Ask the Scholar
Document scope · 1 page
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.
Scholar Source Context
Document identity
localId
12144653
label
Ford Press Releases - Crime, 1966-1967 (2)
core
doc
dtoType
document
citationUrl
pageCount
1
Source metadata
id
12144653
sourceUrl
contentType
document
title
Ford Press Releases - Crime, 1966-1967 (2)
citationUrl
collections
Gerald R. Ford Congressional Papers
Press Releases Subject Files
subjects
Civil disobedience
Crime
Legislation
iiifBase
thumbnailUrl
largeImageUrl
imageCount
1
hasImages
yes
source
import
hasTranscription
no
Source extras
naId
12144653
coverageEndDate
logicalDate
1967-12-31
month
12
year
1967
coverageStartDate
logicalDate
1966-10-01
month
10
year
1966
levelOfDescription
fileUnit
recordType
description
ocrSource
nara-archive
Single page context
seq
1
pageIndex
0
type
document
url
mediaId
d8966cc4a9a06be8
ocrText
The original documents are located in Box D6, folder "Ford Press Releases - Crime, 1966-
1967 (2)" of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald
R. Ford Presidential Library.
Copyright Notice
The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of
photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. The Council donated to the United
States of America his copyrights in all of his unpublished writings in National Archives collections.
Works prepared by U.S. Government employees as part of their official duties are in the public
domain. The copyrights to materials written by other individuals or organizations are presumed to
remain with them. If you think any of the information displayed in the PDF is subject to a valid
copyright claim, please contact the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library.
Digitized from Box D6 of the Ford Congressional Papers: Press Secretary and Speech File at the Gerald R. Ford Presidential Library
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
--Release in PMs of August 3--
Remarks by Rep. Gerald R. Ford, R-Mich., prepared for delivery on the floor of
the House on Thursday, August 3, 1967.
Mr. Speaker, America today is shaken by a deep national crisis--a near-
breakdown of law and order made even more severe by civil disorders in which
criminal elements are heavily engaged.
The law-abiding citizens of America who have suffered at the hands of the
lawless and the extremists are anxiously awaiting a remedy.
This is a time for swift and decisive action. It is a time for early-effect
measures, and a time for longrange solutions which not only repair but greatly
strengthen the fabric of our society. It is long past the time when we should
launch an all-out assault on the criminal in our midst and on the social conditions
which tend to breed crime and civil disorder.
We have before us legislation which we-hope will/stiffen the will and the
way of local law enforcement. I trust all of us here today will work together
to shape this legislation into the best possible Paw enforcement aid for our
states and local communities.
I personally feel that in thi billias in other measures needed to rebuild
a badly torn and bleeding America we must take a new approach and in some instances
a bold and imaginative approach.
We must abandon the idea of direct Federal intervention in the cities, with
a Federal administrator deciding arbitmarily who will get what and how much. In
the field of law enfordement as in others WE must provide the incentive for
strong state and Local action with federal dollar helps That dollar help should
be channeled through the states, through a designated state agency which would
implement a statewide plan for stronger law diparcement as approved by our
Justice Department.
If the legislation now before us is amended to provide for such block grants
to the states to bolster state and local law enforcement, I believe we should
double the authorization requested by the President for fiscal 1968. I also want
an equitable allocation formula written into the bill. I don't want law enforce-
ment grants left solely to the discretion of the attorney general of the United
States.
What is Congress doing about crime in the streets about the arson, looting
(more)
-2-
and murder that have made American cities from coast to coast places of horror,
suffering and shame?
This House has passed an Anti-Riot Act, legislation which has received the
silent treatment by the President and has been labeled unnecessary by the
Attorney General.
We are about to pass landmark legislation to be known as the Law Enforcement
and Criminal Justice Assistance Act of 1967.
What has the President of the United States done to assist the Congress in
meeting the crime and civil disorders crisis of 1967?
Before the most recent outbreaks, he sent the Congress a so-called Safe
Streets Bill which has been amended in more than 20 instances in the House
Judiciary Committee. After the Detroit riot, he appointed a presidential study
commission on civil disorders.
Has there been a flow of proposals from the White House to the Congress in a
move to deal vigorously with the crime-in-the-streets crisis, which occupies a
national priority second only to the War in Vietnam and has eclipsed even the
war in the minds of the American people?
There have not been any new proposals from the White House. There has been
"business as usual." There has been a fresh push by the President for more of
the same, more millions for his Great Society programs, and charges by the
President, the vice-president and the Secretary of Agriculture that you people
here in the House have been inactive.
I submit that the Johnson Administration has delivered itself of a self-
indictment in blaming the 1967 riots on the Congress. I submit that this attempt
to fasten the blame on the Congress indicates a bankruptcy of ideas within the
Administration.
This is "the game of switch," a move by the Administration to divert the
blame from itself by pinning it on the Congress. The Administration is using
the Congress as a scapegoat for its own troubles. The President is asking the
American people to believe that the proposals he has advanced since he assumed
the Presidency in November, 1963, contained all the answers and Congress just
hasn't given him enough money. My friend, George Mahon, answered that argument
beautifully here on the floor last Monday when he cited the tremendous sums that
Democratic Congresses have voted since 1960 and declared that "Spending is not
the answer to these problems."
All of this should tell us that something is bascially wrong with the
Johnson Administration's approach to the prcblems of our cities, the evils that
(more)
-3-
help to spawn crime and civil disorder. Yet the President has spurned every new
approach offered by the Loyal Opposition, has refused to seriously entertain any
new proposals.
I challenge him to take a fresh look at the ideas set forth in the Republican
State of the Union Message of last January 19--particularly those of tax credits
as an incentive to industry to attack urban problems, a proposed Industry Youth
Corps to provide private, productive employment for young people as part of a
revamped War on Poverty, the Human Investment Act which would trigger a nationwide
on-the-job training program by industry, and the Percy-Widnall plan to set up a
National Home Ownership Foundation for slum dwellers.
The Washington Post, one of the country's great newspapers, called editorially
last Monday for a "great departure" in domestic policy, a "different direction."
Republicans proposed a "New Direction" in our State of the Union Message last
January.
We have repeatedly urged the tax credit approach to the problems of the cities.
So, now, does the Washington Post. So, too, does a prominent Senate Democrat.
To the Washington Post and to Bobby Kennedy, I say, "Welcome to the club."
The Vice-President, who has been admiringly labeled "the President's echo"
by the Washington Post, last night lofted a trial balloon on Lyndon Johnson's
behalf. He called for a domestic Marshall Plan to fight poverty in the United
States. I thought we had an anti-poverty program. Is Mr. Humphrey calling the
Johnson Anti-Poverty Program a failure?
Mr. Humphrey obviously is saying that the $25.6 billion ich President
Johnson's 1968 budget message lists as earmarked for the poverty fight this
fiscal year is not enough. Is he proposing that we spend an additional $20 billion
this fiscal year, to be added to the $20 to $30 billion deficit the Johnson-
Humphrey Administration already is running?
Mr. Humphrey appears to be calling the Democratic majority in the Congress a
bunch of pikers, although the President proudly declares in his 1968 budget
message that LBJ spending on "federal aid to the poor" not only has gone up
nearly $16 billion since 1960 but is nearly double the amount spent by John F.
Kennedy in 1963.
Where are all the blessings from this outpouring of federal aid? George
Mahon said on Monday, "The more we have appropriated for these programs, the more
violence we have had." He added, "This refutes the idea that money alone is the
answer to this problem."
I say we need new imaginative proposals, not more of the same. If the
(more)
-4-
President's trial balloon domestic Marshall Plan is simply a dollar-fattening of
his old ideas, then the President is failing to help the Congress meet the great
crisis that confronts the American people.
I challenge the President to cast off his blinders, to open his eyes to
fresh new approaches to our slum sickness. I challenge him to re-think America's
problems, for the sands of time are flowing fast.
#####
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
--Release in PMs of August 3--
Remarks by Rep. Gerald R. Ford, R-Mich., prepared for delivery on the floor of
the House on Thursday, August 3, 1967.
Mr. Speaker, America today is shaken by a deep national crisis--a near-
breakdown of law and order made even more severe by civil lisorders in which
criminal elements are heavily engaged.
The law-abiding citizens of America who have suffered at the hands of the
lawless and the extremists are anxiously awaiting a remedy.
This is a time for swift and decisive action. It is a time for early-effect
measures, and a time for longrange solutions which not only repair but greatly
strengthen the fabric of our society. It is long past the time when we should
launch an all-out assault on the criminal in our midst and on the social conditions
which tend to breed crime and civil disorder.
We have before us legislation which we hope will stiffen the will and the
way of local law enforcement. I trust all of us here today will work together
to shape this legislation into the best possible law enforcement aid for our
states and local communities.
I personally feel that in this bill as in other measures needed to rebuild
a badly torn and bleeding America we must take a new approach and in some instances
a bold and imaginative approach.
We must abandon the idea of direct Federal intervention in the cities, with
a Federal administrator deciding arbitrarily who will get what and how much. In
the field of law enforcement as in others we must provide the incentive for
strong state and local action with federal dollar help. That dollar help should
be channeled through the states, through a designated state agency which would
implement a statewide plan for strouger law enforcement as approved by our
Justice Department.
If the legislation now before us is amended to provide for such block grants
to the states to bolster state and local law enforcement, I believe we should
double the authorization requested by the President for fiscal 1968. I also want
an equitable allocation formula written into the bill. I don't want law enforce-
ment grants left solely to the discretion of the attorney general of the United
States.
What is Congress doing about crime in the streets about the arson, looting
LIBRARY
(more)
-2-
and murder that have made American cities from coast to coast places of horror,
suffering and shame?
This House has passed an Anti-Riot Act, legislation which has received the
silent treatment by the President and has been labeled unnecessary by the
Attorney General.
We are about to pass landmark legislation to be known as the Law Enforcement
and Criminal Justice Assistance Act of 1967.
What has the President of the United States done to assist the Congress in
meeting the crime and civil disorders crisis of 1967?
Before the most recent outbreaks, he sent the Congress a so-called Safe
Streets Bill which has been amended in more than 20 instances in the House
Judiciary Committee. After the Detroit riot, he appointed a presidential study
commission on civil disorders.
Has there been a flow of proposals from the White House to the Congress in a
move to deal vigorously with the crime-in-the-streets crisis, which occupies a
national priority second only to the War in Vietnam and has eclipsed even the
war in the minds of the American people?
There have not been any new proposals from the White House. There has been
"business as usual." There has been a fresh push by the President for more of
the same, more millions for his Great Society programs, and charges by the
President, the vice-president and the Secretary of Agriculture that you people
here in the House have been inactive.
I submit that the Johnson Administration has delivered itself of a self-
indictment in blaming the 1967 riots on the Congress. I submit that this attempt
to fasten the blame on the Congress indicates a bankruptcy of ideas within the
Administration.
This is "the game of switch," a move by the Administration to divert the
blame from itself by pinning it on the Congress. The Administration is using
the Congress as a scapegoat for its own troubles. The President is asking the
American people to believe that the proposals he has advanced since he assumed
the Presidency in November, 1963, contained all the answers and Congress just
hasn't given him enough money. My friend, George Mahon, answered that argument
beautifully here on the floor last Monday when he cited the tremendous sums that
Democratic Congresses have voted since 1960 and declared that "Spending is not
the answer to these problems."
All of this should tell us that something is bascially wrong with the
Johnson Administration's approach to the problems of our cities, the evils that
(more)
-3-
help to spawn crime and civil disorder. Yet the President has spurned every new
approach offered by the Loyal Opposition, has refused to seriously entertain any
new proposals.
I challenge him to take a fresh look at the ideas set forth in the Republican
State of the Union Message of last January 19--particularly those of tax credits
as an incentive to industry to attack urban problems, a proposed Industry Youth
Corps to provide private, productive employment for young people as part of a
revamped War on Poverty, the Human Investment Act which would trigger a nationwide
on-the-job training program by industry, and the Percy-Widnall plan to set up a
National Home Ownership Foundation for slum dwellers.
The Washington Post, one of the country's great newspapers, called editorially
last Monday for a "great departure" in domestic policy, a "different direction."
Republicans proposed a "New Direction" in our State of the Union Message last
January.
We have repeatedly urged the tax credit approach to the problems of the cities.
So, now, does the Washington Post. So, too, does a prominent Senate Democrat.
To the Washington Post and to Bobby Kennedy, I say, "Welcome to the club."
The Vice-President, who has been admiringly labeled "the President's echo"
by the Washington Post, last night lofted a trial balloon on Lyndon Johnson's
behalf. He called for a domestic Marshall Plan to fight poverty in the United
States. I thought we had an anti-poverty program. Is Mr. Humphrey calling the
Johnson Anti-Poverty Program a failure?
Mr. Humphrey obviously is saying that the $25.6 billion wh ich President
Johnson's 1968 budget message lists as earmarked for the poverty fight this
fiscal year is not enough. Is he proposing that we spend an additional $20 billion
this fiscal year, to be added to the $20 to $30 billion deficit the Johnson-
Humphrey Administration already is running?
Mr. Humphrey appears to be calling the Democratic majority in the Congress a
bunch of pikers, although the President proudly declares in his 1968 budget
message that LBJ spending on "federal aid to the poor" not only has gone up
nearly $16 billion since 1960 but is nearly double the amount spent by John F.
Kennedy in 1963.
Where are all the blessings from this outpouring of federal aid? George
Mahon said on Monday, "The more we have appropriated for these programs, the more
violence we have had." He added, "This refutes the idea that money alone is the
answer to this problem."
I say we need new imaginative proposals, not more of the same. If the
(more)
-4-
President's trial balloon domestic Marshall Plan is simply a dollar-fattening of
his old ideas, then the President is failing to help the Congress meet the great
crisis that confronts the American people.
I challenge the President to cast off his blinders, to open his eyes to
fresh new approaches to our slum sickness. I challenge him to re-think America's
problems, for the sands of time are flowing fast.
#
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
Everett M. Dirksen
THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
OF REPRESENTATIVES.
of Illinois
Gerald R. Ford
Thomas H. Kuchel
OF THE CONGRESS
of Michigan
of California
Leslie C. Arends
Bourke B. Hickenlooper
of Illinois
of Iowa
Press Release
Melvin R. Laird
Margaret Chase Smith
of Wisconsin
of Maine
John J. Rhodes
George Murphy
of Arisona
of California
H. Allen Smith
Milton R. Young
of California
of North Dakota
Issued following a
Bob Wilson
Hugh Scott
Leadership Meeting
of California
of Pennsylvania
Charles E. Goodell
of New York
August 3, 1967
PRESIDING:
Richard H. Poff
of Virginia
The National Chairman
Ray C. Bliss
William C. Cramer
of Florida
STATEMENT BY SENATOR DIRKSEN
RELEASE ON DELIVERY
No person has a right to act against the public safety, anywhere,
any time. There is no excuse -- ever -- for riot, arson and murder.
On this Americans are agreed.
Americans also agree that:
When near-anarchy exists in this nation --
When trouble-makers defy the law, incite rioting, burning, pillaging
and murder ---
There must be action. Its urgency is extreme.
Punishment of those who break the law must be swift and decisive --
no matter who they may be.
The protection of life and property must be orimary and total.
The re-enforcement of every arm of the law everywhere must be
maximum. There can be nd compromise with crime -- and crime is exactly
what this is.
Republicans in Congress and across America call for firm, certain
action at all levels and in total strength.
Explanations for this war in America's streets are many. Some may
be well-founded. Others and not. To find the right answers is our first
duty.
The Administration has named a "blue nibbon" commission to work to
this end. This is not enough -- not nearly enough. Congress itself must
act to determine promptly the causes and the cures this frightful
situation. The Congress -- for the people -- must provide the solutions.
(con't)
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-(202) 225-3700
Consultant to the Leadership-John B. Fisher
Senator Dirksen
Page Two
Our people must be made safe in their homes, at their jobs and on the
streets.
Mr. Ford and I, with many of our colleagues, have filed a
resolution calling for immediate creation of a Joint Committee of
the Congress to investigate riots and violent civil disorder, with full
powers necessary to this purpose.
Additional measures having similar objectives have been filed by
others in Congress. The Government Operations Committee of the Senate
may be named to take initial investigative action. Whatever is done must
be done promptly, without partisanship. We are all in this boat together
and the winds are raging.
We repeat, punishment must be swift for those who break the law --
whoever they may be. There must be no reward for those who riot and
destroy.
BUT --
There must be found workable solutions to this unrest and violence
that will permanently assure eradication of these evils.
There must be achieved a restoration of that strength-in-unity that
has made America great and will keep America free.
STATEMENT BY REPRESENTATIVE FORD:
August 3, 1967
The statements just made by Senator Dirksen have my complete and
wholehearted support.
This war in our streets must be brought to the earliest possible end
for the safety and benefit of every American citizen.
I am wholly confident that the Congress and, hopefully, the Adminis-
tration, will promptly and accurately determine the root causes and
enduring cures for this malignant social cancer.
The Republican Leadership of the Congress believes that there are
immediate steps to be taken by all of us -- now. In our January appraisal
of the State of the Union we urged several of these:
A total re-vamping and re-direction of the Poverty War -- where
waste has been astronomical and administration ineffective. We said then
and we repeat:
"We want an Opportunity Crusade that will
enlist private enterprise and the States as
effective partners of the Federal Government
in this fight. We would give the children of
poverty the very highest priority they deserve.
As Republicans have urged for two years, Head
Start requires follow-through in the early grades."
Creation of a new Industry Youth Corps "to provide private
productive employment and training on the job".
The passage of a Human Investment Act "to induce employers to expand
job opportunities for the unskilled".
The enlargment of "opportunities of low-income Americans for private
home ownership".
Support for a system of tax sharing to return to the States and local
governments a fixed percentage of personal income taxes without Federal
control.
The elimination of the poverty of realistic ideas among Poverty
War officials.
We believe that in vastly expanded educational opportunities and
productive job training the earliest and best of these solutions will be
found. A closer application of Federal resources to local needs is clearly
necessary.
In help -- and self-help -- for this generation of Americans, in help --
and opportunity -- for the next generation -- we will find the answers we
seek and must have.
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
Everett M. Dirksen
THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
of Illinois
Gerald R. Ford
Thomas H. Kuchel
OF THE CONGRESS
of Michigan
of California
Leslie C. Arends
Bourke B. Hickenlooper
of Illinois
of Iowa
Press Release
Melvin R. Laird
Margaret Chase Smith
of Wisconsin
of Maine
John J. Rhodes
George Murphy
of Arizona
of California
H. Allen Smith
Milton R. Young
of California
of North Dakota
Issued following a
Bob Wilson
Hugh Scott
Leadership Meeting
of California
of Pennsylvania
Charles E. Goodell
August 3, 1967
of New York
PRESIDING:
Richard H. Poff
of Virginia
The National Chairman
Ray C. Bliss
William C. Cramer
of Florida
STATEMENT BY SENATOR DIRKSEN
RELEASE ON DELIVERY
No person has a right to act against the public safety, anywhere,
any time. There is no excuse -- ever -- for riot, arson and murder.
On this Americans are agreed.
Americans also agree that:
When near-anarchy exists in this nation --
When trouble-makers defy the law, incite rioting, burning, pillaging
and murder --
There must be action. Its urgency is extreme.
Punishment of those who break the law must be swift and decisive --
no matter who they may be.
The protection of life and property must be primary and total.
The re-enforcement of every arm of the law everywhere must be
maximum. There can be no compromise with crime -- and crime is exactly
what this is.
Republicans in Congress and across America call for firm, certain
action at all levels and in total strength.
Explanations for this war in America's streets are many. Some may
be well-founded. Others are not. To find the right answers is our first
duty.
The Administration has named a "blue ribbon" commission to work to
this end. This is not enough -- not nearly enough. Congress itself must
act to determine promptly the causes and the cures of this frightful
situation. The Congress -- for the people -- must provide the solutions.
(con't)
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-(202) 225-3700
Consultant to the Leadership-John B. Fisher
Senator Dirksen
Page Two
Our people must be made safe in their homes, at their jobs and on the
streets.
Mr. Ford and I, with many of our colleagues, have filed a
resolution calling for immediate creation of a Joint Committee of
the Congress to investigate riots and violent civil disorder, with full
powers necessary to this purpose.
Additional measures having similar objectives have been filed by
others in Congress. The Government Operations Committee of the Senate
may be named to take initial investigative action. Whatever is done must
be done promptly, without partisanship. We are all in this boat together
and the winds are raging.
We repeat, punishment must be swift for those who break the law --
whoever they may be. There must be no reward for those who riot and
destroy.
BUT
There must be found workable solutions to this unrest and violence
that will permanently assure eradication of these evils.
