Mr. SMITH. Yes.

A statement of Daniel J. O'Connor, chairman of the National Americanism Commission of The American Legion, on H.R. 15626.

The CHAIRMAN. Favoring?

Mr. SMITH. Right.

(The documents referred to follow :)

STATEMENT OF HON. EDWIN W. EDWARDS, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM LOUISIANA

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee:

As you know, I am a cosponsor of the bill now before you, H.R. 15626. I believe this proposed legislation is vitally necessary in the interests of our national security.

The bill deals with security measures relating to defense facilities. This is a vital area calling for close and rigid control. That which constitutes a "defense facility" is expressly and specifically defined in the bill, leaving no room for misunderstanding and no room for the charge of "vagueness." The definitions are clear and comprehensive covering the field of Government operations to which the bill is directed.

An important part of the bill is that which would restore life to section 5(a)(1) (D) of the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950, which made it unlawful for members of Communist-action organizations to engage in employment in defense facilities. In the case of United States v. Robel the Supreme Court in its decision of December 11, 1967, held that section of the law involved to be unconstitutional for "overbreadth," in violation of the right of association protected by the first amendment. The bill, by its terms, seeks to narrow the interdiction of the section and to supply safeguards to meet the objections of the Supreme Court, thus retaining the effectiveness of the basic purposes of that section of the Act of 1950.

I doubt if any reasonable man with due regard for the national security of this country can be heard to say that members of Communist-action groups should be given employment in such sensitive areas as our defense facilities. H.R. 15626 seeks to see to it that they are not permitted employment in such vital areas.

Make no mistake about it, Communist influences are at work in this country today. Never before in our history has the Government needed more protection for its essential activities than it needs today. Communist-action, Communistdominated, and Communist-infiltrated groups are active, seeking to take advantage of any and all of our weaknesses to make this country an easier prey to Godless communism. The damage that can be done to our national security in such sensitive places as defense facilities is indeed apparent and very real.

The bill authorizes a comprehensive security program in the fields to which it pertains. It authorizes measures for a security clearance program for workers in defense facilities; gives the sanction of the Congress to measures for an industrial security clearance program for protection of classified information released to industry engaged in essential work for the Government; it gives express congressional authority to institute a personnel security program for access to vessels, harbors, ports, and waterfront facilities under the Magnuson Act. Moreover, it not only authorizes the strengthening of security measures, but provides for safeguards against any possible maladministration of the law that might be offensive to individual freedoms.

I am proud to be one of the sponsors of this bill introduced by your distinguished chairman, Edwin Willis, in the interest of our national security. It deserves enactment into law by the Congress and vigorous enforcement by the executive department.

STATEMENT OF HON. WALTER S. BARING, U.S. REPRESENTATIVE AT LARGE FROM NEVADA, ON BEHALF OF H.R. 15649, TO AMEND THE SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES CONTROL ACT OF 1950

Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the opportunity to make a statement on the legislation before this committee, H.R. 15649, and related bills. I am sure I do not have to stress before this committee the urgency and necessity of this legislation.

For many months now, the newspapers, radio, and television stations have carried stories on action taken by the Supreme Court of the United States interpreting, limiting, and even invalidating legislation previously enacted by Congress. However, neither this bill nor any of its provisions is intended to challenge the Court with respect to its decisions. The principal purpose of the bill is to plug the recognized security gaps brought about by the recent Supreme Court decisions.

Mr. Chairman, like you and the other esteemed members of this committee, I have received numerous letters of complaints from Nevadans voicing extreme anger over the Supreme Court's decision overturning Federal legislation concerning the employment of a member of the Communist Party in Seattle, Washington, shipyard which, by the way, the Secretary of Defense had designated as a "defense facility."

"What are you going to do about it?" they asked. It is my hope, Mr. Chairman, that the bill before you will be the answer to their questions.

I feel, Mr. Chairman, that this bill is a very comprehensive one. It is well balanced and contains and covers a variety of situations. The bill contains criteria against teaching or advocating the forceful, violent overthrow of the Government, and against the activities of Communist organizers, and acts, which, if committed in time of war, would constitute treason under the Constitution.

