Area and country

Country programs of U. S. Government agencies, fiscal year 1955—Continued

LETTER FROM PRESIDENT DODDS OF PRINCETON UNIVERSITY

Senator KILGORE. I want to place in the record at this point a letter from Dr. Harold W. Dodds, president of Princeton University, which Senator Smith of New Jersey has forwarded to Chairman Hayden in connection with the appropriation for the exchange program.

(The letter referred to follows:)

Hon. H. ALEXANDER SMITH,

United States Senate, Washington, D. C.

PRINCETON UNIVERSITY, Princeton, N. J., May 2, 1955.

DEAR SENATOR SMITH: Having served as one of the original members of the United States Advisory Commission on Educational Exchange which was set up under the Smith-Mundt Act, I am profoundly disturbed by the action of the House of Representatives in cutting appropriations so drastically below the recommendations of the Executive budget. The collateral action of stipulating that two-thirds of the amount approved must be used in foreign currency is a further kiss-of-death to the essential work of educational exchange.

I know that you must be concerned about this and the purpose of this letter is to tell you that one early member of the Commission is still convinced of the importance and value of educational exchanges, and hopes very much that the Senate in its wisdom will restore its appropriation to the level of President Eisenhower's recommendation.

With warm personal regards, I am,
Faithfully yours,

HAROLD W. Dodds.

LETTER FROM SENATOR BENNETT OF UTAH

Senator KILGORE. I have received a letter from Senator Bennett of Utah in which he urges the full budget estimate of $22 million for the international educational exchange program. The letter will be made a part of the record at this point.

(The letter referred to follows:)

I am very much disturbed by the recent action of the House in voting to reduce the amount requested for the international educational exchange program of the State Department from $22 million to $12 million. I am as mindful as all members of the Congress must be, of the need for economy in Federal expenditures, but this does not seem to me sound economy. Few, if any, of the international undertakings of our Government have gathered such rich and tangible benefits for our country with such a modest outlay of funds, as the educational exchange program.

The dozen or so pieces of legislation through which the Congress has authorized these activities attest to its belief that such a program can further our foreign relations by building a basic understanding of our ideals and way of life in other countries. The action of the Congress also reflects, I am sure, the active support of the universities, the civic groups, and the people of this country. This support is not based on a mere belief. It has grown because of the proved value of this program and its conduct by our Government over the past 17 years.

The carefully selected people from other countries who are brought to the United States under the exchange program are the leaders or future leaders of their nations. They engage in study, teaching, research, and other kinds of educational projects which have meaning for their future careers at home and through which they also help us to understand the values and aspirations of their people. They are, moreover, witnesses of our way of life and become the best interpreters of us to their fellow countrymen.

I recall a series of interviews which a newspaper in my State had with a group of newsmen from the NATO countries who were visiting our country under the exchange program. One man from Italy remarked that he was "pleased to see that the characteristics of the American people, whether in New York or Seattle, were the sane." "They are people," he said, "with a great faith in their future.

They are industrious and meet all problems courageously. I hope to work for the future relations of the American people and mine." What seems to me important about these remarks and those of countless other foreign visitors is that they not only learn our know-how but have grasped the even more important know-why of America. It is just as important to develop this kind of understanding among the people of countries traditionally friendly to us, as among those in countries where strong neutralist or anti-American elements predominate. The people of my State and I feel throughout the country recognize the worth of such a program.

At this point I should like permission to insert in the record a news article in the Salt Lake Tribune telling of a junior chamber of commerce drive to raise funds to bring 12 foreign students to Salt Lake City during the next school year. [Salt Lake Tribune, May 8]

"JAYCEES PLAN FOREIGN STUDENT LURE

“A drive for funds to bring 12 foreign students to Salt Lake City during the next school year will be conducted during the week of May 23, by the junior chamber of commerce, Joe Anderson, board member in charge of youth activities, announced Saturday.

"The students all will be of high-school age, and will live with Salt Lake City families during the 9 months they are attending school here.

"The junior chamber is undertaking the project in cooperation with American Field Service, a group already responsible for bringing many foreign students to the United States as a means of promoting international good will and understanding.

"It will be necessary to raise $6,500 to carry out the project, Mr. Anderson said. An appeal will be made to students in the city schools, to members of civic clubs and to the public to contribute at least 25 cents each."

