There being no objection, the Clerk tions in that section relating to eligible orread the bill, as follows: phans.

H.R. 3079

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, for the purposes of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Mrs. Eleni Bacola Ciacco, doctor of medicine, shall be held and considered to have been lawfully admitted to the United States for permanent residence as of December 19, 1957.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

MISS ROSA BASILE DESANTIS The Clerk called the bill (H.R. 3765) for the relief of Miss Rosa Basile DeSantis.

SEC. 2. For the purposes of sections 203 (a) (2) and 205 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Panote Hadjichristofas shall be held and considered to be the natural-born alien son of Mr. and Mrs. Edward J. Terzian, citizens of the United States: Provided, That the natural parents of the beneficiary shall not, by virtue of such parentage, be accorded any right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

SEC. 3. Section 205 (c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, relating to the number of petitions which may be approved, shall be inapplicable in these cases.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

ENZO (ENZIO) PEROTTI The Clerk called the bill (H.R. 4926)

There being no objection, the Clerk for the relief of Enzo (Enzio) Perotti. read the bill, as follows:

H.R. 3765

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, in the administration of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Miss Rosa Basile DeSantis may be classified as an eligible orphan within the meaning of section 101 (b) (1) (F) of the Act, and a petition filed in her behalf by Santa DeSantis, a citizen of the United States, may be approved pursuant to section 205(b) of the Act, subject to all the conditions in that section relating to eligible orphans.

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to recon

sider was laid on the table.

MRS. MARIA FINOCCHIARO The Clerk called the bill (H.R. 4211)

for the relief of Mrs. Maria Finocchiaro.

Mr. TALCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that this bill be passed over without prejudice.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from California?

There was no objection.

MICHAEL HADJICHRISTOFAS, APHRODITE HADJICHRISTOFAS, AND PANIOTE HADJICHRISTOFAS

The Clerk called the bill (H.R. 4464) for the relief of Michael Hadjichristofas, Aphrodite Hadjichristofas, and Paniote Hadjichristofas.

Mr. TALCOTT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that this bill be passed over without prejudice.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to Is there objection to the request of the request of the gentleman from California?

There was no objection.

CHIZUYO HOSHIZAKI

The Clerk called the bill (H.R. 4928) for the relief of Chizuyo Hoshizaki.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that this bill be passed over without prejudice.

the request of the gentleman from Iowa? The SPEAKER. Is there objection to There was no objection.

DIOSDADO F. ALMAZAN

The Clerk called the bill (H.R. 5006) for the relief of Diosdado F. Almazan. There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill, as follows:

H.R. 5006

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That Diosdado F. Almazan, who lost United States citizenship under the provisions of section 401(e) of the Nationality Act of 1940, may be naturalized by taking prior to one year after the effective date of this Act, before any court referred to in subsection (a) of section 310 of the Immigration and Nationality Act or before any diplomatic or consular officer of the United States abroad, the oaths prescribed by section 337 of the said Act.

From and after naturalization under this Act, the Diosdado F. Almazan shall have the There being no objection, the Clerk same citizenship status as that which exread the bill, as follows: isted immediately prior to its loss.

H.R. 4464

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed, and a motion to recon

sider was laid on the table.

America in Congress assembled, That, in the administration of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Michael Hadjichristofas and Aphrodite Hadjichristofas may be classified as eligible orphans within the meaning of MARIA DEL ROSARIO DE FATIMA section 101 (b) (1) (F) of the Act, upon approval of petitions filed in their behalf by Mr. and Mrs. Edward J. Terzian, citizens of the United States, pursuant to section 205(b) of the Act, subject to all the condi

LOPEZ HAYES

The Clerk called the bill (H.R. 5457)

for the relief of Maria del Rosario de for the relief of Maria del Rosario de Fatima Lopez Hayes.

There being no objection, the Clerk read the bill, as follows:

H.R. 5457

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, for the purposes of sections 101 (a) (27) (A) and 205 of the Immigration and Nationality Act, the minor child, Maria del Rosario del Fatima Lopez Hayes, shall be held and considered to be the natural-born alien child of Mary E. Hayes, citizen of the United States: Provided, That the natural parents of the beneficiary shall not, by virtue of such parentage, be accorded any right, privilege, or status under the Immigration and Nationality Act.

With the following committee amendment:

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert in lieu thereof the following:

"That, in the administration of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Maria del Rosario de Fatima Lopez Hayes may be classified as an eligible orphan within the meaning of section 101(b) (1) (F) of the Act, and a petition filed in her behalf by Mary E. Hayes, a citizen of the United States, may be approved pursuant to section 205(b) of the Act, subject to all the conditions in that section relating to eligible orphans."

