A Fearful Drubbing

The President looked grimly around at the ten Democratic and Republican House leaders who sat at a White House conference table last Tuesday in various attitudes of discomfort. Never (reported one of the Congressmen later) had Dwight Eisenhower appeared so vigorous and determined: he was arguing against the House threat to cut $1.1 billion from his $4.9 billion foreign-aid program. The cuts, Ike said spiritedly, were "destructive" and posed a "dangerous threat" to the nation's security. Against such reductions, already approved by the powerful House Foreign Affairs Committee (TIME, June 4) and about to come up for House action, President Eisenhower threw all his influence--in a losing cause.

While urgently advocating a full measure of foreign aid, the President insisted that he meant nothing personal by his remarks. He looked directly across the table at South Carolina's courtly Democratic Representative James Prioleau Richards, chairman of the Foreign Affairs Committee and, despite his record of support for the Eisenhower foreign policy, the leader of this year's drive for foreign-aid reduction. There was a moment of awkward silence, broken by Speaker Sam Rayburn. Said Mr. Sam: "I love Dick Richards. This time he's wrong and I will oppose him--but I still love him." Ike replied softly: "That goes for me, too."

A few minutes later Richards, wondering why the President had waited until the eleventh hour before making his big move, spoke up: "Why wasn't this meeting called two weeks ago?" Smiled Eisenhower: "That's a good question."

"What Can We Do?" There was a much bigger question at the bottom of the trouble, and it had been hanging over Washington for two years: Why had the Administration failed to frame the kind of world economic policy that makes sense not only of long-range foreign aid, but of all the other economic techniques and forces that the world's leading capitalist-enterprise republic has to offer? Without a real world economic plan, and faced by a fast-moving Communist economic offensive, the Administration had dissipated its foreign-aid advantage, to the distress of staunch foreign-aid friends in both parties--and to the delight of ancient isolationist enemies in both parties.

Without boastfulness, Dick Richards told the conference that he understood the House temper on foreign aid as well as any man alive. If his committee had not made some cuts, said he, the House might have slashed much more drastically. For the sake of continued aid, he added, he would rather risk opposition in the

White House than in the House of Representatives. When Richards finished, Ike turned to House G.O.P. Leader Joe Martin and Speaker Rayburn. Asked Ike: "What can we do?" Replied Martin, seconded by Mister Sam: "Speak out loud and clear at your press conference."

The President took the advice. Next morning he opened his news conference with an off-the-cuff statement that the U.S. is "waging peace." Said he: "There is no amount of money that you can pour into bombs and missiles and planes and tanks and guns that will assure you peace." It is more profitable to spend for "constructive things that tend to make people respectful of the great values that we are supporting." Thus, it would be "tragic" not to support foreign-aid programs "cheerfully and adequately."

"These Foreigners." But the House was preparing to speak out loud and--in its own way--clear. The House leaders had agreed that a $600 million restoration of funds was the best they could hope for. Sam Rayburn picked Arkansas' Democratic Representative Brooks Hays as the man to introduce an amendment seeking the $600 million. Hays got off to a staggering start. "I know that $600 million is a lot of money," he said plaintively. "I cannot even comprehend it." Then he recalled that he was supposed to be arguing for, not against, the amendment, and continued: "We are engaged in building a deterrent to war ... On that basis I appeal to the House to authorize a more generous amount."

Democrats and Republicans alike ganged up on the bill and their leaders' amendment, as many an isolationist scuttled into daylight for the first time in years to take advantage of the new climate. Massachusetts Republican Donald Nicholson said he was for "spending money for our own defense without taking care of these foreigners." Louisiana's Democratic Representative George Long (Huey's brother) described foreign aid as "the greatest fraud since money became a medium of exchange." Georgia's Democratic Representative Iris Blitch won an ovation as she promised: "I will vote for every amendment to cut the amount of foreign aid, and then I will vote against the bill itself." Ohio's Wayne Hays said: "I haven't received a single letter from home urging me to vote for increased foreign aid and I doubt if anybody else has."

Rare Drama. The House leaders struggled desperately against the onslaught. Majority Leader John McCormack, Sam Rayburn and Joe Martin (who read a 380-word letter from the President pleading for the foreign-aid program) all spoke earnestly--and futilely. Then Dick Richards, serving the last of his 23 years in the House (he is retiring this year), arose to defend his committee's cuts. It was a moment of rare House drama: the policy of an able, hard-working committee chairman had been repudiated by his leaders, who were also his dear friends. Sam Rayburn and Joe Martin, said Richards, are "two great Americans." But, he continued bitterly. "They don't know anything about this bill.. All they know is what they are told down at the White House. They have surrendered to the Executive Department without facts or figures. [But] we've come up here with what we think is a good bill for the security of the U.S." As Dick Richards returned to his seat, the House surged to its feet in a roar of cheers and applause.

Finally it came time for a vote on the amendment to restore $600 million--and congressmen of both parties joined to vote it down, 192 to 112 (next day the Administration won a minor victory when the House turned back an amendment that would have cut off all aid to Yugoslavia and Marshal Tito). After the key vote, Sam Rayburn and Joe Martin walked out to the House lobby and sat dejectedly on a leather sofa. They said nothing; there was nothing to say. Martin and Rayburn had taken a fearful drubbing. So had the Administration, and it would have a hard time putting the blame on anybody but the President for two years' failure to do the clear and reasoned planning that the world economic situation requires. In view of this fact, Dick Richards' position made good sense, because the long-range interests of the U.S. might best be served if the cut shocked Dwight Eisenhower into realizing that the problem of casting a world economic policy exists, and will continue to exist until he copes with it.

This file is automatically generated by a robot program, so reader's discretion is required.