Mr. Chairman, it is time that this Congress stand up and show some good old American intestinal fortitude and crack down on those who advocate becoming buddy-buddy with Russia and its satellites. The American people are sick and tired of the actions taken by certain people within our governmental structure— and those outside of our Government who carry enough vocal and financial power to sway the thinking of those inside our Government-of slowly, but surely handing over this country to communism.

Our Constitution grants the right to dissent-but the dissent we have seen and heard ever since the Vietnam war borders on the fringe of outright treason. Any person who owes allegiance to the United States and yet gives aid or comfort, knowingly and willfully, to the Viet Cong or to North Vietnam or to any other nation or armed group engaged in open hostilities against the United States, hostilities in which American boys are fighting and dying, should be punished.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, I would like to point out that where a decision of the Supreme Court has found an act of Congress to be unconstitutional, it is the obligation of Congress to frame and enact further legislation for the purpose of dealing with the problem.

I firmly believe that this bill meets this problem head on and I hope, Mr. Chairman, that you and your excellent committee will give your unanimous approval to the legislation before you. Thank you.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM G. BRAY, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE

FROM INDIANA

The Supreme Court's decision in the case of U.S. v. Robel, allows members of the Communist Party to work in defense plants. On account of this, we are impelled to act upon this proposed legislation which will insure our country the right of defending itself from internal dangers.

The Supreme Court's decision was based on a legal facet of the Constitution, that of the right of association as protected by the first amendment. This basic right cannot be disputed, for America's heritage of freedom is insured by its Constitution. But the right is not absolute. This decision ignored the fact that to survive, a government must protect itself against its enemies who would destroy it by force.

It is no secret that countries have spies employed throughout the world to obtain facts about military, political, and economic developments in other countries. This is especially true of Communist countries. However, it is more difficult to conduct espionage in a totalitarian state such as Russia or Communist China than in countries where people have more freedom of movement and are not under such close supervision.

According to the Communists' views, they are justified in using every possible means such as sabotage, espionage, or other subversive acts in order to obtain information valuable to their country and that can be used to undermine and destroy any non-Communist country. Under communism, the only function of the individual is to serve the state.

Must we extend the freedom of association clause in its entirety to members of the Communist Party, thus enhancing the possibilities of sabotage, espionage, or other subversive acts against the United States? Should individuals dedicated to our destruction be permitted to work in those sensitive areas such as defense facilities, where their doing so can aid that destruction? Why should we enable the Communists to use our freedoms as a means of gaining their goals, goals which would ultimately replace our inalienable rights with Communist doctrines? The problem we are faced with not only today, but yesterday and tomorrow, is whether or not a nation has the right to limit any freedom of a group dedicated to our destruction to insure complete freedom for the majority. A Roman proverb says, "The safety of the people must be the supreme law." The necessity to impose certain limitations on the right of association clause is essential for the internal security of the United States.

STATEMENT OF HON. HERVEY G. MACHEN, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM MARYLAND

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I represent the Fifth Congressional District of Maryland which is composed of Prince George's and Charles Counties, Maryland.

I appear before you today to testify in behalf of H.R. 15018, which I cosponsored. The Supreme Court recently struck down a provision making it a crime for a member of the Communist Party to work in a United States defense plant. It found that "in the balance of Constitutional rights," freedom to associate vastly overshadows the right of the Government to guard against sabotage and espionage in its national defense industries.

The Court has found time and time again that the rights of the criminal weigh heavier in the balance than the rights of society to its security. The battle we wage against crime in the streets-a war of compelling proportions-is hindered by Court decisions which provide one obstacle after another to the apprehension and successful prosecution of criminals.

The winning of the war against Communist aggression is rendered increasingly more difficult by decisions which invite the spread of the conflict to our own land. No one denies that the individual and the accused have rights which must be preserved from encroachment; yet, so too must the rights of the whole society. It is in the consideration of the interests of this group that I cosponsored H.R. 15018.

