And that is why this appropriation is needed; because if you have not got the facts, they will outtalk you. They will always show you that your figures are wrong. And these men want to be prepared now, to go in there, when they get into these conferences.

Now, you ask me: What if they violate their voluntary quotas? Under OCDM, the President of the United States has the right to impose a mandatory quota. And if we have the facts and we cannot convince them on the true facts, then it is up to the President.

But I think we can work this out on an amicable basis. These men have been in Geneva. They have had the representatives of the industry. They have had representatives of labor. It has been the first time in history of negotiations in international trade on the part of this country with our neighbors abroad. They have always been represented by their representatives of industry, who have been their counselors. We have never had that. We have always had diplomats and politicians at the table. We never get anywhere.

Now, this last time, they have invited men from the textile industry. They have invited people from the garment industry. They have invited people in labor. And all of them have worked very closely with these three negotiators.

And I want to say on the record for the convenience of the Senators, and applauding these gentlemen, that an excellent job was done by Mr. Christopher of the State Department, by Mr. Price of the Commerce Department, and by Mr. Wirtz of the Labor Department. And I want to especially compliment Mr. Price, who has a very fine intimate understanding of the textile problem, and he is a man who has come out of private industry, where his salary was at least six times more than he gets from the Government, but he is willing to do this job for the good of the country, and I think he is a dedicated public

servant.

Senator DwORSHAK. Mr. Chairman, I am in partial agreement with what my friend from Rhode Island has said, but he leaves the false impression that we are having a regeneration in our entire approach and viewpoint to this trade situation. I should like to call attention to the fact

Mr. Price, what is your industrial background? Textiles?
Mr. PRICE. Automotive.

Senator DwORSHAK. Well, of course, a few years ago the automotive industry was all free trade, but in the last years they have learned their lesson in a tragic manner, too. So we can be hopeful in that direction.

GATT MEETINGS

But the record shows that since 1947 we have had GATT, the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade, which has held five conferences, the most recent of which has been in session in Geneva for about a year.

Are you acquainted with that?

Mr. PRICE. Yes, sir.

Senator DwORSHAK. We have had a minimum of 100 representatives of the State Department and the Commerce and Interior Departments and the various executive departments in session there. I think they began in September a year ago, if I am not mistaken, and will con

tinue until December of this year. They are still in session, are they not?

Mr. PRICE. I believe so; yes.

Senator DWORSHAK. And we have the Trade Agreements Act in operation since 1934, which is a quarter of a century.

NEED FOR REAPPRAISAL

Now, I do agree with my colleague from Rhode Island that probably the time is long past due when we ought to have a reappraisal of this entire export-import program. And if Mr. Price can give us some assurances that finally there has been a reawakening in the executive departments, and particularly in the State Department, which has been controlled neither by Republicans nor Democrats, but by the Ivy Leaguers and the pro's

And if we are in the sorry state that my colleague refers to in regard to the textile industry, I want to add that we have faced a similar tragic situation in domestic mining, in many other industries which probably are not as extensive as textiles, but are as invaluable to many sections of the country as the textile industry is to the East.

Now, I think emphasis should be put on the fact that if we are having a reappraisal, it is very long past due. And I shall certainly be one of the first to extend congratulations if any tangible worthwhile progress is made; because we have had GATT since 1947, and certainly that is more than a decade. This is approaching 15 years. And in this instance, we have had this current GATT conference in Geneva.

JULY AGREEMENT

You call attention to this July agreement, the Geneva agreement. Well, you do not attach GATT to it. Has GATT given its approval to this proposal? I think it was referred to as multilateral. Is it bilateral in any sense?

Mr. PRICE. No. This is multilateral. And it was done within the GATT. And the long-term planning of it is anticipated to be within the GATT.

However, I would like to make quite clear that this all relates only to one narrow segment. We have only been interested in this matter with respect to textiles.

Senator DwORSHAK. As a part of the pilot program. Well, it is a good place to begin.

Mr. PRICE. May I mention that I am Assistant Secretary for Domestic Affairs?

Senator DwORSHAK. I noticed that. I wondered how you got into this.

Mr. PRICE. And our interest is the domestic industry.

ATTITUDE OF STATE DEPARTMENT

Senator DwORSHAK. Well, who in Commerce represents that phase of export-import trade which may run afoul of the pro's in the State Department, who have consistently, for years, refused to recognize that our domestic industries, whether they be textile, mining, or anything else, are entitled to any consideration? Are you aware of that attitude on the part of the State Department?

Mr PRICE. I have heard some discussion about that.

Senator DwORSHAK. Well, I hope you hear more than discussions. I hope you move the lid and explore to the extent that you can remove some of the roadblocks and the lack of cooperation which have characterized everything which has been done by the State Department, even under a Republican administration.

NEED FOR PROPER DATA

Senator PASTORE. If I may say for the benefit of my colleague, and I think this should be said: In the past I think one of the failings that we have experienced is the fact that we have not had the proper research and statistical data, which at least would be informative either to the State Department, to the Congress, to the people of the country. We have always looked at the black, and we have looked at the blue and the red side of the ledger. We have said, "We import so much. We export so much. So we have no complaint to make."without realizing that in between some industries were carrying a larger burden than they should have carried.

And if we do this in a more expert fashion, if we gather the information that we need, we can avert many of these very serious problems that we have experienced in the past.

Senator DwORSHAK. That is what I have been arguing for about 20 years.

Senator PASTORE. And I have been preaching from the time I was Governor of my State that we ought to be more selective. There is no need of ruining one industry completely and justifying it on the argument, "Well, we sell $17 or $18 billion. We buy $13 billion. So we are $3 or $4 billion to the good."

