenant Robinson recognized as his duty. We
all must bear the common burden.
In so doing, let us dispense with the belief
that we can have business as usual; that we
can simultaneously fight wars of poverty and
wars of liberation of the oppressed; wars of
economics at the same time we are fighting
wars for freedom. Let us discard the notion
that all we need worry about is material com-
forts at home while young men like Lieuten-
ant Robinson are fighting arid dying for us
8,000 miles away.
In short, let us get to the guts of the Viet-
nam matter, now?wholly, totally, and with
singleness of purpose, through whatever may
have to be done?including a sacrifice on the
part of some people of seeking forever to win
elections by keeping everybody happy.
7221
[From the Cheyenne, Wyo., State Tribune,
Mar. 31, 19661
Do Nov Fon=
"Here dead lie we because we did not
choose to live and shame the land from which
we sprung."?A. E. HOUSMAN.
"The bravest battle that ever was fought;
Shall I tell you where and when?
On the map of the world you will find it
not;
It was fought by the mothers of men."
?JOAQUIN MILLER.
The returns are coming in faster than ever
from Vietnam. Yesterday it was Michael
Beck; 4 days earlier Philip Robinson; the day
before that Leonard May.
Three Wyoming boys have yielded up their
lives in a war far from their homeland,
within less than a week's time. Michael
Beck is the second casualty of the war from
our town; the first was Robert Guthrie.
What can we say to the parents and fam-
ilies of these?
In our own incompetent, dumb, and un-
comprehending way, we can say we are sorry;
that we are saddened, and weep with them
over their loss.
That is the very least we can do.
We can tell them?and especially the
mothers and wives?that we share with them
In a modest way, their bereavement.
It will not help very much, but it may a
little.
We can tell them that these are the men
who were made men far ahead of their time;
and who further than that have rendered
the ultimate contribution to their fellow
man, and to their country.
They join a legion of Americans that
stretches back to the war of 1776; to the
likes of the 32-year-old physician named Dr.
Charles Warren who stood in the ranks at
Bunker Hill on a hot June day and yielded
up his own life that there might be an
America.
Or men the stripe of Davy Crockett and a
rag-tag band of beardless youths and mid-
dle-aged men who perished in the Alamo in
a similar battle fought 130 years ago this
very month?then on a foreign field, against
a despot and tyrant.
Or the 600,000 men, mostly youths, who
gave their lives in the most terrible war of
this Nation's history, from Bull Run through
Antietam, Shiloh, Gettysburg, Stone Moun-
tain, Appomattox.
Or the Indian Wars that covered some 30
years and ground that we presently live on,
in comfort and security.
Or San Juan Hill, San Mihiel, the Argonne,
Bataan, the Battle of the Bulge, Pork Chop
Hill.
More than three-quarters of a million men
have died for the America we know today, in
battles here and far away; on our home
ground, in France, Germany, Guadalcanal,
Tarawa, Iwo Jima, the Philippines. In Ko-
rea and now in Vietnam.
Vietnam probably will get worse before it
gets better; and there will be more dread
messages.
But let us say that whatever comes we
must not falter and turn away, if only for
these who already have given the last ounce
of their devotion to America.
They fought for an America that may not
really exist except in their hearts and minds.
But if the ideal was theirs, it is for us the
living to perfect that ideal.
It is now no question that they have
measured up to the greatest heights of any
man, be he President or average citizen.
They now are tested in time.
The question before us, the living, is: Do
we measure up to them?
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
7222 CONGRESSIONAL R.ECORD ? SENATE
let -W.: not forget that we must seek to
merit their faith, every day that we live, for-
ever more. For the Michael Becks, the Phil
Ruhinsons, the Bob Guthries, the Leonard
Mays and all the rest, of this war and those
lief ire.
eta, ha-get.
-Gea . rest the dead, our honored dead,
Who died for you and me/
And Mess him, for his faith and love,
[hti .cor his bravery;
ae who gave his an for us
/Ione the battlefield,
laerair:e he lied con vtiti ons
'ii lisp he Would not yield.
lie' is the hero in the hatl.
everlasting fame
Siiilieri no one In the realm of GP/1
iIris any greater claim.
he laid down his life for
who can offer more
10 arriai his God end fellow man
ice or sbore"'
From, the Sheridan EWyna Press, Mar, 26/
1.96a
l,lrnrrsusrnr ROBINSON LOSP.9 LIFE Tr,t ViIIINAM
Ott Philip Owen :Robinson, 28, son of
Mr. and Mrs. Owen L. Rol-Anson, 10 South
Linden, died March 25 in Vietnam, and be-
comes the first Sheridan man to lose his life
th it conflict.
Lieutenant, Robinson graduated from Sher-
idan EI.tglu Sehool in 1958. Ho attended Sher-
idan College and later graduated from the
-11,Miversity of Wyoming. At one time he
w t irked for the city during the summer.
Mr. and Mrs. Robinson received word while
in Cody. A. U,S. Navy officer drove over 300
/riles to get the word to them there, and the
Oath was confirmed by a telegram from Vice
lblm B J. Semmes, Jr., chief of naval per-
se soul.
It said: deeply regret to confirm on be-
half oi the U.S. Navy that your' son, Lt. (j.g.)
Philip Owen Robinson, U.S. Naval Reserve,
died on March. 9,5 ? ? ? as, a result of hos-
tile Eire received while on patrol 5 miles
eiti,:t of. Otiatlg Ngai City, Republic of Viet-
1.1:1111, Your BOB_ died aboard a helicopter en
route to an aid station with a Navy doctor in
at-endance Your son died while serving his
country. Please accept my most heartfelt
sympathy in your great loss."
'rue Rob nsons said today they had received
? leftrr from Phil last Friday stating he
would he out lame 9 arid wanted to stop at
Rung Kong on his way home. He also said
100 Mines were being planted around his area
so tie felt sit fer
year ago in April, his parents revealed.
he called front Norfolk and said he would be
home in a week, said he had asked for a year's
extension and that he had asked for Viet-
nam, He .Haid he had been thinking of his
kw-My, his frietuls, and our way of life, and
sinee wia single felt he should do some-
thing aiiont it,
Ent all his totters, the Robinsons report, he
said he liked the people and was a firm be-
liever In their cause. He said that if COM-
muntism is to he stopped it would be better
V) CIO it there than on the Montana border.
"tti he died fighting for his convictions,"
his parents said today.
II a body will be flown to San Francisco and
will then come by train to Sheridan. No
definite time or date for services has been
set as yet, hut burial will be hi, the Masonic
circle at Sheridan Municipal Cemetery.
tiiiiiitenant Robinson Was born in Janes-
? Wi.I., March 22, 1938,
belonged to li.lasonte Lodge 43, Sheridan
ileottish Rile, the Methodist Church, the
Wks Club, and was a member of ATO, a uni-
versi ty fratern
flurviving are his mother and father, two
.,litltattl, Anne Sidwell, Sheridan, and Lynn
Gustafson, Oneonta, N.Y., auci seven nieces
and nephews.
SIR WINSTON CHURCHILL DAY
t)ITi? relli,KSEN. Mr. President, after
conferring with the other member of the
subcommittee, the Senator from Arkan-
sas Mr. MCCLELLAN], I ask unanimous
enlist rit that the Committee on the Judi-
ciary he discharged from the further con-
sideration of Senate Joint Resolution 12'7
and that the Senate proceed to its im-
mediote consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
joint resolution well be staled for the
information of the Senate.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
A joint resolution designating April 9 of
erch year is "Sir Winston Chmebill Day."
Mr. DIRKSEN. The resolution prob-
ably has 35 or more sponsors. The rea-
aon for calling it up by unanmous con-
sent, even though it has not cleared the
full committee, is that on April 9, which
is a few days hence, we will observe Sir
Winston Churchill Day becarse it is the
third anniversary of the dale when the
bill was signed which conferred upon
him honorary citizenship.
I am advised that in the garden of the
British Embassy a very impressive statue
of Sir Winston Churchill wlli be dedi-
cated.
The House of Representatives, I be-
lieve, will pass the joint resolution today
also. I believe it timely and appropriate
that we do likewise. In the terms of
the joint resolution we ask that the
President proclaim that day es Sir Win-
ston Churchill Day.
Mr. DODD. Mr. President, in Jan-
uary I introduced Senate Joint Resolu-
tian 127, which would authorize and
request the President; to declare April 9
of each year as Sir Winston Churchill
Day.
Forty of my distinguished colleagues
joined me in cosponsoring this resolution,
demonstrating quite clearly the wide and
strong support for such a tribute to per-
haps the most outstanding man of the
20th century.
It has been my earnest hope that this
measure could be passed before next
Saturday. That will mark the third
anniversary of the act which made Sir
Winston the first honorary citizen of the
United Slates.
It would coincide also with the un-
veiling of a magnificent bronze statue of
Churchill at the British Embassy..
A most notable occasion would become
even more significant if the dedication
of the statue could be the fest anni-
versary cif Sir Winston Churchill Day.
I want to thank the distinguished Sen-
ator from Illinois, Senator DIRE SEN and
the distinguished Senate majority leader,
Senator MANSFIELD, for their interest in
this measare and their invaluable assist-
ance having the resolution tak( a up on
the floor tiday,
Once the Senate passes this resolution,
it is very likely that it can also be ap-
proved by -the House. Congressman
BYRON ROGERS, chairman of the House
Judiciary Subcommittee which hand/es
such legislation, would like to see this
April 5, 1966
taken up on the House floor as soon as
possible before the Easter recess.
I would like to express my apprecia-
tion to Congressman ROGER'S and to the
many persons who have expressed an in-
terest in this legislation.
And, of course, I also waii t to tha ilk the
many cosponsors of Senate Joint Resolu-
tion 127 for their support.
The many distinguished Senators who
cosponsored the resolution are GeninoN
ALLOTT, Republican of Colorado; BIRCH
BATH, Democrat of Indiana; ALAN BIBLE,
Democrat of Nevada; DANIEL BREWSTER,
Democrat of Maryland; QUENTIN Bun-
DICK, Democrat of North Dakota; HPRRT
BYRD, JR., Democrat of Virginia; JouN
SHERMAN COOPER, Republican of Ken-
tucky; PETER Dommitmc, Republican of
Colorado; SAM ERVIN, JR., Democrat, of
North Carolina; Plum J. FANA\ IN, Repub-
lican of Arizona; ERNEST GRUENING, Dem-
ocrat of Alaska; FRED HARRIS Democrat
of Oklahoma; PHILIP Haar, Democrat of
Michigan; VANCE HARTKE, Democrat of
Indiana; ROMAN HRUSICA, Republican of
Nebraska; DANIEL INOUYE, DO/110CM) t of
Hawaii; LEN JORDAN, Republican of
Idaho; ROBERT KENNEDY, Democrat of
New York; TED KENNEDY, Democrat of
Massachusetts; JENNINGS RANDOLPH,
Democrat of West Virginia; THOMAS
KIMMEL, Republican of California; ED-
WARD LONG, Democrat of Misseuri; WAR-
REN MAGNUSON, Democrat of Washing-
ton; EUGENE MCCARTHY, Democrat of
Minnesota; LEE METCALF, Democrat of
Montana; Jack MILLER, Republican of
Iowa; FRANK Moss, Democrat of Utah;
GEORGE MURPHY, Republican of Cali-
fornia; GAYLORD NELSON, Democrat of
Wisconsin; CLAIBORNE PELL, Democrat of
Rhode Island; WINSTON PROUTY, Repub-
lican of Vermont; WILLIS HMERTSON,
Democrat of Virginia; DONALD RUSSELL,
Democrat of South Carolina; HUGH
SCOTT, Republican of Pennsylvania;
STUART SYMINGTON, Democrat of Mis-
souri; STROM THURIVEOND, Republican of
South Carolina; JOHN TOWER, Republi-
can of Texas; JOSEPH TYomcs, Democrat
of Maryland; STEPHEN M. YOUNG, Demo-
crat of Ohio; ABRAHAM RIBICCii,P, Demo-
crat of Connecticut.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, the Committee on the Judi-
ciary is discharged from further con-
sideration of Senate Joint Resolution 127,
and, without objection, the Senate will
proceed to its consideration.
The joint resolution is open to tonend-
ment. If there be no amendment to be
proposed, the question is on the engross-
ment and third reading of the jcint res-
olution.
The joint resolution (S.J. (fes. 127)
was ordered to be engrossed for a third
reading, was read the third tirie, and
passed, as follows:
S.J. REs . 127
Resolved by the Senate and House of Rep-
resentatives of the United States of Amerlea
in Congress assembled, That April 9 of each
year, tile anniversary of the conferring if
honorary United States citizenship on Sir
Winston Churchill, is hereby designated as
"Sir Winston Churchill Day." The P 'esident
is authorized and requested to IStisle each
year a proclamation calling on the ti,ienle of
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
cii
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP671300446R000400060013-8
7234 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
Washington will provide money and set
standards to serve these needs, but it should
not attempt to control every step in the
process, leaving nothing to local imagination
or initiative.
Yet the States and localities are poorly
organized to do their part, and the existing
systems for sharing Federal revenues are un-
wieldy and outdated.
It is the task of creative federalism to fos-
ter new institutions at the grassroots level
and develop new fiscal arrangements so that
State and local governments can become true
partners with the Federal Government, and
not merely little brothers.
WATER POLLUTION AN EXAMPLE
One presidential aid, aware that this ex-
planation is a bit fuzzy, cites the adminis-
tration's water pollution bill as an example
of things to come. A single State cannot
clean a river. A regional agency with juris-
diction along the river's entire course is
necessary. Therefore, the bill withholds
funds from any State whose Governor has
not promised to join an interstate body hav-
ing power to force compliance on those who
can control sources of pollution.
"We are saying, 'You put together an
organization of counties, cities, towns, and
States, and we'll give you the money to clean
your river,' "explains the White House assist-
ant.
An example of new revenue-sharing ideas
is found in the administration's recent pro-
posal for rebuilding urban hospitals. Previ-
ous Federal assistance has been funneled to
the States through Hill-Burton grants and
loans. It has gone primarily for construc-
tion of new hospitals under a formula that
guaranteed help for rural States with low
per capita incomes.
But it did little for the larger cities, where
most of the Nation's obsolescent hospitals
are located. So early in March the President
sidestepped the Hill-Burton program with
a new grant-and-loan plan geared specifi-
cally for old hospitals that need new equip-
ment or a general rebuilding. It is tailor-
made for big cities and it is generous in
financial terms, even by the standards of
the American Hospital Association.
A TREND SYMBOLIZED
The break with tradition in aiding hos-
pitals symbolizes a trend in several other
Great Society programs proposed or enacted
In the last 15 months. The drift is away
from across-the-board grants-in-aid and to-
ward programs that are directed, through
Federal standards, straight to points of great-
est need.
Elaborate and specific guidelines bind the
antipoverty program, demonstration projects
in cities, and educational funds for children
of low-income families. Even the school
milk and lunch programs, Mr. Johnson sug-
gests, should go only to those children who
need them, not to every child that enters a
schoolhouse door.
The shift to tighter Federal restrictions
means less authority for Governors. States
participate in the new programs primarily
in conjunction with other States through
such associations as the Appalachia Commis-
sion or the proposed regional river commis-
sions. The Governor who had wide latitude
in determining where an interstate highway
went in the 1950's will have no such author-
ity in a clean river project of the 1960's.
The confusion and disagreement over
trends in federalism are nowhere better re-
vealed than in the cities demonstration pro-
gram, A key figure in this plan for rebuild-
ing central cities is the Federal coordinator,
the man Who would be assigned to pull to-
gether Government programs at the block
level.
His role is viewed by administration de-
signers as one of creating more initiative,
dynamism, and variety in local development
plans. But local officials are wary of poten-
tial czardom.
"Already, proposed coordinators of Wash-
ington's handouts to metropolitan areas are
being hailed as Federal 'mayors,'" charges
Michigan Gov. George Romney, who has de-
scribed a "new centralism" in which power
flows to Washington as Federal money comes
to the localities.
Aware of this trend, such Governors as
John Connally, of Texas, and William W.
Scranton, of Pennsylvania, far apart in dis-
tance and political philosophy, have voiced
identical complaints: that they are not given
a loud enough voice in the development or
operation of Federal programs.
Connally has traveled to Washington to
keep his hand in the Camp Gary Job Corps.
Scranton complained that the Federal Gov-
ernment keeps talking about cooperation
without seriously seeking State advice.
Many share California Gov. Edmund G.
Brown's lament that "while an increasing
number of government services are adminis-
tered under joint State and Federal auspices,
the Governor is brought into the policy-
making discussions * * * only infrequently,
informally, and haphazardly."
NEW INSTITUTIONS NEEDED
A key element entering into any discussion
of creative federalism is the need for
new institutions, and White House offi-
cials speak of both public and private insti-
tutions. In the public sector, examples are
obvious: the river commissions, metropoli-
tan planning organizations encouraged by
the carrot of financial aid and the rural
development districts proposed to do what
separate country towns cannot.
Applying creative federalism to the private
sector is more difficult. Officials speak of
drawing universities into cooperative re-
search centers with the magnet of Washing-
ton money. Or they talk of semipublic cor-
porations formed to do what private business
alone cannot afford.
One test of the new approach, they say, is
coming soon in the development of a proto-
type of the supersonic transport aircraft.
Private industry alone cannot foot the bill,
sometimes put at $59 billion, for an SST
program running from initial research
through the first generation of 200 planes.
But the Government wants to avoid a per-
manent subsidy of the sort that threatens
to engulf it in connection with the maritime
industry. Federal officials now are trying to
work out an arrangement with manufac-
turers before entering the prototype stage
next year.
"We are looking for some arrangement in
which we can give them the money to get
over the hump, help them with information
and then get some of our money back," one
official said.
Such innovations in either the private or
public sector would be critically reviewed in
Congress, which is normally skeptical of fun-
damental changes. But there is evidence of
growing concern.
Senator EDMUND S. MUSICIE, Democrat, of
Maine, citing the critical absence of coordi-
nation in Federal grants-in-aid and the local
governments' shortage of skilled planners and
managers, is on record in behalf of two fun-
damental reorganizations. He wants a Na-
tional Council for Intergovernmental Affairs
established in the White House and exten-
sive Federal help in training local personnel.
What creative federalism really means is
still anybody's guess. Mr. Johnson appar-
ently is not sure himself, for in his state of
the Union address he announced that "a com-
mission of the most distinguished scholars
and men of public affairs" would be created
to "develop" the new concept.
There is little doubt, however, that the
President expects it to be a major contribu-
tion of his years in the White House.
April 5, 1966
GROWING DISSIDENCE IN VIETNAM
Mr. CHURCH. Mr. President, in the
face of the endemic political division and
deterioration in South Vietnam, I would
like to bring two items which recently
appeared in the New York Times to the
attention of my colleagues. Last Sun-
day James Reston wrote on the "Myths
and Realities in Saigon." He empha-
sized that an effective war against the
Vietcong depends upon a cohesive Saigon
government which does not now exist. He
feels the recent demonstrations at least
have exposed the reality. In an editorial
the next day the Times said Prime Min-
ister Ky's effort to smash opposition in
Danang, and thereby possibly precipitate
another civil war, is the application of
military power to what is basically a po-
litical problem. Because of this, "a
change in government in Saigon is
clearly going to be necessary."
I ask unanimous consent that these
Items by printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the material
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as folrows:
[From the New York Times, Apr. 3, 19661
WASHINGTON: MYTHS AND REALITIES IN
SAIGON
(By James Reston)
WASHINGTON, April 2.?The latest political
agitation in South Vietnam, with its under-
tones of rebellion and anti-Americanism,
gives the impression of a new and particu-
larly vicious crisis, but this is misleading.
It may be a crisis?though it can undoubt-
edly be handled?and it is vicious, but it is
certainly not new. The demonstrations of
the Buddhists and the students against the
Washington and Saigon Governments are not
transforming the situation but only exposing
it. They are not changing the political fun-
damentals, but merely reminding us of what
they are.
THE ANCIENT PROBLEM
The nub of the American problem from
the beginning of this adventure was the
fragility of the political base from which we
chose to operate. The present Saigon Gov-
ernment is a coalition of military warload.s.
The Prime Minister in Saigon, General ity,
never really had control over the South Viet-
namese military commander in the 1st Corps
area, General Thi, whose domain bordered
on North Vietnam.
The present difficulty arose from the fact
that the Prime Minister, General Ky, tried to
prove that he had control over the whole
country. President Johnson summoned him
to a dramatic conference in Honolulu. He
outlined a very sensible program of social and
agrarian reform for South Vietnam with
which General Ky agreed. President John-
son treated General Ky as the leader of all
of South Vietnam, knowing this was not true
but hoping he could make it true if he said
so, but it didn't work.
It is too bad. There should be social re-
form and there should be a powerful central
government in Saigon that could bring it
about, but there isn't. General Ky tried to
prove that there was. Inspired by all the
publicity and flattery of Honolulu and all
of the Johnson-Ky photographs, he tried to
elieninate his rival in the 1st Corps area,
General Thi, and the trouble started.
BUDDHISTS AND STUDENTS
The Buddhists and the st'idents took to
the streets in support of their deposed local
leaders. The protests spread from Da Nang in
the 1st Corps area to Saigon. The U.S. Con-
sul in Da Nang, Samuel B. Thomsen, had to
urge Americans, including the 60,000 U.S.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
April 5, 1966
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SEN ATE 7233
widen its contacts with the rest of the
world? Is it the West that is isolating China
or is it China that is isolating itself?
CHINA ISOLATED
The United States old not, isolate Red
obina from the Soviet Union or from Indo-
nesia or _Mona Cuba; they isolated each other.
Tee United States didn't isolate Red China
hoof Algeria, or from Yugoslavia, or from
Lbs African nations which have expelled
.1eking's diplomats. Ceina isolated herself
b7; her own actions. it isn't the United
States which is blocking an exchange of
American and Chinese newsmen. We have
been trying to Pring this about for years.
led China blocks it.
Would Paing accept an exchange of am-
betesadors with the United States? There
ls every evidence that it would not, except
ou its own terms. For example, Peking
(creed General de Gaulle to withdraw the
French Ambassador from Formosa before it
wsuld accept recognition from Prance. Is
the United States to allow Peking to decide
I, Ire countries with which we are to have
ii plomatic relations'
oNACCEPTABLE CONDITIONS
1-0e5 Peking want to join the itral.? We
int know and it seems to me the U.N.
should find out. So far Red China has laid
U >wit wholly unacceptable conditions: For-
ire-ii must be expelled; the 1950 U.N. reso-
le (ion citing Red China as an aggressor in
the Korean war must be rescinded and the
United States named the aggressor instead;
the "imperialist nations" and their "pup-
pets" should be removed from the U.N.
if a two-thirds majority wants Red China
lei, why shouldn't they make it quite clear
lied: nobody is going to be expelled and on
that premise invite Peking to take a seat?
Filch a course will, at least, show whether
the U.N. is keeping Red China out or whether
Cott China is keeping itself out.
kg,king's self-isolation doesn't mean that
we should not try to bring it into wider
..ontact. It does mean that it will take
ie long time to do it, almost certainly into
he next generation of Chinese Communist
leaders. Like Stalin s Russia, Red China
apparently needs to picture the United States
ie; a big enemy in order to justify the mees-
eve repressions of the Mao regime. A -U.S.
pohicy of containment and contact makes
e'use.
IVIORE Bici BROTHER
Mr. LONG of Missouri. Mr. Presi-
h!ent, 2 weeks ago the Senate Subcom-
nittee On Administrative Practice and
l'eocedUre resumed its hearings on inva-
sion of privacy. We took testimony on
number of problems, ranging from gov-
f.q.nmental invasions of privacy to Indus-
t-rial espionage in the drug industry.
ikIntarently, our subcommittee was not
the only (Inc concerned with this serious
problem. My good friend and colleague
r.onator Armco:Fr took testimony from
Mr.
Rile h Nader on the activities of
1.A:neral Motors. And even the State
liepartment was involved in tracking
01.kiwii American citizens as they traveled
broad.
Max Lerner has writ-ten a most, inform-
alive on this subject. His
opening sentence expresses my feelings,
when he says: "Snoopers, snoopers,
everywhere." I ask unanimous consent
in insert at this point in the RECORD, the
article by Mr. Lerner which appeared in
the Evening Star on Tuesday, March 29,
1966.
There being no abjection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
THE PATH TOWARD A DOSSIER STATE
(By Max Lerner)
Snoopers. snoopers, everywhere. Doubt-
less it is sheer coincidence that three major
cases of snooping, in -three widely different
fields, should have hit the headlines at the
same time. But in the America of 1965
rather than of 19E4 the effeet is too eerily
big brotherish to be shrugged off.
All three have broken here in Washington
One was a ease of industrial espionage and
involved the highly artificial price structure
of the drug industry. The head of a firm
of industrial sleuths, working for a drus
manufacturer, told a senatorial subcont-
raittee that he had planted a spy in a,
wholesale drug company to discover whether
he was cutting his prices to retailers.
