15230 EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS May 19, 1975

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS WASHINGTON SITUATION

HON. ROBERT W. KASTENMEIER OF WISCONSIN

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, May 19, 1975

l\Ar.l{A.STEN1dEIER..:rv.tr.Speaker,the future of farming in the United States is being threatened not only by the cost­price squeeze, but also by an emerging at­titude that the Capper-Volstead Act should be changed.

The Capper-Volstead. Act, passed in 1922, permits individual farmers to join together to market their products. These farmer marketing associations, known as cooperatives, are given partial exemption from the Clayton Act.

Control of cooperatives is vested in member-users on a democratic basis. They operate as nonprofit businesses with limited returns or dividends paid to mem­bers, charging patro:Q.S only the actual cost of performing services. Finally, co­operatives allow only limited returns upon ownership capital, primarily bene­fiting _patrons as opposed to stockhold­ers.

Concern over rising food prices and re­cent lawsuits directed at officers of sev­eral individual cooperatives, has gen­erated sentiment to repeal portions of Capper-Volstead. In part, the strength of American agriculture has been the widespread operation of cooperatives, al­lowing individual farmers to join togeth­er to obtain vital services on a nonprofit or cost basis.

I would like to call to the attention of my colleagues, the following report by the president of the National council of Farmer Cooperatives, which fairly and accurately assesses the cun·ent situation:

WASHINGTON SITUATION

(By Kenneth D. Naden) Storm clouds are gathering on the horizon

which ma.y affect the livelihood and future existence of the American fa.nner more than anything that's happened in agriculture since the depression of the 1930's.

These clouds aren't due to inflation, re­cession, falling farm prices or any of the other economic ills currently plaguing us. They're the result of an attitude which seems to be prevalent in certain areas of the Executive Branch, and more particularly in the Anti­trust Division of the Justice Department.

This attitude ls based upon the belief that the Capper-Volstead Act, the 53-year-old statute which permits individual farmers to join together to market a product, should be amended or changed. Cert-a.in officials believe that this law, which has been tested for over bal! a century, somehow permits farmers to achieve harmful monopoly pow­er through their cooperatives.

How have these attitudes developed? And why are they showing up so strongly now? Basically, I believe, for two reasons.

First, because of concern in this country over rapidly rising '.food prices. When this situation exists~ a.s it has "for several years, officials naturally look for scapegoats: Farm~r cooperatives become fair game.

Secondly, because the Antitrust Divisi-0n o~ the Justice Department is basically biased against Capper-Volstead. It believes farmer

cooperatives have achieved enough market power under this law to cause undue food price enhancement. It has also demonstrated in public statements tha.t these views are based more upon a distorted vision of the co­operative role, than upon sound economic reasons.

A look at the recent performance of farm and food prices shows the fallacy of this argument. Farm prlces have dropped in eight of the last 12 months, while food prices have continued to rise. The most recent report of the Department of Agriculture stated that farm prices are 011' 15 percent from a year ago, but retail food prices are 9 percent high­er than a year ago.

These facts, coupled with the continuing plunge in farm prices, debunk charges that farmers and their cooperatives are exercising excessive market power.

To develop substantial market power, one must control the national output of a com­modity. Farmers don't have such output con­trol. They can't shut down the output of dairy cows, fruit trees, laying hens, sows or a beef herd when demand falls. They can't operate like a hard goods manufacturer who can shut down an assembly line or plant. Agricutlural production just doesn't work that way.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT PROPOSALS

The Justice Department's attitude toward Capper-Volstead has been defined rather clearly this year by the Deputy Assistant At­torney General for Antitrust. His most recent pronouncement was to a Federal Bar Asso­ciation Conference in Kansas City-0n April 3.

The Justice official stated that his depart­ment is continuing an investigation to de­termine if f"S.rmer cooperatives organized un­der Capper-Volstead have achieved monopoly power In "significant m-arkets."

While admitting that the cooperative in­vestigation hasn't reached a stage where definite conclusions can be made about their competitive impact, Justice didn't hesitate to outline several proposals tor potential amendment of Capper-Volstead.

The first would require pre-clearance by the Secretary of Agriculture for all coopera­tives, plus additional clearance for signif­icant expansion <>f operations, plus five-year licensing or renewal for all cooperatives.

This proposal, if enacted, would establish a dangerous precedent f<>r all businesses, co­operative and non-cooperative alike. No sec­tor of American business has even been sub­jected to such a restrictive requirement. Compliance with regulatory laws 1s one thing, but licensing of clearance from a government agency to conduct normal business actlvities or expand operations is quite another. There's absolutely no need for such a requirement in view of the power and restraint authority in­herent in our antitrust laws.

A second proposal by Justice would elimi­nate the Capper-Volstead provision that the Secretary of Agriculture be the authority to determine the presence .of monopoly power among cooperatives, as well as the one to determine that the existence of this power has led to undue price enhancement.

