16176 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE August 28 each year as "Save Your Vision Week"; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. MILLER of California: H.J. Res. 672. Joint resolution to authorize

the President to issue annually a proclama­tion designating the first week in March of each year as "Save Your Vision Week"; to t he Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. BAKER: H.J. Res. 673. Joint resolution to authorize

the President to issue annually a proclama­tion designating the first week in March of each year as "Save Your Vision Week"; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. BERRY: H.J. Res. 674. Joint resolution to authorize

the President to issue annually a proclama­tion designating the first week in March of each year as "Save Your Vision Week"; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. HALPERN: H .J. Res. 675. Joint resolution proposing

an amendment to the Constitution of the United States relative to disapproval of items in general appropriation bills; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. DOLE: H.J. Res. 676. Joint resolution to authorize

the President to issue annually a proclama­tion designating the first week in March of

each year as "Save Your Vision Week"; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

ByMr.KYL: H.J. Res. 677. Joint resolution directing

the National Capital Planning Commission to study and recommend changes in the laws and zoning regulations of the District of Columbia which prescribe height, use, and area limitations on buildings, and for other purposes; to the Committee on the District of Columbia.

By Mr. DERWINSKI: H . Con. Res. 214. Concurrent resolution to

authorize the President to issue annually a proclamation designating the first week in March of each year as "Save Your Vision Week"; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. BURTON: H . Con. Res. 215. Concurrent resolution to

express the sense of Congress on the need for a healthy domestic gold mining industry; to the Committee on Interior and Insular Affa.irs.

By Mr . CELLER: H . Res. 510. Resolution to grant additional

travel authority to the Committee on the Judiciary; to the Committee on Rules.

By Mr. CLEVELAND: H. Res. 511. Resolution creating a standing

Committee on Small Business in the House

of Representatives, and to grant it full au­thority in certain legislative matters; to the Committee on Rules.

PRIVATE BILLS AND RESOLUTIONS Under clause 1 of rule XXII, private

bills and resolutions were introduced and severally ref erred as follows:

By Mr. BURTON: H.R. 8300. A bill for the relief of Gordon

W. McGrew; to the Committee on the Judi­ciary.

By Mr. HAGAN of Georgia: H.R. 8301. A bill for the relief of Capt.

Robert H . Carter; to the Committee on the Judiciary.

By Mr. KLUCZYNSKI: H .R. 8302. A bill for the relief of Andl:zej

Bylina; to the Committee on the Judiciary. By Mr. MACGREGOR :

H.R. 8303. A bill for the relief of Laura G. Carbonell; to the Committee on the Judi-ciary.

By Mr. O'NEILL: H .R. 8304. A bill for the relief of Mrs.

Shiu-sun MA (King); to the Committee on the Judiciary.

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

The Foreign Aid Bill

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

HON. WILLIAMS. BROOMFIELD OF MICHIGAN

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wednesday, August 28, 1963

Mr. BROOMFIELD. Mr. Speaker, I rise to correct an erroneous impression which has caused some to criticize the Committee on Foreign Affairs on the as­sumption that this year it failed to de­vote sufficient time and study to the foreign-aid bill. The exact opposite is true.

As a member of the Foreign Affairs Committee, I am proud of the conscien­tious manner in which the committee has fulfilled its legislative responsibilities. Last year the committee held 24 days of hearings on foreign-aid legislation and spent 12 days in markup sessions to com­plete its drafting, and during the period heard 43 official and 22 public witnesses.

This year the committee devoted even more time and energy to this important foreign policy legislation, beginning its hearings on April 5 and ordering the bil1 reported on August 6, after spending 4 months in intensive study, consideration, and hard work. During those 4 months the committee received testimony in 38 sessions from 63 official and 42 public witnesses, following with 19 sessions for amending the bill.

During the markup sessions 100 amendments were proposed and consid­ered. Forty-six of them were approved, more than doubling the size of the bill. Each and every member had as much time as he needed for presentation of his views and the offering of amendments. I want to stress that many of the most sig­nificant and important amendments

originated with minority members, all receiving bipartisan support, and some of them were adopted unanimously.

Some of the testimony received by the committee was classified by the executive branch and could not be published for security reasons, but the printed hearings number over 1,700 pages. The committee also received from the executive nearly 2,000 pages of presentation data which required careful study and analysis. I think all this adds up to pretty good evidence that the committee regarded and discharged its responsibilities.

Our attendance record was excellent. For this I believe a large share of credit is due our distinguished chairman, Dr. MORGAN. We have come to hold him in affectionate esteem for his unfailing good humor and his absolute fairness in presiding. Under such a chairman, com­mittee work becomes a pleasurable duty, and it is easy to understand why Mem­bers participate with enthusiasm in the committee sessions. Because of the scope and complexity of the foreign aid program, every staff member receives specific assignments to help committee members. This is done on a nonparti­san basis. As a member of the minority, I can state that this has worked out well and efficiently, for under the committee rules any of us is entitled to the services of any staff member on committee work. In referring to the long hours devoted by the committee members to the foreign aid legislation, I also want to express my appreciation for the loyal and efficient dedication to our assistance displayed by all the members of the committee staff.

Mr. Speaker, now that I have said all this, I believe my colleagues will under­stand my taking the floor to correct the charge, even though it has been made by only a few that the committee has been remiss in the time and study it gave the foreign aid bill. No major legislation

has received better examination, study, and careful effort to produce improve­ment.

Save Your Vision Week

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

HON. E. Y. BERRY OF SOUTH DAKOTA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wednesday, August 28, 196~

Mr. BERRY. Mr. Speaker, I have in­troduced, for appropriate reference, a joint resolution. to authorize and request the President of the United States to issue a proclamation declaring the first week in March of each year to be Save Your Vision Week. In so doing, I am cognizant of the fact that various and sundry organizations have, for promo­tional purposes, designated days, weeks, months, and years as reminders of vari­ous good causes.