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That, in the administration of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Mary Francis Crabbs (Koh, Mi Sook) may be classified as an eligible orphan within the meaning of section 101 (b)(1) (F) of the Act, upon approval of a petition filed in her behalf by Reverend and Mrs. Robert Crabbs, citizens of the United States, pursuant to section 205 (b) of the Act, subject to all the conditions in that section relating to eligible orphans. Section 205 (c) of the Immigration and Nationality Act, relating to the number of petitions which may be approved, shall be inapplicable in this case.

Amend the title so as to read: "A bill for the relief of Mary Frances Crabbs."

With the following committee amendment:

Page 1, line 4, strike out the names "Mary Francis Crabbs (Koh, Mi Sook)" and insert the name "Mary Frances Crabbs".

to.

The committee amendment was agreed

The bill was ordered to be engrossed and read a third time, was read the third time, and passed.

The title was amended to read as follows: "A bill for the relief of Mary Frances Crabbs."

and modes of relief therefrom, whether they be to those in the military services by paymasters, based on errors and/or false information; whether they be from lack of inadequate insurance in the warehousing and transporting of goods of the military, including regulations specifying limitations on the amounts thereof; or whether it be from overpayment due to lack of knowledge on the part of the Dual Employment Act, or for other causes.

The Comptroller General, in testifying on April 24, 1963 before the House of Representatives Committee on Post Office and Civil Service's Subcommittee on Manpower and Utilization, included the following excerpt:

"Selective audits, by the GAO and the military services, of military pay allowances expenditures disclosed over 1 million overpayments to servicemen, totaling $100 million during fiscal years 1957 through 1961." About 18 percent or $18 million of identified overpayments could not be recovered. "We estimate that there were also about 500,000 underpayments of about $22 million during these years-"

Overpayments are a function of responsibility as well as accountability on the part of the paymaster, whereas underpayments are usually taken care of by the military personnel themselves recognizing they have been shortchanged.

Certainly no civilian or military paymaster should be relieved of responsibility if he is accountable. I believe we can all agree on this principle. Likewise, it's most difficult as these private bills come through the Congress, to believe that "GI's" of years of experience do not know when they are drawing on the wrong "fogie" or are being dually employed, or in general, are simply "overpaid."

Certainly if they are to be forgiven routinely, it would be an adjunct to the various services, and save much time in Congress, if rules and regulations were drawn up and adopted, including the necessary legislation, and if we must relieve responsibility from those that are accountable.

I would appreciate your comments as to this total situation and all facets thereof, including suggested guidance for the responsible legislative committee and/or the duly constituted "objectors" on both sides of the aisle, at the earliest practicable date. Respectfully submitted,

DURWARD C. HALL,
H. R. GROSS,

BURT L. TALCOTT,
Members of Congress.

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY, Washington, D.C., September 3, 1965. Hon. DURWARD G. HALL, House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR COLLEAGUE: In your letter of August 30, 1965, you have referred to the problem of liability due to various payments to servicemen and civilian employees of the Government which are subsequently determined to have been erroneous. As you know, the Committee on the Judiciary and, in particular, its Subcommittee on Claims is required to deal with this problem on a continuing basis. Overpayments occur from a variety of situations. You have noted the case where an individual mistake is made in a pay account and I gather from your remarks that you feel that the certifying officer in such a case should be held to a greater degree of responsibility. From the cases coming before the committee, it is possible to say that in some cases, the individual employee who made the error has been held responsible but, in many instances, the error is discovered years later when this kind of

determination as to who may have made the initial determination is all but impossible.

Another more difficult aspect of the socalled overpayment problem occurs when official action on the part of a department is subsequently ruled to have been improper, although, until that determination is made, it is clothed with all of the indications of legality and official sanction that would normally be given to governmental action. It is in these cases that the Congress is often faced with a request to relieve a group of individuals. During each Congress since 1959, this committee has sought to evolve a system under public law which would provide a means to review overpayment cases and provide for a waiver of liability as an alternative to congressional consideration. ever, this mode of procedure has not yet been successful.

Your letter also refers to the problem of losses suffered by military and civilian personnel due to the damage and destruction of their personal property while in storage under Government contract. Here again, the committee has recommended public legislation to provide for payment for a reasonable portion of the property lost. The subcommittee has studied this situation in depth in connection with the legislation it has proposed. It is my personal opinion that the question of adequacy of insurance should be the subject of further study. It is my understanding that the insurance companies derstanding that the insurance companies have shown no inclination to write policies which would, in effect, insure military and civilian personnel for property losses over and above that assumed by the Government. In other words, there is no policy which would provide for a deductible amount for the Government adjudication so as to provide a more reasonable premium rate for Government personnel in this situation. The committee also questions the adequacy of the warehousing facilities which are being used by the Government. The frequency of warehouse fires would seem to indicate a deficiency in this respect.

