Слике страница
PDF
ePub

one of our States to a developing country was established, between California and Chile. This effort must be expanded.

Accordingly, we are encouraging the establishment of an Executive Service Corps. It will provide American businessmen with an opportunity to furnish, on request, technical and managerial advice to businessmen in developing countries.

During the present year, the possibilities for mobilizing increased private resources for the development task will be developed by the Advisory Committee on Private Enterprise in Foreign Aid established under the Foreign Assistance Act

of 1963.

In this connection, two specific legislative steps are recommended: One, legislation to provide a special tax credit for private investment by U.S. businessmen in less-developed countries; two, additional authority for a final installment of the pilot program of guaranteeing private U.S. housing investments in Latin America.

Fourth. We will continue to seek greater international participation in aid.

Other free world industrial countries have increased their aid commitments since the early 1950's. There are indications that further increases are in store. Canada recently announced that it expects to increase its aid expenditures by 50 percent next year. A 1963 British white paper and a French official report published in January 1964 point in the same direction. Other nations have reduced interest rates and extended maturities on loans to developing countries.

Of major importance in this effort are the operations of the International Development Association. Under the agreement for replenishing the resources of this Association, which is now before the Congress for approval, other countries will put up more than $1.40 for every dollar the United States provides to finance on easy terms development projects certified as sound by the World Bank-projects which the developing countries could not afford to pay for on regular commercial terms. This is international sharing in the aid effort at its best. For, to the extent we furnish funds to IDA, and they are augmented by the contributions of others, the needs of developing countries are met, thus reducing the amounts required for our own bilateral aid programs.

Under the program before you the United States would be authorized to contribute $312 million over a 3-year period. Against this other countries have pledged $438 million which will be lost in the absence of the U.S. contribution. Action is needed now so that the Association may continue to undertake new projects even though the first appropriation will not be required until fiscal year 1966.

I urge the Congress to authorize U.S. participation in this continued IDA subscription.

Fifth. Let us insist on steadily increasing efficiency in assistance operations. After careful study, I have decided to continue the basic organization of aid

operations, established after intensive re-
view in 1961.
erations will continue to be centered in
the Agency for International Develop-
ment, military assistance operations in
the Department of Defense. Both will
be subject to firm foreign policy guid-
ance from the Secretary of State.

Economic assistance op-
Economic assistance op-

STEPS TO INCREASE EFFICIENCY OF AID

One officer, Assistant Secretary of State Mann, has been assigned firm policy control over all aspects of our activities in Latin America.

Full support will be given to the newly created Inter-American Alliance for created Inter-American Alliance for Progress Committee which is designed to strengthen the aspect of partnership in

the Alliance.

The AID Administrator has instructions to embark on a major program to improve the quality of his staff-and to reduce the total number of AID employees by 1,200 by the end of fiscal year 1965. The AID Administrator has been directed to continue to consolidate AID missions with U.S. Embassies and, wherever possible, to eliminate altogether separate AID field missions.

The Secretary of Defense has been directed to continue to make substantial reductions in the number of personnel assigned to military assistance groups and missions.

In this connection, I recommend two specific legislative steps: One, legislation to provide the AID Administrator with authority to terminate a limited number of supervisory and policymaking employees notwithstanding other provisions of law, and to extend the existing Foreign Service "selection out" authority to other personnel.

This is essential if the Administrator is to carry out my desire-and that of the Congress-that he improve the quality of the AID staff, and at the same time, reduce its total size.

Two, legislation to permit outstanding U.S. representation on the InterAmerican Alliance for Progress Committee under the leadership of Ambassador Teodoro Moscoso.

Finally, I am appointing a general advisory committee, as suggested by Senator COOPER and others, on foreign economic and military assistance problems. It will be composed of distinguished private citizens with varied backgrounds and will serve as a continuing source of counsel to me. In addition to its general responsibility the Committee will examine aid programs in individual countries. These reviews will be made by members of the advisory committee, augmented as necessary by additional persons. I would hope that at least four or five country reviews, including two or three in Latin America, will be completed in the present year.

We wish to build a world in which the weak can walk without fear and in which even the smallest nation can work out its own destiny without the danger of violence and aggression.

This program, based on the principle of mutual help, can make an essential contribution to these purposes and objectives which have guided our Nation across the difficulties of these dangerous years.

