« PreviousContinue »
There will be more revolts in the not too distant future, because people, as is evidenced in our own country, will take just so much, and then they have nothing to lose.
You see, in this one area where people are, and where the leaders of tomorrow are really growing up, the revolutionary leaders of tomorrow are really growing up, there is nobody reaching them, except the cooperatives, the missionary religious groups, and the labor movement.
Senator YARBOROUGH. President Beirne, I have one other group to add to that, the Peace Corps.
Mr. BEIRNE. The Peace Corps, I would add them quickly.
Senator YARBOROUGH. I was in one country in South America a few years ago and was talking to some of the people, and they said the very thing you said:
"Well, your ambassadors just deal with our politicians and generals, and we never see them as a people, but these Peace Corps people, they come out here and live with us. We believe they really want to help us. We didn't know there were Americans like that before they came down here. We thought Americans came here to get something from us.”
Mr. BEIRNE. Good.
Senator YARBOROUGH. I was told about this in one South American country, and so I add to those working in the cooperatives and the labor movement the Peace Corps volunteers.
Mr. BEIRNE. I would quickly take them. They are doing a wonderful job. And so I say in concluding my remarks, Mr. Chairman, that S. 1779 is a hope, a new kind of thinking being applied openly, as it should be, in this society of ours, for the kind of work that is so much needed, and the kind of work that I think will bring returns far greater than any of the billions of dollars we have really spent. This bill would permit the people to talk to people, and we could lessen the troubles we are going to have I believe, that we are going to have not only in Latin America but maybe in other parts of the world. This might be an opening of a whole new dimension that doesn't need the same number of dollars, because it is dealing in a different field, an aspect that I think is more lasting.
Out own experience with 15 out of 16 trainees staying with it, sacrificing for a principle, for a belief, not for a dollar is illustrative. I am happy that you have given me the opportunity to say in my stumbling way how much we think this kind of a new approach is valuable, and I sure wish that you would get the steam and the power to get it through and make it something real.
Senator YARBOROUGH. President Beirne, we appreciate your appearance. We appreciate more than that the fact that months ago when we were out searching for support for this bill, you were coming to us and saying, "I want to support that. That is needed.”
I have read your proposed amendment. I favor your amendments. We must studiously avoid intragovernment competition, that other agencies see as threatening their field of operation.
We must also avoid the danger of red tape bogging the program down. These suggestions show your statesmanship. You are a labor statesman. You are broader than a labor statesman. You are a statesman in our relationship to the world, and particularly the world south of us, the Western Hemisphere.
Since I live in a State with a thousand mile border with the largest Spanish-speaking nation in the world in population, Mexico, which is pressing toward 40,000,000 now, I have some idea of this problem. I think you have rendered this Government and have rendered all of the people a tremendous service in this field, in addition to your leadership over in leading Americans to a better way of life here, in your own organization which you represent so ably and so well.
Senator MORSE. Mr. Beirne, I want to say contrary to your self description in your testimony, it represented no stumbling approach to this bill. You have helped carry it towards the goal of passage, in my judgment.
You have your proposal for a special grant. You have two amendments. And also the revolving fund loan program which I may say I agree with.
I would like to ask counsel for the committee, Mr. Chairman, to take that amendment and redraft the amendment, setting forth very clearly the provision in it regarding the special grant in the revolving fund loan and list the objectives of it.
Part of the language ought to go into the committee report as to the intent of the amendment, but that we put the amendment just in the form showing what the purpose is, and then use the rest of the language of the amendment to explain congressional intent.
I think it is a very fine amendment. I also support the other amendment that you set forth. I want to thank you very much for your testimony.
Senator YARBOROUGH. Counsel are instructed to take the steps that Senator Morse has suggested. I do favor both of those amendments.
President Beirne, we have here the ranking minority member, a man whom you know well, the distinguished senior Senator from the State of New York, who has been an active worker and a leader in many fields of progress.
