UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

th PROCEEDINGS AND DEBATES OF THE 90 CONGRESS FIRST SESSION

VOLUME 113-PART 1

JANUARY 10, 1967, TO JANUARY 24, 1967 (PAGES 3 TO 1422)

UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE, WASHINGTON, 1967 1278 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE January 23, 1967 3. Authorize the Appalachian Regional De­ by Section 401, to be deposited In a revolv­ There being no objection, the memo­ velopment Commission to approve for as­ Ing fund. randum was ordered to be printed in the sistance the programs and projects author­ 5. Add 26 counties In Mississippi to the RECORD, as follows: ized by the Act, and to advance funds Appalachian region. appropriated under the Act to the depart­ 6. Also Include provisions to: Authorize THE LIBRARY OF CONGRESS, ments and agencies Implementing those pro­ the States to construct segments of the de­ Washington, D.C., December 20, 1966. grams and projects. velopment highway system In advance of From: American Law Division. Applications for programs and projects are appropriations. PrOVide Commission em­ SUbject: Revision of Senate Rules at the now approved for assistance by the Commis­ ployees certain .Federal service credits. Re­ Opening of a New Congress. sion, following approval by the State member Imburse the cost of attracting, training and You have asked what procedures and sug­ (Sec. 303). Programs and projects may not retaining personnel at a demonstration gested rulings seem to be most defensible be Implemented until plans for them have health project. Add abandoned 011 and gas and logical for placing before the Senate at been recommended by the Commission, sub­ wells. waste piles, and land acqUisition costs, the opening of a new Congress the question mitted to and approved or modified by the to the mining area restoration authority. of the constitutional right of the majority to President or his designate (Sec. 223). Add "equipment" to the vocational educa­ terminate debate on modification of Rule The amendments would permit the Com­ tional facilities grant authority. Make local XXII. There is general agreement that the mission to testify to the appropriations for development districts eligible for planning Presiding Officer cannot and should not de­ the Appalachian program (now within the grants under Section 701 of the Housing Act cide the constitutional Issue. There is. how­ of 1954. Authorize grants under the Ele­ ever, some disagreement about Whether, In agency budgets at Commerce, HEW, Agricul­ mentary and Secondary Act of 1965 to local ture and Interior) by directing the appropri­ the absence ofa unanimous-consent agree­ education agencies and the Commission for ment, there is any way, short of adopting a ation to the Commission, which would then educational planning and research. Trans­ cloture petition, for the Senate to decide the advance funds for Its programs to the opera­ fer from the Secretary of Commerce to the Issue unless the Presiding Officer simply puts tional agencies. Commission the authority to make grants for the question to the Senate for a vote With­ 4. Authorize a loan program under Sec­ administrative expenses (and technical serv­ out debate. tion 221 of the National Housing Act, lim­ Ices) of local development districts. There are some who argue that any ruling Ited to $5 million of the funds authorized (Summary prepared for Senator Cooper.) of the Chair which permits a vote on the constitutional issue without follOWing Rule Appalachian program funds (except development highways) XXII is in effect a decision by the Chair on the constitutional Issue. Not lIO. Given an [In millions o[ dollars] opportunity to vote, the majority might de­ cide that Rule XXII was not unconstitu­ Authorized, Appropri- Proposed, tional. A ruling that debate must continue first 2 years I ated next 2 years 2 until cloture be Invoked under Rule XXII is more nearly characterized as a decision by Sec. 105. Administration______2.4 2.39 2 the Chair on the constitutional Issue because Sec. 202. Demonstration health [acilities______69.0 23.5 70 it might effectively prevent the Senate from Sec. 203. Lani! stabilization, conservation, erosion controL______17.0 10 17 deciding the issue. Ideally, however, the Sec. 204. Timber development organizations______5.0 1 4 parliamentary situation should develop so Sec. 205. l\lining area restoration______36.5 24.85 39.15 Sec. 206. Water resource survey .______5.0 3.3 2 that the Vice President need give no ruling, 5 nor even an opinion, on the constitutional ~:~: ~n: V.:.si~~aJeducatl,;il -faciiiiles ~======------i6~() ------iii---- 18 issue. Such a development seems possible, Sec. 212. Sewage treatment works_ _ 6.0 6 6 though, to be sure, a new trail would be Sec. 214. Gnmt·in-aid supplements_ 90.0 75 90 Sec. 302. Local development districts_ 5.5 5.25 10 blazed. It is a trail, however, marked by some favorable precedents. Total under sec. 401 _ 252.4 167.29 263.15 One parliamentary fact of life sometimes overlooked is that the Rule XXII procedure • Authorized by act o[ Mar. 9, 1965, for period through June 30. 1967. is not the only one available for limiting or 2 Proposed by amendments o[ 1967, [or period through June 30.1969 terminating debate on a matter. Watkins NO'l'E.-Dors not include 6-year total o[ $840,000,000 for development highway system authorized by act o[ 1965 and Riddick in Senate Procedure list 27 non­ proposed to be increased $175,000,000 by amendments o[ 1967. debatable matters (S. Doc. No. 44, 88th Cong.. (Prepared [or Senator Cooper.) 1st Sess., pp. 325-327). If the constitutional Issue were so framed that the Senate could vote upon It as a non-debatable matter, there would be no need for a decision of the Chair SENATE RULES-AMENDMENT OF A. Doyle, legislative attorney, referring on the issue. In his remarks at the opening RULE XXII, RELATING TO CLO­ to the fact that the Presiding Officer of the 85th, 86th and 87th Congresses, Vice could really rule that the Senate could President Nixon pointed the way. Perhaps TURE set aside, by majority vote, its present the most significant of his comments were Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, at the rules of itself being a continuing body made In 1959: without the Presiding Officer taking a "If, for example, during the course of the advent of Telstar, someone remarked, debate on the motion of the Senator from Was it not a shame that the greatest stand. Texas, which deals with changing the rules, breakthrough in communications in the Referring to the memorandum, it a Senator believes that action should be history of man should come at a time states on page 1: taken and debate closed, such Senator at when man had nothing to say? You have asked what procedures and sug­ that time COUld, in the opinion of the Called upon to make my maiden ad­ gested rulings seem to be most defensible Chair, raise the constitutional question by dress, it also comes at a time when I and logical for placing before the Senate at moving to cut off debate. The Chair would the opening of a new Congress the question indicate his opinion that such a motion was have nothing to say that has not been of the constitutional right of the majority in order but would submit the question to said before-far more eloquently and to terminate debate on modification of Rule the Senate for Its decision." CONGRESSIONAL with greater authority. XXII. There Is general agreement that the RECORD, volume 105, part I, page 9. One significant thing should be ob­ Presiding Officer cannot and shOUld not de­ And later in that session he said: served first, however, and that is that cide the constitutional issue. There is, how­ "A constitutional question would be pre­ the Presiding Officer, the Vice President ever, some disagreement about Whether, in sented If the time should come during the of the United States, has put to rest the the absence of a unanimous consent agree­ course of the debate when action on chang­ doubt with respect to the U.S. Senate ment, there is any way, short of adopting a ing the rules should seem unlikely because cloture petition, for the Senate to decide the of extended debate. At that point any Mem­ being a continuing body. Issue unless the Presiding Officer simply puts ber of the Senate, in the opinion of the It has been stated that the entire mat­ the question to the Senate for a vote with­ Chair, would have the right to move to cut ter of rule XXII beg{l,n with the intro­ out debate. off debate. Such a motion would be ques­ duction by the