Mr. Wood. Approximately that. I haven't got the exact figure; $80 million in counterpart. Senator FULBRIGHT. If we do not repeal it, does it cost any more money? Mr. WOOD. No, sir. Senator FULBRIGHT. Any more than if we do? Senator TAFT. There must be more hanging around somewhere. It talks about it being a revolving fund. Senator FULBRIGHT. That is what I want to know. What is the cost? Do we save any money by this? Mr. Wood. There is an additional $20 million which is in fairly advanced stages of negotiations with these governments. Senator FERGUSON. That ought to be stopped now. Senator FULBRIGHT. What I am getting at is, can we stop that and not cost any more money, with the declaration that we are not interested? Senator TAFT. We probably can, because this bill probably won't be passed for another month, and we could probably get rid of the $20 million. Senator FERGUSON. Even though they get these adverse reportsnow here is an example-and know all about this, they want to commit $20 million more to this same program. Senator FULBRIGHT. All I am getting at is: Can you stop any further expenditure by some device, without making a public declaration you don't believe in this? Senator TAFT. There is no public declaration. There is nothing in that at all. I don't think the psychological thing is of any importance. Senator KNOWLAND. All we have to do is to take out the language and the agency is on notice of the feeling of this committee, and they proceed at their own peril if they go ahead with it. Now I think that is fundamentally what we are faced with. Senator GEORGE. What Colonel Wood is suggesting we put in the report, we don't repeal it expressly but we abandon it. Mr. WOOD. There is one thing in this connection, gentlemen, which I would like to clarify. The use of these funds as we would go forward, these counterpart funds, would be for purposes which are otherwise authorized by the act. [Discussion off the record.] USE OF COUNTERPART Senator TAFT. Isn't there serious doubt of any further economic aid, except as it comes in through these offshore purchases? There is doubt about the whole question of whether you want any more economic aid at all. And this particular part seems to be condemned by everybody. Mr. WOOD. This economic aid in the form of dollars has already been made available. It is the counterpart we are talking about now when I say approximately $80 million has been committed in agreement. It is the counterpart to be used for promotion of productivity. Senator FERGUSON. But, Mr. Wood, why don't we use this counterpart fund for other causes? Why do we always commit it to this kind of thing? Mr. Wood. Senator Ferguson, the great bulk of the counterpart funds in Europe is being used for direct military purposes. Senator FERGUSON. The great part of them, too, is being wasted. They are being frittered away on similar projects to this. Now, I don't know why we leave this in and have, then, your people over in Paris and the other countries say, "Well, they approve of this so we will use this part of the counterpart fund for this cause because it is along that line." They won't read the report. They will have the act before them. I know what departments do when they have something in an act and a contrary idea in a report. They will carry out the act. Mr. Wood. As I see it, Senator, we are completely changing the nature of the operations under this thing. We are not doing the things which the evaluation teams quite properly objected to, detailed interference. Senator TAFT. They object to the whole thing. They object to it being there on the books. They want it repealed. I don't see why our committee shouldn't follow them. Senator SMITH. You wouldn't violate any commitments by repealing it. Mr. WOOD. Where commitments and agreements have been made, we have to go through with it. The CHAIRMAN. All right, Mr. Wood, thank you very much. MOTION TO REPEAL BENTON-MOODY AMENDMENTS CARRIED Senator FERGUSON. Mr. Chairman, I ask for a vote on the motion. The CHAIRMAN. All in favor of the repeal of the two sections will raise their right hands. [There was a showing of hands.] The CHAIRMAN. Eight. Contrary? [There was a showing of hands.] The CHAIRMAN. One contrary. All right; one not voting. The motion is carried. You will see to it that the appropriate repeal sections are put in. Senator GEORGE. Just put it in there somewhere in the bill. [The committee next discussed the payment of freight charges on relief milk shipments, and the financing of pilot rural development projects in India and Pakistan. Funds for the Intergovernmental Committee for European Migration, previously halved by the committee, were restored in full, and an amendment relating to U.N. technical assistance was approved.] PROCEDURE ON THE BILL The CHAIRMAN. I would like to get the authority, then, to report the bill without further reference to the committee, and the committee will then get its report out. Senator KNOWLAND. Mr. Chairman, as you know, of course I don't know what shape the staff is in on the report, but we have permission of the Senate for any committee to report during the recess. The CHAIRMAN. The report won't be ready. Then it goes apparently at the request of Saltonstall down to his committee. My thought was we could get the bill reported and they could work up their report. If there is no objection, it is so ordered. When do we get floor action? Senator KNOWLAND. You tell me when it is going to be out of Saltonstall's committee and I think I can tell how soon we can get floor action, but we have some appropriation bills which are