I recommend this program to the judgment and the conscience of the Congress in the belief that it will enlarge the strength of the free world; aid in frustrating the ambitions of Communist imperialism; reduce the hazards of widespread conflict; and support the moral commitment of freemen everywhere to work for a just and peaceful world.

LYNDON B. JOHNSON. THE WHITE HOUSE, March 19, 1964.

[blocks in formation]

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

There was no objection.

Mr. ALBERT, Mr. Speaker, the foreign aid message of the President is honest, realistic, and practical. Without mincing any words, it says that foreign aid is indispensable to our security. But it also says that foreign aid must be given on a selective basis, to those countries which are really trying to pull themselves up by their own bootstraps. It says that other wealthy nations should bear more of the foreign aid burden. It says that whenever possible U.S. assistance should be reduced and brought to an end.

According to the message, 14 countries are now reaching the point where they can support themselves without our help. It would be unwise from a diplomatic standpoint to call those countries by name, or to fix a specific date for the end of our aid. But the President is determined to speed the transition from U.S. aid to self-support, and I am confident that we will see considerable progress in this direction in coming months.

For the next fiscal year the President is requesting $3.4 billion, which is the amount available in this fiscal year, and the smallest request ever made for foreign aid. This does not mean that the President is cutting the program below what is essential. The stakes are too big for that kind of penny ante.

It does mean that the President is not

A PROGRAM TO STRENGTHEN THE FAMILY OF THE playing the usual game of asking for

FREE

I am convinced this program will enable the United States to live in a turbulent world with a greater measure of safety and of honor.

There is in our heart the larger and nobler hope of strengthening the family of the free, quite apart from our duty to disappoint the evil designs of the enemies of freedom.

more than you need in order to compromise on an amount you can live with.

I commend the President for making this honest and realistic request, and for presenting a message which should help to restore public confidence in foreign aid.

We now have the basis for renewed support in the House this year for this vital arm of our foreign policy.

[blocks in formation]

FOREIGN AID RECOMMENDATIONS

OF PRESIDENT JOHNSON

Mr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House

for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection

which have democratic governments be strengthened. We are engaged in a battle for men's minds. Democracy works best where there is hope for the future; communism is the politics of despair and can best take over when the people lose faith in their future. Our aid programs have strengthened democracy in many nations by providing them with hope for the future.

President Johnson is to be congratulated upon the new and bold approach of his Executive Service Corps. It is a challenge to American private business to help our country through this difficult period in world history.

Let us, the Members of Congress, support this worthy program. Mr. FRASER. Mr. Speaker, the House to the request of the gentleman from has received from the President his message on foreign aid. The President's statement is excellent. With a miniWith a miniMr. BOGGS. Mr. Speaker, President mum of words it deals wisely with several major concerns which the Congress has expressed about the foreign aid pro

Louisiana?

There was no objection.

Johnson's foreign aid recommendations are, in my opinion, a hardheaded, commonsense, fiscally prudent appraisal of

what is necessary for the free world's and our own survival. It merits strong bipartisan support.

Several points stand out in the message:

First. Our sister nations in the free world are stepping up their own contributions to foreign aid for underdeveloped countries.

Second. We are emphasizing more than ever before the indispensable role which private enterprise must play in the developing nations. I hope that phase of the program is enacted first.

Third. We are rapidly reducing the number of free nations which must rely on our military assistance funds for self

defense.

I commend the President on his mes

sage.

Mr. ZABLOCKI. Mr. Speaker, I join the distinguished majority leader and Chairman MORGAN in commending the President for his message on foreign aid. It is a realistic, forthright, and clearcut statement of the policy, direction, and intent of our U.S. foreign assistance to cooperating nations.

The amount of $3.4 billion, $1.1 billion less than requested last year, reflects a truly realistic approach.

The decision to concentrate U.S. assistance where it will produce the best results, to cut back supporting assistance, to utilize private initiative, and to increase efficiency in assistance operations, should rally support for the AID legislation.

Although the message does not contain all of the improvements desired, it is a most praiseworthy, positive approach to strengthening our foreign aid program.

Mr. MATSUNAGA. Mr. Speaker, the President has recommended an austerity foreign aid program, conforming to his economy program for the Federal Government. Congress cannot reduce it further without endangering the balance of power against communism in the underdeveloped countries.

