Senator JAVITS. Apparently another letter was written, among others, by some who identified themselves as five members of your central committee to Congressman Rhodes in the other body. And I would just refer to that by reference, Mr. Chairman, as I think the letter I have inserted covers the matter. The letter written to Mr. Rhodes as chairman of the Republican policy committee on the House side is dated June 19, and also favors the reorganization plan. It was signed by Edward Burling, Jr., George E. C. Hayes, among others, Mrs. J. H. Morrisen, Barrington Parker, and Wesley Williams, who identify themselves as members of the Republican central committee. Mr. SHIPLEY. Yes, they are all able and honorable leaders, and very strong pillars of our party.

I would request, Senator, that I have an opportunity to file with other correspondence the letter I sent to Mrs. Morrisen which dwells on the fact that she wasn't fair and didn't come to the meeting, and really could have consulted the record to see what did happen and how it happened before leading Members of Congress to believe that some shenanigans or funny business was going on.

Senator JAVITS. Mr. Shipley, I hope you won't press that, because I am not putting the Rhodes letter in, I am just putting in Burling's letter.

Mr. SHIPLEY. That is agreeable with me.

Senator JAVITS. I will tell you why I say that. We don't want to get embroiled in the controversy.

Mr. SHIPLEY. I certainly don't want the official party's position to be undermined and diluted by the well-organized but somewhat intemperate attacks of a minority which wasn't there, instead of going to the meeting and listening to the argument and debate and abiding by the decision of the group. We just can't run the railroad if we let this, that, or the other individual place his views ahead of the responsible group that takes a responsible action.

Senator JAVITS. I hope you will examine the letter I have put in. You will find that it raises no issue whatever; it is just a statement by another group stating that they favor the plan.

Mr. SHIPLEY. Yes; I appreciate that. And I say, normal political interchange is healthy for our party and for the country.

Senator JAVITS. Very good.

Let me ask you just one other question. You mentioned that people had this notice as of the first of the year. Do they get one notice for all the meetings throughout the year?

Mr. SHIPLEY. That is the official notice. It lets them set up their calendar for the year. I carry one in my pocket, just like many Members of the Congress do. And they will follow with notices which are not official notices, but we try to get them out.

One of these people, Mrs. Morrisen, told me that she hadn't seen it until a day or 2 days before. After all, one who holds the responsibility of membership has the responsibility to get there. Because these aren't decisions made in the dark of the night by me, these are decisions made at regular constituted meetings by the majority of those present.

Senator JAVITS. But they did get this notice listing the date of the particular meeting?

Mr. SHIPLEY. Yes; and the other meetings of the executive committee from January through December, and the full central committee, which meets every month.

Senator JAVITS. This was the full central committee?
Mr. SHIPLEY. Yes.

Senator JAVITS. What date was it?

Mr. SHIPLEY. I don't recall the date now. It was called to my attention that this was a special meeting. I don't want to misspeak myself, because I simply haven't gone back to the record, since all the people were there, Mr. Biddle, Dr. Robinson, and the Forward Looking Republicans were there.

Senator JAVITS. I ask unanimous consent that anything that Mr. Shipley wishes to put in the record describing the decorum and regularity of the procedure, and the fact that a quorum was present, according to the rules of the organization, be received in the record as supporting his statement.

Senator RIBICOFF. Without objection, it is so ordered.1

Mr. SHIPLEY. I don't think I have seen a majority quorum in the 10 years since I have been the Republican chairman-and I am the senior one in the United States today simply because nobody else will take the job; there is no pay, indeed it has a little outflow connected with it.

Senator JAVITS. Mr. Shipley, your reputation has always been very high with me. And I came this morning especially because of what I had heard and of what had been presented to me.

Mr. SHIPLEY. I appreciate your taking the time to come here, Senator, because you are one of the great admired leaders of our party. If more of us were to follow your leadership, we would win just like you win in New York, instead of losing for one reason or another. Senator JAVITS. Do not speak too soon. I have to run next year. Thank you.