The idea of Save Your Vision Week goes back as far as 1927. Since then the Governors of practically every one of the 50 States have on one or more occasions issued such a proclamation, and the mayors of our larger municipalities as well as some of the smaller ones have done likewise. However, we are prone to take some of the best things in life for granted, and therefore, to neglect them. God's gift of eyesight is one of these.

We are concerned with juvenile de­linquency and school dropouts, and well we should be. Where surveys have been made, the results have uniformly shown that the dropout or the delinquent had an uncorrected visual problem. How much this contributed to the final result it is difficult to say, but c~rtainly it is a factor which can and should be cor.-

1963 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 16177 rected, and the ip:lp_or_tance 9f · -..yh~ch should be brought home to the American people. ·

We are all appalled by the colossal amounts of damage-suffered ill highway accidents and the loss of life. · Again, there are no accurate statistics to show what part faulty vision played in the tragic result. We do know that from 80 to 90 percent of the decisfons made by the driver of an automobile or truck are dependent upon vision. The optometric profession has carried on exhaustive studies on the subject of visual problems in highway safety. Save Your Vision Week will call attention to this impor­tant factor in the operation of motor vehicles.

During the past few years we have been fascinated with the idea of the ex­ploration of space and the realms be­yond. Aeronautics and space explora­tion present their peculiar vision prob­lems.

Therefore; Mr. Speaker; it is in the interest of our national welfare that a Presidential proclamation-should be is­sued each year calling upon the Ameri­can people in the interest of their own well-being, our national economy and defense, to not only save their vision but. to make certain that it is functioning at the highest possible level.

Save Your Vision Week

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

HON. ROBERT DOLE . OF KANSAS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wednesday, August 28, 1963

Mr. DOLE. Mr. Speaker, lam today introducing House Joint Resolution 676, authorizing and requesting the President of the United States to issue a procla­mation declaring the first week in March of each year to be Save Your Vision Week.

It has been said that most of man's knowledge of the world about him comes through his eyesight. For complete participation in the joy of living as well as in our ordinary day-to-day activities, the means by which we see-our eyes­are unquestionably one of man's most cherished possessions.

Save Your Vision Week was first ob­served in 1927 and has been sponsored annually since then by the American Optometric Association, working with other organizations to educate our cit­izens on the protection, conservation and enhancement of their vision.

Save Your Vision Week in my State of Kansas has alerted our citizens to specialized vision needs. In 1957 Kan­sas initiated a campaign entitled "Read­ing Takes Seeing" to emphasize that all schoolchildren should have their vision screened and those detected with vision problems referred to specialists for care. In 1959 the importance of vision in driv­ing was emphasized. Thousands of cit­izens !earned their seeing ability was not

CIX--1018

'UP to .par when behind the wheels of their automobiles. · · ·

The theme in 1961 was "Enjoy Golden Years," the purpose, to assist the elderly person in continuing as a functioning individu.al. uaetting Rid of Vision De­linquents" was the basis for the 1962: eampaign aimed at the estimated 50 million individuals who fair to take proper care of their eyesight.

The efficiency and productivity of in­dustry in Kansas is dependent upon the vision of its workers. Breakage, spoilage and accidents have been reduced by call­ing management's attention to the visual requirements of their plants through Save Your Yision Week pro­grams.

A close personal friend, Dr. Arthur D. Glenn from my hometown, Russell, Kans., is first vice president of the Kansas Optometric Association. He knows the potential importance of observing this special week devoted to informational messages and activities concerning a priceless possession-our vision.

The officers of the Kansas Optometric Associatfon, in addition to Dr. Glenn, are: Harold E. Ripple, Jr., Hiawatha, president; Eugene C. Jeffery, Kansas City, Kans., past president; Eugene D. Nelson, Topeka, president-elect; L.. I. Powers, Hut.chinson, second vice presi­dent; Lewis E. Mock, Jr., Dodge City, secretary; Wendell D. Waldie, Wichita, treasurer. Officers of the Women's Aux­iliary a::e: Mrs. Howard Sharpe, Atwood, president; Mrs. Franklin Reinhardt, Great Bend, first vice president; Mrs. Marvin E. Woolen, Olathe, second vice president; Mrs. L. I. Powers, Hut.chinson, third vice president; Mrs. Harold E. Ripple, Hiawatha, secretary; Mrs. Harold A. Snider, Emporia, treasurer.

Some 83 million persons-more than half of the total population, six and over-are overdue for vision examina­tions. It is known that some 51 million of them-nearly one-third the total­are in immediate need of vision care, ranging from a simple correction of their lenses to surgical attention.

The visual welfare of our Nation is a matter which should concern us all. If a few may be saved from blindness, a few more from highway accidents, and oth­ers from failure in their jobs, through "Save Your Vision Week," this resolution will have served its purpose.

Mr. Speaker, I call on my colleagues to join in support of this most important resolution, as set forth below:

Whereas vision is of the utmost importance to every individual and to the Nation as a whole; and · Whereas many Governors and mayors have, over the past 36 years, issued proclamations. calling upon their citizens to give special at­tention to vision care during the first week in March of each year; and

Whereas the Government of the United States has supported significant research to protect man's priceless gift of vision; and

Whereas the U.S. Post O:ffice Department has authorized the use of special cancella­tion stamps during that week and the pre­ceding week for the purpose of reminding our citizens that their vision demands constant care: Now, therefore, be it . Resolved by the Senate and House of Rep­resentatives of the United States of America

in Congress assembled, That the President of the United States is authorized and re­quested to issue annually a proclamation designating the first week in March of each year as "Save Your Vision Week," and in­viting the Governors and mayors of State and local governments of the United States to issue similar proclamations. The Presi­dent is further requested to consider includ­ing in such proclamation an invitation call­ing upon the press, radio, television, and other communications media, the health care professions, and all other agencies and indi­viduals concerned with programs for the improvement of vision, to unite during such week in public activities to impress upon the people of the Uni~d States the im­portance of vision to their own welfare and that of our country, and to urge their sup­port of programs to improve and protect the vision of Americans.

