GOVERNMENT N o Talking, Please N e w legislation to provide more government information called for by House subcommittee M ..QQic for" new laws designed to "^ry information loose from tight-lipped government officials. Rep. John Moss (D-Calif.) says there is a "clear need" for legislation t o correct abuses in the release of government news. Moss is head of a special House subcommittee
Xhe witnesses . . . Newsmen Wiggins and Pope on federal information policies, which wound up hearings last week. Major points at issue during the hearings centered on the news programs of several government agencies. T h e hearings brought out that there is a great deal of confusion over what information can b e legitimately released to the public. Various laws and regulations were cited, but no clear-cut pattern was evident. Some agencies are withholding information -which the public has a right to know, Moss believes. This "right to know" is t h e battle cry of newspaper, magazine, and radio-TV representatives who are protesting present information operations. There is a trend in Government, the newsmen maintain, which seriously endangers this right. "Arrogance" and "contempt for the public" mark the relations of certain agencies with the press, says James S. Pope of t h e Louisville (Ky.) CourierJournal. There has been a "frightening deterioration" in the news policy of the Defense Department, h e adds.
Pope calls for a change in present laws which would give the public more legal right to government information. The right of free access to news, he feels, is as fundamental as the basic guarantees of the Constitution. Freedom of information, however, is not— and should not become—a partisan political issue. J. Russell Wiggins of the Washington Post and Times-Herald, w h o is chairman of the freedom of information committee of the American Society of Newspaper Editors, also criticized secrecy in some agencies. But in the scramble for such secrecy, America may lose its liberty, he warns, adding that this "scorched freedom" policy should be avoided at all costs. • An ' ' I n h e r e n t " Right. Getting down to cases, the subcommittee called Philip Young, chairman of the Civil Service Commission, to explain the news policies of his department. CSC has been accused of being one of the worst offenders in withholding information. The agency has an "inherent right" to hold back certain information from the public, Young says. Any reasonable request from a legitimate reporter will be answered, if possible. But the CSC is the final judge of what is a "reasonable" request. Moss later termed this position an exaggerated claim of authority, and said: "There are indications that some officials in Washington today believe that they have authority to exercise Presidential powers without the President's authorization or his prior knowledge or even subsequent review of their acts." The subcommittee also turned to the industrial advisory groups which are set up by many government agencies. There is a danger, Moss believes, that some members of these groups might use the confidential information they obtain for their own purposes. He also scored the groups' secret meetings. Undersecretary of Agriculture True D . Morse defended the use of advisory committees in his department. He said there are about 75 such groups in USD A, which are a very important part
of the agency's operations. Morse believes the groups must hold closed meetings to enable "free and frank discussion" to be held. He promised, however, to work on a "more suitable arrangement" for press coverage of these meetings. A note of caution was sounded by the minority member of the subcommittee, Rep. Clare E. Hoffman (RM i c h . ) . He said that newsmen should not b e arbitrary in reporting government news. Federal departments are caught between two criticisms—either they don't send out enough news or they send out too much, Moss' recommendations for corrective legislation were supported by Dante B. Fascell (D-Fla.), the other subcommittee member. They were joined by Rep. William Dawson (D111.), chairman of the parent House
The lawmakers - . . Reps. Dawson, Moss, and Hoffman Government Operations Committee. The Moss subcommittee will resume hearings on the subject in January. • New Secrecy Labels. "For official use only . . . not for publication . . . administratively restricted. . ." Government agencies are using these terms to restrict the flow of information about their operations, t h e subcommittee found. About 3 0 other designations are used by various bureaus to describe data which are not made public. By Presidential order, however, security classification is limited to three types of informationtop secret, secret, and confidential. Most agencies say they make information available whenever possible. In a 552-page report, the subcommittee listed answers to a questionnaire sent to 63 federal agencies. T h e survey covered such diverse groups as the ultra-secret Central Intelligence Agency and the obscure American Battle Monuments Commission. W h e n information is withheld, the NOV.
2 1,
1955
C&EN
5033
GOVERNMENT agencies fall back for justification on executive orders, directives, and legislation. Several agencies, notably the D e fense Department and CIA, make certain data available only on a "need to know" basis. Cost of operating government information agencies is p u t at about $10 million a year by the subcommittee survey. Biggest spenders are the D e partment of Defense, vhich allotted about $3 million for information services, and the Agriculture Department, which spent more than $2.3 million.