Mr. SHIPLEY. Thank

you.

Senator RIBICOFF. Mr. Tilford Dudley, please.

Mr. LYON. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Tilford Dudley has asked me to substitute for him before the committee this morning.

My name is Richard K. Lyon. I am a member of the Democratic Central Committee of the District of Columbia, and also chairman of its suffrage committee. Mr. Dudley, our chairman, had another appointment before the House Judiciary Committee, and he therefore was unable to be here. He has asked that I read his statement to the committee, and then make any additional remarks I might see fit to make and then answer any questions the committee might wish to direct to me.

This is the statement of Mr. Tilford Dudley:

STATEMENT OF TILFORD DUDLEY, CHAIRMAN, DEMOCRATIC CENTRAL COMMITTEE, PRESENTED BY RICHARD K. LYON

I am Tilford E. Dudley, chairman of the Democratic Central Committee of the District of Columbia, whose office is at 1009 13th Street NW., Washington, D.C., 20005.

In view of the detailed information and analytical testimony which you have already received, I will give you simply the statements officially adopted by the central committee and then submit myself for any questions that may be asked at this hearing.

1 Material referred to was not received at the time this publication went to press.

On March 6, 1967, the Democratic Central Committee unanimously adopted and issued to the public the following comments on the President's February 27 message to the Congress:

1

We welcome President Johnson's continuing support for a true home rule bill and his creative use of reorganization powers to establish a form of mayor-city council government. This will enable District leaders to become experienced city officials.

The President's proposal for voting representation and for an interim nonvoting delegate in the Congress is realistic and wise. It will give District residents a voice and ultimately several votes in the Congress.

On June 5, 1967, after the reorganization plan was released to the Congress and the public, the committee adopted the following resolution by a nearly unanimous vote:

The D.C. Democratic Central Committee endorses the Presidential Reorganization Plan for the District of Columbia as a useful contribution toward improving the structure and functioning of the District Government. We deeply regret the dropping of the residential requirement for the Commissioner but we have no doubt that the President will look for and find the Commissioner in the District. We recognize this Plan is no substitute for true self-government and national representation for the District.

Mr. Chairman, that states the position of our party. It was reached after careful study and long deliberation. We recommend that the Congress allow the reorganization plan to go into effect.

Mr. LYON. That concludes the prepared statement, Mr. Chairman, of Mr. Dudley.

Senator RIBICOFF. Thank you very much.

ADDITIONAL REMARKS OF MR. LYON

Mr. Lyon. If I might give the committee just a little additional information, if you will indulge me, I will appreciate it.

Senator RIBICOFF. Please proceed.

Mr. LYON. I would like to say that after the Democratic central committee took action on the 5th of June, the matter of the President's reorganization plan was presented to our Democratic precinct assembly, which is the representative of the grassroots organization of the District of Columbia, attended by our various precinct chairmen. And this resolution was adopted by the precinct assembly of its own initiative; and I would like to have it placed in the record before this committee.

Senator RIBICOFF. Without objection, it is so ordered.

Mr. LYON. It is very brief. I haven't a copy to submit, so if I might read it, I would appreciate it.

The resolution of the Democratic Precinct Assembly of June 15, 1967.

The Democratic Precinct Assembly wholeheartedly concurs in the recent endorsement by the Democratic Central Committee of the District of Columbia on June 5th of the President's Reorganization Plan. In so doing it feels compelled to express its deep regret that Congressmen McMillan and Broyhill have seen fit to introduce in the House of Representatives a resolution of disapproval regarding the reorganization plan in an effort to block its adoption. The Democratic Precinct Assembly pledges itself to do everything possible to defeat such disapproval efforts, and, conversely, to further the legislative acceptance of the reorganization plan as submitted to the Congress by the President of the United States.