What Justice didn't acknowledge, however, is that the Secretary of Agriculture has tn fact ruled on five formal charges brought under the Capper-Volstead Act. In addition, USDA has investigated numerous other com­plaints in which cooperatives were accused of using monopoly power to unduly enhance food prices. In each case, after review of the facts, the Secretary determined that the co­operative involved hadn't caused undue prfoe · enhancement. This, I'm sure, bas been an -irritant to· Justice and probably one of tlie main motivations for " its proposal.

One other proposal by justice would pro­hibit long-term membership clauses, supply contracts, or base plans which appear to limit the freedom of the individual farmer to move in or out of cooperative membership.

This proposal doesn't seem to recognize that cooperative membership is a two-way street. A farmer joins-a cooperative to get the benefit of group action in the marketplace and realize an adequate return on his in­vestment, if possible. If the cooperative is to perform this service for him, it must have his commitment-to deliver his product at a certain time and to meet prescribed stand­ards of quality. Otherwise, the r.ooperative can't honor its commitments to its cus­tomers.

It's obvious that the Justice proposals have ignored the findings of the National Com­mission on Food Marketing which, after a two-year comprehensive study, concluded that cooperatives enhance competition and have a constructive effect in food marketing for consumers as well as farmers.

COOPERATIVES Nor lMMUNE

Cooperatives today have no immunity from unlawful conduct. This fact has been demonstrated in numerous cases. It has been shown that the Sherman Act provides a remedy-a restraint-when a cooperat!ve either competes unfairly, or unlawfully at­tempts to monopolize a. market. This law has sufficient teeth in lt to control any al­leged excesses by a cooperative or non-coop­erative corporation.

REAL MARKET CONCENTRATION

It seems to me that if Justice is sincerely interested in attacking food monopoly power, it would do well to investigate the obvious areas of concentration in the food industry.

Much has been said about alleged con­centration in the dairy industry. What hasn't been pointed out, however, is that the vol­ume of the four largest dairy cooperatives is less than one-third of the volume of the four largest non-cooperative dairy marketing firILS.

Or that in such key food areas as meat processing, cooperatives have only a 3 percent share of the market.

Or that in certain other markets, as few as four non-cooperative corporations control a. dominant share of the market. The four largest manufacturers of breakfast cereals, for example, control about 90 percent of the market.

The four largest firms, all non-cooperative, control the following share of these mar­kets: soup, 92 percent; baby foods, 95 per­cent; tomato products and catsup, 81 per­cent; soft drinks, 89 percent; instant coffee, 81 percent; baking powder and yeast, 86 per­cent; dessert mixes, 86 percent; and grain mill products and refrigerated dough, 81 percent. Such concentration supported by er:. fective supply control and extensive ad­vertising helps assure market power.

By contrast, the four largest firms selling butter (a major product o! dairy coop era~ tives) have only 14 percent of the market.

In summary, there is no logical reason today for placing farmer cooperatives at the top of the agenda when looking for scape­goats on the issue of high food prices. This point was well-articulated by the Agribusi­ness Accountability Project, a public in-terest group which has been critical at times of some cooperative activities. It said:

"Cooperatives are everybody's easy target today, but overall they don't make much of a difference in the pr-ice of food on the shelf. The political scandal ·over milk prices has put cooperatives in -the publlc mind, and going after them has become a way of looking good without getting at the real problem

May 19, 1975 of domination of food processing and retail­ing by the giant corporations."

The AAP's assessment, in my judgment, is entirely correct. It is much easier, more expedient and more visible to attack a sys­tem which represents less than five percent of the voting public than to go after firms which represent significant political clout.

In the· coming battle, farmers will have to convince their representatives in Congress of the merits of Capper-Volstead. That's their best hope.

Because from present indications, it ap­pears that few in the Executive Branch will recognize the merits of Capper-Volstead and help present an objective appraisal of the benefits of cooperation-both for consumers and farmers.

If we fail, it could hasten the demise of the individual American farmer as we know him today. The result might be a momentary drop in farm prices. But that's all it would be. Because the long-term effect would sure­ly be some form of corporate control of food from farm to the retail shelf.

If that happens, the Justice Department will have stimulated food industry concen­tration and price enhancement that it never imagined possible in its wildest dreams.

CATHOLIC WAR VETERANS, POST 1559, A CREDIT TO THE COMMU­NITY

HON. JOSEPH M. GAYDOS OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, May 19, 1975

Mr. GAYDOS. Mr. Speaker, for the past 16 years, Post 1559 of the Catholic War Veterans, and its ladies auxiliary, has singled out for pub_lic recognition a resident of the McKeesport, Pa., area who has provided the community with outstanding service and leadership.

The CWV "Good Fellow" award is highly respected and the caliber of its recipients can be judged by the many prominent individuals who attend the presentation banquet to pay tribute to the honoree.

For example, this year's a ward winner was Merrill W. Granger, executive sports editor of the Daily News in McKeesport, Pa. The esteem in which he is held can be attested to by those who took part in the program:

Very Rev. John C. Cassella of St. Per­petua Church; Victor E. Bertoty and George F. Matta, past commanders of Post 1559; Hon. John Pribanic, mayor of McKeesport; Hon. Charles Gorum, mayor of Glassport Borough; the Rever­end William J. Konus, Holy Trinity Church, and Steve Lesko, secretary­tre.asurer of McKeesport Athletic Sports ~ociation.