There must be achieved a restoration of that strength-in-unity that
has made America great and will keep America free.
STATEMENT BY REPRESENTATIVE FORD:
August 3, 1967
The statements just made by Senator Dirksen have my complete and
wholehearted support.
This war in our streets must be brought to the earliest possible end
for the safety and benefit of every American citizen.
I am wholly confident that the Congress and, hopefully, the Adminis-
tration, will promptly and accurately determine the root causes and
enduring cures for this malignant social cancer.
The Republican Leadership of the Congress believes that there are
immediate steps to be taken by all of us -- now. In our January appraisal
bE the State of the Union we urged several of these:
A total re-vamping and re-direction of the Poverty War -- where
waste has been astronomical and administration ineffective. We said then
and we repeat:
"We want an Opportunity Crusade that will
enlist private enterprise and the States as
effective partners of the Federal Government
in this fight. We would give the children of
poverty the very highest priority they deserve.
As Republicans have urged for two years, Head
Start requires follow-through in the early grades."
Creation of a new Industry Youth Corps "to provide private
productive employment and training on the job".
The passage of a Human Investment Act "to induce employers to expand
job opportunities for the unskilled".
The enlargment of "opportunities of low-income Americans for private
home ownership".
Support for a system of tax sharing to return to the States and local
governments a fixed percentage of personal income taxes without Federal
control.
The elimination of the poverty of realistic ideas among Poverty
War officials.
We believe that in vastly expanded educational opportunities and
productive job training the earliest and best of these solutions will be
found. A closer application of Federal resources to local needs is clearly
necessary.
In help -- and self-help -- for this generation of Americans, in help --
and opportunity -- for the next generation -- we will find the answers we
seek and must have.
9 August 1967
milling
U. S. HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES
REPUBLICAN POLICY COMMITTEE
REP. JOHN I. RHODES, (R.-ARIZ.) CHAIRMAN
140 CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
TELEPHONE 225-6168
10
HOUSE REPUBLICAN POLICY COMMITTEE STATEMENT ON THE DEPLOYMENT
OF AN ANTI-BALLISTIC MISSILE SYSTEM
The House Republican Policy Committee urges the Johnson-Hupphrey Adminis-
tration to provide the American people with an effective Anti-Ballistic Missile
system. The Soviets have been building and deploying their ABM system for some time.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff unanimously support the position that this country should
now proceed to deploy. Congress has appropriated sufficient funds for this purpose.
The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy has warned, "A low order of magnitude attack
could possibly be launched by the Chinese Communists against the United States by
the early 1970's. At present we do not have an effective anti-ballistic missile
system which could repel such a suicidal (for the Chinese) but nevertheless possible
strike.' Time and the rush of events demand action.
As early as 1963 there were rumors that the Russians were developing an
ABM defense. However, Secretary McNamara when questioned about this, engaged in a
dialogue of evasion that appeared to deny that the Soviets had such a system. It
was not until November 10, 1966, two days after the 1966 election, that McNamara
announced there was considerable evidence of the existence of a Soviet ABM system.
Moreover, information from the intelligence community now indicates that the Soviets
are indeed deploying one and possibly two ABM systems. Also, the Soviets probably
will extend and improve their defenses over the coming year and they have accelerated
the deployment of hardened offensive intercontinental ballistic missiles.
It is significant that in response to a news conference question about the
Soviet anti-ballistic missile system, General Paul G. Kurochin, head of the Soviet
Frunze Military Academy, stated that missiles fired at the Soviet Union would not hit
their targets. He also stated that, "Detecting missiles in time and destroying them
(over)
in flight is no problem." Under the circumstances, it is little wonder that Soviet
Premier Kosygin has given no encouragement to hopes for a moratorium on anti-
ballistic missile defense development as a means of limiting the arms race between
the great powers.
There is a continuing split between Secretary McNamara and the entire
Joint Chiefs of Staff on the anti-ballistic missile defense question. For years
the Joint Chiefs of Staff have unanimously supported the position that this country
should deploy Nike X. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Wheeler,
testified that he had gone to President Johnson on his own initiative to present the
Joint Chiefs' case. According to General Wheeler, "the Soviets will undoubtedly im-
prove the Moscow system as time goes on and extend ABM defense to other high priority
areas of the Soviet Union." In his opinion, the Soviet objective is "to achieve an
exploitable capability, permitting them freedom to pursue their national aims at
conflict levels less than general nuclear war."
On March 10, 1967, General Harold Johnson, the Chief of Staff of the U. S.
Army, in his testimony before the House Appropriations Committee, clearly expressed
the position of the prefessional military leaders when he stated, "When do we stop
discussing and when do we reach a decision point?"
With the shock of the recent Chinese thermonuclear explosion on June 17,
1967, efforts to downgrade the potential menace of Communist China have disappeared.
It took the United States 8 years to move from the atomic bomb to the hydrogen bomb.
It took the Soviet Union 4 years to accomplish the same result. In just 2 years and
8 months, Red China has joined the H-bomb club. In a recent report on the Red
Chinese threat, the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy stated:
"We believe that the Chinese will continue to place a high
priority on thermonuclear weapon development. With continued
testing, we believe they will be able to develop a thermonuclear
warhead in the ICBM weight class with a yield in the megaton
range by about 1970. We believe that the Chinese can have an
ICBM system ready for deployment in the early 1970's. On the
basis of our present knowledge, we believe that the Chinese
probably will achieve an operational ICBM capability before
1972. Conceivably, it could be ready as early as 1970-71.
It has been estimated that from 5 to 7 years, from the time the go-ahead
is given, would be needed to deploy even a thin U. S. anti-ballistic missile defense.
Any lingering doubt over whether or not such a system should be developed has been
dispelled by China's amazing progress with nuclear weapons. In a report dated
August 4, 1967, the Senate Committee on Appropriations noted that during fiscal year
1968, there will be approximately $970 million available for an ABM defense system.
The Committee also stated, "The Congress has met its constitutional responsibilities
in this matter, and the responsibility for further delaying this system clearly rests
with the executive branch of the government."
These funds must be put to use without further delay. The secret of
mass destruction is now in the hands of those who may be tempted to use it. Our
defenses must be prepared to meet this challenge.
9 August 1967
11111
MINIT
U. S. HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES
REPUBLICAN POLICY
COMMITTEE
REP. JOHN J. RHODES, (R.-ARIZ.) CHAIRMAN
140 CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING
TELEPHONE 225-6168
10
HOUSE REPUBLICAN POLICY COMMITTEE STATEMENT ON THE DEPLOYMENT
OF AN ANTI-BALLISTIC MISSILE SYSTEM
The House Republican Policy Committee urges the Johnson-Humphrey Adminis-
tration to provide the American people with an effective Anti-Ballistic Missile
system. The Soviets have been building and deploying their ABM system for some time.
The Joint Chiefs of Staff unanimously support the position that this country should
now proceed to deploy. Congress has appropriated sufficient funds for this purpose.
The Joint Committee on Atomic Energy has warned, "A low order of magnitude attack
could possibly be launched by the Chinese Communists against the United States by
the early 1970's. At present we do not have an effective anti-ballistic missile
system which could repel such a suicidal (for the Chinese) but nevertheless possible
strike.' Time and the rush of events demand action.
As early as 1963 there were rumors that the Russians were developing an
ABM defense. However, Secretary McNamara when questioned about this, engaged in a
dialogue of evasion that appeared to deny that the Soviets had such a system. It
was not until November 10, 1966, two days after the 1966 election, that McNamara
announced there was considerable evidence of the existence of a Soviet ABM system.
Moreover, information from the intelligence community now indicates that the Soviets
are indeed deploying one and possibly two ABM systems. Also, the Soviets probably
will extend and improve their defenses over the coming year and they have accelerated
the deployment of hardened offensive intercontinental ballistic missiles.
It is significant that in response to a news conference question about the
Soviet anti-ballistic missile system, General Paul G. Kurochin, head of the Soviet
Frunze Military Academy, stated that missiles fired at the Soviet Union would not hit
their targets. He also stated that, "Detecting missiles in time and destroying them
(over)
in flight is no problem.' Under the circumstances, it is little wonder that Soviet
Premier Kosygin has given no encouragement to hopes for a moratorium on anti-
ballistic missile defense development as a means of limiting the arms race between
the great powers.
There is a continuing split between Secretary McNamara and the entire
Joint Chiefs of Staff on the anti-ballistic missile defense question. For years
the Joint Chiefs of Staff have unanimously supported the position that this country
should deploy Nike X. The Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, General Wheeler,
testified that he had gone to President Johnson on his own initiative to present the
Joint Chiefs' case. According to General Wheeler, "the Soviets will undoubtedly im-
prove the Moscow system as time goes on and extend ABM defense to other high priority
areas of the Soviet Union." In his opinion, the Soviet objective is "to achieve an
exploitable capability, permitting them freedom to pursue their national aims at
conflict levels less than general nuclear war."
On March 10, 1967, General Harold Johnson, the Chief of Staff of the U. S.
Army, in his testimony before the House Appropriations Committee, clearly expressed
the position of the prefessional military leaders when he stated, "When do we stop
discussing and when do we reach a decision point?"
With the shock of the recent Chinese thermonuclear explosion on June 17,
1967, efforts to downgrade the potential menace of Communist China have disappeared.
It took the United States 8 years to move from the atomic bomb to the hydrogen bomb.
It took the Soviet Union 4 years to accomplish the same result. In just 2 years and
8 months, Red China has joined the H-bomb club. In a recent report on the Red
Chinese threat, the Joint Committee on Atomic Energy stated:
"We believe that the Chinese will continue to place a high
priority on thermonuclear weapon development. With continued
testing, we believe they will be able to develop a thermonuclear
warhead in the ICBM weight class with a yield in the megaton
range by about 1970. We believe that the Chinese can have an
ICBM system ready for deployment in the early 1970's. On the
basis of our present knowledge, we believe that the Chinese
probably will achieve an operational ICBM capability before
1972. Conceivably, it could be ready as early as 1970-71.
It has been estimated that from 5 to 7 years, from the time the go-ahead
is given, would be needed to deploy even a thin U. S. anti-ballistic missile defense.
Any lingering doubt over whether or not such a system should be developed has been
dispelled by China's amazing progress with nuclear weapons. In a report dated
August 4, 1967, the Senate Committee on Appropriations noted that during fiscal year
1968, there will be approximately $970 million available for an ABM defense system.
The Committee also stated, "The Congress has met its constitutional responsibilities
in this matter, and the responsibility for further delaying this system clearly rests
with the executive branch of the government."
These funds must be put to use without further delay. The secret of
mass destruction is now in the hands of those who may be tempted to use it. Our
defenses must be prepared to meet this challenge.
(NOT PRINTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE)
10
Congressional Record
United States
of America
PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE
90ᵗʰ
CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
Vol. 113
WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, AUGUST 8, 1967
No. 124
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON
manpower, supported by radical revision of
in enforcing federal law.
personnel practices, is the basic essential for
There are between 16,000 and 20,00 federal
CRIME
achieving more effective and fairer law
law enforcement officials in the United
enforcement."
States. These officers rely daily upon the
(Mr. GERALD R. FORD (at the re-
The foundation for a successful attack upon
more than 420,000 local and state officials for
the problem of crime is better law enforce-
quest of Mr. EDWARDS of Alabama) was
ment. Better law enforcement requires the
support. For example, local police may ac-
granted permission to extend his remarks
best police officers. Many police are not pro-
company postmasters to banks with large
at this point in the RECORD and to include
vided with a salary level and the fringe bene-
sums of money. FBI, Secret Service, Postal
extraneous matter.)
fits that are now prevalent in our society
Inspectors, Immigration officials and many
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker,
among most occupational groups.
others use the assistance of local depart-
The Commission reports that in 1967 alone
ments in carrying out their duties. Local of-
at a time when law and order are of
prime concern to all Americans, I think
there will be 50,000 vacancies in police de-
ficers swear in their oaths of office to uphold
the United States Constitution and all Fed-
partments throughout the Nation. The Com-
it is incumbent on all of us to contribute
mission also reports that the average start-
eral laws. The responsibility should be
what we can to improving our criminal
ing salary for a patrolman in small cities is
reciprocal.
laws and procedures. To this end, Re-
$4,600. In large cities the average is $5,300.
A well-written law of disability and sur-
publicans have created a task force on
Moreover, typical maximum pay is less than
vivorship compensation could stimulate state
crime to study problems in this complex
$1000 over the starting salary.
and local governments to develop state laws
Nor is this the only problem. The fringe
for analogous local circumstances.
area and to propose legislation to im-
benefits customary to most jobs today-life
Under existing law, federal officers are pro-
prove law enforcement. The task force
insurance and survivors benefits-are fre-
vided for in a number of compensatory pro-
is not concerned with any partisan ad-
quently not available to local law officers.
grams, including the Federal Employees
vantage. Rather, it hopes to act as a
Moreover, because police work is considered
Compensation Act which is administered by
catalyst in the legislative process to
a hazardous occupation, insurance premiums
the Department of Labor for the benefit of
produce more effective tools to fight our
are high and difficult to meet with a low
disabled officers and their surviving spouses
and dependent children. The Republican
Nation's grave crime problem.
salary.
For this reason, I believe it might be of
At this time there are no comprehensive
Task Force on Crime believes that we should
interest to Members to read the policy
statistics on the existing state and local
guarantee equal treatment to local police
compensation programs established for po-
who risk their lives to assist federal officers
statements issued to date by the task
lice officers injured or disabled in the line of
protected by this program in such activities
force on crime.
duty. Recent testimony before the House
as apprehension of bank robbers, kidnappers,
Under leave to extend my remarks, I
Judiciary Committee revealed, however, that
and "AWOL" military personnel.
include the statements of May 11, May
the survivors of an officer killed in Rich-
Although the details as to how this pro-
mond, Virginia, would receive the sum of
gram would operate vary to some degree
22, May 31, and June 5, 1967:
$75.00 per month for one year from the Po-
among proponents, all evidence suggests that
FIRST INTERIM REPORT OF THE REPUBLICAN
lice Benevolent Association. Other testimony
the cost to the federal government would not
TASK FORCE ON CRIME, MAY 11, 1967
revealed that in many states not even this
be substantial. However, the dividends to
The Republican Task Force on Crime be-
pittance was provided.
the Nation from such a program would be
lieves that one small, yet positive and signifi-
The policeman, just as the soldier, fre-
significant.
cant step in enhancing the status of local
quently lays his life on the line in carrying
This proposal is a beginning of recognition
police officials would be the passage of a fed-
out his duties. The Congress has provided
of the debt that society owes those officers
eral survivorship and disability compensation
generous fringe benefits to the military in
who daily risk their lives for our safety. It
bill. This law would benefit officers totally
recognition of hazards associated with mili-
is a way of showing public support of these
disabled or the survivors of officers killed in
tary life. There is a need for similar recogni-
men while reducing the concern they expe-
action taken by them to assist in the enforce-
tion of the hazards faced by local law en-
rience for the future well-being of their wives
ment of federal laws.
forcement officers.
and children. The proposal would be a first
The President's Commission on Law En-
However, it is obvious that the federal
step in improving the financial situation of
forcement and Administration of Justice in
government cannot inject itself directly into
the police officer and provide a precedent.
its comprehensive survey of crime in the
the correction of this manifestly unjust sit-
The Republican Task Force on Crime believes
United States, gave considerable attention
that this measure would make a true con-
to the problems of the police. In a special
uation confronting the local policeman. But
report on the police the Commission reached
the Congress can and often has stimulated
tribution to police morale and serve as an
the conclusion that "widespread improve-
local and state authorities by example. The
inducement to others to consider police work
ment in the strength and caliber of police
Congress can provide compensation to the
as a profession.
local police officer who is killed or injured
(NOT PRINTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE)
10
Congressional Record
United States
of America
PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE
90ᵗʰ
CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
Vol. 113
WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, AUGUST 8, 1967
No. 124
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME PRESS RE-
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME PRESS
LEASE, MAY 22, 1967
RELEASE, MAY 31, 1967
Congressman Richard H. Poff, Chairman of
Congressman Richard H. Poff, Chairman of
the House Republican Task Force on Crime,
the House Republican Task Force on Crime,
deplored the attempt to create a conflict be-
took issue today with Attorney General
tween the FBI and the President's Crime
Clark's effort to minimize the national crime
Commission on the proper treatment of
problem.
criminals.
"The Attorney General says 'there is no
Congressman Poff told the House of Rep-
wave of crime in the country,' Mr. Poff re-
resentatives today, "Those trying to conjure
ported. He went on to say, "That he should
up a conflict between the FBI and the Presi-
say so is part of the crime problem in this
dent's Crime Commission 111 serve the cause
country. The Attorney General of the United
of law and order. The FBI says that the right
States is the chief law enforcement officer of
way to fight crime is to strengthen deter-
the nation. If he thinks, as he is quoted as
rence. The Commission says that the right
saying, that 'the level of crime has risen a
way to fight crime is to strengthen rehabili-
little bit', then he is either misinformed
tation. Neither disputes the other. Both are
about the statistics or badly mistaken about
right.
the size of a 'bit.''
"Recidivism statistics reported by the FBI
Mr. Poff pointed out, "Webster says that a
illuminates a tragic truth. Most of the crime
'bit' is a 'mite' or a 'whit.' Those who con-
in this country is committed by repeaters.
tend that the level of crime has risen only
Some 57% of those released from Federal
a, mite are more than a little bit wrong. In
custody in 1963 had been arrested again be-
the decade of the sixties, the growth rate of
fore June 1966. For those paroled, the figure
crime has outpaced the growth rate of the
was 82%.
population by more than 6 times. To me, that
"These statistics do not prove that rehabil-
sounds more like a wave than a whit."
itation is unworkable. Nor do they prove
Congressman Poff said, "The Attorney Gen-
that deterrence is obsolete. All they prove is
eral was also quoted as saying that organized
that both are inadequate in their present
crime is only a 'tiny part' of the picture.
form.
President Johnson last year, following a
"While we must not 'coddle criminals,' we
meeting with former Attorney General Kat-
must not be afraid to experiment with new
zenbach, said that organized crime 'consti-
techniques of criminal rehabilitation. While
tutes nothing less than a guerrilla war against
we must not impose cruel or unusual pun-
society.' The Katzenbach Crime Commission
ishment, we must not be timid in fixing
said that the estimates of illegal gambling
penalties commensurate with the offense.
profits alone, not counting profits from nar-
Successful rehabilitation saves society the
cotics, prostitution and racketeering, run as
burden of a second offense and serves a hu-
high as $50 billion a year. That may sound
mane function as well. Proper punishment
tiny to some; it sounds titanic to me."
not only attacks the problem of recidivism;
Congressman Poff concluded: "The crime
if it is swift and certain, it helps to spare
problem in America will never be solved by
society the burden of the first offense by
miniaturizing it with timid little words. The
chief law enforcement officer must acknowl-
others."
edge It in its full dimensions and thereby
set the atmosphere of urgency essential to
its solution."
(NOT PRINTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE)
10
Congressional Record
United States
of America
PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE
90
CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
Vol. 113
WASHINGTON, WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 9, 1967
No. 125
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON
ruling on a defendant's motion to suppress
come corrupt judicial actions. In gambling
CRIME CALLS FOR APPEALS AU-
evidence collected by law enforcement of-
cases, particularly, arbitrary rejection of
ficials.