The second was an admission by the head.
of General Motors, before another Senor e
committee, that this giant company lied
spied upon a young Washington lawyer tyro
had written a book that is highly critical cff
cars as containers for human beings, am hi
which attacks them as death traps.
Third was the disclosure that at the re-
quest of the FBI, the State Department in d
asked the embassies in Paris and Moscow ,.0
place a Harvard professor of hietory under
surveillance.
I am sure that somewhere in each caee
somebody thought he was (Mine the right
thing: I am also sure that these are not iso-
lated. cases. Industrial espionage is wide-
spread; massive auto corporations, with a big
invostment. in current models, are 'tempted
to protect their investment by len; than open
methods; the State Department now tells -ts
that it is a common practice, and that hun-
dreds and even thousands of Americans hese
been treated with this extra attention.
Shades of Adam Smith, who saw the see-
tern of business competition as "nature's
simple plan." Shades of Jeffers-eel, who WaS
convinced that the crucial value i.n the young
American republic was the jealous safeguard-
ing of the right al criticism. Sb id-es of JIIS-
thee Holmes, who spoke of the "dirty business
of wiretapping" and had the old-fashiored
sense of honor and openness that gave him a
healthy dislike for snooping in every form.
The fact that there things are done com-
monly and on a big scale does not mete
them more attractive but
Of the three cases I find the sleuthing of
americans by U.S. embassies abroad the mieit
disquieting. The target was FI. Stu-:rt
Hughes, a teacher and scholar of distinciti, in,
who has taken some naive political positi. ,ns
I'm the past but probably not any more so
than many other American mtellectu ,Is.
One doesn't have to agree with Hughes in
order to believe that his political posit: ,ns
are no justiffeation for shadowing him when
he goes cm a research assignment to Eurtpe.
It appeared at first that the passport cf.vi-
sion of the State Department had issued eise
surveillance order on its own, without a re-
quest from any agency. Then it turned ont
that the FBI lied sent through a reqmest.
Perhaps it's more consoling for the shack-reed
person to know (if he ever discovers it) i Pat
the surveillance of him is p'u-suant to a
reouest from a Government agency, and leat
everything has been done in proper /cum.
But bureaucratic order doesn't help muco if
the principle itself is a highly doubtful ane.
While saying that it has been common
practice for years to shadow Ameri,,ans
abroad, the State Departmene was tmsble
to cite the legal authority under which is
done. I suppose the answer is that in. is
not a legal but a practical peoblem. at a
tirne of war, whether cold or hot, there are
agencies whose tasks it is to guard U.S.
security. They keep a watch over certain
men within U.S. jurisdiction, and when they
go abroad the vigil presumably continues.
There may be no real answer to the prob-
lem. The FBI and similar agencies would
feel crippled if they could not ask for sur-
veillance of people they suspect. But the
trouble is that there is no way for the rest
of us?the Nation as a whole?to form any
Judgment of how responsibly or irrespon-
sibly those suspicions have arisen, how
and why a particular man is chosen for
shadowing, by whom and on what grounds
the decision to make the request is reached,
and what use is made of the harvest of infor-
mation that is gathered about the suspect,
Can we not, with ail our vaunted intel-
lectual resources, contrive some way by
Which the security of the Nation will be
tolerably guarded while retaining one of the
prime values of our society:
The right of a person to live his life, well
or ill, without benefit of the snoopers?
INTEREST IS BUILDING IN CRE.A?
TIVE FEDERALISM AND INTER-
GOVERNMENTAL RELATIONS
Mr. MUSKIE. Mr. President, the
growing interest of the Nation's press in
the development of a creative federalism
to help State and local governments bet -
ter meet public needs is both salutary
and significant. This interest, of course.
is heightened by President Johnson'..;
particular concern with modernizing our
Federal system to bring State and local
governments into a closer partnershio
with the Federal Establishment. A very
well-written and thoughtful article by
William Chapman appeared last Sunday
in the Outlook section of the Washingto )
Post entitled "The States as Partners."
It highlights some of the thinking ef
Presidential assistants, State leader:3,
and others on this important subject.
I ask unanimous consent that Ma
Chapman's article be printed in tl e
RECORD.
There being no objection, the arti;),e
was ordered to be printed in the P,ECORD,
as follows:
THE STATES AS PARTNMS--L.B.J. WANTS Trim IV
TO COOPERATE WITH FEDERAL GOVERNNI:1 T
BUT NOT AS LITTLE 13ROTHERS
(By William Chapman)
In city halls and State capitols, ears are
cocked apprehensively toward the W I)'
House these clays for answer to a widely ft:?
cussed question: "What is creative federalit
all about?"
It is a common but enigmatic phrase teei
President Johnson has employed for no:;
2 years in speeches and messages touchi;-1,,:
on the Federal, State, and local government s.
To interested visitors, the President 1 ;n;
spoken of it in stirring terms, declaring, ''
means we've got to get this country ready
for the year 2000."
The guests usually go away as unceer 1,1
as when they entered.
More positive guidance is expected t iii
spring when Mr. Johnson is to delis-es a
special message on the issue and appoin
study committee to spend 2 or 3 years a fr-
veying the broad fields of Federal-State rela-
tions. For the present, White House aids
and independent observers offer Only some
clues as to what they think the Presiden . is
thinking. Their description goes like ti is:
The Federal Government is bound to gnaw
larger and more powerful as States, cities,
and towns turn toward it for help in proi M-
ing everything from sewers to Jet airport.,
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
p.
Apr it 5, 1966
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
soldiers in Da Nang, to keep off the streets,
and even American officials and Congressmen
were advised to cancel their proposed trips
to Saigon.
An this proves is that the political situa-
tion is unchanged, and that the propaganda
of Honolulu has not prevailed over the power
and tradition of Saigon. There is no cohe-
sive national spirit in that nation for the
simple reason that there is no nation.
It is still a tangle of competing individuals,
regions, religions, and sects, dominated by a
group of military warloads, representing, dif-
ferent regions, an army without a country,
presiding over a people who have been torn
apart by war and dominated and exploited
by Saigon for generations.
THE AMERICAN DILEMMA
No doubt American power will be able to
sustain the central government of General
Ky in the present crisis, but the more power
we use, the more American domination will
be resented. This is the dilemma. It has
been there from the beginning and the latest
political struggle has merely brought the
facts to the surface.
The basis of American intervention in the
beginning?and even of the official American
thesis now?is that we are in Saigon to sup-
port a "government" and a "nation" against
external aggression, which that Government
and nation must win or lose primarily by
themselves, but there is no Saigon Govern-
ment that can govern, and no South Viet-
namese "nation" in our understanding of
the word.
ENDS AND MEANS
Meanwhile, the war goes on, unaffected so
far by the political turmoil, but there is a
basic problem still unresolved. Washington
is still counting on a cohesive Saigon
Government that does not exist. It cannot
count on effective political or military action
by the South Vietnamese and it is not pre-
pared to produce the political and military
manpower to take their place.
/n short, the administration in Washing-
ton has not adjusted to the facts. It has
not brought its ends and its means into line,
It has accepted the ends of the "hawks"?
destruction of the enemy's forces?but not
the means, and it has accepted the ends of
the "doves"?a negotiated compromise?but
not their means, negotiation with the Viet-
cong who are doing most of the enemy fight-
ing.
So Washington is in trouble. It is relying
on myths and the only consolation of the
present political demonstrations is that they
are at least exposing the reality.
1From the New York Times, Apr. 4, 19661
VIETNAM: WAR WITHIN WAR
Premier Ky's threat to smash dissidence in
Danang and Hue by flying in troops from
Saigon raises the danger of military clashes
with local forces that could precipitate a
second civil war in South Vietnam. It is
the application of mlitary force to what is
essentially a political problem. And the use
of American planes and weapons for this
purpose?despite the claim that American
troops will not be requested?makes it vital
that Washington call a halt to this dan-
gerous adventure.
A change of government in Saigon is
clearly going to be necessary. The question
is not if, but when?and how?a representa-
tive civilian regime can be established. Al-
though he has only been in office 7 months,
Premier Ky already has overstayed by 5
months the time predicted for him by former
Ambassador Maxwell Taylor.
President Johnson's Honolulu embrace
who obscured the Conference's real pur-
pose?to generate a new program of social re-
form?weakened rather than strengthened
Premier Ky's position and made recourse to
anti-Americanism a logical move for his po-
=cal competitors. An attempt to perpetu-
ate Premier Ky in his post to save face for
Mr. Johnson would only tar him further as
an American puppet.
A new political balance has to be struck
in Saigon. What is most important is not
Its exact nature but that a new balance of
political forces should emerge?and that It
emerge in as orderly a fashion as possible.
The crisis in South Vietnam is not a popu-
lar upheaval calling for panic moves; nor has
the Vietcong taken over Danang and Hue.
What was in progress, until this past week-
end, was essentially a Cabinet crisis, accel-
erated by the dismissal from the military
directorate of its most powerful member,
the northern commander, Gen. Nguyen
Chanh Thi. The street demonstrations,
even if somewhat infiltrated by Vietcong
agents, were traditional maneuvers by or-
ganized factions seeking to influence the
outcome. The first need is not to "restore"
Saigon's control of South Vietnam's north-
ern provinces?a control it has not been able
to exercise for many weeks?but to come to
terms with the political problems.
This, Premier Ky now promises to do by
calling a national political congress of all
factions to select a constituent assembly.
The makeup of the constituent assembly is
the critical issue between the Saigon direc-
torate and the militant Buddhist faction led
by the Hue monk, Thich Tri Quang, whose
stronghold is also in the northern provinces.
Tri Quang insists that the new constituent
assembly be drawn entirely from local and
provincial councils to which last year's elec-
tions returned predominantly Buddhist
elements.
It is a mark of Premier Ky's political in-
eptitude that the formation of this assembly,
planned last year and promised for February
at Honolulu, was not completed before the
dismissal of General Thi?and that General
Thi then was permitted to return to Hue.
The crisis illustrates again the extent to
which the United States is becoming Sai-
gon's prisoner. The American Embassy was
not consulted or even informed of General
Thi's dismissal until the military directorate
had taken its fatal decision.
Premier Ky's decision to send troops to
Danang appears also to have been taken
without consultation. Before the situation
gets further out of hand, the strongest in-
fluence must be exerted to resolve the Saigon
struggle by political means.
REA YOUTHFUL PRIZE WINNERS
Mr. MONRONEY. Mr. President, each
year the Farmers Union in Oklahoma
sponsors a Washington trip for its mem-
bers and for youth winners of an essay
contest in the State. Always, the group
is an interesting one and I enjoy visiting
with its members.
One of the winning essays this year
was by Steve Powell, of Altus, Okla,,
who discussed how 4?H Clubs promote
community living. I ask unanimous con-
sent that it be inserted in the RECORD.
A second essay by Kirk Castleberry, Nin-
nekah, Okla., stresses the benefits for
farming as a good way of life provided
by the Farmers Union and by rural elec-
tric cooperatives. I also ask unanimous
consent for its inclusion in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the essays
were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
How MY ORGANIZATION PROMOTES
COMMUNITY LIVING
(By Steve Powell, Altus, Okla.)
I am 15 years old and I do not know
exactly what a community is. What a com-
munity means to me might be something
7235
entirely different than to you. Webster
doesn't define it as to site, but says it is a
group of people having common organiza-
tion or interest. So, if this is true, all of
Oklahoma could be considered a community,
but whether it be all of Oklahoma, western
Oklahoma, Jackson County, or a small com-
munity in Jackson County, my organiza-
tion?the 4-H Club?it is the same in prin-
ciple wherever 1-II Clubs are found. It is
its purpose to first develop the person.
While the person is being developed, we do
like my grandmother does when she is bak-
ing a cake. We throw in a pinch of incen-
tive, a dash of leadership, and a large help-
ing of citizenship. Placed in the oven of
community life to grow for a few years, soon
we are "done" enough to take our place as
responsible' citizens in our communities.
While we 4-41 members are still cooking, we
are definitely making a contribution to com-
munity living. We represent free enterprise
in miniature. We voluntarily joined our
community 4-II Club. No one forced me to
join or dictated which club I should join.
I voluntarily selected my own projects.
The success of 4-H Club projects depends
upon the time and energy that each member
puts into them. Upon the successful com-
pletion of our porjects, we usually receive
some kind of award as the fruits of our
labor. This is true of any community. It
is no better than the people who live there
and no community progresses unless much
effort and leadership is put forth. The
awards I receive are mine and mine alone.
I do not have to share them with those
who have been lazy and less diligent. With
this kind of training, the community we
live in will be in a position to go forward and
be a better place to live as a result of my
organization, the 4-H Clubs.
I am disturbed by the comments older
people make, but mostly I am disturbed
about uninformed people, some of them pro-
fessional peddlers of gloom and doom, who
shout to the housetops the American family
farm and rural communities are being wiped
out. I am disturbed to hear some of them
describe American farming as our greatest
problem. And I hear some of these same
people caution us young people to stay away
from, or get out of farming?that it's not
a good life, that it's too risky. For years the
Farmers Union has promoted and encouraged
family farms. All of us will agree that a
family farm today is much larger than a fam-
ily farm was 20 years ago, and that our com-
munities do not have the same boundary
line they had 20 years ago, but as we 4-H
members view this situation this is a sign of
the times, it denotes progress and we want
to be a real part of this progress of the
changing time. Our 4-H Clubs have geared
their programs and projects to the changing
time just as the Farmers Union has had to
do too. Let us further compare the objec-
tives and goals of our two organizations.
Farmers Union means many things to hun-
dreds and thousands of men, women, and
young people. But each and every activity,
whether on the local or national level, has a
single purpose. The single purpose of Farm-
ers Union or the 4-H Clubs is a strong
family relationship, in a strong agricultural
community, in a strong America. It all
comes back to the family, the most impor-
tant unit in Farmers Union, also the most
important to 4-H Club work.
Strength for your organization or my 1-H
Club comes through knowledge. That is
why your Educational Department of the
Farmers Union is so important to your over-
all program and this is why 4-H Clubs were
first started and this is why they are stronger
today in every community than ever before.
And every member of the family is impor-
tant to your organization. Our 4-H Clubs
members believe that it is not guns, missiles,
and atomic power alone that keep our great
country strong and free. We believe that
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
iso)ige
1..atin)
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
local people and local communities that are
Interested in local affairs contribute more
to a strong economy, a better way of life,
more opportunity for ns young people than
any other factor. I know this is all true:
for the Farmers Union of Jackson County
has and still is taking a real interest in us
4. -1-1 members both with their time and
money, or I have been the recipient of their
efforts.
Yes; we are very much alike: Farmers
Union means summer camps, National and
State conventions, local action and enter-
taining meetings, international exchange
programs. This is our program, too. So
with the same program, Farmers Union and
4 .T1 Clubs can continue to hold hands and
move forward in our communities promoting
a better living for all. The spirit of our 4-H
Club Is refleeted in the prayer of the Saint
O.oin Assisi: "May T seek not so much to be
served, as bi serve others."
ear acute Goon Way oF Tare
( By Kirk (lastleberry, Route 2, Neionkah,
Okla?)
Say', have you ever bathed in a cramped,
cold sided. No. 2 wash tub? If you have, I
shall have little trouble convincing you that
the rural electric cooperatives promote good
community living.
First, lid like to take you on a mental visit
to my grandfather's pioneer Oklahoma farm.
:His day began before sunrise when he rose,
and built a tire in the kitchen range. When
the worst chill was gone, Grandmother rose,
and cooked breakfast-while he went to the
barn, and fed the cattle, mid horses by the
Light of a kerosene lantern. After breakfast,
grandfather harnessed his team and was in
the held by sunrise, tte came to lunch at
12 and was hack in the field by 1 where he
stayed notI iiinelawri.
Grandmother canned the family's food and
Ironed with flat irons heated on the wood
range. She washed on a washboard, and
Mane clothes OD a treadle machine by the
tight of a flickering kerosene lamp.
l'heir only sources of power were their
animals and their muscles.
out a greet change was coming. On
May 11, 1935. President Franklin Roosevelt,
by Executive order, created the Rural Electric
Ad min istra, i on.
When. Congress provided funds, it hoped
private utility companies would use this low-
interest money for rural electric develop-
ment, but they thought it wouldn't pay.
Their lines served 20 to 50 customers per
mile. The rural system would average three.
eio the farmer lived in the "dark age" from
10 to 20 years longer.
'Dien the Farmers' Th,lon which had
strongly Sniinorted the REA. :niggestecl form-
ing rural eleetric rooperatives, Farmers long
Pact been looking to this organization for
leadership in II) beneficial farm legislation;
(2) complele insurance coverage; (3) co-
operative initton gins, wheat elevators, cream-
eries, anrl M1F7 as,tion.
J, when this trusted. organization sug-
gested farmer; borrow money from the REA
and con street their own electric lines, they
listened,
Each of these rural electric cooperatives IS
local, inDeoenrient enterprise whose pri-
mary purpose is to furnish dependable, low-
cost electric serviCe. Each Is owned and goy-
creed by its users through an elected board
ui directors ? 'These directors hire a general
flaniitser. Pe hires and supervises other em-
atoyees. At the annual meeting the eltS-.
tomer-owners rib ,c.uss and vote upon current
problems and chart courses fir the coming
year.
Those who accuse the R1SC's of being so-
cialistically owned and supported by the
(loyernMent are uninformed of their true
onture.
On the farm more than 400 uses of elec-
tricity are known. It is pumping water for
rural homes and stock tanks. Electrified
dairy farms produce more pure milk than
ever before. It Irrigates fields, augers grain,
runs hay elevators, and furialshes power for
all farm shop tools----welders, solderers, saws,
and drills.
Many farm families are enjoying all-elec-
tric kitchens including freeze ranges, gar-
bage disposals, and dishwasheis. Clothes are
washed and dried indoors; electric heat and
air conditioning are being added to farm
homes each month,
The EEC's also provide minty benefits to
the local, State, and National communities.
Competition is Oklahoma's greatest guar-
antee against unreasonable electric rates.
Seven hundred million doll us have been
spent in Oklahoma towns by ItEC customers
on appliances. Motels, restatrants, filling
stations, and drive-in movies u NEC elec-
tricity have added to our State a economy.
No environment; can be more pleasant than
the farm community. Farm :'amities work
together to understand and soh e each other's
problems. Farm children sht re the work
burden, contribute to the buOget, and de-
velop an early sense of respons bility toward
both.
Farm people have a strong al preci.ation of
nature. They experience, year) the joys of
seeding time, sprouting crops, and the ful-
fillment of harvesting. Farming is a good
way of life made much better Lit cooperatives
like the rural electric md Fanners Union,
And I think, beyond doubt, I ve proven to
you the REC does promote good community
living.
COLUMNISTS UND
INVESTIGATION
Mr. WILLIAMS of Delaware. Mr.
President, in the April I, 19C6? issue of
the Washington Post there appeared an
article by Drew Pearson and J ick Ander-
son entitled "Columnists Unctr. Investi-
gation."
During the past several weeks these
writers have written several ayticles out-
lining questionable transactions which
allegedly involve a Member of the U.S.
Senate, and that Senator ha; officially
asked both the Justice Depart ment and
the Senate Ethics Committee lo investi-
gate all of these charT,es and announce
their decision to the public.
In fairness to the man bein, charged,
this investigation should be eonducted
thoroughly and promptly.
If the charges are false the man has a
right to have his name clearel?and if
they are true then the Ethics Cmunittee
should so notify the U S. Senate.
But as this investigation proceeds, let
it be remembered that the No 1 job is
to establieh the accuracy or ir accuracy
of the charges. After this has been
done it will be time enough thui should
there be a question as so the manner in
which the information was obtained.
I repeat, the question here is not how
did Mr. Pearson get the information, but
is it true or false?
I ask unanimous consent thal the ar-
ticle be printed in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printcd in the ,R,ECoRD,
as follows:
1515 IlasnSR IN VESTIGA-1 ION
(By Drew Pearson and ,lack Ancierson)
A funny Thing happened to us the other
day at the Justice Department. 'lee were
called down there by Attorney General
Nicholas dela Katzenbach and were told, we
were under criminal investigation on a
April 5, *If-966
charge filed by Senator THOMA3 Done, Demo-
crat, of Connecticut, of stealing documents
from his files.
This raises a very importane point. If it
Is a crime for newsmen to seek evidence doc-
umenting charges of corruption against a
U.S. Senator, then the press must give up
one of its important functions and Senators
will remain a sacrosanct body, able to expose
others regarding deep freezes, mink coats,
vicuna coats, and Bobby Baker's conflicts of
interest, but immune from exposure them-
selveS.
For it is almost impossible to prove in-
dictable facts regarding a Senator, or for that
matter any official, without using evidence
obtained from the inside.
Furthermore, using inside evidence is one
of the chief ways the FBI and most law en-
forcement agencies operate.
It would have been impossible for instance,
for the FBI to secure evidence on the Ku
Klux Klan in the Liuzzo murder case with-
out having an FBI agent inside the Klan.
Almost every week the FBI pays money for
inside information. So does In iernal Reve-
nue. Many of the tax convictions in the
United States result from inside information.
There is a law on the statute books pro-
viding remuneration to tax informers; and
Congress appropriates the money for tile FBI
to pay for inside information.
PUBLIC'S RIGHT 'no KNOW
As it happens, we paid no money and stole
no documents. We did talk to fernier Mem-
bers of DODD'S staff who were motivated by
the highest interest, namely tao public's
right to know when a U.S. Senator delivers
speeches and performs chores for a foreign
agent; when he deposits in his personal ac-
count thousands of dollars contributed to his
election; when he accepts valu ibles from
companies he helped in regard to Govern-
ment contracts; and when he charges both
the taxpayers and private organist tions lor
trips he makes around the country
The Attorney General's investigation also
raises an important point regarding sen
tonal "theft" or use of unauthorized docu-
ments.
We asked Mr. Katzenbach, for instance,
whether he had investigated Senator joilu
WILLIAMS, Republican, of Delaware, as 1,0
how he obtained the documents which is
publicized in the Bobby Baker case. Obs -
ously they were obtained from Governmer t
employees who believed in the
to know.
The Attorney General said he hr ii not in-
vestigated Senator WILLIAMS.
We also asked whether he had le oestigs Sc'!
Senator DODD'S possession or possible theft of
the Otepka papers. This was the famon;
case where Done, as vice chairmen of the
Senate Internal Security Subcomni ltee, wit
personally involved with obtaining ,qate De-
partment files.
The State Department considered thin
theft. For on September 23, 1963, it charged
Otto F. Otepka, Chief of the Evidence Voids -
tion Division of the State Depart/net lOs 0111.*.e
of Security, with violations of 13 rewilathie8
by giving confidential informatior. to tie
Senate Internal Security Subcommittee.
CHAMPIONED THEFT
On November 5, Otepka was (1,.znir-4.0.
Later that day, Senator DODD denounced the
State Department, warning that if Olepkan
ouster "is permitted to stand it will become
impossible or exceedingly difficult in ellen
any information from employees of the ex-
ecutive branch that bears on * * wron;;-
doing by their superiors."
Katzenbach said he had not inve.aigated
Donn in connection with the alleged ,heft et
the Otepka papers.
Other important Members of Congress /1:1
used documents obviously obtained front sub
rosa Government sources, most of these criti-
cal of the executive branch?Senator; Toms
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
iris
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
7246 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE April 5, 1966
prime weapon needed to bring about a re-
duction in accident frequency and severity.
We do not need more Federal encroachment
in safety matters in noncoal mining. What
we need is an enthusiastic and deeply in-
grained safety consciousness in top manage-
ment; a firmly supported educational pro-
gram for all employees in safe working
habits; and continued and vigorous efforts
to personally recognize and stimulate each
employee's interest in safety through awards
programs, frequent safety meetings, and by
sustained instruction in accident preven-
tion."
Mr. Goodwin admits that some States need
to improve the position of local inspectors,
eliminate out-of-date laws, and improve
State controls over health and safety in the
mines. Why for the past 20 years have many
of the States lagged in this vital matter?
Why is the threat of a Federal statute re-
quired to have the States do what they
should have been doing all along?
The record for this period shows that more
than enthusiasm on the part of management
is required to bring about a reduction in ac-
cident frequency and severity. For anyone
to advocate otherwise is to fly in the face of
reality.
In the December 1963 issue of the Mining
Congress Journal, an article by James Boyd
states as follows:
"We must acknowledge that all mines do
not live up to safety standards that are well
recognized, and that there are no means by
which the industry itself can enforce com-
pliance; hence, some public authority with
enforcement powers is necessary. We firmly
believe that these powers should remain with
the State or local authorities. Enlightened
management recognizes that both the human
and the economic considerations require
strict attention to safety standards, and by
far the majority of mining administrations
enforce within their own operations stand-
ards which are more stringent than can be
feasibly set by law. There are only a few
Who do not live up to these standards and
whose accident rates give rise to the clamor.
for Federal enforcement powers."
Some operators realize that all mines do
not live up to safety standards. There are
no means by which the industry can enforce
compliance on itself.
