Изображения страниц
PDF
EPUB

CIVIL DEFENSE-1961

WEDNESDAY, AUGUST 2, 1961

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON MILITARY OPERATIONS

OF THE COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT OPERATIONS,

Washington, D.C.

The subcommittee met, pursuant to recess, at 10 a.m., in room 362, the caucus room, Old House Office Building, Hon. Chet Holifield (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Representatives Chet Holifield (presiding), Edward A. Garmatz, Joe M. Kilgore, Martha W. Griffiths, and R. Walter Riehl

man.

Also present: Herbert Roback, staff administrator; and Douglas Dahlin, staff attorney; Earl J. Morgan, chief investigator; Paul Ridgely, investigator; and Robert McElroy, investigator.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. The subcommittee will be in order.

Today we hear from Frank B. Ellis, Director of the Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization. Mr. Ellis will have his supporting staff with him.

Before we proceed to hear the testimony, we're going to take the opportunity of recognizing one of our colleagues, Congressman William E. Minshall of Ohio. Mr. Minshall was a member of this subcommittee for several years before he went to the Appropriations Committee, and he has a deep interest in this matter. He is now on the Committee on Appropriations. And we are extending to him the usual courtesy of making a presentation.

Congressman Minshall, will you please come forward?
I understand you have a short statement.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM E. MINSHALL, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

Mr. MINSHALL. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, as a former member of this subcommittee, I doubly appreciate having the privilege of appearing before you today.

As you all well remember and, years ago, several Congresses ago, Mr. Holifield went into this matter of civil defense with great care and great diligence. And that is when interest was first aroused in this most important matter of civil defense, and, of course, fallout shelters. This legislation that I have introduced, H.R. 5677, of course, is not before this committee, it is before the House Ways and Means Committee. And they are awaiting a report from the Treasury Department before they take any action on the measure.

I should also like to point out that other members of this subcommittee, including Mr. Riehlman who is here today, have in the past introduced similar legislation of the type that you have before you here in H.R. 5677.

TAX EXEMPTION FOR HOME FALLOUT SHELTERS

Mr. Chairman and colleagues, I appear before you today to testify in behalf of my bill, H.R. 5677, which would grant tax exemptions to citizens who construct home fallout shelters.

The President himself has given impetus to the necessity of preparing ourselves for the possibility of all-out war. He is asking vastly stepped-up funds for civil defense. I, myself, as a member of the Defense Department Appropriations Subcommittee have long recognized the need for such a practical precaution-this is the third Congress in which I have introduced this incentive legislation.

More dramatically than anything I, or even our Chief Executive, can say regarding the need for home shelters are the daily headlines which emphasize the necessity of hoping for the best and expecting the worst.

It seems incredible that in these times Americans are more preoccupied in building backyard barbecues and swimming pools than in protecting themselves against the awesome possibility of being incinerated and vaporized like flies on a grill.

Some of you may recall that the Pentagon, using electronic computers, last year estimated that 100 million Americans would die in the event of an all-out thermonuclear attack on United States cities.

Pentagon top brass fed into the mechanical brains top-secret facts and estimates of United States versus Soviet weapons systems, in a variety of strategies. The computers came up with the horrifying statistics: most of our population would be either instantly cremated or die from the effects of fallout radiation.

The same computers that clicked out this ghastly information reported that more than half these Americans would survive if vigorous civil defense measures are taken-chief among them construction of home fallout shelters.

My home city of Rocky River, in the 23d District of Ohio, pioneered in home shelter construction. My State of Ohio was the first in the Union to grant tax exemptions to citizens who construct such shelters, or who improve existing facilities to provide protection.

Such legislation on the national level is highly appropriate. It is completely in line with the philosophy of resolving as many problems as possible on the local level. It would generate the interest and incentive needed to promote a countrywide shelter program. It would not replace but would supplement and complement any Federal program for community shelters.

H.R. 5677 would permit amortization over a 60-month period of certain civil defense facilities. It is logical and necessary legislation if we are to spur our citizens to protect themselves and to assure the survival of the United States.

Mr. Chairman, I thank you for the privilege of appearing here today.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Thank you very much, Congressman, for taking the time to come before our committee. We appreciate your interest in this subject. Unfortunately, up until recent days, civil defense has been something which people kind of smiled at. But I assure you, it is not a smiling matter. We appreciate your testimony, and we appreciate any suggestion as to how this tremendously vast and complicated problem can be solved.

Thank you, sir.

Mr. MINSHALL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. HOLIFIELD. Mr. Ellis, you may come forward now with your staff.

STATEMENT OF FRANK B. ELLIS, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF CIVIL AND DEFENSE MOBILIZATION; ACCOMPANIED BY EDWARD A. McDERMOTT, DEPUTY DIRECTOR; CHARLES A. KENDALL, GENERAL COUNSEL; RALPH E. SPEAR, DIRECTOR, PROGRAM AND POLICY; AND CHARLES BREWTON, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, RESOURCES AND PRODUCTION

Mr. ELLIS. May I introduce to the committee Mr. Edward McDermott, who is my Deputy Director, and Mr. Charles Brewton, who has been appointed by the President and assigned to head the Resources and Production Division of OCDM.

Shall I proceed, sir?

