Слике страница
PDF
ePub

from the authorization, but for unfore- committee. The amount acted on and and reduced it to $450 million. The seen situations. If funds are cut back recommended by the House was $450 Senate committee put it all back and for the Alliance for Progress, we are in million. The request of the adminis- raised it to $650 million. a sorry condition so far as contingency tration was $650 million. The Senate Mr. HUMPHREY. That is the adminfund use is concerned.

committee, after considerable discussion istration's request. I will give another reason. Many and debate, recommended that amount Mr. DIRKSEN. Yes. To balance out forces may be at work on the contin- to the Senate.

this account we went back to the exgency fund. There may be military sit Mr. COOPER. The amendment of penditure for fiscal 1963. The so-called uations, for example, which require the Senator from Minnesota would add "powerhouse” amendments contain $525 drawing on those funds. I have reason

I have reason $125 million to the amount authorized in million, exactly what was appropriated to believe that those who battled for the the amendment offered by the Senator for fiscal 1963. We considered that that Alliance for Progress are not aware of from Montana and the Senator from was enough. On balance it ought to be this situation. There will be heavy de- Illinois ?

approved. Those are the figures. mands for contingency funds if a con Mr. HUMPHREY. It would add $125 Mr. HUMPHREY. If we could be astingency arises. If a contingency or

If a contingency or million above the so-called Dirksen- sured that we would get $525 million in emergency does not arise, those funds Mansfield amendments.

appropriations for fiscal 1964, I would ought not to be used. I think the Sen

Mr.COOPER. This amendment would withdraw the amendment. The truth is ator from Georgia is aware that au- not add anything above the amount re that $450 million is provided in the thorizations or programs cannot be cut quested to be appropriated and recom- House bill. If we have only $525 million back and be paid for from contingency mended by the administration?

in the Senate version, as valiant as my funds.

Mr. HUMPHREY. No; my amend- colleagues in the Senate will be in terms Mr. RUSSELL. I am not aware of any ment would bring the amount to what of their conference committee capability, law to that effect. The Appropriations the administration recommended and I doubt that the House will fold up and Committee, when it has reduced appro the Senate Committee on Foreign Rela- agree to the $525 million authorization. priations—and it has been the subject tions recommended.

If we have only a $525 million authorof controversy-has been highly critical I know of no newspaper or journal in ization, I am sure the Appropriations of transfers with respect to appropri- this country, regardless of its political Committee will not automatically approations that have been reduced. But this persuasion, that has not deplored the priate that amount of money. is an authorization. This is not an ap action taken in the other body. They I offered my amendment in the hope propriation bill. In the case of appro felt the $450 million figure was too low. that the conferees on the part of the priations, the Appropriations Committee We all know that when we go to con Senate would be able to come out of conis very jealous, when it has recommeded ference there is give and take. The Sen- ference with

ference with a figure close to $525 reductions, and Congress has acted ac ator from Minnesota is attempting to or $550 million in authorizations. I cordingly, and, despite the fact that recommend the amount the committee hope more than that will come to us in Congress has fixed the appropriations at recommended, and that the administra- the appropriations bill, in the third year a certain level, funds have been trans- tion recommended, and what I consider of the Alliance for Progress program, ferred for that purpose. It has con to be the most respectable segment of when programs are now getting undersidered it an abuse of executive power. the press recommends. I do not see how way. But that is not true in the case of it could be too far wrong.

I have received an excellent report on authorizations. Where we authorize

Mr. COOPER. Would the Senator's this program. I hope that at least we $300 million, if Congress appropriates

amendment add anything to the total will come out of the Appropriations $300 million, it knows the President has amount of the bill?

Committee with the same amount that certain discretion. It seems to me it Mr. HUMPHREY. No.

we had in fiscal 1963. would be a lack of faith in the President, Mr. COOPER. It represents a trans Unless we adopt an amendment that if the Senator says he is so concerned fer?

will restore it to $650 million, or an about the Alliance for Progress, to say Mr. HUMPHREY. It represents a amendment similar to it, we will have no he would not use funds from the contransfer.

chance whatever of coming out with the tingency fund if necessary.