I served with him on the Labor and Public Welfare Committee on Education and many other subcommittees. We are glad he could spare time from his busy schedule. I think the fact that he is here indicates the importance of this measure.
Senator Javits is a man who has a great interest in foreign affairs as well as domestic affairs.
Senator JAVITS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. President Beirne, I have read with interest your testimony. I heard some of it, and find this bill very interesting. I know of your work in Latin America. I have actually been there and met your people, and consider it very admirable and extremely helpful to the country.
The thing that I think the record ought to be clear on with respect to this bill is why you feel as a highly experienced, prestigious American, this bill would not inhibit other foundation activities, like, let us say, the Ford Foundation, which does operate everywhere in the world if it wishes to.
In view of the fact that the foundation to be established by S. 1779 would have contributions both from Government and from private sources, the first question I think one would ask is why can't Government proceed through the AID or some other Government agency, and private sources through foundations, which are very much favored under our law. Why do you need a combination of the two, and a Government contribution?
Mr. BEIRNE. I think the value of this would come in these areas. First, as far as the great work being done by foundations today, I think the needs exist that would indicate they would be able and I think in fact would continue.
Second, to go through AID, and we work with AID, the American Institute of Free Labor Development, our Asian Labor Foundation, our Afro-American Labor Foundation deals with AID, you run into bureaucracy.
If I could scream loud about the people who consider themselves important that they must change a world, just to show they have a job, a job for 6 months and 8 months, if I could scream loudly to change that, I would.
The kinds of groups this bill addresses itself to gets but a very small fraction of the AID money, because there is so little of the money, and it is needed for so many big things.
Third, this particular bill cuts through redtape, with the kind of a council that is set there, and with the kind of a director this bill sets up. The whole thrust of the bill is cutting and doing some work and getting good projects going, and cutting out the redtape, and work with the immediacy that you have to work with, especially when you are dealing with student groups, when you are dealing with farmer groups, and especially when you are dealing with labor groups. These are three of the activist-oriented organizations that run into the frustrations of AID right now, even though AID is doing a wonderful job, the redtape remains.
The activists, the ones who want to go and do things, get awfully frustrated in not being able to get enough dollars to meet the needs that are so apparent.
Senator JAVITS. Why wouldn't a great international foundation like Ford, which is so favored by our law, be able to do precisely the same thing?
Mr. BEIRNE. Ford's work is pretty well cutout for it. I have been before the Ford Foundation with projects to get some money, and you quickly find that they have their set of priorities. They have their ideas of what is needed.
Let us say, as an example, let us say the Communication Workers of America, as it did, wanted Ford to support its Latin American training institute at Front Royal, back in the fifties. Well, this is education. Well, their educational money is more domestic than overseas.
Senator YARBOROUGH. Senator Javits, as the author of the bill I can partially answer that. During this past year it was brought to my attention that many groups with international activities have been unable to raise funds from foundations, government, or business. They went all over the country, and couldn't raise enough money to carry on their activities.
Senator Javits. May I ask, therefore, the author of the bill as to what would he see as being the optimum mix in this bill between public appropriations and private contributions?
Senator YARBOROUGH. We didn't attempt to cross that bridge. We knew we needed more help. We had hoped that there would be no friction.
We did not intend by this bill to infringe on any of the work of any foundations like Ford and Rockefeller. There was no plan in this bill to supersede any of their work or take it over.
Senator Javits. † think that the matter is much better pinpointed by a reference to activities indirectly carried on, or directly but not publicly known by the CIA.
May I ask you, President Beirne, would you feel that this Foundation would have to have in order to make it viable in terms that we are discussing private contributions as well as appropriations from Government?
Mr. BEIRNE. Well, my own view on that is that I would like to see it all public money, so that you would not get into going out to the same sources to raise dollars. I am a fundraiser, among other things.
Senator Javits. I know that.
Mr. BEIRNE. I had the job for 2 years as president of the United Councils and the Community Funds of America, and raised $700 million in these United States last year, and it is not easy.