Robert Cox, past recipient of the "Good Fellow" award; Sam Vidnovic, treasurer of the city of McKeesport; Elroy Face, former ace relief pitcher for the Pittsburgh Pirates; Thomas D. Mansfield, publisher and editor of the Daily News; Leonard staisey, chairman of the Allegheny County Board of Com­missioners; Emil Mrkonic, Pennsylvania legislator from the 37th district, and Joseph Hreha, present commander of Post 1559.

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

Mr. Speaker, year after year, ~ost l559 has gone to a great deal of time and trouble to bring some deserving in­.dividual to the public's attention. I co~­mend the post and its members for their efforts. However, I often think that sometime, someone sh~uld present Post 1559 a "Good Fellow" award. The mem­bers certainly. are a credit to the com­munity.

DEDUCT REFUGEE FUNDS FROM U.N. CONTRIBUTION

HON. C. W. BILL YOUNG OF FLORIDA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, May 19, 1975

Mr. YOUNG of Florida. Mr. Speaker, I am today introducing legislation di­recting that the amount of our annual contribution to the United Nations be reduced dollar-for-dollar by the amounts spent by the Federal Government to aid Vietnam evacuees.

For three decades now, we have an­nually contributed hundreds of millions of dollars to the United Nations for its various activities, including refugee as­sistance. Since 1970 alone, we have con­tributed $159.4 million to the United Na­tions Relief and Works Agency­UNRW A-for Palestinian refugees.

The Congress has approved expendi­tures of $405 million over the next 14 months for Vietnam evacuee assistance. I feel that the United Nations refusal to become involved in the Vietnam evacu­ation, or care of the refugees, is yet an­other politically motivated slap at the United States, and an abdication of its responsibilities on the world scene.

What makes the Vietnam refugees any less deserving of United Nations assist­ance than other refugees?

If we cannot get the United Nations to face up to its responsibilities directly, then we must do it indirectly, by reduc­ing our contribution to that body by the amount which we ourselves are spend­ing on the refugees. The United States is the chief financial supporter of the United Nations, and yet we are also the chief target of U .N. discrimination and abuse. It is time for the Congress to take

· action and remind the U.N. that our re­sources are not infinite, and that if the U.N. wishes our support it must carry out its responsibilities in a more even­handed manner.

Mr. Speaker, attached is the text of my bill, and I urge my colleagues' sup­port for this measure.

The bill follows: H.R.-

A bill to direct the deduction of amounts appropriated pursuant to the Indochina Migration and Refugee Assistance Act of 1975, from the United States annual as­sessed share of the budget of the United Nations Be it enacted by the Senate and House of

Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the annual payments of the United States as­sessed share of the budget of the United Nations becoming payable on or after the date of enactment of the Indochina Migra-

15231 tion and Refugee Assistance Act of 1975 shall be reduced, dollar for dollar, by the amount of any appropriations made pursuant to such Act until the total of such i·eductions equals the amount of such appropriations.

IN FAVOR OF CONVERSION TO THE METRIC SYSTEM

HON. RICHARD L. OTTINGER OF NEW YORK

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, May 19, 1975

Mr. OTTINGER. Mr. Speaker, last week I submitted testimony to the Sub­committee on Science, Research and Technology in support of the admin­istration's bill-H.R. 6154-to provide for a gradual and voluntary conversion to the metric system.

In past Congresses in which I served I also cosponsored met1ic conversion legislation, and I remain convinced that the United States should adopt this sys­tem as soon as possible.

I am submitting for the RECORD my re­marks on the importance of adopting the international system of units and the practical implications of the proposed legislation for the various segments of our society :

Mr. Chairman, it is indeed a pleasure to be able to present these remarks in support of metric conversion in the U.S. to your subcom­mittee. As you know, I have long been an ad­vocate of conversion to the metric system and actively supported this idea in previous Con­gresses in which I was privileged to serve. I am happy to be back this year to be a part of the 94th Congress, which will, I predict, adopt a policy providing for an official changeover to the International System of Units in this country.

In reViewing some of the testimony which has been presented before this subcommit· tee I note widespread support for the bills before the Congress and general agreement that since conversion to metric is in the long run inevitable, it will be more practical to begin the conversion as quickly as possible. I certainly agree with this position and feel that we should get moving while interest ls at a peak and before an ever-increasing rate of infia.tlon makes the problem of conversion in future years more costly and ditrcult for both private industry and the Federal bud­get.

In considering the question of abandoning our long-established tradition of the Eng­lish system of measurement we must look at the effect upon three major group&-the gen­eral public, our education system and pri­vate industry. All indications from the pri­vate sector are that this plan, rather than compliance matters, would actually benefit industry, particularly where international trade is involved. The education community seems enthusiastic about the plans for con­version and has, in fact, been working for years to stress the importance of this system to students in our nation's schools. While the general public may seem somewhat appre­hensive about a sudden change in our system of weights and measurements, the bills we a.re considering this year provide for a gradual conversion which would give the public ample time and assistance in adjust­ing.

