Billions for Allies

For most of the Senate's week, senatorial voices echoed hollowly in a chamber that was three-quarters empty. One voice clearly heard was that of North Dakota's old-prairie twister, Senator William Langer, howling across 19 years of political history: the Democrats had not kept one of their 1932 platform promises, except the promise to put "the saloons back in business." At the height of his oration, word came that Harry Truman had just vetoed a private relief bill sponsored by Langer. The old man roared: "The bill called for $778.78 to be paid to a veteran of World War I. Today he is 80 years old and destitute." He waved his arms and pounded his desk; papers and pencils flew, page boys scurried for cover. "The President vetoes it," he bellowed. "I suppose he must start saving money if we are to give away $8.5 billion."

But finally the Senate got down to serious business. Before the week .was out it passed the Administration's much-debated foreign aid bill. It was a measure voted by men who felt there was no other practical choice, but who were increasingly appalled by U.S. expenditures. The House had cut the President's $8.5 billion request to $7.5 billion. The Senate cut the bill down again--to $7.2 billion.

"The Suicide Route." Illinois' Republican Everett Dirksen, who proposed a $250 million slash in economic aid for Western Europe, voiced one side of the argument: "We lift our voices in magnificent cliches about the danger from outside. Are we alert to the fact that America can die from suicide within? The suicide route is the fiscal route." Majority Leader McFarland voiced the other side: "Is it cheaper to arm European boys, or put all of our young manhood in uniform? The world is in a dangerous situation and we must see to it that our allies are strong economically and militarily."

The voting on amendments reflected all the anxious doubts and confusions surrounding the two points of view. There could be no doubt that those who talked in terms of slicing off a billion or so were acting more from general convictions of the need for economy than from knowledge of specific items which could be sliced. But there was also no more doubt that the Administration's figure was based as much on horseback estimates as solid figures. Dirksen's slash just squeaked through, 36 to 34.

The Predominant View. One more important amendment was argued bitterly. Sponsored by the bipartisan coalition of Ohio's Taft and Illinois' Douglas, it would have put administration of foreign aid in the hands of a single agency (as the House had voted). The amendment was defeated by a majority which preferred to leave control of the money divided between the State Department, the Pentagon and EGA.

The final vote on the foreign aid bill reflected the predominant view that the measure was the best possible guess as to what is required abroad and what the U.S. can afford to put up. Sixty-one voted for it; only five, all diehard Republican isolationists, voted no.*

The Senate Finance Committee, still trying to figure out how to pay for the Government's expenditures, continued to hammer away at a tax bill. By week's end, instead of adding, Senators had tentatively snipped an estimated $1.4 billion from the $7.2 billion tax boost approved by the House. In a long week's work the committee :

P: Approved a boost of $2.2 billion in corporation taxes--$760 million less than the figure voted by the House.

P: Decided to slap taxes on 6,000 building and loan associations, 600 mutual savings banks and a number of farmers' cooperatives, which have so far gone taxfree. Estimated gain in revenue: $145 million.

P: Followed the House's lead in exempting public-supported symphonies, operas, educational, religious and charitable functions from the present 20% federal admissions tax. Estimated loss: $16 million.

* The five: Indiana's Capehart, Montana's Ecton, North Dakota's Langer, Kansas' Schoeppel, Missouri's Kern.

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