« 이전계속 »
more, but the information will be placed in the next bulletin of the Minute Women.
You will hear from many people on this matter once we have informed our members. Since Minute Women does not as a group make resolutions, the expressions of opinion will come from individuals.
Speaking only for myself, I recall General MacArthur's 1952 keynote address to the then Republican Party, when he said the greatest liberals were those who wrote and supported the Constitution. This document gives more freedom to more people than any other political credo in history. I would be distrustful of any attempts to alter either the Constitution or the traditional parliamentary procedures in the guise of streamlining or modernizing. Every amendment to the Constitution since the 16th amendment has weakened our Government rather than strengthened it. Any proposals to restrict free debate of any and all issues in the Senate would similarly be a step in the further weakening of the Constitution. No subject likely to come before the Senate is too unimportant to give full hearing to any Senator with a point of view on it.
The only changes I can see necessary in Senate procedure (as a result of testifying before Senate Interior and Insular Affairs re Alaska Mental Health Act, February 1956) is that the Members be present on the floor during debates and voting. Now how this can be done and still sit on committees, etc., I don't know unless we have four Senators from each State: Two for Senate procedures and two for hearings and office work.
Enclosed is a copy of the June issue of American Mercury containing an article on page 79 written by me on the subject which I know best: Mental Health Molds Your Mind. I hope you will give it consideration.
Thank you for your courage in taking the initiative on this important change in Senate rules. Perhaps we can look forward to your undertaking the task our dearly beloved Senator Joe left us. Sincerely yours in guarding the land we love,
MISSISSIPPI STATE TAXPAYERS ASSOCIATION,
Friars Point, Miss., June 10, 1957. SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE OF SENATE ON RULES, ETC.
Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: Do you feel that to choke down those who want full debate on matters of consequence, will develop our Nation?
Why do you all try to govern more and more when you know that the best governed are those who are least governed.
When a nation goes down most everyone goes with it. There are but few exceptions. Yours very truly,
Tom L. GIBSON.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF PRO-AMERICA, ILLINOIS CHAPTER,
River Forest, Ill., June 4, 1957. Hon. THOMAS C. HENNINGS, Jr., Chairman, Special Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. We the Illinois chapter of National Association of Pro-America protest the amendment to Senate rule 22 to limit debate because we believe it would take away protection which the American people have against undesirable legislation.
Mitzi WATERS, President.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF CHRISTIAN SCHOOLS,
Chicago, Ill., May 23, 1957. Mr. HERMAN E. TALMADGE, United States Senate,
Washington, D. C. DEAR MR. TALMADGE: In response to your letter of May 11 may I state the following:
I am against limited debate if limiting implies the suppression of information pertinent to the issue before the House.
We certainly appreciate the conservative emphasis which is being sounded by a number of our political leaders. May we encourage the economic, conservative program now before both Houses. Sincerely yours,
Washington, D. C., May 23, 1957. Hon. HERMAN E. TALMADGE,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. MY DEAR MR. TALMADGE: Your invitation to appear before the Senate Committee on Rules and Administration is deeply appreciated.
If it were not for the fact that at the present time I am literally swamped with other pressing matters, which I cannot possibly shirk, I would readily accept your invitation, for I feel that debate on legislation should not be further curtailed.
The Founders of our Republic certainly did not limit debate at the Philadelphia Convention. As a result they brought forth a document providing for the greatest freedom of discussion unequaled in human annals.
We are now celebrating the establishment of the first white settlement on American soil at Jamestown. One of the major exhibits there is the Magna Carta, a document on freedom of speech and assembly. As you know, it was signed by King John at Runneymede in 1215, the forerunner of our own rights of freedom.
It is my humble belief that debate should be free as far as our own elected Representatives to Congress are concerned, as long as the arguments used are germane to the subject under discussion. Only enemies of our country, under influence of a foreign power, should be bridled. There are two methods of destroying our system of government. One is by subversion from without our political circles; the other is by amending our Constitution or circumventing it by unconstitutional laws upheld by a subservient court.
It was the intention of the advocates of the court-packing bill in the thirties to circumvent the Constitution by setting up a High Court with a leftwing complexion which would hold unconstitutional leftist laws constitutional. It was the purpose of the Norris amendment to take the amendment powers from our representatives and to throw them to the organized minorities. We were prominent in the opposition forces which victoriously battled the proposal.
We must guard against every effort to centralize government, either by silencing the representatives of the people, or by other means.
Whenever we may be of service, please feel free to call upon us.
WALTER S. STEELE.
Davenport, Iowa, May 14, 1957.
Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR TALMADGE: Freedom of speech is guaranteed by our United States Constitution. We voters can speak only through the mouths of our elected Representatives and Senators in the two Houses of Congress.