Mr. COOPER. I have not been here full amount of money. Mr. HUMPHREY. It seems to me the the last 2 days. Unfortunately, I have Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, we did people who have an interest in the pro not been able to follow the progress of not touch the so-called social trust fund. gram might think differently. A very the debate, particularly on the Alliance Mr. HUMPHREY. That is correct. interesting thing, in connection with the

for Progress. I voted for the reductions Mr. DIRKSEN. That is the $200 milAlliance for Progress and our foreign offered by the senior Senator from Flor- lion, for example, for the benefit of Latin policy relating to the Western Hemi

ida. I intend to support the recom America. sphere, is that this is a relatively new mendations made by the Senator from Mr. FULBRIGHT. $175 million. program. It is in its third year. The Montana and the Senator from Illinois. Mr. DIRKSEN. Yes; but originally first year was an organizational year. I have a strong feeling about supporting, the request was for $200 million, The second year we got some start. We to the fullest extent we can, the Alliance Mr. FULBRIGHT. The House proare now in the third year of the Alliance for Progress.

for Progress. We have been talking for vided for $200 million. for Progress program.

It is in this
2 years about Cuba. The Soviet Union

Mr. DIRKSEN. Yes. period that we are talking about whether has established a military presence in Mr. HUMPHREY. I am not arguing we are going to have, to some degree, Cuba. It is a threat to Latin America. about the other figures. As the Senator freedom in the Western Hemisphere. I do think this area could provide the from Georgia has indicated, possibly the

Mr. COOPER. Mr. President, will the greatest source of danger to this country, President would use some of the conSenator yield?

or the greatest source of strength to the tingency fund for the Alliance for ProgMr. HUMPHREY. I yield.

future of this country. I am going to ress. That is a part of the argument for Mr. COOPER. Will the Senator in support the amendment of the Senator increasing the contingency fund. All form me if I am correct in stating that from Minnesota.

am saying is that in light of the drastic the administration made a final request Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, will action taken by the other body in cutting which totaled $650 million for fiscal 1964, the Senator yield?

the authorization for the Alliance for and that $650 million would have been Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield.

Progress programs, the Senate ought at made available for the Alliance for Prog Mr. DIRKSEN. So that the authentic least to sustain the figure in the comress under the bill reported by the com figures may be in the RECORDand we mittee report, or close to it, so that when mittee? And will the Senator tell me if received these figures from the Appro- we go to conference on the Alliance for this latter amount compares with an priations Committee—for fiscal 1963 the Progress we shall be able to come out amount of $450 million which was in Alliance for Progress had $525 million. with a little more than is offered in the cluded for the Alliance for Progress in Mr. HUMPHREY. In appropriations. Mansfield-Dirksen amendments. the bill passed by the House?

Mr. DIRKSEN. Yes. The budget I am sure the Senator from Illinois Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes. The amount asked for $650 million for 1964. The knows that I really do not like to be in of $650 million was recommended by the House cut the amount by $200 million this position.

this position. I do not exactly support

The

what the distinguished majority leader Mr. MILLER. I would appreciate it the Chamber and who desires to offer and the distinguished minority leader very much if the Senator from Minne- his amendment now. have attempted to do. In other respects, sota would tell us a little more about the Mr. ELLENDER. As I stated a while I believe they had to do what was done. state of these programs, because we have

state of these programs, because we have ago, I am in full agreement with the I hope I can persuade my colleagues in received reports which indicate that all position taken by the distinguished Senthe Senate to agree that the allocation is not well with respect to some of the ator from Minnesota. I do not believe, to the Alliance for Progress would be a countries.

as has been stated by some Senators, wise step to take. Apparently some shift Mr. HUMPHREY. I do not claim to that money could be transferred from was made, and I am not quite sure why. be any expert on this subject, but basi- the contingency fund, as such, to the It seems to me that if we could agree on cally there is considerable truth in what Alliance for Progress. The purpose of a better figure for this year we would be the Senator from Iowa has said with the contingency fund is to provide for serving the cause that we all wish to respect to the fact that a number of unforeseen happenings, such as at Quesupport.

countries have not come forth with what moy and in Lebanon. Mr. DIRKSEN. The situation amounts we call necessary reforms.