Senator from South Da­ There are some Who argue that any ruling tioned by raising a point 0/ order. At that kota [Mr. MCGOVERN], of Resolution 6. of the Chair which permits a vote on the point the Chair would submit the question However, I should like to think that the constitutional Issue without following Rule to theSenate on the ground that a constitu­ controversy really began on December XXII Is in effect a decision by the Chair tional question had been raised because o~ 20 of last year, in a memorandum pre­ on the constitutional issue. the Chair's opinion that the Senate, at the commencement of a new Congress, has the pared by the American Law Division of Not so, says the memorandum. power to make its rules. That power, in the the Library of Congress, entitled "Revi­ Mr. President, I ask unanimous con­ Chair's opinion, cannot be restricted even sion of Senate Rules at the Opening of a sent to have the entire memorandum by action of the Senate Itself, which would New Congress," and signed by Vincent printed in the RECORD. be the case where the membership of the January 23, 1967 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 1279 Senate in one Congress has attempted to son motion presented a constitutional ques­ against the motion in language something curtail the constitutional right of the mem­ tion. He could have, and on many occasions like: bership of the Senate in another Congress other Presiding Officers have, waited until a I make the point of order that this motion to adopt its ruIes." CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, Senator had made a point of order against is l.mproper and not authorized by the Con­ volume 105, part I, page 103 (emphasis the motion. Had he waited for a point of stitution or rules of the Senate. added). order, the question submitted to the Senate The Vice President would submit the point Although these statements pointed the (for debate because points of order sub­ of order to the Senate for debate because it way, we cannot know for certain where Vice mitted to the Senate are ordinarily debat­ raises a constitutional question. The President Nixon's path might have led be­ able) would have been something like: question he would submit is: "Shall the cause that year the Senate voted on a reso­ "Shall the point of order against the An­ point of order that the motion is improper lution to amend Rule XXII under the terms derson motion on the grounds that it Is au­ because not authorized by the Constitution <)f a unanimous consent agreement. The thorized by neither the Constitution nor or rules of the Senate be sustained"? Nixon path was not followed in 1961 because he ruIes of the Senate be sustained?" To parliamentary inquiries, the Vice Presi­ the rules change resolution was referred to This difference in the manner In which the dent would reply that the majority of the conunittee and by the time it reached the question arises and the way It Is framed for Senate by falling to sustain the point of floor again Vice President Johnson was in the Senate's decision makes all the difference order would be directing him to proceed as the Chair and a vote to invoke cloture failed in the world in what a majority can de­ the motion prOVides. by a vote of 37-43. cide. As you know, a motion to table Is After debate had proceeded for some time The Senate proceedings in 1963, In con­ not debatable. A motion to table a question a proponent of the rules change would make nection with S. Res. 9, deserve careful con­ llke that presented to the Senate in 1963 a motion to table. "A motion to lay on the sideration. As the situation was described is in effect a motion to table the Anderson table a point of order submitted to the Sen­ by Joseph L. Rauh in his memorandum of motion. A motion to table the point of ate is in order and not debatable." Watkins October 14, 1966, prepared for the Leader­ order against the Anderson motion, if suc­ and Riddick, supra, p. 473 As Senator Rus­ ship Conference on Civil Rights: cessful, however, would in effect be a re­ sell acknOWledged (CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, "In January 1963, the times were ripe for jection by the Senate of the point of order. vol. 103, pt. 7, p. 9817), "If a motion to table victory. A clear majority of the Senators As Senator Russell said in 1957, after Vice is made and the motIon prevails, It is the favored changing Rule XXII at the opening President Nixon had submitted to the Sen­ sense that the point of order was not well of the Senate of the 88th Congress. With ate for debate and decision a point of order taken, and the precedent would be estab­ this majority behind him, Senator Ander­ made by senator Russell and had ruled that lished against the point of order." If a point son, the floor leader of the effort to change a motion to table would be in order: of order were made against the motion to Rule XXII, moved to close debate under the "I wish to make it perfectly clear that table, the Vice President would rule the point Constitution and the Nixon advisory rulings; there is a rule, of course, that when a point of order n,ot well taken, for which ruling this move was frustrated when Vice Presi­ of order to a ruling is pending, if a motion to there Is precedent as indicated above. If an dent Johnson put the Anderson motion to table Is made and the motion prevails, it appeal were taken from the Vice President's close debate to the Senate for debate instead is the sense that the point of order was not ruling, any SUbsequent questions of order of for a vote (as Vice President Nixon had well taken and the precedent would be estab­ would be decided without debate and "any indicated he would have done). Putting lished against the point of order," CONGRES­ appeal may be laid on the table without the Anderson motion to close debate to the SIONAL RECORD, volume 103, par,t 7, page 9817. prejudice to the pending proposition, and Senate for debate, of course, had the effect His colloquy with the Vice President con­ thereupon shall be held as affirming the deci­ of killlng the motion; this forced the sup­ tinued: sion of the Presiding Officer". Rule XX, porters of a change in Rule XXII to a cloture "The Chair rUles, as I understand, that par. 1. were the Chair by his own action has sub­ motion which was lost 54-42 (less than two­ If the motion to table the point of order thirds)." Rauh memo, supra, p. 3. mitted a point of order to the Senate for against the motion to vote on the rules There are at least two observations to be determination, that a motion to table would without further debate (or with limited made about this account. First, from Vice lie? debate) prevailed, the Vice President President Nixon's remarks, it is not at all "The VICE PRESIDENT. Under Rule XXII, in would then proceed as the motion, which certain that he would have proceeded to put the opinion of the Chair, that is a question to the Senate had decided was not improper, the motion to close debate to an immediate which a point of order would lie. directed him to proceed. The Senate would vote. What he said at CoNGRESSIONAL RECORD, "Mr. RUSSELL. When the motion is made, have decided the constitutional question and volume 105, part I, page 103 was that when a Senator could protect himself by a point the Vice President would not have had to the motion to cut off debate was made, "Such of order against a motion to table. Is that give an opinion upon It, nor would he have a motion would. be questioned, by raising a correct? had to make any ruling not grounded in point of order" (emphasis added). Second, "The VICE PRESIDENT. A Senator can always senate precedents. what Vice President Johnson did In 1963 was appeal from the decision of the Chair, if that to decide hl.mself that the Ande,rson motion Is what the Senator from Georgia refers to," [From hearings, Senate Committee on Rules raised a cons1lltutional question rather than If we assume that debate on a rules change and Administration, 82d Cong., 1951] wa,it for a Memb& of the Senate to make a at the beginning of the 90th Congress pro­ point of order against the motion. Senator ceeds as it did in the 89th Congress, a dif­ WRITTEN STATEMENT FROM THE LIBERAL PARTY Anderson sent the following motion to the ferent result can be reached if a proponent OF' NEW YORK STATE RESPECTING ITS POSI­ desk: of the change makes a motion something TION ON PRoPOSALS To AMEND THE SENATE "I move under the Constitution that with­ like: CLOTURE RULE out further debate the Chair submit the I move that the Senate, Immediately