Now, with respect to supplementing his prepared statement, Mr. Chairman, when Mr. Dudley's quoted statement referred to the analytical analyses of the reorganization plan, I am sure that if he had been able to have been here this morning he would have said that he was not referring to the analyses of the plan presented by Mr. Shipley or Mr. Immer. He would have been referring to the interpretation of the plan and the explanation given yesterday by Mr. Hughes on behalf of the Bureau of the Budget.

Senator RIBICOFF. I understand that.

Mr. LYON. Furthermore, as a matter of personal privilege, and in my capacity as a member of the Democratic central committee and also as chairman of its selection committee, which concerns itself with recommendations to the White House of various candidates for government office, I feel that Mr. Immer's remarks-and I know that I am here primarily to support the reorganization plan—his remarks to the committee have so severely derogated and disparaged the qualifications of Mr. Charles Duncan, our Corporation Counsel, that I feel that the record should not be left unchallenged on this point.

In my opinion, Mr. Duncan has all of the qualifications which an outstanding corporation counsel should have. He is an eminent. lawyer, and is widely recognized as such. His professional ability and integrity are of outstanding caliber; and I feel that it was highly improper for Mr. Immer to have derogated the qualifications of Corporation Counsel Duncan as he did in his testimony.

Similarly, Mr. Immer's remarks regarding Mr. David Carliner, who recently succeeded me as chairman of the Washington Home Rule Committee, and his references to Mrs. Carliner and Judge David Bazelon, are entirely out of order and improper to be spread on the dignified record of this committee. And I felt compelled as a matter of personal privilege to take serious issue with these unfounded and irresponsible allegations.

That completes my statement.

Senator RIBICOFF. Thank you very much. I have no questions.

Is there a representative here from the Washington Urban League? The Washington Urban League asked to testify, even though they are not listed on the witness list. They were advised that the committee would be glad to receive their testimony. Apparently there is no member here, but if their testimony is presented to the committee, it will be placed in the record as if read.

If there are no further witnesses, the committee will stand in recess until tomorrow morning at 10 o'clock.

(Whereupon, at 11:10 a.m. the committee adjourned, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Thursday, July 27, 1967.)

REORGANIZATION PLAN NO. 3 OF 1967

THURSDAY, JULY 27, 1967

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,

Washington, D.C.

The committee met, pursuant to recess, at 10 a.m. in room 3302, New Senate Office Building, Senator Abraham Ribicoff presiding.

Present: Senators Ribicoff and Baker.

Also present: James R. Calloway, chief clerk and staff director; Ann M. Grickis, assistant chief clerk; and Eli E. Nobleman, professional staff member.

Senator RIBICOFF. The committee will be in order.

Our first witness today is Mrs. Donald Watson.

Mrs. Watson, you may proceed as you wish, and your entire statement will go into the record as if read.

TESTIMONY OF MRS. DONALD WATSON, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA LEAGUE OF WOMEN VOTERS

Mrs. WATSON. My name is Mrs. Donald Watson. I live at 130 D Street SE.

Our main purpose in representing the League of Women Voters is to convey to the committee the idea that we have not taken our position in support of the plan lightly. We did a good bit of study on this over the past few months, and we are convinced that it is a step in the right direction.

We would urge the committee not to be sidetracked by any feeling that there are possibilities of home rule in the offing, and that the President's plan should be delayed to provide such an opportunity. We feel that it is not imminent, that the needs of the District are immediate, and that this would be a step in the direction of meeting these needs.

We feel that a nine-member Council, even though appointed, would provide for the development of District leadership, would provide a body that would be closer to the residents of the District. And we feel that this would be extremely helpful.

The league has long supported as the ideal home rule program one that would call for a mayor-council type of government. And we find that the President's reorganization plan does reach an approximation

of that.

We think that the urgency is especially important. We understand that the two civilian Commissioners are nearing the end of their terms. We feel that it would be very difficult to recruit competent leadership in this period of lack of decision as far as the District is

82-247-67-10