It is in our national interest that the underdeveloped countries remain free of Communist influence and that those

[blocks in formation]

Often it is said that the United States is trying to do too much for too many through its programs of assistance to other nations. The President's message makes abundantly clear that apart from educational and technical assistance which necessarily goes to many nations, the bulk of our aid is going to a very few nations-nations who are deserving of tion or their own success at self-help. our aid because of their strategic loca

The President's statement contains many important proposals. He emphasizes the need to strengthen the role of private enterprise in our development efforts, and proposes a new Executive Service Corps and a tax credit for investments made in less-developed countries. Steps to strengthen administration of AID accompanied with a reduction in personnel, emphasis on increased help from other nations, and a plea for our support of the new IDA authorization round out one of the most effective and concise statements on foreign aid which we have received for some time.

Mr. Speaker, a few can quarrel with the objectives outlined in this program for fiscal 1965. What must be done in this House-this year-is to decide whether or not we are going to turn our back on the rest of the world, or whether we will shoulder the responsibilities to which we have fallen heir since the end of World War II. That question must be faced firmly, and now. meet head on the steady erosion of support for the aid programs and the mounting attacks by those who offer no alternative course of action. We must decide whether this bill and the companion appropriation measures are going to be the

We

subject of an accommodation with those who are bent on destroying one of the United States most effective weapons in the struggle for freedom, or whether the House will take to itself the full responsibility for resolving these questions after full and complete debate.

Mr. Speaker, the President's message on foreign aid graphically describes the nature of the decision which must be made by the House during the coming months when he says that:

We will be laying up a harvest of woe for us and our children if we shrink from the task of grappling in the world community with poverty and ignorance.

Mr. ALGER. Mr. Speaker, the foreign aid message is fallacious. It is not supported by the facts of foreign aid as it has developed over the years. On the contrary, foreign aid has become, as this message indicates it will continue, selfcontradictory and self-defeating.

Even a cursory study of the President's message proclaims its errors. Let us examine it.

[blocks in formation]

We will be laying up a harvest of woe for us and our children if we shrink from the task of grappling in the world community with poverty and ignorance.

that communism breeds in poverty. It Here again the fallacious assumption does not, as history clearly shows. It feeds on ignorance, not poverty. There here again rests on a fallacious premise. is a great difference. The entire message

This fallacy is compounded by what follows:

They flourish wherever we falter. If we default on our obligations, communism will expand its ambitions.

We have already faltered on our obligations to the freedom loving and our allies, by outright subsidy, trade, aid, and deals with the implacable enemy, so that we feed, cultivate, and arm the Communists. Our friends are hard pressed to understand, therefore, our castigation of their trading with Castro. We act foolish and our friends see this. Our foreign aid to Communists is part of the measure of this foolishness.

The President goes on:

It is against our national interest to tolerate waste or inefficiency or extravagance in any of these programs. But it is equally

repugnant to our national interest to retreat from our obligations and commitments while freedom remains under siege.

After admitting that we are against waste and inefficiency, the President seems to make it plain that if these are part of foreign and obligations, it is all right.

The endless examples of waste, corruption, privately padded bank accounts and bad judgment suggest to our world neighbors that we lack judgment, have an inexhaustible source of money, and welcome the opportunity to give it away. Of course, we lose their respect and fail to attain any goal but that of looking foolish.

It may be as the President then says: Other nations are needed in this enterprise of mutual help. Encouraging signs exist that the process of sharing the burden is steadily growing.

If others do participate we can expect some sense being introduced to correct our extravagance. Even so, we should lead, not be disciplined by others.

If we abandoned all foreign aid to the Communists, socialists, and neutrals; if we offered our help only on a self-help basis, by letting others earn our help, for which they could pay and keep their selfrespect, we might salvage a measure of the prestige we have lost. Then it might be agreed as the President next says:

The best way for the United States to stim

ulate this growth and to broaden this part

nership in freedom is to make our own example an incentive to our friends and allies.

Foreign aid must be stopped. Only friends should be helped, only those who value and practice freedom in a democratic form of society. The help then given can be whatever projects the benefited countries want, and then only with the major contribution made by themselves. We could, when asked, provide advice and technical help-the rest would be up to the recipient nation.