and The 1951 national legislative program of pending question to the Senate for a vote." Without further debate (or with a specific the Liberal Party is founded upOn the convic­ (The pending question was the motion to time for debate, perhaps allowing one hour tion that our country is in a total emergency proceed to the consideration of S. Res. 9 to for each Senator) direct the Chair to submit and that we are confronted with a struggle amend Rule XXII). to the Senate for a vote the following ques­ for survival and for the preservation of our Immediately, the Vice President spoke as tions: democratic way of life. It is the further pro­ follows: 1. Shall the Senate adopt the X amend­ found belief of the Liberal Party that It "The VICE PRESIDENT. This motion raises ment to the Y substitute for the Z motion would be the height of folly and danger to explicitly a constitutional question. There to change the Senate rules? (majority of regard the communist aggression in Korea as have been 38 previous occupants of this chair, those present and voting); a self-contained phenomenon. On the con­ and the Parliamentarian informs me that 2. Shall the Senate adopt the Y substi­ trary, we view the Communist adventure in all of the decisiOns have been uniform, that Korea as a symptom of and testimony to the tute (as amended or not by the preceding entire Soviet program of expansionism to­ the Presiding Officer does not have the au­ vote) to the Z motion to change the Senate thority to rule on a constitutional matter. ward world domination. It is upon the basis The Chair is In full agreement with those rules? (constitutional majority); of these convictions that we have urged upon precedents, because the Vice President can­ 3. Shall the Senate adopt the Z motion our government a program of total prepared­ not make a decision for 100 Senators, un­ (as amended or not by the preceding votes) ness. To us this means a moblllzation of our less he has previously been granted the au­ to change the Senate rules? (three-fifths of spiritual as well as our material resources. thority to make that decision.... those present and voting); Very properly, we are endeaVOring to secure "This the Senate can do by a majority and, that the Senate further direct the allles in our ideological battle between the vote. Therefore, the Chair submits the Chair to put to the Senate for a vote the democracy in which we believe and the to­ question: question on the adoption of this motion, talitarian philosophy of communism. This "Does a majority of the Senate have the without further debate, immediately after means we must practice democracy to the right under the Constitution to terminate the Senate has decided that this motion fullest possible extent or our preachments debate at the beginning of a session and is proper by refusing to sustain a point of will be to no avail. It behooves us therefore, proceed to an imriled1ate vote on a rule order against it, whether by approving a to strengthen our democratic structure by change notwithstanding the provisions of motion to table the point of order or other­ shoring up such weak spots as stlll exist. existing Senate rules?" CONGRESSIONAL REC­ wise. One such weakness is evident in Senate clo­ ORD, volume 109, part I, page 1214. Immediately after the motion was made, ture rules to date which through the years The Vice President was not required to the Vice President could recognize a Senator have proved unsuccessful in breaking filibus­ make his own determination that the Ander- whom he knew would make a point of order ters thereby preventing Senate action on the 1280 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE January 23, 1967 merits of various legislative proposals. We tion by majority vote, not talk by a minority Proposal No. 2.-This committee has had cannot hope to convince the rest of the world of senators that vetoes necessary action and eloquent warnings that it cannot wait until of the greatness of our democratic forms in dictates unsatisfactory and dangerous com­ 1953 to solve vital problems before the the face of a situation in which the world promises. Nation. sees the Senate of the United States unable Majority rule can be made an operating The world is looking to us for evidence to function on important occasions because fact in the United States Senate whenever of our sincerity on the issue of human free­ of fillbustering tactics. a majority of the Senate, assisted by the dom and equality. The Liberal Party would jealously guard President of the Senate, decide they want As set forth in our statement, our man­ the right of a minority of the Senate to ade­ majority vote. power needs in defense mobilization and quate time within which to present its side In the following restatement of the pro­ production and equal justice require the es­ of every issue and toward this end sufficient posals made by me October 3. 1951, which tablishment and enforcement, Without fur­ safeguards must be a part of any Senate rule were based on the contention In our brief ther delay, of fair employment practices. to llmit debate. Adequate debate, however, that the present rule XXII contains the two Action should be taken now. A way to does not mean interminable debates. The fatal constitutional defects described above, do so is as follows: former is necessary to preserve our demo­ we have met some of the questions raised (I) The Senate Rules Committee should cratic institutions. The latter not only re­ in the October 3 discussion and, recognizing report out a new rule XXII prOViding for fiects unfavorably upon the prestige of the one obstacle pointed out by Senator Mon­ majority cloture. In so doing, it would Senate and its members, but causes irrep­ roney, we are suggesting a way to avoid it. state that the present rule XXII Is uncon­ arable moral, spiritual and economic harm to Proposal No. 1.-When the new Senate stitutional; therefore, it would report, not our country. of the Eighty-third Congress convenes Jan­ an amendment to that rUle, but a new rule. We have consistently called for a majority uary 3, 1953, the following procedure can be (2) A motion is made to take up the pro­ cloture rule appllcable to procedural and adopted: posed majority cloture rule. legislative measures allke. Among the four (1) After the credentials have been sub­ (3) A point of order that there is an exist­ resolutions under consideration, we support mitted and accepted, a senator can rise ing rule can be expected. Senate Resolution No. 105 which, if adopted, and move the adoption of the Rules of the (4) The President of the Senate must rule would serve to break filibusters, while at the Senate of the Eighty-third Congress which on this point of order. same time providing for full and adequate he will then submit to the body. These rules (5) His rUling, if he rejects the point of time for debate. Limiting debate by a major­ may include a new rule XXII providing for order" is subject to an appeal. That appeal ity of those Senators present and voting 14 limitation of debate by majority vote. He would be governed by Senate rule XX, and, days after a petition for cloture has been filed may state, In making his submission, that under that rUle, any abuse of debate could by 16 Senators, and thereafter alloWing an there are no existing rules of the Senate be­ be ended by a motion to lay the appeal on additional 96 hours of debate on the basis of cause the rules of one Senate cannot bind the table. This motion, if carried, would 1 hour of relevant debate for each Senator, a succeeding Senate. Also, he may point out be an affirmance of the Chair's rUling. appears to us to be fair and equitable to both that, until adoption of rules, there is no (6) the motion to take up the considera­ the minority and majority points of view on committee to which his motion can be re­ tion of the cloture rule now being in order, any given issue. ferred. a filibuster Will, in all probability, commence Respectfully yours, (2) It can be expected that a point of order against the motion to take up the rule. MARX LEwIS. w1l1 be made that the motion is out of order (7) There being no rule on cloture, nor­ Chairman, National Legislative Com­ since, it will be contended, there are eXisting mal parliamentary practices will prevail In mittee, Liberal Party. rules which can only be amended as prOVided determining what the cloture rule should be. BEN DAVIDSON, through the present rules. The new cloture rule could be adopted by a Executive Director, Liberal Party. (3) The President of the