nated against in arrangements which our Government or our traders make with other buyers or which our neighbors like Canada make with their sales of wheat. So we respectfully urge that S. 2310 be reported unfavorably by this committee. Senator CLARK. Thank you very much, Mr. Wilson. Senator Dominick? Senator DOMINICK. Mr. Wilson, I have real respect, obviously, for your group and for your humanitarian statement. But I want to make it crystal clear that it isn't a question of trying to solve the starvation or hunger problems of the Russian people. Secretary Ball said yesterday, and I quote him, "People aren't going to starve. They might not eat quite as well, but that margin is not going to be the wheat involved in the purchase from the United States." That is on page 252 of the temporary record here. We are not talking about that. And we are not talking about the Americans distributing wheat or food into Communist countries where they might need it. What we are talking about is a very simple thing, and that is whether the American taxpayer should be required to guarantee the commercial and political risk of the Soviet Union living up to its agreement, and they haven't in 50 out of 52 agreements. They may in this one; we don't know. But should the American public be required to take that risk? That is the only thing that is involved in this. Mr. WILSON. Well, granted that if the Soviets do not achieve this wheat deal, they are not going to die in the streets or on the farms. Is it conceivable that they would have come into the market asking for $250 million worth of wheat if there hadn't been a very serious wheat shortage and one that really pinched them? Second, on the matter of the Soviet agreements, you will recall in the hearings before the Test Ban Treaty that the State Department furnished a list of 27 treaties which the Soviets, they said, have in general kept. Now their record in treaty keeping in many fields, like nonaggression pacts, is very bad. But when you come to the commercial transactions, I know of no case-perhaps you do where they have repudiated a strictly commercial transaction. General Hester, who dealt with the Russians after the war to the tune of more than a million dollars in Berlin in the occupation, told me that when agreements were made that were crystal clear in both languages and on both sides, that they were meticulously kept. When they were vague, political agreements, they might be violated and his point was that agreements with the Russians need to be hammered out so they are self-executing and to the benefit of both sides and I think this is the kind of arrangement which can come within this broad category. Senator DOMINICK. Do you have any information which would lead you to believe the Russians would not buy the wheat for cash? Mr. WILSON. Well, I am not aware, myself, technically, of their gold supply. Let's take a look at the last 3 years of the Communist bloc. The Chinese bought the surplus of Australia. They bought a considerable proportion of the wheat surplus in Canada. Now the Russians have completed buying the available surplus from Canada and have come to the United States. Now that is a pretty heavy drain on the total Communist bloc in terms of gold or dollars. And the only way they can earn dollars is by trading with the United States or with a third country. The only way they can supply gold is their gold reserves, so Senator CLARK. Production. Mr. WILSON. Production, yes, thank you. So why is this not in the broad world interest to try and establish the kind of transactions which are commercially desirable on both sides and to try and make some headway against this cold war, which is costing the United States $56 billion a year in military expenditures, which is creating uncertainty in the minds of everybody. Our central problem is not wheat; our central problem in the world is trying to solve the problems of war, trying to get enough common interests on the two sides so that they will try to insist their governments move toward some kind of accommodation. Certainly in the very elemental aspect of world hunger, I think there is a place where we can begin. Senator DOMINICK. With all due respect to your statement, I couldn't gather anything from it which would indicate you had any special knowledge that the Soviets would not pay for this in cash, if they were so required. Mr. WILSON. I made my point here in the last statement in the testimony I gave, that there is also the question of whether, in our commercial transactions, which we need to increase in our affluent society because what we want to do is increase both our agricultural and our industrial production, and of course our committee has been on record favoring trade in nonmilitary, nonstrategic goods, with the whole world. And whether we are going to treat one set of buyers differently than another set of buyers. I think that reflects both on the Soviets and on us. And there is a point that should not be overlooked in this consideration. Senator DOMINICK. That is all, Mr. Chairman. Senator CLARK. Thank you very much, Mr. Wilson. I must say that I find myself in sympathy with your presentation, which I thought you made very ably. Mr. WILSON. Thank you. Senator CLARK. The committee will stand adjourned until 10 a.m., on Monday morning, when it will meet in executive session to determine how this bill will be handled. (Thereupon, at 12:35 p.m., the committee adjourned, to reconvene at 10 a.m., Monday, November 25, 1963, in executive session.) (The following were ordered inserted in the record:) WILLIS ROBERTSON, [Telegram] WASHINGTON, D.C., November 19, 1963. Chairman, Senate Banking and Currency Committee, Washington, D.C. The National Association of Wheat Growers, which is an association of 11 major wheat-producing States representing 65 percent of commercial wheat production of the United States is deeply concerned by the effect of the Mundt amendment on the sale of wheat for dollars to all Communist countries, especially Russia. We are now holding our State wheat association conventions. Of those held to date all have approved the sale of wheat to Russia and satellite countries as outlined by the President. The President called for sale of wheat through normal commercial channels. It is our understanding that Mundt amendment would disrupt normal trading procedures which have successfully operated in sale of nonstrategic goods to Communist nations. For long period of time it is the feeling of most wheat producers with whom we have had contact that if we allow this cash market for wheat to slip through our hands and be served by our Western competitors we will be benefiting the wheat producers of these other nations at the expense of our own producers. It is furthermore generally agreed the sale of wheat to Russia will not enhance the cause of world communism but will be feeding hungry people and using their gold for food rather than war materiel. We therefore are in strong opposition to the Mundt amendment and request that you place this statement in the record of the committee hearings on this amendment. GLEN L. BAYNE, President, National Association of Wheat Growers. RICHMOND, Va., November 21, 1963. Senator A. WILLIS ROBERTSON, Chairman, Senate Banking and Currency Committee, The Leaf Tobacco Exporters Association opposes the Mundt bill now being considered by your committee. We believe that this bill if approved would virtually eliminate the possibility of any trade with Soviet-bloc countries. Flue-cured tobacco is in a surplus position. Any additional exports of tobacco would improve the economic position of flue-cured growers generally. STUART CARR, President, Leaf Tobacco Exporters Association. WASHINGTON, D.C., November 21, 1963. Senator A. WILLIS ROBERTSON, Chairman, Senate Banking and Currency Committee, Washington, D.C.: Re S. 2310, Farm Bureau believes it would be a serious mistake to permit the Export-Import Bank, or any other agency of Government, to guarantee any part of any extension of credit to the U.S.S.R. or any other member of the Communist bloc. Respectfully request that this telegram be made a part of the official hearing record. CHARLES B. SHUMAN, President, American Farm Bureau Federation. |