The enactment of this legislation is, I believe, clearly in the best interests of the Nation. Certainly, no patriotic American can quarrel with the intent of this legislation to bar from employment in our defense facilities individuals believed disposed to commit acts of sabotage, espionage, or other acts of subversion. Exclusion of such individuals would not be done arbitrarily under the provisions of this bill. Anyone barred under these provisions would be given a reasonable opportunity to defend himself against such action including, if he requested, a hearing.

Whereas our Constitution has been an extremely durable document, needing few amendments to guide a changing society, decisions such as those made by the Court in areas adversely affecting our national defense posture must be reversed. The rulings of a body of nine men, appointed for life, must be subject to final approval by the whole society affected by them.

From the beginning of its history, this country has found it wise to provide checks and balances among the various branches of Government. My bill continues that ideal. It states that it is the people and through them their elected representatives who shall have the final word as to who shall be employed in facilities integrally a part of our national defense system and who shall not. Therefore, I urge you and the members of the committee, Mr. Chairman, to report this bill to the House for consideration so that the people can be heard clearly in this matter.

STATEMENT OF HON. DON FUQUA, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE

FROM FLORIDA, ON H.R. 15272

Mr. Chairman. It would seem that one of the basic responsibilities of any nation is to protect its people.

A recent decision of the Supreme Court has ruled unconstitutional certain sections of the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950. It is obvious that I disagree with that ruling by the introduction of my bill which is part of these hearings.

The highly automated plants of today are open to sabotage, and I think it the responsibility of the Congress to provide such plants with safeguards against those who gain membership in organizations that have as their purpose the violent overthrow of our form of government.

The purpose of this legislation is to institute reasonable measures and regulations to provide sensitive facilities against possible sabotage, espionage, or other subversive activity.

This committee is perhaps more aware of the designs of enemies of this Nation and the lengths to which they will go to subvert this land than perhaps any other.

I urge that very careful consideration be given to the proposals now pending. Stated simply, we are attempting only to give this Nation certain reasonable personnel screening procedures in an effort to protect vital national interests. This legislation accords maximum individual freedom coupled with an overriding need for national security. I urge that my bill or a similar measure be reported to the House for consideration.

STATEMENT OF HON. E. S. JOHNNY WALKER, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM NEW MEXICO, IN SUPPORT OF H.R. 15018

Mr. Chairman, last December the Supreme Court struck down a provision of the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950. The important provision declared unconstitutional made it a crime for a member of the Communist Party to be employed in "any defense facility," as that term might be defined by the Secretary of Defense.

Now Congress must search for another effective means of protecting our national interest. I firmly believe that H.R. 15018 will provide that protection without unnecessarily intruding on the freedoms we seek to strengthen.

The Supreme Court noted, by way of justification, in U.S. v. Robel, that the questioned provision in the act infringes on workers' rights to freedom of association which is guaranteed by the first amendment of our Constitution. It should also be observed, however, that the decision was not without dissent. Justice Byron R. White and Justice John M. Harlan pointed out that the first amendment rights should be balanced against national needs. Barring Communist Party members from employment in defense plants making up less than 1 percent of the Nation's industry is a small price to pay to protect the country from sabotage and espionage, the dissenting Justices further noted.

The amendment I support will clearly authorize the Federal Government to deny employment in defense facilities to individuals believed disposed to commit acts of sabotage, espionage, or other subversive acts clearly detrimental to our way of life.

This bill authorizes and directs the Secretary of Defense to designate certain industrial sites as "defense facilities." The employees will be required to sign a statement indicating that they are aware of this designation. The President would then be authorized to take whatever action deemed necessary to deny employment to anyone whose background reveals there are reasonable grounds to believe that the prospective employee is disposed and has the opportunity, by reason of his employment, to engage in sabotage, espionage, or other subversive acts against his employer.

The inquiries into a person's background would be reasonable, but naturally as reliable as possible, and concern the employee's relevant beliefs, activities, affiliations, and memberships. Prior to his suspension, the employee would be notified of the reasons for the actions being taken against him and given the opportunity to present information in his own defense.