Freeman Notes Relationship of Agriculture and Foreign Poliey

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OP

HON. DONALD M. FRASER OF MINNESOTA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wednesday, August 28, 1963

Mr. FRASER. Mr. Speaker, Secretary of Agriculture Orville Freeman has re­cently returned from his trip to the So­viet Union and other East European na­tions. Upon returning, the Secretary made some pertinent and timely observa­tions on agricultural practices in the countries he visited.

Mr. Freeman's statements are given in a press release of the Department of Agriculture dated August 21. It deserves the attention of all Members of Congress, especially those of us who are particu­larly interested in foreign affairs and in agriculture. By unanimous consent, I hereby include this press release in the RECORD:

JUDGE COMMUNISM BY AGRICULTURAL INTENTIONS

Agriculture provides a little used, but ef­fective window through which Americans can more clearly judge the capabilities and in­tentions of Communist nations, Secretary of Agriculture- Orville L. Freeman said today.

"Agriculture, both in the Soviet Union and other Eastern European nations, is closely meshed with national policy and the overall potential of each country. Through agricul­ture, we can better understand their prob­lems and' the measures being taken to solve them. And, in doing so, we will be better equipped to formulate policies that promote our own national interests and the cause of world peace.

"In this respect, ·no point struck me more forcefully during my recent trip through Russia and Eastern Europe than the realiza­tion that food and agriculture are among the finest instruments we have for building a world based on the achievement of peaceful goals." ' The Secretary summarized his observa­tions at a press conference held after his return from a survey trip of agricultural pol­icies and programs in the Soviet Union, Po­land, Rumania, Bulgaria, and Yugoslavia. He made these points:

The prestige of the United States and of U.S. a·griculture is high, as evidenced by the

16178 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE August 28

warm welcome and generous hospitality the American group received in each country, and by the lack of incidents or signs of hostility.

While all five countries have governments that are solidly Communist they are not identical and cannot be treated as a unit. Each of the five peoples have their own hist ory and tradition, and a real spirit of n ationalism.

Trade has kept a door open to the West, and to close it now by removing Poland and Yugoslavia from the most-favored-nation status would only force greater Communist solidarity, and would deprive the United States of potential markets.

The Communist system of agriculture does not stand well in comparison to U.S. agricul­ture. The family farm system is far superior in making much more efficient use of re­sources.

Americans should not be misled, however, into overlooking the progress which Soviet agriculture is making and will continue to make.

Russia. is shifting agricultural priorities from the new lands to more intensive culti­vation of available cropland.

The people of the five countries are anxious to learn from the United States, and this country also has much to gain from recipro­cal exchanges and broader people-to-people contacts.

The Secretary returned August 13 from his factfinding study of Eastern Europe where he had discussions with the political heads of five countries. They were Premier Khru­shchev of the Soviet Union, President Gheor,ghe Gheorghiu-Dej, of Rumania, Prime Minister Todor Zhivkov, of Bulgaria, and President Tito, of Yugoslavia. In Poland; the President ·and Prime Miinster were out of the country, and Secretary Freeman talked with Vice Chairman Edward Ochab, of the Council of State, and Foreign Minister Adam Rapacki.

"In each country, the people were without exception very friendly. Wherever our party went, we were given a most cordial welcome. There was not a single instance of hostility or criticism," the Secretary said.

"Wherever I had an opportunity I talked to people on the farms, in factories and in the markets. Particularly in areas away from large cities it was evident that most of the people had seen few Americans-and never an American official. When I brought these people the greetings of the President and the American people, and expressed our hopes for a peaceful world, the reaction in­variably was an expression of friendship and a desire for peace.

"In the U.S.S.R. and the other Communist nations, American prestige is high. Perhaps no other event in recent years has impressed the peoples of these countries of our dedica­tion to the cause of peace than the agree­ment to ban nuclear testing above ground and in the atmosphere," the Secretary said.

"There is no doubt that, for these people, personal memories of the horrors and de­struction of war intensify the hope for peace. This hope dominated the expressions of peo­ple everywhere we traveled.

"In all the countries we visited, the gov­ernments are firmly and solidly in the hands of dedicated Communists. Government policy is in accord with the current party line, and dictated and carried out in accord with party principles.

"For agriculture, this means that if the officials in power decide on a certain agricul­tural policy, the whole bureaucratic mecha­nism is thrown into gear to implement that policy-whether it relates to which field crops to plant or how much fertilizer to use.

"We found evidence in each country, how­ever, that officials have learned that too

much uniformity and rigidity limits agri­cultural progress because it fails to allow for local differences and the variations of nature. As a result, more flexibility-espe­cially with regard to adaptation to climatic conditions-is being permitted. But the planning on farms and in regions still must conform to the overall plans and require­ments of the State, which determines all priorities.

"This means that if Chairman Khrushchev carries out his determination-as he indi­cated to me he would-to sizably increase his capital inputs in agriculture, there will be an increase in production, particularly grain and row crops. The Chairman indi­cated he would give strong emphasis during the next 5 years to mixed feed, fertilizer, and chemical production. It ls apparent that he is shifting agricultural priorities from the new lands, where the Russians have placed substantial amounts of virgin land into grain production in recent years, to more intensive cultivation of historic cropland.