But first and foremost our national

leaders, the President most of all, owe the American people, an explanation of

how our gifts to Communists help the

cause of freedom.

How is freedom strengthened when we give aid to and help to strengthen governments which do not express the will of the people or hold their people in slavery? What answer do you give, Mr. President, to the fact brought out in hearings before the Appropriations Committee last year which follows?

Testimony revealed that our aid program is being continued in countries where one of the following illegal actions has occurred:

A dictator has taken over control of the country.

though she does receive assistance indirectly from us through the United Nations.

Specifically, how does a gift of $25 million of wheat to Russia converted into ethyl alcohol to make weapons of war benefit the United States? Such a gift makes the earlier scrap iron to Japan look quite innocent by comparison. If treason is giving aid and comfort to the enemy, wherein does aid to Communists differ from treason, and since when was not treason a crime against the Constitution of our Nation? It is time for an accounting, Mr. President. How about it?

[blocks in formation]

There was no objection.

Mr. CELLER. Mr. Speaker, as chairman of the Committee on the Judiciary, I wish to announce that on April 22 next at 10:30 a.m. the full Committee on the Judiciary will start hearings on Bible reading and prayer in the public schools and other places. I wish to announce that 144 resolutions have been filed with the committee taking some 35 different forms with 103 sponsors, indicating rather widespread interest in this very important topic. The nature and importance of the subject requires that the committee have the best thinking of all schools of thought in its consideration of the pending resolutions. For that reason announcement is being made that on April 22 hearings will begin.

[blocks in formation]

Mr. DORN. Mr. Speaker, the Red A military junta has overthrown a Communist-controlled Moscow radio friendly government.

beamed to all of Central and South

A president or premier has been as- America on January 16 in Spanish ansassinated. other vicious and sinister attack upon

A newly elected President has been me and upon other Members of this prevented from taking office.

A monarch has been dispossessed by a rebel force. The hearings disclosed that 29 countries receiving U.S. aid between 1948-63 have experienced an illegal change of government. Of these 29 countries, Cuba is the only one which is not now receiving direct U.S. aid, al

Congress. Moscow radio through these cheap distortions, false propaganda, and downright lies hopes to divert the attention of the world from their aggressive design to eventually control the Panama Canal. This is an old Communist-Fascist trick to abuse and vilify those who attempt to bring the people

the truth and those who expose the schemes and machinations of the Communist conspiracy.

Mr. Speaker, the open, bold, and aggressive attack on U.S. territory, the Canal Zone, in early January, once it began was taken over and led "lock stock and barrel" by Communist agents from Red Russia, Red China, and Red Cuba. This open attack was a bid for control of the Panama Canal by the Communists. It is part of their strategic plan to seal off and box in the United States in its own backyard which, of course, would eventually result in the collapse of our leadership of the free world and leadership of the Western Hemisphere.

Mr. Speaker, the Moscow attack upon me followed almost immediately a statement I made to this House in which I pointed out Communist agitators, subversives, agents, and saboteurs were promoting mob violence and trying to undermine U.S. sovereignty over the canal. In that speech I defended President Lyndon Johnson and placed in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD a statement issued by President Johnson on the canal crisis. The following, Mr. Speaker, is part of President Johnson's statement which I inserted in the RECORD at that time:

The United States cannot allow the security of the Panama Canal to be imperiled. We have a recognized obligation to operate the canal efficiently and securely, and we intend to honor that obligation in the interest of all who depend on it.

Two days after I placed President Johnson's statement in the RECORD and charged the Communists with mob vio

lence and subversion in Panama, Moscow radio made the following attack upon me. This, Mr. Speaker, is an exact translation of its broadcast made on January 16:

IMPERIALISM IN U.S. CONGRESS (Moscow Radio in Spanish to Cuba 2330 GMT, Jan. 16, 1964)

Summary: Mr. DORN, of South Carolina, had a dream that the U.S. Congress had decided to send him on an inspection journey to the Canal Zone in Panama. After having been given a thick wad of dollars, Mr. DORN went to the airfield and flew to the Canal Zone, where he found everything quiet. But, to his amazement, instead of the Stars and Stripes which had been flying at the masthead since 1903, the flag of the Republic of Panama was flying and the Panamanians were strolling about as if they were in their own land.

