may say we have not handled it as well as we should, but we managed to get by.

Mr. DEROUNIAN. I am a bit confused. You have some exponents of free trade and of H.R. 9900, very eloquent ones, on this committee. In fact you have two on this commitee who last year were very active in trying to amend the Tariff Act of 1930 to impose a duty on shrimp which are now free and even this week you heard one of the gentleman tell us how much we needed H.R. 9900. Yet, when it comes to the district he represents, he tried to impose the tariff on shrimp and to reduce the importation of unprocessed shrimp to the level of 1960. To me this is not consistent. That is why I am asking you some of these questions, because you had a report on this bill last year and in it you seem to sort of take a protectionist view of shrimp. I refer to the report dated August 7, 1961, with relation to H.R. 6168 where you quoted the Tariff Commission seemingly partly in agreement with it, as follows:

Restriction of imports of each form of shrimp to the 1960 level presumably

Shimp Ind

need

would prevent the price-depressing effects of sudden sharp increases in imports prot.

and might provide the measure of stability to the shrimp market, which would be beneficial to all segments of the shrimp trade. In connection with this amendment we wish to point out that there is a question as to what percentage of the duty-free quotas should be taken up by processed shrimp. While it is our opinion that some processed shrimp should be permitted, we wish to emphasize that the quantity should not be so great as to injure our domestic processing industry.

That to me does not indicate that you came out foursquare against removal of all barriers. That was just less than a year ago.

Secretary UDALL. I think our recommendation was not that there be a direct tariff imposed. The wisdom of our action will be borne out although the shrimp industry is still not in good condition. We are attempting to assist this industry in other ways.

Mr. DEROUNIAN. I opposed imposing the tariff on shrimp because it was not affecting our industry here, and yet a very eloquent proponent of H.R. 9900 was the one who proposed this very tariff rate. Thanks very much.

Mr. KEOGH. Mr. Chairman?

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Keogh?

Mr. KEOGH. I would like to make this statement, Mr. Secretary. I got the impression this afternoon that the tenor of some of the statements which accompanied some of the questions asked, and some of the statements which were unaccompanied by questions, seems to indicate the individuals making those statements overlooked the fact that the objective of this bill is to strengthen the economy of this country and of the free world. Frequently people are put on diets until they have gained a point in their health that they can then go back to their regime of debauchery, if that is what they want. Would you agree with that? You do not have to answer that.

Secretary UDALL. Certainly the overall purpose and philosophy of this legislation is that its enactment, and that the type of powers described here would enable us to do a better job of negotiating and would strengthen the economy of this country and of those countries allied with it in a worldwide alliance.

Mr. KEOGH. And sought to be done on a far wider scale with a full contemplation of many more factors than might apply to one particular area or problem?

Secretary UDALL. I would certainly agree.

Mr. KEOGH. And the proposal before us is, therefore, a most essential tool for us in the present period of competition with which we have been faced, and to which, in a greater degree, we will be faced in the future?

Secretary UDALL. I again would simply repeat what others have said, that this is a new phase we are entering into in terms of the world economy. We have to have new tools to work with this period, and I think this is what the legislation provides.

Mr. KEOGH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I apologize for delaying the committee unduly.

Mr. ALGER. Mr. Chairman?

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Alger?

Mr. ALGER. Without apology, Mr. Chairman, since I was one of those who questioned this afternoon, I am looking at the enacting clause of the bill. It says nothing about private economy or strengthening our economy. It says "to promote the general welfare," which is social welfare, "foreign policy," which is the State Department, "and security of the United States," which is defense, all of which we are all for, like we are all for motherhood and the flag, but it says nothing about strengthening the economy of the United States and that, Mr. Secretary, is why some of us think this bill is off on the wrong course.

Mr. KEOGH. I feel the gentleman has fallen into what becomes seemingly an increasing error in assuming that the title of the bill is the bill.

Mr. ALGER. Yes, I fall into that area.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Byrnes?

