Table of Contents
We are living today in an age when an unrelenting struggle between two ways of life is being waged on a vast scale throughout the world.
America has been given the leadership of the free way of life, based upon a democratic system of government that recognizes the dignity of man. The other side is represented by international communism where a minority rules by force, where free thought is suppressed, and the individual is merely regarded as a tool of the state.
This contest will be decided in the underdeveloped areas of the world--in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. Whichever side succeeds in winning the hearts and minds of the teeming millions of people who inhabit those parts of the globe will prevail.
The era of colonialism has come to an end. Its death knell was sounded on the fifteenth day of August 1947, when India and Pakistan became independent nations. Since that time more than six hundred million people on the continent of Asia alone have achieved political freedom. These people are now struggling to build their new societies. The leaders of these revolutions were inspired by the same ideals that burned so fiercely in the hearts of the fathers of our own great republic. The echo of the battle cries of American patriots, "No taxation without representation," "Give me liberty or give me death," may be heard in deepest Africa and in the ancient kingdoms of Asia and the Middle East.
The budding new nations growing out of the wreckage of colonial empires are one and all writing their constitutions on the American pattern.
The Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights have been eagerly studied and widely copied.
The new governments in Asia, the Middle East, and Africa are weak and their peoples are hungry. There is nothing new about poverty and disease in those areas of the world. These have existed for centuries. What is new and significant is that the people are determined to do something about them.
This is the age of "rising expectations." These countries are inhabited by ordinary people who are looking for opportunities whereby they may be able to make a living and raise their families in relative comfort. They will not be content to be serfs any longer. They wish to own their land and be masters of their own destinies.
I made it a point to follow as closely as I could the course of world history from the time of Woodrow Wilson to the present day. I have watched the growing importance of the role played by the United States since she entered World War I in 1917. I have studied Wilson's 14 Points. I am familiar with the beginning of the image of the League of Nations in the mind of that great American statesman, its mutilation at Versailles, and its final rejection by the United States Senate afterward.
I was here in the United States and know of the events which led to our participation in World War II, the signing of the Atlantic Charter, the proclaiming of the Four Freedoms by President Roosevelt, the unconditional surrender of our Fascist and militaristic enemies in Europe and Asia, and the interminable struggle with Soviet Russia ever since. I watched with keen interest the adoption of the Truman Doctrine in sending military aid to struggling Greece and Turkey, the injection of new blood into the economies of devastated western Europe through the Marshall Plan, the enunciation of the Point 4 program by President Truman, the entry of the United States into the Korean conflict, and the workings of the Mutual Security Program.
Since the end of the Korean War the United States has contributed nearly seven billion dollars through the Mutual Security Program to countries in Southeast Asia. It is little known or understood by the American people that the major portion of this so-called "foreign aid" money was given to four countries with whom we have military pacts. In round figures, three countries in Southeast Asia with a total population of less than fifty million people received nearly six billion dollars ($120 per capita) of the amount expended through the Mutual Security Program, while three other countries with a population of 600,000,000 received only one-half billion (less than $1.00 per capita).
Following the same pattern of foreign aid linked with military alliances, we have given hundreds of millions to the kingdoms of the Middle East.
Heeding the advice of Abraham Lincoln, "If we could first know where we are and whither we are tending, we could then better judge what to do and how to do it," I wonder if it is not time for a reappraisal of our mutual-security assistance program. If our objective was to contain communism by providing military equipment through pacts with nations on the peripheries of Soviet Union and China, are these military alliances as realistic today as they were a few years ago? Have conditions changed enough to take a second look? Do we or can we rely on ground forces in western Europe to check Russia? By the same reasoning, to what extent can the military forces of small nations, equipped with obsolete World War II weapons at enormous costs to American taxpayers, assist in repelling military attacks by their powerful communist neighbors? We may just as well recognize the hard fact that in today's world of hydrogen bombs and missiles, the freedom of countries anywhere in the world can be protected from communist aggression only by the deterrent strength of the United States armed might.
While I do not believe we can cancel our military alliances or cut off our military aid completely, more emphasis should be placed on economic assistance to countries in underdeveloped areas with the purpose of building up the internal strength of these nations. The only antidote to communism can come from a satisfied people loyal to their governments and dedicated to the principles of democracy. This faith will develop only when the people can find solutions to their social and economic problems under a system of government where they enjoy those basic freedoms exemplified in our own Constitution.
They must find ways to harness their rivers, to bring water into arid regions, to develop their mines and forests, to produce steel, build factories, to grow three bushels of wheat and rice where one grew before, to eradicate disease, to educate the youth and find jobs for the people. At the same time we must not overlook the urgent need of landownership reform and the creation of conditions whereby the people generally will have a sense of belonging.
The institution of the Development Loan Fund during the past few years is a happy beginning in this direction.
The status quo in the countries of Southeast Asia and the Middle East--which means for the masses grinding poverty, and subjugation by landlords, ignorance, and disease--is dead.
In some instances in keeping with our own program of national security we may be obliged to give military aid to countries ruled by dictators. But in such cases we should never permit the image of America as the champion of a democratic way of life to become in the least bit blurred.
We should at no time relax our efforts to further our main objective, which is to promote the rights of the individual, to assist in the creation of societies where masses of people may enjoy a more abundant life, and generally strengthen democratic institutions throughout the world.
