Ask the Scholar

Document scope · 1 page
doc
Scholar
Ask about this object, its catalog metadata, its source description, or the page inventory. For page-specific OCR and visual context, open one of the page chats.

Source Description

This file contains material relating to Lyndon Johnson.

Scholar Source Context

Document identity
localId
4525469
label
Ford Newsletter, Jan.-May 1966
core
doc
dtoType
document
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
4525469
contentType
document
title
Ford Newsletter, Jan.-May 1966
description
This file contains material relating to Lyndon Johnson.
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Newsletters
subjects
Department of Defense. 9/18/1947-
Affirmative action programs
Agriculture
Apportionment
Appropriations and expenditures
Electoral college
Federal budget
Food aid
Foreign aid
Legislation
National security
Outer space
Poverty programs
State of the union messages
Taxation
Universities and colleges
Veterans
Vietnam War, 1961-1975
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
4525469
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1966-05-31
month
5
year
1966
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1966-01-01
month
1
year
1966
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
mediaId
dff730ec9b0be27c
ocrText
This document scanned from Box D2 of the Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library. Your Washington Review KENT Congressman 5 IONIA JERRY FORD January 19, 1966 Congress has reconvened and I'm pleased to greet you with the first weekly newsletter for 1966. May I reiterate what I said a year ago to every resident of Kent and Ionia Counties: "Any additional duties which I have acquired as Minority Leader will in no way diminish my determination to provide you with all the service which a Congressman can and should furnish. I trust that the thought, 'Oh, he is too busy,' will never deter you from contacting me." If it appears that I may be able to help with a specific personal or family problem involving an agency of the federal government, please let me know. I am always interested in your views on federal legislation and on national and international issues. THE STATE OF THE UNION: Most Americans, I am sure, were impressed with the President's State of the Union address and found it hard to disagree with much of what Mr. Johnson said. The speech was well written and well delivered but we must look beneath the veneer to get at the crucial issues. True, "the cup of peril is full in Vietnam." We must achieve there a prompt and secure peace. This is our prime concern. The President's State of the Union Message gave us nothing new in this regard and consequently was disappointing. There had been indications from the Administration that some good news might be released. Unfortunately there was none and the President could only reiterate, what had been said many times before, that the U. S. would meet the challenge of Communist aggression and live up to our commitments to our allies. On the domestic front, I am afraid the President was being overly optimistic when he predicted that the budget was about to be balanced. He wants to continue all the old spending programs, establish new spending schemes at home and abroad, fight the war in Vietnam - all within a $112.8 billion expenditure and $111 billion revenue figure. Oh yes, he promised to ask for more taxes if putting the excise taxes back on automobiles and telephone service doesn't bring in sufficient revenue. We who have worked so long to get a reduction in the auto and telephone excise taxes hope that the Committee on Ways and Means, in its consideration of this problem, may come up with a better means of securing needed revenue. And the President's proposal to increase the withholding tax will take more money out of our pay checks but at the end of the year when the books are closed will not increase the annual Treasury receipts. LIBRARY The President neglected to point out how inflation has been nibbling away at the resources of the poor, the aged, and all those who live on fixed incomes. From figures released by his own officials we know that under his Administration the cost of living is going up and up. With prices for food, clothing, and shelter rising and with higher taxes in the offing, we can well take another and deeper look at the picture painted by the President in his speech. He wants to "overcome crime and lawlessness" by a "stepped-up program to help modernize and strengthen local police forces." This will help and we are for it. But the issue lies deeper. Greater emphasis must be placed on individual and family responsibility. Privileges of American citizenship must be balanced with duties and obligations. Mr. Johnson complained about those who call for sacrifice and asked, "whom will they sacrifice the children the sick the poor?" It is not the "whom" but the "what." Certainly no one asks that the children the sick the poor be deprived of any help. But we can sacrifice the mismanagement, inefficiency, waste, and political shenanigans which have marked some government programs, especially the so-called war on poverty. The American people will want the Congress to examine very carefully Mr. Johnson's recommendation for more U. S. trade with the Communist bloc of nations. They will want to have adequate assurance that this trade will be in our national interest and that we will reap benefits at least equal to those gained by the Communists. As a people with idealism and a feeling for humanity, we applaud the President's objection to "colonial rule" and his proposals to "conduct a world-wide attack on the problems of hunger, disease, and ignorance." We have been doing this for a long time. But Walter Lippman (certainly no rightist) in his syndicated column on Thursday warned against "globalism" or the attempt of the idealist to enforce everywhere in the world his own views of what is right and what should be done. Just a personal word on Mr. Johnson's recommendation that the term of a congressman should be extended from two to four years. This would be a convenience to legislators. But I like the idea that every Representative must go back to his people every two years for an accounting and an endorsement. I believe this is conducive to responsible government. OUR AMERICAN GOVERNMENT: We have a supply of the latest edition of the 44- page booklet on "Our American Government" listing 175 questions and answers of interest to every citizen. If you would like a copy, please let me know at: House of Representatives, Washington, D. C. MAILING LIST: If you know of anyone who would like to be added to our mailing list for "Your Washington Review," we will be pleased to receive his name and address. Your Washington Review KENT Congressman 5 IONIA JERRY FORD January 26, 1966 No legislative business was scheduled by the House of Representatives last week but this does not mean any lack of congressional activity. In addition to par- ticipating in the "Republican Appraisal of the State of the Union," I was the guest on "Meet the Press" and "Youth Wants to Know" and took part in four other radio or television programs. On Thursday and Friday I was in Grand Rapids for a series of talks, discussions, and office appointments. I plan to be home again next Tuesday for a meeting of the Kent County Council of Parent-Teacher Associations to be held at the West Godwin School at 6:30 p.m. WAR IN VIETNAM: In his portion of the Republican Appraisal, Senator Dirksen outlined our Party's policy on the war in Vietnam. He emphasized that we support the President's peace efforts as strongly as we do his military efforts. We will support anything which Mr. Johnson does to obtain a prompt, just, and secure peace. If this can be accomplished by immediate negotiations through diplomatic channels, we favor such negotiations. If the Commander-In-Chief finds that further military action is necessary to achieve freedom and independence for the Vietnamese, we will support such action. Knowing that there is no substitute for victory, we will back the President in his every effort to achieve military or diplomatic success. Our only objective is a just and secure peace. Our only aim is to promptly bring home all American servicemen - alive and whole. Our only opposition is to getting bogged down in an extended and massive land war in the jungles of Southeast Asia, a war which could go on for many years and produce thousands of casualties. WAR ON POVERTY: We were pleased to hear that the President has finally named a full-time commander-in-chief in the war on poverty. Nearly two years ago on a TV program, Sargent Shriver said, "I would say that if Congress gave us what we are asking for and did not reduce it in future years, that we could look forward in the foreseeable future -- let's say ten years or so -- to the elimination of poverty in the United States." Two of the ten years have passed; the war against poverty is in general disarray. We read in the papers nearly every day of the misuse of poverty funds, and disastrous results from highly heralded programs. There are arguments among the administrators, and resignations of top officials. We sincerely hope that the selection of Mr. Shriver as full-time director will change the course of the war and bring some sort of order out of the present chaos. Our nation can afford to help all of our less fortunate citizens but it cannot afford to squander any of the hard-earned dollars collected from you as tax- payers. Tragically little of the $2.3 billion appropriated to date for the war on poverty has actually been received by our nation's poor. But the army of officials, certainly those in the higher echelons, has been well taken care of. Republican members of the Committee on Education and Labor have recommended and will push for a complete and independent audit of the use of these funds. They have also suggested a survey of the Office of Economic Opportunity (which runs the anti-poverty war) to find out the cause of the breakdown in management. Last Wednes- day there was introduced in the House a resolution (H.Res. 670) calling for the estab- lishment of a Select Committee of the House to conduct a thorough, bipartisan investi- gation of the anti-poverty war. Because there has been bipartisan criticism of the program, we hope this constructive resolution will receive bipartisan support and be adopted. WAR AGAINST INFLATION: Any rise in the cost of living is felt first and most seriously by the poor and the aged living on a fixed income. The cost of living is two percent higher than just one year ago. This is the equivalent of a secret sales tax of some $8 billion annually. Deficit financing and a $26 billion increase in federal spending in two years by President Johnson is the primary cause of this infla- tionary trend. We do need to mobilize a war against inflation. Republicans will do their part by attempting to hold down non-essential, non-defense spending. WAR AGAINST TAXES: The Committee on Ways and Means opened hearings last week on President Johnson's demand that the excise taxes on telephones and automobiles be increased to last year's levels. We believe no new taxes are needed now -- but there must be a prudent restraint on spending. Any war against greater taxation requires first a victory over reckless spending. WAR FOR ADVANCEMENT: Most social problems can be resolved in the area of education and training. The poor, the unemployed, the handicapped, and all youth need education, a skill, or training to meet job opportunities. Republicans have introduced legislation to give an income tax credit for those who pay the education bill in the form of tuition, books, taxes, or other expenses. We favor returning some federal funds to the states for educational use without federal control. We want to encourage local schools, already established, to meet the needs of drop-outs and others who require further training. Republicans are sponsoring a proposal to further encourage industry to train more men and women on the job. The "Human Investment Act" with a tax credit provi- sion will do this. The war to advance the position and skill of all our people is another war we must win. "REPUBLICAN APPRAISAL": Copies of complete text of the Republican appraisal which Senator Dirksen and I presented are available upon request to my office. Your Washington Review KENT 5 IONIA Congressman JERRY FORD February 2, 1966 President Johnson is asking the American people to turn over to Uncle Sam next year a total of $145.5 billion. This is $26 billion more than last year and $17 billion more than for the current fiscal year. This includes trust fund receipts (social security taxes, highway taxes, etc.) and an administrative budget intake of $111 billion. A little over $60 billion will be spent on national defense including the Vietnam War. The next largest single item in the administrative budget is the pay- ment for interest charges which are growing steadily. Over $12.8 billion of our tax money will go for interest payments next year compared with $9.2 billion in 1962. This is an increase of $3.6 billion in five years. The budget does not include one cent for paying off the national debt which will exceed $321 billion at the end of next year. When Mr. Eisenhower left office the debt stood at $289 billion; since then it has been increased by $31 billion. Mr. Johnson is upping defense spending next year by $4 billion but he wants to add $2.4 billion to the cost of non-defense activities. I find it hard to understand how the President can ask business and labor to avoid price and wage increases which are