"The five governments are solidly Com­munist, but the five nations cannot be viewed as a unit, or single bloc. Each of the five peoples has its own history and tradition-and there is a. noticeable spirit of nationalism in each country.

"Even within the bloc, Poland has never been able to carry out the Communist princi­ple of collectivization of agriculture. Be­tween 80 and 90 percent of the land is owned and worked by the stubbornly independent peasants. The official goal is to change this situation, but Communist officials are realis­tic enough not to push the transition too far or too fast.

"Yugoslavia, which is outside the bloc, and has far more significant relationships with the West, likewise has retained the ownership and operation of most of the farmland (88 percent) in the hands of the peasants-and the right to own a limited amount of land is written into the Yugo­slavian constitution. Yugoslav officials said their goal ls social (state) ownership of the land.

"They emphasize they will not seek this goal by force. or coercion, but by evolution and education-which, they say, may take 10, 20, or 50 years. It is significant, with all their penchant for 5-year plans and time­tables, that they refuse to set a timetable for this.

"These facts are very significant for the American people. It is clear that American exports to these two countries (Poland and Yugoslavia) under Public Law 480 have been a significant factor in preventing the forced socialization of the land, and thus in keeping alive a spirit of individual ownership and enterprise. Trade has kept a door open to the West, and the door is opened widest in Yugoslavia.

"In my judgment it would be a serious mistake to close this door by ending the most-favored-nation status that up · to now has been accorded Poland and Yugoslavia. To close this door would both force greater Communist solidarity and deprive ourselves of potential markets. On the other hand, by continuing the most-favored-nation treat­ment we can promote trade that is of mutual benefit, and move toward developing valuable commercial markets for American products.

"I have returned with a number of strong convictions, but none more firmly reinforced than the demonstrated superiority of the family farm system of agriculture based on private ownership of the land.

"United States and Soviet agriculture are scarcely comparable. In my conversation with Chairman Khrushchev, he said his goal is to surpass the United States as the No. 1 agricultural producer. I accepted his chal­lenge with confidence and told him the in­centive built into the family farm system will insure that it will continue as the most

powerful engine for efficient agricultural production.

"My observations convince me that the socialist system is bureaucratic and un­wieldy, and by its very nature inefficient and wasteful. There is a lack of balance, and many extremes. For example, while the Soviet Union has made definite progress in production of grain and row crops, it lags far behind in the yields and production of ani­mal products and fruits and vegetables, which require more skill at individual levels.

"In comparison, the U.S. farmer has a training and background much broader than those we met in the Communist countries. We observed few farmers in the five coun­tries who could match the American farmer with his working knowledge of agronomy, mechanics, veterinary, business management and other agricultural skills.

"We should not be misled, however, into overlooking the progress which the Soviet Union and the other Communist nations are making. It is significant progress by their own standards, and all indications are that it will continue and be accelerated in the years ahead.

"The agricultural practices we saw were, of course, their best, and many of them were impressive. Near Orenburg, we found a 22-percent protein spring wheat. In the Krasnodar region, we found sunflowers with a 46-percent oil content. In Bulgaria, we saw hybrid tomatoes which were equal or superior in quality and yield to our own. We found very good research being carried on at several research institutions.

"There also are several im.portant insti­tutional im.provements underway in the So­viet Union. They are getting technical and scientific know-how into practice more effec­tively by encouraging more local discretion and adaptation to local conditions. There are, in addition, increasing numbers of trained people, as well as more and improved machinery.

"One of the more significant weaknesses in Communist agriculture is in the storage, marketing, processing, and distribution of food commodities. Focusing on production, they are overlooking an aspect of the farm­to-dinner-table process which most Ameri­cans take for granted. This, I predict, will prove to be a serious oversight in the years ahead.

"I left the United States feeling that re­ciprocal people-to-people contacts and the exchange of information on agricultural sub­jects is of mutual benefit. I now feel this even more strongly. We found 1n Eastern Europe that the talk of exchanges met with immediate and favorable responses. We had an opportunity to see some of the effects of exchange programs, and to push for reciprocity in exchanges. And, while U.S. agriculture is far advanced in compari­son to these five countries, there are advan­tages we can gain by such exchanges.

"We can expect to get germ plasm to breed into our plants-our apples, pears, plums, alfalfas, and many forage grasses and leg­umes came originally from Russia--to ob­tain more disease and insect resistance, winter hardiness, drought resistance, and other desirable qualities. We would like to explore Siberia for cold-resistant plants and send entomologists to seek more effective biological controls for plant and insect pests, either in the form of natural enemies or in­sect diseases.

"Few people realize that the United States, through past exchange programs, already has obtained over 2,260 different plant specimens from the Plant Breeding Institute of Lenin­grad.

"I strongly recommend expanding our ex­change programs involving reciprocity to the end that both parties to the exchange bene­fit. In addition to the material gains re­sulting ftom such exchanges, there is the

1963 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 16179 increased understanding and good will which follow when people come to know each other as human beings.

"Finally, the clear evidence of increased attention to the agricultural sector in the countries we visited is a sign and a trend we should welcome and encourage. Invest­rnen ts in raising the standard of living are investments in the peaceful capabilities of these nations."

Labor's Contribution to the Free World

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

HON. DANTE B. FASCELL OF FLOR.IDA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wednesday, August 28, 1963

Mr. FASCELL. Mr. Speaker, as we prepare to celebrate Labor Day 1963 this September 2, the opportunity arises to recognize the contribution of the leader­ship and members of the U.S. labor movement to the free world. I am hap­py to take advantage of this opportunity to voice my regard and commendation for this group of patriotic American citizens.

