serving in any office of any of the several States of the United States or any political subdivision thereof. SEC. 104. None of the funds appropriated in this title shall be used (1) to pay the United States contribution to any international organization which engages in the direct or indirect promotion of the principle or doctrine of one world government or one world citizenship; (2) for the promotion, direct or indirect, of the principle or doctrine of one world government or one world citizenship. SEC. 105. It is the sense of the Congress that the Communist Chinese Government should not be admitted to membership in the United Nations as the representative of China. This title may be cited as the "Department of State Appropriation Act, 1965". Document XIV-7 Supplemental Appropriations for the Department of State for Fiscal Year 1965: PUBLIC LAW 88-635, APPROVED OCTOBER 7, 1964 (EXCERPTS) 25 AN ACT Making supplemental appropriations for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1965, and for other purposes. Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That the following sums are appropriated out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, to supply supplemental appropriations (this Act may be cited as the "Supplemental Appropriation Act, 1965") for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1965, and for other purposes, namely: DEPARTMENT OF STATE INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS AND CONFERENCES CONTRIBUTIONS TO INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS For an additional amount for "Contributions to international organizations", $1,366,000. INTERNATIONAL BOUNDARY AND WATER COMMISSION, UNITED STATES AND MEXICO CONSTRUCTION For an additional amount for "International Boundary and Water Commission, United States and Mexico, Construction", $300,000. C. Contributions to International Organizations Document XIV-8 United States Contributions to International Organizations for the Period July 1, 1963-June 30, 1964: THIRTEENTH ANNUAL REPORT TO CONGRESS BY THE SECRETARY OF STATE PURSUANT TO PUBLIC LAW 806, 81st CONGRESS, TRANSMITTED JUNE 25, 1965 (EXCERPTS)1 INTRODUCTION 2 The United States contributed $257 million to 71 international organizations and programs in the fiscal year ending June 30, 1964. This is about 10 percent less than the previous year and is substantially less than contributions in fiscal year 1962 $325 million-which included extraordinary contributions for the U.N. Operations in the Congo and the Indus Basin Development Fund.3 The 1964 contributions of $257 million represent 0.2 percent of total Federal expenditures during that fiscal year. On a per capita basis this amount is equal to $1.35 for each U.S. citizen. Total contributions by all governments to the organizations and programs to which the United States contributed in fiscal year 1964 amounted to $571 million. Fifty-seven percent of the total U.S. contribution was made to 17 special programs which are financed through voluntary contributions. The amount of the U.S. contribution to these programs is determined on the basis of Executive Branch consideration of U.S. interest in the programs and the fair share which this country should provide, with the approval of the Congress, through its consideration of appropriation bills. Another 11 percent of the total U.S. contribution was to U.N. peacekeeping operations. These were financed by a combination of assessments and voluntary contributions. The remaining 32 percent represents our share of the budgets of international organizations which were financed by assessments, in accordance with their charters. Approximately 75 percent of the total U.S. contributions during fiscal year 1964 was made to the United Nations family of organizations, including the U.N.'s regular budget together with its peacekeeping and other special programs, and to the budgets of the various U.N. specialized agencies. The Organization of American States and other agencies in the Western Hemisphere received about 9 percent; contributions to other regional organizations and programs amounted to 13 percent; and 3 percent was contributed to organizations not affiliated with any of the foregoing. 1H. Doc. 229, 89th Cong., June 28, 1965, pp. 1-4. For the text of Public Law 806, 81st Cong., approved Sept. 21, 1950, see 64 Stat. 902. 2 See American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1963, pp. 1333-1337. 3 See ibid., 1962, pp. 1563-1565. Fiscal Year 1964 Report on U.S. Contributions to International Organizations -Continued 1 1 The amounts reported include the annual contributions and, where applicable, advances to the organization's working capital fund and/or credits due the United States. This table does not include: (a) The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT), considered as part of the cost of U.S. participation in international meetings and conferences. The U.S. contribution to GATT for fiscal year 1964 was $205,550. (b) Loans such as the purchase of U.N. bonds or loans under the Indus Basin Development Program. (c) Surplus commodities unless a contribution was pledged in kind. (d) Contracts and/or research grants by U.S. Government agencies for services or research to be performed. ?Does not reflect repayment on U.N. bonds. Includes airlift services $996,450 provided without charge to the United Nations. Includes $6,000 paid the OAS for exchange of radio frequency notifications. Excludes loans. Percentage overall for duration of program. Reflects cash contribution only and does not include P.L. 480 commodities or shipping costs. • Includes pledge of about $7,500,000 in P.L. 480 commodities. D. Passport Regulations, Immigration and Visas Document XIV-9 The Need for Change in the National Origins System of Immigration: REMARKS BY THE PRESIDENT (JOHNSON) AT A WHITE HOUSE MEETING WITH REPRESENTATIVES OF SEVERAL ORGANIZATIONS INTERESTED IN IMMIGRATION AND REFUGEE MATTERS, JANUARY 13, 1964 (ExCERPT)1 'Department of State Bulletin, Feb. 10, 1964, pp. 211–212. We have met for the purpose of pointing up the fact that we have very serious problems in trying to get a fair immigration law. There is now before the Congress a bill [S. 1932] that, I hope, can be supported by a majority of the Members of the Congress. This bill applies new tests and new standards which we believe are reasonable and fair and right. I refer specifically to: What is the training and qualification of the immigrant who seeks admission? What kind of a citizen would he make, if he were admitted? What is his relationship to persons in the United States? And what is the time of his application? These are rules that are full of common sense, common decency, which operate for the common good. 3 That is why in my state of the Union message last Wednesday I said that I hoped that in establishing preferences a nation that was really built by immigrants-immigrants from all lands-could ask those who seek to immigrate now: What can you do for our country? But we ought to never ask: In what country were you born? 5 6 President Roosevelt and President Truman and President Eisenhower and President Kennedy have all asked for a revision in the present statute. The present statute has overtones of discrimination. President Truman said that the idea behind this discrimination was, to put it boldly, that English or Irish names were better, and better citizens, than Americans with Italian or Greek or Polish names. And such a concept is utterly unworthy of our traditions and our ideals." Now I would hope that each of us and all of us are descended from immigrants. I hope we would ask ourselves this question: How would we feel, if we were put in the other fellow's place? Maybe by doing that and engaging in a little introspection for a time we would find it a good feeling to apply the Golden Rule and do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Great Britain has a quota of 65,000. It uses less than half of that quota. Germany has a quota of 25,000, which it never fills. Italy has a quota of 5,645, but it has a current backlog of almost 300,000. Greece has a quota of only 308, but it has a current backlog of over 100,000. So I think that the immigration statutes require very special examination. I would hope that we would do nothing hasty and makeshift, but I hope that we would apply the tests that I have outlined and the standards that I have suggested, doing unto others as you would have them do unto you, and asking them what contribution they could make to their country, and asking yourselves how you would feel if some of your very special members of your family were involved and were facing what now appear to be almost insurmountable obstacles. 'See the Department of State Bulletin, July 14, 1952, pp. 78-82 (H. Doc. 520, 82d Cong., June 25, 1952). See American Foreign Policy: Current Documents, 1960, pp. 938-940. 7 See the Department of State Bulletin, July 14, 1952, p. 79. |