THORITY
evidence uncovered in a search is one
No one condones unreasonable and illegal
method by which corrupt judges perform
(Mr. GERALD R. FORD (at the re-
searches. But there is confusion as to what
their services for organized crime." (p. 19)
quest of Mr. SCHADEBERG) was granted
is an unreasonable and illegal search. Re-
The Commission Report on the Courts dis-
permission to extend his remarks at this
cent court rulings emphasize the right of the
cusses the need for appellate authority in
point in the RECORD and to include ex-
accused to raise this issue and to test
more detail and points out that in many
whether evidence used against him has been
cases the prosecution is stymied by a pre-
traneous matter.)
illegally acquired. The accused may move to
trial order suppressing seized evidence or a
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker,
suppress evidence which he believes has been
statement by the accused. As stated by the
under leave to extend my remarks I
unreasonably or illegally acquired. But the
Commission's Report on the Courts:
include policy statements of the Republi-
prosecution has no privilege to tcst any
"In many cases the prosecution cannot
can Task Force on Crime dated June 7,
adverse court ruling regarding unreasonable
proceed to trial without the suppressed evi-
1967:
search and seizure.
dence. And even where it has other evi-
TASK FORCE CALLS FOR APPEALS AUTHORITY
After thorough study of this problem in
dence for trial, the chances of obtaining a
the 85th Congress, the Senate Subcommit-
conviction may be severely weakened by the
The House Republican Task Force on
tce on Improvements in the Federal Criminal
suppression order." (p. 47)
Crime today called for early passage of a
Code of the Committee on the Judiciary
A letter from Mr. Fred M. Vinson, Jr., As-
bill granting Government prosecutors gen-
concluded that authorization of the Gov-
sistant Attorney General, addressed to the
eral authority to appeal a court ruling to
ernment to appeal motions to suppress evi-
author of H.R. 8654, Mr. Railsback, sums up
suppress evidence.
dence was badly needed:
the argument for this legislation by stating
Task Force Chairman Richard H. Poff (R-
"The subcommittee is convinced that the
simply that:
Va.) urged positive action on the bill in-
district courts are entitled to appellate
(This bill) would be most helpful to the
troduced by Rep. Tom Railsback (R-Ill.)
guidance in the admittedly difficult field of
Government since an adverse ruling at the
which would permit Federal prosecutors to
search and seizure. If they cannot obtain
preliminary stage of the proceedings may
appeal an adverse ruling on a defendant's
such guidance, the result will be an in-
effectively halt the Government's ability to
motion to suppress evidence collected by law
creasingly chaotic condition, with some
go forward with the prosecution when the
enforcement officials. "When some tradi-
materials suppressed are a substantial por-
judges in a single district consistently ad-
tional methods of police work are restricted
tion of the Government's case." (Letter of
by court decisions, new tools must be devel-
hering to one view of the law, and others
May 10, 1967)
oped to ensure that violations of the law are
to another, incompatible view." 1
This legislation is not without precedent.
met with swift and sure punishment," com-
The Subcommittee in 1956 had success-
Section 3731 of Title 18, United States Code,
mented Poff. "But to remain consistent with
fully recommended that this authority be
originally enacted as the Criminal Appeals
the Supreme Court's interpretation of the
granted in crimes involving narcotics, and
Act of 1907, authorized appeal by the prosecu-
Constitution, and to assure fairness to all
after two years experience with this enact-
tion in certain specified procedural instances.
defendants, any action to provide additional
ment (Title 18, U.S. Code, Sec. 1404) it was
This authority was expanded in 1942, and, as
grounds for appeal by the Government in
concluded that there was no reason to limit
mentioned above, the Narcotic Control Act
criminal trials must be carefully drawn."
this authority to narcotics. The Subcom-
of 1956 gave the United States the right to
The Task Force notes that while no one
mittee noted that the Department of Justice
appeal in narcotics cases from motions to
condones unreasonable and illegal searches,
and the Judicial Conference of the United
suppress evidence. This is directly analogous
there is confusion as to what is unreasonable
States had recommended legislation of this
to those circumstances described more gen-
and illegal. Recent court rulings emphasize
nature.
erally in the bill (H.R. 8654) now before the
the right of the accused to raise this issue
The President's Crime Commission, in
House.
but the prosecution has no such privilege.
calling for the same authority, points out
The Supreme Court recognized that Con-
The President's Crime Commission called
an additional reason for such authority. The
gress has the power to authorize such ap-
for legislation in this area. Its Committee on
Commission found that officials, in review-
peals, provided that they are limited by the
Organized Crime argued that the right of
ing existing situations, can deal with con-
Sixth Amendment provisions of right to a
the prosecution to appeal is particularly im-
flicting rulings in two ways, both undesir-
speedy trial and the Fifth Amendment pro-
portant. The Department of Justice and the
able. Faced with an adverse ruling law en-
tection against double jeopardy.
Judicial Conference of the United States had
forcement officials believe to be unfair, they
The Supreme Court has stated:
recommended legislation of this nature
can abandon the form of search or exam-
"If there is serious need for appeals by the
"Assistant Attorney General Fred M. Vin-
ination attacked in the motion to suppress.
Government from suppression orders, or un-
son, Jr., sums up the argument for this
Of course, this has the effect of denying
fairness to the interests of effective criminal
legislation by stating that it 'would be most
their use of what many judges as well as law
law enforcement it is the function of
helpful to the Government since an adverse
enforcement officials may consider to be legit-
the Congress to decide whether to initiate a
ruling at the preliminary stage of the pro-
imate, proper techniques. The alternative
departure from the historical pattern of re-
ceedings may effectively halt the Govern-
is that they can continue the practice, hop-
stricted appellate jurisdiction in criminal
ing that in some future case a trial judge
cases."2
ment's ability to go forward with the prose-
cution when materials suppresed are a sub-
will sustain the practice, and a defendant
Obviously, to remain consistent with the
stantial portion of the Government's case',"
by objecting and appealing will give a
Court's interpretation of the Constitution,
concluded Rep. Poff.
higher court an opportunity to rule upon it.
and to assure fairness to all defendants, any
The first course of action results in the
action by the Congress to provide additional
STATEMENT ON BILL To ALLOW APPEALS OF
denial of use of proper police methods sim-
grounds for appeal by the Government in
MOTIONS To SUPPRESS EVIDENCE
ply because an appellate test is unavail-
criminal trials must be carefully drawn.
able. The alternative places law enforce-
The necessity to give government prosecu-
The Republican Task Force on Crime asks
ment officials"
in the position of decid-
tors the authority to appeal motions to sup-
for early passage of legislation currently be-
ing which lower court decisions they will
press is widely recognized and supported.
fore the House of Representatives to grant
accept and which they will not." (The Presi-
The House Republican Task Force on Crime
Federal prosecutors general authority to ap-
dent's Commission on Law Enforcement and
concurs with these views and urges the Con-
peal a court ruling to suppress evidence.
Administration of Justice"; Task Force Re-
gress to give early and favorable attention
The Task Force believes that effective law
port: The Courts. p. 40)
to this request for new legislation in this vital
enforcement demands effective tools. When
The Commission's Organized Crime Task
area.
some traditional methods of police work are
Force states the case even more strongly.
restricted by court decisions, new tools must
The report argues that the right of the pro-
be developed to ensure that violations of the
secution to appeal is particularly important
law are met with swift and sure punishment.
in organized crime cases, where so much
One such tool which can expedite the
investigative and prosecuting time has been
1 Senate Report No. 1478, 85th Congress,
task of prosecuting law breakers has been
expended, and where evidence gathering is
2nd Session, p. 16.
introduced by Congressman Tom Railsback
extremely difficult. The report further notes
(R.-Ill.). This bill (H.R. 8654) would permit
that:
Federal prosecutors to appeal an adverse
"Allowing appeals would also help over-
(NOT PRINTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE)
10
Congressional Record
United States
of America
PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE
90ᵗʰ
CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
Vol. 113
WASHINGTON, THURSDAY, AUGUST 10, 1967
No. 126
POLICY STATEMENT OF REPUBLI-
The House Republican Task Force on
security field, where there is a direct threat
CAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME-
Crime endorses and urges enactment of H.R.
to the welfare of the country." 4
SOME COURT-AUTHORIZED "BUG-
10037, a bill introduced by Mr. William Mc-
The President's Crime Commission, after
GING" NEEDED
Culloch, Mr. Gerald. R. Ford, Mr. Richard
an intensive study of the existing uses of
Poff, and 20 other Republicans.¹ This pro-
electronic surveillance equipment by law en-
(Mr. GERALD R. FORD (at the re-
posed legislation would prohibit all wire-
forcement in combating organized crime re-
quest of Mr. HALL) was granted permis-
tapping and electronic bugging except by
ported:
sion to extend his remarks at this point
court authorized Federal, State and local law
"The great majority of law enforcement
in the RECORD and to include extraneous
enforcement officers engaged in the investi-
officials believe that the evidence necessary
matter.)
gation and prevention of organized and cer-
to bring criminal sanctions to bear consist-
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker,
tain other specified crimes. The Task Force
ently on the higher echelons of organized
finds the Administration's proposal (H.R.
under leave to extend my remarks, I in-
crime will not be obtained without the aid of
5386), which bans all wiretapping and elec-
clude a policy statement of the Republi-
electronic surveillance techniques. They
tronic bugging except in an undefined and
can Task Force on Crime dated June 11,
maintain these techniques are indispensable
unreviewable area of "national security"
to develop adequate strategic intelligence
1967:
cases, to be both a dangerous threat to in-
concerning organized crime, to set up spe-
STATEMENT OF THE REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE
dividual privacy and an unwise limitation
cific investigations, to develop witnesses, to
ON CRIME, JUNE 11, 1967
on law enforcement officials who need such
corroborate their testimony, and to serve as
SOME COURT-AUTHORIZED "BUGGING" NEEDED,
equipment to combat the growing problem
substitutes for them-each a necessary step
of crime in the nation.
SAYS TASK FORCE
in the evidence-gathering process in orga-
The Task Force believes that the Congress
The House Republican Task Force on
nized crime investigations and prosecu-
must act-and act quickly-to preserve the
Crime today urged passage of legislation to
tions."
privacy of all Americans. New and sophisti-
prohibit wiretapping and electronic bugging
The Task Force believes that the Attorney
cated electronic bugging devices are used
except by court authorized Federal, State and
General's position is untenable and incon-
today with few restrictions and little re-
local law enforcement officers engaged in the
sistent. It is untenable to contend that elec-
straint. The Federal statutory law is silent
investigation and prevention of organized
tronic surveillance equipment would be ef-
on electronic bugging. All who have exam-
and certain specified crimes.
fective for national security cases but inef-
ined the existing law on wiretapping agree
The proposal is contained in a bill intro-
fective in cases involving serious and orga-
that it is inadequate, confused and often
duced by Rep. William McCulloch (R.-Ohio),
nized crimes. It is inconsistent to hold that
self-defeating. The Federal wiretapping stat-
House Minority Leader Gerald R. Ford (R.-
the use of these extraordinary devices is jus-
ute-enacted in 1934-neither protects pri-
Mich.), Task Force Chairman Richard Poff
tified in national security cases but not justi-
vacy nor promotes effective law enforce-
(R.-Va.) and some 20 other Republicans.
fied when used in major criminal cases.
ment.
"A free society must have powers to iden-
Surely, the Attorney General does not believe
Privacy, appropriately described by Jus-
tify, arrest, search, indict, prosecute, and
tice Brandeis as "the most comprehensive
our nation is endangered only by enemies
punish the criminal," stated Rep. Poff. "When
of the rights and the right most valued by
whose crimes undermine the Federal govern-
these powers are properly and wisely exer-
civilized men", is nothing less than the
ment by sabotage, espionage, treason, or the
cised, they serve in themselves to maintain
foundation of freedom. Freedom is less than
like, when-in fact-our local, State and na-
and to protect the freedoms we cherish. The
complete, however, when society is victim-
tional governments are seriously threatened
measure represents a realistic balancing of
ized by the criminal. A free society must
by the ravages of organized criminal activity.
the protection of individual privacy with the
The President's Crime Commission has thor-
protect its freedom. It must have powers to
needs of law enforcement to combat orga-
identify, arrest, search, indict, prosecute
oughly and irrefutably documented the dan-
nized crime.
and punish the criminal, and when these
gers to our society, government and economy
"The President's Crime Commission noted
powers are properly and wisely exercised
from the activities of organized crime. A. few
that law enforcement officials consider elec-
they serve in themselves to maintain free-
examples from the Commission's report are
tronic surveillance 'necessary' in attacking
dom. As Judge Learned Hand once reminded
illustrative of this documentation:
the nation's spiraling crime rate," Poff con-
us:
"Organized crime affects the lives of mil-
tinued. "The Task Force finds the Adminis-
"The protection of the individual from
lions of Americans, but because it desper-
tration's proposal, which bans all wiretap-
oppression and abuse by the police and other
ately preserves its invisibility many, perhaps
ping and electronic bugging except in an un-
enforcing officers is indeed a major interest
most, Americans are not aware how they are
defined area of 'national security', a dan-
in a free society; but so is the effective prose-
affected, or even that they are affected at all.
gerous threat to individual privacy, and an
cution of crime, an interest which at times
unwise limitation on law enforcement. It is
seems to be forgotten
illogical to claim that electronic bugging
The Attorney General, when presenting
equipment is effective for national security
his formal testimony to the House Judiciary
cases but ineffective in cases involving serious
Committee on March 16, 1967, in support of
1 The co-sponsors of H.R. 10037 are Mr.
and organized crimes, which threaten our
the Administration's proposal to ban all
McCulloch, Mr. Gerald R. Ford, Mr. Poff, Mr.
local, State and Federal Governments."
electronic surveillance except in cases of
Moore, Mr. Cahill, Mr. MacGregor, Mr.
Today's Task Force Report follows Mon-
"national security" declared, as the predi-
Hutchinson, Mr. McClory, Mr. Smith of New
day's call for a Joint Congressional Com-
cate for his position, that "the legitimate
York, Mr. Roth, Mr. Meskill, Mr. Railsback,
mittee on Organized Crime and Wednesday's
needs of law enforcement can be met with-
Mr. Biester, Mr. Wiggins, Mr. Betts, Mr.
Crime Task Force statement supporting early
out the use of such abhorrent devices (i.e.,
Cramer, Mr. Conable, Mr. King of New York,
passage of legislation granting Government
electronic surveillance devices) and con-
Mr. Price of Texas, Mr. Wyman, Mr. Shriver,
prosecutors general authority to appeal a
cluded:
Mr. Wylie, and Mr. Mathias of California.
court ruling to suppress evidence.
"All of my experience indicates that it
In re Fried, 161 F. 2d 453 at 465 (1947).
(electronic surveillance) is not necessary for
8 Hearing before Subcommittee No. 5 of
REPORT OF THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN TASK
the public safety. It is not a desirable (or
the House Judiciary on H.R. 5386. 90th Con-
FORCE ON CRIME ON H.R. 10037, THE ELEC-
effective police investigative technique, and
gress, 1st Session (1967) at 209.
TRONIC SURVEILLANCE CONTROL ACT OF 1967
that it should only be used in the national
Ibid. at 319.
The price of a loaf of bread may go up one
torney of New York County. Mr. Hogan's
tronic surveillance by law enforcement (e.g.,
cent as the result of an organized crime con-
letter notes that:
New York, Massachusetts, Maryland, Nevada
spiracy, but a housewife has no way of know-
"The bill, introduced by you, the Minority
and Oregon).
ing why she is paying more. If organized
Leader and 21 other Congressmen, provides
A comprehensive system of checks and
criminals paid income tax on every cent of
for most stringent restrictions on the use of
safeguards would be established to minimize
their vast earnings everybody's tax bill would
wiretapping and oral communication. But
threats to the privacy of innocent citizens,
go down, but no one knows how much.6
that fact should be no barrier to its passage!
prevent abuses of such investigative tech-
"The purpose of organized crime is not
Law enforcement knows that telephonic in-
niques and assure that the rights and liber-
competition with visible, legal government
terception is the most valuable weapon in
ties of the suspects are not infringed. For
but nullification of it. When organized crime
its fight against organized crime. It ap-
example-under H.R. 10037-
places an official in public office, it nullifies
preciates that, where it is legally authorized,
Information obtained from an authorized
the political process. When it bribes a police
it must be used fairly, sparingly and with
surveillance could be disclosed and used only
official, it nullifies law enforcement.⁷
highly selective discrimination. It asks for
by law enforcement and criminal justice of-
"It is organized crime's accumulation of
and welcomes judicial examination of the
ficials in discharging official duties when in-
money, not the individual transactions by
need for wiretapping in every proposed in-
vestigating or prosecuting a crime. Any other
which the money is accumulated, that has a
vestigation, and judicial authorization,
use must be authorized by the court.
great and threatening impact on America.
supervision and review of its use. These fac-
No information obtained from an author-
The millions of dollars it can throw
tors and considerations are faithfully re-
ized surveillance could be used in any Fed-
into the legitimate economic system give it
flected in your bill. I endorse and support it
eral or State criminal court proceeding un-
power to manipulate the price of shares on
enthusiastically."
less the defendant had been furnished a
the stock market, to raise or lower the price
Mr. William Cahn, District Attorney of
copy of the authorization not less than 10
of retail merchandise, to determine whether
Nassau County of New York State, similarly
days before the trial.
entire industries are union or nonunion, to
endorses such legislation. Mr. Cahn strongly
Information disclosed in violation of the
make it easier or harder for businessmen to
urges "that the Congress enact legislation
statute could not be used as evidence in any
continue in business."
banning wiretapping by private persons and
Federal, State or local court, grand jury or
The Task Force concurs with the majority
permitting wiretapping by officials pursuant
other proceeding.
of the President's Crime Commission in
to court approval and control."
No court authorization for the use of such
urging that "legislation should be enacted
The Task Force believes that H.R. 10037
devices could exceed 45 days. Renewals could
granting carefully circumscribed authority
represents a realistic balancing of the pro-
not exceed 20 days and would be issued only
for electronic surveillance to law enforce-
tection of individual privacy with the needs
if the requirement for the original author-
ment officers." H.R. 10037 would implement
of law enforcement to combat organized
ization remains. Thus the court must con-
this recommendation and is patterned after
crime. The Electronic Surveillance Control
tinually review the need and wisdom of the
the statutory scheme suggested by the Com-
Act of 1967 as proposed in H.R. 10037 contains
electronic surveillance.
mission and discussed in detail in the Report
the following important features: Private use
All information obtained by electronic sur-
of the Commission's Organized Crime Task
of wiretapping and electronic eavesdropping
veillance would have to be recorded by the
Force.9
devices would be absolutely prohibited.
law enforcement officer and then sealed by
Those who have studied or experienced the
The Task Force believes that wiretapping
the authorizing judge. This would serve to
needs of law enforcement in combating
and electronic bugging by private citizens
verify the continuing accuracy of the infor-
organized criminal activity are convinced of
is repugnant to a free society. Private uses
mation so obtained.
the necessity of electronic surveillance. The
of these techniques cannot be justified. H.R.
All persons subject to electronic surveil-
Chairman of the Michigan Commission on
10037 would prohibit all such uses and im-
lance would have to be notified of that fact
Crime, Delinquency and Criminal Adminis-
pose meaningful criminal sanctions.
within a year of the termination of the au-
tration-Mr. John B. Martin-reports that
thorization.
Federal law enforcement authorities would
the Michigan Crime Commission has con-
be permitted to seek court authority to use
Any aggrieved person who had been the
cluded "that organized crime presents such
electronic surveillance devices in the inves-
direct or indirect object of an authorized
overriding public consideration, the use
tigation of crimes involving national, se-
surveillance could make a "motion to sup-
of electronic surveillance should be per-
curity, criminal offenses involving organized
press" the use of such information in any
mitted
The Attorney General of the
crime, and certain other specified crimes (e.g.,
proceeding on the ground that it was un-
State of Massachusetts-Mr. Elliot Richard-
murder and kidnapping).
lawful or obtained contrary to the court
son-told the House Judiciary Committee
The Task Force believes that the use of
authorization.
that it seems clear to me, as it has to
this extraordinary tool is justified by the
Any person whose communications were
virtually every law enforcement authority
extraordinary activities of the underworld
intercepted, disclosed or used in violation of
concerned with the problem, that electronic
and the dangers that exist to our national
the statute could bring a civil suit and re-
surveillance is a key weapon if we really are
security from would-be conquerors. H.R.
cover actual damages (minimum of $1000),
effectively to be able to do anything about
10037 minimizes potential instrusion of pri-
punitive damages, attorney's fees and court
this very far-reaching and very serious
vacy by employing case by case judicial judg-
costs.
problem (of organized crime) 11 Mr. Elliot
ment as to whether such investigative devices
Additional sajeguards would be erected to
Lumbard-Special Counsel to Governor
should be used at all, even for investigation
protect the privacy of privileged communi-
Rockefeller and former counsel to the Special
of the offenses specified under the statute.
cations between husband and wife, doctor
Commission on Crime in New York-has said
H.R. 10037 adopts the well tested approach
and patient and clergyman and confidant
that "wiretaps strike right at the heart of
of the search warrant which, like electronic
and communications employing public tele-
the relationship between organized crime
surveillance, represents a potential threat to
phones, even when interceptions are at-
and political corruption." 12
individual privacy but under proper judicial
tempted by law enforcement authorities.
Professor G. Robert Blakey of Notre Dame
controls has served society in protecting its
The Task Force believes that electronic
Law School, Special Consultant to the Presi-
freedom by bringing the criminal offender to
surveillance authority, even when granted
dent's Crime Commission, who is responsible
justice.
by court order to law enforcement personnel,
for developing the statutory scheme con-
State law enforcement authorities could
should not be used to violate unnecessarily
tained in the appendix of the Commission's
similarly seek court authority to use elec-
the sanctity of those relationships to which
Report on Organized Crime and the statutory
tronic surveillance devices, but only if the
the law has always given special privilege.
scheme adopted by H.R. 10037, presents a
State has enacted legislation specifically es-
H.R. 10037 imposes additional limitations in
compelling case for the propriety and wis-
tablishing such procedures.
such cases. The same is true in cases involv-
dom of this proposal.13
The Task Force believes that each State
ing public telephones.
