Senator MONRONEY. The point, if I may interrupt there, though, that I was trying to make is that all your postal workers, the 600,000 of them, are under the Hatch Act. If they actively and publicly campaign for the candidate for Congress or the candidate for the Senate, they are guilty of a violation of law, and most of them observe it rather scrupulously, I have found. That is your career worker. On the other hand, a first-class office opens up, and here is a man that goes out and organizes maybe the catfish fishermen's association or something in behalf of the Congressman in that county. An examination is held, we will say, open competitive. And perhaps a war veteran of World War II with a vast amount of experience quit his job in the Post Office Department, went into the service, perhaps attained stature in the postal service during the war. I am speaking of a specific case, where a man was in charge of General Eisenhower's mail room. He was for Eisenhower, but, because he made speeches for Eisenhower, it was a very difficult thing for me to appoint that young man, who, by all odds, was outstanding, over a man who had gone out and publicly organized various groups for me during my campaign.

Now, that is the point I am trying to get across, that this present system, from a practical standpoint, I think, blocks out the adequate consideration generally of your postal workers to aspire to the job of postmaster. With a well running and well organized civil-service plan taking politics out of the postal service, the top job will then be one that the postal workers can aspire to without being handicapped, necessarily, by the fact that they are under the Hatch Act and their competition is not. Therefore the politicians are going to have political preferment under either party.

And we are both reasonable and practical enough to realize that that is the situation.

Mr. HALLBECK. Senator Monroney, the only difference in our thinking is this. I don't believe that anything in Reorganization Plan No. 2 would change that situation.

I can't imagine that a postmaster general who receives his appointment as a result of politics, who is responsible to the President as a member of his Cabinet, could be entirely deaf to the requests that would come through political channels for appointments in these twenty-one-thousand-some-odd post offices.

My thinking on it is that there would be absolutely no check or balance, and the man, whoever he might be, who held a position of Postmaster General would be a law unto himself, and he could use that power in practically any way you could imagine.

Senator MONRONEY. You mean you are fearful of the present Postmaster General, or you feel that any Postmaster General might do that?

Mr. HALLBECK. No, I am speaking of the principle.

As a matter of fact, I entered the postal service under Woodrow Wilson, and I have seen an awful lot of Postmasters General. I have seen the good and the bad. And I don't believe that any of them wore wings. Most of them were political appointees.

Senator DwORSHAK. All understood something about politics?
Mr. HALLBECK. They weren't exactly strangers to it. That is for

sure.

As a matter of fact, the author of the present law, of the O'Mahoney Act, I think got most of his experience while serving as the First

Assistant Postmaster General. And he had no great previous experience, at least, with the postal service before he served in that position.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Hallbeck.

Mr. HALLBECK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Walters, will you come forward, please?

STATEMENT OF THOMAS G. WALTERS, REPRESENTING THE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES COUNCIL OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR

REORGANIZATION PLAN No. 2 OF 1952

Mr. WALTERS. Mr. Chairman, for the record, and I will make my statement very brief, my name is Thomas G. Walters, representing the Government Employees Council of the American Federation of Labor.

This council is made up of 25 member unions whose membership in whole or in part are Federal employees.

I would like to endorse the general principle of Senator Johnston's statement and Jerome Keating's, E. C. Hallbeck, and George Riley's, as well as the comments made by the chairman of this committee this morning.

One thing that we, in the council feel very keenly, is that Reorganization Plan No. 2 does not change in any way that we can see, the many ramifications of the method and procedures of making the selection of who is to be postmaster. In fact, we are of the opinion that it would increase the possibility of returning more to the spoils system, if the plan, Plan No. 2, is adopted, than under the present system.

Now, the men who are the officers of the postal unions that make up this council are men with many years of experience in the postal service, most of them having more than 20 years' service in the post office work in the field service.

As for myself, in 1923 I was appointed rural carrier in my home town back in Toccoa, Ga., and we have over the years supported legislation that would improve the merit system.

But I would like to mention this fact in connection with Reorganization Plan No. 2. The more than 21,000 postmasters of the first, second, and third class have in their power the responsibility and the duty and the privilege of making approximately 500,000 appointments, or the supervision of that many employees, and to fill the vacancies from time to time, under the procedures as laid down by the Civil Service Commission.

Now, if Reorganization Plan No. 2 becomes law, and the power of appointing the more than 21,000 postmasters is placed in the hands of one individual, he indirectly and directly would likewise or could likewise have a lot to say as to who would be appointed clerks and carriers, and to other positions in the field service of the Post Office Department.

In the council we have such organizations as the National Postal Transport Association, commonly referred to as the railway postal.

clerks, the National Association of Letter Carriers, and the American Federation of Government Employees, who have the custodial people as their jurisdiction membership, in the National Federation of Post Office Clerks, the National Special Delivery Messengers, and the Postal Supervisors. And all of these groups are unanimous in their opinion that Reorganization Plan No. 2 will not strengthen but weaken the merit system in the field service of the Post Office Department.

Now, with your permission, Mr. Chairman, I would like to file a letter that is dated May 12, a copy of which was mailed to each Senator, and in this in a condensed form there is given the opinion on Reorganization Plan No. 2 that was approved by a special committee that has made a study of this. And I would like to submit that for the record.

The CHAIRMAN. I may advise you, Mr. Walters that it is already a part of the record. (See p. 37.)

Mr. WALTERS. Thank you very kindly.

That short statement, Mr. Chairman, concludes what I had in mind to say, with emphasis on the fact that the council is strong in their opinion that Reorganization Plan No. 2, if it becomes law, will not strengthen the merit system, which we would like to see strengthened, but would, in our opinion, cause the system to be set backward rather than forward.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Walters.

Are there any questions?