Many of the corporations engaged in me-
tallic and nonmetallic mining are cooperat-
ing with the Bureau of Mines health and
safety programs at this very moment.
The following statement on page 58, House
hearings on mine safety, 87th Congress, re-
veals the following:
"Mineowners are indebted to the U.S. Bu-
reau of Mines for its data on accidents and
recommendations for their prevention. The
Bureau employs competent engineers and
obtains trustworthy data in rendering its
service."
The attempt to augment this excellent and
necessary activity with Federal inspection
saw the operators retreat to State inspection
and statutes as the better approach to mine
safety.
If they have such great respect for the
Bureau staff on an educational basis, why
the resistance when an inspector is given
the authority to see that all mines are made
as safe as they can humanly be made?
The very nature of underground mining
makes it a dangerous industry in which to
operate and to work.
You cannot have too many involved in
safety, be they State or Federal agencies,
or private associations. The operators ad-
mit they can't enforce compliance.
The attitude of the Bituminous Coal Oper-
ators Association is in marked contrast to
the metallic and nonmetallic operators of the
American Mining Congress, In a paper de-
livered by Mr. George C. Trevorrow, safety
director of the association at the American
Mining Congress mining show, Las Vegas,
Nev., October 11-14, 1965, stated as follows:
"Top management of most of the larger
coal companies insist on a strong safety
program at its mines. This attitude is re-
flected in every case in a low number of in-
juries and a low injury frequency rate. Part
of this insistence is due to the increasing
sensitivity to public opinion, but mainly be-
cause its representatives have learned that
a safe coal mine is an efficient one and that
a good safety program is just good business.
In many of these companies the top man-
agement insists on getting reports of all
mine inspections, reports of the investiga-
tions of injuries and those of any unusual
occurrences in or about the mines. Such
management obviously is kept informed of
the injuries occurring at the mines. It fol-
lows with this careful scrutiny that inspec-
tions and investigations are carefully made;
the supervisors are anxious to keep substand-
ard conditions found on these inspections to
a minimum; and every reasonable attempt
is made to prevent recurrence of injuries."
The task at hand is such that State in-
spection where it is experienced benefits
from contact with and the work of the Bu-
reau of Mines inspectors, as the operations
In coal have proven. This trend has not
diminished, for they look to the Bureau of
Mines for guidance and information.
Progress in this effort for mine safety leg-
islation in the metallic and nonmetallic
mines has been painfully slow, but there has
been progress none the less. The fact that
this act, HR. 8989 is before the subcOmmit-
tee is evidence as to that.
If the need was not there the legislative
efforts to secure mine safety legislation
would have faltered back in the 84th Con-
gress and come to nothing. The need was
there. The hearings of the 84th, 87th, ,and
89th sessions of the Congress bear out that
contention. The 24-month study by the
Department of the Interior as authorized by
Congress made a major contribution to mine
safety, when it provided the vehicle for the
introduction of a mine safety bill sponsored
by the administration.
The House reported out a good bill. HE,.
8989 can become a better one, if amended
as has been proposed.
We hope this subcommittee will be able
to report favorably on HR. 8989 with the
suggested amendment to section 13 of the
act, and that the Committee on Labor and
Public Welfare will vote its approval of this
much-needed legislation in the vital field
of metallic and nonmetallic mining.
I thank you for the opportunity you have
given me in presenting this stat
RULES OF U.S. MILITARY ASSIST-
ANCE COMMAND IN VIETNAM
Mr. INOUYE. Mr. President, every
American who is a member of the U.S.
Military Assistance Command, Vietnam,
Is issued a very important document, en-
titled "Nine Rules for Personnel of U.S.
Military Assistance Command, Vietnam,"
immediately upon his arrival in Vietnam.
I believe this document speaks rather
eloquently of our fighting men in Viet-
nam who are involved not only in war-
fare but also in the very important task
of bringing about better understanding
and improved relationship between our
people and the Vietnamese.
I wish to share with my colleagues the
nine important rules issued by our com-
mand in Vietnam to our service per-
sonnel.
I ask unanimous consent that the full
text of this document be printed in the
RECORD.
There being no objection, the rules
were ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
NINE RULES FOR PERSONNEL OF U.S. MILITARY
ASSISTANCE COMMAND, VIETNAM
The Vietnamese have paid a heavy price
in suffering for their long fight against the
Communists. We military men are in Viet-
nam now because their Government has
asked us to help its soldiers and people in
winning their struggle. The Vietcong will
attempt to turn the Vietnamese people
against you. You can defeat them at every
turn by the strength, understanding, and
generosity you display with the people.
Here are nine simple rules:
1. Remember we are guest here; we make
no demands and seek no special treatment.
2. Join with the people. Understand their
life, use phrases from their language and
honor their customs and laws.
3. Treat women with politeness and re-
spect.
4. Make personal friends among the sol-
diers and common people.
5. Always give the Vietnamese the right-
of -way.
6. Be alert to security and ready to react
with your military skill.
7. Don't attract attention by loud, rude,
or unusual behavior.
8. Avoid separating yourself from the peo-
ple by a display of wealth or privilege.
9. Above all else you are members of the
U.S. military forces on a difficult mission, re-
sponsible for all your official and personal
actions. Reflect honor upon yourself and
the United States of America.
"PA AND MA AND L.B.J."
Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr.
President, in times such as these, when
many of us feel the tenseness of the
war in South Vietnam and the pressure
of domestic problems of inflation and
taxation, it is helpful to sit back and see
the lighter side of life.
For this reason, I ask unanimous con-
sent to have printed in the RECORD an
article from the April edition of Nation's
Business. The article is entitled "Pa and
Ma and L.B.J." with the subtitle, "Or
How To Become a Casualty in the Gov-
ernment's War on Poverty." It was writ-
ten by Jim Comstock, editor of the West
Virginia Hillbilly of Richwood, W. Va.
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD
as follows:
PA AND MA AND L.B.J.
Pa had no sooner climbed out of the truck
which he'd thumbed a ride in when he
hollered at Ma to get him the foreign coun-
try map and find out where poverty was a
President Johnson had just declared war on
that country and expected every man to do
his duty, and Pa was preparing to do his but
he wanted to know where the place was and
how to get there.
Fiddlin' Clyde, who sat in the parlor a-
strumming his guitar, quit humming the
song he had just composed called "I Left My
Baby Depressed in the Mountains," or "I
Want to Hold Your Handout." He allowed
Ma needn't worry none about no geography
because he knew where Poverty was. It was
in Kentucky. He knew because he heard the
Great Society social worker ,say if anybody
wanted to find Poverty in West Virginia,
they ought to have a look in Kentucky first.
Fiddlin' Clyde ain't called Fiddlin' Clyde
because he plays the fiddle but because he
fiddles around with the guitar. And he al-
ways makes songs about what Pa is think-
ing about.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
April 5, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
certain sections of the act. The amendment
postpones, until 1 year after the date of
publication in the Federal Register of man-
datory mine health and safety standards, the
power of the Secretary to issue a notice to
a mine operator requiring the abatement of
a- violation of curb a standard or to issue an
order of withdrawal and debarment of per-
:sins from a mine where the Secretary finds
an imminent clangor of death or serious phys-
ical harm exists These flowers cif the Sec-
retary of the Interior cannot he exercised,
In any State within less than 90 days after
the adjournment of the next regular session
of the State legislature which convenes after
the date of publication of the mandatory
atandards in the Federal Register.
The extent to which this amendment will
postpone the effective date of the Secre-
tary's powers to issue abatement notices and
orders of withdrawal and debase/vitt, will de-
pend upon the timelag between the enact-
ment of the act and the designation of man-
datory standards, as well as upon the timing
of legislative sessions in the individual
States?particularly in those States whose
legislatures meet only biennially.
During 1906, 26 States will hold legislative
salons. The remainder of the States do not
have a regular legislative session scheduled
Oil iii 1967..
To illustrate what would be presumably an
axtreme possibility for postponement of Fed-
eral enforcement power: Assume an 18-
atonth lag between the date of enactment of
the act and the date of publication in the
,lPederal Register of the mandatory health
:bid safety standards which the Secretary
/mist develop in consultation with advisory
committees, With a State legislature meet-
ing biennially which does not convene until
18 months after the Federal Register publica-
tion date, with a session lasting 4 months, a
total of 43 months, or 3 years and 7 months
Would elapse between the date of enactment
of the act and the date at which Federal
inspectors would acquire the authority to
lame notices of abatement or orders to with-
draw and debar persons from mines where
,in immediate or imminent danger of death
or serious physical harm Is found to exist.
The purpose nt delaying the effective date
will 90 days after the close of the next State
legislative session is to give the State legis-
lature the opportunity?if it decides to avail
itself of the opooriamity?to look at the
mandatory standards designated by the See-
ottary, take action to pass any new legisla-
tion that may be required for establishment
of. a State inspection and en forcement plan to
lie presented for the Secretary's approval, and
1.0 appropriate the money that will be neces-
eary in order to have the State plan carried
out to the Secretary's satisfaction. An, np-
eroyed plan leas to -provide for the develop-
ment and enforcement of health and safety
etandards ? ? ? which are or will be sub-
as,ntially as effective * ? * as the manda-
y standards" designated by the Secretary,
el not unreasonable to require that a sub-
els-initial amount of time be given a State,
:tiler it lens learned what these mandatory
elandards are to be, in which to decide
sehether it wishes to develop and finance a
state plan embodying substantially as effec-
tive standards.
Safety is one field of endeavor where need-
less loss of time in its execution, can. be
lestistrous
Section 13, espeelally (di, will delay the
4,ffeetive and timely implementation of fpR,,
1t95.9. It creates a no man's land between
the Secretary of 'Interior and the several
States. Delays, and indecision would be the
order of the day. Instead of expediting
health and safety for the miners it will serve
to hamstring this ohlective.
With the States having recourse to judicial
review as to the actions of the Secretary, the
No. 5S---7
specter of frustrating delays is all too ap-
parent.
The record as developed over the pest.dec-
ade leaves little to hope for as far as bringing
about some degree of effective and uniform
health and safety measures on the part of
the States.
We respectfully refer to page 167 ,?)f the
hearings on mine safety, before the Select
Subcommittee on Labor of the Committee on
Education and Labor, House of Representa-
tives, 89th Congress, for a detailed staMment
as to the failure of the States to improve their
mine safety codes, if they have them, and
bring some degree of safety to the miners
through thorough inspections and training.
Report No. 606, 89th Congress, 1st session,
House of Representatives, on pages 4, 5, and
6, sets fortis the many and various ftilures
of the several States, as related to mine safe-
ty in the metallic and nonmetallic mires,
We strongly urge the subcommittee to
review the hearings that were held before the
Select Subcommittee on Labor of the Com-
mittee on Education and Labor. Boone of
Representatives, 87th Congress, pages :14-56.
These individual reports are facts that can-
not be ignored and reveal the terrible i,lade-
quacies of Stale mine enforcement and in-
spection.
The record will show that many of the
States are reluctant to appropriate adequate
amounts of money to insure enforcemcnt of
their mining codes by their State F,:ilety
agency or department.
There is no assurance that under section
13 the States will snake any effort to provide
these funds, preferring to let well enough
alone, and lot the Secretary of Interior take
over all these functions.
The gap between the legislative session of
the State legislatures and the one given over
to appropriations would only serve to con..
fuse and delay the putting into being the
health a:nd safety measures that are needed
now?not 2 or 4 years from now.
Since its inception over 50 years age, the
Bureau of Mines has had as one cf its ,nain
objectives the promotion of health and -:eafe--
ty practices in this mining industry. This
aim is being: accomplished. through < ifety
education, first aid training, sechnical eon-
sultation, and safety inspection, of mine, in-
cluding specific recommendations for elimi-
nating or minimizing hazards. The Bureau
staff is ready to assist In every possible way
to prevent injury in mining operations
The responsibility for mine safety in the
metallic an.d nonmetallic field should be giv-
en to the one agency that has experienee in
mening. The Bureau of Mines has the:, ex-
perience and knowledge.
The Bureau is carrying out the inspeelion
and enforcement of health, and safety st 1.11(1-
ards in all the coal mines of the Nation, em-
ploying more than 14 miners. That retron-
sibility was given in the 82d Congress 'wider
Public Law 552, the Neel y-McConnell Act.
This subcommittee referred favorably a hill,
H.R. 3581, dealing with small coal mines to
the standing committee on Labor and Edu-
cation in the 1st session of the 119th Congress.
:rm. 3584 gives the Bureau responsibility
for carrying out various provisions relating
to health and safety.
This bill has been favorably voted on by
the Senate.
'Phe responsibility for Federal action in
health and safety activities has been estab-
lished in. many fields. Some of the more ob-
jective examples of this are such Federal
activities in atomic energy, coal mines. in-
spection services of the Department of Agri-
culture, Food and Drug Act, and the :hip
inspection service.
All of labor, therefore, recommends Mat
section 13 be amended as 'follows:
'Sgc. 13. The Secretary shall previde that the
7915
major responsibility for administering the
provisions of this Act shall be vested in the
Bureau of Mines of the Department of the
Interior. The Secretary acting through the
Bureau shall have authority to appoint, sub-
ject to the civil service laws, such officer:, and
employees as he may deem requisite fo-- the
administration of this Act; and to pros Tine.
powers: duties and responsibilities of all of-
ficers and employees engaged in the ad inn-
istration of this Act: Provided, hoLccrer,
That to the maximum extent feasible, in the
selection of persons for appointment as mine
inspectors, no person shall be so selected un-
less he has the basic qualification of at least
five years practical mining experience and
in assigning mine inspectors to the inspec-
tion and investigation of individual mines,
due consideration shall be given to I heir
previous practical experience in the S' ate,
district, or region, where such inspect,ons
are to be made."
This amendment will make for a more
effective and efficient mine safety law.
The opposition to this mine safety leg 'la-
tion come from some of the operators. 'Why
are the operators opposed to Federal insmec-
tion by qualified inspectors of the Burea .1 of
Mines? Is it because a safer operation would
cost more to operate? We respectfully refer
this subcommittee to pages 171 and 17'S of
the hearings before the Select Subcommit-
tee on Labor of the Committee on Educa-
tion and Labor of the House of Represeilta-
tives, 89th Congress, as regards industries
position on this attempt to secure some leg-
islation relating to the miners in metallic
and nonmetallic mines.
The American Mining Congress has at; ted
that seven in a hundred underground in ?tal
miners can expect to be killed at work in a
working lifetime.
The Bureau of Mines reports that for
metals alone the period 1963-64 there was
a sharp increase in fatalities in 1964 to a
total of 59, 13 more than in 1963. Nonfatal
disabilities also increased to 3,745 in 1964,
compared with 3,485 in 1963.
In October 1965 at the American Mining
Congress Convention held at Las Vegas, Nev.,
Mr. Sidney S. Goodwin, vice president, the
New Jersey Zinc Co., stated as follows:
"You may or may not be aware of iani
fact that several of the States, pantie-Lilo:1y
Utah, Wyoming, Idaho, and New Mexico hive
brought revisions either in their laws or their
regulations to improve the position of local
inspectors; eliminate out-of-date laws; :In-
prove State and local controls over Ise: lth
and safety /natters in the mines. Others are
already developing plans for similar action in
the months ahead. These actions are line
examples of the type of steps that need tc be
taken in all our mining States if Fecieral
policies are to be avoided. The task runs in-
ing in the States becomes apparent if one
takes the study of the Interior Departim nt,
with respect to State laws and their a- le-
quacy, at its face value. This report NVO' Z11
Indicate that most mining States have 1: ws
today which the Federal Government con-
siders adequate. The remaining States Is ice
no direct mineral safety laws or they are
considered inadequate from the standpeint
of meeting standards which the Federal Ci ,v-
ernment believes should be attained.
"Under the terms of the House-passeei till,
it is provided that safety control and en-
forcement of standards could be turned 0 mr
to those States having laws which prosaic
for inspections and enforcement and for a le-
quate personnel to accompany this task. I
would also like to point out that with or
without this type of legislation the indusiry
still feels that management should seek to
strengthen the laws at the local level; to
prove the effectiveness of the agencies
ministering them; them; increase emphasis :in
safety education and training, which is the
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
April 5, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
forts to enable parents of their country
to raise a family responsibly, we make
a tragic error when we do not fill the
vacuum, when we do not give all the
assistance the country requests because
it is in this field that we can make the
greatest strides.
Mr. CLARK. I wish to express com-
plete agreement with the Senator from
Maryland, of whose bill I am a cospon-
sor. I thank the Senator for his re-
marks.
PRICE AND WAGE CONTROLS
Mr. PEARSON. Madam President, in
a speech in this Chamber on March 29,
1966, I proposed that the appropriate of-
ficials of the administration be invited
to appear before an appropriate congres-
sional committee to explain the adminis-
tration's current policy of indirect price
and wage controls.
I argued that this was necessary for
two principal reasons. First, despite the
fact that the administration is engaged
In an extensive price-wage fixing, the full
Intentions of the administration have
never been fully identified and the tech-
niques have never been adequately ex-
plained. Indeed, the administration has
deliberately attempted on numerous oc-
casions to obscure from the American
public its intentions and its methods.
Second, a policy of indirect price and
wage controls is very likely to result in
numerous inequities and various groups
in our society are likely to be forced to
make sacrifices not demanded of others.
Madam President, full and open de-
bate on this extremely important public
policy which affects the vital interest of
every individual in the group can no
longer be delayed. Therefore, I had
delivered to Senator JOHN L. MCCLELLAN,
chairman of the Committee on Govern-
ment Operations, a letter requesting that
this committee initiate hearings on the
administration's indirect price and wage
control policy.
This is the same procedure now being
followed in the House of Representatives
seeking to find some definition of not
only policies but the methods.
Madam President, I want to empha-
size that I am not calling for imposition
of mandatory controls at this time, nor
am I saying that indirect controls should
never be used. However, I am saying,
and most emphatically, that because the
decision to engage in indirect price and
wage controls constitutes the making of
a public policy of greatest importance,
these decisions and their justifications
must be subject to free and open debate.
The Congress must be provided with an
adequate explanation from the admin-
istration and must have the opportunity
to approve, or reject, or modify the op-
eration of this policy.
Madam President, these are the facts.
The administration has been applying
price and wage controls without any ex-
pressed consent of the Congress, and it
Is applying these controls, as far as I can
determine, without any standards or
rules of Government intervention and
without adequate consideration of their
overall and selective economic impact.
In this connection it would appear
that the only rule or guideline that the
administration is using is simply to ap-
ply pressure at those points where its
enormous powers can be used most ef-
fectively. Thus, prices in some indus-
tries and businesses have been rolled
back while other prices have advanced
rapidly. For example, while there have
been price roll backs in aluminum, cop-
per, steel and cigarettes, there have been
price advances in such key areas as
chemicals, plastics, TV tubes, gasoline,
newsprint, and rubber tires.
Some labor contracts have resulted
in wage increases that are within the
3.2 percent productivity guideline while
other wages have gone beyond this 3.2
percent increase.
In illy statement of March 29, 1966, I
expressed the concern that the adminis-
tration's undercover war on inflation was
resulting in economic inequities particu-
larly in agricultural, and I identified sev-
eral areas in which the administration
had acted to force down farm prices.
Farm prices are indeed falling but
there is absolutely no assurance that this
is going to have any anti-inflation effect.
Thus the result of these actions may well
do nothing more than reduce the farm-
ers' already slim margin of profit.
The Secretary of Agriculture, Orville
Freeman, apparently took pleasure last
week in announcing the decline in farm
prices. As William M. Blair reported in
the New York Times of March 31, 1966:
It was the first time in the memory of Fed-
eral farm officials that a Secretary of Agricul-
ture indicated that he was pleased with a
decrease in farm prices.
I am just as concerned about inflation
as Mr. Freeman, but I see nothing that is
pleasing about the decline in farm prices.
It is particularly disturbing to me that as
farm prices are falling, the farmers' cost
of production is rising. The Department
of Agriculture report which showed a
turndown in the prices received by the
farmer also showed an increase in prices
paid out by the farmer. Thus, the parity
ratio dropped from 83 in February to 82
in March. The price cost squeeze on the
farmer is cutting deeper and deeper.
Madam President, the farmers' eco-
nomic position has been weakened and
the Administration is confidently pre-
dicting that farm prices wil continue to
fall. In an article published in the
Washington Post of April 3, 1966, John
Schnittker, Undersecretary of Agricul-
ture, predicted that farm prices will drop
another 10 percent in the near future.
The adniinistration can make these
predictions with confidence because it
has the power to force such a rollback.
But Madam President, the farmers and
the Congress want to know if the admin-
istration can also keep the lid on prices
paid by farmers and also if lower farm
prices will ever mean lower retail food
prices.
I see no evidence to date that suggests
that either of these will occur. Mr.
Freeman has expressed the hope that
lower farm prices will be reflected in
lower retail prices. But the experience
of past history is not at all encouraging
on this score.
7255
Last Friday the distinguished Senator
from South Dakota [Mr. McGovERN] ex-
pressed the belief that recent administra-
tion actions in milk price supports "have
been carefully tailored not to assure fair
returns to the farmer but to avoid any
actual increase in consumer prices."
This appears to be the case not only
In regard to milk but also in regard to
other agricultural products. Farm
prices are frozen or rolled back while
farm costs continue to rise and consumer
prices continue to move upward.
In my statement of March 29, 1966,
I pointed out that the rollback in cattle
hide prices did not prevent a subsequent
increase in shoe prices. But several
days after major shoe companies had
announced major price increases the
Secretary of Agriculture was quoted in
the Christian Science Monitor of April
1, 1966, as saying "the housewife should
be able to save on a pair of shoes as a
result" of the administration's drastic
export limitations on skins and hides.
This is exactly the type of thing that
makes it vitally important that the ad-
ministration's indirect price and wage
control policy be brought into the open
and submitted to full and searching de-
bate. The Congress must be an active
participant in this debate. It is im-
perative, therefore, that congressional
hearings be initiated as soon as possible.
Mr. PEARSON. Madam President, I
suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Madam President,
I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. With-
out objection, it is so ordered.
INTERVIEW OF SENATOR CHURCH,
OF IDAHO, ON AMERICAN BROAD-
CASTING SYSTEM PROGRAM
"FROM THE CAPITAL," FEBRU-
ARY 7, 1966
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Madam President,
during the recent hearings held by the
Committee on Foreign Relations, several
members of the committee showed a
lively interest in the proceedings. One
of the most attentive and discriminating
of my colleagues has been the distin-
guished Senator from Idaho [Mr.
CHURCH]. Many of his statements are
already in the RECORD. I ask unani-
mous consent that the transcript of a
television interview of Senator CHURCH
on February 7, on the American Broad-
casting System, be printed at this point
in the RECORD.
There being no objection, the inter-
view was ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
[Excerpts for the American Broadcasting
System program From the Capital," Feb.
7, 1966]
Guest: Senator FRANK CnuitcH, Democrat
of Idaho.
Correspondents: Keith McBee and Iry
Chapman.
Mr. McBEE. Senator CHURCH, what helpful
things, affecting the Vietnam war, do you
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
7256 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE April 5, 11,:
think can come out of this Honolulu con-
ference.
Senator Cunneen I hope that greater em-
phasis will be given to the economic and
political side of the war in Vietnam RR a
result of this conference. I think that an
tntensification of the war, given the circum-
iitances, is also inevitable; but I would hope
that it does not take the form of broad-
ening the war front or widening the war
horn. in Vietnam.
Mr. McBEE. Does it not take some of the
izenatorial heat, and accompanying press cov-
erage oft of the administration at this par-
ticular time?
Senator Cnoricu. Well, It may have that
effect for the next few days because naturally
and properly, the President is the principal
focus of the news, and the coverage he will
receive in Hawaii will be very thorough and
complete, but I think the Senate Foreign Re-
lations Committee hearings, which are meant
to continue considerably beyond that time)
will get the attention that they ought to get,
and I am not concerned on that score.
Mr. CHAPMAN, Senator CHURCH, on his
arrival in Honolulu the President said as
part of his remarks, "There are special plead-
ers Who counsel retreat in Vietnam, they be-
long' to a group that has always been blind
to experience and deaf to hope." Do you
think this is the way the President regards
his critics on Capitol Hill, you among them?
Senator (Menem I would not think so, be-
noise I do not know of any here on Capitol
hill who have advocated retreat in Vietnam.
If there are any, they are very few and far
between. and I certainly am not one. He
may have been referring to some of the dem-
onstrators who have gone very far in pro-
testing 'the war. I would think that he did
not have in mind responsible critics, because
if it were his purpose to silence responsible
criticism. this would be the stifling of free-
dom right here in America, and I cannot
tinitgine that the President would have any-
thing like that in mind.
Mr. CHAPMAN. Well, in answering report-
ers' questions at the White House, after he
,ahnounced onFriday he was going to Hono-
lulu, he seemed to refer to your hearings as
"a show." Do you think the criticisms
being made up here are falling on deaf ears?