Senate must rule majority vote and the regular parliamentary on this point of order. devices of a motion to close debate or mo­ SUPPLEMENTAL WRITTEN STATEMENT SETTING (4) His ruling, if he rejects the point of tion for the previous question would be FORTH Two PROPOSALS FOR BREAKING FILI­ order,' is subject to an appeal. Under gen­ available to cut off any attempt to filibuster BUSTERS BY A SIMPLE MAJORITY VOTE eral parliamentary rUles, which would be in the adoption of the new rule. (Presented by Walter P. Reuther, president effect during the period prior to the adop­ These two proposals are made on these and director of the fair practices and anti­ tion of specific rules, the appeal can be basic assumptions: discrimination department. United Auto­ debated, although most parliamentary au­ (1) That a majority of the Senate and Its mobile, Aircraft and Agricultural Imple­ thorities limit the debate to one speech by President want an effective cloture rUle, ment Workers of America (UAW...,CIO) each person. want cloture to be determined by majority During my testimony before this committee Should the minority group attempt to vote, want the Senate to be able to come to October 3, 1951, in the course of which I had turn the debate on the appeal from the a vote on the crucial issues facing it today; presented a statement and brief supporting ruling of the Chair into a filibuster, the de­ and our contention that Senate rule XXII Violates bate can be cut off either by a motion to lay (2) That the American people want the the Constitution of the United States by- on the table or by moving the previous ques­ Senate to be an acting, not talking legisla­ (1) Substituting minority rule for the tion. A majority vote in favor of the motion tive body and that in 1953, if not now, there majority rule Intended by the Constitution, to table would operate to affirm the Chair's wlll be a majority of the senate ready to and ruling. A majority vote in favor of the call take necessary steps such as those we have (2) Attempting to bind the present Senate for the previous question would permit an outlined for ending rule by a Senate minority and future Senates with the dead hand of immediate vote on the appeal. and for procuring an effective cloture rule past Senates arid to deprive them of their (5) If the ruling of the Chair is sustained that wlll make possible the establishment constitutional rulemaking power, by a majority vote, the Senate will be able to and practice of majority rule in the United adopt rules for the Senate of the Eighty­ it was asked as to how the Senate could rid States Senate. third Congress by regular parliamentary pro­ We recommend and urge a trial of pro­ itself of the guaranty of unlimited debate cedure of majority vote. If a filibuster provided in rule XXII for all discussions of posal No. 2 in the present Senate, accom­ should be attempted at this point. It can panied by full delineation of the grave con­ motions to take up proposed changes in this again be dealt With by the parliamentary or any other Senate rule. stitutional crisis that exists and the im­ device of moving the previous question out­ portant substantive Issues, such as civil In compliance with the chairman's request Uned in step 4, above. It is significant that made then for a supplemental statement re­ rights legislation, that are at stake. the Speaker of the House. at the time of an Should the attempt succeed, the Senate garding the two proposals offered by me as to attempt to prevent the adoption of rules by methods Whereby the Senate by simple by majority vote will have cured itself of its repeated dilatory motions, ruled that he own infirmity which the Eighty-first Senate majority vote can get itself out of the dead would not refuse to recognize Members at­ end of filibuster alley, we present the fol­ unconstitutionally sought to impose upon tempting these delaying tactics as they were all future Senates to the end of time. lowing matter for inclusion in the record of interfering With the constitutional right of the hearings. the House to determine its rules (Cannon, Should the attempt fail, the American On October 2, while Senator Humphrey Precedents, vol. 5. sees. 5706. 5707). people wlll have a clear understanding of was testifying in support of limiting debate the great fundamental issues at stake; they by simple majority vote, as provided in the Will have a roll call for use in the 1952 politi­ 1 If the Vice President should support the Morse-Humphrey and Lehman resolutions, cal campaign. point of order, thereby declaring rule XXII In any event, whether the attempt suc­ Senator Benton observed that "the logic is adopted by the 81st Senate binding upon the on yoUr side; the guns are on the other ceeds, fails, or is not made in the present 83rd Senate, there would be the possiblUty Senate, we recognize and welcome the fact side." of unlimited debate on the appeal, as Senator We do not believe the filibusterers have Monroney pointed out in the hearings that majority rule in the Senate of the the only guns. We believe it possible to dis­ October 3. Such a ruling, together with a United States is now and will be the No. 1 arm them. This can be done whenever the filibuster, could prevent the majority from civil rights issue in the 1952 campaign and majority of the Senate and the President of expressing Its will. For practical purposes, elections. the Senate make up their minds to do so. the 83rd Senate would be deprived of the This is as it shOUld be. For both major We believe that the surest and most power­ rule-making power assigned to it by art. I, political parties, to continue to give lip serv- ful weapon, the Constitution of the United sec. 5 of the Constitution. (See Pp. 19-20 of States, is on the side of those Who want ac- our brief.) 2 See footnote 1. January 23,1967 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD-' SENATE 1281 ice to civil rights legislation, including FEPC, being a continuing body; and, having We respect the experience of our sen­ antilynch, anti-poll-tax, and other long over­ once ruled that way, it must be agreed ior colleagues, and it is very interesting due measures while acquiescing in continued that the various gaps in the rulings of that in the early days I would be asked strangUlation of such legislation by veto of a minority under the unconstitutional ruie Vice President Nixon and other Presid­ to talk in an effort to protect that right XXII would be to continue a colossal hoax ing Officers, as referred to in the memo­ to listen, because here in the Senate we upon the American people; they would con­ randum of Mr. Doyle, have now been are separated by seniority and by party. tinue to condone costly and tragic economic filled. The Presiding Officer, at the be­ Unless this right of free speech is pro­ • and political injustice for Negroes and'mem­ ginning of a session, when the subject tected, how else can a new Member on bers of other Inlnority groups whose sons was raised, and while a point of order my side of the aisle know the feelings of fight and die to defend freedoms and rights as to the constitutionality of a partic­ the people in Kentucky, California, Del­ they do not now have in full and equal ular section was raised, answered that aware, or Kansas? measure. Majority rule must be establlshed In the rule XXXII held and controlled; that If in the beginning days we had a United States Senate. A rule that will make is, that the Senate is a continuing body temporary majority controlling, debate it possible must be substituted for the pres­ and that the rules could be changed would easily have been cut off before ent antidemocratic, unconstitutional rule only in accordance with the provisions these Senators could have heard these XXII adopted by the Eighty-first Senate and of the rules. speeches and represented their states; presumptuously intended to bind and llInlt It is certainly obvious that a Senator andthe primary duty of a u.s. Senator all future Senates. cannot merely amend a single rule by to reflect the feeling of his State and A Vice President and a majority of the Senate determined to use majority rule to saying, "I raise a constitutional question, vote for the good of the entire country put into practice the oft-repeated pledges Mr. President, as to the constitutionality would have been somewhat stultified be­ of clvil rights in the platforms of both the of rule 1"-01' rule XV, or rule XXII. cause there were many things that, in RepUblican and Democratic Parties can ac­ Obviously, the Standing