Mr. President, I call up my amendto, “You pay your money and you take Mr. MILLER. Not only with respect ment No. 299 and ask that it be read. your choice." In other words, shall we to reforms, but with respect to programs

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The put the money into the contingency fund as well.

amendment will be stated. of the President, giving that added flexi

Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes; programs

The LEGISLATIVE CLERK. On page 2 bility, or do we take it out of that fund also. That is why the Alliance for

of the Mansfield-Dirksen amendments, and put it into the Alliance for Progress Progress has been slow in starting. We

it is proposed to strike out lines 10 and authorization? have not only demanded feasibility

11 and insert in lieu thereof the followMr. HUMPHREY. That is correct. I studies, project by project, and economic

ing: also feel that inasmuch as the commit- studies, project by project,

, but also

On page 40, line 10, strike out "$175,000,tee made a long and careful study of the countrywide plans, country by country.

000" and insert in lieu thereof “$100,000,

000". Alliance for Progress, it would be a good This has compelled some of the countries idea to go along with the progress that to examine their human resources,

Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, a

their has been made. I respect the commit- natural resources, their capital resources,

parliamentary inquiry.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The tee's judgment with respect to the and their public administration struc

Senator from Louisiana will state it. Alliance for Progress funds.

ture. We have insisted on rather high Mr. KEATING. Am I correct in say- criteria. Now they are beginning to

Mr. ELLENDER. As I understand,

this amendment will be voted upon being that the Senator's amendment would show some progress in that respect. In

fore the so-called Humphrey amendadd to the Alliance for Progress fund the some countries the programs have not

ment. exact amount which would be taken from come along as fast as we would like to

The the contingency fund?

(Mr.

PRESIDING OFFICER have had them come along because we Mr. HUMPHREY. That is correct. have insisted upon better performance. amend language proposed to be stricken

KENNEDY in the chair). A motion to Mr. KEATING. I should like, with

If we had insisted in certain other the Senator's permission, to address a parts of the world on the same kind of

out takes precedence over a motion to parliamentary inquiry to the Chair. Is performance that we are insisting upon

strike out. the amendment divisible? It strikes out with respect to Latin American coun

Mr. HUMPHREY. It is not an two sections.

amendment in the third degree? tries, there would have been less criticism The PRESIDING OFFICER. A mo of the foreign aid program than we have

The PRESIDING OFFICER. It is a tion to strike out is divisible. had thus far. I believe we have learned

preferential amendment. Mr. KEATING. So it may be divided a great deal as a result of our demand

Mr. ELLENDER. As the Senator into two parts?

from Minnesota has just stated, I have a for better performance. Our funds in The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Latin America are showing

much better previous engagement. Tomorrow I shall Senator is correct. performance on these projects.

give my reasons why I believe my amendMr. MILLER. Mr. President, will the

I have had brought to my attention a

ment should be adopted. Senator yield? report from Colombia. It is in the form

Mr. MILLER. Mr. President, will the Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. of a letter, with pictures, and it deals

Senator from Minnesota yield? Mr. MILLER. I believe that the Sen- with the city of Cucuta, Colombia.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. ator from Illinois made a good point, but

The letter is addressed to the Presi.