Senator CEIURCII. I cannot say what the
President's attitude may be in that respect
I should think, however, that he would be
interested in the inquiry that the Senate
Foreign Relations Committee is making and
that this would form a part of his continuing
appraisal of the situation. I should not
think that be would want to isolate himself
in the Whi ficiniie with a e.ertein. coterie of
handpicked advisers, all of whom reflect his
own opinion about the war: and for that
reazion I would hope that he would give seri-
ous attention to these proceedings in the
Senate committee, and any other proceed-
ings here on Capitol Hill that are directed
toward a thorough examination of the prem-
tees thaS underlie the war and the objective,
the ultimate objective that we have in mind
out there.
Mr. CHAPMAN, Senator CHURCH, do VOU,
1,niiik the President is carrying out what
Obinsetion he has, to answer these basic ques-
tions that are being raised himself, as op-
posed to making exhortatory speeches about
time war effort?
Minator CHT -RCM I think that it is a part
of the evil of war. I suppose you could say,
that the further a country becomes em-
broiled, the greater the degree of emotion.
It natural enough, we have got 200.000
boys out there now and it is becoming in-
creasingly difficult to take El dispassionate
view of the war; and the larger the Amer-
heir; military commitment becomes, the
greater the danger becomes to the country:
and the longer the casualty lists grow, the
more difficult it will be to remain unemo-
tional about the war. I should think this
would be perhaps the highest responsibility
of the Presidency; to set the tone that will
permit us to continue to be objective and
rational about American policy in Vietnam.
Mr. McBEE. Senator Cii URCH. do you think
thal, the President had any recour?e, from a
military standpoint, but to resume bombing
North Vietnam?
Senator CHUncn. I think that from a
military standpoint the resumption may
have been indicated. The question of how
long the suspension should have been con-
tinued was not a military one bu a diplo-
matic one. Obviously, the bombing has
failed to achieve the military objectives
that were once proclaimed for it. it has not
cut oil the continuing supply of the Vietcong
from the North. It may have ha; assed the
supply lines, but obviously they have con-
tinued and in fact the Vietcong has grown
very much stronger during the period that
the bombings have been underway-, so that
the military objectives of the bombing have
not succeeded. I think that by reinstituting
them we merely want to commence again
the kind of harassment that makes the
supply routes more dangerous iind more
difficult.
Mr. ALMBEE. Well, is it because of the
danger of Red China, do you think, that
heavier bombardment is not being employed
and populations are not being deetroyed?
Senator CHURCH, Well I think that there
are several reasons for this. In the first
place, North Vietnam is a rural country.
We could strike the cities, we could destroy
Hanoi, and we could destroy Haiphong, their
major port. But, if we destromd their
cities and all their industry this amounts
to less than 10 percent of the tot el produc-
tion of their economy, and the government
in Hanoi could resort once again to the
countryside and the resistance vemld con-
tinue, so this will not, I think break the
back of Hanoi. It will not force them to the
negotiating table, It will not aecomplish
what we hope to accomplish; namely, a
political settlement of the war in Vietnam.
On the other hand, it could intensify their
determination to persist in the war, and it
could, of course, increase the de lager of a
Chinese decision to come down. We have to
remember, our memories are not to be so
short as to lead us to forgot our experience in
Korea when the Chineae did come down
after we had reached a certain point in the
extension of that war northward toward the
Chinese frontiers. I think there'; a, plate-
glass window up there somewhere ....we don't
know exactly where it as, but it we con-
tinue to expand the dimension of the war
northward. at some print we're going to
break that window, and when we So. I think
we rem expect the Chinese to respond as they
responded in Korea, when they poured
down over the Yalu Riven with 600.000 men.
Mr. McBsri. Senator, to you ever have a
feeling that the inclination- amour some of
the U.S. military now is to take on China
now, to bring them in if possible, before they
hare atomic delivery cannbilities?
Senator Cuuneu. Well, I would hope that
this is not seriously intended by the military.
I cannot, say whether there is any advocacy
within the military itsel f of such a policy,
But T remember about 15 years ago when
there was considerable argument on behalf
of a preventive war against the Soviet Union,
and it was said then that we will cether have
to fight the Soviet Union now or iater, it is
better to fight her now than later. I am
glad that counsel did not prevail :15 years
ago, and I think that the same counsel
ought not to prevail now I canal; t imagine
a war that would involve a greater tragedy
for the United States, that would involve a
larger number of casualties, and that in the
end would lead to such frustration as a war
with China. No nation in history has man-
aged to conquer China, are we now going to
undertake what all other i;ountries have tried
and failed to do for centuries and iienturies
in the past? People who think ithat a war
against China will merely consist 01 sending
a few bombing planes over and destroying
her nuclear plants are just deceiving them-
selves and the country. That is just the
opening overture in such a war. Eventually,
the only way that China can be conquered
is for land armies to invade and occupy
China. This means conquering an area
larger than any other in the world, save
Russia; and a population of 750 miliion peo-
ple in a body to body confrontation. Now,
I do not know anything at the present that
requires us to engage in such a Ii lcscaust,
and I would certainly hope that rational
leadership will prevail against any counsel.
if it does exist, to extend this war in Asia
to the point where we find ourselves en-
gaged against China on the opposite side of
the world. I cannot believe that Ude is in-
tended by the administration. I an certain
that the President is endeavoring in every
way possible to keep the war in Vietnam
within manageable limits.
Mr. CHA.PMAN. Senator CHURCH, if our ob-
jective in Vietnam is a political settlement,
could we promote that objective by recog-
nizing Vietcong as an agent at the bargain.
hag table?
Senator CHURCH. I think that ;lie only
way we are likely to get to the le rgaining
table is by engaging the Vietcong directly in
preliminary talks that might lead ft a-politi-
cal settlement.
Mr. CHAPMAN. Right now?
Senator Cifuncx. I think that the sooner
that this is done, the better. I kninv of Tic
war that has ever been settled witneut en-
gaging the combatants, and obviously the
Vietcong is the largest single element in
South Vietnam against which our terces arc
now deployed.
Mr. CHAPMAN. But the thing the I. we arc
fighting against is the domination of South,
Vietnam by the Vietcong. Now shouldn't ars
role for the Vietcong be a concession we make
during the negotiating process mil not in
advance of it?
Senator CHURCH. Of course, and I think
that this country would oppose, and certainly
I would oppose, any settlement that delivered
over South Vietnam into the control of the
Vietcong. I am merely saying that the Viet-
cong need to be engaged in conversation:
with other non-Communist elements jr
South Vietnam, looking toward the possi-
bility of establishing some form 01 interior
regime which would restore order and super-
vise the conduct of elections that could ulti-
mately determine the political character ul
the regime in South Vietnam.
Mr. CHAPMAN. Well, Hanoi is mincing tin;
as a sticking point at this time, we muse
recognize the National Liberation Front, tilt
Vietcong, as the spokesman for South Viet-
nam. Do you feel that if we did eic,me SODA'
way toward it that Hanoi might not point
some other sticking point because of the ii
feeling that they can't conquer South Viet-
nam?
Senator CHURCH. There is no 1- etairailig
that the Communists will come to the bar-
gaining table under any circumstances. :But
It would seem to me it would be it irealittaz
for the United States to overlook the peoptc
who are principally engaged in tbe war ir
South Vietnam against the Vietnamese that
we support there. I do not think that tht
United States as a government can open en
conversations with the Vietcong. But I Se
think that the Vietnamese who are involece
against the Vietcong should be encouraged
to open up conversations to cleterminf
whether or not some basis can be found Re
a political settlement in South Vietnammi
which would of course be consistent with
the commitment that we have made to the
Saigon government. I think it is unrealistic.
to assume that we are likely to get to the
conference table by going over the head;:; it
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
April 5, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD? SENATE 7257
the people who are themselves involved in
the battle and who are each day dying in
large-numbers, and to assume a posture that
permits us to talk only to some other gov-
ernment, whether it be Hanoi, or whether
it be Peking, or Moscow. I think that is the
least likely way to reach the conference table.
Mr. McBEs. Do you think, sir, the Saigon
government can talk independently to the
Vietcong, apart from Hanoi?
Senator Crrtracx. I think that definitely,
that there are non-Communist elements in
South Vietnam that should be encourged
to open up conversations, preliminary con-
versations, in the hope that this might lead
to* a more formal conference at which all
elements could be represented. I should
think that this might permit Hanoi then to
back up the Vietcong, while we backed up
the non-Communist elements and would put
neither side in the position of appearing to
be backtracking upon pledges made. The
problem that we have in South Vietnam, our
determination not to backtrack on our
pledges, is similar in ways, I suspect, to
pledges that it has made in support of the
Vietcong. Therefore, the best way to reach
a conference is to engage the fighting ele-
ments in the field. Suppose during our own
revolutionary war that the British had taken
the position that they would deal only with
the French, and not talk at all with George
Washington? The French had more troops
at Yorktown than Washington had conti-
nentals. Obviously, it is not realistic to ex-
pect negotiations to commence which do not
involve the principal participants In the
fight. And yet, up till now this has been the
American posture.
Mr. McBEE. Do you think, sir, during Pres-
ident Johnson's peace offensive there was a
serious breakdown or lack of liaison with
Saigon? Marshal Ky said that certain of the
military might attempt to overthrow him at
any moment, there was very little notice
given to the Saigon regime that the Presi-
dent was about to conduct this worldwide
peace offensive.
Senator CHURCH. Well, that I really am
not competent to say. I do not know what
notice was given to Saigon, I do know that
the Saigon government is dependent entirely
upon the United States for its sustenance,
for a long time it depended utterly upon us
for our money, now it depends on us for our
men. If it must depend upon us to fight its
war, then I think that we ought not to be
handcuffed in our efforts to reach a satis-
factory peace.
Mr. McBEE. On the other hand, sir, might
you infuriate the Saigon regime by treating
them as something of a junior partner in
their own country?
Senator CHURCH. I am sure that the Presi-
dent has not done this, and the very fact
that he is now conferring with the chiefs of
the Saigon regime in Hawaii, confirms, I
think, all of the recognition and all of the
prestige that the President of the United
States can give to this regime.
Mr. CHAPIVIAN. Senator CHURCH, I gather
that your basic point of view on the way to
settle the Vietnam war is attuned to your
feeling that we have exaggerated the impact
of communism within the revolution that is
going on there, as elsewhere, and that we
have really no right and certainly no wisdom
to go in after every revolution, including this
one, because there are Communist elements
or even a possibility of Communist domina-
tion. Is that your point of view?
Senator CHURCH. My point of view is this:
I think that the United States has an inter-
est in doing all that it can to discourage the
spread of communism in the underdeveloped
world. I think, however, that American mil-
itary intervention more often than not May
turn out to be less of a deterrent to the
spread of communism than a stimulant.
Mr. CHAPNIAN. Is that true in Vietnam?
Senator CHURCH. I am afraid in Vietnam
that our decision to convert the war, more
and more, into an American war, pitting
hundreds of thousands of white Western
troops, imported from the opposite side of
the world, against Oriental troops in the
Orient makes the war appear to many
Asians to be an attempt on the part of a
Western nation to reassert political control
over the affairs of an Asian country. Now,
we know this is not our intention. But the
important question is: How do the Asians
see it? And I am afraid that the reason that
Mao Tse-tung is so much opposed to the
settlement of this war and so anxious for
the war to continue is not because he thinks
that the Hanoi government can defeat the
United States of America, but because he
feels that the continuation of the war will
assist China in her larger interests in Asia
and will have more effect in spreading com-
munism elsewhere in Asia than a negotiated
settlement would have. I think it is a great
misfortune that we did not better appreciate
Mao Tse-tung's view of this war some years
ago. I think he has ensnared us in a trap
which he obviously feels serves China's in-
terest. We must remember in this part of
the world that after two centuries of colo-
nial experience, the thing that is most feared
by Asian people is Western imperialism, not
communism as such; and in the lands that
I have visited, many of the lands in this
region of the world, it is capitalism, not com-
munism that is the ugly word. Because
they haven't known our kind of capitalism,
they have only known the kind that was
associated with their old colonial experience.
So when we move into South Vietnam with a
large Western army, this permits the Com-
munists to say that the government we sup-
port is merely a puppet of Western imperial-
ism. It permits China to pose in the role
that she most wants to be accepted in among
her Asian countries. Namely, the role of
champion of Asia for the Asians. And it
helps to identify communism with the one
nationalist aspiration that dominates the
feeling of most people in Asia, it helps to
identify communism with the effort to ex-
pel Western imperialism or colonialism from
Asia. Now that is a losing cause, I think,
and that is the reason why Mao Tse-tung is
so anxious to see this war continue.
Mr. CHAPIVIAN. Senator CHURCH, in a quar-
ter of a minute, how do we prevent Thailand
from becoming another Vietnam?
Senator CHURCH. The best way is by not
permitting the Thai Government to become
accusable of being another puppet of the
United States.
Mr. CHAPMAN. Thank you for
with
us on "From the Capital."
EDITORIAL COMMENT BY JOHN S.
KNIGHT
?
Mr. PITLBRIGHT. Madam President,
I ask unanimous consent that four ex-
cellent editorials written by the distin-
guished editor and publisher, Mr. John S.
Knight, be printed at this point in the
RECORD. Mr. Knight is one of the most
experienced and knowledgeable ob-
servers of the American and world scenes
today. He is also one of those unusual
publishers who writes editorials which
give to his newspapers an unusual in-
terest and zest.
There being no objection, the edi-
torials were ordered to be printed in the
RECORD, as follows:
[From the Detroit (Mich.) Free Press,
Feb. 13, 1966]
THE EDITOR'S NOTEBOOK: NATION SEES IN VIET
POLICY ARBITRARY DISPLAY OF POWER
(By John S. Knight)
It is often said that Lyndon Baines John-
son is a complex and baffling individual.
This understatement was never more
clearly illustrated than in the President's
actions of the last 2 weeks. Prior to the
recent Honolulu Conference, Mr. Johnson
was wooing the doves of peace by insisting
that we wanted no more than an honorable
truce in Vietnam.
The President also urged that the Vietnam
war be placed on the agenda of the United
Nations Security Council for discussion and
possible U.N. action.
By these moves, Mr. Johnson clarified our
position and won world approval as he skill-
fully placed responsibility for continuance
of the war on Hanoi and Peking.
Yet 1 week later, the scene was shifted and
the President spoke from another stage.
This time he was in Honolulu where he
assured Premier Nguyen Ca,o Ky and Chair-
man Nguyen Van Thieu that the United
States is irrevocably committed both to the
defense of South Vietnam and a social revo-
lution designed to solve its problems of
hunger, ignorance, and disease.
Furthermore, the U.S. military buildup in
Vietnam will double this year and may in-
crease to 600,000 in 1967.
"The road ahead," said the President, "may
be long and difficult. But we shall prevail."
General Ky and his entourage were greatly
encouraged by these pledges, as well they
might be. They had succeeded beyond their
most optimistic expectations.
So there you have it, stroking the ruffled
feathers of the doves one week and sharpen-
ing the claws and beaks of the hawks on the
next.
As James Reston has said so succinctly:
"The President has recently been giving the
impression that he is not following a clear
strategic policy, but that he is thrashing
about, rejecting peace offensives and then
trying them, stopping bombing and then
starting bombing, rejecting the U.N. and then
appealing to the U.N., sending Vice President
HUMPHREY to brief Asian leaders on the Hon-
olulu conference which he did hot attend?
all in an atmosphere of restless experimenta-
tion and self-righteous condemnation of
anybody who differs with him."
My own analysis is that President John-
son?ever the strong and prideful one?is
showing marked impatience over our failure
to achieve significant military victories in
Vietnam.
And so, unlike the Government of France
which gave only limited support to their
forces in 1954 and saw them fall at Dienbien-
phu, President Johnson is prepared to rout
and defeat the enemy without regard to the
size and cost of our commitment.
In a word, the President characteristically
rejects any thought of failure. If and when
the United States sits down at a negotiating
table, it will be on Johnson's terms and be-
cause he is the victor.
No, I don't think the President is running
a bluff. He will continue to talk of peace,
but his implacable determination to make
war unrewarding for the Vietcong and the
North Vietnamese seems now to be an in-
disputable fact.
Where all of this rapidly escalating in-
volvement will lead is a matter of conjecture.
Entrance of the Red Chinese, as in Korea?
A rift with Russia? Nuclear war? Who
really knows?
What a shocking thing it is that the small
involvement which began as economic as-
sistance with a few hundred U.S. advisers
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
0
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ?? SENATE A pril
a Vietnam tnore than 10 years ago has now
proliferated into major war.
What irony it is that South Vietnam'
"Iree and democratic society"?the very es-
muice of authoritarian rule?Is now to be
temeeformed by our wealth and resources in-
tc. a flowering paradise of democracy where
no one huntaire or dreads the state police.
Went a tragedy it is that thousands upon
timmands of American boys will die in Viet-
mon bee:an:iv of the Incalculable blunders of
our Jearieralup, both past and present.
Only now and tar too late are we hearing
ehy debits on Vietnam. The handful of
Ilia Senator; v-ho dare to et uestion Govern-
OOliCICS are treated by the President
with studied cot itempt.
i.e.) at toilet it is clear that the President
astautasa an responsibility for the con-
nect of the war. The Hubert Humphreys,
MaNainaeas, and the Rusks are but the
echoes of his desires.
The people winted a strong President and,
in this respect. lie has not disappointed them.
For what we are witnessing today is the
nIcst, arbitrary exercise of power within the
momnry of any living American,
cA,.-SITLE COMMENT
Pr ane Minister Harold Wilson's valiant
efforts to sal vein., the pound from devaluation
may be, thwerted by a strike of the National
I nion of Railwaymen unless the government
eielde to wage boosts which far exceeds its
3.1 -perceat guidelines.
(Nora.--The United States gave Britain
kitaSSiVe financial aid on assurances by Wil-
son that excessive union pay demands would
mit he countenaneed. Yet, here at home,
tondon Johnson's good friend, AFL-CIO
President George Meany, has consistently
:,tiorned the Peesid.ent's anti-inflation ef-
forts.)
niuey bong, the Louisiana kingfish, was
ahead of his ti yaps.
A Presidential commission (Johnson's)
tem th inks a Government check should go to
every American family whose income falls
below $3,000 a year. This is called a nega-
tive income tax, but the idea is basically
tile Same as iluey's which was to take the
money from one man's pocket and put it into
another's. The cast? Only a trifling $20
billion or so, shout one-third of what we
pay for rational defense.
President Johnson's new foreign aid ap-
proach is to be concentrated on countries
that "are not, hostile to us and give solid
evidence that they arc determined to help
themselves."
This is welcome realism, but don't count
mein seeing it happen.
Contrary to general belief, Lt. Gen. James
M. Gavin (retired) did not advocate the
holding of enclaves in Vietnam to the ex-
clusion of all other alternatives. It Was
Generals Gavin end Matthew Ridgway who
persuaded General Eisenhower not to com-
mit IT S. farces to Indochina when. Vice Pres-
ident Nixon was urging that course in 1951.
In his meninirs, General Ridgway said this:
"When the day comes for me to fare my
maker and account for my actions, the thing
won Id be roost humbly proud of was the
lact that I bit lit against, and perhaps con-
hoted to preventing, the carrying out of
eomo Miro-brained tactical schemes which
would. have e.;ost the lives of thousands of
mom 'Po that list of tragic accidents that
irteu ately never happened, I would add
the frith-whine intervention."
Yet it did happen, less than 10 years
later, when there were no longer any Gavins
or etidgways with the courage to oppose the
civilian "generals" in power.
A Washington newsletter reports that Fed-
eral officials are trying quietly to figure
eat some way of pumping more money for
iiiionomic development into the "have-not"
it Lions.
With Vietnam, negative incomes taxes and
the Great Society, it takes an optimist to
believe we will have any left.
[From the Miami (Fla.) Herald, Feb. 20, 19661
PUBLISHER'S NOTEBOOK: VIETNAM Di :BATE LATE
BUT GRAVELY NEEDED
(By John S. Knight)
.ANswaiis, AT LAST
The Senate hearings on. the war ii Vietnam
are OrOVIdin ET, the American people with sorely
needed information on he backftround of
our involvement and the possible pe 35 which
lie ahead.
For the first time, we are get- Mg both
opinion a" ii fact from competent a,ithorities
Who have tether dealt with the la nblem at
firrithand or whose long experiem o in the
military and diplomatic fields ens) lasthem
to see a local war in a global contett.
This is rot to say that the revel:: laons are
new. Newspapers and megazines which are
dedicated to the principle that an informed
public govt ms best, have f itithfully iiorierayed
each and every development leadit g to our
present position in southeast Asia.
And yet, despite millions of words ale-tures,
maps, interpretation, and editorial eamment,
the Vietnam picture has remained unclear
and imprecise.
TRUTH, NOT THEORY
ThalightHII discussion is often oh .2-lared by
simplistic theories which apnea,' logical
enough if not carefully examined. Thus we
have the "win or get out" school of thought,
the "victory" squad led by Barry Goldwater
who now charges President John on with
"groveling" before the enemy, and the "Nix-
onites" who favor "doing more" but stop short
of advocating all-out war,
We have seen, too, the :3uperpatti eta who
would deny the right of dissent and who ap-
pear to believe that any citizens Wm ques-
tion the wisdom of our course are oowardly
and lacking in patriotism.
So it was a good day for our coup ry when
Senator J.. WILLIAM FULBRIGHT, chaaanan of
the Foreign Relations Caom mittee, decided to
stage a full-scale review of the 'Vietnam
problem in an unrelenting search for truth.
SENATE WAS SILENT
The hour is late, as Senator FULDP,;:CHT has
conceded. Eve:n as the peril mour ted, the
august Semite was meekly bowing to the
President's will when it should ht vii been
challenging the wisdom of his policios.
Only Se aators GRUEN:ENG, of Alaska,
MORSE, of Oregon, McGovaaN, of South Da-
kota, runes:mar, of Arkansas, CHCRCH, of
Idaho, MCCARTHY, of Minnesota, MAINSFIELD,
of Montana.. CLARK, of Pennsylvar iii-, and
GORE, of Tennessee, expressed either their
reservations concerning Vietnam policy or
their opposition to it.
Since no Republican men iber of t1L Senate
could find his tongue there was no najor de-
bate on Vietnam in what was once called
the greatest deliberative body in the world.
The information which might hire been
brought to the American people several years
ago was tragically delayed as the administra-
tion literally smothered all oppositiem with
optimistic and meaningless offici ,1 pro-
nouncements on how well the war Was pro-
gressing.
A DEBT WE OWE
But late as it is, the Fulbright committee
is now tearing away the veil of secnocy and
performing a notable public service for the
country.
The televised hearings imove proe 'iced a
needed challenge to the administration,. a di-
versity of views from eminent authorities
and a broader comprehension of the total
situation.
It has been a long, long time since both the
chairman of the Foreign Relations Cianmit-
tee and the majority leader have been iit
odds with the President on major policies
Mr. Johnson is known to be ci .wnright
angry with Senator FULDRIGHT and guiLe dis-
appointed in Senator MANSFIELD, a 'aim and
persuasive man who always reasons lul. never
rants.
Both Senators accept the President's (1
pleasure philosophically and hold Lais i
their convictions.
We owe them a debt of gratitude *-3C' War-
ing the national welfare above come or:lie-0,e
of friendship and party loyalty.
PERSONALITIES
Senator WAYNE MORSE, the most r dentless
critic of administration policies In Vietnam,
is a former dean and professor of law who
was first elected as a Republican 1. at later
switched to the Democratic Party.
He is a strong supporter of the United
Nations and believes the United lit; tes is
acting in violation of international law.
Senator MORSE, a confirmed maverick, is a
blunt and merciless questioner wl o often.
dilutes his effectiveness by resorting to ex-
trernism and overstatement.
Senator J. WILLIAM FULBRIGHT,
scholar and former university president, Mu;
a mind which "encompasses everything."
He has been critical of U.S. intervention in
both Vietnam and the Dominican Republic.
An ideal presiding officer, Senator Fla,-
BRIGHT is ever courteous, a disarming inter-
rogator, and a convincing low-key speaker.
He arid President Johnson have bun long-
time Senate friends.
Senator RUSSELL B. LONG, son of the
famous or infamous Huey, has been moving
Up in the Democratic power structare and
serves as acting majority leader In the ab-
sence of Senator MANSFIELD.
He is a stanch defender of Johnson's poli-
cies, an arm-waving orator who said last
Wednesday that he "swells with pen e when
he sees Old Glory and prays he shall never
see a white flag of surrender."
Senators KARL MUNDT and BOLIEKI: RICK -
ENLOOPER are conservative Midwest republi-
cans who have generally supported the ad-
ministration on Vietnam but appear to be
thinking of how the Republicans ca ii capi-
talize on an unpopular war in 1966.
Senator GEORGE ASKEW, Republican, of Ver-
mont, is known as the "owl" in a mixed
cote of doves and hawks. The Senator is
Well respected for his fairness and judicial
temperament, as is Senator Join/ Sonar:mare,
Democrat, of Alabama, who was Adlai Steven-
son's Vice-Presidential running mate ,n 1952.
