Most recently, the Veterans of Foreign Wars was extremely disappointed, for example, when the Congress approved legislation which could have the effect of putting the Subversive Activities Control Board out of business. I am referring to Public Law 90-237 which, among other things, stipulates that the Subversive Activities Control Board shall cease to exist on June 30, 1969, unless by December 30, 1968, a proceeding under the Subversive Activities Control Act shall have been instituted before the Board and a hearing shall have been conducted by the Board. Unless, therefore, the Attorney General shall institute proceedings before this Board before the end of this calendar year, it could well be the death sentence of the Subversive Activities Control Board. While the provisions of H.R. 15626 do not relate directly to the Board, nevertheless approval of this bill would be a tremendous step forward to strengthen the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950. The authority for the Veterans of Foreign Wars to support this legislation is found in a resolution which was adopted at our 68th National Convention and identified as No. 168, entitled "Strengthen Internal Security Act," and it reads as follows: "Whereas the Internal Security Act of 1950 is this country's major antisubversive law; and "Whereas the world Communist conspiracy has spread its tenacles and devoured an ever increasing number of formerly independent nations; and "Whereas the Communist Party of the United States, as part of the world Communist conspiracy, has stepped up its activities in its designs upon America's future and poses an ever increasing danger to our national securiity; and "Whereas the Congress of the United States has the duty and obligation to enact legislation within the framework of the Constitution adequately to protect the national welfare from the nefarious designs of organized Communism; and "Whereas recent court decisions make necessary amending the Internal Security Act to conform with such decisions and accomplish its purposes of disclosing those organizations and individuals which are operating in the United States as an arm of the International Communist movement; Now, therefore, be it "Resolved, by the 68th National Convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, That we petition and entreat the Congress immediately to enact, and the President forthwith to sign, legislation such as companion bills H.R. 10390 and H.R. 10391 bipartisanly sponsored measures to amend and strengthen the Internal Security Act of 1950." Resolution No. 168 and an omnibus resolution entitled "To Protect the Security and Sovereignty of the United States" sum up in a most definitive manner the position of the Veterans of Foreign Wars concerning Communists, subversive groups, and their adherents whose efforts are bent on destroying the sovereignty of the United States and the continuance of this Republic. Resolution No. 17 reads as follows: "Whereas, according to its Congressionally bestowed charter, one of the major reasons for the formation of the Veterans of Foreign Wars was 'To preserve and defend the United States from all enemies, whomsoever;' and "Whereas the leaders of the world Communist movement have openly threatened the United States and proclaimed the desire and intent of world Communism to conquer the free nations of the world by all possible means, including violent overthrow of our government; and "Whereas certain subversive groups and movements and their adherents have not ceased their efforts to advance ideologies that would destroy the sovereignty of these United States: Now, therefore, be it "Resolved, by the 68th National Convention of the Veterans of Foreign Wars of the United States, That 1. We reaffirm our complete, unwavering opposition to Communism in all its forms, both foreign and domestic, and will resist all Communist policies against the United States and all persons who support, defend, aid and abet them. 2. We reaffirm our opposition to world government, such as Atlantic Union or any similar scheme which would ultimately surrender the sovereignty of the United States of America. 3. We strongly support a United States foreign policy designed to aid the liberation of the enslaved peoples of the world. 4. We oppose any United States aid (direct or indirect, military or financial) to Communist nations. 5. We oppose any weakening of the basic security laws of this Nation, including the Internal Security Act, Communist Control Act, and the Smith Act. 6. We endorse and recommend the continuation of the work of the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and other federal and state agencies charged with protecting the internal security of the United States. 