measured in terms of millions of dollars when he is increasing non-defense spending by billions. But I'm certain that the House Committee on Appropriations which has opened hearings on the President's requests, will be able to cut expendi- tures considerably. The Republican Task Force on the Budget is being reactivated to suggest constructive recommendations for achieving a degree of economy. Unless we are successful, the American people can expect a greater increase in taxes than that now being urged by Mr. Johnson or the serious alternative of runaway inflation. FOUR-YEAR CONGRESSIONAL TERM: The President's recommendation that the term of a member of the House be extended from two to four years seems to be achieving wide support. Most of the arguments favoring this proposition stress the convenience it will provide legislators and their families, the reduction it would bring about in energy and money expended in campaigning, and the opportunity it will afford the incumbent to develop an expertise. But constitutional provisions should be based on more solid considerations. I prefer the two-year term to keep the congressman close to his constituents. This implies that he will not only reflect their views on major issues but will assume leadership in formulating these views. This means "running errands for the home folks" by assisting those who have a legitimate reason to expect his help in dealing with the federal bureaucracy. This means demonstrating to his constituents that he is worthy of their confidence, that they can respect his judgment. Every two years is not too often for the congressman to put his record on the line and seek the endorsement of those who have elected him. Mr. Johnson's suggestion that all congressmen be elected with the President and serve during his four-year term is receiving less support. Many writers recognize that the U.S. does not have a parliamentary form of government as in England where the prime minister (the head of government) is the leader of the majority party in the House of Commons. Our Constitution separates the legislative and executive powers and sets upa system of checks and balances. We want our Congress to exercise independent judgment and protect us from one-party or one-man rule. If we are to have the four- year term, at least one-half of the representatives should be elected each two years. ELECTORAL COLLEGE REFORM: The President doesn't go very far, in fact not far enough, in his constitutional amendment to alter the electoral system for selecting our president and vice-president. He would simply eliminate electors as such in order to prevent any elector from voting for someone other than the candidate of his politi- cal party. But each state would retain its electoral votes and the candidate who received the most popular votes would still get all the electoral votes. This fact should disturb those who are devoted to the "one-man, one vote" theory. But the President ignores it. It is interesting to note that only six times in our history (1796, 1820, 1824, 1948, 1956, and 1960) did an elector exercise his independence and vote differently than he was pledged. Only eight electors out of over 14,500 acted this way and, of course, none affected the outcome of the presidential election. On the other hand, in 14 presidential elections since 1824 the winner received less than 50 percent of the popular votes (included are Mr. Truman and Mr. Kennedy) and in three instances the victor obtained fewer votes than his leading opponent (1824, 1876, 1888). If we are to amend the constitutional provision relative to the elec- toral system, we ought to meet this more serious problem. If Mr. Johnson is truly devoted to the principle of "one man, one vote," he would advocate the election of the president by direct popular vote with a "run off" if necessary to obtain majority rule. An alternative is proposed in S.J.Res. 7 which calls for proportional repre- sentation in the electoral college. If two candidates receive 60 percent and 40 per- cent of a state's popular vote, they would get 60 and 40 percent respectively of the state's electoral vote. This is more equitable than the present system of "winner take all" in each state. This plan also preserves the individuality of the states in the election of the president and continues the slight advantage given to the less populous states by the electoral system. I supported this plan when I first came to Congress and endorse it today. Your Washington Review KENT 5 IONIA Congressman JERRY FORD February 9, 1966 of us will agree with President Johnson when he proposes in our Foreign Aid program "to carry forward the best of what we are now doing in the less-developed world, and to cut out the worst." But the "cuts" must be genuine, effective, and deep. Our mutual security program with some exceptions has served a useful purpose and I have supported its basic principles. But we now have sufficient evidence to show that substantial reductions in expenditures can be made without materially weakening any good which may be accomplished. I'm sure that the President's request for $3.4 billion can and should be cut considerably by the Congress especially in view of our war expenditures and Mr. Johnson's insistence on increasing non-defense spending. We were also pleased to have the President stress in his message on Foreign Aid that "we must concentrate on countries not hostile to us that give solid evidence that they are determined to help themselves." But we must be mighty hard-headed about the "solid evidence." The burden of proof on cooperation and constructive results must rest with the recipient country. Of course our aid must go only to those "countries not hostile to us." But the President should have gone further to insist that our aid (tax dollars) go only to those nations which are helpful to us in the Vietnamese War. Furthermore, I cannot justify nor support any assistance to those nations which in any way help the North Vietnamese aggressors. MR. JOHNSON'S TAX INCREASE: The Committee on Ways and Means has concluded its hearings on the President's tax increase recommendations. Last Thursday it began to consider the matter in executive session. Mr. Johnson wants the new tax bill on his desk by March 15th. It appears that the Committee will approve the President's demand that the excise taxes on automobiles and telephone service be increased to last year's levels. The manufacturers' excise tax on automobiles (passed on to the buyer) would go from 6 to 7 percent. Prior to 1965 the rate was set at 10 percent. The tax on local and long distance telephone service now at 3 percent will go back to 10 percent. Restoration of the automobile tax will mean an additional $60 million in revenue during the current fiscal year and $420 million more during 1967. The new telephone tax will bring in no new taxes before July 1 but will provide an additional $790 million for the next fiscal year. The President also wants to change the withholding tax system so that the total amount of income tax withheld from a person's pay check will come closer to actual amount of his annual tax. The present system withholds $36.5 billion from 63 million taxpayers. Twelve million of these taxpayers break even (within $10 one way or the other) but 14 million or 23 percent do not have enough withheld to meet this obligation. On the other hand, 37 million employees can expect refunds totaling $6 billion because too much is withheld. The proposed change will raise the amount withheld by $1.2 billion and increase the number of taxpayers who break even from 12 million to 29 million. Many taxpayers will not object to this proposal as it will eliminate or reduce the problem of having to pay a large, and often unexpected, lump- sum amount when they file their April 15 income tax returns. The tax bill contains other provisions relative to corporate taxes and social security taxes for self-employed persons. Some of the proposals are good and some, like the telephone and auto taxes, we regret. But like all tax bills, this one will be considered in the House as recommended by the Committee with no amendments or changes permitted. Generally we have to vote "yes" or "no" on the entire bill after weighing the provisions we favor against those we oppose. There may be one oppor- tunity to vote separately on one or two provisions under the "motion to recommit" procedure. I will explain the House vote after final action is taken. VETERANS GI BENEFITS: President Johnson has long opposed providing educational and other GI benefits to those veterans who served in the armed forces after January 31, 1955, the cut-off date for Korean veterans' benefits. Republicans have been urging legislation to establish a program of education and training for these veterans and those now serving in the armed services. Mr. Johnson has finally been persuaded not to oppose such legislation. Last week the Committee on Veterans Affairs approved a bill (H.R. 12410) authorizing a basic monthly allowance of $100 to provide one day of education for each day of military service. Within the Committee the major arguments were over a $100 or $110 basic monthly payment, whether there should be 1 day or 1½ days of education for each day of service, whether training should be confined to an educational institution or include on-the-job and on-the-farm training, and whether this should be a permanent program or one to terminate when the Selective Service System is eliminated. H.R. 12410 also provides home loan guarantees, medical care for non-service connected disabilities, and job preference in federal employment. The legislation is scheduled for passage in the House this week. Degg Singell machie, Nedgi Vivian llevenger COMMITTEE ON UN-AMERICAN ACTIVITIES: The first yea-and-nay vote of this about session came on a $450,000 authorization for the Committee on Un-American Activities to carry on its investigations. It was approved by a vote of 299 to 24. Of the 24 opposed to continuing the work of the Committee, which is now centered on the Ku Klux Klan, five were Democratic Congressmen from Michigan. Until a better method for keeping subversive, anti-American elements under surveillance is developed by the House, I will continue to support this official committee of the Congress. Your Washington Review KENT 5 IONIA Congressman JERRY FORD February 16, 1966 President Johnson's tax increase proposals have cleared the Committee on Ways and Means and probably will be considered by the House next week. The Committee accepted Mr. Johnson's recommendations except for a few minor changes in the with- holding tax schedule. Eventually each employee will fill out a new form relative to his withholding tax which will be refigured so that the total amount deducted from each pay check will more nearly approximate his annual tax. The bill as approved by the Committee also increases the excise taxes on automobile and telephone service to last year's levels. MORE JUDGES: The only major legislative business scheduled for this week is a bill authorizing additional federal judges for certain district and circuit courts. None are specifically for Michigan but the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals which includes Michigan will get two more judges to work with the six presently authorized for the Court which sits in Cincinnati. The number of appeals presented to this court has increased from 340 in 1961 to 558 in 1964. During the same period the backlog has increased from 199 to 422 pending appeals. The bill (S.1666) authorizes six more permanent and four temporary circuit judges, and 30 additional permanent and 5 temporary district judges. While all U. S. judges are appointed for life, temporary judgeships may be created in a given judicial district or circuit. The new judge is appointed for life but when the next vacancy occurs it is not filled and the "temporary judgeship" disappears. A VOTE ON ECONOMY: So often when we say we want to reduce federal spending, we are met with the question, "What will you cut?" This question was the clear and simple issue in the roll call vote on February 3rd: Should we authorize the expendi- ture of $9.5 million of our tax funds to help build an Inter-American Cultural and Trade Center in Miami, Florida? This is a project of a select interest group to try to promote more trade with Latin America. But it has been in the mill a long time and is far from essential in wartime. We must ask whether this is a justifiable tax expenditure when defense and non- defense needs of the federal government are at current levels. I thought not as did 140 members of the House including all Republicans from Michigan. But we lost when 201 of our colleagues voted for more spending. Eight Democratic Congressmen from Michigan were in this group. THE PUBLIC DEBT: According to the official report of the U.S. Treasury on February 1 the national debt stood at $322 billion. One year ago the debt totaled $318.3 billion. This is a $4.7 billion increase in twelve months and means an additional annual interest charge of $156.5 million. FREE WORLD SHIPPING TO NORTH VIETNAM: At a time when the United States is fighting to protect freedom and the free world, it is disconcerting to learn from our friend, Rep. Charles Chamberlain, that "in 1965 there were more free world ships than Communist ships engaged in carrying goods to and from North Vietnam." According to unclassified information a total of 119 free world ships arrived in North Vietnam last year. Sixty-seven of these were registered under the flag of England; 19 were Greek and 18 Norwegian. It is true that the majority of these