Mr. MILLER. My only comment in it seems to me that there is an underlying dent of the United States, and it states: response to the Senator's statement is question of policy involved, and that is

that I recognize that the scrutiny which that the so-called powerhouse amend

With the present we are enclosing some

is being given to some of the Alliance ments seek to make it clear to the Alli- photographs, which show how the Alliance

for Progress program is producing results programs is tight. That is as it should ance for Progress members that we are in our city.

be. It does not mean that when these concerned about some of the countries

We have been granted a loan by the Inter programs are not measuring up to our that have not been performing as we feel American Development Bank, that is helping

American Development Bank, that is helping standards, especially those set forth in they should, and, therefore, we are not to finance a 10-year expansion program, de the Clay Committee report, we should going to approve the amount that was signed to provide water and sewerage house

automatically appropriate the same originally recommended by the Foreign connections for more than 95 percent of

amount of money we did last year. I Relations Committee, but that, instead, our 115,000 inhabitants of the city.

take it from the action of the House that we will leave it up to the President to ex

Their plan was designed to take care

the House has been restive because we ercise his discretion as to whether they of some of the sewerage, water, and

have not been moving fast enough with are going to go ahead with a program.

sanitation needs. I show Senators the the moneys appropriated originally, and Mr. HUMPHREY. Mr. President, I pictures, which obviously cannot be that the understanding and hope that believe that is a valid argument. I do printed in the RECORD. One picture there would be a quicker movement have not deny it.

shows the problem, and another picture not been justified. That is why some of Mr. MILLER. The Senator from Min- shows the solution. In other words, the

the excess funds have been built up. nesota has said that he has received pictures say, “This is what we had, and

Mr. HUMPHREY. One of the reasons progress reports. The Senator from this is what we are getting.”

why we have not moved so rapidly as Minnesota probably has much better in

This was done after American engi- the Senator from Iowa would have liked formation on this point than I. How- neers had been brought in and after

or the Senator from Minnesota would ever, I too have seen some reports which economic and feasibility studies.

have liked is that there was a toolingindicate that of all the Latin American This is the kind of program we ought up job that had to be done in working countries, only about 12 have come forth to support.

with the governments. In many inwith the kind of programs that we have Mr. ELLENDER. Mr. President, will stances, they simply were dragging their long been expecting them to propose. the Senator from Minnesota yield?

feet for a while, in terms of some of the Mr. HUMPHREY. Will the Senator Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield to the criteria or qualifications that had to be permit me to make an observation? Senator from Louisiana, who must leave met according to our commitments un

der the Act of Punta del Este. Many liance for Progress, no specific item is

liance for Progress, no specific item is these funds should be allocated. I agree countries did not have the services that picked out that has been eliminated by

picked out that has been eliminated by that there should be a cut in military were necessary, such as planning officers the authorization or the appropriation. assistance. I agree that there should be and economists, to undertake their part The Senator's amendment restores to the

The Senator's amendment restores to the a cut in the Development Loan Fund. of their work. That is now being done. full budget request the amount for the That amount was further reduced by the Some progress is beginning to be made. Alliance for Progress, and reduces the Morse amendment. When General Clay came before the contingency fund by $125 million.

I am now asking only that the Senate committee, he said, speaking on the total Mr. HUMPHREY. It is merely a shift be given some room for bargaining with authorization in the foreign aid bill, in of funds.

the House Committee on Foreign Affairs response to a question from the chair Mr. SALTONSTALL.

Yes.

Based when we go to conference on the Alman:

upon my experience in the Committee liance for Progress. Yes, sir. We believe that the authoriza on Appropriations, we have already tried I really believe that this is a merition should be in the neighborhood of $4.2 to stand by the contingency fund. The torious position. I am not arguing with billion or $4.3 billion.

administration, whether it be the ad the judgment of other Senators as to The reason we have recommended that ministration of Truman, Eisenhower, or the amounts that ought to be provided this figure be higher than we think the ap- Kennedy, has always asked to have the

Kennedy, has always asked to have the for the Alliance for Progress. If we can propriation need be is that we feel the full

contingency fund at a reasonable level get $525 million, the Senator from Minamount promised to Latin America should be authorized even though we don't really

to allow for any emergency that might nesota will be exceedingly happy. That believe that there is any chance that their arise.

was the total amount provided last year. performance will justify it all being ex

The Senator's amendment would re Last year we had an authorization for pended. We think that a failure to au store the amount to the specific project, $600 million. thorize the full amount for Latin America the Alliance for Progress, where it might Mr. SALTONSTALL, Mr. President, would be widely interpreted as a failure of not be used, because projects might not will the Senator from Minnesota yield the United States to support the Alliance for

come up, and therefore might be cut for a further question? Progress. from the contingency fund.

Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. That was General Clay's statement. Therefore, I personally am opposed to Mr. SALTONSTALL. The Senator In the Clay report, as I recall, special the Senator's amendment for the rea

the Senator's amendment for the rea- from Minnesota is talking to a friend of emphasis was placed upon our commit- son, based on experience, that the con the Alliance for Progress program when ment to the Alliance for Progress and tingency fund is one of the most re he talks to me. the authorization that has been request- sponsible, valuable adjuncts that the ad Mr. HUMPHREY. I fully realize that; ed.

ministration has, even though the fund and I realize also that the same is true Mr. MILLER. I thank the Senator might not be entirely used.

when I speak to the distinguished minorfrom Minnesota. I have great respect I am sorry to have to disagree with ity leader [Mr. DIRKSEN). I said that, for General Clay. However, with ref what the Senator from Minnesota has essentially, we are not arguing about the erence to the last statement the Sen said, but I did wish to call his attention programs; instead, we are merely disator read, I should say, in light of what particularly to the fact that I do not be

particularly to the fact that I do not be- cussing ways and means to fulfill or imwe have been doing and in light of the lieve his statement is entirely backed upplement them. clear commitments that are required un- by experience, namely, that when an Mr. SALTONSTALL. Yes. My point der the Alliance for Progress, that if the amount is cut back, the contingency is that if we are to make cuts in line with Mansfield-Dirksen amendment stands, fund cannot be used when the objective

fund cannot be used when the objective the recent votes in the Senate—and, as and the amendment of the Senator from is not clearly stated.

the Senator from Minnesota has said, Minnesota fails, and if Latin American Mr. HUMPHREY. I hope the Sena- it seems to be the temper of the Senate nations get the idea that we are not pro tor from Massachusetts is correct. to make some cuts in the bill as recomceeding in their support, it will be due Frankly, I have no desire to limit the

Frankly, I have no desire to limit the mended by the committee—we shall be to our own failure of information. I see President's contingency fund. Had I providing for a better overall situation no reason why this information cannot had my way about this matter, the Presi

had my way about this matter, the Presi- by leaving the contingency fund larger be disseminated properly, so that they dent's contingency fund would be cut at and thus providing desirable fluidity for will know that we are still committed to his request, because I thoroughly agree

his request, because I thoroughly agree the administration. their support, and that the only reason with the Senator that the President's I have agreed with the Senator on why we are not authorizing so much contingency fund in many cases serves a some of the positions he takes, but I canmoney is that, frankly, we are disap valuable purpose.

not agree with him on this amendment. pointed with their poor performance in Let us discuss for a moment the Com Mr. DIRKSEN. Mr. President, will some cases—and it has been poor in mittee on Appropriations. Excluding the Senator from Minnesota yield for a some cases. In other instances, we could the member of that committee who is brief question? give quite adequate and quite proper speaking, let us talk about the compe Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. praise.

tency of the other members. It was Mr. DIRKSEN. In view of the proHowever, I cannot accept General the considered judgment of that ccm cedure in the Senate thus far today, is Clay's statement which is, in effect, that mittee that the contingency fund should it intended to have the Senate vote towe would be doing a very poor job of be kept at $175 million. I thought that day on this amendment? public relations in getting that informa that amount was too small. It was also Mr. HUMPHREY. I believe not. Betion across to the people of Latin Amer the considered judgment—if not the fore the vote is taken, the Senator from ica.

unanimous judgment, then surely the Oregon will speak on the Alliance for Mr. SALTONSTALL. Mr. President,