The same ones seem to be getting hit all the time, and the number of organizations and the need seems to be growing as the number of people able to supply the dollars seems to be getting smaller. So I personally would like to see it all Government funds.
I am sure some sort of discussions, with whatever committees get involved, could be instituted in which an equation could be worked out with respect to the number of public and private dollars.
Senator Javits. I think that is very frank and very refreshing. I think it is better to say that than to be indefinite and fuzzy about it. This, then, would be essentially a channel for the use of Government funds for foundation purposes, with a special emphasis upon labor, health, and education. That would be your thought.
Work heretofore carried on in terms of encouraging people-to-people organizations of the kind that you have described and that I have seen in action, and which I think are admirable, especially in Latin America, would then get some of their financing at least in this way. You don't feel, I gather, that this would represent an undesirable element of Government intercession or control in these activities?
Mr. BEIRNE. Not the way this bill reads. This bill is pretty clearly written. When I read it, I thought whoever drafted it did a fine job of zeroing in on realities of life and not getting it mixed up with a lot of other things that may be germain, but hard to grasp.
Senator Javits. Practicably, of course, bureaucracy is a very insidious disease. Might not these very people on this S. 1779 foundation, because they are beholden to Congress and the executive department for their authority and resources, be in temper and the way they operate just as bureaucratic?
Mr. BEIRNE. They could. I have to say that right away. Anybody who wants to make a career of having a job doing nothing, can do it. Senator Javits. Is that your definition of bureaucracy, President Beirne?
Mr. BEIRNE. Oh, no. Bureaucracy is a very, necessary, a very necessary function of government. We would be lost without it. I just rebel when obvious things can't be done when they should be done, and we wake up losing the ballgame.
That is when bureaucracy is at its worst. Bureaucracy at its best a very necessary thing for a government the size of ours to function. I am probureaucracy, but I'm also looking for ways of cutting the redtape, and not losing control of what you are trying to do.
If the bureaucrats came in to frustrate this just for the sake of having a job, why a person like myself and many like me would be screaming, and I think changes would be brought about.
The whole thrust is what is good to me; unfortunately is connected with the CIA affair. Before you came in Senator, I recited the fact that I am in here with clean hands. I have nothing to do with underthe-table money which I read about in the newspapers.
In the Eisenhower administration, the Communications Workers of America negotiated with the Federal Government, from Mr. Stassen's organization at that time, and printed on our brochure that the Federal Government was our partner. It caused no stir within the American labor movement or within labor movements we dealt with in Latin America.
There was a thought, “Gee, if the Government came in there, Latin Americans would say this is the Big Yankee Government again, infiltrating.” It had no such reaction at all. It doesn't today.
When we openly say we get AID funds to run AIFLĎ, to assist in running our Asian Foundation, our Latin American Foundation, it is over and aboveboard and accepted by workers throughout the world.
Now this bill does the same thing. It zeroes in on a neglected field, people-to-people, this is what is neglected in the big appropriation for AID. Thousands of pages of reports are printed, and I am sure nobody understands these reports of AID.
Now, if a director, or if a council, as outlined in this bill, fell in love with themselves and got bureaucratic, I think there would be screams, and then I would be the first one coming in to say save that $100 million, get rid of the outfit, it is worthless. I would be the first one to do that.
Senator Javits. Thank you very much, President Beirne, for very refreshing and very pertinent testimony.
Senator YARBOROUGH. Thank you, President Beirne. I think your testimony here shows a great knowledge of what is needed and how it should operate.
We appreciate your contribution greatly, and ask your continuing help on this, in pushing the bill through to ultimate passage. I hope that we can move this bill at this session. I think it is badly needed. There is a gap that is left after other governmental financing is stopped. Thank you a lot.
Mr. BEIRNE. Thank you, sir.
Senator YARBOROUGH. The next witness is Mr. Edwin Golin, chairman of the Inter-American Partners of the Alliance Business Committee, president of the Gauge Corp., Wilmington, Del. He is a member of the State Board of Higher Education of Delaware.