One of the most positive aspects of the metl'ic system is its simplicity, and that is why it has become so widely used through­out the world. Such simplicity not only makes the system easier to learn and under-

15232 stand, it also reduces the possibilit y -0! er· ror considerably.

It ts slgnlftcan~ fio note that the Unlt.ed States 1s the onlJ' major Indus~ coun­try in the worlcl that has not yet either made t he transition or is at least 1n the process of converting to the metrle system. Such te­nacity in clinging to an old and cumbersome tradition has left the U.S. isolated in the complex world of international trade and promotes an image unbecoming to the na­tion that always takes the lead 1n techno• logical and actentift.c developments.

Mr. Chab'man, I am a eo-sponsor of the Administration's blli, H.R. 6154, to provide for a ·gradual and voluntary conversion to metric under the guidance of a 25-member board whleh would be in existence for what­ever period of tlme is necessary to ·complete the process of transition. There have been a number of other bllls introduced on this subject, and most of them are very simllar to H.R. 6154. There would under these meas­ures be some Federal funds provided to assist tn this transition, but the overall costs or such a program are expected to be minlmal. At a tlme when rampant inflation ls affecting us &ll, lt 1s indeed heart.ening to know that if we do undertake this conversion process the initial costs will eventually be far out­weighed by the greater returns realized as a result of increased efficiencies. It ls this cost effective aspect that has already per­suaded m-any American manufacturers, re­t&llers and exporters to start using the metrlc system.

Aga.in, I reiterate my support for legJsla· tlon to provide for conversion to the metric system and I offer my cooperation and assist­ance to the subcommittee 1n this effort.

MINUTEMAN III

HON. CHARLES H. WILSON OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, May 19. 1975

Mr. CHARLES H. WlLSON of Cali­fornia. Mr. Speaker, in the annual De­fense Department report dated Feb­ruary 15, 1975, there is a statement by Secretary Schlesinger in regard to the fiscal year 19'76 procurement of 50 Minuteman ID missiles which I quote:

We propose to continue the productlon of the Minuteman m ~t the rate of five mls­sUes per month .... The Minuteman III is the only ICBM still in production; the USSR currently has at least three or four. It would be imprudent, 1n my judgment, to close down that production llne before we have a more deftnltlve assessment of bow many of each type of MIRVed ICBM the Soviet Union intends to deploy under the Vladivostok agreement .... These 50 missiles would ful­fill our requirements for follow-on flight testing and also preserve the option to de­ploy more Minuteman ms if that should be deemed necessary.

I endorse the Secretary's remarks. It is vital to our national seeuritv at this time to continue the only ICBA-.. produc­tion line and to maintain a suceessftil and motivated technlcal/management team on ICBM•s. Continued production pro­vides a qua11fted capability in place,, ready to respond to a more accurate assess­ment "f our pooture relative to the U.S.S.R. and ready to respond to a po-

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS

tential need to upgrade the Minuteman Il missiles which are now 10 years old. If we stopped production now, we would need 42 months to restart production. We need additional time to study our alternatives: for future ICBM's, for addi­tional Minuteman Ill missiles, for up­grading of Minuteman II.

Needless to say, continued production provides some 14,000 direct jobs and, through the ripple effect, a probable 35,000 total jobs. Many of these jobs are with small business in regions of high employment.

For your consideration, I recommend approval of the 50-missile Minuteman III procurement.

NATIONAL MARITIME DAY-1975

HON. GLENN M. ANDERSON OF CALIFORNIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, May 191 1.915

Mr. ANDERSON of California. Mr. Speaker, May 22. 1975, is National Mari­time Day. In commemoration of this day, memorial services honoring merchant seamen, who have died at sea during times of both war and peace while serv­ing their country aboard merchant ves­sels, will be held at the Port O' Call vil­lage in San Pedro, Calif.

The merchant marine, which has dili­gently served this country as the logistic lifeline to our Armed Forces and as an integral part of our international trade, will be honored by merchant seamen, families, and friends attending this me­morial service.

National Maritime Day was designated by a joint resolution of Congress to honor the importance of maritime industries and to commemorate the first trans­atlantic voyage by a steamship, the S.S. Savannah on May 22, 1819. This Amer­ican vessel started that historic voyage from its namesake port In Georgia and sailed successfully to its destination, Liv­erpool, England.

The memorial service at Port •o Call village will be held at 12 noon <>n the 22d. Special guests will be representa­tives of the Maritime Trade Council, maritime unions, steamship 'Companies, harbor officials, U.S. Government agen­cies, and local clergy.

In conjunction with this memorial, a burial service will be held on the Angel's Gate, a ship supplied by the Los Angeles Harbor Department. From aboard this ship, the ashes of merchant seamen who have died ashore will be distributed on the waters in the traditional manner of sea voyagers. As a final honor, families, members of unions, and representatives of maritime shipping companies will be aboard to place wreaths on the waters at the close of the service.