7. We endorse and recommend the continuation of the Senate Internal Security Subcommittee, the House Committee on Un-American Activities and any other Congressional Committee formed for the purpose of protecting our country from Communist and other subversive activities." In these most trying and vexing times, it is incumbent upon all Americans to take every step to insure that our security from within is protected. With Communist-dominated nations harrassing and, in Vietnam and other areas, killing Americans, the problem is not a theory, but a reality. Unfortunately, there are always those in our midst who subscribe to the ideologies and views of some or all of these Communist nations. They are the ones who, in many instances, take advantage of our hard-won freedoms to carry out their sinister purposes to ultimately destroy the very institutions they hide behind for protection when they are exposed for what they are. Pursuant to our mandates, as outlined above, the Veterans of Foreign Wars, therefore, indorses the purpose and intent of H.R. 15626. It is our hope and strong recommendation that this legislation be favorably considered and reported to the House in line with these mandates of our organization. Thank you again for the privilege and opportunity to express the views of the Veterans of Foreign Wars concerning this most important legislation. LETTERS FROM SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES CONTROL BOARD Hon. EDWIN E. WILLIS, SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES CONTROL BOARD, OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN, Washington, D.C., April 23, 1968. Chairman, Committee on Un-American Activities, DEAR CONGRESSMAN WILLIS: This is submitted in response to your request for our views on H.R. 15828, the proposed "Internal Security Act of 1968." We limit our comments to the provisions which would be administered by this Board or otherwise involve the Board. Section 201 (1), beginning at line 20 on page 4, would change the term of each member of the Board from five years to seven years for each member appointed after January 1, 1969. We assume that the purpose is to preserve the expertness or experience which the members of the Board acquire by reason of their service. Cases in the Board have been quite lengthy in many instances. We believe that the longer terms are desirable so as to give better continuity in the handling of cases. Section 201 (2), line 9, page 5, would vest in the chairman of the Board alone the authority and responsibility for the internal administration of the agency, with certain exceptions. At the present time each member has an equal vote as to all personnel and administrative matters. Enactment of the provision would make the Board similar in this respect to most of the other adjudicatory agencies. This frees the other members from administrative details so as to concentrate on the substantive work. We favor enactment of the provision. Subsection (3) of section 201, would place the members of the Board in Level IV of the Federal Executive Salary Schedule instead of the existing Level V, and would change the chairman from Level V to Level III. This is a matter for the Congress. The apparent purpose is to make compensation for service on the Board the same as that for comparable agencies as listed in the Executive Salary Schedule. Section 202, line 11, page 6, is aimed at preventing the frustration of Board determinations which in some instances in the past has resulted from delays in the appellate court review of the Board actions. Board orders speak as of the time of the inquiry by the Board. Sometimes the exercise by the aggrieved party of the right to judicial review results in the passage of considerable time before the appeal is decided. The courts have held that they will consider the merits of an appeal only where the record is reasonably current. They have remanded cases to the Board for findings as to the current status of organizations when, through no fault of the Board, the cases lingered in the courts for a considerable time. This "staleness doctrine" seems to imply that the Board must perform the impossible duty of determining what the status of an organization will be a year or more in the future. It puts a premium on dilatory tactics during judicial review of Board determinations. The existing statute contains ample safeguards, through redetermination proceedings, for any group that bona fide changes its status following a Board determination. We favor the proposal to require the appellate courts to decide the validity of an order of the Board at the time the order was issued by the Board. Section 203, line 19, page 6, contains proposed Congressional findings of fact on the danger to the national security which reasonably can be said to exist if members of Communist-action organizations continue as employees of a defense facility after the organization has been determined by the Board to be of such type and the individuals have knowledge or notice thereof and elect to remain members. Findings of fact are, of course, a matter for Congress. The proposed findings seem warranted from conclusions drawn by the Board in formal proceedings and from decisions and opinions of the courts. Your committee may wish to consider inserting the word "final" between the words "an" and "order" in line 8 at page 7. Section 204, beginning at line 13 of page 7, contains a number of provisions aimed at preventing the employment in defense facilities of knowing and intentional