ships are hired or chartered by Communist countries or are under lease to shipping concerns in Hong Kong, but this does not ameliorate the situation. In fact, of the five free world ships which reached North Vietnam ports in December, all were under charter to Communist governments, but four of these ships loaded their cargoes in free world ports (Belgium, Hong Kong, and Japan). Furthermore, as Rep. Chamberlain points out, the unclassified figures do not present the complete picture and that "the true figure is more than double what we are being told." This situation emphasizes at least two significant truths: (1) The American people are not being given the facts about Vietnam to which they are entitled and which would in no way give aid and comfort to the enemy; (2) The Johnson Administra- tion is not using every proper and available means for applying economic pressure on Hanoi. Last year the President objected strenuously to a provision which would have prohibited our foreign aid from going to any country whose merchant ships trade with North Vietnam. I supported this restriction and continue to urge the President to use every means at his disposal to wage economic warfare against North Vietnam, including cutting supply routes, be they on land or sea. OUR BALANCE OF PAYMENTS: During 1965 the United States lost $1.7 billion in gold, the largest amount in any one year since 1960. Our gold reserve is down to $13.8 billion, almost $10 billion less than was held in 1952. This has occurred simply because our government and people are spending more abroad than foreign nationals and governments spend here. This is a serious matter and one which the President recognizes. On page 151 of his 1966 Economic Report, Mr. Johnson says, "If a deficit (balance of international payments) continues too long or becomes too large, the strength of the country's currency can be impaired. There is, in fact, an absolute limit to any country's ability to continue in deficit; eventually, it must run out of reserves as well as borrowing capacity." But having said this, the President acts as if there were no danger -- govern- ment spending abroad is to go on as usual and no effective means is adopted or advo- cated for reducing the deficit and halting the outward flow of gold. Your Washington Review KENT 5 IONIA Congressman JERRY FORD February 23, 1966 This week the House of Representatives will debate and undoubtedly pass the "Tax Adjustment Act of 1966" (H.R. 12752), the bill embodying President Johnson's tax increases on automobiles and telephone service. The bill also provides for changes in the withholding tax. So many employees will receive a shrunken pay-check after April 30th as a result of these changes. The bill establishing additional federal judgeships, scheduled for action last week but not brought up, is on the agenda for this week. The House also is expected to consider supplemental defense and foreign aid authorizations. Because Tuesday is Washington's birthday, no legislative business is planned but the traditional reading of our first President's Farewell Address will be observed. Rep. Patsy Mink, the Congresswoman from Hawaii will read the Address this year. UNIFORM TIME LEGISLATION: The House Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce is expected to report a bill establishing uniform dates for daylight saving time. States and local communities will still be able to decide whether they want to observe daylight saving time. But if they do, it must be between the last Sunday in April and the last Sunday in October. Presently, there is a wide variance in the date for change-over in those states which observe daylight saving time. In 19 states daylight saving time is not observed at all. BANKRUPTCY IN THE GREAT SOCIETY: Individual and business bankruptcies have increased 63 percent in the past five years. During fiscal year 1965 over 180,000 new bankruptcy cases were filed in federal courts compared with 110,000 in 1960. In addition over 28,000 persons came into bankruptcy court under a provision of the law (Chapter XIII) which allows them to seek assistance of the court in paying off their obligations over a period of years. In 1965 over 163,000 employees and non-businesses went into bankruptcy as did 17,000 businesses. In 1960 the comparable figures were 98,000 and 12,000. This means a 68 percent raise in bankruptcies among individuals and non-businesses and a 42 percent increase during the last five years in business bankruptcies. During that same period the population growth was only 6 percent. Legislation has been introduced in both the House and Senate which would require any employee (wage earner) filing for bankruptcy to demonstrate that he should not be required to follow the provisions of Chapter XIII. In other words, the burden wouldbe placed on the bankrupt wage-earner to prove that he should not be required to pay his debts over a period of time under supervision of the court. Presently, he has a choice of doing this or of taking advantage of the regular bankruptcy proceeding. Many au- thorities, including the Judicial Conference of the United States, frown on this legis- lation on the basis that it threatens to undermine the principle of rehabilitation implicit in the bankruptcy system. However, the Senate Committee on Finance has just taken favorable action on a similar proposal in connection with its consideration of a House-approved bankruptcy bill. This matter was brought to my attention recently by a Grand Rapids credit union which felt that some of its employed, wage-earning borrowers who had gone into bankruptcy should be expected to pay off their debts. MEDICARE DEADLINE: All those who may be eligible for "supplementary medical insurance" under Social Security (Medicare) are reminded that the deadline for signing up for this insurance is March 31. Anyone who was 65 or older by January 1 must sign up by the end of March or wait until October 1967 to do so. Those who became 65 after January 1, 1966 have until three months following the month of their birthday to sign up. This "supplemental medical insurance," costing $3 per month, will help pay certain doctor and Burgeon fees, home health visits, and other medical services not covered under the hospitalization provisions of Medicare. The voluntary medical insurance plan becomes effective July 1st. Applications have been mailed to most folks over 65. But if you need an appli- cation or have any questions about it, please contact our local Social Security Office at 50 Ransom Street, N.W., Grand Rapids. The telephone number is 456-2241. STUDENT AID: For the past few weeks our office has been enjoying "student aid in reverse." Miss Miriam Farber and James R. Hooper, Michigan students at George Washington and American Universities respectively, have been working in our Washington office on a volunteer basis. We have made good use of their services and appreciate their help on Friday afternoons and Saturday mornings when they can get away from their classes and studies. Miriam, a graduate of East Grand Rapids High School, is the daughter of Mr. and Mrs. Charles E. Farber, 2930 Bonnell Street, S.E. Jim's parents, now in Kalamazoo, formerly lived at 2226 Nelson,S.E. Jim graduated from Ottawa Hills High School. STUDENT SEMINARS: We had opportunity last week to meet some high school and college students who were in Washington for special seminars in public affairs. Calvin College was represented as was Huntington (Ind.) College whose delegation included a student from Caledonia. On Thursday I spoke to over 70 western Michigan Methodist young people in the House Chamber. AGRICULTURAL YEARBOOKS: We find that we have on hand about 100 copies each of the 1962 and 1963 Yearbooks of Agriculture. The 1962 edition is entitled, "After a Hundred Years" while the 1963 book is called,"A Place to Live." A request for either or both will be honored as long as our supply lasts. Your Washington Review KENT 5 IONIA Congressman JERRY FORD March 2, 1966 President Johnson's tax increase was approved by the House of Representatives last Wednesday by a vote of 246 to 146. If the Senate goes along with this bill (H.R. 12752), the excise tax on telephone service will go up from 3 percent to 10 percent on the first day of the month following a 15-day period after the President signs the bill. The tax on automobiles goes up from 6 percent to 7 percent on the day after the bill is signed. Approval of the bill will also mean shrunken pay-checks for many employees after April 30th when the withholding tax will be readjusted. An effort was made before final passage of the bill to eliminate the excise tax increases but this motion was defeated 207 to 187. I voted against the increase in the excise tax on automobiles and telephone service. We have been working for years to reduce the excise tax on automobiles and had made some headway. Now the President selects this item and telephone service, which certainly is no luxury, for a special tax burden. Furthermore, I have stated repeatedly that if the Johnson-Humphrey Administra- tion would make a genuine effort to reduce non-essential, non-defense spending we could carry on the Vietnam War at the current level without additional taxes. As the Republican members of the Committee said in their report on the bill: "The Administra- tion is asking the American taxpayers to tighten their belts to the extent of some $6 billion in increased taxes and accelerated tax payments. The Administration should make a commensurate effort to tighten its belt. Non-essential expenditure should be cut back and the initiation of new programs deferred until after the emergency. We must be prepared also to win the war at home--the war on inflation." Because I agree with this statement, and because I object to an increase in the tax on telephones and automobiles, I voted against the bill on final passage. FOREIGN AID AUTHORIZATION: Republicans succeeded in attaching an amendment to the $415 million supplemental foreign aid authorization bill prohibiting U. S. assist- ance to any nation that permits its vessels or aircraft to transport any goods of any kind to North Vietnam. However, the President can alter this rule if he determines that it is working against our own national interest. In fact, the amendment is largely symbolic since none of the nations for whom aid is specifically provided by the bill carry on any trade with North Vietnam. The amendment's significance lies in its expression of the intent of the Congress relative to aid to those who help the enemy. APPORTIONMENT OF STATE LEGISLATURES: The Senate is expected to take up this month Senator Dirksen's proposed constitutional amendment relative to membership in state legislatures. Under the "one-man, one-vote" rule of the U. S. Supreme Court, membership in both houses of all state legislatures must be apportioned solely on the basis of population. This has upset the practice in most states, including Michigan, wherein one house was apportioned on the basis of population while membership in the other body was determined on the basis of geography, political subdivisions, and popu- lation. This decision of the Court also caused the present difficulty faced by our own state Supreme Court in attempting to set up an acceptable apportionment plan for Michigan. Under Senator Dirksen's plan (S.J.Res. 103) the people of each state would vote to determine how membership in their own legislature is to be apportioned. They would vote on this issue every ten years following the U. S. census. Under the Dirksen plan, one house of the legislature must be elected from districts formed on a strict popula- tion, one-man, one-vote basis. The other house could be apportioned in the same manner, OR its members could be chosen by districts established on the basis of geo- graphical area and political sub-divisions or on factors other than population. The two plans would appear together on the ballot in a state-wide referendum and the voters would make a specific choice. This is fully consistent with the "one-man, one-vote" concept and with the basic principles of democratic rule. I have endorsed Senator Dirksen's proposed constitutional amendment. I find it difficult to understand the position of those who endorse the Supreme Court's rule but object to letting all the people of a state decide how their own law-making body is to be elected. A HOME FOR THE VICE-PRESIDENT: Committee hearings were opened last week on a bill (H.R. 12944) to provide a $750,000 home for the Vice President. According to its sponsors the mansion will be "a three-story, brick and stone structure, three-car garage, with grounds properly landscaped and fenced" on a site at the U. S. Naval Observatory in northwest Washington. A senior Republican member of the Committee on Armed Services raised this question: "Why should we at this time concern ourselves about furnishing an expensive house for the Vice President, admittedly needed, when the Secretary of Defense refuses to use the funds we have already appropriated to furnish proper housing for our fighting men?" He pointed out that some of our servicemen have been living in little more than barns, even in tents, and that Secretary McNamara had shelved an appropria- tion for necessary military housing on the basis of other budget demands and that it would add to inflation. If this is true, why the rush for an expensive new home for the Vice President? This is one expenditure that can wait. I hope the House Committee on Public Works kills the bill. Your Washington Review KENT Congressman 5 IONIA JERRY FORD March 9, 1966 The White House applied the pressure and