The principal sponsor of H.R. 10037-Wil-
should make an independent determina-
Congress would receive complete statistics
liam McCulloch-has received a strong letter
tion regarding its needs for electronic sur-
from different sources regarding all author-
of endorsement for this proposal from one of
veillance techniques. H.R. 10037 reposes the
ized uses of electronic surveillance equip-
the country's foremost authorities on organ-
determination of the need for these inves-
ment by Federal and State officials.
ized crime-Mr. Frank Hogan, District At-
tigative techniques with each State, and
The Task Force believes that the manda-
would prevent any State from abusing this
tory reporting requirements are essential for
option by setting forth the categories of
continued review of the operation of this
5 The Challenge of Crime in a Free Society,
crimes and general procedures that are to be
statute. The reporting requirement would
a Report by the President's Commission on
included in a statutory scheme.
not only prevent abuses but would also in-
Law Enforcement and Administration of
The Task Force notes that the Administra-
dicate the usefulness of the statute itself in
Justice (1967) at 201.
tion's proposal would repeal the laws of all
that the reports must include the number of
6 Ibid. at 187.
States which authorize court approved elec-
arrests, trials and convicitions resulting from
7 Ibid. at 188.
the authorized interception.
8 Ibid. at 187.
The Task Force also believes that the pro-
10 Hearings, op. cit, note 3, at 916.
9 Task Force Report: Organized Crime,
visions of the statute providing for inde-
11 Ibid. at 930.
Task Force on Organized Crime, The Presi-
pendent study of its effectiveness by a
12 Ibid. at 940.
dent's Commission on Law Enforcement and
"Council of Advisers" appointed by the At-
13 Ibid. at 1023-1393.
Administration of Justice at 80-113.
torney General are very commendable. Such
14 Ibid.
information today is unavailable.
The statute would be self-terminating
AUTHORIZATIONS
(4) A statement of the facts concerning
eight years after its enactment into law.
Sec. 2516. Authorizations for interception
all previous applications to intercept the
The Task Force believes that this would
of wire or oral communications.
same facilities, place or person and the ac-
allow an opportunity to test in the crucible
Federal
tion taken by the judge on each such appli-
of time and application the wisdom and effi-
cation; and
cacy of the statute.
(a) The Attorney General of the United
The Task Force has concluded that this
States (or his designee) may authorize the
(5) If the application seeks authorization
comprehensive-and necessarily complex-
making of an application to the Chief Judge
on the grounds set forth in paragraph 1 of
of a United States District Court (or his
subsection (c) below (strategic intelligence
proposal merits serious and immediate con-
designee), the Chief Judge of a United States
gathering) the applicant must state the
sideration. H.R. 10037 in balancing the
Court of Appeals (or his designee) or the
number of outstanding authorizations based
rights of privacy with the needs of law en-
Chief Justice of the United States (or his
on such grounds.
forcements would increase the protection
of privacy and enhance the effectiveness of
designee), and such judge may under certain
Additional Support for Application
law enforcement.
circumstances authorize the FBI or the Fed-
(b) The judge may require additional ma-
(Attached to this report is a detailed
eral agency having responsibility for the in-
terial to support the application.
analysis of this important legislative pro-
vestigation of the offense for which the ap-
Grounds for Issuance
posal.)
plication was made, to intercept communi-
cations when such interception may provide
(c) Ex parte orders authorizing intercep-
ANALYSIS OF THE ELECTRONIC SURVEILLANCE
evidence of-
tions may be made by a judge in his sole
discretion on a showing that-
CONTROL ACT OF 1967 (H.R. 10037)
(1) offenses relating to enforcement of
the Atomic Energy Act (misuses of restricted
Strategic Intelligence Gathering re Organized
Section 1. Title.
Crime
Section 2. Findings.
data), espionage, sabotage, or treason, where
Section 3. Contains the following amend-
the offense is punishable by death or im-
(1) (A) An individual has been convicted
ments to Title 18 of the United States Code:
prisonment for more than one year;
of an offense involving moral turpitude
PROHIBITIONS
(2) Federal offenses involving murder,
which is punishable as a felony; and
Sec. 2511. Interception and disclosure of
kidnapping, or extortion;
(B) There is reliable information to be-
wire or oral communications exhibited.
(3) Federal offenses relating to bribery,
lieve that this individual is presently en-
sports bribery, transmission of gambling in-
gaged in one of the offenses enumerated in
(a) Prohibits all interceptions (wiretap-
ping and bugging) and uses or disclosures of
formation, obstruction of justice, injury to
Sec. 2516 (above); and
information so obtained, unless specifically
the President, racketeering, or welfare fund
(C) This individual presently has two or
permitted by the provisions of this bill.
bribery;
more close associates who meet the require-
Penalty for violation $10,000 or 5 years, or
(4) Federal offenses involving counter-
ments of paragraphs (a) and (b) above; and
both.
feiting;
(D) The facilities or places to be inter-
(b) (1) Exempts telephone company em-
(5) Federal offenses involving bankruptcy
cepted are being used or about to be used
ployees when servicing or protecting lines.
fraud or the manufacture, importation, re-
by this individual; or
(2) Exempts Federal Communications
ceiving, concealment, buying, selling, or
Tactical Evidence Re Specific Crimes
Commission employees when monitoring
otherwise dealing in narcotic drugs or mari-
(2) (A) One of the offenses enumerated in
pursuant to their regulatory duties.
huana; or
Sec. 2516 is being, has been, or is about to be
(c) Exempts the powers of the President
(6) any conspiracy to commit any of the
committed; and
to obtain necessary information in protect-
ing the United States from international
foregoing offenses.
(B) Facts concerning that offense may be
threats. Such information may be used as
State
obtained through an interception; and
evidence.
(b) When specifically authorized by a
(C) Normal investigative procedures have
(NOTE.-Internal security threats from es-
State statute to make application to speci-
been tried and have failed or reasonably ap-
pionage, sabotage, treason and other similar
fied State court judges, the attorney gen-
pear to be unlikely to succeed as tried; and
offenses specified in Federal criminal stat-
eral of any State or the principal prosecuting
(D) The facilities or place to be inter-
utes are treated under Sec. 2516 of the bill.)
attorney of any political subdivision of a
cepted are being used or about to be used by
Sec. 2512. Distribution, manufacture, and
State, may make application and the judge
a person who has committed, is committing
advertising of wire or oral communication
may authorize under certain circumstances
or is about to commit such an offense.
intercepting devices prohibited.
the use of electronic surveillance devices for
the purpose of gathering evidence of the
LIMITATIONS
(a) Prohibits the-
(1) mailing or sending through interstate
commission of the State offenses of murder,
Number orders for strategic intelligence
commerce of electronic surveillance equip-
kidnapping, gambling (if punishable as a
(d) (1) Judges issuing orders on the
ment,
felony), bribery, extortion or dealing in nar-
grounds set forth in paragraph (1) above are
(2) manufacture of the electronic surveil-
cotic drugs or marihuana, or any conspiracy
limited by the following table:
lance equipment, or
involving the foregoing offenses.
Federal officers: 2 per 1 million national
(3) advertising of electronic surveillance
Sec. 2517. Authorization for disclosure and
population.
equipment. Penalty for violation of $10,000
use of intercepted wire or oral communi-
State officers: 5 per 1 million State popu-
or 5 years, or both.
cations.
lation.
(b) Exempted from the above prohibitions
(a) and (b) Law enforcement officers who
Local officers: 10 per 1 million local popu-
(with the exception of advertising) are-
obtain information by means of interceptions
lation.
(1) common carriers in the normal course
authorized under the bill may disclose such
(NOTE.-This limitation as to number of
of business or persons under contract to
information to another law enforcement
orders applies only to applications filed under
common carriers,
officer or use the information, if necessary
paragraph (1) above-strategic intelligence
(2) Federal, State and local governments
and proper in performing and discharging
re organized crime.)
or persons under contract with such units of
of official duties.
(c) Any person who has obtained informa-
Public telephone
government.
Sec. 2513. Confiscation of wire or com-
tion by means of an interception authorized
(2) No public telephone may be inter-
munication intercepting devices. Authorizes
under the bill may disclose such informa-
cepted, unless in addition to satisfying all
the Federal government to confiscate any
tion while testifying under oath in any Fed-
the foregoing requirements the judge also
eral or State criminal court proceeding or
determines that-
electronic surveillance equipment used,
mailed, sent or manufactured in violation of
grand jury proceeding.
(A) The interception will be conducted in
the above provisions.
(d) Intercepted information otherwise
a way that minimizes or eliminates inter-
Sec. 2514. Immunity of witnesses. Provides
may be disclosed only upon a showing of
cepting communications of other users of the
that United States Attorneys-with the ap-
good cause before a judge with authority to
facility, and
proval of the Attorney General-may seek
authorize such an interception.
(B) There is a "special need" to authorize
and the Federal Court may authorize the
SEC. 2518. Procedure for interception of
such an interception.
granting of immunity from prosecution to
wire or oral communications.
Privileged communications
witnesses in cases involving violations of the
Contents of Application
(3) Conversations between a husband and
provisions of this bill.
(a) Applications of authorizations to in-
wife, doctor and patient, lawyer and client or
Sec. 2515. Prohibition of use as evidence of
tercept must be in writing, sworn, state the
clergyman and confidant may not be inter-
intercepted wire or oral communications.
applicants authority (e.g., State statute) and
cepted unless in addition to satisfying all
Prohibits the use of information as evidence
include-
the foregoing requirements, the judge also
in any proceeding before any Federal, State
(1) Identity of person authorizing the ap-
determines that-
or local court grand jury, department, officer,
plication;
(A) The interception will be conducted in
agency, regulatory body, or legislative com-
(2) A full statement of the facts relied
a way that minimizes or eliminates inter-
mittee, if the disclosure of that information
upon by the applicant;
cepting "privileged communications," and
would be in violation of the provisions of the
(3) The nature and location of the inter-
(B) There is a "special need" to authorize
bill.
ception;
such an interception.
Contents of order
(A) The interception was unlawful,
(e) Orders authorizing or approving an
(B) The order authorizing the inter-
EXPIRATION
interception must specify—
ception is insufficient on its face, or
Section 5. This bill shall expire and have
(1) The nature and location of the author-
(C) The interception was not made in
no force and effect on the 8th year following
ized interception,
conformity with the order of authorization.
its enactment (except some provisions are
(2) Offense(s) for which information is
If the motion is granted, the contents of
necessarily extended for a period of 18
being sought,
the interception or the evidence derived
months to enable the phasing out of cases
(3) The name of the agency authorized to
therefrom may not be used.
affected by the termination).
intercept, and
(2) The United States is given the right
Section 6. Severability clause.
(4) The period of time during which such
to appeal from an unfavorable ruling on a
interception is authorized.
motion to suppress under paragraph (1)
Time Limit and Extensions of Order
above so long as such appeal is not taken
for purposes of delay:
(f) No order may authorize an intercep-
tion for a period exceeding 45 days. Exten-
Sec. 2519. Reports concerning intercepted
wire or oral communications.
sions of the order may be granted for periods
of not more than 20 days, but all extensions
(a) Within 30 days after the expiration
must satisfy the requirements of Sec. 2518(a)
of an authorization order (or any extensions
and (c), i.e., a complete application and the
thereof), the issuing judge must report the
following information to the Administrative
same grounds as originally justified the au-
Office of the United States Courts-
thorization continue to justify the author-
ization.
(1) The fact that the order was applied
for,
Emergency interception
(2) The kind of order applied for,
(g) In emergency situations law enforce-
(3) Whether the order was granted as
ment officers may temporarily waive the for-
applied for or as modified,
mal requirements for authorization so long
(4) The period of time, including the ex-
as-
tensions, of the authorization,
(1) The emergency situation requires such
(5) The offense(s) specified in the order,
a waiver, and
and
(2) Such an authorization would be avail-
(6) The identity of the applicant and who
able absent the waiver.
authorized the application.
Formal application must be made within
(b) Within 30 days after the termination
48 hours after the emergency interception. If
of an investigation or trial using authorized
the application for approval is denied, no in-
interceptions, the Attorney General of the
formation obtained by the interception may
United States (or his designee) or the at-
be used or disclosed and the person whose
torney general of the State or the principal
conversation was intercepted must be noti-
prosecuting attorney of a political subdivision
fied of the interception.
thereof, as the case may be, shall also report
Precautions for accuracy
the above information to the Administrative
(h) Information obtained by interception
Office of the United States Courts and the
shall be recorded, sealed by the authorizing
number of arrests, trials, and motions to sup-
judge and be retained for a period of 10
press and convictions resulting from author-
years. Unless under seal (or no satisfactory
ized interceptions.
explanation of its absence) the information
(c) In March of each year the Administra-
contained in such a recording may not be
tive Office shall report the aforementioned in-
used in any court or other proceeding. Ap-
formation to the Congress.
plications for interceptions must also be
Sec. 2520. Recovery of civil damages au-
sealed by the judge and shall be retained for
thorized. An individual whose communica-
a period of not less than 10 years.
tion is intercepted, disclosed or used in viola-
tion of this bill, is given (1) a civil cause of
action against the person making the inter-
ception, disclosure or use and (2) is entitled
to recover-
Inventory-Disclosure
(A) Actual damages (but not less than
(i) Not later than one year after the ter-
liquidated damages computed at the rate of
mination of an authorized interception, the
authorizing judge shall notify the person
$100 a day for each day of violation or $1,000,
subject to the interception of--
whichever is higher;
(1) the fact of the order authorizing the
(B) Punitive damages, and
interception,
(C) Reasonable attorneys fees and litiga-
(2) The date and period of the authoriza-
tion costs.
tion, and
(3) Whether information was or was not
obtained and recorded during the period of
the interception. The issuance of this inven-
tory may be postponed by the judge on a
STUDY AND REVIEW
showing of good cause to delay or temporarily
Section 3(a). One year prior to termina-
withhold such notice.
tion of this bill, the Attorney General shall
(j) Information obtained by an intercep-
have a study of its operations conducted by
tion may not be used in any Federal or State
competent "social scientists." Upon com-
criminal court proceeding unless each de-
pletion of this study the Attorney General
fendant has been furnished a copy of the
shall appoint a Council of Advisers to be
court order authorization not less than 10
composed of 15 members representing various
days before the trial. This 10 day period may
interests and professions to review the study.
be waived only if the judge finds it was not
Following this review the Attorney General
possible to furnish the defendant with the
shall report to the President and the Con-
information 10 days before trial and the de-
gress the results of the study and review, to-
fendant will not be prejudiced in the delay
gether with his recommendations and the
of receiving such information.
recommendations of the Council of Advisers.
Motion to suppress
(b), (c) and (d) contain technical provi-
sions regarding the staff, compensation, and
(k) (1) Any "aggrieved person" (a person
appointments to the Council of Advisers.
who is the direct or indirect object of the
Section 4. Amendments to Section 605 of
interception) in a proceeding may move to
the Communications Act of 1934 to bring it
suppress the contents of the interception, or
in conformance with the provisions of this
evidence derived therefrom, on the grounds
bill.
that-
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME
142 Cannon Bldg., 225-5107 House of Representatives Washington, D. C. 20515
Chairman
Richard H. Poff
PRESS RELEASE
Virginia
Deputy Chairman
For Release: AM' S Tues.
Robert Taft, Jr.
9/12/67
Ohio
Contact: Ext. 5107
Barber B. Conable, Jr.
ARTICLES DRAMATIZE NEED FOR WIRETAP LAW REP. POFF
New York
William C. Cramer
Florida
Washington, D. C. - Rep. Richard H. Poff (R.-Va.) Monday charged
Samuel L. Devine
Ohio
that a recent magazine series on Organized Crime dramatizes the need
John N. Erlenborn
Illinois
for legislation legalizing court authorized electronic surveillance of
Carleton J. King
New York
Organized Crime conspiracies.
Clark MacGregor
Minnesota
Robert B. Mathias
California
Rep. Poff, Chairman of the House Republ ican Task Force on Crime,
Robert Price
Texas
told his House colleagues that he wrote Attorney General Ramsey Clark,
Thomas F. Railsback
Illinois
"A constituent called me to ask if I have read the articles in the
Henry P. Smith, III
New York
September 1 and September 8 issues of Life Magazine. I have done 80,"
Chalmers P. Wylie
Ohio
Poff reported. He asked the Attorney General, "If you have not, I
Louis C. Wyman
New Hampshire
urge you to do so."
He stated that the constituent wanted to know whether the magazine
articles were factual "and if so, why something hasn't been done..."
Anticipating a possible Justice Department response, Poff explained
that much of the information appears to come from electronic surveillance.
Under present law, wiretap evidence and evidence traceable thereto is
tainted.
"If this is your answer," Rep. Poff wrote, "and if the wiretap
tapes and log entries in the possession of Federal investigators do
in fact document the crimes charged in the magazine articles, then I
have a question of my own. Does this not fully justify legislation
legalizing electronic surveillance of organized crime conspiracies by
law enforcement officers acting under court orders in the nature of
a search warrant?" He concluded, "Your reply will be helpful in
answering the mail I am beginning to receive on the same subject."
- 30 -
(NOT PRINTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE)
10
Congressional Record
United States
of America
PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE
90ᵗʰ
CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
Vol. 113
WASHINGTON, MONDAY, AUGUST 14, 1967
No. 128
BILLS FILLS VOID SAYS TASK
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME, JUNE 19,
twice the national rate. In the first three
FORCE CHAIRMAN
1967
months of this year 8,957 major crimes were
Congressman Richard H. Poff (R.-Va.)
committed here. That amounts to more than
(Mr. GERALD R. FORD (at the re-
Chairman of the House Republican Task
99 crimes per day, 4 each hour, one every
15 minutes."
quest of Mr. STEIGER of Wisconsin) was
Force on Crime, said in a speech on the floor
granted permission to extend his re-
of the House today that the latest FBI Uni-
Congressman Poff said that these figures
form Crime Report "presents a disgraceful
and the facts they dramatize "are disgrace-
marks at this point in the RECORD and to
picture and calls for new laws, better
ful" and that "society needs new laws, better
include extraneous matter.)
laws, stronger laws, laws which make crime
laws, stronger laws, laws which make crime
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker,
unattractive and unprofitable."
unattractive and unprofitable. Congress must
act."
under leave to extend my remarks, I in-
Poff also said that those who shrug off
clude policy statements of the Repub-
the increase in major crime by saying that
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME, JUNE 23,
1967
lican Task Force on Crime dated June
the crime rate is not higher but crime re-
porting is better are not facing the facts.
TASK FORCE WELCOMES "MOVING FORCE" ROLE
13, June 19, and June 23, 1967:
"Perhaps crime reporting is better today than
The House Republican Task Force on
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME,
it was a generation ago," said Poff, "but surely
Crime today welcomed bi-partisan support
JUNE 13, 1967
crime reporting is not measurably better to-
for its June 5, 1967, Task Force Report urging
BILL FILLS VOID SAYS TASK FORCE CHAIRMAN
day than it was a year ago. Accordingly, a
immediate establishment of a Joint Commit-
comparison of crime statistics within that
tee on Crime.
U.S. Representative Richard H. Poff (R.-
Va.), Chairman of the House Republican
time frame is a reasonably reliable indicator
Rep. Richard H. Poff (R-Va.), Task Force
Task Force on Crime, today called the Task
of the growth in crime."
Chairman, offered support for a Resolution
Force endorsed bill authorizing limited court
Poff in his floor speech said, "The latest
introduced Friday by Senators Frank Moss
FBI Uniform Crime Reports compare crime
(D-Utah) and Joseph Tydings (D-Md.).
supervised bugging "necessary to fill the void
in the first three months of 1966 with that in
Their proposal calls for establishment of a
created by Monday's Supreme Court deci-
the first three months of 1967. That compari-
Joint Committee on Crime to attack the
sion in the Burger Case."
son shows an increase of 20% in the 7 major
problems of the nation's spiralling crime
Poff stated that the McCulloch proposal
crimes. These 7 include 4 crimes of violence
rate. It is similar to a Resolution introduced
"reflects the foresight and planning" needed
against the person and 3 property crimes.
in Congress today. "While the Supreme
in February by Rep. William C. Cramer (R-
Personal crimes increased more than property
Fla.).
