my honest conviction that it is imperative in order to assure the constitutional rights of all citizens that the Commission outlined in this bill be appointed; and further that they act with utmost expediency. 1 It is further hoped that, when this Commission reports back to the Congress, that Congress then will take prompt remedial action to grant to civil employees a stronger voice in political affairs. Now I know it is not the thinking of this committee, nor of those supporting this legislation, that the intent of the Hatch Act be circumvented, but neither is it the intent of anyone to make second-class citizens out of those individuals who are willing to devote their time and energies in behalf of Government employment for which, in many cases, the compensation does not truly justify their efforts. I feel that those in Federal and State employ, in most cases, are individuals truly devoted to their government and their country, and their rights should therefore be fully assured and protected.

In speaking in behalf of this legislation, I would urge that among one of the first fields of consideration be the study of the proposals embodied in a bill I have introduced and which is presently pending before Congress, H. R. 558. This bill is identical to H. R. 3084 of the 84th Congress, a bill which passed the House of Representatives last year. Its purpose is to amend the provisions of the law relating to prevention of political activities to make them inapplicable to State officers and employees. I assure the Commission and this committee that I shall cooperate wholeheartedly with them in their investigation by making available to them the many replies I have received from the attorneys general of the several States, the large majority of which have indicated favorable reception to this particular amendment. At this point, I would like to include a statement I made on the floor of the House of Representatives at the time I introduced this legislation:

Mr. Speaker. I have submitted a bill to make certain corrections in the Federal laws pertaining to political activities, corrupt practices, and elections. The specific section 118-K presently forbids the so-called interference with an election by officers or employees of any State or local agency whose principal employment is in connection with any activity which is financed in whole or in part by loans or grants made by the United States or any Federal agency.

Recently, a disgruntled discharged employee made a complaint to the United States Civil Service Commission about the political activities of certain employees in the State of Indiana. Apparently, this same condition has arisen in many of the States.

In fact, if the charges that have been preferred are substantiated, then the same principle could be applied to all local groups. For example, Federal highway aid is used on both State and county and municipal highways and streets. Thus, it is conceivable that all workers on county, city, and State thoroughfares would be restricted from a constructive activity in the political party of their choice.

The same unworthy principle could apply to all appointed employees of the departments of agriculture, conservation, hospitals, and all branches of welfare work.

A previous Congress exempted employees of educational and research institutions from the provisions of this act. This group of teachers is the largest group that receives some Federal aid, and it seems strange that this one group is the only one that is exempt. The same principle should apply to all.

I again want to express my appreciation to the able chairman of this committee and to its members for the opportunity to present my views in support of this legislation, for I know, through personal contact with Federal employees in my own district in Indiana as well as

those employed here in Washington, that they desire better consideration and trust in regard to their right to express their political beliefs. Of utmost importance is a complete exclusion of coverage of State employees where, in many instances, Federal assistance is only a small percentage of their budget. This is another example of the great threat to the rights of the States and individuals any time the Federal Government becomes involved in assistance.

I urge upon each and every member of this committee your serious and favorable consideration of this proposed legislation.

Mr. ASHMORE. Thank you, sir.

The committee will be pleased to have a statement from Mr. Multer.

STATEMENT OF HON. ABRAHAM J. MULTER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. MULTER. Mr. Chairman and members of this distinguished committee, my presence and purpose here today is to lend the greatest possible emphasis to the importance I feel attaches to the enactment of one of the many bills, similar to the one I introduced in this session of Congress, H. R. 1967. They seek to eradicate the acknowledged evils experience has revealed in the Hatch Act.

The Hatch Political Activities Act, 1939, as amended, and the 1940 amendment to the act, strike at the heart of man's most cherished possession in a free society: his political self-respect, his political freedom, his independence in his citizenship.

The Hatch Act is an act that bluntly proclaims itself as a downright legislative gesture discriminating against the Government employee almost as if he were to be regarded as some kind of political pariah. As the act now stands it puts a gag, a halter, and a straitjacket on the political activities of one of the best informed, most articulate, highly educated, and civic-minded voting groups in the population of the United States.