the House of Representatives last Thursday passed the bill forcing cotton farmers to pay $1 a bale to finance cotton promotion and research. Opposed by both the Farm Bureau and the Farmers Union, the bill will cost cotton farmers at least $15,000,000 a year and give the Secretary of Agriculture control over sales promotion for cotton products, magazine and TV adver- tising, and research. He will have a veto over all spending plans and projects. This compulsory check-off system would be put into effect when approved in a referendum by at least two-thirds of the cotton growers OR by votes cast by those who produce two- thirds of the cotton. If the latter method is used, the big producers will be in con- trol. And the Secretary of Agriculture is to say how the votes will be counted. A motion to apply the "one-man, one-vote" rule was defeated 191 to 185. The final vote was close, 189 to 183, with most Republicans opposed to the plan. But enough Democrats felt the heat and "rubber-stamped" the President's demand, Votes were changed at the last minute to provide the margin of victory. DEFENSE AUTHORIZATION BILL: The 392 to 4 vote in the House last Tuesday on the $4.8 billion supplemental military authorization bill was a vote in support of our servicemen in Vietnam. It was a vote in support of our determination to resist Communistic aggression. It was not necessarily a vote of confidence in the manner in which the Johnson-Humphrey Administration has been handling the war. The bill authorizes appropriations for additional aircraft, missiles, and military construction during fiscal year 1966 which ends on June 30th. In a unanimous report, the Committee on Armed Forces expressed a "reservation" as to the necessity of the legislation. It was concerned with the possibility that many items which would have been purchased in 1967 were simply moved into the 1966 supplemental request "with- out any real program for acceleration," and said that "obviously no military advantage would be gained by such a bookkeeping situation." In expressing this reservation the Committee indicted the President and the Secretary of Defense but agreed to give them a chance to prove their contention that these funds were needed now. The Committee assured members that progress under the bill "will be closely followed." Nearly $3.2 billion of funds provided will go for aircraft. Secretary McNamara reported that in 1964 we lost 38 airplanes and 24 helicopters in hostile action. In 1965 we lost 275 airplanes and 76 helicopters. The Secretary predicted higher losses for 1966. About $1.8 billion from this bill will go for replacement of aircraft losses. CONGRESSIONAL RESOLUTION ON SOUTHEAST ASIA: President Johnson has cited the resolution adopted by Congress in 1964 (Public Law 88-408) as a legal basis for the war in Vietnam. This resolution noted that naval ships of Communist Vietnam had attacked U.S. vessels in international waters (Gulf of Tonkin) and that these attacks were a part of North Vietnam's campaign of aggression against its neighbors. The resolution went on to say that "the United States is assisting the peoples of south- east Asia to protect their freedom and has no territorial, military, or political ambitions in that area, but desires only that these peoples should be left in peace to work out their own destiny in their own way." The resolution then states that "Congress approves and supports the determina- tion of the President, as Commander in Chief, to take all necessary measures to repel any armed attack against the forces of the United States and to prevent further aggression." Noting our obligations under the Charter of the United Nations and the South- east Asia Collective Defense Treaty, the resolution continues by saying, "the United States is, therefore, prepared, as the President determines, to take all necessary steps including the use of armed force, to assist any member or protocol state of the Southeast Asia Collective Defense Treaty requesting assistance in defense of its freedom.' South Vietnam is a protocol state and did request assistance. I voted for this resolution on August 7, 1964 and would vote for it today. But this does not mean that I approve of all aspects of President Johnson's direction of the War. I am opposed to getting bogged down in an extensive and extended land war in southeast Asia. I think the President should exert a greater effort at the UN and among our allies to muster assistance in our efforts to achieve a prompt, just, and secure peace. Many in the U. S. who have supported the United Nations over the years were shocked that we received so little support, in fact, vigorous opposition. As President Johnson orders more American forces to Vietnam it becomes more important to stop the flow of military supplies to the enemy through Hanoi and North Vietnamese ports. These Communist ports must be closed for the welfare and security of our American forces. SPENDING AS USUAL: The Democratic-dominated House of Representatives demon- strated again that it is to be "spending as usual" when by a vote of 202 to 173 it approved the expenditure of $4.6 million in tax funds to help Alaska celebrate its centennial. Now, we have no objections to such celebrations. But with taxes going up, defense needs skyrocketing, and inflation stealing from every paycheck, expendi- tures for these state celebrations are among the items which Republicans have labeled "non-essential." They cannot be justified as a cost of the federal government at the present time. Yet nine Democrats from Michigan went along with spending as usual; all five Michigan Republicans present voted "no." Your Washington Review KENT 5 IONIA Congressman JERRY FORD March 16, 1966 Only four minor bills were passed by the House of Representatives last week and only four bills are on the agenda for this week. These include the tax bill, a defense appropriation, and bills for a home for the Vice President and daylight saving time. Committee activity is in full swing, however, and our mail indicates a special interest in five legislative items which to date have not come to the floor of the House for consideration. The first has to do with the use of dogs and cats in research. The Committee on Agriculture has completed its public hearings on a number of bills calling for licensing and regulating those who transport, sell, or handle dogs, cats, and other animals to be used in research and experimentation. The Com- mittee is expected to act on the bill in executive session shortly. Other bills relative to the treatment of the animals after they reach the laboratory are with the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. Hearings were held on September 30, 1965 but to date no further action has been taken or scheduled. There is considerable interest in the minimum wage bill which is presently with the Committee on Rules after being reported by the Committee on Education and Labor last August. The latter Committee is having second thoughts about the legislation which calls ultimately for a minimum hourly wage of $1.75. Discussion is going on within the Committee about rewriting the bill and putting the minimum at $1.60. We are getting many letters pro and con on the "situs picketing" bill which was cleared by the Committee on Rules last week. But as yet we don't know when the House majority leadership will schedule it for debate. This bill would liberalize the rule against secondary boycotts in labor disputes on construction projects. It would over- rule a Supreme Court decision which prohibits a union representing employees of one employer on a construction job from picketing the project in order to close down the whole job because of a dispute with its employer. A fourth controversial proposal is H.R. 8282. This is the bill proposed by President Johnson which would require unreasonable federal standards relative to the amount and length of unemployment compensation payments. The cost through federal taxes would be substantially increased. The Committee on Ways and Means is expected to make substantial changes in President Johnson's bill after it hears the views of Administrators of the various state programs at a public hearing this week. The fifth bill causing an influx of mail is H.R. 4054, President Johnson's proposal to increase the postal rates on parcel post and to permit larger and heavier packages to be sent through the mails. The latter provision is the more controversial one as it may mean the loss of business by some other carriers. The Committee on Post Office and Civil Service has opened hearings on the bill which may continue for the entire month. FOOD FOR PEACE VS FOOD FOR FREEDOM: The use of our surplus agricultural products to alleviate hunger throughout the world was the major purpose of President Eisenhower's Public Law 480 which became the Food for Peace Program and was carried forward by President Kennedy. Now President Johnson wants to change these programs by repealing, altering, or rearranging them to establish a Food for Freedom program. The major purpose of the Johnson-Freeman bill (H.R. 12785) is to give the President "broad discretion." In other words, more authority and more power would rest in the hands of one man. Many of the present restrictions in the law would be eliminated and the President and his appointees would be given a free hand. They call it "discretion," but it is still unbridled "power." The law would be weakened; the bureaucracy would be strengthened. For example, Public Law 480 and the Food for Peace program have always been limited to "friendly nations." In the Johnson-Freeman proposal there is no provision limiting the program to "friendly nations." This matter is to be left to the President. He could give U.S. food to Russia, China, or any other Communist country. He could sell our farm products to these countries for their currencies which could be spent only in the local country. He could sell our tax-purchased agricultural goods to Communist nations on long-term credit. Under the Johnson proposal, the power to make these decisions would rest with Mr. Johnson. In contrast, the present law enacted by the Congress directs that our surplus food donated or sold under easy terms be used only to assist "friendly nations." It defines these nations to exclude Communist countries and those carrying on military aggression. Present law does permit regular commercial sales of farm commodities to Russia and the eastern European satellites. The Committee on Agriculture has opened hearings on this legislation in connection with its overall consideration of the "World War on Hunger." GI BILL AND THE 5th DISTRICT: According to information received from the Veterans Administration about 9800 veterans in Kent and Ionia Counties are potentially eligible for benefits and services under the new GI Bill signed on March 3rd. The educational benefits which go into effect on June 1st are expected to help over 1200 veterans during the first year alone. Eligible veterans can receive up to 36 months of schooling or training on the basis of one month for each month spent in uniform. Monthly payments for those in full-time training are $100 for veterans without dependents, $125 for those with one dependent, and $150 for those with more than one dependent. Your Washington Review KENT 5 IONIA Congressman JERRY FORD March 23, 1966 The tax bill approved by the Congress and signed into law last week was not the same bill passed by the House twenty days earlier. It had gone to the Senate where new provisions were added and to a Conference Committee which had worked out a compromise. So the bill with the same number and name (H.R. 12752: The Tax Adjust- ment Act of 1966) which I voted for on March 15th differed materially from the bill which I voted against on February 23rd. It was a compromise. And as is so often the case, no one is completely satisfied with a compromise. Yet our legislative system and our democratic way of life depend on the willingness of opposing parties to give and take, to compromise. The bill which finally became law contained two provisions, added by the Senate, which were steps in the right direction. The first was aimed at clarifying the law relative to the deductibility for income tax purposes of indirect contributions to political parties. Under this provision, no one can list as a deductible item for income tax purposes the amount paid for advertising in any publication, or payments made in connection with any dinner or program, or admissions paid for any parade, gala, or concert, the net proceeds from which go to any political party or candidate. The second provision added by the Senate and long advocated by Republicans extends social security benefits to those over 72 years of age who never had the opportunity to qualify for social security coverage. These folks were either born too soon or Congress acted too late to provide them with basic benefits or the chance to earn these. About 370,000 persons now 72 or over or who will become 72 either this year or next may benefit to the extent of $35 a month for the husband and $17.50 for the wife. However, these payments would be reduced by any amount received as a governmental pension, as retirement pay, or as an annuity payable on account of per- sonal services performed. About two-thirds of the beneficiaries will be women and 80 percent of the women will be widows who would receive $35 a month. DEFENSE APPROPRIATIONS: The House last week voted 389 to 3 to provide an addi- tional $13 billion to carry on the Vietnam War between now and June 30th, the end of the current fiscal year. It was clear that those who voted