Court knocked out New York's wiretap pro-
crimes. The largest increase, 42%, was in the
"We're not concerned with whose name ap-
visions," Poff continued, "the Justice did not
crime of robbery as reported in cities with
pears on a particular Resolution," Poff stated.
rule out court authorized wiretapping.
populations ranging between 250,000 and
"Crime slashes through party lines. It is ob-
Rather, the majority opinion calls for legis-
500,000.
viously a bi-partisan problem requiring im-
lative guidelines similar to those contained
"With respect to all 7 crimes, cities with a
mediate action. The June 5 Task Force Re-
in the Task Force Report of Sunday, June
population of 100,000 or more registered a
port called for establishment of a Joint
total increase of 20%. However, it is a mis-
11.
Committee on Organized Crime to devote
"We will be able to adjust the bill with
take to assume that crime growth is only
'full time to the development of information
little difficulty," Poff stated. "Some language
a city problem. Rural areas reported an in-
and legislative proposals to control organized
adjustments are needed but we have stayed
crease of only 4 percentage points less, and
crime, its effects and impact.' If our House
within the limits of the 4th Amendment and
the crime growth rate of 22% in suburban
Republican Task Force on Crime can serve
do not conflict with yesterday's ruling."
communities was even higher than that in
as the moving force behind Administration
On Sunday, the House Republican Task
cities.
proposals, we welcome that role," Rep. Poff
Force on Crime urged passage of legislation
"Neither is there any remarkable difference
concluded.
"to prohibit wiretapping and electronic bug-
in the reports by geographical region. The
ging except by court authorized Federal,
Northeast, North Central, Southern and
State, and local law enforcement officers en-
Western regions ranged between 18% and
gaged in the investigation and prevention of
21%. But the District of Columbia sustained
organized and certain specified crimes."
its inglorious record. Crime in the Nation's
Capitol jumped nearly 42%, or more than
10
(NOT PRINTED AT GOVERNMENT EXPENSE)
Congressional Record
United States
of America
PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE
90ᵗʰ
CONGRESS, FIRST SESSION
Vol. 113
WASHINGTON, TUESDAY, AUGUST 15, 1967
No. 129
POLICY STATEMENTS OF THE RE-
NEW AND SHARPER TOOLS FOR LAW
poses constitutes an act of unfair competi-
PUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON
ENFORCEMENT
tion and an unconscionable trade practice
CRIME-POFF AND HRUSKA JOIN
(Statement by Hon. RICHARD H. POFF, chair-
against others engaged in that business.
IN FIGHT ON CRIME
man of the Republican Task Force on
The first two bills in my package are new.
Crime)
They are intended to activate the antitrust
(Mr. GERALD R. FORD (at the request
The war on crime to be successful must
laws in a more vital way and focus their ap-
of Mr. ZION) was granted permission to
be planned both long-range and short-
plication upon the problem or organized
extend his remarks at this point in the
crime.
range. My concern is that action begin now.
RECORD and to include extraneous mat-
To that end, the able Senator from Ne-
As indicated earlier, the first bill would
outlaw the investment of income derived
ter.)
braska and I are introducing today in our
Mr. GERALD R. FORD. Mr. Speaker,
respective Houses a package of bills designed
from specified criminal activities in legit-
to modernize old criminal statutes and adapt
imate business. The activities specified are
under leave to extend my remarks, I in-
them to the new challenge which crime
those typical of syndicate conduct. They
clude policy statements of the Repub-
include gambling, bribery, extortion, coun-
poses. The package will not only sharpen old
lican Task Force on Crime dated June
terfeiting, narcotics traffic, and white-slav-
tools but forge new tools of law enforce-
30 and July 11, 1967.
ment.
ery. This bill would bring to bear upon
organized crime the criminal penalties and
[From the Republican Task Force on Crime,
My package contains three bills:
civil sanctions currently defined in the Sher-
June 30, 1967]
(1) A bill prohibiting the investment of
man Act. Equally as important, if not more
POFF AND HRUSKA JOIN IN FIGHT ON CRIME
funds illegally acquired from specified crim-
inal activities in a legitimate business con-
so, this bill would give Federal investigators
U.S. Representative Richard H. Poff (R-
broader and more certain jurisdiction to
cern;
Va.), Chairman of the House Republican
investigate the activities of syndicated crime
(2) A bill prohibiting the investment in
Task Force on Crime, and Senator Roman
and identify its illegal revenue sources.
such concerns of funds legally acquired but
Hruska (R-Neb.) today proposed to com-
The second bill would outlaw the invest-
deliberately unreported for Federal income
bat the nation's spiraling crime rate through
ment in legitimate business concerns of
tax purposes; and
new anti-trust legislation and an omnibus
income derived by organized crime from
(3) An omnibus bill to improve criminal
"Criminal Procedure" Act. Several House
other legitimate enterprises if such income
procedures in such areas as searches and
Republicans joined them in introducing a
has not been reported for Federal income
seizures, gathering of evidence, no-knock
three-bill legislative package.
tax purposes. This bill would furnish the
entries for capture of perishable evidence,
The two anti-trust measures would pro-
predictae for investigation of the myriad
appeals for suppression orders, witness im-
hibit the use of illegally acquired funds or
ramifications of organized crime's infiltra-
munity, perjury definition, and obstruction
those deliberately unreported for income tax
tion into the many compartments and ech-
of investigations.
purposes in legitimate concerns. "Trafficking
elons of American business. Moreover, in
in vice and greed, organized crime has a
ORGANIZED CRIME
addition to requiring payment of the tax on
gigantic earning power," Poff stated. "This
The first two bills in the package are aimed
the unreported earnings, the crime syndicate
earning power has created a reservoir of
at organized crime. Organized crime, which
would be subjected to payment of multiple
wealth unmatched by any legitimate finan-
crosses state lines and employs the resources,
damages authorized under the Sherman Act.
cial institution in the nation. Receipts from
vehicles and paraphernalia of interstate
In addition to the other wholesome aspects
illegal gambling alone have been estimated
commerce, is a national problem. As such,
these two bills would have, jointly they would
at up to $50 billion a year," Poff noted.
Federal jurisdiction is unchallenged and
allow organized criminal activities to be at-
"The Omnibus Bill embraces a number of
Federal responsibility is undisputed.
tacked before their anti-competitive impact
important criminal procedure improve-
Organized crime is a threat to the Ameri-
can destroy legitimate business. They would
ments," continued Poff. "By defining the
can free enterprise system. Trafficking in
siphon off a large part of organized crime's
limits of police investigative powers, the bill
vice and greed and all the ignoble human
dollar reservoir, and this could do as much
makes it plain that a police officer, while
frailties, syndicated crime has a gigantic
to control this problem as sending a few
making a lawful arrest, can search both the
earning power. Receipts from illegal gam-
crime chiefs to the penitentiary for a tem-
person and the immediate presence of the
bling alone have been estimated at up to 50
porary season.
suspect for the purpose of preventing es-
billion dollars a year. This earning power has
I have said these two bills are new. They
cape; protecting the officer from attack;
created a reservoir of wealth unmatched by
are; however, there is some precedent in
capturing stolen property; or seizing prop-
any legitimate financial institution in the
practice. The existing antitrust laws have
perty used in commission of the crime. The
nation. As the President's Crime Commis-
been used by law enforcement authorities in
omnibus bill contains a new law enforce-
sion elaborately documented. organized
the criminal field. The Sherman Act makes
ment tool called the 'obstruction of investi-
crime's overlords have tapped this reservoir
every combination or trust and every con-
gation' law. It would make it a Federal crime
and invested its funds in wholly legitimate
spiracy in restraint of interstate commerce
for a person to obstruct a Federal criminal
business activity. Because resources are prac-
an illegal enterprise. The penalty structure
investigator engaged in the lawful investi-
tically unlimited, the crime syndicate has
permits fines up to $50,000 and confinement
gation of a Federal offense. The measure at-
the power not only to acquire and control an
up to one year, or both. The existing anti-
tempts to better define witness immunity
individual business establishment, but, by
trust laws also make provision for pretrial
laws, perjury laws, and several other pro-
massive purchases and sales on the stock
discovery and investigation by grand juries
cedural areas."
market, to manipulate capital values and in-
for criminal prosecutions. In addition to
Both Poff and Hruska noted that the
fluence price structures. By careful, me-
criminal penalties, the Act permits an in-
"package of bills is intended to give law
thodical, clandestine infiltration of several
jured party to bring a civil suit for injunc-
enforcement authorities new and sharper
segments of a particular industry, organized
tion or recovery of civil demages and at-
tools" for their tasks "without sacrificing
crime can use its vast concentration of dol-
torney's fees.
any of the cherished rights which mark us
lars to create monopolies and, by coercive
In the case of United States V. Bitz, 282
as free men. The people expect the Congress
methods, to restrain commerce among the
F. 2d 465 (2d Cir. 1960), racketeers had been
to act," Poff concluded.
states and with foreign nations.
indicted under the criminal provisions of the
Clearly, the investment in a legitimate
antitrust laws for conspiring and threaten-
[From the Republican Task Force on Crime,
business of funds illegally acquired or funds
ing to strike against the distributors of
June 30, 1967]
legally acquired but unreported for tax pur-
newspapers to coerce money from them. The
Circuit Court of Appeals upheld the indict-
The omnibus bill creates a new law en-
properly, advance notice to the defendant of
ment as an appropriate use of the antitrust
forcement tool which has long been needed.
intent to use such evidence prior to trial,
laws, and convictions were subsequently
For the sake of brevity, it is called the "Ob-
notice to persons subject to such electronic
obtained.
struction of Investigation" law. Patterned
surveillance within one year after the author-
In the case of United States V. Pennsyl-
after the concept of the obstruction of jus-
ization, limited periods for such authoriza-
vania Refuse Removal Ass'n., 357 F. 2d 806
tice statute which has been on the books for
tion, civil remedies to aggreived parties, and
(3d Cir. 1966), Cert. Denied, 384 U.S. 96L
many years, the new law would make it a new
limitation on certain privileged communica-
(1966), the defendant was charged under the
Federal crime for a person to obstruct I
tions such as those between lawyer-client,
antitrust laws with a conspiracy to restrain
Federal criminal investigator engaged in the
husband-wife and clergyman-confidant. Pub-
trade by coercive methods in the garbage
lawful investigation of a Federal offense.
lic telephones would also be subject to sim-
collection business. He was convicted and
The omnibus bill undertakes to write a
ilar stringent restrictions.
the courts sustained the conviction.
better witness immunity law than the nation
The civil injunction provisions of the anti-
now has. Indeed, the nation now has some
All officials, state and Federal, engaged in
electronic surveillance would be required to
trust laws were used to enjoin a conspiracy
41 immunity laws. These are too many, too
report annually through the Administrative
to sell yellow grease by coercive methods,
imprecise and too awkward. The language
Office of U.S. Courts to the Congress on their
and the use of the law for this purpose was
of the new bill represents an improvement
activities to allow for continuing Congres-
upheld by the Supreme Court in the case
without perfection. It is intended principally
sional overview, and the legislation itself
of Los Angeles Meat & Provision Driver's
to be a working paper rather than the final
would be self-terminating in eight years.
Union V. United States, 371 U.S. 94 (1962).
product. Refinements can be made and some
Only last March the Department of Jus-
efforts must be made to work out a system of
It is thus apparent that the most careful
tice filed a civil antitrust action against the
coordination and liaison with state and local
thought and consideration has gone into the
National Farmers Organization alleging vio-
law enforcement personnel. Until those who
drafting of this bill in order to protect the
lence and coercion in attempting to monopo-
have special information necessary to con-
privacy of the individual against both tres-
lize the interstate sale of milk. Clearly, if
vict others can be assured that they will en-
pass by his neighbor and unreasonable intru-
the present antitrust statutes can be used for
joy immunity from prosecution at all levels
sion by the policeman. And yet society's in-
such a purpose, they can be used against
of government, no federal immunity statute
terest in investigating and controlling crim-
criminal combinations by organized crime in
will function properly.
inal activity is incorporated as an essential
restraint of trade.
The omnibus bill comes to grips with a
element of the equation of law and order.
Indeed, it may be that the present anti-
problem which has plagued law enforcement
Mr. Speaker, I am proud to announce that
trust laws are sufficient without amendment
people from the beginning. Our perjury laws
I have been joined in the sponsorship of this
as a tool in the war against organized crime.
retain today the old common law require-
package of bills by the following Members of
If so, the two bills I have introduced aren't
ments of direct evidence and corroborative
Congress: John Rhodes, Melvin Laird, Bob
necessary. If not, they should be refined and
testimony. The omnibus bill, while preserving
Wilson, Leslie Arends, Barber Conable, Carle-
passed. In their present form, even if im-
the requirement for proving falsity, elimi-
ton King, Clark MacGregor, Robert Price,
perfect, they can serve as a vehicle for hear-
nates the direct evidence rule and the so-
Arch Moore, Edward Hutchinson, Robert Mc-
ings to enable the Judiciary Committee to
called two-witness rule. Such legislation was
Clory, Robert Taft, Henry P. Smith III, and
make a determination on this point.
warmly recommended by the President's
Chalmers Wylie.
CHANGES IN CRIMINAL PROCEDURE
Crime Commission, and most legal scholars
I repeat, as I began, this package of bills
The third bill in my package is an omnibus
agree that there is no longer any justification
is intended to give law enforcement author-
for the cumbersome procedures which the
ities new and sharper tools for this task. It
measure embracing a number of important
common law required.
is well and good to attack the causes of
criminal procedure improvements. Court de-
cisions defining the limits of the powers of
In context with this package of bills, I
crime at the environmental level. It is useful
investigative officers in the field of searches
consider it appropriate to identify once again
to treat with socioeconomic conditions which
the electronic surveillance bill, H.R. 10037,
breed crime. We need to improve the method-
and seizures need to be clarified and codified.
introduced recently by the ranking Minority
ology of rehabilitation to help control recid-
This bill makes it plain that a police officer,
while making a lawful arrest, can search both
Member of the Committee on the Judiciary,
ivism. It is helpful to modernize and ex-
the person and the immediate presence of
the Gentleman from Ohio, Mr. McCulloch;
pand physical equipment and facilities used
the suspect for the purpose of preventing the
the distinguished Minority Leader, the Gen-
by policemen.
tleman from Michigan, Mr. Gerald Ford;
Yet, we must understand that these are
suspect from escaping, protecting the officer
from attack, capturing property which is the
myself and a score of other Republican
gradual, long-range techniques. Something
Members of the House.
needs to be done now. Our old laws are not
fruit of the crime or seizing property used
in the commission of the crime. It would also
The principle thrust of H.R. 10037 is to
adequate to the new need. They must be
translate into statutory law the recent ruling
protect the right of privacy of the individual
modernized. This is the province of the Con-
of the Supreme Court in the Hayden case,
citizen. For that purpose, it outlaws all wire-
gress. The people expect the Congress to deal
which held that officers armed with an ap-
tapping or bugging by private citizens. At
with this duty.
propriate search warrant can seize and im-
the same time, the individual's right of
pound personal property to be used as so-
privacy is carefully balanced against society's
[From the Republican Task Force on Crime,
called "mere evidence" in the prosecution's
right of security. The bill authorizes society
July 11, 1967]
case. Heretofore, the law has permitted sei-
to protect itself by discovering the criminal
"IT TAKES MORE THAN LAWS," SAYS POFF
zure only of fruits of the crime and contra-
plans and practices of those who have no
Rep. Richard H. Poff (R.-Va.) today called
band. Mere evidence, no matter how proba-
proper regard for society's security. It au-
for greater cooperation between the Legisla-
tive, was exempt from seizure.
thorizes law enforcement authorities to
The omnibus bill contains what has come
acquire from a judge of competent jurisdic-
tive, Judicial, and Executive Branches of
to be known as the "no-knock" proposal.
tion a warrant (in the nature of a search
Government in an effort to combat the prob-
Under present law the officer with a search
warrant), authorizing the officer under care-
lems of crime and organized criminal activ-
ity nationwide.
warrant is required before entering the
fully proscribed conditions to conduct elec-
The Chairman of the House Republican
premises to knock, request admission, and
tronic surveillance against named indi-
divulge his authority and purpose under the
Task Force on Crime stated, "The people are
viduals in identified locations.
demanding that Congress prepare new and
warrant. The bill would permit forcible entry
H.R. 10037 implements the recommenda-
stronger laws to deal with the nation's un-
against the will of the occupant if the mag-
tion of and is patterned after the statutory
precedented crime rate. But no matter how
istrate has made a determination-and has
scheme discussed in the Organized Crime
strong, no matter how carefully drawn, no
registered that determination in the war-
Task Force report published by the Presi-
matter how well developed new laws may be,
rant-that the property sought is perishable
dent's Crime Commission.
Congress only legislates. Law enforcement,"
or that danger to the life or limb of the offi-
The bill contains the following significant
Poff continued, "requires more than laws,
cer might result without such authority.
features:
studies, or commissions. Effective law en-
Such an entry may be made even without
Private use of wiretapping and electronic
forcement demands enthusiasm, dedication,
express authority in the warrant if this is
eavesdropping devices would be absolutely
determination, and a continuing effort to
necessary to his protection in executing the
prohibited.
enforce the laws."
warrant or if it is virtually certain that the
Federal law enforcement officials could ob-
Poff expressed dismay at the Attorney Gen-
occupant already knows the officer's author-
tain court authorized electronic surveillance
eral's recent memorandum banning almost
ity and purpose.
orders for investigation of certain specified
all wiretapping and eavesdropping. "That
Another part of the omnibus bill is the
offenses, including national security and
leaves, as the next logical step, an order in-
language of H.R. 8654 introduced earlier
organized crime.
structing Federal law enforcement officers to
by the Gentleman from Illinois, Mr. Rails-
State authorities could engage in similar
wear blinders and stuff cotton in their ears,"
back, and recently endorsed by the Repub-
activities pursuant to proper state statutory
Poff commented.
lican Task Force on Crime. This language,
authorization. (The President's proposal
"The battle against crime has not been
following the precedent in the Narcotics
would not only ban all wiretapping and bug-
won. The problems are still with us in even
Control Act of 1956, permits the prosecutor
ging but also repeal existing state laws.)
greater number," Rep. Poff told his House
to appeal orders suppressing evidence or
An elaborate and comprehensive system of
colleagues.
granting a motion for return of seized prop-
checks and safeguards would be established
erty before the prosecution proceeds to trial.
to protect individual privacy, curb abuses
This proposal enjoys the support of the
by law enforcement officers and assure the
President's Crime Commission, the Judicial
rights and liberties of the criminal. Such
Conference of the United States, and the
safeguards include provisions for the sup-
Department of Justice.
pression of evidence when gathered im-
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME
142 Cannon Bldg., 225-5107 House of Representatives Washington, D. C. 20515
Chairman
PRESS RELEASE
Richard H. Poff
Virginia
For Release: AM's
Deputy Chairman
Monday
Robert Taft, Jr.
Ohio
Contact: 8/28/67
Ext. 5107
Barber B. Conable, Jr.
New York
William C. Cramer
RULES "HAM STRINGING" AGENTS SAYS CRIME TASK FORCE
Florida
Samuel L. Devine
Ohio
The House Republican Task Force on Crime today called on the
John N. Erlenborn
Illinois
Attorney General "to utilize every legal investigative tool available"
Carleton J. King
New York
to combat the nation's spiraling crime rate.
Clark MacGregor
Minnesota
The Task Force charged that the Attorney General's June 1967,
Robert B. Mathias
California
regulations "strictly limiting legal electronic surveillance" have
Robert Price
Texas
Thomas F. Railsback
no other effect than the Tham-stringing of Federal agents in their
Illinois
Henry P. Smith, III
day-to-day conduct of organized crime investigations. No need for
New York
the Attorney General's regulations has been shown. They are, in fact,
Chalmers P. Wylie
Ohio
Louis C. Wyman
further evidence that the Attorney General is fighting a war of
New Hampshire
retreat against organized crime," the group charged in a prepared
statement.
"We view his regulations as inevitably discouraging the use of
sound, acceptable, and legal investigative techniques in combating
organized crime. He now sits in judgment as to what may or may not
be necessary in an investigation thousands of miles from his Washington
office. An agent in the field places his life or personal safety in
jeopardy during investigations. Time, obviously, may be vital --
delay deadly," the Task Force asserted.
"The cumbersome, time-consuming, inter-agency procedural
structure the new regulations erect is likely to intimidate and
frustrate the most diligent investigator. So long as adequate safe-
guards against illegal practices exist, investigating ought to be left
to investigators,"
The Task Force declared, "We urge the Attorney General to
reexamine and revise what is to us an incredible retreat in the war
against criminal activity."
GERALD FORD VIBRARA
August 28, 1967
STATEMENT OF THE HOUSE REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME
The House Republican Task Force on Crime believes that it is a necessary and
proper function of the Attorney General and the Department of Justice to operate
within the framework of existing law in conducting its investigations into and
prosecutions of criminal matters, be it organized crime or any other type of crime.