Communists. We agree with the inherent principle that Communists operating in this country under foreign control and direction should not have access to any national security information. It is clear under the Supreme Court's decision in the Robel case that there must be adequate standards in order legally to bar Communists from employment in defense facilities. The proposed provisions contain standards which were lacking in the provision declared unconstitutional in the Robel case. We have no opinion on whether the factors supplied by the provisions of H.R. 15828 are adequate in all respects. The provisions seem to us to be worthy of enactment so as to have them tested in the courts. The Bureau of the Budget has advised by telephone that there is no objection to the submission of these views. Sincerely, JOHN W. MAHAN, Chairman. SUBVERSIVE ACTIVITIES CONTROL BOARD, OFFICE OF THE CHAIRMAN, Washington, D.C., April 26, 1968. Hon. EDWIN E. WILLIS, Chairman, Committee on Un-American Activities, DEAR CONGRESSMAN WILLIS: This is written in response to your request for our views or comments on H.R. 15626, 90th Congress, which contains provisions aimed at protecting the security of defense facilities. We note that H.R. 15828, which was also introduced in the 90th Congress, contains provisions having the same basic purpose. We certainly agree with the purpose of barring active, knowing Communists and other security risks from access to classified national security information. We agree that in the light of court decisions express legislative authorization and specific standards are necessary in order to carry out this purpose. H.R. 15626 takes a quite comprehensive approach to the problem. Much thought and effort was obviously given to drafting the proposed legislation. We have not attempted a line-by-line study of the procedures, standards, and criteria set forth in the bill. We defer to the Departments of Justice and Defense and the other departments and agencies which have been closely involved with the present industrial security program. The proposed new section 5(a) (1) (C) would make it unlawful for any member of a Communist-action organization to engage in any employment in any defense facility (lines 12-15 at page 2). H.R. 15828, on the other hand, applies only to "active members" who have "subscribed or assented to any unlawful objective of such organization" (page 8 beginning at line 13). The application to all members as is done in H.R. 15626 is of questionable legality under the Supreme Court's decision in the Robel case and cases like Dombrowski. We recommend consideration of modifying the H.R. 15626 provision along the lines of the provision in H.R. 15828. The procedures, standards, criteria and guidelines set forth in the bill seem to take care of the points covered by the various, applicable court decisions. While some are perhaps rather broad, we do not have any informed basis for suggesting changes. The Bureau of the Budget has advised by telephone that there is no objection to the submission of these views. Sincerely, JOHN W. MAHAN, Chairman. STATEMENT OF DANIEL J. O'CONNOR, CHAIRMAN, NATIONAL AMERICANISM COMMISSION OF THE AMERICAN LEGION, ON H.R. 15626 (A BILL TO 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) Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, The American Legion appreciates the opportunity to testify in support of H.R. 15626, a bill which would authorize the Federal Government to deny employment to certain subversive individuals in defense facilities of the United States. Certain provisions of the Subversive Activities Control Act of 1950 which made it unlawful for members of Communist-action organizations to engage in employment in a defense industry were nullified by the Supreme Court in United States v. Robel, decided December 11, 1967. The Supreme Court held that those provisions were void for "overbreadth," unconstitutionally abridging the "right of association," protected by the first amendment to the Constitution. In order to protect the internal security of the United States, the Congress must adopt legislation which will meet the Supreme Court's objection or take the drastic position of preempting the authority of the United States Supreme Court to rule on any legislation related to the national security. Today, we recommend enactment of new law to meet the Court's fiat on overbreadth, its references to limitations on executive or legislative authority and, specifically, its invalidation of United States Coast Guard regulations on permits to merchant seamen. H.R. 15626 will accomplish these objectives. Personnel engaged in security work find it most difficult to protect the United States because of the infiltration and subversive tactics of world communism. It is especially discouraging to law enforcement officials and others charged with preserving our internal security to see their efforts vitiated by Court decisions of this nature. Reasonable men find the burden placed on them so intolerable they are tempted to abandon the battle against subversion and simply go through the motions because their efforts are stymied