for this legislation were endorsing a policy of firmness against Communist aggression as presently being carried out by the President as Commander in Chief. This was true in my case but does not mean I go along with everything that has been done or is being done to plan and carry out our responsibilities in Vietnam. The record will show that the President and the (Newaltr) Department of Defense were uncertain as to their needs and objectives in developing our defense policy. They have drastically under-estimated the expense of the war. Thus the need for a $13 billion supplemental appropriation. This underestimating of expenditures and uncertainty as to the course of the war been factor in the inflationary pressures we now face here at home. At times during the past months I have felt that the advice of our military leaders has not been followed to the degree that it should have been. I fully under- stand that our military forces must always be subject to civilian control. The American people every four years elect the Commander in Chief. President Johnson was selected by a majority of voters in 1964. He has the responsibility to execute and implement the military decisions and commitments in Vietnam which he has done. Having committed 235,000 U.S. forces in Vietnam, I hope President Johnson will strongly bear in mind, for their protection and U. S. security, the recommendations of the Joint Chiefs of Staff. UNIFORM DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME: As passed by the House of Representatives, the "Uniform Time Act" creates a special problem for Michigan. The bill (S. 1404) as it came from the Senate simply required those states or communities which use daylight saving time to do so uniformly from the last Sunday in April to the last Sunday in October. The bill as approved by the House would establish daylight saving time between those dates in each state unless the state legislature decided against advancing the clocks in that state. In event the legislature exempts the state, standard time must be observed throughout the entire state. But under the official chart of the Interstate Commerce Commission, the "standard time" for the Lower Peninsula of Michigan is "eastern" while that for the Upper Peninsula is "central." Michigan achieved uniformity (except for a few communi- ties in the UP) by placing the Upper Peninsula on central daylight saving time the year around. If the House bill becomes law and control goes from Lansing to Washington, Michigan will have difficulties especially in the summer months. If the state exempts itself from the federal law, the Upper Peninsula will be an hour behind the Lower Peninsula and a person will lose or gain an hour by crossing Mackinac Bridge. If the state goes along with the federal law, it will mean that during the summer our clocks will be two hours ahead of the sun. (Michigan lies west of 821/2° longitude and is in effect already on year-round daylight saving time.) Because of its effect on our state, I voted against the bill. (I would have supported the Senate version.) We hope that when the Senate and House conferees meet to iron out the differences in the bills, attention will be given to Michigan's prob- lem. If this is not done, it appears that the Interstate Commerce Commission could solve the difficulty by changing Michigan's "standard time" zones. This could be a long and controversial process. Your Washington Review KENT 5 IONIA Congressman JERRY FORD March 30, 1966 The House of Representatives is scheduled to consider this week the second supplemental appropriation bill for the current fiscal year. The record now shows that in fiscal 1966 President Johnson underestimated the Vietnam military needs by $15 billion. These "supplementals" are to make up deficiencies and to provide funds for other authorized projects. Among the items in this week's "supplemental" are $12 million for rent subsi- dies and $10 million for financing the federal Teachers Corps. Both of these new spending schemes were enacted last session but no money was provided. Once an appro- priation is made for rent supplements (Uncle Sam pays a portion of a family's rent), the federal taxpayers are on the way to a 40-year, $6 billion program. Under last fall's proposals a family in New York with an annual income of $11,000 or one having assets up to $24,000 could be eligible for a rent subsidy. The regulations have now been changed and these limits reduced substantially. But once the money is supplied, Congress will have little or no control over future regulations. A federally-operated Teachers Corps can only mean further control over local schools by Washington bureaucrats and a deterioration of morale among local teachers by the importation of what may be called an "elite Corps" with special privileges and benefits. Its total cost and potential damage are unpredictable. FASTER MAIL TO OVERSEAS SERVICEMEN: Legislation unanimously approved last week will provide air mail service for all overseas servicemen. Included in this fast delivery at regular rates will be letters, voice recordings of personal messages, current newspapers and magazines, and small packages. Air transportation now is used for first-class mail and small parcels to the far Pacific, to sailors and marines on sea duty, and to all servicemen in remote areas. Surface transportation is used (unless airmail postage is paid) for mail going to other areas with the delivery time varying from 29 days to England to 55 days to Pakistan or to 2½ months to India. If this bill becomes law, a letter with a 5-cent stamp mailed from Michigan to a soldier in Germany will go from New York to Germany by air in one day rather than taking one month by ship as is now the case. PRESIDENT'S RECOMMENDATIONS FOR CHILD SAFETY: President Johnson has sent to Congress a message outlining a Child Safety Act which should have prompt attention. It is a proposal which all of us can support unless, of course, the committee hearings uncover facts or implications not presently apparent. The proposal requires special safety caps for closing the containers of certain patent drugs which are attractive to children. It would limit the number of candy- flavored children's aspirin in a single bottle to 15 or 20, making it less likely that a child could take a lethal dose if he should get hold of a bottle when mother is not watching. The proposal would restrict the use of certain beans grown in the Caribbean and sometimes used to represent the eyes on stuffed animal toys. Federal officials say that chewing and swallowing just one of these beans can cause death. They also report that each year more than 500,000 children swallow poisons accidently. Nearly 500 children under the age of five were among the 2,100 Americans who died in 1964 from taking poison by accident. VICE PRESIDENT'S MANSION: The spenders-as-usual carried the day when the House voted 197 to 184 to authorize the construction of a $750,000 mansion for the Vice President. Only 59 Democrats voted against the expenditure while 191 of their col- leagues went along with the spending regardless of military needs, a rising cost of living, and the threat of new taxes. Republicans cast 125 "no" votes with only six of our members going the other way. We have no basic objection to a publicly-owned home for the Vice President. But we do object to this sort of non-essential spending at this time. There is no urgency in this matter. The Vice President has provided his own home for 177 years. Mr. Humphrey has a home with which he says he is happy. Office space is provided for him both on Capitol Hill and in the Executive Office Building. As was pointed out in the debate the bill had one purpose: "To provide a palace for entertainment" for the Vice President. The $750,000 is only the initial, minimum cost and does not include the value of the land already owned by the government. The cost of maintenance and of "entertainment" could run to more than half-a-million dollars a year. If there were no war, no inflation, and no federal deficit it can be argued there is justification for a residence for the Vice President. But under current cir- Cumstances the vote on the Vice President's mansion was symbolic. It demonstrated an attitude toward public funds (tax dollars) and again it was spending as usual; again there was no distinction drawn between essential and non-essential expenditures. And who was for this expenditure? Not the President or Vice President. They had not requested it; there is no money in the budget for this home. The leading advocate in the House debate stated, "Now they ask the question, Who is for this?" And he answered, "The people are for this." In reply I can only say that not one person outside of Congress has spoken or written to me in support of this mansion. Many have written to oppose its construction now. Eight Democrats from Michigan voted to spend as usual and two others listed their support of the proposal. All six Michigan Republicans present voted "no." They were joined by one Democrat. There is a difference between Republicans and Democrats. Your Washington Review KENT Congressman 5 IONIA JERRY FORD April 6, 1966 This /is the week before Easter and we expect hundreds of visitors from home. Many of you have written to say you were coming and to request passes for the House and Senate chambers and other information. We trust that all of you who are planning a trip to Washington will come in to see us when you are here. Our office is in the Capitol Building on the second or principal floor, near the rotunda. Last week the senior class from Byron Center, Kelloggsville, and Lee High Schools toured the building, and I had an opportunity to talk with two of the classes. DAYLIGHT SAVING TIME: Final approval was given last Wednesday to the bill which requires each state to observe daylight saving time throughout the entire state from April to October unless the legislature votes to retain standard time throughout the state. This creates a special problem for Michigan. If the legislature does not act, the Lower Peninsula, now on Eastern time, will for six months in 1967 be two hours ahead of the sun. If the legislature exempts our state from the law, the Upper Peninsula will be one hour behind the rest of the state in the summer months. Action by the Interstate Commerce Commission will be necessary to resolve the problem. RENT SUBSIDIES: By a vote of 198 to 190 the House of Representatives last Tuesday committed our country to a 40-year, $6 billion rent subsidy program. This is the plan under which you as a taxpayer will help pay the rent of others who may be just as well off as you are. Qualifications for those to benefit from this tax subsidy are to be set by the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. He is to determine the amount of the subsidy as well as the income and asset limitations of those who will benefit. These limitations could be set as high as were proposed last fall: a family income in New York City up to $11,000 and assets of $24,000, or more or less, as the Secretary dictates. Right now the Secretary says they will be much lower, but for how long? Even if subsidies were a desirable means of providing proper housing, this is not the time to adopt a new and revolutionary spending scheme. The United States today is in the midst of wartime inflation. At such a time the Congress has a respon- sibility to cut back and hold the line on domestic spending. At the same moment that the President's lobbyists were pressuring Congressmen to vote $12 million to get rent subsidies under way, Mr. Johnson was expressing the need for an "anti-inflationary 5 to 7 percent increase" in your income taxes. Secretary McNamara has held up the construction of essential military housing in this country for our servicemen because of "inflation pressures." He refused to spend money appropriated by Congress for badly needed homes for families of service- men because of the additional spending necessary to finance the war in Vietnam. But the same Administration demands a new non-defense housing program to cost billions. This kind of federal spending can only mean more taxes or higher prices or both. A DOLLAR SPENT: In an editorial last week a Washington newspaper said: "The GOP has for long espoused a peculiar doctrine according to which the expenditures of a dollar by the Federal Government is, per se, more inflationary than the expenditure of a dollar by a business enterprise or a household A dollar spent is a dollar spent. If the GOP is worried about inflation, it should seek to reduce the outlays of the big spenders, the householders and business enterprises. That can easily be accomplished by raising taxes." In other words, let's tax and tax and tax. Uncle Sam knows much better than you how to spend your hard-earned money. In fact, you are the villain, you are the big spender, you must be punished for raising prices. Your punishment is to take the form of greater taxes. Can anything be more ridiculous? We can't blame the farmer, the laboring man, the housewife, nor the businessman for the rise in the cost of living. The responsi- bility rests with President Johnson and the Democratic Congress which will this year spend about $107 billion, with a deficit approximating $7 billion. But just last Thursday Mr. Johnson called upon housewives, mayors, and businessmen to curtail pur- chases. The President has demanded that labor, industry, and agriculture hold the line against price and wage increases. They have cooperated well. In all fairness, cannot they expect Mr. Johnson to hold the line on federal spending and taxes? Again in the