E. The use of non-U.S. teachers in U.S. schools is unacceptable and raises questions about the legality of waiving citizenship requirements. The qualification requirements listed for DOD schools state "Teachers and administrators who have adequate training and experience background and who show the enthusiasm and ability to develop the best scholarship and citizenship in young Americans are selected for the overseas dependent schools". The first general requirement is United States citizenship. Another is loyalty to the United States. It is clearly the intent of the U.S. Congress that dependents of all U.S. citizens are to be taught by U.S. citizens (in overseas schools) and that the Canal Zone schools are considered Federal schools. The large percentage of military dependents in the Canal Zone schools is an additional and vital reason for requiring adherence to DOD standards for teachers. More importantly, however, is the fact that we are entitled to the same consideration under law that is afforded other Governmental agencies in overseas areas and should not be made an exception to the law. In short, don't discriminate against the U.S. citizen in the Canal Zone.

F. We feel that the proper course of action for the Canal Zone Government to take is to hold a reduction in force of the Latin American school teachers with all rights under Company/Government and Civil Service Commission Regulations applied. The schools in the Republic of Panama need the educational expertise of these teachers badly. We are sure that the patriotism of these teachers toward the Republic of Panama will temper their feelings about any loss of job positions with the Panama Canal. At the same time, the Panama Canal Company will be returning to Panama a valuable natural resource.

In conclusion, the Ad Hoc Committee of the U.S. Labor Organizations and Civic Councils has voted to oppose the transfer of Latin American teachers fight all the proposals with every means at our disposal.

RESULTS OF AD HOC COMMITTEE SURVEY

[Questionnaires returned from Gamboa, 188; questionnaires returned from Atlantic side, 903; questionnaires returned from Pacific side, 1,495; total questionnaires returned, 2,586]

GENERAL COMMENTS QUOTED FROM QUESTIONNAIRE

"To me the most dangerous item above is number 4. I have no objection to L.A. teachers being absorbed into the U.S. school system if their instructional involvement is limited to teaching the Spanish language. I strongly object, however, to all day exposure of U.S. citizen children to a teacher whose culture, and more importantly, whose allegiance is not to the U.S. We have enough trouble teaching our children to be good U.S. citizens without introducing the impediment of alien teachers."

"Number 4. I would strongly object to my children being taught full time by a L.A. teacher. Such a teacher could not help but to carry into the classroom his or her own culture and background, and most importantly his allegiance to his own country, and my children could only suffer in the process. If faced with such a situation, I would feel it necessary to withdraw my children from schools in the Canal Zone and make other arrangements for their education." FROM A NON-U.S. CITIZEN: "As a non-U.S. citizen I think that one more time UNCLE SAM sacrify his own people in benefit of outsiders. Don't you think it is about time that he think in HIS OWN PEOPLE and forget about the rest of the world, in this case the L.A. living in the Canal Zone, who don't pay taxes to the U.S. Government and in this case can't get benefit of something the U.S. CITIZEN have work for it."

"Become a Panamanian and reap the benefits."

"God bless America. I love my country. I want the best for fellow Americans. I want to speak English, salute the Stars and Stripes, and sing the Star Spangled Banner. I don't want to force this on anyone. Panama has its own language, customs, flag and songs. So be it. All Americans for one, God for us all."

"We are two different cultures, we have two different languages, our goals and aims in education and life vary considerably. To inflict one upon the other only causes defeat and destroys and weakens one's own values and traditions. Panamanians are Panamanians with a rich culture that should be respected. We have more to lose than to gain."

"The U.S. could save by having schools and housing for U.S. citizens only. There is no reason why the U.S. should furnish schools or housing for Panamanian citizens."

"If the Panama Canal Co. is going to pay tuition for Panamanians to go to school, then they better get ready to pay for my children to go to the school in the States that I am sending them to if L.A. teachers are transferred into C.Z. schools."

"Having been in the Canal Zone for ten years and having been told how there is always a housing shortage, sub-standard housing, and all the rest. I fail to see how this move can help anything. As for schools, I would honestly have no objection to my children going to school with Panamanian children. However, if I were a Panamanian, I would certainly object to my children being taught a different culture. Again as to housing, if it is to be opened up, then to keep this "official" housing is certainly the rankest form of discrimination. Apparently our good Governor and the State Department intend to implement the treaty and present it to Congress as an accomplished fact. Frankly, to sum up the whole mess, I gag."

"I don't care where anyone is educated. If you are not an American, you cannot pass on American culture. You don't get that out of books."

"As a U.S. taxpayer, I feel I should have a great deal to say about how our country controls our U.S. tax dollars, and backing these proposals is unconstitutional."

"Get me the hell out of here."