Recent amendments of the dual employment statutes give promise of a reduction in cases where an individual after years of service is informed that he must refund everything that he has earned as a civilian employee. It is my impression that personnel officers of the Government have now become more familiar with the implications of the statutes and their application to retired personnel of the military services. In many of the cases that have previously come before the committee, the individuals were advised that they could be hired under the dual employment statute after a review of the law and the court decisions, and then some years later a determination was made that the Dual Office Act barred their employment.

Your letter referred to the testimony of the Comptroller General concerning overpayments in a 1963 hearing before a subcommittee of the Post Office and Civil Service Committee. You have noted that overpayments are a function of responsibility and accountability of a disbursing or other accountable officer. The Comptroller General has been given the authority to relieve accountable officers of liability for improper or incorrect payments or loss, and for a number of years, the subcommittee has not been called upon to pass upon this type of relief.

In past years, it was necessary to have this type of liability adjusted by private bill. This authority is conferred on the General Accounting Office by sections 82a-1 and 82a-2 of title 31 of the United States Code. It is my understanding that the relief of the accountable officer does not affect the liability of the individual.

As to the individual who is subjected to liability for any one of the variety of reasons

which may occur in the Federal fiscal system, the subcommittee has attempted to evolve a standard for relief which is fair both to the Government and to the individual. In this connection, the subcommittee has required that the overpayment be the result of an error on the part of the Government which was made without the knowledge of the individual concerned and without fault on his part. Further, the money must have been received in good faith on the part of that individual. Finally, it has been required that there be a showing that repayment will result in an unfair and tangible hardship to that individual. The subcommittee has, therefore, sought to condition relief upon the establishment of these objective standards. I hope that my comments are of some assistance to you, and I am sure that the members of the subcommittee would welcome any suggestions you may have concerning the variety of problems which are brought before it in the form of requests for legislative relief. Sincerely yours,

ROBERT T. ASHMORE, Chairman, Subcommittee No. 2.

ANGELO IANNUZZI

Mr. FEIGHAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's desk the bill (H.R. 3128) for the relief of Angelo Iannuzzi, with an amendment of the Senate thereto and concur in the Senate amendment.

The Clerk read the title of the bill. The Clerk read the Senate amendment as follows:

Strike out all after the enacting clause and insert: "That, in the administration of the Immigration and Nationality Act, Angelo Iannuzzi shall be held and considered to be within the purview of section 101 (b) (1) (B) of that Act.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ohio? There was no objection.

The Senate amendment was concurred in.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

ZENAIDA QUIJANO LAZARO Mr. FEIGHAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's desk the bill (H.R. 2305) for the relief of Zenaida Quijano Lazaro, with an amendment of the Senate thereto and concur in the Senate amendment. The Clerk read the title of the bill. The Clerk read the Senate amendment as follows:

Page 1, line 11, after "That" insert: "if the said Zenaida Quijano Lazaro is not entitled to medical care under the Dependents' Medical Care Act (70 Stat. 250),".

The Speaker. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ohio? There was no objection.

The Senate amendment was concurred in.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

FACILITATING ADMISSION OF
CERTAIN ALIENS

Mr. FEIGHAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the

Speaker's desk the joint resolution (H.J. Res. 504) to facilitate the admission into the United States of certain aliens, with amendments of the Senate thereto, and concur in the Senate amendments. The Clerk read the title of the joint resolution.

The SPEAKER. Evidently a quorum is not present.

Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, I move a call of the House.

A call of the House was ordered. The Clerk called the roll, and the following Members failed to answer to their

The Clerk read the Senate amend- names: ments as follows:

[Roll No. 266] Griffiths Hanna Hawkins

Andrews,
George W.
Andrews, Glenn Hébert

Page 7, line 1, strike out all after "Naranjo," down to and including "States," in line 3 and insert: "citizens of the United States," Page 8, strike out all after line 10 over to and including line 2 on page 9. Page 9, line 3, strike out “24” and insert: Blatnik "24" "22".

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ohio? Mr. CONTE. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, can the gentleman tell us what these amendments are about?

Mr. FEIGHAN. This resolution is for the relief of adopted children who were beneficiaries of individual bills in the House.