By this we mean they should not go beyond the law but at the same time they should
utilize every effective investigative tool available to them inside the law.
In June, the Attorney General promulgated and issued to the Department of
Justice and to other departments and agencies of the federal government (for
example, the Bureau of Narcotics of the Treasury Department) a set of regulations
expressly designed to, in the language of the regulations, "strictly limit legal
electronic surveillance." These regulations have no other practical effect than
the "ham-stringing" of Federal agents in their day-to-day conduct of organized
crime investigations. We view them as yet another manifestation of the fact that
the Attorney General is fighting a war of retreat against organized crime and that
it is only a matter of time before his federal forces will be in a full scale rout.
The limitations in his regulations go far beyond wiretap and third-party
bugging. They go far beyond the strict limitations placed upon these practices by
the Supreme Court in the Berger case. They reach even transmitters and recording
devices used by one of the parties to a conversation, a Narcotics agent who is
about to make a purchase or a Treasury agent who is about to be bribed. This
technique was specifically sanctioned by the Supreme Court as recently as last
November in the Osborn case, and it is a technique most frequently employed in
organized crime investigations. To be sure, these regulations do not actually
forbid the use of transmitters and recorders under those circumstances, but they do
create a labyrinth of procedure, inventory control and just plain red tape which
culminates in the obtaining of advance approval from the Attorney General before any
use may be made of such devices. And if that advance written approval has been or
will be denied or simply delayed in just one single instance, then that is just one
less case the government may be able to bring.
Frequently an agent in the field places his life or personal safety in jeopardy
during the investigation of organized crime cases. Necessarily, he must deal clan-
destinely with people who are armed and dangerous. Under those circumstances it is
usually mandatory -- from a safety consideration alone -- that what transpires be
overheard instantly by other agents nearby. The same thing may be said of inform-
ants, particularly narcotics informants, for whose protection there ought to be at
least some concern. Informants are even now difficult enough to find and cultivate;
- 2 -
they will be altogether unavailable if they are to be abandoned to their own wits
in dangerous situations. Further, potential witnesses in organized crime cases
are, for a variety of reasons, sometimes difficult to corroborate. What is over-
heard by a transmitter may be preserved by a recorder and later become probative,
competent and, most important, accurate corroborative evidence in the prosecution.
Quite apart from the fact that we seriously question the authority of the
Attorney General to meddle in this fashion in the purely investigative affairs of
other departments and agencies of the federal government, we view his regulations
as inevitably discouraging the use of sound, acceptable and legal investigative
techniques in combating organized crime. It is proper, of course, for him to
advise other departments and agencies of the federal government as to the existing
law with respect to the use of investigative tools. But as the ultimate authority,
under his own regulations, he now sits in judgment as to what may or may not be
necessary in an investigation thousands of miles from his Washington office. Time
may be vital -- delay deadly. He cannot possibly know the facts better than the
agent in the field, even after he has required the agent to justify his request in
considerable written detail. The cumbersome, time-consuming, inter-agency pro-
cedural structure the new regulations erect is likely to intimidate and frustrate
the most diligent investigator. And where authority to employ a device is denied,
agents may understandably decline to expose themselves to danger, informants will
refuse to cooperate, and crime will go unpunished because witnesses are not
corroborated.
No need for the Attorney General's regulations has been shown. On the contrary,
he has himself informed us that as far as federal agencies are concerned, electronic
surveillance by all illegal means has been a thing of the past since July 1965. If
that is true, then the regulations are without a logical purpose. Where legal
investigative techniques are available, their use ought to be encouraged and the
decision to use them ought not be subjected to unwarranted inter-agency interfer-
ence. In short, this Task Force believes that, so long as adequate safeguards
against illegal practices exist, investigating ought to be left to the investiga-
tors. In the war against crime they are the people on the firing line; they are
doing the work; they are taking the risks.
We call upon the Attorney General to reexamine and revise what is to us an
incredible retreat in the war on criminal activity. As the chief law enforcement
officer of this country he should move vigorously by all means within the law to
enforce the law.
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
Everett M. Dirksen
THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
of Illinois
Gerald R. Ford
Thomas H. Kuchel
OF THE CONGRESS
of Michigan
of California
Leslie C. Arends
Bourke B. Hickenlooper
of Illinois
of Iowa
Press Release
Melvin R. Laird
Margaret Chase Smith
of Wisconsin
of Maine
John J. Rhodes
George Murphy
of Arizona
of California
Issued following a
H. Allen Smith
Milton R. Young
of California
of North Dakota
Leadership Meeting
Bob Wilson
Hugh Scott
of California
of Pennsylvania
Charles E. Goodell
August 29,1967
of New York
PRESIDING:
Richard H. Poff
of Virginia
The National Chairman
Ray C. Bliss
William C. Cramer
of Florida
REPRESENTATIVE FORD:
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The War at home -- the war against crime is being lost. The
Administration appears to be in full retreat. The homes and the streets
of America are no longer safe for our people. This is a frightful
situation. Our people will no longer tolerate it. In the past six
years the population of the United States has increased by 9% while crime
has risen by 62%. The end is not in sight.
The Republicans in Congress demand that this Administration take
the action required to protect our people in their homes, on the streets,
at their jobs. To this end, we have proposed--and vigorously pushed --
bills which will provide the Administration with whatever tools it needs
to do the job. We will continue to press this Administration and its
top-heavy majority in Congress relentlessly, day after day after day.
There can be no further Administration excuse fo indecision, delay or
evasion.
When a Rap Brown and a Storeley Carmichael are allowed to run loose,
to threaten law-abiding Americans with njury and death, it's time to
slam the door on them and any like them and slam it hard!
In the 89th Congress, Republican efforts produced:
Reasonable extension and improvement of the Law Enforcement
Assistance Act, to assist local and state law enforcement
officers;
New thinking regarding means to improve probation and parole
service and defeat of Administration efforts to remove supervision
of probation officers by Federal judges;
Creation of a Commission to fully revise and reform our
Federal criminal laws.
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-(202) 225-3700
Consultant to the Leadership-John B. Fisher
Mr. Ford:
In the 90th Congress, Republican efforts have resulted in:
The rewriting through imperative amendments of the
Administration's crime control bill, to further strengthen
the hand of state and local governments in crime prevention,
detection and prosecution;
Passage by the House of an Anti-Riot Bill, for prosecution
of those who use the facilities of interstate commerce with
intent to incite a riot;
Passage in the Senate of a bill to strengthen and clarify
the review by Courts of Appeal of criminal sentences of Federal
courts;
Introduction of a bill, the Criminal Activities Profits Act,
to prohibit the use of illegal funds in legitimate business;
Introduction of a bill providing for electronic surveillance
control, in order that the right of individaul privacy might
be fully protected while the national security is equally
preserved;
Introduction of an Omnibus Criminal Procedures bill, to
strengthen the hand of law enforcement officers and judges;
Introduction of a bill to establish in Congress a Joint Com-
mittee on Organized Crime.
These are only a few of the actions already taken by the Republicans
in Congress for the protection of our people against organized crime,
group violence, and individual crime.
In addition, there has been created a House Republican Task Force on
Crime and a Republican Coordinating Committee Task Force on Crime.
Each has been hard at work.
Finally, the 25 Republican governors across the nation have activated
their "Action Plan", to inaugurate a new era of creative state leadership
to meet the national crisis of social injustice and lawlessness.
No one has a right to shout "Fire!" in a theatre. No one has a
right to incite riot, looting, destruction and murder. There is no such
thing as the right to act against the public safety by any one, anywhere,
any time.
Our people are frightened by the rampant crime of all types that is
overwhelming the nation. The Congress can, if it follows Republican
leadership, provide the tools for fighting crime that the Administration
must use. We demand that the Congress and the Administration act -- now!
STATEMENT BY SENATOR DIRKSEN
August 29, 1967
Not a day passes without hundreds of reports of individual crimes
against our people. Not a week passes without evidence of the vicious
successes of organized crime from coast to coast. Never in our history
have our people been so threatened. Never before has civil discipline
been so lax. Never before has leadership been so lacking.
The law must be enforced. The law must be obeyed. The law must
be respected. The great failure of our society is its inability to
maintain law and order.
Respect for the law is the duty of the people. The enforcement of
the law is the responsibility of the Alministration. The means it
requires for the purpose is the responsibility of the Congress.
We demand that this Congress, with its overwhelming Democratic
majority, ake immediately the steps we have proposed for Administration
use.
We demand also hat the Administration:
Apply without further delay the major recommendations of
its own, hand-picked Crime Commission;
Cease to restrict our law enforcement officers in
their proper use of the investigative tools they have at
hand;
Furnish our law enforcement officers with the investiga-
tive tools they still require and watch Republican-proposed
legislation would rovide:
Establish, as Republicans have long urged, a National
Law Enforcement Institute, for research and training in
prevention and prosecution of organized and individual
crime and for the dissemination of the latest techniques
in police science.
Sen. Dirksen
Finally, as presented in our Appraisal of the State of the Union
in January of this year and earlier, we remind America's judges to
uphold the rights of the law-abiding citizen with the same fervor as
it upholds the rights of the accused.
By unanimous resolution, the recent Conference of Chief Justices,
attended by jurists from 45 states, reasserted this principle and
necessity. We applaud their action and commend it without reservation
to every judge in the land. The protection of the good citizen is
paramount and compelling. I submit that the strengthening of a good
society is more important than the creation of a so-called "Great Society".
On an earlier day, in his war against an international criminal,
a redoubtable Englishman besought the United States to "Give us the
tools and we'll finish the job". In this hour, the Republicans in
Congress are prepared to provide this Administration with whatever
tools it now needs to grind organized and individual crime into the
dust that our people might be safe.
We demand that it delay no longer.
We demand that it finish the job.
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
Everett M. Dirksen
THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
of Illinois
Gerald R. Ford
OF THE CONGRESS
of Michigan
Thomas H. Kuchel
of California
Leslie C. Arends
of Illinois
Bourke B. Hickenlooper
of Iowa
Melvin R. Laird
Press Release
of Wisconsin
Margaret Chase Smith
of Maine
John J. Rhodes
of Arizona
George Murphy
of California
H. Allen Smith
of California
Milton R. Young
of North Dakota
Bob Wilson
of California
Hugh Scott
of Pennsylvania
Charles E. Goodell
of New York
PRESIDING:
Richard H. Poff
of Virginia
The National Chairman
William C. Cramer
Ray C. Bliss
of Florida
REPRESENTATIVE FORD:
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
AUG 2 9 1967
The War at home -- the war against crime -- is being lost. The
Administration appears to be in full retreat. The homes and the streets
of America are no longer safe for our people. This is a frightful
situation. Our people will no longer tolerate it. In the past six
years the population of the United States has increased by 9% while crime
has risen by 62%. The end is not in sight.
The Republicans in Congress demand that this Administration take
the action required to protect our people in their homes, on the streets,
at their jobs. To this end, we have proposed--and vigorously pushed --
bills which will provide the Administration with whatever tools it needs
to do the job. We will continue to press this Administration and its
top-heavy majority in Congress relentlessly, day after day after day.
There can be no further Administration excuse for indecision, delay or
evasion.
When a Rap Brown and a Stokely Carmichael are allowed to run loose,
to threaten law-abiding Americans with injury and death, it's time to
slam the door on them and any like them -- and slam it hard!
In the 89th Congress, Republican efforts produced:
Reasonable extension and improvement of the Law Enforcement
Assistance Act, to assist local and state law enforcement
officers;
New thinking regarding means to improve probation and parole
service and defeat of Administration efforts to remove supervision
of probation officers by Federal judges;
Creation of a Commission to fully revise and reform our
Federal criminal laws.
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-(202) 225-3700
Consultant to the Leadership-John B. Fisher
Mr. Ford:
In the 90th Congress, Republican efforts have resulted in:
The rewriting through imperative amendments of the
Administration's crime control bill, to further strengthen
the hand of state and local governments in crime prevention,
detection and prosecution;
Passage by the House of an Anti-Riot Bill, for prosecution
of those who use the facilities of interstate commerce with
intent to incite a riot;
Passage in the Senate of a bill to strengthen and clarify
the review by Courts of Appeal of criminal sentences of Federal
courts;
Introduction of a bill, the Criminal Activities Profits Act,
to prohibit the use of illegal funds in legitimate business;
Introduction of a bill providing for electronic surveillance
control, in order that the right of individaul privacy might
be fully protected while the national security is equally
preserved;
Introduction of an Omnibus Criminal Procedures bill, to
strengthen the hand of law enforcement officers and judges;
Introduction of a bill to establish in Congress a Joint Com-
mittee on Organized Crime.
These are only a few of the actions already taken by the Republicans
in Congress for the protection of our people against organized crime,
group violence, and individual crime.
In addition, there has been created a House Republican Task Force on
Crime and a Republican Coordinating Committee Task Force on Crime.
Each has been hard at work.
Finally, the 25 Republican governors across the nation have activated
their "Action Plan", to inaugurate a new era of creative state leadership
to meet the national crisis of social injustice and lawlessness.
No one has a right to shout "Fire!" in a theatre. No one has a
right to incite riot, looting, destruction and murder. There is no such
thing as the right to act against the public safety by any one, anywhere,
any time.
Our people are frightened by the rampant crime of all types that is
overwhelming the nation. The Congress can, if it follows Republican
leadership, provide the tools for fighting crime that the Administration
must use. We demand that the Congress and the Administration act -- now!
STATEMENT BY SENATOR DIRKSEN
August 29, 1967
Not a day passes without hundreds of reports of individual crimes
against our people. Not a week passes without evidence of the vicious
successes of organized crime from coast to coast. Never in our history
have our people been so threatened. Never before has civil discipline
been so lax. Never before has leadership been so lacking.
The law must be enforced. The law must be obeyed. The law must
be respected. The great failure of our society is its inability to
maintain law and order.
Respect for the law is the duty of the people. The enforcement of
the law is the responsibility of the Administration. The means it
requires for the purpose is the responsibility of the Congress.
We demand that this Congress, with its overwhelming Democratic
majority, take immediately the steps we have proposed for Administration
use.
We demand also that the Administration:
Apply without further delay the major recommendations of
its own, hand-picked Crime Commission;
Cease to restrict our law enforcement officers in
their proper use of the investigative tools they have at
hand;
Furnish our law enforcement officers with the investiga-
tive tools they still require and which Republican-proposed
legislation would provide;
Establish, as Republicans have long urged, a National
Law Enforcement Institute, for research and training in
prevention and prosecution of organized and individual
crime and for the dissemination of the latest techniques
in police science.
Sen. Dirksen
Finally, as presented in our Appraisal of the State of the Union
in January of this year and earlier, we remind America's judges to
uphold the rights of the law-abiding citizen with the same fervor as
they uphold the rights of the accused.
By unanimous resolution, the recent Conference of Chief Justices,
attended by jurists from 45 states, reasserted this principle and
necessity. We applaud their action and commend it without reservation
to every judge in the land. The protection of the good citizen is
paramount and compelling. I submit that the strengthening of a good
society is more important than the creation of a so-called "Great Society".
On an earlier day, in his war against an international criminal,
a redoubtable Englishman besought the United States to "Give us the
tools and we'll finish the job". In this hour, the Republicans in
Congress are prepared to provide this Administration with whatever
tools it now needs to grind organized and individual crime into the
dust that our people might be safe.
We demand that it delay no longer.
We demand that it finish the job.
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME
142 Cannon Bldg., 225-5107 House of Representatives Washington, D. C. 20515
Chairman
Richard H. Poff
PRESS RELEASE
Virginia
END DEBATE, WITHDRAW OPPOSITION For Release: PM' Mon.
Deputy Chairman
GOP TASK FORCE ON CRIME URGES
10/2/67
Robert Taft, Jr.
Ohio
Contact: Ext. 5107
Barber B. Conable, Jr.
Washington, D. C. - The House Republican Task Force on Crime
New York
William C. Cramer
today introduced legislation which would amend the McCulloch
Florida
Samuel L. Devine
Electronic Surveillance Act to bring it within the framework
Ohio
John N. Erlenborn
outlined by the Supreme Court in the Berger case, and recently
Illinois
Carleton J. King
supported by the Judicial Conference of the United States. The
New York
Clark MacGregor
Task Force credited Notre Dame University Professor G. Robert
Minnesota
Robert B. Mathias
California
Blakey with drafting the amendments.
Robert Price
Texas
The GOP crime group called upon the President to instruct the
Thomas F. Railsback
Illinois
Attorney General "to withdraw his opposition" to use of court
Henry P. Smith, III
New York
approved electronic surveillance in the investigation of organized
Chalmers P. Wylie
Ohio
crime by federal and state law enforcement officers. Calling the
Louis C. Wyman
New Hampshire
Judicial Conference of the United States support for wiretap
legislation "most significant", they stated, "There is no longer
a basis for reasonable controversy over the necessity or
Constitutionality of this legislation.
"The time has come to end the debate. Now it is time for
action," the Task Force declared.
With respect to the Judicial Conference, the Task Force noted
that it "is a body of unparalleled prestige" headed by the Chief
Justice of the United States Supreme Court. Judicial Conference
membership includes the chief judges of all the Federal Circuit
Courts and selected judges of certain Federal District Courts. Their
report "represents the considered judgment of a purely judicial
body" whose members are "in no way spokesmen for law enforcement."
The GOP statement continued, "Their stated position, volunteered
and unsolicited, can only be interpreted in one way. They recognize
the need for electronic surveillance in order to effectively fight
crime, Moreover, they recognize that law enforcement can be given
this tool within the limitations of the Constitution."
- 30 -
On Tuesday, September 26, the Judicial Conference of the United States
formally proclaimed its approval of legislation which would authorize court-
approved electronic surveillance during both Federal and State criminal
investigations involving organized crime.
The House Republican Task Force on Crime believes that this is one of
the most significant statements that has ever been issued on the subject
during the many years that it has been debated. The Conference is a body
of unparalleled prestige, It is headed by the Chief Justice of the United
States Supreme Court. Its membership includes the chief judges of all the
Federal Circuit Courts and selected judges of certain federal District Courts.
The Conference report represents the considered judgment of a purely
judicial body. The members are in no way spokesmen for law enforcement.
Their stated position, volunteered and unsolicited, can only be interpreted
in one way. They recognize the need for electronic surveillance in order
effectively to fight crime, Moreover, they recognize that law enforcement
can be given this vital tool within the limitations of the Constitution.
The impact of this report is staggering. As the totally voluntary act
of an eminently responsible group, it undoubtedly reflects the deep concern
with which its members view the menace of organized crime and the problems of
combatting it. It utterly destroys whatever was left of the Administration's
position against the court supervised use of electronic surveillance. It
underscores anew the virtual unanimity of knowledgeable opposition to that
position.
It is our understanding that the Judicial Conference had some reservations
about some of the technical aspects of bills that have already been introduced.
The point to be made is simply that they are clearly in accord with the spirit
and purpose of such legislation.
Early in this session of Congress, Rep. William McCulloch (R.-Ohio)
introduced legislation designed to strike the delicate balance between the
individual right to privacy and the legitimate need for society as a whole
to be protected from criminal acts. The McCulloch bill was essentially
- 2 -
prohibitory; yet at the same time it preserved to law enforcement carefully
limited authority to employ effective and proven investigative techniques
with court approval and supervision. This Task Force has been most active
in urging the enactment of this legislation.
In June, the Supreme Court decided the now famous case of Berger V. New
York. At the time we felt the language of Berger was a blueprint for a statute
which would meet Constitutional demands and an invitation to the Congress to
fashion such a statute. It appears that we were correct.
It is the suggestion of the Judicial Conference that such electronic
surveillance legislation be drafted with a specific eye towards the Berger
decision. This has been done. Today Rep. McCulloch and Rep. Richard H.
Poff (R.-Va.), Chairman of this Task Force, introduced in the House legislation
incorporating amendments to the McCulloch bill which we feel accomplish
precisely what the Judicial Conference suggests is Constitutionally attainable.
In large part, the amendments are the work product of a highly qualified
and respected legal scholar, Professor G. Robert Blakey of the faculty of
Notre Dame University Law School. Professor Blakey's credentials in this field
of the law are unquestioned. He was a consultant on organized crime to the
President's Crime Commission. He has practical knowledge of the legitimate
needs of law enforcement; he is nonetheless abundantly sensitive to individual
rights and liberties.
There is no longer a basis for reasonable controversy over the necessity
or Constitutionality of this legislation. The time has come to end the debate.
Now is time for action. We call upon the President to instruct the Attorney
General to withdraw his opposition. It is not too late for this, If that is
done, there will be no basis for partisan conflict and we predict that
Republicans and Democrats alike, in both Houses of Congress, will unite to
speedily enact legislation which is both eminently reasonable and vitally
necessary.
