Mr. FASCELL. This plan does not merge the USIA into the Department of State, does it?

Mr. WELLFORD. No, sir.

Mr. FASCELL. It creates a new agency totally independent, autonomous. Is that correct?

Mr. WELLFORD. Basically, yes.

Mr. FASCELL. It has the same responsibility with the Congress as any other governmental agency. Is that not correct?

Mr. WELLFORD. That is correct, sir.

Mr. FASCELL. With respect to its independence, the Director reports to the President, does he not?

Mr. WELLFORD. That is correct, sir.

Mr. FASCELL. The language, therefore, which says the Director shall have primary responsibility under the direction of the Secretary of State, means strictly foreign policy guidance. Is that correct?

Mr. WELLFORD. It means guidance as to the major substantive foreign policy concerns.

Mr. FASCELL. The language is not intended broad and sweeping in the sense of management or operational responsibility, is it, of the new Agency?

Mr. WELLFORD. No, sir.

Mr. FASCELL. It in no way affects the autonomy or independence of the VOA to broadcast. The President said that in his statement, did he not?

Mr. WELLFORD. That is true.

Mr. FASCELL. So we not only have the Presidential guarantee, but we have the language guarantee in the statute.

Mr. WELLFORD. That is correct.

Mr. FASCELL. The whole purpose of saying "under the direction of the Secretary of State" was intended by the President solely to convey the idea that the Secretary of State is the chief officer responsible for the articulation of foreign policy and therefore should be USIA's source of information regarding the foreign policy of the United States. Is that not true?

Mr. WELLFORD. Yes, sir, it is meant to convey the need for linkages between the basic foreign policy initiatives of the Secretary of State and agencies such as this one that have a bearing on those policies. The day-to-day operations of the new Agency are not going to be subject to direction from the Department of State.

Mr. FASCELL. Is there any change with respect to the new plan over the present policy guidance direction that the Secretary of State now gives the USIA with regard to foreign policy?

Mr. SZANTON. We do not anticipate that in practice there will be any change of that kind.

Mr. FASCELL. So to carry out the mandate of the President, the Agency for International Communication will have the sole responsibility of maintaining the integrity of the educational and cultural programs. Is that correct?

Mr. SZANTON. That is correct.

Mr. FASCELL. And to keep the Voice of America's news gathering and reporting functions independent and objective. Is that correct? Mr. SZANTON. That is correct.

I should say, Mr. Fascell, that the line of authority runs through the Director of the new Agency. It is not merely the Director of that Agency but the Secretary and the President who have some responsibility, given the President's own statements on the subject, to maintain that integrity.

Mr. FASCELL. I realize that.

Mr. WELLFORD. I would point out, Congressman Fascell, that the Secretary of State's responsibility is broad, and it is difficult to pinpoint every aspect of it right now.

Mr. FASCELL. I am not worried about the gray areas because those happen every day and they have to be resolved in the working arrangement that sensible people ought to work out, given the President's direction. The President is ultimately responsible for deciding what it is that he wants to do in foreign policy and for his agencies implementing his foreign policy objectives.

So it is not the gray areas. The whole question is whether or not there will be any undue interference as a result of this arrangement with the independence of the VOA. That is the whole issue. That is also true regarding the independence of the cultural affairs programs. That is the issue.

In other words, we do not want somebody writing the newscast or changing it or editorializing or telling the people how to run the news service.

Everybody understands that they have to report accurately what the foreign policy of the United States is and what the objectives are that can be carried out. The day-to-day problems which arises with respect to implementation would be no different tomorrow than they are today. It is going to take responsible, sensible officers

Mr. HORTON. Would the gentleman yield?

Mr. FASCELL. Yes.

Mr. HORTON. I am concerned about this, too. This was my concern when I was asking about specifics. How are you going to safeguard those protections about which Mr. Fascell was talking?

Mr. FASCELL. First of all, you have the President's word on it.
Mr. HORTON. But he may not be President-

Mr. FASCELL. We have a long legislative history on it right now which we just got through making.

You raise the level of the VOA director to an Associate Director, which is a lot better than he is now because that puts him at the same level as an Assistant Secretary of State.

VOA directors have had no problem in the past getting to Congress and getting their case heard when they think they have been stepped on. We have had hearings in the Congress with respect to that problem. The Congress is still here as a forum.

There is one other avenue which should be available that had been recommended. That was increasing the capability of the advisory commission to undertake the role of hearing complaints since the advisory commission would be composed of members in the industry, appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate. There is a possibility there.

Any man worth his salt who thinks that for some reason he is getting stepped on can go a number of routes to get his message across that his autonomy is being interfered with. Those are the Congress, the public, and the advisory commission.

Given the word of the administration with the legislative record that is now being made, I do not foresee any greater problem than we have already had. I see considerable improvement in the capability of VOA.