Mr. BYRNES. If this question has been asked you, Mr. Secretary, just advise me, and we will hold it. However, I would like to address myself just briefly to adjustment assistance and how it would work in areas that are partciularly within your field. I have been led to understand that there have been problems in the copper mining and in the lead and zinc industry from their imports and in fact that has been a subject that has plagued this committee considerably, as to what should be done to remedy that situation. However, how would you apply the adjustment assistance program as contained in this bill to the mining segment, and let us assume that copper mines go out; at least some of them that are more toward the margin, because as the duty goes down imports come in at a lower price and more companies approach that marginal area of course, but what would you do to transform these workers or these mines as far as that is concerned, because under the adjustment assistance program the suggestion is that they move into something else, and that the Government would furnish means whereby they could change their line of production.

It seems to me that we get up against a stone wall when it comes to applying that in some of your mining sections. If you have some ideas of how you do it in these areas, I would like to have it.

Secretary UDALL. I think what is contemplated is something a little more versatile maybe than we thought about and that is, let us

say, that a mining company is in trouble, is in danger of folding up,
and that there is a possibility by automation, by research, by some-
thing of that kind, for them to compete more successfully, that this e
would be envisioned also as a possible remedy. It is not just a matter
Aficiony
of forming a bridge and doing something else. It is a matter of doing
better what you are doing so that you are competitive. I think this
concept is also included.

Mr. BYRNES. You come from a mining area, do you not?
Secretary UDALL. Yes.

Mr. BYRNES. Do you think that the problem of those mines that are in trouble from competition and from the price that results in the domestic market from the imports results from the fact that they just are inefficient, that they are not using the proper mining?

Secretary ÚDALL. The district that I used to represent produced half the copper in the United States and they are pretty competitive because they have the best processes and the best machines, and they have the lowest grade ores, too. It is amazing what they can do, but the minerals industry is a pretty tough one to apply this concept to. I think you are right because the minerals industries are built around a certain area, a certain town, and if you are in trouble everybody is in trouble, as the Congressman knows.

Mr. BYRNES. I think that is typical of the kind of impact where you could just create ghost towns.

Secretary UDALL. And usually the town is located there because that is where the minerals are.

Mr. BYRNES. Right.

Secretary UDALL. I am well aware of the fact that that is one of the toughest problems you have.

Mr. BYRNES. That is why I wanted to address this to you in this particular area, because I think it gives us an example of one of the more severe types probably. It is certainly a type that we can envision as an injury that can take place. At least from all of the evidence that this committee has received in the past about the problem of copper, the problem of lead, and the problem of zinc, Mr. Chairman, there are a lot of these communities, which if we do not at least maintain the present level, are going to become ghost towns and are going to be looking to what this bill does in this area of assistance. Frankly, you do not give me or I do not think you give them much hope by your answer here that they just have to improve their efficiency and the Government will try and help them if there is efficiency.

Secretary UDALL. There is a possibility too, of course, of turning the work force and the plant, such as it is, to a different use. Mr. BYRNES. To a different use?

Secretary UDALL. Well, to some different manufacturing or some other activity, and I think this is contemplated also, but the mining ghost town, at least out in my part of the country, has been part of the American scene for the last 75 or 100 years, and there are always the ups and downs. This has always been sort of part of the picture. Mr. BYRNES. I hate to leave the record stand.

Secretary UDALL. I am just saying that there are some types of mines that play out. This has nothing to do with foreign competition. That is the point I am making. We call them ghost towns because the ore

played out, but this has nothing to do with foreign competition, and this is part of the game. It always has been.

Mr. BYRNES. You can make this game a lot tougher, can you not? At least we have been led to believe so by people from your area.

Secretary UDALL. At the same time the mining industry has kept going where it is going and going strongly today by improving its methods of processing, but getting better machines, and they are doing a good job.

Mr. BYRNES. By Government stockpiling.

Secretary UDALL. They have done a pretty good job on their own. The stockpiling is not a big factor, I do not think, generally.