The first amendment is technical. The adoptive parent is now a U.S. citizen.

The second amendment deletes the name of Mirjana Tomas who was the subject of H.R. 5011. Her application for suspension of deportation has been referred to the Congress.

The third amendment deletes the name of Maria Stella Pezzo Calafato who was the subject of H.R. 7290 by Mr. REID of New York. The beneficiary has married and is no longer eligible for the relief provided in the resolution.

Ashbrook

Baring

Bolton
Bonner
Brademas
Bray
Cameron

Clawson, Del
Conyers
Craley

de la Garza Farnsley Fuqua

Hungate
Jones, Mo.
Karth
Kee
Keith

Kornegay

Lindsay
McClory

Pirnie

Poage

Powell

Reifel

Resnick
Rhodes, Ariz.
Roncalio

Rostenkowski

Ryan

Saylor

Sisk

Thomas

The SPEAKER. On this rollcall 381 Members have answered to their names, a quorum.

By unanimous consent, further proceedings under the call were dispensed with.

FOREIGN ASSISTANCE AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATION BILL, 1966

Mr. PASSMAN. Mr. Speaker, I move that the House resolve itself into the that the House resolve itself into the Committee of the Whole House on the State of the Union for the consideration of the bill (H.R. 10871) making approMr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, will the priations for foreign assistance and regentleman yield?

lated agencies for the fiscal year ending

Mr. CONTE. I yield to the gentle- June 30, 1966, and for other purposes;

man.

Mr. GROSS. These bills were not on today's calendar; were they-that is the bills that the gentleman is now asking for concurrence in these amendments?

Mr. FEIGHAN. No, they were previously passed by the House.

Mr. GROSS. I thank the gentleman. Mr. CONTE. Mr. Speaker, I withdraw my reservation of objection.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Ohio? There was no objection.

The Senate amendments were concurred in.

A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

and pending that motion, Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that general debate on the bill be limited to 3 hours, one-half of that time to be controlled by the gentleman from Kansas [Mr. SHRIVER] and one-half to be controlled by myself.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to the request of the gentleman from Louisiana?

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, reserving the right to object, at the proper time I shall ask for recognition to make a point of order against consideration of the bill. I should like to be advised as to that time.

The SPEAKER. The Chair will say that if the unanimous-consent request is granted the gentleman may then asCOMMITTEE ON INTERSTATE AND sert whatever he wants to under the FOREIGN COMMERCE

Mr. HARRIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce may be permitted to sit this afternoon during general debate.

The SPEAKER. What is the number of that section?

Mr. GROSS. Section 649.

The SPEAKER. Of the authorization bill?

Mr. GROSS. Of the authorization bill, which reads as follows:

Notwithstanding any other provision of this act, the aggregate of the total amount authorized to be appropriated for use during the fiscal year 1966 for furnishing assistance and for administrative expenses under this act shall not exceed $3,360 million.

Mr. Speaker, I call attention to the report, top of page 3, where it is clearly stated:

Funds available-fiscal year 1966 foreign assistance program.

That amounts to $3,630,622,000.

Mr. Speaker, I submit that the limitation placed in the conference report clearly limits this bill to $3,360 million. The SPEAKER. What was the figure? Mr. GROSS. The limitation contained in the conference report, which is now law, is $3,360 million. The report accompanying this bill states clearly there is sought to be appropriated by this bill $3,630,622,000.

The SPEAKER. The Chair understands that the gentleman from Iowa referred to section 649 of the authorization bill?

Mr. GROSS. Section 649 of the conference report of the authorization bill.

The SPEAKER. The Chair wants to understand what the gentleman from Iowa says. The gentleman from Iowa referred to section 649 of the conference report?

Mr. GROSS. Yes.

The SPEAKER. Where does that appear in the conference report-what page?

Mr. GROSS. I do not have a copy of the conference report. I do have a copy of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD. It appears on page 10 of the conference report near the bottom of the page, three paragraphs above the bottom of the page. I would point out, Mr. Speaker, it was a new section.

The SPEAKER. That is part of section 303.

Does the gentleman from Louisiana desire to be heard on the point of order?

rules.

There was no objection.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order against consideration of The SPEAKER. Without objection, it this bill on the ground that in adoption

is so ordered.

There was no objection.

CALL OF THE HOUSE

Mr. BOW. Mr. Speaker, I make the point of order that a quorum is not present.

ing new appropriations in the amount of $3,285 million which is $75 million below the amount authorized.

Under section 645 of the basic act, and I quote:

Unexpended balances: Funds made avail

dated with appropriations made available