With that in mind I introduced the following resolution in the House of Representatives:
"Whereas the objective of the people of the United States is the attainment of a peaceful world where freedom of the individual and the dignity of man are recognized, and where the State is the servant and not the master of the citizens: Now, therefore be it
"Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the desire, hope, and expectation of the Congress that nations receiving military assistance under the mutual-security program guarantee to their people freedom of speech, freedom of religion, and freedom of the press."
This resolution had the approval of the distinguished chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, the Honorable Thomas E. Morgan, and was voted out favorably by the Committee with only one dissenting vote.
I received a highly gratifying vote of confidence from the voters of my district in 1958; they gave me 63 per cent of the vote in re-electing me to my second term in Congress.
During my nearly four years in Washington I have had sufficient time in which to crystallize my ideas on basic national issues and fundamental aspects of American life.
We must have an adequate national defense. I firmly believe in a balanced budget, but we should never subordinate the security of the United States for any budgetary consideration. Being the second best military power on earth is not enough. We must continue to negotiate for disarmament, but we must never permit ourselves to get to the point where we may be forced to negotiate from a position of weakness.
During my trip to the Far East I saw what a good job the United States Information Agency, under the able leadership of Mr. George V. Allen, is doing. But our efforts in that field lag far behind the actual needs of the situation. International communism is spending many times more money to sell its ways of life in that part of the world. The American people too long have remained comfortably unconcerned about what people elsewhere think about our country. It is high time that we recognize the urgent need to expand our program of public relations under the USIA and make a broader presentation of our democratic way of life.
I believe the basic strength of the free-enterprise system lies in the fact that Americans, throughout their one hundred-and-seventy-year history, have enjoyed equality of opportunity. We must continue to provide an atmosphere for the youth of America in which they can exercise the maximum of initiative and develop their individual faculties and talents to the fullest extent.
I am a strong advocate of federal aid to education as a means to give our youth full opportunity for a high-school and college education and to maintain a high standard both in educational curriculum and school equipment.
It is a known fact, a fact forcefully brought home by Mr. Khrushchev during his appearance before the National Press Club in Washington, that the Soviet Union today is producing twice as many scientists and engineers as we are in the United States. We cannot permit this situation to continue.
Full employment, full production, full consumption is my motto for America. We must have an expanding economy. The United States must continue to provide public services for its people--sufficient medical research, necessary flood control and reclamation projects, adequate housing, good highways and, above all, opportunity for employment at decent wages and incentive for investment.
We must exert every effort to curb inflation. Inflation can have a corroding effect on the American economy. The incentive to save and invest must be sustained among our people. Those who saved for retirement or earned well-deserved pensions must not be robbed of their equities through the diminishing value of the dollar. The Congress of the United States is searching for ways and means to keep the American dollar sound and stable.
The small businessman is the backbone of our business community. Yet, like the small corner grocery store of only a few years ago, thousands of small businesses are being pushed out by mammoth combinations operating under corporate control. I supported legislation passed by the Congress in 1958 to increase the prestige and the lending ability of the Small Business Administration. It has been a source of great satisfaction to me to assist small businessmen in my district in obtaining loans and the other valuable services available through Mr. Donald McLarnan, southern California regional director of the SBA. The amount of loans approved in Riverside and Imperial counties during my service in Washington has been a modest million and a half dollars, but that money saved many a business from failure, and enabled others to finance needed expansion.
I favor a full share of the national income for the farmers. Although they comprise 13 per cent of our nation's population, they receive only 6 per cent of the national income. I shall continue to work diligently to obtain for them a "fair shake" and a reasonable return for their investment.
Because of lack of proper leadership in the Department of Agriculture, the national farm situation has deteriorated in the past seven years. Surpluses have piled up. The cost of the farm program to the taxpayers has been steadily rising. An imaginative approach to the problem of farm surpluses could convert these surpluses into a national asset instead of a constant headache and financial burden to the American people. Millions of Americans could be provided with a more balanced and nutritious diet. A hungry world would receive the bounty of American farms with much more gratitude than they do the tons of obsolete military hardware under the Mutual Security Program.
Collective bargaining is the magna charta of labor. The workingman's rights to organize and bargain collectively must be protected. A well-paid white-collar and blue-collar worker is the best antidote against business depression for he furnishes the buying power for the products of our factories and farms.
I believe in adequate pensions for senior citizens, veterans, and retired military and civil-service personnel, based on the rising cost of living. I have consistently voted for legislation favorable to their welfare. I have also taken a personal interest in the problems of individual veterans and pensioners in distress. America has a moral obligation to our older, retired citizens as well as to those men and women who were willing to fight and die for our country.
Vital to the lives of the residents of Riverside and Imperial counties is supplemental water. I have fought--and I shall continue to fight--for this precious water supply. To that end I have made it my business to acquire a comprehensive knowledge of the water problems of my area. I have arranged for committees of Congress to come to my district to make a first-hand study of our water problems. My positions on the House Interior and Insular Affairs Committee and as chairman of the Water Resources Subcommittee of the California congressional delegation afford me an unusual opportunity for effective action in this field.
I have consistently, and with all the force at my command, supported civil-rights legislation in Congress. There is no room in the United States of America for second-class citizenship. In Uncle Sam's family there are no foster children. All American citizens must enjoy equal rights under law. Discrimination of man against man in any form is repugnant to the ideals which all Americans cherish.
All these matters touch, in a greater or lesser degree, on the crucial issues facing America today. If we face them squarely and grapple with them fearlessly, the future of the great political experiment launched by the Founding Fathers will be assured.
Table of Contents