Mr. BYRNES. It was a big factor a few years ago that they did that instead of having an increase in the rate of duty. I can remember that. Secretary UDALL. It kept some things going in some industries, but not in the big ones.

Mr. BYRNES. I am not talking necessarily about the big fellow. Frankly, all through this whole process, and even the problem of duties, I do not worry about the big fellows and their capacity very often to take care of themselves. I think even the textile industry with its difficulties has demonstrated that, if you are big enough and particularly from the standpoint of encompassing a big enough area so that you have enough Congressmen, you can produce some pretty good miracles which a smaller industry could not do, so it is these smaller industries and the smaller units that frankly concern me as to what happens; not necessarily that they are inefficient but they are

smaller.

Mr. KEOGH. Will the gentleman yield?

Mr. BYRNES. Surely.

Mr. KEOGH. I thing in order for us to develop this colloquy you had to start off on the assumption that the industry, whatever it is, is going to be completely forgotten and neglected in the exercise of existing authority and in the exercise of the authority here sought. I question whether that is a realistic assumption.

Mr. BYRNES. I think I have some basis for the assumption, Mr. Keogh.

Mr. KEOGH. You may have some, but I do not.

Mr. BYRNES. In the very fact that we have had pending before this committee bills to increase the duty or to put a processing tax or an additional tax to bring the price of some of these metals and minerals when they entered this country up to a point where the domestic industry felt it could be competitive and could still stay in business, and we have had hearing after hearing on it, but because an increase in duty would offend some other country, we have resisted. In this whole program the idea is that we are going to work with other countries. Therefore, the tendency, it seems to me, would very definitely be to suggest that we can get by in this country without some of these marginal producers and put more people into the area of being marginal and now we are above that line, and then the result of that is that some of these mines are certainly going to go out of existence. To me the whole path that we follow, at least from the evidence that has been presented before this committee in the past, and even a bill that we reported out of this committee last year sponsored by the gentleman from Tennessee, imposed an in

crease in duty and yet it is resisted although we thought it was necessary because of the plight the industry was in.

Mr. KEOGH. But there is here a recognition of the fact that there will be some disruptions and provision is made for that. I think that you are arguing a very narrow point of view.

Mr. BYRNES. You and I, I think, will have these discussions when we get into executive session. I would not like to take the time of the Secretary. But the point of my referring to it, and I think the Secretary understands it, was how does the adjustment assistance program come in and meet that problem that would be then created? Secretary UDALL. Let me say, first, that the menerals picture at the present time, although we have gone through adjustments, this is the type of business where because of the ore bodies that are available, because of the different types of mechanization, there is constant change, but our minerals industry in the main is pretty healthy at the present time. I covered this in my prepared statement, what happens with small producers in an adjustment program of this kind. I think there are two or three different alternatives. It may be a little harder to apply than in some of the other situations to these mining towns that are separated and are out and a part and are built around an ore body, but, nevertheless, I think if it gets to that point there can be these types of solution that I am talking about and it might work just as effectively as elsewhere, but it is speculative to say so. I will admit that.

Mr. BYRNES. It is a happy state that at least you have that confidence.

Mr. KEOGH. Mr. Chairman, if the gentleman will yield to me, I share that confidence, too. I think that we have before us a potential program that approaches the problems of a particular industry in the context of a much broader horizon and out of it will come many more possible and potential solutions than we have ever had before. Thank you very much.

Mr. BYRNES. I wish you would lend me your tranquilizers.

Mr. KEOGH. I will use them. My tranquilizers come from my opportunity to associate with you too infrequently.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Secretary, again we appreciate very much your coming to the committee. You have been very helpful. So do not stay away so long in the future.

Secretary UDALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

The CHAIRMAN. Without objection, the committee adjourns until 10 o'clock in the morning.

(Whereupon, at 4:50 p.m., the committee recessed, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Thursday, March 15, 1962.)