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
Everett M. Dirksen
THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
of Illinois
Gerald R. Ford
OF THE CONGRESS
Thomas H. Kuchel
of Michigan
of California
Leslie C. Arends
Bourke B. Hickenlooper
of Illinois
of Iowa
Press Release
Melvin R. Laird
Margaret Chase Smith
of Wisconsin
of Maine
John J. Rhodes
George Murphy
of Arizona
of California
H. Allen Smith
Milton R. Young
of California
of North Dakota
Bob Wilson
Issued following a
Hugh Scott
of California
of Pennsylvania
Leadership Meeting
Charles E. Goodell
of New York
PRESIDING:
Richard H. Poff
of Virginia
The National Chairman
Ray C. Bliss
October 26, 1967
William C. Cramer
of Florida
BY THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP:
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The demonstrations that have taken place in Washington and
across the nation in recent months have given the American people
increasing and even frightening concern for the future. We share
that concern, since never before in our history has lack of
confidence in America's leadership been so evident.
We believe, very strongly, that the hour has now passed when
firmness must continue to yield to tolerance in dealing with these
violent few. They are unwilling to demonstrate peacefully. They
are unwilling to debate without violence. They are permitted, never-
theless, to disturb the public peace, to endanger their fellow-citizens
in their lives and property, and to undermine the very well-being of
the nation itself by giving aid and comfort to our enemies.
We are well aware, as all Americans must be, of the Constitutional
rights of freedom of speech and peaceable assembly which are so great
a part of our treasured heritage. We are equally aware, however,
that there is no right to act against the public safety by anyone,
anywhere, any time - for any reason.
This nation had its origin in obssent. We have always believed in
unlimited criticism - in time of war and in time of peace. Free
speech.-- without violence - must always be permitted and approved.
But law breaking and violence can never be condoned. Our country
has prospered and survived as a democracy, in great part through
peaceful, even if at times heated, discussion among men of good-will.
Its future will be equally dependent upon the maintenance of this
great tradition.
(con't)
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-(202) 225-3700
Consultant to the Leadership-John B. Fisher
- 2 -
Oct. 26, 1967
It is our conviction that it is the malcontent, the misguided and,
yes, the malicious, who form the greatest part of these demonstrations
Fortunately, they represent only a very small fraction of our
population. That there may be many others who share their views on
particular issues is very possible. But it is these, and these alone,
who see fit to breach the public peace, break the nation's laws, defy
established authority, and destroy public property.
These wretched few can no longer be tolerated. They must be held
in check hereafter and, when necessary, be brought to justice, legally
but firmly by the scruff of their collective necks. The safety and
the peace of mind of all decent, hard-working, law-abiding millions of
other Americans must be preserved.
The first duty of those in authority -- in Washington and in every
community throughout the land-is the preservation of public order
and the firm enforcement of the law. The rights and the privileges
of those countless millions of good Americans who obey the law and
keep the peace must be given priority above all others, at all times.
Tolerance of marchers and demonstrators is all very well -- up to the
point at which they defy the law and endanger the public safety. We
call upon those in authority everywhere to enforce the law, with our
full backing, in the public interest. We urge them to do so without
undue concern hereafter as to the protests and whinings of these law-
breakers, who have no regard whatever for the good of the community and
who in our view, seek only publicity and selfish personal privilege.
We repeat, there is no right to act against the public safety
by anyone, anywhere, any time -- for any reason.
It is the conviction of the Republican Leadership of the Congress --
and, we believe, of all good Americans everywhere -- that the law must
be enforced and the safety of our people preserved. We pledge our
utmost efforts to this end.
FOR THE SENATE:
FOR THE HOUSE
Everett M. Dirksen
THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP
OF REPRESENTATIVES:
of Illinois
Gerald R. Ford
Thomas H. Kuchel
OF THE CONGRESS
of Michigan
of California
Leslie C. Arends
Bourke B. Hickenlooper
of Illinois
of Iowa
Melvin R. Laird
Margaret Chase Smith
Press Release
of Wisconsin
of Maine
John J. Rhodes
George Murphy
of Arizona
of California
H. Allen Smith
Milton R. Young
of California
of North Dakota
Bob Wilson
Hugh Scott
of California
of Pennsylvania
Issued following a
Charles E. Goodell
Leadership Meeting
of New York
PRESIDING:
Richard H. Poff
of Virginia
The National Chairman
Ray C. Bliss
William C. Cramer
October 26, 1967
of Florida
BY THE REPUBLICAN LEADERSHIP:
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
The demonstrations that have taken place in Washington and
across the nation in recent months have given the American people
increasing and even frightening concern for the future. We share
that concern, since never before in our history has lack of
confidence in America's leadership been so evident.
We believe, very strongly, that the hour has now passed when
firmness must continue to yield to tolerance in dealing with these
violent few. They are unwilling to demonstrate peacefully. They
are unwilling to debate without violence. They are permitted, never-
theless, to disturb the public peace, to endanger their fellow-citizens
in their lives and property, and to undermine the very well-being of
the nation itself by giving aid and comfort to our enemies.
We are well aware, as all Americans must be, of the Constitutional
rights of freedom of speech and peaceable assembly which are so great
a part of our treasured heritage. We are equally aware, however,
that there is no right to act against the public safety by anyone,
anywhere, any time -- for any reason.
This nation had its origin in dissent. We have always believed in
unlimited criticism -- in time of war and in time of peace. Free
speech -- without violence -- must always be permitted and approved.
But law-breaking and violence can never be condoned. Our country
has prospered and survived as a democracy, in great part through
peaceful, even if at times heated, discussion among men of good-will.
Its future will be equally dependent upon the maintenance of this
great tradition.
(con't)
Room S-124 U.S. Capitol-(202) 225-3700
Consultant to the Leadership-John B. Fisher
- 2 -
Oct. 26, 1967
It is our conviction that it is the malcontent, the misguided and,
yes, the malicious, who form the greatest part of these demonstrations.
Fortunately, they represent only a very small fraction of our
population. That there may be many others who share their views on
particular issues is very possible. But it is these, and these alone,
who see fit to breach the public peace, break the nation's laws, defy
established authority, and destroy public property.
These wretched few can no longer be tolerated. They must be held
in check hereafter and, when necessary, be brought to justice, legally
but firmly by the scruff of their collective necks. The safety and
the peace of mind of all decent, hard-working, law-abiding millions of
other Americans must be preserved.
The first duty of those in authority -- in Washington and in every
community throughout the land-is the preservation of public order
and the firm enforcement of the law. The rights and the privileges
of those countless millions of good Americans who obey the law and
keep the peace must be given priority above all others, at all times.
Tolerance of marchers and demonstrators is all very well -- up to the
point at which they defy the law and endanger the public safety. We
call upon those in authority everywhere to enforce the law, with our
full backing, in the public interest. We urge them to do so without
undue concern hereafter as to the protests and whinings of these law-
breakers, who have no regard whatever for the good of the community and
who in our view, seek only publicity and selfish personal privilege.
We repeat, there is no right to act against the public safety
by anyone, anywhere, any time -- for any reason.
It is the conviction of the Republican Leadership of the Congress --
and, we believe, of all good Americans everywhere -- that the law must
be enforced and the safety of our people preserved. We pledge our
utmost efforts to this end.
EXCERPTS from an
Address of Rep. Carl Albert, Majority Leader, U.S. House of Representatives,
before the annual meeting of the Cotton Producers Association
in Atlanta, Georgia, November 20, 1967
WHY VIETNAM ?
Undoubtedly, two weeks ago, most of you through your newspaper or
television became aware of the so-called Peace March whose participants
erupted in violence in our national Capitol while attempting to close
down the Pentagon. These people were ostensibly expressing their right
to dissent---a right our Republic does not question. No doubt, there were
many well-meaning citizens among them who have honest differences of
opinion with the Administration, but in my judgment, we would be naive to
think that these marchers included only those who have a distaste for war.
The group certainly was basically organized by international communism,
and the marchers included every communist and communist sympathizer in the
United States who was able to make the trip. It is passing strange that
on the very day this protest was made in Washington, similar demonstrations
took place in all communist countries, in Latin America, Europe, and even
in Australia whose troops are in battle in Vietnam. Of course, the common
denominator, the common organizer of all these events is the communist
world wide apparatus. It is a strange coincidence that counter demonstra-
tions in support of the struggle for liberty in South Vietnam did not occur
in various countries as they did in the United States.
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE--
November 22, 1967
Remarks by Rep. Gerald R. Ford, R-Mich., on The Floor of The House, Wednesday,
November 22, 1967.
Mr. Speaker: The distinguished majority leader of the House. Mr. Albert,
charged Monday night in Atlanta, Georgia, that the massive anti-Vietnam demon-
stration staged at the Pentagon Oct. 21 was "basically organized by international
communism" and that "the marchers included every communist and communist
sympathizer in the United States who was able to make the trip."
Mr. Speaker, this statement apparently is based on the kind of information
given orally to Republican leaders of the House by the President at a White House
meeting after the Pentagon demonstration. I presume the same information was
made available to the Democratic leaders. I subsequently urged that the White
House make public the information it has on the true nature of the so-called
peace demonstration at the Pentagon. As a result, the Attorney General of the
United States visited me in my office and argued against release of the infor-
mation.
I believed then and I believe now that the American people should be given
full information on the degree of communist participation in the anti-American
policy demonstration so that the people may judge just how deep or widespread
anti-Vietnam War sentiment is in this country.
If the evidence in the hands of the Executive Branch of our government
indicates manipulation of the peace movement in this country by Hanoi, then the
propaganda impact of such demonstrations will be lessened and perhaps destroyed.
This would be a highly beneficial result, indeed.
Mr. Speaker, one of the national news magazines has quoted the Secretary of
State as saying that the release of this information would trigger a new wave
of McCarthyism in this country. I dislike taking issue with the distinguished
Secretary of State, but I believe the American people are now mature enough to
receive such information and to react without hysteria.
Mr. Speaker, in view of the fact that the distinguished Majority Leader
of the House has made charges of a most serious nature regarding the communist
role in the demonstration at the Pentagon, I urge that the President order a
(more)
-2-
full report made to the American people on the extent of communist participation
in organizing, planning and directing the disgraceful display which took place
at the Pentagon last Oct. 21. Such a report will be most helpful and
constructive to all Americans. In addition, such a disclosure would be bene-
ficial to the well-intentioned Americans who participated in this demonstration
not knowing who had organized the demonstrations at the Pentagon and elsewhere
throughout the free world.
###
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME
142 Cannon Bldg., 225-5107 House of Representatives Washington, D. C. 20515
Chairman
Richard H. Poff
Virginia
SUMMARY OF THE POSITIONS OF THE
Deputy Chairman
Robert Taft, Jr.
Ohio
HOUSE REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE
ON CRIME
Barber B. Conable, Jr.
New York
First Session, 90th Congress
William C. Cramer
Florida
Samuel L. Devine
Ohio
The Research and Planning Committee of the House Republican
John N. Erlenborn
Conference has created a number of Task Forces to offer to Members
Illinois
information, analysis and recommendations for action on specific
Carleton J. King
New York
issues of substantial national importance. The House Republican
Task Force on Crime, created on March 27, 1967, is one of these.
Clark MacGregor
Minnesota
Rep. Richard H. Poff of Virginia was named Chairman of the group
Robert B. Mathias
and Rep. Robert Taft, Jr. of Ohio, Deputy Chairman. Twelve other
California
Republican Congressmen with broad and varied backgrounds in the
Robert Price
problems of law enforcement, crime and delinquency were appointed
Texas
to complete the Task Force membership.
Thomas F. Railsback
Illinois
It is the specific function of the Crime Task Force to study
Henry P. Smith, III
the myriad questions raised by the alarming upward trend in crime
New York
during recent years, to draft or endorse legislation to improve
Chalmers P. Wylie
law enforcement and citizen respect for the law, and, by focusing
Ohio
public attention upon the problems and proposed solutions, to act
Louis C. Wyman
ultimately as a catylyst in the legislative process in order to
New Hampshire
produce the tools necessary to reverse the trend.
During the First Session of the 90th Congress, the Crime Task
Force has worked towards these goals by developing formal policy
positions concerning specific anti-crime measures that are or should
be the proper subject of Congressional legislation. Task Force
statements supporting seventeen separate legislative proposals
were published on thirteen occasions between May 11 and December 11, 1967.
Each defines a position of the Task Force adopted only after careful
research, study and discussion of a specific crime problem and the
proposed legislative solution to it. In eleven instances the anti-
crime measure which was the subject of such a statement was legislation
proposed and introduced by the Task Force as a whole along with other
Republican members of Congress.
The following is a brief summary of the anti-crime legislation
which the Task Force has proposed or endorsed during the First Session,
categorized according to the general area in which each most properly
falls:
-more-
2
I. ORGANIZED CRIME
1. Electronic surveillance--a bill which outlaws all wiretapping and electronic
eavesdropping except by law enforcement officials under Court approval and
continuing Court supervision during national security investigations and
investigations of certain organized crime type cases. The Task Force
believes that enactment of this legislation would be the single most
important step in combatting organized crime. The McCulloch-Ford bill
(H.R. 13275, October 3, 1967), co-sponsored by the Task Force, follows
the blue-print for such legislation fashioned by the Supreme Court in
the Berger case.
2. Witness immunity--a bill to expand the power of the Government to compel
the testimony of hostile witnesses by granting them immunity from pro-
secution when they plead the Fifth Amendment during the investigation,
and during the trial of certain organized crime cases. Title II of the
Criminal Procedures Revision Act (H.R. 11267, June 29, 1967), co-sponsored
by the Task Force contains this provision.
3. Loan-sharking--a bill (H.R. 14373, December 11, 1967) which would make it
a federal crime to lend money at rates of interest prohibited by State
law whenever such a loan interferes with or affects interstate commerce
or whenever any part of the loan transaction or efforts at collection
cross state lines. In addition to the Chairman and members of the Task
Force, this bill is sponsored by the Minority leader, the ranking Minority
member of the Committee on Banking and Currency and the ranking Minority
member of the Committee on the Judiciary.
4. Obstruction of investigations--a bill which would make it a federal crime
to interfere with or obstruct investigations by federal agents by the
intimidation of potential witnesses. Legislation of this nature was
passed by the Congress and enacted into law during the First Session.
It was first proposed by Rep. William Cramer (R.-Fla.), a Task Force
member, in 1960, and is contained in Title I of the Criminal Procedures
Revision Act.
5. False Statements--a bill which makes the rules of evidence in perjury
prosecutions less rigid and more realistic. This is contained in
Title II of the Criminal Procedures Revision Act and was recommended by
the Katzenbach Crime Commission.
6. Profits from Criminal activities--a bill which makes it a federal crime
to invest money which has been earned from illegal racket activities
in legitimate businesses. This is the Criminal Activities Profits Act
(H.R. 11268, June 29, 1967) co-sponsored by the Task Force.
7. Funds unreported for tax purposes--a bill which makes it a federal crime
to invest money which has not been reported for income tax purposes in
legitimate business. This is H.R. 11266, co-sponsored by the Task Force,
and principally aimed at organized crime.
- more -
3
8. Joint Congressional Co-mittee on Organized Crime--a bill creating a
permanent bi-partisan Committee of both Houses of Congress to investigate
organized crime and report its extent, impact and effect to the American
public. This is H.R. 6054, first proposed by Rep. Cramer.
II.
INVESTIGATIONS AND PRE-TRIAL PROCEDURES
1. Motions to suppress--a bill creating in the Government a limited right to
appeal to a higher Court the granting of a defendant's motion to suppress
confessiona and other evidence. H.R. 8654, propsoed by Rep. Thomas Railsback
(R.-I11.), a member of the Task Force, is such a bill and such a provision
is contained in Title I of the Task Force sponsored Criminal Procedures
Revision Act. The bill has passed the House.
2. Searches incident to arrests--a bill to codify, and make less confusing, the
existing law of search and seizure where lawful arrests are involved. Title I
of the Criminal Procedures Revision Act contains a provision to this effect.
3. Searches pursuant to warrants--a bill to permit the issuance of search warrants
for property which constitutes evidence of the offense in connection with which
the warrant is issued. This is in conformity with a recent Supreme Court
decision (Warden V. Hayden). It is the subject of H.R. 8653, proposed by
Rep. Railsback, and contained in Title I of the Criminal Procedures Revision Act.
4. Execution of search warrants--a bill to permit the issuance of search warrants
authorizing the officer executing it to enter the place to be searched without
announcing his identity and purpose where the Judge or Commissioner has
determined that physical evidence sought is likely to be destroyed or when
danger to the officer exists. This is one of the provisions of the Criminal
Procedures Revision Act, patterned after H.R. 8652, sponsored by Rep. Railsback.
III.
THE POLICE
1. Survivorship and disability benefits--a proposal to provide Federal survivorship
and disability benefits for local police and non-federal law enforcement officers
who are killed or injured while assisting federal officers in the apprehension
of, for example, bank robbers, kidnappers and AWOL military personnel. The
Survivorship program originally proposed was broadened to include a disability
program in a bill introduced by Chairman Poff and endorsed by the Task Force.
This legislation passed the House this year.
IV.
THE COURTS
1. Bail reform--a proposal to re-examine and amend the Bail Reform Act of 1966
to allow the Courts more discretion in granting or denying release on
personal recognizance to defendants who are found to be a danger to the
community or in revoking the release of those who have committed other
crimes after release.
- more -
4
2. Federal Magistrates--a bill to abolish the present U.S. Commissioner
system and to replace it with a lower-tier of judicial officers, U.S.
Magistrates, who are empowered to handle minor trials and otherwise
perform routine Court functions that presently occupy the time of
Federal judges that ought to be devoted to more serious matters. S. 945
proposed by Senators Tydings (D.-Md.) and Scott (R.-Pa.), is such a bill.
V.
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
1. The District Anti-Crime bill--an omnibus anti-crime bill dealing with
special law enforcement proposals for the District of Columbia. H.R. 10783
passed the House on June 26, 1967, by a vote of 355 to 14.
2. Appropriations and personnel--proposals to increase the authorized
strength of the District of Columbia Police Department, to increase
the staff of the District Bail Agency and to provide for personnel to
supervise the activities of defendants released on personal recogni-
zance prior to trial.
At the close of the First Session, the Crime Task Force had several other
matters under active study and consideration. It is expected that formal
statements reflecting a clear-cut policy position of the Task Force will be
issued across a wide spectrum of anti-crime proposals during the early months
of the Second Session.
From time to time during the First Session, individual members of the Task
Force have made speeches on the floor of the House concerning current and topical
matters in the crime area. In addition to its 13 formal position papers, on a
number of occasions where the content of an individual member's speech reflected
the position and views of the Task Force as a whole, the Task Force has brought
the speech to public attention in a news release. Among the views thus
promulgated are the following:
1. That there is no conflict between the position of the Crime Commission
calling for measures to strengthen rehabilitation and that of the F.B.I.
emphasizing the need to strengthen deterrence. Neither disputes the other and
both are right;
2. That Attorney General Ramsey Clark is mistaken when he says that the
crime level has risen only "a little bit" and that organized crime is but a
"tiny part" of the entire crime picture:
3. That the Life Magazine articles on "The Mob" indicate that organized
crime is far from a "tiny" problem and that much of the material contained
therein, obviously obtained by electronic surveillance, also refutes Attorney
General Clark's statement that use of these devices is neither effective nor
highly productive;
- more -
5
4. That the statistics offered by the Department of Justice in defense of
their organized crime program are virtually meaningless when one considers the
very small percentage (2.6% or 0.4% per year) of the estimated total number of
top level racketeers who have been convicted since 1961;
5. That formal support for electronic eavesdropping legislation has been
recently announced by the Judicial Conference of the United States, the National
Association of Chiefs of Police and the Association of Federal Investigators,
among others, and that the Attorney General now stands virtually alone in his
opposition to it; and
6. That Dr. James L. Goddard of the Food and Drug Administration was ill
advised to equate marijuana with alcohol and thus legitimaze, glamorize and
popularzie the possession and use of an unlawful commodity by our nation's
youth.
During the First Session individual members of the Task Force proposed
anti-crime legislation in their own right which has not yet been the subject of
a Task Force study. Among these are bills offered by Rep. Cramer and
Rep. MacGregor (R.-Minn.) establishing a National Institute of Law Enforcement,
a bill co-sponsored by Rep. Railsback in the area of gun control, and an
interrogation bill offered by Task Force Deputy Chairman Robert Taft, Jr. (R.-0.)