General Maxwell Taylor, former chief of
staff for American forces in Europe, U.S.
commander in Berlin, and the 8th Army';
commander in Korea, is an articalato ex-
ponent of administration strategy in Viet-
nam where he served as our Ambassador for
15 months.
The McNamara-Taylor reports of several
years ago on the war's progress prove ii to be
extravagantly optimistic.
George Kennan, long a career diplomat
and former Ambassador to Russia, and Yugo-
slavia, is credited with inventing the "con-
tainment" concept of dealing with Rum am.
Mr. Kerman, now with the Institute for
Advanced Study at Princeton, N.J., ft ers We
are on a collision course with Red China,
does not favor withdrawal from Vietnam but
vigorously opposes escalation of the a, at.
Can. James Gavin (retired) rose from
private to lieutenant general, served in World
War II, as paratroop commander and later
as President Kennedy's Ambassador to
France.
The general supports a holding concept in
Vietnam and sees great peril in widening the
war. He believes, as do many military ex-
perts, that Vietnam is a poor staging area
for a major conflict.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For. Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
April 5, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 7259
PAT-ON-BACK DEPARTMENT
The National Broadcasting Co. is to be
complimented for carrying live coverage of
the Senate hearings when the other networks
were taking care of the soap and detergent
commercials.
A high-level CBS decision to suspend live
coverage of the hearings produced the resig-
nation of Fred Friendly, president of CBS
News, who said the decision "made a mock-
ery" of the network's crusade to obtain
broadest access to congressional debate.
The ruckus, with its attendant adverse
publicity, quickly got CBS back on the sound
track, but NBC rates the laurels for public
service,
[Frorn the Detroit (Mich.) Free Press,
Feb. 27, 1966]
THE EDITOR'S NOTEBOOK: GREAT DEBATE OVER
VIETNAM HAS SERVED THE NATION WELL
(By John S. Knight)
The great debate over Vietnam is produc-
ing some welcome results.
For the first time since our unfortunate
involvement began more than 10 years ago,
the American public is beginning to under-
stand the full significance of our role in
southeast Asia and the nature of our so-called
commitments.
It has been the fashion to deplore teach-
ins, street demonstrations against the war,
and the writings of those who have differed
with administration policies,
Yet these protests have served a useful
purpose. For there is today a public aware-
ness that the Vietnam problem has many
facets and no simple solutions.
The Senate hearings conducted by Chair-
man J. W. PULBRIGHT, of the Foreign Rela-
tions Committee, brought to the Nation the
views of able and scholarly men with wide
experience in global relations.
We can be proud that our country is served
by Generals Gavin and Taylor, the broad
knowledge of former Ambassador George
Kennan and the lucid expositions of Secre-
tary of State Dean Rusk.
And, with an exception or two, the Sena-
tors who conducted the interrogations posed
questions which were pertinent and direct.
Whether one agrees or finds fault with in-
dividual testimony is not so important as the
fact that every American citizen had the rare
privilege of hearing a full exposition of the
Vietnam war from all viewpoints for the first
time since U.S. military participation readhed
major proportions.
Until the Senate hearings, the objectors to
Government policies were held in contempt
as being either flaky or downright un-
patriotic.
But no such charges could be brought
against Gen. James M. Gavin, paratroop
commander in World War II and former U.S.
Ambassador to France.
Nor did they apply to George Kennan, a
former Ambassador to Russia and the archi-
tect of our "containment" concept in the
cold war with Moscow.
Such men, along with Senator FULBRIGHT
and a handful of Democratic Senators who
dared to defy the all-powerful Lyndon John-
son, spoke with courage and conviction.
And yet there are some superheated patri-
ots among us who find the Senate "disguist-
hag" and charge the Fulbright committee
with "giving aid, comfort, and -information
to the enemy."
One such is a Mr. Frederick J. Read, of
Grand Rapids, who would bring the press,
NBC, and the Fulbright committee into
court to show reason why they. should not
be tried for treason.
The Reads and those of his persuasion
forget that the purpose of the Fulbright
hearings is to enable our citizenry to becorne
better informed on Vietnam and that such
a clearing away of misconceptions is vital to
a healthy democracy.
The charge of traitorous conduct is un-
worthy of a reply other than to remind Mr.
Read that the United States is not officially
at war.
A free nation could not long endure in a
climate of no dissent. Only dictators flour-
ish for a time in those unhappy lands where
freedom of expression is shackled by the
State.
The Fulbright hearings were long overdue.
For years, the August Senate sat in silence
as administration spokesmen in Washington
and Saigon brainwashed the American pub-
lic with optimistic pronouncements which
bore little or no resemblance to the truth.
One need only to recall the fatuous state-
ments by Ambassador Lodge and the Mc-
Namara-Taylor reports to President Ken-
nedy to understand how completely we were
misled on the progress of the war.
Had it not been for the dissenters, the
studied conclusions of Senate Leader MIKE
MANSFIELD and the Fulbright hearings, we
might still be searching in vain for the truth.,
President Johnson, who bridles at opposi-
tion in any form, is reported to have watched
the televised Senate hearings with avid in-
terest. He should have been pleased since
Gen. Maxwell Taylor and Secretary Dean
Rusk, reflecting administration policies un-
der merciless questioning, came off very well
indeed.
It appears, however, that the President
is now harkening to the voices of dissent.
At least he senses the need for a clarifica-
tion of administration policies.
Thus he gave the country needed reassur-
ance in his Freedom House speech by stating
that the United States was not caught in a
"blind escalation of force" which might lead
to a vast conflict with Communist China.
Bill D. Moyers, the White House press sec-
retary, told reporters that the President did
not intend the speech to be an answer to his
critics or a denunciation of those who dis-
agree.
But had It not been for the critics, it is
an open question as to whether Mr. Johnson
would have declared himself against a wider
involvement with such evident emphasis.
Of course the larger question is whether
a wider war can ultimately be avoided since
we have ample evidence at hand that "small
wars" often lead to major confrontations.
Nevertheless, the President's address pro-
vided a partial and long-sought exposition
of policy.
The great debate over Vietnam has served
us well.
RANDOM NOTES
The administration's reaction to Senator
ROBERT KENNEDY'S first statements about
bringing the South Vietnamese and indig-
enous Vietcong into a coalition government
is a good example of Potomac confusion.
Vice President HUBERT HUMPHREY ridiculed
this idea as akin to "putting a fox in a
chicken coop * * * an arsonist in the fire
department." But in the Senate hearings,
Secretary of State Dean Rusk insisted that
the United States would stand for free elec-
tions in Vietnam and accept the result. The
outcome of such elections could mean pre-
cisely such a coalition as KENNEDY originally
mentioned.
President Nasser of Egypt, who once told
Americans they "could drink sea water" if
they didn't like his policies, is at it again.
Nasser, who has received millions in Ameri-
can assistance, is now assailing U.S. military
aid to Israel and threatens a "preventive
war."
Sukarno of Indonesia is another recipient
of our favors who never misses an opportu-
nity to blast the United States. We deserve
him since the Truman administration en-
couraged the Netherlands to yield their
sovereignty to Sukarno in 1949.
Just before the death of Fleet Adm. Chester
Nimitz, he warned that Japan will remain
friendly to the United States "just so long as
that friendship profits Japan."
The admiral predicted that whenever the
Japanese feel they can do better elsewhere,
they will do it, and that "includes an alli-
ance or trade agreements with Red China."
At some stage, Japan could become a fac-
tor in the Vietnam struggle since she is
known to be unhappy over the possibility of
an enlarged war.
The current agitation in Congress to force
safety improvements in automobiles is com-
mendable, but how does one cope with
drunken drivers, others with weak eyes, and
poor reflexes and car-happy kids who "own"
the rood?
You can't pad sense into people.
[From the Miami (Fla.) Herald, Mar. 13,
1966]
THE PUBLISHERS NOTEBOOK: GREAT DEBATE
UNCOVERS A arum NEW BRINK
(By John S. Knight)
RANT VERSUS REASON
No responsible editorialist enjoys belabor-
ing Government policies merely for the sake
of controversy. Unbridled and irresponsible
criticism can be as harmful to the national
interest as remaining silent when it is being
endangered.
The great debate over Vietnam is a case
in point. Senator WAYNE MORSE, of Oregon,
is one of the courageous few who has con-
sistently challenged the validity of our in-
volvement in southeast Asia. Yet he often
unhorse,s himself when engaging in ill-tem-
pered bombast.
By contrast, Senator J. W. PULBRIGHT, Of
Arkansas, is even tempered, judicial, and a
model of propriety as he interrogates the wit-
nesses who appear before the Senate Foreign
Relations Committee.
There are likewise journalists who rant and
fume in columns of lint-picking, captious
criticism. They become largely ineffective
since they persuade no one, but only harden
the beliefs of those who already agree.
Responsible writers of opinion do not lack
conviction. But they prefer the use of facts,
logic, and analysis to make their case. Not
as exciting, perhaps, but decidely more in-
formative and trustworthy.
Being human, both the politicians and
members of the press can be arbitrary,
capricious, petty, and illogical. Or, they
may be fair, objective, analytical and zeal-
ously devoted to the search for truth.
The Senate hearings on Vietnam have re-
vealed both the bellicose traits of a few
and the even dignity and composure of the
many. In journalism, with notable excep-
tions, the comment has been vigorous and
well reasoned.
THE ULTIMATE GOAL
As Senator FULBRIGEIT now concedes, the
public debate on Vietnam came several years
too late. Yet it has been productive if only
because the Johnson administration is now
aware of the boiling disent and the chal-
lenge to its policies.
Senator PITLBRIGHT'S oomrnittee has pro-
vided a badly needed, full-scale review of the
Vietnam situation. This has been most
helpful to a confused American public which
seeks nothing more than clarification of our
aims and ultimate objectives.
Within recent days, it has been illuminat-
ing to learn that even as we fight an un-
declared war in Vietnam, the ultimate goal
is the containment of Red China.
Defense Secretary McNamara and Vice
President HUBERT HUMPHREY have said as
much in interviews and appearances before
the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.
So the "little war" of a few years ago
which we were told was being fought to resist
aggression and protect the liberty-loving
South Vietnamese is now a major exerci se in
power politics.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
7260 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ?SENATE April 5, 1966
Walter Iippmann dismisses the notion
that China can be contained in Vietnam
as "sheer mythology." He asks, quite ap-
propriately, how Secretary of State Dean
Rusk and McNamara can believe that they
are containing China despite the fact they
have alternated the Soviet Union. spread
doubt and division in Japan, have no support;
in Pakistan tinc India.
-in the realm of great power polities in.
Asia" says Lipnmann. "the United States is
playing :i lone hand. * * The true contain-
ment of China is possible only as and if her
emet
Asian maghbors, the Soviet Union,
Japan, India, and Pakistan, are alined to-
c?- are at least acting on parallel lines.''
'(MOOS RTSX,
One does not have to be an alarmist to
comprehend the enormity of this undertak-
ing and its inherent hazards.
Yet we inch on and on through the jungles
OS Vietnam toward a possible confrontation
with China, standing virtually alone and
with no true insight into the moods of Rus-
nia's inscrutable leaders.
To those who decry the Fulbright hear-
ing's as meaningless and political, the an-
ewer can be made that except for the testi-
mom/ which they have produced, the public
would not today be aware that the United
States is back to "britilismanship" in a stage
winch would have alarmed even the late
John Foster Dulles, master of bluff and bins-
-Mr in Eisenhower's time.
Tine erudite gentleman from Arkansas--
undismayed over the criticism of his col-
leagues and undaunted by the President's
displeasure deserves the gratitude of his
fellow Americans for a magnificent public
eervice.
Republican leaders, who couldn't find their
Longues in the Vietnam debate, are counting
upon the war's unpopularity to bring them
sizable gains in this year's congressional
e ice tions.
Being neither hawks nor doves, they can
bottet of their support for the President if
things go well. But should the war take an
Ulaii1011E: turn, the GOP will blame the Demo-
crats. They also have the appeasement issue
when and if negotiations begin.
No stateerminshin, this; only practical
coli tics.
-U.S. SPOTLIGHT ON CHINA
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Madam President,
ask Ur nitnimous consent to have printed
at this point in the RECORD an article-,
entitled "Now U.S. Spotlight Turns on
China," written by Frederic Collins, and
published in the London Sunday Times
of recent date.
There being no objection, the article
.was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
fit;
Now U.S. tti.POTLIGlir TURNS ON ellINA
;11'," Frederic Collins)
Tee focus of debate now is shifting to
China from the Vietnam war. Senator Pith-
:adorer begins public hearings on China on
Tuesday before the Senate Foreign Relations
Committee and will extend them over sev-
eral. weeks. There is every prospect that they
will conic to command attention as serious
and intense as those he held on the war
tele f.
The transfer of interest is general. Offi-
cial comment, public and private, is begin-
ning to center on China, as is public discus-
:Mina The debate on the war has at least
temporarily exhausted itself, leaving opin-
ion seemingly still divided between majority
etipport for President Johnson and an ir-
reconcilable minority of opposition, appar-
ently not growing at the moment.
The change in debate reflects the sense
of a need to find a policy on China which
can be clearly understood by the public and
win its support. The curious fact that such
a policy does not new exist is explained by
the involvement of the China issue in the
most vicious kind of idedlogical publics over
at least two decades.
Proponents of almost any course c ther than
uncompromising hostility toward Commu-
nist Chins became the oljects of snti-Com-
munist witch hunts. One effect we: to drive
most Gil tett experts out of the go ernment.
The administration for that very reason'will
be hard put to find stars to presen: its views
in Poiannenr's hearings, when C.mir turn
comes after his witnesses, drawn at iirst from
academia. :Are heard.
FottninDEN S1711.1EOT
Senn tOr FT7I.BRIGHT, announcing the hear-
ings, rernarked that netiniand China has
been something of a ford; tdden sul: iect since
the days of Senator McCarthy. He hopes the
hearings may "give more maneuverability to
the Government," induce a "feeling of free-
dom," and embolden "same peor e in the
administration to change the polite...a
That indeed might happen. The four
most recent administrations have Mien hope-
lessly restricted by the miuderous aolitics of
the issue. Ventilation could help a lot.
The quickening discussion is already be-
ginning to produce indica tions of tea: kind of
policy which might result from full debate.
The goal seems to be a formula foe the con-
tainment of China without either foil-scale
hand-to-hand war with her or an unending
task of military resistance to proxy aggres-
sion, as in Korea (including 1 ml ion Chi-
nese "volunteers") arid in Vietna.m.
Eirective peaceful containment c' -cud then,
under such a formula, provide a climate
within which China's fears could be quiet-
ened and her aggressive impulses cured by
persuasion.
Senator FULBRICIrr treight one day find
common ground with .t.he administration
One? more in such a policy, after their long
estrangement. He believes the oLly course
open in Asia is an understanding with China
permitting neutralization of southeast Asia.
The administration, including highest
officers, scorns this, holding that Commix-
nial,s, or any compulsive aggressor:, are not
to be trusted in neutralize tion schemes. But
liVI.REICHT counters that if the issue of
Chinese and American power is .eft unre-
solved, even a total victory in Smith Viet-
nam is unlikely to solve very much.
It seems clear, however. that the differ-
ences between him and the administration
are in considerable part those of timing.
The administration thinks it madness to talk
now of treating with China or ev,m hoping
to. Fi,LIMIGHT thinks h: not, too early to
begin talking abo it.
THE MITA:RATION OF GLOIBALISM
Mr, FITT,BRIGIM Madam President,
ii.sk unanimous conserit to haw printed
at this point in the RECORD ar article
entitled "The Frustration of GLibalism,"
written by Walter Lippmann, and pub-
lished in the Washington Post if recent
date.
There 'being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in tht. RECORD,
as follow.:
Ineusraarraer ..:Ft GLOW?: EOM
(By Walter Lippmann)
The edginess which him apoeare.1 recently
among the President's principal cidvisers is
a symptom of the frustration which is so
pronounced in Congress Eclad in the country.
The frustration springs not from any fear
that the American forces in Vietnam can be
defeated on the battlefield. The frustration
springs from doubt that there is "my other
course still open except to escalate the war
without any genuine prospect of eliding it.
The President is supported in Congress and
in the polls because there seems ai be no
alternative to what he is doing.
Once the President had raised the stakes
by investing 200,000 American troops
it made the fight predominantly an American
war. He had, as one of his suppc thers lit-
marked recently, painted himsell into a
Corner.
From the perspective of the WI.i e Housc
the pursuit of a militery decision could lead
to a confrontation with China or the Soviet
Union or both. On the other hand, the at-
tempt to negotiate a truce raised inavoid-
ably the question whether Presitient Johnson
was prepared to negotiate with Ids enemies
in the field, of whom some 80 pet sent arf:
Vietcong.
if for the time being we cannot do any-
thing to dissolve the President's predicament
we can, at least, make an effort to understand
how for 12 years we have slithered .ind now
have slipped into such a war.
In a preceding article I argued that ti:e
containment of Red China, which is a neces-
sary objective of our policy, is beim!: grosely
mishandled by the President's prin anal ad-
visers, Messrs. Rusk and McNamara. Then
way of containing China has left us without
support, and in certain cases with tile ac Live
opposition, of every great power in Asia. Yet
if China is as expansionary as we t iiink she
is and must be contained it can be cone ongy
by a coalition of great powers concerned with
Asia. In the preceding article I u aid, too
that the egregious result of our policy wet
hidden from view by a piece of well-circu-
lated political mythology; namely, that tin
outcome of the fighting in South Vietnam
would decide China's foreign policy and tin
future of the Communist revolutioe on tint
planet.
I venture to believe that the root of the
Rusk-McNamara misconception of our for-
eign relations is the myth, propagated since
the First World War by the naive aiid ideal-
istic followers of Wilson, that all overeigr
states, whether big or small, are not only alike
in their human rights but alike aka: in their
right to exercise influence in the vorld,
believe this to be a myth which fal ;hies the
nature of things and the facts of fife. It hal.
rendered Mr. Rusk incapable of sound juicig-
ments in foreign policy.
In the Senate hearings, for exai iple, 1\1c',
Rusk discussed with great moral fervor the
conception of spheres of influence in inter-
national politics. They were inadnitisible,
said. Therefore we could not recorenze that
China too might claim a sphere of influence.
We were too pure for such worldly ?id thine:::
as spheres of influence. But on what ground:.
we were doing what we have been doing in
the past few years in Cuba, Guatemala, the
Dominican Republic, and Panama, 'Yin Reel,
was too dainty to say.
For a foreign minister to deny inat
treat the territory south of us as a i Ameri-
can sphere of influence, and that we dm
risk a world nuclear war to prevent ticc SOWifl.
Union from entering it, and that we have
suppressed revolution in the Don-dale:in Re-
public on suspicion of the intrusion of for-
eign Communist influences?all ills is tv
blatantly contrary to the facts that it is re-
garded everywhere else as extremt ly crud(
hypocrisy.
For my own part I know of no Sell011S cmi
educated student of international polite,s
who attempts to deny that great powers vdt
insist on spheres of influence which no other
rival great power may enter with it: icilhltccil
forces. This is one of the element try facie,
which every competent foreign minister
keeps in mind. It is a fact, just a the eii-
istence of two sexes is a fact.
While the existence of spheres of nfluenee
is undeniable, there can be great ddlerenest
in how the great power exerts its influence
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP6Z18_00.446R000400060013-8
April 5, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? sENA'i E
Historically, there was a revolutionary turn-
ing point in the evolution of the concept of
spheres of influence when President Roose-
velt declared that our Latin American policy
would be the good neighbor policy. He did
not say that we did not have a sphere of in-
fluence. He said that we intended to act
within it, not as lords and masters, but as
friends and partners with our neighbors.
This was the progressive evolution of the
classic concept of spheres of influence.
U.S. POLICIES IN THE FAR EAST
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Madam President,
I ask unanimous consent to have printed
at this point in the RECORD the text of a
broadcast by Eric Sevareid on the CBS
evening news of March 14, 1966.
There being no objection, the text of
the broadcast was ordered to be printed
in the RECORD, as follows:
When it comes to the President's conduct
of foreign relations, the U.S. Senate has the
constitutional right and duty to advise and
to consent. When it consents, that's not
news. In our 16 years' involvement with.
Vietnam that is all it has done. But when
it advises, that is news. And so, in a way,
the biggest story in Washington now is the
story of the Senate, specifically its foreign
relations committee, more specifically its
chairman, FULBRIGHT, of Arkansas.
Two and three weeks ago, administration
officials were privately denouncing the Sen-
ator's public inquiry into our Far Eastern
policies, conveying to the enemy and the
world, they said, an image of the United
States as a divided country. Mr. FULBRIGHT
made the right answer today; since the
country obviously is divided, he said, what
was conveyed was not an image, but a fact.
Yesterday Vice President HUMPHREY said
FULBRIGHT'S current hearings on China are
among the most fruitful procedures now go-
ing on. Nobody in power was talking about
the Senator that way a while back.
What this means is that FULBRIGHT has
won his first objective?to make the admin-
istration think far more seriously and deeply
about the danger of a condition in which
the world's greatest power and the world's
most populous power, both armed with nu-
clear weapons, are scarcely on speaking
terms. We have nothing like the means of
communication with Peking that we had
with Moscow at the most critical moments
in Russian-American relations.
The Vice President's remark yesterday that
we should try to contain China without iso-
lating her?in other words, do as we did with
Russia?is public recognition of FULBRIGHT'S
achievement. Now the real authorities on
China, and there are several, buried rather
deep in the layers of Government, are more
likely to be listened to at the top levels. An-
other signal that Washington wants to get
on a new footing with China is the Presi-
dent's decision to let American scholars trav-
el to China?if China will let them in.
All things begin in the mind, including
catastrophes. For months, many minds in
Washington have been gradually drifting
from the idea of war with China as a possi-
bility toward the idea as a probability. The
next stage would be expectation. This is
what FULBRIGHT has detected and wants ito
halt.
THE WAR IN VIETNAM?COMMENT
BY THE BRITISH MAGAZINE "THE
ECONOMIST"
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Madam President,
the January 29 issue of the widely re-
speeLed British magazine, the Economist,
No. 59-9
contains a perceptive and provocative re-
port from Saigon entitled "Ones Who
Wait and See." I should like to sum-
marize the main points in this article
because I think that they raise questions
that all of us should ponder. They point
up to me the subtle contradictions and
paradoxes of the war in Vietnam.
First af all, the Economist points out
that as more American troops pour into
Vietnam, especially as they approach in
numbers the size of the South Vietnam-
ese Regular Army, there is a growing risk
that the South Vietnamese Army will be
looked on as mercenaries. The article
notes that while General Westmoreland
is reportedly aware of this danger, "sta-
tistics are working against him."
The second point the article makes is-
that the larger the American establish-
ment in Vietnam becomes, the more it
dwarfs the Vietnamese Government and
the more the suspicion grows "that Viet-
nam's independence and sovereignty
have become a mere shadow."
The third point in the article is that
as the war grows in intensity, democracy
and freedom become empty words. The
generals that have stepped into Presi-
dent Diem's shoes "are telling the peo-
ple?with the Americans nodding ap-
proval?that they cannot indulge in the
luxury of a democratic regime as long as
the war lasts."
The fourth point is that many Viet-
namese are becoming increasingly bitter
and indifferent because they see, on the
one hand, that if the Communists win,
the country will be enslaved, while, on
the other hand, the alternative of na-
tional independence and freedom "is no-
where in sight either." The article
points out that this has led more and
more people, including a good many in
the South Vietnamese Army, to ask: "For
what and for whom are we fighting?"
Finally, the Economist states that after
20 years of war:
The Vietnamese are back where they
started but this time with the Americans
instead of the French by their side.
Summing up, the article concludes that
so far as the Vietnamese are concerned:
National independence and individual free-
dom seem to be two irreconcilable aims in
a country caught in an East-West confron-
tation which has reached the stage of open?
though indirect?military conflict.
As for the United States:
In coming to Vietnam to defend freedom
they cannot escape infringing on Vietnam's
national independence.
The United States will inevitably "reap
the resentment of the Vietnamese peo-
ple, because, to win the war, they will
have to take over the effective direction
of the country."
It seems to me that the article is an
unusually good analysis of the inevitable
consequences of the war in South Viet-
nam. These consequences are per-
suasive arguments, as if any more were
needed, for hoping that we shall soon
be able to move to a negotiated settle-
ment of the war.
Madam President, I ask unanimous
consent that the article mentioned above
be printed in the RECORD at this point.
7261
There being no objection, the article
was ordered to be printed in the RECORD,
as follows:
ONES WHO WAIT AND SEE
(Prom our Saigon correspondent)
Too few people are paying attention to
something that is going to exercise increas-
ing influence on the course of the Vietnam
war. This is the resurgence of Vietnamese
nationalism. To French residents of Sai-
gon?many of them ex-members of the
French expeditionary corps who have made
Vietnam their home?the present political
picture is strangely reminiscent of the early
1950's. Attentisme?fence-sitting?is grow-
ing among the Vietnamese.