Mr. Speaker. I would like to urge the people of the United States to honor our American merchant marine on .May 22, 1973 by displaying the :flag of the Unit.ed

iV!ay 19, 1975 States at their homes and other suitable places.

TRIBUTE TO MRS. THERESA S. KOLDIN, NOTED JEWISH LEADER

HON. STEPHEN J. SOLARZ OF NEW YORK

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, May 19, 1975

Mr. SOLARZ. Mr. Speaker, I rise this afternoon to pay a well-de.served tribute to a woman who has been a tireless vol­unteer for many Jewish organizations-­Mrs. Theresa S. Koldin of Brooklyn, N.Y.

This Thursday, Mrs. Ko1d1n will be the guest of honor at a luncheon spon­sored by the Brooklyn Division of the United Jewish Appeal-Federation of Jewish Philanthropies Joint Campaign for her services over the years to that organization. She is a founder of the U.J.A. Manhattan Beach Women's Divi­sion and is a member of their board. Mrs. Koldin has been instrumental in the success of the special gifts program. This fundraising program asks that members contribute a minimum of $1 per week to the U.J.A.-Federation campaign and has had hlghly positive results. Tess Koldin is being honored for the leadership she has provided for the entire U.J.A. cam­paign in the Manhattan Beach Com­munity.

A graduate of Adelphi University where she received her bachelors degree, she continued. h~ education at Columbia University earning a masters degree in psychology. Mrs. Koldin pursued a career as a professional psy.chologist while raising two daughters and also worked for her outside interests. She is on the Brooklyn Board of Adelphi University, a member of B'nai B'rith, Hadassah. American Jewish Congress. and the League of Women Voters. Mrs. Koldin is the founder of the Midwood Chapter of Women's American ORT, a far-reaching and progressive organization for the re­habllltation and training of the handi­capped.

Theresa Koldin is a truly remarkable woman who has devoted her life to others. She is a true f1·iend, a leader of the Manhattan Beach community, a philanthropist, a person always ready to lend a hand when the work must be done and to extend a hand to a friend in need. I am, indeed, proud to be able to be affili­ated with so grand a woman as Tess Kolclin and also to have her as a mother­in-law. She has, over the years, been .a source of inspiration and given guidance in my political career and has counseled me in areas of mutual concern. I know that the United Jewish Appeal-Federa­tion Joint Campaign has benefited great­ly due to the continued work and eft'orts of Tess Koldin.

I am pleased to joln In honoring Theresa Koldin's work and I am delight­ed to brlng her accomplishments to the attention of our colleagues.

May 19, 1975 JUDGE ALEXANDER CRITICIZES

THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM IN THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

HON. WALTER E. FAUNTROY OF THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, May 19, 1975 Mr. FAUNTROY. Mr. Speaker, on

Thursday, May 8, 1975, the Honorable Harry Toussaint Alexander, an associate judge of the Superior Court of the District of Columbia, filed a prepared statement before the House District Committee holding oversight hearings on the administration of justice in the District of Columbia. Judge Alexander's statement and testimony are highly crit­ical of many cill·rent practices and pro­cedures which exist in the criminal justice system in the District of Colum­bia. He recommended many sweeping, remedial changes to cure the pervasive existing injustices. Conspicuously absent from the hearings were local television and radio media, and as a consequence, Judge Alexander's remarks did not re­ceive the attention that they merited. Because of the importance of the sub­ject matter covered by Judge Alexander in his testimony, I want to share with my colleagues a synopsis of his prepared statement and recommendations:

REMARKS OF THE HONORABLE HARRY T. ALEXANDER

That crime is a problem of paramount concern to the citizens of the District of Columbia. is evident, but what is seemingly not so evident to both legislators and judges alike are the causes of crime in the District of Columbia. Crime is ca.used by substandard ·education, substandard housing, unemploy­ment, underemployment, poverty and racism. As Chief Judge Bazelon of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia. Circuit stated in his address to more than one hundred Black Judges of the Judicial Council of the National Bar Association in 1972, " .•. many thoughtful persons .•• admit that almost all violent street crime is nurtured by poverty, bitterness, ignorance, racism and despair." I subscribe unequiv­ocally to this view and submit that once the ca.uses are understood, the solution is patent.

Thus, the following recommendations, I submit, will have a substantla.l impact in reducing the crime rate:

I. Full Home Rule for the citizens of the District of Columbia. Full Home Rule would eliminate the feelings of powerlessness, hopelessness and alienation which exist under colonla.l a.nd quasi-colonial status.

IL Guaranteed full employment for all people ready, willing, and able to work. Since approximately 76 percent of the reported offenses in 1973 were property offenses, meaningful and mobile employment could be expected to ca.use a substantial reduction in the number of property offenses committed.

m. Expungement of illegally and improp­erly acquired arrest records. Arrest records create additional obstacles to meaningful employment for poor, Black and underedu­cated people in this City.