Rules of the the normal course of doing business in compllsh thatend. Senate were enacted in accordance with this wonderful bodY, a newcomer or one Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr. President, refer­ section I, article 5, of the U.S. Constitu­ separated by party could not have heard ring, again, to page 2: tion; and if anyone of the rules is from other sections of this Nation. constitutional, then all the rules are li'or if by simple majority rule the pro­ Given an opportunity to vote, the majority might decide that Rule XXII was not uncon­ constitutional; and the way to amend or ponents prevail today, then a temporary stitutional. A ruling that debate must con­ change those rules at the beginning of a majority can create havoc and cut off tinue until cloture be Invoked under Rule session is in accordance with those rules. practically half of the Senate from being XXII Is more nearly characterized as a de­ I am proud that the Presiding Officer heard at any time. The right of that cision by the Chair on the constitutional Is­ saw fit to rule on January 18 as he did minority to represent their States would sue because it might effectively prevent the and filled in the gap in the understand­ be eliminated. Their views would not Senate from declding the Issue. Ideally, ing of the proponents that the rules be heard. And the paramount duty of however, the parllamentary situation shOUld acting for the good of the country could develop so that the Vice President need give could be changed merely by raising a no rullng, nor even an opinion, on the con­ constitutional question. It has also been never be done. A temporary majority, stitutional Issue. Such a development seems so held by the Senate, by a substantial restless of "wasting time," could call for possible, though. to be sure. a new trail vote of 61 to 37, raised on the question a vote and a vote there would be, and would be blazed. It Is a trail, however. as to whether or not a majority of this States not represented in the combine marked by some favorable precedents. body believes, constitutionally or not, would never be heard. I would like to The author concludes in the final that a single change can be made in the listen to these States. paragraph: rules only by a temporary majority. It But even the realization that what­ found that is not constitutional, and ac­ ever I say has been said better does not If the motion to table the point of order against the motion to vote on the rules with­ cordingly, now we are at the point of diminish the need I feel for defending out further debate (or with llmited debate) the proposed rule change to change the what I genuinely believe to be a basic prevailed, the Vice President would then rule from a requirement of two-thirds to premise upon which this U.S. Senate proceed as the motion, which the Senate had a three-fifths majority of Senators pres­ and, indeed, this Nation as a whole is decided was not improper. directed him to ent and voting. predicated-majority leadership assured, proceed. The Senate would have decided the The most respected Senator from but never at the expense of minority constitutional question and the Vice Presi­ Georgia, RICHARD RUSSELL, at the begin­ rights. dent would not have had to give an opinion upon It. nor would he have had to make any ning of this debate emphasized that all The remarks of the distinguished sen­ ruling not grounded in Senate precedents. the arguments employed over the years ior Senator from my sister State on last for advocating the change of rule XXII Thursday expressed brilliantly the posi­ I am pleased, that the Vice President have now been answered. The propo­ tion I believe to be the only constitu­ did not see fit to duck the issue, as was nents have no civil rights bill to point tionally sound one. suggested by those who were trying to to-that the rights of the individual Senator RUSSELL said: change in a unique fashion the rules of have been lost in a parlimentary maze. It has been demonstrated that they (the the Senate and the precedents of the Sen­ And the Senator has also pOinted out majority) can pass their bllls under the ate itself as a continuing body. with equal eloquence the fact that on the present rules. Not only that. but a deter­ But, rather, on January 18, on page 925 one hand no legislation can be painted mined majority in the Senate has passed of the CONGRESSIONAL RECORD, there ap­ to as having been blocked by rule XXII. every blll they desired to pass when In the pears a statement made by me at the 30 hearts and minds of the majority of the On the other hand, in his years' ex­ Senators they wanted the blll, since I be­ time that the Chair had made a ruling perience, precipitous action on the part came a Member of this body. onthe point of order by the distinguished of our Government has been avoided by Senator from Georgia as to a division of the safeguard of rule XXII of this body. Why, then? Why, when the proof of the question, that the Chair ruled in ac­ With the on-rush of speed in com­ the possible is so evident for anyone to cordance with rule XVIII and that sub­ munications in everyday life, I hope in see? Why, when the weight of evidence sequently, during the morning, the Chair my remarks to emphasize rule XXII as contradicts so forcefully the contentions ruled in confirming rule XX of the a safeguard to precipitous action. I of the OPI:'vnents to minority guarantees Standing Rules of the Senate. would emphasize the rules as a safe­ must we sit now and genuinely fear for When I asked what the position of guard to minority rights and freedom of the preservation of so sacred a principle? the Chair was as to whether this body speech. And I would emphasize the his­ One of the proponents of changing was presentlY operating under the tory of this Senate as a continuing body, rule XXII has said on the floor of the Standing Rules of the Senate, the Vice and its value as a continuing body. Senate within the past week that the President ruled as follows: I was for freedom of speech, the right Constitution of the United States pro­ The answer to the senator's question is to talk and--on behalf of new Members­ vides for majority rule-not by a major­ that the rules of the Senate shall continue the right to listen. ity of the whole body-but by a majority from one Congress to the next unless I had pledged, in becoming a Member of those present and voting. changed as provided In these rules. of the Senate, as all new Members are I submit, Mr. President, that this is Obviously, this was a ruling in sup­ told, to listen and to get the feeling of wrong. I submit that this interpreta­ port of rule XXXII as to the Senate things. tion of the intent of the sacred document CXill-81-Part 1 1282 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE January 23, 1967 that has guided all the actions of all There are too many instances where engage in extended debate as I would the Senators since the inception of this great much more than a simple majority was rights of those who agree with me. body cannot be justified. specifically required for constitutional I cannot help recalling the conflicts As I read the Constitution, Mr. Presi­ acceptance for this not to be so. If the that raged in this Chamber on the one"; dent, it says in the very first amend­ framers of the Constitution-men who man, one-vote principle; on section 14 ment: spent much more time than we in de­ (b) of the Taft-Hartley Act; on the so­ Congress shall make no law respecting bating the merits and demerits of each called prayer amendment. All of these, an establishment of religion, or prohibiting word, every phrase and every idea-had Mr. President, are issues I personally the free exercise thereof; or abridging the intended that a simple majority should would have supported and would have freedom of speech. or of the press; or the rule, they would have said so. wanted to vote upon. And they are is­ right of the people peaceably to assemble and What, then are the arguments of those sues upon which I would have diligently to petition the Government for a redress of who \vould silence the sound of the few, tried, after an acceptable period of time, grievances **• or abridging the freedom of to generate sufficient support to invoke speech. in order to more quickly magnify the voice of the many? cloture and terminate debate. That phrase demands special attention The Constitution says "no" to their But never, never, Mr. President, would because no phrase in all of our history charade. I have. supported an