debate on rent subsidies, Democratic leaders accused Republicans of being "blind in their concern for human beings." Frankly, this is getting a little monotonous. I wish they would look at some of the letters I receive from the poor, the aged, the retired, the widows, the infirm, from young parents with small children, and from other folks of ordinary means. They are all deeply concerned with their tax burden, with the cost of a pound of bacon, and the price of a bottle of medicine. They, our friends, neighbors, and relatives, want lower taxes, not higher taxes; they want lower prices, not higher prices. Republicans agree and want truly to help these folks; we want to assist all 190 million Americans. THE VOTE: In an effort to strike out the $12 million rent subsidy appropria- tion, 125 Republicans were joined by 65 Democrats but we lost when 192 Democrats and six Republicans gave the President an eight-vote margin of victory. The President was given his way in spite of the fact that public opinion polls everywhere show an over- whelming popular opposition to the rent subsidy program. It's time to return the Congress to the people. Your Washington Review KENT 5 IONIA Congressman JERRY FORD April 13, 1966 Because of the Easter recess the House of Representatives will conduct no legislative business this week. Personally, I will be taking a few days of vacation with the family but am scheduled to make three speeches in California on Friday and Saturday. Last week in the office we greeted over 250 visitors from home. In addition to the regular sights, our visitors were able to see the cherry blossoms in full bloom. FIRST REGULAR APPROPRIATION BILL APPROVED: Each session the Congress must approve 13 regular appropriation bills to provide funds for operating the government in the ensuing fiscal year. Last Wednesday the first of these bills appropriating $1.17 billion for the Department of Interior and related agencies was approved. The story was the usual one: the House cut the President's requests by $35 million, but the total approved still exceeded this year's appropriation by $30 million. In other words, for 1967 the President requested $65 million more than he received in 1966 for activities covered in the bill; the House voted to give him an additional $30 million. Following extensive hearings on the budget, the Committee cut certain items and increased funds for others. One of the major increases in next year's appropriation is to provide school buildings for the education of Indian children. The bill contained funds for operating our 230 National Parks and other areas comprising about 26.4 million acres, where about 127.5 million visitors are expected in 1967. Money was also provided to manage 186 million acres of land in our National Forests and Grasslands where 169 million visitors are expected, where 6 million head of livestock will graze, and where 11.6 billion board feet of timber valued at $146 million will be harvested in 1967. In fact, the activities covered by this bill are expected to bring into the U. S. Treasury as revenue about $992 million in 1967. So the net cost to the taxpayer is in the neighborhood of $330 million. FURTHER EFFORTS TO SAVE: Nevertheless, in any budget exceeding $1 billion savings can be made if there is a real desire and some pressure on Department Adminis- trators. Republicans proposed an additional 5-percent reduction in this money bill. This was to save public funds, to lessen the necessity for more wartime taxes, and to help Cabinet officers cut expenditures in line with the President's request to them. Republicans supported the President and the taxpayers 127 to 6; but we lost when 227 Democrats refused to vote for the cutback in non-military spending. APPROPRIATIONS FOR TREASURY, POST OFFICE, EXECUTIVE OFFICES: Over $7 billion were appropriated for these agencies in the second appropriation bill for 1967 approved last week. The story was the same: expenses up $540 million over 1966 even with a $36 million cut in the President's request. The Post Office will cost over $5.8 billion and expects to take in $5 billion. This leaves a postal deficit of $800 million to be made up by the taxpayers. Not included in this bill but required by the Treasury is $12.75 billion for in- terest on the public debt. This is a boost of $750 million over this year in interest charges alone. A billion dollar increase in the national debt means over $33 billion more per year in interest. The debt is now $321 billion compared to $317.8 a year ago. RUBBER STAMP REVOLT: House Democratic leaders have been informed by 26 of their colleagues from the West that no longer will they be told how each of the 26 is going to vote on any controversial issue. It is common practice in any legislative body to take a head-count to see if there are enough votes to pass or defeat an important bill. It is done in the House by both parties. But last week, 26 western Democrats wrote the Speaker to say they would provide only a numerical breakdown on how they stand but would give no names. This is their answer to the kind of pressure exerted by the leadership and the White House on those who may object to being a "rubber stamp" for the President. In the letter to the Speaker the group said that it feels "the leader- ship should be more responsive to members of the House of Representatives, an impor- tant segment of the legislative branch, rather than to the executive branch." This is a healthy sign. These western Democrats want to exercise independent judgment and to represent the interests of their constituents; they object to continu- ing as a rubber stamp for the Chief Executive in the White House. This attitude must be encouraged. We need a strong, independent Congress to prevent one-man rule, to protect the President from himself, and to preserve the liberties of every American. REPUBLICAN RESPONSIBILITY: Because six Republicans joined 192 Democrats to pass the rent subsidy appropriation by a vote 198 to 190, some commentators have insisted that Republicans provided Mr. Johnson with this legislative victory. It is true that if the six Republicans voted the other way, and there were no other changes, the measure would have been defeated 196 to 192. But anyone who knows anything about the legislative process and the situation in the House when the vote was taken, knows that there would have been other changes. Enough Democrats who voted "no" would have been "persuaded" to vote "yes." It was this sort of thing that the 26 western Demo- crats had in mind when they wrote to the Speaker. They know that with a 2 to 1 Demo- cratic majority and with the pressures that can be applied upon Democratic Congressmen by the White House, the Republicans can't defeat or pass any legislation. Most news- paper reporters and commentators also know this. Republicans cannot be held respon- sible until they have power to control, through a majority of the elected members, which is 218 in the House and 51 in the Senate. Your Washington Review KENT Congressman 5 IONIA JERRY FORD April 20, 1966 One of the more controversial issues scheduled for consideration by the House of Representatives this week involves the Community Relations Service established by the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The Community Relations Service was set up in the Department of Commerce to provide assistance to communities and individuals in resolving problems of discrimination based on race, color, or national origin. This Service has the responsibility of attempting to mediate disputes and to work out problems through discussion and compromise in a peaceful and voluntary manner. The Service was placed under the Secretary of Commerce rather than the Attorney General in order to separate it from the Department of Justice which carries out criminal investigations and prosecutes violators of the law. In his Civil Rights message to Congress in 1963, President Kennedy proposed the establishment of the Community Relations Service and stated: "the confidence of all will be greater in an intermediary whose duties are completely separated from department functions of investigation or litigation." President Johnson, however, has proposed in "Reorganization Plan No. 1 of 1966" to transfer the Service to the Department of Justice. His Plan will go into effect unless either house of Congress passes a "resolution of disapproval." The House is scheduled to act on such a resolution this week. House Republicans agree with the late President Kennedy and want to keep the Community Relations Service in the Department of Commerce. However, a majority of the Committee on Government Operations which considered the "resolution of disapproval" recommended that it not pass. In other words, the Democratic majority wants to "rubber-stamp" Mr. Johnson's proposed transfer. THIRD POWER PLANT AT GRAND COULEE DAM: Another bill on the agenda for this week authorizes the construction of a third power plant at Grand Coulee Dam on the Columbia River in the State of Washington. Twelve turbine-generator units to be com- pleted by 1983 will produce about 3.6 million kilowatts of electricity. The plant will cost approximately $390 million which is to be repaid over a 50-year period with interest. FROM THE MAIL POUCH: Our mail in recent weeks indicates a continued interest in legislation to regulate the sale and shipment of firearms, to increase the size and weight of parcel post packages, to liberalize the rule against secondary boycotts in labor disputes on construction projects (situs picketing), and to alter the federal STORARY standards relative to the amount and length of unemployment compensation payments. Senator Dodd's bill on firearms (S.1592) has been approved by the Subcommittee on Juvenile Delinquency and ordered reported to the full Senate Committee on the Judiciary. As reported this bill would prohibit the interstate mail order sale of concealable firearms and would require dealers to sell these weapons only to residents of their own state. Rifles and shotguns could be sold by mail. All dealers would be required to have a federal license. No pistol or revolver could be sold to anyone under 21 while the minimum age for purchase of a rifle or shotgun would be 18. Most of the letters we receive oppose this legislation. The Subcommittee on Postal Rates of the House Committee on Post Office and Civil Service this week is continuing its hearings on the proposal to increase the size and weight of packages which may be sent through the mails. Hearings opened during the first week of March and will continue until May 1st. Between 75 and 100 witnesses will testify to present the pros and cons and suggest changes in the Presi- dent's proposal. Our mail is running about 50-50 on this proposal. The Democratic leadership has stated that the House will deal with three more labor bills this session in this order: minimum wage, equal opportunity, and situs picketing. The minimum wage bill (ultimately to $1.60 per hour) may be scheduled for next week but we can't predict now when situs picketing will come to the floor. On this issue, too, our mail is running about even, pro and con. The Committee on Ways and Means will continue in executive session this week to consider H.R. 8282, the bill proposed by President Johnson which would increase federal taxes for the unemployment compensation fund and set up new federal standards relative to the amount and length of unemployment compensation payments. Most of those who write to us are opposed to the bill as recommended by the President. A number of letters have been coming in lately from city officials and local policemen and firemen in support of my bill (H.R. 455) to authorize social security coverage for policemen and firemen in Michigan. The Congress will grant this coverage, which it has already done for 19 states, when the state associations of policemen and firemen endorse social security for their members. During the last few days we have received a number of letters in support of H.R. 164, a bill to rescind and revoke U. S. membership in the United Nations. The bill has been referred to the Committee on Foreign Affairs where it is pending with no action scheduled. LEGISLATIVE REAPPORTIONMENT: The Senate has agreed to vote this week on the constitutional amendment permitting the people of each state to determine how their state legislature is to be selected. It would authorize the voters to apportion one house on a basis other than population. While I think this amendment should be approved, I doubt that it will obtain the required two-thirds vote necessary for adoption of a constitutional amendment. Your Washington Review KENT Congressman 5 IONIA JERRY FORD April 27, 1966 The House of Representatives last Wednesday rubber-stamped President Johnson's transfer of the Community Relations Service from the Department of Commerce to the Department of Justice. You will remember that last week I explained that President Kennedy insisted this conciliatory service should be separate from the office of the federal prosecutor. Republicans supported the Kennedy position 109 to 18 but the vote in the Democratic-dominated House was 220 to 163 for Mr. Johnson. CATS AND DOGS: A bill to control dognapping has been cleared for consideration by the House this week. It would authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to regulate the transportation, purchase, and sale of dogs and cats to be used in research. In its report the Committee on Agriculture said: "Research facilities and lab- oratories last year used thousands of dogs and cats for which they paid many millions of dollars. This demand has