Mr. President, judgment of an overwhelming majority Progress program; and in view of his will the Senator from Minnesota yield? of the members of the committee-that knowledge of the Latin American area, Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield.

this fund should be $150 million. I have his remarks will be most important. So Mr. SALTONSTALL. Most respect no desire to cut the President's contin- I have no intention of pressing for a vote fully, I say to the Senator from Min- gency fund; nevertheless, I sense the today on this amendment. nesota that I think he is mistaken in temperament of the Senate to be that Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, will the the statement he made some time ago it is going to make some cuts. I felt Senator from Minnesota yield? that the contingency fund could not be that way when the bill was reported to Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. used in any place where the authoriza the Senate. If that be true, I do not Mr. MORSE. I am glad to cooperate tion had been reduced or the appropria want my amendment to be interpreted in this connection. I did not know the tion for a specific purpose had been re as one that would add money to the bill. Senator's amendment was to be brought duced. I have checked with one of the My amendment merely provides for a up today. He knows that I wish to work clerks of the Committee on Appropria- different allocation of the funds as pro- with him in connection with this subtions, Mr. Scott, and have confirmed my posed in the Mansfield-Dirksen-Ful- ject matter. memory of a good many years that the bright-Sparkman-Aiken - Hickenlooper Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes, indeed. contingency fund can be used where the amendment. There is an honest dis Mr. MORSE. And other Senators also purposes are vaguely stated. In the Al- agreement among Senators as to how wish to work with him and collaborate

with him in this connection. However, in South Vietnam; and in this case we The programs which are underway can some of our amendments are not even are talking about an authorization—not be thoroughly justified economically, drafted as yet.

an appropriation-of $650 million or $525 socially, and politically. We have not Furthermore, I think that at this point million for the Alliance for Progress, al- constructed, in connection with this proin the debate on the foreign aid bill we though, to be sure, there is also the So- gram, any four-lane roads that go noneed to have whatever discussion and cial Progress Trust Fund, for which I be- where, or luxury homes and luxury builddebate we are going to have on all aspects lieve the Senate recommended $175 mil- ings that are not needed, in areas of povof the Alliance for Progress program. lion. But when we consider the total erty.

But when we consider the total erty. We have been printing books, We cannot deal with this particular amount we are contemplating authoriz- building schools, developing rural credits, amendment without affecting the entire ing—it has not yet been voted—for all engaging in land reform, helping in home program, inasmuch as the Alliance goes the republics of the Western Hemisphere, building, cleaning up slums, installing to the very heart of the program. There- in terms of any real aid program, we find water systems, and protecting the public fore, in our discussions and debate to that it is only approximately $150 million health. I think the people of the United morrow in regard to the Alliance for more than the amount we have put into States find these programs most desirable Progress program, we wish to outline the South Vietnam in 1 year.

and worthy of support. various proposals in regard to amend Mr. MCGOVERN. There has been Mr. MCGOVERN. And those proments of or modification in the Alliance some understandable impatience regard- grams are not covered by any continfor Progress program. That is why I ing the rate of the progress we are mak- gency fund; am I correct in that statepropose that there be no vote tonight on ing in the countries to the south of us. ment? this amendment. Furthermore, I under- Can the Senator from Minnesota state Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator is stand-although I may be mistaken

I may be mistaken how long we have been involved in South correct. They are not. about this that the amendment of the Vietnam, as compared to the length of Mr. MCGOVERN. As the Senator Senator from Louisiana (Mr. ELLENDER] time the Alliance for Progress has been from Louisiana (Mr. ELLENDER] said behas precedence over this amendment; operating?

fore he left, the purpose of the continand he has already left the Chamber, Mr. HUMPHREY. As I recall, our in- gency fund, is to meet emergency condiwith the understanding that no further volvement in South Vietnam began about tions, usually of a military nature or votes will be taken tonight.

1954; I refer to our direct involvement something of that sort. Mr. HUMPHREY. The Senator from after the French were defeated.