The growth of the labor movement in the United States is a tribute to the high standards of good citizenship of its mem­bers and the outstanding examples of co­operation for mutual benefit between labor unions and management. No­where in the world can be found a more outstanding group of fellow craftsmen. United in pride of occupation, they are constantly alert to discoveries of new methods and techniques for improved standards of workmanship which con­tribute to the national good.

During the past 100 years, many of the landmarks of our national progress have been initiated and given impetus by the labor movement. Public school educa­tion came into being in our country as a result of the demands of labor leaders. School lunches, safety measures in shop and factory to cut . down accidents among workers and public-these and many more have had the support of the labor movement. The U.S. labor move­ment has always been found in the fore­front of all movements for the better­ment of our fellow man. The flourishing state of members of labor in our country stands as a monument to the democratic process at work, arousing the admira­tion-and sometimes envy-of workers the world over.

One of the most vital contributions of the labor movement has been its activi­ties in the International Labor Organiza­tion at Geneva, where both labor and management are part of the policy­making force. In addition to planning and implementing aid to workers all over the world, including the newly developed nations, such as Nigeria, representatives of U.S. labor unions have drawn world attention to the fact that in the soviet Union and .Soviet-dominated countries, there is no free labor m0-vement.

I join my colleagues and all our: citi­zens in a tribute to· and deep desire for a continued happy and progressive rela­tionship between labor and management

to the end that our Nation may maintain its security and fulflll its role as leader of the free world.

Results of a Questionnaire

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OF

HON. ROBERT McCLORY OF ILLINOIS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Wednesday, August 28, 1963

Mr. McCLORY. Mr. Speaker, recently I circulated a public opinion question­naire in more than 85,000 households in

the 12th Congressional District of Illi­nois, comprising Lake, McHenry, and Boone Counties. I am particularly pleased to report that almost 15,000 ques­tionnaires were returned with answers, comments, and-in some instances-an accompanying letter expressing indi­vidual views.

Reviewing these questionnaires and reading the many opinions has been one of the stimulating experiences of my service as a new Member of Congress. I am proud of and grateful for the over­whelming interest in good government and good citizenship which led to these responses from my constituents. And, I include the compiled opinions of the 12th Congressional District of Illinois in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, as follows:

1963 questionnaire-Final results

P ercent

Yes No

1. Do you favor a Federal income tax cut this year (check 1): A. Without a reduction in Federal spending?---------------------------------- -------- --- 14.9 B. Only if Federarspending is reduced?_------------------------ ------------------------ 85 .1

2. In relation to Cuba-A. Do you think the Cuban situation has been handled wisely?_________________________ 21.5 78.5 B. Do you favor a naval quarantine of Cuba to eliminate the Castro-Soviet threat through

economic pressure?--------------------------------------------------------------- -- 78 .8 21.2 C. Do you believe the Government should manage the news as was done in the Cuban sit-

uation?- ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- 36 .8 63 .2 3. Do you favor the creation of a joint committee of Congress to examine the President's budget

and recommend sound fiscal policies?_------------------------------------------------------ 86 .3 13 .7 4. Do you favor adoption of one of the following farm programs (check 1):

A. Rigid controls and quotas on individual production, mandatory land retirement-a strictly regulated farm economy?---------------------------------------------------- 3 .6

B. No controls, no supports, no protection-a completely free farm market?--------- ----- - Zl .4 C. Moderate and flexible price supports, voluntary large-scale land retirement-a gradual

withdrawal of Government from the farm economy?_________________________________ 69 .0 5. Does our Nation need a youth program under Federal control, such as-A. '.rhe Domestic Peace Corps? ___ :________________________________________________________ 33 .9 66 .1

B. The Youth Conservation camps?------------------------------------------------------ 48.2 51.8 6. Do you favor Federal aid to education such as-

A. Aid to public grammar and high schools?---------------------------------------------- 36. 7 63. 3 B. Aid to private and parochial grammar and high schools?------------------------------- · 17.1 82. 9 C. College construction grants?----------------------------------------------------------- 46. 4 53. 6 D. Federal scholarships for higher education?--------------------------------------------- 55. 5 44. 5 E. Federal income tax credits for parents paying tuition?________________________________ _ 73. 6 26. 4

7. Do you favor Federal subsidies to assist urban mass transportation?·------------------------- 2618 73. 2 8. Do you favor Federal civil rights legislation-

.&. To guarantee the right to vote?--------------------- ----------------------------------- 88. 3 11. 7 B. To enforce school integration?--------------------------------------------------------- 43. 3 56. 7 C. To grant equal opportunity for employment on Federal work? _____________ _:_ _________ 83. 2 16. 8

9. On foreign aid, do you favor- · · A. A sharp reduction in foreign aid spendfug? ____________________________________________ 86. 3 13. 7 B. Any foreign aid to nonalined nations?------------------------------------------------- 22. 2 77. 8

10. Do you favor hospital and nm-sing home care for people over 65 financed by increased social secul"ity taxes and increased Federal income taxes for those not under social security?_______ 28. 2 71. 8

11. Do you favor the creation of a Federal Crime Commission to investigate and intensify the war against organized crime?-------------------------------------------------------------------- 83. 2 16. 8

REA: The Future of Rural Texas

EXTENSION OF REMARKS OJ'

HON. RALPH YARBOROUGH OF TEXAS

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES

Wednesday, August 28, 1963

Mr. YARBOROUGH. Mr. President, on Monday, July 22, 1963, I addressed the annual meeting of the members of the Bartlett, Tex., Rural Electric Co­operative at Bartlett, Tex. Because of a number of requests that this speech be printed in the RECORD, I ask unanimous consent that my remarks at that meet­ing be printed today in the RECORD. . There being no objection, the speech

was ordered to be printed in the RECORD, as follows:

REA: THE FUTURE OF RURAL TEXAS

Chairman H. M. Keith, members of the Bartlett Electric Cooperative, fellow Texans, the State of Texas can be called the heart-

land of the REA. One of our proudest Texas accomplishments is that we have strung over 156,000 miles o! REA-financed lines along the Rio Grande, through the Panhandle, across the west Texas plains, on the cen­tral Texas blacklands, and among the east Texas piney woods. Our 79 active borrower rural electric co-ops serve 384,000 consumers over these lines. This is more consumers served on more miles of line than in any other State in the Union.