Well, that is a very healthy thing. But in between we can save some of these domestic industries that have been withering on the vine. And that is the purpose of this. We ought to do more of it.

Senator DwORSHAK. Will my colleague give me some assurances that he will assist us in trying to rehabilitate and stabilize the domestic minerals industry?

Senator PASTORE. As far as is within the power and the province of your colleague from Rhode Island, he will extend every bit of his energy to accomplish the hope of my friend.

Senator DwORSHAK. And I wish he would go to Geneva, because he said what we need to do is to out-talk the other people, and I am sure he could do a very effective job.

Senator HOLLAND. I think that everyone knows that the subcommittee that has jurisdiction over this matter and this committee, have been wholly sympathetic to this whole effort since the beginning. In fact, we started it, so far as the financial support of it was concerned, and I have no doubt that we will continue to do so.

REASONS FOR HOUSE CUT

I am somewhat at a loss, in looking at the report from the other body, to discover the basis on which the $37,000 cut was made. Apparently that is two-tenths, or one-fifth of the entire requested appropriation.

Mr. Scammon, can you give us any information as to what basis this cut was placed upon?

Mr. SCAMMON. I cannot, sir.

Mr. Grieves or Mr. Alexander, do you have any reason as to the particular sum involved?

Mr. ALEXANDER. We have no information on it except from the report.

Mr. SCAMMON. I am afraid we will have to draw a blank on that, sir.

Senator HOLLAND. Well, what was the date for the making of the supplemental request? Was it prior to the beginning of this fiscal year?

Mr. ALEXANDER. It was during the month of August that this request was made.

Senator HOLLAND. It occurs to me that this may have been based on the thought that perhaps one-fifth of the year would have elapsed, and that therefore the appropriation might safely be cut by that onefifth for that reason. I see no other explanation. Maybe that is not

the one.

Mr. SCAMMON. I would add that the figure was already geared on the basis that the treaty arrangements were going to be effected on the 1st of October. In other words, it was not originally based on a 12 months' period which then could be cut back a fourth on the elapsing of time, but rather in the first instance, in not becoming effective until October 1.

Senator HOLLAND. Based on a 9-month year, then?

Mr. SCAMMON. Yes. That is right. On a 9-month year.

Senator HOLLAND. That makes it even more difficult for me to understand the basis on which the cut was made. I thought perhaps you could shed some light on that.

Mr. SCAMMON. I cannot, and evidently my colleagues do not have evidence of it either, Senator.

EFFECT OF CUT ON AGREEMENTS

Senator PASTORE. And if I may make this suggestion, it may be a little unorthodox, but surely I think Mr. Price or some of these gentlemen ought to mention it to Carl Vinson on the House side so that he could talk to the conferees of the House, as well, because this whole appropriation is tied in with the effectiveness of this agreement.

We have traveled to Geneva. We have traveled to Tokyo, in order to accomplish this. And to destroy it by this cut, of course, would be working against it.

Mr. PRICE. Senator, we have to have two things. One is the ability to process this data. The second, or really the primary thing, also, is the certainty of the accuracy of the data itself. This is another part of the program which comes under the Treasury, the customs.

In that case, they requested $300,000 for additional inspectors, as well as other purposes within the customs. This was cut by the same House committee to $150,000. We will be very greatly handicapped, indeed, in policing both of these agreements unless we have that data. Senator PASTORE. Well, I wish you would address yourselves to Mr. Vinson, who represents this House group, and explain that to him.

Senator HRUSKA. Mr. Chairman?

Senator HOLLAND. Senator Hruska.

Senator HRUSKA. I would like to ask Mr. Price: Have you attended any of these GATT meetings that we have had?

Mr. PRICE. No, sir.

Senator HRUSKA. Are you familiar with them?

Mr. PRICE. Only in a general way.

Senator HRUSKA. It has been suggested that we get together here and talk on a high level in generalities, without reference to statistics and facts. Do you believe that to be the fact?

Mr. PRICE. Senator, I am not competent to comment on GATT except with reference to this special textile committee we have within GATT.

Senator HRUSKA. Is it not reasonable to assume, however, that these are dedicated men who are devoting all of their time, and that they would go to these meetings armed with statistics and facts and information about the areas which they will discuss?

Mr. PRICE. I think that is why it is very important to the U.S. delegation on the textile committee, which is supposed to meet for the first time on the 9th of October, to have precisely the type of statistical data that we desire.

TEXTILES AND GATT

Senator HRUSKA. Was not the subject of textiles discussed in any of the GATT meetings?

Mr. PRICE. I do not know, sir.

Senator HRUSKA. I mean you went to this special meeting. And you did not inquire into the history of GATT?

Mr. PRICE. That was only textile, Senator.

Senator HRUSKA. Only textile. That is what I am talking about. So you went there without knowledge of the history of GATT. You went there to this meeting in Geneva, without any knowledge of that? Mr. PRICE. Without any knowledge of what, Senator?

Senator HRUSKA. Of any transactions, negotiations, or concern. that GATT might have had in the field of textiles.

Mr. PRICE. Senator, the GATT has been working in this general area for a great many years. What we were anxious to do, and what we accomplished in the GATT was to set up a separate textile organization within the GATT. This was done uniquely. As a matter of fact, so far as I know, never within the GATT before was one industry singled out and made the subject of a special committee of its own.

Senator HRUSKA. I understand that; but my question was whether you familiarized yourself with what went on during the GATT meetings with reference to textiles. I know that GATT covers a vast area. All of us do. But did you familiarize yourself, or did your staff familiarize itself, with those things which were discussed, negotiated, and talked about during GATT meetings concerning textiles?

Mr. PRICE. Why, certainly. There were representatives there among the State Department people on the American delegation who had been working with GATT for years.