given rise to a large network of dealers who oftentimes secure dogs and cats by simply combing the streets and picking up any animal they can catch. These dogs and cats are usually stripped of all identification and often moved across State lines to escape jurisdiction of local and State laws." Under the bill, H.R. 13881, dealers and research facilities would be licensed and required to keep records on all dogs and cats sold, bought, or transported. Researchers could purchase the animals only from licensed dealers. Farmers and owners of a small number of dogs and cats could sell the animals without obtaining a license. The significance of the exact language in a bill is illustrated by another comment of the Committee when it said: "The Committee considered a proposal to change the words 'buy or sell' to 'buy and sell.' The Commitee did not adopt this proposal because it felt that such a change would create an exemption for animal thieves who st eal dogs and cats and then sell them, as well as for persons who might operate dog and cat farms for the sole or major purpose of providing these animals for research purchase." While this bill also authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to prescribe humane standards to govern the transportation and handling of dogs and cats by the lealers, it does not attempt to regulate the research facilities in this regard. Bills calling for federal regulations of the use of these animals in the laboratories are pending with the Committee on Interstate and Foreign Commerce. WAR MANAGEMENT: Bouquets and brickbats have been coming my way since I raised the question of "mismanagement" of the war in Vietnam. By actual count the letters, cards, telegrams, and telephone calls of commendation have outnumbered those of con- demnation 6 to 1. Some write, "we hear you on TV and admire you," or "I wish to commend you for the valiant stand you have taken," or "please accept my appreciation for your speech denouncing the outrageous way in which the war in Viet Nam is being conducted," and "I admire you for your honest fight." On the other hand a few write, "I am disappointed in your last charges that the Administration is mismanaging the Viet Nam war," or "how shocked our family are at your charging Johnson Administration with mismanagement," or "why don't you just fade away," and "I believe you are dead wrong." But it is noteworthy that while the Secretary of Defense was denying any short- comings, the Pentagon confessed that it was buying back from a German company for $21 each more than 5500 bombs which it had sold to the company for $1.70 each only two years ago. This definitely is mismanagement and poor business. And as the credi- bility gap is bridged and as more facts areemade public, the more voluminous becomes the evidence of mismanagement. But management of a war involves more than nuts and bolts, more than bombs and ships, more than housing, supplies, and weapons for our servicemen. It involves hard decisions relative to dealing with sources of danger or potential danger to our servicemen. Proper management makes every effort to cut off the flow of supplies into enemy territory, as witness President Kennedy's quarantine of Cuba. Proper management of a war today calls for an effective effort at the United Nations. Britain's U.N. moves in its dispute with Rhodesia exemplify this. Management of a war today demands diplomatic skill and success in obtaining the fullest cooperation of friendly nations and similar skill in promoting stability in a nation we are trying to help. Any impartial observer must conclude that the management record of the Johnson Administra- tion in these areas leaves much to be desired. May I reiterate what I said in my newsletter of January 26 in discussing the Republican State of the Union message: "In his portion of the Republican Appraisal, Senator Dirksen outlined our Party's policy on the war in Vietnam. He emphasized that we support the President's peace efforts as strongly as we do his military efforts. We will support anything which Mr. Johnson does to obtain a prompt, just and secure peace. If this can be accomplished by immediate negotiations through diplomatic chan- nels, we favor such negotiations. If the Commander-in-Chief finds that further mili- tary action is necessary to achieve freedom and independence for the Vietnamese, we will support such action. Knowing that there is no substitute for victory, we will back the President in his every effort to achieve military or diplomatic success." But this does not mean that we can close our eyes to mismanagement or weak and ineffective policies. As I said on January 26th, we strongly object "to getting bagged down in an extended and massive land war in the jungles of Southeast Asia, a war which could go on for many years and produce thousands of casualties." Your Washington Review KENT 5 IONIA Congressman JERRY FORD May 4, 1966 Republicans succeeded in writing into the Agricultural Appropriation bill last week a prohibition against the sale of surplus agricultural commodities to nations which sell or transport goods to Communist North Vietnam. The purpose of this provi- sion is to tighten up on shipping into North Vietnam. It would affect nations which sell to Hanoi or permit their ships to carry supplies to our enemy. Even the sponsor agreed that "this is a rather modest step (and) falls far short of what I am sure most of us would desire in cutting back on shipping into North Vietnam." Yet on a special roll call vote 98 Democrats voted against this modest restriction. Every Republican voting (132) supported the ban on the sale of our surplus goods to those countries which aid the Hanoi regime. Ten Democratic Congress- men from Michigan opposed this anti-communist restriction; one (Mr. Diggs) voted with us, and one other (Mr. Conyers) was absent. THE APPROPRIATION: The President requested $7 billion for the Department of Agriculture in 1967. The bill approved by the House allows $6.9 billion but this is still $527 million more than was appropriated for the current year. However, the consideration of this appropriation bill did not follow the pattern set so far this year. There was bipartisan support for an increase in funds for certain established programs which had been cut rather drastically by the President. For instance, Mr. Johnson proposed to cut the special school milk program from this year's $103 million to $21 million for next year. The House restored the $82 million reduction. The Democratic Committee stated: "A cut of $82 million would deny supplemental milk to about 80 percent of our school children who are now benefiting from this program." Mr. Johnson also wanted to lower the budget for the school lunch program by $19 million but the Committee restored the amount saying that to reduce the funds "would also deny wholesome mid-day lunches to many children who receive no other nutritious meal each day." The House also put back in the budget funds the President had eliminated for agricultural research and soil conservation. As was pointed out in House debate, there are many places where Mr. Johnson can cut expenses but instead he chose "to assault traditional, successful, valuable programs of proven worth." On the other hand, I fully supported President Johnson's recommendation that funds for certain conservation programs be kept at $100 million. The Committee allowed $220 million for these programs which include primarily liming acid soil and constructing water storage reservoirs used mainly for watering livestock. I voted to keep the President's figure but we lost 75 to 30. I also endorsed Mr. Johnson's request for $220 million for the Rural Electrifi- cation Administration which the Committee had raised to $365 million. Those of us who voted against the increase were not only trying to hold down the budget but were indi- cating to REA that it should not go further into the business of generating power. Rather it should emphasize distribution of electricity to those not otherwise served. It is significant that in 1936, nearly 90 percent of the farms in our country had no central station electric service while today over 98 percent have such service. EQUAL OPPORTUNITY ACT: By a vote of 299 to 94 the House last Wednesday approved the Equal Opportunity Act. This bill is designed to more effectively pro- hibit discrimination in employment because of race, color, religion, sex, or national origin. The bill makes no changes in the law relative to unlawful employment prac- tices. It keeps these intact but alters the method of enforcement and extends coverage under the law. Under current law, by 1968 the rules are to cover an employer or labor organization with 25 or more employees or members. The bill as passed by the House extends coverage by 1967 to employers and labor organizations with 8 or more employees or members. The bill also makes the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, established by the Civil Rights Act of 1964, a quasi-judicial body with power to issue cease-and- desist orders in a manner similar to that of the National Labor Relations Board and the Federal Communications Commission. This is intended to strengthen the power of the Commission but as the Committee on the Judiciary stated, "It is the intent of the Committee that maximum efforts be concentrated on informal and voluntary methods of eliminating unlawful employment practices before commencing necessary formal proce- dures." I supported this bill, H.R. 10065, on final passage. DOGS AND CATS: The bill as recommended by the Committee on Agriculture to control the purchase, transportation, and sale of dogs and cats for use in research and experimentation which I described last week was approved on Thursday by a vote of 352 to 10. Amendments defeated on the floor would have included all vertebrate animals (some 200 different species) under the provisions of the law and would have required research facilities to retain records for two years and to keep a bill of sale for each animal. The Committee was told that 59 million mice and rats are used each year in cancer research alone. These amendments were defeated by a voice vote. SITUS PICKETING: Among the bills scheduled for consideration this week is the controversial H.R. 10027. This legislation would overrule a Supreme Court decision which prohibits a union representing employees of one employer on a construction job from picketing the project in order to close down the whole job because of a dispute with its employer. Your Washington Review KENT Congressman 5 IONIA JERRY FORD May 11, 1966 The house of Representatives last Thursday approved an appropriation bill for the Departments of Labor and HEW which exceeded the President's request by nearly a half-billion dollars. But no White House lobbyists were around urging or demanding that Mr. Johnson's budget figures be maintained. There was no sincere effort by Administration forces to hold the line on spending. And let no one lay the blame on Republicans even though some may have supported certain increases. The cold hard facts of the matter are that this Congress is dominated and controlled by a 2 to 1 majority of the President's own party. The half-billion dollar increase was made by the Democratic Congress without serious objections from the Democratic Administration. The bill as passed appropriated $10.5 billion, up $1.7 billion over this year and $500 million more than the $10 billion requested by the President. An effort to cut expenses 5 percent across the board was defeated 235 to 143. It must also be pointed out that the President is expected to request nearly $4 billion more for education and poverty programs. The bill as passed was incomplete and the additional funds will be provided in a "supplemental appropriation." Republi- can members of the Committee urged that action on the entire $14 billion request be considered at one time and in one bill, but this recommendation was rejected 130 to 90 on a teller vote. NASA AUTHORIZATION: Rejecting all efforts to reduce expenditures for space research and exploration, the House on Tuesday approved a $4.9 billion authorization bill for the National Aeronautics and Space Administration. The money must still be made available by an appropriation bill which may not exceed the amount authorized. The largest single item in the bill is nearly $3 billion for the Apollo program designed to land men on the moon and return them safely to earth within this decade. To do this, three basic units are being developed: a command module or vehicle to house three astronauts and various control systems; a service vehicle containing additional supplies, and a two-stage lunar excursion module to carry two astronauts to the moon's surface and back to the command and service modules in lunar orbit. The only amendment subject to a roll call vote was a modest one indeed. It would have set aside $20 million in the research and development funds, less than one-half of 1 percent of the total, for research on the elimination of aircraft noise. This is a serious problem to many people in numerous areas. A solution should be found; and to earmark $20 million out of over $4 billion for this purpose seemed quite in order. No new funds were being added and more of our citizens could obtain additional practical benefits from space research. I supported this amendment but we lost 271 to 90. Michigan's Republicans voted for the amendment; Michigan's Democrats voted against it. HIGHER EDUCATION ACT EXTENDED: Legislation was approved by the House last week to extend for three years the Act providing federal aid for construction of college