In no other place is freedom of speech so important as it is in the Senate. No "gag rule” must be imposed.
Our national lawmakers have permitted themselves to be dictated to by the President, who-according to the Constitution—is supposed merely to "execute” the laws which they make. Our national lawmakers have sat helplessly by, permitting the Supreme Court to revise and rewrite the United States Constitution by the "interpretation” of their own inexperience in the field of constitutional law; whereas, the business of the Supreme Court is to uphold all parts of the Constitution-even that part pertaining to States' rights.
Our national lawmakers must not further relinquish their privileges and their obligations by taking away from themselves, and from the people and States represented by them, the right to free and unlimited debate.
I trust that you will do your utmost to insure that there be no change which will limit free debate as granted in Senate rule XXII. Sincerely yours,
GWEN PATTON INMAN
Mrs. Gerald O. Inman, National Historian and Past National Chairman of National Defense,
THE NATIONAL SOCIETY OF HUGUENOTS IN THE STATE OF Iowa,
Davenport, Iowa, May 14, 1957. Re Senate rule XXII. Senator HERMAN E. TALMADGE, Senate Committee on Rules and Administration,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR TALMADGE: Our Iowa State motto is: "Our liberties we prize and our rights we will maintain."
I hope that our United States Senators will take that as their motto when they vote upon the question of changing Senate rule XXII, and that their decision will be not to impair in any way or degree their right to free, unlimited debate, for if they do give up that privilege, our Nation will soon have no liberty to prize.
The Supreme Court has robbed the States of their States rights; it has robbed individuals of their freedom of choice. The President forced acceptance of the NATO Status of Forces Treaty, robbing our fighting men overseas of any protection from their United States Constitution; he forbade Senators from voting for the Bricker amendment, which would safeguard our sovereignty and our United States Constitution; he proposed “atoms for peace" and sharing our atomic stockpile with other nations—thereby indicating a willingness to put us at the mercy of fair-weather friends and enemies; he unconstitutionally forces (robs) taxpayers in order to be a "hail fellow, well met” (to be a big shot) among foreigners; he neglects home defenses while building all kinds of defenses and defense-materiel factories on foreign soil to be taken by (and helpful to) our enemies whenever they desire to strike; he has assumed dictatorship by taking upon himself the power to tax (by his outrageous giveaway program) and the power to declare war—a power not constitutionally his, but recently stolen by him from Congress.
Upon what doth this man feed—that he has grown so great? He feeds upon the truly great, the MacArthurs and the McCarthys, and he uses his power to scourge them who are so far above him that he can never really touch nor besmirch the hem of their garments.
Thank God for men like them and like you, who put patriotism above self, and right before fear. I know you will lead the fight to keep unchanged Senate rule XXII. Very sincerely,
GWEN PATTON INMAN, Director and State Chairman of National Defense, Iowa Chapter.
RESOLUTIONS ADOPTED BY THE 44TH ANNUAL CONGRESS, NATIONAL SOCIETY OF
NEW ENGLAND WOMEN, May 22, 1957, SWAMPSCOTT, Mass.
VI. SENATE CLOTURE RULE
Whereas civil rights agitators are working to change the Senate rule on the closing of debate in that body in order to make easier the passage of civil-rights legislation; and
Whereas seven bills before a subcommittee of the Senate Rules and Administration Committee propose (1) to change the presently required affirmative vote of two-thirds of the Senators duly chosen and sworn to (2) to two-thirds of those present and voting, or (3) to a simple majority vote; and
Whereas traditionally the Senate is a curb upon hasty action by the House and is now the only free parliamentary body left in the world:
Resolved, That the 44th Annual Congress of the National Society of New England Women urge the Rules Committee and the Senate of the United States not to stifle freedom of speech on the Senate floor, but to maintain its present rule requiring an affirmative vote of "two-thirds of Senators duly chosen and sworn" as this country's greatest protection against adoption of harmful legislation promoted by special interest groups for selfish ends.
NATIONAL SOCIETY OF NEW ENGLAND WOMEN,
Davenport, Iowa, May 14, 1957. Re Senate rule XXII. Senator HERMAN E. TALMADGE, Senate Committee on Rules and Administration,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR TALMADGE: I understand that a special subcommittee has been named to take testimony on proposals pending to change Senate rule XXII, relating to limitation of debate.
If the constitutional government of our United States Republic is to endure, it is essential that no limitation of any kind be imposed upon the period of debate on any subject in our United States Senate. The system of checks and balances devised by the wise men who wrote our United States Constitution has been badly impaired, as it is, by the usurpation of power by the executive and judicial branches of government. It is imperative that the elected voices of the people, our United States Senators, be given full opportunity to speak for us, ungagged and unmuffled, if we are to retain any vestige of the freedom which made our Nation great.