"I have already begun to look for employment in the U.S. The Canal Zone is dying. The State Department does not give a damn about the little man in America today. Once the Government decides to do something, it does it. If I choose to object, nobody listens, and if I lose my job as it seems evident. I swear I will never again work for the U.S. Government in any capacity and I will make sure that my children don't either. I am sick and tired of seeing non-U.S. citizens (who refuse to bear the responsibility of U.S. citizenship) demanding what they call their Constitutional rights (by the U.S. Constitution). They want to have their cake and eat it too! I am shocked, ashamed and disgusted with the sappy attitude my Government has taken toward Latin

America today. It is no wonder everyone keeps his hand out to Uncle Sam while fellow Americans in the States starve. For the record, I am not a Zonian. I have lived in the Canal Zone for five years. I came from the States for my job here and I will undoubtedly return soon. I have a great feeling of sorrow for my fellow Americans who have called the C.Z. their home-and will soon lose that home."

"I strongly disapprove of the proposal to pay transportation and tuition costs for non-U.S. citizens to attend schools in the Republic of Panama. The costs would be prohibitive. It is not even feasible that such a proposal be made, especially in view of the "austerity" program now being conducted by our C.Z. Government. Also, it is very important that we keep our U.S. schools accredited so that our children may look forward to further education in U.S. colleges." "I feel we have more to fear from the many high level individuals within the Company who are ready for retirement or are secure in their particular positions than from racial crusaders such as Metcalf who are concerned with the political and social aspects rather than with the primary mission of the Company to expeditiously and safely put ships through the Canal."

"I do not object to any teacher who has the proper credentials but disapprove if they don't have them. I would like the option of sending my children to Panama parochial schools the same as the non-U.S."

"The administration is smart. They won't take our jobs from us but they will make it so miserable for us that our jobs won't be worth having."

"Why must the U.S. Government try harder to please the citizens of another country than its own citizens?? What good is it to be a U.S. citizen in the Canal Zone anymore? Not only are we losing the advantages of citizenship; it is getting to a point where it is more advantageous to be a Panamanian."

"If things get bad enough the only thing left to do is to pack up and leave. I think it likely that decisions will be made for us by someone else and very soon. I don't see any way for there to be real "sharing" of control in the Zone. Either the U.S. is going to run it or Panama will. If Panama gets control, the Governor and the troops will be asked to leave immediately (and at that point everyone else better leave). If the U.S. intends to keep control, then there doesn't need to be any talk of reducing security positions (we won't have enough of them). There has been neither enough housing, nor adequate housing, for U.S. citizens for more than 20 years and the Zone authorities have repeatedly said so. Now to suddenly break out with all this talk about 'sharing' something that everyone agrees doesn't exist—well, that docs make one wonder! How can the U.S. have any obligation to run ANY schools for children of Panamanian employees? They are not U.S. citizens. The Panamanian employees are paid roughly 3 times the amount of parents of other Panamanian students in the Republic, so where is the justification for watering down U.S. schools for some well-to-do Panamanians? Close the Latin American schools in the Canal Zone; give the teachers serverance or annuities and stop all the howling about it. AND ONE OTHER THING. It is still not too late for the U.S. citizen, especially those in authority, to take some pride in themselves and the fact that they are engaged in one of the great enterprises in history; this hangdog apologetic air of abjectness is appropriate only for thieves in the night who are engaged in some second story job. If we run the Canal, then LETS SAY SO, and no need to apologize for that, or for having been very generous to the people of the Republic of Panama in the process!"

"Leave the Canal Zone for the States where my children will receive total U.S. schooling and I can live where I choose, next to whom I choose, and my home will be protected by U.S. citizens."

"As a U.S. taxpayer I object to my tax dollars going into a fund for the education of foreign national students."

"Protected by Panamanians on the Canal Zone Police Force in a time of anti-American rioting? I am getting the hell out of here right now."

"To fight this problem that was not brought about by the U.S. citizens in the Canal Zone in the first place. Many of us have fought for our country and our flag and in no way do we intend to see it tread upon. I will make the same stand that I made when I served my country from 1966 to 1969. I served with the Special Forces, U.S. Army, and I don't think that I have to say any more because the name speaks for itself.”

"I feel that I have no obligation of loyalty to a company that is not being loyal to me and is certainly not working in my best interests."

"As a mother of two elementary age school children and also as a U.S. citizen who pays my share of U.S. taxes, I am outraged that they do not see fit to give my children an American education-teaching them what it is to be an American, the outlook, the culture. I abhor the thought of a non-U.S. citizen, who has different sentiments politically than I do, teaching my impressionable children." "What next? Maybe Mr. Metcalf would like to give each graduating Latin American student a certificate of U.S. citizenship along with his or her diploma. Panamanians are Panama's responsibility. I expect and demand that the U.S. Government work only to protect the rights of U.S. citizens."

"It is obvious that the U.S. rate employee is still needed in the Canal Zone to accomplish the obvious mission of training and to maintain the high standard of the labor force necessary to the Canal for the operation itself. The adversities over the past five years that the U.S. employee has had ot overcome make it extremely difficult to justify one's reasons for working and living under conditions those adversities have created."