facilities. The bill (H.R. 14644) authorizes $453 million for grants to pay up to 40 percent of the construction costs for community colleges and up to one-third of such costs for other colleges and universities. For 1968 the amount available goes to $700 million and for 1969 to $900 million. Michigan's share would be $20 million, $31 million, and $40 million respectively. Additional funds will be supplied for building graduate school facilities, and for loans to colleges to construct academic facilities. There was bi-partisan support for this bill which extends a workable and working program. It was pointed out that there are now nearly 6 million students in American colleges and that by 1975 enrollment is expected to reach 8.6 million. Freshmen enrollments for 1965 are 18 percent above those of the previous year. The number of colleges and universities rose from 866 at the end of World War II to almost 2,200 in 1966. Grand Valley State College is one of these new institutions. Ten years ago, approximately 240,000 students were enrolled in graduate school. Last September the number had increased to 570,000. Projections indicate that by 1974 there will be over million graduate students. DESTRUCTION OF UNFIT CURRENCY: Under a bill approved last Monday by the House, worn-out paper money now sent to Washington for destruction will be destroyed in 36 cities throughout the country where there are Federal Reserve Banks or branches. This will result in a saving in preparation and shipping costs of $500,000 a year. Under present law, worn, soiled, or mutilated Federal Reserve Notes (paper money) are returned by banks to a Federal Reserve Bank. Here holes are punched in the bills which are also cut in half lengthwise. The lower half is then shipped to Washington. When the bank hears by telegram that a shipment has arrived, it sends the upper portion of the money. After the money has been carefully counted, it is burned in a huge incinerator. Finally, the ash is carefully raked to be sure the bills have been completely destroyed. Under the legislation approved last week, unfit currency will be punched and burned at 36 points, eliminating shipment to Washington. Approximately 1.5 billion pieces of unfit currency, valued at between $7 and $8 billion, are destroyed each year. Your Washington Review KENT 5 IONIA Congressman JERRY FORD May 18, 1966 By a four-vote margin the House of Representatives last Tuesday committed the American taxpayers to a rent subsidy program which could cost up to $20 billion over the next 40 years. Republicans voted 119 to 6 against this new revolutionary pro- posal, but the Democrats voted approval 186 to 69. This was the fourth vote in the House within the year on rent subsidies. Presi- dent Johnson recommended the program in his housing message of March 2, 1965. On June 30th the House approved it by only six votes, 208 to 202. But in October the House refused by a vote of 182 to 162 to supply funds to get the program under way. In March of this year at President Johnson's request the House reversed itself and voted 198 to 190 to provide $12 million for use this fiscal year which ends June 30th. Then the Democratic-controlled Committee on Appropriations voted 25 to 21 to delete from the regular appropriation any funds to continue rent subsidies in the new fiscal year beginning July 1st. But the House on Tuesday overruled its committee and voted 192 to 188 to provide $20 million to fund the program next year. This confusion and the close votes indicate the complexity of the issue and the controversy sur- rounding it. But we are now on the way with a revolutionary scheme which will increase in magnitude and cost as the years go on. The time to stop the program was now, but instead the Democratic-dominated House rubber-stamped the President's demand. Rent subsidies mean that all of us as taxpayers will pay that part of a tenant's rent which represents the difference between the fair market rental of an apartment and one-fourth of the tenant's income. / For example, a family with an income of $250 a month could live in a $100-a-month apartment and pay only $62.50 a month, with you and me as taxpayers picking up the tab for the remaining $37.50. However, if the family decides to live in a $200-a-month apartment it would still pay $62.50 while our subsidy would go up to $137.50. said But this is not to be assistance for the poor only. Secretary Weaver has indi would liketo expe the Mogran cated that the program will be expanded to include families in the middle income bracket, $9,000 to $11,000 per year. It should also be pointed out that subsidies will be paid only to tenants in newly constructed apartments or those which have undergone major rehabilitation. INDEPENDENT OFFICES APPROPRIATION: Rent subsidies were considered in connec- tion with the $14 billion Independent Offices appropriation bill providing funds for about 20 agencies including NASA, the Veterans Administration, and the Federal Aviation Agency. This bill as recommended by the Committee was unique in that the amount involved was $305 million less than the President requested and $373 million less than the comparative appropriation for this year. You will remember that the usual pattern is for the President's overall request to be cut but the total spending for next year to exceed that for this year. In this bill the Committee made no increases in any request by the President and in 30 instances reduced expenditures below those of the current year. For this reason Republicans made no effort to effect a 5 percent across-the-board reduction. The Committee had done a good job. I voted against this appropriation bill on final passage only because the House had added funds for rent subsidies. MINIMUM WAGE: The House is scheduled to consider this week legislation (H.R. 13712) increasing the minimum wage from $1.25 to $1.60 per hour by February 1, 1968. The bill also proposes to extend coverage under the law to about 7 million additional employees by including smaller businesses and removing certain exemptions in the retail trades, laundries and drycleaning establishments, restaurants, hotels and motels, and hospitals. Employees of a farm operator with sales of $20,000 a year or more also would be subject to the law but the rate for these newly covered persons would be $1 an hour in 1967, $1.15 in 1968, and $1.30 in 1969. Some contend that it will take "a large army of investigators" to enforce the law on the several million farms and ranches through- out the country. SALE OF PARTICIPATIONS IN GOVERNMENT AGENCY LOAN POOLS: Uncle Sam holds billions of dollars in mortgages or other financial assets obtained from college housing loans, direct VA loans, and loans made by other governmental agencies including the Export-Import Bank and the Farmers Home Administration. President Johnson has requested authority to pool these assets, and to sell participation certi- ficates or shares in these assets to private investors. The Federal Treasury would have the money, investors will acquire a right to have their investment repaid with interest (they will not have title to any of the assets), the taxpayers will pay a higher rate of interest, and the federal budget will appear to be more nearly in balance. This is a gimmick to fool the public on total budget expenditure. The Presi- dent's 1967 budget contemplates a deficit of only $1.8 billion. The deficit would be $6 billion except for the proposed sale of $4.2 billion of financial assets. Once initiated there is no end to this form of budget maneuvering. Uncle Sam owns $33.1 billion of financial assets. By pooling these for participation sales and by the miracles of bookkeeping, we might even reduce the national debt to say nothing of eliminating the annual deficits. Of course, interest payments by the taxpayer will be higher under this plan, up 1/4 to 3/8 percent. It is noteworthy that the liberal ADA has joined Republicans in opposing this scheme which is scheduled for consideration by the House this week. Your Washington Review KENT 5 IONIA Congressman JERRY FORD May 25, 1966 President Johnson's sale-of-assets bill was rubber-stamped by the Democrat- dominated House last Wednesday by a vote of 206 to 190. Every Republican voted against it as did 64 Democrats. This bill, which I described last week, will permit the Administration to refinance mortgages and other assets to make it appear that Uncle Sam is spending less than is actually the case. It will make the debt ceiling meaningless and will cost millions of dollars in increased interest charges. Republicans were unanimous in voting to limit the interest to 4-3/4 percent but were overwhelmed 218 to 180 on a roll call vote. FREEDOM OF INFORMATION: Republicans are in full accord with a bill (S.1160) recommended by the Democrat-controlled Committee on Government Operations making it easier for any person to obtain information from public records. The bill defines specifically what information may be withheld rather than depending on such vague phrases as "good cause found," "in the public interest," and "internal management." It is designed to prevent what happened in 1962 when an agency decided it was not "in the public interest" to disclose cost estimates submitted by contractors in connection with the multimillion-dollar deep sea "Mohole" project even though it appeared that the firm which won the lucrative contract had not submitted the lowest bid. Nothing in the bill, however, would affect information relative to national security. GUAM AND VIRGIN ISLANDS TO ELECT GOVERNORS: Legislation was approved by the House last week authorizing the people in Guam and the Virgin Islands to elect their own.governors. Presently these officials are appointed by the President with the approval of the U.S. Senate. The people of Guam have been electing their own legis- lature for 16 years; the Virgin Islands have had an elected council or legislature since we acquired them from Denmark in 1917. The Committee on Interior and Insular Affairs pointed out that in each terri- tory the people have exercised their political powers in a responsible manner and have earned the right to elect their own governor. The House agreed and sent the legislation to the Senate for further consideration. FOREIGN AGENTS REGISTRATION ACT: The House approved a bill (S.693) last week to tighten the law on those individuals or associations engaging in political activity on behalf of foreign governments or any foreign interests. The foreign agents will be required to disclose their identity in testifying before Congressional committees; contingent fee contracts between agents and their employers based on success in LIBRARY political activities of the agents are prohibited, and campaign contributions on behalf of the foreign interests are banned. The bill was designed to protect the United States from clandestine political activities that seek to benefit foreign interests and was approved 285 to 0. MINIMUM WAGE AND SITUS PICKETING: The bill (H.R. 13712) to increase the minimum wage and extend its coverage which was scheduled for consideration last week was postponed until this week. The House will debate and vote on a number of amendments involving restaurant and agricultural workers, "tipped employees," and those employers who have government contracts. The bill as recommended by the Committee increases the minimum wage for those presently covered from $1.25 an hour to $1.40 on February 1, 1967 and $1.60 in 1968. Newly covered non-farm employees will reach $1.60 through five steps by 1971. For farm workers the minimum will be $1.00 on February 1, 1967, $1.15 on February 1, 1968, and $1.30 in 1969. It is estimated that over 7.2 million additional workers will come under the minimum wage provisions of this bill if it becomes law. The situs picketing bill, H.R. 10027, was scheduled for House action three weeks ago but not called up. You will remember this is the legislation to overrule a Supreme Court decision which prohibits a union representing employees of one contractor on a construction job from picketing the project in order to close down the whole job because of a dispute only with its employer. The Democratic leadership did not take up the bill for debate and a vote apparently because the Democratic Chairman of the Committee on Education and Labor, which had recommended the bill, objected to further action until the Senate had passed the Equal Opportunity Act which was approved by the House on April 27th. CIVIL RIGHTS ACT OF 1966: The House Committee on the Judiciary has completed three weeks of hearings on H.R. 14765, the President's civil rights proposals for this year. No opposition witnesses were heard during that time but these are expected to testify this week when the Committee may wind up the hearings. The provisions relative to the selection of juries and the prevention of discrimination in the sale or rental of housing are the most controversial of the six parts of the bill. At this point it is difficult to forecast what the Committee's recommendations will be on this White House proposal. A DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION: The Committee on Government Operations is continuing its hearings on the bill (H.R. 13200) to establish a Department of Trans- portation at cabinet level. The new Department would include the Federal Aviation Agency, Coast Guard, Maritime Administration, Bureau of Public Roads, and certain functions of the Civil Aeronautics Board and the Interstate Commerce Commission. The Committee is expected to complete its hearings shortly but is not expected to make its recommendations for some time.