CONCLUSION
Attendance at Task Force meetings has averaged 80% of the membership. All
members have given generously of their time and talents. The staff, both pro-
fessional and volunteer, under the able leadership of the director, Mr. Brian
Gettings, has performed effectively, devotedly and tirelessly. The Republican
Conference, the Committee on Research and Planning and the Republican leadership
have advised and assisted the Task Force in every possible way. For its part, the
Task Force has taken steps to maintain continuing liaison with ranking Republican
members of all legislative committees.
To repeat, the Task Force conceives its mission to be two-fold: (1) to conduct
the research necessary to alert the people to the nature and enormity of the problem
of crime in America: and (2) to propose and promote specific legislative solutions
to the problem. The criticism and counsel of all Republican Members of the House
are earnestly solicited.
Respectfully submitted on behalf of the
HOUSE REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME
by: Richard H. Poff, Chairman
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME
142 Cannon Bldg., 225-5107 House of Representatives Washington, D. C. 20515
Chairman
Richard H. Poff
PRESS RELEASE
Virginia
For Release:
Deputy Chairman
PM's Tuesday
Robert Taft, Jr.
Contact:
Dec. 5, 1967
Ohio
225-6931
Barber B. Conable, Jr.
New York
William C. Cramer
Florida
GOP CRIME GROUP UNVEILS COMPREHENSIVE ATTACK
Samuel L. Devine
Ohio
ON ORGANIZED CRIME'S MONEY MAKERS
John N. Erlenborn
Illinois
Carleton J. King
Washington, D.C. - The House Republican Task Force on Crime
New York
Clark MacGregor
Tuesday unveiled plans for a comprehensive legislative" attack on the
Minnesota
Robert B. Mathias
three major money makers of organized crime, gambling, narcotics traffick-
California
Robert Price
ing and loan-sharking. They pegged the "take" from these racket activities
Texas
Thomas F. Railsback at "nothing less than $10 billion a year--$50 for every man, woman and
Illinois
Henry P. Smith, III
child in America."
New York
Chalmers P. Wylie
Federal statutes specifically aimed at those offenses "are largely
Ohio
Louis C. Wyman
inadequate", the GOP Crime Task Force charged, and they said "no legisla-
New Hampshire
tion of significance in these areas has been enacted since 1961."
In a prepared statement, the Task Force outlined its plans for a program "aimed
directly at the three most lucrative racket activities. In some instances we will
modernize old proposals: in others, we will make recommendations to fill the gaps in
existing laws: in still others, we will propose new laws where none now exist, 11 they said.
Because "organized crime cannot be met with programs whose impact will not be felt
for twenty years, immediately effective solutions are required," the Crime Group said,
and these are "laws and law enforcement".
The Task Force reiterated its support for legislation which would permit court
supervised electronic eavesdropping and which would broaden witness immunity procedures,
but said that "pending Congressional action on these bills", the enactment of their new
program would "greatly aid the Executive Branch" in the war against organized crime.
Rep. Richard H. Poff (R.-Va.), Task Force Chairman, indicated that the first part
of the program would deal with "loan-sharking" and that the legislation would be
introduced "hopefully in a day or so."
-30-
Gambling, narcotics trafficking, and loan sharking account for
the great preponderance of the illegal dollar loss to the American
public that is being channeled today into the pockets of racketeers.
The President's Crime Commission indicated that illegal
gambling provided organized crime with a net profit of no less than
seven billion dollars a year. With respect to loan sharking, the
lending of money at higher rates than the legally proscribed limit,
they found that it was organized crime's second largest source of
revenue and noted that many officials "classify the business in
the multi-billion dollar range." The Commission further stated
that the illegal heroin trade alone is three hundred fifty million
dollars annually. This does not take into account the trade in
marijuana and hallucinogens like LSD, part, if not all of which
is also controlled by organized crime.
In light of these reliable estimates, it seems fair to place
the "take" of these three illegal activities at nothing less than
ten billion dollars a year, or fifty dollars for every man, woman
and child in America. This is approximately one-half of the entire
cost of the war in Vietnam for the fiscal year 1967, almost the
exact amount of the federal budget deficit of $9.9 billion for
the same year, and half again the $6.3 billion the President
originally said his 10% surtax on incomes would produce in the
first year. We note the Crime Commission's finding that "if
organized crime paid income tax on every cent of their vast
earnings, everybody's tax bill would go down " We do not
suggest that all the money that is thus being poured into the
coffers of organized crime could or even should be diverted to
the Government. Rather, it is our purpose in citing these figures
to dramatize the staggering sums that are being siphoned from the
American public at the very time when it is being asked to make
financial sacrifices to combat inflation, cut the budget deficit,
and pay for the increased cost of the war.
2
The organized criminals of today are generally not the
creatures of poverty and despair although surely they princi-
pally feed upon the victims of poverty and despair. Organized
crime cannot be met with programs whose impact will not be felt
for twenty years. It requires immediately effective solutions,
laws and law enforcement. Part of the responsibility for enacting
the laws lies with the United States Congress; part of the
responsibility for enforcing these laws lies with the Executive
Branch of the Federal Government.
This Task Force finds that existing federal statutes specifi-
cally aimed at gambling, narcotics trafficking and loan-sharking
are largely inadequate. The Anti-Racketeering statutes of 1961
have been effective to some degree in this regard but experience
has shown that ev en they are but a partial solution. No substantive
legislation of significance in these areas has been enacted since
then. It is our intent to propose to the Congress in three stages
beginning shortly a comprehensive legislative program aimed
directly at these most lucrative racket activities. In some
instances we will modernize old proposals; in others, we will
make recommendations to fill the gaps in existing law; in still
others, we will propose new laws where none now exist.
This Task Force remains committed to the proposition that
the enactment of legislation permitting court-supervised electronic
eavesdropping would constitute the single most important step the
Congress could take in the war against organized crime. In our
view, the neactment of a broader witness immunity procedure would
also be highly significant. We nonetheless realize that more than
even these statutes are necessary if it is to be a full-scale
war that we will fight and win. Pending Congressional action on
the eavesdropping and immunity bills, we believe that the enactment
of the program we propose will partially fulfill the Congress'
responsibility in the war and will greatly aid the Executive
Branch in discharging its part.
REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE ON CRIME
142 Cannon Bldg., 225-5107 House of Representatives Washington, D. C. 20515
Chairman
Richard H. Poff
GOP CRIME GROUP OFFERS
PRESS RELEASE
Virginia
Deputy Chairman
"ANTI LOAN-SHARK" BILL
For Release:
Robert Taft, Jr.
Monday, AM's
Ohio
Contact:
Dec. 11, 1967
225-6931
Barber B. Conable, Jr. Washington, D.C.--As the first of three steps in its "comprehensive
New York
William C. Cramer
Florida
legislative attack" on the major sources of income for organized crime, the
Samuel L. Devine
Ohio
House Republican Task Force on Crime today introduced a bill specifically
John N. Erlenborn
Illinois
aimed at "loan-sharking."
Carleton J. King
New York
Last week the GOP Crime Group announced plans for a legislative program
Clark MacGregor
Minnesota
directed at gambling, narcotics trafficking and loan-sharking, "the three
Robert B. Mathias
California
major money makers of organized crime," whose "take" they estimated at
Robert Price
Texas
"nothing less than $10 billion a year."
Thomas F. Railsback
Illinois
Calling "loan-sharking", or the lending of money at illegal rates of
Henry P. Smith, III
New York
interest, "a source of racket income second only to gambling in the
Chalmers P. Wylie
Ohio
multi-billion dollar a year range," the Task Force cited findings by the
Louis C. Wyman
New Hampshire
President's Crime Commission that typical loan-shark victims are marginal,
small businessmen and wage earners in mass employment industries. They
said that the classic rate of interest charged was "20% a week."
The Task Force pointed out, among other things, that "Congressional Committee reports
are filled with testimony concerning small businesses which have been taken over lock,
stock and barrel by the syndicate which got its first foothold through a loan shark."
Despite this and the fact that loan sharking is clearly part of organized crime on a
national level, "no federal statute exists which deals directly or effectively with it,"
the Crime Group continued. "In our view this constitutes a serious gap in the law."
-- more --
2222
The GOP bill makes it a federal crime to lend money at illegal rates of interest
whenever such a loan interferes with or affects interstate commerce, or whenever any
part of the loan transaction or efforts at collection cross state lines. It is based
upon the loan for a charge prohibited by State law. "If there is no initial violation
of State law, there is no violation of Federal law," a Task Force spokesman said.
The bill is sponsored by Rep. Richard H. Poff (R.-Va.), the Task Force Chairman,
by the thirteen other members of the Task Force, and by GOP Minority Leader Gerald R.
Ford (R.-Mich.), Rep. William M. McCulloch (R.-Ohio), Ranking Minority Member of the
House Judiciary Committee, and Rep. William B. Widnall (R.-N.J.), Ranking Minority
Member of the House Banking and Currency Committee.
Among the benefits that will result from the new law is increased jurisdiction
"for federal agents to investigate loan-shark allegations," the Task Force explained.
And, they added "the mere thought that they may now be involved in a federal crime might
be enough to drive many loan-sharks out of business, without anything more."
-30-
HOUSE REPUBLICAN TASK FORCE
STATEMENT
ON CRIME
LOAN-SHARK LEGISLATION
According to the President's Crime Commission, "loan-sharking", the lending of money
at illegal interest rates, is a source of revenue for organized crime, second only to
gambling. The annual "take" from loan-sharking has been estimated by many knowledgeable
law enforcement officials to be in the "multi-billion dollar range."
The Commission noted that gamblers borrow to pay their losses and addicts borrow to
purchase narcotics. They also found that the same men who take bets from or sell policy
slips to employees in the mass employment industries, on the docks for example, lend them
money to pay off the gambling debts or to meet household expenses. Small businessmen
borrow from loan sharks when legitimate credit channels are closed to them and in this
regard, Congressional Committee reports are filled with testimony concerning small businesses
which have been taken over lock, stock and barrel by the syndicate after it got its
foothold through a loan shark.
The Crime Commission determined that interest rates vary from 1 to 150 percent a week
but that the classic 6 for 5, or 20 percent a week, was most common with small borrowers.
They observed that the loan shark is usually more interested in perpetuating interest
payments than in collecting principal and that force or threats of force of the most brutal
kind are used to effect interest collection, eliminate protest when interest rates are
raised and prevent the harassed borrower from reporting the activity to enforcement officials.
Despite the wealth of documentation concerning the evils of loan sharking and its clear
relation to organized crime on a national level, no federal statute exists which deals
directly or effectively with it.
Two federal statutes have been used from time to time against loan sharks, but they are
applicable only where actual collection methods amount to provable extortion. These statutes
are generally anti-racketeering statutes aimed at extortion, among other things. At the
time they were enacted, Congress did not have loan sharking specifically in mind. In our
view, this constitutes a serious gap in the law for the very practical reason that while
extortionate collection may be implied in any loan shark situation, in the overwhelming
majority of cases extortion simply cannot be proved.
The dock worker who borrows from the well-known neighborhood loan-shark to pay for
family sickness may not be told and does not have to be told precisely what will happen to
him if he doesn't pay on time. The clothing store operator who borrows to keep up with
legitimate creditors during slack seasons may not be beaten up by the polite yet menacing
hoodlums who inquire as to the status of payments. He too knows what the message is.
These are the typical situations--the threat merely implied but nonetheless real and
effective simply because the syndicate lurking in the background is known to be involved.
Under existing federal law, extortion could not be proved in either situation.
- more -
2222
The House Republican Task Force on Crime, as the first step in its legislative
program against the major sources of income for organized crime, has drafted and introduced
in the House of Representatives, a bill specifically aimed at loan sharking. It is
intended to expand federal jurisdiction over this activity and to make it a federal crime
to lend money at illegal rates of interest, wherever such a loan affects or interferes
with interstate commerce. It is thus a two-part bill which approaches loan sharking
from two well-established bases of federal jurisdiction. Both parts amend the existing
anti-racketeering statutes which we have previously noted.
The first part amends Section 1951 of Title 18, United States Code, which deals
with robbery and extortion which interferes with or affects interstate commerce. Loan-
sharking would be added as a federal crime under these circumstances, and as a result,
an illegal loan to a business which ships its goods from Chicago to Detroit might be
the subject of a federal prosecution.
The second part amends Section 1952 of Title 18, which deals with several racketeering
activities that are federal crimes when any part of the transaction crosses state lines.
Loan-sharking is added to these, and as a result, a telephone call from New York to Miami
or travel from New Jersey to Pennsylvania might be the subject of federal prosecution.
Both violations are based upon the lending of money for a charge or rate of interest
prohibited by the laws of the State where the loan is made. If there is no initial
violation of State law there is no violation of Federal law. Subsequent threats to
enforce collection of the loan need not be proved so long as the loan itself is illegal.
There is an abundance of precedent for this legislation and we feel it will go a
long way towards drying up a principal source of revenue for organized crime. For one
thing it will provide hitherto lacking jurisdiction, except where a potential tax
evasion case is present, for federal agents to investigate loan-shark allegations.
Further, federal prosecutions will inevitably result but even where they don't, evidence
will be turned over to local law officers for prosecution. Finally, the mere thought
that they may now be involved in a violation of federal law, might be enough to drive
many loan-sharks out of the business without anything more. This, in itself, will be
a significant accomplishment.
CONGRESSMAN
NEWS
GERALD R. FORD
HOUSE REPUBLICAN LEADER
RELEASE
--FOR RELEASE IN SUNDAY AM's--
December 17, 1967
The following is an exchange of correspondence between House Republican Leader
Gerald R. Ford (R-Mich.) and Rep. Richard H. Poff (R-Va.), Chairman of the House Re-
publican Task Force on Crime, summarizing legislative action taken in the 1st
Session, 90th Congress, and the prospects for additional action on the part of the
Congress and the Administration in 1968.
December 12 1967
Honorable Richard H. Poff
Chairman
House Republican Task Force on Crime
U.S. House of Representatives
Washington, D. C.
Dear Dick:
As we approach the close of the first session of the 90th Congress, I want to
express to you as Chairman of the House Republican Task Force on Crime the sincere
appreciation I feel for the fine work you and all Task Force members have done this
year. I have just had an opportunity to review the summary of performance, and the
record is truly outstanding. You have made specific and positive proposals for
legislation dealing with the prevention and control of crime in America and have
stimulated legislative action which otherwise would never have been taken.
Conspicuous among Republican contributions to the legislative successes of the
House in the field of crime control were the interstate anti-riot bill authored by
Bill Cramer of Florida, the bill introduced by Tom Railsback authorizing prosecu-
tion appeals in suppression of evidence orders, the bill granting disability bene-
fits as well as survivorship benefits to local police officers wounded or killed
in pursuit of federal law-breakers, the McClory amendment to the crime bill to
establish a National Institute on Law Enforcement and Criminal Justice, and the
Bill Cahill bloc grant amendment to the crime bill and the juvenile delinquency
bill.
I would be interested to have your estimate of the prospects for a genuine
crackdown on crime in 1968. Specifically, do you think that the President's re-
cent statements on crime, particularly yesterday's aimed at the Congress, re-
presents a true change of direction? If so, how does the Attorney General fit into
this picture?
Wishing you a happy Holiday Season, I am
Very truly years,
Gerald R. Ford, M. C.
Honorable Gerald R. Ford
December 14, 1967
Minority Leader
U. S. House of Representatives
Washington, D. C.
Dear Jerry:
Your letter concerning the Task Force is most gracious. I know all members
would want me to express their appreciation not only for these kind words but for
the leadership and assistance you have given so faithfully in connection with all
our projects.
I will do my best to reply responsively, candidly and yet briefly to your
questions. Actually, all three questions are intimately interwoven into one, viz.,
will there be any escalation in the Administration's war on crime in 1968?
(more)
- 2 -
My answer depends upon many imponderables and unpredictables. There is nothing
uncertain about the need for escalation; the crime problem is bigger than ever be-
fore, growing faster than ever and neglected more than any other. In fairness,
it should be said that so far as the President is concerned, neglect has been more
unavoidable than purposeful. The President has been necessarily preoccupied with
other grave domestic problems and with the tragic war in Vietnam. While it may be
that the Pre sident's recent statements concerning the crime problem foreshadow a
deliberate, methodical campaign in the election year to blame Congress for the
problem, I doubt that it is accurate to say that his statements represent any
change in philosophical approach.
What is imponderable and unpredictable is how, in your words, the Attorney
General fits into the picture. During his short time in office, Attorney General
Clark, formerly attached to the lands division of the Justice Department, has
shown himself to be something less than a "crime fighter." It was he who per-
suaded the President to veto the District of Columbia crime package last year and,
in the year since, major crime in the District has increased by 34%, a rate more
than twice that of the nation at large. It was Clark who issued instructions to
all Federal investigative agencies strictly limiting the use of on-person trans-
mitters with remote recorders, an evidence-gathering technique repeatedly and
presently sanctioned by the courts. It was Clark who opposed and still opposes
legislation conformed carefully to the Constitutional mandates of the Supreme Court
which authorizes wiretaps by police officers investigating specific crimes under
court warrant and continuing court supervision; persists in his negative posture
in the face of endorsements by his three immediate predecessors in office, the
Judicial Conference of the United States and every major national organization of
law enforcement officials. It was Clark who allowed the whole hot summer of 1967
to pass without even calling public attention to the existence of a Federal crime
statute making it a Federal crime to travel from one state to another with the
intent to promote or incite arson. It was Clark who delayed until last week end
even a minimum administrative and organizational effort to deal with the mass
violations of Selective Service laws, and then he was content simply to establish
a new unit which functionally can do little more than can already be done under
traditional procedures.
More recently, a syndicated columnist reported sharp disagreement between
the President and his Attorney General on how to proceed in the matter of Stokely
Carmichael.
From the foregoing, you will see that what is unpredictable is how long Mr.
Clark will fit into the picture at all. I am sure that you have heard as I have
heard speculation that, as the election grows nearer, if the nation's chief law
enforcement officer continues to rest on the oars, Clark may go the way McNamara
and Goldberg are going and others may go.
In summary, I think that beginning early next year there is likely to be a
Presidential crusade to blame Congress for the crime crisis. And there will
doubtless be some surface escalation of the war on crime, a political pageant,
with or without Ramsey Clark.
Sincerely,
Richard H. Poff, M.C.
###
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S
OUTLINE
A. Proposed Functions of the Task Force
1. Introduce and sponsor anti-crime legislation.
2. Adopt and promulgate positions where Congressional legislation may
be inappropriate.
3. Conduct studies and prepare reports in support of the above.
4. Publicize the functions and recommendations of the Task Force.
a) Press releases
b) Direct correspondence
B. Areas of Study (by subcommittee)
1. Crime prevention and control
a) Riot and civil disobedience
b) Firearms control
c) Police operations
1) federal grants and subsidies
2) national academies
3) citizen complaint and review boards
4) use of women
d) Causes of crime
1) poverty and social disadvantagement
2) white collar crime and crime among the affluent
3) disrespect for rights of others
e) Effect of the courts on growing crime rate
1) the District of Columbia as an example
2) selection of judges
2. Investigation, Pretrial Procedures and Constitutional Rights
a) Stop and frisk laws
b) Miranda and its predecessors
c) Discovery, a two-way street
d) Codification of law of search and seizure
e) Appeals from pre-trial suppression orders
f) Model Penal Code (for D. C.)
g) Federal jury selection
h) Bail projects--success of federal program
i) Hand writing and voice identification
3. Juvenile Delinquency
a) Youth offender acts
b) Model Juvenile Code (for D. C.)
c) Constitutional rights of juveniles
d) The rehabilitation process
1) facilities for incarceration
e) Causes of delinquency
1) begins in the home--inadequate discipline and supervision,
children not taught to respect the rights of others.
4. Organized Crime
a) Educate the public as to the nature, scope and dangers of organized
crime (logs, studies, etc.)
b) Wiretapping and eavesdropping
1) necessity
2) utility
3) constitutionality
c) Immunity for witnesses
d) Protection of witnesses
è) Federal effort must be emphasized
1) O. C. & R. section of Justice Dept. should be a Division
2) as such should have a section to advise states
3) own investigative staff--team approach
4) problems with Tax Division
f) State Crime Commissions--support formal commissions with real powers
g) Joint Congressional committee on O. C.
h) Grand Juries
5. Federal, State and Local Cooperation
a) Safe Streets Act
b) Federal grant programs in general
c) Cooperation of federal investigative agencies with those of the states
d) Role of federal government as advisor to the states
e) Habeas corpus from state convictions
f) Limitation on Supreme Court in ruling on state criminal convictions
6. Probation, Correction and Rehabilitation
a) Uniform sentencing
b) Appeal of sentences
c) Uniform procedures for revocation of parole and probation
d) Model correctional system (Federal)
e) Composition of parole boards