Senator SASSER. You stated that in your judgment if the General Counsel were appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate that this would remove him or her from politics.

Mr. TILTON. Well, I should not say it will remove him. Nothing will remove a person, and I stand corrected on that, Mr. Chairman, but I do believe it will insulate that person far more than he now is as is evidenced by the fact that the last General Counsel was in fact, as I recall it, asked to resign by the commissioners and did in fact resign. As I say I find nothing improper with the commissioners doing that, but it does point out the fact that he is not an independent person, and that is what is required.

I would give you the example of the NLRB, the General Counsel of the NLRB. He is a Presidential appointee, confirmed by the Senate, and that person is genuinely independent, and that is the key.

Senator SASSER. Thank you very much, Mr. Tilton for appearing here this morning. We appreciate your remarks, and the staff may have additional questions to submit to you later which I am sure that you will respond to.

Mr. TILTON. We will be pleased to answer any questions that you or staff may have for us, Senator.

Senator SASSER. Thank you very much.

Senator SASSER. Our next witness is Mr. C. H. Fields, assistant director, national affairs, American Farm Bureau.

Mr. Fields, we are delighted to have you here this morning to appear before the committee and give the views of the American Farm Bureau relative to this legislation and look forward to hearing what you have to say.

TESTIMONY OF C. H. FIELDS, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, NATIONAL AFFAIRS, AMERICAN FARM BUREAU

Mr. FIELDS. Thank you, Senator. Appreciate the opportunity to be here.

We appreciate the opportunity to present the views of the American Farm Bureau Federation on legislation dealing with the involvement of Federal employees in partisan political activities.

The Farm Bureau is the largest general farm organization in the United States, with a membership of over 2.6 million families in 49 States and Puerto Rico. It is a voluntary, nongovernmental organization. The voting delegates of the member State farm bureaus to the most recent annual meeting of the American Farm Bureau Federation adopted the following policy on the Hatch Act:

We oppose repeal of the Hatch Act. We do not believe Federal employees should be involved in political campaigns, nor should they be eligible to run for public office until they have terminated their public employment.

We urge you to reject the legislation now before you. Its enactment would lead inevitably to the demise of the civil service system. The nonpartisan nature of the civil service has been a keystone of Federal policy since reforms were instituted during the administration of President Chester A. Arthur nearly a century ago. We do not believe

that Federal employees can long have protection from partisan political decisions affecting their employment security and at the same time be free to take sides openly in political campaigns.

Public service is a citizen's privilege-not a right. It is reasonable for the public to expect its employees to perform their tasks in a professional manner as free from partisan influences as possible. It is also reasonable to expect that these same civil servants be prohibited from engaging in partisan political activities.

To preserve the nonpartisan nature of the civil service system we ask you to reject the proposed legislation now before you.

Thank you for this opportunity to present the views.

Senator SASSER. Mr. Fields, in your statement you assert that citizens should expect to have at least some curtailment of their political rights when entering Government service.

As a philosophical matter, if there were a legitimate way to protect against coercion, would you then favor giving Federal employees the same political rights enjoyed by others?

Mr. FIELDS. Well, I think if we could be convinced that anybody was wise enough to adopt legislation of that character, we might be conyinced. However, we do not think this legislation should be considered in isolation. We notice that over in the other House H.R. 13 is moving along which talks about agency shops for unions and Federal employment. We know that union dues is spent in political campaigns. So we look at all of this. And there is all kinds of coercion, both from the standpoint of politicians within the service, within the Government and then we might have coercion from the standpoint of the unions. So we look at the whole picture in carefully studying this.

Senator SASSER. I note that the resolution adopted by the American Farm Bureau which you quote in your prepared statement puts the Farm Bureau on record as opposing repeal of the Hatch Act. Now, none of the proposals before this committee would repeal the Hatch Act. They would revise the act. Has the Farm Bureau not taken a position on the particular revision proposals before this committee or has it?

Mr. FIELDS. Well, I think the delegates perceive these bills as in effect repealing the heart of the Hatch Act. Now I realize this is not a repeal, that it is substantial changes, and I think our delegates considered that this legislation actually would repeal the essential heart of the Hatch Act, which we think would accomplish the same thing as repeal.

Senator SASSER. Well, many have said that the Hatch Act has not worked too well, that public officials and Federal employees still feel political pressure in the day-to-day performance of their jobs.

Do you feel that the prohibitions against coercion which have in many instances not worked, could they be tightened up and strengthened so that most Federal employees could take part in elections without damaging their objectivity on their Federal job?