attempt to reduce has more universally been discussed, de­ The basic choice Of right from wrong the number of Senators necessary to ter­ fended, rediscussed, and redefended. cries "no" to their demands. minate that debate through the invoca­ I submit, Mr. President, that just as The precedents set by those who have tion of cloture. politics is our forte. so words and se­ traveled the long road we now embark r do not believe that the Senate could mantics are the game of the staff that upon refute the claims of the impatient devise a rule which better insures both comprises the G. & C. Merriam Co., which ones among us who feel that their be­ full and free debate and the possibility writes what must surely be the official liefs must prevail now, that their will of bringing to a vote legislation supported dictionary of the Federal Government, must be worked without interference by a genuine consensus of the American and indeed the entire Nation-Webster's from those of a different will. people than does rule XXII. Unabridged. Mr. President, I, as did all of those The framers of the Constitution re­ That book, Mr. President, defines who now sit in this august body, worked garded the power to make laws as a "abridge" as "0) (a) to deprive; 0) (b) hard to get here. I do not maintain power to be exercised only with the to diminish (as a right) by reducing; (2) that my will shall be done, but I do greatest deliberation. They understood to shorten in duration. To shorten or maintain that my thoughts, my beliefs, that government ought to govern by the cut down in extent." my ideas, and my position on the impor­ consent of the people, rather than by I believe, then, that the Constitution tant issues we will confront have just as force. They understand that laws, to be itself specificially prohibits total rule by much right to full expression as those truly effective, must take effect in the a simple majority and the deprivation of of any Member of this Senate. minds of the people through their recog­ anyone's right to full expression, and I r have traveled my State well over nition of what is just. They understood believe those who fought the first bat­ these past 12 months. I have talked that laws must, therefore, express a con­ tle-the framing of an acceptable docu­ with my people. They have talked gen­ sensus-a general agreement about what ment to weld a jealous, loosely knit set uinely to me about the principles they is just and right-among people every­ of far-flung colonies together-recog­ where in our great country. They wished nized this. There is ample evidence that feel must be defended by us in the Sen­ to preclude the danger to order and tran­ this is so. ate; and r intend to see that their con­ quillity of radical, sweeping, arbitrary They provided in many instances for fidence in me. their trust in my ability to legislation unsupported by a matured votes requiring a majority of two-thirds. guarantee expression of those principles, consensus among the people and rammed No person shall be convicted on im­ is justified. through the legislative branch without peachment without the concurrence of Some years ago before I presided in the adequate 'consideration which would two-thirds of the Senators present, the senate of the State of South Caro­ have revealed that people everywhere in That can be found in article I, section 3, lina, the ruling had been made-and as the country were not with it. For the Each House, with the concurrence of presiding officer I was able to sustain framers knew that Jaws which do not two-thirds, may expel a Member. That, the precedent-that the senate of the command the consent of people through too, is in article I, section 5. State of South Carolina was a continuing their recognition of what is just must be In section 7 of this same article, it is body, as the Senate of the United States given effect, if at all, by force or threat provided that a bill returned by the is a continuing bodY, It cannot be said of force. President with his objections may be re­ that in the senate of the State of South When we say that democracy presup­ passed by each House by a vote of two­ Carolina we have a substantial liberal poses a great faith in the people, we thirds. bloc. Whether this situation is good or mean that democracy is founded on the The President shall have power, by bad is another question. Other bodies belief that people are truly capable of a and with the advice and consent of the of the several colonies, and later States, moral and political consensus, an agree­ Senate, to make treaties, provided two­ of this great Union, following the prec­ ment about what is just and right. If thirds of the Senators present concur. edents made in the Senate of the United this faith in the popular conscience is The Constitution provides for this in ar­ States, have ruled that their State sen­ without foundation, then democracy­ ticle II, section 2. ates are continuing bodies, without refer­ government by the people-is without The Constitution further provides ence to a conservative or liberal wing, foundation. that Congress shall call a convention for thought, or influence. Laws have been passed from time to proposing amendments to this docu­ A great but obscure writer once said time having great bearing upon the lives ment on the application of two-thirds of that the strength of this great Nation of the people. which nevertheless have the legislatures of the several States. lies not in the views of her manageable not commanded the consent of people The 12th amendment to the Constitu­ majority but in the ideas of her unman­ everywhere and which have been effected tion provides that when the choice of a ageable minority. by force or threat of force. At such a President shall devolve upon the House Somewhere, Mr. President, there must time the cry is raised that the law ought of Representatives, a quorum shall con­ be a solid line of defense against total to be obeyed because it is the law. I sist of a Member or Members from two­ rule by a simple majority. agree Wholeheartedly that law should thirds of the various States of the Union. There must be a safeguard somewhere be obeyed because it is law. I suggest, This same amendment further provides to assure that the strength of an emo­ nevertheless, that it.isa bad sign for that a quorum of the Senate when choos­ tional majority can be tempered with the democracy, for government by the con­ ing a Vice President shall consist of two­ reflections of a differing minority. sent of the governed, when it is necessary thirds of the whole number of Senators. It makes no difference, Mr. President, to enjoin respect'for law as law because So, Mr. President, I say again, to argue what the issue is or who constitutes the the purpose of the law does not elicit the that the Constitution of these United minority. That consideration is irrele­ moral recognition of the people. In pro­ States provides for rule by a simple ma­ vant to this discussion. portion as laws can be executed only by jority is not found within the provisions I would defend just as vigorously the means of calling for obedience to law of the Constitution itself. right of minorities who differ with me to for no better reason than that it is the January 23, 1.967 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE 1283 law, we can be sure that a general, popu- in the legislative process. To modify the of making national laws affecting those lar consensus is lacking and that the rules of debate in the Senate would deny having such interests. No national ma­ threat of force is imminent. to those of us who are new the right to jority should have power to override Careful, thorough, and prolonged de- listen and the right to learn. minority rights. The freedom of Sen­ bate in the Senate provides the best Mr. President, the primary argument ators to speak on behalf of the rights and insurance that laws, which -must be made by those who wish to make it easier interests which concern the people of obeyed, correspond with the prevailing to close off debate in the Senate is that their States should make possible the judgment of. people in all parts of the no minority should be able to hinder the salutary defense of minority rights country about what men owe to other majority in carrying through its legis- against majoritarian despotism. men. " lative will. I said a moment ago that I am con­ Those who urge modification of rule Against this contention, I should like cerned that the Senate preserve for its XXII may say that the majority of