As more American troops pour into Viet-
nam (they will soon outnumber the Viet-
namese Regular Army) and engage the Com-
munists directly in big battles, the Viet-
namese Armed Forces risk being looked upon
as suppletifs. These were the local auxil-
iary troops recruited, armed, and paid by
the French in the earlier Indochina war,
who fought under the heavy moral handicap
of being looked upon by their Vietnamese
Communist opponents as mercenaries. The
American commander in Vietnam, General
Westmoreland, is reported to be acutely
aware of this danger. He is trying his best
to correct the impression. But statistics are
working against him.
The bigger the American establishment in
Vietnam gets, the more the Vietnamese Gov-
ernment is dwarfed. No assertion to the
contrary by Vietnam's ruling generals can
wipe out the suspicion that Vietnam's inde-
pendence and sovereignty have become a
mere shadow.
This is one side of it. There is another.
As the war grows in scale and intensity,
democracy and freedom, the two slogans
which were so prominent in the last years of
President Diem's rule and rallied round
them all the forces which were to overflow
his regime, have now become empty words.
The generals who tossed President Diem
out in the name of democracy and freedom
speak Mr. Diem's language now that they
have stepped into his shoes. They are tell-
ing the people?with the Americans nodding
approval?that they cannot indulge in the
luxury of a democratic regime as long as
the war lasts.
Many people, in particular the articulate
elements who had turned a Ceaf ear to the
same plea by Mr. Diem now say they have
been deceived. Hence the growing bitter-
ness, brooding indifference, and attentisme.
The Vietnamese Government and the Ameri-
cans are shocked by this attitude, just as
Bao Dai and the French were in the early
1950's. But even allowing for the undoubted
loss of nerve and cynicism of a number of
Vietnamese, there is a real moral problem
here. To many honest and courageous Viet-
namese it looks well-night insoluble. If the
Communists win, the country will be en-
slaved. But the alternative?national in-
dependence and freedom?is nowhere in
sight either. The question now being asked
by more and more people, including a good
many in the Armed Forces, whose daily lot
is lighting and dying, is: for what and for
whom are we fighting?
After 20 years of war, suffering and wait-
ing, the Vietnamese are back where they
started, but this time with the Americans
instead of the French by their side. The
political problem remains unsolved. Per-
haps it cannot be solved, for national inde-
pendence and individual freedom seem to be
two irreconcilable aims in a country caught
In an East-West confrontation which has
reached the stage of open?though indi-
rect?military conflict.
To? the Americans too the answer seems
unfindable. Whether they like it or not, in
Approved For Release 2005/06/29: CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
7262 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE April 5, 1966
coming to Vietnam to defend freedom they
cannot escape infringing on Vietnam's na-
tional independence. Mr. Arthur Schlesinger
says in "A Thousand Days" that President
Kennedy was acutely aware of the dilemma
but died before he could solve it. The United
States will have expended a great deal of
blood and money to save Vietnam only to
reap the resentment of the Vietnamese peo-
ple, because, to win the war, they will have
to take over the effective direction of the
country. They will have to find a formula
that will reconcile the desire for individual
liberty with the equal desire for Vietnam
to be independent of any great power. Other-
wise the war will be very much the "dirty
war" so well known to the French?long,
bloody, costly. exasperating, and indecisive.
STATEMENT ON U.S. POLICY
*rOWARD CHINA
Mr. FULBRIGHT. Madam Presi-
dent, I ask unanimous consent to have
printed at this point in the RECORD a
statement on United States China policy
prepared by a number of Asian scholars
who -support in principle the changes
recommended for U.S. policy toward
China.
There being no objection, the state-
ment was ordered to be printed in the
:-Z,Econ.n, as follows:
STATEMENT itS UNITED STATES CHINA PO L IC Y
We, the undersigned, submit the following
statement for the consideraation of the ex-
ecutive branch, the Congress, and members
of the public.
'Chat the formal China policy of the United
States has long since been out of date is
widely recognized and tacitly accepted even
by officials of the American government.
Changes in this policy will not solve the
Los or political and military challenges to
the United States in Asia, but they can im-
prove the ability of the United States to deal
wish these problems and reduce the likeli-
hood that a crisis could turn into a major
military confrontation.
We believe that the following represent ac-
curately factors on which United States
policy on China should now be based:
1. The People's Republic of China with its
capital at Peking is a reality of international
politics, whose importance to the course of
international affairs will grow. There is in-
creasing danger in the isolation of the United
States from China and of China's relative
isolation from other nations and internations
of institutions,
S. The People's Republic of China is now
committed to a policy of hostility to the
Vol led States and has made opposition to
U.S. policies a cornerstone of its foreign
il. in the immediate future the United
Shoes is unlikely to persuade Peking that it
is not its most implacable enemy. But the
United States can hope to convince Peking
that, while prepared to respond when chal-
lenged, the U.S. is at the same time interested
in, exploring areas of mutual interest and
normal] sing rel at i ons wherever possible.
1 . The government of the Republic of
China on Taiwan will be a member of the
international community for the Indefinite
rut are, but only as the government of Tai-
wan, and not as a potential government for
mainland China.
Ii. The major prOblems for the United
States in Asia have to do with establishing
stable and mutually satisfactory relations
between the United States and Asian national
governments, while helping to develop social
and economic viability within Asia countries
through technical and economic aid pro-
grams. Although the problems are intensified
by the existence of an expansioniat Commu-
nist force in Asia, they arise from factors in-
dependent of communism itself and must be
dealt with in the context of the total situa-
tion.
In the light of these principal factors and
others, we urge that the U.S. Government
adopt the following polities:
1. The United States should cease to use
its influence to prevent the admittance of
the People's Republic of China to the United
Nations and other international bodies. In
the interests of international peace and the
national interests of the United States, the
government at Peking should be acii:epted into
these institutions, without conditions posed
by us or by Peking.
O. The U.S. Government should announce
that it is prepared, while maintaining rela-
tions with Taiwan, to enter into negotiations
regarding the establishment of full and for-
mal diplomatic relations with the People's
Republic of China.
8. The United States should oropose to
the People's Republic of China in opening
of a new phase of bilateral negotiations at
which the following items wouid be dis-
cussed: (a) Exchange of diplomatic repre-
sentation: (b) renunciation of farce as an
instrument of policy; (c) arms control in-
cluding problems of the control over nuclear
weapons.
4. The United States should e,nnounce
that it is prepared to accept accredited news-
papermen scholars, and others from the
People's Republic of China and call upon
the People's Republic to reciprocate. Ameri-
can willingness to accept Chinese visitors
should not, at least in the short ran, depend
on reciprocation.
5, The United States should end its total
trade embargo with Communist China and
permit the importation and exportation of
nonstrategic materials.
We believe that the measures suggested
here would only initiate what must be a long
and difficult process leading, we Ii 'pe, to the
normalization of relations bet ween the
United States and the People's Republic of
China and a reduction of hostilities between
the two countries. We believe, despite the
antagonism shown by the Chinei:e govern-
ment, that it is up to the Uniteci. States to
try to move the Chinese to a greater accept-
ance of the principles ef coexiste ace in the
emerging world community.
--
POSI7CION PAPER: RECOMMEN DAM NS FOR A
CHANGE IN UNITED STATES -CHID ESE RELA-
TIONS AND POLICIES
INTRODHC TION
The purpose of this paper is to set forth
reasons supporting CET tam n recommended
changes in U.S. policy toward China. It is
hoped that the paper will contr.bute to a
growing consensus within the tinted States
that our China policy should be modified,
that our Government should indice te willing-
ness to undertake changes, and that these
proposed changes should be debated and dis-
cussed increasingly by citizens throughout
the country.
There are occasions When poliQ makers in
government are reluctant to emoark on a
given policy change because they think such
a change would not be support:id by the
public. With respect to U.S. policy toward
China it appears that this factor is one of
those inhibiting U.S. sosvernmensal action.
Therefore, it is important throuirth discus-
sion and sober exchange of views, to per-
suade the Government that there is wide-
spread support for a change in its policy
toward China and that the United States,
by changing its policy within parameters dic-
tated by its own best interests, can con-
tribute ultimately to an improvement in re-
lations between the two countries.
BACKGROUND
A policy statement was drafted by a small
group of scholars concerned with U.S. for-
eign policy. It was submitted to members
of the Association for Asian Studies to learn
the views of a group considered among the
most knowledgeable about China, Asia, and
U.S. relations with nations in that part of
the world. The members of this association
have varied backgrounds and posit is knowl-
edge about different facets of Chinese life
or other parts of Asia. Most of them are
members of university faculties; some are
serving abroad in various capacities. Of
about; 2,700 who were sent the draft state-
ment, over 300 (11 percent) responded, a
much better than the average response to a
mailed request for an answer.
The Asian specialists were asked to indi-
cate whether they approved the statement
in principle, whether they desired to recom-
mend changes in it, or whether they did not
wish to be associated with this effort. Over
85 percent (258) said they were sympathetic
with the aims of the statement. Of these
198 were prepared to support it in principle
and have their names so designated. (A list
of these is available.) The remaining 60
said that they would sign the recommended
policy changes if certain moth-Ile itions in
wording or concept were made. Since, in
most cases this could not be done without
resubmitting the statement to all those who
had already signed, these names have had
to be omitted. Eighteen respondents sell
they supported the statement but for vari-
ous reasons did not wish to sign it. Only 10
stated they did not wish to be associated
with the statement because they opposed
the proposed changes in United States-China
policy; in most cases the opposition was not
to the statement in its entirety but to parts
of it. Five respondents stated that they did
not wish to sign the statement, but gave na
explanation of their views.
The large number of signers who are ex-
perts in Asian studies is convincing evi-
dence that the changes suggested are
grounded in knowledge about China or the
surrounding area as well as in recognition
of U.S. interests in that part of the world.
The general point of view of the Asian spe-
cialists, as revealed in comments of those
who responded to the statement circulated,
is reffected in the following pagss. This
paper is not necessarily endorsed by the
signers of the statement on changes recom-
mended.
GENERAL CONSIDERATIONS
The United States has always been op-
posed to Communist expansionist and ag-
gressive policies. In the past the Govern.
ment has also refused to deal with Commu
nist governments. We have believed com-
munism to be an antidemocratic i'orce, in-
imical to the growth of freedom slid self -
government, and bent on the dcetruction
of those governments whose economic sys-
tems were based on a measure of free enter-
prise and capitalism. At times we assumed
that Communist governments w mted to
destroy any society or government that wait
not Communist.
Because of the above considers' ions the
United States waited for 14 years before i
established diplomatic relations with the
Soviet Union in 1933, and then the fact or
recognition in no way implied approval of
its government or policies, but r: tiler ac-
ceptance of the Soviet Union as s. govern-
ment in control of a large population and
important territory. After World War TI,
while the United States never severed diplos
matte relations with the Soviet Union, our
Government, nevertheless, felt that the So-
viet Union had to be contained in what we
believed were aggressive and expansionist
policies. Today the Soviet Union has given
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400060013-8
April 5, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE
osophy; James L. Martin, coordinator of non-
Western studies.
Miami University, Oxford, John H. Badgley,
department of government.
Ohio State University, Dayton, Byron S.
Weng, instructor in government.
Ohio University, Athens, John F. Cody, pro-
fessor of history.
Western College for Women, Oxford, T. A.
Bisson, chairman, department of intercul-
tural studies; Robert Brank Fulton, associate
professor of intercultural studies.
OREGON
Lewis and Clark College, Portland, Hideo
Hashimoto, professor of religion.
University of Oregon, Eugene, Kathleen G.
Aberle, research associate in anthropology.
PENNSYLVANIA
Carnegie Institute of Technology, Pitts-
burgh, M. Bronfenbrenner, Graduate School
of International Affairs:
Franklin and Marshall College, Lancaster,
Thomas Hopkins, assistant professor of re-
ligion.
Haverford College, Haverford, Holland
Hunter, chairman of the department of
economics.
Ohio Methodist Theological School, East-
ern, Ernest E. Best, associate professor of
theology.
University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia,
Derk Bodde, professor of Chinese; F. Hilary
Conroy, professor of history; Leigh Lisker,
professor of linguistics; Jonathan Mirsky,
oriental studies, Chinese; Donald E. Smith,
associate professor of political science.
Wilson College, Chambersburg, Roswell G.
Townsend, professor of economics.
Frederick Gaige, Philadelphia.
TENNESSEE
Memphis State University, Memphis, Ram
Mohan Roy, department of political science.
UTAH
Brigham Young University, Provo, Paul
Hyer, coordinator of Asian studies.
University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Helmut
G. Callis, chairman of Asia studies, profes-
sor of history and political science.
VERMONT
University of Vermont, Burlington, Hor-
ace Briggs II, instructor, department of poli-
tical science.
VIRGINIA
Sweet Briar College, Sweet Briar, Richard
C. Rowland, department of English.
University of Virginia, Charlottesville,
Richard J. Coughlin, professor of sociology;
Maurice Meisner, assistant professor of East
Asian history.
WASHINGTON
Eastern Washington State College, Cheney,
Charles H. Hedtky, division of history and
social science.
University of Washington, Seattle, Paul R.
Brass, assistant professor of political sci-
ence; Charles F. Keyes, assistant professor of
anthropology.
WISCONSIN
University of Wisconsin, Madison, Eugene
Boardman, professor of history; Ripley Moor,
assistant professor of Indian studies.
CANADA
University of Toronto, Donald E. Willmott,
associate professor of sociology.
CEYLON
University of Ceylon, Gananath Obeyese-
kere, lecturer in sociology.
FRANCE
T. D. Long, Organization for Economic
Cooperation and Development, directorate
for scientific affairs, Paris, France.
INDIA
Margaret L. Cormack, Director of Educa-
tional Foundation in India.
JAPAN
Hokyo University, Toshio Ueda, professor
emeritus.
ADDITIONAL ASIAN SCHOLARS SUPPORTING IN
PRINCIPLE THE CHANGES RECOMMENDED FOR
UNITED STATES POLICY TOWARD CHINA
ARIZONA
Arizona State University, Temple, Guilford
A. Dudley, associate professor of history.
CALIFORNIA
California State Polytechnic College, San
Luis Obispo, Francis V. Catalina.
Stanford University, Stanford, Mark Man-
call, assistant professor of Asian studies;
Harold H. Fisher, professor of history and
chemistry, emeritus; Hoover Institute and
Library.
University of California, Berkeley, Chaun-
cey D. Leake, University of California, San
Francisco Medical Center, San Francisco.
University of California, Santa Cruz,
Bruce D. Larkin, assistant professor of inter-
national relations.
University of California, Los Angeles,
Michael Moreman, assistant professor of
anthropology; Nikki Keddie, assistant pro-
fessor of history.
Willard P. Norberg, Ackerman, Johnston,
Johnston & Mathews, San Francisco.
HAWAII
University of Hawaii, Honolulu, John
Singleton, associate director, international
development fellowships and seminars,
Center for Cultural and Technical Inter-
change between East and West; George H.
Gadbois, Jr., associate director, exchange of
persons programs, Center for Cultural and
Technical Interchange between East and
West.
MASSACHUSETTS
Harvard University, Cambridge, John Fair-
bank, director, East Asian Research Center;
Morton H. Halperin, Center for International
Affairs.
Wellesley College, Wellesley, Paul A. Cohen,
department of history.
MICHIGAN
University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Alex-
ander Eckstein, professor of economics.
Western Michigan University, Kalamazoo,
Charles 0. Houston, associate professor, in-
stitute of international and area studies.
MINNESOTA
University of Minnesota, Minneapolis, Ro-
meyn Taylor, department of history.
MISSOURI
University of Missouri, Columbia, James
W. Hamilton, department of sociology and
anthropology.
MONTANA
Montana State University, Bozeman, Rich-
ard B. Landis, assistant professor of Asian
history.
NEW YORK
Brooklyn College, Brooklyn, Charlton M.
Lewis, department of history.
Colgate University, Hamilton, Kenneth W.
Morgan, professor of religion.
Columbia University, New York City,
Wayne Wilcox, department of government.
Cornell University, Ithaca, John W. Lewis,
associate professor of government.
Union College, Schenectady, Malcolm Wil-
lison, assistant professor of sociology.
PENNSYLVANIA
Gettysburg College, Gettysburg, John Rog-
er Stemen, department of history.
Wilson College, Chambersburg, Helen-Lee
Jones.
A Gutkind Bulling, Philadelphia.
WASHINGTON
Gonzaga University, Spokane, Jack D. Sal-
mon, assistant professor of political science.
7267
University of Washington, Seattle, Marwyn
S. Samuels, modern Chinese studies.
TAIWAN
Mark Belden, Taipei.
POLITICAL INSTABILITY AND CHAOS
IN SOUTH VIETNAM
Mr. MORSE. Madam President, since
late 1963, when President Diem of South
Vietnam was deposed, the political and
military situation in that country have
seemed to race each other toward the
brink of failure and disaster.
For 9 months, we have heard that po-
litical stability is being achieved, so the
military situation can be retrieved by
American military forces. But, in the
last week, the political instability and
chaos of South Vietnam has reached a
new peak. Police, armed and trained
by the United States, and apparently
some army units, have taken part in
demonstrations against the government
of General Ky. American air transport
has been furnished to Ky's forces to sup-
press them. If there is such a thing as
a civil war within a civil war, it surely is
transpiring today in South Vietnam.
A new addition to these demonstra-
tions, and an almost inevitable one, is
their tone of anti-Americanism. Visits
by White House arid Cabinet officials and
Members of Congress have to be sus-
pended, so as not to add to the appear-
ance that the country is an American
vassal, which unfortunately it is.
But at the same time, the jingoism
whipped up by the administration to sup-
port the war has been reflected in press
editorials calling for a crackdown on
dissidents not only by the Government of
South Vietnam, but also by the United
States if necessary. Obviously, the ra-
tionale for what we have done up to now
requires that we remain whether or not
there is a government in Saigon worthy
of the name.
It is the opinion of the senior Senator
from Oregon that we will remain in
South Vietnam irrespective of what hap-
pens to its government, because we have
made, South Vietnam an American vas-
sal, to the shocking discredit and dis-
grace of our country, as our action will
be recorded on the pages of history for
future generations to read.
Having sold ourselves the concept that
we are in Vietnam to save people from
communism, there are no limits to what
we can convince ourselves must be done
to stay there. We never pretended that
freedom and liberty for the people of
the south were at stake, because they
never had freedom or liberty under their
various governments. It is only commu-
nism from which we mean to save them--
not tyranny, not death, not misery, not
destruction, not foreign rule. All these
and worse are being visited upon the
people of South Vietnam by the com-
bined forces of the United States and
General Ky, all as a result of the wrong
that the United States has committed in
South Vietnam, the wrong action of the
United States in supporting an immoral
and illegal war and involving itself in
bloodletting in a country in which it had
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67B00446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
7268 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE April 5, 1966
no right to be in the first place. It is
all as a result of the policy of the United
States in South Vietnam as we proceeded
in 1954 to violate our treaty obligations,
and, in effect, to help destroy the
Geneva accords.
Madam President, that is the sad and
sordid record of the United States which
is being supported by the present Presi-
dent of the United States. As a Demo-
crat, I want to say that the responsibility
rests primarily upon my party, and my
party should be held to an accounting
by the American people unless my party
etops its illegality in South Vietnam.
As wc send increasing numbers of sol-
diers into Vietnam to hunt and destroy
the Vietcong and send increasing num-
hers of aircraft to smash both south and
north, we can scarcely avoid a growing
animosity among its people for a foreign
'military power that destroys their coun-
try in the name of its own national in-
terest.
We must expect the rationalization
tram the Pentagon and from the White
t louse that what we do to help put down
Lids insurrection or civil war within a
civil war is done because we are satis-
lied that it is Communist dominated.
The American people will not receive
any rationalization from the Johnson
administration for the continuation of
this butchery in South Vietnam without
being told that we are doing it in order
to put down communism.
say that the American people ought
to be protected against the loss of their
lives from an administration that is us-
ing this false rationale in order to jus-
tify our illegality in South Vietnam.
We ought to say to the people of south-
Asia: "Yell are going to run your
own affairs and we are not going to kill
,ninerican boys to support one side in a
war that has been a civil war from the
beginning." This is being demonstrated
o clearly now in South Vietnam for
i,hose who are willing to see that what is
mvoived there is a civil war, and some
A the characteristics of a religious war,
I am one Senator who will never vote
to kill an American boy in a war that has
;Lay of the overtones and undertones of
m religious war. I do not intend to vote
ip kill American boys in South Vietnam
ln a contest that has a scintilla of cause-
L.?-effect relationship between Ca.tholi-
eism and Buddhism. This administra-
ion cannot deny the religious overtones
and undertones that have been involved
ln this war from the beginning.
Madam President, the absence of any
elittine government in South Vietnam
?or this country to respond to, and the
Failure of our alliance partners to invoke
,Lhe 3EATO treaty, are instinctively
understood by the American people. In
Einy opinion, they explain the widespread
attitude of the American people which
supports their government, but which
also seeks an end to the war by negotia-
Lion, by United Nations action, or even
by some exclusive knockout blow that
would get it over with. It has only been
the most recent public opinion polls
which have gotten away from the ques-
tion of whether people simply support
their government, for most people will
say "Yes" to that, no matter what it
does. But framed in terms of whether
they would support a candidate for Con-
gress who, in the words of the poll, "says
he would try harder to reach a compro-
mise peace settlement in Vietnam," 67
percent believe they would vote for him.
Another poll queried the public on
their attitude toward a United Nations
arbitration of the issue, and found 2 to
1 in support for that solution, pi ovided
the Communists agreed in advance to
abide by it.
Pollsters are increasingly commenting
on the fact that persons advocating
greater use of military power tn. the
South and in the North do so in the
assumption that it will bring a quick
end to the war.
It is this latter point that the Presi-
dent heavily distorts when he tries to
create the impression that "warhawks"
are pressing him against his wishes to
step Up the level of the war. He has even
sought to lay the blame for this at the
doorstep of the Senate Foreign Rela-
tions Committee, by saying our hearings
created more wa.rhawk sentiment in the
country.
Far from creating ivarliawk senti-
ment, our hearings have con vinced
many people that our real task in Viet-
nam is to find a way to end the war;
some erroneously feel that a bigeer ap-
plication of military power will do that.
That false impression was planted by
the President's own administration when
it advertised the bombing of North Viet-
nam as a means of forcing Hanoi to the
bargaining table. Every time the Sec-
retary of State announced that a new
application of military power was aeeded
to make someone stop what they were
doing, he contributed to the seductive
notion that bombs would solve our prob-
lems there, if only we use enoagla of
them.
This talk has come primarily from
the White House and from the Presi-
dent's Cabinet. I say to President John-
son that the real warhawks are in his
own administration. It is the Pnssident
himself who seeks to deride and belittle
those in Congress who seek peaceful
solutions in Asia. If there were the
pressure he talks about from public
opinion to increase the scope and level
of the war against his wishes, he would
do what every politician does in those
circumstances, and encourage the peace
wing of his own party to hold hearings,
to speak up, to offer alternatives, and in
general, to offset unwelcome war talk.
This the President of the United
States has not done and is not doing,
and I shall be surprised if he ever does
it. He has not done it; he has do, ke just
the opposite. He has tried to ridicule
the speeches, to offset the hearines? and
to dismiss the alternatives. The White
House displeasure with the peace wing
has been made evident on many occa-
sions and in many ways. But no White
House displeasure or rebuke was di-
rected, for example, at General tieMay
when he suggested bombing North. Viet-
nam into the Stone Age. No rebulai was
administered to the White House adviser
General Taylor when he urged the min-
ing of Haiphong Harber, withte it the
slightest basis in international law for
that war-hawk proposal. He continues
to sit at the President's right hand and
continues to give him bad advice, with
the result that both Taylor and the Pres-
ident, plus Rusk, McNamara, and Lodge
and the rest of the bad advisers of the
President, are misguiding this country
into a war that will eventually kill Amer-
icans by the hundreds of thousands.
These war-hawk views are emanating
from the President's personal and official
family. The organized strength of that
family is brought to bear not against the
war talk, but against the peace talk.
I deeply regret this, because I wel-
comed the Johnson platform of 1964
when he said in his campaign speeches
that "we will not go north" and he would
not send American boys to fight a war
that Asians should fight for themselves.
I am sorry to repeat it again, but I
intend to repeat it on the platforms of
America from coast to coast, as long as
there is any hope for us to stop this
American outlawry in southeast Asia.
The American people gave President
Johnson a mandate in November 1964,
and it was a mandate joined in by mil-
lions of Republican voters, as w 11 as
Democratic voters. It was a mandate
against the Goldwater war policy. It
was a mandate for peace. It was a man-
date against an escalation of the war. It
was a mandate against sending increas-
ing thousands of American boys to be
slaughtered in South Vietnam.
The President of the United States
has walked out on that mandate. It is
his administration that beats the war
drums and waves the flag to tatters.