Fundamental to our concept of ordered liberty as American people ls the right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. Unfortunately, 1n recent years, courts and legislatures have engaged ln the dangerous process of diluting the Fourth Amendment by enactment of the no-knock provision of the

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS District of Columbia Court Reform and Crim­inal Procedure Act of 1970, 23 D.C. Code I 591; by sanctioning indiscriminate .. spot checks .. for motor vehicles; by permitting full blown searches of p~rsons stopped for specified traf­fic offenses, and by Judicial laxity in enforc­ing the Fourth Amendment prohibition against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Therefore, in order to restore the Fourth Amendment to its exalted place in our con­cept of freedom, I would make the following recommendations:

1. Legislat ion to curtail unlawful wa.rrant­less searches and seizures. The situations in which a warrant may be dispensed with should be narrowly defined.

2. Repeal of 23 D. C. Code I 581, which au­thorizes warra.ntless arrests for certain m1s­demeanors not committed in the officer's presence.

3. Legislation to abolish the widespread and discriminatory practice of "spot checks" without probable cause.

IV. Another area of importance is the ad­ministration of the Ball Reform Act in the District of Columbia. The provisions for pre­trial release, with the exception of the pre­ventive detention provisions, 23 D.C. Code. Sec. 1322, are, on the whole, unobjectionable and the Act certainly represents an advance over the deplorable situation which existed prior to its enactment. However, the Report of the District of Columbia Ball Agency for 1974, reflects that the judiciary ts not fully complying with the spirit of the law. Only about half of all persons charged with crimes in the Superior Court of the District of Col­umbia in 1974 were released on non-financial conditions. These figures are not as they should be if all Judges on the Court were carrying out the mandates of the Ball Re­form Act and the Eighth Amendment. An­other ca.use for concern to those who cherish freedom is preventive detention. Although the number of people detained is numerical• ly small, I believe such detention is constitu­tionally significant in a society which pro­fesses belief in the presumption of innocence and in due process of law.

Furthermore, in many cases, the govern­ment does indirectly, that which 1t cannot accomplish directly in effectively detaining accused persons pretrial by obtaining exor­bitantly high money bonds in Ueu of invok­ing the preventive detention provisions. This practice is clearly in violation of 23 D.C. Code, Sec. 1321(a) (5), which prohibits the imposition of any financial condition to as­sure the safety of any other person or the community.

Another problem related to pretrla.l release is the lack of resources to assist persons on ball to obtain education, training, employ­ment or drug counseling. These la.ck of re­sources, no doubt, contribute signlficantly to the alarming rearrest rate among pretrial releases. These problems are compounded by the large number of arrested persons who are addicted to drugs. In order to remedy this situation, an Office of Pretrial Services must be established to provide comprehensive services to pretrial releases.

My recommendations in this area are: 1. Repeal the Preventive Detention Stat­

ute, 23 D.C. Code, Sec. 1322; 2. Enact legislation requiring the approval

of the Chief Judge before a financial condi­tion of release may be imposed;

S. Conform 23 D.C. Code, Sec. 1325, regu­lating release after conviction, to the stand• a.rd appUcable in federal courts, set forth in 18 U.S. Code, Sec. 3148, which places the bur­den of proof on the government to demon­strate that an accused should not be released;

4. F.stablish an agency to assure that pre­trial releases are provided with jobs, train­ing and education, in order to minlm1z.e the risk that the accused will return to the sys­tem again.

15233 5. Establish a network of drug free thera­

peutic communities to rehabilitate drug ad­dicts, and abolish methadone maintenance.

Implementation of these recommendations w1ll do much to assure that we have taken a step in the right direction in attaining pre­trial Justice, and in beginning the rehablli­·tation process at the earliest possible time.

V. Of all the existing deficiencies in the criminal justice system in the District of Columbia, perhaps the most egregious prob­lem ts the inadequate and incompetent counsel furnished to indigents; or stated in another fashion, the "ineffective assistance of counsel" rendered indigents. For many years, I have complained about the deplor­able situation regarding counsel furnished to indigent persons charged with crimes.

Two identifiable causes of this deplorable situation are: 1) the inadequate certifica­tion and appointment system, and 2) inade­quate financial r_emuneration.

Too often, some of my colleagues and I have been forced to delete some counsel from appointment, and to remove others. Finally, on February 26, 1974, in addressing a com­munication to the Comptroller General of the United States, in conjunction with my re­sponse to a questionnaire, submitted through the Chief Judge to all Judges of the Superior Court. designed to ascertain the effectiveness of representation of indigents under the Criminal Justice Act, I outlined the sub­standard nature of the legal representation provided to indigent accused in the Superior Court of the District of Columbia.

I wish to emphasize that my criticisms of the attorneys appointed to represent indigent accused do not pertain to the Georgetown Legal Intern Program, the Public Defender Service or to the law student clinical pro­grams.

In order to implement the Sixth ,Amend­ment right of all accused to the effective assistance of counsel, I recommend the fol­lowing changes:

1. All accused shall be entit led to choose an attorney of his or her choice who is ready, willing a.nd able to accept an appointment. The accused shall notify the Coordinator of the Criminal Justice Act Program of three choices, from which his or her attorney shall be selected. This will result in the selection out of many incompetent attorneys and the retention of competent attorneys. Any prob­lems of excessive demand for a particular at­torney will be solved by having the accused list three choices. _

2. Increase in pay for attorneys and a termination of voucher reduction by judges for purely fiscal considerations. Reduction in pay shall be based only upon merit and must be accompanied by a brief statement of rea­sons why the performance of the attorney did not merit full remuneration.