In authorizing an exchange program, the Congress wisely foresaw the value of sending Americans abroad. The people selected to go overseas under the State Department's program are chosen because they are good representatives of our country and because the educational projects they are carrying out can benefit us and the people of the countries to which they go. Through their daily activities and their work they are able to reach hundreds and thousands of people who have not had the chance to be first-hand witnesses of the American scene. One instance of this comes to my mind in connection with Dr. A. Ray Olpin, president of the University of Utah, who went out to New Zealand under the exchange program. His 3-week stay there was packed with addresses before Rotary clubs, manufacturers associations, chambers of commerce, and teachers colleges in addition to conferences with civic, educational, and research leaders, press interviews, radio recordings and visits to homes of New Zealanders. Because of Dr. Ölpin's research and educational background, he was able to demonstrate to his audiences that research is the lifeblood of industry, that educational institutions have an important role to play, and that the results of such research serve the interests of all citizens by producing products at lower cost and higher wages and better working conditions for labor.

What is more, just as we want others to understand the "know why" of America, our responsibility as a leading power in international affairs today demands that we have more citizens in our country who have a similar understanding of other nations and their people. Sending Americans abroad under the exchange program is one of the best means at our disposal to build up such a corps of American specialists.

The cut of $10 million voted by the House will cut the heart out of these activities in all parts of the free world and will eliminate them in 31 out of 75 countries. The strengthening of the program in the Far East, Near East, and Latin America, which had been recommended by high officials of the executive branch and by several congressional committees, will be impossible. The House cut would, in fact, result in a reduction of present activities in these areas.

I would like to reaffirm my conviction that this program is effective and has proved its value. The State Department has formally requested the Senate to restore the funds cut by the House. I believe we should support the request for $22 million to continue this very necessary effort to improve our international relations.

STATEMENTS AND COMMUNICATIONS

Senator KILGORE. Several communications and statements have been received on the exchange program, and they will all be filed in the record at this point.

(The communications referred to follow:)

STATEMENT OF WARREN GRIFFITHS ON BEHALF OF THE FRIENDS COMMITTEE ON NATIONAL LEGISLATION, WASHINGTON 2, D. C.

Gentlemen, on behalf of the Friends Committee on National Legislation I wish to present to the committee our belief that the Department of State's international educational exchange program warrants at least the $22 million appropriation for fiscal 1956 requested by the President. Indeed, we would like to see the appropriation increased.

We believe in two-way interchange of persons, to make it possible for Americans to go abroad and foreign leaders and students to come here. It is our understanding that the $10 million cut approved by the House—with $8 million to be used for foreign currency-will affect particularly the ability to bring foreign leaders and students to the United States. This would be a tragic happening, for experience over the years has shown the importance of bringing foreign nationals here to understand our way of life. And this program is so vital because it makes it possible for those from abroad to see every area of American life and not be limited to acquaintance with a few urban centers.

It is a program that deserves wholehearted and enthusiastic support. hope that the appropriation will be increased rather than reduced.

NATIONAL CATHOLIC WELFARE CONFERENCE,
Washington, D. C., May 3, 1955.

The Honorable Senator HARLEY KILGORE,

Chairman of Subcommittee, Committee on Appropriations,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D. C.

We

DEAR SENATOR KILGORE: Over a period of years, the National Catholic Welfare Conference, like other voluntary agencies, has cooperated closely with the State Department on the international exchange of persons program. It is our conviction that the program is an important weapon in our ideological struggle with communism, that it provides us with an invaluable means of countering the continuous flow of anti-American propaganda, and that it is effective in demonstrating to the nations of the free world the cultural and spiritual values which underlie the American way of life. For these reasons, we urge the Senate Appropriations Committee to approve the full budget of $22 million requested by the President for the exchange program.

We appreciate the Congress' desire, after so many years of supporting extensive foreign aid programs of all kinds, to hold the expenditures for such items to a minimum. At the same time, we feel it would be a mistake to place the exchange program in the category of an expendable luxury. We think that if the exchange program is placed in its proper frame of reference, viz., that of national defense, that its true importance and its necessity will be apparent. If the exchange program is just a valuable cultural activity and no more, then there is no reason why the program should not be reduced in favor of more pressing fiscal needs of the Nation. But if it is a necessary adjunct of American diplomacy in the cold war, if it wins for us strong dependable friends in strategic positions, then the responsibility of our Government to support such a program generously would seem to be beyond question.

Our own experience with the exchange program has shown that the important goals described above are being achieved. More than that, the State Department's activity in this field has provided leadership, inspiration and example to the innumerable private groups and voluntary agencies, like ourselves, who are carrying on their own exchange programs. Brining foreign students to the United States has been very largely a cooperatve venture of the State Department and private groups. The Institute of International Education reports that one of its major functions is combining Government grants, under the Fulbright and Smith-Mundt programs, with tuition and maintenance awards given by private sources. Clearly, any significant reduction in the State Department exchange program will have adverse effects on the private programs far out of proportion