repeatedly by Court decisions which have overstretched reasonable bounds in an effort to make the individual's rights the "sacred cow" of liberal interpretation at the expense of the Nation as a whole. The American Legion cannot agree with certain decisions of the Court, such as this one, which allows Communists to remain employed in defense plants. Nowhere in these decisions do we find an expression of confidence, faith, and trust in public and private officials to evaluate the evidence and make findings based thereon which are fair, equitable, and consonant with the national interest. Mr. Chairman, who and what is a passive Communist? What man or woman joins the Communist Party for the sake of joining? Who joins the Communist Party and then states he disagrees with the aims and objectives of the Communist Party? The Court majority has proclaimed that guilt by association is an infringement of the first amendment and proceeds to protect the rights of the so-called passive Communist, the commie who joins the party, but perhaps disagrees with its aims and purposes. Mr. Chairman, we commend you and the committee for providing specific authority for the President to institute a personnel screening program to secure the objectives of the Magnuson Act even though we believe sound reason would dictate the President already has the inherent power to effectuate a program to accomplish this purpose. We appreciate, too, your setting of specific standards to meet the objections relating to associational activities and are particularly pleased to note the provision regulating the jurisdiction of the Courts in certain proceedings. Your sincere effort to establish procedures to authorize specific investigation, hearing, and review procedures; cross-examination and confrontation of witnesses; and the issuance of compulsory process, all attest to your good faith in providing the constitutional safeguards for all persons coming within the orbit of this legislation. The American Legion has, since its founding, fought communism and what it stands for and we find it difficult to accept the tortuous reasoning which allows enemies of this Nation to be employed in defense industries. It follows, therefore, that your remedial action should be approved by the Congress of the United States if we are to protect our beloved country. Another important section of this bill covers the refusal to testify upon the grounds of self-incrimination in any authorized inquiry relating to subversive activities conducted by any congressional committee, Federal court, Federal grand jury, or any other duly authorized Federal agency, as to any question relative to subversive activities of the individual involved or others. We believe Congress has not only the right but the duty to enact legislation to safeguard defense facilities from acts of espionage and sabotage and to set up personnel and industrial security clearance programs to protect classified information as well as the actual facilities, whether it be vessels, harbors, or docks. Representing the members of The American Legion, numbering 2,600,000, and 1.000,000 members of the American Legion Auxiliary, I urge this committee to report favorably on H.R. 15626. If ever there was a time in our Nation's history when we should be concerned about communism, it is now. We have seen this ideology spread throughout the world and we would be "sad sacks" to stand idly by while judicial fiat allows Communists to be employed in our defense industry. I urge you to give the internal security of our Nation top priority, and pass this bill on to the floor of the House for consideration. Thank you for allowing me to appear here today. The CHAIRMAN. Our last witness this morning is Mr. Speiser, with the American Civil Liberties Union. Mr. Speiser, you may come forward, sir. If you wish, you can file your statement at this point and speak from it. STATEMENT OF LAWRENCE SPEISER, DIRECTOR, WASHINGTON, D.C., OFFICE OF AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION Mr. SPEISER. Very well, Mr. Chairman. I would like my statement included in the record in its entirety. I will not read it. In order not to keep members of the committee in suspense, I will state at the outset that we are opposed to the enactment of H.R. 15626, H.R. 15018, and the related measures, which are attempts to overturn the Supreme Court's decisions in United States v. Robel, and Schneider v. Smith. We go into the constitutional arguments in some detail in our testimony. I am quite willing to answer questions of the committee, based on the submission that we have made. (Mr. Speiser's prepared statement follows:) STATEMENT OF LAWRENCE SPEISER, DIRECTOR, WASHINGTON OFFICE, AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION, ON H.R. 15626, H.R. 15018, AND RELATED MEASURES, APRIL 30, 1968 I am Lawrence Speiser, director of the Washington, D.C., office of the American Civil Liberties Union. For almost a half century the ACLU has existed with the sole purpose of protecting and extending the liberties and rights contained in the Bill of Rights of the United States Constitution. Our continued |