Mr. DORN awakened in a cold sweat and looked around his apartment, anxiously awaiting the opening of the ordinary session of the U.S. Congress, of which he is a Member. He would then climb to the rostrum and shout with patriotic fervor: "Capitulators, you have dragged the Nation so far that in one of its parts, I mean in the Panama Canal Zone, a foreign flag is fluttering."

"Murmurs would come from the gentlemen from Texas, Florida, and Alabama who would growl: "This is against the law, treaties, and international justice."

But what is clear and unequivocal is that the continued occupation of the Panama Canal by the United States is illegal and it contradicts the principles of international law, and particularly U.S. obligations as a member of the United Nations.

The people of the Republic of Panama, with the support of all the peace-loving peo

ples in the world, demand with vigor the return of national property which was snatched from them; namely the Canal Zone. They struggle with valor and determination against the U.S. imperialists, against the Mr. Dorns and similar types. Panama must be master of the Canal Zone. The Panama Canal must be nationalized. These are now the aspirations of the Panamanian people.

Mr. Speaker, I might remind the House that Moscow Radio only attacks an American when he is working for the United States and what he says is constructive for the United States and the free world and is opposed to the diabolical plan of the Communist-controlled world to subvert and conquer the free world.

ATTITUDE OF PRESIDENT JOHNSON TOWARD NEGOTIATIONS WITH WITH PANAMA

Mr. CASEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

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

There was no objection.

Mr. CASEY. Mr. Speaker, I was interested in the interpretative report on the front page of the Washington Post this morning concerning the President's attitude toward negotiations with Panama. Of course, this reporter had to rely on hearsay, if you will, as the source of his information. He indicated that Assistant Secretary Mann might not be in accord with the President. I doubt that seriously, knowing Tom Mann as I do.

Furthermore, he indicated some of the Latin American officials felt that the image of President Johnson had deteriorated. On the contrary, I think President Johnson's image has grown vastly with all of the people of the world and especially this country in view of the fact that he shows when he feels he is right he is going to stand firm and will not give in to further erosion of our position in the Canal Zone. It is true some of the ambitions of those in Panama who would like to take over the canal may have deteriorated some, but I

say to President Johnson, "Congratulations on your stand, and I for one feel you have the full backing of the citizens of the United States."

Mr. ALBERT. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. CASEY. I certainly will.

Mr. ALBERT. I commend the distinguished gentleman from Texas for the statement he has made. I know he knows whereof he speaks, and it is a statement that should have been made. I congratulate him.

Mr. CASEY. I thank the thank the distinguished majority leader for his comments.

PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE ON
FOREIGN AID

Mr. MOORHEAD. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

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

There was no objection.

Mr. MOORHEAD. Mr. Speaker, I want to associate myself with the distinguished majority leader and the distinguished majority whip in their remarks on the foreign aid message of the President.

This is a tough message which should be well received by the Congress. According to my count on 23 occasions the President of the United States used words such as "waste," "reduction of personnel," "promotion of efficiency," personnel," "promotion of efficiency, "private business," and so on.

This message provides for reduction in requests for money. It provides for aid only to countries which are helping themselves.

It proposes a concentration of aid, the rifleshot approach, if you will, instead of a shotgun blast.

Two-thirds of the military aid would go to 11 countries. Four-fifths of the supporting assistance would go to four countries. Two-thirds of the development lending would go to six countries. This is a message which the Congress can support.

CHIEF JUSTICE EARL WARREN

LAUDED

Mr. COHELAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

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

There was no objection.

Mr. COHELAN. Mr. Speaker, today a native Californian, a distinguished jurist and a great American, Chief Jusjurist and a great American, Chief Justice of the United States, Earl Warren, celebrates his 73d birthday.

Few Americans, Mr. Speaker, have contributed so much to their country. Few have insisted on and maintained such high standards of public service. Few have been so faithful and selfless in their dedication and devotion. Few so in their dedication and devotion. Few so richly deserve our gratitude and appreciation. It is a measure of our free society-a society which Earl Warren has played such an outstanding role in defending-yet a blot on our sense of decency and fairness, that he has been so viciously vilified by uninformed extrem

ists and malicious malcontents.

Chief Justice Warren is a distinguished graduate of the University of California and its noted school of law.