3. Implementation of a certification process for attorneys appointed to represent indigent accused. A system should be implemented which would require that before an attorney can represent an indigent in misdemeanor cases, he, at a minimum, must serve as co­counsel in two misdemeanor jury trials with an experienced attorney, and be certified by the judges before whom he or slie appeared, as well as his co-counsel to be competent to handle misdemeanor cases.

The same system should be implemented in felony cases, except there should be grada­tions in requirements according to the penalty involved. A system of periodic per­forms.nee ratings, resulting in advancement or demotion should be implemented. Appro­priate divisions might be maximum 5 year penalty, maximum 10 year penalty and life maximums, with certification schemata similar to that proposed for misdemeanors. In life penalty cases, there should be a requirement that counsel must have prac­ticed in this jurisdiction for at least three years, and tried 5-10 felony jury trials. Leg-1.slation should be enacted incorporating

15234 these minimal standards in the interest o:f assuring that all accused are represented by competent counsel. With the increased qual· ity of counsel, accused who are processed through the system would more likely leave the court feeling that there has been "a day in court" and justice has been done.

VI. As important as it is to assure that an accused is represented by competent coun­sel, it is equally important that he or she is treated fairly and justly by the judge in whose hands his or her liberty rests and by the prosecutors. Across the Nation are heard cries of backlog, expediency, calendar control, guilty pleas; but seldom does one hear a cry for increa-sed quality of justice by the courts. The quality of justice is para­mount and everything else, including expedi· ency, is secondary. Thus, I would suggest that more judges and supporting stafi' be hired to alleviate the backlog.

VII. Other abuses which urgently need reform are plea bargaining and sentencing. Plea bargaining is widespread and some even suggest the administration of criminal jus­tice cannot survive without the impetus it creates. The problem with plea bargaining is that the end result is usually not a bargain for the accused. Too often, the prosecutor, armed with a padded indictment and the threat of a long sentence, often psycho­logically coerces the accused into pleading guilty. This must be stopped 1f our system of justice is to be preserved.

One method to eliminate judicial and prosecutorial abuses of plea bargaining is to implement appellate review of the length of sentences.

VIII. Sentencing is an aspect of the law which perhaps, is the most lawless, and where the opportunity for a judge to allow his or her biases, prejudices and emotions to interfere. with his or her judgment is per­haps greatest. The range of permissible sen­tences is great; for example, a sentence im· posed for first degree murder, arguably, can range from probation to life imprisonment . . Likewise, for armed robbery, armed burglary, armed rape and assault with a dangerous weapon.

Thus, in the interest of assuring that proper considerations are being employed in sentencing; that the number of widely dis· pa.rate sentences is reduced, and that the liberty of the citizens of the District of Co· lumbia is not arbitrarily abrogated by the criminal justice system, the following changes, as previously outlined, should be implemented by legislation:

1. Prohibition of judicial involvement in plea bargaining;

2. Prohibition against imposition of a more lenient sentence, in exchange for a guilty plea.

3. Prohibition against all plea discussions outside the presence of the accused.

4. Implement the right to appellate review of the length of a sentence.

5. Repeal 23 D.C. Code, Sec. 112 requiring that a sentence be consecutive to one al· ready imposed unless otherwise stat ed by the court.

6. Abolish life sentences in all cases ex-cept aggravated murder. .

7. Expand range of permissible alternatives to incarceration for all ofi'enders, and ap· propriate funds to facilitate expansion of community treatment facilities.

8. Permit probation as an alternative for all ofi'enses.

IX. The problems of prosecutorial abuses are acute in the criminal Justice system and time does not permit me to cover them ln detail here. Thus, I will briefly summarize my recommendations 1n this regard:

1. Establish an elected local prosecutor'& office for the prosecution of all ofi'enses con­tained in the District of Columbia Code.

2. Eliminate prosecuto~ial overcharging of otrenses 1n order to coerce guilty pleas from an accused.

EXTENSIONS OF REMARKS 3. Implement grand jury reform along the

lines outlined in H.R. 2986, introduced by Congressman· Conyers. Only widespread re· form of the grand jury will insure that peo· ple will not be charged with offenses for which no probable cause exists,

X. There are many other areas of the crimi· nal justice system which urgently need re· form, but time does not permit exploration and detailed development here. However, in addition to the suggestions outlined above, I would make the following recommenda· tions:

1. Re-establish the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit as an appellate court of last resort from the Superior Court of the District of Columbia. This right was abolished by the District of Columbia Court Reform and Criminal Pro• cedure Act of 1970, without full consideration of the value of citizens in this city of having two appellate courts to pass judgment on their claims. I suggest that this Committee seriously reconsider this matter and re• establish the appellate procedures in efi'ect prior to Court Reorganization.