Mr. HUMPHREY. Exactly. I know Oregon is correct; and I am very anxious Mr. McGOVERN. Since then we have that certain Senators feel that there are to take up this matter with the Senator expended well over $3 billion in that one changes that need to be made in the from Oregon and his associates, because country, whereas the Alliance for Prog- Alliance for Progress program. With I am sure that a package which will ress has been operating for approxi- some I agree. For example, the military greatly strengthen the Alliance for mately 2 years in some 20 different coun assistance program. I think we should Progress can be arranged. After this de- tries. I believe the Senator from Min- get into that. The Senator from Orebate, I shall meet promptly with the Sen- nesota would agree that we have not been gon will do so. I wish him to know that ator from Oregon to discuss this subject. entirely satisfied with the progress we I feel that the military assistance pro

Mr. McGOVERN. Mr. President, will have made in South Vietnam, although gram in Latin America ought to be cut. the Senator from Minnesota yield? we have been involved there over a much As I told him the other day, it is my Mr. HUMPHREY. I yield. longer period of time.

intention to support him. The Senator Mr. MCGOVERN. Would the Senator Mr. HUMPHREY. Absolutely SO. from Oregon feels that if cuts are to be from Minnesota say the Senate was act- Furthermore, in a few days Mr. Harri- made in some of these items, possibly we ing in accordance with a long established man, our Under Secretary of State, will can make them at that point and in a foreign policy if it were to demonstrate go to a very important conference in package. I am amenable to that sugin a concrete way its special considera- South America—the Conference of the gestion. I wish to talk to the Senator tion of the Western Hemisphere?

Inter-American Economic and Social about it. Mr. HUMPHREY. I certainly would. Council, at which he, one of the highest The amendment is now before the If there is any nation which demon- representatives of our Government, will Senate. The amendment will give us strates special consideration of the West- discuss, once again, the plans for the an opportunity to talk on that aspect of ern Hemisphere, certainly it is the United economic advancement of the countries the foreign aid bill. States, through the U.S. Congress. I of this hemisphere, region by region, I wish to conclude my presentation tothink I can say with complete accuracy country by country, area by area, and

country by country, area by area, and day on the question by saying that of all and confidence that so far as the Amer- category by category. I believe it would the items in the bill that deserve the ican people are concerned today about be wise to arm Mr. Harriman with the most thoughtful consideration, it is the foreign aid, the one area of the program kind of commitment for resources that Alliance for Progress. It will be fully to which they seem to make an enthusi- will strengthen his position in that con discussed by a number of Senators. That astic response is the Alliance for Prog- ference, in terms of exacting from our will be time well spent. Of all the items ress. They want to do something con- sister republics the conditions which we

sister republics the conditions which we in the bill that deserve the support of structive for this hemisphere. There are believe to be necessary in order to have

believe to be necessary in order to have Congress, it is the Alliance for Progress. 101 reasons for that. Some say it is be- an effective aid program.

I hope that we will do nothing either cause of fear of Castro; but I think the

I repeat that because of the position overtly or indirectly that will weaken our more important reason is the realization taken by Congress, and, in particular,

taken by Congress, and, in particular, position in relation to the Alliance for that we have denied to some of our because of the

position taken by the sub- Progress. neighbors in this hemisphere the atten- committee headed by the Senator from Mr. McGOVERN. The Senator from tion they justly have deserved over all Oregon himself, as was indicated here Minnesota has expressed my views exthese years.

in the early stages of the debate on the actly, including the comment he made Mr. McGOVERN. Furthermore, even aid bill, certain conditions and criteria

aid bill, certain conditions and criteria about the desirability of reducing some Castro is a representative of a country in for the Alliance for Progress program of the military aid funds. When the our hemisphere.

were established, and I believe those con motion to recommit the bill was made Mr. HUMPHREY. Yes.

ditions and criteria will make that pro the other day by the Senator from OreMr. McGOVERN. Does the Senator gram much more viable and much more gon [Mr. MORSE), I joined and I believe from Minnesota have information which effective than any other program we others joined-in supporting the motion he can give us in regard to the cost of have had in any other part of the world, to recommit, not because we wanted to our involvement in South Vietnam, as save the Marshall plan. This is one of make drastic cuts in the foreign aid bill compared with the entire cost of every the reasons for the delay or for what across the board, but because we saw in thing we are doing in the 21 countries of some call the slowness of our progress. that motion an opportunity to make some Latin America?