As Governor of California he served for 11 years with a distinction clearly appreciated and evidenced by widespread appreciated and evidenced by widespread voter approval.

As holder of the highest judicial office in the land he has, for another 11 years, been a steadfast and unrelenting guardian of the rights of the individual citizen.

A tough and vigorous public prosecutor in his younger years, Chief Justice Warren has recognized that strict adherence to the rules of fair procedure is an indispensable condition of a free society. His pensable condition of a free society. His concern for individuals reflects not sen

timentality or softness, but a conviction that freedom affords the key alike to public welfare and the national security.

As Earl Warren's representative in Congress, Mr. Speaker, I bring him a special message of congratulations from people who remember him with particular fondness.

But congratulations are not limited to his home or his State. I know that all Members join me in paying tribute to the Chief Justice on his birthday and on the vigor with which he faces the useful years ahead. The people of this country are fortunate indeed to have this man with his rare blend of wisdom, commonsense, compassion and integrity in their highest judicial post.

Happy Birthday, Mr. Chief Justice. Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. COHELAN. I yield to my colleague.

Mr. MILLER of California. Mr. Speaker, I would like to associate myself with my distinguished colleague from Alameda County, the gentleman from California [Mr. COHELAN] in what he has said about the great and good Chief Justice Earl Warren.

Mr. ROOSEVELT. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members have 5 days to extend their remarks on the anniversary of the birthday of the Chief Justice, following the remarks of the gentleman from California [Mr. COHELAN].

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

There was no objection.

OUR PROBLEMS IN VENEZUELA

Mr. STINSON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

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

There was no objection.

Mr. STINSON. Mr. Speaker, in last night's Evening Star, there was an article by the Associated Press which perhaps outlines the problems which the United States and the other freedomloving people of the Western Hemisphere face. The article states, and I quote:

U.S. Ambassadors to Latin America are

reported to be divided over the degree to which the United States should support Venezuela's demands for action against Cuba by the Organization of American States.

The article went on to say that:

Some of our Ambassadors suggested that it might not be wise for the United States to go all out for Venezuela's proposals because this could split the OAS.

If some of our Ambassadors to Latin American countries are opposed to taking strong action against Castro, then no wonder communism is so successful in the Western Hemisphere. How discouraging for Venezuela to try to stand up against the Soviet-backed might of Cuba when her ally to the north, the United States, hesitates to take a positive stand in her behalf. How discouraging for

Venezuela and other Latin American countries when instead of opposing communism the United States imposes a naval blockade around Cuba to prevent any anti-Communist Cubans from attacking the oppressors and dictators of their homeland. No wonder the prestige of America continues to sink when some of our own diplomats are opposed to ridding the Western Hemisphere of communism. How can we expect the other nations to oppose the Communists if we, their strongest ally, refuse to act? Mr. Speaker, it is high time that the United States stops listening to the appeasers and accommodators and starts to assume the position of leadership which is our responsibility. The appeasers of the State Department and Foreign Service should be relieved of their duties and replaced with men of courage and initiative.

BACK ALLEY TACTICS IN THE BOBBY BAKER INVESTIGATION

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

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

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Speaker, the chairman of a congressional committee, allegedly investigating the activities of Bobby Baker, apparently wants to clamp the lid on that smelly mess, and he is quoted in the newspapers as saying those who oppose him are engaged in "back alley" tactics.

Well, Mr. Speaker, there must have been some chasing through "back alleys," and some "back alley" tutelage to make it possible for Baker, a page boy and former legislative employee, to gallop to a $2 million fortune at the ripe old age of 35.

Yes, let us find out what went on in the "back alleys" of the Capital, the wall-to-wall, lavender-carpeted townhouse on N Street, as well as other countinghouses in Washington, D.C., Washington, D.C., and elsewhere.

THE PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE ON FOREIGN AID

Mr. ADAIR. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

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

There was no objection. Mr. ADAIR. Mr. Speaker, we have listened with interest to the reading of this year's foreign aid message. I believe from it we may gain two quick impressions. First of all, the thing that many of us in the legislative branch have been saying and fighting for in the past many years is now vindicated, that is that there is not the need for the very large sums of money which have in recent years been requested for this program.