Giving the President clear authority to seek a temporary or permanent injunction, restraining order, or other order against the management of defense facilities under the terms of this legislation will not, in my opinion, infringe upon our cherished right of association. It will, however, better enable us to protect all of our cherished rights and privileges.

STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES E. CHAMBERLAIN, A U.S. REPRESENTATIVE FROM MICHIGAN, ON H.R. 15018, TO AMEND THE SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES CONTROL ACT OF 1950

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate being given this opportunity to appear before your committee and to testify in support of H.R. 15018, a bill which would permit the Government to bar certain individuals from employment in defense facilities.

It is perhaps symptomatic of the problems spawned by modern technology that we, here on Capitol Hill, received an offer by a commercial firm a year or so ago to "sweep" our offices to ensure that we were not being "bugged." Every week one may find in the newspapers advertisements for commercial firms which will erect security barriers on the one hand, or penetrate other security barriers on the other. Elsewhere one can find firms that will specialize in other subtle intricacies of the intelligence profession.

While these commercial threats are serious, one must recognize that the expertise so advertised can be far more perfectly accomplished by national governments, which can professionalize to the greatest possible degree the arts of espionage, sabotage, and subversion. Instances of foreign-supported clandestine and covert activity in America are legion, and this country has had to learn some painful lessons at the hands of our enemies.

It is an unfortunate fact of the present day that we are faced with a continuing and constant problem of anti-American activity within our borders, some of it readily visible, other less so. Among the most important targets in this activity are manufacturing facilities which are related to our national defense. The advantages which can accrue to our enemies through successful penetration of these activities are great. Generally one may expect that the goal of such a penetration will include the gathering of vital information, although in conditions of international tension or war, the primary goal might be sabotage. In either case, the loss to our national defense effort is unacceptable, and the detection of such enemy effort after the fact will not repair the damage that has been done.

It should be abundantly clear that the miniaturization of destructive weapons, the refinement of toxic chemicals, the ubiquity of copying machines and miniature cameras, and other technological advances have given the single agent a tremendous potential for damaging activity. Instruments of mass destruction can now be carried in a briefcase, while atomic secrets can be carried away on the head of a pin. Espionage can go undetected forever, and sabotage cannot always be traced.

In the face of such threats, it is clearly in the national interest to investigate most carefully the relative risks to our national security that may be posed by the employment of persons of questionable mental stability or loyalty in defense facilities. It is not enough that we just keep records of certain persons, or to prosecute espionage cases after the fact. Our national defense and the most basic good judgment require that we have the legal means to avoid catastrophe.

I would emphasize, Mr. Chairman, the preventive nature of this legislation. The activities of enemy agents or misguided individuals in this area do not lend themselves to remedy, and the damage done may well be irreparable. Appropriate legislation should be enacted. The barriers must be carefully drawn, constitionally correct, and strictly enforced. If our country is to have a reliable national defense, it is fundamental that we must provide for the security of our defense industries.

STATEMENT OF FRANCIS W. STOVER, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL LEGISLATIVE SERVICE, VETERANS OF FOREIGN WARS OF THE UNITED STATES, WITH RESPECT TO H.R. 15626 WHICH WOULD AMEND THE SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES CONTROL ACT OF 1950 TO AUTHORIZE THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT TO DENY EMPLOYMENT IN DEFENSE FACILITIES TO CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS, TO PROTECT CLASSIFIED INFORMATION RELEASED TO UNITED STATES INDUSTRY, AND RELATED MATTERS

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the invitation to present the views of the Veterans of Foreign Wars with respect to H.R. 15626, which would plug some of the loopholes in the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950 caused by recent court decisions and greatly strengthen the act in other areas.

My name is Francis W. Stover and my title is director of the National Legislative Service of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States.

The Veterans of Foreign Wars strongly supported the legislation which finally became the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950.

The Veterans of Foreign Wars has, down through the years, supported liberalizing amendments to this act which have strengthened and improved the effectiveness of this most important law.