Mr. FIELDS. NO; I do not think we believe at this point it is possible to do that. I think what the Congress ought to be doing instead is looking at strengthening the present prohibitions against coercion in the act, without opening up into partisan political activities.

Senator STEVENS. Do you feel that Federal employees are more subject to political pressures than private sector employees?

Mr. FIELDS. Well, I do not know that they are now. I doubt that they are now. We think that as a result of this legislation would result in them being more subject to coercion.

Senator SASSER. Mr. Fields, thank you very much for appearing here this morning and giving us the views of your organization and comments on this pending legislation. Some of the other members of the committee may have some questions to submit to you later. I think perhaps Senator Stevens might.

Mr. FIELDS. We would be glad to respond. We wish we had some members in Senator Stevens' State, but we have not found enough land up there to farm up there much. We have no members in his State.

Senator SASSER. You have got plenty of members in my State; my dad is one of them. Delighted to see you and thank you for being here today.

Mr. FIELDS. Thank you.

[The prepared statement follows:]

STATEMENT OF THE AMERICAN FARM BUREAU FEDERATION

(Presented by C. H. Fields, Assistant Director, National Affairs, Sept. 22, 1977) We appreciate this opportunity to present the views of the American Farm Bureau Federation on legislation dealing with the involvement of federal employees in partisan political activities.

Farm Bureau is the largest general farm organization in the United States, with a membership of over 2.6 million families in 49 states and Puerto Rico. It is a voluntary, nongovernmental organization. The voting delegates of the member State Farm Bureaus to the most recent annual meeting of the American Farm Bureau Federation adopted the following policy on the Hatch Act:

We oppose repeal of the Hatch Act, we do not believe federal employees should be involved in political campaigns, nor should they be eligible to run for public office until they have terminated their public employment. We urge you to reject the legislation now before you. Its enactment would lead inevitably to the demise of the Civil Service System. The nonpartisan nature of the Civil Service has been a keystone of federal policy since reforms were instituted during the Administration of President Chester A. Arthur nearly a century ago. We do not believe that federal employees can long have protection from partisan political decisions affecting their employment security and at the same time be free to take sides openly in political campaigns.

Public service is a citizen's privilege-not a right. It is reasonable for the public to expect its employees to perform their tasks in a professional manner as free from partisan influences as possible. It is also reasonable to expect that these same civil servants be prohibited from engaging in partisan political activities.

To preserve the nonpartisan nature of the Civil Service System we ask you to reject the proposed legislation now before you.

Thank you for this opportunity to present the views of over 2.6 million American families on this important matter.

Senator SASSER. The committee will stand in recess.

[Whereupon, the committee was adjourned at 11:08 a.m.]

LEGISLATION TO AMEND THE HATCH ACT

MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 26, 1977

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS,
Washington, D.C.

The committee met pursuant to notice at 10 a.m. in room 3302 Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Thomas Eagleton, presiding. Present: Senators Eagleton, Sasser, and Mathias.

Staff members present: Claudia T. Ingram, professional staff member; Paul C. Rosenthal, counsel, and Elizabeth A. Preast, chief clerk. Senator EAGLETON. Good morning ladies and gentlemen.

The committee will come to order. Today is the fourth day of hearings on H.R. 10.

H.R. 10 was passed by the House of Representatives early this year. This committee heard testimony on July 18 and July 19, as well as September 22, so today we continue the hearing.

Our first witness this morning is Hon. Steven Solarz, Member of the US. House of Representatives.

Good morning, Congressman Solarz. You may proceed.

TESTIMONY OF HON. STEVEN J. SOLARZ, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Representative SOLARZ. Thank you, Senator. With your permission, I would like to submit my formal testimony for the record, and then briefly summarize one or two of the most sounding points in it. Senator EAGLETON. That is permissible. The full statement will be made a part of the record.

Representative SOLARZ. Thank you very much, Senator.

Let me begin by taking note of the fact that when your committee had hearings a short while ago concerning the fate of one individual, the attention of the Nation was focused on the outcome of those proceedings, and from what I gather, watching on television in the hearing room, it was difficult to get a seat in the hearing room.

Here you are holding a hearing on a bill that affects the lives of over 2 million Federal employees, and the attention of the country and the press is obviously significantly reduced, which I think is sort of an interesting commentary on some of our priorities.

In my case, I come here today to strongly testify in favor of H.R. 10. I am sure you are fimilar with most of the traditional arguments in favor of the legislation, so I want to confine myself to answering what

97-222 O 78 - 19