the to point out that the framers of the Con­ Members the right to listen and the right people give their mandate at every elec- stitution did not mean to establish. that to learn. I said that these rights are par­ tion for certain policies and programs kind of government which would best ticularly important to new Members with and that rule XXII permits a minority of facilitate the unobstructed rule of a na­ less experience. But the very fact that it Senators to obstruct the popular will ex- tional majority' or of a parliamentary is the business of Congress to formulate pressed at the polls. majority. Indeed, they deliberately legislation for the entire country, and To this dangerous contention I should placed obstacles in the way of majority the fact that Members' experience and like to say that the parliamentary proc- despotism. They intended, rather, to es­ knowledge are primarily of the interests ess in Congress is not merely a procedure tablish a government designed to give se­ of the people in their States, mean that; to be used by the majority to register its curity to the rights of people. And they the right to listen and the right to learn will on the assumption that its will has knew that the greater number does not are indispensable for every Member. Is a popular mandate and should not there- make right because it is the majority. there any Senator possessed of such de­ fore encounter effective opposition with- Law is meant to secure to every man tailed and comprehensive knowledge of in the legislative chamber. American what belongs to him, and no majority every section of our country that without democracy is representative in essence. on earth has the right to take from him further education of a kind-the kind of Specific, legislative issues are not, and what is his own. education to be derived from exhaustive cannot, be decided directly by the voters As I see it, Mr. President, legislators debate-he can give full consideration to in voting for the candidates of their on every level of government, Federal, interests shared by people in States of the choice. Discussion of issues in political State, and local-represent not merely East and West, North and South? Is campaig.ns is not meant to replace full numbers of nameless and homogeneous there any Senator who would presume to debate and consideration of such issues people. Legislators are meant to repre­ propose laws binding on the people of a in Congress. It is quite alien to our po- sent the rights and legitimate interests State far distant from his own without litical tradition that a majority of law- of their constituents. Rights ought to giving careful and patient attention to makers should feel justified in denying be represented in the legislative process Senators from that State who have the to the minority means of effective op- and secured by law because they are most direct and intimate knowledge of position on the theory that the majority rights and not merely because of the the problems and needs and achieve­ is carrying out the will of the people numbers of people whose rights and in­ ments of the people whom they repre­ expressed at election time. This theory terests they are. sent? is operative in other countries, and has The present requirement for cloture Or should any group of Senators, be­ made it possible for a parliamentary under rule XXII insures that a minority cause they are in the majority or because majority to cut off almost all debate on. of Senators shall not be denied the right the combined numbers of people they its legislative program and to make pro- to represent the legitimate interests of represent are a majority of the Nation found changes in its country's legal order their constituents in opposition to a nu­ feel justified on the basis of numbers in overnight. merical majority determined to effect its denying to other Senators freedom to I hope that we shall never permit this will in' disregard of those interests. make known to the majority the points possibility to develop in America. We· Surely, any Member who hesitates to as­ of view and the communities of interest shall not so long as we preserve inviolate sert that the majority makes right must shared by people in their own States? the right to full and free debate in the hesitate likewise to facilitate cloture by The framers of the Constitution wisely Senate. Such debate allows for the ex- modifying rule XXII. undertook to counterbalance and limit plicit confrontation of opposing claims Before any change in the present clo­ every kind of power which the Constitu­ represented by different Members. ture rule is made, I suggest that Mem­ tion grants. Legislative authority is lim­ Through such confrontation of opposing bel'S consider also that they, as Senators, ited by enumeration of the powers of claims, through extended and thorough represent the people in a somewhat dif­ Congress and is counterbalanced by the arguments for and against such claims. ferent way than do Members of the executive and judicial branches. These Members may coine to recognize rights House of Representatives. Seats in the latter branches are likewise limited and which they had not sufficiently consid- House are apportioned among the States balanced. ered before. And when argument on on the basis of population, and the House But there remains another kind of both or all sidesof an issue elicits recog- may be said therefore to represent the power which must also be limited-the nition of differing claims, adjustment by American people as such, on a national power of the majority. Limitation of law of opposing interests may be achieved basis. The Senate also represents the majority power is more urgent today and a more comprehensive level of jus- people, but it represent the people of the than ever before, perhaps, because there tice realized. States, and the people of eaeh one of the appears to be an increasing number of This is the business of the Senate. And States have the same number of Sena­ people today who take the term "liberal­ in this connection, I should like to men- tors to represent them as the people in ism" to mean the right to free use of tion that one right of every Senator every other one of the States. The Sen­ political power. which must be defended is the right to ate is not only a national, but also a It seems to be more and more an ac­ listen, the right to hear both or all sides Federal, body. It is representative at cepted proposition, for example, that the of an issue argued with the maximum of once of the people and of the States as President, because he is elected, in reality, thought and the minimum of haste. The States. by a national majority, should have his right to listen is particularly indispen- Every Member knows that commu­ own legislative program carried through sable to me as a new Member. I sus- nities of interest arise within geograph­ Congress with a minimum of opposition. pect that other Senators beginning their ieal areas such as counties, cities, and Those who may oppose one or another first terms may feel as' I do. Those of States. It seems to me, then, that Sen­ part of the President's program render us who are new to the Senate must feel ators have the duty to represent the themselves open to the charge of defying the tremendous responsibility which our communities of interest in their States. the Nation's will. constituents have given us- the respon.,. There are genuine, important, and very At the same time, the indispensable sibility to represent their rights in the different interests throughout our coun­ regulation and limitation of debate in legislative process.. I know, for my own try. Freedom of debate in the Senate the House facilitate control over the part, that I have.a. great deal to learn should insure that each of these interests course of business by the majority b~fore I can be-an effective participant receives due consideration in the business leadership so that the minority can offer 1284 CONGRESSIONAL RECORD - SENATE January 23, 1967 less effective opposition than can a mi­ Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. would make it possible for a third net­ nority in the Senate. In this connection, President, I suggest the absence of a work, ABC, which up until now has had I should like to quote a statement which quorum. difficulty in competing with the other the distinguished Senator from Georgia The PRESIDING OFFICER. The two giants, National Broadcasting Co. [Mr. RUSSELL] made several years ago clerk will call the roll. and