A great Texan, the beloved late Sam Ray­burn, sponsored the Rural Electrification Act in the U.S. House of Representatives .. It has often been said that, had the service of Mr. Sam to his country been limited to his part in passing this act alone, it would have been sufficient to give governmental immor­tality to his name.

The members of this cooperative can feel especially proud because it was here that the first REA loan in this State, and one of the first in the Nation, was approved in Sep­tember 1935, and the Bartlett Electric Co­operative, Inc., placed the first REA­finaiiced line in operation on March 9, 1936.

In February 1935, I was appointed by the late beloved Gov. Jamea V. Allred as a mem­ber of the original board of directors of the Lower Colorado River Authority of Texas,

16180 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE August· 28 which built the series of six fine dams on the Colorado River above Austin. You grew up · together. Actually, the Lower Colorado River Authority was set up by Tezas a few months before the national REA was passed by Con­gress.

Over our entire State, at the time REA was created in 1935, only 11,466 farms, or 2.3 percent of the total, were receiving central station electric service. Today, 28 years later, an estimated 223,000 farms, or 96.2 percent of all farms recorded in the State by the 1959 census of agriculture, are being served. What is more, approximately 70 percent of these electrified farms in Texas are being served by REA borrowers.

Nationally, farm electrification advanced very slowly during the 53-year period from 1882, when the first central generating sys­tem went into service, to 1935, when REA was created. Less than 11 percent of all farms in the United States had electric serv­ice in 1935. Today REA estimates that 97.6 percent of our 3.7 million farms recorded in the 1959 census are now electrified. Slightly more than half of these electrified farms are served by REA-financed electric systems.

Opponents of REA are quick to say that the original purpose of REA has already been accomplished, that virtually all the Nation's farms have electric service, and that all the additional powerplants and transmission lines rural America needs can be :financed in the free market. I doubt seriously if Mr. and Mrs. John McGuftln of New Mexico would agree with this. The McGuftlns lived on their ranch for 21 years without such 20th century conveniences as electric lights, refrigerator, television or washing macine.. They would still be without these modern "necessities" if a rural electric cooperative had not last year extended 3.5 miles of line to their ranchhouse to make them the 5-millionth consumer to receive electricity through REA loans.

Despite the fact that some of their areas have grown in population, rural electric co­operatives continue to serve the most diffi­cult and the sparsely settled areas of the Nation. Nationally the co-ops average little more than three consumers per mile of line. All but the smallest commercial utility sys­tems have, on the average, 33 consumers to each mile of their line.

The comparison from the standpoint of revenue ls even more dramatic. In 1960, REA-financed systems averaged $414 revenue per mile of line, compared to $6,580 per mile for the commercial companies. No other source of power will accept the risk and chal­lenges of serving the typical REA co-op ter­ritory. The fact that some of the original territory of REA borrowers has prospered does not abolish the responsibility or the right of the cooperatives to continue serving these areas.

The rural electric program ls good for all Americans. It· ls making tremendous con­tributions to our national strength and progress. However, numerical progress in rural electrification has obscured the fact the rural areas still have far to go before parity ls achieved. Seldom mentioned is the fact that the consumer on the lines of an average REA borrower system still has to pay almost 20 percent more for 250 kilowatt­hours used in a month than the average city consumer.

Why does this rural disadvantage exist? The truth is that it costs more to provide quality electric service to rural areas. In addition to low revenues and low density of consumers--your cooperative averages less than 1.7 consumers per mile--power require­ments in rural areas tend to be high during certain periods of the day, and often negligi­ble during the rest of the day. Rural elec­tric cooperatives, then, with relatively few commercial or large powerloads to even out power requirements, must make proportion-

ately greater investments in faolllties used only for a few hours a day. · '

That the rural electrification prograni has succeeded so well in the face of such severe obstacles is ample reason for pride on the part of all those with even a slight connec­tion with REA. The fact is that REA has succeeded · far beyond the dreams of its founders.

When REA was organized, its opponents argued that farmers would never use enough electricity to pay for building the lines. Contrary to these pessimistic views, rural consumers are using electric energy in much greater amounts than REA supporters ex­pected when the original lines were built.

On the farm alone more than 400 uses of electricity are known, at least 250 of which increase production or make farming more profitable. Use of electricity from REA­financed lines by farm and nonfarm con­sumers has more than doubled in the past 10 years. Average monthly consumption of electricity per consumer has increased from 182 kilowatt-hours in 1952 to 400 kilowatt­hours in 1962.

Rural electric cooperatives have created a new market for power that did not exist be­fore the task of rural electrification was un­dertaken. Cooperative systems purchased $97 million worth of power from the private power industry last year.

The rural electrification program has brought increased business into rural com­munities. The rural market for electrical appliances and equipment is estimated at $1 billion a year. In addition, the availability of electric power in rural areas encourages the establishment of industry and general economic development. And of course, each co-op is directly responsible for some em­ployment in its area and injection of cur­rency into local economies.