Therefore, as I have said before, it is
for the people to take account or this
administration, and of those running
for office who support escalating the war
and increasing the slaughter of Ameri-
can men. Those men should not have
been sent there in the first place, for the
reasons given by candidate Johnson in
the fall of 1964. They should be given
the protection advocated by General
Gavin, General Ridgway, George Ken-
nan, and other recognized authorities,
who have recognized the soundness of
the enclave approach, as contrasted to
the Johnson approach of an expcnsion
of this war that is going to lead lo the
killing of untold hundreds of Arneeicans
in a part of the world where we he ve no
interest.
It would seem evident that the Ameri-
can people must make good on the indi-
cations that they would support candi-
dates for Congress who would try harder
to negotiate an end to the war, whether
through the U.N. or directly with our
adversaries.
Is it not interesting that in this civil
war, as with any war in Vietnam these
days. those Vietnamese who are oppos-
ing the tyrant, Ky, are urging arbitra-
tion or negotiation of the war though
the United Nations or through reco:iven-
ing of the Geneva Conference?
That is not Communist propaganda,
Madam President. That sounds like
people seeking to deliver their country
from a war that is being conducted by
a foreign power?the United States. I
am not surprised at the anti-American
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
April 5, 1966 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD ? SENATE 7269
sentiment that is characterized by the
opponents of Ky.
Madam President, I repeat, it would
seem evident that the American people
must make good on the indications that
they would support candidates for Con-
gress who would try to negotiate an end
to the war, whether through the United
Nations or directly with our adversaries.
I pray they will, for this administration
can be checked only by a Congress will-
ing to check it, and that must be pro-
vided by the voters.
I close, Madam President, by saying
that I think it is exceedingly sad that
my Government is supporting such a
tyrant as General Ky, the leader of a
military junta, whose first reaction to
opposition seems to be, "Kill."
We have seen his brutality manifested
on many occasions. Now, because he is
being opposed in Da Nang by one of the
most highly educated men in South Viet-
nam, a scholar and a brilliant doctor?
who points out so clearly that Ky's talk
about the Da Nang rebels being Com-
munist controlled, which unfortunately
is endorsed by American officials in Viet-
nam, is not supported by a scintilla of
evidence?Ky's response is, "Kill him."
That is the kind of a brute we are sup-
porting in South Vietnam. That is the
kind of a tyrant American boys are dy-
ing to keep in power.
Madam President, my country cannot
justify it. This administration cannot
justify it. We have no moral right to
send U.S. forces to South Vietnam in
support of this brute who has come to
control the military junta of South Viet-
nam.
Oh, I think the rebellion will be put
down. But let me warn the American
people today, when it is put down, with
the use of American arms and American
planes?and I suspect also with the use
of American power?the headlines will
say, "Ky Sustained?Ky Victorious?
Stablity Maintained"; and yet the sad
fact is that my Government and yours,
may I say to the Senate, is supporting a
tyranny in South Vietnam, a brutal
military junta that has not the slightest
conception of the meaning of the word
freedom.
That is our record.
Mr. GORE. Madam President, will
the Senator yield?
Mr. MORSE. I am happy to yield
to the Senator from Tennessee.
Mr. GORE. In the opinion of the
senior Senator from Oregon, will this
position deter, discourage, or contain
communism, or does it lower the prestige
of the United States, and thereby in-
crease the prestige of communism?
Mr. MORSE. The United States,
since it started violating the Geneva ac-
cords in 1954, has been creating Com-
munists by the hundreds of thousands in
the underdeveloped areas of the world
and throughout Asia. The greatest aid
communism has in the world is Amer-
ican foreign policy.
The United States, through its mili-
tary aid, through its support of military
juntas, is the greatest aid communism
could have. We cannot defeat commu-
No. 59-10
nism with American bullets, as the Sen-
ator from Tennessee has heard me say
so many times. We possess the greatest
weapon against communism; Bread, not
bullets, and the expertation of our sys-
tem of economic freedom which gives
to individuals dignity and self-respect
and helps to develop them so that they
can develop their own political freedom.
I do not have to tell the Senator from
Tennessee, the Senator from Alaska, or
the Senator from North Dakota what is
going on in South America. The support
my country has given military juntas in
Latin America by way of military aid
has increased the threat of communism
in Latin American, not decreased it.
To the extent that we are being suc-
cessful in some areas in Latin America,
it is in those areas where a democratic
form of life is desired by the masses of
the people, because they understand it
and we have been building it up by pre-
paring the seedbeds of economic free-
dom of choice for the masses.
That is the way, to defeat communism.
But, my country is out on a bloody
course of assuming that it can contain
communism with bombs and bullets and
military power in Asia. We will be bog-
ged down there for decades to come,
until finally the American people under-
stand?as the French people came sadly
to learn and understand?that we can-
not contain Asia with western military
power.
Some of us have got to be willing to
speak out and take the abuse that goes
with it, and have all our motives chal-
lenged, including our patriotism.
I consider it the greatest patriotic chal-
lenge which has ever confronted me in
my 21 years of service in the Senate.
It is my duty and my trust to do what
I can to save American lives in south-
east Asia. I cannot save American lives
in southeast Asia by supporting Lyndon
B. Johnson in continuing to escalate
America's war in southeast Asia.
Madam President, I am perfectly wil-
ling to let history be the judge in my
opposition to what I am sorry to say has
now become Johnson's war in Asia.
Madam President, I suggest the
absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The
clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call
the roll.
Mr. BIBLE. Madam President, I ask
unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without
objection, it is so ordered.
HOME RULE FOR THE DISTRICT OF
COLUMBIA?APPOINTMENT OF
CONFEREES
Mr. BIBLE. Madam President, home
rule for the District of Columbia is a sub-
ject that has been debated on Capitol
Hill and elsewhere for many years. I
am hopeful that conferees from the Sen-
ate and the House of Representatives can
sit down around the conference table at
a very early date.
Reasonable and responsible men with
conscientious differences of opinion have
traditionally worked out legislative differ-
ences by the conference route.
Six times since 1949 the Senate has
passed legislation to grant self-govern-
ment to the District of Columbia. With
House passage late last year of a charter
approach to this question, Congress has
come further down the home rule road
than ever before in modern history.
Therefore, as an eternal optimist, I ex-
press the hope that conferees from both
bodies can make real progress in this
area.
The PRESIDING 0.F.V.ICER laid be-
fore the Senate the amendments of the
House of Representatives to the bill (S.
1118) to provide for the District of Co-
lumbia an elected mayor, city council,
board of education, and nonvoting Dele-
gate to the House of Representatives, and
for other purposes, which were, to strike
out all after the enacting clause and in-
sert:
That this Act may be cited as the "District
of Columbia Charter Act".
DECLARATION OF POLICY
SEC. 2. It is the intent of Congress to make
available to the inhabitants of the District
of Columbia such measure and form of local
self-government as they themselves shall
democratically establish if such self-govern-
ment is consistent with the constitutional
injunction that Congress retain ultimate
legislative authority over the Nation's Capi-
tal. In taking this action it is further the
intent of Congress to demonstrate its funda-
mental and enduring belief in the merits of
the democratic process by exercising its re-
tained legislative responsibility for the seat
of the Federal Government only as it con-
cerns amendments to any charter which
might be established under this Act, but
not as it concerns the routine municipal af-
fairs of the District of Columbia.
SELF-GOVERNMENT REFERENDUM AND CHARTER
BOARD ELECTION
SEC. 3. (a) (1) The Board of Elections shall
conduct a referendum, on a day specified by
it, not later than one hundred days after
the date of enactment of this Act to deter-
mine if the residents of the District of Co-
lumbia want self-government for the Dis-
trict of Columbia. The following proposi-
tion shall be submitted to the voters In
the referendum:
"The voters of the District of Columbia
are being asked In this election whether they
want a District of Columbia Charter Board
created whose purpose would be to write a
charter for the District of Columbia. The
charter, if approved in accordance with the
District of Columbia Charter Act, would es-
tablish local self-government for the District
of Columbia. Do you approve the creation of
a District of Columbia Charter Board?
yes no."
(2) In order for the proposition to be ap-
proved, a majority of those voting must
vote in favor of the proposition.
(b) The Board of Elections shall also con-
duct an election on the same day as the
referendum to choose members of the Char-
ter Board (to be established in accordance
with section 4).
(c) Every qualified elector?
(1) who has registered with the Board of
Elections, in accordance with section 7 of
the District of Columbia election law, for
the last election held in the District of
Columbia prior to the date of the election
and referendum authorized by this section
and who the Board of Elections ascertains
is still a qualified elector, or
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP671300446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
7270 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- SENATE April ;i" , 1966
(2) who registers with the Board of Elec-
tions in accordance with subsection (d) of
this section,
shall be entitled to vote in such election
and referendum.
(d) Ill) The Board of Elections shall con-
duct a registration of electors under section
7 of the District of Columbia election law,
during a period beginning as soon as prac-
ticable after the date of enactment of - this
Act arid ending not more than thirty OT less
than twenty days before the date of the
referendum and election.
(2) The Board of Elections may by regu-
lation prescribe any reasonable method for
ascertaining whether a person registered to
vote in the last election held in the District
of Columbia prior to the date of the election
and referendum authorized by this section
is a qualified elector. Any such person who
it ascertains is a qualified elector shall be
notified by mail before the beginning of
the registration period established under
paragraph (1) of this subsection.
(e) (1) Before the beginning of the regis-
tration period the Board of Elections shall
publish in each of the daily newspapers of
general circulation in the District of Colum-
bia a list of registration places and the dates
and hours of registration.
(2) Not later than two weeks before the
election and referendum, the Board shall
publish and mail to each registered voter a
voter information pamphlet which shall con-
tain (A) a statement (not exceeding one
hundred and twenty-five words in length)
by each candidate for election setting forth
his qualifications, (B) an argument for ap-
proval of the proposition to be submitted in
referendum, and (C) if this Act is not passed
in each House without opposition, an argu-
ment for disapproval of that proposition.
Such argument shall not exceed five hundred
words in length. The argument for approval
of that proposition shall be jointly written
by two Members of Congress who voted for
late approval of this Act, one appointed from
the House by the Speaker and one appointed
nom the Senate by the President pro tem-
pore. The argument for disapproval of that
proposition shall be jointly written by two
Members of Congress, similarly appointed,
who voted against tne approval of this Act if
there were Members in each House that voted
against approval of this Act; otherwise such
argument shall be written by one Member,
who voted against approval of this Act, who
shall be selected by the President pro tem-
pore or the Speaker, as the case may be.
(t) (1) In the election of members of the
Charter Board, there shall be a number of
different ballot forms equal to the number
or candidates. The Board of Elections shall
arrange such ballot forms so that the order
in which the candidates' names appear on
the ballot forms is rotated from one voting
precinct to the next The rotation shall be
accomplished by arranging one ballot farm
so that the names of the candidates are listed
vertically in alphabetical order and by ar-
hinging each succeeding form by placing at
the bottom of the list the name which was
el, the tap of the list on the preceding form.
The forms shall be allotted to voting pre-
cincts by lot in a manner prescribed by the
regulations of the Board. of Elections.
(2) Ballots and voting machines shall
show no party affiliation,, emblem, or slogan.
(g) (It To be a candidate for the office of
member of tlw, Charter Board a person must
be nominated in accordance with this sub-
section, must be a registered elector of the
District of Columbia, and must have been a
continuous resident of the District of Colum-
bia for at least three years prior to the day
of the election. The President, Vice Presi-
dent, Members of Congress, and officers and
employees of the District of Columbia shall
be ineligible for membership on the Charter
Board.
(2) To be nominated as a candidate a per-
son must present a petition to the Board of
Elections not less than forty-five days prior
to the election. Such petition shall contain
signatures of at least three hundred reg-
istered electors and shall be accompanied by
a nonrefundable filing fee of $25. The Board
of Elections shall determine the validity of
the signatures contained in such petition.
(3) Members of the Charter Board shall
be elected from the District of Columbia at
large.
(h) (1) In. the election each voter may cast
one vote for each of not more than fifteen
candidates. The fifteen candidates receiving
the largest number of votes shall be elected.
(2) The Board of Elections shall certify the
results of the election and referendum to the
President, the Clerk of the House, and the
Secretary of the Senate, and the Board of
Elections shall issue a certificate of election
to each .person elected to the Charter Board.
ESTABLISHMENT OE CHARTER BOARD
San 4. (a) If the proposition eubmitted to
the referendum conducted under section 3 is
approved, there shall be establiehed an in-
dependent agency of the United States to be
known as the District of Columbia Charter
Board. The Charter Board shall he composed
of the fifteen persons elected in the election
conducted under section 3. The candidate
for office of member of the Charter Board
Who received the highest numbea of votes in
such election shall be chairman eif the Char-
ter Board until the Charter Board selects a
ehairman from among its number.
(b) Each member of the Charter Board
shall be entitled to receive $50 per diem when
engaged in the performance of duties vested
in. the Charter Board, except that (1) a mem-
ber who is also an officer or employee of the
United States shall not be entitled to receive
ouch per diem for any day for which he is
compensated by the 'United States for his
services as such an officer or employee, and
(2) no member may receive more than $5,000
in the aggregate for his services as a member.
(c) The Charter Board shalt have the
power to appoint and :5x the compensation
of such personnel, as it deems advisable,
without regard to the provisions of the civil
service laws and the Classification Act of
1949, as amended.
(d) The Charter Board may procure, in
accordance with the provisions cf section 15
of the Administrative Expenses Act of 1946
(5 U.S.C. 55a), the temporary or intermittent
services of experts or consultants. Individ-
teals so employed shall receive compensation
at a rate to be fixed by the Charter Board,
but not in excess of $1()0 pore diem, includ-
ing travel time, and while away from their
homes or regular places of business may be
allowed travel expenses, including per diem
in lieu of subsistence, as authorized by sec-
tion 5 of the Administrative Exp rises Act of
lei"; (5. U.S.C. 73b-2) for persons in the Gov-
ernment service employed intermittently.
(e) The District of Columbia government
shall furnish such spece and facilities in
Public buildings in the District as the Char-
ter Board may reasonably requeet, and shall
provide the Charter Board with sach records,
information? and other services as may be
required by the Board for the carrying out
of its fu action.
(f) The Charter Board may he ,d meetings,
hearings, and issue submenas within the Dis-
trict of Columbia. Subpenas may be issued
under the signature of the Chairman of the
Charter Board, or any member of the Charter
Board designated by him, and may be served
by any person designated by such Chairman
or member.
(g) Hearings of the Charter Board shall
be open to the public .and shall be held at
reasonable hours and at such places as to
accommodate a reasonable number of spec-
tators.
(h) (1) There is authorized to be appro-
priated not more than $300,000 for the ad-
ministrative expenses of the Charter Board.
(2) There is authorized to be appropriated
to the Board of Elections such sums as may
be necessary to conduct the election, and
referendums authorized by this Act.
.POWERS AND DUTIES OF CHARTER BOARD
SEC. 5. (a) Subject to the limitations in
subsection (b), the Charter Board shall have
the power to propose a District of Columbia
chaster, within two hundred and ten days
from the day on which the election and
referendum is held under section 3. Such
charter shall, if approved in a referendum
conducted under section 6 and if not disap-
proved by Congress under section '7, establish
a municipal government for the District of
Columbia. The Charter Board miy propose
a charter only by the vote of a majority of
its members, and only one charter may be
proposed. A copy of the proposed charter
shall. be transmitted to the Board of Elec-
tions.
(b) (1) The Charter Board is auehorized to
prepare a charter which may vest in a Dis-
trict of Columbia government complete leg-
islative power over the District oi Columbia
with respect to all rightful subjects of legis-
lation which are within the scope of the
power of Congress in its capacity as the leg-
islature for the District of Columbia as dis-
tinguished from its capacity as tbe National
Legislature. The Congress reserves the right
at any time after the adoption of such a
charter to exercise its constitutional au-
thority to amend in whatever fashion it
chooses any charter written pursuant to this
Act. Provisions of a charter may ,irovicle for
subsequent amendment of the charter by the
people of the District of Columbia. Such an
amendment must be submitted in a referen-
dum. However, such an amendment shall not
take effect if disapproved by Co:ngress in the
manner provided by section 7(c).
(2) The President of the United States
may disapprove any legislation enacted by
a District of Columbia government estab-
lished under a charter approved pursuant
to this Act, but his positive assent is not
needed for any such legislation to take effect.
(3) The Charter Board may also provide
in the charter for the creation Of such courts
as may be necessary to assume the functions,
solely relating to the affairs of t se District
of Columbia, of any Federal court within the
District.
CHARTER REFERENDUM
SEC. 6. (a) The Board of Else ions shrill
submit to referendum the charter proposed
by the Charter Board.. Such referendum
shall be conducted by the Board or Elections,
on a day specified by it, not later than forty-
five days after the Charter Board transmits
the charter proposed by it to the Board of
Elections. The provisions of section 3 re-
lating to the referendum condor ted under
that section shall be applicable to the refer-
endum conducted under this sect on, except
that (1) the registration period thrill 'begin
as soon as practicable after the tr insmission
of the proposed charter to the Board of Elec-
tions, (2) the arguments respecting approval
of the proposition shall be written by mem-
bers of the Charter Board appointed by the
chairman thereof, and (3) the voter informa-
tion pamphlet shall contain a copy of Me
proposed charter.
(b) The following proposition shall be sub-
mitted to the voters in the referendum:
"The District of Columbia Chacter Bciard
has written a charter which, if approved in
accordance with the District of Columbia
Charter Act, would establish local self-gov-
ernment for the District of Columbia. Do
you approve the charter?
.yes en,"
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
733:
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE April 5, 1966
ties prosper, and there is great confi-
dence in the future. We must trace this
good fortune to the basic resources of the
region?to the good earth, the water,
and the hardworking and skilled people
on the farms and ranches and in the
towns.
We have done more than build?we
have rebuilt. We have conserved and de-
veloped our resources and made them
work for us. We are proud of this herit-
age. But we know that we can sustain
our prosperity only by continued dedica-
tion to the principles of sound resource
conservation and development.
We know, too, that all is not well with
the land and the waters that flow across
it. The soil still washes and blows where
it should be held secure by vegetation.
The streams are polluted with wastes
that limit or destroy the value of this
needed water.
While we have accomplished much in
conserving and developing our land and
water resources, we have much yet to do.
In Kansas, soil conservation districts
embrace every farm and ranch, and the
majority of these districts have signed
modernized agreements with the De-
partment of Agriculture to permit
broader and more useful development of
the rural lands and waters of the State.
Yet, only 34 percent of the needed soil
and water conservation work on Kansas
farms and ranches has been completed,
and at the current completion rate of
about 11/2 percent per year the job
clearly will take a long time to finish.
Of a total of 236 watersheds that need
project-type action in Kansas, 40 have
been authorized for planning assistance,
and of these 21 have been authorized
for installation of works of improvement.
These examples are a brief indication
of basic soil and water conservation work
that remains to be done in Kansas. A
similar picture could be drawn for every
State, for every State has a great backlog
of watershed protection and other con-
servation work waiting to be acted on.
This is a challenge we cannot ignore.
We must move resolutely forward in
programs to conserve and develop our soil
and water and related resources?to
clean our streams and curb further pollu-
tion of them; to prevent damaging
floods; to save the soil from washing and
blowing away; to make the best possible
use of our water resources through im-
poundment and distribution as needed
for building sound local economies; to
preserve the woodlands from heedless ex-
ploitation; to enrich the lives of our
people by continuing to make the coun-
tryside a more beautiful as well as a
more useful place for the benefit of all
Americans.
UNEMPLOYMENT COMPENSATION
(Mr. ANDREWS of North Dakota (at
the request of Mr. BROWN of Ohio) was
granted permission to extend his re-
marks at this point in the RECORD and to
Include extraneous matter.)
Mr. ANDREWS of North Dakota. Mr.
Speaker, H.R. 8282 which is pending on
the important matter of unemployment
compensation, is of a good deal of inter-
est to all of us in the House. I have been
in contact with a constituent of mine,
Mr. Richard H. Barry, a well-known
financial and business consultant, who
has some ideas pertinent to the revision
of this legislation. They are embodied in
a resolution from the Fargo Chamber of
Commerce, which I would like to insert
In the RECORD at this point for the study
of those interested:
RESOLUTION
Whereas the Fargo Chamber of Commerce:
1. Is strongly in favor of an equitable sys-
tem for both employees and employers in
administering the mechanics and financing
cycles of temporary and seasonal unemploy-
ment in the permanent work force as distin-
guished from part time or occasional workers,
and
2. Recognizes the need and advisability to
up date the unemployment compensation
insurance system from time to time in the
light of experience and changing conditions,
such as the premise in most States that the
employer should pay 100 percent of the cost
of unemployment insurance; and
3. Is unalterably opposed to H.R. 8282 in
-its present form, as it is woefully inadequate
insofar as the need for an up-to-date system
of unemployment insurance is concerned;
and
4. Suggest that the time has come for the
Congress of the United States to redefine the
following;
4.1 The purpose and scope of unemploy-
ment compensation insurance; and
4.2 The respective financial responsibilities
of the employer, the employee and the gen-
eral public to pay the insurance premiums,
first for cycles of temporary and seasonal
employment of the permanent work force,
and second, the much higher cost of insur-
ance programs embracing part time and oc-
casional workers, plus cycles in excess of 6
months; and
4.3 The duties and compensation of the
State and Federal administrators of the pro-
gram, plus the mechanics of how such regu-
lators and administrators are appointed; and
5. Suggest to the Congress of the United
States that legislative bills such as HR.
8282 are frequently drawn and sponsored by
civil service employees of the United States
Department of Labor giving to them, through
the office of the Secretary of Labor, unwar-
ranted and excessive bureaucratic control
without sufficient regard for the following:
5.1. The full context of what is in the best
interests of the public; and
5.2. For the tax inequities caused the
majority of employers; and
5.3. For the excessive financial burdens for
the majority of small employers with stable
payrolls; and
5.4. For the denial to all employers of effec-
tive recourse to the judicial branch of gov-
ernment to establish the intent of the law;
and
6. Suggest that the foregoing preamble to
the resolution summarizes the attitude of the
vast majority of employers in describing
their concern with the implications of H.R.
8282 to grant to a few unidentified key em-
ployees in the vast U.S. Department of Labor
under the guise of authority to issue routine
regulations or bring about uniformity, a
wide range of excessive control over the rights
of employers and in effect making such Fed-
eral administrators the sole proprietors of
all knowledge; and
7. Suggest that the Federal advisory com-
missions appointed In the past exclusively
by the U.S. Secretaries of Labor to represent
labor, business and the best interests of the
citizens as a whole have failed to function
effectively in that capacity; and
8. Suggest that a specific instance of the
failure of a recent Federal Advisory Commis-
sion to function for extended periods of time
and failure to issue reports at reasonable
intervals is shown by the attached letter
dated August 2, 1962, from the office of the
late Congressman, Hjalmer C. Nygaard: Now,
therefore, be it
Resolved, That Congress in its evaluation of
H.R. 8282 be hereby urged to take into con-
sideration the foregoing preamble and take
affirmative action to have the President of
the United States with the advice and con-
sent of the Senate appoint a full-time bi-
partisan three-man Unemployment Compen-
sation Board of Administration of which the
Secretary of Labor would be an ex officio
member to deal more knowingly and equita-
bly with the employee and employer in the
full context of what is in the best interest of
the Nation; and be it further
Resolved, That this resolution be forwarded
to the following Members of Congress for the
State of North Dakota with the request that
each of them evaluate these recommenda-
tions and if they are in accord with them
that they write their colleagues on the Ways
and Means Committee of the House of Repre-
sentatives encompassing their thoughts on
the substance and spirit of this resolution:
Senator MILTON R. YOUNG, Senator QUENTIN
BURDICK, Congressman MARK ANDREWS, and
Congressman ROLLAND REDLIN.
FARGO CHAMBER OF COMMERCE.
CONGRESS OF THE UNITED STATES,
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,
Washington, D.C., August 21, 1962.
Mr. RICHARD BARRY,
Fargo, N. Dak.
DEAR Ma. BARRY: Unfortunately I am not
able to come up with the material you wanted
relative to S. 3411 and H.R. 12385, copies of
which are enclosed.
I am advised that the Federal Advisory
Commission under the Bureau of Employ-
ment Security is not functioning at present.
The terms of the past members have expired
and new members have not as yet been ap-
pointed. It is expected they will be named
within the next 10 days or 2 weeks at which
time I will send you the names. The last
report published by this Commission came
out in 1954 and is now out of print. I have
been put on a waiting list for any new report
which may be forthcoming.
This is a rather vague and cloudy reply,
but it is the best I can give you under the
circumstances. Under separate cover, I am
sending you a 1962 Congressional Directory.
On pages 516 and 517 you will find the make-
up of the Bureau of Employment Security-
which may give you some information that
will be helpful. I am holding copies of the
two bills and the information you gave me
over the phone for Mr. Nygaard.
Sincerely,
IRENE MARTIN EDWARDS,
Assistant to Congressman Rjalmar C.