RESOLUTION OF THE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE PANAMA CANAL

Whereas the government and administration of the Canal Zone are matters under the legislative jurisdiction of the Subcommittee on the Panama Canal; and

Whereas the municipal services provided by the Canal Zone government, such as police protection, fire protection, customs service, postal service, and education, are significant protection for residents of the Canal Zone and have an intrinsic relationship to the safe operation and U.S. control of the Panama Canal; and

Whereas the rumor of imminent transfer of jurisdictional services in the Canal Zone is creating a situation deleterious to the morale of the employees in the Zone and is therefore damaging to the efficient operation of the Panama Canal; and

Whereas the transfer or abrogation or termination or modification by executive order of these jurisdictional functions constitute a contravention of the spirit of the applicable statues and regulations governing the Canal Zone and therefore would constitute an unwarranted arrogation of power by the executive branch and would result in a constitutional crisis and confrontation of great proportions; therefore, be it

Resolved, That it is the sense of the Subcommittee that no executive order, action or agreement be proposed and/or executed which would have as its effect the transfer of the control of any aspects of jurisdictional services of the Canal Zone to the government of the Republic of Panama or autonomous agencies of the government of the Republic of Panama; and be it further

Resolved, That this Subcommittee will take any and all actions necessary to stop the unwarranted arrogations of power by the executive branch should the executive branch attempt to transfer, abrogate, terminate or modify what are essentially U.S.-controlled services in the Canal Zone; and be it further Resolved, That the only means by which jurisdictional services in the Canal Zone be allowed to be transferred to the Republic of Panama or any other non-U.S. government agency be by means of treaty or legislation; and be it further

Resolved, That copies of this resolution be dispatched immediately to the President of the United States and the Secretary of State.

PREPARED STATEMENT OF FRANK A. MANSON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL SECURITY-FOREIGN RELATIONS DIVISION, THE AMERICAN LEGION

Mr. Chairman and distinguished members of the subcommittee: As recently as March 24, 1976, The American Legion National Commander Harry G. Wiles has written to President Ford expressing his concern over current efforts by certain officials of the Executive Branch to relinquish U.S. sovereignty, ownership and control of the U.S. Canal Zone.

The issue of sovereignty in 1976 transcends strictly the hemispheric relationships of the past. In this age, the pressures and influences of super-power relationships have become zeroed on this narrow waterway which serves as an open crossroad for U.S. and world-wide shipping.

The Panama Canal must remain open and available in the long term interest of the maritime nations.

The economic future of the United States heartland with its newly built McClelland-Kerr Canal joining the Mississippi to the Oklahoma-Kansas boundary, is increasingly dependent on the free and unrestricted sealanes in the Gulf of Mexico, the Caribbean and the Panama Canal. These sealanes are actually lifelines for survival on an increasingly inter-dependent planet.

The economic security of the United States is inextricably interwoven with its rivers, and seaways opening such vast resource areas as the Ohio Valley, the Tennessee Valley and the newly developing Arkansas Valley to world-wide markets. Seaborne commerce is the competitive answer to international trade. Trade is a deterrent to war, and an incentive for peace.

The advent of containerized shipping utilizing the inter-modular mode has opened new and promising vistas of commerce. In fact, it is completely revolutionizing the shipping industry.

Few Americans realize that about 70% of the cargo moving through the Panama Canal either originates within or is destined for U.S. ports, and that U.S. container ships represent some 55% of total canal transits for that type of modern cargo ship.

Contrary to the projections of those who have spent too much effort on past trading patterns, the combination of navigable waterways and containerized shipments point to an increased use of these strategic waterways.

Militarily, these same Caribbean, Gulf and Canal waters give mobility, flexibility, versatility and economy to U.S. forces at a time when U.S. taxpayers are crying out for maximum defense at the minimum cost. The Panama Canal enables the rapid deployment of ships from Atlantic to Pacific and back again. History has repeatedly demonstrated the logic and the urgency of such a deployment capability. Heavy canal usage during the conflicts of World War II, Korea and Vietnam, both by combatants and military related traffic, bear witness to the canals military value.

Politically, we are witnessing the advent of Marxist leadership into the Panama area. This is an ominous development when considered with the latest threats against Puerto Rico, Guantanamo Bay and the Canal Zone itself. The latest intelligence indicates over 2,000 Cuban "workers" have been sent to Panama to help Gen. Omar Torrijos in his determination to liberate the U.S. Canal Zone. What use is Castro planning for his thousands of Angola veterans? Where this Marxist penetration will end is anyone's guess. But the "workers" are now on location. How does one placate the implacable-satiate the insatiable. Sometimes "no trespassing" signs will suffice.

The U.S. Canal Zone stands as a symbol of U.S. will on our 200th birthday. Panamanian citizens listening to the sounds of nearing drummers, ponder their own destiny. They see thousands of Cubans and arms arriving. Many of the enlightened Panamanians are undoubtedly asking themselves what life is like in East Europe, and in such far away places as Latvia, Lithuania and in nearby Cuba where the people have been liberated by Marxist regimes.

On the matter of sovereignty, Isthmus history has been well documented by the U.S. Congress. Suffice to say, the question of sovereignty of the U.S. Canal Zone was decided by the Hay-Bunau-Varilla Treaty of 1903 which not only gave complete sovereignty in perpetuity so that the United States citizens would be persuaded that it was sound to invest their tax dollars in such a high risk venure which thus far had been marked by the failures of other nations. In the same Treaty of 1903, the Republic of Panama acknowledged that the