Rural electric cooperatives have made an outstanding record in repaying their loans. From its beginning REA has advanced more than $5 billion to its electrification and tele­phone borrowers. Adding its commitments, the total would be over $6 billion. Repay­ments to the Treasury have totaled more than $1.8 billion principal and interest. Loans outstanding total approximately $3.7 billion. The $1.2 billion paid on the prin­cipal ls about 25 percent of the principal borrowed. This has been repaid, plus $640 million of interest money paid to the U.S. Government over and above the principal. This interest was paid for the right to use Government funds to get started. In the long history of REA only two loans have ever been foreclosed, at a net loss of only $44,478. No bank, no Government agency, nor any other group of borrowers have ever before compiled such a record.

On January 1, 1963, REA borrowers in Texas had repaid almost $100 million on the principal of their $354 million in loans and had paid $46 million in interest. No bor­rower in Texas was overdue in payments on its REA loan, nor has any Texas borrower ever been foreclosed.

It is well that our hearts should swell with pride at the glorious history of REA, but we should never lose sight of our role in the years ahead.

Demands of tomorrow-in a dynamic, ex­panding economy-will dwarf the electric power requirements of yesterday. Anyone familiar with the electric industry knows that the demand for electricity in the Na­tion is doubling every 10 years, and on the rural systems about every 7 years. Meeting this increased demand will require continued large capital outlays. Failure to meet it is to fail to meet the needs of rural people for adequate and reliable electric power.

Rural electrification has increasingly be­come more than a matter of mechanical tech­nology. REA and REA-financed electric sys­tems have for 28 years been among the lead­ers in the battle to raise living standards in

rural areas. This period has established the rural electric co-op as a powerful · social and economic force in the development of rural life.

Rural cooperative systems have been termed "private enterprise with a built-in public conscience." This public conscience has already worked to change the face of rural America. Your actions have furnished an example to the whole world of ordinary citizens taking the initiative and shaping their future. This banding together for a common cause in a spirit of cooperation is a unique trademark of the rural electrification movement.

The success of the REA program in raising rural living standards has made it a logical choice as a leader in the rural areas devel­opment of the Department of Agriculture. The achievements of the past can be a beacon of light to lead the way for improved conditions in all rural areas.

Presently our rural economy is not progressing as rapidly as it should be. REA and REA-borrowers can contribute toward breaking this economic roadblock.

The stake of rural electric co-ops in rural areas development is obvious. Cooperatives serve rural areas. If the economic base of rural areas becomes stagnant, people move away. This has already happened in large degrees. Testimony to this is offered by 500,000 idle services on the lines of rural electric cooperatives today. If the economic base of the area served shrinks, so does the business base of the co-op.

However, if new economic opportunities are provided to hold people in the area, it means growth for the cooperative and the area as well as greater benefits to consumer­members in terms of better service at lower rates, since the electric business is a volume business.

Cooperatives have recognized this mutual interdependency and have taken steps to stimulate local economies. Many rural elec­tric systems are making remarkable progress in developing small rural industries for which the economic potential to themselves and their communities far exceeds the in­vestment required to attract the industry.

These development projects are scattered throughout the country. They include a lumber project in Idaho, a furniture factory in Kentucky, a commercial recreation en­terprise in Illinois, a meatpacking plant in Nebraska, and a wood chipping plant in Mississippi. In addition to these local in­dustries, 600 REA-financed systems report they have assisted their communities in launching a number of public facilities in­cluding hospitals, water systems, and sewer­age systems.

Remarkable progress has been made but the need for further development is great in rural America.

The role of the REA ls far from finished. Rural electric cooperatives, on the basis of their performance, have earned a perma­nent place in rural America. REA can look back upon a distinguished record of achieve­ment, but the biggest challenge lies now in the future. We know that REA and rural electric cooperatives will continue to be a social and economic force for progress in rural America.

Now that is the record of the REA for the past 28 years. But where does the REA stand in Congress today?

The House Appropriations Committee has approved $425 million for REA under the agriculture budget. The amount is enough to meet the needs for loans to local coopera­tives. But provisions have been included that will hamstring the REA and delay the loans by practically giving private power suppliers a veto over the loans. It demands tJiat a final last chance must be offered to the private supplier to offer an acceptable contract. The effect of this language would be delay and more delay. It ls to be hoped

1963 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - HOUSE 16181 that thi& private power veto over REA loans can be eliminated in the Senate.

There are some six anti-REA bills pend­ing in Congress, all but one of them spon­sored by Republicans, that would raise the interest rate on REA. This is a longtime goal of the private power companies in the continuing effort to bury REA. I intend to oppose these bills to raise the interest rate

SENATE FRIDAY, AUGUST 30, 1963

The Senate met at 9 o'clock a.m. and was called to order by the Acting Pres­ident pro tempore [Mr. METCALF].

The ACTING PRESIDENT pro tem­pore. The Senate, under previous order, will now adjourn to Tu~sday next.

ADJOURNMENT TO TUESDAY, SEPTEMBER 3, 1963

Thereupon <at 9 o'clock and 3 seconds a.m.) the Senate adjourned, under the order of Wednesday, August 28, 1963, until Tuesday, September 3, 1963, at 12 o'clock meridian.

•• ...... • • HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

FRIDAY, AUGUST 30, 1963

The House met at 12 o'clock noon and was called to order by the Speaker pro tempore, Mr. SISK.

DESIGNATION OF SPEAKER PRO TEMPO RE

The SPEAKER pro tempore laid be­fore the House the following communi­cation from the Speaker:

AUGUST 30, 1963. I hereby designate the Honorable B. F.

SISK to act as Speaker pro tempore today. JoHN W. McCORMACK,

Speaker of the House of Representatives.

PRAYER The Chaplain, Rev. Bernard Braskamp,

D.D., offered the following prayer:

Ephesians 6: 14: Stand therefore, hav­ing your loins girt about with truth, and having on the breastplate of righteous­ness.

O Thou God of our fathers and their succeeding generations, may the mind and heart of our President, our Speaker, and all Members of Congress daily be made strong and vigorous with great moral and spiritual ideals and principles.