Surely none of us here can be persuaded that it was ever the intent of Congress or the intent even of the most inflexible sponsors of the Hatch Act to so curtail the interest, enthusiasm, energy, and educational influence of Government employees as to produce as a consequence 2 million ciphers and political nonentities amid the American electorate. The act paralyzes deliberately a vast reservoir of political talent and knowledge capable of a very high order of political progress which should be given full vent and not stifled.

However, in fairness it must be said that the Hatch Act came as a climax and a stopgap to a period of abuse when this country was in the very pit of economic despair. It therefore attracted to itself extreme provisions-which my bill now aims to eliminate-to meet a then possibly extreme situation.

For the record I explain that the Hatch Act struck out in its day— the late 1930's-at actual or alleged political malpractices that misused that WPA for questionable vote-getting ends. Because of thisa fact that no longer exists in a context that has long disappeared from the American scene-the act prohibited Federal officeholders below the policymaking echelon in the executive branch of the Government to participate actively in political campaigns.

My bill eliminates this dead legislative wood from the act. It

eliminates also the 1940 amendment to the act extending its provisions to State and local government employees whose salaries are drawn in whole or in part from Federal funds. This politically paralyzed still another solid group of interested and alert Americans into political nonentities.

The legal and ethical values of the Hatch Act that have a genuineness and validity are in no way molested by my proposed bill. Its broad features remain.

The decayed carcass that my bill would cut from the Hatch Act are the second, third, fourth, and fifth sentences of section 9 (a) of the act entitled “An act to prevent pernicious political activities, 1939,” approved August 2, 1939, as amended (5 U.S. C. 118i). My bill would also cut away the second, third, and fourth sentences of section 12 (a) of the act (5 U. S. C. 118k), and sections 15, 16, and 18 of the act (5 U.S. C., secs. 1181, 118m, 118n).

The effect would be that the Government employee would have restored to him the full rights of United States citizenship. The effect would be also to free from political bondage the State and local government employees whose salaries are drawn in whole or in part from Federal funds.

This, it seems to me, apart from the other evil features of the measure, represents a gratuitous invasion-and in a sensitive field at that of a regulatory function that should properly be left to the several States where it definitely belongs.

It is provisions like this, using the Federal Treasury to make applicable to a State employee Federal acts because the payroll is derived from Federal funds, that excites so much suspicion and fear of Federal legislation. The idea, it seems to me, is wrong in principle and the provision is mischievous in its execution.

Another phase of the Hatch Act that is relegated to oblivion should my bill become law, is embodied in sections 15, 16, and 18 which I have already mentioned. These sections concentrate powers in the Civil Service Commission, powers to discretion, that should be removed. Thus the Commission, as in the States of Maryland and Virginia, or in municipalities the majority of whose voters are employed by the Government of the United States, may determine whether in these areas populated mostly by Government employees, the Government worker may participate in political management and political campaigns. The act now provides that the Commission has the right to determine the extent to which the Government employees' participation may go. These and other kindred provisos my bill would nullify.

These, substantially, are the Hatch Act evils of which I have been speaking, and it is these my bill would correct.

It is needless to report to this committee that the agitataion for change in the Hatch Act has a considerable history.

There has come to my office here in the Capitol considerable correspondence, informed, intelligent, honorable, from not merely my own district, but from distant parts of the country: Plymouth, Wis., for instance; St. Paul, Minn.; Portland, Oreg., complaining of the Hatch Act.

In one instance I find that a post-office employee was prevented from holding the position of mayor of his city to which he had been

duly elected. There had been in the first instance no objection to his holding the job of alderman. But when he rose to the position of mayor the postal regulations were suddenly made applicable to all municipal offices prohibiting their occupancy by Federal employees. I do not think it would be hard to prove that this was a loss to the man himself, to his city which had tried to honor him and to use his dedicated civic spirit and services, and a loss in the end perhaps to his State and his country. It is from these grassroots that our greatest statesmanship and leadership has been derived and will continue to come.