I hope that you will do your utmost to insure that there be no change which will limit free debate granted in Senate rule XXII. Sincerely yours,
GWEN PATTON INMAN,
RESOLUTION OF THE NATIONAL SOCIETY PATRIOTIC WOMEN OF AMERICA, INC.
SENATE RULE XXII
Whereas rule XXII, the filibuster rule, is a protection of the minority, and the early patriots knowing that limited debate could be and was harmful to the best interests of the young nation, established the rule now known as Senate rule XXII in 1806 which remained in force until 1917, when it was amended; and
Whereas in 1949 the Senate realizing that the former provisions of the rule were best, changed the rule to its former status, which required two-thirds majority of all Members whether present and voting or not: Therefore be it
Resolved, That the Alabama Council Patriotic Women of America, hereby oppose any change in or amendment to rule XXII of the Senate; and be it further
Resolved, That the Alabama Council Patriotic Women of America, commend members of the subcommittee in their effort to have public hearings on proposed changes in this all important rule, believing as did the Founding Fathers that the citizens have the right of facts and information.
RESOLUTION OF NATIONAL SOCIETY, SONS OF THE AMERICAN REVOLUTION,
SUPPORTING FREEDOM OF DEBATE IN UNITED STATES SENATE I, the undersigned, Harold L. Putnam, executive secretary of the National Society of the Sons of the American Revolution, hereby certify that the following is a full, true, and correct copy of a resolution duly proposed and unanimously adopted at its 67th annual congress held at Salt Lake City, Utah, on May 29, 1957, viz:
“Whereas maintenance of freedom of debate in the United States Senate performs the same essential function as freedom of the press, under the first amendment, in keeping the people fully informed in respect to matters which may vitally affect their freedom and the security of constitutional rights.
“In recent years various attempts have been made to bring about the enactment of restricted rules in the Senate of the United States which may endanger freedom of discussion in that House of Congress.
“We recognize the possibility of abuse of the right of free debate in the Senate just as we know that freedom of the press is, at times, abused.
"The alternative, which is control of debate, and may lead to a condition equivalent to the censorship, is too dangerous to be seriously considered: Now, therefore, be it
‘Resolved, That we express our unalterable opposition to the enactment of any rule in the Senate which will substantially alter the right to freedom of discussion secured by Senate rule XXII.
"We call upon the Rules Committee of the Senate to protect this essential right when acting on pending proposals relating to the change of that Senate rule."
I further certify that said resolution has never been modified or rescinded, and that the same is now in full force and effect.
In witness whereof, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the seal of said society at the city of Washington, D. C., this 10th day of June 1957. (SEAL]
HAROLD L. PUTNAM, Executive Secretary, National Society, Sons of American Revolution.
NATIONAL SOCIETY UNITED STATES DAUGHTERS OF 1812,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. DEAR SENATOR TALMADGE: When the hearings on the subject of changing Senate rule XXII relative to the limitation of debate take place, I wish to be recorded as opposing any kind of limitation.
It is becoming increasingly apparent to even the least observant person that executive dictatorship is replacing our constitutional government “by the people. Such dictatorship, together with judicial misinterpretation by executive appointees to the Supreme Court, presents a grave threat to our Republic.
The voters elect the legislators to represent us, to make our laws for us, and to speak for us. You were not elected to do the bidding of a President; you were elected to check his power if his head becomes too big for his hat. You were not elected to relinquish to the Supreme Court your power to make the laws of our Republic. You were elected to check the power of the Supreme Court. Many of our Senators have forgotten that they represent us, the voters; they are our voice. The voice of the people must not be stilled, must not be limited.
Our freedom depends upon our being heard. I urge you: Oppose any kind of limitation on Senate debate. Very sincerely yours,
GWEN PATTON INMAN,
Mrs. Gerald O. Inman,
NEW JERSEY CHAPTER OF PRO AMERICA, INC.,
West Orange, N. J., June 12, 1957. DEAR SENATOR HENNINGS: The New Jersey Chapter of Pro America is strongly opposed to any limitation of debate in the Senate. We hope that you agree with Sincerely,
REPUBLICAN WOMEN OF PARK RIDGE, INC., ILLINOIS,
Park Ridge, Ill., June 6, 1957. SPECIAL SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE SENATE COMMITTEE
ON RULES AND ADMINISTRATION, United States Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C. GENTLEMEN: We, the members of the Republican Women's Club of Park Ridge, Ill., strenuously oppose any limiting of debate in either the United States Senate or House.