Grant that in all their plans and la­bors, their struggles and sacrifices, they may be sustained by a radiant vision of the ultimate triumph of the forces of truth and righteousness.

We cannot foretell what the future has in store for us; but we will trust Thee and not be afraid for we have Thy divine assurance that, as our days, so also shall be our strength.

May we encourage one another as we seek to establish a commonwealth of freemen, doing justly, IOving mercy, and

o:µ REA loans. I am against all these re­cent increases in high interest ·rates on money. To raise the interest rates on REA loans would set off a chain reaction of high interest rates for everybody.

I am also a strong supporter and a co­author of the act creating the area redevelop­ment program, to bring new industry to areas of weak economy. Area redevelopment is

walking humbly with Thee in the ways of peace.

Hear us in .the name of our blessed Lord. Amen.

THE JOURNAL The Journal of the proceedings of

Wednesday, August 28, 1963, was read and approved.

SIGNING OF ENROLLED BILLS The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr.

SISK). The Chair desires to announce that pursuant to the authority granted the Speaker on Wednesday, August 28, 1963, the Speaker did on August 29, 1963, sign the following enrolled bills of the House:

H.R.1135. An act to designate the dam being constructed and the reservoir to be formed on the Des Moines River, Iowa, as the Red Rock Dam and Lake Red Rock;

H.R. 2671. An act authorizing construction of a bank protection project on the Guyandot River at Barboursville, W. Va.;

H.R. 3887. An act to authori2.e the accept­ance of donations of land in the State of North Carolina for the construction of an entrance at Great_ Smoky Mountains National Park, and for other purposes;

H.R. 4823. An act to modify the flood con­trol project for Rend Lake, Ill.;

H.R. 5222. An act to provide for the with­drawal and reservation for the Department of the Navy of certain public lands of the United States at Chocolate Mountain Aerial Gunnery Range, Imperial County, Calif., for defense purposes;

H.R. 5883. An act to correct a land descrip­tion in the act entitled "An act to provide for an exchange of lands between the United States and the Southern Ute Indian Tribe, and for other purposes";

H.R. 6710. An act to approve an order of the Secretary of the Interior canceling irri­gation charges against non-Indian-owned lands under the Wind River Indian irrigation project, Wyoming, and for other purposes;

H.R. 7500. An act to authorize appropria­tions to the National Aeronautics and Space Admi.nistration for research and. develop­ment, construction of facilities, and adminis­trative operations, and for other purposes; and

H.R. 7594. An act to designate the McGee Bend Dam and Reservoir on the Angelina River, Tex., as the Sam Rayburn Dam and Reservoir.

A LADY IN THE BALCONY Mrs. GREEN of Oregon. Mr. Speaker,

I ask unanimous consent to address the House for 1 minute and to include an editorial.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the gentle­woman from Oregon?

There was no objection. Mrs. GREEN of Oregon. Mr; Speaker,

discrimination by man evidences itself in · diverse ways-subtle and not so

important .to the R;EA. .The Senate passed. a bill for extension of the ARA program after it was knocked down by a few votes in the House. I am hopeful that the Senate ARA extension bill will be brought forward again and will be passed by the House. · ·

ARA and REA, together can build a new prosperity for rural Texas. That is the hope of the future for the rural counties in Texas.

subtle. And as Columnist Art Buch­wald, in his own inimitable way, points out in a recent column that discrimina­tion comes in varying sizes and shapes. Under unanimous consent I place in the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD a Buchwald col­umn printed in the August 29, 1963, editions of the Washington Post. Once again Mr. Buchwald, by humor rather than by the frenzied blaring of trumpets, causes the wall of rationalization for discrimination to topple:

A LADY IN THE BALCONY

(By Art Buchwald) One of the things that came out of the

march on Washington was a protest by wom­en reporters that they were discriminated against by their male counterparts at Wash­ington's National Press Club.

Miss Elsie Carper, president of the Wom­en's National Press Club, protested last Mon­day to A. Philip Randolph, chairman of the march on Washington, who was scheduled to be guest speaker at the men's National Press Club, that women would have to sit in the balcony_ during his talk.

She asked that Mr. Randolph change the site of his speech so that the men and women reporters would be alfowed to sit together.

The embarrassed Mr. Randolph turned down Miss Carper's request, though he did come out for equality for women and said he was against discrimination of any kind. He went ahead and gave the talk to an all-male audience with a few women sitting in the balcony.

The question of discriminating against women has always been a ticklish one in the Nation's Capital. Although the majority of members of the National Press Club consider that some of their best friends are women, the feeling is that women aren't ready to take their places as men's equals, and no amount of legislation will change the attitude toward the female reporter by male members of the Press Club.

ENTER AGITATORS

One correspondent spoke for several mem"'. bers at the bar when he said, "OUr women were very happy to sit in the balcony until outside agitators from the North came down here and started causing trouble. Women prefer to be together. That's why they have women's colleges and women's magazines. We've always treated our women good, but they wouldn't know what to do with equal rights if we gave it to them."

Another newspaperman agreed. "You said it. You start mixing the sexes and you know what you'll wind up with? Babies. I've seen it happen during the war."

"I don't mind women asking for equal pay and wanting their children to go to school with our children,'' said a third reporter. "But what I'm worried about is that if we let them eat with us, pretty soon they'll want to dance with us, and neck with us, and be­fore you know it all the barriers will be down, and they'll be wanting to play poker with us."

"We don't ask to go to their beauty par­lors," a columnist said. "Why should they ask to come to our club?"

Everyone at the bar nodded their heads. SCANDALOUS CHICAGO

A young reporter said, "I was in Chicago recently at the Playboy Club and you know