The figures quoted by the subcommittee are admittedly incomplete because some agencies did n o t submit complete estimates covering their information activities. The agencies spend more than $2.5 million each year on security programs for safeguarding restricted information. The Atomic Energy Commission lists annual expenditures for classification activities and document control as $1.7 million a year. This figure does not include sales of publications to industry groups or private individuals.
Trade Takes Over Four m a j o r actions in f o r e i g n t r a d e field may s i g n a l n e w trends affecting c h e m i c a l producers Jt^OTENTiAL new trends in foreign trade policies turned u p in four different places last week. • Tariff Commissior* «nd State Dep a r t m e n t ended hearings on possible tariff cuts for chemical products. • Congress began hearings on how foreign economic policy affects the domestic economy. • Commerce Department eased trade restrictions with Russia. • National Planning Association five-year study recommends lower tariffs and help for domestic industry. The chemical industry has a vital stake in these developments. Chemical products are involved either directly or indirectly i n each of the actions. • Fourteen Must Go. A two-pronged study of present tariff levels conducted by the Tariff Commission and t h e State Department's Committee on Reciprocity Information caused immediate concern in chemical circles. The government groups are trying to work out tariff reductions which will serve as bargaining points in trade talks to be held in Geneva next year. High on the list slated for possible tariff cuts are more than 40 chemical products. Fourteen key defense chemicals on trie list (see table) should he exempted from tariff reductions, according to Samuel Lenher, president of the Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association. T h e alternative, he says, is to "erode by concessions essential domestic productive capacity." These chemicals a r e produced a t a level well below defense mobilization goals, Lenher asserts. National security dictates that present capacity should b e maintained in a state of readiness to meet any emergency. 5034
C&EN
NOV. 2 1,
195 5
A stumbling block in the way of equitable t r a d e policies is t h e so-called "basket" provision of tariff laws. Tariff legislation generally spells out duties for certain products. Related items not covered specifically in the law are lumped together in miscellaneous, or "basket," classifications. Because of the n u m b e r and complexity of chemical products, these items often are placed in basket classifications. Such general determinations can lead to trouble, says Lenher. Any tariff revisions tend to treat each product in t h e basket classification on the same basis. This can lead to "across-
SOCMA Requests:
N o Tariff Cuts On 14 Key Chemicals acetic acid acetone carbon tetrachloride ethylene dibromide ethylene oxide ethyl methyl ketone methanol methyl v hloride methylene chloride methyl isobutyl ketone pentaerythritol perchloroethylene phenol phthaiie anhydride
the-board" tariff cuts, which are opposed by many in the chemical industry. T o avoid inequities which might re suit from the Geneva t r a d e talks, Lenher proposes a three-point program to aid U. S. negotiators. First, he favors limiting concessions to chemicals which were actually imported last year. Secondly, foreign countries should be required to ^ecify t h e particular chemicals for which t h e y are a primary producer and on which a trade concession is desired. Lastly, he proposes Liiat a uaincu person rammar with the organic chemicals industryshould be included in t h e team of U. S. negotiators. • Congress Takes a Look. Lenher got another opportunity to present his views on foreign trade—this time on a broader basis. A joint House-Senate subcommittee on foreign economic policy w a n t e d his views on how essential industries and tariff cuts were related. T h e SOCMA president's testimony was part of an over-all study to explore the relation of t h e U. S. foreign trade policy to the continued growth and stability of the domestic economy. O . R. Strackbein, tariff champion who heads the Nation-wide Committee of Industry, Agriculture, and Labor on Import-Export Policy, w a s a star witness. H e called for a flexible tariff policy which avoided any broad rate changes. H e also favors import quotas which h e terms as "more responsive to changes in industry, in trade, and in technology." More t h a n half of all imports, such as coffee, are not competitive with domestic industry, Strackbein points out. These imports, together with some products which are competitive with domestic items, can increase substantially without injury t o American producers. A limiting factor, however, will b e the general prosperity of the national economy. Also testifying was D o n D. H u m phrey, Duke University economics professor who authored a survey sponsored by the National Planning Association a n d the Twentieth Century F u n d . This survey, which covered U. S. imports, recommended a "substantial" lowering of tariffs to stimulate foreign trade. T o compensate domestic industries injured by this policy, the study proposes federal loans a n d other aid. While the Congressional group was debating a n d discussing foreign trade practices, t h e Commerce Department took positive action to set u p a list of nonstrategic items which can b e shipped to Iron Curtain countries. Included in the list are p h o s p h a t e rock a n d rosin.