pending. The CHAIRMAN. Let the record show that the following Senators voted against reporting the bill as amended. They are Langer and Gillette. The others are recorded in favor of it. STATE DEPARTMENT REORGANIZATION PLANS The CHAIRMAN. I have here from Wilcox something in relation to our getting more specific instructions from the committee as to what I should do, if anything, about the State Department reorganization plan.' These plans are now before the Government Operations Committee. It is suggested to me that I take the matter up with the chairman of that committee. Well, what good is going to come of it? What are we going to do about it? He is investigating government operations. We have got a subcommittee that has jurisdiction of that. The question is could you write a letter and suggest collaboration, cooperation, or what? We have got another one of those mixed situations. Senator MANSFIELD. Mr. Chairman, I would like to suggest that the reorganization plan be brought before Senator Ferguson's subcommittee on the State Department so that his committee can have some idea of what is entailed. Senator FULBRIGHT. I think, Mr. Chairman, that is a good practice, not just because of this one, but I think for the future whenever reorganization plans come up affecting the basic jurisdictions of a committee, that they ought to have an opportunity to inform themselves, to be prepared, in other words, on the floor later to know about this business. Senator KNOWLAND. I don't think you can eliminate the other committee, because under the LaFollette-Monroney Act, the reorganization plan could go through, but we ought to have a look at it. Senator FULBRIGHT. The same theory under which we send this to Saltonstall's Armed Services Committee. I think it is a good practice that we are to have this opportunity, and if you need a motion, I will make it. 1 The bill was reported to the Senate on June 13. On June 15, it was referred to the Armed Services Committee, Leverett Saltonstall, Chairman, which reported it back on June 18 with amendments. 2 Reorganization plan No. 7. sent to Congress by the administration on June 1. The Legislative Reorganization Act of 1946. The CHAIRMAN. Go ahead and make it on the record. Senator FULBRIGHT. I just move that as a policy of the committee that reorganization plans affecting the State Department be referred at the appropriate time to this committee for its consideration. Senator KNOWLAND. Be re-referred. The CHAIRMAN. Is there any comment? Hearing none, it is unanimously approved. Senator SPARKMAN. Mr. Chairman, along that same line, it seems to me there are several measures that are introduced that we certainly ought to have a look at. For instance, this grain to Pakistan. Now we handled one to India last year. I think it is perfectly all right for Agriculture, since it involves Commodity Credit Corporation, to go ahead and handle it basically, but I believe we ought to check that, too. I don't mean by that hold hearings or anything like that, but certainly it is a matter we ought to look into before action is taken. The CHAIRMAN. We were having a general discussion here as to, first, the specific bill. Then we had a discussion as to the overall general authority for a bill that is coming up. Maybe that one will be referred to us. Senator KNOWLAND. I think Agriculture is meeting today on Pakistan wheat, as I understand it. Senator SMITH. They met this morning at 10 o'clock. The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, gentlemen. You have been very patient. We would like to move along with a number of these matters. Tuesday we should report out the St. Lawrence matter. [Whereupon, at 12:15 p.m., the committee adjourned.] MINUTES TUESDAY, JUNE 16, 1953 UNITED STATES SENATE, COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS, Washington, D.C. The committee met in executive session at 10 a.m. in the committee room. Present: Chairman Wiley, Senators George, Green, Fulbright, Gillette, Humphrey and Mansfield. The committee first discussed a proposed committee print which the chairman desired published, relating to communism and to be used in connection with the mutual security bill. There was some objection to this and it was decided to withhold action on the request at this time. The chairman then brought up S. 589, the St. Lawrence Seaway bill. A motion was made by Senator George to include the ThyeHumphrey amendments in the bill. The motion was defeated by a vote of 4 to 8. Senators voting in the affirmative were Senators George, Fulbright, Humphrey, and Mansfield. Senators who voted in the negative were Senators Smith (by proxy), Tobey (by proxy), Taft (by proxy), Ferguson (by proxy), Knowland (by proxy), Green, Gillette, and the chairman. The chairman then brought up the reporting of S. 589. Senators voting to report were 13 and those opposed 2. Senators voting in the affirmative were: Smith (by proxy), Hickenlooper (by proxy), Tobey (by proxy), Taft (by proxy), Langer (by proxy), Ferguson (by proxy), Knowland (by proxy), Green, Sparkman (by proxy), Gillette, Humphrey, and Mansfield. Senators voting in the negative were George and Fulbright. Senator Humphrey proposed, and it was agreed to, that the report contain some notice of the deepening of channels. A detailed explanation of his request will be found in the transcript. The Senator also called attention to certain exchanges of correspondence he had on this subject, which he would make available if desired. For record of proceedings, see official transcript. The chairman reported S. 589 to the Senate today. (649) 72-194-77-vol. V-42 |