Mr. Speaker, we are pleased to find now that the Executive apparently finds agreement with the legislative point of view on this matter and therefore sends

up a reduced request for this year. However, the bill still seeks too much money, in addition to its other deficiencies.

A second thing, which goes along with that and should not by any means be forgotten is the fact that expenditures or prospective expenditures are not to be measured by the amount of the authorization and the appropriation requested.

We must remember that the unexpended balances still continue at very high levels and will be available for expenditures in the coming fiscal year. Thus, it is entirely possible that in spite of an apparent reduction, our expenditures may continue at the level that they have maintained in recent years.

THREAT TO THE CITRUS FRUIT

INDUSTRY IN FLORIDA Mr. GURNEY. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

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

There was no objection.

Mr. GURNEY. Mr. Speaker, down in the Sunshine State of Florida, our No. 1 industry, with the exception of tourism, is the production of citrus fruit.

Last week, the very life of this vital industry was threatened by a nefarious scheme to permit Latin American fruit to be shipped into the United States without the payment of import tariffs.

Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Speaker, the President has prepared a strong and, at the same time, a realistic foreign aid program.

He spells out the fact that the program has been adjusted to changes in the world situation. He has reduced the size of the program to $3.4 billion, which is the approximate level established by the Congress during the last session, taking into account the unexpended balances which were reappropriated.

In 17 countries, economic aid has ended.

New funds for military equipment grants are being requested for seven fewer countries for fiscal 1965 than for fiscal 1964.

The President wants to cut the number of AID employees by 1,200 by the end of fiscal 1965.

The Committee on Foreign Affairs begins hearings on the foreign aid bill on Monday morning. We are going to take a careful look at the program, and I am sure we will find that further savings will be possible.

Every one of us has to face the fact that we cannot go overboard in cutting foreign aid.

We are in the middle of a cold war and we cannot fight a cold war without foreign aid. We do not get rid of the cold war by pretending it does not exist and eliminating foreign aid.

The security of our country depends on our following the course which the

President has outlined for us.

Mrs. FRANCES P. BOLTON.

Mr.

Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to

address the House for 1 minute and to revise and extend my remarks.

The Board of Directors of the Virgin Islands Corporation which includes Secretaries Freeman and Udall, was prepared to lease Government land in that territory to shipping czar, D. K. Ludwig, who planned to import oranges from the the request of the gentlewoman from Republic of Panama to the free port of St. Croix-Saint Kroy-manufacture orange juice concentrate, then ship the product into this country duty free.

Mr. Ludwig withdrew his lease offer at the request of the White House, after that dwelling on Pennsylvania Avenue was flooded with thousands of telegrams from Florida growers. But I am suspicious the deal is only temporarily forgotten, perhaps only until November.

In this belief, I have today introduced a bill to remove the tariff exemption from any citrus product manufactured in the Virgin Islands if it contains any foreign material. Presently, the reguPresently, the regulations grant duty-free status to a manufactured product if it contains less than 50 percent foreign material.

This modification of the tariff schedules will allow Mr. Ludwig to devote his efforts hopefully, to activities more wholesome than undermining an industry which provides jobs, Government revenue, and health-giving fruit for our Nation in Florida, Texas, and Caliour Nation in Florida, Texas, and California.

FOREIGN AID

Mr. MORGAN. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute.

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

There was no objection.

The SPEAKER. Is there objection to

Ohio?

There was no objection.

Mrs. FRANCES P. BOLTON. Mr. Speaker, we have just had the message of the President of the United States read. I was particularly interested to find that in the message the President suggests that we have had some padded budget heretofore, and this time we have taken all of the padding out. I hope that is true.

We were told many times in past years that there was no padding. Now, we find that all along there has been. I have always tried to be very fair with this bill. Sometimes I have leaned so far over backwards that I have nearly fallen trying to believe all of the things we were told. One thing I have done consistently. I have tried for years to get in simple terms how much they had last year, how it was spent; how much they were asking for and for what purposes. I have asked for that information again this year, and I hope we may receive it.

I thank the Speaker for being permitted to say a few words in behalf of this bill.

AMENDING THE INTERNAL SECURITY ACT OF 1950

Mr. WILLIS. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent to take from the Speaker's desk the bill (H.R. 950) to amend the Internal Security Act of

« ПретходнаНастави »