2. Re-establish the statutory right to trial by Jury for juveniles. This right also existed prior to Court Reorganization. It was abol· ished in the face of expediency arguments, which upon examination were palpably without merit. Since only a few jury trials per year were requested, juvenile jury trJals could not have had a substantial affect on the backlog of the court.

Juveniles, simply because of the accident of their birthdate, should not be denied a right so fundamental to our sense of justice. If trial by jury is sacred and fundamental for adults, it is no less for our children and youth. Thus, I would urge immediate legis· lation granting juveniles the right to trial by Jury.

3. Restrict the sale and possession of hand· guns. In 1955, I wrote a memorandum to the United States Attorney, while serving as an Assistant United States Attorney in which I recommended enactment of legislation to accomplish this end.

Now twenty-one years later, minus Presi­dent John F. Kennedy, the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King, my former employer, Senator Robert F. Kennedy, and thousands and thousands of other citizens, we are all still fighting to outlaw handguns.

Two recent, prominent tragic events, one in Wheaton, Maryland, where several inno· cent people were killed and several injured, and another in Oakland, California, where Congressman Dellum's nephew was murdered in the course of a robbery, illustrate the ur· gent need for speedy passage of legislation as proposed by Congressman Fauntroy.

4. Amendment . of the Law Enforcement Assistance Act to allow for greater utilization of LEAA funds for rehabilitation; and a de· crease in utilization of funds for hardware. The District of Columbia Jail, all Shelter Houses, Halfway Houses, the District of Co· lumbia General Hospital and St. Elizabeth's Hospital, the Childrens' facilities, the Wom· en's Detention Center and Lorton Reforma· tory are all in need of funds.

5. Enactment of full Home Rule for the· District of Columbia.

The principles of full Home Rule require first that servants of the people be elected by the people; and secondly, that their domi· cile be With the people. This concept should include, at the very least, all major employees of the Legislative, Executive and Judicial Branches of the District of Columbia Gov­ernment. The only exception allowed should be when no qualified person, for a given po· sltion. resides in the District of Columbia.

Included within the category ot major employees shoUld be all Judges of the su­perior Court; all oftlcers and members of the Fire Department and Metropolitan Police Department; all persons employed a.t super grade level, and all persons earning salaries

May 19, 1975 of $10,000 or more, as employees of the District of Columbia Government.

6. Our criminal justice system is character· ized by a lack of respect for people 1n every phase; from arrest through the precinct , through the jail, through the cell block, through the courtroom, through the prisons, and through halfway houses. People arrested are treated with utter disdain and are vic­tims of inhumanities 1nfiicted by the sys­tem. There is no reason why a person ar­rested should be treated as if he or she were not human. I am confident that persons of wealth and high position a.re not treated in the subhuman manner in which minorities are treated. Mr. Uofi'a, Mr. Dean, Mr. Colson and Mr. Agnew were certainly not treated as if they were subhuman, while being proc­essed in the criminal Justice system. I t should not happen to anyone else.

XI. These legislative proposals necessarlly require appropriations. Since the wars of Viet Nam and Cambodia have been lost, and our more than $150 billion too, it is high time we utilized the funds once used to build destroyer escorts, tra.in pilots, dlsoover sunken submarines and sunken tanks, and funds used for other milttary purposes, to enhance the quaU.ty of Justice. as well as the health, welfare, safety, life, liberty, and ba.p· piness of our people in the District of Columbia.

AUSTIN PUBLIC LIBRARY

HON. J. J. PICKLE OF TEXAS

IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Monday, May 19, 1915 Mr. PICKLE. Mr. Speaker. a library

can be one of a community's most valu­able assets. The city of Austin 1s very fortunate to have one of the most pro­gressive and far-reaching library sys­tems for a city of its size.

Recently, the library has expanded its services to be of better use to the older citizens. Retired persons are always among a library's best patrons.

I salute this special e1Iort on the part of the Austin Public Library to expand its fine work.

I enclose this article from Aging mag· azine about this forward-looking project: AUSTIN PuBLIC LmRARY BEGINS PROGRAM FOR

ELDERLY, HANDICAPPED

The Austin, Tex. Public Library is bring­ing a new dimension of services to the com­munity.

Under a title III Older Americans Act grant !rom the Governor's Committee on Aging, it has establlshed a program to reach the elder­ly, disabled, and others unable to use nor­mal fac111ties.

_Mrs. Helen Gallagher, Project Director of the Travis State School for the mentally re· ta.rded, initiated a plan to expand the serv­ices to the school's older retardates. Victor Hinojosa, M.D., Superintendent, and Mrs. Carter Clopton, Consultant for Aging for the State Department of Mental Health and Mental Retardation, cooperated in putting the plan into operation.

The school has approximately 250 residents over 60 who could benefit from the program. It provides transportation for older residents to the Oak Spring Branch Library nearby.

The building has modern equipment on one level, ample sp!J.ce, and statt interested in helping the elderly.

The library offers programs for all levels of function, picture books, simple reading ma­terial and large print books. Movies are a highlight of the program and arts, crafts, and puppet shows are planned.