If the Senator from Iowa will recall, when the leadership made the statement, it said: "As of 11 o'clock or thereafter." Later, it said, "11 o'clock or some hours afterward."

I know the statement I am about to make will result in some disappointment on the part of some Members, and perhaps justifiably so, but it is not the intent of the leadership to have the Senate stay in session all night. It is the intent of the leadership to have the Senate take a recess within the next 2 hours.

I hope the membership will trust our judgment in this matter. It may be good, it may be bad, but in view of what we have been able to arrive at in the form of a consensus among ourselves, that is the best we can say at the moment.

Mr. MUNDT. Mr. President, I yield myself such time as I may require.

I ask that the Senate be in order. I cannot waste my time by attempting to speak when the Senate is in disorder.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will be in order.

Mr. MUNDT. I rise to express the sentiment I share with the distinguished Senator from Iowa, and some concern and some surprise about the turn of events, after 121⁄2 hours of continuous session. Although we were told we would be out of here by 11 p.m., for some reason unbeknown to a great many of us

in the Chamber, who also are Members of the Senate, we are now being told that we are expected to stay here for 2 more hours.

Mr. MANSFIELD. Mr. President, will the Senator yield?

Mr. MUNDT. I yield.

Mr. MANSFIELD. The Senator will take my word, I am sure, that the leadership never did say we would take a recess by 11 o'clock. We said, "11 o'clock as a minimum." My first statement was to the effect that it would be 11 o'clock or thereabouts. About 2 hours ago the question came up again; and I said, "11 o'clock and some hours afterwards." I believe that is the exact language I used. Mr. MUNDT. Of course, I take the word of the Senator from Montana. I did not get the addendum.

Mr. MANSFIELD. That was my fault. Mr. MUNDT. I should like to have the leadership take the rest of the Senate into its confidence, so we can find out whether this is to be a test of endurance. If so, I can take it. Normally, I do not go to bed until midnight; and I am just beginning to get underway; and I feel a speech coming on. I have a whole hour to use, and I might as well be doing something. If this session is to be some kind of endurance contest, I wish to be informed. If this session is to serve some useful purpose, I do not wish to throw a monkey wrench into the machinery; but I like to be confided in.

I should like to know what the thinking of the leadership is, and what the purpose of the leadership is in keeping us here in an almost around-the-clock session, which I thought might have been much more appropriately employed about 30 days ago, before we got to the situation of cloture.

Mr. MANSFIELD. The Senator from South Dakota knows that I have always been opposed to the idea of around-theclock sessions. I hope the distinguished Senator from South Dakota and the membership of the Senate as a whole will recognize that the distinguished minority leader and I have attempted, in conjunction with the deputy leaders, to arrive at a consensus which we believe will serve the best interest of the Senate and, we hope we do not know-will be in the best interests of the bill.

We have tried to be very circumspect in our dealings. It is no secret, I suppose, that many times on yesterday and today we could have raised points of order, on the basis of the quorum calls which were being too frequently asked

for. However, we felt that in the interest of harmony, it would be best not to do so.

We feel that the decision we have just arrived at is in the best interest of the Senate and is in the best interest of the consideration of the bill. All I can say to the Senator, on behalf of all of us, is that we hope he will trust us a little longer.

Mr. MUNDT. I am a very trusting soul. I trust everyone. I just did not happen to be included in the polling process by which the consensus was arrived at. So it comes as a surprise.

I should like to make one observation, because I have a great deal of time left. Inasmuch as apparently we are not interested in saving time, but are interested in utilizing time, I am very glad to utilize some of my time.

I am now speaking as one who voted for cloture-one of the few times in my life that I reluctantly did. I did it because I believe in majority rule; I believe there comes a time, in a legislative body, when it is quite apparent that either there must be cloture or the majority will be denied the right to vote on a legislative measure, and therefore, in order to avoid rule by a minority, it is necessary to engage in the process called cloture.

However, I should like to say for the record because cloture will be proposed again, some day, that there will be those who will argue that we should tighten rule XXII, to make it easier to get cloture.

We are witnessing one reason why I was opposed to cloture. It tends to make a shambles of the legislative process.

I am sure no one here seriously believes we are giving careful consideration to any of the amendments being proposed. I have voted against most of them, as most other Senators have; and most of us voted against them for the same reason. There has been very little discussion of the amendments, in connection with their presentation. So when there is any doubt, it is usually safe parliamentary procedure to vote “nay.”