Senator MONRONEY. Was any attempt made other than through the Government Employees Council to ascertain the individual views of the working members of those unions?

Mr. WALTERS. Yes, sir. For some 2 years now, this has been a live issue before the Senate Post Office and Civil Service Committee, and at many conventions this has been discussed and talked about with the people throughout the United States.

Now, we don't feel that the adoption of Reorganization Plan No. 2 would in any way change the many ramifications of making the appointments or promotions to any position in the field service.

We simply think that it is taking away, from 96 people who are elected by the voters of this Nation, an opportunity to look at the situation, and placing it into an appointive one-man pocket. This is the objection that we have to this plan.

Senator MONRONEY. You are assuming, of course, that that one man would violate his oath of office and try to make a political personal patronage system out of it.

Mr. WALTERS. The temptation would be very, very great.

Senator MONRONEY. But you do know that today under the present system it is customary to give political weighting to appointments for postmasters?

Mr. WALTERS. That is true.

Senator MONRONEY. I mean, we are not children. We know that is a fact.

Mr. WALTERS. But this plan doesn't change that, as we see it. Senator MONRONEY. At least it puts it in the hands of the principal executive official who is charged with the operation of the postal

service.

Mr. WALTERS. That is right.

Assistant Postmaster General. And he had no great previous experience, at least, with the postal service before he served in that position.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Hallbeck.

Mr. HALLBECK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the committee.

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Walters, will you come forward, please?

STATEMENT OF THOMAS G. WALTERS, REPRESENTING THE GOVERNMENT EMPLOYEES COUNCIL OF THE AMERICAN FEDERATION OF LABOR

REORGANIZATION PLAN No. 2 OF 1952

Mr. WALTERS. Mr. Chairman, for the record, and I will make my statement very brief, my name is Thomas G. Walters, representing the Government Employees Council of the American Federation of Labor.

This council is made up of 25 member unions whose membership in whole or in part are Federal employees.

I would like to endorse the general principle of Senator Johnston's statement and Jerome Keating's, E. C. Hallbeck, and George Riley's, as well as the comments made by the chairman of this committee this morning.

One thing that we, in the council feel very keenly, is that Reorganization Plan No. 2 does not change in any way that we can see, the many ramifications of the method and procedures of making the selection of who is to be postmaster. In fact, we are of the opinion that it would increase the possibility of returning more to the spoils system, if the plan, Plan No. 2, is adopted, than under the present system.

Now, the men who are the officers of the postal unions that make up this council are men with many years of experience in the postal service, most of them having more than 20 years' service in the post office work in the field service.

As for myself, in 1923 I was appointed rural carrier in my home town back in Toccoa, Ga., and we have over the years supported legislation that would improve the merit system.

But I would like to mention this fact in connection with Reorganization Plan No. 2. The more than 21,000 postmasters of the first, second, and third class have in their power the responsibility and the duty and the privilege of making approximately 500,000 appointments, or the supervision of that many employees, and to fill the vacancies from time to time, under the procedures as laid down by the Civil Service Commission.

Now, if Reorganization Plan No. 2 becomes law, and the power of appointing the more than 21,000 postmasters is placed in the hands of one individual, he indirectly and directly would likewise or could likewise have a lot to say as to who would be appointed clerks and carriers, and to other positions in the field service of the Post Office Department.

In the council we have such organizations as the National Postal Transport Association, commonly referred to as the railway postal.

clerks, the National Association of Letter Carriers, and the American Federation of Government Employees, who have the custodial people as their jurisdiction membership, in the National Federation of Post Office Clerks, the National Special Delivery Messengers, and the Postal Supervisors. And all of these groups are unanimous in their opinion that Reorganization Plan No. 2 will not strengthen but weaken the merit system in the field service of the Post Office Department.

Now, with your permission, Mr. Chairman, I would like to file a letter that is dated May 12, a copy of which was mailed to each Senator, and in this in a condensed form there is given the opinion on Reorganization Plan No. 2 that was approved by a special committee that has made a study of this. And I would like to submit that for the record.

The CHAIRMAN. I may advise you, Mr. Walters that it is already a part of the record. (See p. 37.)

Mr. WALTERS. Thank you very kindly.

That short statement, Mr. Chairman, concludes what I had in mind to say, with emphasis on the fact that the council is strong in their opinion that Reorganization Plan No. 2, if it becomes law, will not strengthen the merit system, which we would like to see strengthened, but would, in our opinion, cause the system to be set backward rather than forward.

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you very much, Mr. Walters.

Are there any questions?

Senator MONRONEY. Was any attempt made other than through the Government Employees Council to ascertain the individual views of the working members of those unions?

Mr. WALTERS. Yes, sir. For some 2 years now, this has been a live issue before the Senate Post Office and Civil Service Committee, and at many conventions this has been discussed and talked about with the people throughout the United States.

Now, we don't feel that the adoption of Reorganization Plan No. 2 would in any way change the many ramifications of making the appointments or promotions to any position in the field service.

We simply think that it is taking away, from 96 people who are elected by the voters of this Nation, an opportunity to look at the situation, and placing it into an appointive one-man pocket. This is the objection that we have to this plan.

Senator MONRONEY. You are assuming, of course, that that one man would violate his oath of office and try to make a political personal patronage system out of it.

Mr. WALTERS. The temptation would be very, very great.

Senator MONRONEY. But you do know that today under the present system it is customary to give political weighting to appointments for postmasters?

Mr. WALTERS. That is true.

Senator MONRONEY. I mean, we are not children. We know that is a fact.

Mr. WALTERS. But this plan doesn't change that, as we see it. Senator MONRONEY. At least it puts it in the hands of the principal executive official who is charged with the operation of the postal service.

Mr. WALTERS. That is right.