I have received complaints in which alert and active men and women who would like to take part in their political affairs declare that they have been relegated to what is properly labeled "second-class citizenship." It certainly seems to me that this is not overstating the case. Of course, I know that section 9 of the Hatch Act, while forbidding political management or political campaigning on the part of Government employees permits them-I quote:

The right to vote as they may choose and to express their opinions on all political subjects and candidates.

Giving the Government employee the right to vote and speak his mind on elections is almost made to seem here like an act of largesse, as if it were a bonus of some kind, instead of the granting of a basic human right.

As I view the situation even this becomes a somewhat sterile gesture in light of the restrictions to which the Government employee is otherwise confined.

He may vote and he may gossip politics but he may not do any of those things that will make this political personality in a free society effective and meaningful. He is forbidden to participate in political management. He cannot pitch into and be a part of the campaigns of politics which give American life vividness and color and excitement and interest. The Hatch Act turns him into a political wallflower, the ugly duckling, who must be isolated from the most vital activity of his country. It deprives him of his political red blood corpuscles.

Gentlemen, the Hatch Act is outmoded, archaic, unjust, and unnecessary. The time has come to subject it to the legislative surgery that will keep alive whatever genuine virtue it possesses and radically eliminate the portions that experience has proved unwise and unfair. That surgery, I humbly suggest, can be performed effectively if my bill, H. R. 1967, is enacted into law.

Thank you for the privilege of submitting my views to you.

Mr. ASHMORE. Thank you, Mr. Multer.

The committee will be pleased to have a statement from Mr. Anfuso. STATEMENT OF HON. VICTOR L. ANFUSO, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Mr. ANFUSO. Mr. Chairmen and members of the subcomm. ttee, I appreciate this opportunity to present a statement in support of my bill, H. R. 5376, to remove certain restrictions imposed on the political activities of officers and employees of the Federal and State Govern

98011-57-3

ments. My bill seeks to amend the Hatch Act which was passed by the 76th Congress in 1939.

It is my firm conviction that under this act the civil-service em ployees of our Federal and State Governments are relegated to a po sition of second-class citizenship. Surely, this was not the origina intention of the sponsors of that act when it was enacted about 1 years ago. Nor do I believe that the assertion of political privileges can be denied under the United States Constitution to a large segment of our population simply because they happen to be employed by the Government.

Political freedom and the freedom of expression should be granted on the same or equal scale to Government employees as it is extended to all citizens of the United States. Federal or State employment should not in itself become a factor or a means of depriving American | citizens of rights guaranteed to them in our Constitution. These peo ple are entitled to express their views and their opinions on political parties, issues, and candidates, regardless of their place of employment. În fact, in a democracy such as ours we should encourage them to do

SO.

For this reason, it is my view that the time has come to ease such restrictions imposed on civil-service employees. I feel that Congress should take the necessary steps to extend to them the same privileges of participation in the political life and activities of the country as | all other citizens enjoy.

Originally, the Hatch Act was intended to curb unorthodox and pernicious political activities on the part of certain individuals or groups, who abused these privileges. It was not intended to punish all Government employees by depriving them of the full benefits of citizenship. In the long run our country will be the loser and our democratic processes will suffer if we continue to deny such rights to several millions of our citizens, who are among the most loyal. patriotic, sincere, and intelligent.

My bill seeks to remove the restriction contained in the Hatch Acti which forbids any officer or employee in the executive branch of the Federal Government from taking any active part in political management or political campaigns. It also seeks to remove the same restriction with respect to officials and employees of any State or local agency whose principal employment is in connection with any activity which is financed by loans or grants made by the Federal Government or any of its agencies.

Our country is regarded as the moral leader and moral spokesman of the free nations of the world. As such, it does not befit the United States to deny basic rights and to discriminate against many of its own citizens merely because they are employed by the Federal or State Governments, Government employment should be a badge of honor, not a status of second-class citizenship.

bill

For these reasons, I urge you to give due consideration to my and to approve it. Such action by your subcommittee will be a first and proper step in the right direction to strengthen American democracy and American prestige as "the land of the free and the home of the brave."