Nygaard.
HAIPHONG, THE SANCTUARY THAT
HURTS
(Mr. DICKINSON (at the request of
Mr. BROWN of Ohio) was granted per-
mission to extend his remarks at this
point in the RECORD and to include ex-
traneous matter.)
Mr. DICKINSON. Mr. Speaker, I
have spoken so often of this matter that
I feel a little redundant. However, the
Issue is too vital, so important to our
Nation, that I feel compelled to bring
the matter to the attention of the House
and the public until something effective
is done about it.
My reference is to the need of blockad-
ing Haiphong and other North Vietnam
ports in order to keep the British and
other free world ships particularly from
carrying in supPlies to the Vietcong. I
am happy the Greek Government no
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
April 5, 1966
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE
Similarly, the provisions of law relating
to the payment of unpaid salaries in the
event of the death of a Member of Congress
during his term of office are made applicable
to the District Delegate (subsec. (c) ),
and the privileges of participating in the re-
tirement benefits of the Civil Service Retire-
ment Act which are applicable to Members of
Congress are made applicable to the Dis-
trict Delegate (subsec. (d) ) .
In the same way, subsection (e) makes ap-
plicable to the District Delegate, and to his
office, the provisions of law relating to al-
lowances for stationery, telephones, the hir-
ing of clerical help, and the furnishing of
office equipment which now apply to Mem--
hers of Congress and to the Resident Com-
missioner. The statutory provisions for con-
gressional office space are also made applicable
to the District Delegate (subsec. (f).
The provisions of Federal criminal law
which relate to Members of Congress, to their
iietivities, and to their elections, are also
made applicable to the District Delegate.
Thus, the Federal Corrupt Practices Act is
made applicable to the Delegate's position
(subsec. (g) ), as are also the provisions
of law making it -a Federal crime to intimi-
date voters (subsec. (h) ), as well as those
punishing the use by Federal employees of
influence or authority to interfere with elec-
tions (subsec. (i) ) .
;Subsection ()) contains the changes re-
quired in existing law to assure that appoint-
ment of candidates to the armed services
academies from the District would be made
by the elected Delegate, rather than by the
appoin fed ,Cornmissioners.
..;ECTION 5
'1'his section contains the definitions which
are used throughout the bill, and also a num-
ber of miscellaneous provisions which will
be important in administering the law. Sub-
section (a) contains the definitions. Sub-
section (b) simply brings up to date the
provisions of the existing law with respect
to the current name of the former munici-
pal court. Subsection (c) changes the dead-
line date for tiling nominating petitions
for candidates for local party elections, so
as to give enough time for the operation of
the new procedure for challenging nomi-
nating petitions, established by subsection
Id) below.
The new subsection (d) amends the existing
District of Columbia election law so as to
give the Board of Elections authority to ac-
cept initially the signatures on duly filed
nominating petitions, but sets up a mecha-
Mani by which the petitions can be timely
challenged, and the challenges resolved by
the Board of Elections, with a right of later
review in court. It also provides that the
order in which the names al candidates
will appear on the ballot shall be determined
by choosing lots.
Subsection (e) amends the existing law
slightly to clarify the authority of the Elec-
tions Board to issue regulations to accept
some ballots which have been cast outside
the precinct in which the registrant lived--
as one example, in the case of a person who
was registered in one precinct but on elec-
tion day is in a hospital in another precinct
and is voting as a "shut-in."
Subparagraph (f) changes the existing
elections law slightly so as to require that
only one of the officials in the polling place
will be needed to accompany an illiterate
or handicapped voter into the voting booth
in order to carry out the voter's directions
with respect to recording his vote (present
law requires the presence of two officials).
The change would also provide that the voter
can, if he so desires, have a second official
of the Board of Elections to witness the
recordation. of his vote in accordance with
his directions.
Subsections (g) and (h) will shorten and
simplify the party "primary" ballots under
the 1955 Election Act, by eliminating the elec-
tion of altern,ates to the various party offi-
cials. The party primary ballots have been
widely criticized because of their length
and complexity. The elimination of the elec-
tion of alternate officials will substantially
shorten the ballots in a number of cases. At
the same time, the alternates can, of oourse,
be selected by the parties themselves, by cau-
cus or other means not involving the use of
the citywide primary election machinery.
The party officials themselves. (national com-
mitteemen and women, delegates to the Pres-
idential nominating conventions and when
designated by the parties, members and offi-
cials of the local party committees) would
continue to be elected by ballot uneer the
present election law.
Subsection amends the existine elec-
tion law to make it clear that if the local
political party committee so desires, the party
primary ballots may contain presielential
preference questi.ons to be answered by the
voters. The bill requires that the local
party committee furnish the potentia i presi-
dential candidate with written information
to the effect that it is so proposing his name
to go on the ballot. At the same time the
bill provides a mechanism by which the po-
tential candidate may, if he chooses, re-
move his name from the ballot without the
necessity of stating a reason for his decision
in tins respect.
The right to have these president:, 1 pref-
erence questions on the ballot unacr the
present law has 'been sharpy disputed ever
since the act was passed in 1955, and a 1964
court decision cast a further cloud on the
authority of the board of elections lo per-
mit presidental preference questions under
existing law. With this amendment these
presidential preference questions would also
replace the so-called pa:rty questions. These
party questions have been criticized as di-
luting the powers of the elected party officials
to formulate party policies, and also because
the questions add further to the length of
the ballot.
Subsection (1) would remove an ambiguity
in existing election law by establishing a
clear deadline for filing the designanons of
the offices of local party committees to be
filled by the party primary elections.
Under the existing election law each can-
didate on the ballot has the right to have
one watcher at each polling place. Subsec-
tion (k) would change this arrangement
slightly in the light of the length of the
party primary ballots (in tae 1964 election,
for instance, there were over 250 candidates
on the party ballots), to give the Bieird of
Elections authority to issue regulatimAs rea-
sonably limiting the number of watchers in
each voting place, and reasonably to regulate
the scope of the watchers' activities while
at the same time preserving their rights to
perform their important duties.
Subsection (1) would give the Board of
Elections clear authority to declare that duly
nominated and unopposed candidates for
party office are elected without opposition.
The fact that they have been so elected
would appear on the party ballot, together
with the names of all the candidates who are
opposed and whose election is to be deter-
mined by the voters. This change witl fur-
ther simplify and shorten ballot forms, with-
out in any way diminishing: the effectiveness
of the elections under the act.
Subsection (m) changes the method of
compensation of the members of the three-
man Board of Elections. They are now paid
$25 per day while performing their duties.
With the enactment of this act there will be
two elections in every even-numbered year,
with occasional special or party runoff elec-
tions to be expected from tone to time, thus
substantially increasing the activities of the
Board of Elections. The amount of time
spent by Board members NI an election year
is substantial, and the changeover to some
-7331
modest, fixed annual compensation i.3 de-
sirable and appropriate under all the circum-
stances.
Subsection (n) amends the law an as to
give the candidates a period of 30 days after
each election in order to complete and file
their financial reports. At present they have
only 10 days in which to perform this work,
a period which is insufficient and unwork-
able.
Subsection (o) tightens up the enOirce-
ment provisions of the present Taw so as to
make it clear that any false statement by a
registrant with respect to qualifications for
voting will render him subject to penalty,
whereas the present act limits the applicabil-
ity of the penal provision to false statements
as to the registrant's residence or \ oting
privileges outside- the district. The bill also
makes the enforcement provisions of the act
applicable to the restrictions on contribu-
tions and requirements for reporting exsend-
itures.
Subsections (p) and (q) amend the title,
and the first section of the existing le,w, so
as to reflect the fact that the act provides
for the election of the Delegate to the Souse
of Representatives in addition to the other
officials elected under the existing law.
SECTION 6
Enactment of the first five sections cf this
bill would have the effect of convertirg the
present quadrennial election cycle in the
District of Columbia to a biennial cycle--
that is, there would be two elections, in
every even-numbered year, whereas mit the
present time there are two elections only ill
every fourth year?in presidential election
years.
Enactment simply of these first live sec-
tions in an election year such as 1966 would
raise some operating problems. It; takes
several months to get ready to run an elec--
tion well, and funds have to be made avail--
able for the purpose.
In order to take care of these initial start-
ing problems, section 6 has been added which
authorizes special elections in the autumn
of 1966 to elect a Delegate to the House to
serve in the 90th Congress, which convenes
next January. This section 6 spec:Means;
validates for purposes of these 19136 elec-
tions all the 1964 registrations (approxi-
mately 200,000 of them were made al that
time) to the extent that the registrants prove
that they continue to meet the qualifies..
ionsrequired by the District of Cab imbia
election law.
Section 6 also provides for additional reg--
istrations for these 1966 elections, and gives
the Board of Elections flexibility in schedul-
ing the dates for the 1966 primary and gen--
eral elections for Delegate, and for party run--
off elections also, if such additional elec-
tions prove to be necessary. The section pro--
vides a time limit in which the Board is
required to complete the installation of the
new permanent registration system in re-
place the present periodic registration.; now
required. The deadlines prescribed w;11 as--
sure that the permanent registration system
will be in full operation for the 1968 elec-
tions.
Technical note: The bill has been (tented
to meet the codification requirements of the
District of Columbia Code and also, in sec-
tions 2(a) and 4, the codification require-
ments of the United States Code.
A CONSERVATION JOB TO DO AT
HOME
(Mr. SHRIVER (at the request of Mr.
BROWN of Ohio) was granted permission
to extend his remarks at this point in
the RECORD and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. SHRIVER. Mr. Speaker, across
mid-America the land blooms, comniuni-
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
April _67,71966
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
CONGRESSIONAL RECORD -- HOUSE
longer permits Greek-flag ships to engage
in this trade; so, perhaps we are making
progress, even if it is slow.
It has been noted that Soviet Russian
vessels are carrying the latest Mig-21's
to Haiphong for unloading; one ship
we have been informed, arrived just the
other day. Yet the propaganda line is to
paint the Russians as the "good guys"
and the Red Chinese who are presently
doing far less for the Vietcong as the
"baddies."
While I do not pretend to be an au-
thority on this subject, others are. By
unanimous consent, I introduce an edi-
torial from Navy, the official publication
of the Navy League of the United States:
HAIPHONG, THE SANCTUARY THAT HURTS
The question of when or whether the
United States should take decisive steps to
shut off the flow of arms and war supplies
into Haiphong, North Vietnam's biggest and
busiest port, continues to gnaw at the John-
son administration.
Pressure for such action has mounted in
recent weeks, as American aircraft losses and
the number of North Vietnamese regular
army troops infiltrating into the south in-
crease. The principal methods advocated are
these: (1) bombing from the air; (2) laying
of minefields in the harbor, and (3) the es-
tablishment of a partial blockade or quaran-
tine of the type ordered by President Kennedy
during the Cuban missile crisis of 1962.
Gen. Maxwell D. Taylor, a former Chair-
man of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and now a
Presidential adviser on Vietnam, told Con-
gress early last month that he believed it was
time to do something about Haiphong. He
said he throught mining the harbor would
be the simplest way to discourage shipping
from entering that port.
About a week later, a raft of interpretive
stories came out of the Pentagon?indicating
that a background session for reporters had
been held by official spokesmen?which said
that the Joint Chiefs want to bomb some of
Haiphong's industrial and petroleum storage
areas as part of a general expansion of the
air war against North Vietnam.
Several leading Republicans, including
Senate Minority Leader EVERETT DIRKSON
and former Vice President Richard Nixon,
have been advocating a blockade of the Com-
munist port. A number of influential Demo-
crats in Congress, Senators RUSSELL and
SYMINGTON, for example, also favor such a
step.
EXPLOITING OUR FEARS
The thinking behind these recommenda-
tions for ending the de facto sanctuary status
of Haiphong goes like this: It doesn't make
sense to bomb North Vietnam at all if the
Communists are allowed to import anti-
aircraft guns and missiles and the shells and
bullets which make the bombing more
expensive in American lives and money and
increase the casualties among our forces
engaged against the enemy in the south.
The administration, however, is f &art@
that if we attack Haiphong, or blockade it, we
might risk a serious crisis with the Soviet
Union and/or Communist China. The Rus-
sians and Chinese are well aware of this fear
and have exploited it. The Russians report-
edly have passed the word through diplo-
matic channels that if we strike either Hai-
phong or the capital city of Hanoi (also a
saneutary) they will have to take some kind
of counteraction. The Chinese have said the
same thing publicly. According to a member
of the Philippine Senate, who had Just
returned from a visit to Peking, the Chinese
told her that they would feel Justified in
entering the Vietnamese war if the United
No. 59-18
States attacked the two big cities in the
north.
State Department and Pentagon leaders
have played down the heavy military aid the
Soviet Union has been giving the North
Vienamese aggressor, presumably on the
theory that good relations with Moscow
should be maintained so that it might, one
day, persuade Hanoi that it should come with
us to the peace table. As a consequence there
has been a tendency on the part of the ad-
ministration to downgrade the importance
of Haiphong to the war effort against us and
also to entangle it with the question of
bombing Hanoi, for which there is far less
pressure.
Accordingly, there must have some red
faces in Washington late last month when
a copy of a letter purportedly sent by the
Kremlin to Communist parties around the
World found its way into print in the West-
ern World. Dealing with the Moscow-Peking
split, the communication for the first time
gave the American people a fairly detailed
account of the kind and scope of the mili-
tary aid the U.S.S.R. has been supplying our
enemy. Here is what it said, in part:
The Soviet Union delivers large amounts
of weapons to the DRV (Democratic Repub-
lic of Vietnam), including rocket installa-
tions, anti-aircraft artillery, airplanes, tanks,
coastal guns, warships, and other items. In
1965 alone, weapons and other war materiel
worth about 500 million rubles ($550 mil-
lion) were placed at the disposal of the
DRV.
"The DRV is receiving support in the
training of pilots, rocket personnel, tank
drivers, artillerymen, and so on. Our mili-
tary aid is being rendered to the extent the
Vietnamese leadership itself thinks neces-
sary."
Figures on the value of Chinese military
aid to North Vietnam are not available, but
it is doubtful that it would match the So-
viet's half-billion dollar annual rate, a rate
the Kremlin makes clear may go even high-
er?Han01 only has to ask.
BULK. OP IT GOES BY SEA
With China and the U.S.S.R. assailing each
other so bitterly that some observers believe
the two Communist giants are near a com-
plete break, it may be assumed that the bulk
of this Soviet aid reaches North Vietnam by
ship, through Haiphong. Again, the Krem-
lin letter referred to above sheds some light.
It said;
"The Chinese Communist Party leadership
hindered the implementation of the agree-
ment of the Government of the U.S.S.R. with
the Government of the DRV on an immedi-
ate increase in military aid for the DRV. The
CCP leaders did not permit Soviet transport
planes with weapons to fly over CPR (Chi-
nese Peoples Republic) territory.
"Then, Chinese personalities also placed
obstacles in the way of the transportation of
war materiel to Vietnam by rail. Thus, at
their request, an additional shipment of mil-
itary equipment, including anti-aircraft artil-
lery, which is needed so urgently to protect
the Vietnamese cities and villages against the
United States air pirates, was recently deliv-
ered to the Vietnamese comrades. The Chi-
nese authorities refused for a long time to
relay the freight, under the pretense that the
papers for its transit had not yet been filled
out and that they did not know whether
Vietnam needs this war materiel."
It is clear that the port of Haiphong is
vitally important to the North Vietnamese
war effort and that this importance will in-
crease as Soviet and East European Commu-
nist aid expands. Militarily, it would make
sense to disrupt this lifeline that helps sus-
tain our enemy. We control the sea and the
air and could do so. There are, of course,
diplomatic and political factors that the
7333
President must weigh. But the American
people now know, ironically from the Krem-
lin and not from the White House, how vast
the Soviet military aid to North Vietnam is
and how necessary Haiphong is to its deliv-
ery. The pressure for a new decision by the
President is bound to increase further.
Should he decide to allow Haiphong to re-
main a sanctuary, he will have to make a new
case. His present one is not convincing.
DISRUPTIVE CCC CORN SALES
SHOULD BE THOROUGHLY IN-
VESTIGATED
(Mr. NELSEN (at the request of Mr.
BROWN of Ohio) was granted permission
to extend his remarks at this point in
the RECORD and to include extraneous
matter.)
Mr. NELSEN. Mr. Speaker, on March
8, 1966, I sent the following letter to the
distinguished chairman of the House
Committee on Agriculture, calling his at-
tention to the recent policies of the
Commodity Credit Corporation which
have initiated a potentially disastrous
situation in the Minnesota corn market:
MARCH 8, 1966.
Hon. HAROLD D. COOLEY,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,
House of Representatives,
Washington, D.C.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In the face of de-
partmental predictions to the contrary and
drastically dropping corn prices, the Com-
modity Credit Corporation has dumped near-
ly 175 million bushels of corn on the market
since the first of this year. During the past
9 weeks, the Commodity Credit Corporation
has disposed of about one-till-71 of the total
CCC reserve supply.
Can this be the same Government agency
which predicted in December that corn re-
quirements this year could "be met largely
out of the 1965 crop, with only limited
amounts of corn expected to be made avail-
able from (Government-owned) stocks"?
On December 17, the USDA announced that
sales in 1966 would be less than last year's
total of 417 million bushels. Nevertheless,
in the first 9 weeks of 1966, the Commodity
Credit Corporation has sold a total which
already amounts to 42 percent of the entire
1965 total. In January, the Commodity
Credit Corporation dumped 62 million
bushels of corn, compared to only 8.4 million
bushels in December. The February total of
140.2 million bushels dumped was the high-
est for any month in 4 years and more than
double the amount for February 1965. The
Commodity Credit Corporation seems bound
and determined to break their newly estab-
lished record this month. Last week, they
unloaded 72 million bushels of corn.
In 2 days of last week, the Commodity
Credit Corporation dumped 40 million
bushels of corn in Minneapolis; nearly five
times the amount sold in December on all
markets. These sales in Minneapolis were
made at 6 to 7 cents under the level of the
futures contract in Chicago for March. The
closing prices of corn futures after these two
days were from 6% to as much as 10 cents
below the February 14 level.
Most of the unloaded grain was purchased
by domestic users. In February, for ex-
ample, the Government sold 122.9 million
bushels for domestic use and 17.3 million
bushels for export. Why has this heavy em-
phasis on domestic sales occurred during a
year when exporters say that total exports
will exceed '700 million bushels if the sup-
plies are available at ports, an increase of
130 million bushels over the 1964-65 total.
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
Approved For Release 2005/06/29 : CIA-RDP67600446R000400060013-8
7334 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE
The answer, of course, is a concerned Gov-
ernment effort to drive the farmer's corn
prices down, This effort has succeeded, as it
always has. Prices on No. 2 yellow corn in
Chicago have dropped since mid-February
. from $1.33 to $1.27. Prices on corn sold for
future delivery on the Chicago Board of
Trade closed last Friday at $1.23 a bushel,
down 8 cents from mid-January.
It is very discouraging to farmers that, at
a time when the parity price ratio shows
signs of creeping upward, the heavy hand of
the Commodity Credit Corporation would
shatter this reviving trend with its dumping
practices. It may be that as in the recent
cases ot actual or threatened dumping of
aluminum and steel, the official excuse will
be that of curbing inflation. However, some--
one will have to prove to me how a segment
of our economy can be held responsible for
our growing threat of inflation when they
only receive 80-some percent return on their
contribution to our economy.
A better explanation for these recent
dumping practices just might be tied in with.
their timing. This happens to be the time
of year that farmers are being asked to sign
up for acreage-retirement programs. As
some corn traders have suggested, "we can
only suspect the corn disposal has the aim
of discouraging a large corn acreage this
year. This amounts to no less than economic
Assault being used to force fortners into pro-
grams which Congress clearly intended to
,snnain voluntary,
I would hope that through your leader-
ship, the House Committee on Agriculture
will act quickly to halt this misinterpreta-
tion of congressional intent and insure the
restitution of the grain market to the sup-
ply and demand influences of a free economy.
Sincerely yours,
ANCHER NELSEN.
Member of Congress.
On March 28, T. received the following
reply from Chairman COOLEY:
ROUSE OE REPRESENTATIVES,
COMM'. rEr. ON AGRICULTURE,
Washington, D.C., March 28, 1966.
Don. Aucunt NELSEN,
House of Representatives?
Washington. D.C.
DEAR ANDO ER : I forwarded to Secretary
Preeman your letter of March 8. concerning
Government activities in the corn market,
requesting of the Department a discussion
which might he useful in understanding
these activities. I now have a response
tram Mr. John A. Schnittker, Under Secre-
tary, a copy of which is enclosed, along with
a table he supplied.
There seems to be substantial disagree-
ment on what is being done and what is
being accomplished. I'd appreciate your
comments upon Mr. Schnittker's letter.
Sincerely yours,
Maim) D. CoOLEY,
Chairmen,
DEPARTMENT OP AGRIC riLTORE,
Washington, D.C., March. 23, 1966.
lion. HAROLD D. 000LEY,
Chairman, Committee on Agriculture,
House of Representatives.
DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: We appreciate this
opportunity to respond to the inaccurate or
misleading statements contained in Con-
gressman A NeitER NELSEN'S letter to you
which was forwarded to us for reply.
The Department, in the press release noted
by Congressman NELSEN, stated that CCC
sales in 1965-66 were expected to be consid-
erably smaller than in the previous year, but,
we further indicated that in application of
the ever-normal-granary principle, CCC sup-
plies would be offered as necessary to insure
,in orderly movement of supplies into domes-
tic use and export. This principle involves
acquisitions by COO when supplies are over-
burdensome and releasing stocks when the
market flow is inadequate. The basic objec-
tive of the ever-normal-granary and CCC
sales policy is that of promoting orderly mar-
keting over a period of years and within a
given marketing year. This has been, and is
presently the basis for the CCC sales and
procurement policy.
As has been the case since enactment of
the present type of feed grain pr gram, the
Department this season has offered its stor-
able corn supplies for unrestricted domestic
use at the market price but not less than the
legal minimum, that is, the applicable loan,
plus a gradually increasing month] y markup.
The markup this season began with 4i/4 cents
per bushel for October (compared to nothing
in past years) and is again being increased
by .11,t2 cents in each succeeding month to
reach a scheduled final total of 17% cents
for July, August, and September.
Thus, the CCC minimum price has a built-
in upward seasonal trend and is above the
current loan redemption value for producers
at all times by a gradually widening differ-
ence.
Sales of corn for restricted use, mainly for
export, or of nonstorable qualities, have also
been available at not less than market price.
The increase in rate of disposals beyond
the levels indicated in December is accounted
for by several subsequent developments.
First, it became apparent by February that
total utilization would be larger than initi-
ally estimated by nearly 90 million bushels,
including an increase of 50 million bushels
in exports. The estimate of the /965 corn
crop also was adjusted downward by 8 mil-
lion bushels and from the feed value stand-
point may actually be somewhat lower.
Second, an unevenness developed in the
market offerings of corn after harvest ac-
companied by an uncharacteristic price
movement considering the size of the 1965
crop (see tables 1 and 2), partly because a
larger-than-usual proportion of the new
crop went into storage at relatively high
moisture levels, hence was taking more time
to get into condition considered desirable for
sale by producers. A good many producers
also reacted to the somewhat unqualified dis-
cussion of growing world food needs by put-
ting off corn sales against the possibility of a
big surge later in export demand.
It became apparent by January that if the
Department was to carry out its general re-
sponsibility of insuring an adequate and
reasonably steady supply movement to users,
It would be insufficient to limit CCC offer-
ings, as initially anticipated, primarily to
get rid of supplies unsuitable for further
storage and to meet the needs of the emerg-
ency livestock feed program at concessional
prices as required by law.
As more was learned about the low quality
and high-moisture condition of 1965 corn in
the northwest Corn Belt, particularly in
Minnesota., it also became apparent that con-
siderable quantities of dry corn from CCC
stocks would be desired. for blending with
the new crop to improve its acceptability in
the market. In this connection, it may be
mentioned that up to 2 million bushels of
CCC bin site corn per week are continuing
on offer to local Minnesota buyers to further
insure coverage of blending needs.
From now on, however, it seems likely that
total CCC disposals will taper off substan-
tially as the movement of corn from other
sources normalizes.
Incidentally, the reference to CCC dispos-
als of about 140 million bushels in February
being the highest in 4 years for that
month is not a very good indicator of the
average overall monthly rate so far this
season. At only 4.8 and 8.5 million bushels
respectively, the recent October and Decem-
ber rates were the lowest for those months in
all of the five seasons since the present; type
of feed grain program began. The November
total of 19 million bushels was the lowest
April 7i, 1966
for the month in the five seasons with the
exception of 1964-65 and at less than 62
million bushels the current January dispos-
als were the smallest for the Month except
In 1963-64.
We hope that the foregoing deals ade-
quately with respect to the points raised in
the letter from Congressman NELSEN.
Sincerely yours,
JOHN A. Sermirrann,
Under Secretary.
TABLE 1-Corn: Receipts at primary marke l