We will never satisfy those who are purists in the sense that they think VOA ought to be totally independent and outside of government. This plan does not touch that. Those people will always be critical of the fact because they see that as the only way to guarantee the total automony.

Mr. HORTON. Would the gentleman yield further?

Mr. FASCELL. Yes.

Mr. HORTON. I appreciate your comments on this and I am glad it is in the record, but I would like to hear from the representatives of OMB what they feel are the safeguards that are written in the plan. Maybe you agree with what Mr. Fascell has said. If you do, fine. Do you have any other guarantees or any other means whereby these protections can be effected?

Mr. WELLFORD. Yes; I do agree with what Congressman Fascell said. I would add that the President intends to appoint a strong Director for this Agency and one who is devoted to the goals stated in his message.

Because the Director does report directly to the President, if problems develop that in his mind appear to impinge on the independence of the Voice of America, he is able to carry that problem directly to the President and have it resolved there.

This gentleman would be confirmed by the Senate. The oversight responsibilities in the House and in the Senate will continue. I think there are plenty of built-in safeguards to take care of the problem about which you are concerned.

Mr. FASCELL. Mr. Chairman, I have only a couple more questions. I know you have been very generous in allowing me to proceed. I will be finished in a second,

Mr. BROOKS. Can we go out of order to Mr. Moss for one question he has?

Mr. FASCELL. Certainly.

Mr. Moss. Mr. Chairman, I would like to ask that the information I requested from OMB be supplied for the use of the committee and for the record within 1 week in view of the time limitations on the consideration of this legislation. I ask that the record be held open at this point to receive it.

Mr. BROOKS. Can you manage to get that done within a week, Mr. Wellford?

Mr. WELLFORD. Yes; I am told that we can do that.

Mr. BROOKS. Without objection, so ordered.

[The information referred to follows:]

99-651 - 78-3

When we appeared before the Subcommittee on Legislation and National Security on October 18, 1977, on behalf of Reorganization Plan No. 2 of 1977, you requested that we provide the following information:

1. an enumeration of the studies considered by the
Administration in formulating Plan No. 2;

2. biographical information on the individuals
who advised the President on Plan No. 2; and

3. information on the relationship between the
Voice of America and the Armed Forces Radio
and Television Service.

Please be advised that this information was provided to Chairman Brooks on October 27, 1977. I trust that you will feel free to call upon us if we may be of any further assistance and thank you for your support of Plan No. 2.

EXECUTIVE OFFICE OF THE PRESIDENT OFFICE OF MANAGEMENT AND BUDGET

Mr. BROOKS. Mr. Fascell?

Mr. FASCELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Wellford, at the present time the USIA is still operating under direction of the so-called Kennedy letter. With the reorganization plan going into effect, the Kennedy letter no longer will be applicable. Will President Carter issue a new directive to the Agency for International Communication?

Mr. WELLFORD. The President's plan obviously supersedes the Kennedy letter, as you point out. The President has stated the mission of this new Agency in the message accompanying this reorganization plan. It is not to be involved in covert or propagandistic activities. If a further clarification in terms of a memorandum to the head of the new Agency is necessary-and we have not really decided that-then obviously we can do that.

I think that the main point is that the Kennedy memorandum has been superseded by this new plan.

Mr. FASCELL. I understand that. The question is what will this

administration do in terms of either an Executive order or a directive which will put into its language those guarantees which are now in the President's message. That is the $64,000 question which Mr. Horton has asked and which I am asking.

We have it in the President's message. We have it in the record. The point is that if the President would then issue a directive or an Executive order at the time that the reorganization takes effect, you have the thing nailed down and you answer all of the doubts.

I would strongly suggest that you do that.

[Witness nods head affirmatively.]

Mr. FASCELL. You are nobbing your head in the affirmative. I hope the record shows that because you are going to get hung with the responsibility of representing the administration here today.

Mr. WELLFORD. I find your remarks so generally agreeable that I tend to nod before I speak, but let me speak.

Mr. FASCELL. Translated for the record, that means the witness said yes, they are going to issue a directive and he will see to that.

Mr. WELLFORD. The witness is saying that he understands your con

cern.

Let me explain, Congressman Fascell, that we thought about this in drafting the plan. We thought the plan and the message basically answered these kinds of questions. If we need to go further with an explicit memorandum to the head of the new Agency, we will do so. We will be happy to talk with you about it if you wish.

Mr. FASCELL. Don't talk to me; talk to the chairman.

Mr. WELLFORD. We will talk to the chairman about it and the other members of the committee.

Mr. HORTON. We do want to report this out before we have that kind of assurance.

Mr. WELLFORD. Yes, sir.

Mr. FASCELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. BROOKS. We have a distinguished member of the full committee present who has not been recognized. He is a very able and diligent member of this committee, Mr. Levitas, the gentleman from Atlanta, Ga.