Mr. HOLIFIELD. You may proceed. But, before you proceed, Mr. Ellis, let the Chair state that this subcommittee appreciates the vigorous way in which you have proceeded since you have been in the Office of Civil and Defense Mobilization. We recognize the fact that you have been making a hard fight for the survival of our civilian population. And we applaud you for the firmness with which you have stood and the fierceness with which you have fought for the principles in which you believe. We may not agree with you on all the positions you have taken, and you may not agree with us, but, nevertheless, we recognize you as a stanch fighter for the preservation of our civilian population in the event of nuclear attack.

You may proceed.

Mr. ELLIS. Thank you, sir. It makes the sacrifices worthwhile with that kind of recognition, sir.

I

It is a pleasure to appear before this committee, which has been both friend and critic to civil defense for the past six years. should like to pay a special tribute to you, Mr. Chairman, for your statesmanship and vision in supporting this program during the lean years-years in which as a nation we did little while the Soviet Union was spending large sums on civil defense preparedness. I wish to note also the support Mr. Riehlman and others have given to this program in the past. I am confident that on a matter of the national survival, which is what civil defense is, this nonpartisan support will continue.

NO MORE IMPORTANT PROBLEM THAN CIVIL DEFENSE

There is no more important problem facing the Nation today than the problem of civil defense. We are dealing before this committee with the survival of this Nation. We are also dealing with the national will-that somewhat intangible ingredient which charges the environment of our daily life, either positively or negatively, and which marks the difference between a leader of nations and a second-class power. If we are to remain true to our heritage of freedom and face up to the problems of our time, we must take reasonable measures for the protection of our civilian population. The taking of such measures symbolizes our determination to react positively to the Soviet challenge, rather than to choose the part of piecemeal surrender. In the critical days and months to come, I shall, under Executive leadership, address myself to the stimulation and the strengthening of the national will.

Evidence is now at hand to conclude that the level of public support for civil defense is greater than had been officially supposed. I am convinced that the public is no longer content to stand naked before the threat of enemy attack when a vast improvement in our preparedness is possible, and, in my judgment, feasible.

The United States has a 2-to-1 economic superiority over the Soviet Union. This economic superiority-the superiority of our mobilization base represents the measure of our capacity to take those measures which are necessary for our national defense and security. In certain areas, however-and civil defense is a case in point-we have not used our economic potential to create actual strength-inbeing. As the President indicated in his epochal telecast to the Nation of July 25, the time has now come when we must increase the overeall strength of the Nation, not merely to meet an immediate crisis but to maintain our freedom over the long pull.

My testimony will deal, in order, with the five major topics suggested in your letter of invitation. These are:

(1) The overall civil defense plan, including the background and necessity of the administration's new nonmilitary defense program: (2) The role of the Office of Emergency Planning;

(3) The utilization and coordination of the Federal establishment;

(4) The development of adequate preparedness at State and local levels; and

(5) The management of resources in an emergency, including, but not limited to, the postattack period.

I. THE OVERALL NONMILITARY DEFENSE PLAN

Nonmilitary defense has three principal elements:

(1) Protection of life and property in the event of attack, including shelter and supporting systems;

(2) Strengthening, mobilizing, and managing the resources of the Nation in the interest of current and future national security and to support essential military and civilian operations to that end, both domestic and foreign; and

(3) Finally, insuring the integrity, continuity, and capability of civil government to function at all levels of our Federal democratic system under any potential conditions of emergency. The first of these elements is a collection of programs which we call civil defense. As a system, civil defense is complementary to military defense, and can best be evaluated in the context of our total defense program. Upon my recommendation to the President, major functions in the civil defense program have been delegated to the Department of Defense.

Programs for strengthening, mobilizing and managing the Nation's resources for maximum national security and maintenance of the Government's integrity, on the other hand, are part of the inherent responsibility of the President, and have been retained in the Executive Office. Also part of the President's responsibility is the design of the total program and coordination of the activities of the Federal departments and agencies in these several fields. As Chief of State and elected representative of all the people, the President has responsibility for the leadership and stimulation of the States and their political subdivisions. The role of the OCDM (to be redesignated the Office of Emergency Planning, when Congress acts) is to advise and assist the President in the discharge of all these responsibilities. I will cover those functions more fully in later sections of my testimony. Let me describe the necessity for the recent organization changes which were designed to place civil defense in a more effective setting without sacrificing essential control.

When I was placed in charge of the OCDM in early February, I undertook as my first order of business a thoroughgoing review of agency functions and organizations; in the course of this study, I prepared a comprehensive report to the President which included the following points:

(1) Civil defense is of critical importance to the strength and survival of the Nation;

(2) Civil defense programs are well developed and ready to move. The groundwork has been prepared;

(3) Although a sound basis for action has been established, civil defense has failed to attain adequate public and official support, and little actual progress has been achieved;

(4) The key element in an effective civil defense program is a comprehensive system of fallout shelters. To make shelter effective, certain supporting elements are required, including warning, communication, radiological defense, and organizational readiness to perform disaster services.

The actions subsequently taken by the President indicate acceptance of these basic findings as working principles.

The President's decision to place responsibilities for the shelter program in the Department of Defense indicates that civil defense is now regarded as an integral part of our total defense program. Major civil defense expenditures can now be judged, as they should be, in the context of other expenditures for defense, both active and passive. The value of such a program can be evaluated to the Congress as part of a total system designed to deter attack, or to blunt the thrust of any attack which might occur.

I am confident that civil defense will flourish in this context. There is at present a serious lack of balance in our preparations for a possi

« ПредыдущаяПродолжить »