However, I point out that although we selective cuts in the military field parMr. HUMPHREY. I think last year may be proceeding a little slower than ticularly, which would give us a stronger we expended $500 million or $600 million we would like to, we are proceeding well. over-all program.

I am happy to be a cosponsor of the tion which it believes is contrary to the Bradstreet figures were unreliable and amendment offered by the Senator from material I used. I ask unanimous con- did not agree with the material pubMinnesota. I thank him for yielding sent that the National Lumber Manu- lished in the "Statistical Abstract of the to me.

facturers Association's statement of Oc- United States” for 1963. The latter tober 10, and attachments, be printed publication is characterized by NLMA as

in the RECORD at the conclusion of my "an official U.S. Government publication LUMBER PROFITS remarks.

of established repute.” Mr. MORSE. Mr. President, on Sep The PRESIDING OFFICER. With The NLMA quotes figures from the tember 13, 1963, I made a statement on out objection, it is so ordered.

Statistical Abstract which indicate a the floor of the Senate on the lumber (See exhibit 1.)

larger number of failures in the lumber situation in which I discussed exten Mr. MORSE. I note with concern

I note with concern industry than those used by Dun and sively the production and profit situation that the National Lumber Manufac- Bradstreet. I ask unanimous consent in the lumber industry. The data in turers Association believes that the Dun that the pertinent portions of table 678 support of my statement came from an and Bradstreet report "erroneously of the 1963 Statistical

1963 Statistical Abstract be analysis prepared by Dun & Brad- credits the lumber industry with greater printed in the RECORD at this point in street, Inc.

economic achievements than it could my remarks. The National Lumber Manufacturers honestly claim." I have made a further There being no objection, the portions Association, on October 10, released a investigation, particularly regarding the were ordered to be printed in the RECORD, statement which contains some informa- contention that certain of the Dun and as follows:

[Statistical Abstract of the United States, 1963, p. 506)
No. 678. Industrial and commercial failuresNumber and liabilities, by industry and size of liability: 1955-62

[Liabilities in thousands of dollars. Excludes Alaska and Hawaii. See footnotes 2 and 3, table 676)

[blocks in formation]
[blocks in formation]

Total..---

Mining and manufacturing.
By industry:

Mining--Coal, oil, mise...
Food and kindred products.
Textile-mill products and apparel..
Lumber and products.
Paper, printing, and publishing.
Chemicals and allied products.
Leather and products..
Stone, clay, and glass products.
Iron, steel, and products.
Machinery.
Transportation equipment.

Miscellaneous
By size of liability:

Under $25,000...
$25,000 to $100,000.-
$100,000 and over-

Wholesale trade.--
By industry:

Food and farm products.
Apparel.--
Dry goods.
Lumber, building materials, hardware.
Chemicals and drugs.--
Motor vehicles and auto equipment.

Miscellaneous.----
By size of liability:

Under $25,000-
$25,000 to $100,000.
$100,000 and over.

Retail trade ----
By industry:

Food and liquor..
General merchandise..
Apparel and accessories..
Furniture, home furnishings.
Lumber, building materials, hardware.
Automotive group.-
Eating and drinking places.
Drug stores.-

Miscellaneous
By size of liability:

Under $25,000...
$25,000 to $100,000.-
$100,000 and over.

Construction
By industry:

General building contractors..
Building subcontractors.-

Other contractors -
By size of liability:

Under $25,000.
$25,000 to $100,000-
$100,000 and over.

[blocks in formation]
« ПретходнаНастави »