If cloture means, as it apparently does, that after cloture is obtained, the majority will try to grind down, by an endurance testing process, any support of amendments by Senators who have legitimate reasons to suggest amendments, or who propose them, that is an additional reason why we should not change rule XXII, and is an additional

8

Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I fully understand that the majority leader and the minority leader did not formally announce that the session would come to an end at 11 o'clock. But I distinctly remember conversations, at about o'clock, on the floor of the Senate, in which it was stated to me that the majority leader and the minority leader had put themselves in a position in which 11 o'clock would probably be about the time for us to recess, and that they did not want to be embarrassed by being requested to take a recess earlier than that time. Of course I realize their responsibilities.

I rose to ask why this change of rules when we are between second and third base. I still do not understand it. If something constructive is to be accomplished, that is one thing.

The PRESIDING OFFICER. The time of the Senator from Iowa has expired.

Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I yield myself half a minute more.

The

OFFICER. The PRESIDING Senator is recognized for half a minute. Mr. HICKENLOOPER. I am like the Senator from South Dakota: I have left plenty of time in which to speak. If a constructive purpose is to be accomplished at this hour, I do not know what it is, and I have been unable to find on this side of the aisle any Senator who knows what that constructive purpose, if any, is. I am only looking for light and for some explanation.

Mr. LONG of Louisiana. Mr. President, I call up my amendment numbered

The PRESIDING OFFICER. An amendment is pending now. The question is on agreeing to the amendment (No. 846) submitted by the Senator from South Carolina [Mr. THURMOND].

On this question, the yeas and nays have been ordered; and the clerk will call the roll.

The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.

Mr. DIRKEN (when his name was called). I have a pair with the senior Senator from Mississippi Mr. EASTLAND). If present, and voting, he would vote

380

Department of Commerce (2 to 3 months)

years) (plus 2.500 temporary employees for special voting census)-Sincerely,

NICHOLAS DEB. KATZENBACH,

Deputy Attorney General.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, will the gentleman yield?

Mr. McCULLOCH. I yield to my colleague from Iowa.

Mr. GROSS. Mr. Chairman, I would like to say to the gentleman from Ohio that this letter which is being submitted for the RECORD speaks of precise estimates.

Mr. McCULLOCH. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will ask me the question I will answer it and then comment on what he has said as a preliminary to his question, so the RECORD will be complete.

Mr. GROSS. The gentleman has the letter there.

Mr. McCULLOCH. All right, Mr. Chairman, I read the words once before. They are not exactly as described by my usually unusually accurate colleague from Iowa. The words that I used are "preliminary cost estimates."

Further examination of the preliminary cost estimates contained in that letter have disclosed several errors in computation. In addition. information now available allows more precise estimates with regard to cer

tain of the figures. As corrected, the total estimated cost for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission in title VII $3,800,000, rather than $5,760,000 and the estimated cost for the Department of Justice for titles I, II, III, IV and VI is $1,595,140, rather than $1.690.140. Further, the esti mated cost for title V (Civil Rights Commis sion) has been revised from $1,425,000 to $500,000 so that it reflects only the addi tional estimated cost expected to result from passage of title V. rather than the total estimated cost of the Commission.

Broken down by title, the corrected preliminary cost estimates are as follows:

Title I. voting: Department of
Justice

Title II, public accommoda-
tions: Department of Justice.
Title III. public facilities: De-
partment of Justice.....
Title IV. school desegregation:
Department of Health, Edu-
cation, and Welfare..
Department of Justice.

$120,000

442, 540

312, 530

10,095, 000

657, 560

10,752, 560

500,000

62, 510

3,800,000

75,000

1,800,000

15, 990, 140

NICHOLAS DEB. KATZENBACH. Deputy Attorney General.

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE,

OFFICE OF THE
DEPUTY ATTORNEY GENERAL,
Washington, D.C., February 6, 1964.

Hon. EMANUEL CelleR,
Chairman, Judiciary Committee,
House of Representatives, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in response to your request for information concerning the number of persons who would be employed in connection with the administration and enforcement of the various provisions of H.R. 7152.

For your convenience these preliminary estimates have been broken down by title and represent the expected average employment over a 5-year period.

Two of the items represent employment which will not recur after the first year.