Columbia Broadcasting System, to and which appeared in the Congres­ The legislative clerk proceeded to call merge with a large company, acquiring sional Digest of February 1953. He the roll. able management, a better corporate said: Mr. BYRD of West Virginia. Mr. structure, and putting the corporation in If the majority had the power, such as you President, I ask unanimous consent that a position where it could more effectively ha.ve in your House of Representatives, to the order for the quorum call be re­ compete with National Broadcasting Co., come in with a rule, that even prevents an scinded. which, as we all know, is owned by Radio amendment to a bill, that the debate shall The PRESIDING OFFICER. With­ Corp. of America. be very limited on a bill, and permit a bare out objection, it is so ordered. It would seem to me that if this majority to jam through such a proposal, not only would the Senate lose Its value as a Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi­ merger were permitted to go into effect, bulwark of Individual liberty In this country, dent, I commend the Senator from South it would mean the capital structure of but it would be subordinated completely to Carolina for the very fine and able speech that third network would be parallel to the will of the party in power. he is making on this subject. that of the other two networks. The Senator from Louisiana hopes be­ Most people share the belief that at The many are not always right. Just fore this debate is concluded that he this time American Broadcasting Co. is as they are not always wrong. All I ask will have an occasion to address himself nat in any position to give very effective is a safeguard to insure that when they to this subject also. competition to CBS, much less NBC. are wrong and the few are right that the When I first Came to the Senate, there Speaking only as one Senator, and I ideas of the few have time to be heard, was a fight over a change in the rules, mean to cast no reflection, on a Sunday to be planted and to grow. in 1949. It was my privilege to serve night, for example, one may turn the TV As James Roscoe Day said: on the Committee on Rules and Adminis­ dial to that beautiful color of NBC and The individual champion of a cause Is tration at that time, and to stand for just leave it there. Once in a while the more likely to have thought seriously and the position for which the Senator from Columbia Broadcasting Co. may come safely that the blind followers of partisan leaders. The world's history Is strewn thick South Carolina is contending at this through with a program such as "The with such incidents. Nearly all of the great time. Honeymooners," with "The Jackie Glea­ Issues have been lamentably in the minority It certainly entailed a great deal of son Show," for which they undOUbtedly and the men who have stood in the front of hard work and diligence on the part of pay a huge sum of money, and put it in a them have had to bear abuse. the Senator from South Carolina to position to have some people turn their The great consideration Is not the voices study this matter to the extent he has dial away from channel 4. I regret to of today but the voices of the tomorrows done in order to make his views avail­ say that very seldom on prime time are Into which will be streaming the light of ac­ able to the Senate. there many people who turn to channel 7, complished facts. It Is safe to assume that the voice of prog­ I commend the Senator for his very which is the ABC outlet. ress will be vindicated by the ages. To pro­ diligent efforts to prepare himself and What American Broadcasting Co. and test small concepts, to champion great pro­ for the very fine speech he has made on the International Telephone & Telegraph portions is sure prophecy. It is out in that this occasion. seek to do is to join and present such direction that we find the purpose and plans Mr. HOLLINGS. Mr, President, I am strength that they can have parallel or­ of God. It Is out in that direction that we very grateful to the distinguished Senator ganizations to the other two major na­ follow the orbit of large and noble human from Louisiana for his remarks. tional broadcasting companies. events. In my judgment, if the proposed merg­ The right to be heard Is Inherent In man and fundamental In his free land. The right er were permitted to go into effect, the to be followed must depend upon what rea­ THE PROPOSED MERGER OF AMERI­ competition would be more vigorous, and son and sound arguments he makes known. CAN BROADCASTING CO. AND IN­ as a result of the more vigorous competi­ If no age, neither his own nor any suc­ TERNATIONAL TELEPHONE & tion the public would get better per­ ceeding one, hears him, he has spoken In formances. vain. If he utters truth and wisdom, some­ TELEGRAPH CO. Many Senators are aware of what has where at some time It will accomplish that Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. Presi­ happened with regard to the televising of whereunto It is sent. It will not return void. dent, this country has had an oppor­ sports. There has been tremendous bid­ If It proves to be a mistake, nevertheless he who speaks his convictions has the ennobling tunity to have the remarks of the Sena­ ding to televise great sports programs. satisfaction of having obeyed the command tor from Kentucky [Mr. MORTON] with Because there has been so much avail­ of duty as he saw It. respect to the proposed merger of the able in the way of showing sports over American Broadcasting Co. and Inter­ television for the public to view, there It has been argued, Mr. President, that national Telephone & Telegraph Co. has been outstanding showing of sports. our governmental system and its two­ Many times I have been critical of the This has been of tremendous help to col­ thirds rule are wrong because no other Justice Department for not actively and leges, professional football, and profes­ corresponding body in any other country more vigorously pursuing the antitrust sional baseball, so much so that the in­ adheres to this principle. laws of this Nation. In this instance, come from television is the most im­ That argument is invalid. however, I believe the Justice Depart­ portant source of income to professional Given the position of the United States· ment is in error. As a matter of con­ football and a major item of income to in the world today, it would be my po­ science and consistency, I feel I should professional baseball teams. sition that perhaps other nations should mal,e my position clear with regard to In my view, as one who has spent a be copying what we do rather than our this matter. great many years studying antitrust looking to them for precedents and pro­ I served as chairman of the Monopoly problems, it would be in the public in­ cedures. Subcommittee of the Select Committee terest to have a third network, compete When all is said and done, Mr. Presi­ on Small Business for so many years that fully a network which does not have dent, when the heady haze of oratorY I have almost forgotten when it started. complete nationwide coverage now. Ap­ clears away, we find ourselves in debat..; Last year I resigned that seat in order proval of the mergerwould permit this ing this issue, face to face with one, sim­ that one of our distinguished colleagues, company to more' effectively compete ple basic question. Will we continue to the Senator from Wisconsin [Mr. NEL­ with the two major networks. guarantee that a group of men in the SON], might make a contribution more In saying that, so far as the Senator U.S. Senate-whomever they may be and fully in that field. from Louisiana is concerned, I would whatever the issue-shall have the right Over many years it has been my feel­ have no objection if the Federal Com­ to defend their position within reason­ ings that the purpose of. the antitrust munications Commission wanted to per­ able limits to the best of their ability. laws should be to stimulate vigorous mit a fourth or fifth or sixth network to As one who has watched this body with competition rather than to stifle it in be ll.ble. to engage in such competition as great respect and admiration from afar any respect. .. Can be generated. But it seems strange for many years, and who now is fortu­ The action of the Federal CommuI1ica~ that Jp,e J.ustice Department would have nate enough to join in its councils, I tions Commission, on which that Com­ sat· idly· by while the National Broad­ prayerfully hope so, mission acted properly, in my opinion, casting Co. grew as a part of Radio